Who is your favorite character in the game? Download Star Trek Fleet Command FOR FREE on your iOS/Android device clcr.me/ST_ProjectAir and become a part of the Star Trek universe!
I'm just wondering if you would be able to create an RC plane That is perhaps rocket powered That looks like a Starfleet ship Love your stuff my man Keep it up
Hello from France, I'm 65 years old. I love young people like you with crazy ideas and so much energy to implement them. And you share your experiences with us, so keep going, you are role models!
Love older people like you :) We need less moaners and more positivity and mixing with the younger generation, we can all learn so much from each other 👍
@@DrYver_ Bonjour, si j'en crois à 11:24 l'inscription sur la fusée, c'est du Thé !!!! (Tea Powered). Non, il ne donne pas de détails sur ses propulseurs. Il faudrait le lui demander. J'adore son énergie communicative!!
@@DrYver_ Ce sont des fusées qu'on peut trouver sur internet mais en France il faut un permis pour les acheter, Sinon tu peux utiliser du sucre et du nitrate de potassium pour créerun booster, tu peux chercher "Sugar Rocket" pour voir, il y a même un tuto en Français. Attention par contre il faut faire ça avec beaucoup de précaution parce que c'est explosif.
'Oh bollocks!' : -) Having been to a few rocketry events, you usually hear that, then raucous laughter. Either that, or 'Is it supposed to do that?' then people running away.
LOL! My first rocket (powered by an E9-8) had an issue where the shock cord would burn up all the time. But I learned to place it properly and spray graphite on it. Never had a parachute problem again... until my sixth flight on my H-powered rocket where my shroud lines got caught and ripped off my rocket. RIP
When he mentioned that the nosecone was tight I knew that was foreshadowing of things to come... Though the volume of gas needed to pop it off even if it wasn't tight is probably way more than those motors can provide anyway.
@@antoinepalacios5158 Jesus your first rocket took an E motor? That's crazy man. I started on A-Cs. Recently built a mean machine so I'm now doing some larger setups.
This 70 yr old from Miami who played with the Estes rockets in his younger days really enjoyed this video. Love the design and congrats on that much success for launch #1. Looking forward to #2. Good luck!
This is a beautiful example of 3d printing in a practical form. EVERYTHING doesn't have to be printed, and it's like some people don't like that or something. Not only does this look cooler, but it's closer to how it's actually done. Excellent work bro, just excellent.
From my experience with model rockets, I would think that you may have such a large volume of space inside the fuselage that the rockets' ejection charges are not effective. If that is the issue, there are a couple of paths you could go down to address it. It will just take a little of that impressive engineering that you regularly demonstrate. 👍
In the vidéo of the test we can see the explosion charge of the two booster didn't explose at the same time. This can explain why they don't have the power to push the nose
@@pierre-antoine9757 Even if they all lit off simultaneously, I still think the volume may be an issue. Those motors are typically used on a rocket with a ~1" diameter and perhaps 12-24" length. Say a max of 75 cubic inch volume per motor. Nine rockets then would have ~675 cu-in. However, a 100mm rocket at an equivalent length would have more than 1200 cu-in volume. Twice as much as those motors - in a best case scenario - are typically used for. This will be a surprisingly difficult challenge to solve. (Please forgive me for my mixing of units. Can't help it.)
YES!!!!! you would be better off with a triple G80- 10 Aerotec engine set. with over 10 times the power and around 6 times the ejection charge deployment power.... that is if they all fire which in my case is a sure shot. I have never had an Aerotec dud.
12:13 That's why full size rockets are held to the pad until all motors are stable and producing equal thrust. A challenge with a burn time of a few seconds, but perhaps a 0.5 second hold might get you a stable enough burn before launch. Awesome; I love your projects!
@@YellowPinkie I've never watched footage that carefully. I assume these clamps can also help I'm aborting the launch after ignition but before release or is that impossible?
They built an orbital class rocket 50 years ago it just they didn’t want to continue spending money on it so it was abandoned. They also have 200 nuclear intercontinental rockets
If you continue to have problems with ignition timing you can use a hold-down launch pad to hold the rocket down for say half a second to make sure that everything is firing properly. Great video love your work
Tip: Make a hole in the nose cone mix: -75% potassium nitrate -15% charcoal 10% powdered sulfur fill up the nose cone with the newly made old style gunpowder put a nail with spike facing inside of nose cone in hole. BE VERY CAREFUL AND GET FAR AWAY. PUT THE NAIL JUST BEFORE LAUNCH. you essentially have an unguided missile.
Ive been working on a project quite similar to what you did here. One thing that I tried to do that I thought was pretty cool is I 3D printed fly away launch rail guides. So as soon as the buttons leave the rod the buttons fly off the rocket which makes it more aerodynamic as it travels through the air.
I'm not from France, however I am 63 and also enjoy youthful enthusiasm!! I was born in the year of Sputnik and grew up with the Apollo program and am very happy to see rocket enthusiasts going for it today :-))
Used to build and launch rockets years ago, and I found that if I cut a hole in the center of the parachute (such as real parachutes have) the rocket didn't get carried away as far, it allowed a more straight descent without all the pendulum swinging motion. It didn't lose any efficiency due to that hole, it just allowed the air in the parachute to exit the canopy without inducing the swinging.
nice build on the rocket... I may not be the first to suggest this, but in order to solve your parachute deployment issue, you need to run a smaller tube up the center of the rocket called a shotgun tube. This tube directs the ejection charge from the center engine (which should have a slightly longer ejection delay) up to the parachute hatch/nose cone. Ensure that the shotgun tube is fairly well sealed and that your parachute hatch/nose cone is the only way the gasses can escape. Also, your ignition issue can be resolved using higher voltage. The setup that I use outputs around 53 volts (7x 9 volt batteries)
Cool rocket, couple of things: the launch buttons want one to be at the bottom and one on the CG. Also the sex noises followed by ‘eject eject’ were hilarious. 👍🏻
Well done! MY first rocket, built long before either of your parents were even a leer in your grandparents' eyes, was almost identical in design to yours. Fins were smaller, and I suspect you need to enlarge the fins and lengthen of the fuselage a bit. Intuition, and you lost 2 engines. In the good old days of the very early '60s, 3D printers didn't exist. Hell, printers and computers didn't exist! Well they did, but they were pretty big, slow, clunky, and well, you get the point. I came up with your ignition system for 3 engines using 2 paper clips, uncoiled, and alligator clips, powered by my father's car battery. It worked. My igniters were loops of NiChrome wire, with fuse wire wrapped into the loop. As soon as the wire got hot, the fuse went off, and the flame started the engines. Simultaneous firing across the board. I believe the early Soviet (real) rockets relied on a similar type of system. Ya done noble! Sand down your next nose cone, lubricate it with something and try again! Oh, for the record, as a 12 year old, I dreamed of working for NASA. Mann tracht, und Gott lacht! I became a physician, Internal Medicine. I might not have gotten anything into space, but I saved a hell of a lot of lives. Never give up! You have no idea of where this little hobby of yours will get you. Best wishes from the States.
Lightly sand nose cone until it can be easily pulled off but when turned upside down it doesn’t just fall off. I used to do model rockets (not just the small ones). I’m not expert but this has worked very well for us!
Maybe try using springs to assist with the contact to the motors by making the crocodile clips push upwards. That may give an extra chance to light up all the engines. And maybe a long quick-lighting fuse from the base to the top connecting to a separate ejection system could better work. Beautiful build and test, mate. Wonderful.
Dang I love rockets! Though only 6 ignited, getting a cluster working is super hard! Big respect for how successfully you got it working! Can't wait to see more rockets on your channel
I’ve been enjoying your series. I wouldn’t worry about the rocket nose coming off early. It can be loose. If the top comes off because the nose winds up sideways while at full speed you’re going to want the rocket slowed anyway. So a little sanding is all you need I think to fix your problems might want to tape nose in place until just before launch to keep it together during travel to site. You might also want to be sure your fuselage stays pretty airtight to allow charges to work.
I make sugar rockets and rather than using electric igniters, I fill the engine's bore hole with a bit of loose fuel mix (sugar/KNO3) and touch it off. You can do the same with black powder, but it tends to run back out of the hole, while the sugar fuel mix tends to hold in place enough to fight gravity and stay up inside while the rocket points up. With each engine prepared with fuel mix they are sensitive to a high temperature flash, easily provided by a small tray of fuel/black powder fixed under the engine assembly. Engines that fail to catch on the initial flash have a second chance to be set off by the other engines during flight. I've had a lot of success with this method using single engine rockets, and in my mind it would be a great fit for your situation.
Could you put each croc clip on long lengths of wire so they still have time to ignite as it starts moving up the launch stand. Also you could mount a dowel on the inside of the nose cone with a disc at the opposite end so it works like a piston to eject the nose cone Edit: great production in this video too
This flight reminded me of a V2 test flight where the engine malfunction caused the missile to take a digger. You may solve the chute ejection problem, but balancing the thrust before liftoff with off-the-shelf engines may be a bit of a challenge. It is a lot easier with liquid fuel as one can monitor and ramp up the engines. In fact the V2 had a engine stabilization step in its launch procedure. You might have to very selective on your engines (e.g. weigh them) and igniters being rich and matched. Lots of fun. Best of luck.
Great video .....As an option for anyone building a rocket-like this, if you decide to go really big or add more thrust. Carbon fibre dowels are available in a variety of designs, sizes, strengths. They only add a few dollars over the cost of wooden dowels. On a rocket this size and thrust, you're looking at a cost of around 8.00 USA dollars /6 + plus pounds for #4 24 inch / 60 CM long dowels.
manual ejectors maybe? just 3d printed holder with small servo in the head if its not to heavy or timed ejection if its to high for signal or maybe even an ejector with a C02 bottle if you want i would like to help and send over some ejector ideas if the the rockets are not enough
back in 1963 I built my own launch vehicle, with at the time large D type rocket engines with the idea to launch a field mouse into low earth orbit (in my mind). No 3 D printing in those days I rolled my own tubes from kraft paper and glue around a large wood cylinder turned on a lathe. My dad had a wood shop. I hand carved the nose cone from balsa wood a spheroid design with hollowed out compartment and door for the passenger. The most difficult part was catching the field mouse, which after repeated attempts was successful. on launch day the mouse was fed his last supper, with all hope of retraining him alive after his ride. ignition of the single D motor was successful, the rocket climbed to what I estimated was 3,000 feet, unlike your experiment the ejection charge successfully deployed the parachute, when I found the nose cone ie Capsule, the door was open and the mouse was gone. To this day I hope he landed successfully and opened the door and ran back to the forest, but I still have visions of him free falling from 3,00 feet. Such is life in the pursuit of knowledge.
The issue may be in your wiring of the igniters. Send me a schematic of how you wired them and the voltage and amperage of the batteries included the length of wire and gage from batteries to igniters. This is the engineering part of the science. Awesome job young man!
You’re doing a good job with your channel James! I love rocketry as well, currently certified level 2 with the Tripoli rocket association. Just watched your kerbal video too. Not sure if you have any rocket flight simulator software but it can really help with these sized rockets. Open rocket is free or rocksim is better but not free. Also, your cluster rocket setup is probably fine, just need more amps (bigger battery) to make sure all the igniters go quickly. Sometimes I add a tiny bit of black powder in the nozzle and hot glue it shut. Works well. Keep up the good work brother!
Rather brilliant. I’ve not had rockets in 50 years or so, but they were so much fun. I put a big motor in a tiny rocket and never saw it again, so I get your pain. My only suggestion is to increase your launch battery, or perhaps use three parallel circuits to ignite three motors each. Nine igniters is a LOT of load for one battery.
Cluster ignition can be tricky. Long ago, I used two AGM automotive batteries. One battery provides 12 volts to switch a relay at the launch pad where a second AGM automotive battery was relay switched with short leads to deliver high current to the igniters which were flashbulb/thermalite with a custom wiring harness to avoid electrical shorts or open circuits. Igniter Technology has advanced quite aways since then and there are better options. When clustering a large group of motors (I never ventured past 5) relay switched power was the easiest,safest, and most effective way then.
Nice Flight! the combination of the rocket and the launch pad has a really cool retro aesthetic! Cluster rockets are always difficult with ignition but you still got a good flight out of it! hope to see more rocket related content from you!!!! ;) also if you need some thrust vector control for your next attempt at the space-shuttle let us know ;P
Good 3D printers are not that expensive anymore, and there are services that you can have 3D print for you. a $300 printer will get you decent quality, certainly good enough for this project in particular.
Higher voltage battery for you ignition circuit should slove your miss fire issue, add a bit of fine black powder between you rocket motors and the wadding for your parachute will give enough pressure to eject the parachute.
1) 12v high-amp source, like a car battery through a relay 2) Igniters dipped in a pyrogen material for high-energy ignition. Look up Quick Dip. I like the ring hookup.
Since consistency is an issue with solid rocket motors, consider making a multi stage rocket where the starting motor is a larger class and leads to a smaller class. The charge from the previous motor is powerful enough to ignite the following motor, they just have to be close to each other.
Suggest using a non-flammable wading to prevent blowback from rocket flames burning the fuselage/parachute. Also suggest using a fine grit sandpaper around the cone base so the parachute can eject. Loose but snug. model rocket wadding alternative. As an alternative to recovery wadding, you can use a baffle, fire resistant crepe paper or fire resistant cellulose insulation.
It'd be cool if you could use several motors without the ejection charge and then a few with, set up maybe 3-4 motors to fire on the launchpad, and then stage the other motors using pieces of cannon fuse, so as the main motors fire it ignites 3 more motors, followed by 3 more motors firing from fuses placed beneath the previously fired motors. The final 3 motors having ejection charges.
@@tarunkumaar625 im not sure, im sure it could be weighed and calculated based on the ammount of thrust a single motor provides. The rocket itself im sure doesn't weigh much. If you split the stages 3,3,and 3 you'd have even thrust, on each stage, granted that is if all 3 engines fired on each stage and you didnt have a dud causing an imbalance of thrust
Easy ignition fix: after you insert the igniters, securely tape over the nozzles to hold all wires against the motors. This forces all wiring to remain attached until ignition is complete, and the blast or lifting of the rocket pulls all away. This will get you those last few milliseconds needed for multiple ignitions. The flame will very quickly burn off any tape that may effect directional control.
It would be interesting to see if you could build a common pressure chamber for multiple engines and then you could have a single exhaust nozzle. It would probably be pretty hard to light all the engines but at least you wouldn’t have to worry about a symmetrical trust if they let a different times
You may lose some maximum altitude, but investing in a hold down system that arrests the rocket for a few fractions of a second while all motors ignite may help. Some solenoid cannibalized from an electrical relais might help. (or even just a magnet that lets go only when the majority of motors have ignited.)
Looked rather like a V2 coming down sans parachute. Glad it didn't drift towards a neighbors house. Might cause a squawk. "Dammit, Jerry's at it again!"
I remember 30 years ago wasting whole packs of igniters just trying to get an Estes motor to light. I didnt know what I was doing of course and had no recourse for information. It still impresses me when someone gets 2 to light at once lol.
Pack the fuses with flash powder which you can scrape off sparklers for hotter ignition, glue in with hot glue nose cone should not be tight just barely snug
Well done, all in all. The thing about the Big Bertha design is that it's so stable that you could probably just set it on it's fins and launch it without the tower.
Been away for a while but you just reminded me why I love RU-vid, another nice one mate, already a long time Fleet Commander so there's that and I think I am going to be replicating your rocket this weekend thanks. I am looking into replicating the Opel rocket glider for which your design, with some modification, can be perfect. Nothing wrong with dowel mate, it's the essence of composite engineering to utilize and fruit salad the best materials in a given structure, if we are to be shamed for using dowel stick your use of card is a no-no as well...or balsa for that matter!
I would do some static testing of your parachute ejection. one thing to consider once you get that sorted is that not all of your motors will need that ejection charge. Maybe just the center one.
You could use some sort of lock to lock the rocket to the pad for an instant allowing just enough time for all the rockets to ignite before unlocking and allowing launch. Like your videos.
Getting them to all go is a challenge. I thought of first slightly roughing up the inside of the solid fuel where the igniter goes and also adding a bit of flash powder in there then inserting the ignitor. Also since there are 9 of them make sure your power source is up to the task. To light one is just a burn so when it goes it goes. But lighting them all may need a faster power spike to make the ignitors flash as opposed to burn. Good luck with this it's very interesting to follow. Or just use one big motor and screw it.
When i watched you for first time i thinked you got almost 1million sub. But i was false. You make cool videos with high quality and i like it. Loves from Turkey
The inability to ignite solid fuel propellent motors simultaneously is why a launch vehicle is held down on the launch pad and only released on complete ignition of all motors.
You need to make the ignition wires long and lightweight. They need to hang from 9 (can be less) posts surrounding the rocket. The idea is for the igniters to follow the rocket up allow more time for slower igniting motors.
Got your "hight powered rocket plane " video in recommendation, now I've been watching your videos for 3 hours continuously. You're doing good work mate.
do some rocket zip line impact tests, i love watchin those, its nice to see something accelerate really fast and than smash into something, just buy a long thin metal cable and tie it from tree to tree with a target at one side to see what the carnage will be like, maybe can make a two stage rocket so the second one will really be flying
Get motors with no ejection charge and setup a small electronics bay and a small compartment below the nose cone. Use an altimeter with deployment to eject the parachute. Should be much more reliable and you also get an altitude reading. You could also slim down the rocket by using fewer larger motors if that is legal. Fewer motors to light would also be more reliable. I think you can get D and E size motors in the U.K.
@8:12 I would attach similar buttons on the opposite side of the cylinder to balance the rocket during flight, also to insure the rocket doesn't fly until all filaments spark reach the engine I would use an electronic delay operated solenoid to release the rocket after insuring all engines have started. There are other complex ways to let the rocket fly after insuring all engines have started - this will prevent any undesirable tilting / twisting after leaving the launch pad. Always use balancing weights by using supper glue or Epoxy Glue and a mini carbon weights, or similar weights. Am assuming the button is very light weight to minimize the lift off drag. For the delay part, you may use the 555 timer or simple 8 pins Microcontroller, a transistor gating driver and the solenoid with the base of transistor (or MOSFET Gate) connected to the timer, or the Microcontroller. In order to insure all engines started then use Nichrome wires and twist them very tight around the engine fuses - after the fuse starts then it automatically break free and fly.
Maybe if you took and made an inner funnel that would project the thrust for your chute to deploy might work. Make a small round disc and at the end of the opening so to push the chute upwards and do make the cone a mm looser for better reaction to this part of your endeavors upon this project. In all I think your going about it the right way. Keep it up.
Love the video, a few sergestions on the ignision (I dont do rocets, but have yoused plent of pyrotechnics): My first sergestion is to link all the starters in series not parallel (we fined that we get a more reliable response with that) OR My seconed sergestion would be to use some very lightweight wire (the stuff you inside small motors) so as the rocket takes off, it have a little longer to ignight the slower rockets.
I was in rocketry for 6 years and getting all the engines to light at the exact milsecond is almost impossible. But that was a good flights. It is better to have a loose nose cone and then you can use small strips of tape to make it fit just right.
The cluster engine is interesting but you should think about fewer more powerful motors. You'll also need to channel the exhaust gases to get the parachute out (not just removing the friction). Great job.
Idea for a better or more reliable ignition system: Put the ignition system on board of the rocket and power it by a supercapacitor or rechargeable battery. For safety reasons, you should put the rocket into launch position and then charge the ingnition system's energy storage. The energy source should be linked to a thyristor that is kept in the "off"-state by a resistor connected to the negative charge while switching in positive to negative direction. The launch switch would then be connected by two contact areas met by contact spikes from the launch pad. Those contact areas would need to shortcut the control-terminal of the thyristor to the positive charge. This system would fire the launch system until the voltage drops to 0V. To do it easy, you could print that areas onto a PCB and solder both the resistor and the thyristor onto the PCB and put both into the bottom, between the engines. The thyristor you need depends on the current needed but the resistor can be anything well below a watt and around 10 kilo ohms would suffice.
put some loose black powder on top of all of the engines so all of the loose powder will ignite and eject the parachute with one blast, not counting on all of the motors firing their ejection blast at the same time. there needs to be at least 5-10mm of clear airspace above the engines, so the flame front from one engine eject blast will ignite all the others.
The us navy uses rubber rings for some airplanes so they don’t leave till the thrust overpowers the rubber rings. Should be able to use a materials only strong enough to prevent liftoff for an instant allowing enough time for all motors to ignite.
Ok, here's my technique for 100% ignition of clustered black powder motors - foolproof! Been using it since the 80's with 0 failures. I used to call it my 'explosive ignition system' - but did see someone call it 'flashpan ignition'. The way I do it is to 'prime' the nozzles with black powder, flush to the bottom of the motor, then carefully seal with tissue paper around the base of the motor, using white glue. This is done immediately before launch. Then prepare a small 'reservoir' or 'flash pan' of black powder with a single (launch) igniter - below the mounted motors, which will flash directly onto, and through the tissue paper. I guarantee 2 things - 1. with that black powder filled in each nozzle, each motor WILL ignite. 2. Each motor will ignite at precisely the same time. I have found that FFFG (finer) powder works best. Probably any type of flash powder would work, as well. Here's an example of one of my launches using this technique from years back - also with a recovery system failure! ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-P-8d2fuFeOE.html Enjoyed your 21st century manufacturing techniques - keep having fun!!!!
For ignition try a pi zero w with starter pins to each engine. that way they all light at the same time. the pi zero w is wifi and Bluetooth so you can start the lanch via your phone.
Excellent! Probably didn’t have enough current to set off all the igniters. Need to look at the distance from where you’re power feeds the ignition ring. Would not be surprised if the two engines that didn’t ignite had the igniters ripped out before they could start the engines. Minute resistance in your ring would be enough. Though I did like the idea it would need to ensure you have the power for all the igniters. Don’t need to burn engines to test the order the igniters combust.
