This whole thing was dope as hell and you're getting tantalizingly close. But the bit I'm the most excited for is what you said at the end. "I want to put stuff in space". I mean assuming you're not just gunning for a spot at spacex or something, I look very forward to launching a satellite off your space launch company some day ;)
When we can put model rocket level stuff in orbit it opens a whole new can of worms in terms of possibilities. Like. Consider landing with 6Mn+ vs closer to 1Kn. Changes landimg requirements drasticaly.
@@allenpickett5307 let's say you want to ship a small but delicate package to a very remote village deep in the African wilderness. The cheapest option would be FedEx who could ship it there on a 747, but they can't get it to that exact village, they can only guarantee it will get a a village near that one because you are just one of many customers shipping stuff on that plane. But let's say your package is something that absolutely needs to get to that specific village, like medicine or correspondence to specific people in that village. Your next option is to go with a smaller scale courier service who will charge you more than FedEx, but their courier will hand deliver your package right to that village without making any other stops on the way and then they'll even get a signature to ensure it got to the right spot. In this analogy SpaceX is FedEx. They make BIG rockets and so they handle BIG payloads, with smaller payloads usually saving money by hitching a ride along with the bigger ones. But it is understood that those smaller payloads are not the main priority and will have to be happy with the orbit they get. The courier service is an analogy for companies like rocket lab or one that Joe might feasibly form in the future (assuming he starts with small scale launch vehicles). The village in this analogy is the specific orbit you want your satellite to be in. Some small payloads still need the amount of dedicated attention that SpaceX gives to its main payloads, so they have to go with smaller launch vehicles who are willing to give them that kind of guarantee.
@@Mallchad due to the limitations of how efficient chemical rocket engines can be, it's not really possible to get stuff as small as model rockets to orbit. Smallest vehicle to reach orbit was JAXA's SS-520-5 three stage solid rocket which was 20 inches wide, 31ft tall, and weighed 2.9 tons (54cm wide, 9.5m tall, weighing 2600kg). It's payload capacity is only 9lbs (4kg). And they were really pushing the limit of how small you could get. Rockets are powerful tools, but in the grand scheme of things getting to orbit takes a shit ton of energy and we just don't have a way to pack all that energy into a smaller vehicle. If someone could come up with a magical propellant that can store way more energy in the same amount of space than current propellants then you could bring size down in theory, but that is unlikely to happen.
@@maxk4324 I know. The definition of "model rocket is blurry". And when you're this guy, I doubt *a little bit bigger* is a huge obstacle to overcome. Not to mention as you said, this is only with current technology. You remember people said you couldn't land rockets using suicide burns / hoverslam? Now look at the space industry .
Gosh, hope he didn't get an interview where they ignored his accomplishments and only looked at his formal education. I'd pack it all in a room and say F it too.
Didn't joe mention before, I don't remember if it was a TV interview, but he got a few offers from space agencies but he turned it down because he wanted to work on BPS.Space first.
@@tb46475 well Falcon heavy is same as falcon 9 they've just strapped 2 f9 like boosters on the both side of falcon 9 first stage but starship is totally a different thing
Gargarin was basically a passenger in a pre-programmed flight. He didn't have to navigate and he couldn't. As for later US flights people completely ignore the computers on the ground which did the main work. AS they do to this day, because it makes more sense. You know the old "Apollo Computer less power than a digital clock" meme. Which is wrong anyway, unless the clock i in a smartphone. But the computer and the crew were at the receiving end of 3 massive IBM 360 mainframes on the ground who did the main work (as was Gemini). Not to mention all the biological computers on both sides.
Far, far, _far_ exceeds. If memory serves, both the AGC (Apollo Guidance Computer) and the LVDC (Launch Vehicle Digital Computer) executed about 15k instructions per second. zmescience.com/science/news-science/smartphone-power-compared-to-apollo-432
I've seen far crazier stuff done with solid motors. www.mda.mil/video/FTM-44%20Public%20Release%20Video_20-MDA-10599_web.mp4 is done entirely with solid motors, for example. Still, extremely impressive for a non-military budget!
I don't think he will ever properly land a solid motor rocket, but he is laying all the groundwork. If/when he switches to liquid fueled rockets, that he can vary the thrust and shut off at the right time, he'll nail the landing easy.
Hi, I have an suggestion to prevent it from falling after touchdown. You can design a few solid weights to fall to the base of the legs right after touchdown. And at the same time turn off the engine. The solid weights would increase the required torque to tilt the rocket. And turning the engine off would make the rocket not thrust the other side. (Or) After touchdown, you can make the the thruster direction depend on gravity by disconnecting the motors.
@@MaxVandenbussche Put a capacitor across the DC motor would make things better. But it would definitely affects the start up time/profile of the motor.
Jeez man! I know nothing about rockets or math but I’m able to basically follow all the way through with a reasonable amount of comprehension. You’re really a phenomenal communicator and I, for one, appreciate you.
Absolutely awesome system! One note: you have to be careful running a Kalman filter on GPS data. Errors in GPS measurements don't strictly follow a Gaussian distribution, which works against the error profile assumptions used by Kalman filters. Keep up the great work!
On point, that's what I was thinking as well. How about using Extended Kalman Filter which essentially linearizes the non-linear function around the current error estimate?
A number of years ago I remember some guys were developing a product to improve GPS drift issues by using a second GPS in a fix ground station to help alleviate drift by sending it's details to the second unit. As you know it's stationary any movement is due to GPS drift and the idea is you can then use that drift from the fixed station to improve accuracy of the unit it the air in the same area. The assumption is both units will give similar levels of drift in the same area. Anyway it's another data point for the kalman filter at least
@seonap thanks was quite a few years back that I read about it. Not sure if it would help here or not. In theory I guess it would improve the accuracy of the output from the kalman filter and I doubt it would take him long to implement given his skill set. Not sure how the latency would impact things admittedly, so might not be practical anyway if that's an issue. I'll have to go read up on it again.
Joe, your work and attitude towards it are an inspiration to me. I have a 5 year degree in aeronautical engineering and have worked with recreational aircraft companies for 10 years now. Never have I experienced your level of professionalism since leaving uni, nothing I've seen even comes close! It's not even so much the amazing skillset that you have built along the way but rather the the will, determination and patience to "do it right", even if it takes more time, requires new equipment or learning new skills. Going to the effort of using the best tools available instead of silly workarounds makes a good engineer. You are a fine example.
@@manofsan what? That's new to me... As far as i know, you can't throttle SRBs on demand... You can only adjust the throttle curve according to time spent burning... Do you know of a solid rocket booster which does something else?
I love these videos so much. I doubt there is any other creator on the platform making system as complicated as these. Personally I would love to see more information about the mechanics - maybe 5 minute videos dedicated to specific systems?
@@andie_pants My family has had it...wouldn't know unless job required testing...I know about 10 coworkers that had loss of taste or something...only people it really affects negatively are those with cardiac issues.
@@andie_pants why would want people to die cmon man that is a bunch of malarkey and yin know it. I know 50 people who have had it with no problems - that is majority of people
@@andie_pants I look at the data - the data shows only people with Comorbidities have issues - it’s science - I believe it is due to America’s insisting on taking medications in excess - that is my hypothesis that those with cardiac problems are likely to die - most of us are going to get this now and there is nothing anyone can do about it unless you live in a bunker with no human contact and air supply separate from outside world
@@andie_pants I do think every life is precious (also why I am pro-life) but there are a total of 138 children in the USA that have died of Covid so statistically I would have to disagree with children being at risk as of 11/19/20: downloads.aap.org/AAP/PDF/AAP%20and%20CHA%20-%20Children%20and%20COVID-19%20State%20Data%20Report%2011.19.20%20FINAL.pdf
This project is incredible. Unimaginable scale of hard work in there. You are so passionate about what you're doing. If I had to make a wish, it is to work with you on your projects. Cheers from this 13-yr old lad who has the same dream as you have. Edit: Please do a favor to this lad by helping him get an inch closer to his dreams! 😁
This is incredible work! I'm so glad I've been following you for the last few years seeing you progress to this point. I can't wait for your next attempt!
gnss isnt accurate enough to feed into your loop with any kind of certainty. you need some sort of lidar/camera system. or maybe RTK gps with a base station
It is. It isn't absolutely accurate, but relatively. It's always off by up to a few meters, but for a duration of a flight that stays the same distance and direction.
Wow, incredible! Being a model rocketist myself, here are some quick suggestions for better landing: *Make the bottom of rocket heavier* - Heavier bottom means that the center of gravity is downward, which tilts the rocket to the weight, and it straightens itself better on landing. But this way could result in the rocket not flying as high as it did. *FIRE!* - If you have checked out the NAR rulebook, one of the rules is to try to keep the rocket away from grass, or anything flammable. Just be careful, because when I worked on my reusable rocket, it set the grass on fire! *Try to find a place where is ground is flatter* - This could improve rocket stability, so it can land better. Have you tried a landing pad? Those are the quick tips, AWESOME WORK! I'm still working on stability.
Amazing video, first time I've come across your stuff! Subscribed ready for future updates! On an aside, if anyone finds out where I can get this blue NASA hoodie, please let me know, it looks amazing and need some new hoodies!
Wow, Joe! Incredible to see the work you have been doing...and harvesting from interns! Terrific progress, you are closing in...”vanishing decimals of accuracy.”😎
If you ever accomplish to land this rocket successfully, you should fund a company that sells these mini self landing rockets. A lot of rocket enthusiasts will love it!
When you explain the way it calculates and manages the suicideburn I can't help being reminded of "The missile knows where it is because it knows where it isn't". Anyone else?
man im lookin at the moon and bps space suddenly pops in my head so i went to check joe's progress since the last time i checked the channel was months ago!
"There's no right way" *Me grabbing popcorn and looking to see how many armchair engineers are going to throw in their 2 cents about the "right way" to do things. * Great video as always.
To avoid the problem of the propulsion motor potentially igniting the landing motor, why not use E15-0 and plug the top with epoxy ? This way there will be no delay charge burning which could ignite the other motor.
Also happens to be the same solution as the FAMID: Family annoying mouse impingement device. Place on the bottom of a laser mouse. People from the pre mouse ball generation never think to look under the mouse.
This is the most impressive undertaking of model rocketry( even professional rocketry) I’ve ever seen on RU-vid or, anywhere else, for that matter. If NASA or Elon Musk doesn’t have you on their payroll by now, that’s there loss. If ever you are offered a job by someone in the industry, decline it. They’ll be working for you soon enough. Id bet money that in the very near future, your name will be forever linked to astronautics and aerospace engineering. Good luck on your future designs and builds. I await the video of one of your vehicles blowing past the Karman Line on its way to place a Sputnik tribute satellite into orbit. I wouldn’t be surprised If you’ve already accomplished this. Thanks for the great video and for sharing such an amazing accomplishment with the rest us. I’ve always wondered how Tony Stark’s origin story would unfold. Just Kidding , you’ve got that beat. Keep it up. Thanks again.
Seeing all these armchair rocket scientist people pretend to know better solutions or reasons why Joe is wrong is honestly hilarious. Although, not sure if I would find it funny after having worked on this stuff for 5 years.
Hmm, due to how GPS locks up once you start moving at higher speeds (due to civilian GPS limits) have you considered making your own ground tracking system using some time domain systems? It wouldn't be practical, nor necessary, for these launches, but it may be necessary in the future.
Joe, this flight demonstrates the need for throttling. Using cosine loss from TVC is what caused the final wobble and lateral velocity. Also, are your grid fins servo controlled? If so, check out MIMO control theory.
many of ur rockets dont land smoothly because they are not heavy work on it i think the reason they don't land because : 1. they are not heavy 2 . the landing stands what ever you call them they are quiet elastic 3. even those stands are elastic a little bit the thrust is produced from the motors even after they touch the ground vertically and causing the system to fall aside The solutions are: 1. you need to increase flight time so that we can get thrust needed on the correct time. increasing the time of filght means that the main booster must be released after the total fuel completes and in newtons laws of motion there is a formula F = (dm/dt)*v dm/dt is the fuel required ive done the caluculation required you can reply me if you want that
Why don't you use 2 motors so that you can control the thrust. Like when you want to decrease the thrust they can face opposite to each other a little bit. I do not know about the complications but I think that you will be able to land the rocket with 2 motors
I do not subscribe to channels easily in most cases. I have gleefully subscribed to yours young man. You and others like you are the future magicians of this world and why you are not employed by Elon Musk or NASA with your own crew. Incredibly interesting project and video.
Awesome video. It seems like you are using GPS to control landings which is probably more effective on a larger rocket but I'm not sure. Is there some way to use the Cameras to zero out side to side motion? Computer Vision problem. Also, how did you learn all this? It's impressive.
hey @BPS.space I am a computer science undergrad how can we learn about the flight control mechanism like the code stuff of the rocket sensors which resources have you used to design and learn about this project... plz respond great fan of yours ..I see you the next elon musk.(you do look the same hahaha)...
he made a series on it called landing model rockets and here is a discord server that i think you may find helpful regarding flight control: discord.gg/B5NsaGtg
You have done an amazing thing. This is amazing. It doesn't matter if it sticks the landing. When I was in Jr high school, we used to talk about being able to do this in the rocketry club. I was adamant that it couldn't be done at the scale of modelling we had back then (1982). When I saw SpaceX do it , I felt like my opinion was verified. Not on the model rocket scale. You have proved me wrong, and I'm glad you did.
Awesome. Perhaps one of the most interesting content in RU-vid. Keep going! I do believe this project meet in great way engineering, math, creativity, a bit of art, manufacturing, and creativity for testing & solving real problems. Congrats!
I've been reviewing old Apollo mission footage and info and getting up to speed on ISS and space exploration news tonight. I popped back over to your channel to see if you'd landed any of your projects on the moon yet; no hyperbole intended. Meanwhile watching your progress now is as exciting as the news will be when you do "put stuff in space." It's only a matter of time. I'm so proud of you.
Hey, I just thought I’d give some ideas to the awesome project. I noticed the rocket, due to the low altitude, has no chance to stabilize thus flight being unstable for landing and the rocket falling down. The reaction wheel is activated a bit too late, if possible maybe code it so at a certain altitude or time in the duration of flight it will turn on whilst it’s still going up just before the rocket runs out for thrust. This will allow the wheel to be at full speed before going down therefore it allowing a more stable re-entry.
