Am I wrong to hope it was a recovery test only and they are going to fill it full of lox/kero for a later run?
On 19/03/15 11:31, Anthony Cesaroni wrote:
Hi Troy, Kudos on the launch. If you had designed it to fly on an O motor and given the structural and aerodynamic loads involved, why was the rocket that heavy? Anthony. Sent from my iPhoneOn Mar 18, 2015, at 7:46 PM, Troy Prideaux <GEORDI@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: Fair point. Ok, for a small contribution: Last weekend we launched the 1:1 scale V2 HPR rocket. It was a success, albeit at a much lower altitude than we all would have liked, but hey, you can't expect to break altitude records launching a 400kg rocket on a single O motor:) Anyway, the low altitude apogee certainly provided some challenges for recovery, but the CO2 separation and deployment system that I mentioned here last year worked a treat. The valve system was quite a different design to the system I generally settled on. The remote fill hose disconnect system worked a treat (controlled by the LCO controller). The devices' pressure status reporting and remote activation all worked perfectly on the day. Hats off to all involved in the project. Great team, fantastic team leader and support from everyone. Troy.Just to be a wet blanket, what does this >50 message thread (combining the multiple subjects it's been under, and not including the various previous times Mr. Henson has opined on the subject) have to do with (AMATEUR. ROCKETS.)? A little off topic discussion is understandable, but to hash out the details in a forum of people who ar