...
Goal | Reason |
|---|---|
Contain and Support a Soda Can During Flight | Learn how a carbonated beverage will behave after experience launch conditions. |
Use a Party Payload Including Lights and a Speaker | Expose delicate electronics to launch conditions. |
Utilize a Reefed Parachute In Recovery | Test a single-bay deployment system for future use. |
Deploy a Smoke Flare at Apogee | Develop a method of mixing and deploying a smoke flare for aid in locating rockets on the ground. |
Open Recovery Bay at Apogee and Disreef Parachute | Recovery of the rocket. |
Track Rocket Position | Aid in locating the rocket after flight. |
Reach 6,000 ft. | Apogee goal. |
Gather Telemetry Data During Flight | Verify success of reefed parachute and collect information about the rocket’s performance. |
Post-mortem
...
The Good
All systems of the rocket were finished in time for the launch day, without the need to pull multiple all nighters to get it there.
All portions of the rocket were recovered and fairly well documented.
Division of labor between the various sub teams was fairly even, given the context of what each sub team was working on.
Team leadership felt cohesive and communication between leads was mostly clear and consistent.
The Bad
Following an accidental launch of the rocket by URRG officials, the rocket experienced a RUD, with the rocket separating into 3 sections: nosecone and parachute, upper half of the rocket, and lower half / booster section of the rocket. The parachute and nosecone drifted into the field, the upper half of the rocket fell and landed next to the rail, and the booster section went ballistic, impacting a field ~0.5km away. All sections of the rocket still in existence were recovered. Launch Initiative Members responded quickly to the situation and successfully disarmed the black powder charges in the upper half of the rocket as per SOP. One recovery team collected the parachute and nosecone from where they had drifted in the field, while the other recovery team located and dug out the booster section.
The RUD of the rocket was likely caused by an uneven connection between the booster and polycarb sections of the rocket, and possibly asymmetrical motor burn. The joint between the two aforementioned sections was uneven, and likely caused there to be uneven trust transfer up the rocket, causing the wobble exhibited by the rocket. In the case of asymmetrical motor burn, not much could have been done except perhaps closer inspection of the motor prior to integration with the rocket. There was a series of other structural failures that occurred after the rocket broke into 3 pieces, and while some improvements could have been made during manufacturing it is unclear weather they could have been mitigated (such as snatch cord tearing) given the failure mode of the rocket. More detailed documentation of the various failures of the rocket is available in the team drive.
Overall the main lesson learned is that space race should have more active oversight from more senior members of the club in order to identify and correct potential mistakes during the manufacturing of the rocket. Furthermore, a much more intensive pre-flight check is needed in order to ensure the rocket is flight ready and identify any critical errors the space race team might not notice or otherwise minimize due to an (understandable) desire to get the rocket in the air.
Furthermore, Launch Initiative members need to feel more empowered to push back on directives from URRG officials they find to be unsafe, and it should be stressed that when the igniter is in the rocket engine, it is armed, and should be treated as such due to all the implications of that fact.
Design overview
Payloads
Payload Requirements
...