On the direction of Aerospace

Aerospace / RC
#1

I would like to get some input on possible directions to go! The H.A.B. is still in the works, but I want to branch out a bit too.

As I’m sure you guys have seen, I’d like to build a bench model of a liquid rocket motor to learn the nuances of liquid rocket plumbing. I would also like to build a high-power hybrid rocket to learn construction techniques for conventional rocket construction materials (graphite, aluminum, carbon fiber, etc). If we can learn the necessary lessons from these two projects, I’d like to parley them into building a real liquid rocket motor and fly it!

I also would like to increase our activity on the RC side of things! To do so, I was thinking about possibly doing a collaborative build with DTFB. As most of the FT plans can be built in a matter of hours by a single person, I thought we may step away from that design style and try to make our own plans for a truss/rib design (like the old balsa models). This could be a fun project that could be split up among several people – “You take the wings, I’ll take the fuselage, he can do the electronics, then we put it all together” sort of approach.

What do you guys think? Any ideas you guys have would be great! I doubt we can tackle everything at once so I want to do the ideas that are most appealing to the greatest number of people first. The more activity we have at the beginning, the greater chance we have of tackling the later, more expensive projects.

1 Like
#2

I think I need more time than I have. But I’m pretty sure everyone who has been involved in Aero has had that issue. The hunting season is almost over so I will have more time than I did over the winter.

The HAB is currently on hold. The primary issue is Harold has been too busy, and since I don’t know enough about the electronics to do it myself (… yet) and I was also hurting for time, I stopped cycling the HAB thread and holding meetings regularly. For those not in the loop, there has been some chatter about restarting it on Aero’s Google Hangout. I completely forgot the meeting a week or two ago (oops, sorry) so wasn’t there to coordinate. We need to re-coordinate again. I really would like to see it go.

There’s a number of other group projects which have been discussed

  • I liked the idea of having Aero lead the autoclave initiative.
  • I don’t mind working on a liquid rocket motor
  • Multi-person aircraft build.

However, I say we should take the conversation a different direction. The current big issue is lack of participation. I know a lot of that has to do with people not having time. Still, if there were some sort of big draw, that would give people a much bigger reason to show up, which would help quite a bit. It might be instructive for us to think of ourselves as being in competition with RC flying fields and race tracks and such, and analyze it from that perspective.

So … what does a proper RC workshop have? For aircraft? For cars? For other types of vehicles? We have a lot of interesting things at DMS, but at the end of the day if I’m not making a foam airplane with my own engine and such then what does DMS Aero do for me? Are there airplane design classes? I know Harold did some build classes, but that only goes so far. In order for people to participate, there needs to be something more than “oh we have Phoenix on a computer yo.” Drive participation with something truly useful, then group projects will be more achievable.

#3

We(Chuck & I) left some styrofoam on the donation shelf yesterday afternoon. He figured you guys might want it or someone else may want it to make some planes/drones & what not.

#4

To add, my main contention is we need something people can’t or don’t usually have themselves. Which is a little hard in RC because the people who do RC typically have the equipment they need or get it themselves and do not need a community initiative to get something besides maybe a flying field. The hobby is developed around being able to do it in your garage, after all.

This is why I liked the autoclave idea. I don’t know very many places where a 'clave would be accessible to your average modeler. (I haven’t looked though; I could be sorely mistaken.)

#5

I’ll have to check the next time I go to my parents, but I think I still have all the schematics and whatnot for the test bed engines we used in college. It’s all paper (CAD wasn’t really a thing back then), but it’d be a good starting point for you.

1 Like
#6

I grabbed the the styrofoam for that exact purpose, if the committee needs it I will bring it back :slight_smile: Well I grabbed a bunch Wed night. I am still working through designing a twin engine thingie, I’d like to get more involved with aero.

2 Likes
#7

Good, I’m glad that someone could use it. That’s why it was put there. I probably would have just thrown it away, but Chuck suggested someone could use it for that (RC objects) purpose

1 Like
#8

That would be awesome! I’d love to see them! :smiley:
Would it be easier for you to meet at DMS? Or convert them to digital and send them?

#9

I’d like to bring some of my old x-plane designs into real life:



in RC scale of course.

1 Like
#10

That seems like a doable project! A DTFB version of those would be easily affordable and seems complex enough for a multiple person build!

#11

Likely just scan them and email them. They’re 1,000 miles away, in a box, in my dad’s basement with the rest of my school notebooks. Lo those many years ago I was a lab assistant, and the prof I worked for specialized in rocket fuel, so we spent a lot of time playing with them.

Unrelated but interesting: summer sausage makes a reasonably high thrust fuel if you blow liquid oxygen through it, and has the added bonus of the exhaust smelling delicious instead of instantly killing you. Thrust to weight wasn’t good enough to fly, but it was fun to do as a demo.

#12

So are those models available somewhere in an STL or some such?

@Millioncorn, do you want to set something up for this?

Edit: also, what is the design goal of the second one?

#13

For the most part they were contests for old school X-Plane.org contests, I will most likely be able to find the files somewhere, or recreate. The first one was heavy lift, the second one I think was speed I think.

#14

If you can come up some STLs that would be great, but we can recreate them if you come up with some profile pics.

#15

I plan to do this once we have a few more details nailed down about the project (Some orthos or STLs, decision on which one we want to build, how big we want to build it, what functions will it have) so that by the time we get together we would be able to start planning construction methods and working on drawing plans.

#16

Honestly it’d just be cool to see if we could design something cool, flight test in x-plane and build. Also, anyone ever explored the possibility that we have the tools/skillets at the space to do this: https://youtu.be/Zt1L4XXfOB0

1 Like
#17

He mispronounces “stator”. :slight_smile: </ar>

Also, this video kind of glosses over the “how it’s made” part of the compressor/turbine cartridge. While the rest of it’s really cool in its own right, that part would be the hold up to making one @ DMS, I would think. Of course, maybe you can BUY the shaft, turbine, and compressor wheels off the shelf, for all I know…

I’d love to see it happen. Been wanting one of these since before they existed. I’d love to read about one being made here!

1 Like
#18

A custom turbine may be a bit beyond our reach at the moment. I don’t know of any active aerospace members who have haas mill trained. On top of that there is a delicate balance for fine-tuning the vibrations (also requiring equipment we don’t have) which means there will be a learning curve on machined items with a possibility of damaging them with tests – This usually leads to building the part in question multiple times, and the part being damaged will be that difficult-to-manufacture one. Maybe once we have some more members with a broader scope of experience/training.

#19

I have the HAAS firmly in my crosshairs :slight_smile: But I see what you mean. Guess it wouldn’t be great to build something that performed like the Jumos in the earliest ME-262s, lots of flameouts, fires due to throttle movement speed. As many models I simulated fiery crashes with as a kid, would not be cool to watch the project go down in flames. Assuming a model V-1 wouldn’t be appreciated flying around, because a pulsejet has been built at the space :smiley:

#20

Me too, I was fascinated by aircraft and the working of turbine engines. My warbird loving friends look at me like a heretic when I suggest that some famous WWII fighters would have been/would be epic with turboprops instead of piston engines. Imagine a FW190-D9 Dora for example with a Pratt PT6T-6B. That makes me happy for some reason.

1 Like