Wanted: Spunky Lab Assistant

A recent Best Buy commercial shows some
customers shopping for a Geek Squad assistant.
This in no way inspired this post, the body of
which was already written, it merely makes it
timely.

In order to expidite the process I'm going online
in my search for a new Spunky Lab Assistant.

First let me dispel rumors about what happened
to my previous Spunky Lab Assistant [SLA].  She
did not get blown up, burned down, nor
bisected by lasers.  I did not turn her into a
monster, rather she turned herself into a 
monster all on her own.  Another story for
another day [off the web].

This is not as easy as I thought it would be.
I'm trying not to be too picky about specific
job skills, but there are quite a few that
are inherent to the long tenure of any Mad
Scientist's SLA.

Summary of desired job skills;
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Major or minor in any 2 of the following;
chemistry, mathematics, physics, applied or
theoretical, computers, or other tech field.
A dropout with a good reason has preference
over a graduate with a bad reason.

Experience with grant applications.

Know the A B C's of proper fire extinguisher use.

Be able to sew Ripstop & Tubular Nylon, Kevlar,
Nomex and Denim.

Know the charades gestures for; Sedative.

Be able to work both English and Metric factors
in the same equations without freaking out.
[It's a rocketry thing.]

Know what the Periodic Table is for, and NOT for.

Be able to tidy up without disturbing "all my
tubes and wires and careful notes."

Know how to make a lab coat and safety gogs
look jazzy.

Make GOOD Coffee, sometimes with makeshift
equipment, or under adverse conditions.

In the words of Dr. Hawkeye Pierce as played by
Donald Sutherland; "She's gotta be able to work
in close without getting her tits in the way."

Oh yeah, most important;  If I start running, she
should be able to keep up!

Apollo 11 Owners' Workshop Manual, No Really!

When I first saw this last year or so over on
Zzakk's garage, I assumed it was some kind
of spoof.  Not sure if the book even existed,
or was just a cover.

I found the link on Spaceflight Now website.
The link went to Amazon.  There it was, for sale.

I'd like to add that I had the Haynes manuals for
all my motorcycles and love them.  Much better
than Chiltons IMO.  Haynes books are more
likely to list a substitute for that hard to find
Grumman Z347L  pintle injector spanner.

Maybe if my brother buys this for my birthday 
I can fly that Lunar Lander out of my back yard.
It looks good there, but it's tough to cut around.

A Classy Ride

But pretty it aint.
The Bell X-14, I want one!
Can anyone name another jet powered aircraft
with an open cockpit?
I suppose it's just as cool that the X-14 is a VTOL,
but I like the open cockpit best. I want to take it
to the coast and wave to the girls as I cruise slowly
just off the beach, scarf trailing behind.
Surprisingly it would go 172mph and reach 20,000Ft,
brrrr, it's cold up there!  Well, not too surprising,
any plane that can VTO has power to spare.  Range
was 300 miles. Corpus Christi here I come.

The X-14 was built on the cheap in 1957 using  
Beach Bonanza and T-34 Mentor parts. Vertical
lift is provided by a belly mounted flap that
vectors the dual jet exhausts downward. Bleed
air from the engines to puffer vents at the wingtips
and tail provides control in hover.

Good news, it's being restored at a museum in Indiana.

My very 1st Rocket, Corny but Cool.

This had to be my first rocket, such as it was.
I'm sure it wasn't my first parachute though,
there were doubtless some paratroopers before
then, certainly plenty of them after. You could
always tell where my brother and I lived, there
were always parachutes, or the remains of
parachutes, hung from the wires and trees near
the house.  Actually, it wasn't too long before
we were making our own 'chutes out of whatever
came to hand.
I was only 4 or 5 years old, but I remember
getting the Corn Flakes and going positively
apeshit over the Corny 7 offer.  I remember
having to wait till the cereal was gone before
we could cut off the boxtop and send it off
with the whopping 35cents.  Y'know, back
then, food would actually get stale after a
while.  I still remember the agony of waiting
and the pure joy of the package arrival. To
this day ordering stuff is at least as much fun
as fondling stuff in a store, especially in this
electronic age we live in.  
 I admit it, Ebay be FUN!
I remember playing with the Corny 7 in the
back yard and the "Foomp!" sound it made as
you launched the capsule.   I also remember
playing with it awfully close to the apartment
building, but I don't actually remember
whatever became of it. Likely I put it on the
roof.
As I rcollect, being the Corny 7, the astronaut
figure in the capsule was Corny the Rooster.
The available info doesn't seem to support this
though.  I question whether all of the capsules
were blue.  I keep thinking mine was red.
Thanks to RBToys.com.

Atlas 5 Updates

Atlas 5-411 Astra 1KR, Flt#8, with single strapon.
Note the vectoring main motors.


Atlas 5-511-AV010, New Horizons, Flt#7
All up with five strapons.


This illustration speaks for itself.


A special thanks to Gunter Krebs who made comment on my Atlas? 5 post. He also posted a link to the Atlas 5 info on his most excellent website; Gunter's Space Page
I had visited Gunter's sites in the dim and distant past and since then lost his address.

So it turns out that the Atlas 5 can be flown with up to five strap-ons, or as few as one [or zero of course]. This is still practically unique in the space launch industry. Aside from the two shuttle systems which are asymetric by nature, the augmented Atlas 5 is the only other one that I know of. This of course requires a robust thrust vector system and an equally capable flight control computer able to adapt to, or be programmed for, the asymetry from the moment of liftoff in addition to the usual trajectory programming, weather, and any other possible anomolies.

While the original Atlas balloon tankage was welded stainless steel, I learned that the Atlas 5 tankage is isogrid [machined] aluminum. The main motor[s] are/is a Russian RD-180. Actually a single assembly with two chambers. One more very useful link: Atlas 5 Data Sheet

The DSP Goddard

3-2-1 Ignition.
Note the clip attachment.


1st stage ascent.


Staging smoke and weathercocking

DSP stands for Deep Space Probe, 'cause it sure doesn't look like an atmosperic rocket. I named it Goddard in honor of Robert Goddard's famous first liquid fueled rocket which
was likewise a tractor rocket. A tractor rocket pulls from the front rather than pushes from the aft.

The Goddard was inspired and built in a junk pile back in the early '90's. The top cap is from a Colgate upright toothpaste pump that was a good fit on a BT-60 coupler once the internal
threads were moto-tooled off. It was supposed to look like a docking ring, but I never bothered with the extra details. The large ball was from a Valentines balloon bouquet and was clear plastic with a tiny teddy bear inside. Last I looked, it and other sizes were available at Hobby Lobby. The gold pressure spheres are plastic Xmas ornaments. The conical body is the
heart of it and was originally a Yoplait Yogurt cup. The legs are the only costly components, Dave Brown fiberglas pushrods from the hobbyshop. The tailring is a handy droppoff of LOC 5.38 airframe tubing.

One leg is used as a blind launch lug for a 3/16" rod. The other 2 legs each have an ignitor extension wire up them, with flat blade crimps at the bottom for the micro-clips and binding posts at the top for wrapping ignitor wires to.

With a single motor, the Goddard balances behind the nozzle. With two D12's the CHAD booster motor crosses the balance point, and once I even flew it 3 staged. I don't recommend it except in absolute calm. It flies quite well on E11J & F12J's on calm days, and E15W & E18W on breezier days. The old Estes E15 was good, but I have yet to try the newer Estes E9.
Even staged, short delays are the rule.

I have 80% of the parts I need for an H-I sized version, that'll stand nearly 6ft tall.
All Range Safety Officers fear me!

1st pic by KeithAlanK, pics 2-4 by John Lee.

I was speechless!

I'm over it now.
This is the longest I've gone between posts.

When the Obama administration killed the NASA Constellation Program I truly did not know what to think. Since I didn't want to start blathering like an idjit without knowing any real facts,
I just shut up. Too bad politicians and newscasters can't do the same. I do try to look at both sides of anything, thus I can't be gung-ho about every cool aerospace project that comes along,
or about a cancellation. I did NOT like the Constellation Program, particularly the Ares I, top and bottom. I won't miss it a bit. The Ares V/VI iterations looked better, but were plagued by problems as well. As near as I can tell, it needed bigger engines than are currently available. Until they re-approach or exceed the Saturn Program F1 engine they're wasting time and money. Now it appears that NASA is going to redirect research money in that direction. The "New Hydrocarbon Engine" is intended to meet or exceed the Russian RD-180 which puts
out 860,000 Lbs of thrust. Not big enough I say. Hydrocarbon is fancy talk for Kerosene. Not as much energy per pound as burning Hydrogen, but it's a LOT denser, which saves volume on the first stage where it can be used. Saved volume means less booster weight and height, and it doesn't need to be insulated, or defueled if a launch is seriously delayed.
Another article spoke of NASA initiating real research into orbital fuel depots. Another needed link in the chain to future space activities.

Between cancellation of Constellation and the Shuttle retirement, the job loss numbers are nothing short of staggering. I hear numbers like 20,000 jobs lost in Florida alone. Combined job losses in others states may rival that. This is a bad time to even threaten that, given the nation's financial woes. That's a lot of folks that aren't going to spend an extra dime towards improving the economy even while they can. Another factor to consider is the message this sends to our children. We are trying to get more kids interested in science and high tech educations, meanwhile the folks who currently hold those kinds of jobs are getting laid-off enmasse.

A recent report stated that it would take 2 years from the go signal to add new flights to the shuttle's remaining few. No big stumbling blocks besides putting the fuel tanks back in production. The shuttles will still be flying for most of this year, so that still leaves a bit of a gap. Maybe some overtime or the temporary shift of extra workers would close that gap somewhat.
I do think the STS system is aged, but we should not walk away from its' capabilities for any reason. I never felt that the STS should be our only major access to space, and now less than ever, but we should continue to use it where other vehicles won't suffice. At this point it would take quite a while to produce new improved shuttle orbiters, but we should get on with that. It'll always be more expensive to do so later.
Special thanks to the articles I found at Spaceflight Now.
http://spaceflightnow.com/

Basically, I'm Annoyed!

Here's a rare picture free post.
This is just words, about words.

It's not uncommon for fad words to come and go in daily use in our culture. Some words stick around, some peak and then decline rapidly, some not fast enough. The word; "Problematic" thankfully has faded away. It's not a bad word in itself, but so few people used it correctly,
it would set my teeth on edge every time by reflex.

What has me growling this time is the word; "Basically".
What really set me off was an American reporter in Haiti being interviewed by another reporter over a live feed right after the recent earthquake. This guy said "Basically" at least six times, but never kept it basic. That's as bad as a hippy saying "Like" and/or "Y'know" every sentence. This guy was educated and experienced though, how embarrassing. I hope his colleagues make a blooper disc of it. I wouldn't mind "Basically" so much if it didn't precede the LONG version of an explanation so often. It should be followed by one or two concise sentences of explanation tops, otherwise it's not basic is it?

After listening to enough people say "Basically", I realized that a lot of the time it's thrown in while they're collecting their thoughts or composing the next sentence before launching into an explanation, thusly it takes the place of dead air or the more honest; "Uhhh" or "Um".
No excuse!
After a few times though, it has a negative effect on one's appearance of intelligence.

OK, I wrote; "Basically" 5 times, [including this time] but only USED it once, in the title. There it was used correctly and concisely, IF you don't bother to read the post.

The Ace MonoKopter in Action

This is my Ace MonoKopter when I flew it in Oct 2009.
The motor was an out of production [rats!] Aerotech G33-5J.
I've wanted to do a post about the MonoKopter for a while
now, but a lack of decent photos held it up. You must agree,
this sequence of pics are well worth the wait.

To give y'all an idea, the MonoKopter is 48" from motors to
wingtip fin, the wing is 27" x 7" x 3/4"thick, the flybar is a
1/2"dia x 36" oak dowel.   The weight is approxx. 28oz less
motors.

I ordered the Monokopter from Korey Kline in person, along
with a couple of his other Ace kits at LDRS-6. Being an ARF,
I had a bit of a wait for it to be produced and shipped. Well
worth it though. After numerous flights in the late '80's and
throughout the '90's, I considered it retired after a bad
landing damaged it. In fact I planned to give it a Viking funeral
after I completed CAD drawings of it. I'm glad I decided to
start flying it again. I figure by next fall I should have a serious
replacement for it after my smaller [and cheaper] monocopter
autorotation experiments are concluded.  Ummm, lets say
instead, when the experiments progress far enough.

You might wonder why MonoKopter is spelled with a capital K.
Normally monocopter is spelled with a lower case C. I can't
recall for sure at this point if it was correct, but the MK's
designer Korey Kline, like myself, Ken Kzak, are fond of K's.
I do know I've always spelled it that way.
The photo set was a good bit longer but I left a few out.
Blogger.com will only let me upload five per post.

25% More Goblin

Pics by; KeithAlanK

Welcome to 2010.

This is my slightly upscale Goblin. I originally built it
for a halloween Goblin contest that was going to be
held at a launch at McGregor TX about 10 or so years
ago. The launch got rained out as I recall, but I'm
glad I built the new Goblin anyway.  It uses an Estes
Citation Red Max/Patriot black plastic nosecone. The
fins are 1/16" plywood through to the MMT, and the
airframe is BT-60 with 1 layer of 3oz glass. The
motor mount is 24mm for D12's thru small F reloads. 
Like the original Goblin it uses streamer recovery.

The demon artwork came from one of my favorite
comic books; Those Annoying Post Brothers by Matt
Howarth. When I first saw that demon I thought of
the Goblin artwork, they're from different artists
but appear to be from the same Hell.
The Indecline art on the left fin is from a stenciled
graffitti that is on freight cars all over the country.
I skewed the art slightly to better fit the fin, and
now the character looks like he's walking downhill.
Indecline inclined.

As a kid I built an original Goblin kit, making it my
first D kit though I never flew it on more than a C6-5.
The trees verging on my local field were already well
enough decorated with my model rockets. That Goblin
got scrapped long ago, but its' nosecone still flys on
another rocket.
The stand is a cast iron star that came from a Texican
gee-jaw store.  My brother gifted me several different
stars one Xmas after I flashed on the concept of using
them for rocket stands. Thanks bro.