The distinguishing feature of this rocket, like all the kits from New Way Space Models, is that the body tube is square instead of the traditional round body. This is a D-powered payload rocket, capable of flying with larger E and F motors as well as a smaller C power. My particular rocket had the payload bay modified to carry a small HD video camera and an altimeter/accelerometer.
I chose this rocket to carry the camera because it can have considerable excess rocket thrust to compensate for the heavy (47 gram) camera. It also was somewhat short and has smaller fins which I suspect / believe will be more stable with the heavy noseweight. My previous camera booster was overstable, which I suspect contributed to somewhat blurry images from the motion, and a tendency to wind-cock and fly at a angle. As a bonus, the square sides of the payload made it easier to install a flat glass window. I had hoped that the clear plastic would be optically clear, but it blurrs and distorts the camera's view. Another bonus is the plastic screws that secure the bulkhead ("connector" according to New Way) and prevent a loss of the electronics. To this I added Nylon screws to secure the nose cone on top also.
With its additional weight, it now is carried by two parachutes: a 19" and a 9" Nylon parachute. (The 9" is only for a redundant backup chute.)
I modified the suggested black/white paint and used red and white to make it more visible in the air and on the ground, to help prevent the loss of a rather expensive payload. I did not use the gold foil supplied by the kit. The construction followed the stock kit, however I modified the clear plastic payload tube to carry a small glass window for the camera to "look out of", because the plastic created too much distortion of the image.
I have not yet given this rocket a test flight yet, so I have no idea how high and how well it will perform by itself or with the additional payload weight. New Way was not helpful in providing any altitude estimates of this kit. My hunch is that it will fly well.
| Flight Date: | 2014-05-24 |
| Rocket Name: | C-Thru |
| Flyer's Name: | Rich DeAngelis |
| Launch Site: | Fort Indiantown Gap, PA |
| Actual Altitude: | 427.00 Feet |
It was a beautiful day for launching rockets, although the wind was a bit breezy. But it was a very good day for aerial photography – very clear and not hazy. I decided to launch my video camera in the C-Thru before anything changed.
Previous flights showed that despite the manufacturer’s suggestions, the C-Thru would do better with a 5-second delay instead of a -3. Both of the previous flights ejected about 1 second before apogee, which may have been a factor for the parachute issues I experienced.
The C-Thru was loaded up to 190 grams, since it carried an altimeter and a video camera in a modified payload. The payload weight alone made it surprising that it would need extra delay time, but it did.
This flight is the first test with the payload/recovery system re-configured so that the payload & camera remains upright while descending, thanks to a shock cord attachment on the nose of the rocket.
The rocket lifted off with a healthy 11 Gs of acceleration, but the stronger winds turned it about 30 degrees into the wind. It averaged 2.6 Gs for the 1.7 second thrust time, and at burnout it was moving 97 mph. After a satisfyingly long 4.6 second delay, it ejected the parachutes, though still traveling upwards a bit. The ejection was measured at 405 feet, with the final apogee at 427 feet, so it gained an additional 22 feet in the last 1/10 second of the flight up.
One of the two parachutes became a bit tangled in the shock cord so it did not open fully. The other chute was fine and brought the payload back at 14mph. It landed safely in the grass about 150 feet upwind. It was a 25 second flight.
The pictures were quite clear, although there still was significant blur on the way up and spinning on the way down. Though having the payload section suspended from the nose thru a swivel helped, it was not the magic solution to perfect videos. It still swung under the chute too much.
On this clear day, it was the pixel resolution of the camera and not the haze that limited the view. Since I could not view or monitor the video in the field, I decided a second flight was needed to ensure I took some good photographs.
Sponsored Ads
 |
 |