Space: The ultimate in higher

Discussions on high/extreme altitude and mach busting rockets.

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
jase
It runs on moonshine
It runs on moonshine
Posts: 1221
Joined: Wed May 11, 2011 11:06 pm
Location: 43° South

Re: Space: The ultimate in higher

Postby jase » Mon Aug 31, 2015 2:52 pm

cryoscum wrote:Cross linking to another thread here, rockoons were abandoned by NASA in the 1950's as not worth pursuing. The practical complexities are virtually insurmountable & this has not changed since then. Read up on the subject (always a good idea).

Just my 2c worth...


Scoop1261 wrote:Before you get all enthusiastic about launching something to 100km's you should read up on the Space Activities Act!
You will need VERY DEEP pockets, and a suite of awesome lawyers just to get you to the launch permit stage!
Me and my rockets run on Moonshine.

citizenspace
Parachute Packer
Parachute Packer
Posts: 47
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2015 12:32 pm
Location: Sydney, NSW

Re: Space: The ultimate in higher

Postby citizenspace » Mon Aug 31, 2015 3:25 pm

jase wrote:
cryoscum wrote:Cross linking to another thread here, rockoons were abandoned by NASA in the 1950's as not worth pursuing. The practical complexities are virtually insurmountable & this has not changed since then. Read up on the subject (always a good idea).

Just my 2c worth...


Scoop1261 wrote:Before you get all enthusiastic about launching something to 100km's you should read up on the Space Activities Act!
You will need VERY DEEP pockets, and a suite of awesome lawyers just to get you to the launch permit stage!


1) They abandoned them because mass produced (relative to rockets) sounding rockets became available that made it no longer worth pursing rockoons.

2) There have been 149 recorded Rockoon launches. Sorry, but that doesn't ring insurmountable practical complexities to me. Where are these challenges you keep telling me about? Where in the system are they? What do they pertain to? Why are the insurmountable?

3) Launch requirements in the US or NZ (Particularly NZ for Rockoon launches) are much more relaxed, but still I certainly acknowledge the depth of BS and safety precautions one must go through in order to launch to space. But any team considering launching to space I would hope would be determined enough to reach their goal that they would tackle that anyway. Paperwork with rockoons is much more tiresome but not entirely restrictive.

4) If you want to convince me that Rockoons are a no go, instead of sending me personally aimed insults along with sentences that pretty much all sum up to 'Rockoons are 100% impractical and have insurmountable complexities that mean you can't do them', why don't you point out the problems that I seem to be missing? Maybe then I can have a deep hard look at those issues.

You haven't been a particularly informative person. I fail to find a single piece of information you have given me that has been informative. Really. All you have told me is that it is completely impossible. That has caused to me search even more for the issues. So far I have found nothing. Zip. Nada. So instead of sending me on this wild goose chase if you are so certain of yourself why don't you just tell me? Then if they are insurmountable you can laugh at me and I can laugh at me and I'll go on my merry way.
This thread is dedicate to speculating about launches to space. To quote:
All that aside though it would certainly be quite a thing to see! So if you have any comments, 100km+ simulations you've done, dreams etc feel free to post them.

So instead of being rude and uninformative, point out why I am wrong, what I have missed and why these obstacles are immovable. Because I've been searching all day and can't find anything wrong with Rockoons that can't be solved.
Also please clarify this for me
If you can read and knew what I was saying then why did you say that I was laughing at the most respected rocketeer in the country? Or were you implying that it is disrespectful to laugh alongside him as well?
The best way to do something well is to make sure you've tried all the ways of making it fail.
NASA does it all the time with simulators :D
---

User avatar
jase
It runs on moonshine
It runs on moonshine
Posts: 1221
Joined: Wed May 11, 2011 11:06 pm
Location: 43° South

Re: Space: The ultimate in higher

Postby jase » Mon Aug 31, 2015 4:05 pm

Nope, I'm done here...

Good luck with your research - I hope you find what you are looking for.
Me and my rockets run on Moonshine.

citizenspace
Parachute Packer
Parachute Packer
Posts: 47
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2015 12:32 pm
Location: Sydney, NSW

Re: Space: The ultimate in higher

Postby citizenspace » Mon Aug 31, 2015 4:07 pm

Awesome thanks, yeah I think I've found quite a bit. Posted the results on the rockoon thread.

Undeniable is that if you've got the money and want a simple space launch.... Grab an S motor and build yourself a traditional rocket and launch in NZ or USA. But if you're more strapped for cash and can bear longer project time and complexity then Rockoons is the way to go.

However as the starter of this thread said... The legal issues is always going to be harder then the rocket :D
The best way to do something well is to make sure you've tried all the ways of making it fail.
NASA does it all the time with simulators :D
---

User avatar
ROCKet STAR
Astronaut
Astronaut
Posts: 1725
Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2009 1:40 pm
Location: Blue Mountains, NSW
Contact:

Re: Space: The ultimate in higher

Postby ROCKet STAR » Mon Aug 31, 2015 4:31 pm

citizenspace wrote:Awesome thanks, yeah I think I've found quite a bit. Posted the results on the rockoon thread.

Undeniable is that if you've got the money and want a simple space launch.... Grab an S motor and build yourself a traditional rocket and launch in NZ or USA. But if you're more strapped for cash and can bear longer project time and complexity then Rockoons is the way to go.

However as the starter of this thread said... The legal issues is always going to be harder then the rocket :D


It still unfortunately comes back to the Space Activities Act. Launching in the US or NZ is not a workaround for this. If you are an Australian Citizen, you are bound by it wherever on Earth you launch from.
Chris Barnes

AMRS# 29 - L3

UKRA - L3

citizenspace
Parachute Packer
Parachute Packer
Posts: 47
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2015 12:32 pm
Location: Sydney, NSW

Re: Space: The ultimate in higher

Postby citizenspace » Mon Aug 31, 2015 4:34 pm

Ah crap.. Well, that screws things.
What happens if you happen to have both NZ Citizenship and Australian Citizenship? Would you still be bound to the Space Activities Act then?
The best way to do something well is to make sure you've tried all the ways of making it fail.
NASA does it all the time with simulators :D
---

User avatar
ROCKet STAR
Astronaut
Astronaut
Posts: 1725
Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2009 1:40 pm
Location: Blue Mountains, NSW
Contact:

Re: Space: The ultimate in higher

Postby ROCKet STAR » Mon Aug 31, 2015 5:09 pm

citizenspace wrote:Ah crap.. Well, that screws things.
What happens if you happen to have both NZ Citizenship and Australian Citizenship? Would you still be bound to the Space Activities Act then?



The purpose of the Space Activities Act is basicaly an arse protection exercize. There are a number of international treaties which govern activities in space, and these treaties hold individual nations accountable for these activities. Basically put, if you launch something into space, and something goes wrong, the Australian government would be held responsible.

Most countries manage this risk with some kind of domestic legislation to oversee all space activities originating from that nation and it's citizens. That way they can ensure that any activities fall within the scope of the international treaties, as well as ensuring there is no undue risk.

I can't answer for sure as I'm no lawyer, but my feeling is that if someone were a citizen of two contries who each had domestic space legislation, and that person were to follow the procedures and seeked approval for their space activities from one of those nations, that nation would therefor be taking responsibility for the said activities, so it would be reasonable to assume it unnecessary to seek approval from the second nation.

Given that NZ does not currently have any domestic space legislation with any approval process (though I believe they are going to be implementing some) then the Australian government would potentially still be liable. As such I reckon you would still be bound by the act.
Chris Barnes

AMRS# 29 - L3

UKRA - L3

User avatar
Scoop1261
L3 Rocket GURU
L3 Rocket GURU
Posts: 1947
Joined: Sun May 06, 2007 9:29 pm
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Contact:

Re: Space: The ultimate in higher

Postby Scoop1261 » Mon Aug 31, 2015 5:12 pm

And that's why I suggested reading the Space Activities Act 1998!

A nice bit of "light reading" that will bring you up to speed on the legalities of launching a rocket, balloon or whatever "launch vehicle" you choose to 100km or more

Once again ..... Deep pockets are a planning necessity
Why Limit Yourself?

AMRS #4 - L3 |TRA #11080 - L3 |MDRA #263

Impulse: A Whole Lot ..So much I've lost count!

citizenspace
Parachute Packer
Parachute Packer
Posts: 47
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2015 12:32 pm
Location: Sydney, NSW

Re: Space: The ultimate in higher

Postby citizenspace » Mon Aug 31, 2015 5:26 pm

Ah yes been reading that for about half an hour or so now... Man, I gotta admit, these guys are thorough... Although it seems you don't have to be a corporation for an overseas launch certificate. Still reading through it, but so far that seems to only pertain to local Australian launches. You also don't need a launch permit. So I guess that simplifies stuff a bit, right?

Also here:
(2) The Minister may grant the overseas launch certificate to the person only if all of the following criteria are satisfied:
(a) the Minister is satisfied either:
(i) that the insurance/financial requirements in Division 7 will be satisfied for each launch to be conducted under the certificate; or
(ii) that, having regard to the nature and purpose of the space object or space objects concerned, it is not necessary to insist that those insurance/financial requirements be satisfied;

So it might be possible to get an overseas launch certificate without satisfying the insurance/financial requirements of Division 7. Right? So under best case scenario:
You don't have to be a corporation or get a launch permit or meet the insurance/financial requirements in Division 7.

That sounds more attractive. Digging down into it further though because frankly that just sounds a little too good to be true.
The best way to do something well is to make sure you've tried all the ways of making it fail.
NASA does it all the time with simulators :D
---

User avatar
cryoscum
STOP... Hammer Time The Prodigy
STOP... Hammer Time    The Prodigy
Posts: 1802
Joined: Wed Oct 06, 2010 2:54 pm
Location: QLD, NSW & VIC

Re: Space: The ultimate in higher

Postby cryoscum » Mon Aug 31, 2015 5:42 pm

Let's for the moment forget about the Space Act...
"Insurmountable" refers to the fact that you cannot keep the balloon within any reasonably sized cylinder before it hits 100k'. A twin balloon carrying a load of a fully loaded small rocket, launch rail & its own tracking equipment will be 100+km away (horizontal distance) before it gets to 20km high. The 6W transmitter you need to track it at that range (which you'll have to get a license for, BTW) will have to be on board the rocket too, toasting anything else you have in there. Accordingly the rocket would need to become bigger to fit it all, the balloons will need to be bigger again and your range before launch-ready goes up again. No LCO or RSO would touch such a thing, so you'd need to do any of your approvals yourself and good luck with CASA. They'll love the idea of a chunk of explosive being sent into the great blue yonder before it self-launches, or at the very least stay up there for hours. Tell me when I should stop...

No offense mate, but you should remember that you're not the first one to consider this and you won't be the last. For amateur rocketry the rockoon is nothing more than something that should be attempted with 1/4 A-motors and a 300mm diameter helium balloon...
AMRS L3 | NAR L3 | QRS 089 | MDRA 224
AMRS Technical Advisory Group

Total impulse for 2016: 32,458 Ns (thus far)
Total impulse for 2015: 84,231 Ns
Total impulse for 2014: 40,757 Ns
Total impulse for 2013: 62,927 Ns

citizenspace
Parachute Packer
Parachute Packer
Posts: 47
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2015 12:32 pm
Location: Sydney, NSW

Re: Space: The ultimate in higher

Postby citizenspace » Mon Aug 31, 2015 6:05 pm

cryoscum wrote:Let's for the moment forget about the Space Act...
"Insurmountable" refers to the fact that you cannot keep the balloon within any reasonably sized cylinder before it hits 100k'. A twin balloon carrying a load of a fully loaded small rocket, launch rail & its own tracking equipment will be 100+km away (horizontal distance) before it gets to 20km high. The 6W transmitter you need to track it at that range (which you'll have to get a license for, BTW) will have to be on board the rocket too, toasting anything else you have in there. Accordingly the rocket would need to become bigger to fit it all, the balloons will need to be bigger again and your range before launch-ready goes up again. No LCO or RSO would touch such a thing, so you'd need to do any of your approvals yourself and good luck with CASA. They'll love the idea of a chunk of explosive being sent into the great blue yonder before it self-launches, or at the very least stay up there for hours. Tell me when I should stop...

No offense mate, but you should remember that you're not the first one to consider this and you won't be the last. For amateur rocketry the rockoon is nothing more than something that should be attempted with 1/4 A-motors and a 300mm diameter helium balloon...


Thanks, finally someone points out a problem. No offence taken by the way, I know I'm not the first to consider it. If I was, I wouldn't have been able to find half the information I did :) Just thought the Rockoon platform might prove a more inexpensive launch, albeit certainly a far more complicated one.

That's certainly a problem I never found nor considered. I wonder if a lesson could be taken from government/commercial sounding rockets? How do they provide telemetry? Through satellites would be my guess, but I might be wrong. They often communicate data from 100-400km's away so perhaps looking at that could be helpful.
http://www.cinele.com/index.php?option= ... Itemid=254
That might have something useful in there... From what I can see the second one would fit in the rocket I simmed, so I don't see why you would need to make the rocket bigger. Although I don't really know squat about transmitters, so I'm not in a position to comment on that issue.

Yeah I can imagine trying to convince the authorities would become a nightmare... Recovery would become easier with a glider though. Although when I say that don't mistake me for saying easy. Easier, but still a nightmare.

Honestly, while the rockoon would most likely be cheaper, the complexities involved would probably make it impractical for an amateur rocket space shot with man power any less then the GoFast Rocket team. And even then the paper work would be a nightmare.
Rockoon = Cheap, Incredibly Complicated, Stressful and Nightmare-Loads of Paperwork
2 Stage Ground Launch = Expensive, Relatively Simple (compared to rockoon), Painful Paperwork

So far that's the verdict I've drawn. Thanks for raising the transmitter issue, I honestly never thought of that.
The best way to do something well is to make sure you've tried all the ways of making it fail.
NASA does it all the time with simulators :D
---

User avatar
cryoscum
STOP... Hammer Time The Prodigy
STOP... Hammer Time    The Prodigy
Posts: 1802
Joined: Wed Oct 06, 2010 2:54 pm
Location: QLD, NSW & VIC

Re: Space: The ultimate in higher

Postby cryoscum » Mon Aug 31, 2015 6:32 pm

Agreed, honing your skills with single stage rockets until you do larger ones is the best way to go. Then only study, design and test 2 stage systems. By that time you'd have built a mountain of skills, contacts and credibility, making you ready for that serious two-stager. A proven track record goes a long way with CASA, the other regulators and the people who run your launch site, so don't lose that enthusiasm, but temper it with cold calculating sensibilities. It is what separates us from a bunch of red-necks that will eventually blow themselves up :)

Look forward to reading about your progress.

Cheers
Nic
AMRS L3 | NAR L3 | QRS 089 | MDRA 224
AMRS Technical Advisory Group

Total impulse for 2016: 32,458 Ns (thus far)
Total impulse for 2015: 84,231 Ns
Total impulse for 2014: 40,757 Ns
Total impulse for 2013: 62,927 Ns

citizenspace
Parachute Packer
Parachute Packer
Posts: 47
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2015 12:32 pm
Location: Sydney, NSW

Re: Space: The ultimate in higher

Postby citizenspace » Mon Aug 31, 2015 6:41 pm

Yep that's the conclusion I've pretty much reached. Took me two and a half pages of being a fool to reach it, but it makes the most sense.
Of course you always end back up at the price... And of course the Space Activities Act 1998.... but so far it seems like my original find is holding with the SAA 1998. So far cost for the rocket still seems like it would be $90k... I've only been able to get the price of a P motor ($11,500USD) so I don't know the cost of the R sized booster I have in mind... But that's all in due time :D
Thanks for the encouragement by the way. Enthusiasm I seem to have in abundance, probably too much if you ask most people :D
The best way to do something well is to make sure you've tried all the ways of making it fail.
NASA does it all the time with simulators :D
---

User avatar
Jordz
Rocket Flyer
Rocket Flyer
Posts: 54
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2016 8:26 pm

Re: Space: The ultimate in higher

Postby Jordz » Wed Jul 06, 2016 9:48 am

Just an idea for a launch site im suprised hasnt been thrown in yet; international waters.

There are no laws stopping research installations in international waters, and due to the location of Australia theres actually a massive amount of areas with no flight paths over them. Id say it would probably be cheaper to hire a barge than get government licences too, which is embarassing really...

User avatar
CATO
Mr Smiley
Mr Smiley
Posts: 2053
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2009 6:20 pm
Location: Sydney, NSW
Contact:

Re: Space: The ultimate in higher

Postby CATO » Wed Jul 06, 2016 11:54 am

Jordz wrote:Just an idea for a launch site im suprised hasnt been thrown in yet; international waters.

There are no laws stopping research installations in international waters, and due to the location of Australia theres actually a massive amount of areas with no flight paths over them. Id say it would probably be cheaper to hire a barge than get government licences too, which is embarassing really...


http://www.ntnews.com.au/news/northern-territory/nt-government-working-to-bring-space-industry-to-territory/news-story/dd89fb368bbcdc37a0899c47d2e98340
"In thrust we trust"

AMRS 21 L3 RSO
TRA 07459 L3

Impulse:
2019: 14,725 Ns (44% N)
Ns 18: 14,767; Ns 17: 5,973; 16: 34,558; 15: 35,955; 14: 6,016; 13: 10,208
PB - Gorilla N2717WC, H: 10,260', S: M1.14


Return to “Higher, Faster, Further”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest