Welcome to the Water Rocket Forum, sponsored by The Water Rocket Achievement World Record Association.

The largest, most sophisticated and ground breaking group supporting you, the serious water rocket flyer! Whether you are a beginner or an expert, the WRA2 has something for everyone.

A water rocket is a type of model rocket using water as its reaction mass. The pressure vessel (the engine of the rocket) is constructed from thin plastic or other non metallic materials (usually a used plastic soft drink bottle) weighing 1,500 grams or less. The water is forced out by compressed air. It is an example of Newton's third law of motion.

parachute deployment just an idea

Discussion about deployment systems including altimeters, timers, air speed flaps, servo systems, and chemical reactions.
The Mooseheads
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 146
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2006 2:08 am

Re: parachute deployment just an idea

Post by The Mooseheads » Mon Nov 03, 2008 10:25 am

Hey USWR,

You guys sure took a lot of flak for disrupting the status quo. Thank goodness you all have thick skins and didn't let all the negative attacks drive you away. Thanks for sticking around and helping get everyone on the same page and working together.


Rick C.
The Mooseheads

User avatar
Tim Chen
WRA2 Member
WRA2 Member
Posts: 871
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 1:44 am

Re: parachute deployment just an idea

Post by Tim Chen » Mon Nov 03, 2008 11:42 am

Hey everyone! We had a lot of success with our tests this weekend. All of our deploy ideas worked and we didn't have a single crash landing. The designs that used a side opening door were the fastest to deploy. The streamer rocket was the slowest to deploy. It is important to note that the streamer method of extracting the chute was only effective after the streamer had inverted the rocket. If the rocket falls nose first the streamer didn't really pull the parachute out until the drag had made the rocket swap ends. This is a important observation to us because we are using a MAD sensor and it only triggers the deploy servo when the rocket has pointed downward after apogee. On one hand this is good for us because the rocket will fall a ways before the parachute opens and will not drift so far. On the other hand it means the chute must be really sturdy so it won't rip apart during a high speed deploy. We have lots to think about now.


Tim Chen
Captain, Team Enterprise

User avatar
U.S. Water Rockets2
WRA2 Member
WRA2 Member
Posts: 41
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 12:57 pm

Re: parachute deployment just an idea

Post by U.S. Water Rockets2 » Sat Nov 08, 2008 7:06 pm

The Mooseheads wrote:Hey USWR,

You guys sure took a lot of flak for disrupting the status quo. Thank goodness you all have thick skins and didn't let all the negative attacks drive you away. Thanks for sticking around and helping get everyone on the same page and working together.
In any hobby or interest there are always going to be a few malcontents who want to keep the masses and general public away so they can be the big fish in a small pond. Once we realized that some people were interested more in the politics than they were in building and flying we moved on to bigger and better things and found people who knew that our work could attract more people and this was a positive thing and not a bad thing.

It's been great to hear from all the great people out there who we have been able to bring into this hobby. We really have to thank the nice people at Discovery Channel for helping to get us on Mythbusters. Some of the most productive people in Water Rockets have come forward and attributed their interest in Water Rockets to seeing that one episode. It's a great feeling to watch these people we inspired expanding the hobby. It's our dream come true!

Keep your eyes on the forum, we have some really interesting developments to bring you and a new team member coming aboard!



User avatar
Team Seneca
WRA2 Member
WRA2 Member
Posts: 242
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2006 1:40 am

Re: parachute deployment just an idea

Post by Team Seneca » Fri Nov 28, 2008 4:24 pm

Tim Chen wrote: 2) Make a "clamshell" nosecone that is hinged and springs open when it is removed from the FTC and has the parachute stored inside. If there is not enough room in the nose for a parachute we will extend the nose with a section of T8 tube that will become the "clamshell".
I hope you guys got a peatent for that clamshell nosecone deploy idea. You big fan down under has usurped the idea for his own rocket and didn't bother to give you any credit.

Nice guy. :roll:


Bill W.
Team Seneca

User avatar
Tim Chen
WRA2 Member
WRA2 Member
Posts: 871
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 1:44 am

Re: parachute deployment just an idea

Post by Tim Chen » Fri Nov 28, 2008 7:28 pm

Team Seneca wrote:
Tim Chen wrote: 2) Make a "clamshell" nosecone that is hinged and springs open when it is removed from the FTC and has the parachute stored inside. If there is not enough room in the nose for a parachute we will extend the nose with a section of T8 tube that will become the "clamshell".
I hope you guys got a peatent for that clamshell nosecone deploy idea. You big fan down under has usurped the idea for his own rocket and didn't bother to give you any credit.

Nice guy. :roll:
What can we do? It's not going to stop us from brainstorming on the forum.


Tim Chen
Captain, Team Enterprise

air.command
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 183
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2008 5:20 am

Re: parachute deployment just an idea

Post by air.command » Sat Nov 29, 2008 1:21 am

Tim Chen wrote:
Team Seneca wrote:
Tim Chen wrote: 2) Make a "clamshell" nosecone that is hinged and springs open when it is removed from the FTC and has the parachute stored inside. If there is not enough room in the nose for a parachute we will extend the nose with a section of T8 tube that will become the "clamshell".
I hope you guys got a peatent for that clamshell nosecone deploy idea. You big fan down under has usurped the idea for his own rocket and didn't bother to give you any credit.

Nice guy. :roll:
What can we do? It's not going to stop us from brainstorming on the forum.
Hi Bill,

I realise it's your mission in life to personally attack and criticise other people on forums, that's fine by me, you are entitled to your opinion. It's actually quite entertaining to read :) . Personally I believe people on the forum would rather learn more of your experiences with water rockets since you seem to be one of the early members of WRA2. You are listed on the personal best altitude list as 647 feet which is quite impressive. Would you like to share some information about your rockets? I do realise that secrecy is important to you, so I understand if you choose not to include full details. I apollogise if you have already posted this information elsewhere.


Hi Tim,

Sounds like we came up with similar ideas for the parachute deployment. I'd be more than happy to add a link on our website to your design. Do you have a web page where I can link to diagrams or photos of your design?

Tim, I believe that sharing ideas in the hobby is very important. You will find others will often have further suggestions for improvements on your design the same way you will make suggestions on other people's design. A particular design can spark off another tangent for someone else to explore. This is why we publish as much detail as we can. The nice thing about the internet is that as we see others doing similar work we can go back and add references to their projects. We do not have the resources to find and include every possible suggestion made by every water rocketeer. We try to include those references to things that have gone past an idea stage and have gone to actual construction or flight and are documented in some way. Thanks Bill for bringing Tim's deployment idea to our attention. We look forward to hearing how you go with it Tim.


http://www.AirCommandRockets.com

User avatar
Team Seneca
WRA2 Member
WRA2 Member
Posts: 242
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2006 1:40 am

Re: parachute deployment just an idea

Post by Team Seneca » Sun Nov 30, 2008 6:54 pm

air.command wrote:I realise it's your mission in life to personally attack and criticiseother people on forums, that's fine by me, you are entitled to your opinion.
You are mistaken. My mission is to defend people on forums from attacks and theft. I suppose most criminals opine that the police "attack and criticize" them and have no positive purpose as well.

I'm curious just why do you address me here right now? I don't recall speaking to you. Why would you respond to me just to make a bunch of negative comments about me, when I was adressing Tim and a nameless theif?

Have you ever heard the expression "returning to the scene of the crime"?
air.command wrote:Hi Tim,
Sounds like we came up with similar ideas for the parachute deployment. I'd be more than happy to add a link on our website to your design. Do you have a web page where I can link to diagrams or photos of your design?
Why didn't you think about mentioning Tim and Mark's idea when you first documented your derivative system? Why were you completely silent when people complimented about your blog entry on what a great deploy idea you had?

Ditto for their variable nozzle idea and the "flight computer" ideas you usurped?

But now you've been discovered you want to give Tim partial credit? Is it standard practice for George Katz (a.k.a. Air Command Water Rockets) to only credit people after he's been caught plagiarizing from them?

I find it funny how you have hastily implemented ideas I've seen discussed on this forum within days of their first mention, post them to your blog, and then claim "parallel development" or pretend you were unaware of the discussions when I've pointed out the odd coincidences. I find it quite a bit stranger that I can mention that I think an idea was stolen without mentioning any names in the same topic you supposedly never read and within hours you show up to defend yourself with an elaborate song and dance number.

You should know better than to steal the work of other people for your own shameless self-aggrandizing, but you don't. The end justifies the means to you, and you have no respect for intellectual property of others. I have plenty of proof. Keep weaving your tall tales of innocence if you want me to post more examples.

Have a good night. :)


Bill W.
Team Seneca

User avatar
Alex
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 108
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2008 11:54 pm

Re: parachute deployment just an idea

Post by Alex » Sun Nov 30, 2008 7:03 pm

It's turned into Warld War 3 in here :(


Water Rockets are amazing things, One second there sitting on the launch pad, the next, splattered all over your shirt.

User avatar
Alex
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 108
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2008 11:54 pm

Re: parachute deployment just an idea

Post by Alex » Sun Nov 30, 2008 7:08 pm

ARG! Curse me and myy fast typing....so many spellign errors....

anywho, here's an idea......right after Apogee the rocket is kinda floating....then it just points downward and falls right? well, Have these small tubes on the corners of the inside of the bottle, have the nose cone attached to those tubes via 4 small holes....there is a string at the top of the cone that goes inside the bottle the end of that string leads to the parachute. SO, whent he rocket turns over after apogee, Cone pops out (maybe some velcro on one side to keep it from falling....) the parachute follows....and all is history....eh?


Water Rockets are amazing things, One second there sitting on the launch pad, the next, splattered all over your shirt.

User avatar
Team Seneca
WRA2 Member
WRA2 Member
Posts: 242
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2006 1:40 am

Re: parachute deployment just an idea

Post by Team Seneca » Sun Nov 30, 2008 7:34 pm

To whom it may concern:

http://www.wra2.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=3620#p3620

This is a web link to the Team Enterprise deploy systems.


Bill W.
Team Seneca

air.command
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 183
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2008 5:20 am

Re: parachute deployment just an idea

Post by air.command » Mon Dec 01, 2008 4:07 am

Team Seneca wrote:
air.command wrote:I realise it's your mission in life to personally attack and criticiseother people on forums, that's fine by me, you are entitled to your opinion.
You are mistaken. My mission is to defend people on forums from attacks and theft. I suppose most criminals opine that the police "attack and criticize" them and have no positive purpose as well.
air.command wrote:Hi Tim,
Sounds like we came up with similar ideas for the parachute deployment. I'd be more than happy to add a link on our website to your design. Do you have a web page where I can link to diagrams or photos of your design?
Why didn't you think about mentioning Tim and Mark's idea when you first documented your derivative system? Why were you completely silent when people complimented about your blog entry on what a great deploy idea you had?

Ditto for their variable nozzle idea and the "flight computer" ideas you usurped?

But now you've been discovered you want to give Tim partial credit? Is it standard practice for George Katz (a.k.a. Air Command Water Rockets) to only credit people after he's been caught plagiarizing from them?

I find it funny how you have hastily implemented ideas I've seen discussed on this forum within days of their first mention, post them to your blog, and then claim "parallel development" or pretend you were unaware of the discussions when I've pointed out the odd coincidences. I find it quite a bit stranger that I can mention that I think an idea was stolen without mentioning any names in the same topic you supposedly never read and within hours you show up to defend yourself with an elaborate song and dance number.

You should know better than to steal the work of other people for your own shameless self-aggrandizing, but you don't. The end justifies the means to you, and you have no respect for intellectual property of others. I have plenty of proof. Keep weaving your tall tales of innocence if you want me to post more examples.

Have a good night. :)
Hey Bill, I certainly don't want to start a flame war here as it sure does not serve anyone any good, I am sure WRA2 admin does not want it either as it ends up driving people away as has happened in the past. It probably won't matter to you what I say here but I would like to address some of your concerns, since on previous occasions I haven't had the opportunity to. Mostly because I was not a member of this forum so I could not post here directly, and when I tried via another member of this forum to address your concerns, the link to the answer was removed, so hence the one sided debate.

I am also addressing you right now, since you obviously have an axe to grind with us personnally so I would like to know what it is that is exactly bothering you? Otherwise you would be jumping up and down all over everyone else for not crediting the inventors of the Gardena mechanism or an air flap every time they say they used one on their website.

It appears one of the issues is you don't like the fact that we built a flight computer, and that you had been one of the early ones who built it years before us and we did not credit you with its invention. I have no reason to doubt that fact that you built one years before. We certainly do not claim that we invented it, we do not claim that we were the first to use it, we just designed and built one because we thought it was a good idea. Can you please tell me where we were supposed to have gained knowledge of your work from or "stolen" your design from? From what you mention your system was based on an accelerometer while as you put it ours is a "simple timer".

Onto the variable nozzle idea. I distinctly remember telling Tim that he had a good idea with the variable nozzle. As I recall our variable nozzle is based on a completely different design than was discussed. You yourself had argued for the nozzle to work the other way round. I'd be happy to point you at a number of references to variable nozzles concepts discussed on other forums over the years. Because someone mentions a particular topic on a forum does not automatically make them the inventor of it.

You raised a point about us not linking to the WRA2 forum directly from our site. This is true, a site that personally attacks us certainly isn't high on our priority to include. The reason we joined was so that we could contribute to the discussion as a sign of goodwill, but the attacks continue and hence the reduced participation in discussions.

You mention the fact that we conspired to in your words "vandalize" the WRA2 entry on wikipedia. As I recall this incident was a couple of years ago and goes back to the great wikipedia wars. In hind site my suggestion of reverting the changes made by WRA2 was stupid. However, in no way did we revert any changes, or do anything to the wikipedia entries.

We publish work on our website for everyone to share free of charge. Ideas for various rocket components we build come from all over the place not just this forum, and you are probably right, we don't always include all credits, and probably should try harder on this front. If you look at our website we do include lots of references to other people's sites and their work. We started our website to share our work with fellow rocketeers, after being inspired by Armadillo Aerospace and a number of water rocket enthusist sites and how open and detailed they are with their blogs.

We are always happy to discuss issues people feel aggrevated about. In the few instances where we don't include credit a quick email saying "Hey George, you did not include a credit to our work on your site, could you please add it" will always be met with prompt and corrective action. It is certainly not our intention to pass off someone elses work as our own.

I've blabbed long enough, but the big question is where do we go from here? I see there are two options, we continue this back and forth argument getting nowhere or move on and try to mend bridges. If you are happy to offer corrective action I am happy to listen. What do you say Bill?


http://www.AirCommandRockets.com

User avatar
Tim Chen
WRA2 Member
WRA2 Member
Posts: 871
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 1:44 am

Re: parachute deployment just an idea

Post by Tim Chen » Mon Dec 01, 2008 1:55 pm

George,

Over the past few months Mark and I have discussed on the forum a lot of our developments and our ideas. The reason we do this is because we want to share our thoughts with other guys and get feedback or get a response from someone who may have already tried something and can give us some advice or cautions. We also want to try and inspire others to improve the ideas we have so everyone benefits from them. We don't ask for any fanfare or hoopla and anyone can use our plans for their own developing. It's just we feel a little hurt that three of our ideas have turned up on your own website very soon after we talked about them here and you choose not to mention who you had been discussing the ideas with.

To add insult to injury, you never posted back that you had done more development of the ideas or asked for further opinions on the development with us after initially reading about it. We could waste a lot of time and money on duplicated efforts and never know you were doing it already because you won't talk about it.

From your response to Bill, it looks like you have some kind of problem with Bill himself and you want to punish the whole forum because he's on here. You seem to be just getting ideas for your personal website from the forum and not putting any contributions back into it because you know it riles Bill up.

You guys should stop playing around and either get along or just agree to ignore each other.


Tim Chen
Captain, Team Enterprise

User avatar
andicirk
WRA2 Member
WRA2 Member
Posts: 95
Joined: Thu Oct 09, 2008 1:20 pm

Re: parachute deployment just an idea

Post by andicirk » Mon Dec 01, 2008 2:08 pm

personally ,
i think this should be a private email , if you want to make this a sport with bragging rights then make it a team sport ,
wrocketiers against gravity.
i understand the people wanting recognition for there hours of work and thought process's , but as many scientific communities realise the only way to advance is to advance together , truly sharing ideas and thoughts and from this true developement begins other wise we will rest like the drug companies , in our own corners bouncing off walls and making very slow progress....


so what do we do , patent everything we do and work like a corperate organisation and sue ppl for using our idea, there are very few "original" ideas just the redevelopement and fine tuning of many other ppls hard work ( if i am standing here it is because i am standing on the shoulders of giants ) so lets give ppl recognition , lets work together and move forward and above all lets keep private arguments .......

private


andi



air.command
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 183
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2008 5:20 am

Re: parachute deployment just an idea

Post by air.command » Mon Dec 01, 2008 3:19 pm

Tim Chen wrote:George,

Over the past few months Mark and I have discussed on the forum a lot of our developments and our ideas. The reason we do this is because we want to share our thoughts with other guys and get feedback or get a response from someone who may have already tried something and can give us some advice or cautions. We also want to try and inspire others to improve the ideas we have so everyone benefits from them. We don't ask for any fanfare or hoopla and anyone can use our plans for their own developing. It's just we feel a little hurt that three of our ideas have turned up on your own website very soon after we talked about them here and you choose not to mention who you had been discussing the ideas with.

To add insult to injury, you never posted back that you had done more development of the ideas or asked for further opinions on the development with us after initially reading about it. We could waste a lot of time and money on duplicated efforts and never know you were doing it already because you won't talk about it.

From your response to Bill, it looks like you have some kind of problem with Bill himself and you want to punish the whole forum because he's on here. You seem to be just getting ideas for your personal website from the forum and not putting any contributions back into it because you know it riles Bill up.

You guys should stop playing around and either get along or just agree to ignore each other.

Thanks for your honest and candid answer Tim. I sincerely apollogise if you feel you have been wronged by us. As I mentioned the reason there were no references to this website or the ideas presented here was solely because of the personal attacks on us coming directly from here. It had nothing to do with yourself, and you certainly have a right to feel hurt to have been dragged into this. You and Mark have very good ideas and the water rocket community certainly benefits from them. You will agree from our website we do provide references to other people's work all the time. I have no issue with people critising the things we do but when attacks become personal that is a different matter.

If it will help we will include references to the ideas presented here. Perhaps we can work together on a project?

I agree people should work together and share ideas, and give full credit where credit is due. As I told Bill I am willing to work on a mutually amicable solution.


http://www.AirCommandRockets.com

WRA2 Admin
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 26
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2006 5:31 pm

Re: parachute deployment just an idea

Post by WRA2 Admin » Mon Dec 01, 2008 7:16 pm

air.command wrote: As I mentioned the reason there were no references to this website or the ideas presented here was solely because of the personal attacks on us coming directly from here. It had nothing to do with yourself, and you certainly have a right to feel hurt to have been dragged into this. You and Mark have very good ideas and the water rocket community certainly benefits from them. You will agree from our website we do provide references to other people's work all the time. I have no issue with people critising the things we do but when attacks become personal that is a different matter.
George,

Thank you for apologizing to Tim and Mark,

Your explanation for not linking here because you feel that some people here attacked you doesn't help matters. You want people to think that you are justified because you are the victim of attacks from Bill. From Bill's point of view, you are the one who instigated trouble by conspiring in public with people who were attacking the WRA2 Wikipedia entry. You're not the victim, but the aggressor in that case.

I tried to mend the fences and invited you to come here and enjoy our forum because I want everyone to get along well, but you really didn't do anything differently and it really looks like you have tried to stir up trouble with Bill through your entries on your personal website. This is one of the main reasons we created this forum. To be a central place for ideas to be shared within a united community. Your actions though, appear to everyone that you are working against that goal.

If you and Bill want to flame one another please take it offline. The forum has a private message function that can be used for this purpose. Maybe you guys can work it out by talking to each other. If this continues I will suspend BOTH of your accounts for 30 days!


David Walker
Administrator
The Water Rocket Achievement World Record Association

Post Reply