|
by Senor Barborito 01/08/2003, 8:18am PST |
|
 |
|
 |
|
Entropy Stew wrote:
FABIO wrote:
Entropy Stew wrote:
A friend of mine once had a model rocket you could put a payload in, shoot up into the air, and would parachute back to the earth. He and his friends stuck a hampster in there. The G-forces from takeoff reduced it to some blood and a pile of guts.
-/ES/-
Are you sure it wasn't due to the secondary explosion that blows the top off and allows the parachute to deploy?
I think the chamber they put the hampster in was meant to hold a camera, so I don't think shit would be exploding in it.
-/ES/-
When you have a model rocket, you have the cardboard tube body, the plastic nosecone that fits into it - there's a good chunk of slightly smaller diameter plastic tubing behind said cone that ensures a firm fit and at the end of this is a small plastic loop to which the ends of the parachute are tied. The payloader series of rockets are essentially the same as any other but the nosecone has been extended to include a small clear section which you can open up.
Now, between the parachute and the engine, before launch, one places (depending on the power of the engine) 2-4 pieces of wadding paper. Why is this? Because at the very end of each model rocket engine there is an explosive charge under a clay cap that blows said clay cap forward, forcing the nosecone and parachute out of the body (the wadding paper is just asbestos-like material used to prevent the parachute from catching fire from said explosive charge).
Generally, the explosive charges tend to be if anything slightly overpowered because nothing sucks more than watching your model rocket nose over and bury itself in the dirt - although if you're lucky you can just cut a few inches off the top of the cardboard tube and have at it. Also, many people put clay into the nosecones of the more elaborate (and expensive) model rockets for proper balance.
Payloaders in particular have often been slightly modified to hold M80s lying in wait for that explosive charge at the end. The results are, I can readily attest, both wonderfully illegal and explosive.
Point is, there's as good a chance that the smooth acceleration liftoff wasn't so much at fault for reducing the hamster to so much viscera as was the explosive charge that deploys the parachute. The nosecone/parachute assemblage is affixed to the whole rocket body with essentially a giant rubber band for a reason - one of the most common failures is breakage (or incineration) of said band.
Of course, this was D12-and-under (as high as could be found in any hobbyist shop at the time) model rocketry over a decade ago, things have (I've been told) advanced quite a bit in the meantime.
Payloaders all come with several large warnings everywhere in the packaging: DO NOT PUT EXPLOSIVE DEVICES OR LIVE ANIMALS OF ANY KIND blah blah blah THIS IS A HORRIBLE CRIME blah blah BILLION YEARS OF MANRAPE PRISON - you get the idea.
--SB |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
Anyone here believe in Flying Saucers? by laudablepuss 01/06/2003, 7:34pm PST 
Son, put down the crackpipe slowly, turn towards me, and keep your hands visible by Sonny Crockett 01/06/2003, 7:48pm PST
Re: Anyone here believe in Flying Saucers? by mrs. johnson 01/06/2003, 7:59pm PST
Re: Anyone here believe in Flying Saucers? by veronica 01/06/2003, 10:24pm PST
Re: Anyone here believe in Flying Saucers? by mrs. johnson 01/07/2003, 12:30am PST
Re: Anyone here believe in Flying Saucers? by veronica 01/07/2003, 2:16am PST
Re: Anyone here believe in Flying Saucers? by mrs. johnson 01/07/2003, 11:16am PST
Re: Anyone here believe in Flying Saucers? by Rightbug 01/07/2003, 6:12pm PST
Nobody, I repeat, nobody is denying the greatness of seafood. n/T NT by mrs. johnson 01/07/2003, 7:28pm PST
I hate all forms of seafood now and forever by Senor Barborito 01/07/2003, 9:07pm PST
Re: I hate all forms of seafood now and forever by mrs. johnson 01/07/2003, 9:19pm PST
Re: I hate all forms of seafood now and forever by Senor Barborito 01/07/2003, 9:33pm PST
Re: I hate all forms of seafood now and forever by mrs. johnson 01/07/2003, 9:40pm PST
Re: Anyone here believe in Flying Saucers? by veronica 01/07/2003, 9:23pm PST
Re: Anyone here believe in Flying Saucers? by mrs. johnson 01/07/2003, 9:28pm PST
Holy fucking pseudoscience by Entropy Stew 01/06/2003, 8:14pm PST
Re: Holy fucking pseudoscience by Senor Barborito 01/06/2003, 9:43pm PST
Here, link by Senor Barborito 01/06/2003, 9:50pm PST
Re: Here, link by veronica 01/06/2003, 10:01pm PST
Re: Here, link by Zseni 01/06/2003, 10:15pm PST
Re: Here, link by laudablepuss 01/07/2003, 1:59am PST
Uh, what? by laudablepuss 01/07/2003, 1:47am PST
Re: Uh, what? by Entropy Stew 01/07/2003, 4:03am PST
Re: Uh, what? by laudablepuss 01/07/2003, 11:45am PST
Re: Uh, what? by Chairman Mao 01/07/2003, 12:15pm PST
Re: Uh, what? by laudablepuss 01/07/2003, 12:48pm PST
Re: Uh, what? by Chairman Mao 01/07/2003, 1:55pm PST
Re: Uh, what? by veronica 01/07/2003, 9:34pm PST
Its nowhere near as gay as a segway by Chairman Mao 01/07/2003, 9:51pm PST
Are people actually using Segways? Haven't seen one yet. -nt- by Colonel K 01/07/2003, 10:59pm PST
I saw one... it was beautiful by mrs. johnson 01/07/2003, 11:02pm PST
Re: I saw one... it was beautiful by veronica 01/07/2003, 11:23pm PST
Re: I saw one... it was beautiful by Colonel K 01/07/2003, 11:43pm PST
Chicago: Redefining Gay by Entropy Stew 01/08/2003, 12:05am PST
Re: Chicago: Redefining Gay by mrs. johnson 01/08/2003, 12:18am PST
He was a block away and a story below, and I was moving by Entropy Stew 01/08/2003, 12:48am PST
Re: He was a block away and a story below, and I was moving by mrs. johnson 01/08/2003, 12:59am PST
Re: He was a block away and a story below, and I was moving by Entropy Stew 01/08/2003, 1:13am PST
Re: He was a block away and a story below, and I was moving by Motherhead 01/08/2003, 1:27am PST
WOW THIS IS GETTING GAYER BY THE SECOND. KER-GAY! by Entropy Stew 01/08/2003, 2:11am PST
The People and the Folks. Those are gangs? Amish gangs? by conflictNo 01/08/2003, 2:24am PST
Headspin by Entropy Stew 01/08/2003, 2:33am PST
If I ran a gang we would be called the Gentlemen and we would all wear zoot suit by s. conflictNo 01/08/2003, 2:54am PST
If you ran a gang called the Gentlemen, it would be 1846. by Fussbett 01/08/2003, 4:07am PST
Re: WOW THIS IS GETTING GAYER BY THE SECOND. KER-GAY! by motherhead 01/08/2003, 3:21am PST
Re: He was a block away and a story below, and I was moving by junior allen 01/08/2003, 9:27am PST
Almost forgot - Glad to see you made it here -nt- NT by Entropy Stew 01/08/2003, 12:49am PST
Oh, and... by Chairman Mao 01/07/2003, 1:59pm PST
Re: Uh, what? by FABIO 01/07/2003, 1:47pm PST
Not sure, but I doubt it by Entropy Stew 01/08/2003, 12:16am PST
Er by Senor Barborito 01/08/2003, 8:18am PST
Here, picture by Senor Barborito 01/08/2003, 8:38am PST
Well fuck me -nt- by Entropy Stew 01/08/2003, 2:43pm PST
Re: Uh, what? by Mhead 01/08/2003, 1:58am PST
|
|
