Posts by inventorjim

The 'echo chamber' effect misleading people on climate change

No peer review, that's hilarious? Human-induced climate change is an established scientific theory. It matches well with observed data. This has been independently verified by scientists around the world.

The idea that 'humans are not affecting the climate', is not an established theory and it has not been peer reviewed by any credible scientist...anywhere.

By the way, science is not a belief system; you would know this if you truly 'loved science'. To truly love science you need to put aside your pride and let your preconceived notions (beliefs) go.

Re: Political Bullshit

Your conclusions are as confused as your understanding of the facts.

The Earth has indeed warmed 1.53 F since 1880 - NOAA

Following your own simplistic black-and-white logic: Human-generated CO2 is causing the Earth to warm.

For the record:

1) There are no legitimate scientists in doubt of the fact that the Earth is warming.

2) There is no debate among the educated that this warming is caused by human activity.

3) This sensational need to deny facts, is clear evidence that our educational system is failing.

LOHAN ideas..

Connecting the heater

This one is in my neck of the woods as I am an electrical engineer specializing in electrodynamics.

Use the magnets to press the electrical contacts together. That is a great idea.

I would further recommend supporting the entire rocket by them in lieu of the rod (see above :)

Making it work:

What are the electrical tails on the magnets for? Are they to reverse-saturate the magnets? This would effectively 'turn the magnet off.'

If that does not work then try:

Couple the magnets via iron cores that remain on the launcher. Wrap the cores with coil-wire. When it comes time for separation use a large pulse of electrical flow to induce a magnetic field of opposite polarity of the permanent magnets this will literally push the rocket away from the launcher. Make sure the coils are in series to ensure a synchronized release.

Good Luck!

More thoughts from an armchair-rocket-engineer...

The article: "Battle continues over LOHAN's mighty rod" Published May of 2012, mentions something about a test launch of the rod system? Did that happen?

Below is a weight shedding scheme for the suggestion in my previous post but, first, for clarification of further discussion, my view of acceleration by a rocket:

1) In the initial portion of the launch the rocket's acceleration vector will be entirely determined by the relationship between the center of effort (CE) and the center of gravity (CG). This is the period where ground based rockets rely on a launch rod or rail. If the rod is not stable it will create wild asymmetry between CE and CG. Even a very small amount of friction at the rod-tube will (albeit briefly) mechanically couple the launch rig to the rocket - meaning their combined moment of inertia will determine the rocket's trajectory. Friction is a huge question mark; far too many parameters there for predictable/repeatable events.

2) In the second portion of the launch the direction of flight will be determined by the relationship between the rocket's CE and the center of aerodynamic resistance (CR). Ground based rockets have a thick atmosphere to work with, a lot of speed, and fancy vectored thrust to be able to enter this portion of the launch shortly after leaving the rod/rail. LOHAN does not - a variation from a ground based launch is a necessity.

3) This last portion aerodynamic stability, may never be attained (as has been previously discussed) due to the thin atmosphere and relatively small control surfaces - alas, I am not an aeronautical engineer specializing in high altitudes at mach speeds, so I can't answer that one!

Scheme for each of the above mentioned portions of launch:

1) Use a long weighted boom at the tail so that the rocket will literally stand on its motor. That is, if you supported the rocket at the nozzle does the entire aircraft point vertical? This is absolutely critical because of the lack of stabilizing rod and active stabilization.

2) Drop the weighted portion of the boom yet, leave enough boom length to keep the CR aft of the CE, which will be necessary for stable flight. perhaps as the rocket accelerates and the stabilizing effect of the rod increases, several potions of the boom may be dropped.

3) Drop the entire boom for aerodynamic flight, both during the burn and after.

Ahh, then the real trick right: Making it work.

Make the boom hollow with a long shaft running down the center. The shaft will be cut into portions coupled to each other with sockets. A servo rotates the shaft assembly which has several sets of unequal-length threads cut into each end. The first portion of the boom is bolted on by the shortest threads. The second portion and any subsequent portions have progressively longer sets of threads. Servo unscrews only enough threads to drop the intended portion.

Stability During Acceleration...

Trying to direct/control a rocket with nothing more than a balloon, string, and rod sounds like the beginning of a bad joke: This balloon, string, and rod walked into a bar...lol

The rocket and launching rig should make a clean separation. The rod is likely to cause more issues than solve.

The rocket needs to be inherently stable during acceleration regardless of how you launch it. This means the CG needs to be aft of the thrust. Put a long rod on the tail. Drop the rod for the glide home.