Not quite Doug.

There will be a single list for each of the categories in each impulse range with impulse definied as TOTAL installed impulse. The people who have made flights qualifying for a record will fill out a record form, get their two witnesses to sign the form and submit it.

IF they aren't a club member, but they break the record - they go on the list with all the members - period. The Club altitude records are essentially club member records UNLESS someone who isn't a club member beats the record at one or the other NCR launch site.

The big difference is that non-members are not eligible to declare altitude records that exceed NCR's waivers flown at other venues. Also, if a non-member doesn't beat the 1st place winner for that impulse class, they don't get on the list. NCR members can declare for 1st, 2nd, or 3rd place whereas non-members only get on the list by beating 1st place.

I thought you were an NCR member?

Warren

Yes, but I was just trying to get clairification which you did. It seemed like the list of records was rather lengthy but you explained it very well and it seems fair.

Doug

I guess in the end here, I should be clear and say this...

A) NCR Club altitude records SHOULD be flown at NCR launch sites.

==

B) but don't expect to fly a K to 28,000' at BALLS and get credit for the NCR club K record. You'll have the Tripoli World record, but the club K record will still be John Wilke's North Site flight of 20,719' on an AT K250. Our waiver covers the altitude so go ahead and fly it at the North Site.

I guess I respectfully disagree on both counts. Here is why... before the new web page came up, we had a very specific set of rules laid out, and they were posted online. In fact, they were voted on a club meeting and adopted by the membership at large. The written rules were quite clear that flights could be flown at other venues. That is why I didn't blink when at flew at Hartsel (in 40 deg temps for the F & G, which didn't help). Incidentally, some of the predecessor records were actually flown up at Walden (the F & G records, to be precise). Walden is where TRM used to fly, and is well over 8K MSL.

With regard to records over 20K-- you never know if or when we will have windows for going over 20K. I set the current K record under a 30K window. We do not know if we will ever have another 30K window again. If you go to Black Rock and fly to 22K, then my hat is off to you and I believe you deserve the NCR K record. I believe *strongly* that any record that is higher than our standing waiver should be the club record, period. I say this because anyone who thinks windows can't be done away with and waivers can't be lowered hasn't been in this hobby very long. When I started flying at Hartsel, IIRC the standing waiver was ~18K and there were windows to 26K. Today, the Hartsel waiver is a standing 7K waiver (up from 6K last year) and the windows are to 14K, but ONLY prior to 8AM. My how times have changed.

I'm fine with stripping the F, G, H, and M records from the books. If people think they were set wrongfully, then by all means nullify them. I give you my word that there will be no hard feelings, and I'm glad to try and re-establish them on NCR turf. That said, they were set in good faith, pursuant to the written protocol that this club voted on. Unfortunately, this document was lost (along with 1, 2, 3 mile club, club charter, etc.) when the website was updated.

FWIW, I planned to re-fly all the above this year on NCR turf, anyway. This is not a big deal. I did want everyone to be aware of the backdrop here. I was recently told that flying at Hartsel was, and I quote, "cheating". I do not concur.

JW

My belief is that NCR records are records set by any NCR member at a recognized launch site regularly flown from. This prevents misguided members from travelling to the moon in hopes of establishing new records, or closer to home, from the top of your favorite 14K peak. There are not many sites in current use more favorable than North, Hartsel being the sole exception I know of.

Now the other side of the coin are field records, these should not be restricted except by the clauses of in advance declaration and two NCR members who can verify. So anyone flying at the North site can claim these and they should be ranked w/o consideration of membership basis.

To me this seems the simplest compromise.

7 - Electronic Altimeters used to establish the maximum altitude must come from a list of "approved" electronic altimeters in order for the altitude to be declared official. They must be unmodified in any way (excluding minor hardware modifications such as changing out the terminals or added holes to facilitate mounting). This list of approved altimeters has yet to be developed and will be determined through consultation with Tripoli and NAR technical staff. Flying multiple altimeters is strongly recommended as this provides backup in the event of a disputed altitude. Purely Accelerometer-based altimeters shall not be acceptable for altitude record purposes as altitude is not directly sensed but inferred from acceleration data. Barometric or GPS based altitudes are required. In the event of a flight with multiple altimeters or altimeter + GPS position sensing, the lowest altitude reported by the various devices is the official altitude. In extreme cases, it may be asked that the altimeters used be submitted for testing to determine how accurate and precise the reported altitude is.

I do not believe that taking the lowest is the thing to do. I Suggest that when flying more then one unit you take the difference between the 2 altimeters and split it. So if one altimeter was 14,386ft and the other was 14,402ft you would end up with an altitude of 14,394ft. Calibration and differences in spec will produce different variances. Most should be fairly close to one another that it shouldn't be a HUGE difference. But to proclaim that the higher of the 2 as not being correct over the lower is not an accurate representation of the flight either. Who is to say what one is correct. So split it. I believe that is plenty fair.

Here is a case in point Lets say a RRC2x and a ARTS. (ARTS is a dual sensing unit with Baro and Accelerometer that uses both to Calculate final Altitude not just Baro and not Just Accelerometer.) You will end up with a different altitude. And in fact I will bet that the ARTS will always be lower as it takes into the factor the Accelerometer.

Just my suggestion anyhow.

My belief is that NCR records are records set by any NCR member at a recognized launch site regularly flown from. This prevents misguided members from travelling to the moon in hopes of establishing new records, or closer to home, from the top of your favorite 14K peak. There are not many sites in current use more favorable than North, Hartsel being the sole exception I know of.

Now the other side of the coin are field records, these should not be restricted except by the clauses of in advance declaration and two NCR members who can verify. So anyone flying at the North site can claim these and they should be ranked w/o consideration of membership basis.

To me this seems the simplest compromise.

I understand what you are saying. I would prefer that all NCR members that wish to participate in the Altitude events would do so here at the NCR Sites. UNLESS..... The flight will surpass the given altitude of the highest waiver offered at the NCR event. So if its over 30K then guess what you may need to fly at Black Rock or somewhere that will be able to provide such a flight and it should count if it is successful with CLEAN recovery. But then again that would be my preferance. I do recall though that we did have rules as JW states about being able to fly that anywhere. As I said I would prefer but I do also respect the rules previously made and say it should not be required to be forced to be done at NCR.

Sites like Hartsel hardly have to much advantage anymore really over the north site as Hartsel has a much lower waiver and a normally much cooler temp. Both which will have an effect on the flight. The north site is at 5500 ft above MSL and plenty high enough to have a fair impact. But this is just my 2 c. Its amazing that on any given day any site could have that special something and net you that prize..

call em what you want--two sets of records, the simpler solution seems to me, Conway, is to have field records and club records, Hard to cry foul. I think in reality they would be the same. Exceptions would include over 30K flights, Can't set that an Pawnee. My intention would be to recognize great flights lit anywhere by NCR members, and in fairness, if the visitios come and waste our North records, they deserve recognition.

Here is a thought. Two columns on the records page: the first column is for official club records set at an NCR site by an NCR member. The second column is for flights flown by NCR members at another venue that exceed the first column.

I do think that anything over 20K (not 30K, but 20K) should be eligible to flown elsewhere and still be the "official" club record. High altitude windows come and go, and they are sometimes hard to invoke even if you are told they are available due to air traffic that day, etc. Said another way, if you build a rocket that you think will go to 25K, you have maybe two NCR launches per year and then only windows that may or may not happen. These launches are in the spring and the fall, times when the weather can be nominal. If that were my rocket, I'd want the flexibility to fly it at BALLS just in case the weather or FAA failed us at the N site.... and if one of us flies a bird to 27K, let that be the official record. The windows can be finicky. Don't penalize the flyer...

My thought was the only eligible flights away from NCR venues would be those flights that exceed the standing waiver - not necessarily the higher altitude windows.

Warren

I guess I'm still unclear on why anyone would be opposed to NCR records set anywhere for any altitude, excluding Hartsel if thats an issue? (Con, at 100% RH and 110F temps a generic altitude rocket at North will just overcome the advantage of flying at Hartsel at 0%RH, 45 degrees--otherwise, the advantage under Identical conds. is about 6 percent according to my sims--thats flying just under the standard waiver there).

Concern over legitimacy? Having better recovery area, thus making such a shot "easier"? The field record concept seems fairest in this regard, cuz its been flown from the same place, with the same obstacles.

But I'm even more curious whether we want to recognize EX altitude records under a separate column, obviously, along the TRA guidelines?

To me these seem like some of the more interesting and challenging records in some respects.

I know this will sound suspicious coming from me, but I think to say that you can fly anywhere BUT Hartsel is not approriate, either. I say that because TCO and NCR have many common members, Hartsel is closer for some than the N. site, TRA has had records set there (when they had a much better waiver), etc. If it is legit enough for TRA, then it ought to be good enough for us -- IF we are going to allow off-site records.

FWIW, if I crank my H rocket in Rocksim, I show that 50 deg F at Hartsel equates to ~90 deg F at the N. site, so I concur-- we have pretty good conditions up north. I'll bet it is 90 degrees up north a lot more often than it is 50 degrees at Hartsel... especially since anything over 7K has to be flown PRIOR to 8am per their new waiver.

I hope to up my TRA "G" record up north this year, just to prove this point 🙂

In the FWIW dept, The numbers you cite make sense--mine were for a g rocket, the differences should get smaller as the overall impulse gets greater.

Just remember guys, air density does not fall off in a linear fashion with increasing altitude. The roughly 3000 of difference between the north site and Hartsel causes a much greater fall-off in atmospheric density than the difference between sea level and 3000'. Merely simming temperature differences between the site does NOT accomodate the difference in atmospheric pressure. Talk to Jim Amos about something called the Standard Atmosphere Model and how it affects accuracy in altimeters if you want a real earful. Rocksim does NOT incorporate the standard atmospheric model. It uses a linear progression which is NOT accurate.

Warren

Warren,

Thats very interesting, I assumed RS used a lookup table or one of the eqns approximating density as fx of elevation sbove sea level. So has anyone played with what numbers produce the most accurate resluts for sims at North and Hartsel, weather fluctuations aside?

My thought is a bit more direct. JW shows up with the same rocket, same motor, etc. as was flown at Hartsel. I'll betcha a beer I can increment my Hartsel record. The rocket will be unmodified vs. Hartsel. When you see it, you will understand why it can't be any shorter, etc.

I really believe I'll exceed my record at the N site vs. Hartsel -- as long as we have a calm, warm, and relatively mild day up north.

I like the new Odell's IPA, BTW 🙂 Bring a six pack, I like to share....