RCP 2021-011
Enter NAR login credentials for access.
Please enter your username or email address. This should be the same login you use for your NAR membership
6 Comments
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
- Home
- Join NAR
- Site Map
- Contact Us
- My Membership
- About NAR
- American Rocketry Challenge
- Model Rocket Info
- High Power Rocketry
- Educational Resources
- Find a Launch
- Local Clubs
- Insurance Questions/Claims
- Safety
- Rocket Motor Information
- Contest Flying – NAR Competition
- National Scoreboard
- US Team Selection Scoreboard
- Register an NAR Launch
- Competition Results Entry
- Team Registration
- Teams List
- Contest Events
- Competition Meets
- International Competition
- Competition Guide
- U.S. Model Rocket Sporting Code
- Rules Revision Process
- US National Model Rocket Performance Records
- Sport Rocketry Magazine
- Member Resources
- Website Fixes
- Donate
- What’s My NAR Number?
- Log out
High Power Rocket Certification
Design and Fly High Power Rocket Vehicles Learn MoreLocal Rocketry Clubs
Connect with Proven Rocketry Experts Find A Club TodayMembers-Only Forum
Engage in meaningful conversations about rocketry topics that matter. Get Connected!Sport Rocketry Magazine
Six 48 Page Issues a year with NAR Membership!
Totally agree with Dan’s proposal, small fields would support 5 NS streamer duration, as 18mm diameter models would essentially fly to similar altitudes of a 13mm diameter 2.5ns model. Both could out-fly the field , if thermals are present, but their small mass should present no safety issues in a larger municipality.
Dan states, “Events like Streamer Duration only allowed for 13mm motor class events. Of those engine classes, only one has commercially available motors with a suited engine delay for the event.”
That available motors suitable for 1/4A to A S/D come from one manufacturer isn’t, IMO, a relevant argument for adding B S/D to the NRC. Given that Estes was almost lost to bankruptcy should underscore that fact that we are all darn lucky we have the motors we do to fly these events.
Also, if competitors can consistently qualify their 1/4A to A S/D models, what is gained by adding B S/D to the NRC. Is B S/D truly harder than any of the 13mm S/D events? IMO, it’s not when you have a no return rule in the NRC. So, other than more altitude, and the need for an entirely new set of airframes and streamers, nothing is gained except an increased burden on our A and B division competitors.
Again, IMO, the addition of more events to the NRC is being expressed by the existing C and T members all of whom are not the target market of the NRC. If competitors want to fly events outside the current NRC list, there is nothing to stop them. But what is being sought here is the convenience of flying events that are more stimulating to the adult competitors AND getting NRC credit for it. I will not support this RCP.
B SD was once the most flown contest event. I was surprised when this event was omitted from the original slate of NRC events. IMHO 18mm streamer models are much easier to prep than the 13mm models. It’s kid-friendly. Harder to recover one of these birds, but who cares about returns anymore?
I don’t agree with adding the other proposed events to the NRC. But I will vote in favor of this addition to the NRC.
We will definitely outfly our model rocket field (40 acres) with a decent B SD model. It’s hard enough to do A SD without repeatedly losing rockets.
This one doesn’t strike me as necessary. B S/D can go a long way up, and drift a long way away – which goes against the NRC “small-field” focus. There’s variety and challenge with the smaller impulse classes.