RCP 2021-016
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
9 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!
I haven’t been to enough NARAMs to observe the consistency or inconsistency of the placement of the thermometer used to record the temperature for use in temperature correction of altimeter data, but I certainly agree it should be consistent, and having the official thermometer up at the top of the tent doesn’t sound good.Â
Especially in conjunction with RCP 2021-017 to remove the 1% exceedance requirement when setting a new record, consistency of recording these temperatures across contests, not just at a given contest, will be important.
Whether use of a Kestrel Data Drop is the best way to do this I will leave to folks more directly involved in organizing any given contest as they decide how to best meet the “sensor shall be placed in a well-ventilated, shaded location near the launch site†requirement. It seems to me a digital thermometer on the table at check-in, as long as it’s in the shade, would meet the proposed rule requirement, as would such a device placed on a chair or box under and shaded by the check-in table if check-in isn’t shaded at a given meet.
I tend to agree with Bernard, let’s not get too specific. I have been to NRC launches that the CD/club did not own a nice digital thermometer. A call to a nearby weather reporting facility was probably just as good, as even if you do have a $300 Kestrel setup and shaded and all, it could easily warm or cool 3 or 4 degrees from checkin to actual launch.
What we don’t need are unfunded mandates. Send my section (MTMA) a free Kestrel Data Drop and I will vote yes for this RCP. I can’t guarantee that everyone in my section will vote yes.
For NARAM, I would actually take this a step further and require the temp at time of launch to be recorded on the flight card at the time of flight, not at check-in. Â Temperature has a big effect on how we adjust altimeter readouts for the final score. Â For barometric altimeter-based altitudes to be accurate, the temperature needs to be accurate.
NRC events are different, and you have to go with what you have. Â But for NARAM, where records are likely to be set, we should try to be more accurate.
Steve. While I don’t disagree with your intent here, I want people to be aware of real world implantation. Who is going to do this at NARAM? One more added thing to do, given now we are scraping for enough to run the range. And if you were to require it at launch instead of check in, how many flight cards are coming back to data entry with NO temp on them? It already happens occasionally now, it will be many times worse when it’s gotta be remembered at the pad. Just passing along as food for thought here. 🙂
As someone who has sat behind the big switchboard, it would be easy enough for the LCO (or Queue Manager, though we haven’t had one for a couple of years) to record the temperature.
The original proposal had many more requirements about the use of Ketrel Data Drop and recording the timestamps. It was later greatly shortened to a simple generic statement on the placement of the sensor. That small change should reduce the chances of abnormal readings like we saw at NARAM when the sensor was left in direct sunlight, so I support this change.
The Logic and Effect sections of the RCP should be amended to be in line with the simplified wording.
I agree with Steve. First of all, this rule as stated only impact NARAM, so NRC launches don’t need special equipment to implement.
Second, the recording of temp should be at time of launch, otherwise the requirement is somewhat pointless and open to someone trying to game the system.
Third, Brian is right. Recording a temp for the launch is not that big of a deal. It could be done @ launch by the LCO or as it is being sent over to the records/ data table immediately after the launch.
I think we need standardization, but not mandate a specific technology solution. Posting some kind of temperature sensor in the shade at 4 feet above ground is accurate enough without speficy a given vendor technology. I think we should also consider the accuracy of the temperature compensating mechanism in each manufacturer’s altimeter. These may be more accurate and measure real time temperature compensation at launch. I think the error in correcting data from an external temp source is going to be less accurate than each real time recording alimeter’s own temperature measurement (at altitude) rather than at ground level. I vote no for this reason of no research into compared accuracies. Â