Model Rocket Nails Vertical Landing After Three-Year Effort (hackaday.com) 81
Aryan Kapoor, a high schooler from JRD Propulsion, successfully developed a model rocket with SpaceX-style vertical landing capabilities. The three-year effort was made possible by a thrust-vector control and clever landing gear design. Hackaday reports: He started in 2021 with none of the basic skills needed to pull off something like this, but it seems like he quickly learned the ropes. His development program was comprehensive, with static test vehicles, a low-altitude hopper, and extensive testing of the key technology: thrust-vector control. His rocket uses two solid-propellant motors stacked on top of each other, one for ascent and one for descent and landing. They both live in a 3D printed gimbal mount with two servos that give the stack plus and minus seven degrees of thrust vectoring in two dimensions, which is controlled by a custom flight computer with a barometric altimeter and an inertial measurement unit. The landing gear is also clever, using rubber bands to absorb landing forces and syringes as dampers. You can watch the first successful test flight and landing on YouTube.
Joe Barnard has entered the chat (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Joe Barnard has entered the chat (Score:5, Informative)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
BPSspace literally wrote the first comment to the video, congratulating them for the achievement.
Let's not invent outrage where there's none.
Re: Joe Barnard has entered the chat (Score:2)
I donâ(TM)t think thereâ(TM)s outrage being invented here. Just pointing out that BPS space did it. Of course everyone in the space community is excited when someone else does something cool.
Trump (Score:1)
No, Trump did it first, and did it better than anyone else.
Nobody thought he could do it, but he got it done and it was better than anyone else. Nobody said he could do it, but he just got it done and it was better than anyone thought he could do.
Just ask him. He'll tell you.
Re: (Score:2)
No, Trump did it first, and did it better than anyone else.
Nobody thought he could do it, but he got it done and it was better than anyone else. Nobody said he could do it, but he just got it done and it was better than anyone thought he could do.
Just ask him. He'll tell you.
And it was powerful, beautiful and perfect ...
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder how long it will be before we see "Trump Facts" in the style of Chuck Norris. Oh wait, look. [amazon.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Umm, no. The design was not similar. Watch the video and compare to how BPSpace did it .. very different .. only similarity is using solid rocket motors.
Re: (Score:2)
Solid rocket motors is a big one, no? Both use them with a thrust vectoring gimbal and fold-out legs. The only major difference is that this one ignites a second motor vs just landing on the first one.
This is not to detract from the achievement of course, it's pretty incredible stuff to DIY.
Re: (Score:2)
It looks like the one in TFA avoided the ceramic thrust control as well. Simplification is good when you can get away with it.
The one in TFA also managed it with much more approachable commercially available solid motors expanding the inquiry to a lot of people who simply aren't set up to make their own.
For those reasons, both have made a significant contribution to the discussion.
Re: (Score:2)
Wouldn't work with a real rocket (Score:4, Interesting)
While this is nice to watch, the rocket bounces quite a lot and a real one would have been destroyed.
I'm guessing he just timed the start of the second (landing) solid-propellant motor (along with the thrust vectoring), but a really smooth landing would require the ability to adjust the amount of thrust.
Re:Wouldn't work with a real rocket (Score:4, Insightful)
Still, despite the valid nitpicking... the kid did a good job with this.
Re: (Score:2)
Still, despite the valid nitpicking... the kid did a good job with this.
Yes, the kid did a good job. I wonder why people are trying to throw shade on him. Musk and his returning rockets did not nail it on the first try, but peopel worship him as a god, while perhaps some of the same people find issues with a high school student doing the same thing.
So despite a shaky landing, you can bet your tickets to Mars that the kid will get better with each launch.
Re: (Score:2)
Still, despite the valid nitpicking... the kid did a good job with this.
Yes, the kid did a good job. I wonder why people are trying to throw shade on him. Musk and his returning rockets did not nail it on the first try, but peopel worship him as a god, while perhaps some of the same people find issues with a high school student doing the same thing.
So despite a shaky landing, you can bet your tickets to Mars that the kid will get better with each launch.
I think you're seeing the results of two rather common phenomenon.
1. A younger person achieved something great. Certain older folks will absolutely want to cut that kids legs out from under him and stop him from being proud of that achievement. Most of us grew up with someone in our lives like this, yet most are too traumatized by it to admit that it's a common phenomenon. Except for:
2. Some people are so traumatized by it, since their entire family did it to them their entire lives, that when someone polit
Re: (Score:2)
Still, despite the valid nitpicking... the kid did a good job with this.
Yes, the kid did a good job. I wonder why people are trying to throw shade on him. Musk and his returning rockets did not nail it on the first try, but peopel worship him as a god, while perhaps some of the same people find issues with a high school student doing the same thing.
So despite a shaky landing, you can bet your tickets to Mars that the kid will get better with each launch.
I think you're seeing the results of two rather common phenomenon.
1. A younger person achieved something great. Certain older folks will absolutely want to cut that kids legs out from under him and stop him from being proud of that achievement. Most of us grew up with someone in our lives like this, yet most are too traumatized by it to admit that it's a common phenomenon. Except for:
2. Some people are so traumatized by it, since their entire family did it to them their entire lives, that when someone politely points out a minor quibble with a still impressive effort on the part of a younger person, not even intending it to sound snarky, the automatic knee-jerk response is, "Why are you beating him up over something cool?"
So ends today's armchair psychological lesson.
It's a pretty rad effort, and I think there's value in pointing out minor issues with his achievement in hopes that he can integrate those minor issues into his process and continue to advance from his already very impressive launch/return system on a model rocket. It's certainly a long ways away from my old model rockets, then went up and often went boom before they came back down.
Yes, some people do fold under the pressure. In a counter example, I was supposed to never amount to anything. I was supposed to be another faceless worker in the coal mines of Pennsylvania - at best. Even within my own family. My older sister was the smart promised child. I was the presumed n'er do well. They put her through college, and she decided with one term left, she wasn't interested any more, and quit. Ironically they took that disappointment on me. So I set out to prove them wrong. And I did by s
Re: (Score:2)
If the rest of your design can tolerate more bounce, perhaps it is best to allow more bounce.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Or to know EXACTLY how much thrust the landing rocket will provide, and for how long. And work out on the fly at what point to ignite it based on attitude and height above ground. Ideally it should also estimate how much thrust is going to be spent in vectoring back to vertical. Maybe not impossible, but very, very unlikely. The other option is to have excess thrust and a way to reduce it while vectoring, which is what ultimately BPSspace did, and I think could be refined further.
Re: (Score:2)
Different challenges with sizes. Real ones are probably (among other things) less bouncy because of more inertia that comes with mass.
Re:Wouldn't work with a real rocket (Score:5, Interesting)
Real ones also use liquid fuels and can be throttled. Here you're just at the mercy of whatever the cheapo motor wants to do.
Re: (Score:2)
In a multi engine design you could use the thrust vectoring to waste some of the impulse by vectoring the engines in partial opposition. Of course, you also increase the risk of failure by multiplying the number of engines you need to get reliably ignited.
Re: Wouldn't work with a real rocket (Score:2)
Re:Wouldn't work with a real rocket (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
he is a highschool kid who did this himself, with no prior training or experience in it. Cut him some slack, like you would for Musk
By “no prior training”, I’m assuming you meant to proverbially slap every teacher he’s ever had right across the face and label them pointless and worthless, yes? While you’re at it, give the parents a punch for good measure.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
are you just trying to be an asshole? Does that get you hard? He had no experience with rockets or software coding, none. prior to starting.
Every educator contributed to him taking the next step. From the math involved to learning about gravity.
In other words, I’m not trying to be the asshole ignoring or dismissing every other factor that contributed to his success. You don’t mold rocket scientists out of mud. Takes a bit more than that.
Re:Wouldn't work with a real rocket (Score:4, Insightful)
are you just trying to be an asshole? Does that get you hard? He had no experience with rockets or software coding, none. prior to starting.
Every educator contributed to him taking the next step. From the math involved to learning about gravity.
In other words, I’m not trying to be the asshole ignoring or dismissing every other factor that contributed to his success. You don’t mold rocket scientists out of mud. Takes a bit more than that.
Dude, this ain't you! Having a bad day or something? Yes, he owes a debt of gratitude to every human who came before, the people that created the equipment he created the rocket parts and the inventor of gunpowder and solid rockets, the National Socialists of WW2 and their pulsejet and V2 rockets. The Russians and their Katyusha. His parents for conceiving birthing and feeding him and raising him and his first grade math teacher, even the fast food restaraout where he grabs some food at some time, maybe the farmers that raised the food for him to eat and grow and learn.
But that isn't the point. He did something pretty damn cool, and he was self taught. He looked up the pertinent information, did the experiments, did the calculations, and ran the experiments, eventually succeeding in his project.
Re: (Score:2)
are you just trying to be an asshole? Does that get you hard? He had no experience with rockets or software coding, none. prior to starting.
Every educator contributed to him taking the next step. From the math involved to learning about gravity.
Try to convince HR reps that every year you spent in school counts as experience. In the real world, they are not, at all, the same thing.
In other words, I’m not trying to be the asshole ignoring or dismissing every other factor that contributed to his success. You don’t mold rocket scientists out of mud. Takes a bit more than that.
You're pretending that education is experience. You're blurring lines that aren't at all blurry. I read hundreds of books on rockets before I built my first one back in the 1980s. That didn't count as experience to anyone until I put my first fins on a cardboard tube and started building structures. You either think it is, or you're trying to pick a fight with somebody fo
Re: (Score:2)
are you just trying to be an asshole? Does that get you hard? He had no experience with rockets or software coding, none. prior to starting.
Hah! Looks like you and I are on the same page, Lazarus! I posted to him above that his post sounds like him being an asshole.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Dude/Dudette, just taking every opportunity to try to piss in other people's cheerio's is really a sad way to live, rather if you were one to celebrate other's successes, you might end up being a happier person.
Of course, you could just be a psychotic, who only wants to hurt others as much as possible, and I see your comments usually lea
Re: (Score:2)
Dude/Dudette, just taking every opportunity to try to piss in other people's cheerio's is really a sad way to live, rather if you were one to celebrate other's successes, you might end up being a happier person.
Is it maybe that someone is stepping on Musk's toes and territory, believing Musk to be the sole owner of returning rockets?
Indeed landing a rocket vertically with a solid freaking motor is nothing to be sneezed at. That takes some serious calculations and very precise timing. It is like the old "moon lander" game writ in real life.
Is it that some people have strange issues with young people doing impressive things?
Or is it just an unhappy person trying to crab pot others into their world of sadness and
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I have no doubt he had help. Maybe lots of it. But he had the vision and the tenacity to find his way to success over several years. That counts for a lot, especially when he's so young.
Pure speculation on my part, but I think he had several conversations that went like this:
Kapoor: I need to do X-thingy.
Scientist/Engineer: Oh, you mean a way to adjust the thrust vector. I have heard of parts Y from supplier Z that might help you.
Kapoor: Cool! Now I need to find a way to control it.
Scientist/Engineer: Perha
Re: (Score:2)
he is a highschool kid who did this himself, with no prior training or experience in it. Cut him some slack, like you would for Musk
By “no prior training”, I’m assuming you meant to proverbially slap every teacher he’s ever had right across the face and label them pointless and worthless, yes? While you’re at it, give the parents a punch for good measure.
Tell us master of all things technology - tell us of your great contributions. Hope you understand that you sound like an asshole.
Re: (Score:2)
he is a highschool kid who did this himself, with no prior training or experience in it. Cut him some slack, like you would for Musk
I think you touched on something. Some people might be kind of jealous. For me, him doing this with solid motors is all the more impressive. Keep at it, young Padawan!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't cut any slack for Musk who I'm sure didn't do the work, unlike the many SpaceX engineers. Musk was the impulsion.
Here the kid was both the impulsion and did the work.
That being said, I'd love to see a new version with adjustable thrust.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Wouldn't work with a real rocket (Score:2)
A lot of the bounce comes from the fact that relative to scale, things happen *way* faster when your rocket is small. The time between being 1 rocket height up, and being 0 is extremely small when acceleration is 10 rocket heights per second squared, not 0.01 rocket heights per second squared.
Re: (Score:2)
Model rocket motors vary in performance, even within a nominal engine rating. They also are vulnerable to mishandling. Dropping a motor can fracture the grain, leading to a rapid burn. Staging was accomplished by the first stage motor having the top end of the propellant grain left open, so hot gases and particles from the top end of the first stage motor would ignite the second stage motor. Staging failures were frequent. My last experience was around 1968, but I doubt that the motors have changed muc
Re: (Score:2)
While this is nice to watch, the rocket bounces quite a lot and a real one would have been destroyed.
I'm guessing he just timed the start of the second (landing) solid-propellant motor (along with the thrust vectoring), but a really smooth landing would require the ability to adjust the amount of thrust.
Sure looks like a real rocket to me.
Re: (Score:2)
And give it to someone whose name is literally "Aryan" ? (yes yes I know he's of Indian descent .. it is ironic enough though).
Re: (Score:3)
backslashdot snarked:
And give it to someone whose name is literally "Aryan" ? (yes yes I know he's of Indian descent .. it is ironic enough though).
Despite the association of the term with Nazis and other racial supremecist ideologues, the actual, origiinal Arians were ethnic Persians [wikipedia.org], none of whom had blue eyes or blond hair (which they acquired only through interbreeding with the mostly-Greek mercenaries whom Alexander the Great left behind as garrison troops, when he moved on from pacifying the easternmost Persian satrapies to conquering the Indus Valley).
I've always been amused at the worship of "Aryan purity" by Oswald Moseley
Re: (Score:2)
Which means 'Great People' IIRC? Correct me if that's wrong. Very generic as I recall.
Nothing controversial unless your education is (sadly) limited to public schools.
Re: (Score:2)
The word "Aryan" has a pretty sordid history in 19th and early 20th century "archaeology." It is funny as hell that some of that period's pseudoscientific racial superiority nonsense involved the imaginative misinterpretation of the same Indian fairy tale as they nicked the term from.
Amazing (Score:2)
Even if he has copied a step-by-step tutorial to achieve this, it would still be very impressive. If one of my kids did this, I'd be looking mournfully at my savings as I prepared to finance as much additional education as they required to get into the field professionally.
Amazing engineering work! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
There's more info there on his website: http://jrdpropulsion.com/?page... [jrdpropulsion.com]
Servos: 2x MG90S
Processor: Atmel ATSAMD21E18
Sensors: BMI088, MS5607
As for the pcb printing, just search for "pcb printing" and you'll find many online printing services.
It's rather cheap, and you can even order them with the smd components pre-soldered.
For the software though, that's an other story.
Re: (Score:1)
It's super-hard (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Superhard vs. Superlucky. (Score:4, Insightful)
this is really awesome! (Score:2)
But is this a hack? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Did he really create a stable system, that can handle random changes - like wind, or an engine out? I.e. did he really write the equations for a feedback control system, and validate that those equations match his hardware's response? Or did he just hack at it until it worked under ideal conditions?
(Translation) ”Nice job on the bounce, kid. Now let’s see you do it again.”
Repeatability is about the only thing that separates pure luck from pure genius.
Rocket Explodes; Afternoon Ruined (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't understand why every big engineering project doesn't do this. Start with a tiny model that a high-schooler can afford to build, get the methods and mechanisms working, then scale up. I know that many of the problems you encounter at larger scales are different from smaller scales. But not ALL of them, surely.
Do you think controlling an R/C car 1/10th the size around a racetrack , is honestly anything like F1 drivers controlling a car around a racetrack?
And that’s just dealing with factors on the ground.
Many of the problems you would encounter are likely different enough to not find the teeny tiny effort, worth it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Almost none of the technology in a R/C car translates to F1. There are many examples where scaling works the other way, it is much harder to engineer a supersonic model jet than a full sized one.
Re: (Score:3)
When you get corned by an example that contradicts your premise you resort to pedantry. Almost none of the technology in a R/C car translates to F1. There are many examples where scaling works the other way, it is much harder to engineer a supersonic model jet than a full sized one.
Exactly. But the strangest thing is that he apparently has no idea of the very common practice of scale model testing. They do test F1 models in wind tunnels. They test a lot of scale models in Wind and water type tunnels. Happens in a lot of places every day. The main drawback is you have to make the model very precise so that the scaling doesn't introduce specious effects. The main advantage is that it is less expensive to make an accurate scale model than a full scale one, and of course, sometimes the re
No (Score:3)
Just for modelling the aerodynamics of a race car properly with a tiny model you need to switch to a cryogenic wind tunnel (gas temperature 100K) to maintain the Reynolds number, and that is easily more expensive than building full-size functional prototypes for anything except space- and aircraft.
Re: (Score:2)
Anything like? Yes.
As an non-F1 driver speaking to another, I call bullshit until you prove it.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't understand why every big engineering project doesn't do this. Start with a tiny model that a high-schooler can afford to build, get the methods and mechanisms working, then scale up. I know that many of the problems you encounter at larger scales are different from smaller scales. But not ALL of them, surely.
Do you think controlling an R/C car 1/10th the size around a racetrack , is honestly anything like F1 drivers controlling a car around a racetrack?
And that’s just dealing with factors on the ground.
Many of the problems you would encounter are likely different enough to not find the teeny tiny effort, worth it.
The non-sequitur of the year! What on earth would the idea of an RC model being used to emulate an F1 vehicle as a retort to scale modeling and testing - which is performed regularly as an integral part of research?
You wouldn't use an RC model. Those are toys, and even if modeled on a real F1 care, would not be accurate enough. You'd use a small model built to exacting standards and tested in wind tunnels. Just. Like. this. https://www.formula1.com/en/la... [formula1.com]
Or if you are talking about fluid devices, Wa
Re:Rocket Explodes; Afternoon Ruined (Score:4, Insightful)
To a point they do. However, not everything scales well. To get an accurate representation EVERYTHING must be scaled, gravity included. Money is also the big factor. The labs have setups they can change to test lots of different conditions, but they can't replicate the existing machine that will be modified. We vet out the critical variables, and then use our brains to make the leap to the real size.
This test was a great proof of concept and achievement.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't understand why every big engineering project doesn't do this. Start with a tiny model that a high-schooler can afford to build, get the methods and mechanisms working, then scale up. I know that many of the problems you encounter at larger scales are different from smaller scales. But not ALL of them, surely.
Not every project, but a lot of them do. I've worked on projects that start out with some 3-D work get preliminary builds at the modeling stage, get tested and reported on, then scaled.
Often this work is performed by college or graduate students. Build, test, take the results, work with the engineer to refine the model. The system works.
Common Problems Known and Solved (Score:2)
I know that many of the problems you encounter at larger scales are different from smaller scales. But not ALL of them, surely.
No, not all of them but the ones that are relevant to both scales are generally the problems that everyone is already aware of and that already have good, well known solutions because the small scale stuff has already been done before. The only way to learn about the new problems you have to deal with is to build at scale.
But did he do it twice? (Score:2)
In the video I get the impression there was only one success.
The rocket appears to ascend only about 70 feet and the landing gear looks very springy. I'm thinking this could be launched many times and fail without much damage, which is fine but you may have succeeded mainly by chance only once.
Using Estes rocket motors, which probably aren't particularly consistent and he said they have a tendency to explode.
Two of the most unpopular names (Score:2)
Two of the most unpopular names ever, lol.
"Aryan", ummm do I need to say more nope
"Kapoor"- invokes memories of Anish Kapoor, a genuine scumbag 'artist' who got into an internet brawl with the maker of the "world's blackest paint". Kapoor is not legally allowed to buy or use his paint, and people buying it have to attest that they're not buying it for Anish Kapoor and will not give it to him.
Might as well have named the kid Genghis Hitler.
But bravo to him for the landing, some very cool stuff there for sure
Re: (Score:1)
There are more than 100,000 Kapoors in India. Most people who heard that name probably know one or more Bollywood actor bearing it, including Raj Kapoor, Rishi Kapoor, Randhir Kapoor, Rajiv Kapoor, Kareena Kapoor, Karishma Kapoor, Ranbir Kapoor, Anil Kapoor, Boney Kapoor, Arjun Kapoor, Sonam Kapoor, Jahnvi Kapoor, Shashi Kapoor, Khushi Kapoor and countless others. All in all, I'd say the name Kapoor is hugely popular.
Weird video during the landing (Score:2)
OK can someone explain to me why the landing part of the video looks fake? The way the camera is following the crafts bounce perfectly seems odd to me. But maybe they're using some camera tracker?
This is someone to invest in (Score:1)
Any kid with the perseverance to spend 3years solving a hard engineering problem is someone to be invested in.
Whether itâ(TM)s a university scholarship or just a grant to invest in him.
âoeSpecialization is for insectsâ
Go get them Aaron.
most space tech should be built out of lego (Score:2)