Could someone address the time requirements to progress a squadron through the rocketry program? We had a seniors meeting last night and decided to commence training, but I need to have an idea how much classroom/ field time we need to schedule to get to the end. We have no one onboard who has a badge, nor is there a nearby club.
I have looked at the 50-20, and have checked out the NAR site. Good scoop.
Having scanned the syllabus, I am very excited about this, it appears the cadets will learn a great deal about physics and math, and have a ball besides. Not sure how to maximize class time (it seems there will be lengthy time requirements to build rockets in each stage, not sure how long it takes). I am even tempted to get a small rocket this week and launch it with my boys (ages 10, 11, 15) and get a taste of this. Hoping to find a low and slow model, as i do not want to track the thing for a long ways the first time out.
ANY POINTERS ARE WELCOME (as long as they move at sub-sonic speed, I'm a rookie ya know)!
These have been my experiences thus far:
I have taken the approach that I will NOT hold my cadets hands with regards to the tests in each of the three stages. I have presented the info to them via handouts and a brief lecture (30 minutes), but passing the test is up to them. If they cannot get it done when the group tests, they will have to get it done during the regular testing nights.
The Fizzy Flyer and Goddard Rocket can both be built within 30 minutes, with the amount of time needed to fly them being largely dependent on the size of your group. For the Goddard, I lined the cadets up across a field, pointed out a landmark, and instructed them to launch their rocket, run to it, and repeat the process until they reached the landmark and then returned to the original starting point.
I used this rocket for the first hands-on option of the Titan phase:
http://www.questaerospace.com/Itemdesc.asp?ic=1005&eq=&Tp=
It is inexpensive, very easy to build, and guarantees that the cadet will have a nice looking model to take home at the end of the day. Total build time was approximately 45 minutes with a group of eight, which included fixing some mistakes related to skipping ahead instead of waiting for the next set of instructions.
This is all I have accomplished thus far, although I'm planning to apply for an AFA grant to complete the program in early 2010. I'm torn between making the rest of the program a group activity or allowing those that want to earn their badge work on their own with kits supplied by the squadron.
I started the model rocketry program in my unit in April. I've used 1.5 hours per month (including rocket building time) and we are set to finish in August. Perhaps I've used more time than others, but it also takes a bit longer because of the amount of cadets that are going to be completing it.
Not sure why this thread was moved. the place I posted described it as such:
"Cadet Programs Management & Activities
The art of local CP: Talk about it all - Model Rocketry, Drill Teams, Color Guard, Aerospace Education, Moral Leadership, Physical Fitness, Leadership Academies, and anything else."
What I am doing is a cadet program, and it is management I am asking about, AND model rocketry IS LISTED in the description, soooooo, why was it moved? ???
Model rocketry falls under the Aerospace Education as much as, if not more than, it does Cadet Program. The governing reg, CAPR 50-20, has AE as the OPR.
I can understand why it would/could be in both places:
1) Post in under Cadet Programs because the inquiry is about integrating the program into the CP (time requirements, resources involved, etc. Not so much the execution or purpose of the program).
2) Post it under the AE section because it's, well, the Model Rocketry Program.
I suppose it doesn't really matter though.
Tried the fizzy flyer today. Lowest flight: 2 inches (no joke). Highest flight: 8' (a little over actually). I watched video after wards, and even the highest flying rocket began to pitch over about 2' off the ground. I realize that CG and CP are concepts introduced during the next 2 phases, but it sure would be nice to get the max altitude possible out of these alka seltzer rockets.
We used construction paper, and even then it seems that CG and CP are co-located. I am reluctant to introduce more mass into the units, but would it behoove us to get some weight forward in the unit? Maybe a 3/8" nut taped in the nose cone?
FYI, instead of a film canister, I used a "one touch" test strip canister (that is the one that went over 8'). I also tried a "novamax" test strip canister, but didn't get much height out of it (3' was the max).
Any suggestions would be great.
Jean
PS Traveling to the hobby shop to try and get a discount on multiple Alphas and also a basic two stage rocket.
IIRC, the vendor listed in the Rocketry booklet has educator kits for CAP fairly cheap. I think it was under $2/Alpha with the kit.
Sorry, I am looking and cannot find IIRC listed in the 50-20 (looking in the back).
IIRC is shorthand for If I Recall Correctly. I don't remember the name of the vendor and I don't have the manual handy.
Quote from: arajca on July 31, 2009, 10:35:04 PM
IIRC is shorthand for If I Recall Correctly. I don't remember the name of the vendor and I don't have the manual handy.
You can buy from Estes directly through their Education Catalog and get class packs and pretty much everything else they sell for a decent price. Anywhere I have looked that was cheaper could not handle the bulk we needed.
arajca,
OOPS! someone is showing his age (me). Never seen that before!
DC,
the local hobby store is going to be giving me the Estes educational price. ends up he is a member of the local RC plane consortium, and believes in CAP, so he gave us a discount on some stock items too! I also found out that the local school district does an abbreviated model rocketry program in the 4th and 5th grade.
Question: what choice do most cadets make at the titan phase practical? is the 2 stage rocket more popular, or the 3 oz payload? We do not seem to have much in the way of special altitude restrictions here, so assume that a multi-phase rocket is just fine.
When I ran a program a couple years ago, I provided a list of suggested rockets with an order form and the squadron ordered them at one time - the cadet had to pay for the rocket when they picked it up. This system allowed us to take advantage not only of the educator's pack, but also a large order discount (15%) and shipping (one large order vs a bunch of little ones).
Most cadets chose the payload option. If a cadet wanted a rocket not on the list, they had to provide it themselves (none did).
Quote from: jeancalvinus on August 01, 2009, 01:59:31 AM
arajca,
OOPS! someone is showing his age (me). Never seen that before!
DC,
the local hobby store is going to be giving me the Estes educational price. ends up he is a member of the local RC plane consortium, and believes in CAP, so he gave us a discount on some stock items too! I also found out that the local school district does an abbreviated model rocketry program in the 4th and 5th grade.
Question: what choice do most cadets make at the titan phase practical? is the 2 stage rocket more popular, or the 3 oz payload? We do not seem to have much in the way of special altitude restrictions here, so assume that a multi-phase rocket is just fine.
I doubt any 'normal' (18 or 24mm) two stage rocket would be much of a problem anywhere rockets are legal, they don't go
that high...
Payloaders are usually easier to build, but watching a two stage go is pretty cool as well, I'm not sure I have ever noticed a preference toward one or the other...
I saw an inexpensive payloader rocket today called "eggscalibur." It was under $10.
I am trying to keep this under $30 per cadet overall. Hope to succeed.
I do hope to launch a 2 or 3 stage for the final myself. I hope to find one that doesn't go all that high (don't want to walk too far to find it), and maybe uses A motors.
The cadets seem to be excited about this. I hope to use it to draw a few more in...