[ExI] It's not rocket science - Well, it is actually.

[spike]

>... On Behalf Of Mike Dougherty
Subject: Re: [ExI] It's not rocket science - Well, it is actually.

On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 1:25 AM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
>> pressures, it was more likely to explode.  If the rockets crashed or
exploded very often, that could become an expensive hobby.

>Yeah, it could cost you an arm and a leg.


We had a local rocketry club back in the late 60s.  Whenever the
commercially sold kit rockets were launched, which always had kit motors,
nothing ever went wrong.  Out of hundreds of launches, I don't remember any
of them ever doing anything unexpected.  But when the homebrew models showed
up, either airframe, nozzle or motor, everyone would get waaaaay back, way
back.  Those failures were durn near as common as successes for the amateur
rocket designers.  We had wild instabilities, we sometimes had shrapnel
explosions, but we never did actually injure anyone.   Never destroyed any
actual property either, other than the experimental rockets themselves.
Things were different back in those days.  People didn't get uptight much
about things like that.  It was the Space Coast Florida in the Space Decade.
Danger was more accepted.

spike