hongshaorou/openrocket
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity
openrocket/swing/resources-src/datafiles/components/README.md

1239 lines
62 KiB
Markdown
Raw Normal View History

updates for gradle
2023-04-18 21:48:26 -05:00
# openrocket-database - Enhanced components database for OpenRocket
This project is aimed at sport rocketry people who use OpenRocket for design and flight simulation.
This is an enhanced parts database for [OpenRocket](http://openrocket.sourceforge.net/),
providing a massive number of additional rocket parts (nose cones, body tubes,
transitions, etc.) and corrections to the built-in parts database contained in the
OpenRocket jar file.
Installing this package does not change how OpenRocket __works__ in any way. It only changes what
components are available for selection in the menus.
The OpenRocket developers have expressed interest in incorporating this database into the
app, replacing the outdated original parts database, but I don't know when that will happen
as there has not been an OpenRocket release in several years.
I apologize in advance for the geeky way you need to install this. It's not very
complicated, but there's a bit of command line work. You'll need to be able to use a `git`
client to grab this repo, and create a soft symlink so that OpenRocket finds the database
when it starts up.
I invite contributors to create a packaged installer, especially for Windows.
## Compatibility
OpenRocket compatibility: tested with OpenRocket 15.03 __only__
System compatibility: works anywhere OpenRocket can run
## Release Notes
0.9.1.14 - Sep 2021
* Fixes
* README - fix broken URL for Estes catalog archive
* Updates
* apogee - add new file with TARC foam nose cones and egg protectors
* README - add info about not being able to remove the old database when using the packaged installers
* README - move some old release notes to the archive file
0.9.1.13 - Jan 2021
* Fixes
* quest - fix incorrect length of 10mm tube - was 10 meters
* Updates
* quest - change most tube dimensions to inches now that official specs are mostly in inches
* README - note demise of Semroc legacy website, end of FSI reboot, revival of Giant Leap Magna-frame tubes
0.9.1.12 - Jan 2021
* Fixes
* Bluetube - Add missing CenteringRing opening tag (closes issue #3)
0.9.1.11 - Oct 2020
* Fixes
* Madcow - update FC80 ID/OD to match newly published dimensions of FT80
* Madcow - ID/OD of FC55 changed noticeably now that data has been published
* Madcow - remove more source error tags based on website data improvements
* Madcow - 4" tube SKU changed from T39 -> T40
0.9.1.10 - Apr 2020
* Fixes
* Madcow - add FC75 and newly published mfr data for FC80
* Madcow - update body_tube_data.xlsx for mfr website changes and fixes
* Madcow - source error for FT11 SKUs removed; fixed on madcow.com
Release notes from older versions can be seen [here](docs/release_notes_archive.md)
## Installing
In all environments, I recommend you create a symlink to the cloned repo so that OpenRocket
will find the components database there. Doing it this way allows OpenRocket to
automatically find the updated files after you do a 'git pull' to grab the latest version
from GitHub. Otherwise you would have to copy updated files to where OpenRocket expects them.
### Mac
```bash
git clone https://github.com/dbcook/openrocket-database.git
cd ~/Library/Application\ Support/OpenRocket
ln -s ~/openrocket-database/orc Components
```
### Linux
```bash
git clone https://github.com/dbcook/openrocket-database.git
cd ~/.openrocket
ln -s ~/openrocket-database/orc Components
```
### Windows
Here you need to clone the git repo and create a soft directory symlink to where you cloned it.
* Install git for Windows (https://git-for-windows.github.io/)
* Get a command prompt. You either have to use "Run as administrator" or have Developer Mode enabled.
Run the following:
```bash
git clone https://github.com/dbcook/openrocket-database.git
mklink /D %APPDATA%\OpenRocket\Components C:\openrocket-database\orc
```
## Removing the Built-in .orc Files from OpenRocket
With the orignal jar file installation of OR 15.03, it was possible to remove the stock built-in .orc
files from the OpenRocket jar file. This is a slightly technical operation and requires
that you have the 'zip' tool or equivalent.
However, as of late 2021, you _must_ use the prepackaged OpenRocket installers due to the
very outdated Java JRE version needed by OpenRocket, and removing the old parts database
is not currently feasible unless you are building OR from source.
The OR developers intend to replace the old parts database with this one
when they make a new release, so eventually the need for this will disappear.
I have no idea when that will actually happen.
All of the built-in .orc files are serialized into
a single binary file under datafiles/presets/system.ser. You can remove this file safely,
but be aware that this deletes *all* the parts, including a few that have not been
replaced by this package.
The following commands show how to remove the old database from the jar file.
```bash
cd location-of-openrocket-jar
cp OpenRocket-15.03.jar OpenRocket-15.03-nopresets.jar
zip -d OpenRocket-15.03-nopresets.jar datafiles/presets/system.ser
```
## Reporting Problems
Please file issues here on GitHub so that they can be tracked and get comments. I'm
very interested in:
* Data for missing parts, including source attribution.
* Parts that insert into OpenRocket with zero mass (indicates a problem in the material definition)
If you have a large contribution, please fork the repo, make your changes, and submit a pull request.
Please don't report problems on TRF, via email, etc. - use GitHub issues; others may be ignored.
## Features and improvements
* Detailed documentation on how the components database works, and much info about restrictions and limitations.
* Much research data added as comments in the files
* Mass overrides mostly removed - material densities set correctly
* Mass data for tubing analyzed to remove outliers and derive correct average densities
* Master materials reference file built, with heavily researched data
* Estes file vastly enhanced: added missing parts, PNs, Pro Series II parts, many errors fixed
* Semroc: many errors and conflicts resolved, missing parts added
* LOC Precision: many conflicts and errors resolved, parachutes added
* New manufacturer files added: Top Flight, Madcow, MPC, generic chutes/streamers
## State of the Project
After 5+ years of development, the project is now about as complete as it's going to get.
Indexing of new Estes parts is no longer possible, most of the historically significant
vendors are covered, and the lineup of parts from
the modern manufacturers has been stable for some time.
Corrections to the Semroc parts are no longer possible now that the original Semroc
web server has crashed irrecoverably.
The information about how OpenRocket databases work
has been through several iterations including code dives and is pretty accurate, but it's
somewhat Mac centric because that's what I use most.
### Possible Updates
* Build a separate Centuri file (but compatible tubes and nose cones are in the Semroc file)
* Review / upgrade BMS, PML, and GLR stock files
* Add Bluetube / Always Ready Rocketry centering rings (and nose cones if possible)
* Add historic FSI and CMR parts, though they are no longer available anywhere
### Database Files Status
| File | In Stock OR | Upgrade/Completion State |
| ----- | ----- | ----- |
| `Estes.orc` | Yes | 100% - split - see new files below
| `loc_precision.orc` | Yes | 100%
| `semroc.orc` | Yes | 99% - believed complete, some cleanup continues
| `bluetube.orc` | Yes | 100% - tubes and couplers are done, still needs CRs and NCs
| `Quest.orc` | Yes | 98% - everything known is done
| `bms.orc` | Yes | --
| `Fliskits.orc` | Yes | --
| `giantleaprocketry.orc` | Yes | --
| `publicmissiles.orc` | Yes | --
| `apogee.orc` | No | 50%? new file added with TARC foam NCs and egg protectors
| `fsi.orc` | No | -- new file needed
| `cmr.orc` | No | -- new file needed
| `mpc.orc` | No | 98% - all known data included
| `estes_classic.orc` | No | 98% - classic era parts are complete
| `estes_ps2.orc` | No | 98%
| `madcow.orc` | No | 99%
| `top_flight.orc` | No | 100%
| `competition_chutes.orc` | No | 100%
There are files I may never do, or do in very abbreviated form.
* Fliskits - Jim Flis ceased operations of Fliskits in 2018; no unique parts except nose cones. A file exists
in OR 15.03 but it has not been updated.
* CMR - the unique tube sizes are no longer made by anyone, so very limited usefulness.
* FSI - same story as CMR with unique tube sizes that are no longer made by anyone.
Software validation tests are needed to make sure that parts generate reasonable masses and have
internally consistent dimensions. I experimented with creating some `.ork` design files for this,
but there are limitations to the usefulness of that due to
how OpenRocket copies components into the .ork file, so something better is needed.
### Future Parts Database Organization
See [this discussion](docs/next_gen_parts_database.md)
### Data Gathering Discussion
Accurate data is really hard to come by for many items, and it's getting harder.
There are some good sources such as the Brohm body tube / nose cone kit cross references and
archived catalogs from the era of domestic in-house production. However, some
manufacturers such as LOC Precision and Quest have never provided complete or accurate parts data.
#### Model Rocket Documentation Archives
The main online resources for model rocket kit and parts information are:
* [JimZ plans site](http://www.spacemodeling.org/jimz/)
* [RocketShoppe](http://www.oldrocketplans.com/centuri.htm)
* [Estes instructions archive](https://www.estesrockets.com/customer-service/instructions)
* [Estes catalogs archive](https://www.estesrockets.com/customer-service/full-catalog/)
* [ninfinger.org rockets archive](http://www.ninfinger.org/rockets/rockets.html)
The JimZ plan site offers kit instructions _and_ fin pattern and decal scans. Coverage includes
a great many vintage Estes kits, plus some Centuri and other plans. Scan quality is sometimes
poor from having been done a long time ago on weak equipment, and sometimes utility is compromised
by lack of pixel scale control or reference rulers in the scans. Many of the decal images are
pretty poor. There have not been any new additions to this site since circa 2010 or so.
The Rocketshoppe plans site is similar to the JimZ site, with instructions plus fin and decal scans.
There is some overlap in coverage with JimZ. The decal and pattern scans often suffer the same
kinds of problems as on the JimZ site, for the same reasons. I don't know if new plans are
actively being added to Rocketshoppe.
The Estes instructions archive is _only_ instructions; there are no fins or decal scans. But the
quality of the scans is uniformly good, and coverage is pretty good. There is no Centuri material
even though Estes owns it all.
The Estes catalog archive contains excellent quality scans of Estes catalogs all the way back to
the legendary No. 261 catalogs. It has pretty much made ninfinger.org obsolete for Estes
catalogs due to the much higher scan quality. There are as yet no Centuri catalogs there.
The ninfinger.org site has a lot of scans of rocket catalogs and documents, including some
of the more obscure vendors. Scan quality is sometimes very poor, but there are important
and unique resources there such as early Aerotech and Canaroc catalogs.
### Data Availability by Manufacturer
This section discusses the parts data situation for various prominent model rocket vendors.
#### Estes
[Estes Corporate History](docs/estes_history_and_sub_brands.md)
Estes has an archive with many kit instructions and nearly all back catalogs on its
website, and many kits have instructions plus fin and decal scans on the two prominent
rocketry archive sites (JimZ and Ye Olde Rocket Shoppe). In addition, John Brohm
produced comprehensive Estes body tube and nose cone kit cross-references in 2007
that contain a lot of hard-to-find data.
Early catalogs were comprehensive and accurate in their specs for parts, usually giving
full dimensions and a representative weight.
Estes produced an encyclopedic "Custom Parts Catalog" in 1974 that is a valuable reference,
though it contains many errors.
John Brohm published ca. 2007 a pair of valuable documents that cross-reference Estes
nose cones and body tubes to the kits in which they were used. These contain information
not available anywhere else, and have been highly valuable for this project.
##### Contract Manufacturing
In the last two decades, the use of offshore contract manufacturing in China by Estes has
drastically limited our ability to get parts data. Estes production now works roughly like this:
* Kits are assembled and packaged by the overseas contractor
using parts that are either made or sourced by the overseas
contractor.
* The only thing that comes back to the USA is fully packaged finished product.
* The manufacturers do not send back parts to Estes unless Estes
specifically asks (and pays) for that to happen.
* There is a cost associated with every SKU (product) that gets packaged
and sent back to the USA, creating a strong disincentive to have the
contract manufacturer package up a lot of individual parts.
* A few Estes kits - typically small production run scale models - are
actually produced in Penrose.
These facts have some consequences:
* Customer service requests for incomplete or damaged kits are handled by sending an
entire new kit; the parts are not separately inventoried by Estes.
* Newer kits have no PNs listed in the kit instructions, since the parts
can't be obtained separately.
* Some parts, such as nose cones, that are made available at retail are bundled
into assortments, with the assortment having its own PN. The internal PNs
of the constituents aren't published, nor their specs. In some cases the
actual contents of Estes assortments can change over time.
The way that outsourced
contract manufacturing works now almost guarantees that individual part details will not
be publicly available unless the manufacturer goes to extra expense to provide it.
As Estes shifted production to China, in addition to the issues created by
contract manufacturing, several more things happened that affected our ability
to get Estes parts info:
* Even for parts that are listed separately on the Estes website, little or no
dimension or weight data is usually given anymore.
* The number of obvious errors in Estes catalogs increased substantially after
about year 2000.
* Estes did not produce a catalog for 2017. Catalog production resumed in
2018 but with little parts information.
Thus we have better parts data on legacy (1960s through the late 1980s)
parts than for newer ones. At this writing, the only way to index the parts used in
kits is by obtaining and measuring actual samples, which I think is not going to
happen broadly. In the future we'll likely have almost no parts data
until 3D scanning and shape-matching become convenient.
##### Part Numbers
The Estes part numbering scheme is as convoluted as you might expect for a company that
started as a small operation in the early 1960s. The first part numbering system was very
mnemonic, e.g. "BT-20J" was a body tube. In the 1970s Estes introduced pure numeric
("non-significant") PNs, first of 4 digits and later 5-6 digits. Many parts from the transition
period had both the original and numeric PNs. The traditional part numbers gradually
disappeared from catalogs and instructions, all but vanishing by 2010.
A much more detailed explanation of Estes part identifiers may be found [here](docs/estes_sizes_and_part_numbers.md)
#### Centuri Engineering
Up until about 1971-1972, Centuri catalogs had parts listings nearly on par with Estes.
But the Centuri catalog parts listings after the Damon acquisition in 1972 are sparse and omit many
dimensions. The overall completeness is much less than for Estes in the same
era, even though the same parent company owned both brands.
Almost no Centuri kit instructions listed any part numbers.
Centuri kit instructions are not archived on the official Estes instructions pages, even
though Estes owns the rights to all things Centuri. Various plans do exist on the
[JimZ plans site](http://www.spacemodeling.org/jimz/)
and [RocketShoppe](http://www.oldrocketplans.com/centuri.htm),
but coverage is poor - neither site has even 50% of known Centuri kits.
No Centuri parts file is provided with the stock OpenRocket.
Fortunately, the SEMROC online listings provide data for many Centuri-compatible tubes and nose cones.
Given SEMROC's attention to detail, the SEMROC dimensions for Centuri parts can be
considered authoritative when they exist, unless analysis clearly shows errors. However, even the
SEMROC listings are incomplete; there are many blank entries for manufacturer PN in the SEMROC
Centuri kit cross-reference pages.
Overall, we can probably construct a reasonable Centuri parts file, but it may be impossible
to have comprenehsive data in the period between 1972 and Centuri's end of production around 1980.
#### LOC Precision
LOC Precision was an early high power kit vendor, founded in 1986 by Ron and Deb Schulz in Ohio.
It was acquired in late 2000 by Barry Lynch when Ron and Deb retired, and most recently sold in
November 2016 to Dave Barber and Jason Turicik of Plymouth, WI. (source: LOC website 2018)
Dimensional data from LOC Precision is notoriously incomplete and error-filled, but I've
been able to resolve most of it using Apogee's tabulated data and some measurements of actual parts.
As of late 2018, the website parts listings have had some minor improvements in dimensional data.
#### SEMROC
SEMROC is unique in that a majority of its parts are dimensionally exact reproductions of
classic Estes and Centuri parts. The late Carl McLawhorn was a fanatic about getting those things
right, and data from the SEMROC legacy website has helped resolve
uncertainties about some obscure Estes parts, especially tubes and nose cones. eRockets acquired
SEMROC after Carl's passing and has done a fantastic job of getting nearly all the SEMROC parts back
into production and indexing them on the [erockets.biz](http://erockets.biz) website.
The body tube and nose cone listings on the old SEMROC website were unique resources,
and I have digested them into a table of dimensions text file and a spreadsheet.
Sadly, in late 2020 the server that hosted the legacy SEMROC website died in a hardware crash.
eRockets has said that it cannot be restored, so that resource is gone.
Semroc is known for its vast array of Estes and Centuri compatible nose cones, but they
also make some nose cones for their own kits. This leads to some complications. There
are nose cones produced by SEMROC with Estes style designations that are not
referenced in any known Estes literature. These fall into a few different
situations:
1. Specialty parts Estes made that never received a traditional PN. In the era after
Estes stopped assigning "BNC-xxx" codes, they would assign a numeric PN only, and might
never appear in a catalog. Semroc appears to have created BNC-xxx designators for these. Example:
* BNC-5RA PN 70217 for #0893 Red Alert (PN given in instructions, no known Estes use of "BNC-5RA")
2. Semroc-specific parts that Semroc made for their own unique kits. If they were made to
mate with an Estes tube size, Semroc would assign a made-up Estes style BNC-xxx
designation. Example:
* BNC-20MG (1.9 inch odd shape for Semroc Moon Go)
3. Semroc unique parts that are upscales/downscales of other well known Estes nose cones as indicated
by Semroc on their website. Example:
* BNC-20LS (2.0 inch elliptical, downscale of BNC-60L)
4. Semroc parts that are balsa versions of Estes _plastic_ PNC-xxx parts that had no Estes
balsa equivalent. Examples:
* BNC-20ED (4.2 inch "capsule", version of PNC-20ED from Saros, Nomad)
* BNC-50KP (balsa version of PNC-50K, which was not the same shape as Estes BNC-50K)
* BNC-50S (balsa version of PNC-50S; Estes never made a balsa version)
##### Nose Cone Shape Drawings
It turns out that the shape drawings on the nose cone individual pages on the Semroc legacy site were
accurately to scale, and to make things even better, they were mostly at the
*same* scale. Randy Boadway, owner of eRockets, confirmed to me at NARAM-60
in 2018 that the drawings do in fact come directly from the software that controls the
nose cone making machines, so they were authoritative.
On the new e-rockets/Semroc site, the pixel scaling of the drawings is not as
consistent as on the legacy site, but the drawings are still very useful and remain authoritative.
To exploit this you have to be careful about the browser zoom factor. In Chrome,
hitting 'zoom in' five times gives you 200 pixels/inch in the Semroc legacy site drawings.
Here is a list of zoom factors for Chrome on the Semroc legacy site images:
* +0 - 100 pix per inch
* +1 - 110 pix per inch
* +2 - 125 pix per inch
* +3 - 150 pix per inch
* +4 - 175 pix per inch
* +5 - 200 pix per inch
This enabled me to do pixel measurements in Gimp and get reasonably accurate
shoulder lengths (and sometimes other doubtful dimensions) for all the Semroc
nose cones. The drawings allowed correction of some errors in tabulation,
and also enabled good determination of the hole dimensions in drilled nose cones.
The nose cone drawings have also proven that Semroc did *not* scale the
shoulder length exactly, just the shape of the __exposed__ portion of the nose
cone or transition. Randy Boadway also confirmed this to me at NARAM-60.
#### BMS (Balsa Machining Service)
BMS is operated by Bill and Mary Saindon of Pahrump, NV. Much of the BMS business is
balsa parts, but body tubes and Aerotech motors are also available. Lists of
tubes and balsa parts are on the [BMS website](https://balsamachining.com).
The balsa parts lists do not show shoulder lengths, while the tube listings
give full dimensions. No mass/weight data is given. BMS makes a significant number
of their own unique centering rings.
The BMS part numbering is somewhat Estes-like, but with considerable modifications.
The classic Estes tube series numbers (5, 20, 50, 55, 60, 70, 80) appear
somewhere in the BMS part number. Other designations are used for Centuri
compatible items.
In addition to their own stocked parts, BMS also makes custom balsa parts for other
rocket kit makers.
#### Fliskits
Fliskits, operated by Jim Flis, ceased operation during 2018 after 16 years in business.
Fliskits was most noted for making very imaginative kits, and for great customer service.
There is a 2-page 2014 Fliskits kit catalog online, but it has no parts information.
There are, however, many useful snapshots of fliskits.com in the
[Internet Wayback Machine](https://web.archive.org).
Fliskits body tube sizes were all Estes standard. There is a variety of nose cones that were
likely made by BMS or Semroc - fortunately, full dimensions are given. There is only one
balsa transition, and all the centering rings look identical to BMS rings. Apart from the
nose cones, there do not look to be any custom parts.
#### MRI (Model Rocket Industries)
The lineage of MRI, MPC and AVI is sequentially connected. There is an article with some
historical information reported directly from Myke Bergenske on
[this blog post by Chris Michielssen](http://modelrocketbuilding.blogspot.com/2011/03/some-mri-mpc-and-avi-questions-answered.html)
MRI was started by Myke Bergenske of Wisconsin, who later was the owner of AVI. Myke may
have acquired Central Rocket Company from Richard Goldsmith in the early 1960s per a
post from Terry Dean on oldrocketforum.com on 11 June 2007. Myke subsequently made
some kind of deal with General Mills circa 1969, leading to MRI being morphed into MPC,
which operated as a division of General Mills.
In 1973, the MPC rocket line was bought back by Myke and re-branded as AVI. AVI
finally went out of business in 1979.
Information about this chain of events can be found [here](https://www.rocketryforum.com/threads/the-lost-history-of-model-rocketry.63543/)
A 1969 MRI catalog scan is available on ninfinger.org. It has tube OD, length and
weight, and nose cone length (presumably exposed length) and weight. The tubes use
the T15, T20, etc. metric style part numbers. Balsa transitions also have length
and weight data.
#### MPC
MPC, a division of General Mills, entered the business as a successor to MRI, and
produced rocket parts and kits from ca. 1969 to 1973, when the product line was
transferred back to
Myke Bergenske d/b/a AVI. AVI continued to manufacture and sell kits under the MPC
name (with substitutions for some originally plastic parts) until around 1978-1979. The kit
line is historically significant as many of them were designed by G. Harry Stine,
one of the principal founders of model rocketry.
Very short MPC catalogs were produced in 1969 and 1970, followed by a Minirocs brochure
when 13mm motors and rockets were introduced. The 1970 "catalog 2" lists the parts, with
part numbers and partial dimensions. Tubes were made in metric 5, 15, 20, 25, and 30mm
sizes. Only the OD of the tubes is given, and the nose cones are only identified by what
tube size they fit and a general profile drawing.
Myke Bergenske is reported in the blog post cited above to have claimed that in 1970,
MPC sales exceeded those of Estes.
The only online presence of the MPC catalogs is on
http://vintagevendingwarehouse.weebly.com/history-of-mpc.html
Tubes and nose cones that may have been added when the Miniroc line was introduced are not
separately cataloged anywhere. A couple have been identified (3 cal ellipsoid and 5 cal ogive
T-15 nose cones) by pulling information from kit descriptions and instructions.
The MRI/MPC metric tube sizing system has persisted to the present (2019) due to its adoption by
Quest, which not coincidentally was founded by Bill Stine, son of MPC designer G. Harry Stine.
I have confirmed that the modern day Quest tubes have identical
dimensions to the original MRI/MPC tubes, with a uniform 0.5mm (.020") wall thickness. Quest gives
dimensions for some but not all of its tubes. The Quest data combined with a few actual parts
should let us definitively recover the nose cone shoulder diameters appropriate for the
metric tubes.
Despite the thin information, I have been able to build a relatively complete MPC parts file
which is now included with this package. Any parts that may have been created during
the AVI ownership era have not been included yet.
#### AVI (Aerospace Vehicles Inc.)
AVI was created around 1973 when Myke Bergenske bought back the MPC business from General Mills. AVI was
famous for having an enormous newspaper style catalog in which many of the items were not
really available, and for making some very nice black powder motors, including a 24mm "E11.8".
AVI continued production of various MPC kits, with some substitutions to replace expensive injection
molded parts. AVI ceased operation around 1979, at which time some of its motor making equipment
was transferred to FSI, allowing FSI to enter the 18mm motor market to supplement its by then
nonstandard 21mm and 27mm motor lines.
I do not believe that AVI actually produced enough unique parts to make an OpenRocket file necessary.
An interesting side note is that the AVI and FSI motor making equipment surfaced *again* circa
2015 - in very poor condition (I saw photos at NARAM-58) - when David Lucas and the late Dave Bucher
located and bought up residsual assets of FSI in an effort to restart production of some FSI products.
#### Madcow Rocketry
Madcow Rocketry, owned by Mike Stoop, is a mid to high power vendor operating in the
Los Angeles area for the past several years (as of 2018). Madcow acquired the Rocketry
Warehouse fiberglass kit line in 2016, but not the fiberglass tube/nose cone manufacturing
operation. The tubes and nose cones sold by Madcow were and continue to be made by the
former owner of Rocketry Warehouse, Curtis Taylor.
Madcow also acquired the Polecat Rocketry line of kits around the start of 2019.
To the best of my knowledge, Madcow Rocketry has never published a print catalog.
Madcow has spotty dimensional and mass data on its website; perhaps 2/3 of the parts have
some useful data. Mass information is missing for many nose cones, especially the larger
ones. For numerous parts including FT115, FC45, FC55 and FC80 there is no data at all.
The published data for some items is suspect; in some cases there is very little clearance
between the OD of couplers and the ID of the mating body tube.
Madcow tube-size-related SKU nomenclature is extremely inconsistent in multiple aspects:
* Inches (FT40) vs millimeters (T38)
* Insisde diameter (FT30) vs outside diameter (FT40)
* Different designators used for the same sizes (cardboard T39 vs fiberglass FT40)
* Mating coupler/tube SKUs with designators that don't match, going in both directions
(fiberglass FT22 tube uses FC54 coupler, but cardboard T54 uses C22 coupler)
#### Quest Aerospace
Quest Aerospace was founded by Bill Stine, son of G. Harry Stine, who himself was a founder of
MMI. Quest was originally called Quest Aerospace Education, Inc.
and was based in Phoenix. Later it was reported operating from Colorado. Most recently it became
a division of RCS RMS, Inc. (parent company of Aerotech) in about 2016, and operates from Cedar City, UT.
Quest formerly sold 18mm and 20mm black powder motors, which have been discontinued in 2017-2018
(reportedly due to sourcing problems in China) in favor of "Q-Jet" composite A through D motors designed
by Aerotech.
The [Quest website](https://www.questaerospace.com/) has good dimensions for most body tubes, but
incomplete or no dimensions for nose cones and other part types. There is basically no useful mass
data anywhere in their literature.
In the latest editions of the website (last examined in Jan 2021), Quest now gives dimensions
for nearly all of their body tubes in inch units. The Quest file here has been updated to match.
Quest makes several ready-to-fly Micromaxx (1/4" diameter motor) rockets that can only be had as part of starter sets:
* Space Fighter
* Flying Saucer
* No Mercy
* Critical Mass
* Saturn V
* Space Shuttle
There is also one builder MMX rocket in the form of the Boingo, available only in a 12-pack.
It has a foam nose cone that is not sold separately and for which no PN is given.
The parts content of these Micromaxx rockets is totally undocumented.
Chris Michielssen reported to me (personal message, Nov 2019) that there was also an MMX X-15
starter set, which Dane Boles at one time had "a few" for sale.
Side note: The Saturn V and Space Shuttle are offered in a "Space Pioneers" starter set, which
is a reference to the New Canaan YMCA Space Pioneers founded by G. Harry Stine (father of Quest
founder Bill Stine), one of the early NAR sections from the 1960s.
A fair fraction of Quest kit instructions are available, and all of the instructions examined have
part lists with numeric PNs and brief descriptions.
Quest currently has at least 38 kits in production (counting from the website as of March 2018),
while the Quest website has around 30 plans on its
[Downloadable Instructions page](https://www.questaerospace.com/page/download_instructions).
[Ye Old Rocket Shoppe](http://plans.rocketshoppe.com/quest.htm) has 14 plan sets that are mostly
not listed on the Quest site, while the JimZ plans site has no Quest data. None of the posted
plans appear to be for Micromaxx sized models.
Comparing the instructions reveals that Quest used product number 1005 for two completely
different models, the Tracer and the Starhawk.
The `quest.orc` included with stock OpenRocket has many errors. I constructed a completely
new Quest file with better dimensions; however the masses are all computed volumetrically and
are mostly unverified.
#### FSI - Flight Systems Inc.
FSI was originally based in Raytown, MO and was run by Harold Reese, a pytotechnics
specialist, and later by his son Lonnie. It operated from the 1960s until the mid
1990s - the last known catalog was 1996. FSI made their own black
powder motors in A through F classes, and also made an early composite propellant
motor called the Thunderbolt. FSI was notable for producing motors in odd diameters
(21mm and 27mm) that were never adopted by any later vendor, leading to unique tube sizes.
In about 2015 the decaying FSI and AVI motor making equipment and some remaining parts inventory
were located and acquired by Dave Bucher and David Lucas, who announced a relaunch of the company.
At NARAM-58 they sold a small number of some FSI branded kits made from NOS parts with substitutions
to enable use of 24mm motors. However, their website never went live for orders, and the passing
of Dave Bucher in 2017 was a setback to the reboot attempt. The 2017 website is gone, but
Facebook posts resurfaced in 2018 with two new people identifying themselves only as
"B.G." and "R.M." apparently joining Dave Lucas. The Facebook posts made it
clear they planned only on bringing out a few new kits.
The FSI restart is not known to have had individual parts on sale, and did not produce
any new motors. In 2020 I was told privately that the new FSI has ceased operation and that the FSI
assets are again for sale.
It's likely that the modified old
stock kits sold at NARAM-58 are now exceedingly rare, as they were made legitimately under the
FSI name but no more than a few tens of them exist.
FSI had printed catalogs that provided good data on tube sizes, which have already been incorporated into
`tube_data.txt`. Catalogs were produced only sporadically, but the product line changed slowly.
FSI did sell almost all of the parts that went into their kits, so making a good parts file
looks feasible. One unusual FSI part series was the hardwood nose cones. Getting proper weights
for these may be challenging since the specific type of hardwood wasn't given, and it's not
certain that the same type of wood was always used.
#### Apogee
Apogee started as a competition specialty supplier called Apogee Components that was run by
Ed LaCroix of Minneapolis at least as far back as 1994. Apogee Components carried various parts
including lightweight phenolic "blackshaft" tubing, nose cones, etc.
A 1994 Apogee catalog can be seen
[here on ninfinger.org](http://www.ninfinger.org/rockets/catalogs/apogee94/apogee94cat.pdf)
It has good dimensions and weights for the competition parts.
At some time a number of years ago (check date), Apogee Components was sold to Tim van Milligan
of Colorado, who turned it into a general retail outlet for various rocket companies including
Estes, Quest, LOC, and others. It is still officially named Apogee Components
as of early 2019.
Apogee now mostly sells parts OEM'd from other vendors. Their website is notable for having a
lot of tabular dimension and mass data that seems to have been obtained from actual measurement
of parts. Their website is the only source of published mass data for a number of LOC
components. It is not error free, but has helped resolve inconsistencies in LOC
and Madcow data.
Apogee does make a few own-design parts, including the foam egg protectors and nose cones widely used by
TARC teams, and foam ejection plugs used in NAR/FAI competition. I don't believe they make any tubes or
nose cones that aren't available elsewhere. Separating these out
from all the OEM parts would be tedious, but it could be possible to assemble a small
Apogee file with the important parts.
#### Wildman Rocketry
Wildman Rocketry is operated by Tim and Jackie Lehr of Van Orin, Illinois. It is one of the
most important high power vendors and sells many large fiberglass HPR kits of their own design,
along with parts.
Wildman provides so little data that it is probably not worthwhile to try to make a
parts file, though there are certain unique parts, such as the 3" and 4" polycarbonate nose cones
used for the Punisher 3 and 4.
For most Wildman fiberglass tube sizes (1.6, 2.2, 2.6, 3.0, 4.0, 5.5, 6.0 inches), you can
find reasonable equivalents in the Madcow file.
#### Giant Leap Rocketry
(History from various sources including Giant Leap Rocketry Inc. Facebook page, Aerotech news archives, etc.)
Giant Leap Rocketry was originally founded on June 1, 1997 in Baton Rouge, LA.
As of 2002 (rmrfaq archive) their address was 6061 Hibiscus Drive, Baton Rouge, LA 70808, and
the company was selling phenolic tubing and fiberglass nose cones. The owners were Ed Shihadeh
of Baton Rouge and Kent (last name needed).
In 2005, Giant Leap was selling Aerotech motors; but as of 2018 they are no longer selling motors.
Giant Leap Rocketry was sold in October 2016 to Dix Densley of Hillsboro, OR and Bob Martell of
Portland, OR. Operations have been moved to Hillsboro, OR.
I haven't found any information about any other ownership changes between 2005 and 2016. The current
status of the company is unclear as there have been no Facebook posts since August 2017, and no other
recent activity or even discussion of Giant Leap.
There doesn't seem to have been any systematic production of print catalogs. The company had
minimal presence on Facebook between their account starting in 2012, and fall 2016 right before
the company was sold. There are no Giant Leap catalogs on Ninfinger.org, and Google searches come
up empty.
Giant Leap offers some dimensional data on their current (2018) website. They offer three types
of tubes: K-frame (Kevlar/fiberglass hybrid), Magnaframe (hybrid phenolic/vulcanized fiber),
and phenolic. Wall thickness is only given for the phenolic tubes, and weights are not given for
much of anything. I heard verbally at a 2018 event that all tubes except the phenolic have been
discontinued. However, as of Jan 2021 this does not seem to be the case, as all sizes
of Magna-frame are now shown as in-stock again.
There is now a file on the Giant Leap website with RockSim data for some (unknown) subset of
Giant Leap parts. I have yet to digest this.
### Missing Manufacturers
There are several product lines from legacy and major manufacturers - especially high
power vendors - that are not represented in the stock OpenRocket. Some of these are now covered in
this database.
* Centuri (many cloneable kits with parts different than Estes). The Semroc parts file contains
main closely compatible parts including all nose cones and tube sizes.
* Apogee Components / van Milligan. They mostly sell other vendors' parts, but they do source
some unique ones, e.g. foam egg protectors for TARC.
* Apogee Components / Ed LaCroix. The original Apogee made competition parts that the later
Apogee under Tim van Milligan did not carry forward.
* CMR (long defunct but had unique tube sizes)
* FSI (long defunct but had unique tube sizes)
* ModelRockets.us (Discount Rocketry), offers tubes with heavier wall than Estes, and various
plastic nose cones.
* Very small manufacturers including Kopter, Pine Cap Assoc., US Rockets, ASP, etc.
* Canaroc
* High power kit and parts vendors
* Wildman
* Rocketry Warehouse (pre Madcow acquisition)
* Polecat Aerospace (pre Madcow acquisition)
* Fruity, Rocketman, Sky Angle, and B2 nylon parachutes
## OpenRocket Usage and Quirks
For most things, you can use OpenRocket as you normally would. However, there are a few things
you should know about if you want maximum accuracy.
### Hollow One-Piece Plastic and Fiberglass Nose Cones
Due to limitations in what OpenRocket allows you to specify for nose cones, partial manual
entry is required to get the most accurate mass and CG locations for heavier _one-piece_
hollow plastic or fiberglass nose cones (currently this affects LOC only):
* When putting in a plastic nose cone, go select the nose cone
from the presets database. At this point the displayed mass will be too small, because
the shoulder thickness is zero and the "end capped" setting is not on.
* Select and copy the "Wall thickness" value on the General tab for the nose cone.
* Switch to the Shoulder tab, and paste into the "Thickness" field.
* Turn on "End capped". Now the mass at the bottom of the nose cone dialog will be correct,
and the nose cone CG will also be correct.
At present, only the LOC nose cones and transitions have been adjusted so this procedure works, because
they are pretty heavy and the CG actually moves a fair amount.
### Size Matching in the OpenRocket Parts Selection Dialogs
The 'match fore diameter' (the field name varies slightly) option in the parts selection
dialogs is very useful for narrowing the giant list to potentially compatible parts.
However, it is buggy and when choosing couplers or inner tubes it sometimes shows parts
that are slightly too large to fit inside the outer tube. Verify your dimensions!
### Metal Tip Fiberglass Nose Cones
The density of aluminum at 2.7 g/cm3 is a little more than that of fiberglass (1.8 to 2.2
g/cm3). Metal tip nose cones will weigh slighly more than composite tip versions and have
their CG slightly further forward, but the delta is not that large and OpenRocket has no
good way to model this in a single component. For highest accuracy in mass, CG and
moments of inertia, you can add a small mass object at the nose cone tip to make up the
difference.
Should you care about this level of accuracy, I also suggest you weigh your individual
nose cone parts and adjust accordingly. Manufacturer data is scarce and there are
individual part variations.
### Advanced Tactics for Complex Nose Cone Shapes
Many specialty nose cones do not match one of the simple CP-computable shapes modeled by
OpenRocket. In these cases an approximate shape is used and noted in comments in the .orc
file. If the mass is too far off as a result, one of two things may have been done in the
.orc files in this project:
* For hollow nose cones, the wall thickness will be adjusted to correct the mass. This preserves
the accuracy of the moments of inertia.
* For solid nose cones, a mass override may be used.
If you are trying to make a visually accurate OR file, some nose cone shapes that are
composites of other simple shapes (BNC-55AM, Honest John etc.) can be modeled using a
shoulderless forward cone, one or more transitions, and tube extensions for cylindrical
nose cone sections. Short (even zero) length 'phantom' tubes may need to be added to join
those items. However, there is no way to do this kind of thing as a single component
preset in a .orc file, so if you want that level of fidelity you will have to do it
manually. Jim Parsons (TRF user K'tesh) has posted many examples of these techniques in
various TRF threads. In cases like the Honest John and Demon nose cones, you will get very
good appearance with reasonable drag and CP computations. However for parts with draggy
appliques like the Odyssey nose cone, there is no real way in OpenRocket to get the drag
correct.
### Parachute / Streamer Descent Performance Simulation
OpenRocket has very basic parachute / streamer perforamnce modeling that is not suitable
for anything more than a first order estimate of descent rate. A better
parachute descent rate calculator can be found on the Fruity Chutes website here:
[Fruity Chutes Descent Rate Calculator](https://fruitychutes.com/help_for_parachutes/parachute-descent-rate-calculator.htm).
This model has some built-in parameters for chutes from other manufacturers, and an
explanation of how the equivalent Cd and area are determined.
## Conventions
Various conventions have been adopted to make the database files more organized, readable,
and usable from the OpenRocket user interface.
* Mass overrides have been eliminated to the maximum extent possible. This has primarily
been done by using good density values for the materials, and adjusting non-significant
dimensions such as wall thickness of hollow parts. One case where mass overrides
become necessary is for oddly shaped, solid nose cones where OpenRocket cannot
model the shape properly and the standard material density produces a notably incorrect
mass when applied to the approximate shape chosen. Drilled nose cones and tail cones also
often need mass overrides as they can weigh less than half of what an un-drilled part weighs.
* CG overrides are never used, though I may revisit this decision for some drilled parts.
* Units of measure for dimensions have been set to the units used in the manufacturer's
specifications. For example, dimensional specs of Estes body tubes have all been
changed to inches, allowing direct comparison to Estes catalogs. The OpenRocket
original files have almost all lengths in meters, which obstructs comparison to catalog
values for the entire USA rocket industry.
* Descriptions have been regularized to the engineering standard of a comma-separated list
of attributes, progressing from the most general to the most specific. For example, a
Semroc BNC-5AW has the description "Nose cone, balsa, BT-5, 2.25", elliptical, PN BNC-5AW".
* Materials entries have been consolidated into a master reference file
`generic_materials.orc` and pasted into the parts database .orc files where used. Note
that the master materials file is not actually processed by OpenRocket; it is just used
as a source of truth for the materials pasted into the actual component files.
* Materials entries not actually used in each component file have been removed.
* Synthetic part numbers have been generated for components for which dimensions are known
but there is no documented part number from the vendor. For example, the 12.25 inch BT-5
used in the Estes #2009 Rain Maker is assigned a PN of "BT-5_12.25in".
* When multiple part numbers are known for a given item, they are given as a list in the
PartNumber field.
* Items not uniquely tied to any given manufacturer have been assigned a manufacturer name
of "Generic xxxx", where xxxx (if present) may be a category like "competition".
* Body tubes are listed in descending order of length so that if you sort on Description, they
will appear in that order as long as other attributes of the tube series are identical.
* Leading zeroes have been removed from part numbers, except in certain cases where they are
consisdered significant.
## Technical Info - how OpenRocket Parts Databases Work
### OpenRocket File Types
There are two major kinds of files we are concerned with in OpenRocket:
* Component definition files `*.orc`
* Rocket definition files `*.ork`
The .orc component database files start life as ascii XML and are human-readable in the OpenRocket
source tree. However, when the OpenRocket jar is built they are serialized into a single binary
file. If you want to see the original built-in files you have to grab the OpenRocket source code
from [SourceForge](https://github.com/openrocket/openrocket/). You can either clone the repo
and dig in, or look around on the GitHub site. In the source tree the .orc files are under
```
swing/resources-src/datafiles/presets/
```
The .ork rocket definition files are always binary and there is no very easy way to inspect them.
There is no .xsd XML schema definition file to go with the .orc files, though there probably should be.
### Built-in Component Databases
The OpenRocket builtin databases are embedded in the main OpenRocket jar as a serialized binary file
in `datafiles/presets/system.ser` inside the jar.
There is nothing in the manifest `META-INF/MANIFEST.MF` that refers to this file, so
updating or removing it does not require altering the manifest.
### State of the Built-In Databases
In the OpenRocket source tree, the .orc files are extremely stale and no one has worked on them
recently. The most recent change to the Estes file was in April 2014, and the rest have
not changed since 2013 or before.
### OpenRocket Data File Search Path
When OpenRocket starts up, it hunts down __all the database files on its search path__ and loads
all the parts ("components") from them into a single giant list. When you choose "From database..."
in the presets menu for any type of item in the UI, OpenRocket will show you the whole list of
items of that type.
The general search order for database files is:
* Items existing in the active document (we still need details on this from a code dive)
* Files included in the OpenRocket jar under `datafiles/presets/system.ser`
* External .orc files in platform-dependent locations, as described below
#### Windows External File Locations
* If %APPDATA% is set: `%APPDATA%/OpenRocket/Components/*.orc`
* If %APPDATA% is not set: `%HOMEPATH%/OpenRocket/Components/*.orc`
*TBD* need description of how Windows stores locally added prefs in the registry!
#### Linux External File Locations
* `$HOME/.openrocket/Components/*.orc`
#### Mac OSX External File Locations
* `$HOME/Library/Application Support/OpenRocket/Components/*.orc`
* Preferences in `~/Library/Preferences/com.apple.java.util.pref.plist`
The OSX prefs are only used to hold materials definitions, not components. Unfortunately,
it is *only* the prefs values that appear in the materials dropdown when editing a
component.
### Top Level Structure of .orc Database Files
```xml
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"?>
<OpenRocketComponent>
<Version>0.1</Version>
<Materials>
<Material UnitsOfMeasure="g/cm3">
<Name>xxxx</Name>
<Density>0.0</Density>
<Type>BULK</Type>
</Material>
...
</Materials>
<Components>
<Transition>
</Transition>
...
</Components>
</OpenRocketComponent>
```
### Organization of .orc Database Files
Each .orc file has a set of material definitions at the top. These material definitions
only have scope within the current datafile.
Conversely any given .orc presets database file can *only* use materials defined in the
same file. This is why in OpenRocket there are duplicate material definitions (with
identical names) in various built-in .orc files. In some cases the density values among
these duplicates don't agree. Some of this might be intentional to capture the fact that
different manufacturer's typical materials vary, but the variances don't look designed or
systematic.
There is no provision for generic, non manufacturer specific materials except via the
compiled-in default materials.
IMPORTANT: The material definition referenced by a component is only consulted *when the
component is first created in your .ork file!* If you subsequently save the .ork, then
update the material definition in the .orc, and reload your .ork design, the material
definitions for existing components __WILL NOT BE UPDATED__. If you change the density
for some material, in order to get your design to update you must manually open the
affected components, and re-select the component preset from the database. This behavior
may seem like a bug, but is actually needed to allow .ork files to be opened by any copy
of OpenRocket, even if it doesn't have the same database files or stored presets as yours.
### Listing available XML tags
You can find out the XML tags that can be used in .orc files via doing the following in an
OpenRocket source tree:
```
find . -name "*.java" | xargs grep XmlElement
```
Note that you will not find specific entries for `EngineBlock`, `CenteringRing`,
`Bulkhead`, and `LaunchLug`. These exist but all are special cases of `BodyTube` and have the same
allowed fields of `InsideDiameter`, `OutsideDiameter`, and `Length`.
### Enum Values for Nose Cone and Transition Shapes
The allowed values for the `Shape` element in `NoseCone` and `Transition` elements are:
* CONICAL
* ELLIPSOID
* HAACK
* OGIVE
* PARABOLIC
* POWER
The HAACK, OGIVE, PARABOLIC and POWER types all take a numeric shape parameter that can be set in
the UI, but that cannot be specified in a .orc file and get set to a default value when
such a part is selected.
### Units of Measure in Component Database Files
Materials definitions in .orc files all must have density specified in one of the following
units of measure using the "UnitsOfMeasure" attribute:
```
Bulk density: g/cm3, kg/m3, lb/ft3
Areal density: g/cm2, oz/in2
Line density: g/cm, oz/in
```
In the stock built-in OpenRocket databases, all materials are specified in g/cm3, g/cm2 or g/m.
For __components__ you use the "Unit" attribute in the component definitions to
specify other units as desired. In the standard OpenRocket presets files they are all
metric, even for American parts, which makes checking the dimensions against the USA
manufacturers' Imperial units specs very laborious. In my custom .orc files I have
specified the units to be those of the manufacturer's published data to make it easier to
check for errors.
Units recognized by OpenRocket are found in the source tree in
```
core/src/net/openrocket/sf/unit/UnitGroup.java
```
Here are the most useful units groups:
```
Length: mm, cm, m, in, in/64, ft
Distance: m, km, ft, yd, mi, nmi
Velocity: m/s, km/h, ft/s, mph
Mass: g, kg, oz, lb (slugs missing)
Angle: deg, rad, arcmin
Density (bulk): g/cm3, kg/dm3, kg/m3
Density (surface): g/cm2, g/m2, kg/m2, oz/in2, oz/ft2, lb/ft2
Density (line): g/m, kg/m, oz/ft
Force: N, lbf, kgf
Impulse: Ns, lbf*s
```
### OpenRocket .orc Database File Limitations
There are some pretty serious limitations on what can be specified in the .orc component
database files. Some of these could potentially be fixed easily; others are more
structural.
* General limitations:
* Cannot 'include' other .orc files
* Cannot make components that are groupings of other components
* Can only reference materials from within the same file
* Cannot define any graphic appearance attributes
* Cannot define component finish
* No support for multiple part numbers or SKUs
* No way to specify the comment to be displayed in the UI comment tab
* No support for component versioning
* Body tubes:
* Cannot designate a body tube as a motor tube
* Cannot specify motor overhang or default ignition parameters as seen in UI
* Nose cones/transitions:
* Cannot specify shape parameter for OGIVE, POWER, PARABOLIC and HAACK shapes
* Cannot specify wall thickness for nose cone or transition shoulders
* Cannot specify whether nose cone or transition shoulders are capped
* Cannot directly specify a rear-facing nose cone for pods or nozzle cones.
However, you can fake this out by creating a reducing transition with a zero
aft shoulder diameter.
* No support for drilled-for-a-tube solid (balsa) tail cones. You can only
define a fully filled part, or hollow with constant wall thickness.
Therefore, there is no good way to model an Estes BTC-55Z or similar part.
* Parachutes:
* Cannot set drag coefficient for parachutes, though UI has this
* Streamers:
* Cannot set drag coefficient or Cd automatic mode, though UI has them
* You can set thickness in .orc streamer components but it does not appear in the UI
and may have no effect
* Cannot specify a minimum packing length (usually the stream width + margin)
* Fins:
* Cannot define finset or tubefin components at all
* Mass components:
* Cannot define mass components at all
* Shock cords:
* Cannot define shock cord components at all
* Additional problems not specific to .orc files:
* OR does not model moments of inertia for hollow NC/transition shoulders
* OpenRocket only supports tubular launch lugs - no support for rail buttons or guides
* No support for lug standoffs
* Cannot attach a mass object to a parachute (e.g. Chute Release device)
* Cannot attach a mass object to a streamer
* Cannot attach finsets to nose cones and transitions (thus cannot model Estes Sprint XL),
couplers, inner tubes
* Cannot define bulkheads with holes in them
* Cannot define centering rings with multiple holes for cluster motor mounts
* No support for streamer attachment lines
* No support for parachutes with spill holes
* No support for different parachute designs (flat, spherical, toroid, x-form, etc.)
* Cannot specify packing volume or packed length/diameter for parachutes
* UI issues related to component databases and part selection
* Diameter matching in the UI is buggy
* If you are defining a nose cone and load one from the database with a different shape, the
shape dropdown doesn't update and the displayed mass doesn't recompute. I haven't verified it,
but this may also be a bug with transitions.
* UI part selection dialog expands poorly, only 1/3 of the area gets used for the main table
* UI doesn't visually distinguish between component intrinsic attributes and parameters
related to their placement or use in the design like relative position, radial position, etc.
* The filter field in the parts selection UI defaults to near zero width (on Mac at least)
* UI doesn't remember last size of the parts selection dialogs, you have to resize every time
* Duplicating a part, whether by copy/paste or by creating a 2nd one attached to the same
parent component, always puts them right on top of each other. That is useful for
items that are going to be distributed radially about the centerline like cluster motor
tubes, but not helpful for centering rings, launch lugs, and bulkheads.
* Packing diameter of parachutes, streamers and shock cords should default to the ID of
the parent body tube, and packing length of streamers should default to the width of the
streamer.
* Relative (axial) position and radial position of components really should be on the same tab.
### Hardcoded Default Materials and Preference/Registry Augmentation of the Materials Dropdown List
When you pop up the dialog for a new nose cone, even before picking from the
database via the upper right dropdown, there is a default list of materials available.
These are hardcoded in Databases.java. However if you click Custom and add a new material
to the list, it gets persisted using Prefs and lands in (on OSX)
```
~/Library/Preferences/com.apple.java.util.pref.plist (binary file)
```
At this point it doesn't look like there's any way to add materials to this dropdown list
via a .orc file - a severe limitation. There is code in Databases.java that adds database
listeners for line/surface/bulk materials, but the actual listener in MaterialStorage.java
only adds the material to the preferences, and only if the material is flagged as
user-defined.
There is also no UI to *remove* a material defined in the prefs, though there's code in
the MaterialStorage DatabaseListener that will remove the pref on elementRemoved() firing.
But you can use Apple's property list editor included in the Apple Developer Tools X Code
package from developer.apple.com/xcode, or with TextWrangler from barebones.com.
See also (on OSX)
```
~/Library/Preferences/openrocket.favoritepresets.*.plist
```
which look like they will contain the presets you designate (by checking items in the
database) for the various component types (nose cone, body tube, etc.)
After you pick an item from the database, the "Component material" dropdown still shows
the same generic list...it does NOT show the list of materials defined in the manufacturer
specific .orc file. This means if you change the material for a catalog component
to something in the dropdown, you are *not* able to change it back to the original
material defined in the manufacturer .orc file.
*Windows* We need solid information about how this works in Windows from a contributor!
## References
[John Brohm, Estes Nose Cone Reference, version 10.1](http://www.rocketshoppe.com/info/Estes_Nose_Cone_Reference_10.1.pdf)
Cross reference that lists Estes nose cones __used in kits__ by numeric part number,
traditional part number, and kit usage. Does not list dimensions or mass/weight data.
Last updated circa 2008 so does not include recent kits and many plastic cones. Fails to
list nose cones that apepared in a catalog but were never used in a kit, such as BNC-55AA,
BNC-10B, and multiple BNC-30xx. Contains some scattered errors.
[John Brohm, Estes Body Tube Reference](http://www.psc473.org/howto/EstesTubes.pdf)
Cross reference listing Estes body tubes and the kits in which they appear. Shows lengths, BT-xxx
designators, numeric part numbers, and PNs of the kits.
[Semroc legacy site nose cone listing](http://www.semroc.com/Store/Products/NoseCones.asp)
Shows all the nose cones Semroc and its owner Carl McLawhorn knew of, with dimensions.
Annoyingly fails to list shoulder lengths, but provides correct dimensions for many parts for
which Estes data is erroneous or not otherwise available. You must use this in conjunction with
the Semroc nose cone compatibility list since the overall nose cone listing shows many items
representing parts that were never issued by Estes as balsa nose cones.
[Semroc legacy site nose cone compatibility list page](http://www.semroc.com/store/Scripts/xref.asp?company=Classic)
Shows which Estes BNC and PNC series nose cones were made by Semroc, and shows the Semroc BNC
equivalents for the Estes plastic PNC nose cones. Very helpful for determining which parts were
ever actually made by Estes.
[Catalog archive on the Estes site](http://http://www.estesrockets.com/customer-service/full-catalog)
Downloadable PDFs of nearly all Estes and many Centuri catalogs with high quality scans.
[Estes official instructions archive](https://www.estesrockets.com/customer-service/instructions)
This resource from Estes contains good quality downloadable PDF scans of the instructions for many kits.
However it is very incomplete in kit coverage, and does not include scans of fins, templates, cardstock parts,
or decals.
[Catalogs on Ninfinger.org](http://www.ninfinger.org/rockets/rockets.html)
This site contains scans of historic model rocket catalogs from Estes, Centuri, FSI, LOC, and others.
Some of the Estes and Centuri catalog scans here are old and of poor quality - check the Estes catalog archive listed
above for generally better versions.
[MPC History and Catalogs](http://vintagevendingwarehouse.weebly.com/history-of-mpc.html)
This is the only site where I could find any scans of MPC catalogs. There are also 3
MPC kit documentation sets on JimZ and more on plans.rocketshoppe.com. I was able to use this
information to build a reasonable MPC parts file.
[Quest Downloadable Instructions](https://www.questaerospace.com/page/download_instructions)
This page has about 30 instruction sets for Quest kits. It is not complete and actually does not
include most of the 14 plans on the Ye Olde Rocket Shoppe plans site. It also does not include
any Micromaxx kits. Quality of the PDF files is very good.
Reference in New Issue Copy Permalink