Why Use a Flight Simulator

Using a flight simulator before launching a model rocket can provide several significant benefits:

1. Predicting Flight Path and Behaviour: A simulator can model the rocket's flight path, allowing you to predict how it will behave under various conditions, such as different wind speeds and directions. This helps in understanding the rocket's capabilities and limitations.
2. Safety Assessments: Simulating the flight can help identify potential safety issues. By understanding the flight dynamics, you can ensure that the launch area is sufficiently clear of obstacles and that the rocket won’t pose a risk to people or property.
3. Performance Optimization: By simulating various scenarios, you can optimize the rocket's design and performance. This includes tweaking aspects like the weight distribution, engine power, and aerodynamics to achieve desired flight characteristics.
4. Troubleshooting and Problem-Solving: If you encounter issues with your rocket, a simulator can help troubleshoot and understand what might be going wrong. By adjusting variables in the simulation, you can pinpoint potential problems and find solutions before attempting another physical launch.
5. Educational Value: Flight simulators are excellent educational tools. They allow you to learn about aerodynamics, physics, and engineering principles in a practical and engaging way.
6. Cost-Effectiveness: Testing with a simulator is much more cost-effective than conducting multiple physical tests. It saves the cost of building and potentially losing or damaging rockets during test flights.
7. Experimentation and Creativity: Simulators allow for a degree of experimentation and creativity that might not be feasible or safe in real-world testing. You can try out different designs and configurations to see how they perform without the risk of physical damage.

RockSim vs Open Rocket - what simulator provide the most accurate information and is easiest to use

When comparing RockSim and OpenRocket, two popular model rocket simulation software programs, it's important to consider both their accuracy and ease of use:

1. Accuracy:
   • RockSim: Developed by Apogee Components, RockSim is a sophisticated and detailed simulator. It offers accurate simulations for a wide range of rocket designs and is often praised for its detailed analysis capabilities. RockSim's accuracy is a result of its comprehensive database of components and its sophisticated physics engine.
   • OpenRocket: An open-source project, OpenRocket is also known for its accuracy, especially considering it is a free tool. It provides good simulation results and is continually updated by a community of users and developers. However, it might have some limitations in its component database compared to RockSim.
2. Ease of Use:
   • RockSim: This software is user-friendly, but due to its advanced features and detailed design capabilities, it may have a steeper learning curve for beginners. It provides a more professional interface, which can be both an advantage and a challenge depending on the user's experience level.
   • OpenRocket: Generally considered more accessible for beginners, OpenRocket has a straightforward and intuitive interface. Its open-source nature means that a lot of community support is available, which can be helpful for new users.
3. Other Considerations:
   • Cost: RockSim is a paid software, while OpenRocket is free. This can be a significant factor for hobbyists or those on a budget.
   • Community Support: OpenRocket, being open-source, has a large community for support and shared designs. RockSim, while also having a user community, is more of a commercial product with professional support.
   • Updates and Development: OpenRocket benefits from continuous updates from its community, while RockSim updates are managed by Apogee Components.

In conclusion, the choice between RockSim and OpenRocket depends on your needs and experience level. If you are looking for a more professional tool and are willing to invest in paid software, RockSim might be the better choice. However, if you are a beginner or an enthusiast looking for a free and user-friendly option with a supportive community, OpenRocket would be more suitable. Both can provide accurate simulations, so your decision might also hinge on how advanced or specific your simulation needs are.

• So, what are your thoughts and preferences?
• Are you flying kits or scratch-built rockets?
• How do you determine your centre of pressure if it has not been supplied by the manufacturer or if your kit has been modified?

CASA also requires all users of public airspace to keep records of every venture into the skies above and keep records of their flights (that is why we do flight cards). However, if an incident requires investigation, then a good set of records may come in handy.

A number of years ago, one of our members strapped a keychain camera to the side of an Estes Dude kit.

Flying a 7-Foot Inflatable Model Rocket Video

A television crew from a local news station there on the day asked us for a copy of the launch, even though it only went to about 700 feet. It was broadcast on that night's news as a puff piece, which happened to capture the attention of the local CASA regional manager.  

The following morning, I was contacted by the CASA manager and threatened with prosecution for violating airspace and our NOTAM. When I told CASA, it only went to about 700 feet on D12-3 Motor, and this rocket couldn't exceed our 5,000-foot waiver. I was told they had been piloting aircraft for a lifetime and knew the difference between 700 and 7,000 feet. I was still not believed by CASA when I explained that the video had been recorded on a wide-angle key-chain camera and only appeared higher, especially when the footage was viewed from ground level to apogee, the perspective distorted and deceptive. 

We had to resort to finally getting the RKT file from the member to prove the flight path of the rocket.

Please keep good records - I hope you never need them.

Like a lot of others, I use Open Rocket for each of my design and scratch builds to simulate stability and performance. In the last major update, the ability to design and model pods on the end of fins was added, which was something I put to use on my Tin Tin Rocket.

OpenRocket all the way, it's in my price range... FYI: The author of OpenRocket attended a QRS launch a few years ago escorted by Ari (they're both Finnish)...

OpenRocket is the way. RasAero II is good for sanity checking things, but it's not quite as user friendly when compared to OpenRocket.
If you want 6DOF analysis/capabilities you can check out Tu Wien's ORtools package. It's based on OpenRocket 15.03 but I've run it up and tested it and it does what it says on the tin.

https://github.com/SpaceTeam/ortools

I personally use Rocksim, however for high altitude flights or flights exceeding MACH 1 I will also run my simulation through RASaero ( https://www.rasaero.com/)
RASAero is a little harder to use, however you can import a Rocksim file.