This TARC season is over...

Girl Scout team poses with their rocket (Click to enlarge).

Another TARC season has passed - and once again, no team from the Huntsville area made it to the Finals up in Virginia. I have some thoughts on why this keeps happening, which I will share later. But first, let's consider the good things that came out of this year's TARC:

• We had 2 new Girl Scout teams, who went from totally inexperienced to making 3 qualification flights in just three months. This is quite an accomplishment, especially when you consider that one group of scouts had the best scores, beating even the John Paul II teams. One cannot help being impressed, and I sincerely hope that these young ladies will be back next year.
• All teams made qualification flights.
• All rockets flew straight, though we had a few problems with fins popping off. So often, in fact, that it became a running joke.

So one can be pleased that the teams crossed the finish line, which is indeed something to be happy about. We just didn't do well enough to place.

Redstone Composite Squadron team member poses
with the rocket (Click to enlarge).

Girl scouts prep their rocket (Click to enlarge). 

So what went wrong? The Huntsville teams can obviously build stable rockets that meet the competition goals, and they certainly put in the practice time - these are not the issues. The problem is not in the building and the flying. It's what comes after the flying, in the analysis of the data from the practice flights.  Therein lies the difference between making so-so qualification flights and qualification flights good enough to make the TARC top 100.

The local teams simply do not bother to analyze their flight data. There are no plots, no analysis of the altitude versus mass, no accounting for weather conditions - even though these numbers are recorded for each flight. The strategy used by the teams in recent years is based on luck, i.e., let's practice until we get a flight that has a low score, then attempt the qualification flights immediately afterward. They are essentially making random guesses until the rocket makes a good flight. The specs of that flight - mass, motor, ballast, etc. - are then duplicated for the qualification flights, even when the weather conditions have changed significantly. The outcome is predictable - lacking compensations for the wind and temperature, the qualification flights have scores in the 40's, 50's and 60's, even though the good flight had a score of 10 or less.

Girl scout rocket takes to the air (Click to enlarge).

JurassicTARC team member retrieves the rocket
(Click to enlarge).

But you can't compensate by guessing. You have to look at the practice flight data to get those numbers. Unfortunately, that requires the local teams to put forth an effort beyond what they are currently willing to do. So they trust to luck. And sooner or later, that strategy will pay off for someone. On a rare day, Fortune will smile upon a team who will string together two decent qualification flights, setting them on a path to the TARC Finals. But to win in Virginia, you have to fly to a different altitude on a different field, and even Fortune can't help against those odds. Placing in the top 10 requires that you understand how to adjust the rocket to meet a different goal.

John Paul II teams hard at work (Click to enlarge).

We are planning to hold a TARC workshop early in the coming season - maybe there will be a team that will listen and realize that looking at the flight data is just as important as designing the rocket. 

I keep hoping.