Two Flights, One Rocket

2026-08-15 · F67W-4 · pico flight computer
drag to orbit · wheel / pinch to zoom.
F2's canopy descent is drawn straight down —
horizontal drift wasn't observable.
compass bearing arbitrary — no magnetometer.
data-validity notes below the viewer.
t+18.00 s

What you are looking at

Both flights of the nosecone telemetry unit on 15 August 2026, rebuilt in 3D from the raw 100 Hz IMU and 50 Hz barometer logs. Same rocket, same motor, launched about an hour apart. Flight 1's ejection charge fired 0.1 s after apogee but the chute jammed in the tube — ballistic return at ~17 m/s. Flight 2, after a repack, deployed cleanly and came down at 5.1 m/s.

Attitude comes from integrating the gyro (bias re-estimated from 60 s of still pad data), position from double-integrating body acceleration rotated into the world frame, with altitude anchored to the barometer. The nose axis is taken from the burn-averaged thrust direction, which absorbs board-mount skew.

Why the trajectories are believable

The IMU-only altitude — integrated blind, never shown the barometer — is the validation channel:

Flight 1Flight 2
IMU-only altitude at apogee85.9 m80.1 m
Barometer apogee84.6 m76.9 m
Worst ascent disagreement3.3 m3.9 m
Max speed, world-frame integration37.8 m/s37.4 m/s
Max speed, independent 1-axis method37.9 m/s38.5 m/s

What the reconstruction settled

Flight 2 reached 8 m less apogee on an identical boost (6.1 vs 6.0 g). The orientation data answers why: its nose was 27.6° off vertical at burnout versus flight 1's 4.6° — it weathercocked into wind and spent the same energy arcing ~30 m downrange, crossing apogee nose-nearly-horizontal. Trajectory, not performance: drag-free energy heights agree to 0.4 m.

Validity limits

DOMINIC BELYAEV · NOSECONE TELEMETRY · RAW LOGS + RECONSTRUCTION SCRIPT IN THE BUILD FOLDER