sferrin said:
Abraham Gubler said:
I'm hardly going to help you ripoff and reverse engineer an Australian product (the rocket, the seduction decoy is US). However I will point out it took Aussie engineers decades to develop a stable hovering rocket that can simulate the maneuvering of a warship. So sucked in and I wish you the worst in your endeavours.
Didn't want to be rude but I'll second that.
Well, if I were one of those Aussie engineers, I wouldn't lose sleep - If they are asking ME to work on it, they can't be too serious about it

I don't think I will magically come up with something that will make this product obsolete. And I'm pretty sure this thing will disappear off the scope in a matter of a couple of weeks, replaced by another Friday afternoon email requesting a flapping-wing stealthy steam-powered UCAV. Well, I'm complaining but these assignments are intellectually challenging and break the routine.
I too was amazed that the Aussie engineers managed to successfully balance an upside-down pendulum. At the same time, I would have used a different lifting method in my purely academic study, while preserving the same payload. So actually, there would be no Aussie-technology ripoff. I wanted to reverse-engineer the decoy because I still need to get an estimate of the payload weight, structure weight, battery weight, etc...in order to make an equivalent (but different) system.
Anyway, I appreciate the info shared, in particular the video. I was wondering what a launch of the thing looked like in real life.