UM/S2H/Suppressors/Scopes and More!

[Tail_Hunter]

Because 1.5” is thin.

 

[WCT3]

Does anyone else have a problem with the S2H site not loading properly? The home page works but the courses and shop page are both blank.

 

[Scottyboy]

Does anyone else have a problem with the S2H site not loading properly? The home page works but the courses and shop page are both blank.

Looks to be a ‘you’ problem, both pages are loading fine for me

 

[WCT3]

We will do that video. We may do one this week at the winter S2H class.

Did you guys end up making a video like this? How you pack and your process for setting up to glass

 

[WCT3]

Looks to be a ‘you’ problem, both pages are loading fine for me

Weird, I've tried on both my phone and desktop with the same problem

 

[ElPollo]

@Unknown Suppressors
@Unknown Munitions
@Formidilosus
@Ryan Avery

I really appreciate the effort you all are making in developing new products and engaging and updating Rokslide in the development and testing process. Most companies do that behind closed doors. I think the result of what you are doing is likely that you end up with better products and that your customer base ends up with a better understanding of what those products are capable of before they buy that product. It’s a good model that I’d like to see others adopt. That said, we can be a fickle lot. So you do open yourself up to a lot of posts where people don’t agree with the direction or the process or just nit-picking because people have too much time on their hands. Y’all have done a good job staying out of those weed patches. I’m looking forward to seeing the final product on this suppressor, your RokStok lite, and other things coming down the pipe. I’m also just really happy to see someone else getting into the reflex suppressor market in the US.

 

[4th_point]

Who cares when you have the end product to test.

These are just ways to guess at testing outcomes with less investment and reduced trial and error, but should still be confirmed through actual testing. So, once actuall testing is done, worrying about these things is to put theories in front of reality. Observed reality always trumps theory, always, no exceptions, ever. There may be times when observational technique should be evaluated to confirm the disagreement is valid, but that is different and reflected in your 3rd question.

LOL - thanks for the laugh. I hope that you are not speaking on behalf of the company.

Those were pretty standard questions for those with acoustic backgrounds, which I have.
I've worked in product development WRT noise attenuation and mitigation as a noise engineer.

I would expect any company making a silencer to welcome a technical discussion.

I see it as a good opportunity for the owner of the company to brag a bit on the development process.

As I stated, I wish the company well.

 

[4th_point]

PS - a competent noise engineer would realize that there are some obvious tests that could be done, and maybe they are yet to be released, but are missing from this thread.

Hence why I want to know the capability of the business. Especially as a potential customer.

 

[Marbles]

LOL - thanks for the laugh. I hope that you are not speaking on behalf of the company.

No, and that should be obvious to any competent WKR.

PS - a competent noise engineer would realize that there are some obvious tests that could be done, and maybe they are yet to be released, but are missing from this thread.

Hence why I want to know the capability of the business. Especially as a potential customer.

A competent noise engineer would know how to educate and explain. Then, you have the engineers who insist a solution works while the people actually implementing it know it doesn't. Hence, why your resume makes me respect you less because you threw it out without taking the time to make a case for why wonkish analytics should matter more than the end product.

 

[4th_point]

Sorry to get you all fired up.

It's an opportunity to clear up some of the statements made in this thread. By the guy(s) running the business.

 

[walk2112]

Easy gents, most of us just want to know if it’s affordable, light, tough (enough), and has that hearing safe whisper womf.

 

[ElPollo]

Sorry to get you all fired up.

It's an opportunity to clear up some of the statements made in this thread. By the guy(s) running the business.

I would say you had (and still have) an opportunity to reach out offline to ask questions without publicly flexing your nerd muscles. I have my own nerd muscles, but flexing them on a public forum is not something I consider to be a great look for myself if I am really wanting to engage people in a conversation. It’s sort of like saying, “I think I am smarter than you. Wanna see how dumb you really are?”

Note: I live in a house with really smart, non-neurotypical people, so I regularly have to explain stuff like this. My response is not meant as an insult.

 

[pods8 (Rugged Stitching)]

The thing about modeled information is they are only as good as the assumptions that the model is based off. Sometimes those assumptions are completely wrong as demonstrated by testing. Hence Marble's point that it doesn't matter what modeling they did or didn't do as long as their testing regime is robust.

As opposed to other companies that MIGHT rely more on modeled data and have cans blowing apart... That is just a complete speculation statement, I have zero insight to what the companies having failures did or didn't do in design versus quality control issues.

 

[IrkedCitizen]

Does anyone else have a problem with the S2H site not loading properly? The home page works but the courses and shop page are both blank.

Looks to be a ‘you’ problem, both pages are loading fine for me

Weird, I've tried on both my phone and desktop with the same problem

It's not just him. I have the same issue. Clearing cache and history doesn't fix the problem

 

[RockAndSage]

PS - a competent noise engineer would realize that there are some obvious tests that could be done, and maybe they are yet to be released, but are missing from this thread.

Hence why I want to know the capability of the business. Especially as a potential customer.

I don't think anyone here is anti-science or anti-engineering, but plenty of us have been burned by purchases of "highly engineered" items that end up not working as advertised or expected. Optics are an excellent example of this.

There are also plenty of examples of excellent innovations across the decades that were accomplished, essentially, in the tradition of the great American layperson scientist - the Wright Brothers, Elmer Keith, Steve Jobs, to name a few. They all started with observation and desired end-states, and obsessively "scientifically fiddled with it" until they got the results they were looking for. What made it science was the detailed recording of their data and observations, isolating variables, and taking an iterative approach - not modeling done by "qualified", certified, professional engineers.

You're not wrong in wanting what you're asking for or thinking it would be useful - but you're also not right enough to invalidate the experimentation and cumulative iteration process they're working though. It's equally valid science.

 

[4th_point]

I would say you had (and still have) an opportunity to reach out offline to ask questions without publicly flexing your nerd muscles. I have my own nerd muscles, but flexing them on a public forum is not something I consider to be a great look for myself if I am really wanting to engage people in a conversation. It’s sort of like saying, “I think I am smarter than you. Wanna see how dumb you really are?”

Note: I live in a house with really smart, non-neurotypical people, so I regularly have to explain stuff like this. My response is not meant as an insult.

I understand what you're saying, but if questions make people squirm, then don't post about product dev in a forum.

Could I PM the owner, and get answers? Sure. But that doesn't help anyone else lurking, that wants more information.

Especially with a product that can impact someone's health (hearing)?

You don't need to be an acoustic engineer to make a can. However, when certain interesting claims are made, then it naturally raises some interesting questions.

As I stated before, it's an opportunity for the owner to brag about the development process to achieve the goals.

Anyone going into the business of making a product to mitigate or attenuate noise should welcome a discussion.

And to state the obvious - I am not the only person interested in this product and claims, that has relevant knowledge and exposure to noise mitigation. There are others watching, but don't post here.

So you could say that I am interested in hearing from the owner, rather than state reasons to dismiss the product as others have (offline).

If the owner simply stated, "We're making it for ourselves, based on our informal tests. That's it, take it or leave it." that would be totally cool with me. My recommendation would be to simply re-eval the claims being made, or show the data.

My main takeaway from this start-up business - making a silencer/can/suppressor - is super positive - it is open, and has aired some dirty laundry. Super commendable!

 

[Sundodger]

One of the pillars of engineering is constantly correlating your modeling data to real world data.

Its an annoying and never ending process.

 

[4th_point]

Here's some food for thought...

Noise is a complicated field, yet it is common for the general population to believe that since they hear a sound, they are able to speculate and make assumptions about it. It's common and not that a big of a deal. It's ignorance, not lack of intelligence. And there's no risk just stating an opinion.

The worst offenders, that I have personally worked with, were mechanical engineers. Reasoning is a strong suit for an engineer, or should be, however most mechanical engineers are not exposed to advanced signal processing at the undergrad level. Some basic vibration and frequency analysis are taught, but noise/vibe is a special graduate program. So what happens is that they try to reason their way through a noise problem with what they have. That's fine, unless they make definitive claims or act as an authority.

I've seen well intentioned mechanical engineers run noise tests incorrectly with SLM (sound level meter) or vibe tests with the wrong type of accelerometer. The risk is huge, as product claims are then made off of the bogus data. This can have statutory, regulatory, and legal risks. If you make claims, you'd better be prepared to back them up in some industries as it becomes discoverable evidence in court.

Most of the electrical engineers that I worked with have been very cautious to speak about noise and vibe. I think it's due to the fact that they are heavily exposed to advanced signal processing, and more importantly, thinking in the frequency domain. In other words, they seem to understand the depth of their ignorance. Again, not lack of intelligence - they just don't have the proper background.

I don't know many mechanical engineers that are really knowledgeable about frequency analysis, unless they are involved with structural dynamics. Structural dynamics requires an advanced degree.

So even if someone is just using an SLM, they still need a certain level of competence. Even if frequency analysis is not an objective. There are pictures of silencer tests online, that make noise engineers shake their heads.

 

[Formidilosus]

My recommendation would be to simply re-eval the claims being made, or show the data.

What claims specifically?

 

[4th_point]

What claims specifically?

Are you the owner or part of the business? Let's start there. Fair?