COMPARATIVE STUDY OF DIFFERENT NOSE CONE GEOMETRIES FOR MODEL ROCKET AERODYNAMIC PERFORMANCE

The nose cone is the second major fin-independent lever available to a model-rocket designer for shaping static stability, drag, and usable internal volume, yet — like fin geometry — it is frequently chosen by convention rather than analysis. This paper presents a systematic, first-principles comparison of seven canonical nose cone shapes (conical, tangent ogive, full parabolic, half-power series, elliptical, Von Kármán, and LV-Haack) using slender-body (Barrowman/Munk) theory for center-of-pressure prediction, a wetted-area skin-friction and bluntness-proxy drag model, and internal-volume computation, all applied to a common baseline sport-rocket airframe. The center-of-pressure formula used here is validated against the classical Barrowman results for a cone (Xn = 0.667L) and a tangent ogive (Xn = 0.465L). Across the shapes studied, vehicle static margin varies by only about 0.11 caliber, indicating that nose shape is a comparatively weak stability lever once fin geometry is fixed; nose drag coefficient varies by roughly 75% (0.082 for a cone to 0.144 for an ellipse), and internal volume varies by a factor of two, from the conical minimum to the elliptical maximum. These results are consolidated into practical guidance for selecting nose cone geometry according to whether a design prioritizes maximum stability, minimum drag, or internal payload/recovery volume.