iHobby Show

[Initiator001]

The iHobby Show starts Thursday in Chicago.

We've gotten some insight into a few things Estes will be displaying (Thanks Mike and John).

I hope the manufacturers and those who can attend the Show will take pictures and post them along with any information they may gather. ;)

[K.M.Knox]

After seeing the pictures of the Nike, I can't wait to see what else is coming...

[Initiator001]

I did note that on the iHobby Show exhibitor flloor plan Estes has it's own booth this year, separate from Great Planes.

[falingtrea]

Looks like Angelo of Sunward will be doing a daily blog. Check here (http://www.sunward1.com/blog) to find the setup day blog.

[rokitflite]

The iHobby Show starts Thursday in Chicago.

We've gotten some insight into a few things Estes will be displaying (Thanks Mike and John).

I hope the manufacturers and those who can attend the Show will take pictures and post them along with any information they may gather. ;)


2.6" V-2 in new paint scheme...

[Royatl]

2.6" V-2 in new paint scheme...


Is that it? or rather, is that all?

[ghrocketman]

I hope it's not just another Nike Smoke and another V2.

I'm hoping for something that I would consider MAJOR like the re-issuance of the 1/45 Little Joe II or the Pershing 1A maxi-brute or the K-21 original Gemini-Titan.

Short of something of the caliber of those three kits won't excite me or be "smoking hot" as John Boren put it....I'm hoping for something really good but a Nike Smoke and V2 would NOT fit that description.

Does the market REALLY need another Nike Smoke anyway ? That thing has been made by like 47 different companies in the past, and short of the original "real smoke" Enerjet Nike Smoke from '71 to '76 or so, none of them are really a big deal no matter the size.
If somebody wants to make a "Nike" rocket, how about a reasonably priced 24mm sized Nike Ajax, Nike Hercules, Nike Zeus A, Nike Zeus B, Nike Cajun or other "Nike" variant that is not just a 4FNC special.

[the mole]

I was hopeing for maybe a 1/100 Saturn 1B.

[Brent]

Pictures, I want pictures.

[A Fish Named Wallyum]

Does the market REALLY need another Nike Smoke anyway ? That thing has been made by like 47 different companies in the past, and short of the original "real smoke" Enerjet Nike Smoke from '71 to '76 or so, none of them are really a big deal no matter the size.
If somebody wants to make a "Nike" rocket, how about a reasonably priced 24mm sized Nike Ajax, Nike Hercules, Nike Zeus A, Nike Zeus B, Nike Cajun or other "Nike" variant that is not just a 4FNC special.
Agreeing with you on this one. :( Wasn't there a presentation edition of the Nike Smoke from Quest a few years back? I would have considered that the final word on the Nike Smoke subject.

[sandman]

I have a 3" Nike Smoke I built from scratch for my level 1.

I really don't need another one.

But hopefully someone else will.

[ghrocketman]

The 1/100 Saturn 1B would be another one that I would consider a "smoking hot" major announcement.

[scsager]

Pictures, I want pictures.

Saw packaging for one of the new G40 motors (no motor inside)

Saw the tube cutting guide - for tubes up to BT-60

Estes had a nice display in a good location, but not a lot of people crowding around the booth. The same could be said for Quest and Sunward as well as NAR and Tripoli.

Took a few snaps at the Estes Booth, and one of Sabrina with her newest Girl Scout patch. Sadly no Rocket Make-it Take-it this year.

[the mole]

REALY! :mad: This is it. I was expecting more.

[Initiator001]

REALY! :mad: This is it. I was expecting more.

There is more...but I don't know what it is. ;) :rolleyes:

I believe Estes will have a new AMRAAM model. I don't have any details.

[blackshire]

The 1/100 Saturn 1B would be another one that I would consider a "smoking hot" major announcement.Forcefully uh-greed!!! The "IB" was NASA's most aesthetically pleasing vehicle. Also, "while the molds were out" for a 1/100 scale Saturn IB, they could make *Centuri* 1/100th scale Little Joe II kits (see: http://www.ninfinger.org/rockets/nostalgia/72cen032.html ) with the pre-applied body wraps (including the corrugated, metallized booster body wrap). In addition:

Centuri's 1/100th scale Little Joe II was much easier to build than the Estes version at that scale (which required a -lot- of sanding for a kit with plastic parts, see: http://www.ninfinger.org/rockets/catalogs/estes91/91est48.html ), and it would be a great "first" scale kit due to its simplicity. Since Estes now has the plastic motor adapters, such an LJII kit could have an 18 mm motor mount like the Centuri version (the Estes version had a 13 mm motor mount) so that it could use everything from A3-4T to B4-4 motors (although I think it could handle the stress of B6-4 motors).

[Randy]

Saw packaging for one of the new G40 motors (no motor inside)

Saw the tube cutting guide - for tubes up to BT-60

Estes had a nice display in a good location, but not a lot of people crowding around the booth. The same could be said for Quest and Sunward as well as NAR and Tripoli.

Took a few snaps at the Estes Booth, and one of Sabrina with her newest Girl Scout patch. Sadly no Rocket Make-it Take-it this year.


Scott, are there a lot of people attending overall? Are the rocket companies doing anything special to attract people to their booths? I wish they had a guide for up to bt 101. Congrats to Sabrina, she's a doll. Go Girl Scouts!

Randy
www.vernarockets.com

[bob jablonski]

[



Sadly no Rocket Make-it Take-it this year.[/QUOTE]

I guess no one wanted to pick up the slack after we closed Starlight. Sunward teamed up with us 2 years, And they did it them selves one year and we did it solo last year.
Kinda funny the smaller rocket companys did it.........
Mr. Bob
Starlight dude

[Jerry Irvine]

I think it is very good that Estes has released a large Nike-Smoke. It was a favorite of G Harry as well as his son Bill at his other prior companies. It was an Enerjet fav as well as a component of most popular scale models in the 70's and 80's.

The larger size is more practical for mass management to offset the smallish scale fins. I suspect Estes has compromised on scale size to lean toward more stability.

Keep up the good work guys.

Maybe we will see Estes single stage kits of the many NASA two stage rockets using the Nike booster. Nike-Apache, Nike-Cajun, etc.

Jerry

[GregGleason]

I would be surprised if Estes put a Saturn 1B on the market, but pleasantly so. Between the Semroc and Apogee kits, I'm not sure if they see much upside to it.

The discussion of large Estes kits with AP motors has got me reflecting back on the Enerjet Centuri kits that were available, back in the day. Cool if they got a big Athena added to their stable. Regardless, it does warm my heart to see these turn of events. :)

It has also got me thinking (aside from "The Dude"), what is the largest Estes kit ever offered by volume. Is it now their new Nike Smoke kit?

Greg

[Royatl]

It has also got me thinking (aside from "The Dude"), what is the largest Estes kit ever offered by volume. Is it now their new Nike Smoke kit?

Greg

Not by a long shot. It would have to be one of the North Coast By Estes 4" kits, the SA-14 Archer, which was 4" diameter and 62" long.

[gpoehlein]

I would be surprised if Estes put a Saturn 1B on the market, but pleasantly so. Between the Semroc and Apogee kits, I'm not sure if they see much upside to it.

The discussion of large Estes kits with AP motors has got me reflecting back on the Enerjet Centuri kits that were available, back in the day. Cool if they got a big Athena added to their stable. Regardless, it does warm my heart to see these turn of events. :)

It has also got me thinking (aside from "The Dude"), what is the largest Estes kit ever offered by volume. Is it now their new Nike Smoke kit?

Greg

I wouldn't think so - the 1/19th scale V2 was 33.5" long and 3.9" diameter. Also, the Pershing 1A was 41" long and 3.9" diameter. So, although the Nike Smoke will be about 43 inches long, it is only 3" diameter. Without doing the math, I'm guessing the V2 and Pershing are still a bit bigger. And, of course, the 1/100th scale Saturn V was also 3.9" at the base and stood 43.5" tall.

[A Fish Named Wallyum]

reflecting back on the Enerjet Centuri kits that were available, back in the day. Cool if they got a big Athena added to their stable.

:cool: :cool: YES!!!!!

[ghrocketman]

So far I'm NOT seeing ANYTHING even REMOTELY "smoking hot".
An AMRAAM would NOT cut the mustard either...PML has done them to DEATH as well as being available in what I cal semi-kit form from TLP as most of the kit needs replacing.

I guess maybe I expect a little too much, but geez....when someone says "smoking hot" I expect something 99% of the LPR/MPR rocketry community would see as major, not been there done that stuff offered by too many others.
So far very disappointing.

Is it THAT HARD to understand that they should come out with products either:
A) Are actually being ASKED for (1/45 LJ II, 1/100 S1B, Pershing 1A, Gemini Titan)
or
B) Unique products not currently filled by another company (new BP engines, not relabeled engines)

The Pro Series II line is cool but it is taking forever to get to market; these bigger companies should take some cues from the smaller manufacturers; they can bring out 10+ new kits relatively quickly.

[JumpJet]

So far I'm NOT seeing ANYTHING even REMOTELY "smoking hot".


The smoking hot comment was a play on words for the Nike Smoke.


By the way do you EVER post anything positive or even a neutral comment about anything? I don’t believe I’ve ever read any of them if you have.

John Boren

[gpoehlein]

Ignore 'im, John - I, for one, am looking forward to the 3" Nike Smoke with 29mm mount. I think it will be a heck of a lot of fun (The Nike Smoke is one of my favorite missile/sounding/research rockets).

Looking forward to it and the new motors!

BTW - any idea when the tube cutting guides are coming out? My Hobby Town got the motor adapters in and I got a pack of each, so I'm ready for the next fun tool from Estes! :p

Greg

[JumpJet]

BTW - any idea when the tube cutting guides are coming out?


I'm not sure why it's taken so long to get the tubes cutters out but they should be out by the end of the year but hopefully MUCH sooner, since they would make a great stocking stuffer.



John Boren

[bernomatic]

Please, I am so tired of the "hey we got a nose cone, body tube, and three fins. Let's paint it mauve this time, get graphic arts to print up some cool stickers and find a smoking name to sell the same ole cr*p under."

If we're lucky, Estes's re-releases one of the good old rockets and comes up with maybe one new exotic a year. and we're supposed to eat the pablam and shout "yummy, we want more."

When I was fourteen, my fleet included a couple of "classic" 3fnc rockets like an Alpha and the Big Bertha". The rest of the fleet was a later model Star Blazer, Orbital Transport, USS Andromeda, USS Atlantis, Wolverine, Mini Bomarc (couldn't afford the full size, but gosh darn I wanted it), Scissor Wing Transport, Gyroc and a triple stager of which I can't recall the name.

Yes there still was a plethora of the basic rockets back then, but it was offset by a multitude of rockets requiring craftsmanship and whetting your imagination.

[gpoehlein]

Please, I am so tired of the "hey we got a nose cone, body tube, and three fins. Let's paint it mauve this time, get graphic arts to print up some cool stickers and find a smoking name to sell the same ole cr*p under."

If we're lucky, Estes's re-releases one of the good old rockets and comes up with maybe one new exotic a year. and we're supposed to eat the pablam and shout "yummy, we want more."

When I was fourteen, my fleet included a couple of "classic" 3fnc rockets like an Alpha and the Big Bertha". The rest of the fleet was a later model Star Blazer, Orbital Transport, USS Andromeda, USS Atlantis, Wolverine, Mini Bomarc (couldn't afford the full size, but gosh darn I wanted it), Scissor Wing Transport, Gyroc and a triple stager of which I can't recall the name.

Yes there still was a plethora of the basic rockets back then, but it was offset by a multitude of rockets requiring craftsmanship and whetting your imagination.

Hey - they got a different fin shape too! :p

Seriously, there are times when the cool graphics makes a 3FNC or 4FNC. This is the case with the Cherokee D, Der Red Max and even models like the Goblin. Although there is just something about the shape of the Alpha's fins that just says "model rocket" to me - might be because it was the first rocket I ever built and flew.

Then again, a good percentage of the early sounding rockets and missiles were 3FNC or 4FNC rockets - Only a very few like the Nike Smoke or Honest John have a unique enough shaped nose cone to stand out - most used simple ogives, cones and parabolic/elliptical nose cones. You can add a transition to step from one size body tube to another to mix it up - witness the X-Ray and the Cobra. Other classic 3 and 4 fin models threw in things like staging (Omega) and clustering (Ranger) to make them more interesting.

That said, I do like the SF models of the seventies and eighties. I thing Estes hit the peak of SF model design in the mid eighties (just look at the 1984 catalog and count the SF models). I mean, just look at models like the Orion, Galactic Taxi, Star Speeder, Space Station Aquarius, Scorpius, Falcon Commander, NASA Pegasus, Starship Nova, Vindicator, USSF Fireflash, Starship Excalibur, Xarconian Destroyer and Manta Bomber, just to name a few.

That said, we do have some cool kits today: QCC Explorer, Xarconian Cruiser, Equinox, Fusion X25, Crossbow SST, Plasma Probe, Solar Flair, Alien Invader and Satellite Interceptor, as well as the reissued Interceptor are all nice SF kits. And even though they are 3 or 4FNC models, I still like models like the Magician, Big Daddy, Hornet, Phoenix Bird and EPM-010.

Heck, sometimes I LIKE building and flying a cool decalled 3FNC model. I think we're in some pretty exciting times with not only all the cool stuff coming out of Estes these days, but also the great models from Semroc, Fliskits, Sunward, Custom and too many others to mention. Far as I'm concerned, Estes is going in the right direction and I'm excited to find out what they're gonna do next! :D

Greg

[blackshire]

(in reply to scsager, who wrote [in part] in Reply #13):

"Sadly no Rocket Make-it Take-it this year."

I guess no one wanted to pick up the slack after we closed Starlight. Sunward teamed up with us 2 years, And they did it them selves one year and we did it solo last year.
Kinda funny the smaller rocket companys did it.........
Mr. Bob
Starlight dudeYou and scsager raise an important point, Bob. An excellent way for Estes to conduct the "Make-it, Take-it" events would be for them to offer (either directly or through the clubs, NAR Sections, or hobby vendors who would work with the kids at the events) Gnome rocket kits, since they are simple and inexpensive (both for Estes *and* for their builders to fly, because they use mini engines). Also:

Since the Gnome is best prepped using a straw, or a rolled paper dowel, or a pen to push the wadding down into its body tube (you can see it being done in this Estes Gnome video on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1d_CcfWvbzM ), Estes could offer imprinted ballpoint pens (with the Estes logo *and* their web site URL) with the "Make-it, Take it" Gnome kits for this purpose.

[jharding58]

I am afraid that the issue that Estes Cox; and indirectly Hobbico has to deal with is market sizing and market share. Although "we" see things as being obvious in terms of which scale model or classic model should be released, how many would actually wind up being sold? Unless and until there is some effort (beyond TARCS) to drive someone under the age of 30 into model rocketry we BARs simply do not have the financial wherewithal to render a high development cost model to market. Yes it would be great to see the original Little Joe II and 1B come out in our lifetime, but how many would sell? The issue which is always mooted is that the molds are not quite where they need to be. If the molds need to be redone, ten there is a fixed cost item. Packaging and compliance with various consumer product safety issues drives expense, then you have to have a demonstrable margin to get a VP Sales to approve the expenditure against sales projections in a dormant consumer market.

I like what Estes is doing. I am also pretty impressed that they are still around and have not gone the way of most model companies. Given time and a more liberal set of purse strings I am sure that there would be a higher number of models coming out that meet the rather high and specific expectations of most who post here, the hobby was a drowning man and Hobbico threw a ring. Let's not try to saw it apart because it seems to be inadequate.

[bernomatic]

Yes there are a lot of dynamics to doing business with the subsequent costs, but IMHO Estes is sitting on its laurels and being bought and sold (as a company) on only that.
The new owner comes in looking for his cash cow, only to be told he needs to buy oats and bedding and other items to keep the cow producing milk. So instead of getting the best, he just settles for second rate and is willing to let the cow's name and reputation pull in the money. When he isn't making what he thinks he should be, he just sells to the next person for what he can get.
From what I have read of Vern (and Glenda) Estes, they were personally involved in this hobby and took first person interest in it. I doubt any corporate entity has a CEO down in the trenches, so to speak. Vern took an idea, made a better mouse trap and came up with the winning solution which is why his name is remembered more for model rocketry than Orville Carlisle.
At this time I don't really care too much what designs they come out with as I prefer to work on my own designs (except for some cloning of those 70's-80's classics), however, I do want to see the industry and especially Estes succeed if not just so we continue to have cheap motors to buy to put in our own designs.

[Der Red Max]

The smoking hot comment was a play on words for the Nike Smoke.
The slower folk need to have it explained to them.

By the way do you EVER post anything positive or even a neutral comment about anything? I don’t believe I’ve ever read any of them if you have.
That's rhetorical right?
Some folk are just plain miserable and need to share it so they won't feel so alone in life.

You guys are doing great work,
don't let the Negative Nancy's of the world affect you efforts (as I'm sure they won't).
Can't wait for more unveils!
ESTES RULES!

[Initiator001]

I am afraid that the issue that Estes Cox; and indirectly Horizon has to deal with is market sizinf and market share. Although "we" se things as being obvious in terms of which scale model or classic model should be released, how many would actually wind up being sold? Unless and until there is some effort (beyond TARCS) to drive someone under the age of 30 into model rocketry we BARs simply do not have the financial wherewithal to render a high development cost model to market. Yes it would be great to see the original Little Joe II and 1B come out in our lifetime, but how many would sell? The issue which is always mooted is that the molds are not quite where they need to be. If the molds need to be redone, ten there is a fixed cost item. Packaging and compliance with various consumer product safety issues drives expense, then you have to have a demonstrable margin to get a VP Sales to approve the expenditure against sales projections in a dormant consumer market.

I like what Estes is doing. I am also pretty impressed that they are still around and have not gone the way of most model companies. Given time and a more liberal set of purse strings I am sure that there would be a higher number of models coming out that meet the rather high and specific expectations of most who post here, the hobby was a drowning man and Horizon threw a ring. Let's not try to saw it apart because it seems to be inadequate.


Nice synopsis.

Just a nit to pick: It was Great Planes not Horizon which purchased Estes.

[Initiator001]

I guess maybe I expect a little too much, but geez....when someone says "smoking hot" I expect something 99% of the LPR/MPR rocketry community would see as major, not been there done that stuff offered by too many others.
So far very disappointing.

Is it THAT HARD to understand that they should come out with products either:
A) Are actually being ASKED for (1/45 LJ II, 1/100 S1B, Pershing 1A, Gemini Titan)
or
B) Unique products not currently filled by another company (new BP engines, not relabeled engines)

The Pro Series II line is cool but it is taking forever to get to market; these bigger companies should take some cues from the smaller manufacturers; they can bring out 10+ new kits relatively quickly.

99% of the LPR/MPR rocket community knows of/flies Estes. Maybe Quest, possibly AeroTech. By this I mean the folks whose only contact with rocketry is through what is on the peg at their local hobby shop.

Not Semroc.

Not Fliskits.

Not PML.

Not Polecat.

Etc.

The remaining 1% (Or less) 'hard-core' rocket hobbyists do not purchase enough product from a company like Estes that would allow it to survive. Estes and Quest get the majority of their revenue from sales to hobby distributors which in turn sell the product to hobby shops who sell to the public.

I remember listening to Lee Piester back when I worked for Enertek. Lee said he really liked scale rocket models but they had the lowest margins and the lowest sales when he ran Centuri Engineering. My tracking of orders for Enertek and my review of the sales figures when I worked for AeroTech showed me Lee was correct. :(

I look forward to what the 'new' Estes will be producing in the future. It will certainly be better than what the previous 'management' was doing with the company. :)

[blackshire]

-SNIP-
I remember listening to Lee Piester back when I worked for Enertek. Lee said he really liked scale rocket models but they had the lowest margins and the lowest sales when he ran Centuri Engineering. My tracking of orders for Enertek and my review of the sales figures when I worked for AeroTech showed me Lee was correct. :(
-SNIP-Did Lee do any research into why scale models had/have the lowest sales? Besides a lack of "eye-catchyness" of some scale rockets among kids (plus the greater expense of the fancier kits such as the Saturns), my guess is that even eye-catching scale models may intimidate kids because of the higher building Skill Level, finishing & painting that they require to achieve their eye-catching appearances. If this is the case, then simplified low-Skill Level (especially E2X "No Painting Required") scale kits of attractive full-scale vehicles should sell well if their prices are comparable to those of non-scale sport rockets of similar sizes.

[bernomatic]

Did Lee do any research into why scale models had/have the lowest sales? Besides a lack of "eye-catchyness" of some scale rockets among kids (plus the greater expense of the fancier kits such as the Saturns), my guess is that even eye-catching scale models may intimidate kids because of the higher building Skill Level, finishing & painting that they require to achieve their eye-catching appearances. If this is the case, then simplified low-Skill Level (especially E2X "No Painting Required") scale kits of attractive full-scale vehicles should sell well if their prices are comparable to those of non-scale sport rockets of similar sizes.

I would surmise that could be a part of it, but think back to when you were a young teen with some bucks to spend, what do you buy? The 1/100th Saturn V? or instead a Mars Snooper, Trident, Orbital Transport and a Scissor Wing Transport, all four for the price of the one?

You may dream of one day building that expensive skill level 5 as I still do, but the wallet keeps you going for the less expensive stuff.

So then why not the less expensive Mercury? I don't know, maybe it just didn't have the prestige the Sat V did or maybe it didn't seem like it was worth the extra time you knew it would take. Or maybe the real rockets didn't touch the imagination of us post moon landing rocket scientists like the more exotic models did. I remember sliding into the cockpit of my mini-brute Star Blazer to hurriedly be launched to repel the invading commies in their Wolverines.

[blackshire]

I would surmise that could be a part of it, but think back to when you were a young teen with some bucks to spend, what do you buy? The 1/100th Saturn V? or instead a Mars Snooper, Trident, Orbital Transport and a Scissor Wing Transport, all four for the price of the one?I mentioned the expense factor of some scale kits (in particular, the Saturns) above. I was most interested in multi-stage and single-stage sport models.You may dream of one day building that expensive skill level 5 as I still do, but the wallet keeps you going for the less expensive stuff.Having already lost (to crashes, trees, and wind drift) by that time several cheap rockets that I had invested a lot of time and effort into building & finishing well, I had no interest in getting an expensive Saturn V and possibly wrecking or losing it.So then why not the less expensive Mercury? I don't know, maybe it just didn't have the prestige the Sat V did or maybe it didn't seem like it was worth the extra time you knew it would take.Both the Centuri and Estes Mercury-Redstone kits were on the high side for their time, and the Estes one was a nightmare to build with all of its little dowel escape tower pieces.Or maybe the real rockets didn't touch the imagination of us post moon landing rocket scientists like the more exotic models did. I remember sliding into the cockpit of my mini-brute Star Blazer to hurriedly be launched to repel the invading commies in their Wolverines.I was never that imaginative...but I appreciated those kits for their aesthetic virtues (the mini engine Star Blazer in particular) just the same.

[Randy]

I'm just glad Estes was purchased by a decent company that has responded to much of what we as old time hobbyist had to say. I think they'll keep it going if we respond by purchasing a reasonable amout of product. Even if they only issue any particular item every 5-10 years it's a better market than we had for a long time. Not to mention Mike & John visit here and are in tune with our requests. It's nice to have someone on the inside to listen even if they can't produce everything we'd like to see.

I had given up on Estes just about the time they were purchased and was very skeptical about Hobbico. I have been pleasantly surprised and they have fully recovered me as a customer and grateful hobbyist.

Randy
www.vernarockets.com

[jharding58]

I mentioned the expense factor of some scale kits (in particular, the Saturns) above. I was most interested in multi-stage and single-stage sport models.Having already lost (to crashes, trees, and wind drift) by that time several cheap rockets that I had invested a lot of time and effort into building & finishing well, I had no interest in getting an expensive Saturn V and possibly wrecking or losing it.Both the Centuri and Estes Mercury-Redstone kits were on the high side for their time, and the Estes one was a nightmare to build with all of its little dowel escape tower pieces.I was never that imaginative...but I appreciated those kits for their aesthetic virtues (the mini engine Star Blazer in particular) just the same.


The underlying problem is and always has been that there is nothing exciting in the contemporary inventory of manned space flight to generate excitement in anyone under 39. Having a driven consumer base (Pro-Sports and NASCAR come to mind) with a level of interest that is easily directed to consumerism provides gargantuan revenue opportunity. The second issue seems to be that the illusion of RT_ (fill in fly, race, sail, or run) has completely undermined the concept of a master level build. The point with regard to the escape tower construction is spot on; there is a diminishing skill set iin hand crafts in favor of simulation and automation. The corrollary in the R/C flying field is training systems which absent input revert to a slow circle at altitude - essentially parked until the operator resumes control. It is obviously a cost saving direction to take, but the process of rebuilding a model (after of course building one) provided a required pathway to understanding how the model is put together and how it works the way that it does. By way of example I was in the LHS when a parent brought in a Blade CSX helicopter to have the rotors replaced - granted that they are handed and installation of the ball links requires looking at the head assembly, but surely there should be enough interest in the mechanics of rotorcraft to want to know how the thing works? Does no one take something apart any longer? I thank whatever deity that I have walked in on my sons surrounded by a sea of parts and asking if I can help them make it work.

We suffer from an abject lack of ability and interest in a generation to invest themselves in a process to achieve an end result. The dearth of kit sales is a clear indicator that the warning about "instant gratification" and the adverse impact upon conditioning went unheard. Buy and fly bridges the gap of the pesky process of building and investing themselves in the finished model. I would not see the end of launch sets with ready to fly rockets as they fill an obvious need to engage young people with the sport/hobby. But by the same token there is a required step of broadening the interest in rocketry from simply watching a model fly to wanting to build a model and then assume some ownership in the finished article; dare I say pride?

[bernomatic]

We suffer from an abject lack of ability and interest in a generation to invest themselves in a process to achieve an end result. The dearth of kit sales is a clear indicator that the warning about "instant gratification" and the adverse impact upon conditioning went unheard. Buy and fly bridges the gap of the pesky process of building and investing themselves in the finished model. I would not see the end of launch sets with ready to fly rockets as they fill an obvious need to engage young people with the sport/hobby. But by the same token there is a required step of broadening the interest in rocketry from simply watching a model fly to wanting to build a model and then assume some ownership in the finished article; dare I say pride?

I am sure the factors for the lack of participation are many, but the one thing I don't believe is that there is a lack of interest on the part of the children. They can not help how things are marketed to them nowadays and it is in large part I am told due to the disruption of the family. This is just one idea from someone dealing with children more than me so I pass it along as it was told to me. Basically because of the the large amount of single parent families, when dad comes over for his day with his son (daughter) he doesn't want to waste time building a rocket, plane, train (whatever), he just wants to get to the gratification part so his son (daughter) can go home to the mother and exclaim what a exciting time they had.

I don't necessarily hold to this fully, but I can see some truth in it. The other problem we have is that we are up against technology of an indoor (and therefor less weather affected) nature. I'm not talking of course about the building part, but the flying. Even as adults we become saddened(?) when a launch is canceled due to weather. Think how it is for a youngster, especially one who may have been waiting for this day a while since dad can only visit once a month. Compare this to just turning on the TV and PS3 and you're within minutes zooming along in the cockpit of your x wing fighter (and dad can use another controller to fly with or against you).

Next thing, and I'm sure GH will help chime in with this one. The "Gubmint" is against us. It takes constant vigilance to keep them out of our backyard. And then they still sneak in. I am not a coonspiracy theorist, I don't see black helicopters flying crossing patterns over the nation. etc. However, if one level of government doesn't get you, another probably will. In Cleveland we have some great places to launch rockets, close to the inner city where a majority of children live, easily accessible, blah, blah, blah. It is our Metroparks system or "The Emerald Necklace" so named because it stretches from the shores of Lake Erie down south around the city and back up to Lake Erie. Acres and acres of park land, and you can't launch there. When I was young you could, but not anymore. Cities will not let you launch in city parks or if they do, you have to have a parent, blah, blah, blah.

I'm not talking about letting eight year olds go launch by themselves and I don't know what the cut off age should be, but I do know when I was a minor I used to go and launch whenever I had the motors and the inclination. I didn't have to be under the supervision of an adult and this is were I have a parting of ways with GH and others. The little things that some did may have given the hobby if not a bad name in some eyes, but something that has to be at least watched out for. Launching rockets with m-80's, launching horizontally against targets (even dead trees), is something adults take notice of. Maybe I was more mature for my age, but I never did that. I'm not saying I'm better than anyone, nor that I didn't have the inclination, but the biggest reaspon that I can recall is that money was scarce for me and I worked hard on building the rocket, and I just couldn't see wasting the money and the effort for the onetime thrill of seeing it explode.

[ghrocketman]

When things deserve something positive to be said about them, I do so.
Wish I could do that for more companies more often than just Semroc and Aerotech, but those two seem to bring to market goods that members of the community are actually ASKING for in a timely fashion....most others do NOT.
Give me a reason to praise a company and I will gladly do so. The last time I was able to do this for the "big E" was when they brought out the Saturn V again. People wanted that and they produced it...keep doing THAT.

When something less than needed/asked for is highly promoted that does not fill a needed niche/want, yes most likely I will voice a negative opinion toward it.
That applies DOUBLY so to something that has been done ad nauseum.
I think somebody must be SMOKIN' something to think we actually needed another Nike Smoke ?
Do companies actually do market research to determine the kits they bring out ?
I cannot imagine anything pointing to a need for this one.

Does ANYONE have this at the top of their want list- "Yeah...sure wish we had another Nike Smoke kit on the market " C'mon now....

I do like the direction "Big E" is moving in...far better than just the toy company one person tried to make it....just wish they would bring out more kits we are asking for and re-issue BP motors they used to make we are asking for.

[chrism]

I like the direction that Estes is going now. I like the fact that they re-released some of the old Centuri classics that we all loved as kids and have introduced new classics as well. I think that John is doing a great job even if some the the classics may never come back (like the Andromeda or Saturn 1B).

Overall, I like where the entire hobby is going. When I was first building rockets in the late 70s and early 80s I was only aware of two companies (Estes and Centuri) that my LHS carried their products. Of course there were other companies as well, but I had not heard of them (Semroc, RDC, etc) since Al Gore had not invented the internet yet.

When I came back to the hobby in 2006, I found that there were a lot of rocket companies out there so even if Estes does not have the kit you want we can get something that fits our personal taste from another company and n ow that Mr. Gore's invention is up and running, getting the kits we want is not a problem.

Chris M.

[bernomatic]

I don't want to see old kits re-issued, I want to see new kits that will capture the imagination and take us to new highs.

Most of Shrox's kits come to mind. :)

[Randy]

I don't want to see old kits re-issued, I want to see new kits that will capture the imagination and take us to new highs.

. :)


Well, I don't know that anyone wants just old kits, but there is a definate demand for re-issuing a few old classics every so often.

Randy
www.vernarockets.com

[blackshire]

-SNIP-
In Cleveland we have some great places to launch rockets, close to the inner city where a majority of children live, easily accessible, blah, blah, blah. It is our Metroparks system or "The Emerald Necklace" so named because it stretches from the shores of Lake Erie down south around the city and back up to Lake Erie. Acres and acres of park land, and you can't launch there. When I was young you could, but not anymore. Cities will not let you launch in city parks or if they do, you have to have a parent, blah, blah, blah.
-SNIP-If I lived there, I wouldn't just accept that state of affairs. The first step would be to find out when that prohibition was put into effect and why. Next, any model rocketry clubs in that area (if that area has a NAR Section, that would be even better) could join forces with other local youth organizations that use model rocketry (Cub Scouts, Boy Scouts, Brownies, Girl Scouts, Camp Fire USA, 4-H Clubs, Civil Air Patrol, etc.) to lobby the city for use of the parks for this wholesome, educational activity that keeps children out of trouble and inspires them to take interest in mathematics, the sciences, and technology (just as politicians play up the "It's for the children!" angle to get what they want, pro-model rocketry people can do the same).

[bernomatic]

Well, I don't know that anyone wants just old kits, but there is a definate demand for re-issuing a few old classics every so often.

Randy
www.vernarockets.com

Okay I lied, I do want to see some kits reissued. Like the Interceptor, Mars Lander or the Scissor Wing Transport.

These kits had unique parts which are difficult to get and/or costly to reproduce. I admit I bought an Interceptor when they first were reissued (and not the E version, I'm not a Tim Allen "more power" enthusiaist. Seems to me more power in rocketry means More Walking or More Money to replace rockets floating on the breeze). For those type kits I applaud the Estes re-issues.

[blackshire]

Okay I lied, I do want to see some kits reissued. Like the Interceptor, Mars Lander or the Scissor Wing Transport.

These kits had unique parts which are difficult to get and/or costly to reproduce. I admit I bought an Interceptor when they first were reissued (and not the E version, I'm not a Tim Allen "more power" enthusiaist. Seems to me more power in rocketry means More Walking or More Money to replace rockets floating on the breeze). For those type kits I applaud the Estes re-issues.I'd love to see a mini engine powered Interceptor! Nowadays I too consider the recovery walk distance as well as the motor cost as criteria when choosing rocket kits, and I would welcome mini engine versions of the classic kits (as well as new scale kits for mini engine power).

[kevinj]

Okay I lied, I do want to see some kits reissued. Like the Interceptor, Mars Lander or the Scissor Wing Transport.

Where have you been? 2 out of those 3 have been reissued.

kj

[Sunward]

... I guess no one wanted to pick up the slack after we closed Starlight. Sunward teamed up with us 2 years, And they did it them selves one year and we did it solo last year.
Kinda funny the smaller rocket companies did it.........e
Rocket Make it Take was an expensive giveaway that did nothing for the hobby.

[bob jablonski]

Rocket Make it Take was an expensive giveaway that did nothing for the hobby.
I dunno, I picked up 2 distributers as a result.
Mr. Bob
Starlight Dude

[Doug Sams]

Okay I lied, I do want to see some kits reissued. Like the Interceptor, Mars Lander or the Scissor Wing Transport.Does Estes have to make these kits? Or is it acceptable for them to come from another quality supplier? That is, if you have a Mars Lander kit, regardless of origin, as long as it's a well crafted kit, is that satisfactory? For example, Semroc currently offers a Mars Lander clone. And Tango Papa has (had?) an enhanced version along with two upscale options. Lots of the Estes/Centuri classics are available thru third parties.

While I too miss the thrill of seeing all those childhood icons offered in the Estes catalog, I don't lament Estes not offering many of them today. I understand how tiny the market is for many of these kits.

Anyway, as mentioned, the Interceptor and Scissor Wing Transport are recent re-releases and should be available for sale or trade on the rocket forums, ebay, amazon, etc. Many of the other classics can be had as well - Semroc offers a 1/70 Saturn 1B, for example. Still others can be cloned without great challenge - Sprite, Scout and Streak to name a few.

So I'm reluctant to beat up on Estes too much over their kit portfolio. They have to meet today's market conditions, and most of the kids getting into rocketry don't even know what a Saturn V or Mars Lander are, so they aren't champing at the bit to buy them.

Anyway, while little in their recent releases thrills me, I can build pretty much anything I can think up if I take a notion to do that, kit or no kit. I don't need Estes to kit it for me to enjoy it. [Add] That is, there are lots of choices and workarounds.

Doug

.

[chrism]

I'm with you Doug on this one. I really don't mind if Semroc re-releases a kit instead of Estes or has the parts to clone one. Thanks to Semroc, we can get the Goblin and Cherokee-D as kits today, even if they do not come with the Estes decal.

[bernomatic]

I was not trying to discuss exactly what rockets Estes should bring back, but noting examples of wrhat I would buy (as evidenced by my mention that I have a re-issue interceptor). These are the ones I would buy instead of cloning because they have special parts that would be difficult and/or expensive to make or buy.

Just from the nostalgia view I would prefer an Estes re-issue to another company's cloned model. However, it would still have to be because of hard to clone/costly parts. Otherwise I would clone it myself. So, I would buy the Semroc Mars Lander, but probably not the Orbital Transport. Unless of course buying the Orbital Transport offered me a large enough savings.

But the same would hold true of an Estes re-issue. Right now on my bench I have an Andromeda clone which cost me around $25 to build. The majority of that price was for the decals, which I couldn't print myself because they had white on them (and it wasn't just some white strips, it was the intricate design of the centaur.)

But my point prior to the "lieing post" was, not for Estes to rest on its laurels (re-issue old kits), but for them to concentrate on "going where no man has gone before" ala the mention of the Shrox kits. If they want to re-issue some of the classics then for us old farts, fine.

[Jerry Irvine]

Scale rockets have "constituencies" which limits the sales volume of each model. Scale models tend to be more difficult to build and have a very narrow finishing option of one or two narrow examples.

Sport models do not suffer from any of these 'limiting factors". People build them quick and dirty, often very dirty, with a wide range of color schemes, and even kitbash them.

So more are sold.

Jerry

Like/love scale models? Buy these now!

Tomahawk 1.2 (http://v-serv.com/usr/kits/tomahawk1.2.htm)

Arcon 1.2 (http://v-serv.com/usr/kits/arcon1.2.htm)

V-2 2.25 (http://v-serv.com/usr/kits/V-2-2.25.htm)

[MarkB.]

Jerry,

You're killing me; V-2, Arcon, Tomahawk: one each from the 40's, 50's and 60's.

How about

Terrier-Improved Orion
Black Brant IX or XII
Terrier-Black Brant
Really cool looking Terrier single stage.

All launched by NASA in the last 90 days.

[blackshire]

We are fighting a war that's already lost when it comes to kids and rocketry. I taught science to teens for years. Every year many have argued with me that the space shuttle flew to the moon and Mars, that we have people the moon and Mars now, and many thought we've had people on other planets....and sadly stars. Many thought that the moon was the biggest thing in the sky, the sun was about as close as the moon, that stars really were just points of light, that shooting stars really are stars falling from the sky, and the list goes on. This is after kids were taught correctly year after year about the solar system and stars.Those were great opportunities to "trick" the kids into doing research: If I had argued those things to my science teacher, knowing him he would probably have made a friendly wager with me--if I could find documentation of those achievements in publicly-known periodicals or books, he would give me an "A" for extra credit work; if I couldn't, I would grade papers for a month, or something like that.Many kids have been erroneously taught that the shuttle goes to the moon, Mars, and beyond because that kind of shuttle info isn't in our science books. Many teachers without our love and knowledge of space exploration just guess that the shuttle has done all our space exploration.They were taught those incorrect things by *teachers*?We are in an age of kids watching tv, movies, video games 10+ hours a day during school and nearly 20 hours a day when they are out. They have no concept of what is real or what is fiction. They are taught by the media and by poor parenting to defy adults and authority figures, and that they (the kids) are always right. We are in an age where, to them, tv, movies, and video games are MUCH more sensational than real life space exploration. We are in an age where kids are handed everything on a silver platter and how dare us make them "build" their own toy when all they want is another Xbox 360, Playstation, or Wii....most already having one or two of the three. They don't even go outside their bedrooms anymore because they have their own computer, cell phone, and HD tv to hook up their multiple gaming boxes. These are the people with no jobs living in govt. housing just as much as than the middle class. As a firefighter, I've seen thousands of dollars worth of tv/stereo/gaming/cell phone/computers in apts. where kids have no bed and sleep in the floor. It's all about instant electronic gratification now. Electronics are today's drug and nearly every young family is addicted worse than heroin or meth could ever do. They pay $300 cell phone bills, but have their heat cut off because they won't pay their electric bill.

Sure, we can hook a few kids. Sure, many of us here on the forum build and fly with our kids and have them interested in rocketry. But never in a million years will we capture even a tiny fraction of the rest of our youth's attention away from electronics and media for more than a fleeting moment. It's just never going to be like it was in the golden age of manned space exploration and model rocketry.I don't disagree with you, but if Estes' UP Aerospace SpaceLoft bulk-packaged scale kits can succeed, surely other simple scale kits could also be popular, especially if multiple rounds' decals were provided to permit customization (and the SpaceLoft kits depict only *one* round--the first SpaceLoft vehicle). "Scale" doesn't necessarily have to equal "complicated." For example:

The Improved Orion would make a simple, attractive, and high-performance (due to its low-drag boat-tail) scale kit. If it included decals and documentation for an Improved Orion round that carried high school student-built payloads, such a kit could inspire some kids to consider "trying for the 'real thing'" to develop their own payloads to fly aboard full-scale Improved Orion vehicles, since other kids like themselves (rather than just "fuddy-duddy old rocket scientists in white lab coats") have done so successfully. For those kids who aren't grabbed by these possibilities, such a scale kit could also serve as a sport model that could be painted (or not) whichever way the builder wishes. The Indonesian RX-200 (which has carried student 145 MHz amateur radio communications relay payloads), RX-320, and RX-420 sounding rockets would also make good "scale-sport" kits.Fortunately, that fleeting moment still generates tons of sales for Estes and Quest and keeps them going. Us long term folks don't make a dent in Estes' sales figures so they are crazy to cater to us instead of the masses. Where we lifers make a dent is in MPR and HPR, and with the niche areas such as retro-repros, flying lighthouses, fakewolfes, saucers, etc.I agree with you, but I also think that--depending on the scale kit--such mass-marketed kit/scale kit "crossovers" are possible, as Estes' UP Aerospace SpaceLoft bulk-packaged scale kits show. If a scale kit is simple, inexpensive, and attractive, it will sell. Also, I think smaller scale model rockets like the SpaceLoft (which use mini motors) would be more popular because they are cheaper to fly as well as to buy.That said, I'd still love to get my hands on a few new production 1/45 LJ II kits!Patience...

[Sunward]

....The reason was simple. The iHobby Show organizers burned through the two local rocket clubs who were supporting the event by being extremely dishonest and by playing the local clubs against each other in order to get the 'best deal', even after they had an agreement in place with one of the clubs.....
I got first hand the politics of everything back in 2007. Didn't get involved and left the show to get the volunteers. The show was always able to get volunteers.

....I think the MITI only increases interest in rocketry if it can be more than a simple and fast build session. When we supported it, we did a special launch session a few weeks later where we provided one free motor to the kids. We tried to extend the experience with rockets past just the initial build session.
This may be true, but the Chicago venue didn't permit the launching of any rockets.

The biggest complaint I saw with the MITI, and why I stopped providing kits was for 2 simple reasons.

One, I didn't see ANY sales increase from sponsoring the event. Second, the MITI seemed to turn into free day care for many parents. The kids with their parents would make the rocket, plane, car, etc, and then go on to the next session.

[bernomatic]

In Cleveland in 2012, you could probably do a MITI and have a launch. Cleveland Hopkins Airport is nextdoor to the IX center as well as NASA Glenn Research center.

With a little bit of planning and communications all around, I see it as feasible to have some sort of area set up as a launch site, of course weather permitting which in October in Cleveland is no given (for good or bad).

But with a fall back plan, (using RockSim to show their rocket in a simulation flight?) and the caveat that if you don't like the weather in Cleveland wait 5 minutes, it'll change, something could be done.

Also my sons and I are using that expo as our date for finally launching our model rocket company. The highlight of which are mini engined rockets of an inexpensive nature. Designs for a half dozen or so are in need of being finalized and printed up, etc. etc. They would fly mostly on 1/2A and 1/4A and be marketed toward inner city neighborhoods with children with no large launch areas.

[Sunward]

In Cleveland in 2012, you could probably do a MITI and have a launch. Cleveland Hopkins Airport is nextdoor to the IX center as well as NASA Glenn Research center.

With a little bit of planning and communications all around.....
the idea was discussed briefly in Chicago but still too early too see if it can be pulled off.

....Also my sons and I are using that expo as our date for finally launching our model rocket company. ....
So you going to exhibit at the show?

Why would you wait a year to launch your company?

[bernomatic]

So you going to exhibit at the show?

Why would you wait a year to launch your company?


The idea is to exhibit at the show. The other question is of course money (and the wife). We're working on the details.

[GuyNoir]

There needs to be coordination between the build session and local clubs and/or NAR for follow up. You've seen the NAR booth there :) Not even an attempt to promote rocketry in a professional way and basically one person's attempt to promote his TARC agenda at the expense of promoting NAR.

I was involved with the iHobby Show and its predecessors for years, both before and during the time I was NAR president. My experience with the show led me to develop "Bunny's Rule of 10's". It runs like this:

Build 1,000 rockets over a weekend
If lucky, get 100 to come to a launch where you provide a free engine and assistance to fly the rocket they built.
10 might consider joining your club after flying.

These show did not generate significant membership increases for local clubs. They portray the hobby in positive ways to the general public, they can generate good will with industry, but they're not very efficient means to bring a lot of new bodies into the hobby.

From an NAR perspective, IMHO, since this event is a trade show, and the industry itself is not a buyer for NAR memberships, the cost benefit ratio doesn't work out. It cost use about $2,500 at a minimum to put a booth in, and we didn't get enough additional distribution for Sport Rocketry to justify that expense. The last two public days, we could not sell memberships, and frankly, the hobby merchandise that was there was of much more interest than organization memberships, even when we had a professional booth presence there.

My $0.02; YMMV.

[Shreadvector]

Southern California Rocket Association (NAR 430) has been staffing a club booth at AMA and other hobby shows every year for decades. We get the booth donated for free from the show, otherwise we would not pay to attend and display. Most of the shows, such as the AMA Expo, have a Make-It & Take-It and we supply the slave labor. In past years we bought the glue for the kits and the show either paid for kits or had them donated by a manufacturer. Recently Gorilla Glue has sponsored MITI at the AMA Expo, and since we were told this in advance I was able to provide advanced warning to them that traditional Gorilla Glue is NOT good for Model Rockets (it foams up to 3 times it's size and fouls the inside of rockets) and we managed to get them to provide "Gorilla Wood Glue" which is perfectly acceptable for model rocket building.

Anyway, we hand out hundreds of our Claendar of Events for the club and loads of NAR applications. The rule of 10's seems to be pretty accurate, but you have to realize that big shows such as iHobby or AMA Expo are national and international events with people attending from far, far away from your club's launch site. That is why we ask:
"Do you fly rockets?" if they say yes, we ask them if they live in Southern California and if they say yes to that we hand them a club Calendar of Events and NAR application. If they say no to living in the area (but they said yes to flying rockets), we give them an NAR application and urge them to look on the NAR website for a local club or consider forming one of their own.
For those who said "no" to the "do you fly rockets?" question, we follow up with "would you like to?". If they say ues, we direct them to the free rocket building area. We also ask these folks the question about if they live in the area.

At the building area, we have traditionally built Estes Generic E2X or Quest Starhawks or Viper rockets. These have plastic fin cans and can be walked around the hobby show without damage (no fins falling off). They are also SEEN by everyone as they are walking around and people ask them "where did you get that?" and "was that free?". Everyone at the MITI is asked if they live in the area and given the same literature if they did not already get it at the club booth. Also, those who live in the area are give an flight card filled out for the rocket they are building that indicated the motor to be used for first flight (or several motors and they circle the one they bought). On the back of the flight card is an abbreviated Clendar of Events and information on where to buy motors (local hobby shops, Quest, eHobbies, etc. as appropriate).

The rule of 10's still applies, but those who do show up are MUCH better prepared than normal beginners and tend to come back many times.

People who were at the show who live in other states or other countries will take the free rocket but will not launch with your club. Hopefully they join or form a club in their area as a result of this positive experience and exposure to the hobby.

THE big benefit of the hobby shows is contact with scout/youth grouop leaders and teachers. They end up bringing big groups to our club launches, so the rule of 10's get multiplied.

This year, for the AMA Expo, I handed out 400 flyers (that I created since the AMA has no flyer even though I've asked them repeatedly) at a STEM student conference in nearby Riverside CA. There were hundreds and hundreds of students and parents and teachers. Many parents were also scout leaders. I was in one of the booths that Boeing sponsored and I had TARC models and photos and videos (photos were all from the TARc finals and had the Boeing logo within the photo). I handed out over 200 TARC 2-sided color info sheets to the students in 7th through 12th grade (and a few 6th graders). They get VERY interested when you ask them what grade they are in and when they are in the target grade group you say "would you like information on the $60,000 prize pool rocket contest for 7th through 12th graders with the top team also winning a trip to the big air show in Europe?"

As a result of this year's handouts at this STEM conference, I am hoping that many more folks (and scout groups) show up at the AMA Expo to build free rockets and airplanes.

[Jerry Irvine]

How about

Terrier-Improved Orion
Black Brant IX or XII
Terrier-Black Brant
Really cool looking Terrier single stage.I'll look into that.

[Jerry Irvine]

Southern California Rocket Association (NAR 430) has been staffing a club booth at AMA and other hobby shows every year for decades.

we managed to get them to provide "Gorilla Wood Glue" which is perfectly acceptable for model rocket building.

Anyway, we hand out hundreds of our Claendar of Events for the club and loads of NAR applications. The rule of 10's seems to be pretty accurate, but you have to realize that big shows such as iHobby or AMA Expo are national and international events with people attending from far, far away from your club's launch site. That is why we ask:
"Do you fly rockets?" if they say yes, we ask them if they live in Southern California and if they say yes to that we hand them a club Calendar of Events and NAR application. If they say no to living in the area (but they said yes to flying rockets), we give them an NAR application and urge them to look on the NAR website for a local club or consider forming one of their own.
For those who said "no" to the "do you fly rockets?" question, we follow up with "would you like to?". If they say ues, we direct them to the free rocket building area. We also ask these folks the question about if they live in the area.This should be in the FAQ.