What Types of Rockets Do You Favor?

[foamy]

What kind of rockets do you favor building? Check whatever/as many as you like. How about a little of the "why?" you like to build such and such types of rockets.

I like sport and sounding rockets for the simple reason that they look the way I think a rocket should look. Nothing wrong with man carriers—I just haven't had an itch to build one yet.

[mycrofte]

Much like yourself, I favored the sounding rockets when I started. But, lately I have taken to exotic rockets to get away from the 3FNC syndrome.
_____________________________________________________

[Les]

Started with them, but got tired of 3FNC

Mostly do Sci Fi, Fantasy, Odd Roc now

[tbzep]

I like them all and have multiples of each category on display. However, when I look at my sport rockets I find that they are almost all classics from the golden era of rocketry. I have very few modern examples.

[Doug Sams]

...when I look at my sport rockets I find that they are almost all classics from the golden era of rocketry.So there needs to be a category for "classic sport" rockets :)

Of course, this being YORF, I suppose that's to be expected ;)

BTW, mine, too.

In fact, I'm even more narrowly focused on variations of the K-40. Maybe foamy shoulda included a Midgets category :D:D:D

Doug

.

[chrism]

One of the advantages of low power rockets is that they come in a variety of designs. Most of the MPR/HPR come in the simple 3FNC formula that it can get boring after awhile. I don't see a lot of fantasy rockets in the MPR/HPR range although some do exist.

[Doug Sams]

One of the advantages of low power rockets is that they come in a variety of designs. Most of the MPR/HPR come in the simple 3FNC formula that it can get boring after awhile. I don't see a lot of fantasy rockets in the MPR/HPR range although some do exist.That's a good point. I can only think of a handful of scale and oddroc mid- and high-power kits. And many of them are of uncertain and intermittent supply. SHR had a pretty big Sat 1B. Tango Papa had 1.6x and 2x scale Mars Landers. Neibauer had a 4" Mercury-Redstone. I'm sure there were a few more, but not a lot.

That said, I've seen quite a few upscale clones (ie, scratch builds) of classic sport, scale and odd-roc kits.

I tend to build mostly from scratch, be it LPR, MPR or HPR. My perception is that lots of folks who fly MPR and HPR tend to be more scratch oriented. If that's true, that may explain the lack of kits at that level. It may be there is disproportionately less demand than for LPR. But some of the MPR and/or HPR home built oddrocs I've seen include an X-30, a 4X Orbital Transport, a giant X-wing fighter, and an Me-163 with ~5 foot wingspan. So there is definitely some interest, but not necessarily enough to drive supply.

That is, it may be a lack of critical mass (of demand). Given the MPR and HPR market sizes are much smaller than LPR (in terms of units sold), it may be that, if, for example, 10% of LPR is odd rocs, the corresponding 10% of the mid-power market is so small as to be of insufficient size to tool up for.

Another perspective is that MPR and HPR tend to present other challenges that preclude the details of odd and scale rockets. For example, if I'm worried about building an av-bay, I may not want the added challenges of dealing with a Saturn paint scheme or hinged Mars Lander legs.

That is, with the added challenges of reloads and altimeters, I'm sure some rocketeers want to keep the rest of it simple and straightforward - ie, 3FNC.

Doug

.

[dlazarus6660]

I favor designing, building and flying Jet aircraft rockets. Just my thing.

[AcroRay]

SF-style rockets are what drew me into this hobby and keeps me here the most. I like interesting designs beyond the usual 3 or 4FNC.

That said, I also like scale manned & sounding rocket kits and military ordinance, usually if they're interesting designs with lots of tanks, engine bells and surface structures - things like Vostok, Taurus, Jayhawk, etc.

But I build all sorts. They all have their appeal!

[MPRocket]

Personally, i like the old '70s sci-fy models. they look great, compared to the things estes is pulling out today.

[Scott6060842]

Personally, i like the old '70s sci-fy models. they look great, compared to the things estes is pulling out today.

Hard to beat the Mars Landers, Mars Snoopers and Tridents of 60's-70's Estes....but Estes of today is doing some great things too.

[MPRocket]

Hard to beat the Mars Landers, Mars Snoopers and Tridents of 60's-70's Estes....but Estes of today is doing some great things too.


I suppose they are in building kits. It just seems that they are starting to go with R/C stuff and pre-built stuff thats the same old, same old.

[MPRocket]

maybe ill try my hand at that new black star voyager coming out soon. that seems pretty good.

[Brain]

I rather agree with the comment about the simplicity of MPR & HPR rocket designs. It's to be expected considering what it must take just to put the basic airframe together for such as I've seen... wow! There's a pic out there of an HPR Kraken some dude went ahead and built, but these are a rarity. To dress one up for a NAR certification is probably pointless.

Since I don't know if I'm ever going to get to the point of ever being certified, I lean more towards the aesthetic side of design for even these bigger boys. In fact, I'd like to one day put together an MPR or better version of my Dead Ringer rocket. Design looks to be one of my strengths (I guess) and I should show that off and learn some rocketry while I'm at it!

[Tau Zero]

I like anything that looks cool. But I also have a soft spot for science fiction-style rockets.

Here's proof positive :eek: :rolleyes: ;) :D :cool: :

http://www.semroc.com/Store/scripts/RocketKits.asp?SKU=KN-2

[foamy]

I like anything that looks cool. But I also have a soft spot for science fiction-style rockets.

Here's proof positive

Heh. As I've mentioned elsewhere, I don't normally cotton to futuristic type rockets. Nor do I care for reversed fins. But, I bought that one. It's clean enough to be cool and it has nice lines. Nice job Jay and Semroc.

[chrism]

Foamy, I have seen your work on the forum. With your painting skills, you can make a generic 3FNC look good!

[foamy]

Foamy, I have seen your work on the forum. With your painting skills, you can make a generic 3FNC look good!
Thanks chrism, I get lucky every now and then. It doesn't always work out happily, but I fly'em anyway.

[frognbuff]

Not all scale models are 3FNC. I spent 6 years working in ballistic missile defense. Hence my affinity for subjects like this - the North Korean Unha-3. We watched these things closely.....

Big Bertha (24" long) shown for scale. Model flies on a cluster of 4 18mm motors.

[Tau Zero]

Heh. As I've mentioned elsewhere, I don't normally cotton to futuristic type rockets. Nor do I care for reversed fins. But, I bought that one. It's clean enough to be cool and it has nice lines. Nice job Jay and Semroc.foamy,

Thanks for making an exception in this case. ;) :D :cool:

[luke strawwalker]

Not all scale models are 3FNC. I spent 6 years working in ballistic missile defense. Hence my affinity for subjects like this - the North Korean Unha-3. We watched these things closely.....

Big Bertha (24" long) shown for scale. Model flies on a cluster of 4 18mm motors.

Interesting... how much for the kit??

Why four 18mm motors when a single 24 mm would do the job?? Why not the option??

Seems like with itty bitty fins (okay, probably uses your supplemental fins) the added weight of a cluster would just make things that much harder to make stable...

I like the prototypes you're modeling... you have a website??

Later! OL JR :)

[blackshire]

Interesting... how much for the kit??

Why four 18mm motors when a single 24 mm would do the job?? Why not the option??

Seems like with itty bitty fins (okay, probably uses your supplemental fins) the added weight of a cluster would just make things that much harder to make stable...

I like the prototypes you're modeling... you have a website??

Later! OL JR :)I can't speak for him, but my guess is scale realism--the full-scale Unha-3 (and Unha-2) had four nozzles (a four-chambered engine rather than four engines, I think) on its first stage. A mini motor-size scale Unha-2 or Unha-3 kit would be a perfect A3/A10-XT "pack burner!" :-)

[frognbuff]

Spot-on! Scale realism was the rationale behind the cluster. Stability provided by - you guessed it - a detachable fin unit.

I decided early-on this would be WAY expensive as a kit. BT-80 main tube, cluster engine mount, two transition sections, nose cone, decals, etc. Retro- and settling-rocket nozzles came out of my spare parts box - but I couldn't exactly do that for a kit. Instructions would have been a bear to make too. So, in the end, I built two prototypes only. Sold one on Ebay, kept the other for myself.

If somebody wants to make one, I can provide a drawing and decals for a small fee. Procuring the parts would be up to you! I'm proud of those decals. I don't have any graphics programs, so I had to be creative making the hanggul characters (which say "Unha" - "Galaxy" - BTW) and matching the font on the numeral "3."

[luke strawwalker]

Spot-on! Scale realism was the rationale behind the cluster. Stability provided by - you guessed it - a detachable fin unit.

I decided early-on this would be WAY expensive as a kit. BT-80 main tube, cluster engine mount, two transition sections, nose cone, decals, etc. Retro- and settling-rocket nozzles came out of my spare parts box - but I couldn't exactly do that for a kit. Instructions would have been a bear to make too. So, in the end, I built two prototypes only. Sold one on Ebay, kept the other for myself.

If somebody wants to make one, I can provide a drawing and decals for a small fee. Procuring the parts would be up to you! I'm proud of those decals. I don't have any graphics programs, so I had to be creative making the hanggul characters (which say "Unha" - "Galaxy" - BTW) and matching the font on the numeral "3."

Ah, okay... neat project!

Later! OL JR :)

[blackshire]

Spot-on! Scale realism was the rationale behind the cluster. Stability provided by - you guessed it - a detachable fin unit.

I decided early-on this would be WAY expensive as a kit. BT-80 main tube, cluster engine mount, two transition sections, nose cone, decals, etc. Retro- and settling-rocket nozzles came out of my spare parts box - but I couldn't exactly do that for a kit. Instructions would have been a bear to make too. So, in the end, I built two prototypes only. Sold one on Ebay, kept the other for myself.

If somebody wants to make one, I can provide a drawing and decals for a small fee. Procuring the parts would be up to you! I'm proud of those decals. I don't have any graphics programs, so I had to be creative making the hanggul characters (which say "Unha" - "Galaxy" - BTW) and matching the font on the numeral "3."A thought: If you also have scale data on other North Korean SLVs and/or ballistic missiles in addition to the Unha SLVs, a Peter Alway-style scale data (with brief histories) book on all of them would be popular among scale modelers (and not just those in model rocketry). Using Lulu.com (see: www.lulu.com ) or CreateSpace.com (see: www.createspace.com ), you could publish it at *zero* cost (Lulu publishes my book that way). They make a percentage on each copy sold, they handle all of the order-taking and shipping, the author retains the copyright on the work, and they pay the author via PayPal or check. For those readers who wanted to build scale models of the vehicles, BMS, Roachwerks, or Semroc could make the parts for them.

[frognbuff]

I too would love to see this stuff in an Alway-style book! However, I can't claim the accuracy of a Peter Alway product. It's not as if North Korea (or China, or Iran) has offered up dimensioned drawings of their missiles and SLVs. My efforts derive from the best information available on the internet, to include a lot of photo mensuration. Not sufficient to win a scale competition - but more than adequate to create a passable model of the subject. Sport scale rocketry at its best!

[blackshire]

I too would love to see this stuff in an Alway-style book! However, I can't claim the accuracy of a Peter Alway product. It's not as if North Korea (or China, or Iran) has offered up dimensioned drawings of their missiles and SLVs. My efforts derive from the best information available on the internet, to include a lot of photo mensuration. Not sufficient to win a scale competition - but more than adequate to create a passable model of the subject. Sport scale rocketry at its best!That's no problem at all, as Sport Scale is the most common scale event. Also, many of Peter's vehicle subjects were documented as Sport Scale rather than (measured) Scale contest subjects because of a dearth of dimensioned drawings. As he would say, "It's a feature, not a flaw!" :-)

[blackshire]

Also, this German web site (see: http://www.b14643.de/Spacerockets_1/index.htm ) contains numerous photographs as well as information on North Korean SLVs and missiles.