Estes Saturn V Is Back!

[hcmbanjo]

Oh Boy! I get to be the one to announce it here first!

The Estes SATURN V is listed on the Estes website, moved to the "What's New" listings .
http://www.estesrockets.com/002157-saturn-v

At this moment, if you go to the product page it shows it "Out Of Stock"
But we are closer to lots and lots of masking!

[the mole]

Hope they make the new plastic fin a viable separately. I need them to update my old kits.
They would make the fins step much easier to build. :)

[jeffyjeep]

Hope they make the new plastic fin a viable separately. I need them to update my old kits.
They would make the fins step much easier to build. :)
Hear! Hear! Perhaps they'll offer the plastic parts kit separately like with the LJII.

There must be a million SV's out there with busted fins and crushed LES's!

[blackshire]

Oh Boy! I get to be the one to announce it here first!

The Estes SATURN V is listed on the Estes website, moved to the "What's New" listings .
http://www.estesrockets.com/002157-saturn-v

At this moment, if you go to the product page it shows it "Out Of Stock"
But we are closer to lots and lots of masking!That's great news! Maybe it's the first in a new two-kit "then & now historical set," the other perhaps being an SLS scale kit?

[ghrocketman]

They are finally reccommending realistic motor choices for this kit with the E30-4 and the E12-4.
They should completely drop the D12-3 from the list...unless there is zero wind and one wants a lame-O flight it is useless.
The 24mm SU F32-4 is a great motor for this kit.

[blackshire]

They are finally reccommending realistic motor choices for this kit with the E30-4 and the E12-4.
They should completely drop the D12-3 from the list...unless there is zero wind and one wants a lame-O flight it is useless.
The 24mm SU F32-4 is a great motor for this kit.The description on its page doesn't mention the 3 x 18 mm motor cluster option that earlier releases of the Saturn V kit had. While I wouldn't care to try flying it on three C6 black powder motors, three 18 mm composite D10 or D21 motors should give it a sufficiently energetic--and realistic looking, with multiple exhaust flames--flight profile (albeit with the risk of having a motor fail to ignite at launch, of course).

[tbzep]

The description on its page doesn't mention the 3 x 18 mm motor cluster option that earlier releases of the Saturn V kit had. While I wouldn't care to try flying it on three C6 black powder motors, three 18 mm composite D10 or D21 motors should give it a sufficiently energetic--and realistic looking, with multiple exhaust flames--flight profile (albeit with the risk of having a motor fail to ignite at launch, of course).
The most realistic flight profile is the single D12-3. Slow and majestic...but it ends a little soon. 3 C6's kick it off the pad quickly, more like the space shuttle. Just about any composite motor makes the liftoff profile look more like a Nike booster. As for multiple exhaust flames, if you keep the mount at it's stock recessed location, you won't see much flame out of smaller outboards. A10's have about finished their peak thrust by the time the rocket clears the pad.

[blackshire]

The most realistic flight profile is the single D12-3. Slow and majestic...but it ends a little soon. 3 C6's kick it off the pad quickly, more like the space shuttle. Just about any composite motor makes the liftoff profile look more like a Nike booster. As for multiple exhaust flames, if you keep the mount at it's stock recessed location, you won't see much flame out of smaller outboards. A10's have about finished their peak thrust by the time the rocket clears the pad.A10s never entered my considerations, although they (or A3-4Ts) might be just right for the BT-60 size, semi-scale Estes Saturn V; somewhere between three and five 13 mm mini motors should give the semi-scale Saturn V realistic liftoffs. (Today's 3D printing could easily make this 1:242 scale model--including in a Skylab 1 version--available again.) Also:

That's what I was thinking (besides the multiple exhaust flames) regarding the 1:100 scale Saturn V--three 18 mm composite "D" motors, with their greater aggregate "dry weight" (after their propellant is consumed) than a single "E" or "F" motor, should provide slow, realistic liftoffs (three D10 composite motors might be a good match for the Estes Saturn V's weight). (The plastic, RTF Cox Saturn V had that same realistic ascent with two D12-3 motors, which the model needed due to its greater weight.)

[dlazarus6660]

Are you kidding me!

I still have my 1999, 30th anniversary kit sitting on the shelf, unbuilt!

[stefanj]

Are you kidding me!

I still have my 1999, 30th anniversary kit sitting on the shelf, unbuilt!
I just started on mine. Filling the tube spirals and glued in the motor mount and stuffer tube.

[jeffyjeep]

My SV kit shipped today! Yay!

Can't wait!

[rocket.aero]

Might someone post of photo of the new injection-molded fin parts, along with anything else new that might be lurking in the box?

James

[the mole]

My SV kit shipped today! Yay!

Can't wait!

My SV kit shipped also. probably be looking at it Monday or Tuesday.

[the mole]

Look what arrived on the doorstep.
The box is just a little different print wise but the box is the same size.
The instruction is different but basically the same.
The page in the instruction for the fins is different.
The fins are in their own bag

Sorry about the pictures I did them in a hurry.

Have had time to read the instruction. They're laid out nice. The paint instruction is real good. Looks like everything you need to construct a sturdy model.

[blackshire]

Look what arrived on the doorstep.
The box is just a little different print wise but the box is the same size.
The instruction is different but basically the same.
The page in the instruction for the fins is different.
The fins are in their own bag

Sorry about the pictures I did them in a hurry.

Have had time to read the instruction. They're laid out nice. The paint instruction is real good. Looks like everything you need to construct a sturdy model.Thank you for posting those! I'm curious about the Command Module--does it have the molded-on surface details of the earlier Estes Saturn V kits, or is it smooth like those in the Centuri 1:100 scale Saturn V and Saturn IB kits? The reason why I ask is because a smooth CM could more easily be used to build a matching 1:100 scale Little Joe II (the 1990s-vintage Estes Apollo Little Joe II kit required a lot of sanding on its Command Module in order to smooth it down, while the Centuri 1:100 scale Little Joe II kit didn't require that sanding). An Estes 1:100 scale Little Joe II would be a very nice kit, even with a molded-on-detail-equipped Command Module (in that case, the kit could depict the last Little Joe II round, which used a space flight-rated Command Module (with its BPC--Boost Protective Cover) and Service Module (minus the Service Module's main engine, with its large nozzle).

[the mole]

Blackshire, the Command Module--does have the molded-on surface details of the earlier Estes Saturn V kits.

[ghrocketman]

Those fins look FAR too large for a scale model.
I prefer the MUCH smaller scale fins of the original K-36.
Use more nose weight and MORE (29mm pro-series) POWER.

[blackshire]

Blackshire, the Command Module--does have the molded-on surface details of the earlier Estes Saturn V kits.Thank you for letting me know!

[blackshire]

Those fins look FAR too large for a scale model.
I prefer the MUCH smaller scale fins of the original K-36.
Use more nose weight and MORE (29mm pro-series) POWER.They are enlarged to ensure aerodynamic stability (the original 1969 Estes [and Centuri too, I think] Saturn V kit had true-to-scale fins). Our "YORF resident" 3D printing establishments could make after-market true-scale fins for the new Estes Saturn V kit. Although adding ballast up front would make it fly straight with the true-scale fins (and the higher-impulse recommended engines could easily loft the extra mass), utilizing M. Dean Black's exhaust-augmented finless rocket stability techniques (see: http://www.oldrocketforum.com/showthread.php?t=14670&highlight=finless ) would enable such a Saturn V model to fly stably with true-scale fins and no ballast (plus, it could produce a wider, more scale-like exhaust trail, depending on the motor mount arrangement).

[tbzep]

Centuri's fins were oversized, but not as much as the Estes 2001 wood fins.

[blackshire]

Centuri's fins were oversized, but not as much as the Estes 2001 wood fins.Thank you for clarifying that--I never saw a Centuri Saturn V "in person." The original 1969 release Estes Saturn V (see: http://www.ninfinger.org/rockets/nostalgia/69est024.html ) had true-scale fins that I think were balsa. (The photograph of a less-than-expertly-built 1:100 scale Saturn V on page 9 of the "4-H Aerospace Program" booklet [see: http://www.ninfinger.org/rockets/nostalgia/4h9.html ] suggests this, although the model might have been the Centuri Saturn V [if it had balsa wood fins; the Centuri catalog citation says that it had "pre-shaped fins" http://www.ninfinger.org/rockets/nostalgia/69cenp16.html , which implies that its fins were balsa wood].)

[tbzep]

Thank you for clarifying that--I never saw a Centuri Saturn V "in person." The original 1969 release Estes Saturn V (see: http://www.ninfinger.org/rockets/nostalgia/69est024.html ) had true-scale fins that I think were balsa. (The photograph of a less-than-expertly-built 1:100 scale Saturn V on page 9 of the "4-H Aerospace Program" booklet [see: http://www.ninfinger.org/rockets/nostalgia/4h9.html ] suggests this, although the model might have been the Centuri Saturn V [if it had balsa wood fins; the Centuri catalog citation says that it had "pre-shaped fins" http://www.ninfinger.org/rockets/nostalgia/69cenp16.html , which implies that its fins were balsa wood].)
I guess it's possible the 69 Centuri kit had balsa fins, but the 70 model definitely had oversized plastic fins. I have a feeling the 69 did too. If you notice, the 1/100 Saturn 1B is described as "pre-shaped" fins also. I don't recall it ever having balsa fins.

[blackshire]

I guess it's possible the 69 Centuri kit had balsa fins, but the 70 model definitely had oversized plastic fins. I have a feeling the 69 did too. If you notice, the 1/100 Saturn 1B is described as "pre-shaped" fins also. I don't recall it ever having balsa fins.I can see in the 1971 Centuri catalog citation (see: http://www.ninfinger.org/rockets/catalogs/centuri71d/71dcen30.html )--from the illustration, and from the text mentioning "hollow core" and "clear molded" fins--that their Saturn V kit (by that time, if not from the very beginning) had slightly-over-sized molded plastic fins (theirs were more subtly "nudged" out of scale than the Estes kit's fins, in its later releases). Also:

I had always thought that Centuri's Saturn IB had plastic fins too, and their use of the term "pre-shaped fins" in their Saturn V kit description--as well as in their Saturn IB's kit description--does indeed suggest that their Saturn IB also had plastic fins from the start. (In those days, plastic parts in model rockets were still something of a novelty [even plastic nose cones in 3FNC and 4FNC kits were touted as special features back then], so I can see how they could have used "pre-shaped fins" to denote detailed, high-fidelity molded scale--or very nearly so, in the case of their Saturn V kit--plastic fins.)

[Earl]

I can see in the 1971 Centuri catalog citation (see: http://www.ninfinger.org/rockets/catalogs/centuri71d/71dcen30.html )--from the illustration, and from the text mentioning "hollow core" and "clear molded" fins--that their Saturn V kit (by that time, if not from the very beginning) had slightly-over-sized molded plastic fins (theirs were more subtly "nudged" out of scale than the Estes kit's fins, in its later releases). Also:

I had always thought that Centuri's Saturn IB had plastic fins too, and their use of the term "pre-shaped fins" in their Saturn V kit description--as well as in their Saturn IB's kit description--does indeed suggest that their Saturn IB also had plastic fins from the start. (In those days, plastic parts in model rockets were still something of a novelty [even plastic nose cones in 3FNC and 4FNC kits were touted as special features back then], so I can see how they could have used "pre-shaped fins" to denote detailed, high-fidelity molded scale--or very nearly so, in the case of their Saturn V kit--plastic fins.)

Pretty sure both the Centuri Saturn V and Saturn 1b always had plastic, two-piece vacu-formed fins. Each fin consisted of two vacu-formed halves that were joined with cement, allowed to thoroughly dry, then you trimmed away the excess plastic around the outer edge. I've never seen a set of instructions for either kit that had balsa or any other material for the Saturn fins. All instruction sets I've ever seen or have (and I have a number of vintage kits of each Centuri Saturn) show the vacu-formed fin halves. Matter of fact, I have a vintage Saturn 1b about ready for paint now. That fin can, with eight fins built as described above, was pretty tedious, but they turn out pretty nice. Takes work though, no doubt.

Earl

[blackshire]

Pretty sure both the Centuri Saturn V and Saturn 1b always had plastic, two-piece vacu-formed fins. Each fin consisted of two vacu-formed halves that were joined with cement, allowed to thoroughly dry, then you trimmed away the excess plastic around the outer edge. I've never seen a set of instructions for either kit that had balsa or any other material for the Saturn fins. All instruction sets I've ever seen or have (and I have a number of vintage kits of each Centuri Saturn) show the vacu-formed fin halves. Matter of fact, I have a vintage Saturn 1b about ready for paint now. That fin can, with eight fins built as described above, was pretty tedious, but they turn out pretty nice. Takes work though, no doubt.

RarlThank you--that makes Centuri's term that they applied to both their Saturn IB and Saturn V kits, "pre-shaped fins," even more sensible, because the kits' fins weren't molded (in a cavity) like other plastic model rocket parts, but were shaped from sheet plastic over an internal "plug," which was then removed. I only had the "poor man's Saturn IB and Saturn V models," the Cox (made by Estes in the 1990s) Ready-To-Fly all-plastic rockets. :-) I'd love it if Estes made a 1:100 scale "Apollo kit set"--a Saturn IB and an Apollo Little Joe II in the same scale as their Saturn V kit.

[Initiator001]

... I only had the "poor man's Saturn IB and Saturn V models," the Cox (made by Estes in the 1990s) Ready-To-Fly all-plastic rockets. :-) ...

Just a minor correction.

Cox re-issued several of their original RTF model rocket models between 1989-1991.

Estes did not acquire Cox until the mid-1990s at which point the rockets were no longer part of the active product line.

Only 1000 of the Cox Saturn Vs were produced (Still with the wrong interstage paint pattern).

I posted some history about Cox over on TRF many years ago. I believe you can search and still find my thread.

[blackshire]

Just a minor correction.

Cox re-issued several of their original RTF model rocket models between 1989-1991.

Estes did not acquire Cox until the mid-1990s at which point the rockets were no longer part of the active product line.

Only 1000 of the Cox Saturn Vs were produced (Still with the wrong interstage paint pattern).

I posted some history about Cox over on TRF many years ago. I believe you can search and still find my thread.It's been a long time, but seem to I recall talking with Estes at the time (maybe it was Cox, but I think it was Estes) and "lobbying" them to produce the Little Joe II and Nike Zeus (the Little Joe II booster section's mold was lost in a move, breaking when it fell off a truck, and the Nike Zeus molds weren't usable or available for a reason that I can't recall). Similar to how Centuri owned Estes on paper (even though both were run as supposed competitors) before we started seeing "Centuri Corp." on Estes products after Centuri went away, did Estes perhaps already own Cox on paper at that time, before Cox's tooling (some or all of it) was transferred to Estes' location?

[tbzep]

Thank you--that makes Centuri's term that they applied to both their Saturn IB and Saturn V kits, "pre-shaped fins," even more sensible, because the kits' fins weren't molded (in a cavity) like other plastic model rocket parts, but were shaped from sheet plastic over an internal "plug," which was then removed. I only had the "poor man's Saturn IB and Saturn V models," the Cox (made by Estes in the 1990s) Ready-To-Fly all-plastic rockets. :-) I'd love it if Estes made a 1:100 scale "Apollo kit set"--a Saturn IB and an Apollo Little Joe II in the same scale as their Saturn V kit.
Yes, they were vacu-formed with sheet styrene, left half, right half. Same as the fins for the Estes Maxi-brute kits. Thin styrene, careful trimming, sanding. Back in the day, good old Testor's cement that contained stuff the People's Republik of Kalifornia forbids. Today it's Tenax-7R, Pro-Weld, chlorinated brake cleaner, or equivalent.

[blackshire]

Yes, they were vacu-formed with sheet styrene, left half, right half. Same as the fins for the Estes Maxi-brute kits. Thin styrene, careful trimming, sanding. Back in the day, good old Testor's cement that contained stuff the People's Republik of Kalifornia forbids. Today it's Tenax-7R, Pro-Weld, chlorinated brake cleaner, or equivalent.I miss the good old-formula Testors liquid plastic cement; it worked like a charm on the vacu-formed styrene parts of my father's Estes U.S.S. Enterprise kit. As with large fiber fins, I wouldn't care to use vacu-formed styrene fins whose rear portions protrude below the bottom edge of the body tube, because they would easily get bent or broken by the landing impact forces (although even a rocket with large, non-rear-protruding vacu-formed fins could suffer such damage if the rocket was swinging--as it might be on a breezy day--at landing).

[JumpJet]

I know you guys are smart enough to figure this out when building the Saturn V but we supplied the shorter 24mm D size yellow spacer tube instead of the longer 24mm E size spacer tube. This tube is used to place the engine block in the correct location. We will correct this in future pack outs of the kit.



John Boren

[John Dyer]

I know you guys are smart enough to figure this out when building the Saturn V but we supplied the shorter 24mm D size yellow spacer tube instead of the longer 24mm E size spacer tube. This tube is used to place the engine block in the correct location. We will correct this in future pack outs of the kit.



John Boren


Thanks John.

By the way - I got my 2 Saturn's in the mail yesterday - I'm thinking one is going to have to be converted to a Saturn V Skylab...


John

[jadebox]

We have a lot of the Saturn Vs in stock now. Maybe we could stack up the boxes to build a barrier against the hurricane!

We're trying to get the ones already ordered out in the mail today. The USPS might not send carriers out tomorrow since we will probably be facing tropic storm force winds by noon. :-(

-- Roger

[John Dyer]

We have a lot of the Saturn Vs in stock now. Maybe we could stack up the boxes to build a barrier against the hurricane!

We're trying to get the ones already ordered out in the mail today. The USPS might not send carriers out tomorrow since we will probably be facing tropic storm force winds by noon. :-(

-- Roger

Stay safe my friend!

[Initiator001]

It's been a long time, but seem to I recall talking with Estes at the time (maybe it was Cox, but I think it was Estes) and "lobbying" them to produce the Little Joe II and Nike Zeus (the Little Joe II booster section's mold was lost in a move, breaking when it fell off a truck, and the Nike Zeus molds weren't usable or available for a reason that I can't recall). Similar to how Centuri owned Estes on paper (even though both were run as supposed competitors) before we started seeing "Centuri Corp." on Estes products after Centuri went away, did Estes perhaps already own Cox on paper at that time, before Cox's tooling (some or all of it) was transferred to Estes' location?

Cox products first appeared in the 1997 Estes catalog.
By then Cox was no longer in the model rocket business. Sales of the rockets had not met expectations.

I visited Cox after it moved to Corona, California, in December 1990. I spent several hours in the plant being given a tour by the R & D director. While there I viewed the Saturn V model in it's production packaging. I was allowed to take a picture but I was asked not to show it until the models had actually shipped to hobby distributors.

Estes did not acquire Cox until 1995.

[blackshire]

Cox products first appeared in the 1997 Estes catalog.
By then Cox was no longer in the model rocket business. Sales of the rockets had not met expectations.

I visited Cox after it moved to Corona, California, in December 1990. I spent several hours in the plant being given a tour by the R & D director. While there I viewed the Saturn V model in it's production packaging. I was allowed to take a picture but I was asked not to show it until the models had actually shipped to hobby distributors.

Estes did not acquire Cox until 1995.You are definitely a primary source for this information. Thank you for setting the record straight, and in detail. Also:

Does Estes have any of the Cox RTF rocket molds today, or were they lost in the fire (if they got to Estes' plant after Estes bought Cox)? If they're still extant (and usable, or at least serviceable), maybe an anniversary re-release of the Cox rockets would be financially worthwhile to Estes today. The Cox Honest John, Saturn IB, Saturn V, and Space Shuttle America all flew well with appropriately-high impulse motors (the Cox Honest John wasn't excessively heavy for its size). (The Cox X-15, unlike Estes' smaller "Firing Line" RTF X-15 [it and the Firing Line Banshee and Vampire would make nice re-releases, too, if their molds still exist...], was marginally stable, although a little clay nose ballast would remedy that.)

[cudacrazy72]

Hi All! I am new to the forum. I have a question. I am building the new Estes Saturn V. How much clay should I put in the capsule? The kit comes with 4 squares of clay but the instruction show using 2 squares. Should I use all 4 squares?

Thanks

[tbzep]

Hi All! I am new to the forum. I have a question. I am building the new Estes Saturn V. How much clay should I put in the capsule? The kit comes with 4 squares of clay but the instruction show using 2 squares. Should I use all 4 squares?

Thanks
It will fly on a single D12-3 and even an 18mm cluster (3) without adding clay. I don't know about the E12's and larger motors.

[John Dyer]

Hi All! I am new to the forum. I have a question. I am building the new Estes Saturn V. How much clay should I put in the capsule? The kit comes with 4 squares of clay but the instruction show using 2 squares. Should I use all 4 squares?

Thanks


John Boren should be able to give you a definitive answer - hopefully he's monitoring this thread.

What motor combinations are you planning to fly? Be very aware of where the CG should be, based on the heaviest motor you plan to fly in the model.

John

[cudacrazy72]

John Boren should be able to give you a definitive answer - hopefully he's monitoring this thread.

What motor combinations are you planning to fly? Be very aware of where the CG should be, based on the heaviest motor you plan to fly in the model.

John

I was just going to use the motors Estes recommends. I was going to use either a D12-3 or E12-4 for 1st flight and then a E30-4 if all went well.

[John Dyer]

I was just going to use the motors Estes recommends. I was going to use either a D12-3 or E12-4 for 1st flight and then a E30-4 if all went well.


I meant to look last night to see if the instructions indicate where the CG should be. Can you check the instructions to see if this info is there?


John

[cudacrazy72]

Oh ok. :o I will check the instruction to see if it specifies where the CG is suppose to be. Thanks for the help.

[John Dyer]

Oh ok. :o I will check the instruction to see if it specifies where the CG is suppose to be. Thanks for the help.


I'm thinking the info should be there. The idea is to check the CG with the heaviest motor you will use (E30) - that should tell you whether or not you need to add clay.


Enjoy the build!

I have one model in painting stage (from the previous release), and will be working on another build from the latest release - planning on a conversion for a Saturn V Skylab.


John

[johnpursley]

Believe it or not, the old K-36 Saturn (with the 3-motor or D option) would actually fly just fine on just TWO C6-3s if one happened to not ignite. Don't ask me how I know that. In fact, it probably flew better on two C motors because two C6 motors have more total impulse than an single D-12 (though it was the slightly more "potent" though less reliable D-13 that was initially used in the old Saturn).

[tbzep]

Believe it or not, the old K-36 Saturn (with the 3-motor or D option) would actually fly just fine on just TWO C6-3s if one happened to not ignite. Don't ask me how I know that. In fact, it probably flew better on two C motors because two C6 motors have more total impulse than an single D-12 (though it was the slightly more "potent" though less reliable D-13 that was initially used in the old Saturn).
The 1/70 Saturn 1B was originally a 4 engine cluster and the A8-3 was a recommended motor. The rocket is listed within 0.04 oz of the weight the Saturn V, but I bet most 1B's were/are heavier due to the way most folks glue and paint them. Four A's are the equivalent of a single C motor. We've flown ours on 4 B's (equivalent to 2 C's), but we never had the courage to try four A8's.

[ghrocketman]

I'd bet a 4x18mm cluster flight of a 1/70 K29 Saturn 1B on two B14-5's (or 2 B8-5's) and 2 C5-3's would make for a neat/interesting flight.

[johnpursley]

Yes, the 1/70 Estes Saturn IB had a 4-engine cluster (it was never offered with any other option...even after the D motors were released). What a memory-maker! And, it DID fly surprisingly well even on four of the "old" A.8-3 motors...and even better on the "metric" A8-3 which had slightly more impulse and a much higher peak and average thrust. The originally recommended A.8 (that's A point 8...it was the pound system) had about half the peak and average thrust as the "metric" A8 (no point before the 8) of 1968 through today (though the old A.8 did have almost twice the effective thrust duration). Plus, we tended to fly in "better" weather conditions as well as launching them straight up, waiting for calm days to fly the "big" models. Today, many modelers fly big, heavyweight models in any condition that exists and hope for the best (and blame the motor or the model manufacturer for design faults when they prang or "zipper" a model).

I don't recall specific instances of not getting a full cluster of 4 A motors to light (I'm sure it happened to me but I just don't recall specific instances) but I do remember when flying a Saturn IB on C6-5 motors in high school only lighting up two and it flew just fine though it was way past apogee when the recovery system deployed. I had the same "two engine" experience flying the 3-engine Saturn 5 though its wasn't as harrowing because of using C6-3 motors rather than C6-5s. I even recall "mixing" motor types on the old IB and it just seemed to fly fine.

I think people forget that modelers, particularly those in the hobby since before, say the mid-'70s, built rockets (and just about any other kind of flying model) appreciably different than than today. Today, they simply build significantly heavier...it's a fact. Gobs of Epoxy, "reinforcing" here and there. Heavy fabric recovery systems. Layers and layers of primer and paint. Fiberglassing...and on and on. Remember, in the '60s and most of the 70s, most modelers used nothing but white (and sometimes yellow) glues. CA was almost unheard of (and not suited to the materials used) and epoxies were messy and expensive (still are!). Plus, whether you bought from a hobby shop or direct (almost the "only" sources for model rockets back then) the mantra was to keep weight down while keeping strength up. This wasn't the "gospel" just for model rockets but for EVERY type of flying model. This was hammered home by publications like Model Rocket News (which if you EVER mail ordered from Estes you became a "subscriber" seemingly for life), Model Rocketry and The Model Rocketeer...and even the model aircraft publications that occasionally had model rocket articles. Following the instructions back then, it was almost impossible to build significantly overweight and what minor "overweight" instances that might have resulted was usually well within the safe performance capabilities of the recommended motors.

There were likely only a relative handful of the old IB that weighed more than 10 ounces...well within the lift capability of even the old A.8 motors. And, I'll just about bet that most were flown on B motors...especially after they saw how the model would "streak" (relatively speaking) off the pad. I built a twin D12 Saturn IB once. Talk about memories! And thanks for the Semroc Saturn IB today!

[johnpursley]

I'd bet a 4x18mm cluster flight of a 1/70 K29 Saturn 1B on two B14-5's (or 2 B8-5's) and 2 C5-3's would make for a neat/interesting flight.

Holy Cow! What a "vision." I remember almost being "afraid" of the B14 motors after putting them in something like an Alpha or WAC Corporal. Those models almost literally disppeared off the pad. It would have been "glorious" on C5 motors. I wish we had B14 and C5 motors still available today.

Anyone remember the B16 from Estes (I don't) from about 1962? It had an average thrust of 16 pounds and burned for less than a tenth of a second. Talk about a tiny sledge-hammer motor!

[tbzep]

I've flown the 1B on several combinations, built with removable mount. Single D12, 4 B's, 3 C's to this date. I actually like the slower liftoff of the single D12 better. It's still too fast for scale liftoff, but closer to the slow majestic liftoff of the Saturns.

I can't imagine the altitude of the 1B on four A8's, maybe 75 ft? Thank goodness the 3 second delay is really 2 seconds! The single D12 probably hits around 100 ft, barely above the tree tops with the heavier removable mount and museum quality finish of our model. A stock built one might get 120 if one doesn't weight it down with a slick finish.

[johnpursley]

I've flown the 1B on several combinations, built with removable mount. Single D12, 4 B's, 3 C's to this date. I actually like the slower liftoff of the single D12 better. It's still too fast for scale liftoff, but closer to the slow majestic liftoff of the Saturns.

I can't imagine the altitude of the 1B on four A8's, maybe 75 ft? Thank goodness the 3 second delay is really 2 seconds! The single D12 probably hits around 100 ft, barely above the tree tops with the heavier removable mount and museum quality finish of our model. A stock built one might get 120 if one doesn't weight it down with a slick finish.

We're two birds of a feather when it comes to scale, it seems. I'm a notorious "low and slow" flyer when it comes to scale models. Altitude doesn't mean a flip to me..."it is what it is" so long as it's a nice, safe, successful flight.

Though it's been years since I flew a IB on A motors it probably did hit around 100 feet or so (about twice as high as the ball park lighting on the field I normally flew from). Also, "way back then" delays actually seemed to run a little long. Some people kind of stick their noses up at 100 feet (as well as at "low and slow") but I personally don't care (doesn't sound like low and slow ruffles your feathers, either!).

[tbzep]

We're two birds of a feather when it comes to scale, it seems. I'm a notorious "low and slow" flyer when it comes to scale models. Altitude doesn't mean a flip to me..."it is what it is" so long as it's a nice, safe, successful flight.

Though it's been years since I flew a IB on A motors it probably did hit around 100 feet or so (about twice as high as the ball park lighting on the field I normally flew from). Also, "way back then" delays actually seemed to run a little long. Some people kind of stick their noses up at 100 feet (as well as at "low and slow") but I personally don't care (doesn't sound like low and slow ruffles your feathers, either!).
Not a bit ruffled! In fact, I have built up a small fleet specifically for that purpose so that I can do school demos on something more than a B motor. I've got several 2.6" models with 1/4" thick fins that fly well on C11's or D12's and of course the Saturns. My son has a nice cardstock Little Joe II that flies on 18mm motors and we've done gap staged Aerobee Hi's and the like that staged at less than 20 ft on some of my special A8-0 motors before they were re-released. I've also "manufactured" some nice 1/4A3-0T's for my Mini Brute Beta to stage just above the launch rod!

[the mole]

I would like to build this Saturn V with this modification.

[ghrocketman]

I remember the old 1962 Estes B16. It was 2.5n-sec impulse and had a 0.08 sec burn time.
It was like a controlled explosion. That B16 was rated in the old POUNDS, not Newtons system too.
It made the B3 (B14 in newton rating) seem like a long-burn pip-squeak.
I still have a couple in my collection somewhere.
They have a nozzle opening at least as big as an E12 and a DEEP large core.
I flew one once iin an Astron Sprint.
SPRINT was an understatement. It was more like insta-warp to Mach 1+.
Got it back fine though.
Made GREAT boosters for an Astron Farside-X with a B16-0, C5-0, C6-7 combo.
I once flew a Farside on a B14-0 to B14-0 to B14-7. That was one wacky FAST straight-up flight with ZERO weathercocking.
The first time I ripped fins off a rocket was an old Astron Ranger with a cluster of 3 old B16-something motors.....48 POUNDS of thrust for .08 second in a 2.2oz rocket was more than it could handle. It was a spectacular shred that did not really damage the rocket. It kept going straight up after it shred the fins at about 75' ! That's way more kick than an old FSI F100 and very few flew those in BT-60 sized rockets.

[johnpursley]

I remember the old 1962 Estes B16. It was 2.5n-sec impulse and had a 0.08 sec burn time.
It was like a controlled explosion. That B16 was rated in the old POUNDS, not Newtons system too...


I got into the hobby in '63 but really didn't come up to speed until late '64 or so and never put my hands on the B16 (n the metric system it would have been something like a B70 ish designation!). I did fly a number of B3s which, thrust curve-wise, are pretty much like B14 motors...which I loved as booster motors.

From what I understand, there were VERY FEW of the B16 motors ever produced so you are lucky to have actually experienced them!

[johnpursley]

Just over the past day since mentioning the upcoming Accur8 Saturn V skin kits I have been contacted by several people who (to generally paraphrase) have said, " I have built my Saturn, applied the (vac or paper) wraps up to the point where it is ready for your skin kit."

The Accur8 Skin kits for the Saturn V (in fact for any model to which Accur8 Skin Kits are applied except maybe the Little Joe II) are best applied DURING construction. In the case of the Saturn V they should be applied to both the BT-101 and BT-80 tubes before ANY construction involving those tubes is begun. The kit wraps, tunnels and details go OVER the skins.

As with all the other kits I have skins available for, a patient and careful modeler can apply the skins to a completed (or partially completed) model but it will extend the building time and open the door for flaws or mistakes in application of the skins.

So, if you have already applied the kit wraps and details to your Saturn V and are intending to "skin" it with the Accur8 kit (should be available in a couple of weeks) I would use copy paper to make accurate templates for cutting the skins in the skin kit...especially for the SII tank. To try to cut and apply the skins without such templates is inviting less than satisfactory results.

If anyone has any questions about the Skin kit or how to apply it...or whatever, feel free to contact me direct through one of the links below.

[johnpursley]

After posting here and elsewhere that I will be releasing a skin kit for 1/100 scale Saturn Vs I have received a pleasantly surprising number of responses.

I am currently taking "pre-orders" at $40 up until the "production" kit is released (hopefully by Christmas). Contact me for details if you are interested in the pre-order deal.

An addition to the kit is the use of a printed aluminum skin for the Service Module and Fins (to fit the latest Estes Saturn). This is not "chrome" Mylar, silver ink printing, or a "metalized paper, but actual aluminum that is a bit thicker than traditional "foil" to resist "dings" and "crinkling" and it is adhesive-backed like the printed poly skins in the kit. I will also provide decals for the (non-aluminum colored) surfaces of the SM including the radiators, white panels, and the "UNITED STATES" and American flags which are on white backgrounds. I may also provide the fin markings though they would be identical to the Estes fin decals.

Just in case one might not like the metal skin for the SM I am including a "conventional" printed poly sking for the SM.

I am still working on the prototype Saturn with the skins (it is for a special customer who has waited months to get his Saturn...I'm not selling it for those who might ask) and until things are finalized there won't be photos or the like...you may ask, but until things are "final", no photos. That's a whole can-of-worms that I opened on past projects that I want to avoid on this one <G>.

Also started preliminary work on a 1/100 scale Little Joe II skin kit that will include the SM markings for the various LJII missions as well as the "metal" skin described above for the body and fins. I won't have it ready any time before LATE January or later...but feel free to contact me about it.

[blackshire]

After posting here and elsewhere that I will be releasing a skin kit for 1/100 scale Saturn Vs I have received a pleasantly surprising number of responses.

I am currently taking "pre-orders" at $40 up until the "production" kit is released (hopefully by Christmas). Contact me for details if you are interested in the pre-order deal.

An addition to the kit is the use of a printed aluminum skin for the Service Module and Fins (to fit the latest Estes Saturn). This is not "chrome" Mylar, silver ink printing, or a "metalized paper, but actual aluminum that is a bit thicker than traditional "foil" to resist "dings" and "crinkling" and it is adhesive-backed like the printed poly skins in the kit. I will also provide decals for the (non-aluminum colored) surfaces of the SM including the radiators, white panels, and the "UNITED STATES" and American flags which are on white backgrounds. I may also provide the fin markings though they would be identical to the Estes fin decals.

Just in case one might not like the metal skin for the SM I am including a "conventional" printed poly sking for the SM.

I am still working on the prototype Saturn with the skins (it is for a special customer who has waited months to get his Saturn...I'm not selling it for those who might ask) and until things are finalized there won't be photos or the like...you may ask, but until things are "final", no photos. That's a whole can-of-worms that I opened on past projects that I want to avoid on this one <G>.

Also started preliminary work on a 1/100 scale Little Joe II skin kit that will include the SM markings for the various LJII missions as well as the "metal" skin described above for the body and fins. I won't have it ready any time before LATE January or later...but feel free to contact me about it.Another 1/100th scale Saturn V option that you could offer--if you don't already offer it--would be a white SM wrap, to depict Apollo 6's white Service Module. To my knowledge, Apollo 6 was the only Apollo-Saturn V that flew with a white SM, but I suppose it's possible that at least one Saturn IB--maybe one of the early suborbital test flight rounds--carried a CSM whose SM had the same (or a very similar) white paint scheme.

[tbzep]

Another 1/100th scale Saturn V option that you could offer--if you don't already offer it--would be a white SM wrap, to depict Apollo 6's white Service Module. To my knowledge, Apollo 6 was the only Apollo-Saturn V that flew with a white SM, but I suppose it's possible that at least one Saturn IB--maybe one of the early suborbital test flight rounds--carried a CSM whose SM had the same (or a very similar) white paint scheme.
I've seen pics and have read that it was painted white to match the CM, but never have seen a reason given for doing it while leaving 1, 4 and 7-ASTP unpainted.

[blackshire]

I've seen pics and have read that it was painted white to match the CM, but never have seen a reason given for doing it while leaving 1, 4 and 7-ASTP unpainted.I can only guess, but perhaps it was a thermal control management experiment (which didn't yield better performance than that obtained from Apollo 4's simpler, "fewer-things-to-go-wrong" [such as a lack of peeling/flaking white paint, as on Apollo 6; Mariner 2 suffered from that in 1962])? Or...

As with all of the good luck tricks and invocations that were used--almost in desperation--with Vanguard 1 after the post-Sputnik Vanguard TV-3 "Kaputnik!" debacle on Dec. 6, 1957, maybe the Apollo launch crews (who knew they were running out of time and Saturn rockets to get the first landing before 1969 was over), returned to Apollo 4's simpler--and perhaps easier to make--CM outer finish out of a hope that it might bring them (and the subsequent Apollo missions) some of the luck that had made Apollo 4 proceed so perfectly. (Rocket and space scientists, engineers, technologists, and technicians are highly-trained, "hard-boiled" people who use logic, but many of them also aren't the least bit afraid to "petition and/or honor the unseen" for help--Japan's rocket pioneer Dr. Hideo Itokawa even publicly expressed his thanks for such sought assistance, and even Elon Musk once said before a pivotal early SpaceX launch, "Any entities who are watching over this, please bless this launch."

[johnpursley]

Another 1/100th scale Saturn V option that you could offer--if you don't already offer it--would be a white SM wrap, to depict Apollo 6's white Service Module. To my knowledge, Apollo 6 was the only Apollo-Saturn V that flew with a white SM, but I suppose it's possible that at least one Saturn IB--maybe one of the early suborbital test flight rounds--carried a CSM whose SM had the same (or a very similar) white paint scheme.

As far as Saturn V goes, Apollo 4 and 6 used Block I spacecraft and the SMs were both white. All subsequent missions utilized Block II spacecraft with SMs that had various white/silver patterns. There were no "bare metal" SMs. The "silver" you see was an "aluminum" coating (call it paint) over a very thin cork material that covered almost the entirety of the SM. The eight radiators on the SM/CM fairing were actually on panels slightly over .5" thick attached to the outside of the fairing and were always white. The two larger radiators located near the aft of the SM where integral and flush to the SM skin (they did not protrude) and were also always white. The SM "bays" had variations of white and silver coverings.

Anyway, I am planning to produce skin kits for SMs of all the Saturn missions with the Apollo 4 and 6 skins, of course, being white. Ditto on the SMs for the Saturn 1B skin kits when I release them sometime in the next couple of months.

The current Saturn V skin kit to be released by Christmas (or shorty thereafter) will be representative of either Apoll0 or Apollo 11...haven't decided precisely which one yet...

[johnpursley]

As far as Saturn V goes, Apollo 4 and 6 used Block I spacecraft and the SMs were both white. All subsequent missions utilized Block II spacecraft ...

Woops! I'm going to correct myself...I should have said the spacecraft (meaning the CM/SM combo) of Apollo 4 and 6 were both Block I and they were painted in the colors you see in publicized photos...mostly all silver with a bit of white for Apollo 4 and all white for Apollo 6...but no bare metal (the KSC environment was too harsh for the alloys used to fabricate the honeycomb skins of the SMs). After 4 and 6 flew, the "production" Block II SM's got the silver "painted" cork treatment (the cork served as both an insulator and an ablator for heating experienced during launch as well as protection from the RCS plumes.

The spacecraft (CM and SMs) for both Apollo 4 and 6 weren't "strictly" Block I...both missions had elements of Block II modifications...they were a bit "mongrelized" with true Block II beginning with Apollo 7.

[tbzep]

Woops! I'm going to correct myself...I should have said the spacecraft (meaning the CM/SM combo) of Apollo 4 and 6 were both Block I and they were painted in the colors you see in publicized photos...mostly all silver with a bit of white for Apollo 4 and all white for Apollo 6...but no bare metal (the KSC environment was too harsh for the alloys used to fabricate the honeycomb skins of the SMs). After 4 and 6 flew, the "production" Block II SM's got the silver "painted" cork treatment (the cork served as both an insulator and an ablator for heating experienced during launch as well as protection from the RCS plumes.

The spacecraft (CM and SMs) for both Apollo 4 and 6 weren't "strictly" Block I...both missions had elements of Block II modifications...they were a bit "mongrelized" with true Block II beginning with Apollo 7.
And later Block II's for the Skylab and ASTP were customized as well to save weight. Directional high gain antenna was left on ASTP, but off the rest as was other items like eliminating fuel tanks, less fuel, fewer fuel cells, increasing hydrazine for thrusters, etc. on all of them.

[blackshire]

Woops! I'm going to correct myself...I should have said the spacecraft (meaning the CM/SM combo) of Apollo 4 and 6 were both Block I and they were painted in the colors you see in publicized photos...mostly all silver with a bit of white for Apollo 4 and all white for Apollo 6...but no bare metal (the KSC environment was too harsh for the alloys used to fabricate the honeycomb skins of the SMs). After 4 and 6 flew, the "production" Block II SM's got the silver "painted" cork treatment (the cork served as both an insulator and an ablator for heating experienced during launch as well as protection from the RCS plumes.

The spacecraft (CM and SMs) for both Apollo 4 and 6 weren't "strictly" Block I...both missions had elements of Block II modifications...they were a bit "mongrelized" with true Block II beginning with Apollo 7.Thank you. I knew that the Block I and Block II designations applied to the Command Modules (the main difference being that Block I CMs lacked a docking port and tunnel leading to the LEM [later abbreviated to LM]). I wasn't aware of the cork-over-honeycomb SM skins, but they make perfect sense from the standpoints of thermal & RCS plume protection, and of mass (the LM's mass growth in particular required rather drastic efforts in order to keep all three modules within the Saturn V's translunar payload capability, and even the Saturn IB didn't have a luxurious Earth orbit payload excess).

[luke strawwalker]

Thank you. I knew that the Block I and Block II designations applied to the Command Modules (the main difference being that Block I CMs lacked a docking port and tunnel leading to the LEM [later abbreviated to LM]). I wasn't aware of the cork-over-honeycomb SM skins, but they make perfect sense from the standpoints of thermal & RCS plume protection, and of mass (the LM's mass growth in particular required rather drastic efforts in order to keep all three modules within the Saturn V's translunar payload capability, and even the Saturn IB didn't have a luxurious Earth orbit payload excess).

A Saturn IB couldn't orbit a CSM with the full lunar fuel payload... it was too heavy. Of course the full lunar fuel load wasn't required for LEO missions anyway...

Later! OL J R :)

[Les]

Has anyone heard any status about these Saturn V skins?

The original goal was for Christmas - last year....

Thanks

After posting here and elsewhere that I will be releasing a skin kit for 1/100 scale Saturn Vs I have received a pleasantly surprising number of responses.

I am currently taking "pre-orders" at $40 up until the "production" kit is released (hopefully by Christmas). Contact me for details if you are interested in the pre-order deal.

An addition to the kit is the use of a printed aluminum skin for the Service Module and Fins (to fit the latest Estes Saturn). This is not "chrome" Mylar, silver ink printing, or a "metalized paper, but actual aluminum that is a bit thicker than traditional "foil" to resist "dings" and "crinkling" and it is adhesive-backed like the printed poly skins in the kit. I will also provide decals for the (non-aluminum colored) surfaces of the SM including the radiators, white panels, and the "UNITED STATES" and American flags which are on white backgrounds. I may also provide the fin markings though they would be identical to the Estes fin decals.

Just in case one might not like the metal skin for the SM I am including a "conventional" printed poly sking for the SM.

I am still working on the prototype Saturn with the skins (it is for a special customer who has waited months to get his Saturn...I'm not selling it for those who might ask) and until things are finalized there won't be photos or the like...you may ask, but until things are "final", no photos. That's a whole can-of-worms that I opened on past projects that I want to avoid on this one <G>.

Also started preliminary work on a 1/100 scale Little Joe II skin kit that will include the SM markings for the various LJII missions as well as the "metal" skin described above for the body and fins. I won't have it ready any time before LATE January or later...but feel free to contact me about it.

[GuyNoir]

Has anyone heard any status about these Saturn V skins?

The original goal was for Christmas - last year....

Thanks

Last I heard from John in August was the following:

"The whole Saturn V skin kit thing has ground to a halt. Have most of the medical issues down to once a month trips back to Houston BUT have picked up (or more correctly, renewed) previous “real rocket” activities which REALLY makes the Saturn V skin project an “up in the air” prospect."

You should be able to contact him directly via the Accur8 site to see if status has changed.

[Les]

Actually, I've sent him several emails and asked questions via posts with no response, although he has responded when I've asked about other wraps.

Meanwhile, he collected money for pre-orders and now the project is up in the air? :(

[ghrocketman]

I NEVER put money down on "pre orders" due to situations just like this.
If it isn't ' in stock' you get ZERO $$$$ with NO exceptions.

ALWAYS Under-Promise and Over-Deliver !
ANYTHING short of that is always an unacceptable excuse.

[johnpursley]

Actually, I've sent him several emails and asked questions via posts with no response, although he has responded when I've asked about other wraps.

Meanwhile, he collected money for pre-orders and now the project is up in the air? :(

Les,

I think you may have hit the nail on the head when ou stated you asked questions via posts. Well, I don't generally conduct business via posts on forums and...I admit...I may only visit ANY forum on once or so every several months. I have also not received any notifications from YORF regarding posts on this matter from you or anyone else in a number of months.

I also think that perhaps you are confusing eBay orders you have made from me and your communications abut those orders through the eBay messaging regarding those orders. eBay has nothing to do with the Saturn V skin project.

I have checked through my emails the past 90 days and I have received no emails from you regarding the Saturn V skin kits. Knowing full well the possible shortcomings of email and perhaps overzealous filtering, blocking, etc., that's not to say that you haven't sent me emails...just that I haven't seen them either to my recollection nor by my emails of the past 90 days. I typically respond to all business emails (and personal ones, for that matter) within a business day.

My Accur8 email is: johnpursley@accur8.com . If for some reason you (or anyone else) don't feel you are "getting through" to my business email, my PERSONAL email is johnpursley@msn.com . I absolutely do not "dodge" emails from customers nor intentionally NOT respond where a request is relevant.

Please contact me at either of these email addresses if you have specific questions about the Saturn V skin kits that I don't answer for you here. I have specifically just added you to my contacts for both email addresses to assure that any future messages from you aren't unintentionally blocked. I don't know what else I can do.

Having said that...

The Saturn V skin kits are pretty much on "hold" for a variety of reasons though I have not abandoned it. I am getting back on track with things but I still can't commit to an actual delivery date. I apologize for any inconvenience and for my letting folks who pre-ordered down, but I have offered all that have communicated with me alternatives to the Saturn V skin kits...including full refund on request. Needless to say, I am a bit embarrassed that I haven't delivered but also don't want to "take your money and run." If there is anyone out there who pre-ordered the Saturn V skin kits that haven't already been in touch with me, please feel free (I encourage you) to contact me. I spite of what has been implied by posts here, I DO IMMEDIATELY RESPOND to all relevant emails I receive.

John Pursley
Accur8 Spacemodels
johnpursley@accur8.spacemodels

[jetlag]

All my dealings with John, both through his eBay offerings and personally have been absolutely top notch. His skin kits are first rate, and I actually have quite a few. I can hardly wait to do his Ragnarok rendition. He has always delivered and has been extremely helpful with any questions I have had (my needing some advice, especially).
Thanks to John for a first class product! It's obvious he really cares about what he produces.

Allen

[Les]

John has contacted me.

As an FYI, I looked at my email records and saw that I emailed him about the Saturn V skins in May and again in June. On YORF I posted a question on the status of the Saturn V skins when there was a posting about the 50% off sale in September. Who knows, spam filters or whatever may have blocked my messages

Regardless, my main interest is getting the Saturn V wraps. Every year at the beginning of June the Kopernik Observatory holds a "Rocket Fest" and they ask me to bring some of my rocket collection to display. I definitely want a good looking Saturn V out there, especially in 2019 for the 50th anniversary of Apollo 11. I believe I'll get my best results using the wraps. I'll still wait.

And I agree about the quality of John's work. I already have 2 versions for the Interceptors, MR (including the fins), LJII, GT (BT80 size), Trajector, and Cosmic Interceptor....

[GuyNoir]

All my dealings with John, both through his eBay offerings and personally have been absolutely top notch. His skin kits are first rate, and I actually have quite a few. I can hardly wait to do his Ragnarok rendition. He has always delivered and has been extremely helpful with any questions I have had (my needing some advice, especially).
Thanks to John for a first class product! It's obvious he really cares about what he produces.

100% agreed.

[blackshire]

I NEVER put money down on "pre orders" due to situations just like this.
If it isn't ' in stock' you get ZERO $$$$ with NO exceptions.

ALWAYS Under-Promise and Over-Deliver !
ANYTHING short of that is always an unacceptable excuse.I must, sadly, agree (a too-trusting gun enthusiast friend of mine--a Vietnam veteran with PTSD who has great difficulty in standing up for himself--got burned multiple times by gun dealers and gunsmiths over pre-orders). His "beneficiaries" were either running the equivalent of pyramid schemes (buying parts for previous "waiting-in-line" customers with *his* money), or outright frauds, or older guys who had real--but unexpected--medical crises that they spent his money on. Also:

I have ordered several books from Amazon.com via pre-order (including as gifts to be sent to designated gift recipients) with no problems, but being a well-known, multi-million (or billion) dollar corporation which "sells" reliability along with their wares, they have a powerful built-in incentive to deliver on their given availability dates.

[burkefj]

It's a tough thing for small producers to invest a lot of time and materials for an item that may or may not sell, typically I'll only release a kit if I'm pretty sure it will sell, or if it uses the majority of components that I already have, so the only investment I have to make is in templates and instructions. I typically only kit things that I have built for myself because I thought they were neat to start with.

The only time I've done pre-orders was for the Bomarc, Thunderchief and Skydart upscales that a few people really wanted me to make but that I didn't think would be a big return in general, I asked for enough pre-orders to make it worth my time to get the components and spend the time to make templates and kit those items and it has worked out ok. I had already built prototypes for my own use so I knew they flew well. In one case it was a model that I did not want to build for myself, but that design was straight forward enough and the customers were competent RC flyers so they took on the challenge of confirming my estimated boost CG and doing test glides and the test flights themselves.

However I certainly understand ordering vapor ware and not getting anything making people reluctant. I have had two transactions with John, one just recently with a design I asked him to work on that took a month or two but he did create it before asking for $$, and he has delivered both times.

[blackshire]

It's a tough thing for small producers to invest a lot of time and materials for an item that may or may not sell, typically I'll only release a kit if I'm pretty sure it will sell, or if it uses the majority of components that I already have, so the only investment I have to make is in templates and instructions. I typically only kit things that I have built for myself because I thought they were neat to start with.

The only time I've done pre-orders was for the Bomarc, Thunderchief and Skydart upscales that a few people really wanted me to make but that I didn't think would be a big return in general, I asked for enough pre-orders to make it worth my time to get the components and spend the time to make templates and kit those items and it has worked out ok. I had already built prototypes for my own use so I knew they flew well. In one case it was a model that I did not want to build for myself, but that design was straight forward enough and the customers were competent RC flyers so they took on the challenge of confirming my estimated boost CG and doing test glides and the test flights themselves.

However I certainly understand ordering vapor ware and not getting anything making people reluctant. I have had two transactions with John, one just recently with a design I asked him to work on that took a month or two but he did create it before asking for $$, and he has delivered both times.All of that sounds eminently reasonable to me, and with such cottage industry production, it does make financial sense in many cases to offer pre-ordering (particularly when the materials involved have a certain minimum-quantity "price break," which makes the per-unit cost lower once that point is passed, and:

To me, it's a judgement call. You've been on YORF for a long time (with no criticism from other members for anything--including not delivering on merchandise--as far as I can see), so I would have no qualms about making a pre-order for anything you offered; ditto for any "through-Shapeways" vendor. If some brand-new YORF member suddenly appeared offering items, I wouldn't go, "J'accuse!" at them, but I would check--if possible--first before committing to a pre-order, or even an order.

[JediBoss]

I am the customer mentioned in John’s post. I have been in contact with John numerous times about different projects, and he has always delivered exemplary products as promised to me. I have no doubt that he will deliver the Saturn V skins in time. I have had and continue to have full confidence in his ability to deliver and will stand by him no matter what.

[blackshire]

I am the customer mentioned in John’s post. I have been in contact with John numerous times about different projects, and he has always delivered exemplary products as promised to me. I have no doubt that he will deliver the Saturn V skins in time. I have had and continue to have full confidence in his ability to deliver and will stand by him no matter what.I'm with you; John Pursley is one of those who have been around--including in the hobby--for a *long* time, and I have never read or heard anything unkind about him and his character, and I wouldn't have any qualms about ordering (or pre-ordering) his products, either.