the golden age of model rocketry

[motley16]

We all have our favorite kits. Most of us have childhood memories of our favorite kits we could not afford. But what is your favorite year or just the peek time for this hobby?

[stefanj]

I predict that most people will peg the golden age as the years around when the hobby.

I'd like to note that virtually every kit you could ever buy is available now, or can be easily cloned.

While we all miss certain motors, the selection these days is surprisingly good, especially at the high end.

Digital cameras beat Cineroc and Camroc hands-down.

We're in the golden age!

[Mark II]

When was the golden age of model rocketry? Why, my friend, we are in it now. Our victory earlier this year in the BATFE lawsuit should have dispelled any remaining doubt about that. :D

But to answer your question, my involvement in the hobby during its "classic" years was from 1967-71. Looking back on that period, I feel the most nostalgic for the year 1969, for a whole host of reasons. You can probably guess what some of those reasons are.

When I restarted my rocketry hobby in 2004, in a Rip Van Winkle sort of way I expected almost everything to be the same as it was in 1971. I was perplexed, bedazzled, confused, disappointed and thrilled by what I found, though. My predominant feeling since then, though, has been sustained exhilaration, and that shows no sign of ending anytime soon. Every time I look around and think that things couldn't possibly be better, some new and thrilling development pops up. The only thing that is really lacking now (and its a big one) is numbers, as in, the number of people who are flying model rockets now. But while I realize that the number of model rocketeers are down in the USA from where they once were, I also think that worldwide, there are more people enjoying this hobby now than there ever were at anytime in its history. Losses in the US over the years have been balanced by gains nearly everywhere else during that same period. I don't know this for a fact, but I strongly suspect that it is true.

MarkII

[blackshire]

I must wholeheartedly agree. I cannot think of any OOP (Out Of Production) rocket kit that I cannot acquire either as a complete reproduction kit or in a "piecewise" way from several different vendors.

A case in point: While I was never a Cub Scout or a Boy Scout, I have always liked the Akela-1 (see: http://www.oldrocketplans.com/centuri/cen1654/cen1654.htm ), which is physically identical to the Centuri Viking (see: http://www.ninfinger.org/rockets/catalogs/centuri81/81cen34.html ), from which the Estes Viking is derived. I bought the laser-cut fiber fins and the properly-sized body tubes, launch lugs, motor thrust rings, and nose cones (in balsa) from Semroc, two cast-resin reproduction nose cones from Sirius Rocketry, and the 8-rocket Akela-1 decal sheet from Excelsior Rocketry.

Even if my heart was set on reproducing a rocket that has a lot of molded plastic parts (such as the MPC Moon-Go, for example), I could have precision-turned and laser-cut parts and decals custom-made by any number of small vendors.

Some people may gripe that we no longer have B14 or B8 motors or A8 or A10 booster motors, but having 95% of a full bale of hay is a cause for celebration, not lamentation!

[Rocket Doctor]

For me it's the Scout, the first Estes kit and then the Omega two stage and the Cineroc.

I have buitlt and lost many rockets over the past 45 years, and while many would be a favorite of mine, it would be hard to narrow it down. But the above would be my first choces.

The rockets of yesteryears were great because you had to "build" them, lots of balsa, not like today, plastic and molded parts.

With the Estes Classic Series, hopefully, they will be getting back to that. It might not be on schedule, but, I think it will be worth the wait. Can't wait for their Saturn V also.

[metlfreak]

1988 for me. My dad had just gotten back into the hobby I had never heard of or seen a "flying modle rocket" before but once I shot my first one I was addicted. Of course I was 4 years old in 1988. I built my first rocket in 1995 it was the mini engine ninja. I lost interest in the hobbyaround 2002. by that time I was into composite rockets however estes pretty much cut production down to about 5 rocket kits and the rest were RTF. The last rocket I built up until this month was in 2003. My dads favorite rocket was the Ram Jet. We lost it in the early 90s. So in 03 when he got back from Iraq I suprissed him by getting a New still in the pack never built Ram Jet. We built it together and after that I pretty much was done with the hobby. UNTIL now. I am working on an upscale of the Ram Jet. Guess I picked a hell of a way to get back into the hobby. I plan on building quite a few rockets now I wan to build what I call "the complete NASA run. thats Mercury Atlas, Saturn 1B, Saturn V, Space Shuttle, and Nasa's new rocket. and also want to design one and perhaps an upscale of super big bertha in there. Just a few ideas I have.

[mperdue]

As others have already said, this is the golden age.

[GuyNoir]

When was the golden age of model rocketry? Why, my friend, we are in it now. Our victory earlier this year in the BATFE lawsuit should have dispelled any remaining doubt about that. :D

What he said. . . :D :D :D

[Rocketcrab]

We all have our favorite kits. Most of us have childhood memories of our favorite kits we could not afford. But what is your favorite year or just the peek time for this hobby?

Depends on the person's perspective of course. I flew my first model rocket when I was 12, on October 17, 1968. It was the Astron Scout. I drifted away @1971, when I "discovered" other interests - cars, girls, etc, just like most of us. Back into it 1978-1982, then a major career change, then back for good from 1987. I never really got out of the hobby, even though I might not have been flying. All this to say, I'm not sure I can define what was my favorite era. I might be able to better define what, in my opinion was the low point. I think that might have been the mid-70's. I wasn't flying much if at all, but in that period a number of manufacturers bailed out [MPC, AVI, etc] and the kits and designs just seem to get "dumbed down". Inflation in that time period took it's toll, too, as well as the decline of interest in the space program.

I think many people consider "the golden age" as that time period when they they first started in the hobby - it was all new. I could say the '68-'71 time period for me, but in a real sense, the period from 1987 to the present has been much more interesting and exciting. The founding of our club, SPAAR in '88, the onset of the HPR age, the advances in ACPC motors, electronics, etc.

OK, I've babbled on long enough. My favorite kit? In my heart, the old Astron Scout because it was my first [sounding maudlin here?], so the "Golden Scout" project last year was really cool to me. But the old Estes Saturn 1B is up there too. It graced the cover of the 1968 Estes catalog, the first catalog I ever had [and read from cover to cover a zillion times]. However, due to the price, $9.95, I could never afford one! It was almost like the girl you had a crush on but could never have. Ironically, I have several unbuilt SEMREC Saturn 1B kits in my stash, and one is actually about 95% built - and I started it 2 years ago! Go figure. OK, sorry for putting way too much thought into this..... :rolleyes:

[stantonjtroy]

I was in third grade (1975) when I got my first rocket. An X-15 starter set (the good one). I bought (well, my grangfather did) it at the Kennedy Space Center Gift shop. We were there to see Deke Slayton take the last Apollo into space for the ASTP. That whole experience and the next five to ten years cemented it for me as far as rocketry goes. Most all of the clones I've made, and plan to make, are from that time. My kids and now my wife are all hooked. Is this a great hobby or what?

[DeanHFox]

I think "Golden Age" depends on what terms you're using as your definition.

If you define Golden Age as, "When were a lot of kids involved in the hobby, and everyone was caught up in the magic of the space race, and you waited for your package from Penrose, and carried around catalogs in your back pocket and no one thought you were a geek" --- then the late 60's, early 70's, of course. I wish that kids today could feel how awesome that was. It was a time when the "coolness" of rocketeers was comparable to the rappers of today. :)

OTOH, if you define Golden Age as, "When people, young and old, are involved in the hobby, and you can build anything from a MicroMaxx to a Level 3 giant, and you can buy from a lot of vendors for simple or exotic designs, and can converse with so many fellow rocketeers through a medium like this forum" --- then the Golden Age is, in fact, right now. :)

[mycrofte]

I would consider this time to be more of a Renaissance period of rocketry.

[Rocket Doctor]

http://www.royalfaires.com/

[ghrocketman]

I used to think the "golden age" of model rocketry was from about 1968-1978 when so many of the greatest original designs were around along with 3 times the BP SU motor choices, but have came to realize it really is NOW. With the exception of the BP engine choices, we have a FAR greater selection of kits and motors now than there ever has been.
The ruling against BATFE was the icing on the cake.

[Doug Sams]

I used to think the "golden age" of model rocketry was from about 1968-1978...but have come to realize it really is NOWI think it's both. That is, as others have said, there's the golden memory period when each of us first got into it, and there's now, when the selection is better than ever. The one thing about the first period, for many of us, was the moon race going on in the background, which heightened the experience, and helped pull the hobby along on its coattails.

...when so many of the greatest original designs were around along with 3 times the BP SU motor choices...GH, I gotta argue that. If you look at just Estes, there are actually more choices now than they had back then. Yes, there were some motors then we can no longer get, but they didn't have D12's or E9's, so they have replaced many of the OOP motors with other, equally fun products. If you add Centuri into the mix, their motors were largely the same mix, with only a few extras such as the E & F stuff (very expen$ive in their day) and a couple of 13mm types Estes didn't have. After that, while there were several other motor vendors, the portfolios had only a few differentiated products, and most of these vendors weren't widely available - eg, it's hard to lament the loss of a motor I never heard of to start with, such as the FSI stuff.

I'll agree that, if you add up all the little niche mom-n-pop motor makers, many of whom were only in business a very short time, there were certainly more motor choices back then, but if you look only at the widely available BP motors from that era, the mix today is as good as it's ever been (IMO :)).

And, if you complement today's BP mix with the D-E-F-G APCP motors out there, there's little comparison. So, yeah, I still want B14's and some others, but I'm pretty happy with all there is to play with today.

Doug

.

[metlfreak]

I think it's both. That is, as others have said, there's the golden memory period when each of us first got into it, and there's now, when the selection is better than ever. The one thing about the first period, for many of us, was the moon race going on in the background, which heightened the experience, and helped pull the hobby along on its coattails.

GH, I gotta argue that. If you look at just Estes, there are actually more choices now than they had back then. Yes, there were some motors then we can no longer get, but they didn't have D12's or E9's, so they have replaced many of the OOP motors with other, equally fun products. If you add Centuri into the mix, their motors were largely the same mix, with only a few extras such as the E & F stuff (very expen$ive in their day) and a couple of 13mm types Estes didn't have. After that, while there were several other motor vendors, the portfolios had only a few differentiated products, and most of these vendors weren't widely available - eg, it's hard to lament the loss of a motor I never heard of to start with, such as the FSI stuff.

I'll agree that, if you add up all the little niche mom-n-pop motor makers, many of whom were only in business a very short time, there were certainly more motor choices back then, but if you look only at the widely available BP motors from that era, the mix today is as good as it's ever been (IMO :)).

And, if you complement today's BP mix with the D-E-F-G APCP motors out there, there's little comparison. So, yeah, I still want B14's and some others, but I'm pretty happy with all there is to play with today.

Doug

.
Quest is working on a more powerful Line of BP motors, and its rumored Estes is too. These include a reproduction of the E-15-4 and "F "sized BP motor. Im awaiting confirmation on this from Estes.
Im not sure whats true but I know for a fact Estes is trying to make a come back in a big way. I was told that the "classic" series has a ton of yet to come rockets and will see the repoduction of some of the OOP motors. Im not sure of the details of what motors exactly at this time, but hopefully someone will get back to me on the E and F one though.

[metlfreak]

B14 hugh....Goodness I bet that would send a rocket a couple feet

[tbzep]

B14 hugh....Goodness I bet that would send a rocket a couple feet

For an average sized model rocket, it wouldn't send it quite as high as a B6 or a B4, but it would get off the pad a heck of a lot quicker. ;)

[Rocket Doctor]

It took us 52 years to get to where we are now.
Orville Carlisle

G Harry Stine - Model Missiles ,Inc

Vern Estes - Mabel - Estes Industries 1958 - 1969

Lee Piester - Centuri

The beginning showed us what imagination these pioneers had and for all of the companies and designers after them.

Our greatest challenge is to get more yourth involved in the hobby and secure launch site in the process.

Hopefully, the hobby will continue for another 52 years.

And as pointed out, we have such a huge selection of kits, and related products to choose from from many great vendors, big and small and those inbetween.

[Royatl]

I still think the year 1971 was THE golden year for model rocketry, when everything that was legally possible at the time in model rocketry was at its peak. But it was so in the same way that 1999-2000 was the golden year for the Internet. In other words, it was a bubble.

I think now could be the Renaissance where various things are developing for the long term, if not for two things: the current economy, and the lack of flying fields. Ok, and if there weren't distractions like "Rock Star" and the Wii.

[mycrofte]

Maybe that is what we need, RockSim for X-Box...

[Rocket Doctor]

Hey Roy

How are you doing, how is everything down your way?
Ken

[ghrocketman]

Agree that we need B14's back (and no I DO NOT buy that mamby-pamby safety reason why they are not produced; get some AUTOMATION, period), but I would even settle for the return of the semi-port burning B8 and C5 series.
Why the B4 and B6 lines continue to co-exist is beyond me. It would make MUCH more sense to drop the B6 and bring back the B8 or B14. That way one would have a lower thrust long burn in the B4 and some REAL boost of heavy load ability with the B8 or B14.
When I talk of the 3 times the BP engines in the past, I count each DELAY as a separate motor.
The B14-0,5,6,7 counts as FOUR motors.
How about the 1/2A6-0,4, B4-6, 1/2A3-0T, A3-0,6T, B8-0,3,5,7, C5-0,3, A8-0, A10-0T, A5-2,4, B4-0,5M, and D11-9 ? That's TWENTY-THREE motor choices right there !
Those are all very useful motors for those involved in HOBBY model rocketry (not TOYS).
I applauded Estes for the concept of the C11-0,3,5,7 engine line but the pricing totally STUNK and they discontinued ALL but the C11-3 rather quickly. I miss the C11-0 for low flights in my Omega clone. The C11 series should have sold for no more than $0.75/pak more than 18mm C's as that is much more than the extra 24mm materials could have cost. All they are is a D casing with half the propellant.
Nowadays we are lucky to have more than one delay choice for each BP motor offered, and darned lucky if we get a booster version.
I wish somebody in the reasonably near future could make semi-boutique 1/2A through C SU 18mm BP engines in a real variety. I don't consider Quest a major player in the 18mm BP engine game due to the fact that they offer even less choices than Estes with the same basic vanilla offerings. When I rarely do see Quest 18mm engines they are always priced higher than Estes motors. I know they do probably contribute to Estes having to keep their prices down though.

[Rocket Doctor]

SAFETY is the main reason that B14's aren't being produced. Remember what happened at Quest.

Motor production is serious business, and, unless you want to put a employees life at risk, is it worth it?

B14's need to be drilled, period, and, for what it might cost to automate, I don't think the price of automation would warrant the cost to the consumer.

Maybe there is someone out in rocketland that might want to produce B14's at their own risk, fine, but, it's a big risk.

Just think, If Estes stopped producing motors , then what . I think that sales figures determines what motors are produced.

Maybe Quest should be approached to see if they are willing to expand their motor selection, even the B14's. Possibly the Chinese are willing to take the risk of producing the B14's.

Also, keep in mind there is only ONE black powder manufacturer in the US, DuPont and Hercules got out of the balck powder market.

A side note, Hercules had a plant in NJ, they had an explosion several years ago, leveling many buildings and blowing out windows in the homes and businesses in a very large area. .

Also, NJ has Picatinny Arsenal, with it's 5,000 acres, and, every now and then they also have "situations".

Propellant is a risky business, we should be happy for what we have in this suit happy society.

[ghrocketman]

I would like someone OTHER than Estes to offer engines such as the B14, B8, C5, etc.
While I would be satisfied if Estes were to bring back those engines, my response to them would be a four word one; "It's about danged time" which I think sums up the sentiment of about 90% of the model rocket HOBBY community.

[Doug Sams]

SAFETY is the main reason that B14's aren't being produced. Remember what happened at Quest.

Motor production is serious business, and, unless you want to put a employees life at risk, is it worth it?I tend to side with GH on this one, RD. B8's are pressed without drilling - no safety factor there. Or, thinking like an engineer, with all the cheap technology we have today, it seems perfectly reasonable that a safe, unmanned, automated drilling station should be possible - again making safety a non-issue for B14 production.

I can't see how such a drilling operation would be any more risky than the (existing) pressing operation.

Doug

.

[Doug Sams]

B14 hugh....Goodness I bet that would send a rocket a couple feetThis motor was noted for its ability to lift extra heavy rockets. While it was only B impulse, the key differentiator was its high average thrust level. It was good for getting a (heavy) 3-stager going.

If you're wondering why B impulse and not C or higher, there are two considerations. These were 18mm motors (x 2.75" long). In that form factor, the deep core prevented having a higher impulse. To get high thrust and higher impulse required going to a larger case (such as the 24mm x 2.75" D12 and C11 motors).

So, while our lament for such a seemingly low power motor may seem misplaced, those of use who fly 3-stage BP rockets have a bona fide desire for such a motor. http://forums.rocketshoppe.com/images/smilies/smile.gif

Doug

.

[ghrocketman]

3xB14-5 in an Astron Scrambler makes for quite the high thrust liftoff in an "eggloft" flight as well.
REALLY tests the strength of your fillets of balsa fins on cardboard tube too !
That amounts to a 15 n-sec D42, which far exceeds ANY available composite offering for load-lifting with a "D" impulse.

Although I would really like the return of the B14-0 for a booster motor (my supply is now down below 20 or so engines), the B8 and C5 pressed-core motors will lift nearly as much and would be acceptable instead of the B14.
What many don't know is that in the original iteration of the port-burning B, the B3 (in average POUNDS of force instead of newtons) tested out as a B18 in the metric newton-rating system. This motor I think only existed for less than 1 year sometime between 1967 and 1968 as the metric-rated B18 before it got some sort of a manufacturing change that de-rated it to a B14.

[Rocket Doctor]

I tend to side with GH on this one, RD. B8's are pressed without drilling - no safety factor there. Or, thinking like an engineer, with all the cheap technology we have today, it seems perfectly reasonable that a safe, unmanned, automated drilling station should be possible - again making safety a non-issue for B14 production.

I can't see how such a drilling operation would be any more risky than the (existing) pressing operation.

Doug

.

Doug


I'm speaking about B14's not B8's. The problem is, B14's need for the core to be drilled out. Drilling black powder with the chance of a spark and fire and or explosion is the problem.

We have discussed motors here in length for along time in the thread "Motor Matters".

Estes will not produce B14's.......as far as any other motors on the wish list, I don't know.

With the B14's, the core cannot be pressed into the motor.

RD

[luke strawwalker]

Were the FSI core burners pressed or drilled?? Looking at my old FSI catalogs, and having bought a book on how to make sugar motors back in the late 80's (Teleflite corp.) that had instructions on how to turn brass dowel stock down into tapered motor core mandrels, the FSI cross-sections look identical to the tapered core pintles from the 'roll your own' book.

SO, why couldn't somebody start making some core-burning pressed motors??

Just curious, as I was too young and too broke to afford FSI motors back in the day and was sad to see they had passed into history during my absence...

Later! OL JR :)

[Royatl]

Were the FSI core burners pressed or drilled?? Looking at my old FSI catalogs, and having bought a book on how to make sugar motors back in the late 80's (Teleflite corp.) that had instructions on how to turn brass dowel stock down into tapered motor core mandrels, the FSI cross-sections look identical to the tapered core pintles from the 'roll your own' book.

SO, why couldn't somebody start making some core-burning pressed motors??

Just curious, as I was too young and too broke to afford FSI motors back in the day and was sad to see they had passed into history during my absence...

Later! OL JR :)

The FSI motors were pressed by hand. A little bit fancier than what the Teleflite book describes, but not much different than how Orville Carlisle did the little motors. If you do it by hand you have a little more control over how the powder gets evenly distributed around the pintle. A fast automated machine like Mabel is probably going to have loads of problems with a long pintle. In fact it did. the later B14s and the B8/C5 were longer-than-average pintles. The B8/C5 apparently had problems because the tip of the pintle would break off at times during production, causing delays, motors that were suspect and had to be destroyed, and of those that made it through to market, some had tiny cracks that started at the tip of the core.

[blackshire]

Although the economic Return On Investment (ROI) for developing it could be questionable, would a composite propellant B14 be feasible from a technological standpoint? A star-shaped grain void would provide a greater burning surface and thus more thrust, and a slot at the very head end of the grain would allow the tip of the igniter to touch the propellant to ensure reliable ignition. A composite B14-0 booster motor could perhaps be made by using a very short delay grain with a black powder disc (to blow through to provide the burning particles to ignite a black powder upper stage motor) above the delay grain.

[Royatl]

About 20 years ago, Ed LaCroix and Gary Rosenfield made a composite B8 motor (13mm) for the competition market that was probably better than any black powder B14 ever.

Cute little motors, fairly easy to ignite with tiny copperhead ignitors. I don't remember offhand if they were center core or c-slot grains. I still have two or three of them.

IIRC they were $8 a piece.

So I don't think a star-core is needed, or that a 14n av thrust is needed, since these could lift an egglofter very nicely.

[Rocket Doctor]

Mandrels cannot be used in an automatic machine. If you were to hand press the motors, that would be another issue. Look at the thread "Motor Matters" we have discussed all possibilities of making motors and everything inbetween.

[blackshire]

About 20 years ago, Ed LaCroix and Gary Rosenfield made a composite B8 motor (13mm) for the competition market that was probably better than any black powder B14 ever.

Cute little motors, fairly easy to ignite with tiny copperhead ignitors. I don't remember offhand if they were center core or c-slot grains. I still have two or three of them.

IIRC they were $8 a piece.

So I don't think a star-core is needed, or that a 14n av thrust is needed, since these could lift an egglofter very nicely.

I had one of those! Unfortunately I never got a chance to fly it (I gave it and a lot of other rocketry material to a friend before I moved to Alaska). I'd love to see AeroTech bring this one back into production. Speaking of Ed LaCroix, does anyone have the plans and fin patterns for his "pre-Tim Van Milligan" Apogee Components competition model rocket kits?