PDA

View Full Version : New QCC Explorer here


jspitza
05-06-2011, 12:03 PM
Just picked up the new Estes QCC Explorer and it looks AWESOME!!!! Frigin bargain too at less then $20.00
Its Friday, whole weekend cleared for Mancave activities and a new Estes kit in hand. Hmm....
time to put on some Michale Jackson, put on my special moon pant. whoops....he he went a little to far there. Have a great weekend everyone and if I fubar this one, I can at least afford to get another. Take care, Jeff

JumpJet
05-11-2011, 01:40 PM
So, has anyone built one of these yet, let alone fly one?


John Boren

jspitza
05-11-2011, 06:39 PM
Hi John:
I've started mine-managed to complete one of the four intakes but for myself its way beyond my comfort zone. It reminded me of the balsa aircraft we built as kids in terms of building the ribs and side walls. For me this is one tough kit that I wish was a bit easier to build but then again I'm not advanced enough for this level. Take care, Jeff S

Royatl
05-11-2011, 09:26 PM
So, has anyone built one of these yet, let alone fly one?


John Boren

I'm starting mine, along with a mini Honest John.

Bill
05-22-2011, 10:24 AM
Hi John:
I've started mine-managed to complete one of the four intakes but for myself its way beyond my comfort zone. It reminded me of the balsa aircraft we built as kids in terms of building the ribs and side walls. For me this is one tough kit that I wish was a bit easier to build but then again I'm not advanced enough for this level. Take care, Jeff S


That is probably why Estes rated it a skill level 4.

I loved those wooden Chinese puzzles as a kid. The instructions to insert pieces P and Q into R, then twist is highly amusing. This is going to be fun...


Bill

jeffyjeep
05-22-2011, 11:40 AM
I haven't started mine yet, But I don't see how the balsa work could be much harder than the intake tunnels on the Estes Screaming Eagle.

evo666
05-24-2011, 01:17 AM
I can't wait to receive my shipment and start building this rocket.

JumpJet
05-24-2011, 04:55 PM
Any pictures out there that someone can post of their build? I would also like to see a built up and painted model. A report on how it flies would be nice to see also. Am I asking for too much? It's flying season out there, so you need to build baby build.

John Boren

Chas Russell
05-24-2011, 07:23 PM
Still waiting to find one here in Fort Worth. Nada at LHS, Michaels, or Hobby Lobby. Could order from an internet site, but then one kit and shipping. Bother.

Chas

Bill
05-25-2011, 03:46 PM
Still waiting to find one here in Fort Worth. Nada at LHS, Michaels, or Hobby Lobby. Could order from an internet site, but then one kit and shipping. Bother.



HobbyTown USA in Plano had one when I stopped by after the launch on Saturday.


Bill

micahel
05-28-2011, 12:47 PM
The first intake was a little challenging. By the 4th it was easy. Most difficult part
is keeping CA off fingers. Wax paper helps some. I'm building my QCC for AT E and F reloads.
Lookingfor a maintenance free baffle design using coupler.

jharding58
05-28-2011, 01:13 PM
I haven't started mine yet, But I don't see how the balsa work could be much harder than the intake tunnels on the Estes Screaming Eagle.

Screaming Eagle is a fun little build. There were a couple of the 80/90 releases with cardstock intakes that were similar, but without the fin penetrating the nacelle. I think it is the hardnes of the balsa that makes the difference - plus the LC edges. I usually sand the edge after assembly to remove the charred wood. I think it makes for a better finish.

One other suggestion is to assemble the intakes on wax paper with machinists squares to keep the 90 degree angle. Use the square to set the first glue joint on the inside. Once that is cured set the second from the outside.

jspitza
05-29-2011, 07:32 AM
Screaming Eagle is a fun little build. There were a couple of the 80/90 releases with cardstock intakes that were similar, but without the fin penetrating the nacelle. I think it is the hardnes of the balsa that makes the difference - plus the LC edges. I usually sand the edge after assembly to remove the charred wood. I think it makes for a better finish.

One other suggestion is to assemble the intakes on wax paper with machinists squares to keep the 90 degree angle. Use the square to set the first glue joint on the inside. Once that is cured set the second from the outside.
Thank you very much for this tip. I've kinda burned out on this one for the moment because of the intakes. I was suprised at the amount of CA glue left to sand off! I then primed to check for flaws and filled in gaps with FnF. For me, thats a lot of work but it should be well worth my efforts. Now onto the other three! Take care, Jeff

jeffyjeep
05-29-2011, 07:39 AM
Screaming Eagle is a fun little build. There were a couple of the 80/90 releases with cardstock intakes that were similar, but without the fin penetrating the nacelle. I think it is the hardnes of the balsa that makes the difference - plus the LC edges. I usually sand the edge after assembly to remove the charred wood. I think it makes for a better finish.

One other suggestion is to assemble the intakes on wax paper with machinists squares to keep the 90 degree angle. Use the square to set the first glue joint on the inside. Once that is cured set the second from the outside.
I had to look up the word "nacelle." You got me on that one.

jharding58
05-29-2011, 09:35 AM
Thank you very much for this tip. I've kinda burned out on this one for the moment because of the intakes. I was suprised at the amount of CA glue left to sand off! I then primed to check for flaws and filled in gaps with FnF. For me, thats a lot of work but it should be well worth my efforts. Now onto the other three! Take care, Jeff

A rather nice property of the steel squares is that you can place the two balsa parts in position with the square and then wick thin CA (the only kind to use with our builds) into the joint. The steel does not bond to the balsa and the part pops off. These make for really nice square joints with the added benny of their weight. Things don't move.

jspitza
05-29-2011, 11:08 AM
A rather nice property of the steel squares is that you can place the two balsa parts in position with the square and then wick thin CA (the only kind to use with our builds) into the joint. The steel does not bond to the balsa and the part pops off. These make for really nice square joints with the added benny of their weight. Things don't move.
Hmm, I just may see a trip to Harbor Frieght in the very near future!

jharding58
05-29-2011, 11:51 AM
That or Micro Mark. they have them in three sizes: 1,2, and 3 inch.

jspitza
06-01-2011, 04:24 PM
ok, just ordered a set of these:
http://www.micromark.com/90-Degree-Angle-Jigs-Set-of-6,7469.html
I'll start up number two nacelle once I have them. Thanks again and take care, Jeff

jharding58
06-01-2011, 04:31 PM
Those will definitely work for you, I use these because they can be used in so many ways. Not only in construction of 90 degree pieces, but also pressing parts together, as well as setting up tools.

http://www.micromark.com/2-x-2-x-2-Inch-Angle-Plate,6721.html

micahel
06-05-2011, 08:49 PM
So, has anyone built one of these yet, let alone fly one?


John Boren

Here's mine built and then right before launch on an AT F39. Figured I would start getting
used to flying Estes on composite motors.

jeffyjeep
06-05-2011, 08:58 PM
Very nice! Did it fly well?

jharding58
06-05-2011, 08:58 PM
Was there any problem with the coupler on the BT-60s? Even with a sanded surface and a thin film of glue I was stopped by the grab about .5mm apart and had to fill the gap.

micahel
06-05-2011, 09:20 PM
Was there any problem with the coupler on the BT-60s? Even with a sanded surface and a thin film of glue I was stopped by the grab about .5mm apart and had to fill the gap.

That's funny because the *EXACT* same thing happened to me. I just covered small gap
with the black decal.

micahel
06-05-2011, 09:22 PM
Very nice! Did it fly well?

Yes, I was a little concerned about the intakes shredding, but it flew straight on a windless evening. Will post video tomorrow...

jspitza
06-06-2011, 05:31 PM
Here's mine built and then right before launch on an AT F39. Figured I would start getting
used to flying Estes on composite motors.
Smoking build!!!!!

Doug Sams
06-06-2011, 06:04 PM
Was there any problem with the coupler on the BT-60s? Even with a sanded surface and a thin film of glue I was stopped by the grab about .5mm apart and had to fill the gap.In my experience, a thin film is more likely to grab than a larger amount of yellow glue. I imagine white glue behaves similarly.

I think the extra glue acts as a lubricant that enables you to get the pieces positioned properly before the grab effect occurs.

While I prefer to avoid having to clean up the extra glue (and also the extra shrinkage from the extra glue), it beats the heck out of a mis-installed motor mount or coupler.

That said, I usually just mix up a small batch of hobby epoxy. While I'm adamantly opposed to the over-use of epoxy, the extra working time makes installing couplers much easier and much less frustrating :)

Doug

.

micahel
06-06-2011, 08:22 PM
flight pic

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wz7M316Sdgg

micahel
06-06-2011, 08:24 PM
pic

jspitza
06-10-2011, 03:41 PM
Those will definitely work for you, I use these because they can be used in so many ways. Not only in construction of 90 degree pieces, but also pressing parts together, as well as setting up tools.

http://www.micromark.com/2-x-2-x-2-Inch-Angle-Plate,6721.html
Well as luck would have it, these jigs are aluminum and stuck very well to the balsa while using CA. I should have tested it out on a scrape piece first. I'm assuming that the steel squares don't stick like aluminum? Uhgg, I'm about to give up, use the parts for a kit bash! Actually, I've ruined a intake sheet so I'm SOL. Thanks for reading this and I'm getting better all the time with the advice given here. Have a great weekend, Jeff

JumpJet
06-10-2011, 03:51 PM
I didn't want to butt in since I love tools and there is NO such thing as having to many of them but I designed these intakes to be able to be assembled "square" without the need of using any type of angle.


John Boren

BoosterDude
06-10-2011, 05:36 PM
Mine assembled straight/square with no problems.

jspitza
06-10-2011, 05:45 PM
I think I ran into problems by not dryfitting enough of the assembly. I just finished another intake and it looks pretty square without the use of a jig. Waiting for the primer to dry ain't fun with this build!

jharding58
06-11-2011, 04:09 AM
Well as luck would have it, these jigs are aluminum and stuck very well to the balsa while using CA. I should have tested it out on a scrape piece first. I'm assuming that the steel squares don't stick like aluminum? Uhgg, I'm about to give up, use the parts for a kit bash! Actually, I've ruined a intake sheet so I'm SOL. Thanks for reading this and I'm getting better all the time with the advice given here. Have a great weekend, Jeff

Well, I guess I did not consider two things - the porous nature of the aluminium and the thin nature of the CA. Let me expand. The steel machinist plates will rarely grab if CA seeps through the sheet - which in itself is a good indication that I used too much CA. The advantage is that the glue will set up and then the part can be popped off the steel. A single edge razor blade moved down the face of the steel will usually be enough.

I use Pacer ZAP Thin CA in the pink bottle. Also the teflon tubing extension on the nozzle. It basically resolves to a 1mm diameter tube applying a less than drop amount of CA to the interior joint line. Capillary action will pull the CA along the inside angle and set up in 5-10 seconds. If you can see the adhesive in the angle then you have placed too much.

Sorry about the foul up. As an aside I really would recommend the steel machinist angle plate. You just keep finding new ways to use then on models - and to set up tools (which I suppose is part of their original intent).

http://www.micromark.com/2-x-2-x-2-Inch-Angle-Plate,6721.html

BoosterDude
06-15-2011, 08:21 AM
Here's a couple of pictures of my completed QCC. Excellent kit, but the decals have some issues that Estes need to correct. The decals are very thin and fragile. Almost like the Interceptor decals, but not as bad. Also, the red stripes that go down each side of the intake are not directional. In other words, all of the stripes provided are for the left side of the intake. So I had to cut each one to make a right and a left for each intake. The other issue is minor, but it still bugs me. The black louvers on top of each intake are shown on the card to have seven fins which look really cool. The provided decals give you four fins, not as cool.

Easily one of the best Estes kits of all time, a very fun build. It's nice to build a rocket with built up wood structures.

http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd96/BoosterDude/DSC00390.jpg

http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd96/BoosterDude/DSC00391.jpg

hcmbanjo
06-15-2011, 09:46 AM
As an aside I really would recommend the steel machinist angle plate. You just keep finding new ways to use then on models - and to set up tools (which I suppose is part of their original intent).

http://www.micromark.com/2-x-2-x-2-Inch-Angle-Plate,6721.html

Wow, I use my machinist angle on a lot of rocketry builds. I've never had a problem with it sticking to glues.
I originally bought it to build the hulls of model ships, those bulkheads must be at a 90 degree angle to the keel.
I may not need it for 3FNC models, but it's handy to have around for the more complex builds.

Les
06-15-2011, 11:00 AM
That looks fantastic. I've got to get me one. Doubt it will come out as nice as yours.

Leo
06-15-2011, 12:23 PM
Beautifully made rocket http://www.oldrocketforum.com/images/icons/icon14.gif

jharding58
06-15-2011, 12:56 PM
That truly is a great build. But I have to make one observation on your comment about decals. The oldest argument in the book is that decals are always too thick. They never lay down on a featured surface without a ton of decal solvent or they want to ride up over a recessed panel line. If they tear then it is a matter of needing a more wet surface to which the decal is applied. The only solution that I can think of to completely eliminate the risk of tearing a decal would be to make the film thicker - and I am not sure if I want that solution.

Still and all that is a really beautiful finish.

jharding58
06-15-2011, 12:59 PM
I didn't want to butt in since I love tools and there is NO such thing as having to many of them but I designed these intakes to be able to be assembled "square" without the need of using any type of angle.


John Boren

You never butt in, rather gently implicate a note of logic.

As for the intakes they are really a build in hand item - put all the pieces together and then wick thin CA into the gaps. I am lazy and like to leave them laid up on the board on wax paper.

There is a trusim about thin CA - you can always add more, but it is difficult to take away.

BoosterDude
06-15-2011, 01:47 PM
That truly is a great build. But I have to make one observation on your comment about decals. The oldest argument in the book is that decals are always too thick. They never lay down on a featured surface without a ton of decal solvent or they want to ride up over a recessed panel line. If they tear then it is a matter of needing a more wet surface to which the decal is applied. The only solution that I can think of to completely eliminate the risk of tearing a decal would be to make the film thicker - and I am not sure if I want that solution.

Still and all that is a really beautiful finish.

Not sure about the age of the argument, but the decals provided in this kit are too thin/fragile. They exhibit the same characteristics as the Interceptor decals that tend to stretch and deform. The other releases from Estes haven't been a problem.

The solution in this case is to first correct the errors on the decal sheet. Then make them the same thickness as the other recent releases from Estes.

Leo
06-15-2011, 02:02 PM
I prefer the thin decals. They blend in real nice on the rocket.

jharding58
06-15-2011, 02:13 PM
Well, either way you do well. If a decal stretches it is because the surface is too dry and the decal is dragging. You will have the same issue with Excelsior if you leave them too long on a too dry surface - most notable are the big roll pattern wraps for the Gemini. If the surface is wet enough (that is to say more than the liquid remaining on the back of the decal as you slide it off the backing sheet) you should have enough of a lubricant to move a decal without stretching. Obviously there is a water soluble adhesive on the decal and you do not want to over-dilute that or it will lift, and I suppose on the primarily smooth surfaces of model rockets there is little surface detail to overcome (unless you span a conduit).

My only point is that I do not want thicker decals. There is more of an edge and they tend to yellow more quickly.

BoosterDude
06-15-2011, 02:51 PM
Well, either way you do well. If a decal stretches it is because the surface is too dry and the decal is dragging. You will have the same issue with Excelsior if you leave them too long on a too dry surface - most notable are the big roll pattern wraps for the Gemini. If the surface is wet enough (that is to say more than the liquid remaining on the back of the decal as you slide it off the backing sheet) you should have enough of a lubricant to move a decal without stretching. Obviously there is a water soluble adhesive on the decal and you do not want to over-dilute that or it will lift, and I suppose on the primarily smooth surfaces of model rockets there is little surface detail to overcome (unless you span a conduit).

My only point is that I do not want thicker decals. There is more of an edge and they tend to yellow more quickly.

I agree with your installation techniques.

I've never had any issues with Excelsior or with most decals for that matter. In fact, Excelsior work great and blend perfectly into the finish once clear coated. The only issues I've had are with the QCC and the three Interceptors that I've built. I just used water transfers on a 1/4 scale P-47 over rivet and panel line surface details with no issues. In other words, I know what I'm doing.

I think maybe you're taking my comments to the extreme. I don't want decals that are 1/16" thick either. It's a fine line, no doubt.

jharding58
06-15-2011, 04:07 PM
I suppose it is using decals on small subjects. I also build 1/72 and 1/48 AFV models.

JumpJet
07-02-2011, 12:43 PM
So has anyone out there flown their QCC Explorer yet and if so how did it go?


John Boren

qquake
07-03-2011, 07:18 AM
Well as luck would have it, these jigs are aluminum and stuck very well to the balsa while using CA. I should have tested it out on a scrape piece first. I'm assuming that the steel squares don't stick like aluminum? Uhgg, I'm about to give up, use the parts for a kit bash! Actually, I've ruined a intake sheet so I'm SOL. Thanks for reading this and I'm getting better all the time with the advice given here. Have a great weekend, Jeff

Why not build it with three intakes/fins instead of four? I'm sure it'll still be stable, and you might as well, since one of your intakes is ruined. FYI, there is a detailed build thread over on TRF:

http://www.rocketryforum.com/showthread.php?t=22209&highlight=explorer

jspitza
07-04-2011, 07:06 PM
Why not build it with three intakes/fins instead of four? I'm sure it'll still be stable, and you might as well, since one of your intakes is ruined. FYI, there is a detailed build thread over on TRF:

http://www.rocketryforum.com/showthread.php?t=22209&highlight=explorer
Thanks for the advice, qquake. I'll probably just try again at a later point in time. Take care and have a happy 4th of July! Jeff

foamy
07-05-2011, 07:55 AM
Paid my first visit to a new (to me) hobby shop, about thirty miles away. Nice place, about as good as, or perhaps better than the one that closed in my town. Anyway, they had the new QCC Explorer in stock for $19. Even though I had no intention of buying any rockets, just before I hit the register, I snatched it. Ended up spending more than I had planned, but with no sales tax and the clerk giving me 10% off on everything except paint, I didn't have too many qualms.

What I didn't know, even after reading a build thread and seeing it on the forums, was that this is a right fair sized rocket, sporting a "D" sized motor mount. I think that's what hooked me. That and I think this is one of Estes more innovative and best looking offerings in a while. It'll be some time before I get around to building it, but I'm glad to have run across it and picked it up.

If I run across the "Air Commander," I'll snag that one as well. That too, is a good looking rocket and I guess those two, (the QCC & AC) are my favorites of the latest Estes offerings.

Bill
07-05-2011, 05:39 PM
Anyway, they had the new QCC Explorer in stock for $19. Even though I had no intention of buying any rockets, just before I hit the register, I snatched it.


That phemomenon is sometimes aptly described as something "sticking to the hand."


Bill