#11
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Agreed. I built a Bertha in 1977 and it had the 8.5" stuffer but no coupler. The "current style," however, is a regular 2.75" mount with no stuffer tube.
__________________
Living life on the edge...launching C's on a B field. |
#12
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Upon becoming a BAR, I remember studying these more closely, and coming to the conclusion this was a case of over-engineering. Having the coupler tube spanning the gap from the aft centering ring to the front centering ring provided no extra benefit. If the rings were properly sized - ie, sanded to the right size - they would have no problem sliding into the airframe (or outer motor tube) - the coupler tube didn't add any functionality, IMO. [Conjecture] That said, I suspect it was a vestigial construct. At some point early on, it was needed, but as the centering rings evolved, somebody (at Estes) realized one day that the rings were sufficient, that the extra coupler was superfluous, and they stopped using them. (Here's where it'd be nice to get input from someone who was there back then ) Doug .
__________________
YORF member #11 Last edited by Doug Sams : 06-02-2015 at 09:10 AM. |
#13
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Doug .
__________________
YORF member #11 |
#14
|
||||
|
||||
I have only built two Estes kits that had the 'coupler' style mount. An early 70's Astron Delta and an early 70's Honest John.
All others have had just centering rings.
__________________
When in doubt, WHACK the GAS and DITCH the brake !!! Yes, there is such a thing as NORMAL, if you have to ask what is "NORMAL" , you probably aren't ! Failure may not be an OPTION, but it is ALWAYS a POSSIBILITY. ALL systems are GO for MAYHEM, CHAOS, TURMOIL, FIASCOS, and HAVOC ! |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
My first BB, early '60s?, had the coupler and no stuffer.
Be careful with a 24x95 mmt. One of my current BBs hit, by altimeter, 501 meters with an E9.
__________________
Clear skies and fair winds, Mike NAR 31689 |
#16
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Second that. I flew mine on E12s twice and only got it back once. Bill
__________________
It is well past time to Drill, Baby, Drill! If your June, July, August and September was like this, you might just hate summer too... Please unload your question before you ask it unless you have a concealed harry permit. : countdown begin cr dup . 1- ?dup 0= until cr ." Launch!" cr ; Give a man a rocket and he will fly for a day; teach him to build and he will spend the rest of his days sanding... |
#17
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
My theory is that as yellow glue became more common and popular, they got tired of dealing with complaints about the mount "freezing" in the wrong place. Bill
__________________
It is well past time to Drill, Baby, Drill! If your June, July, August and September was like this, you might just hate summer too... Please unload your question before you ask it unless you have a concealed harry permit. : countdown begin cr dup . 1- ?dup 0= until cr ." Launch!" cr ; Give a man a rocket and he will fly for a day; teach him to build and he will spend the rest of his days sanding... |
#18
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
While I can't speak for why they removed the coupler back then, I have recently found the need for one. When I built my first Citation Patriot clone, I was concerned about how easy it would be for those wide fins to snap off during landing, so I glued them on with some hefty fillets. The fins stayed on fine when the rocket hit the ground but they tended to buckle the body tube. I still fly that Patriot even though the tube is buckled under all three fins. At least it's symmetrical. My solution on the second Patriot was to add a coupler to the motor mount, which reinforced the body tube enough to keep it from getting buckled. That change transferred the energy back to the fin and while they still occasionally snap off, it's a lot easier to fix than a buckled tube. Estes did not make many kits with fins as wide as the Patriot and therefore didn't need the reinforcement. Maybe that's why they eventually dropped the coupler.
__________________
Living life on the edge...launching C's on a B field. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|