#1
|
||||
|
||||
Other Scouts
As I was finishing up my sons and my SOG Scouts (#450-452) and the rebuild of my childhood Scout, I was looking though the old catalogs looking for paint schemes and discovered the Scout II and Scout III in late 80's catalogs.
What was the difference or improvement? I couldn't find a plan for either on any of the usual websites.
__________________
NAR 79743 NARTrek Silver I miss being SAM 062 Awaiting First Launch: Too numerous to count Finishing: Zooch Saturn V; Alway/Nau BioArcas; Estes Expedition; TLP Standard Repair/Rescue: Cherokee-D (2); Centuri Nike-Smoke; MX-774 On the Bench: 2650; Dream Stage: 1/39.37 R-7 |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
My NAR section just had a group build of Golden Scouts.
Prior to the meeting the issue of how to paint them came up. Peter Alway, always a stickler for historical accuracy suggested the following: "small bottle of Testor's gold, and a Q-tip". |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
Scout III Plans
__________________
Don NAR 53455 "Carpe Diem" |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
The Scout III is mini powered. If you look at the other Scouts, the motor retaining hook is like a regular engine hook (without the curly end). The Golden Scout is your best choice. The Golden Scouts are stilll available, and, July isn't that far off. |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
The other resource is http://www.ninfinger.org/~sven/rockets/rockets.html . Scout II: http://www.ninfinger.org/~sven/rock...87/87est26.html Scout III: http://www.ninfinger.org/~sven/rock...91/91est24.html From there we get the catalog descriptions. Quote:
While it's limited to T power (and hence A impulse), I don't see that as a drawback. Most folks who flew them on B and C motors never saw them again With the motor mount, it's gonna be heavier, yet it has no gauze for the fin roots. Can't help but wonder if it wasn't prone to cracks. Quote:
This is the big mystery version. No plans, and little other info. It says tumble recovery, but the pic does not show a motor hook. It does have the vent hole. I wonder if this version ejects the motor and "tumbles" in (euphemism for lawn dart recovery) ala the feather weight recovery birds such as the Streak, Quark, etc . It uses the full sized motors, so it's not clear what, if any, differences there are with the Scout 1. Doug . |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
I have the Scout II and the only real difference is that it uses a flat spring steel hook instead of music wire like the original and Golden Scout. I flew mine once and the engine ejected past the hook.
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Different hook, same ol' outcome - I guess that's par for us mortals Doug . |
#8
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Doug . |
#9
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
It had a decal, that's what did it! |
#10
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
I downloaded plans for the Scout II from the Estes website and sent them to Scott to be posted on YORP. As 5x7 noted, one of the main differences is the use of a engine hook made of flat spring steel, similar to a standard engine hook, instead of the music wire hook of the original. 5x7 mentioned that the motor kicked in the sole flight of his Scout II, and that is consistent with my own experience with another rocket, the FlisKits Tumbleweed, which operates on the same principle and uses a standard engine hook (ineffectively, in my experience). The original music wire hook was (and is) far more effective in retaining the engine after kick-back. (OTOH, the standard motor hook was effective in my Astron Sprite, but that might have had something to do with the unique dimensions of the Series III engines.) Other differences: no gauze fin gussets, and the gauze motor hook covering is apparently replaced with what I take to be a paper template printed in the instructions that the builder cut out and glued over the hook. (5x7, was that actually what it was?) There is also a smaller strip to glue over the brass retainer wire. The small oval Estes logo decal that was the only decoration for the original kit has been replaced with a larger set of decals - one that shows the rocket's name and three other trim decals for the fin tips. The body tube is still a BT-30, and the nose cone is a BNC 30D. The color scheme, as shown in the catalogs and described in the instructions, is yellow and red. Finally, the plans include a fin template, even though the kit was furnished with pre-cut fins, just like the original version. This is helpful because the printed template shows that the fin angle has been increased in version II from 22° to 29°, presumably to address the fin charring issue. (I think that this change alone was enough to earn the kit a new name.) The Scout II still uses 18mm motors. An interesting little detail: the kit number of the Scout II, #1959, corresponds to the year that Vern Estes created the original Scout design. With the Scout III, the engine mount was changed to use the 13 mm mini "T" series engines, and consequently, version III was given a kit number (0878) that conformed to the Mini-Brute number series (08xx). Mark \\.
__________________
Mark S. Kulka NAR #86134 L1,_ASTRE #471_Adirondack Mountains, NY
Opinions Unfettered by Logic • Advice Unsullied by Erudition • Rocketry Without Pity
Last edited by Mark II : 06-07-2008 at 11:56 PM. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|