Poll: What part of model rocketry do you like?

[ShieldWolf]

What part of model rocketry do you like the most? Designing, building, collecting, flying, cloning, up/down scaling, or something else entirely?

Myself, I like building the best. I have always liked the sense of satisfaction I get from making something with my own two hands.

Randal

[A Fish Named Wallyum]

Cloning. I like building stuff that people recognize at the pads.

[six-o-one]

Guess I'm a building/flying guy in the sense that I enjoy the precision aspect of building and seeing my good work illustrated in the form of good aerodynamics resulting in straight flights.

[Doug Sams]

What part of model rocketry do you like the most? Designing, building, collecting, flying, cloning, up/down scaling, or something else entirely?

I do some cloning, but mostly what might be called clone bashing where I upscale or downscale as well as stretch, tweak and otherwise modify existing designs. Plus I do a fair amount of scratch building, but even then, there is usually an existing model that provides some inspiration. (Example: Guess what rocket inspired the Doug 1b. :) And like others here, I frequently ask how I might add a booster to something.

I greatly enjoy solving the engineering challenges of construction - how can I make a (good) centering ring for that (oddball) tube? How can I attach the recovery harness in a rocket with interchangeable motor mounts? How can I keep the fins aligned perfecty while assembling a multi-stage rocket? How can I draw a perfect wrap for a transition? Those are just a few examples.

And getting compliments on my paint jobs while standing in line to fly is always an ego boost.

But there's no doubt that the real adrenaline rush is those few seconds of powered flight, when you see the 2nd stage light and then the 3rd, then you see the chute/streamer deploy. That's why I fly. You never know for sure what's gonna happen.

There is no thrill of success when there is no risk of failure.

Doug

[Ltvscout]

Collecting of course. ;) Hey, you guys that replied in this thread, vote in ShieldWolf's poll as well so we can see how the numbers go in the end.

[A Fish Named Wallyum]

I guess "Groupies" falls in the "other" category? :D

[CPMcGraw]

I chose OTHER, since I like all of those things. I'm not sure I can pick one as the MOST FAVORITE.

To me, it's all part of the hobby. I have as much enjoyment building as I do flying; designing as I do cloning; collecting clones as much as adding originals; researching the old designs as well as yakking with everyone here...

Craig

[jflis]

In order of preference:

designing

up/down scaling (been doing that since 1969)

Building and flying tied for 3rd

Actually, all 4 of these are about tied for *first* :)

Probably my most exciting downscale was my mini mars lander (about 9 months before Estes announced it), then my up and down scales of the snooper, transport, saucer and too many more to count :) Back in the 80's I was doing so much of that, that my local club referred to it as "Glandular Conditions" (that was before the term "up scale" or "down scale" was coined.

You can see many of them on my personal web site by clicking here. (http://jflis.com/hobbies/rocketry/rocketry_photos.htm)

jim

[Tweener]

I always looked at building as a necessary evil, because I'm so impatient to see the finished project and I've never tried my hand at design or modification (though I've had a few ideas...). Cloning is a new concept to me that I find I enjoy very much, but the first time I pushed that button 30+ years ago, I was hooked on the WHOOOSH!! It's definitely flying for me. ;)

[ShieldWolf]

You know, with this being "Ye Olde Rocket Forum", I really expected cloning to be higher on the list. Hmm... :rolleyes:

Maybe it's getting lumped in with building. I know that I enjoy the building aspect the most, whether it's a quality kit, an original design, a clone, or an up/down scale.

I agree that it's not really a rocket untli it's flown, but sometimes there's a little stress involved with getting everything prepped, and out to the field and toubleshooting launch eguipment, and worrying if I'll get my rocket back, etc. :eek: Of course, when all goes well, it's fun and exciting. :D

Building, on the other hand, I find to be a soothing activity that lets me forget about work and bills and all the other things that can wear us down in our everyday lives. :( If I'm having trouble with something, like filling those @$#% spirals, I can stop and walk away from it, or work on something else until my attitude improves. :cool:

Randal

[Tau Zero]

What part of model rocketry do you like the most? Designing, building, collecting, flying, cloning, up/down scaling, or something else entirely?"Yes" to almost all of your questions. :D

Like Craig, I like the different activities or "sub-steps" in the overall process for different reasons. However, I *have* found myself dawdling over the building phase just for the sheer joy of flashing back to when I was building rockets as a kid... apparently because it helps me get in touch with my "younger self." :)

Of course, I often find that I need to exorcise a new design (RockSim is both my salvation *and* my addiction), and getting all excited about it... and then I get bogged down before I get to actually building it. :( Cloning and up- and downscaling are cool, but collecting doesn't really grab me... probably because I'm not independently wealthy, and haven't been able to afford any of the eBay prices for Centuri stuff I've seen. :eek:


Myself, I like building the best. I have always liked the sense of satisfaction I get from making something with my own two hands.I would have to say that seeing something fly that I've actually *built* (plastic glue is for plastic models, IMO) with my own hands is a rush that many in the RTF crowd don't really understand yet. :(

The idea of "rocket groupies" reminds me of a song that's out now about "The geeks get the girl." :D


Cheers,

--Jay
"Centuri Guy"

[CPMcGraw]

I would have to say that seeing something fly that I've actually *built* (plastic glue is for plastic models, IMO) with my own hands is a rush that many in the RTF crowd don't really understand...

Amen to that.

Craig.

[Carl@Semroc]

I voted for flying, but I have been reminded lately that it is the firing of engines! I have been firing a lot of engines lately on a test stand and I am just as mesmerized by the raw conversion of chemical energy to a rocket exhaust as I was 48 years ago!

Of course, everything else about model rocketry ties for a close second.

[Ltvscout]

I voted for flying, but I have been reminded lately that it is the firing of engines! I have been firing a lot of engines lately on a test stand and I am just as mesmerized by the raw conversion of chemical energy to a rocket exhaust as I was 48 years ago!
Hopefully those are prototype Semroc motors that you're firing! :)

[Eagle3]

I love it all. About the only thing that, to me is laborious is filling balsa. FillnFinish has greatly reduced that chore though. :D

[Eagle3]

Hopefully those are prototype Semroc motors that you're firing! :)

Need a qualified beta tester Carl? :D

[Carl@Semroc]

Hopefully those are prototype Semroc motors that you're firing! :)
Not yet! I am just surveying what is currently available and comparing to what WAS available "back then."

[Carl@Semroc]

Need a qualified beta tester Carl? :D
I don't think NFPA 112x allows beta testers. :( But... I will be trying to establish the market for engines currently unavailable. So far, with a very unscientific poll, the B14 is unanimous.

[CPMcGraw]

I don't think NFPA 112x allows beta testers. :( But... I will be trying to establish the market for engines currently unavailable. So far, with a very unscientific poll, the B14 is unanimous.

Couldn't we just start a "wish list" thread for you, Carl? :rolleyes:

A3-0T & A10-0T (13mm), A8-0 (18mm) would be nice... That Firefly would also be very happy... :D

Craig...

[Phred]

Ooohhh a nice long burn, 13mm B motor would be a joy. Say a B3?

AP allows for both a B3 or even a shorter burn B7, depending on the motor design, no?

Phred

[Doug Sams]

Carl wrote: I am just surveying what is currently available and comparing to what WAS available "back then."While it's no doubt important to look at "back then", it's key to put a new twist on it moving forward.

1. Take your modular approach (booster motor with separate, glue-in delay/ejection unit) and make it like the HPR motors -> let the user dial in the delay as part of the assembly. Your basic items will be a Bx-0, a Cx-0, a 10 sec delay unit and a trimming tool. The user drills the delay and glues it into the motor (or uses it sans delay as a booster). The thrust profiles should be shaped for general use (ie, medium avg thrust - eg, B6, C6).

2. Heavy lifters: Besides the B14, how about a C20-C25? The deep core may take up much of the space (ie, length in the 2.75" case) leaving only a booster. Or, maybe the modular delay is only partially inserted ala the AVI motors. For me, I'm primarily interested in the booster.

3. How about a D impulse 18mm (x2.75") motor? With an ordinary core, it seems to me a nearly full D can be squeezed in (sans delay). Might make an interesting booster. With a deep core, I'm not sure if it would be much different than the aforementioned C20-C25.


13mm motors
4. The modular delay might get tricky. Not sure if the inside diameter of a 13mm motor case leaves enough room for lots of smoke and the thickness of the delay's wall...or maybe the delay doesn't need a very thick wall.

But the key here is to build A impulse motors only in this form factor. 13mm motors can always be adapted to 18mm and short-18mm applications, but not vice versa. Instead of spreading your resources by having A impulse 18mm motors AND A impulse 13mm motors, you concentrate them into one case that the user can then adapt up. My thinking is that the 13mm (x1.75") A motor is shipped in a package with an empty 18mm case (that is marked with a dashed line at the 1.75" mark) to be used as an adaptor. Each 3- or 4-pack of 13mm motors comes with one such adaptor. An A booster is a must. Deep core preferred.

5. 1/4A and 1/2A boosters. And if you can do the adjustable delay, that'd be awesome. A 1/4A sustainer with long delay would be very handy for my fleet, and much more universal if the user can set the delay anywhere from 0-5 seconds.

24mm motors
6. My big desire here is heavy lift - D40 and E50. Again, with the modular delays, you build one D40-0, one E50-0 and one adjustable delay from which the users can configure umpteen differents combos.

7. How about a 1.75"x24mm motor? Take Estes' C11 and saw off the unused inch.

Summary
The idea is the hit the market in the voids. Estes has a light-medium thrust E9, so you counter with the high thrust E50. Estes has a medium thrust D12, you would have a high thrust D30-D40.

Estes has 10 different 18mm B and C motors. With only three components - Bx-0, a Cx-0 & 10 sec delay module - you can cover all that and much, much more.

Estes doesn't have 1/4A, 1/2A or A boosters, but with modular delays, users will always have the booster option (by omitting the delay).

My 2 cents. Take it for what it's worth :)

Regards,
Doug

[CPMcGraw]

Take your modular approach (booster motor with separate, glue-in delay/ejection unit) and make it like the HPR motors -> let the user dial in the delay as part of the assembly. Your basic items will be a Bx-0, a Cx-0, a 10 sec delay unit and a trimming tool. The user drills the delay and glues it into the motor (or uses it sans delay as a booster). The thrust profiles should be shaped for general use (ie, medium avg thrust - eg, B6, C6).

Doug,

This might be made easier to manufacture: Build delays of 1-, 2-, and 3-second thickness, and just let the user select which ones and how many might be needed, and stack them. Safer than drilling, and more easily "tuned" to a given flight profile.

If this is possible, even half-second intervals might be considered for competition flights...

Craig...

[Eagle3]

I don't think NFPA 112x allows beta testers. :( But... I will be trying to establish the market for engines currently unavailable. So far, with a very unscientific poll, the B14 is unanimous.

I was teasing Carl... well, maybe there was a little hoping there, too. ;)

I'm not surprised about the B14 being a favorite in the polls, but I'd be really surprised if anyone would make them again considering the work involved. I'm with Phred. I nice 13mm B3 or 4 would be sweet! I loved the old Centuri mini Bs.

[Ltvscout]

I don't think NFPA 112x allows beta testers. :( But... I will be trying to establish the market for engines currently unavailable. So far, with a very unscientific poll, the B14 is unanimous.
Yup, another vote for the B14 series. ;) The 1/2A6-0 was also nice for a second stage on 3-stagers such as the Farside. Boosted by a B14-0 of course. :D

[Doug Sams]

This might be made easier to manufacture: Build delays of 1-, 2-, and 3-second thickness, and just let the user select which ones and how many might be needed, and stack them. Safer than drilling, and more easily "tuned" to a given flight profile.

If this is possible, even half-second intervals might be considered for competition flights... Craig, I was thinking APCP delays. They're much more user-friendly for drilling AND safety. But thinking about it further, that might add too much cost - I imagine a BP delay is much cheaper to make than APCP. But for ease of adjustment, using a tool such as a peach pitter or Cesaroni's DAT is quite easy. Conversely, according to Murphy, if you give the user three different thicknesses of delays, there's a 97% chance he'll put together the wrong combo :)

Seriously, your idea has merit, but I'm concerned about blow-by. More parts means more chances for failure. Although even having one user installed delay piece still provides a failure point.


BR,
Doug

[Doug Sams]

I voted for flying, Carl, you did indeed enter your vote, right? I'm a little concerned - the builders are leading the flyers 5 to 3. Makes me wonder about the virility of some of Ye Old Rocketeers :)
Doug

[Doug Sams]

Yup, another vote for the B14 series. ;) The 1/2A6-0 was also nice for a second stage on 3-stagers such as the Farside. Boosted by a B14-0 of course. :D You're thinking like I do. I'm more enchanted with the idea of flying three stages - and actually viewing all three - than I am with using staging for performance. The B14-0 gets the heavy (well, it's heavy once all three motors are loaded) Farside moving without putting it in orbit (ala a D12), the 1/2A6-0 provides the drama of a middle stage without going out of sight, and the user still has the option of A8-5, B6-6 or C6-7 in the sustainer. (I even have a couple of B4-6's for something a little different.)

While my DARS brothers will tell me to wear a skirt, I plan to fly my Comanche on a C11 to A10 to Axxx combo. I see this combo as being the modern day equivalent to the B14-1/2A
booster combo above. I flew my Tridget the other day similarly. A10 to 1/2A to 1/2A. If I coulda put a 1/4A in the 2nd stage, I woulda. I just want to see it stage, not get to the moon :)

Maybe someday I'll do the D-C-C in the Comanche, but altitude doesn't really excite me, especially when I can't see it. I'd much rather keep it low and observable. It's kinda funny...I lawndarted my L2 attempt last fall, but I still get lots of comments on the flight. The heavy, 6" rocket went low and slow, so everything was plainly visible (including the inadequate ejection charge) to everyone there. Hopefully I can repeat it but with a proper chute deployment next time :)

Doug

[Doug Sams]

Yup, another vote for the B14 series. ;) The 1/2A6-0 was also nice for a second stage on 3-stagers such as the Farside. Boosted by a B14-0 of course. :D
Ya know, I've been thinking about cloning the Farside or Farside X. (I just have to get over my Midget fetish first :)

Anyway, I think the 1st stage can be converted to 24mm motors enabling the C11-0 to be used. It seems like a reasonable substitute for the B14. Others thoughts? Do the booster fins really need canting? IE, does it really need to spin for added stability?

I'm thinking C11 to A10 to A8-5 will make for a decent flight. Yeah, I know, the A10-0T is de-cert'd. Unless you accidentally write down B6-0 on the flight card :)

Doug

[A Fish Named Wallyum]

Carl, you did indeed enter your vote, right? I'm a little concerned - the builders are leading the flyers 5 to 3. Makes me wonder about the virility of some of Ye Old Rocketeers :)
Doug

I voted "Groupies". No worries here!

[A Fish Named Wallyum]

While my DARS brothers will tell me to wear a skirt,
Doug

If there is a god, I won't be anywhere near Texas when this happens. :eek:

[Tau Zero]

You're thinking like I do. I'm more enchanted with the idea of flying three stages - and actually viewing all three - than I am with using staging for performance. [snip] Maybe someday I'll do the D-C-C in the Comanche, but altitude doesn't really excite me, especially when I can't see it. I'd much rather keep it low and observable.I wholeheartedly agree with you, Doug. I prefer to get my rockets back, so I find myself using smaller motors. (Of course, after I lost my Semroc Javelin last summer on a C6-5 , which I *thought* was an A8-5... you get my drift [pun intended]. :eek: )

http://home.earthlink.net/~gomero/rocketreviews.html

My wife asked me how much it cost, and I told her, "Six bucks." She was concerned that when I lost a rocket, I also lost money. (I didn't mention anything about paint, labor, or time invested.) Plus, I seem to have a vaguely conservative personality (which means I've discovered that I actually have control over very few things), ;) so for the *most part,* I let caution override "launch fever." :eek: And I gravitate toward model rockets instead of high power because I JUST DON'T HAVE THE STORAGE ROOM! ;) :D

After my first launch as a BAR at the Tripoli Idaho (mostly high power) launch in November 2001, an onlooker observed about my 13mm streamer recovery semi-scratch bird, "Well, at least you don't have to walk very far to get *your* rocket." :p
And last August, I flew my Semroc SLS Javelin 3 times on C11-5's, and got it back! I guess I learned my lesson from the month before, eh? ;) :cool:


Cheers,

--Jay