Yes, I recall them putting out several models with BNCs during that time. They made the claim that we asked for them. IIRC, the complaints came from classic reissues with PNCs instead of the BNCs they originally came with, and they evidently thought we wanted everything with BNCs.

__________________
I love sanding.

Doing it in BT-55 is just as DUMBBBBB as not using the Enerjet fin can.
I was not aware the BT-56 is no longer available. Bummer.

__________________
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.

Looking forward to the Odyssey nose cone in balsa.

__________________
Bill Eichelberger
NAR 79563

http://wallyum.blogspot.com/

I miss being SAM 0058

Build floor: Centuri Design Contest F-150 Hurricane Estes - Low Boom SST Semroc - Shrike, Snake Jumper, SST Shuttle

In paint: Canaroc Starfighter Scorpion Estes F-22 Air Superiority Fighter, Solar Sailer II Semroc Cyber III

Ready to fly: Estes - Multi-Roc, Solar Sailer II Semroc - Earmark

I'm not tied up emotionally with it, as I'm more interested in "clono-mods" than in fastidious clones. Much like I can appreciate a perfectly restored muscle car, but I want my '62 Cadillac to have a turbo LS and modern suspension and brakes.

I never liked the slip-over design of the Enerjet can and how it leaves a step in the airframe diameter. It just seemed like a lazy compromise for simplicity over performance. And the fins were thin, leading to them fluttering and failing frequently when flown with thrustier mid-power motors. The old Enerjet advertising of the 1340 being Mach-capable with the right motors seems to have been patently false.

Now that BT-56 is gone, presumably forever (except for the Amazon in launch kits, but they don't include the Enerjet fin can and will eventually sell out and be gone), the way forward is BT-55. I can rail against it or I can get on with life and building rockets I think are cool. My plan is to play around with improved Enerjet clones in BT-55 for 24mm power (using the Phoenix Bird decals) and LT-125 for 29mm power.

I think we are living in the golden age, in that an unusual dork like me can just create what we want as far as plastic parts, and it doesn't require a corporate decision that they will be profitable tooling up and making 20,000 of the parts for something to come into existence.

I'd like to see that cone too, Bill....

__________________
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.

I recall there was an error in the Estes Classic Phoenix Bird release.

The fins were TTW and those were to be attached BEFORE the motor mount was installed.

I will THIRD the comment that the model should have been released in ST-13/BT-56 and used the Enerjet Fin Can.

__________________
Bob
S.A.M. # 0014

Yes.

https://modelrocketbuilding.blogspo...rt-1-parts.html

Yeah, thaty'll work great if you never want to get the motor mount actually in.
Unless it has some really goofy front centering ring
Makes one wonder just what kind of "proof reading" department they had. I'm betting it is far better now with Langford ownership.
The Hobbico ownership however was FAR better than that toy company disaster guy.

__________________
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.