Ye Olde Rocket Forum

Go Back   Ye Olde Rocket Forum > Weather-Cocked > Current Kit Talk
User Name
Password
Auctions Register FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts Search Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02-04-2020, 04:53 PM
tbzep's Avatar
tbzep tbzep is offline
Dazed and Confused
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: TN
Posts: 11,610
Default No sign of the C5-x yet

Nothing in the "engines" or "coming soon" sections of the Estes website.

Has anyone heard an estimate on its reintroduction...3rd or 4th quarter maybe?


.
__________________
I love sanding.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 02-04-2020, 10:26 PM
ghrocketman's Avatar
ghrocketman ghrocketman is offline
President, MAYHEM AGITATORS, Inc.
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Nunya Bizznuss, Michigan
Posts: 13,443
Default

Have not heard anything yet.
If they have to discontinue something though, I would hope it is the dismal C6-3.
There is NOTHING the C6-3 does that the C5-3 doesn't do better.
Same thing goes for the C6-0 vs the C5-0
__________________
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, and HAVOC !
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 02-05-2020, 01:59 PM
Joe Wooten's Avatar
Joe Wooten Joe Wooten is offline
Master Modeler
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,164
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ghrocketman
Have not heard anything yet.
If they have to discontinue something though, I would hope it is the dismal C6-3.
There is NOTHING the C6-3 does that the C5-3 doesn't do better.
Same thing goes for the C6-0 vs the C5-0


I could care less about using a C5-3. The C5-0 booster is what I want. The perfect booster for a 3 stage minimum diameter rocket.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 02-05-2020, 03:58 PM
Doug Sams's Avatar
Doug Sams Doug Sams is offline
Old Far...er...Rocketeer
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Plano, TX resident since 1998.
Posts: 3,965
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Wooten
The C5-0 booster is what I want. The perfect booster for a 3 stage minimum diameter rocket.
I don't know. The C5-0 will still have the long, low tail on the thrust curve. I would think its sibling B8-0 would be better for staging. Unless of course you like the drama of watching your heavy stager hanging precipitously in the air while that low thrust tail is burning

Now, if it were something like a C10...

Doug


.
__________________
YORF member #11
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 02-05-2020, 06:32 PM
ghrocketman's Avatar
ghrocketman ghrocketman is offline
President, MAYHEM AGITATORS, Inc.
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Nunya Bizznuss, Michigan
Posts: 13,443
Default

The C5-3 is a great motor for the Mars Lander, 1284 Space Shuttle, Centuri Space Shuttle,, and all other high-drag/mass 18mm rockets. It always out performs the C6-3.
__________________
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, and HAVOC !
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 02-05-2020, 11:14 PM
LeeR's Avatar
LeeR LeeR is offline
Retired with Way Too Many Kits
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Colorado
Posts: 3,222
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Sams
I don't know. The C5-0 will still have the long, low tail on the thrust curve. I would think its sibling B8-0 would be better for staging. Unless of course you like the drama of watching your heavy stager hanging precipitously in the air while that low thrust tail is burning

Now, if it were something like a C10...

Doug


.


I’m going to play ghrocketman, with a twist:

What we need is a B14-0, and a C version, too, where the motor casing is full to the top with propellant.
__________________
Lee Reep
NAR 55948

Projects: Semroc Saturn 1B, Ken Foss Designs Mini Satellite Interceptor
In the Paint Shop: Nothing! Too cold!
Launch-Ready: Farside-X, Maxi Honest John, Super Scamp
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 02-06-2020, 02:44 PM
Joe Wooten's Avatar
Joe Wooten Joe Wooten is offline
Master Modeler
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,164
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Sams
I don't know. The C5-0 will still have the long, low tail on the thrust curve. I would think its sibling B8-0 would be better for staging. Unless of course you like the drama of watching your heavy stager hanging precipitously in the air while that low thrust tail is burning

Now, if it were something like a C10...

Doug


.


I used to have a bunch of C5-0 motors (still have a few). I used almost all of them to fly 2 and 3 stage rockets. Never had on tip over on boost. I flew a Comanche 3 on a C5-0/C5-0/C6-7 combo several times and got it all back most times. Every time it flew straight up. There was no wind, but if there had been I would never had used that combination.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 02-06-2020, 03:54 PM
tbzep's Avatar
tbzep tbzep is offline
Dazed and Confused
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: TN
Posts: 11,610
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Sams
I don't know. The C5-0 will still have the long, low tail on the thrust curve.

The C6 has a nearly identical tail but less kick off the pad. The C6 tail might be closer to ~4.5N instead of ~4N shown on the C5 curve, but it is slightly longer in duration than the C5 tail. Both booster motors will break through and stage slightly sooner than the times listed if the samples are from delayed motors or are averages of all the motors together. There isn't a separate zero delay thrust curve like there is with some of the other motors.

https://www.nar.org/SandT/pdf/Estes/C6.pdf
https://www.nar.org/SandT/pdf/Estes/C5.pdf
__________________
I love sanding.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 02-06-2020, 05:18 PM
astronwolf's Avatar
astronwolf astronwolf is offline
Lost his Drifter
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Northeast Ohio
Posts: 1,277
Default

You are looking at 24 year old data that I would wager that is no longer valid. It may be NAR S&T valid in a squishy sort of NAR S&T way, but we would likely have a different opinion. Yes it's the only thing we have to refer to, but getting down to minutia like how the different motor "tail down" is probably just speculation.
__________________
-Wolfram v. Kiparski
NAR 28643 - TRA 15520
MTMA Section #606 President
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 02-06-2020, 06:48 PM
tbzep's Avatar
tbzep tbzep is offline
Dazed and Confused
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: TN
Posts: 11,610
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by astronwolf
You are looking at 24 year old data that I would wager that is no longer valid. It may be NAR S&T valid in a squishy sort of NAR S&T way, but we would likely have a different opinion. Yes it's the only thing we have to refer to, but getting down to minutia like how the different motor "tail down" is probably just speculation.

It's all I have to go by, but if the BP has changed enough to change the C6 performance over the last 24 years, it's probably going to change the C5's too. I doubt they re-engineer it.
__________________
I love sanding.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:59 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.0.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Ye Olde Rocket Shoppe © 1998-2024