Disappointing that they do not recommend the E12-6.

E12 forgetitis is a fairly common ailment, even in Penrose.

I have flown two E12 motors so far - love, love, love them.


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...

The centering ring is essential to keeping the fins in place. I guess using epoxy as glue for the fins, centering ring installation, and engine mount makes for a pretty solid assembly. The holes in the perimeter of the centering ring grab the top tabs of the fins internally.

The fins are pretty flexible, so I can only guess it's pretty resilient. I'm not sure how heat from the motors will affect the plastic and cardboard assembly over time.

A work around didn't really jump out at me while building it, but this was the first time I saw a fin can assembled in this manner. It was only after I finished assembling the kit that I began to have concerns. They may be unfounded. Time will tell.

I love the material the this kit is made from. Very solid parts.

David

__________________
I used to have super powers, but then one day, my Therapist took them away from me.

NAR #96285

SoAR #503

My Low Power Rocket Fleet

Level 1 (2-22-2014) GRITS Winternationals
Level 2 TBD
Level 3 TBD

I know how you feel. I love that motor as well. Especially in my Estes 1/20th scale V-2 and my Estes Rubicon.

David

__________________
I used to have super powers, but then one day, my Therapist took them away from me.

NAR #96285

SoAR #503

My Low Power Rocket Fleet

Level 1 (2-22-2014) GRITS Winternationals
Level 2 TBD
Level 3 TBD

I get an 'Out of Stock' message.

My kit is on it's way. How is the pre-printed wrap on this kit? It was rather wrinkled and lumpy on the last Spacex kit.

I would much rather lay the wrap myself since I know I can get it perfect.

__________________
Never trust an atom. They make up everything.

4 out of 3 people struggle with math.

Chemically, alcohol IS a solution.

NAR# 94042
SAM# 0078

The wrap looked very good. I saw one small wrinkle but no show stopper. There are some reference marks on the wrap that need to be in the correct position that you will reference when building the kit. It's probably a good thing it's preinstalled for most builders.

David

__________________
I used to have super powers, but then one day, my Therapist took them away from me.

NAR #96285

SoAR #503

My Low Power Rocket Fleet

Level 1 (2-22-2014) GRITS Winternationals
Level 2 TBD
Level 3 TBD

I did get a later second run of the Space X Falcon 9 with the wrap installed.
The BT-60 body tube is very thick and rough.
All the body tube seams and tube roughness showed through the thin wrap.
The installed wrap was actually on crooked, the seam graphics and alignment marks we off by 1/16".

Here's the blog post on the Space X tubes:
http://modelrocketbuilding.blogspot...-tube-wrap.html

There are some very well engineered features on the model -
the body wrap is not one of them.

__________________
Hans "Chris" Michielssen
Old/New NAR # 19086 SR

www.oddlrockets.com
www.modelrocketbuilding.blogspot.com
http://www.nar.org/educational-reso...ing-techniques/
Your results may vary
"Nose cones roll, be careful with that."
Every spaceman needs a ray gun.
Look out - I'm the Meister Shyster!

I had a first run Falcon 9 kit, and had no problem installing the wrap smoothly and straight. The tube on that run was a fairly standard white glassine covered tube.

By contrast, the tube on the new V1.1 kit is heavier and cheaper, just slightly better than mailing tube quality, judging simply from the roughness on the inside, and a manufacturing defect which shows as a "bunching" along one of the seams (not to mention the tube coupler, which appears to be made from the same material). The wraps are smooth enough, but is misaligned on my model just as hcmbanjo described. Enough to be noticable only on close inspection. (Additional comment after seeing hcmbanjo's blog post on the tubes: My kit was nowhere near that bad! The interesting thing is that, on my kit, the horizontal lines were all faded out at the seam, so you couldn't see the obvious misalignment. I wonder if this was a Just-In-Time fix mid-run?)

The payload fairing tube is a higher quality tube, though just a tad larger than the plastic parts were made for. Or possibly the plastic parts ended up smaller than the specs, since they are very loose (I'd estimate almost 1/2 millimeter off on the body side, and only a little tighter on the payload side)

Still, given that it's not supposed to have all the external details, it looks like a good model, and they at least attempted to model the landing legs (with foam stickers), though it looks like a last minute addition.

The engine mount construction doesn't bother me at all, considering it is done with epoxy, though I think the instructions should have advised roughening up the plastic surfaces where the epoxy is applied.

__________________
Roy
nar12605

Yes. The first run of the F9 kit was far better than the second. I now recall that on the second run the BT was VERY thick. So thick in fact that I had to sand the inside of it a large amount to even get the PNC to fit tightly.

__________________
Never trust an atom. They make up everything.

4 out of 3 people struggle with math.

Chemically, alcohol IS a solution.

NAR# 94042
SAM# 0078

My kits came today as promised. I opened the one with the slightly dented box and found it very much as Royatl describes. The other one will get stashed along with the first-run Falcon 9 kit I have.

I went and grabbed my V1 flyer (from the second, thick tube/pre-applied wrap run) to compare. My guess at the beginning of the thread that the new one is a different scale was apparently incorrect. They appear to be the same diameter.

That whole rear shroud/motor mount assembly is very interesting. I think I'd use something slower-setting than 5 minute epoxy to build it....and am thinking of alternatives as well (my favorite plastic-to-paper adhesive is Pacer Formula 560). I'm also wondering how to actually get a payload in that big payload section rather than the parachute....but maybe I should just leave well enough alone and fly an AltimeterOne/Two or Estes Altimeter in there..

I'll weigh it later but it may well be just glorious on E9s (as well as E12s).

One other major difference - there's no pretense of removing the fins for display as with the first Falcon 9 models. A bit about not flying it without them is clearly a copy/paste from the first instructions.

Also there's just one larger 'chute. That's a good idea. I fly my V1 on only one 'chute. No way I'm going to chase that Dragon to the next county.

Again it's pretty clear that at least some parts are from the same supplier as used for modelrockets.us kits (chute, motor hook).

__________________
Bernard Cawley
NAR 89040 L1 - Life Member
SAM 0061
AMA 42160
KG7AIE