AeroTech Open Thread

eggtimer rocketry
Shop deals on ebay
madcow rocketry
The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
KenRico said:
I want to OPENLY post some things I like about Aerotech .

A number of Non HAZMAT required shipping motors

Lotsa dealers

And some of my faves : F35W H250G H170M H550ST & K1103X

Kenny
Click to expand...

I'm so interested in the F35. I just can't pull the trigger to buy the case until I fly one and see how it performs.
 
grouch said:
F35W or F37W? I am confused. I don't recall seeing an F35W.
Click to expand...

Yup, it's a motor. It's kinda weird. The 24/60 case's only reload. Sold in a 2 pack, not sure if it needs hazmat.

Nate
 
The F35W fits the RMS-24/60 case. Unfortunately, that is the only load for the case at present. The 24-60 case fits motor mounts that fit the 24mm Estes E9 and E12 motors.
 
Thanks guys, that was totally off my radar. I even had to read the post a couple of times to catch the 24mm part. My mind was stuck on the 29/60 F37. It looks like I might have to pick up one of these cases. It looks like fun and the price is right.
 
I've flown quite a few F35W's and they are awesome little motors. GREAT motor for the Estes Interceptor E.

They are definitely sold in a 2-pack and IIRC, the propellant weight is right at 30 grams so they can ship without HAZMAT.

I think an F33FJ and F34R load will eventually be released for this casing (24/60) at some point although it's been about 5 years and counting since they were first announced.
 
I was thrown off a little by this as well. I never connected the dots to realize there's a 24mm and 29mm version in a 60ns configuration. The 24mm has the single F35W reload sold in two-packs while the 29mm version has an F37W and F62T to choose from, both sold as single-packs. Nice to know.
 
I am hoping that now that the CA law has been revised and new RMS reloads can be CSFM Classified as "Model Rocket Motors" that Aerotech will move forward with more types of reloads for this casing.


Donaldsrockets said:
I've flown quite a few F35W's and they are awesome little motors. GREAT motor for the Estes Interceptor E.

They are definitely sold in a 2-pack and IIRC, the propellant weight is right at 30 grams so they can ship without HAZMAT.

I think an F33FJ and F34R load will eventually be released for this casing (24/60) at some point although it's been about 5 years and counting since they were first announced.
Click to expand...
 
Kruegon said:
I'm so interested in the F35. I just can't pull the trigger to buy the case until I fly one and see how it performs.
Click to expand...

My advice is to pull the trigger. Even though only one reload currently available, it is a fantastic one! It might just be the best value available in the F-range.

Cheers,
Michael
 
With the AT stuff, can the reloads for the shorter 24mm case be used in the 60mm long version with a spacer, or do they require you to have both cases?
 
EXPjawa said:
With the AT stuff, can the reloads for the shorter 24mm case be used in the 60mm long version with a spacer, or do they require you to have both cases?
Click to expand...

You've gotta have both cases. If I remember correctly, the explanation was that the larger case needed larger threads and thicker walls, and thus was incompatible with the other reloads.

Nate
 
Correct. Thicker casing wall and the same outside diameter means that the inside diameter is too small for the 24/40 reloads to be used.

BUT, there could be all sorts of interesting reloads created for this casing size. hopefully there will be. To drive that, absurdly large sales numbers of casings would be noticed, so go ahead and order one or two or 8 of them.

:wink:


nute said:
You've gotta have both cases. If I remember correctly, the explanation was that the larger case needed larger threads and thicker walls, and thus was incompatible with the other reloads.

Nate
Click to expand...
 
I gotta say that it sounds like either a lack of planning or an engineering justification for a marketing ploy. It seems like if they'd planned it out in the design phase, it would've been reasonable to commonize things. OTOH, I've been involved with enough projects that had such intentions, but due to one thing and another wound up diverging... So, that would imply that the end closures aren't common either, which means that the part number count they have to produce and inventory is increased. That seems less than ideal from a business point of view, and also runs somewhat counter to the cost-saving justification to the customer. I'd be upset if I bought into a reload system with the idea that it would cover all of my needs for a given size MM, only to find that I actually one or two other sets to cover all the bases. That takes away from the value to me. Sorry, I'm just sort of typing out loud here...
 
The 24/40 and 24/60 fill substantially different needs for me. A cluster of E11's is a beautiful sight and the F35 is awesome. Had they gone with just one case, my 24/40 reloads would be significantly more expensive. The extra hardware paid for itself a long time ago.

Cheers,
Michael
 
The 24/60 casing is the length of an Estes E9.

The E9 did not exist when the 24/40 was created.

Many years later the E9 appeared, and to make that size motor required stronger casing and threads for the higher pressure.
 
And I can believe that, of course. But as a potential buyer now, in my simplistic viewpoint, I think "hey, I'm burning a bunch of 24mm BP motors, I should get a RMS to fill that need", and that need would ideally be using it in place of anything that might have a 24mm motor mount. To be fair, though, everything I'm building with that mount size has the thrust ring spaced so it can accommodate a 3.75" long motor case, even if that means I use a spacer a lot of the time. So, (again) in my simplistic view, a single RMS case is all I should need. But I recognize that it won't fit a large portion of everybody's rockets, and that if they did standardize things now, they'd leave a lot existing customers high & dry. So, it isn't a practical solution under the circumstances. But it would be nice if they did start offering D & E sized reloads for it, so potential future customers (like me) can have a single case if they wanted...
 
I have not heard anything about it, I'll see if Karl knows about it. We have not had any reports of failures on the new L1000 DMS motor.

crossfire said:
Hi
I read there was a DMS L CATO on Sat. at Potter. I am wondering if there is any feed back on the replacement DMS Ls that were sent out about a Month ago. I hope the CATO was on of the old DMS Ls. I have 2 of the replacements to fire.

Thanks Gary
Click to expand...
 
Kruegon said:
This style of statement does not help this discussion. Approaching the topic in this fashion will only harm the newly established lines of communication we have established here. AT has already stated that new RMS loads will include both the traditional and the EZ delays. Stirring this pot the wrong way will only drive our AT friends away. This is our best chance to have our opinions and desires heard and considered. But only if we approach it with civil and respectful tones.

According to our local vendors, this specific topic is split almost 50/50. Personally, I prefer the + delays. I like the idea of using the tapped closure for min diam. I also like the choice of plugged vs motor eject. I also see the advantage of EZ. And I'm not against it.

I do wish we had the tapped closure option for 29mm cases though. A 1/4"-20 tap would allow it. I'd have one milled but I couldn't fly it anywhere.
Click to expand...

Very well stated, thank you. The 29mm tapped closure is something we are looking into.
 
KenRico said:
I want to OPENLY post some things I like about Aerotech .

A number of Non HAZMAT required shipping motors

Lotsa dealers

Thanks for the feedback, I'll try to accept the good stuff too :D

And some of my faves : F35W H250G H170M H550ST & K1103X

Kenny
Click to expand...

Thanks for the feedback, are you sure you only want to leave positive thoughts here? :D The 1103X and the 550 are 2 of my own favorites.
 
crossfire said:
ATGM
So what is the correct way to install motor lighter? Was the L-1000 failure from batch from last year?

Thanks
Click to expand...

Not sure what you are specifically asking about the igniter, are you referring to placement or...

As for the L1000, we have no reports as of right now.
 
What I am asking is some are saying when installing igniter run the igniter all the way to the top of motor than back it off 2-3". Just asking if we should just place igniter all the way up the motor to the top and not back it off?
 
crossfire said:
What I am asking is some are saying when installing igniter run the igniter all the way to the top of motor than back it off 2-3". Just asking if we should just place igniter all the way up the motor to the top and not back it off?
Click to expand...

Ahh I see...the best method is to place the head of the igniter all the way in until it hits the delay grain. Some users like to back it off a bit but this isn't necessary.
 
Thanks much for the info. I think they were saying by backing off igniter there would be less pressure in motor to avoid a CATO in the DMS L-1000. What do they know.
 

Similar threads

Valkyrie Recovery Systems
Valkyrie will be going to NSL 2024!
Replies
2
Views
219
Valkyrie Recovery Systems
Valkyrie Recovery Systems
overklock
Aerotech G-force Build Thread - WIP
Replies
12
Views
2K
gldknght
gldknght
Dane Ronnow
Build thread: Aerotech HV Arcas
2
Replies
43
Views
5K
Dane Ronnow
Dane Ronnow
Bruiser
RIP IQSY Tomahawk
Replies
3
Views
1K
waltr
W
fyrwrxz
  • Locked
The end of the Never Ending Story
2
Replies
46
Views
4K
OzHybrid
OzHybrid

Latest posts

Back
Top