There used to be a kit (can't remember the maker), but that's long OOP, usually goes for good money on ebay and I don't know if they flew very well...rockets with big wings sticking out usually crash better than rocketing upwards in a straight line. There are PMCs (Plastic Model Conversions) around.
There are a lot of rocket folks out there that are afraid of rockets with wings simply because the do not understand them. The only reason a rocket with wings is unstable is because the CG is not located correctly. If the CG is in front of the CP by an appropriate amount, it will boost just fine.
If it will fly as an aircraft, it will boost as a rocket if you balance it correctly.
I just converted an Estes V2 into a winged manned A4b with radio control. Several folks thought it would be problematic or not work at all. Their fears were ungrounded.
......The problem with the X1 is that the wings aren't swept like the A4b or the X2 and are quite wide...this (from what I can tell) moves the CP way up front (hence a lot of nose weight needed) and causes more drag. Additionally the big wing makes it more susceptible to wind as well as imperfections in build affecting the straight line flight performance. Quite a lot of things working against this design rocket-wise; however it isn't impossible...just very tricky.
I've found two X-1 rocket builds on-line (including the Estes Canadian Arrow modification Aerostadt listed above) and both only lasted one flight and was destroyed on the second. I came close to getting a OOP large X1 rocket kit on ebay last year, but the other guy just wanted it more and outbid me (and I usually don't lose when I really want something...lol). I do plan on building one eventually (on my loooong list of to-do's), but I have to be realistic about the challenges this design presents.
......
You guys have much more experience than me on this (kudos to both of you for your fine machines!); however I'll believe it when I see it made into a retail rocket kit which works. This rocket plane is really popular, so why hasn't there been any successful rocket kit of it? At least I don't believe there has been one in recent years...hence the OP's question.
(Note that I'm saying this in reference to the X1 as a rocket first and RC rocket-boosted glider second.)
I agree Tom, it isn't hard to do, just needs to be done correctly, straight wing or not doesn't make a bunch of difference, especially at slow boost speeds like I prefer..and nose weight, well sometimes that helps to keep speeds lower as well and make the boost more tame...My A-4B has about two ounces of nose weight, but it floats due to the wing area...
Frank
Kit makers, particularly the large volume ones, would be worried about and turned off by the large amount of ballast required for an non gliding X-1 model and the likelihood of builders leaving out the ballast and trying to fly the model in an unstable condition. Ergo, I am certain we will never see mass market kits.
I might have to do a low power non gliding X-1 just to show it can be made to boost well... If not very high due to the ballast required.
I found another photo of a cruciform X-1 I designed for a guy in england, it turned out quite nice...that is something that would be kittable and I know flies well, but I don't know if there is any interest in this style of model.
Frank
That one looks good and gets around the forward CP issue by being a flat/profile kit and note that the wings are also set back. while these fly nicely and are great in their own regard, they don't quite satisfy those who are looking for a scale/semi-scale looking rocket kit (like those Micromeister showed above).
yes, the wings are pushed back an inch or more, mainly because the top profile pushes the CG actually further forward, but you gain in lifting area so usually it's a win. The CG on this model is actually an inch ahead of where the wing leading edge meets the fuse shape. I understand about profiles, they work really well but some people just don't care for the look. I personally would rather have a good flying plane than a good looking plane, though if you can combine both that's better
Frank
That one looks good and gets around the forward CP issue by being a flat/profile kit and note that the wings are also set back. while these fly nicely and are great in their own regard, they don't quite satisfy those who are looking for a scale/semi-scale looking rocket kit (like those Micromeister showed above).
Side note is that I've been into RC for over 30 years now and probably buy a dozen RC planes and vehicles annually.
Actually, the profile only fuse helps with the CP issue a little bit. The cruciform fuse with both plan view and profile representation of the fuse actually is a little worse in the CP department that the real shape. As the real shape of the fuse pitches, it is less affected by the local airstream than the cruciform is.
Like Frank said, the extra lift from the planform fuse is usually worth the extra ballast to get the CG where it needs to be on the cruciform fuse.
Getting back to the rocket non-gliding category of X-1 models, I still think it is not going to be hard to get a scale outline X-1 model to fly right. You simply have to be willing to use enough ballast to get the CG right and to have enough motor to get it off the rod or rail with enough velocity to be stable. Some model sizes and motor choices will work better than others.
If you are willing to do some subtle tweaking of the tail size and wing placement, it gets easier.
I'm starting to think that the solution is actually a compromise and similar to what was already being done and also mentioned by George and Frank...having RC control of the X-1 on boost makes a lot of sense. My rocket club doesn't allow RC last I checked, so I never investigated that avenue (aka forbidden fruit), but perhaps I'll try it on my local field more as a means to control the craft during boost.
Given that RC rocket gliders are covered by the NAR safety code, why would a rocket club not allow a RC rocket glider to fly at one of their launches?
That would be the first time I have ever heard of a misguided rule like that.
This was listed in the rules:
"NO RC’s permitted at the field. Our insurance only covers rocketry-related activities so anything other than that is not permitted. If you have an RC device in a rocket, please see a board member."
There may be provision for exceptions, but I've never asked...I usually don't even get in all the launches I have planned and I probably shouldn't add to my build pile right now. :blush: I do plan on asking a board member about it though...they'll likely make exceptions based on their discretion. The members are generally really cool about things.
Enter your email address to join: