Estes Astron Falcon Boost Glider kit K-13

The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

georgegassaway

Well-Known Member
TRF Supporter
Joined
Jan 17, 2009
Messages
5,204
Reaction score
1,547
With the 1/45 Little Joe-II model pretty much done, I've started another sport project.

Well, SpaceX has been doing a lot of stuff with their Falcon that can land for re-use.

So I’ve decided to build a Falcon. But I feel the need….

The need for ….. WINGS!

XnUg3P7.jpg


An Estes Falcon B/G. When I got into the hobby for real in 1970, I had messed with attaching an engine directly to a Dime Store type balsa glider (Jetco wing thru slot in fuselage type IIRC). Spun 15 feet into the air and shredded.

DEd8Ib4.jpg


Not sure if I tried anything else, but within a few months, I got an Estes Falcon (I think that was the first kit B/G I built). I flew it, it did a nice barrel roll up, ejected the motor, and death-dived down and broke. I fixed it, but it never worked out. It might have even shredded on a later flight. And that was my first and only Falcon. I had quite a bad star of luck with gliders. The first glider i had that worked, were twin gliders, the old MPC Lunar Patrol with two gliders (Looked like rounded-winged versions of the Orbital Transport glider), and that was in 1971, a year after I’d been in the hobby. My first contest, in Atlanta in 1971, I used THAT in B B/G, but had to tape one glider on to not separate.

Now, 46 years later, I want to build another Falcon. I checked out the plans, and found the wing looks pretty skinny, a lot less chord than Renger’s Sky Slash which it was based on (Estes did it so two wings could be cut from one standard 3 x 10” sheet of balsa). So, I checked out the Sky Slash and compared the wing. Yep, way more chord, more area. But the wing planform looks too different (And fuselage very different). What I’ve ended up doing is increasing the Falcon wing root and tip chord a bit, but not as extreme as the Sky Slash.



So, it’ll look much the same, but glide better.



Now, this is for sport flying of course, but why would I want it to glide better?



Yeah, it would glide farther away and be more likely to get lost.



Or…..



Maybe not!

dItPMHF.jpg

(24” ruler in above photo, and my own DX-8 Tx)

Yeah, just as I did for Astron Space Plane 2X and 4X R/C models in 2008, this is a 2.5X scale-up for R/C. I have a good stock of C6-0’s that I can boost it with. Span will be about 28”, wing area about 150 sq inches. The wing I ended up with, had its size based on what I could cut out from a 6 x 36” sheet of 1/8” balsa. For awhile I was considering 3X, which would have needed two of those sheets and a lot left over, but 3x would be more D sized, I was this to fly reasonably on C6 power.

Receiver and battery will go into the big engine pod. A Scale pod would be about 1.8”. But I’ll make it with a BT-55 pod which will have plenty of space for R/C “payload”.

Structural fuselage is a graphite boom (4mm square), with balsa added to make it look like the “T” fuselage of the Falcon and also make it stiffer. Part of the lower front section of the fuselage is reinforced.

Another reason is that last summer after NARAM, I flew the Space Plane 4X three times at a local launch. Flew great. Until flight #3, when the G12 hit a void in the propellant, increased the thrust like crazy, and shredded the model. So I no longer have an old “Classic” B/G model converted for R/C. And I had seriously planned to build a scaled-up R/C Falcon a few years ago. So with this, when I go to a launch to sport fly, I can take this to get in some simple easy R/C RBG flying, and launch it off a rod, no tower.

Well…. I realized with the increase in wing chord versus the original Falcon wing, and making the stab a little bigger, and making the fuselage a bit longer…..I needed a good way to find out where the glide CG needed to be. So, I went ahead and built a 40% scale model of the 2.5X. In other words…. a “normal size” model of the Falcon but reflecting the changes I’ve made for the 2.5X. Below is picture taken of both, further along in the build, with the “normal size” Falcon, and the 2.5X with a simulated pod laying near it.

hv71jId.jpg


Took an hour or less to build the regular Falcon. So much different to build that one 46 years later, with CA and accelerator rather than Testor’s Wood Glue. And using a proper sanding block, and knowing how to airfoil. It’s not exactly a great airfoil, but still better than what I made long ago.

And now I do have a F/F Falcon to play around with, after all. Will probably rig up a 13mm adapter to kick out and unroll a streamer, probably fly on 1/2A3’s mostly.

So, this makes the first two Estes B/G kits I’ve built, with the Space Plane. Among early Estes gliders, I have also done a Flying Jenny (was a DOM plan in MRN, not a kit), SkyDart (several in the 70’s, plus the 2X R/C), and Orbital Transport. Not feeling the love for the Nighthawk. it’s OK, just never made one.

Latest update - Installed the servos and pushrods. image below, model upside down, showing the Dymond D-47 servos inline, glued into the vertical part of the "T" fuselage

QmTuBS8.jpg


Taped the dummy pod on (No pylon), and taped the receiver and battery pack to the outside of the pod.

vGFxNOl.jpg


And here is a view of the tail section, showing the rudder pushrod and control horn.

Yv92Lyj.jpg


Took it outside and did some trim test throws. It pulls a little left, and is a bit tail heavy. Well, the BT-55 pod will be a bit longer and mounted a bit more forward when the pylon is added. Pulling a bit to the left… there may be a warp. Also the 1/8” wing is more flexible than I expected it to be. So I may cover the wings with a model plane covering, perhaps Coverite, to make them stiffer. And if the pulling to the left is due to a wing warp, I can fix the warp using the covering iron

There’s a club launch Saturday, so I’m planning to fly it then. Although I might try to get in a test flight boost or two on Friday.

- George Gassaway
 
Three threads started by accident?

Watching with great interest, George. I also remember making the Falcon back in the day.
 
Definitely looking forward to when the R/C version flies! I think a lot of people have fond memories of the Falcon, thanks to both the original Estes kit and the more recent Semroc Hawk clone.
 
I think I had the Falcon, too, but could not get it to fly and it broke early on. I distinctly remembering something that looked like a saucer with a circular wing and a pilon mounted motor tube. It didn't fly correctly for me, either. This was on the order of 50 years ago. I'm also looking forward to see how these new versions fly.
 
Sorry for the duplicate threads. I was editing my original post and I used the “back” button in between edits which may have generated new threads. I’ve asked the mods to delete the other two that have no replies (I can’t delete a thread like I can with a message).

I think I had the Falcon, too, but could not get it to fly and it broke early on. I distinctly remembering something that looked like a saucer with a circular wing and a pilon mounted motor tube. It didn't fly correctly for me, either. This was on the order of 50 years ago. I'm also looking forward to see how these new versions fly.

Sounds like the old Estes Astron Invader. That is an oldie I’ve never tried.

https://www.rocketryforum.com/showthread.php?35120-Estes-(Astron)-Invader-(K-19-or-1219)-Gallery

attachment.php


That would be QUITE a interesting glider to scale up for HPR (with a sane choice of thrust curve), making the wings out of 3/4" or 1" blue foam, and R/C it. Though if I ever do a Level-2 Cert, I'm going to build something like an 8X to 10X Astron Space Plane with blue foam wings. The 4X I had flew very well, the handling during R/C glide was great.

In te early 70's I did try “The Bat” plan from Model Rocketry magazine, and the SAI Mini-Bat kit which was not related to "the Bat" (The Mini-Bat often went Maxi-nuts on boost).

- George Gassaway
 
Last edited:
I have the Falcon 2.5X ready to fly now. I decided to go with a BT-60 pod, which looks more scale-ish. It contains a 100 mAh 2S 7.4v Lipo battery and Spektrum AR-400 receiver with case removed. The D-47 servos are fine with 7.4V, other servos would be fried without adding a regulator down to 5V.

6rmllpm.jpg


The pylon was built up using a 1/8” core and 1/16 sides. That produced a 1/8” thick tunnel for the servo plugs and wiring to run from the fuselage to inside of the pod.

2dWlD3v.jpg


The engine mount has four vent holes in the centering ring so that the ejection charge will vent backwards out of the holes. Although I still plan to use C6-0’s, but even booster motors can have a little “kick”. So, this bird will not eject the engine.

s6WrwkJ.jpg


And so here it is, with the pod on and wings covered. I used “Econokote”, that I had found for $1.50 in a thrift store (I like red for my main wing color anyway, have done the mostly red with yellow tips on a lot of my models). It is light, but did not stiffen the 1/8” wings as much as I hoped. But may be stiff enough, we’ll see.

tThwdxd.jpg


Total glide mass with burned out C6 is 155 grams.

Will probably get in some test glide throws Friday afternoon, to work out the CG and trim settings. Will fly it Saturday for sure.

A view of the underside, showing servos, pushrods, and such.

- George Gassaway

8u3saoj.jpg
 
Last edited:
Sounds like the old Estes Astron Invader. That is an oldie I’ve never tried.

https://www.rocketryforum.com/showthread.php?35120-Estes-(Astron)-Invader-(K-19-or-1219)-Gallery

That would be QUITE a interesting glider to scale up for HPR (with a sane choice of thrust curve), making the wings out of 3/4" or 1" blue foam, and R/C it.
I did an R/C upscale a couple of years ago, with mixed results. Perhaps a better pilot could control it better: https://www.rocketryforum.com/showthread.php?63104-Astron-Invader-2-5x-upscale-R-C

Ari.
 
Well, actually got in some test flights today. I was using a 1/4" lug on a 1/8" rod, but it was windy. The model got hung on the rod, then finally came off but only after the pad was already falling backwards, and the glided landed on its back. Cracked the horizontal "T" balsa, but did not break the 4mm square graphite boom.

I fixed it, and replaced the 1/4" lug with a 10mm body tube for the lug, so no binding. It took off but not too well, and climbed up to about 100 feet or so. I did another boost later which was a bit better.

Tonight I am making up a simple tower for it, since the launch tomorrow will have about the same wind. It will take off better out of a tower. And then I can compare it with other tower-launched models I've flown on C6 power and different weights.

If I can get it to boost OK enough to feel in full control at burnout, then I'll do some Chad-Staged C6 flights.

But I do realize I went a bit too big on this one, at 2.5x size, the mass is more than I was shooting for. For a single C6 powered model, 2X would have been better (not as good of a glide but a lot higher boost and better liftoff), and perhaps able to take off well enough in wind to use a rod rather than tower. For sure a tower is always better than a rod, but then the tower is not as convenient to fly with due to the assembly/disassembly and simply a big piece additional of launch gear rather than using the same pad os some other models. I was fortunate that the Space Plane 2X and 4X were just fine using a rod.

Good thing is that the wings are strong enough (so far anyway).

- George Gassaway
 
Last edited:
Very cool project, I hope it works well. I still have my Falcon and Invader and like to see other projects involving them.
 
A very cool project, George.

I lost my original Falcon on its first flight, circa 1970. It took a bit of a odd angle off the pad and boosted straight into the sun. Never saw it again despite several hours walking a grid in the 1 foot grass that covered most of the field.

An upscale RC Nighthawk is on my long term build list, sized for 24mm motors.
 
My first catalog was the 1964 Estes, and I remember looking at the Space Plane and Falcon, trying to decide if I ought to get one. But never did get one, being a whole lot more excited about building regular rockets I saw in those pages. My first glider was the Astron Invader, and I had great success flying it. I guess I lucked out, it boosted straight, and circled the field nicely. My friend Rob built one, but did not use the dihedral brace during construction, he built the "wing" as a perfectly flat disc. It flew well, it just glided inverted.

I also built the Flying Jenny. It shredded rather spectacularly on one flight when I decided to try it on a B14 motor. :facepalm:

As a adult, about 30 years later, attempts to fly a newly-built Invader proved unsuccessful, with it arcing into the ground during powered flight. I guess I forgot the experience I had developed as a young kid. :)

I also built the Nighthawk, and enjoyed that one very much.

I'll be interested to hear more about the RC upscaled Falcon.

Here is one of the only pictures I have of my early rockets. This is a scan of a color slide taken in 1966. The Invader is in the back on the left, leaning against the wall -- black/silver/red in color. A few other slides survived,\ from that roll, including some pictures I took while on a tour of Estes Industries in March of 1966. That trip was made nearly 50 years ago!

Lee's-rockets-1966.JPG
 
Last edited:
Friday night, I made some small modifications to an existing R/C RBG Tower, allowing the Falcon 2.5X to fly out of it.

0oGhQUU.jpg


Flew it Saturday at a local club launch. Wind was about 10 mph most of the day.

dFx3M4K.jpg


Took off better from the tower than off a rod Friday, as expected. First few flights were C6-0. Not a great altitude, but better than the rod launches Friday. Each time it rolled to the right a bit. I kept adjusting the boost trim. Finally got rid of most of the right roll.

By the third flight, went to Chad-staged C6’s. That worked out well, a pretty nice altitude compared to single C6. If the single C6 was to 150 feet, then the 2-staged C6 was to about 400 feet.

Don’t know the durations. Of course it’s not built for contest flying. The glide is OK, and handling is good. Got the glide trim really locked in well. It handled the wind pretty nicely.

For the seventh and last flight of the day, I did 3-staged C6’s. Because….. why not?

bUhxazm.jpg


Well, it worked. But during boost it sometimes acts a little twitchy, and during the 3rd stage burn it got more horizontal than vertical. But it was already high up, so no danger. Just that by the time it went into glide, it was not much higher than the 2-stage boosts. So, I don’t think I’ll try another 3-stage C6 flight (Might be interesting to try a B4 for the 3rd stage, or possibly a Quest C6 which is more like a C4). Sometime I may try it on the Aerotech D2.3 reload, it'll be a bit slower boost but will burn for 8 seconds. https://www.nar.org/SandT/pdf/Aerotech/D2.3.pdf

So, while it came out heavier than I planned, it is OK. I wrote on Friday night that a 2.0X might have been better. Well, certainly so for boosting higher on a C6. But 2.0X might be a bit “hot”. So now I think if I built a second scale-up for a single C6, that maybe around 2.2X to 2.3X. Also I’d use a smaller diameter pod, BT-55 or 35mm.

I did not get any launch or glide pics because….. uh, busy with transmitter. But I did have my camera at the pad, looking up, to get a few boost videos. During one of those, preparing to land, I flew the glider over the pad and the glider was seen in one of the videos.

7VMaQX7.jpg


Below, short video of the 3-stage boost.

- George Gassaway

[video=youtube;45OYHd---48]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=45OYHd---48[/video]
 
Last edited:
Here is some Falcon 2.5X video. First two flights (single stage and 2-stage) shot by Gary Aslakson. The 3rd video is a repeat of the at-pad view of the 3-stage boost (used the Youtube editor to put them all into one video).

[video=youtube;yZsAIZfZ8RI]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yZsAIZfZ8RI[/video]

A couple of screenshots:

JAgU5MA.jpg


ZUZwZbj.jpg


- George Gassaway
 
Back
Top