Minimum Diameter 54mm - Let's see yours.

Shop deals on ebay
the model rocket show
SilicdyneTRF
Onebadhawk
The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
JimJarvis50 said:
Yep, those pics were mine! Taking along water wasn't too hard to figure out. It was about 105F at the time.

Jim
Click to expand...

You say that but I was all excited about recovering my rocket and I just didn't think about anything else. In hindsight I should have cached Google Maps satellite imagery on my laptop so I could have actually looked at the coordinates location on a map. If I would have done this Charlie Ogino would have easily come across my rocket as I could have shown him exactly where it was on the map.

That said I won't make the same mistake again. No use getting all excited about recovery, it's better to approach it methodically and logically.
 
plugger said:
You say that but I was all excited about recovering my rocket and I just didn't think about anything else. In hindsight I should have cached Google Maps satellite imagery on my laptop so I could have actually looked at the coordinates location on a map. If I would have done this Charlie Ogino would have easily come across my rocket as I could have shown him exactly where it was on the map.

That said I won't make the same mistake again. No use getting all excited about recovery, it's better to approach it methodically and logically.
Click to expand...

Getting lost in the moment is easy after a launch. I pack a recovery backpack before flight. If I land close, hey cool, but if I'm out there, I'm prepared. Grab and go.
 
I am working on one, but it is a different kind of thing. Mine is aiming more at flying motors like the I65. Phenolic airframe, standard dual deploy, balsa core fins laminated with carbon. Tweaking the sims as I go, but likely looking at about 9k' on the I65.
 
I'm basically duplicating a post from the Watering Hole, but this appears an appropriate place for it.

CF Mongoose 54 photo shoot...unfortunately a bit overcast, but you get the idea. I had not appreciated just how big this rocket is, but at 6 ft I'm almost exactly eye-to-tip with it n the stand. There are no RBs or guides as I will be tower launching this one. It has a good layer of Duplicolor Clear Coat and was extensively polished with Maguire's Ultimate Compound.



Nose Cone is held onto the Coupler with (3) 4-40 set screws. The coupler is held to the payload tube by (3) 4-40 set screws also. The NC is currently setup up for an Eggfinder, but has plenty of room for a longer range tracker down the road (I am studying for Ham license now). It is setup to be DD from the payload only by either cable cutters or chute release. The motor is retained by an aluminum rod that threads into the forward motor closure and a T-nut in the electronics bay aft bulkhead. This would allow for an extra 8" piece of bt being added to retain the Loki 54-4000 motor (motor would function as the coupler for the extension in that configuration) if this rocket lives that long. The NC tip is also painted with high temp header paint, and was put through the tempering cycles in an oven in the lab...Argonia compatible now.



The fins were tacked on with JB Weld, heavily filleted with Aeropoxy + Milled FG, then vacuum bag T2T with two layers of CF and US Composites 635-Medium. This was my first attempt at vacuum bagging T2T, and it didn't go perfect. Therefore, there are a few places where I sanded into the top layer, but these are mainly in the center of the bt, or the center of the fin. The under layer is good throughout and since the weak spots wouldn't be expected to be the failure spots I think I will be plenty good...we shall see.



I have an RRC3 and Eggtimer Quark on the sled, and all that is left for the build is to solder up a couple magnetic switches, and get final weights on everything for a good sim file. Ground testing gave me a vigorous, smooth ejection with 0.6g (there is one 2-56 shear pin on the payload). I am hoping to get this in the air three times at Airfest on AT 54 motors. The highest planned for that weekend is a K550W which sims to about 16k.
 
Last edited:
Like I said in the Watering Hole, the Mongoose looks great. Can you elaborate on why you used screws on the NC/coupler? Did you just not want to see the epoxy through the fluorescent fiberglass, or did it have something to do with your tracker setup?
 
BDB said:
Like I said in the Watering Hole, the Mongoose looks great. Can you elaborate on why you used screws on the NC/coupler? Did you just not want to see the epoxy through the fluorescent fiberglass, or did it have something to do with your tracker setup?
Click to expand...

It was mainly about the tracker setup. The NC can easily be removed to access the tracking bay without taking apart the prepped payload bay. This lets me install or turn on the tracker as late as possible. One of my Eggfinders is on a self contained tracking sled that can simply screw into several of my rockets, so I can move them around during a launch. However, I like to prep everything else at home prior to the launch, hence the external access.

I also wanted to make as many of the fittings mechanical, instead of permanent, as possible so I could change out pieces if they are damaged.
 
Last edited:
Modified Punisher Sport, will fit a K550 though that flight should have a tracker and a different nose cone -
la61Mir.jpg
 
CoyoteNumber2 said:
I'll kick things off with mine. Presenting...HammerSpace.

Filament-wound fiberglass airframe, G10 fins by Public Missiles, altimeter sleds by Additive Aerospace. Featherweight Raven3, Communication Specialists AT-2B tracking transmitter, Cobra CDR 820 high-definition video camera. The only flight to date was at BALLS 24 on a CTI L265 to 21,950 feet above ground level.
Click to expand...

HammerSpace flew again at BALLS 25, this time on a CTI L730. Beat all my previous bests. 24,379 feet altitude, 1,362 miles per hour (Mach ~1.8) velocity, 41.26 Gs acceleration.
 
8F792F90-DF2A-4ADD-A927-4F823D830958.jpeg
Mac Hyper54 still in the build phase. Still looking for jobs.

Estimate by OR is 26,400 feet on a Loki L1040 but I don’t believe it.
 
My first minimum diameter 54mm was a haphazard attempt. On "Back in Black" I used biaxial fiberglass sleeve over LOC tubing. Fins were not tip to tip and the outcome was a shred at Max Q on an Aerotech K1100.



My next attempt was "Bones". I used Biaxial Sleeve over PML phenolic tubing and a airfoiled ACME fin can. This rocket had many successful flights and proved to be a conssitant performer in my fleet. "Bones" Finally met it demise when a motor adapter got stuck in the airframe and I busted the booster section trying to remove it.



Now a decade later I have upped my game for my 2017 build. A Go Devil 54 x 4. I took a standard Go Devil 54 from Mad Cow and did 4 fins instead of 3. I used Carbon fiber 1/8" panels for the fins and 2 layers of 5.7oz carbon 2x2 twill tip to tip.







 
Last edited:
I've also flown Madcow's GoDevil 54, slightly shortened, but with just the regular fins using J-B Weld to the Australian Altitude record for a K motor at Thunda 2019 recently. It reached 20138 feet AGL (6138.1 meters AGL) on a CTI K300 Classic Long Burner.
Big Devil - before launch.jpg
Used the boat tail closure and a fly-away rail guide for extra altitude, and an AltusMetrum Altimeter/GPS Tracker. Painted with a layer of clear coat, so it's the colored fiberglass airframe and nose cone. No stickers, that slows it down.

upload_2019-6-5_17-42-39.png
 
Cloudbuster 54's and the Vulcan L750-30's to fly them. G10 (not G12) airframe,LOC nose cone. Flown at LDRS X in 1991 at Black Rock. Altitudes ranged from 17k to 20k feet. (Measured angles to the chalk dust clouds, no electronic altimeters at the time.) CB54s LDRS X L750 cropped.jpg
 
airforcetp1991 said:
I know this is an older post but can you confirm that the Blackhawk 54 has a carbon fiber airframe not fiberglass, I’ve seen different things in different threads/on different sites? Thank you!
Click to expand...
The airframe on my Blackhawk 54 is not carbon fiber. It uses the earlier regular wall tubes (~0.065”) that have density and working properties similar to wound fiberglass. My understanding is the the kits sold now are the lighter thin wall (~0.045”) tubes.
 
WoShuGui said:
The airframe on my Blackhawk 54 is not carbon fiber. It uses the earlier regular wall tubes (~0.065”) that have density and working properties similar to wound fiberglass. My understanding is the the kits sold now are the lighter thin wall (~0.045”) tubes.
Click to expand...


Thank you. I emailed Wildman and they confirmed the airframe and fins are fiberglass.
 
Tonimus said:
Hoping not to hijack here, why are these MD bird's fins not mounted against the aft end of the rocket, but 2-3 inches up?

mperegrinefalcon said:
It provides an aerodynamic benefit in that it destabilizes the rocket so it doesn't wheather cock.
Click to expand...

I'd like to know more about this.

If the only goal in mounting the fins higher than the bottom end of the rocket was to create less stability, then making the fins smaller would seem to be a better choice.

I'm certainly no aerodynamicist (is that even a word?), but I suspect there might be something more to it like, moving the fins to an area of less turbulent airflow makes for less drag and more effective stabilizing.

My guess is that that's probably a gross oversimplification if it's even accurate. I'd welcome more input...
 
Bruce said:
Tonimus said:
Hoping not to hijack here, why are these MD bird's fins not mounted against the aft end of the rocket, but 2-3 inches up?



I'd like to know more about this.

If the only goal in mounting the fins higher than the bottom end of the rocket was to create less stability, then making the fins smaller would seem to be a better choice.

I'm certainly no aerodynamicist (is that even a word?), but I suspect there might be something more to it like, moving the fins to an area of less turbulent airflow makes for less drag and more effective stabilizing.

My guess is that that's probably a gross oversimplification if it's even accurate. I'd welcome more input...
Click to expand...

One reason to do this is to allow room for motor retention. The age old retention - TAPE.
 

Similar threads

G's Monster Rocket
Open Rocket vs Experience in HPR
Replies
3
Views
191
mtnmanak
mtnmanak
gsitexas
Sold Binder Design "Excel" Model Rocket Kit (54mm Motor Tube Components Added) - SOLD
Replies
1
Views
672
gsitexas
gsitexas
Cooperr
29mm minimum diameter design questions
Replies
19
Views
2K
Glasspack
Glasspack
J
Aerotech K185 - Have you had this problem?
Replies
10
Views
993
jdeveau
J
L
Sold Rocketry Warehouse 54mm diameter Scarab 54 fiberglass kit - new & unbuilt
Replies
4
Views
657
David Schwantz
David Schwantz

Latest posts

Back
Top