Page 1 of 8 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 225

Thread: X-Plane SST: Scratch Build

  1. #1
    Join Date
    16th March 2012
    Location
    Ft. Lauderdale
    Posts
    1,390

    X-Plane SST: Scratch Build

    I have never scratch built a rocket.

    I have built and flown 4" LOC V2 and PML AGM-256 Pit Bull. And am in the middle of building the Sirius Sat V (Build Thread to restart this eve!), and PML 4" Patriot.

    For my next project I want to try something new and different.

    Hopefully my design sketch will upload...

    The basics of the 1st draft design are:

    X-Plane SST

    4" x 42" Body Tube (90% certain FG)
    5:1 FG Nosecone (20")
    3 tail fins
    2 wings
    2 engine cluster. 29 MMT. (the reason for the cluster is my local field allows up to G's. As well as trying a cluster will be new / exciting)

    Before I order any parts,... anyone have any thoughts / warnings?

    I don't have any sim s/w. Is this remotely stable? I have no issue with adding a reasonable amount of nose weight (say 8-12 oz). But if it takes 2kg in the nose to make it stable...
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	X-Plane SST-1.jpg 
Views:	188 
Size:	103.3 KB 
ID:	91910  
    Last edited by Quaranta; 28th July 2012 at 06:29 PM.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    22nd July 2011
    Location
    Where ever the the boss sends me...
    Posts
    1,378
    I have always been interested in the x-15 style rockets. I took your information and put it into Open Rocket. OR says its 0.93 cal stable with a pair of H128s with no added nose weight. This assumes a FG nose & tube, and 1/8 plywood fins/wings. Some will say that they need to be thicker, and they are probably correct. If you don't have Open Rocket, I highly encourage you to download it and learn to use this free design software.

    Terry

    XPlane-SST.pdf

    XplaneSSt.ork
    Terry

    NAR L1
    2013: 1 E-16, 1 E-9, and a B6-4... I'm way behind

  3. #3
    Join Date
    16th March 2012
    Location
    Ft. Lauderdale
    Posts
    1,390
    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rex View Post
    I have always been interested in the x-15 style rockets. I took your information and put it into Open Rocket. OR says its 0.93 cal stable with a pair of H128s with no added nose weight. This assumes a FG nose & tube, and 1/8 plywood fins/wings. Some will say that they need to be thicker, and they are probably correct. If you don't have Open Rocket, I highly encourage you to download it and learn to use this free design software.

    Terry

    XPlane-SST.pdf

    XplaneSSt.ork
    Terry, Thank you very much. I didn't even know open rocket was free! I was concerned about buying Rock Sim and making a mistake,... not even knowing the answer was garbage!

    I downloaded OR. Pretty easy to get started. Here's my effort. No motors,... but a chute and I put 8 oz 1" back from there tip of the nose cone... pretty good numbers.

    Looks feasible.

    As you summized,... the X-15 is the inspiration. I went with 3 tail fins as I like the look of 2 wings / 3 fins resulting in drooping stabilizer. It also lets me mount my launch lugs midline on the underside... less obtrusive on the design,... perhaps suggesting it is launched inverted from the underbelly of a mothership.

    Thanks for your help!

    Simon
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	X-Plane Jpeg.jpg 
Views:	109 
Size:	46.6 KB 
ID:	91926  
    Last edited by Quaranta; 29th July 2012 at 12:22 AM.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    16th March 2012
    Location
    Ft. Lauderdale
    Posts
    1,390
    No one else interested enough to post?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    2nd March 2010
    Location
    N.Haverhill,NH
    Posts
    4,997
    Quote Originally Posted by Quaranta View Post
    No one else interested enough to post?
    Im very interested.
    Thing is,I dont do simulators and Im a LPR and some MPR builder.
    Ill let the people that build rockets this size chime in on suggestions on your build.
    However,I will say,"I do like the looks of this very much"
    Good job on the design.
    NAR 90998
    SAM 0322
    If you have given your best, then you have stopped trying.
    http://daily-quip.com/
    I like Fat-Bottomed Rockets
    Temple of the Dog

  6. #6
    Join Date
    16th March 2012
    Location
    Ft. Lauderdale
    Posts
    1,390
    Thanks for the response.

    I've pretty much decided to go ahead with it. I'm going to contact Wildman / Tim tomorrow... see if he'll slot a 4' FG tube for me (not sure if he offers this service!)... if not I'll prob go to PML. Having a pro with the proper equipment slot the tubes will ensure the fins/wings are parallel to the rocket axis.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    2nd March 2010
    Location
    N.Haverhill,NH
    Posts
    4,997
    Quote Originally Posted by Quaranta View Post
    Thanks for the response.

    I've pretty much decided to go ahead with it. .
    COOL
    Throw your hat over the fence and order the stuff.
    NAR 90998
    SAM 0322
    If you have given your best, then you have stopped trying.
    http://daily-quip.com/
    I like Fat-Bottomed Rockets
    Temple of the Dog

  8. #8
    Join Date
    7th November 2011
    Location
    Waxhachie, TX
    Posts
    510
    Hell yeah!!

    After watching, and watching, your Sirius Saturn build I am stoked on this one!!

    Wish I had more input, sorry more focused on my current L2 build...lol
    TRA # 13934 L2

    Tripoli Houston #002

    Level 1 7-14-12

    Level 2 12-15-12


    Our day job >>> http://www.catfishplantation.com

  9. #9
    Join Date
    16th March 2012
    Location
    Ft. Lauderdale
    Posts
    1,390
    Quote Originally Posted by Spooks View Post
    Hell yeah!!

    After watching, and watching, your Sirius Saturn build I am stoked on this one!!

    Wish I had more input, sorry more focused on my current L2 build...lol
    Thanks for the response and encouragement!

    FYI, The Sat V thread has returned as I finish the pre-priming filling / sanding. Hope to begin paint this week... Here's the link:

    http://www.rocketryforum.com/showthr...V-Build-Thread

    As for this project, I have updated the design. Originally I was going with a 42" BT,... but have increased it to 48". This way, I need much less nose weight for my max planned engine (2x H399 or similar). Much better stability.

    With the update, the name has changed to X-Plane HST.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	X-Plane HST 48 JPEG.jpg 
Views:	85 
Size:	54.3 KB 
ID:	92079  
    Last edited by Quaranta; 30th July 2012 at 01:48 PM.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    26th January 2010
    Location
    Northern California
    Posts
    8,136
    I like it! I've always liked the looks of the X-Planes. You mentioned flying it on a G cluster, because your local field only allows G's. Keep in mind a G cluster will probably be a high power flight due to the combined propellant weight. You might want to check with your club first, and make sure they would allow it.
    NAR 91107, Level 2

    I think paint and I have an uneasy truce going.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    2nd September 2010
    Location
    The Korova Milkbar
    Posts
    1,356
    Cant wait to see the glue start flying! Subscribed.
    NAR#91770 level 2
    TRA#13995 level 2

  12. #12
    Join Date
    16th March 2012
    Location
    Ft. Lauderdale
    Posts
    1,390
    Quote Originally Posted by qquake2k View Post
    I like it! I've always liked the looks of the X-Planes. You mentioned flying it on a G cluster, because your local field only allows G's. Keep in mind a G cluster will probably be a high power flight due to the combined propellant weight. You might want to check with your club first, and make sure they would allow it.
    Good advice to check. I will.

    from the NAR website:

    Quote Originally Posted by NAR

    Where Is The Line Between Model and High Power Rocketry?

    A rocket exceeds the definition of a model rocket under NFPA 1122 and becomes a High Power rocket under NFPA 1127 if it:

    Uses a motor with more than 160 Newton-seconds of total impulse (an "H" motor or larger) or multiple motors that all together exceed 320 Newton-seconds
    Uses a motor with more than 80 Newtons average thrust (see rocket motor coding);
    Exceeds 125 grams of propellant
    Uses a hybrid motor
    Weighs more than 1,500 grams including motor(s); or
    Includes any airframe parts of ductile metal.
    2 x aeotech g79's come in under the 125g propellant mass limit, so I'm OK there. I'm also OK by total impulse.

    Weight,... that's way over,... but I think that is OK. But definitely will check.

    Good advice! Thanks.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    16th January 2011
    Location
    Spring Green WI
    Posts
    813
    Wildman Tim has his own tube slotting machine. I would think he would do it for you.
    GP

  14. #14
    Join Date
    16th March 2012
    Location
    Ft. Lauderdale
    Posts
    1,390
    Good to know. I sent him an e-mail,... but I think his e-mail filter considers me SPAM.

    I'll give him a call tomorrow.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    16th March 2012
    Location
    Ft. Lauderdale
    Posts
    1,390
    Quote Originally Posted by qquake2k View Post
    I like it! I've always liked the looks of the X-Planes. You mentioned flying it on a G cluster, because your local field only allows G's. Keep in mind a G cluster will probably be a high power flight due to the combined propellant weight. You might want to check with your club first, and make sure they would allow it.
    I checked. They said... NO.

    Thanks for making me check into it!

    I still like the design and still want to build it. I just need to reconsider size / power.

    I sim'd with 2x Max F's... 120m. and I build heavy... so no way.

    Build it as designed with a single 38 mm MMT. A G78 sims at 170m. That's borderline. And I don't like the idea of compromising design for local field when the max motor is only a maybe...

    A can down scale to a 3" body tube.... would probably be 36" BT with a 15" nose cone. 51" LOA. Would use a single 29mm vs 38mm MMT. This is the only option for satisfactory local use. Need to sim it though.

    The final option is to build it as designed. Forget local field flights.

    Not sure what approach to take. I'm going to sim the 3" BT option.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    16th March 2012
    Location
    Ft. Lauderdale
    Posts
    1,390
    No surprises when doing a rough sim at 3". Minimum power would be something such as F50.

    Now just to decide what I want...

  17. #17
    Join Date
    26th January 2010
    Location
    Northern California
    Posts
    8,136
    I'm glad you checked before you got there and were turned away. If it were me, I think I'd go 3", so I could launch it at my local field. You can always build a 4" later, if things change and you have a place for HP flights.
    NAR 91107, Level 2

    I think paint and I have an uneasy truce going.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    16th March 2012
    Location
    Ft. Lauderdale
    Posts
    1,390
    Quote Originally Posted by qquake2k View Post
    I'm glad you checked before you got there and were turned away. If it were me, I think I'd go 3", so I could launch it at my local field. You can always build a 4" later, if things change and you have a place for HP flights.
    I have HPR field in the vicinity,... just not as convenient. about 1.5-2 hours away. the local field is 30 minutes.

    I'm leaning toward the 3" as well...
    Last edited by Quaranta; 31st July 2012 at 02:31 PM.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    26th January 2010
    Location
    Northern California
    Posts
    8,136
    Quote Originally Posted by Quaranta View Post
    I have HPR field in the vicinity,... just not as convenient. about 1.5-2 hours away. the local field is 30 minutes.

    I'm leaning toward the 3" as well...
    Well in that case, build both! I'm a member of two clubs, one field is about 30 minutes away, the other is 1-1/2 hours. There was a time when the local field only allowed up to G motors. But I always went to both launches. I probably enjoy MPR slightly more than HPR, that's why I suggested the 3". Sounds like you'd get to fly it more often. And with a 29mm motor mount, you can always throw it up on a baby H if you get the chance.
    NAR 91107, Level 2

    I think paint and I have an uneasy truce going.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    16th March 2012
    Location
    Ft. Lauderdale
    Posts
    1,390
    Ha. No only 1 version. The 3 " version is the most sensible. Need to investigate whether I want 29mm or 38mm MMT. My thought has always been you can adapter down... so start bigger.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    26th January 2012
    Location
    Florida, Near TTRA
    Posts
    2,180
    Which field are you referring to that is 1.5-2 hours away? I think Tripoli South Florida is a lot closer to Ft. Lauderdale than that.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    16th March 2012
    Location
    Ft. Lauderdale
    Posts
    1,390
    Tripoli Ft Myers. They launch in LaBelle, FL 33440.

    Tripoli South Florida lost access to its former site a couple years back.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    26th January 2012
    Location
    Florida, Near TTRA
    Posts
    2,180
    Oh. I guess the Rocketreviews club finder hasn't been updated recently.

  24. #24
    Join Date
    16th March 2012
    Location
    Ft. Lauderdale
    Posts
    1,390
    I appreciate you looking. West palm is also only up to G.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    26th January 2010
    Location
    Northern California
    Posts
    8,136
    Quote Originally Posted by Quaranta View Post
    Ha. No only 1 version. The 3 " version is the most sensible. Need to investigate whether I want 29mm or 38mm MMT. My thought has always been you can adapter down... so start bigger.
    I get told that on a lot of my builds, that you can't adapt up. But I look at the big picture. I never want a motor eject rocket to go over 2000 feet, so what's the use of being able to put an I600 in a 2lb rocket? Another thing I look at, is mail ordering motors. We don't always have an onsite vendor, so I've had to order motors a lot. Most 29mm reloads, even H, can be shipped without the hazmat fee. All 38mm reloads, including G, incur the fee.
    NAR 91107, Level 2

    I think paint and I have an uneasy truce going.

  26. #26
    Join Date
    16th March 2012
    Location
    Ft. Lauderdale
    Posts
    1,390
    This design is going to require 6-8 oz of nose weight with big engines,... so it'll be close to 1500 grams (3.3 pounds) on the pad with bigger engine. I agree with you on the 2K height limit for engine deploy. I usually target 1500 feet. That said, I already own 38mm aerotech / CTI HW.

    I order engines online as like to know what I have before I go... I try to order 10-20 at a time. reduces the impact of the HazMat Fee.

    I've decided to go 3" x 33" body tube (FG). single 38 mm x 15" MMT. 5:1 FG nose cone. Wing fin profane modified slightly. flies to 1800 feet on H123.

    Parts ordered from Tim / Wildman...
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	X-Plane HST 3"-38mm JPEG.jpg 
Views:	67 
Size:	49.5 KB 
ID:	92191  
    Last edited by Quaranta; 1st August 2012 at 12:06 AM.

  27. #27
    Join Date
    26th January 2010
    Location
    Northern California
    Posts
    8,136
    Can't wait to see it! I too used to target 1500ft, but I find myself going higher, especially if my son is there egging me on.

    "What do you think? H73, H148, or I245?"

    Without even a half second's hesitation, "I245! I'll go chase it for you!" I think he's secretly hoping for a CATO. Gotta love him! LOL
    NAR 91107, Level 2

    I think paint and I have an uneasy truce going.

  28. #28
    Join Date
    16th March 2012
    Location
    Ft. Lauderdale
    Posts
    1,390
    My boys are 4 and 6,... Every thing's cool to them. But they already appreciate a good CATO.

    Best wishes to you and yours.

    Thanks again for the prompt to check 2xG.

  29. #29
    Join Date
    26th January 2010
    Location
    Northern California
    Posts
    8,136
    Mine's 26 going on 12.
    NAR 91107, Level 2

    I think paint and I have an uneasy truce going.

  30. #30
    Join Date
    16th March 2012
    Location
    Ft. Lauderdale
    Posts
    1,390
    All parts have been ordered.

    I'm expecting it take a while for all the pieces to arrive,...

    I'll resume / continue this thread as the build thread, when all the parts are assembled. Build likely to start in september.

    Thanks for the input.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •