"starters"

The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

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

Zonie

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2011
Messages
585
Reaction score
12
Not sure if this was discussed here or not, but I have noticed that ignitors are starting to be labeled as "starters" and "initiators." Anything to do with shipping rules perhaps?

Change the description then it is a different classification?

???
 
Main reason I can think of is after the BATFE lost their case against us reguarding their classification of APCP as an explosive the ATF basically raised their noses and sniffed,"Well, we still control explosive ignitors." Some early types of motors used Thermalite to either be the ignitor or assist the ignitor in lighting off large motors. I make my own "motor starters" using no controlled items like crushed Thermalite, something I did use to use.

I think the idea was to get away from any possible ATF intervention due to a name.
 
Main reason I can think of is after the BATFE lost their case against us reguarding their classification of APCP as an explosive the ATF basically raised their noses and sniffed,"Well, we still control explosive ignitors."


I really don't think that's their attitude. They have to regulate igniters by law. It would literally take an act of Congress to change that. I don't know who came up with the name change and I have no idea if it's legal but it sounds good to me.
 
Main reason I can think of is after the BATFE lost their case against us reguarding their classification of APCP as an explosive the ATF basically raised their noses and sniffed,"Well, we still control explosive ignitors." Some early types of motors used Thermalite to either be the ignitor or assist the ignitor in lighting off large motors. I make my own "motor starters" using no controlled items like crushed Thermalite, something I did use to use.

I think the idea was to get away from any possible ATF intervention due to a name.

Based on what I'm hearing from those involved in discussions with the BATFE (yes, they still happen), they're not "raising their noses" at us. NAR, Tripoli and the BATFE have a fairly constructive relationship.

-Kevin
 
This was explained somewhere around a year ago when they annonced the change in the Estes newsletter. Only Estes changed from "igniter" to "starter" and there is a physical difference. They have replaced the pyrotechnic coating (pyrogen) on the tip with something that is not pyrotechnic. The new coating appears to be a simple protective coating to help prevent damage to the delicate tiny bridge wire. You need to install them so the tip is touching the propellant since there is no longer any pyrogen to burn with a sparkler effect and bridge a gap to reach the propellant.

Yes, they clearly stated they did this to make them easier to ship (no longer a regulated item).
 
I told it as it was reported to us after the final ruleing of Judge Walton. Good luck finding a spool of Thermalite much less 1-2" for an ignitor. It was ATF's word that they would be enforcing use of explosive ignitors much more closely, it's NOT something I made up....:dark:
 
This was explained somewhere around a year ago when they annonced the change in the Estes newsletter. Only Estes changed from "igniter" to "starter" and there is a physical difference. They have replaced the pyrotechnic coating (pyrogen) on the tip with something that is not pyrotechnic. The new coating appears to be a simple protective coating to help prevent damage to the delicate tiny bridge wire. You need to install them so the tip is touching the propellant since there is no longer any pyrogen to burn with a sparkler effect and bridge a gap to reach the propellant.

Yes, they clearly stated they did this to make them easier to ship (no longer a regulated item).

I do have a pre-2010 MSDS of the Estes igniter and it is what I would term a "mild" pyrogen. I have no idea what the new stuff is.

Do you know if anyone done a side-by-side test of the old vs new Estes igniter/starter?

It makes me wonder if the Estes motors with the old igniters will become collectable.

Greg
 
I don't keep them around long enough to be collectable. My grandkids won't let me.
 
I do have a pre-2010 MSDS of the Estes igniter and it is what I would term a "mild" pyrogen. I have no idea what the new stuff is.

Do you know if anyone done a side-by-side test of the old vs new Estes igniter/starter?

It makes me wonder if the Estes motors with the old igniters will become collectable.

Greg

Had some in my rocket box from the 80's... basically unless they're in hermetically sealed packaging, they rust into oblivion... (and heck most of those IN sealed packaging rusted away to nothing! Guess it's the oxidizer in the pyrogen).

I had some RED pyrogen Estes ignitors from from some OLD D11-9's I picked up at a very old and very small hobby shop/electrician's supply (owner was an electrician into model planes and farted with rockets way back when) and those REALLY corroded to nothing...

So I don't really see them being "collectible" with any longevity unless they're encased in Lucite or something...

Later! OL JR :)
 
Had some in my rocket box from the 80's... basically unless they're in hermetically sealed packaging, they rust into oblivion... (and heck most of those IN sealed packaging rusted away to nothing! Guess it's the oxidizer in the pyrogen).

I had some RED pyrogen Estes ignitors from from some OLD D11-9's I picked up at a very old and very small hobby shop/electrician's supply (owner was an electrician into model planes and farted with rockets way back when) and those REALLY corroded to nothing...

So I don't really see them being "collectible" with any longevity unless they're encased in Lucite or something...

Later! OL JR :)

Sealed packages are collectable. Once packages (of anything) are opened, they lose their value. So they are sealed and maybe rusted / worthless, or opened to check and worthless. :)
 
No side by side "test' as ther are no defined "test" parameters.

I have fired many, many Solar Igniters in the past as a demonstration, so i know what they look like (micro-sparklers).

I fired a Solar Starter with an Estes controller inside a Jack In The Box restaurant after the first launch where I got one. It simply heated the bridge wire until red hot and the coating material burned with a tiny very short lived flame using the air as it's oxidizer. if it was inside a motor with no air I think it would simply smolder with the red hot bridge wire doing all the work to "start" the motor.

I do have a pre-2010 MSDS of the Estes igniter and it is what I would term a "mild" pyrogen. I have no idea what the new stuff is.

Do you know if anyone done a side-by-side test of the old vs new Estes igniter/starter?

It makes me wonder if the Estes motors with the old igniters will become collectable.

Greg
 
It has come to my attention, from reliable sources that the reason for the loooooooonnnnnnngggggg delay in the restocking of Quest “Q2G2” igniters is a revamping of the formula used so as to allow for simple mail delivery, or something along those lines.

I never ran into a problem with them in this regards when ordering, but heck; what do I know?
 
I fired a Solar Starter with an Estes controller inside a Jack In The Box restaurant after the first launch where I got one. It simply heated the bridge wire until red hot and the coating material burned with a tiny very short lived flame using the air as it's oxidizer. if it was inside a motor with no air I think it would simply smolder with the red hot bridge wire doing all the work to "start" the motor.
Anecdotally, have you guys seen any increased percentage of misfires using the new Solar Starters at SCRA? We have seen a growing number of them at our club (especially dramatic ones where the starter burns through and falls out of the motor while still glowing, without igniting it). I wonder if it's due to people not installing the starter with the tip touching the propellant, relying on the sparkly igniter pyrogen to get the job done in the past-- now that's no longer the case. Either way, I'll be keeping an eye out when helping new people install starters.
 
We had only one group recently that might have used bulk packs of motors that came with Starters. i only noticed this when I had to pull one a plug out of a motor to help them install it and i noticed it was a Starter and not an Igniter.


If they were using a bunch of them, then there is possibly a slightly higher misfire rate based on misfires at our last two launches with this large group (the group was too big and scheduled prevented them from all shoing up the same day).

I saw one very experieinced flyer have a misfire with a 29mm BP Estes motor using the supplied Starter. I inserted an Igniter and it it ignited.

I still prefer plain nichrome wire with the little loop at the tip and a good battery.

I've saved up around 200 of the Q2G2 igniters. The ones with the thinner lead wires (or thinner insulation?) are set aside for dipping in Magnalite pyrogen for composite motors. The rest are reserved for clustering. I have a few hundred Solar Igniter retail packs set aside as well, along with a few hundred in bulk bags. Those are also quite fine for small clusters.
Anecdotally, have you guys seen any increased percentage of misfires using the new Solar Starters at SCRA? We have seen a growing number of them at our club (especially dramatic ones where the starter burns through and falls out of the motor while still glowing, without igniting it). I wonder if it's due to people not installing the starter with the tip touching the propellant, relying on the sparkly igniter pyrogen to get the job done in the past-- now that's no longer the case. Either way, I'll be keeping an eye out when helping new people install starters.
 
Also, some B6 Estes motors have an insanely shallow centerbore. When you install the igntier or starter, you can barely get the plug installed and it "crunches" the tip when you push it in.

not seen on C6 motors, just lots of B6 motors from the last few years.
 
Even with the older solar igniters, I add a few crumbs of 'help' into the nozzle before adding the igniter and a plug. Works every time.
 
FWIW, I've begun referring to any match/igniter/initiator generically as "starter". That way, regardless of its actual composition, this generic name covers it.

"I've lost the starter that came with this CTI reload. Do you sell something that would work?"
 
I've been trying to find the source, but can't. But as I recall the new starters are a corn starch/glue mixture. Possibly PVA, but some type of polymer.
 
Anecdotally, have you guys seen any increased percentage of misfires using the new Solar Starters at SCRA? We have seen a growing number of them at our club (especially dramatic ones where the starter burns through and falls out of the motor while still glowing, without igniting it). I wonder if it's due to people not installing the starter with the tip touching the propellant, relying on the sparkly igniter pyrogen to get the job done in the past-- now that's no longer the case. Either way, I'll be keeping an eye out when helping new people install starters.

I was out at the ROC launch this past Saturday. There was a noticeably large percentage of failures going on at the small pads. It was like every 4th or 5th rocket had a ignitor/starter issue. This went on for several rounds. I was sort of wondering if it could be the "starters".


Jerome
 
For what its worth, I received an order of "twiggys" from Quickburst today.

On the outside of the box was a "Shippers declaration" ... UN0454 Proper Shipping Name: Toy Propellant Devices/Igniters Class or Division: 1.4S

Inside the box was a copy of my invoice with the description "Twiggy Motor Starters"

twiggy.jpg
 
We can call them whatever we want but, as of a couple of months ago, the BATFE agent who came by to do an inspection said the e matches and Twiggies that I have were igniters and needed to be listed and in the magazine. I had him check with his boss to be sure. Keep in mind that this agent was easy going and not out to bust my balls.
 
We can call them whatever we want but, as of a couple of months ago, the BATFE agent who came by to do an inspection said the e matches and Twiggies that I have were igniters and needed to be listed and in the magazine. I had him check with his boss to be sure. Keep in mind that this agent was easy going and not out to bust my balls.

I don't mean to pry but why do you still have a LEUP if that's what you were being inspected for? Or do you have a LEMP or HEMP?
 
I don't mean to pry but why do you still have a LEUP if that's what you were being inspected for? Or do you have a LEMP or HEMP?

The LEUP is for my 3 half filled cans of BP and a handful of e matches and twiggies. If I had an antique cannon I wouldn't need the LEUP for the black powder. Yes, it's a stupid law. To be honest, if I didn't already have the LEUP from the dark days before we won the lawsuit, I doubt that I'd bother. It costs me $50 every couple of years so it's worth keeping just to stay legal.
 
hmmm... i thought the new estes igniters looked different and took longer. well i guess ill be adding acetone to Ye old igniter man kit and start dipping them...




Sent from my iPhone using Rocketry Forum
 
hmmm... i thought the new estes igniters looked different and took longer. well i guess ill be adding acetone to Ye old igniter man kit and start dipping them...
It will be a long time before I have to resort to that. I have between 125 - 150 packs of Estes igniters. I even have quite a few of the old igniters that came with the tube and diamond packs. When my daughter used to come to launches, she always wanted to use the old igniters just because none of the other kids had them.
 
Astron igniters were great, but they phased them out when they dropped the classic launch controller with battery clips to connect to power sources beyond the now common 4 x AA alkaline battery. The new 9V systems are OK, but the new Pro Series II controller can fire anything.

Original Astron igniters were 30 Ga with a smooshed area covered in a flexible pyrogen. The smooshed area was easy to bend and provided higher resistance right where you wanted it. Later, they switched to a non-smooshed slightly thinner nichrome (31 ga?) and it still had the flexible pyrogen coating and you just had to bend it anywhere within the pygrogen coated zone. They were fantastic and i installed them with a wadding wedge/ball or a sliver of balsa from leftover fin stock. The balsa sliver was a primitive version of the modern plugs, but was only safe to use on a launch site with no dry brush or grass or leaves. i saw the balsa slivers mostly used on lush green lawn launch sites.

It will be a long time before I have to resort to that. I have between 125 - 150 packs of Estes igniters. I even have quite a few of the old igniters that came with the tube and diamond packs. When my daughter used to come to launches, she always wanted to use the old igniters just because none of the other kids had them.
 
Back
Top