How do you view Mid Power?

SilicdyneTRF
shop deals on amazon
the model rocket show
the rocketry show
The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

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

grouch

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2011
Messages
3,836
Reaction score
784
Location
Phoenix AZ
Although G's are my favorite letters to burn, I don't really poke around the mid power threads that much. I have been trying to understand why and something occurred to me. Bear with me as I think out loud and hopefully something interesting will come out of it…..

How do you see mid power rockets? For me, mid power is more like a mini high power rocket. I like the idea of taking the construction methods and features of the larger stuff, just shrunken down to a smaller, mid power level. Conversely I also recognize that some people may see mid power more as larger low power rockets complete with detailed protrusions, fantasy and scale builds and such. So where do you fall, is mid power a large low or a small high?
 
I suspect others will have more reasoned opinions on this, but I view mid-power as somewhat advanced, and beyond what the normal citizen would think of for a model rocket.
Having launched only about 6 D's and 3 E's in a Mega Mosquito, I recognise that those motors are much more expensive, and are likely to eat up spare cash fast.

So, I see it as something to advance to, something to shoot for, but something to weigh carefully, as they can be an expensive waste if not done right!

Don't get me started on high power.... I've never shot one!
 
Last edited:
All of the above. I have:

Some basic paper 24mm kits that fly on D/E.
Some scratch builds with cardboard tubes and basswood fins that are E/F/G capable.
A Mega Der Red Max which I certified HPR level 1 on but is usually a "mid power" rocket.
An all fiber glass 29mm motor dual deploy rocket which is as complicated to fly as a high power but can use F - I motors.

I love them all.
 
Mid power is like methadone. Doesn't quite get you there, but takes the edge off.

I like having a few mid power birds in case the weather goes bad, or when I just need a few quick pop at the top flights.
 
I sort of think everybody so far has missed the point.

Mid "Power"... not size of rocket or even construction style. It's motor size... most commonly E, F & G "motors".

You are fairly limited to light weight construction for A, B, C and even D motors. An Estes 18mm C maxes out at what? 4 oz? A D12-3 is 14 oz? Even most of your G motors are limited to less than the 3.3lb (1500 gram) Federal definition of a Model Rocket. So your component materials and building styles are more of a function of your "Motor". Therefore we call it "Mid Power" and not "Mid Construction Parts" or "Mid Building Style".

Besides.. MPR is our own made up hobby jargon.


Jerome :)
 
I will confess I have all sizes and kinda bailed on the bigger stuff a few years ago. It's hard to drag around big rockets and it's harder to store them. I'll also admit it's been a while for an Estes type launch, and the little pride and joys seemed to get munched in the hangar pretty easy. Seems I've developed a habit of living around the "I" category for a while now. I'm comfortable and enjoy a variety of builds and I really don't see an "M" in my future at all. I'd rather push the button on a "G" motor and get 8k out of it than burn a summer's worth of motors and parts on a level 3 to see 1200'. Guess I'd rather drive a Ferrari than a bulldozer. ( Now you've started it you idiot..why can't you keep you stupid opinions to yourself?. Gee-some of your best friends are L3's now what are they gonna think..you better go hide under the bed until this one blows over. It's prolly too late anyway-you should take up stamp collecting. I bet they won't even renew your membership...) Ahem-we're sorry for the schizophrenic break my patient has suffered, but Dave will return shortly. -Dr. 'J'
 
Last edited:
Mid-Power is what I do for warm up on windy days, to check upper wind in the 3-5000 ft range

Sometimes just for fun, it's great just to stick a motor in something & go fly it with out the hassle of prepping altimeters.

Then there are times when I'll just take light small rocket, maybe a 29 or 38 size airframe and stick the biggest 6grain 24 or 29mm in with just a tacker and a 20.00 read only altimeter and let it rip for fun.

If it does get lost, not much money involved.

Basically I just love flying anything from micro's to O's..... it all makes me :smile:

I too am getting up there in years and anything bigger than 4in weighing more than 20lbs is getting hard to lug out of a field.
 
what's in a name, would a rocket by any other name smell as sweet? I think that I view them as just plain rockets, adjusting power and construction to suit. I have used surface mount balsa fins on a G powered minimum diameter bird (and it survived just fine). although I do tend to look at E motors as the top end of 'low-power'.
Rex
 
JeromeK99 said:
I sort of think everybody so far has missed the point.
Click to expand...

To be honest, I think everybody has missed my point but that's nothing new. I seemed to be clocked differently than others. I get that mid power is based on motor power levels. I am talking about the rockets that use these power levels. If you scroll through the threads in the MP section you will see that the rockets built here are different than that of the HP and LP sections. For the most part it seems to me that the bulk of the threads are what I would call over grown LP rockets. But a few, oh so few are slightly different. They are smaller version of larger rockets, i.e. glasses fin cans, through the wall, minimum diameter screamers that are launched from rails, dual deploy altitude seekers…all on smaller motors than an H but with the same feel and goal. Theses are the little gems I'd like to see more of.
 
grouch said:
To be honest, I think everybody has missed my point but that's nothing new. I seemed to be clocked differently than others. I get that mid power is based on motor power levels. I am talking about the rockets that use these power levels. If you scroll through the threads in the MP section you will see that the rockets built here are different than that of the HP and LP sections. For the most part it seems to me that the bulk of the threads are what I would call over grown LP rockets. But a few, oh so few are slightly different. They are smaller version of larger rockets, i.e. glasses fin cans, through the wall, minimum diameter screamers that are launched from rails, dual deploy altitude seekers…all on smaller motors than an H but with the same feel and goal. Theses are the little gems I'd like to see more of.
Click to expand...
I think that's the best part of mid power. you can scale up your favorite estes kit or scale down your favorite HPR. either way they look great and fly at a reasonable cost.
 
Bigger than low power, smaller than high power...

The momma bear of rockets.




Honestly, I see little or no difference across the entire spectrum. It is just a matter of scale. Some of those MMX birds would drive me nuts to build, contest rockets are another form of crazy. I guess I just don't see the value of trying to shove the various rockets into categories.
 
Last edited:
When I think of midpower, I mostly think of lighter HPR. I have plenty of midpower-capable rockets that aren't really either low power or midpower (Maxi Alpha and Mega Mosquitos, not to mention Decaffinator) that fly black powder D's and E's but could fly small composite motors. But my midpower rockets that can fly F's and G's are all basically small HPR's such as the G-force (which I'm going to fly on H's in a few weeks), MDRM (can fly H's) and Leviathan (probably not going to fly HPR but flies great on F's and G's.)
 
Based on the motor/ engine designations, I hear MPR and think of motors.
When I here Mega Mosquito - I think Rocket. When I hear Alpha.Big Bertha, DarkStar, V-2 , or any other Kit name I think Rocket.
I only think LPR, MPR and HPR when thinking motors.


Sent from my iPhone using Rocketry Forum
 
Last edited:
blackbrandt said:
I think they are small HPR.
Click to expand...
This is what I was looking for. I am not looking for people to put them or anything into categories, just how you see them. More or less a philosophy exercise. fyrwxrz pretty much summed up my personal view on rockets in general. Anyway, it seems I have failed on TRF yet again.
 
I think of it as a cross between low and high power. For instance, a my D-Region Tomahawk flying on an F39T uses low power construction, and really a low power size, but it's flying on a reloadable composite motor, a staple of High power. Alternatively, an Estes Argent uses a cross between LPR (wood glue, paper tubes)and HPR (wood CRs, plywood fins) and flies on anything from an F39T to a G80(and probably larger) which covers a fairly wide range of motors in the mid power range. Or, something like a Wildman Mini uses high power construction methods and also flies on a wide range of motors in the mid power range. But, an Estes Vagabond flying on a black powder E9 is also mid power because Es are considered mid power (realistically, most Es are reloadable which definitely doesn't seem like it belongs in the same category as an Estes A8). So, I think of mid power as a true cross between both high and low power in any combination.

Just my aloud thoughts.

Nate
 
grouch said:
Anyway, it seems I have failed on TRF yet again.
Click to expand...

I don't think you've failed at all. It's been really interesting to see people's response and views on this. It's a good thread.

My own response:
I love mid-power - I see it as a possible way to experience most of the "good stuff" about HPR without so much expense & effort. I can fly a LOT more MPR rockets than I can big ones - in terms of cost per flight, time spent, prep time, gear and equipment, etc., etc. And I can still get in some serious altitude, dual deploy, tracking, challenge, thrills, etc. if I want to. I don't have to worry about waivers and such. I don't have to wait for perfect conditions.

Basically, I can fly as complicated, or as simple, as I want. I CAN go for complex designs & construction/avionics/big altitude/etc. But I don't have to. Or I CAN keep it simple - keep the build basic, stuff a motor in there, and launch it. But I don't have to. Most of the time it's something in between - I can fly whatever fits my mood, available time & budget, conditions, etc.

Another way I approach MPR is as a test-bed for some of my HPR ideas. I sometimes prototype an idea (which will eventually be an HPR rocket) - building a smaller/basic version that flies on D/E/F motors. These are often crude, but they are a great way to work out the bugs before I commit big money/time into something in HPR that might not work.

As a more direct response to your actual question - I guess I tend to view it more as "small HPR" rather than "big LPR". But it's not an exact thing with me, and it does change and morph from time to time. Most of the time I fly it's on F/G/H/I motors - which technically qualifies as the upper end of MPR and the lower end of HPR. For me this seems to be "the most bang for the buck".

Viva MPR!
s6
 
My view. I think it's the most over looked level of the hobby. Seams like most people only do it for a short while before jumping into high power. I don;t know if they think you can't do any thing with them.,Or they just want to stuff a bigger motor in a rocket. You know more fire and smoke type thing. But for me it;s what makes me happy. I don't need to fly with a club I can go out on my own and have some me time flying high performance rockets that most people don't even think about. And it's like most people think you have to build a MPR like a lPR to get any performance out of them. For me it's the opposite, You have to build it where it's going to hold together at separation, Because if you open a chute while a paper rockets doing a 100' a second it's just going to fold in half. It's like even the motor manufacturers over look this part of the hobby,by not having the option for longer delays for motors. But it's probably that there is not a lot of call for them. For instance I've got a 24mm rocket that does 3800' on a F-39-9 and it's still doing a 100' a second when the chute deploys. Some of you said the motors still have enough power that you can take a high power kit and down scale it to a mid-power motor. But I'll take a low power rocket and put a mid-power motor in it. For that matter if you wanted to you could even put a high power motor in them. For example the estes super alpha on the H-242, or the Aerotech cheetah on the H-123-14 What this part of the hobby has done for me is to think outside the box. Something I enjoy tremendously. I have enjoyed this thread also. a lot of good thoughts about this part of the hoddy.
 
I view mid power as just what a particular rocket was designed for. A guideline. I've put big motors in little things and little motors in big things. I like mid power as a fun place to experiment. The rockets are light enough to stay below the waiver requirement, but can be quite more robust that low power. I think mid power is also a good place to play around with cluster, staging, air starts, dual deployment, electronics...
 
Estesbasher said:
My view. I think it's the most over looked level of the hobby. Seams like most people only do it for a short while before jumping into high power. I don;t know if they think you can't do any thing with them.,Or they just want to stuff a bigger motor in a rocket. You know more fire and smoke type thing. But for me it;s what makes me happy. I don't need to fly with a club I can go out on my own and have some me time flying high performance rockets that most people don't even think about. And it's like most people think you have to build a MPR like a lPR to get any performance out of them. For me it's the opposite, You have to build it where it's going to hold together at separation, Because if you open a chute while a paper rockets doing a 100' a second it's just going to fold in half. It's like even the motor manufacturers over look this part of the hobby,by not having the option for longer delays for motors. But it's probably that there is not a lot of call for them. For instance I've got a 24mm rocket that does 3800' on a F-39-9 and it's still doing a 100' a second when the chute deploys. Some of you said the motors still have enough power that you can take a high power kit and down scale it to a mid-power motor. But I'll take a low power rocket and put a mid-power motor in it. For that matter if you wanted to you could even put a high power motor in them. For example the estes super alpha on the H-242, or the Aerotech cheetah on the H-123-14 What this part of the hobby has done for me is to think outside the box. Something I enjoy tremendously. I have enjoyed this thread also. a lot of good thoughts about this part of the hoddy.
Click to expand...


I agree, now when I buy a MPR I want to stuff a 38mm motor mount in it, not necessarily to go anything over a G but if I want to I can. I built an Estes Argent and put a 38mm mount in it and after one G flight perfect up and perfect down it is kinda beat. As I carried it back to the pad I then just dawned on my how flimsy it was and it will probably never get anything higher than an H load. hummm

I guess they are small HPR to me and maybe they shouldn't be. I have to admit it would be nice on the pocket book I have met some die hard LPR or HPR folks but never a die hard MPR.

MPR just seems to be a jumping point to HPR.


TA
 
Mid Power is a way for someone to dip their toes in the High Power water.

At the higher end of the F-G range, performance altitude-wise gives a taste of High Power.

Mid Power is where most rocketeers begin using epoxy and fiber glass.

It's a good introduction or preparatory step to High Power.

Recommended.
 
Midpower is key for me since I mostly fly at moffet with a 160 ns limit. You can fly HPR rockets (over 80 n thrust, over 53 oz weight) but no H's or more at moffet.
 
To answer OP's question, as far as the rocket only goes, I would say smaller high power. Most MPR builds are similar to HPR. I enjoy flying all power levels.
 
I'd say mid-power is BOTH the high end of LPR and the low end of HPR. The whole definition of MPR is entirely arbitrary, because the line separating model rocketry and high power rocketry has to be drawn somewhere, but that doesnt mean there is a sudden shift from LPR building techniques to HPR. The fuzzy transition area from LPR to HPR is what we call MPR, and it has elements of both.

I remember the first time I flew an Estes E12 motor and thinking, "WOW! Now THAT is a ROCKET LAUNCH!" I felt like I had crossed a line to a new level of propulsion, and I definitely was in the mid-power realm when I tried an E20. But the rocket I was using was definitely an LPR model in terms of materials, design and construction technique. I didn't feel like I had entered a new level of rocket building until I built a PSII kit with heavier tubes, plywood fins and CRs, nylon chute, screw-on retainer, etc.
 
I don't think this was a failure, it's a great thread and thought process.

Most of my "mid power" birds are basically HPR's that can fly on F and G. The Vulcanite, Optima, some other scratch builds... all HPR rockets, that I enjoy simple, quick G flights on. I've got a couple like the Onyx and Painkiller micro that are solidly MPR.

To put it in words.... I see MPR as "cheap, fast, easy and FUN"

I'd love to see more motors pushing the 160N/s limit
 
Last edited:
I look at MPR as a stepping stone to HP so I guess I consider my mid power rockets as small high power.
 

Similar threads

ZeroGPrints
What glue do you use?
2
Replies
31
Views
870
Back_at_it
Back_at_it
ZeroGPrints
Hello everyone!!
Replies
6
Views
316
ZeroGPrints
ZeroGPrints
smstachwick
36DD (Dual Deployment)
Replies
7
Views
682
Daddyisabar
Daddyisabar
GrouchoDuke
Kids flying mid power at high power launches...Model Rocket Launch Area...but!?
2
Replies
57
Views
5K
jackiboi_11
jackiboi_11
S
question about stability
Replies
9
Views
756
sgirard
S

Latest posts

Back
Top