The Launch Pad Rockets

The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I would look at the Launch pad kits as a transition more towards mid power rocketry. They will take some creative effort on your part to make them perform as you expect. I personally like the kits as for the fins comming apart it is as several have stated, cutting your fins out wrong.

I have an alarm that I built and only modified slightly and has made some awsome flights, only failure in eight flights was the shock cord mount came loose so I replaced it with kevlar and a screw eye epoxyed in and still works great.
As for being a mid power rocket it is all to the skill you teach yourself and learn and that will make your rocketeering a great adventure.

This is my TLP Alarm nine flights and still kicking. I didn't CA the fins but it would be a wise choice too. I have never broken a fin, it has almost suffered a zipper from an old D12-3. I like to fliy it on F21-4s but it has a few mods to fly with that motor and its a long walk to recover it too LOL! :cool:
 
sorry I disagree...the TLP alarm is a "model rocket" like ALL of the tlp kits.. ..not one kit from tlp employs midpower constuction or materials.

the estes executioner would be a better midpower "transition" . atleast it has ply fins. or an aerotech kit or a loc weasle.

a tlp kit would be a terrible example of midpower construction.
 
I did not mean to imply that it was a mid power kit but could be. Since you are making your own fins, why not use plywood. they give you a template. make them so they go through the tube. On the package of my TLP Alarm kit it states (mid power kit) I only see this as you will have to put forth more effort into the build and moderatly improve your skills to accomplish it. The package also says that it is a model kit and a proto type configuration. I think maybe it being underlined is the key or at least how I inturpeted it LOL!

This is also the only TLP kit I have built and can say I learned quite abit from the build, lacking attention to detail and not learning along the way will only get you what you put into anything. To me it was more of a fun build than building my Aerotech Arcas. The Alarm also flys higher too ;)

I am just starting a build on the Exicutioner I would not think of it as a mid power rocket in it's stock form from just the through the wall fins but is a good interduction to doing this type build. I do think looking at the two kits the center rings that come with the Alarm are of a stronger material. First thing I have done is tossed the shock cord, center rings and parachute to swap with kevlar shock cord, plywood center rings and a nylon chute. If you are going to do this with the kit attention to the CP, CG is in order as well as the length of the shock cord since it will not stretch it will have to be considerably longer. This will also add weight so expect the altitude to be lower on the engines you fly on.
Learn and be safe :cool:
 
I recently started a TLP Type 30 kit and am under the impression that most TLP kits are advertised as mid power rockets. The pic below shows the packaging with the motor choices listed. F24-7 I would consider mid power. Mine will be flown on D motorts. I did research TLP kits before buying and was aware of the fin stock issues. I replaced the flimsy balsa included in the kit with 1/8" balsa from a local hobby shop. I also left the paper nose cone tip off. The Type 30 also uses the tri-fold paper estes style shock cord mount which I used, looking back I wish I would have used kevlar string and a "through the motor mount" design. Overall I`m pleased with the kit, it is probably the simplest of the TLP kits but it was a good intrduction to their products. Below are some pics.

Heres the packaging and parts

Picture002.jpg


Replacement fins

Picture005.jpg


Ready for final paint

budweiserking004.jpg
 
I get the kevlar shock cord from uncle mikes off ebay, not bad stuff to work with. Hey, that rocket looks pretty good so far, hope you are going to put a finished picture in there now that we have been teased LOL!
My shock cord didn't break on the launch pad , the folded paper mount just dryed out and finally let it slip out, it would have been better if I had coated the thing with some glue in the first place. They do give you a nice long length of cord. Being stung once by a cord failure from heat degridation I always try to go with kevlar now. I use the 3/32 hobby plywood to replace the fins with now to on the larger rockets too as I hate repairing them. I also use a krylon appliance epoxy primary paint coat in white, it covers well and My thoughts are it adds a little strength to the airframe. other colors go over it well also. I tryed the rustolium apliance epoxy and had trouble with the paint lifting while taking off tape from adding another color but I might have been rushing it too LOL.
 
I`m not going to finish this rocket as a Type 30. I`m planning on a red and white paint scheme with a "Budweiser King" theme. I also have a TLP hellfire kit that is going to get a Coors Light Silver Bullet theme. Should make for quite a drag race. Below is a picture of a home made decal sheet for the Budweiser King.

Bud decals
Picture007.jpg
 
Nice I like to see change some times and the bud idea is good! As you could see I do the same my alarm has it's own personality LOL! Can't wait to see the picture of it in it's new scheme.
 
Originally posted by 5280
I recently started a TLP Type 30 kit and am under the impression that most TLP kits are advertised as mid power rockets. The pic below shows the packaging with the motor choices listed. F24-7 I would consider mid power. Mine will be flown on D motorts.

Heres what I'm saying,
( and Nice job on the rocket 5280 !)

yes they are "advertised" as midpower rockets.
and yes you can fit a midpower "motor" in the mount.

just as you can fit a midpower "motor" in an estes or quest mount too, but that does not make it magicaly transform into a midpower rocket.

too me a midpower rocket is a kit with beefier tubes , stronger fins. thru the wall construction.. ect... a rocket built specifacly for midpower motors.

If the motor is the deciding factor
estes and several other kit makers should start labeling their rockets as midpower too.

I love the TLP kits but as far as what you get. they are nothing more than a very lightweight model rocket .than can(in most cases) accomidate a midpower motor. not knocking them just trying to clear up what I call a midpower kit.
 
Great points Stymye-

But you know that midpower (E-F-G motor) models don't _have_ to have beefier tubes, through-the-wall fins or any of that. There's this perception in the hobby that any rocket you put a motor > D in has to be built like a brick outhouse. It's probably spill over from the HPR side of things where the beef is needed.

That way lies the slippery slope of needing a bigger motor to fly the heavier rocket that needs beefier components that requires a bigger motor...You can still have a large impressive rocket and fly on F and G motors without making it a heavy tank.

I just thought of this while I was writing this, about half of my midpower kits were manufactured by HPR companies. Those are my MPR that have the thicker walls, plywood CR and fins and such. My TLP kits and other scratchbuilt MPR are built around the regular tubes and materials used by LPR manufacturers.

I think it's important to remember that there is a continum of MPR kits out there, and we shouldn't complain about one manufacturer's kits being flimsy compared to models that are on the edges of HPR.

kj
 
Great points Zog.

I have twice flown BT-70 tubed scratch build clusters at "F" power levels with no problems. Neither model had TTW fins nor were they built with epoxy.

Would I do it all of the time? No. But my point here is that a well built LPR kit will take some serious abuse.

I think it's all in how you build them. As every experienced builder knows; their are many "tricks" that can be utilized in the building process to boost the strength and durability of a model.

Using the "rivet" method when attaching fins is a good one as is using several thin layers of quality yellow glue for fillets. Allowing each one to "soak in" before laying in the next one. Pro Bond is thin enough for this technique. Anyhoo the list is endless...
 
Ah I like to see this :D If We disagree and agree with the points each of us makes, I learn the best from this a few times my misconceptions of something I had just not thought about long enough or didn't see. Some very good points

I love the TLP kits but as far as what you get. they are nothing more than a very lightweight model rocket .than can (in most cases) accomidate a midpower motor. not knocking them just trying to clear up what I call a midpower kit.

Good point and alot of people just slap em together and go but you have to admit they can be more challenging to assemble and seeing an improvement on how to make it better to achieve your goal as a midpower rocket is there in these kits. There is alot unsaid in a kit as far as what can be done and how to go about it. What is what makes a mid power rocket exactly

I think it's all in how you build them. As every experienced builder knows; their are many "tricks" that can be utilized in the building process to boost the strength and durability of a model.

This is my thinking also, Meaning no offence to anyone but the fun of building the rocket and how you approach your build and some experimentation to be born of it. The first time I launched the Alarm with the F21 I thought the fins would still be at the pad when it took off, and when it did Fly, I felt like I just flew a midpower rocket. It made me want more LOL! I do think that a larger motor would be one thing that would put it in the midpower class. and an Estes model rocket hitting you under power with a C motor would mostly be a shock an F engine would definetly be a bigger class hit and would deserve more respect in the build. The average Estes builder would build as the instructions state and go fly it but I think as you move up so do your skills and they should, as I went into HPR there was alot I learned that was not in the instructions. Thanks to my peers and more experienced rocketeers have shown me.
 
Originally posted by zog43editor
That way lies the slippery slope.....
I don't doubt for one second that some pretty heavy-duty materials and assembly concepts are needed for the successful flight of many high-powered rockets.

But I see (too often, in my opinion) many of these things used unnecessarily in mid-power and even in low-power rockets in what seems to be a knee-jerk first try, before conventional low-power construction is even given a chance. I cringe every time I read about someone cutting plywood CRs for mid-power rockets, or fiberglassing 'tip-to-tip'

There are many things that can be done with low-power materials to reinforce a rocket. Proper engineering and design may be over the heads of many 'starting' rocket builders, but by the time anyone has built a few dozen kits it seems to me that some basic skills should have been mastered that would instill enough good judgement to allow pushing the fringes of stronger construction. There is a certain 'elegance' to building something with the minimum of materials that will still get the job done.

Then again, with all the plastic RTF cr*p that gets purchased for the first three rockets, without local clubs where people can talk to other people and learn, and without rocketry magazines to see new tips and techniques, maybe it IS expecting too much for people to learn on their own.

Granted, the number of mid-power motors I use each year can be counted on the fingers of one hand, so I can't speak too much to the need for H-and-above reinforcement. But even with D and E BP motors I cannot remember the last time I ever had a mid-air structural failure.

OK, I'm back down off my soapbox-
 
But I see (too often, in my opinion) many of these things used unnecessarily in mid-power and even in low-power rockets in what seems to be a knee-jerk first try, before conventional low-power construction is even given a chance. I cringe every time I read about someone cutting plywood CRs for mid-power rockets, or fiberglassing 'tip-to-tip'

Then again, with all the plastic RTF cr*p that gets purchased for the first three rockets, without local clubs where people can talk to other people and learn, and without rocketry magazines to see new tips and techniques, maybe it IS expecting too much for people to learn on their own.

It is easy to go to heavy on a build I agree, My Alarm is still lite just my preference to add what I did. I have never had a failure of that type ether and until just recently I started putting the plywood CR's in they are easyer to move into place and pick up for my big fingers as for there strength definetly stronger but you are right not so needed if you build it right and put some effort into doing so. Eight and ten inch corn stalks out in the field can put some good hits on your rocket on landing so I try to beef up the tubes with a coupler on the inside at the fin area to keep the tube from flexing even a little over time helps keep the fins from cracking along the tube.

You can't learn it if you don't know about it unless you develope it your self and then as I have found sometimes I have been just honeing my bad habbits :rolleyes: LOL! I do learn though with all this brain power here in this forum. I have been blown away by some things I have seen in the forums that work and I had misconceptions about but that is why I keep coming in here to stir my thoughts and yours. I guess best way to learn from each other with the time we have for it.
 
I have only one Launch Pad kit, the Harpoon. I bought it so my kids could have Harpoons too. TLP kits remind me of Estes kits from the '70's and early '80's.

In the picture you see:
Hangar 11 Harpoon 54mm
The Launch Pad Harpoon 24mm
Quest Harpoon 18mm
 
Here's the TLP Harpoon on a D12 or E9. I used both that day, not sure which is in this picture.
 
Nice looking Harpoons. A very nice shot of the big one goin up. That almost qualifies as a Harpoon Batterie :) I like that you have the different sizes Too.

Is your HPR a scratch built? Looks like Pine Island.
 
Sweeeeet! I have a TLP Harpoon. Still in the package though:( . So many rockets, so little time......this working for a living thing is really getting in the way of my hobbies!!!
 
Originally posted by sandmantoy


Is your HPR a scratch built? Looks like Pine Island. [/B]

Sort of, it's a Hangar 11 Harpoon that Bobby B. designed. Yes, that's Pine Island at NERRF II last spring. That rocket flew great at a launch weight of 21 pounds. It was 6.5' x 5.5", 120" chute, 54mm motor, Missile Works RRC2 altimeter.

Here's another shot:
 
Originally posted by Thrasher
Sort of, it's a Hangar 11 Harpoon that Bobby B. designed. Yes, that's Pine Island at NERRF II last spring. That rocket flew great at a launch weight of 21 pounds. It was 6.5' x 5.5", 120" chute, 54mm motor, Missile Works RRC2 altimeter.

Here's another shot:

Holy crap that a cool picture!!!
 
Nice shot, I got my L1 at NERRF II. Funny I don't remember that one. It was my first big event for rockets, was alot to remember. I remember Bobby though, he was knee deep in it lol. Buissy as he was he could stop and help you. I had a Fresh BSD 4" horizon to cert. with there. Really nice field, I can't wait for NERRF III. ;) I flew the horizon stock on a H123 and after I certified I put the dual deploy section on and gave it a try with a H211. Shock cord burned through in front of the motor, RRC2 said the fincan fell from 3540 feet and landed in the fresh plowed mud field with an echo LOL. Not a scratch on it, the G10 fins are bullet proof stuff. RRC2 worked nice chute opened up at 300' and landed within 10' of the fincan. I like my horizon but I wish I had put a 54mm motor mount in it. Now it sports some Kevlar and won't be bouncing of the ground anymore. I hope LOL!

I think I need to try one of those K555 LOL!

Here is my horizon stock with the Ebay section next to it. I was to buissy biting my fingernails to get a launch picture lol.
 
I Finally finished the Type 30 I mentioned earlier in this thread. I still need to add a couple coats of clear. This kit was a pretty basic build, I left off the paper nose cone and replaced the supplied fin stock with 1/8" balsa. I don`t know why I decided on a Budweiser king paint scheme but I`m pretty happy with how it turned out. Here are a couple of pics of the finished rocket.

bud013.jpg


bud014.jpg
 
Nice looking it was worth the wait. I haven't got to work on my rockets for weeks :( I have a few builds started but winter is here and I don't have to cut the grass anymore lol ;)
 
nice job on that! and the pinstriping really sets it apart
 
How long does it take to get a order from launch pad? I placed a order on March 31 as of yesterday nothing. I live in CA.
 
If you ordered directly from The Launch Pad, probably your only recourse is to keep trying to contact them. Many years ago, the owner of The Launch Pad had a bad accident and the service was reportedly never quite the same thereafter. A few years ago, they reopened their website, but it sounds like from your post that there might still be problems. A better approach might be to find a reliable vendor that carries The Launch Pad products and order from them instead.
 
Last edited:
I ordered the sidewinder and any vendor that lists it is out of stock. I have emailed launch pad two separate time with no reply. I will give them another week if nothing I will contact paypal. Thanks
 
I've tried several times to contact them, with no replies.
The business is up for sale according to a reliable source.
The information that was passed to me was the owner was ill, no details.

Several vendors still have kits in stock, and would place an order with them.
I would hope if they couldn't fulfill your order they would contact you.
But no one knows what is going on there as communication is zero.
 
Back
Top