Terrier-Orion

Anyone build the Quest Terrier Orion?
I like the looks of this rocket for some reason.
Might be a good one to upscale.
Just wondered/looking for input on how it flys and all that.

Attached is an OR file of a slightly upscaled Terrier Orion designed to be flown gap staged.

Built and painted...but got rained out of maiden flight last weekend

View attachment Quest-Terrier-Orion-24mm-Staged.ork

I've got one in my box of unbuilt kits. It's the Quest kit - I like its look, too, but I just haven't gotten around to building it yet.

Check out https://www.rocketreviews.com/ for reviews of this rocket.

I had just put some color on mine yesterday. I really liked the looks of this rocket but, my impression of the kit is something much less than that. This is my first Quest kit and I believe I've been spoiled by Semroc and even Estes.

The tubes are fair to middl'in—spirals have to be filled and I don't think they are of the quality that I've been used to. The die stamped centering rings aren't. There was nothing centered about them. I replaced the mount with an Estes mount that I had (lucky).

On the bright side (FTBS), the plastic transition is very nice and the nose cone is a typical plastic NC, nothing remarkable. The balsa was laser cut (but not with the precision of any other fins I've had) and the balsa itself was pretty dense (which is good) even though it wasn't very pretty. Instructions are very good.

I reckon that it'll be all painted and ready to fly in a week or so. I'll mention how it goes.

I built mine close to a year ago and just got the chance to fly it last month.

Pretty stiff winds and with a Quest C6-5 it arced into the wind so badly it was flying horizontal by the end of the burn.

Popped the chute about ten feet from the ground with no damage was sustained.

jpummil said:

Attached is an OR file of a slightly upscaled Terrier Orion designed to be flown gap staged.

Built and painted...but got rained out of maiden flight last weekend

Click to expand...

Have you flown it yet? One concern I have about long boosters is that they're still stable after seperation. They (at least this one doesn't) don't have any sort of recovery system. What keeps them from core-sampling; what keeps them from hitting the ground forward-end-first, with velocity?

Hmmm, exellent question.
One of the reasons I brought my initial question to the table.
How's it fly, etc.
Regardless, I think it still looks cool as heck and I want to build one.
Even if it never flys, it will look good in the collection!

Woody's Workshop said:

Hmmm, exellent question.
One of the reasons I brought my initial question to the table.
How's it fly, etc.
Regardless, I think it still looks cool as heck and I want to build one.
Even if it never flys, it will look good in the collection!

Click to expand...

I agree ,I need this one also in my collection.

Time to do something about that :wink:

Looks very nice foamy !!

Paul T

Nice looking bird so far,I've eyed that at HL all the time. The only quest rocket I've tried was the harpoon AGM came out pretty good but the bt's are flimsy imo

Yeah, I usually reinforce the BT's by doing TTB construction on the bottom of Quest kits.

BUT, having said that, some of my best rockets are Quest's, so I guess YMMV.

sooner.boomer said:

Have you flown it yet? One concern I have about long boosters is that they're still stable after seperation. They (at least this one doesn't) don't have any sort of recovery system. What keeps them from core-sampling; what keeps them from hitting the ground forward-end-first, with velocity?

Click to expand...

No flight yet. Today's festivities cancelled due to high winds in Tulsa area...
I did give the problem of the long booster and its behavior some consideration. My expectation is that it won't achieve a lot of altitude due to the jump off the pad and the 0 delay time on the D12-0. I also kind of expect the separation caused by the booster charge will cause a bit of a tumbling effect at first thus scrubbing some of the velocity of the fall.

The booster will weigh under 2oz at separation, so no substantial mass to deal with. And...of course, both a heads-up flight AND tilted away from the crowd with special consideration of the wind.

jpummil said:

No flight yet. Today's festivities cancelled due to high winds in Tulsa area...
I did give the problem of the long booster and its behavior some consideration. My expectation is that it won't achieve a lot of altitude due to the jump off the pad and the 0 delay time on the D12-0. I also kind of expect the separation caused by the booster charge will cause a bit of a tumbling effect at first thus scrubbing some of the velocity of the fall.

The booster will weigh under 2oz at separation, so no substantial mass to deal with. And...of course, both a heads-up flight AND tilted away from the crowd with special consideration of the wind.

Click to expand...

Please let us know how it works out. I copied the sim file you posted, and deleted the upper stage. The lower is stable by more than 1/2 a caliber (less after burnout). I was thinking of making a whole trifecta to duplicate the NASA ATREX experiment, or combining it with a "Standard" missile upper to make an "original" Terrier. I've also designed a booster for a Standard 3 that comes apart like a clamshell after seperation. The build bug hasn't bitten me yet...

I built one stock and flew it several times. It frustrated me each time because the flights were hardly stable -- it corkscrewed badly for me. I decided to convert it to a 2-stager, the only modification being an 18mm MMT in the sustainer. As I recall, the gap is 8-9 inches and it staged and flew perfectly the one time I flew it in that configuration (C6-0 to C6-7). However, I experienced the problem wondered about in this thread: the booster came down nose first and core-sampled. I intend to repair or replace the booster and just haven't gotten to it yet.

maricopasem said:

I built one stock and flew it several times. It frustrated me each time because the flights were hardly stable -- it corkscrewed badly for me. I decided to convert it to a 2-stager, the only modification being an 18mm MMT in the sustainer. As I recall, the gap is 8-9 inches and it staged and flew perfectly the one time I flew it in that configuration (C6-0 to C6-7). However, I experienced the problem wondered about in this thread: the booster came down nose first and core-sampled. I intend to repair or replace the booster and just haven't gotten to it yet.

Click to expand...

Hey! Thanks for posting! Sorry about the core sample, but it does answer one of the questions posed above :wink:

Also happy to hear that the gap staging worked as expected! I coated the inner motor tube with high temp paint, and the transition has an internal cone shape leading into a 1/4" hole I reinforced with a piece of metal tubing. Also drilled a couple of vent holes in motor tube near transition to allow the cooler air out as the hot ejection charge pushes its way up the tube.

Now to re-think the core sample dilemma :eyepop:

jpummil said:

Now to re-think the core sample dilemma

Click to expand...

Like I said, I simmed just the booster, with a 24mm mount, and it's marginally (about 0.5 caliber) stable. If this were the entire rocket, I wouldn't launch it in this configuration. What's not considered in the sim is the loss of propellant, since we're essentially looking at a coasting ballistic object. The loss of propellant will make the booster even more stable (data sheet says empty casing weighs 16 grams), with just a tad over 1 caliber of stability. OK, now we know the numbers. So what if we make a loop of heavy gauge solder (solid-core stuff like they use for stained glass), and glue it to the top (forward surface) of the bottom centering ring? Using 1.5 oz weight makes the booster almost negative stability. Adding more weight will make the booster actually unstable.

View attachment Terrier-booster-24mm-burned engine.ork

View attachment Terrier-booster-24mm-burned engine weight.ork

Right, so how does this change the stability of the whole rocket? With the addedd 1.5 oz weight, stability of the rocket with engines becomes 0.39 calibers - I wouldn't fly it like this.

View attachment Quest-Terrier-Orion-24mm-Staged tail weight.ork

Adding a 1/2 oz weight just under the nose cone brings the stability back to 1.38 calibers. Not as stable as the original, but I think it would be safe (original was 1.71 cal.). More could be added if needed.

View attachment Quest-Terrier-Orion-24mm-Staged tail and nose weight.ork

How does this additional weight affect performance? Original simms to 1494 feet, the nose/tail weighted version simms to 1365 - a loss of 130 feet. I think that's acceptible, considering you're improving the safety of the rocket (and the nose weight in the upper stage will make it more stable after seperation as well).

So why go through all this bother? I think the two stage sounding rockets and military models should be built as realisticly as possible (using paper, plastic and balsa...). It's also a unique and interesting technical problem. I've got several projects/ideas That became more likely to be built, now that I've satisfied myself I'll get all the parts back - in a reusable form.