I was running the Jolly Logic 2 Altimeter. It indicated Apogee at 155' and ejection altitude at 137'. Had the rocket not arched over a bit like it did, I could have gotten a little more altitude out of it.So altitude was 155 feet? Do you think that was apogee, or somewhat lower ejection altitude?
Too bad about the fin, looks like it wants a soft field. I’ll wait for spring when our ground isn’t frozen!
For anyone still wondering who wants to buy one for $150... take a look at this Twitter thread, it is quite interesting:
There are a bunch of replies from people who had no idea such a thing existed, and who (claim to) want one. Estes needs to (somehow) get the word out better to the SpaceX crowd.
That's the key. I mean, I want one, but I can't justify the $150 price tag. I'm willing to bet more than a few people who want one will have second thoughts when they see the price. Still, you make a great point about how there are plenty of people who would like to have this rocket, but don't even know it exists.and who (claim to) want one
It might objectively be appropriately-priced, but I wonder how many people will want to shell out that kind of money for something like this.
Well, after sitting on my desk at my office for some time, finally decided to take it home and fly it, did better than I thought it would on a C6-3, the C5-3 would be better.
Well, I'm guessing the tree gave it up?
Must've thought it looked like a drone ship from altitude..The SpaceX/Estes tree finding software worked! Ya we were able to shake it out , this is my son and I's low power spot, and have never had a rocket find that tree until this one haha.
The $320 model you mention has this description on Everyday Astronaut: "Primarily Metal Construction with some Injection Mold Plastic". Looking at the photos, the legs and grid fins are all plastic, along with a lot of the detail parts. Since the tube areas are heavier metal, the chances of breaking the plastic spindly leg parts look worse.Everyday Astronaut has a $320 model of the Falcon 9, but it's all metal, the legs fold out and the stages separate. It's more than double the cost of the Estes rocket, but as a table-top desk ornament, the $320 one gets you a lot more. Sure you can't fly the metal one (well, only if you shoved a K motor in there), but the Metal one is also less likely to break.
Just bought it, but have not assembled yet. Looking forward to it, because it's 1/3rd the price of the Estes rocket, and might actually fly better. And I'm excited that I have to assemble and paint it. But Max-Q is a new company, so I gave them my business because I would like to see more firms participate in this hobby.We have a few at our launches as well. Might check out a company called Max Q. He has one for $50
Building the Max Q Rockets SpaceX Falcon 9We have a few at our launches as well. Might check out a company called Max Q. He has one for $50
I ordered their rockets. They are 100% 3D printed. You can assemble one of their kits in a single evening. No painting is required for the one I've built so far, which is the Falcon9 -- the parts that are supposed to be white are printed in white and the parts that are supposed to be black are printed in black. Decals are provided. The instructions are so-so, but you can figure it out if you've ever assembled an Estes kit. Parts are keyed, so that they should only go together the correct way, but I dry fitted everything just to be sure as it's not 100% clear which bits fit together. But like I said, you can figure it out, and it will go together pretty quick if you're using CA to assemble it.Anyone know more about Max Q? They offer 2 rocket kits and have a physical address out of Texas. The build video is great, by the way.
More info here:Anyone know more about Max Q? They offer 2 rocket kits and have a physical address out of Texas. The build video is great, by the way.
Enter your email address to join: