List of suppliers who state the airframe material on all rockets.

[Bravo2zero]

Think the OP bailed after first post.

Scuse my old age - what is OP?

 

[OverTheTop]

Original Poster

 

[Bravo2zero]

I am sorry but LOC lists the thickness of EVERY one of their airframes.
Heavy Duty Rocket Frames Cardboard Tubing - LOC Precision – LOC Precision / Public Missiles Ltd.

What "trap" ? All kits I've seen/built have a list of parts/materials. Not much of a mentor if ya can't read. Consumer rights issue? Really?
Never built a fiberglass kit. Been flying K's for yrs. in my Binder Design Excell+ and Certifier.

Im fairly new to this forum - only flown high power for a few years, so not as much experience as the people here making all these long monologues about Alex’s post. It makes me apprehensive about posting here at all. The guy was making an observation about manufacturers listing materials used in the kits. The responses here are mostly missing the simple point and actually in some cases bordering on trolling! So disappointed in this forum so far.

 

[Bravo2zero]

I am sorry but LOC lists the thickness of EVERY one of their airframes.
Heavy Duty Rocket Frames Cardboard Tubing - LOC Precision – LOC Precision / Public Missiles Ltd.

I think Alex’s post was talking about materials mostly.

 

[tim cubbedge]

Scuse my old age - what is OP?

Original Poster

 

[phyzzld]

Im fairly new to this forum - only flown high power for a few years, so not as much experience as the people here making all these long monologues about Alex’s post. It makes me apprehensive about posting here at all. The guy was making an observation about manufacturers listing materials used in the kits. The responses here are mostly missing the simple point and actually in some cases bordering on trolling! So disappointed in this forum so far.

While I agree that some go overboard with their responses, I think you should reread the OP's first post again.
First, he claims to be mentoring "new people", then talks about them flying kits on K motors. That probably raised a few eye brows.
Second, in my opinion:

...Surely in 2022 it's time for suppliers to be up front and specify the airframe material and thickness in their descriptions. Suppliers specify the airframe material when it's a stronger material but if it's cardboard or fibre the buyer is in the dark...

To me, this implies the vendors are being dishonest by not listing full details on their products. That will not make you many friends here, and the "consumer rights" thing is ridiculous. If you buy something without knowing what it is, there is nothing anyone here can do for you.
Finally, the OP seems to be neglecting the fact that the construction technique used, especially for hpr, is just as important as the airframe material. A cardboard rocket will fly a K just fine if you build it right. Also, if you are unsure if a kit you are considering is safe with a certain motor, that is exactly the kind of question to ask here on the forum.

I am not trying to bash the OP and if I am interpreting his post wrong let me be the first to apologize. I know of no vendor that is "hiding" the specs of their kits. If they are, don't buy from them. Searching a website, sending an email or making a phone call is part of the due diligence any customer should do before buying a rocket kit. If a new rocketeer is not willing to do that, then God help them when going for an L2 or L3.

So before you judge the forum too harshly, note that most of the responses here have tried to be constructive and informative regardless of whether they agree with him. There are many great people here willing to help you, so don't be afraid to ask.

 

[sharkbait]

Im fairly new to this forum - only flown high power for a few years, so not as much experience as the people here making all these long monologues about Alex’s post. It makes me apprehensive about posting here at all. The guy was making an observation about manufacturers listing materials used in the kits. The responses here are mostly missing the simple point and actually in some cases bordering on trolling! So disappointed in this forum so far.

Don’t let this sour you to TRF, there is a wealth of knowledge here amongst the membership and if you frame your questions more tactfully, you will find that you will receive many helpful answers.

The OP had many red flags in his post that people become concerned about as we like to preserve the safety of our hobby and the reputation of our few hard working vendors.

1. you don’t let new persons assume they can but a kit and go out and fly a K motor.

you MENTOR them by building and flying G and under kits, then getting their level 1 certification and building and flying at level one, eventually getting their level 2 certification and flying up to K’s

2. you should have the skills, knowledge, and experience as mentor to know that cardboard rockets can safely fly on K motors when properly constructed

3. you should not threaten the vendors with”class action”, all the vendors are up front with their products and a little communication with a vendor can answer any questions you may have that go beyond what’s listed on their site.



yes, I know as I too mentor new people and college teams, money can be tight and I know some newbies have big dreams that they need to do on a budget, so I have helped them choose kits that can be safely adapted down to 38mm & 29mm from 54mm so they can perform though different levels with the same rocket.

4. Be as specific as you can. What vendors are hiding their kit materials, is Loc, Madcow, Wildman, CW, Binder Design, ARR, none were listed in the OP none of the above hide anything and all will answer questions if you have them

so again, try posting “I am having a hard trying find out what vendor X’s rocket kits are made from, can someone help me find out what the materials and thicknesses are”. If you start out bashing you will get the same in kind

 

[CoyoteNumber2]

4. Be as specific as you can. What vendors are hiding their kit materials, is Loc, Madcow, Wildman, CW, Binder Design, ARR, none were listed in the OP none of the above hide anything and all will answer questions if you have them

I asked him that very question in post #5 and he's declined to respond.

 

[heada]

As one of the people who replied, while I stand by what I said, I could have been more diplomatic about it. I apologize for the tone of my replies but not the content.

Far too many times have I read in here about college students being thrown into HPR without the most basic of materials understanding. They either want to use carbon fiber for everything on a rocket that nowhere near requires it or they expect low power materials like seen in Estes kits to perform like high end composites.

This lack of knowledge and experience is where a mentor becomes key to success. The same is true for any person who wants to delve into HPR. If the person who is doing the mentoring doesn't have the knowledge or experience then that is where things start to really get dangerous and that is what set me off. Had the OP asked questions about kit materials or vendors or any number if things, I think and hope that the replies would have been vastly different and knowledge would have been free-flowing.

Come ask questions about materials. Ask questions about vendors. Ask questions about previous projects by others. Don't come accusing vendors of hiding information and being a safety hazard when both are plainly untrue.

 

[rharshberger]

blue tubes Achilles heel is its bad tendency to absorb water, which causes warpage.
do an Internet search for blue tube, I’d imagine there’s information about it.

Blue Tube 2.0 is way better than the original version IMO in both warpage and moisture absorption

 

[dhbarr]

Blue Tube 2.0 is way better than the original version IMO in both warpage and moisture absorption

Wood hardener is also a fairly cheap sealant.

Disclaimer: I haven't tried this on Blue Tube specifically.

 

[firemanup]

Of course an experience constructor can fly a high impulse 54mm K motor in a cardboard airframe rocket by beefing up the construction or accepting that a fin is likely to break on landing. That does not change the issue that the airframe material should be stated in the kit description. If that's not supported by the rocketry community as indicated here then the solution to guiding the newbies into the right rocket is to state the range of motors recommended by the seller as Apogee do. Quantum plastic airframes have limitations too and the PML site makes it clear what range of motors are suitable for a standard build and one with a re-enforced fin can.

“accepting that a fin is likely to break”

Your comments, all of them, as a whole, read like someone who has VERY little experience flying hi power rockets.

Checked the webpage link you provided and for me it’s coming up not found.

Flying A thru M motors since 2001 and I have never been surprised by a kit and it’s components.

Kits from Vaughn Bros, BSD, Estes, LOC, Performance Rocketry, SBR, Mach1, Giant Leap, Wildman, Aerotech, Quest, Binder, Fliskits, PML, Cosmodrome, just to name a few and never once was i surprised by the components or unclear as to the expected capabilities or motor impulses for the stock kits.

Over three hundred flights and about the only bird that routinely pops a fin off flies on D motors, an Estes Phoenix.

Have you ever flown anything bigger than a J? What kits/manufacturers have you flown? What kit/kits genuinely surprised you as far as it’s components? Are you Tripoli or Nar? I honestly can’t figure out if this is trolling or just inexperience.

 

[ShadowSpire48]

I've done a 5.5 Goblin on a K535 with no issues but I wouldn't put anything larger in it, not because of the cardboard but those big fins will rip off.