Orbital Transport Shuttle Mini R/C rocket glider for D2.3 motors

[burkefj]

I built this for myself and liked it so much I decided to offer it as a kit, which flies standalone on D2.3 or C3.4 18mm reloads. It comes with a lightweight(14 grams) pointed cone but you can substitute a mini-bertha/mini-fat boy/bertha cone or print one using a thingverse design by Jack Hydrazines... I'd offer it with the bertha cone but no-one sells that cone separately.

I built it two ways, with servos mounted on the bottom which I think looks better, or with servos mounted on the top of the wing recessed into the body tube for people that may want to use it as a non powered parasite glider on an upscale(2.33x) Orbital Transport booster and are worried about the bottom mounted servos catching on the mounting on the booster. First one shows with stickershock markings, second I did hand cut vinyl using some 1/4" and 1/2" cut vinyl letters I picked up at Hobby Lobby and some of my company decals I cut up for logos...

It's 19" long, 15" wingspan, BT-60 based and right at 5 oz ready to fly(142 grams) with d2.3 motor. It flies very nicely. If you were going to build it as a parasite only you would need to move the receiver and battery back to mid body and cut an access hatch to keep CG which would need to be 1/2" further forward than the boosted version to keep the glide CG and up elevon settings needed to match the settings on the original free flight model.

The Prototype used HS-55 servos which weigh 8 grams each and I used 2.5 gram servo extensions to attach to the receiver, but I found I needed to push the receiver back into the fuselage a bit for CG.
On the second I used hs-65 servos which weigh 10 grams and used no servo extensions and removed the receiver case which saved 8 grams, and I needed 4 grams of nose weight, result was they were within 2 grams of each other ready to fly.



Here is a pre-decal flight video, flies very nicely.

 

[tab28682]

I see you have really embraced the D2.3 motor and the small models that work well with it.

I remember that a few years ago you were not as big a fan of the smaller D3.2. Are these smaller models a way for you to introduce more folks to smaller and less expensive models, or have you grown to really like them as well?

I have only flown my little Black Horse space plane on the D2.3 to date, but I did start two other models several years ago for the D3.2 that ought to get finished in 2021.

 

[Aeronerd]

Both really very cool.

 

[burkefj]

This was looking at it from a kit perspective primarily. At the time Aerotech didn't have the plugged front closures so you had to JB weld the normal closure(sort of hacky but ok), and the tubes/cones I had access to that would allow me to make a low priced kit with decent performance with the hand cutting/fitting I do didn't work well enough. I'm not also a huge fan of the micro bricks for other than micro rocket planes as I don't think they center as well and have as much strength as I think they need for this application and I wanted to design something that could use standard light receiver/battery/servos to make it easy for people. I did do a profile Interceptor for a D2.3 that flew well but people seem to have an aversion to profile planes for some reason.

Now I do have access to the lighter small cone that is hollow to allow putting the battery inside for CG, smaller tubes I stock for other kits, and I've been able to design a couple of kits that have decent performance for a fun flyer, are light enough to use standard equipment/battery/receiver, and are simple enough for me to make to keep the price around $50 shipped. Also the use of the 18mm case only requires getting a plugged closure to maybe opens it up for more people, and the price per flight is lower. Where the D2.3 is really good for 5-5.75 ounces and with a tail mounted model using a body tube and cone it's really hard to design something lighter than 5 ounces using standard equipment. If I was hand building something I could do built up models and keep the weight down but for kitting it's too much work and there isn't roi in getting a laser cutter and that has it's own problems.

I still prefer the E-6 sized models as they are easier to see, and have more leeway for shape/scale designs and still meet the weight reqirements for that motor(8-13 oz rtf is a good range using standard equipment)

But yes, they are cute and fun.

I see you have really embraced the D2.3 motor and the small models that work well with it.

I remember that a few years ago you were not as big a fan of the smaller D3.2. Are these smaller models a way for you to introduce more folks to smaller and less expensive models, or have you grown to really like them as well?

I have only flown my little Black Horse space plane on the D2.3 to date, but I did start two other models several years ago for the D3.2 that ought to get finished in 2021.

 

[tab28682]

This was looking at it from a kit perspective primarily. At the time Aerotech didn't have the plugged front closures so you had to JB weld the normal closure(sort of hacky but ok), and the tubes/cones I had access to that would allow me to make a low priced kit with decent performance with the hand cutting/fitting I do didn't work well enough. I'm not also a huge fan of the micro bricks for other than micro rocket planes as I don't think they center as well and have as much strength as I think they need for this application and I wanted to design something that could use standard light receiver/battery/servos to make it easy for people. I did do a profile Interceptor for a D2.3 that flew well but people seem to have an aversion to profile planes for some reason.

Now I do have access to the lighter small cone that is hollow to allow putting the battery inside for CG, smaller tubes I stock for other kits, and I've been able to design a couple of kits that have decent performance for a fun flyer, are light enough to use standard equipment/battery/receiver, and are simple enough for me to make to keep the price around $50 shipped. Also the use of the 18mm case only requires getting a plugged closure to maybe opens it up for more people, and the price per flight is lower. Where the D2.3 is really good for 5-5.75 ounces and with a tail mounted model using a body tube and cone it's really hard to design something lighter than 5 ounces using standard equipment. If I was hand building something I could do built up models and keep the weight down but for kitting it's too much work and there isn't roi in getting a laser cutter and that has it's own problems.

I still prefer the E-6 sized models as they are easier to see, and have more leeway for shape/scale designs and still meet the weight reqirements for that motor(8-13 oz rtf is a good range using standard equipment)

But yes, they are cute and fun.

All good reasons! And, anything that gets more RC RG models out there is a very good thing. +1 on the cuteness factor. Also, less storage space required...

 

[burkefj]

Yes! If you watch the video the last flight had a turbo boost, like there was an air void or something, i really grease the front end and liner well so pretty sure it was not blow by, but concerning, fortunately the model held together, I sent the video link to Karl to examine. I've had this happen on G-12's but never E-6's, this is the first time I'm seeing it in the D2.3.

All good reasons! And, anything that gets more RC RG models out there is a very good thing. +1 on the cuteness factor. Also, less storage space required...