Is Shooting a Viking Rocket legal?

[Matt_The_RocketMan]

It may not be a better way of keeping the engine in the rocket , but at least you dont have to worry about over friction fitting, hence you dont have to tear up a good rocket just to get the empty engine casing out

 

[kuririn]

Use BOTH friction fit and a tape wrap at the end of the motor. If your motor still kicks out then you are doing something wrong.
And the nose cone of the Swift doesn't kick out cuz it's supposed to be glued in. The motor is supposed to be loose, not friction fitted too tight, since it's supposed to kick out. Some RSOs don't allow motor eject rockets, some do depending on field conditions.
Welcome back, kid. Always find your posts entertaining.
PS Just saw your post above mine. Use pliers to remove a tight fitting motor.
PPS I've used tape wrap alone (without friction fit) many times and never had a failure.

 

[lakeroadster]

The heat generated inside the motor itself tends to increase the motors diameter, due to thermal expansion. Thus the motor gets tighter in the rocket and less likely to be expelled... if the friction fit is indeed snug prior to ignition.

 

[Matt_The_RocketMan]

Use BOTH friction fit and a tape wrap at the end of the motor. If your motor still kicks out then you are doing something wrong.
And the nose cone of the Swift doesn't kick out cuz it's supposed to be glued in. The motor is supposed to be loose, not friction fitted too tight, since it's supposed to kick out. Some RSOs don't allow motor eject rockets, some do depending on field conditions.
Welcome back, kid. Always find your posts entertaining.
PS Just saw your post above mine. Use pliers to remove a tight fitting motor.
PPS I've used tape wrap alone (without friction fit) many times and never had a failure.

Is there a certain type of tape that cannot be used when doing a friction fit? I think that clear tape may not be useful at all, I would think it melts when the engine heats up, thus the tap is sorta there" and it requires more than pliers to get the motor out.

And for swift, i would think that the mini' would melt the inside of the nose cone , it might not go anywhere , but probably after a lot of uses the plastic may start becoming more brittle/ holes may appear, but maybe not depends on how much heat can be absorbed by the nose cone...

Maybe I could start looking for other ways of keeping the engine inside with a relatively non existent failure rate...

PS. doesn't gluing the nosecone in make any rocket ceptable to blowing up?

 

[Nytrunner]

Thin masking tape is appropriate for friction fit. A bit around the top of the motor, and again around the bottom. But as you've discovered, not too much, otherwise the motor expands and you have to bung out the nozzle and peel it out from the inside. Clear (cello) tape may actually glue the motor in with heat, and that's exactly what you don't want.

The mini engine is fine for the swift. Has been for 15 years. If you're worried about it, put a half a square of wadding in the nose before you glue it on.
Also for the swift, the motor is intended to eject, so no it won't blow up.

 

[Matt_The_RocketMan]

Thin masking tape is appropriate for friction fit. A bit around the top of the motor, and again around the bottom. But as you've discovered, not too much, otherwise the motor expands and you have to bung out the nozzle and peel it out from the inside. Clear (cello) tape may actually glue the motor in with heat, and that's exactly what you don't want.

The mini engine is fine for the swift. Has been for 15 years. If you're worried about it, put a half a square of wadding in the nose before you glue it on.
Also for the swift, the motor is intended to eject, so no it won't blow up.

Thanks for telling me that about Swift, I thought the dang thing would pop as soon as its recovery system came online.

Friction fitting in its shaky history with me, is a scientific method that "works" when an exact amount of tape is wrapped around the motor. From my general understanding of having no proper engine mounts makes me worry when the rocket is supposed to function at 100%, safely at competitions. I am currently looking for alternative sources of keeping the motor inside the engine bay. I personally, hold high regards to the Viking rocket, due to it being one of the highest flying rocket using only a 18mm engine. The only problem with the rocket which in my terms and most NAR safety personal at competitions is the the kick back from the engine. I would rate the safety of the rocket at a (higher caution rocket) under this i would label on the rocket; make sure that all NAR rules are reviewed before the flight of this rocket especially the build of the rocket, and the surroundings of where it is being shot in.

 

[kuririn]

The Viking is an entry level rocket. It is designed with the fewest number of parts for ease of assembly and low cost. Minimum diameter so no motor mount, only a thrust ring. Perfect beginner's rocket.
If secure motor retention is important to you, consider getting an Estes Hi Flyer instead. Minimum diameter as well, but with an engine hook on the tube secured with a retainer ring. Slightly more challenging build.
Estes designs and features are each targeted for a particular market segment. Choose accordingly.

 

[Matt_The_RocketMan]

The Viking is an entry level rocket. It is designed with the fewest number of parts for ease of assembly and low cost. Minimum diameter so no motor mount, only a thrust ring. Perfect beginner's rocket.
If secure motor retention is important to you, consider getting an Estes Hi Flyer instead. Minimum diameter as well, but with an engine hook on the tube secured with a retainer ring. Slightly more challenging build.
Estes designs and features are each targeted for a particular market segment. Choose accordingly.

haha , its not about the ease of the build, I think its the actual saftey of the rocket for those who use it, dont worry ive build many complex rockets.

 

[kuririn]

Friction fit is as safe as any other retention system. It's not the method, but correctly using it that determines the safety and your success. When I first started building and flying rockets EVERY kit was friction fit. From the simplest with featherweight or tumble recovery to the most complex clustered rockets.
Nowdays if there is no engine hook or retainer I prefer tape wrap on the end instead of friction fit. Like I said, works every time, no struggling to get the motor out. Laters.

 

[beeblebrox]

I am briefly going to bring up the topic for another questioner.
I have been toying with some new viking models I made a few months back, shot like 6 of them , using different motors ; A8-33, B6-4 and C6-7. Of the six shots i lost 2 rockets due to to tight of tape wrap, and to loose tape wrap, how can I use these rockets if I dont know the complete and utter safety of the friction wrap? I feel like friction fitting a engine in a rocket is quite primitive, i just built swift, and it is also a friction wrap rocket, but the only issue, is it has a tumble recovery system, but the engine is ejected from the rocket, how the heck does this not pop off the nose come? Also is the kit technically breaking its own rules? It primary just fictions a fire starting rocket.

Wrap 1/2" masking tape around the nozzle end of the motor until the tape thrust ring is the same diameter as the tube OD. about 4-6 wraps depending on how thick the tape is. then wrap one wrap of 1/2" tape over the seam between the motor tape ring and the body tube. This is tried and true and your motor will not eject, you can also the use different length motors since there is no thrust ring needed in the rocket. Use 1/2" tape for 18mm and 24mmnotors. Use 3/4" tape for 29mm and 38mm motors. 1" Tape for 54mm motors. (Less then 500NT av. Thrust) Use some sort of metal retainer for larger than that. This WAS the method for decades, It works. Any questions PM ME.

 

[Matt_The_RocketMan]

Wrap 1/2" masking tape around the nozzle end of the motor until the tape thrust ring is the same diameter as the tube OD. about 4-6 wraps depending on how thick the tape is. then wrap one wrap of 1/2" tape over the seam between the motor tape ring and the body tube. This is tried and true and your motor will not eject, you can also the use different length motors since there is no thrust ring needed in the rocket. Use 1/2" tape for 18mm and 24mmnotors. Use 3/4" tape for 29mm and 38mm motors. 1" Tape for 54mm motors. (Less then 500NT av. Thrust) Use some sort of metal retainer for larger than that. This WAS the method for decades, It works. Any questions PM ME.

For the Viking rocket could i place the engine block ring like 5cm back so that the motor hangs out more? Initially I could have a larger space to mask the motor in place with both techniques. Initially this may work, or may not work, 5cm maybe to much hangout for the motor after it ejects , but it could make the tighter friction fits a little less troublesome

 

[Donnager]

Got tired of the tape/friction fit in my Viking, so I built a 2X upscale, to test Loctite Powergrab for fillets.

For me, did not work, too flexible and didn't penetrate well. The edges didn't seem to be stuck that well, so I fidgeted with it and eventually peeled it all back off, but made the fillet edges a little janky.

Re-did fillets with epoxy, and I now have a Viking that will fly anything 24mm.

 

[Matt_The_RocketMan]

Got tired of the tape/friction fit in my Viking, so I built a 2X upscale, to test Loctite Powergrab for fillets.

For me, did not work, too flexible and didn't penetrate well. The edges didn't seem to be stuck that well, so I fidgeted with it and eventually peeled it all back off, but made the fillet edges a little janky.

Re-did fillets with epoxy, and I now have a Viking that will fly anything 24mm.
View attachment 388914

that a nice rocket you have there, and it solves the problem A-okay for you, but for the original viking it is literally meant to be light weight and a high-flier, that is why i dint add a engine hook, do to the added weight, the comp I go to only lets use use mini's all the way up to B6-4 impulse so the rocket that goes the highest wins, this is why the rocket is key to winning, I also choose it to due to the height requirements of minimal 12 inches. Nice build but that's not what i am looking for

 

[Matt_The_RocketMan]

I would like to know weather 4" of masking tape / clear tape is enough to hold the engine in, I feel like if there is an a exact measurement that I should be looking for, I think this should be labeled on the rocket instructions. A approximation of wrapping the motor is down right sloppy, my goal today is to find an exact measurement of about how much tape is supposed to be used for a sung ft.

 

[Steve Shannon]

I would like to know weather 4" of masking tape / clear tape is enough to hold the engine in, I feel like if there is an a exact measurement that I should be looking for, I think this should be labeled on the rocket instructions. A approximation of wrapping the motor is down right sloppy, my goal today is to find an exact measurement of about how much tape is supposed to be used for a sung ft.

There are always variations in inside diameter of motor mount tubes and outside diameter of motor cases. Nobody will ever be able to give you an exact length of tape that works for friction fitting.

 

[samb]

I would like to know weather 4" of masking tape / clear tape is enough to hold the engine in, I feel like if there is an a exact measurement that I should be looking for, I think this should be labeled on the rocket instructions. A approximation of wrapping the motor is down right sloppy, my goal today is to find an exact measurement of about how much tape is supposed to be used for a sung ft.

Your goal in unrealistic IMHO. Friction fit has always been all about FEEL. Variables that affect the procedure include atmospheric conditions, minute variations in I.D. of a given motor tube, minute variations in the O.D. of a given motor case, variations in the thickness of the tape used. As always, I like to refer to my favorite model rocket building blog from my favorite master model builder for guidance:

https://modelrocketbuilding.blogspot.com/2012/02/friction-fitting-engines-part-1.html

[edit] Always nice when Steve Shannon agrees with me !

 

[beeblebrox]

Friction fit is never a good idea anyway, you think its good but sitting in the sun for a half hour waiting for someone to launch it can make things change and loosen up....best bet for minimum diameter is make sure the end of the fin root is about 3/8" - 1/2" from the end of the tube, wrap about four to five wraps of tape around the nozzle end of motor, then one wrap of tape around the seam. I don't have a rocket to specifically show so here is the wordless workshop example: It will not eject and it will come out easily after the flight!

 

[Scott Hala]

Whenever I see this topic, all I can think of is "Did the rocket somehow gain person hood?" But that's just me I think.

 

[DaHabes]

Uh Does it actually work? Ejection charge is pretty powerful

we stopped using it entirely cause we shot it at comp in a grassy place and we retrieved the rocket without engine, its considered highly dangerous for that to occur

When I started doing this in the early 1960's, friction fit was all you had on some rockets. I just retired my original Little Joe II. Flew it upwards of 30 times over 55 years, friction fit...

 

[Woody's Workshop]

I'm probably getting in on this one a little late, but...
Since you have the engine block in already, take the Xacto knife and make a 1/8" cut (sideways) in front of the engine block between the fins (Not where launch lug is).
Get an engine hook and a Mylar retaining ring (both available at eRockets.biz).
A link for your convenience.
RING
HOOK
Insert the engine hook. Since it's built, you'll have to cut the Mylar ring.
Glue it over engine hook with the cut on the opposite side of the engine hook.
A few of Estes' older rockets had this form of engine retention when they first came out.
Before engine mounts became common.
It might help if you cut the Mylar ring at an angle opposite the spiral wrap. It would be harder to pull away than a straight cut. If you can fit 2 that would even be better, cutting in opposite directions.
Cutting against the spiral wrap won't weaken the wrap as much and retain more of it original shape.
You can even paint it if you'd like since the color is milky on the Mylar ring.
I personally like the Viking. 3,4 or 5 fin design with several mounting surfaces to choose from.
I have even used 3/32" balsa on the last one I built due to the card stock layers on the fins can separate on hard landings. I like the high viability of the new paint, but prefer the old style decals. Much more appropriate. And the Viking is a high altitude flyer on a budget...if your eyes are still good enough to see it.

 

[kuririn]

I'm probably getting in on this one a little late, but...
Since you have the engine block in already, take the Xacto knife and make a 1/8" cut (sideways) in front of the engine block between the fins (Not where launch lug is).
Get an engine hook and a Mylar retaining ring (both available at eRockets.biz).
A link for your convenience.
RING
HOOK
Insert the engine hook. Since it's built, you'll have to cut the Mylar ring.
Glue it over engine hook with the cut on the opposite side of the engine hook.
A few of Estes' older rockets had this form of engine retention when they first came out.
Before engine mounts became common.
It might help if you cut the Mylar ring at an angle opposite the spiral wrap. It would be harder to pull away than a straight cut. If you can fit 2 that would even be better, cutting in opposite directions.
Cutting against the spiral wrap won't weaken the wrap as much and retain more of it original shape.
You can even paint it if you'd like since the color is milky on the Mylar ring.
I personally like the Viking. 3,4 or 5 fin design with several mounting surfaces to choose from.
I have even used 3/32" balsa on the last one I built due to the card stock layers on the fins can separate on hard landings. I like the high viability of the new paint, but prefer the old style decals. Much more appropriate. And the Viking is a high altitude flyer on a budget...if your eyes are still good enough to see it.

Woody, just one problem. How is he supposed to get the mylar ring under the fins if it's already built?
This method for a minimum diameter rocket is the same as the Hi-Flier.
Much easier to do before assembly than after.
Cheers.
PS See post #97.

 

[Steve Shannon]

[edit] Always nice when Steve Shannon agrees with me !

I’d be a fool not to!

 

[Matt_The_RocketMan]

Friction fit is never a good idea anyway, you think its good but sitting in the sun for a half hour waiting for someone to launch it can make things change and loosen up....best bet for minimum diameter is make sure the end of the fin root is about 3/8" - 1/2" from the end of the tube, wrap about four to five wraps of tape around the nozzle end of motor, then one wrap of tape around the seam. I don't have a rocket to specifically show so here is the wordless workshop example: It will not eject and it will come out easily after the flight!

View attachment 393744 View attachment 393745 View attachment 393746

Ill try out measurements on my Wizards with some 1/2 A engines, im betting between 6" or 7" will be enough, I may be wrong. Better test this before competition tomorrow

 

[Woody's Workshop]

Woody, just one problem. How is he supposed to get the mylar ring under the fins if it's already built?
This method for a minimum diameter rocket is the same as the Hi-Flier.
Much easier to do before assembly than after.
Cheers.
PS See post #97.

Did you read the full post?
I explained installation on an assembled rocket.

 

[kuririn]

Did you read the full post?
I explained installation on an assembled rocket.

Yup, read about the cut on the mylar ring. Still don't see how you get the ring under the assembled fins.
Like this:

 

[kuririn]

Of course, a rectangular piece of cardstock or tubing glued over the engine hook would probably be a better choice than a mylar ring for an already built rocket. This is how we did it in the early days for minimum diameter rockets, using gauze. Now they use Tyvek and more modern materials.
Like this:

 

[Matt_The_RocketMan]

I got numbers for you guys... drum roll... 7" is what most of our engines flew with. We shot 6 Wizard rockets and 1 viking rockets with this amount of friction fit tape. I would say using more that 7" resulted in not properly fitting the to motor. Some rockets we using more / less of the tape. I would recommend about 1 or two wraps of tape for engines sizes 1/2 A to A8-3. Larger engines required a little less than 7" which surprised me.. I am talking about B6-4

 

[samb]

Ok, 7 inches. So who won the contest ?

 

[Woody's Workshop]

Yup, read about the cut on the mylar ring. Still don't see how you get the ring under the assembled fins.
Like this:
View attachment 393878

That's a HiFlyer. Viking is much different.
I do agree it isn't a feasible alternative as an after thought on a HiFler!