Estes re-imaging of The Gyroc as The Tazz

[nosecone]

Saw this on Coming Soon page of their website.

"A re-imagining of an Estes classic! Based on the Estes Gyroc of the 60s, the TAZZ is an awesome addition to any rocketeers collection. Launch it up to 700 feet on a C6-3 engine and watch as it spins back down to earth!"

 

[K'Tesh]

Looks good to me!

 

[jlabrasca]

Instruction are already up. Looks like the plastic parts would be easy to print. Would it still be "cloning" if you built one before it was released? Protoclone? Preclone? Think I'd use an elliptical cone, though.

 

[Jim Hinton]

Hi Folks;

Does it kick the motor like the original? That part always makes them a little nervous at club fields. Based on the engine hook, I'm guessing that they designed a fix for that. That's about the only thing that I didn't like about the Gyroc.

Jim

 

[jlabrasca]

Hi Folks;

Does it kick the motor like the original? That part always makes them a little nervous at club fields. Based on the engine hook, I'm guessing that they designed a fix for that. That's about the only thing that I didn't like about the Gyroc.

Jim

 

[neil_w]

So the motor mount kicks out with a streamer I guess? That seems reasonable. Did the old Gyroc really just kick out the bare motor?

 

[BABAR]

Why do people get bent out of shape by ejected motor casings? An unstable rocket that land sharks spewing propellant or ejecting flaming propellant after landing (wadding doesn't catch everything) is a much higher fire risk than an 18 mm (or 24 mm) casing tumbling from altitude.

 

[kuririn]

Yeah, new one looks like a pop pod engine mount with plastic hold down tabs. Old one ejected the engine and that released the tension on the wooden hold down tabs and activated the flaps. IIRC original Estes Gyroc didn't have decals, I painted it with an orange and white "barbershop pole" pattern. Looked cool spiraling down.

 

[Flash]

Old Gyroc did just kick out engine with no streamer. It was based on BT20 size tube, this one is larger

 

[jlabrasca]

Yeah, new one looks like a pop pod engine mount with plastic hold down tabs. Old one ejected the engine and that released the tension on the wooden hold down tabs and activated the flaps. IIRC original Estes Gyroc didn't have decals, I painted it with an orange and white "barbershop pole" pattern. Looked cool spiraling down.

Three were a couple iterations from Estes. The kit I had came with decals for a roll pattern and the warning "EXPERIMENTAL".

 

[kitbasher99]

The Semroc Gyroc kit uses the Pop-Pod Motor Mount with a 13mm Motor but keeps the original size. This is just an Upscale version using plastic parts and changing the rubber band attachment points for the flaps.

 

[kuririn]

Very similar system to the Apogee SR72 Darkbird design that came out years ago.
Only difference is the flaps go in the same rather than opposite directions as in the Gyroc/Tazz, and the Darkbird glides rather than coptering down.



Laters.

 

[Jim Hinton]

Hi Folks;

Anything that kicks the motor is a bozo NAR no-no. That always disqualifies a flight in a NAR contest etc. I think that they are concerned about the potential terminal velocity. A 29mm reload could put a hurt on somebody as an example. This would be different in that it kicks the mount with a recovery device. I hope they include plenty of streamer with the kit. That mount could be a little tough to find in the grass.

Jim

 

[shreadvector]

Old Gyroc did just kick out engine with no streamer. It was based on BT20 size tube, this one is larger

Yes, LARGER!.

BUT, not as large as the one that Marc McReynolds built (BT-80).

 

[neil_w]

Yes, LARGER!.

BUT, not as large as the one that Marc McReynolds built (BT-80).

Or this one...

 

[kuririn]

Heh, that appeared to be a little big and heavy for helicopter recovery!
And what was it that was burning and rolling on the ground at liftoff?
Impressive, but scary.

 

[K'Tesh]

Instruction are already up. Looks like the plastic parts would be easy to print. Would it still be "cloning" if you built one before it was released? Protoclone? Preclone? Think I'd use an elliptical cone, though.

I think if you directly copy it, it would be uncool. Using it as inspiration for a unique design (upscale, downscale included) on the otherhand is OK. If every manufacturer has to worry about people cloning their new designs the number or new designs might be adversely affected.

 

[jlabrasca]

I think if you directly copy it, it would be uncool. Using it as inspiration for a unique design (upscale, downscale included) on the otherhand is OK. If every manufacturer has to worry about people cloning their new designs the number or new designs might be adversely affected.

>smile<

I was REALLY just asking what you would call a copy of an unreleased design.

It is an interesting question. Imagine that I am not planning to make a kit for sale or for free distribution. Nor will I publish plans, or files for digital fabrication. My interruption of Estes revenue stream would then be exactly one kit, and the IP would only be the drawings published on their website.

I will not make the argument that it is a fair use, nor will I claim that flying the pre-clone at a well attended launch would benefit Estes.

Why do people get bent out of shape by ejected motor casings? An unstable rocket that land sharks spewing propellant or ejecting flaming propellant after landing (wadding doesn't catch everything) is a much higher fire risk than an 18 mm (or 24 mm) casing tumbling from altitude.

That's a strange comparison. Its like "Why do people worry about fire ants? They aren't as dangerous as rattle snakes!"

I was struck in the head by a spit 18 mm casing at launch last year (or the year before -- my memory hasn't been too good since I got hit in the head by a falling casing >g<). It hurt (seriously). If it had been the head of one of the little kids at the launch there would have been loud crying. I just went to my car and sobbed quietly for a little bit.

Really seriously, I am glad that I didn't look up when they called "heads up" for the falling lawn dart, else I might have taken the motor in the eye.

 

[mikec]

Anything that kicks the motor is a bozo NAR no-no. That always disqualifies a flight in a NAR contest etc.

That's a competition (pink book) rule, not a safety code rule per se. The Estes 220 Swift, for example, explicitly says in the instructions that the 13mm motor is supposed to be ejected.

That said, as a general rule I'd like to see spent motor ejections not be a normal thing.

 

[kuririn]

Almost all the featherweight and tumble recovery lightweight rockets had motor eject. Reason is simple: if the motor wasn't ejected, the nose cone would be blown off!
Some of these are still around today. Mosquito, Quark, Swift. Li'l Herc, Triton,yada yada
For RSOs the problem with ejected engine casings are:
1. Fire hazard
2. Injury hazard
3. Litter problem
I fly 'em all the time, but there are no NAR sanctioned meets or contests in my state.
Laters.

 

[boatgeek]

Why do people get bent out of shape by ejected motor casings? An unstable rocket that land sharks spewing propellant or ejecting flaming propellant after landing (wadding doesn't catch everything) is a much higher fire risk than an 18 mm (or 24 mm) casing tumbling from altitude.

For example, the sign at our local LPR launch site telling rocketeers to pick up all litter, including spent engines. Leave enough on the grass and they might decide that rocketeers are too much trouble and throw us off of the only TARC field within a dozen miles.

 

[rharshberger]

Yes it did, I have an original Gyroc, that I fly several times each year and spitting the motor is what allows the trailing edges to move turning it into a helicopter recovery.

So the motor mount kicks out with a streamer I guess? That seems reasonable. Did the old Gyroc really just kick out the bare motor?

 

[shreadvector]

Or this one...

That came down much too fast.

Marc's came down slow, like the original Gyroc. Only it was larger and fluffier.

 

[BEC]

Almost all the featherweight and tumble recovery lightweight rockets had motor eject. Reason is simple: if the motor wasn't ejected, the nose cone would be blown off!

Not to get too picky here but...the tumble recovery models I am familiar with aren't supposed to kick the motor out, just back. They have vents in the body tube towards the top to allow the ejection charge to escape. I'm thinking Astron Scout, Sprite here. Sprites, in particular do sometimes kick the motor all the way out...which leads to streamlining in

I know there's at least one Design of the Month model or some such that had weights on the aft tips of the fins which may have used that to tumble after spitting the motor altogether.

True tumble recovery models use a CG shift to go from stable on boost to unstable on recovery. (That's why the Scout used to come with a copy of Estes TR-1 on stability.)

That said, the Mosquito and the Swift 220 say they are tumble recovery....but neither of them actually tumble. instead they streamline in. Same for the new Luna Bug....but that one comes down rather more slowly thanks, I expect, to the drag of the little "footpads". Mine tumbles a bit at ejection then comes relatively slowly straight down.

My thought about the Tazz was pretty much what kitbasher99 said - it is, conceptually, an upscale of the Semroc re-imagining of the Gyroc with it's 13mm, streamer-recovered motor mount.

The original Gyroc, spit motors and all, was one of my favorites from my first rocketry period in the late 1960s. Nothing could be simpler to prep for flight. Put the motor in, put the igniter in, go fly.

 

[shreadvector]

Not to get too picky here but...the tumble recovery models I am familiar with aren't supposed to kick the motor out, just back. They have vents in the body tube towards the top to allow the ejection charge to escape. I'm thinking Astron Scout, Sprite here. Sprites, in particular do sometimes kick the motor all the way out...which leads to streamlining in

I know there's at least one Design of the Month model or some such that had weights on the aft tips of the fins which may have used that to tumble after spitting the motor altogether.

True tumble recovery models use a CG shift to go from stable on boost to unstable on recovery. (That's why the Scout used to come with a copy of Estes TR-1 on stability.)

That said, the Mosquito and the Swift 220 say they are tumble recovery....but neither of them actually tumble. instead they streamline in. Same for the new Luna Bug....but that one comes down rather more slowly thanks, I expect, to the drag of the little "footpads". Mine tumbles a bit at ejection then comes relatively slowly straight down.

My thought about the Tazz was pretty much what kitbasher99 said - it is, conceptually, an upscale of the Semroc re-imagining of the Gyroc with it's 13mm, streamer-recovered motor mount.

The original Gyroc, spit motors and all, was one of my favorites from my first rocketry period in the late 1960s. Nothing could be simpler to prep for flight. Put the motor in, put the igniter in, go fly.

"Featherweight recovery" is the correct term for lightweight models that spit the motor. The motor tumbles (allegedly) and the model slowly floats down (not "streamlines in", which would be a heavy rocket "lawndart").

 

[neil_w]

The original Gyroc, spit motors and all, was one of my favorites from my first rocketry period in the late 1960s. Nothing could be simpler to prep for flight. Put the motor in, put the igniter in, go fly.

I always make sure to have at least one rocket with me at each launch that flies this way (my two Quinstars and Odd'l Cyclone fill the role). It is wonderful to "take a break" from all the typical prep and just shove in a motor and fly.

 

[BEC]

"Featherweight recovery" is the correct term for lightweight models that spit the motor. The motor tumbles (allegedly) and the model slowly floats down (not "streamlines in", which would be a heavy rocket "lawndart").

Yes, Fred. That's why I pulled only the bit about "tumble" out of the post I quoted.....

 

[kuririn]

Current version of the Li'l Herc by Semroc has washers on the fin tips. When the motor ejects, it becomes unstable and tumbles down. Without the washers it streamlines in.

 

[kuririn]

Not to get too picky here but...the tumble recovery models I am familiar with aren't supposed to kick the motor out, just back. They have vents in the body tube towards the top to allow the ejection charge to escape.

Is that right?

 

[BEC]

Yup. I have had motors kick all the way out on three different Sprites I've built, which can be a little irritating (and leads to a dented nose cone at the very least). So good luck with those.

I'll have to look at that Lil' Herc.

To go back to Fred's comment....as far as I know the original "featherweight recovery" model was the Astron Streak. According to the old catalogs it weighed an eighth of an ounce, which I believe. It also had a nice blunt nose cone (BNC-10A). In a way it's kind of ironic that the model weighed less than the spent motor case it kicked out. But....generally spent motor cases do tumble on the way down. I would much rather have a Streak fall on my head than a Swift 220 with it's very pointy plastic nose cone.




....and now back to discussing the Gyroc and its derivatives......