Who sells BT50H?

The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

neil_w

OpenRocketeer
TRF Supporter
Joined
Jul 14, 2015
Messages
16,642
Reaction score
11,415
Location
Northern NJ
I've mostly switched over to BT50H for my scratchbuilds. I buy it from BMS.

The other day I was curious, and to my great surprise I could not find it listed at any other vendor. Well, eRockets has "foil-lined" BT50H, but I don't know what that is exactly, or whether I'd want it. The foil lining is probably good for protecting the tube against ejection charges, but I'd be concerned trying to glue anything into it. Turns out when I went back and looked, BMS sells foil-lined as well as the normal stuff I usually buy.

Does *anyone* else sell the regular stuff? Who's using BT50H out there? Do you use the foil-lined, or regular? What's the deal?
 
I've used it in a couple of rockets that have ejection baffles. I think in this case it will hold up better.

03-baffle-inside-jpg.281500
 
IIRC it was explained to me once a few years ago that the foil lined BT-50 was to protect the motor tube from the high heat of composite motors. The casings can get pretty hot. As I found out the first time I tried to pull out a casing immediately after recovery. 😁
 
IIRC it was explained to me once a few years ago that the foil lined BT-50 was to protect the motor tube from the high heat of composite motors. The casings can get pretty hot. As I found out the first time I tried to pull out a casing immediately after recovery. 😁
That’s what I call “self critiquing”. Nobody needs to tell you not to do that again.
 
Buy an ST-9 tube from erockets.
Almost twice the thickness of a BT-50 tube but fits 24mm motors.
Ah, there it is. That's even thicker-walled than BMS BT50H, probably close enough to be interchangeable, at least for internal tubes.
I've used it in a couple of rockets that have ejection baffles. I think in this case it will hold up better.
03-baffle-inside-jpg.281500
Interesting, I'd never seen that in use before.

Outer diameters (according to vendor):
Regular BT50: .976"
BMS T50H: .990"
BMS T50MF (foil): 1.000"
eRockets BTH-50 (foil): .992"
eRockets ST-9: .998"


A little more standardization would be nice, but whatcha gonna do.
 
What about centering rings? The BMS T50H is .014 larger than the standard BT-50 on the OD, so you need to remove .007 on the radius of a normal CR, which I assume is no big deal to sand out. It goes up from there. Would you be concerned, or noticeably inconvenienced by any of those?

Intresting to note, the next row down on the BMS chart is their T104 (Centuri ST-10) which has a 1.00 ID, so it would make a viable sliding sleeve for the eRockets ST-9 (I assume a Centuri clone) or slightly smaller. Think of the design possibilities...

I didn't read any answer about gluing to the foil inside on the T50MF. Sure, epoxy should hold to the metal, but is the metal bonded well enough to the cardboard for a sound joint? Has anybody done this, like for inserting an engine block or a BT-20 stuffer tube?
 
What about centering rings? The BMS T50H is .014 larger than the standard BT-50 on the OD, so you need to remove .007 on the radius of a normal CR, which I assume is no big deal to sand out. It goes up from there. Would you be concerned, or noticeably inconvenienced by any of those?
I am already in the habit of only purchasing rings for BT50, and sanding out the insides to fit. I find the BMS 50H rings are often a bit loose. Easier to remove material (especially with my beloved sanding sticks) than to add it.
I didn't read any answer about gluing to the foil inside on the T50MF. Sure, epoxy should hold to the metal, but is the metal bonded well enough to the cardboard for a sound joint? Has anybody done this, like for inserting an engine block or a BT-20 stuffer tube?
I would think that the foil would be compressed between the ring and the body tube, so it really has nowhere to go. I would tend to trust it, although not necessarily to the same degree as I would a standard cardboard tube. I too am still interested in anyone's actual experience with this.
 
In one of my last builds, it was using a BT-55 tube, with a 24mm motor mount. I was concerned about the hibachi effect on the tube, so I took 4" of BT-55 tube, cut it length-wise, removed a small slice so it would slide into the main body tube. I then took some actual aluminum duct tape with adhesive and lined the inside of the tube. I then epoxied it in the main tube ahead of the motor mount. I don't think its going anywhere. Maybe this is a viable option instead of fooling with BT-50H foil tube?
 
Outer diameters (according to vendor):
Regular BT50: .976"
BMS T50H: .990"
BMS T50MF (foil): 1.000"
eRockets BTH-50 (foil): .992"
eRockets ST-9: .998"

LOC 24mm tubing, in 12" lengths: 0.99"/0.95"
They also have 6" and 18" MMT in 24mm, I found no mention of OD

weight and cost aside, Mach1 BT 50 fiberglass tube is 0.98"/0.94"
 
LOC 24mm tubing, in 12" lengths: 0.99"/0.95"
They also have 6" and 18" MMT in 24mm, I found no mention of OD
Excellent find. I shot them an inquiry regarding the OD of their 24mm motor mount. I would guess it's the same as their other 24mm tubing, but would like to hear them confirm. Does anyone else resell their tubing?
 
Does anyone else resell their tubing?

Good question, I've been looking at various sizes of airframe tubing for a couple of planned projects. Too confusing, now I can't remember who sells what.

Chris at CSRocketry does sell LOC parts, but he drop ships tubes- none in stock.

The motor tube in Aerotech's 29mm/24mm motor adapter measures 0.99"/0.95", but I don't see that they sell it separately in any length.

Would you let us know if you get a response from LOC? I'll add that to my spreadsheet.
 
I never cared for the thin wall standard BT-20 and BT-50 tubes.
All my BT-50 based Odd'l Rocket kits include heavier walled BT-50H tubes. (Break-Away and Fighter Jets)

I had some Odd'l Rockets heavy walled BT-20H tubes made after years crimped standard 20 tubes.
They are available from jonrocket.com
https://jonrocket.com/shop/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=9_10_224&products_id=1686Looks like jonrocket is out of stock!

These BT-20H tubes are also included in the Odd'l Heavy Duty Engine Mounts.
 
I never cared for the thin wall standard BT-20 and BT-50 tubes.
All my BT-50 based Odd'l Rocket kits include heavier walled BT-50H tubes. (Break-Away and Fighter Jets)

I had some Odd'l Rockets heavy walled BT-20H tubes made after years crimped standard 20 tubes.
They are available from jonrocket.com
https://jonrocket.com/shop/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=9_10_224&products_id=1686Looks like jonrocket is out of stock!

These BT-20H tubes are also included in the Odd'l Heavy Duty Engine Mounts.
Andy@ASP has T-50H
 
The dimensions they give are .947"/24.05mm ID, .98"/24.89mm OD, which if correct is only *barely* heavier than regular BT50, not enough to make much of a different IMHO. Also only available in 12" lengths.
True, but it’s good for LPR stuff. If you’re looking for heavy wall, I’d suggest buying it from LOC.
 
True, but it’s good for LPR stuff. If you’re looking for heavy wall, I’d suggest buying it from LOC.
You misunderstand. Let me update my table:
Code:
                         OD          Wall thickness
Regular BT50:           .976            .013
ASP T50H:               .980            .016
BMS T50H:               .990            .020
BMS T50MF (foil):      1.000            .025
eRockets BTH-50 (foil): .992            .021
eRockets ST-9:          .998            .024
LOC LBT-50             1.000            .025

So ASPs thick-walled BT50H is by far the thinnest of all the varieties that anyone else sells. Undoubtedly it's better than regular BT50, but I'd still usually choose the heavier ones. Also 12" limits its usefulness.

It's possible the given dimensions are wrong. ASP gives .978 for their regular T50 tubing, which would make the difference with the T50H even smaller. But I can only go buy what they publish, not having any in my hands.

I added LOC to the table, but they too only offer it in 12" lengths.
 
You misunderstand. Let me update my table:
Code:
                         OD          Wall thickness
Regular BT50:           .976            .013
ASP T50H:               .980            .016
BMS T50H:               .990            .020
BMS T50MF (foil):      1.000            .025
eRockets BTH-50 (foil): .992            .021
eRockets ST-9:          .998            .024
LOC LBT-50             1.000            .025

So ASPs thick-walled BT50H is by far the thinnest of all the varieties that anyone else sells. Undoubtedly it's better than regular BT50, but I'd still usually choose the heavier ones. Also 12" limits its usefulness.

It's possible the given dimensions are wrong. ASP gives .978 for their regular T50 tubing, which would make the difference with the T50H even smaller. But I can only go buy what they publish, not having any in my hands.

I added LOC to the table, but they too only offer it in 12" lengths.
Well, and the density ( and therefore mass/inch ) on these is likely going to be all over the place. Is there something specific you're trying to accomplish, or just exploring options?
 
LOC has 24mm MMT in 18" length, but they don't publish it's dimensions. (though as you said, length reduces it's usefulness)

I'm in a similar boat. I want to rebuild a Q-Modeling kit. They used BTH-60 which I cannot locate.
 
You misunderstand. Let me update my table:
Code:
                         OD          Wall thickness
Regular BT50:           .976            .013
ASP T50H:               .980            .016
BMS T50H:               .990            .020
BMS T50MF (foil):      1.000            .025
eRockets BTH-50 (foil): .992            .021
eRockets ST-9:          .998            .024
LOC LBT-50             1.000            .025

So ASPs thick-walled BT50H is by far the thinnest of all the varieties that anyone else sells. Undoubtedly it's better than regular BT50, but I'd still usually choose the heavier ones. Also 12" limits its usefulness.

It's possible the given dimensions are wrong. ASP gives .978 for their regular T50 tubing, which would make the difference with the T50H even smaller. But I can only go buy what they publish, not having any in my hands.

I added LOC to the table, but they too only offer it in 12" lengths.
LOC’s LBT-50 airframe tubing is in 12” lengths, but they also sell their 24mm x 18” long motor mount tubing.
 
You misunderstand. Let me update my table:
Code:
                         OD          Wall thickness
Regular BT50:           .976            .013
ASP T50H:               .980            .016
BMS T50H:               .990            .020
BMS T50MF (foil):      1.000            .025
eRockets BTH-50 (foil): .992            .021
eRockets ST-9:          .998            .024
LOC LBT-50             1.000            .025

So ASPs thick-walled BT50H is by far the thinnest of all the varieties that anyone else sells. Undoubtedly it's better than regular BT50, but I'd still usually choose the heavier ones. Also 12" limits its usefulness.

It's possible the given dimensions are wrong. ASP gives .978 for their regular T50 tubing, which would make the difference with the T50H even smaller. But I can only go buy what they publish, not having any in my hands.

I added LOC to the table, but they too only offer it in 12" lengths.
Check out this place, that might be to your liking,
https://www.rocketarium.com/Build/Airframes/50T
 
LOC has 24mm MMT in 18" length, but they don't publish it's dimensions. (though as you said, length reduces it's usefulness)

I'm in a similar boat. I want to rebuild a Q-Modeling kit. They used BTH-60 which I cannot locate.
I think the LOC 38mm airframe/motor mount tubing might be close in size to the BTH-60 ?
 
Back
Top