I expect something like that went through Mr. Boren's mind, yes....and the new owners let him have new blow-molded parts created to realize this desire. Of course that means parts for later designs using the 29mm tubing.
New Estes kit for 2023 - So Long #9722
- Thread starter turbofireball
- Start date
Help Support The Rocketry Forum:
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2022
- Messages
- 3,184
- Reaction score
- 2,874
I'd just use a Cherokee E kit and make the booster out of the excess length of BT-55 they supply. C-55 coupler stock and 29mm MMT nest in the BT to get down to 29mm. All cheap and easy. Overall, should be quite a bit lighter than a full length of 29mm MMT and the Cherokee nose cone should be aerodynamically better than the So Long NC, for reasons I discussed above.
Wow, who would have thought there would be so many cool ways to build rockets that are or aren't this kit...and no approach is wrong.
/S
/S
You might look into Apogee's lightweight 29mm tubing and matching nosecones. The tubing is 29.9mm OD. Ideal for black powder and for the ringless version of the H13. For low thrust motors which do have thrust rings, I too have settled on BT55.
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2022
- Messages
- 3,184
- Reaction score
- 2,874
I have those in my build pile already. H13s are on the build list after L1 certification.
This is good to know, I'm leaning towards not building another Scratch built min diameter and sticking with BT-55 29mm motor instead. BT-55 parts are cheap, easy to find , and offer a bit more durability than a min diam 29mm. The paint started to melt on the last launch of my Min Diameter F-15-8 rocket I have and the motor section is heavy duty tubing, not the standard thin stuff like the main body tube (Quest). My BT-55 F-15-8 went ridiculously high and I can't say it was any less than my Min diameter version that was the same length with the same fins. The mmt tube and spacers needed for the BT-55 should reduce the surface heat a little, even though it will add a small amount of extra weight. I was planning to start adding weight to the nose cone anyway just so others don't think I'm completely crazy. Sadly I can only launch these at a Club Launch, and only if the sky is clear. Out of 3 launches I only got it back the last 2 times because someone else spotted it coming down. (Thanks Back_At-It)
Last edited:
I was going to build a Star Orbiter as a "hot rod" . While waiting on it to come i ran across the Aspire. I also ordered it also. Once i started building them the differance was pretty obvious . Tim did an excelent job on the instructions for the aspire (there online also) if anyone is interested in going fast or high or just building a strong rocket i highly suggest reading them. I have not launched mine yet but i have Aerotech G-77 red line for it. RS shows right at 750 mph and 4000' Thats faster than the G-80 engine.
The apogee F-10-8 engine shows 5479'
The apogee F-10-8 engine shows 5479'
Attachments
Yes my Cherokee E has the extra tube added.
That'll be the name of the third stage I stick on the bottom.
Might have to gap stage it to fit the extra name decal on it though...
Brilliant!That'll be the name of the third stage I stick on the bottom.
Might have to gap stage it to fit the extra name decal on it though...
Scott_650
Well-Known Member
Just for fun during the Browns-Steelers game (my wife is a Steelers fan) I did a quick OR sim of the So Long - lots of guess work and some hand waving but I think this is going to be close. Here's the screen shot and the file, please feel free to correct anything out of whack, I'm far from being an OR wizard. FYI the booster is from Apogee's RS file for the Estes Loadstar, resized and stripped of its motor tube and rings - I left the fins the same, figured they were close enough. The sustainer started out as a BB II RS file from Rocket Reviews, I eyeballed everything to close enough to suit me - YMMV.
I set recovery deployment at apogee and left the 18" plastic chute just to have the mass of something recovery related in the rocket.
I set recovery deployment at apogee and left the 18" plastic chute just to have the mass of something recovery related in the rocket.
Initiator001
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2009
- Messages
- 3,400
- Reaction score
- 1,110
The So Long kit's finishing scheme recalls the original Sizzler (#1906) model.
Scott_650
Well-Known Member
It’s a good looking scheme, I’m sure when OR Ninja K’Tesh does his sim magic his result will be face card correct. I’m a sucker for those classic simple three color schemes like the So Long.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2022
- Messages
- 3,184
- Reaction score
- 2,874
Alternate decal:
Too Long
Too Long
Alternate name: Ron Jeremy.
This rocket is appropriately named!
Anyone heard of a release date or time frame?
According to someone in another thread I can't find right now, during the NARCON Manufacturer's Forum, Estes said So Long and Great Goblin are due in June and Black Brandt XII in September.
Scott_650
Well-Known Member
That’s the general timeframe I recall - I think it was Mallory Langford who posted that info in the chat during the Estes presentation. There was some discussion about whether the chat posts are archived or recoverable but I don’t know what the conclusion was.
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2022
- Messages
- 3,184
- Reaction score
- 2,874
Gives me a target to get my DBRM nosecone Goblin built!
dpower
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2009
- Messages
- 1,864
- Reaction score
- 509
Mallory Langford, vNARCON 2023 manufacturer's forum:
"Look for the So Long in early summer - June time frame"
"No bulk packs on the so long at this time"
"Sanding bar in May, black brant in September"
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2022
- Messages
- 3,184
- Reaction score
- 2,874
Do we know what tubing will be used for the So Long? The specs for BMS and Semroc BT-52H motor mount tubing are the same, but differ slightly from LOC. I have an idea that Estes' MMT might be a little thinner, but haven't physically checked any parts. Apogee has 29mm MMT tubing, as well as its lighter 29mm tubing that the Aspire is made from, at 0.018-in wall.
They say the rocket is 1.21" OD. That's the same size quoted by BMS, et. al, for their thick wall motor mount tube. Apogee thin wall tube is listed as 1.176"
Incidentally, I've not seen LOC 29mm tubing differ from BMS, etc. In fact, Mike Turicik at LOC told me it measured 1.21" OD, 1.14" ID, which are the same numbers BMS provides.
Agreed. My scratch built 29 mm MD build used heavy wall tube for the lower 7 inches and regular tubing for the upper part. Paint almost melted so I think regular tubing might not be great for housing an F engine and it’s 3.5 second burn time.
We know both from the leaked image that started this thread and from the page when the 2023 catalog was released that the OD is 1.21", which is the same as the typical heavy-wall 29mm motor mount, including that used by other Estes Pro Series kits.
At 1.176", Apogee 29mm tubing has 5.5% less frontal area and is 55-60% of the weight of 1.21" tube.
Rocketry Works lists a 29mm tube that purports to be even thinner (1.168") and lighter than the Apogee tubing.
For a low-thrust motor like the F15 (or G12, H13, etc.), practically any rocket is going to be over optimal weight, so the thin-wall stuff can probably be made to fly higher. It may run into heating problems though, as @PDawg says.
Similar threads
