Estes Saturn V #1969 Build - Let's share ideas and experiences...

Mike, since we're not getting widespread flight reports of buckled motor tubes, I'm guessing yours was the exception rather than the rule. Maybe you got a lemon motor with a particularly energetic ejection charge. Happens sometimes.
I would not be overly concerned about flying a stock 1969 Sat V. this Saturday.
But a little insurance never hurts.
Laters.

kuririn said:

Mike, since we're not getting widespread flight reports of buckled motor tubes, I'm guessing yours was the exception rather than the rule. Maybe you got a lemon motor with a particularly energetic ejection charge. Happens sometimes.
I would not be overly concerned about flying a stock 1969 Sat V. this Saturday.
But a little insurance never hurts.
Laters.

Click to expand...

Hey I have a problem, moreover a question of doubt. For the engine mount all three rings are supposed to be covered in wood glue as you insert it into the large bottom half of the rocket? I dont know how i didnt get glue on the middle ring but apparently i did not. Is that a issue ? What can be done if anything to make sure the engine doesnt just rocket thorught the whole rocket due to a insecure engine mount

Matt_The_RocketMan said:

Hey I have a problem, moreover a question of doubt. For the engine mount all three rings are supposed to be covered in wood glue as you insert it into the large bottom half of the rocket? I dont know how i didnt get glue on the middle ring but apparently i did not. Is that a issue ? What can be done if anything to make sure the engine doesnt just rocket thorught the whole rocket due to a insecure engine mount

Click to expand...

Drill a hole on either side of the CR and inject some glue or epoxy. Something that expands as it cures will help ensure more bonding surface area. Try gorilla glue or Elmer’s glue all max.

I doubt it matters much.

Not quite to the moon... but close enough to make me happy

That's a good picture!

RocketManMike said:

I'll be damned. That's it exactly. Thank you for sharing that report. Those of you still building your Saturn Vs may want to read this article.....

Click to expand...

Nice. My first Saturn has been retired after one flight, but I will do the sleeve on subsequent builds given that I plan to go with a multiple engine mount system intended to allow me to fly either cluster or single motor. It could also be that the sleeve makes the tube dense enough to keep heat from distorting the tube that way, like a solid tree trunk is more resistant to catching fire than thin bark pulled from it.

The ejection charge on my composite E30-4T was powerful given it blew the S-IVB transition bulkhead forward into the tube AND partially ejected the motor casing even with the engine hook. I haven't checked to see how much it sooted up the stuffer tube though.

Flew mine yesterday on an Aerotech E-28. I left the delay at 7 but should have shaved off a second but all went very good.

captbk said:

Flew mine yesterday on an Aerotech E-28. I left the delay at 7 but should have shaved off a second but all went very good.
View attachment 389035

Click to expand...

That field looks amazing. Where do you fly?

mikec said:

I did this too, and ended up with 2.2 oz of weight in the nose, and it was still only marginally stable on an AT E20. I've subsequently decided I'm never flying it again with the engine bells mounted (I made them removable and had to move the motor back somewhat to make this work.) I hope your outcome is different, but be careful. The kit is not very stable with its smallish fins.

Click to expand...

To follow up with a launch report, I wound up trimming the center core MMT about an inch and a half shorter, then I added all 4 pats of clay, some more plumbers putty/lead sinkers to bring the CSM weight to 5.30oz total...

This made the rocket balance just at the upper roll pattern ( under the “United States” decal)... I flew it on an Aerotech E-15-4 with 2 36” plastic chutes on the booster, and the stock plastic chute on the upper stage, with a Kevlar cord rig to balance it escape tower up...

The flight was a success except for 2 or 3 shroud lines pulling through the plastic on one of the booster section chutes, but all in all a great flight.... No buckling of the MMT was noted post flight...

With this flight in the books, I’m planning another flight later in November to commemorate the 50th Anniversary launch of Apollo 12, with a bigger 24mm motor at our High Power club...

Here are some photos and I’ll try to post video of the flight as well!
Thanks for all the ideas, suggestions and well wishes!

VonRecktofen said:

To follow up with a launch report, I wound up trimming the center core MMT about an inch and a half shorter, then I added all 4 pats of clay, some more plumbers putty/lead sinkers to bring the CSM weight to 5.30oz total...

This made the rocket balance just at the upper roll pattern ( under the “United States” decal)... I flew it on an Aerotech E-15-4 with 2 36” plastic chutes on the booster, and the stock plastic chute on the upper stage, with a Kevlar cord rig to balance it escape tower up...

The flight was a success except for 2 or 3 shroud lines pulling through the plastic on one of the booster section chutes, but all in all a great flight.... No buckling of the MMT was noted post flight...

With this flight in the books, I’m planning another flight later in November to commemorate the 50th Anniversary launch of Apollo 12, with a bigger 24mm motor at our High Power club...

Here are some photos and I’ll try to post video of the flight as well!
Thanks for all the ideas, suggestions and well wishes!View attachment 389224View attachment 389225

Click to expand...

Here is the launch video that I took with an IPhone....<iframe width="560" height="315" src="" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Hope the link works!

Should I glue the LEM Shroud to the third stage booster body tube? The obvious answer to me is yes, but I have looked over the instructions 3 times and don't see where it is mentioned at all either way. Just want to make sure I don't do something I will regret later...

gtche98 said:

Should I glue the LEM Shroud to the third stage booster body tube? The obvious answer to me is yes, but I have looked over the instructions 3 times and don't see where it is mentioned at all either way. Just want to make sure I don't do something I will regret later...

Click to expand...

Yes, glue it on.
That plastic eyelet is confusing isn't it? It serves no purpose for this model.
Maybe if they make a 1/100 Sat. 1B with the separation point at the shroud, then there will be a use for it.
(Hint, hint).
Laters.

You can also friction up the SLA to S-IVB cone with some tape, then use a couple small tape dots of white glue to secure the cone to the tube enough for flight without permanently attaching it (just give it a deliberate twist to break the bond).

I did that on mine, but since I was only flying it once I didn't worry as much about a more permanent bond. Still it can be checked periodically to make sure it is holding fine between flights. Otherwise that cone is a rather loose fit.

Kuririn - That eyelet was what got me second guessing. I fundamentally knew there was no purpose, as I had already sealed the third stage from the bottom with the die cut card. But that eyelet kept staring at me asking me to tie it to something!

Thanks for the help. I would not have made it this far in the build without the contributors to this thread and the outstanding blog by Chris Michielssen.

BTW, I highly recommend reinforcing the glue joint on that die cut card circle at the bottom of the third stage. The charge on the Estes E30-4T I used was so powerful it blew it almost all the way up the S-IVB tube.

Finally ready for priming and filling and sanding and painting. So...50% complete maybe?

Warning. White is easy. I am just masking for the black currently. Big task...

OverTheTop said:

Warning. White is easy. I am just masking for the black currently. Big task...

Click to expand...

Yup. Be prepared to spend as much time on touch-up as you do on painting the roll patterns. The "Centuri way" was to paint it all BLACK and mask off the roll patterns, then spray everything else white. I'm not sure which method is better, but I do know that putting black over white is easier than putting white over black.

I will be going for the "Looks good from 5 feet away" finish.

cerving said:

Yup. Be prepared to spend as much time on touch-up as you do on painting the roll patterns. The "Centuri way" was to paint it all BLACK and mask off the roll patterns, then spray everything else white. I'm not sure which method is better, but I do know that putting black over white is easier than putting white over black.

Click to expand...

Centuri way worked perfectly for me using Rust-Oleum 2x flat paint... Since this is the Centuri Saturn V, a mere 40+ years in the making! What's good about putting the white on the black, is that you can touch up the edges with a nice black sharpie...

DeltaVee said:

Centuri way worked perfectly for me using Rust-Oleum 2x flat paint... Since this is the Centuri Saturn V, a mere 40+ years in the making! What's good about putting the white on the black, is that you can touch up the edges with a nice black sharpie...
View attachment 389799

Click to expand...

It doesn't look like you used the slip on fins, did you add nose weight to compensate?

cerving said:

Yup. Be prepared to spend as much time on touch-up as you do on painting the roll patterns.

Click to expand...

My mind had begun to accept that as the masking was progressing...

5x7 said:

It doesn't look like you used the slip on fins, did you add nose weight to compensate?

Click to expand...

I did not. I did have nose weight and it went straight up... for about 100 feet and then took a hard right turn! (mmt was 24mm with an E12). did a bit of wiggling around up there and then started for the ground... it did gain some additional altitude and then started to come in fast... but when ejection occurred, it was high enough for *almost* no damage except to 1) my wits and 2) my underwear! (Truthfully, a very small zipper tear that is virtually unnoticeable now... but alas *I* know it's there...) As the instructions originally said in the pack with the slip on fins... "not needed but a MUST for enerjet flights!). I figured I was good because I had more nose weight (large washers) than the original clay, and an E12 sure as heck weighs less than three E6's! Next time it'll be either more weight or the slip-ons! (it's still in too good a shape to leave it to chance again!).

kuririn said:

Mike, since we're not getting widespread flight reports of buckled motor tubes, I'm guessing yours was the exception rather than the rule. Maybe you got a lemon motor with a particularly energetic ejection charge. Happens sometimes.
I would not be overly concerned about flying a stock 1969 Sat V. this Saturday.
But a little insurance never hurts.
Laters.

Click to expand...

So back in the 70's I converted my Estes K36 to fly on 2 D12's... turns out it flew amazingly well with that configuration. Since the fins were scale, of course the slip-ons were used... but this kit also used a BT50 stuffer. When I pulled the original motor mount to do the "upgrade" there was a ton of damage to the stuffer...

I had built a minimum diameter BT 50 rocket for D motors back in my days in Salt Lake where I stood a chance at getting something like that back (which I did). The D motor ejection charge burns HOT... and the hibachi effect on the tube ahead of the thrust ring bore that out (so much so on the next version of that I used 2 ar-2050 rings and a short bt20 mini stuffer to keep the *heat* away from the tube. The first flight caused so much char damage that when I pulled the motor the tube separated at the burn point. Between that and the pressue, I came to the conclusion that the standard BT 50 is unsuitable for this application without *considerable* reinforcement... (either the ST9 as you suggest or a BT 52 sleeve covering the tube near the the motor... my Centuri Saturn uses an ST16 as the stuffer and that's far better...

DeltaVee said:

. "not needed but a MUST for enerjet flights!).

Click to expand...

I lost the slip on fins for mine 30+ years ago, that’s the first I heard they were optional, thanks for the info!

5x7 said:

I lost the slip on fins for mine 30+ years ago, that’s the first I heard they were optional, thanks for the info!

Click to expand...

That's my recollection at least. I'm sure they were an add on to the original kit since the vacuform fins are oversized.

They'd be easy to recreate with evergreen clear plastic sheet... butyrate sheet would be better but that stuff is hard to come by.

DeltaVee said:

That's my recollection at least. I'm sure they were an add on to the original kit since the vacuform fins are oversized.

They'd be easy to recreate with evergreen clear plastic sheet... butyrate sheet would be better but that stuff is hard to come by.

Click to expand...

just looked at a pdf of the original instructions which was only flew with 3 b4-2 or 3 C6-5, no slip on fins mentioned anywhere. It must been added later in the kits lifespan.

5x7 said:

just looked at a pdf of the original instructions which was only flew with 3 b4-2 or 3 C6-5, no slip on fins mentioned anywhere. It must been added later in the kits lifespan.

Click to expand...

For sure. I have the instructions in hand along with the box... There is no mention of them in the booklet. Sometime there a phrases I have heard or read over my 61 years that have lodged in my skull... That one about using enerjets is one. I jonesed them for a long time... Maybe that's why

DeltaVee said:

Between that and the pressue, I came to the conclusion that the standard BT 50 is unsuitable for this application without *considerable* reinforcement... (either the ST9 as you suggest or a BT 52 sleeve covering the tube near the the motor... my Centuri Saturn uses an ST16 as the stuffer and that's far better...

Click to expand...

Don't know if they still have 'em but there used to be bt-50 tubes with a metal foil lining inside. That was for insulating the tube against the hot gases of 24mm motors. Erockets and maybe BMS used to carry them.
EDIT: Found the listing at Erockets but it's out of stock:
https://www.erockets.biz/semroc-body-tube-t-50mf-8-1pk-sem-bt-50mf-8/