Giant R/C Me163 Formation Flight (video)

eggtimer rocketry
Wildman Rocketry
the rocketry show
The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

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

Winston

Lorenzo von Matterhorn
Joined
Jan 31, 2009
Messages
9,560
Reaction score
1,749
[video=youtube;7VxLrZVgJB0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7VxLrZVgJB0[/video]
 
Awesome! :clap:

Also very timely since I just ordered a smaller scale RC Rocket boost Komet from Hobby King yesterday during their BF sale...was about 50% off! This one uses a C6 rocket motor and is mainly powered by a electric prop, but it's performance in the video is impressive to me. I'm not ready to fly it, but after a bunch of stick time... :grin:

[video=youtube;Z9tDy5rlEBQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z9tDy5rlEBQ[/video]
 
Titan II said:
It becomes second nature and not an issue.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Hundreds of thousands of RC pilots deal with this non-issue every week. Some training and practice and you never think about it again.

I have two of the HK Me-163 models, one of each version. The v1 version from about three years ago did not have the 18mm motor mount installed. It also had a smaller prop and very high RPM motor. The new v2 version has a larger prop, lower rpm motor and provision built in for the 18mm rocket motor.

I did the first reported rocket conversion of the v1 Komet. Interesting that the v2 version suddenly appeared with the rocket motor mount included....;)

YouTube video of the v1 Komet with an air start of a C6:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9NbLpHf0ZDA
 
Last edited:
KenECoyote said:
Awesome! :clap:

Also very timely since I just ordered a smaller scale RC Rocket boost Komet from Hobby King yesterday during their BF sale...was about 50% off! This one uses a C6 rocket motor and is mainly powered by a electric prop, but it's performance in the video is impressive to me. I'm not ready to fly it, but after a bunch of stick time... :grin:

[video=youtube;Z9tDy5rlEBQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z9tDy5rlEBQ[/video]
Click to expand...
Very, very cool. I looked this up on RC Groups and someone said this was on sale for $85, normally $140. Wow. That's a hell of a deal.

Since I didn't see the motor ejecting in the video (even though it looks like an EU-available motor in the video and not Estes), I checked what the manual said about rocket motor use:

https://www.hobbyking.com/hobbyking/store/uploads/455385530X50800X17.pdf

Your Durafly Me-163 can supports the use of a standard ‘18mm class’ model rocket engine if you wish. Sufficient space at the rear fuselage allows for both the mounting of the engine and the running of the switch wires internally beneath it.

To prevent damage to the model, use only ‘capped’ type ‘single stage’ rocket engines and an RC switch that is rated to the required amount of voltage/ampage needed to ignite the fuse. R/C switches are available from hobbyking.com, see ‘Optional Parts’ of this manual.

I think by "capped" they mean "plugged" and that's why there is no ejection which would happen with a C6-0 and, apparently, fry that part of the foam aircraft. I've seen people use epoxy to plug the forward end of 18 and 24mm Estes booster motors but, while perfectly safe, still technically violates the rule against modifying motors, I think. However, what else can you do other than possibly mod the motor section of the plane to allow ejection without frying the plane? 18mm motor ejection is OK by the safety rules if I recall correctly, but then you have potential fire issues if not over green grass or bare ground or at a sufficient altitude when the motor ejects.

18mm metal case reloadables without the ejection charge loaded might do, but they might still require something to block gas from the delay charge from going forward, maybe a dog barf bit in the hole to the (missing) ejection charge. Also, the metal case on reloadables might get hotter than the Estes paper casings, especially with the long-burn motors, which could then do it's own thing to the foam. All that said, a D13-10W without ejection charge would be cool, lots of thrust and white smoke followed by a 10 second smoke trail to make it look like it was still thrusting.

All kinds of cool videos of it on YouTube. That puppy is FAST:

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Hobbyking+Me-163

This video is by the US Hobbyking channel, deals with the motor ignition setup, and, sure enough, at 5:40 he mentions using epoxy to plug the Estes booster motor:

[video=youtube;YJZFAfSgJX0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJZFAfSgJX0[/video]
 
Winston said:
Very, very cool. I looked this up on RC Groups and someone said this was on sale for $85, normally $140. Wow. That's a hell of a deal.

Since I didn't see the motor ejecting in the video (even though it looks like an EU-available motor in the video and not Estes), I checked what the manual said about rocket motor use:

https://www.hobbyking.com/hobbyking/store/uploads/455385530X50800X17.pdf

Your Durafly Me-163 can supports the use of a standard ‘18mm class’ model rocket engine if you wish. Sufficient space at the rear fuselage allows for both the mounting of the engine and the running of the switch wires internally beneath it.

To prevent damage to the model, use only ‘capped’ type ‘single stage’ rocket engines and an RC switch that is rated to the required amount of voltage/ampage needed to ignite the fuse. R/C switches are available from hobbyking.com, see ‘Optional Parts’ of this manual.

I think by "capped" they mean "plugged" and that's why there is no ejection which would happen with a C6-0 and, apparently, fry that part of the foam aircraft. I've seen people use epoxy to plug the forward end of 18 and 24mm Estes booster motors but, while perfectly safe, still technically violates the rule against modifying motors, I think. However, what else can you do other than possibly mod the motor section of the plane to allow ejection without frying the plane? 18mm motor ejection is OK by the safety rules if I recall correctly, but then you have potential fire issues if not over green grass or bare ground or at a sufficient altitude when the motor ejects.

18mm metal case reloadables without the ejection charge loaded might do, but they might still require something to block gas from the delay charge from going forward, maybe a dog barf bit in the hole to the (missing) ejection charge. Also, the metal case on reloadables might get hotter than the Estes paper casings, especially with the long-burn motors, which could then do it's own thing to the foam. All that said, a D13-10W without ejection charge would be cool, lots of thrust and white smoke followed by a 10 second smoke trail to make it look like it was still thrusting.

All kinds of cool videos of it on YouTube. That puppy is FAST:

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Hobbyking+Me-163

This video is by the US Hobbyking channel, deals with the motor ignition setup, and, sure enough, at 5:40 he mentions using epoxy to plug the Estes booster motor:
Click to expand...

Actually, it was on BF sale for half off, so I think it was $68 plus shipping (which is about $15 extra).

Regarding the motor, I don't think it would really be a problem since this isn't a rocket glider...it's an RC plane with rocket boost option, so it won't be launching off a rod/etc. at a rocket club. Regardless, I did a quick search and did find that there are 18mm "plugged" motors and reloads:

https://www.oldrocketforum.com/showthread.php?t=12809
"The C3.4T-P and the D2.3T-P reloads are “plugged” and intended only for use in radio controlled rocket gliders and cars. They do not include a delay or ejection charge and are therefore not suitable for standard vertical launch model rockets, without the use of electronic recovery system deployment."

​
and

"Instead of using R/C-specific hardware like previous RMS-R/C motors, AeroTech designed the new end-burning reloads to be compatible with existing RMS-18/20 hardware. Users are instructed to plug the ejection well in the forward closure with “JB Weld” epoxy to prevent reverse thrust from escaping out the forward end of the motor as the propellant grain burns out. AeroTech will make a separate forward closure available for users who wish to continue using their RMS-18/20 motors with standard model rockets, and there are also plans for a “plugged” forward closure to eliminate the step of applying the JB Weld epoxy.
​

​
Both motors are NAR certified and have an initial thrust spike of approximately 2 pounds that quickly drops to about ½ pound during the sustain portion of the burn, tapering to 0.4 pounds at burnout with the D2.3T-P. The C3.4T-P has a burn time of 2.9 seconds while the D2.3T-P has a burn time of 8.6 seconds.

https://www.nar.org/SandT/releases/R142.html

The C3.4T-P and D2.3T-P reloads may be purchased by flyers 18 years of age or older, with no user certification required. The reloads are available now from the ValueRockets.com website at $12.99 per 3-pack for the C3.4T-P and $14.99 per 3-pack for the D2.3T-P. A bulk pack of 12 reloads will be available soon at a price 10% lower per reload than the 3-pack price."
​

I did wonder if it would be possible to alter the Komet for rocket boost lift off; however that would likely mean changing it to a 24mm mount, which would be tricky if at all possible (looks like it may just about fit by cutting the rear shorter and widening 3mm on each side). With 24mm mount, there is a plugged AT case (although it is pricey) and reloads.
 
Last edited:
KenECoyote said:
Actually, it was on BF sale for half off, so I think it was $68 plus shipping (which is about $15 extra).
Click to expand...
Even better.

Regarding the motor, I don't think it would really be a problem since this isn't a rocket glider...it's an RC plane with rocket boost option, so it won't be launching off a rod/etc. at a rocket club. Regardless, I did a quick search and did find that there are 18mm "plugged" motors and reloads.
Click to expand...
Yes, I know that. All of my comments related to possible foam damage from a long burn metal reload case heating up or ejection or delay gasses going forward, not about the long burn motors not having adequate thrust to launch the aircraft.
 
For my rocket powered conversion of the early HK Me-163, I simply made up a plywood plugged 18mm motor mount and reamed out the rear of the model to fit the motor mount. I have been flying it mostly with C6-0 motors. I fill the rear of the motor with fairly well packed dog barf and let it burn out in the motor mount. Works fine and violates no part of the safety code.

You would need to add a motor tube and ply bulkhead to the new version as well to be able to do this. The molded plastic motor mount frame from the factory does not cut it for non plugged motors.

I have seen a guy do rocket assisted takeoffs of the new version of the Komet. He get it moving on the ground to near takeoff speed and ignites the motor. Fun to watch, but I prefer air starts.

I would not use the RC switch that HK suggests for ignition. A small 5-10 amp brushed electric motor controller works better.

Might try a C6-7 and just let the casing eject with enough streamer to be legal.
 
For my rocket powered conversion of the early HK Me-163, I simply made up a plywood plugged 18mm motor mount and reamed out the rear of the model to fit the motor mount. I have been flying it mostly with C6-0 motors. I fill the rear of the motor with fairly well packed dog barf and let it burn out in the motor mount. Works fine and violates no part of the safety code.

You would need to add a motor tube with a ply bulkhead to the new version as well to be able to do this. The molded plastic motor mount frame from the factory does not cut it for non plugged motors.

I have seen a guy do rocket assisted takeoffs of the new version of the Komet. He get it moving on the ground to near takeoff speed and ignites the motor. Fun to watch, but I prefer air starts.

I would not use the RC switch that HK suggests for ignition. A small 5-10 amp brushed electric motor controller works better.

Might try a C6-7 and just let the casing eject with enough streamer to be legal.
 
KenECoyote said:
I did a quick search and did find that there are 18mm "plugged" motors and reloads:

AeroTech designed the new end-burning reloads to be compatible with existing RMS-18/20 hardware. Users are instructed to plug the ejection well in the forward closure with “JB Weld” epoxy to prevent reverse thrust from escaping out the forward end of the motor as the propellant grain burns out. AeroTech will make a separate forward closure available for users who wish to continue using their RMS-18/20 motors with standard model rockets, and there are also plans for a “plugged” forward closure to eliminate the step of applying the JB Weld epoxy.
Click to expand...

I have one of these closures. Call AT and they'll send you one.

Ari.

1449090793244.jpg
 
Winston said:
Yes, I know that. All of my comments related to possible foam damage from a long burn metal reload case heating up or ejection or delay gasses going forward, not about the long burn motors not having adequate thrust to launch the aircraft.
Click to expand...

Sorry about the misunderstanding...I was addressing the notes about the rule about modifying motors since that has been a recent concern of mine due to new interest in RBGs. I'll have to investigate the possibility of heat damage to the foam - your notes are very much appreciated since I'd hate for the jet to melt it's rear end from 8.6 seconds of rocket reload! :)
 
tab28682 said:
For my rocket powered conversion of the early HK Me-163, I simply made up a plywood plugged 18mm motor mount and reamed out the rear of the model to fit the motor mount. I have been flying it mostly with C6-0 motors. I fill the rear of the motor with fairly well packed dog barf and let it burn out in the motor mount. Works fine and violates no part of the safety code.

You would need to add a motor tube with a ply bulkhead to the new version as well to be able to do this. The molded plastic motor mount frame from the factory does not cut it for non plugged motors

....

Might try a C6-7 and just let the casing eject with enough streamer to be legal.
Click to expand...

So the "plywood plugged 18mm motor mount" has positive motor retention to keep the C6-0 from ejecting?

I also considered trying a streamer on a motor and allowing it to eject, but that was more for the rbgs.
 
KenECoyote said:
I also considered trying a streamer on a motor and allowing it to eject
Click to expand...

NAR requires streamers only in competitions. I am not aware of any rule that prohibits ejecting naked cardboard casings, and in fact have done that many times--including with CHAD-staged RCRGs. There's a thread somewhere about my 3-stage (D12-D12-D11) Mega Baron.

Ari.
 
I don't think you need to worry about heat from the long burn reload motors. I've been using the E-6's for years with 7-8 second burn, the cardboard tube protects the depron foam and the front of my motor tubes are open, so the metal casing just butts against the foam, I've never had any melting...I would have gotten one of these but I had just completed my own version that is a bit larger just before these came out that was designed for the 24mm motors.

I've looked at those d2.3's but it seems the thrust is so small it's more for effect on something this big, same really goes with the C-6's... To get enough boost to actually fly anything on these 18mm motors I'd need to get the weight down to about 5 ounces rtf so I haven't bothered with it yet. If you can get the CG right you could ream it out slightly and use one of the quest D-5 20mm motors, but they do get hot and you'd need cardboard around it. They are plugged however.

I don't think there is anything wrong with ejecting a casing, you just need to be sure the cg shift is ok, on my models, it would make them too nose heavy ejecting a 24mm cardboard casing so I suggest not to do it, but the 24mm empty casing weighs about 25 grams or more so it makes a larger difference, the 18mm's are lighter.

Tom, what bad experience have you had with the hk switch, I got one for airstarting my Q2G2's for my Dynasoar after release from the titan booster, but I haven't flown it yet.




Frank.
 
Last edited:
image.jpg

image.jpg

Frank is right. No need to worry about the heat on the foam near the motor mount.

Speaking of Me-163s...

My flying buddy and I just received a couple of the new Klima Me-163 EPO foam kits set up for rocket power. This kit uses modified moldings from the Hacker Me-163 electric PnP ARFs and arrives unpainted. He also got one of the electric ones that come pre painted. I resisted that since I have a HK v1 Me-163, a HK v2 Me-163 and two of the old ACT foam Me-163 kits from about 15 years back. I thought a fleet of 5 Me-163 models is probably enough, for now....;)

The model comes with a nice one piece aluminum motor mount with molded in front bulkhead. Designed for the (unavailable in the US) Klima D3, but I am hoping that some of the new 18mm RG suitable AT reloads will work out.

The Klima Me-163 is smaller and quite a bit lighter than the HK Durafly Me-163.

https://www.lindinger.at/en/airplanes/free-flight-und-static-models/klima-me-163-raketengleiter

Shipping for three kits from Lindinger was a reasonable 20 euros. I think he got an RC HLG in the shipment as well, do that was for four kits total.

I will be posting a full review thread over in the RG forum soon.
 
Last edited:
Tom, looks like these are 296 grams, so maybe 9 ounces, I think for the D2.3 you need to be 5 grams or less, but maybe on the higher thrust D's the would work, but I'm thinking vertical takeoff....these are all shown at a mild slope.

[video=youtube;9ho0_TkwWU4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ho0_TkwWU4[/video]

tab28682 said:
View attachment 277535


Frank is right. No need to worry about the heat on the foam near the motor mount.

Speaking of Me-163s...

My flying buddy and I just received a couple of the new Klima Me-163 EPO foam kits set up for rocket power. This kit uses modified moldings from the Hacker Me-163 electric PnP ARFs. He also got one of the electric ones that come pre painted. I resisted that since I have a HK v1 Me-163, a HK v2 Me-163 and two of the old ACT foam kits from about 15 years back. I thought a fleet of 5 Me-163 models is probably enough, for now....;)

The model comes with a nice one piece aluminum motor mount with molded in front bulkhead. Designed for the (unavailable in the US) Klima D3, but I am hoping that some of the new 18mm RG suitable AT reload will work out.

The Klima Me-163 is smaller and quite a bit lighter than the HK Durafly Me-163.

https://www.lindinger.at/en/airplanes/free-flight-und-static-models/klima-me-163-raketengleiter

Shipping for three kits from Lindinger was a reasonable 20 euros. I think he got an RC HLG in the shipment as well, do that was for four kits total.

I will be posting a full review thread over in the RG forum soon.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
burkefj said:
Tom, looks like these are 296 grams, so maybe 9 ounces, I think for the D2.3 you need to be 5 grams or less, but maybe on the higher thrust D's the would work, but I'm thinking vertical takeoff....these are all shown at a mild slope.
Click to expand...

Thinking more about air starting this model on that new low thrust D reload. The ramp angle does not meet our safety code for a rocket launch over here, but at an AMA RC event or field, it is allowable as a rocket assisted takeoff.

If you look at the thrust curves for the Klima D3 and the AT D2.3, the AT has higher thrust in the first second of burn, at around 10 newtons. And the thrust curves are not terribly dissimilar. Might be enough to pop it off a legal 45 degree launch ramp at a launch.

Or, a 45 degree plus bungee assisted launch at a rocket event with motor start on the pad....;)
Tough to rig, though.
 
Last edited:
burkefj said:
Tom, what bad experience have you had with the hk switch, I got one for airstarting my Q2G2's for my Dynasoar after release from the titan booster, but I haven't flown it yet.

Frank.
Click to expand...

I found that the one I tested could pulse power for a moment when the system was powered up.
Other folks over on RC groups had a similar experience. I think a small brushed motor speed controller is a better solution.
 
Right, ok, yes I knew about that, my normal precedure is to power up then apply igniter, but you are right if there is a non glitching solution that's better.
 
Looks like you do get a moment after ignition where the Klima 163 on the Aerotech D2.3 gets about 4-1 thrust to weight at 9 oz starting weight....

Might work well enough.
 

Similar threads

dr wogz
Shane MacGowan (Pogues) dead at 65
Replies
5
Views
363
stealth6
stealth6
BareRocketry
Black Powder Charge for Model Rocket Dual Deployment
Replies
6
Views
370
SolarYellow
SolarYellow
prfesser
Sprint: Zero to Mach 10 in five seconds
Replies
3
Views
323
prfesser
prfesser
K'Tesh
The Experience Of Pan Am...
Replies
3
Views
302
K'Tesh
K'Tesh
J
3D Printing Tube Sanding Made Easy
Replies
1
Views
445
thzero
T

Latest posts

Back
Top