29mm HP engine choice???

[rsbhunter]

Ok, I have decided to try for lvl certification in January....going with a 29mm hp engine. I am looking at getting the most "bang for my buck". I am looking at either the 29/180, or the 29/240. Can I use the spacer kit to use 29/180 reloads in the 240, and what is the difference between the forward closure with seal ring and the standard forward closure? Thanks for any help, i did look at the Aerotech site, but it didn't help....rsbhunter

 

[2-0turbo]

The 29/240 case with a RAS would allow you to fly 240, 180 and 120 motors. The 180 would only let you go down to 120. Here is a good chart: AeroTech 29mm RAS.

RCS has a drawing of the 29mm RAS that might answer some of your questions, Here.

That being said, I would recommend you go with a DMS motor for your cert. Completely your choice, but there is a lot going on for your cert flight (written test, inspection, witness, etc.) and having one less thing to worry about can tip the odds of success in your favor. There are a lot of cool H motors and even I motors you can use (depending on your rocket).

 

[rsbhunter]

The 29/240 case with a RAS would allow you to fly 240, 180 and 120 motors. The 180 would only let you go down to 120. Here is a good chart: AeroTech 29mm RAS.

RCS has a drawing of the 29mm RAS that might answer some of your questions, Here.

That being said, I would recommend you go with a DMS motor for your cert. Completely your choice, but there is a lot going on for your cert flight (written test, inspection, witness, etc.) and having one less thing to worry about can tip the odds of success in your favor. There are a lot of cool H motors and even I motors you can use (depending on your rocket).

THANK YOU ! I should think to look at Apogee...they have alot of excellent reference material. The reason I'm looking at the 29 is no hazmat. I may eventually have to go that route, but $50-to $70.00 for haz makes me choke. I can get the 29-180 loads with no hazmat, and 3 orders of reloads with no haz will pay for the engine assy. Thank you very much for the help...rsbhunter

 

[Art Upton]

How many loads have you flown in the 29/40-120 case so far???

The 29/180 case is a little easier. But using the 29/240 plus RAS spacer makes it just a tiny bit more comp then the 40-120 case.

Do you so far have complete confidence in your use of the 29/40-120 system?

Edit: I would recommend the DMS H135, BUT you have no way to get one without hefty HAZmat fee, and so RMS will be your answer.

 

[rsbhunter]

How many loads have you flown in the 29/40-120 case so far???

The 29/180 case is a little easier. But using the 29/240 plus RAS spacer makes it just a tiny bit more comp then the 40-120 case.

Do you so far have complete confidence in your use of the 29/40-120 system?

Edit: I would recommend the DMS H135, BUT you have no way to get one without hefty HAZmat fee, and so RMS will be your answer.

I hate to say yes (Murphys law) but I have 98% confidence that my procedure is right, and I have 2 cases that probably have 10 launches on them each. I take my time, and follow a routine EVERY time I load. I did just place an order for a 29/240 Aerotech assy. I will order the RAS adapter kit next month, along with a 180mm reload. Believe me, I am at the age where I double and triple check (ocd?) everything. But i do appreciate the advice, if more people listened to it, things might go smoothly!! Thank you, rsbhunter

 

[DeltaVee]

I used the 29/240 plus RAS for my L1 flight, with the motor being the H165 R. Before then, I extensively used 24/40 & 24/60 cases. Aeons ago, my brother gifted me the 29/60 and 29/100 combo offer (which doesn't appear to exist anymore) so I had experience with the "high power style" mid power loads.

With the H165, H238 or H128 you won't have to worry about the forward seal disk... Granted the casing and the RAS make it a bit more complicated but you'll appreciate not having to get a lot of additional hardware.

The ONE thing that I find slightly annoying about the RAS in this case, is that the floating forward closure is well inside the forward edge (not a ton but enough!) making loading the black powder charge a bit of a challenge (you just want to be careful when you do load it!). And I seriously do NOT think that loading the charge prior to floating closure insertion is a good idea at all!* Also the red cap for ejection charge retention won't fit inside (it's made for the std. closure anyway so no surprise there). You'll need to use the tape disk.... you're going to want to carefully slide it down (I use a half inch dowel) then tamp it down tight around the edges.

* I SUPPOSE you can do it but you'd have to insert the floating closure with the wide opening facing downward and slide it into the motor while it's positioned with the nozzle end up to prevent the delay element from potentially sliding back and admitting extra powder into the space!

 

[Art Upton]

I hate to say yes (Murphys law) but I have 98% confidence that my procedure is right, and I have 2 cases that probably have 10 launches on them each. I take my time, and follow a routine EVERY time I load. I did just place an order for a 29/240 Aerotech assy. I will order the RAS adapter kit next month, along with a 180mm reload. Believe me, I am at the age where I double and triple check (ocd?) everything. But i do appreciate the advice, if more people listened to it, things might go smoothly!! Thank you, rsbhunter

OK, Kewl Beans

Just remember the RMS motors assemble different, so read how that works, with the spacer a few hundred* times before you get and use the reload.

* JK

 

[DeltaVee]

OK, Kewl Beans

Just remember the RMS motors assemble different, so read how that works, with the spacer a few hundred* times before you get and use the reload.

* JK

Very good advice!

 

[Art Upton]

Using the Tape disk on the ejection charge, your going to need to put masking tape over it as well. I do that on all my RMS forward closures.

I would tape over the well end, then run a strip around the circumference of the closure holding the ends of the tape down that went over the well. You need to do that before you get any grease on your hands or outside on the closure.

You can see in the picture I posted this morning, the red forward closure has some tape residue that is now bonded to it looking gray. I had left the tape on for like 7 years before I cleaned it this spring when finding it. Don't do that, clean it after use.

I have never used the RAS, but if I did, I would think I would load the ejection charge before putting it in the tube that makes it below the end.

I suggest asking about that with folks that have used it a lot. That would prevent 'spillage' But it might cause an issue I don't know about since I have never used it so please ask around

 

[DeltaVee]

Using the Tape disk on the ejection charge, your going to need to put masking tape over it as well. I do that on all my RMS forward closures.

I would tape over the well end, then run a strip around the circumference of the closure holding the ends of the tape down that went over the well. You need to do that before you get any grease on your hands or outside on the closure.

You can see in the picture I posted this morning, the red forward closure has some tape residue that is now bonded to it looking gray. I had left the tape on for like 7 years before I cleaned it this spring when finding it. Don't do that, clean it after use.

I have never used the RAS, but if I did, I would think I would load the ejection charge before putting it in the tube that makes it below the end.

I suggest asking about that with folks that have used it a lot. That would prevent 'spillage' But it might cause an issue I don't know about since I have never used it so please ask around

It all depends on how far down the RAS ends up. I've not adapted down to the 120 reloads with the 240 case. With just one spacer it's not too hard to load the charge without spilling. If you do spill it, you can dump it out into a small vessel and try again anyway.... so far I've never spilled (lucky). I think perhaps that adapting down to 120 loads, would require insertion of the closure upside down because it'd be much harder to load the ejection charge from the top.

FWIW, I've not had to augment the tape disk so far... If I were to assemble the delay and fill the ejection charge, that'd be one thing and I probably would do it. Not really possible if you fully assemble first and then dump the charge in. One time I made a long skinny funnel out of typing paper and it worked w/o spilling a single grain!

 

[Art Upton]

It all depends on how far down the RAS ends up. I've not adapted down to the 120 reloads with the 240 case. With just one spacer it's not too hard to load the charge without spilling. If you do spill it, you can dump it out into a small vessel and try again anyway.... so far I've never spilled (lucky). I think perhaps that adapting down to 120 loads, would require insertion of the closure upside down because it'd be much harder to load the ejection charge from the top.

With it down in the case, can you still tape the end up? The tape disks tend to fall off. At least they used to always back when I last used AT RMS Motor Ejection.

 

[DeltaVee]

With it down in the case, can you still tape the end up? The tape disks tend to fall off. At least they used to always back when I last used AT RMS Motor Ejection.

So long as the rim of the charge well is CLEAN and you get it positioned right, and tamp down on the edges all around with some sort of flat tool it'll stick. But if you have to pull it off and reposition, the stickum does not hold too well afterwards... then I resort to cutting a disk out of masking tape!

In fact moving forward, I may just do the tape as a matter of course as the stuff I seem to come up with grips like a fiend.

 

[rsbhunter]

Again, all great info...I will read the instructions 10 times, dry assemble 20 times, and hopefully not screw it up only once!!! I only have 2 29/40-120 hobby cases now, but I actually enjoy loading them. Both single and 2 grains loads...the ejection charge loading DOES sound interesting, but doable...Thanks to all, you guy's are proof that it does take a village to raise the village idiot!!! rsbhunter

 

[DeltaVee]

Again, all great info...I will read the instructions 10 times, dry assemble 20 times, and hopefully not screw it up only once!!! I only have 2 29/40-120 hobby cases now, but I actually enjoy loading them. Both single and 2 grains loads...the ejection charge loading DOES sound interesting, but doable...Thanks to all, you guy's are proof that it does take a village to raise the village idiot!!! rsbhunter

I think having the low-end RMS casings (29/60 and 29/100) helped me a lot... and I did play with the RAS quite a bit prior to usage. The literature that comes with the RAS is less than ideal (not bad but also not great) as there is very little actual english in it. The sheet I have has four diagrams.... three pertain exactly to the 240 casing (but I only know that after the fact). The fourth diagram is for the 360 case which is spelled out on the paper. Beyond that it does not say what you can and cannot adapt to.

There is a table on Apogee's website that describes which motors will adapt and which won't. It used to say you could adapt down to the 29/100 loads but that was wrong... and has since been fixed.

If the RAS came with a pair of 1" long spacers, you could adapt the 120 casing all the way down to the 60 casing. But I suppose you really wouldn't want to carry the extra weight on a F62 motor!

 

[rsbhunter]

Yes, Apogee can be and is an excellent source of information. I still try to give some of my money to them when I can. I figured the 240 case was as long as I'd want to go, above that, and it will be 38mm. Not a quitter, but at almost 70, a space shot is not in my future!!! I love doing this stuff!!!!rsbhunter

 

[DeltaVee]

Yes, Apogee can be and is an excellent source of information. I still try to give some of my money to them when I can. I figured the 240 case was as long as I'd want to go, above that, and it will be 38mm. Not a quitter, but at almost 70, a space shot is not in my future!!! I love doing this stuff!!!!rsbhunter

Yes the 360 case extends a touch too far into a rocket for my comfort... And I'm not that far behind you

 

[WizardOfBoz]

I compiled a spreadsheet of 29 and 38mm motors.
If you want to avoid a HAZMAT charge, and can't buy a motor from a vendor online, then for L1 and a 29mm motor tube you are looking at Aerotech RMS-29s I think.
These are (with casing and formulation):

H128W-14 29/180 White Lightning
H165R-14 29/180 Red Line
H238T-14A 29/180 Blue Thunder
H180W-14 29/240 White Lightning
H210R-14 29/240 Red Line
H220T-14 29/240 Blue Thunder
H250G-14 29/240 Mojave Green
H268R-14 29/360 Red Line
I200W-14A 29/360 White Lightning

I used an H180 for my (successful, thankfully) L1 flight using a Madcow Super DX3. That's a bigger heavier rocket (5lbs without motor).
I purchased a RMS-29/360 case and the reload adapter system. Had to ask for a missing part but folks here and Aerotech helped out. I've done two H180 flights - these motors, and the RMS-29 system work great.

Not sure if the extra expense of the longer case plus adapter was worth it though. I could have used a 240 case. With adapter, the 360 motor can use 360 and 240 motors, the 240 case uses 240 and 180 motors. So the 360 case handles the two motors listed above, but also allows the 240 motors. It does NOT accomodate the 180 motors and is too long for some rockets. To start out I think I'd get the 240 case and adapter, or (for your rocket weight) the 180 case by itself. The former being more expensive but flexible, the latter being more tailored to that one L1 flight.

I also wanted to fly the thing at a launch recently and the only motor that was available was a Cesaroni VMax 38mm I-566. The vendor lent me the Cesaroni motor tube. These are super high thrust (143lbf!) for a very short time. Flew great but I think that the thrust buckled the top tube a bit. I've reinforced it and luckily it flies great still. A group of young rocketeers recently tried something like an I-212 38mm on a rocket that was about a foot long and probably weighed 8 ounces. The LSO told them it was unlikely to survive, and it didn't. Took quite a while to find all the parts. Point is, your idea of minimizing height and using a reasonable motor is (it seems to me) a good one.

Good luck!

 

[rsbhunter]

I compiled a spreadsheet of 29 and 38mm motors.
If you want to avoid a HAZMAT charge, and can't buy a motor from a vendor online, then for L1 and a 29mm motor tube you are looking at Aerotech RMS-29s I think.
These are (with casing and formulation):

H128W-14 29/180 White Lightning
H165R-14 29/180 Red Line
H238T-14A 29/180 Blue Thunder
H180W-14 29/240 White Lightning
H210R-14 29/240 Red Line
H220T-14 29/240 Blue Thunder
H250G-14 29/240 Mojave Green
H268R-14 29/360 Red Line
I200W-14A 29/360 White Lightning

I used an H180 for my (successful, thankfully) L1 flight using a Madcow Super DX3. That's a bigger heavier rocket (5lbs without motor).
I purchased a RMS-29/360 case and the reload adapter system. Had to ask for a missing part but folks here and Aerotech helped out. I've done two H180 flights - these motors, and the RMS-29 system work great.

Not sure if the extra expense of the longer case plus adapter was worth it though. I could have used a 240 case. With adapter, the 360 motor can use 360 and 240 motors, the 240 case uses 240 and 180 motors. So the 360 case handles the two motors listed above, but also allows the 240 motors. It does NOT accomodate the 180 motors and is too long for some rockets. To start out I think I'd get the 240 case and adapter, or (for your rocket weight) the 180 case by itself. The former being more expensive but flexible, the latter being more tailored to that one L1 flight.

I also wanted to fly the thing at a launch recently and the only motor that was available was a Cesaroni VMax 38mm I-566. The vendor lent me the Cesaroni motor tube. These are super high thrust (143lbf!) for a very short time. Flew great but I think that the thrust buckled the top tube a bit. I've reinforced it and luckily it flies great still. A group of young rocketeers recently tried something like an I-212 38mm on a rocket that was about a foot long and probably weighed 8 ounces. The LSO told them it was unlikely to survive, and it didn't. Took quite a while to find all the parts. Point is, your idea of minimizing height and using a reasonable motor is (it seems to me) a good one.

Good luck!

I have the 2.6 Madcow DX-3 , the NCR Corporal and the PML 2.56 AGM. The AGM is the heaviest at 36 oz, bare , no motor. The DX-3 and Corporal both are right at 30 oz. I do use a JL Altimeter 2 and JLCR, so that adds a bit....Thanks for the info....rsbhunter

 

[Art Upton]

I hate to say yes (Murphys law) but I have 98% confidence that my procedure is right, and I have 2 cases that probably have 10 launches on them each. I take my time, and follow a routine EVERY time I load. I did just place an order for a 29/240 Aerotech assy. I will order the RAS adapter kit next month, along with a 180mm reload. Believe me, I am at the age where I double and triple check (ocd?) everything. But i do appreciate the advice, if more people listened to it, things might go smoothly!! Thank you, rsbhunter

I had a cup of coffee and was thinking..
I was looking at CS Rocketry website AT hardware...

The 29/180 case [$56] is only $9 more then the Adapter system [$47]
Only one left of the 29/180 case in stock FYI at CS rocketry

Being you already have 2, Yes Two 29/40-120 cases already....I can't see your using or buying any 29/120-HPR style G RMS reloads? So why the adapter set and added complexity?

If you did not have those cases, it might make a point for the adapters to run 120s, but you have 120 motors already.

So why not just get the 29/180 case instead of the adapter set?

The thing is, if you loose a 240 motor with the adapter system running a 180 reload, your losing more then if you only lost the 29/180 flying by itself. Edit: plus your not able to fly your 240 loads till you buy a complete 240 motor again.

Maybe that is why in the back of my mind I have all the cases and never bought the adapter systems? Nope, I don't think they had adapter systems for AT when I was buying into 29 motor cases or 38s. Or I just didn't remember them.

Even if I lost my 29/180 case next year, I think I would get another case than an adapter set using my 240 or 360 case to host it.

 

[cwbullet]

AT I 205 or H 135

 

[tsmith1315]

Nope, I don't think they had adapter systems for AT when I was buying into 29 motor cases or 38s. Or I just didn't remember them.

Your memory is correct, the RAS wasn’t around back then.

 

[bad_idea]

I hate to say yes (Murphys law) but I have 98% confidence that my procedure is right, and I have 2 cases that probably have 10 launches on them each.

Just pay close attention to the instructions - which will be a little different than for the 29/40-120 - and you'll do fine. My first L1 attempt was on my first high-power-style reload, after extensive experience with Hobbyline reloads (though probably less than your 20 flights). The motor worked fine.

The 29/180 case [$56] is only $9 more then the Adapter system [$47]
Only one left of the 29/180 case in stock FYI at CS rocketry
. . .
The thing is, if you loose a 240 motor with the adapter system running a 180 reload, your losing more then if you only lost the 29/180 flying by itself. Edit: plus your not able to fly your 240 loads till you buy a complete 240 motor again.

Very good point. Also means a complete second motor - to have two motors ready to go for a launch - is only forward and rear closures away when the time comes. The RAS probably makes more sense for the 29/360 case, or for someone who doesn't already have a 29/40-120.

 

[Art Upton]

Very good point. Also means a complete second motor - to have two motors ready to go for a launch - is only forward and rear closures away when the time comes. The RAS probably makes more sense for the 29/360 case, or for someone who doesn't already have a 29/40-120.

Yes, over the years I have both red and blue forward, and several blue rear closures.
So I can have two 29 motors ready to go, as well as 2 38 motors ready to go with what was collected over the years. Wait, with the loaded 38/720 J500G motor I found yesterday from long ago; I actually could have 3 38mm motors ready to go.

So as you say, when the time comes, things get collected. As RSB found out, he is now wanting to do L1 flights, where before he was not interested; 'At That Time' *

I even have a 'special' blue forward delay closure for 'Jerry' motors, that I have never used. Long story how I got that.

*We all here know how that is, and we may have once said that long long ago...

 

[rsbhunter]

I had a cup of coffee and was thinking..
I was looking at CS Rocketry website AT hardware...

The 29/180 case [$56] is only $9 more then the Adapter system [$47]
Only one left of the 29/180 case in stock FYI at CS rocketry

Being you already have 2, Yes Two 29/40-120 cases already....I can't see your using or buying any 29/120-HPR style G RMS reloads? So why the adapter set and added complexity?

If you did not have those cases, it might make a point for the adapters to run 120s, but you have 120 motors already.

So why not just get the 29/180 case instead of the adapter set?

The thing is, if you loose a 240 motor with the adapter system running a 180 reload, your losing more then if you only lost the 29/180 flying by itself. Edit: plus your not able to fly your 240 loads till you buy a complete 240 motor again.

Maybe that is why in the back of my mind I have all the cases and never bought the adapter systems? Nope, I don't think they had adapter systems for AT when I was buying into 29 motor cases or 38s. Or I just didn't remember them.

Even if I lost my 29/180 case next year, I think I would get another case than an adapter set using my 240 or 360 case to host it.

You are 100% correct. I am going to buy the 180mm case. I honestly don't know what (or if) i was thinking. I can use the closures interchangeably, and over time buy a fore and aft closure and have both options loaded at the same time. Sometimes the fog is thicker than the thought...thanks for bringing that up...rsbhunter

 

[rsbhunter]

Yes, over the years I have both red and blue forward, and several blue rear closures.
So I can have two 29 motors ready to go, as well as 2 38 motors ready to go with what was collected over the years. Wait, with the loaded 38/720 J500G motor I found yesterday from long ago; I actually could have 3 38mm motors ready to go.

So as you say, when the time comes, things get collected. As RSB found out, he is now wanting to do L1 flights, where before he was not interested; 'At That Time' *

I even have a 'special' blue forward delay closure for 'Jerry' motors, that I have never used. Long story how I got that.

*We all here know how that is, and we may have once said that long long ago...

Honestly, my interest in L1 flights didn't happen til Brady and the guy's got the club going, and the chance to possibly fly without a 2 hour drive. So, chapter 2 begins...." he was sitting alone, sanding the fillets on his soon to be level 1 rocket.....rsbhunter

 

[WizardOfBoz]

I have the 2.6 Madcow DX-3 , the NCR Corporal and the PML 2.56 AGM. The AGM is the heaviest at 36 oz, bare , no motor. The DX-3 and Corporal both are right at 30 oz. I do use a JL Altimeter 2 and JLCR, so that adds a bit....Thanks for the info....rsbhunter

So first a question: Do you find the JLCR easy to use? Reliable?

Second, my understanding is that there are several DX3 variants. The regular DX3 is 2.6" diameter and should weigh about 20oz or less. The Super DX3 is 4" and mine weighs 2.29 kg, or about 5 lbs, loaded with an H180 in a 360 casing with the RAS installed, ready to launch. Then there's the 2.2, 2.6, 3, 4, and 8 inch versions in various forms of paper, glass, and CF.

I like the design because its strong, and the fin tapers make it less likely to break a fin. Well balanced, mine flys great.

AT I 205 or H 135

I think that the OP has the 2.6 inch, 20oz version of the DX3. I'd feel very comfortable launching my 5lb DX3 with an I205. Same motor with the 20oz version and I'd expect to not see the rocket or motor ever again. Perhaps you were joking using hyperbole (something like "for plinking the squirrels that are eating the tomatoes in my garden, I like to use a .177 air rifle, or my .50 BMG")?

 

[cwbullet]

I think that the OP has the 2.6 inch, 20oz version of the DX3. I'd feel very comfortable launching my 5lb DX3 with an I205. Same motor with the 20oz version and I'd expect to not see the rocket or motor ever again. Perhaps you were joking using hyperbole (something like "for plinking the squirrels that are eating the tomatoes in my garden, I like to use a .177 air rifle, or my .50 BMG")?

Concur.

 

[4regt4]

The 29/240 case with a RAS would allow you to fly 240, 180 and 120 motors. The 180 would only let you go down to 120. Here is a good chart: AeroTech 29mm RAS.

RCS has a drawing of the 29mm RAS that might answer some of your questions, Here.

That being said, I would recommend you go with a DMS motor for your cert. Completely your choice, but there is a lot going on for your cert flight (written test, inspection, witness, etc.) and having one less thing to worry about can tip the odds of success in your favor. There are a lot of cool H motors and even I motors you can use (depending on your rocket).

Biggest reason why I didn't use DMS for a cert flight was that I'd have to buy the delay drill tool. I already had the one for the RMS/Hobbyline. And I knew I probably wouldn't use the DMS drill tool in the future as I planned on just RMS going forward.

Hans.

 

[4regt4]

With it down in the case, can you still tape the end up? The tape disks tend to fall off. At least they used to always back when I last used AT RMS Motor Ejection.

I've heard several people say they've had issues with the circular disk coming loose. Before putting in the powder and covering it with the disk, I scrub the rim with 99% IPA. Never had an issue with the disk coming loose. Just the opposite - I have to scrub the residue of the paper off of the surface after firing. The ejection charge blows a hole in the center, the edges remain intact and still attached to the closure.

Hans.

 

[WizardOfBoz]

Using the Tape disk on the ejection charge, your going to need to put masking tape over it as well. I do that on all my RMS forward closures.

I would tape over the well end, then run a strip around the circumference of the closure holding the ends of the tape down that went over the well. You need to do that before you get any grease on your hands or outside on the closure.

This seems like a better approach. You're kind of trusting both the tensile strength of the tape in addition to the stick of the disk.

When I've loaded my 360 tube with a 240 motor, the results have been almost comically messy. The grains are looser in the cardboard tube than the tube is in the aluminum casing. So things slide out pretty easy. First, I put the grains in the cardboard tube into the casing. After drilling, I put together the delay element and its casing and the orings onto the rear RAS closure. Then I put the charge into the well, and tape it up. Then I push the assembled rear closure into the casing with the spacers. Then the aft closure, nozzle, and o-ring, not quite all screwed in. Then I add the rear closure cap, tightening the threads completely. Then I tighten up the aft closure cap.

If thing go awry, the rear closure fall out and the delay element partially wiggles out, so osme of the BP can go in-between the delay and the bulkhead. Then one must disassemble everthing, and clean it, a reassemble.

If I was smart I'd get a 38mm (~1.5 inch diameter) piece of Delrin of appropriate length (about the length of how far the nozzle sticks into the motor. I'd mount it on a wood plate. Then I'd put the grains in, forcing both the cardboard sleeve and the grains in the proper distance. Turn on its side, remove the casing, add the nozzle and the aft closure. Then slide the forward closure and extension sleeves into the forward section, finishing with the forward cap. This would, I hope, avoid spills of BP, cleaning, and reassembly.