No, nozzle issues will give you trust issues. Temp cycling, poor handling causes cracks allowing the gasses to expand and possible explosion.What fails on an Estes E that CATOs? If it is the nozzle, would strengthening the clay with an adhesive help? I have yet to have a CATO, but then I haven't flown many black powder motors higher than a D12.
I'm heading in that direction as well. I have purchased, but not yet used, 18/20, 24/40 and 24/60 casings and reloads. They are victim to the 2020 induced flight delay...I just use Aerotech reloads. 24/40 cases are awesome, most of the Ds I use are Aerotech 18mm reloads.
And people complain about how much motors cost today!Estes needs to get rid of the 1950's pyrotechnic technology and come into the 21st century with reloadable bp motors.
Just use composite plastic cases with screw on/off nozzle inserts and replace the bp/delay/ejection charge every use.
Hopefully the AT/Quest Q-jets will spark stiffer competition from Estes and the likeSO what are you saying? That a reloadable BP motor would cost more than a disposable one? Do reloadable composite motors cost more than single use disposable composites? I don't know, that's why I'm asking.
Think of the advantages: a more efficient nozzle, higher chamber pressures so you could do DEF high thrust without having to worry about a shot nozzle, higher ISP.... the drawbacks are that you have to be 18 to buy a metal reloadable; that's at least a 20-25 yr old regulation that definitely needs to be changed to 16 yrs old at a minimum.....I think it's been shown over 20-25 years old that RMS is just as safe as single-use disposable motors are, if not safer.
The problem with DEF BP is that the clay nozzle is held in place through a mechanical bond ; it's pressed and swells the casing somewhat and then it contracts back.....this bond is only good for up to maybe 250psi max..... If you could run BP at 400 psi the Isp might increase 10-to 15 % ; plus you could have D30 to F40 BP motors ; but if you used a reloadable casing then you wouldn't have to worry about nozzle cracks and thermal humidity cycling affecting the nozzle BP slug interface....
AT uses clay nozzles in their single use ABCD Q-Jets.....and they designed a "circular" hook of a sorts that helps retain the nozzle so it won't blow out....why can't Estes get with New England Paper company, the company that supplies the paper engine tubes and come up with a way to pre-roll such a paper ring on one end of a paper tube that would act like the circular hook that AT has?
Essentially yes. By nature of the significant capital investment required to either A) retool their existing machines or B) replace the machines entirely with fabricators that have the added features.SO what are you saying? That a reloadable BP motor would cost more than a disposable one?