Apogee Level 2 Build

[mtnmanak]

Unpopular opinion: TVM is a nice guy, but I don't like how he builds. I prefer a more precise build approach with an eye towards a more robust assembly.

For me, the process of building and finishing is part of the hobby, but not everyone in rocketry is here for the same things.

As long as the flight execution is safe, it's all good.

Agree completely with the assessment of TVM's build processes. As I noted in the first post on this thread, I added a centering ring to the front side of the fins and then later in the thread, I deviated from the videos by not gluing in the rear centering ring until I had placed internal fillets around all the fins, in addition to the care placed on ensuring the fins were straight. For me, this is standard practice for most through the wall fin installations, so I only used the video as a guide for that.

As a reference, watch TVMs Zephyr build video. I cringed at his epoxy application on the fin can. I think I got epoxy on me just watching it.

I just got done watching all the build videos this past week but haven’t purchased it yet. I’ve had my eyes on it for a long time among other kits so we’ll see. TVM takes some short cuts that I wouldn’t, but maybe with his experience he knows where he can and can’t cut corners. That is the reason I get so much time wrapped up in my builds. I would spend more time on adding fillets to centering rings, measuring instead of eye balling, wedging the fins between CRs, etc. Does it come faster, guys the more you build or does a guy just get more particular as he learns lol? I’ve only built a handful of hpr rockets so far

I do think this gets easier. This particular bird is a wonderful kit with excellent materials - Apogee should be commended for putting this kit out there. However, at the end of the day, it is about as bog standard of a 4-fins-and-a-nosecone rocket as you will find. Outside of some epoxy and drilling skills, this a super easy build. Kind of a "if you've built one, you've built them all" kind of thing. Every rocket is different, and every build has its challenges, but this one is a great kit to learn on if this is your first HPR, Level 2 or fiberglass kit.

I would note, though, that if this is the first time you are working on a full FG kit, take your PPE a little more seriously than TVM did in the video. He does wear gloves, a mask and eye pro, which is seriously great, but I think he was very cavalier wearing short sleeves. Maybe I am just more susceptible to the FG than other people, but I know the tube edges and the dust irritate my skin terribly. I wear long sleeves and kitchen rubber gloves when sanding and cutting the FG. If I don't, my arms look like I have some awful disease and they itch for days. Especially when I sand the inside of the tubes. Not only does the dust get on your arms, but, for me, the edges of the tube/bottom of the nosecone cut my skin a lot if I am not wearing long sleeves. Just my experience.

I I have watched the instructional videos on putting this thing together twice but that was a long time ago so I think I'm going to watch the whole thing again before I start mine. I'm pretty sure I just want to build it exactly like the video shows as I will only be flying this rocket maybe twice, three times at the most, built the way the video shows I would imagine that it will hold together well enough for three flights

Even if you deviate from TVM's methods/techniques and do this more deliberately and with precision, if you watch the videos again, you will see that the total video length is just under 3 hours (with the kit, you get a DVD with the video uninterrupted, so it is easier to see the total time). The only cuts/pauses in the video are really for glue or paint to dry. Consider that 3 hours includes TVM talking about stuff and painting the rocket and a solid 20 minutes about the launch and failure/repairs. So, maybe in the videos there is about 2 hours of actual building.

 

[Hobie1dog]

[QUOTE="mtnmanak, post: 2060037, member: 32176"


Even if you deviate from TVM's methods/techniques and do this more deliberately and with precision, if you watch the videos again, you will see that the total video length is just under 3 hours (with the kit, you get a DVD with the video uninterrupted, so it is easier to see the total time). The only cuts/pauses in the video are really for glue or paint to dry. Consider that 3 hours includes TVM talking about stuff and painting the rocket and a solid 20 minutes about the launch and failure/repairs. So, maybe in the videos there is about 2 hours of actual building.
[/QUOTE]

Now that you explained it in those terms I guess your 4 hour build time is pretty accurate. My thinking that it was going to take 12-16 hours to build has caused me to delay starting the build. I sometimes want there to be a little guy sitting on my shoulder screaming "Just Do It"

 

[Dan Griffing]

Unpopular opinion: TVM is a nice guy, but I don't like how he builds. I prefer a more precise build approach with an eye towards a more robust assembly.

For me, the process of building and finishing is part of the hobby, but not everyone in rocketry is here for the same things.

As long as the flight execution is safe, it's all good.

After watching his videos TVM seems to be nerdy and disorganized like I would be if I were improvising to build a rocket while trying to make a video on a shoestring. These videos would more accurate if they were carefully rehearsed according to a fully developed instruction sequence and didn’t depart from them. But then the videos would be three times as long and totally unwatchable.

Another problem unrelated to the videos is that TVM wears two rocketry hats. He’s “Mister Rocket”, a trained rocket scientist who offers expert rocketry building and scientific advice. You can tell by the volumes of articles he’s written for decades for Apogee’s publications that are available online. These make many rocket science topics intelligible to the average rocket hobbyist. Where else could you expect to see an article relating the complex engineering concept of the dimensionless group called the “Reynolds Number“ to fin shape, airflow and rocket stability.

On the other hand he’s the owner of Apogee Components and the chief showman and cheerleader for his brandname and company who’s interested in selling rocket kits and supplies to a rocketeers in a niche market where it’s difficult to maintain a successful business.

I’m a real fan of both aspects of TVM and I buy a lot from Apogee Components but I know what kind of a difficult balancing act his job has to be. You just have to sort out the science from the marketing.

 

[mtnmanak]

One other modification I forgot - in the video instructions, TVM uses a bulkhead and eye-bolt in the nosecone. I used a centering ring and a u-bolt instead. I think the u-bolt is more secure, but, more importantly, this will allow me to easily nosecone weight in the future if I need to.

 

[Hobie1dog]

I think the u-bolt is more secure, but, more importantly, this will allow me to easily nosecone weight in the future if I need to.

how will you add weight?, with the u-bolt there?

 

[mtnmanak]

how will you add weight?, with the u-bolt there?

There is plenty of room to pour an epoxy slurry through the hole, if needed

 

[pollux]

Unpopular opinion: TVM is a nice guy, but I don't like how he builds. I prefer a more precise build approach with an eye towards a more robust assembly.

I wonder if you would mind giving us some examples of what you do differently or what you don’t like? So those of us who don’t know can learn?

 

[Nytrunner]

or what you don’t like?

Exhibit A: Epoxy Putty - will not touch the stuff

 

[Buckeye]

I consider Tim's videos to be nice demonstrations of basic fundamentals, not gospel. Considering he pumps out a video or newsletter every week, free of charge, it is hard to fault the guy. Many manufacturers don't even supply instructions - just a bag o' parts. Agreed, if he videoed a meticulous build, it would be unwatchable.

Tim has always advocated against over-building as well, so his videos reflect that. Yeah, I don't use epoxy clay either, but it did hold up to a failed deployment on his Level 2!

 

[pollux]

Exhibit A: Epoxy Putty - will not touch the stuff

Awesome. Thanks. Can I ask what you use instead? In the TVM videos I have followed, he uses epoxy putty as filler in wraps and such, and uses thickened epoxy like Rocketpoxy for joints and filets. What would you use?

 

[Dan Griffing]

I consider Tim's videos to be nice demonstrations of basic fundamentals, not gospel. Considering he pumps out a video or newsletter every week, free of charge, it is hard to fault the guy.

Tim is quite effective at using videos and newsletters to dominate the online space for rocketeers, especially those who are just getting started.

I used Tim’s advice almost exclusively when I was getting started. But once I met other advanced rocketeers, I expanded my horizons.

Then I found are other sources of expertise where Tim’s name was seldom even mentioned. The clearest example of this are all of the great sources of expertise that appear on The Rocketry Forum. Emblematic of this, I’ve never seen TVM ever make an appearance here to enter any of their discussions. Its like he’s only interested in rocketry unless it’s under the banner of his company.

An exception to the non-Apogee expertise in rocketry is Apogee’s RockSim software, which is as close to a universal standard that most rocketeers use and respect.

 

[mtnmanak]

I wonder if you would mind giving us some examples of what you do differently or what you don’t like? So those of us who don’t know can learn?

As Nytrunner noted, the fix-it epoxy clay is something TVM sells and promotes widely, but you will find most people on this forum avoid it. I can tell you from experience it is not great stuff. I used it on a build quite a few years ago for fillets on TVM's advice. The fillets looked great and the rocket flew about 5 times without incident, then, on a relatively normal landing, one of the fillets cracked. I fixed it, and then on the next launch, 2 other fillets cracked. That was the last time I used the fix-it epoxy clay. If you want to use it on the back side of screws, weld nuts, etc, that should not be an issue, but it is very heavy and bulky compared to paste or liquid epoxy, so why bother?

There are a number of things I don't agree with him on the way he does things, but it doesn't mean he is "wrong". Just not my desired technique. For example, using a bulkhead in the nosecone means it will be very difficult to add nose weight later (as opposed to using a centering ring or a removable weight system). But, the way he built it will work.

I consider Tim's videos to be nice demonstrations of basic fundamentals, not gospel. Considering he pumps out a video or newsletter every week, free of charge, it is hard to fault the guy. Many manufacturers don't even supply instructions - just a bag o' parts. Agreed, if he videoed a meticulous build, it would be unwatchable.

Tim has always advocated against over-building as well, so his videos reflect that. Yeah, I don't use epoxy clay either, but it did hold up to a failed deployment on his Level 2!

At the end of the day, I am a huge fan of TVM and Apogee. I give him enough money every year to buy a small car. They don't always have the cheapest prices, but I am not aware of anyone that has the sheer volume and breadth of available parts, kits, accessories, etc. Best "one stop shop" on the web. And, as noted, the volume of incredibly useful videos and newsletters is simply astounding. Sure, there are a few techniques I change, but no one has the library of info our there that TVM does. They have contributed a lot to rocketry.

Awesome. Thanks. Can I ask what you use instead? In the TVM videos I have followed, he uses epoxy putty as filler in wraps and such, and uses thickened epoxy like Rocketpoxy for joints and filets. What would you use?

I would first recommend watching John Coker's video on epoxy basics:

That is an excellent place to start. In fact, watch everything John has out there. Great stuff. "Next level" from a lot of the Apogee videos.

I use Aeropoxy 6209 "Structural" epoxy for anything and everything that needs a strong bond. It is my general purpose epoxy. Fins, internal fillets, couplers, rings, bulkheads, etc. The downside is a long cure time, but I have a "hot room" or put a heater really close and that speeds up the cure time considerably. You cannot beat this stuff for bond strength.

For external fillets, I usually use RocketPoxy. I like the paste consistency and it was worked well for me on all HPRs. Difficult to sand when dry, so get your fillets looking good before that stuff hardens.

For layups (glassing tubes and fins, carbon fiber fabric, etc), I use Aeropoxy "Laminating" epoxy. I usually use the 2032 resin with the 3660 hardener.

I still use 5-min epoxy (any brand works - BSI is what I have on the work table right now) for tacking down parts before using Aeropoxy for the actual strength. Example there is when I am installing fins, I will use 5-min epoxy on the root edge to get the fin straight and true, then fillet everything internally with Aeropoxy. Also, things like switches, terminals, charge wells, etc - all 5-min epoxy.

 

[Steven88]

Well said. Tim puts a lot of effort into his business and once you become a VIR member you get a percent back in points which makes him only a little higher on price than his competitors and I consider it worth it for the advice he gives out especially for people getting started in rocketry. I too, used his advice a lot getting started, even if today I don’t do everything exactly like he does.

 

[Buckeye]

Then I found are other sources of expertise where Tim’s name was seldom even mentioned. The clearest example of this are all of the great sources of expertise that appear on The Rocketry Forum. Emblematic of this, I’ve never seen TVM ever make an appearance here to enter any of their discussions. Its like he’s only interested in rocketry unless it’s under the banner of his company.

C'mon. That's a cheap shot. This forum, while good, is not the be all, end all, of rocketry. Tim gives away plenty of expertise through very organized videos and newsletters, and you want to complain that isn't good enough because he doesn't post here? I'm sure he has better things to do. There is an Apogee rep who contributes to the forum now and then.

 

[Steven88]

Might check out a T3 GPS too from missile works. I integrated 1 into my nose cone easily. Good thing too, that flight landed close to 3/4 of a mile from the launch pad.

Eric

How difficult is it to set the T3 up and use it for tracking? If I remember right, it pairs with an Android device? Is it simple to use and follow? Thinking of integrating one into a nose cone

 

[mtnmanak]

I consider Tim's videos to be nice demonstrations of basic fundamentals, not gospel. Considering he pumps out a video or newsletter every week, free of charge, it is hard to fault the guy. Many manufacturers don't even supply instructions - just a bag o' parts. Agreed, if he videoed a meticulous build, it would be unwatchable.

One criticism I would have for kits like this is the lack of written instructions. Your point is well taken that, especially as you move up in the size and "levels" of rockets, many kits don't come with anything, but at this level, it would be nice for the kit to come with some written instructions. Given the amount of time TVM spends on videos and newsletters, it wouldn't be that much of an effort for him to produce a 1-2 page sheet for this kit. The thing is, if you don't have a lot of experience, the videos really are great, but if you do have a lot of experience, a 1-2 page sheet giving the high points of a specific kit would be better. Sitting through 3 hours of video is not always what I want to do. Tell me the basics and where the "gotcha's" are.

This is more of an issue with the Saturn V Apogee sells. I have that kit too and found the lack of written instructions for a scale model of that detail to be a problem.

Finally, many of the build videos are very old. The Level 2 and the Saturn V videos are great examples. These are all in old 480p resolution. Played on a modern computer, they are either so small or so grainy, it is hard to make out details. I am not sure it is worth his time to redo them in a modern resolution, but a written set of instructions would help greatly to alleviate this issue.

 

[Dan Griffing]

C'mon. That's a cheap shot. This forum, while good, is not the be all, end all, of rocketry. Tim gives away plenty of expertise through very organized videos and newsletters, and you want to complain that isn't good enough because he doesn't post here? I'm sure he has better things to do. There is an Apogee rep who contributes to the forum now and then.

We see many other notable HPR experts on TRF, but TVM only plays in his own ballpark. I value his advice but it would be nice to have it not always be part of an
plug for Apogee Components.

I have always had great rocketry kits, supplies, service, and advice from Apogee Components, including stuff from other manufacturers.

But when I’m looking for technical advice, I’m uneasy with something that always seems to have a sales pitch mixed in. TVM is the only vendor who has actual rocket science credentials. But for the last two decades he’s been more of a marketeer, and that diminishes the quality of his advice as a rocket scientist.

 

[Nytrunner]

How difficult is it to set the T3 up and use it for tracking? If I remember right, it pairs with an Android device? Is it simple to use and follow? Thinking of integrating one into a nose cone

It's quite easy to get going. Syncs with Android (i use rocket locator app). Read the instructions thoroughly, practice practice practice the binding and setup process with the device you'll use. Do it at home a few times, walk around the neighborhood to see it tracking and use the features, etc....

 

[mtnmanak]

Back on thread a bit here... Rocket is painted. My kids got involved, told them they could only pick paint from what we had on the shelf, given we are close to Halloween, my son wanted "Purple People Eater" and my daughters wanted "Pink Princess". Compromised with a purple body and hot pink fins and nosecone. Everybody wins!

Ground tested the main chute deployment today, needed 1.4g of FFFFg to deploy the main.

 

[Steven88]

The first photo shows two Missile Works RRC2’s mounted on a MAC Performance 3” sled. The sled has one 9 volt printed battery box on it. Two 7.4 volt LiPo batteries are perfectly installed in the one 9 volt battery box. The last picture is of the 7.4 volt LiPo battery that fits perfectly in the battery box.

The Missile Works printed sleds are less work to install because they are pre drilled for their product line. You can purchase their sleds for 4” rockets with provisions to mount two RRC3’s with two separate 9 volt battery boxes.

I use the MAC Performance sleds with the RRC altimeters when I want redundancy in smaller rockets. One of the pictures has two RRC3’s mounted on a 4” sled. This is more work than using Missile Works dual 4” sled. However I like MAC Performance’s red pushbutton switches better than the rotary switches that the Missile Works sleds are setup for.

Best of luck with your project,
Bob

You probably saw that Missile Works has a conversion kit to switch over from a rotary switch to a screw switch?

 

[Steven88]

If you do want screw switches on our printed sleds, you can purchase this adapter for all our single units sleds:
https://www.missileworks.com/store/#!/Screw-Switch-Adapter-Kit/p/39751287/category=5760490

Additionally, the RRC3 Dual sled supports direct mount of 2 screw switches without the adapter.
-Jim Amos, Missile Works

 

[Bobfly]

I

I wonder if you would mind giving us some examples of what you do differently or what you don’t like? So those of us who don’t know can learn?

This forum is an excellent resource for new people getting into the hobby / sport. There are plenty of very experienced rocketeers that are willing to answer technical questions and provide advice. I recommend that you view some of the very detailed build threads that are available. They have detailed photographs. The building techniques are transferable. You don’t necessarily need a thread for the exact kit that you are planning on building.

Checkout some of Jim’s, blackjack2564, building threads.

It is a shame that many of the kit manufacturers do not provide written instruction. MAC Performance Rocketry, macperformancerocketry.com, provides detailed written instructions with all of their kits. You might want to check them out.

Pollux, you asked for some things that experienced builders might not like on the Level 2 kit, or better alternative building techniques for the kit.

1) See my previous post about the plywood AV Sled / Battery Box.

2) The motor mount centering rings are made out of a very thin fiberglass. I ordered two additional centering rings from Apogee when I built my kit a few years ago. I didn’t like using the weak eyebolt that comes with the kit. Welded eye bolts are much stronger. It didn’t make sense to me to install such a strong eyebolt through a single super thin fiberglass centering ring. The fiberglass would fail long before the eyebolt would ever fail.

I sandwiched a 1/2” plywood centering ring between two of the kits fiberglass centering rings. This assembly provided a much stronger platform for the eyebolt attachment. It also provides more surface area for bonding to the motor mount tube and the booster tube.

3) Use different epoxies for different purposes. Five minute epoxy is fine for tacking and light jobs. You can use much stronger epoxies. I use J B Weld for the motor retainer and tacking of the fins. I use RocketPoxy for structural assemblies and fillets.

4) Since I purchased the additional fiberglass centering rings, I was able to install one just forward of the fins. By installing the motor tube assembly into the booster tube without installing the third rear centering ring, you have clear access for interior fin fillets.

5) I filled the fin can with structural expanding foam prior to installing the third and rear centering ring.

6) Someone in an earlier post recommended Apogee’s Guillotine Fin Jig. I’ve been using them for years. The jig really helps you obtain perfect fin alignment.

Best of luck,
Bob

 

[Bobfly]

Back on thread a bit here... Rocket is painted. My kids got involved, told them they could only pick paint from what we had on the shelf, given we are close to Halloween, my son wanted "Purple People Eater" and my daughters wanted "Pink Princess". Compromised with a purple body and hot pink fins and nosecone. Everybody wins!

Ground tested the main chute deployment today, needed 1.4g of FFFFg to deploy the main.

It’s great that you got your kids involved. We need young people to have fun and enjoy the hobby.

 

[mtnmanak]

I

6) Someone in an earlier post recommended Apogee’s Guillotine Fin Jig. I’ve been using them for years. The jig really helps you obtain perfect fin alignment.

Note on the guillotine jigs - they are made for Apogee by Macklin Missile Works: https://www.macklinmissileworks.com/

First, Ted Macklin will sell you the plans for the jigs in case you want to save some money and cut out all the parts yourself.

Second, They carry some different sizes on the Macklin site than Apogee has, so you can get their "mid-size" jig (which Apogee doesn't carry) and that is perfect for 3"-4" tubes. The Large jig Apogee sells is great, but it is very expensive and should be called "Gigantic" size. It is big.

Third, for the most part, if you don't see something or something is sold out, just email Ted. He is awesome to work with and may be able to get you what you need. He also follows up with you during and after the sale to make sure you got what you need and to answer any questions. I have even emailed him years later to ask questions about best practices on certain fins/body tubes and he has answered promptly and with great suggestions.

 

[School of Rock'et']

How difficult is it to set the T3 up and use it for tracking? If I remember right, it pairs with an Android device? Is it simple to use and follow? Thinking of integrating one into a nose cone

The set up for the T3 is actually really easy. You will need the transmitter and receiver box, an Android device with Bluetooth and an application called rocket track. The t3 works great. The downfall IMO is the drain on the 1s LiPo battery while connected. If you have a long prep or pad wait time, the transmitter might drain far enough to turn off. The receiver will keep the last known position of the rocket. Unfortunately if it does die on the pad it will just point you to the cell you launched from originally.

The nosecone is definitely the way to go. Charge the LiPo. She should have 2-3 hours of signal. Good luck!!!

 

[Banzai88]

The downfall IMO is the drain on the 1s LiPo battery while connected. ....... Charge the LiPo. She should have 2-3 hours of signal. Good luck!!!

I'm an RTX flyer and I wasn't aware that there was such a dramatic difference in the T3 and RTX battery life. I just looked up the manual for both, and the same 1S 750 mah Lipo in the T3 is ~4 hours vs the RTX at ~10 hours. I guess that's the big trade off in form factor/weight/cost.

I know for a fact that the ~10 hours on the RTX is HIGHLY conservative, as I've returned the next day with swamp hip waders and a 40' recovery pole, and got lock on almost a mile out when driving to recovery (and the battery survived to be recharged and is still flying 3 seasons later).

 

[Nytrunner]

I'm an RTX flyer and I wasn't aware that there was such a dramatic difference in the T3 and RTX battery life. I just looked up the manual for both, and the same 1S 750 mah Lipo in the T3 is ~4 hours vs the RTX at ~10 hours. I guess that's the big trade off in form factor/weight/cost.

I know for a fact that the ~10 hours on the RTX is HIGHLY conservative, as I've returned the next day with swamp hip waders and a 40' recovery pole, and got lock on almost a mile out when driving to recovery (and the battery survived to be recharged and is still flying 3 seasons later).

Unless Im mistaken, the T3 has a 250mW transmitter vs the RTX 100mW

 

[Banzai88]

Unless Im mistaken, the T3 has a 250mW transmitter vs the RTX 100mW

Nope, they both use the same 250mW XBee

From the RTX page "The RTx system uses the standard 250mW XBee 900 MHz ISM Radio system "
From the T3 page "- 1/4 watt License Free XBee Radio Modems "

Same GPS chipset, too.

 

[user 30299]

I'm an RTX flyer and I wasn't aware that there was such a dramatic difference in the T3 and RTX battery life. I just looked up the manual for both, and the same 1S 750 mah Lipo in the T3 is ~4 hours vs the RTX at ~10 hours. I guess that's the big trade off in form factor/weight/cost.

I know for a fact that the ~10 hours on the RTX is HIGHLY conservative, as I've returned the next day with swamp hip waders and a 40' recovery pole, and got lock on almost a mile out when driving to recovery (and the battery survived to be recharged and is still flying 3 seasons later).

T3 tracker - base and rocket unit.

RTx tracker - rocket unit.

The two systems use the identical XBee Pro S38 unit. The battery life may be tied to the amount of info that is transmitted. But I'm just making a guess, and I have not confirmed that with Missile Works. The T3 sends all the NMEA info for all the satellites that the unit is tracking. The RTx sends a "truncated" NMEA string, and does not send all the satellites that the unit is tracking. I came across this when testing the two systems with the VisualGPS program. And that I did confirm with Missile Works. I use the Missile Works Bluetooth module to check the T3 and RTx systems before launches.

But it does seem odd that the battery life is not identical for systems that have identical tracking components.

 

[Brian Ditmer]

We see many other notable HPR experts on TRF, but TVM only plays in his own ballpark. I value his advice but it would be nice to have it not always be part of an
plug for Apogee Components.

I have always had great rocketry kits, supplies, service, and advice from Apogee Components, including stuff from other manufacturers.

But when I’m looking for technical advice, I’m uneasy with something that always seems to have a sales pitch mixed in. TVM is the only vendor who has actual rocket science credentials. But for the last two decades he’s been more of a marketeer, and that diminishes the quality of his advice as a rocket scientist.

I'm no expert, but I know the hobby business in general. It's very hard to make a business successful (and keep it that way) I don't fault him at all for shaping most of his advice around the products he sells.