Engine nacelles on the pods for sure.
NCC-xxxx decal.
Starfleet logo decal.
Maybe interior LED lighting?
We’ll, that saucer needs greebles for starters…
Engine nacelles on the pods for sure.
NCC-xxxx decal.
Starfleet logo decal.
Maybe interior LED lighting?
Vacuformed styrene saucer.We’ll, that saucer needs greebles for starters…
Vacuformed styrene saucer.
Phaser cannons around the rim.
Photon torpedo housing on the bottom half.
Cost doubles, nobody buys it.
John Boren commented on YORF that Bill Simon sent him his original model so it could be “reverse engineered” into a current kitKind of looks like the USS Enterprise got speared....
So I'm assuming it's a single motor design... Looks like an excellent candidate for a 3 motor cluster.
You cut out the coolest part of the page... I want one just because Bill Simon designed it.. retro cool.
View attachment 499825
Vacuformed styrene saucer.
Phaser cannons around the rim.
Photon torpedo housing on the bottom half.
Cost doubles, nobody buys it.
Agreed, although catalog reviews are lame. Front and back covers are valuable spaces. I don't think I would have put the same rocket on both. I hate that product weights were scrubbed out of the catalog. Finished rocket weights were always questionable, but bare parts are not. Perhaps somebody should make a supplemental catalog insert with the missing weights? Still, the catalog is far from the golden years of Estes, when the catalog included scientific and finishing supplies, and a helpful yellow educational section. BTW, Estes does sell glues an paints and many other items on their website.I like the general look and design of this catalog...IMO the best one in many years.
The reappearance of the A3-6T is really intriguing. It originally went away because of the variations in BP batches made it impossible to produce 6 sec delays using batches with low specific impulse. I wonder if they changed suppliers to make it possible again? That probably translates to higher costs since the specs have to be tightened. I'd be interested to hear what the actual delay turns out to be.
The estimated weights are on the website if they’re really needed.…I don't think I would have put the same rocket on both. I hate that product weights were scrubbed out of the catalog. Finished rocket weights were always questionable, but bare parts are not. Perhaps somebody should make a supplemental catalog insert with the missing weights?…
I must have been hallucinating the first time I looked, I thought weights were there. Impossible for me to understand why they wouldn't include them.I hate that product weights were scrubbed out of the catalog. Finished rocket weights were always questionable, but bare parts are not. Perhaps somebody should make a supplemental catalog insert with the missing weights?
And the website has an encyclopedic amount of information - more than any catalog could reasonably hold https://estesrockets.com/edu-videos-and-lesson-plans/I must have been hallucinating the first time I looked, I thought weights were there. Impossible for me to understand why they wouldn't include them.
But then it doesn't really matter to me because although I wore out my catalogs ever year as a kid just like everyone else around here, I don't use the catalog as a reference anymore. The website is the canonical reference.
I would think that Longer in Production should mean price increase for materials and cost of doing business but not for R&D since that gets recovered at some point.Estes typically raises it's prices 5%-7% each year. It also depends on how long the kit has been in production. Longer in production=More price increases.
In addition material costs go up along with overhead.
This year's price increases do seem to be a bit higher than in past years...
I suspect that these motors are being produced for the FAI World Champioships.
Is that to make it more competitive?The 2023 FAI World Championships will be flown using 1/2A motors for the four performance events traditionally flown at A impulse (parachute, streamer, helicopter, and rocket glide duration).
James
Is that to make it more competitive?
Maybe, but the effect is to demphasize drag and craftsmanship, and emphasize piston launchers.No, the idea is to lower the performance a bit. These models can travel great distances downrange, and by lowering the impulse a bit the hope is that more models will be recovered closer to the rangehead.
We've followed parachute duration models downrange more than ten kilometers, and recovered them successfully. It's a great deal of fun, but not exactly the best use of anyone's time on the range.
Maybe, but the effect is to demphasize drag and craftsmanship, and emphasize piston launchers.
Spoil sport. Contest rocketry is all about the thrill of the chase and heroic recoveries. I've been wrong before, and no doubt will be again.Wrong.
Let me put it another way: I want to reduce the possibility that someone gets creamed on a Texas highway while chasing their model.
Where? I haven’t seen the rocket kits on there in a long time?There's a rocket in the spacex website;
At least you can save $30.00Now they are trying to hit me up for $150...
I wonder if Steve at @Launch Lab Rocketry could make an alternative upgrade kit for the Star Orbiter with TTW fins in the Vapor pattern? Maybe toss in a bit of nose cone clay. I'd certainly be interested in one like that and building a Star Orbiter/Vapor hybrid.John Boren commented on the catalog thread over at YORF - there has been no changes to the Star Orbiter. Evidently whomever did the image composition for the 2022 catalog shot of the SO made a mistake.
Does anyone else find it strange that the A3-6T is classified as a single-stage motor? The delay is longer than the A8-5, which is marked as an upper-stage motor. I’m assuming there is a reason for this?Motors...
Added the A3-2T and A3-6T.
There’s some good info from BEC on post #61Does anyone else find it strange that the A3-6T is classified as a single-stage motor? The delay is longer than the A8-5, which is marked as an upper-stage motor. I’m assuming there is a reason for this?
A ton of stuff, now that I think about it. The rod is too short and likely too thin, that doesn’t look like the Pro Series II pad or anything resembling competent DIY mid/high power equipment, and that park is way too small to fly it on the recommended motors unless they’ve way underpowered it or put a streamer in it.Bill said they're using less photo models but seems like there's more, or the graphics are getting more realistic.
View attachment 503008
Not sure if this was brought up, but what's wrong with this photo?
View attachment 503010
Not sure if this was brought up, but what's wrong with this photo?
That's an Estes E launch pad. For midpower rockets.A ton of stuff, now that I think about it. The rod is too short and likely too thin, that doesn’t look like the Pro Series II pad or anything resembling competent DIY mid/high power equipment, and that park is way too small to fly it on the recommended motors unless they’ve way underpowered it or put a streamer in it.
Then again, it’s not something that screams out to me. It’s good enough for a catalog photo.
PS at some point they're going to need a controller.
Enter your email address to join: