Estes - MAV #7283 Gallery

Discussion in 'Estes' started by Spree610, Mar 25, 2020 at 4:53 PM.

Help Support The Rocketry Forum by donating:

  1. Mar 25, 2020 at 4:53 PM #1

    Spree610

    Spree610

    Spree610

    Forum Supporter TRF Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2020
    Messages:
    6
    Likes Received:
    1
    Last edited: Mar 25, 2020 at 4:59 PM
  2. Mar 25, 2020 at 5:01 PM #2

    CalebJ

    CalebJ

    CalebJ

    Forum Supporter TRF Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2020
    Messages:
    138
    Likes Received:
    35
    Gender:
    Male
    For what it's worth, the pads at the base of each fin are very fragile. Two have broken from mine after a few launches. Also, take the minimum motor requirements very seriously. I put in a B (I don't remember which, sorry) and it never cleared the pad.
     
  3. Mar 25, 2020 at 5:22 PM #3

    Antares JS

    Antares JS

    Antares JS

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2020
    Messages:
    86
    Likes Received:
    41
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Eastern Shore, VA
    That's also something I learned the hard way by crashing my Mercury-Redstone on a B when Estes made them with the plastic fins twenty years ago. I now refuse to fly Estes kits with a bunch of plastic pieces on anything less than a C, even if the instructions say a B is possible.

    I'm kind of going back and forth on whether I really want this particular rocket. On one hand, it looks pretty cool. On the other hand, it's not much of a challenge.
     
  4. Mar 25, 2020 at 5:25 PM #4

    CalebJ

    CalebJ

    CalebJ

    Forum Supporter TRF Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2020
    Messages:
    138
    Likes Received:
    35
    Gender:
    Male
    It really is an incredibly quick and easy build, so I get that. It was a great one for us because my son was able to be directly involved in the process, which is a lot harder for him on more advanced models.
     
    Bill S likes this.
  5. Mar 25, 2020 at 5:41 PM #5

    Antares JS

    Antares JS

    Antares JS

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2020
    Messages:
    86
    Likes Received:
    41
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Eastern Shore, VA
    That makes sense. Unfortunately my daughter is only two and can't really be involved in anything at all with glue at the moment. :p
     
  6. Mar 25, 2020 at 5:46 PM #6

    BEC

    BEC

    BEC

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2009
    Messages:
    2,887
    Likes Received:
    135
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Auburn, WA
    Here's a liftoff shot. Estes C6-3 as recommended. 262 feet per FlightSketch Mini aboard. It goes much better and almost twice as high on a Q-jet C12-4. Because almost all the extra total impulse gets consumed by more drag, the D16-4 doesn't go much higher.

    I haven't broken off any landing pads flying it (from that grassy field) but I have now broken one off when the model fell in my workroom. I've glued it back on and reinforced the joint with some heat shrink tubing. We'll see if it holds up.
     

    Attached Files:

    Antares JS and CalebJ like this.
  7. Mar 26, 2020 at 10:14 AM #7

    Bill S

    Bill S

    Bill S

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2019
    Messages:
    206
    Likes Received:
    38
    Gender:
    Male
    My son built one of these. I had figured to break out some QJet D16s, probably the -4. So you think it went higher with a C12-4, rather than the D16-4? Interesting. I don't have any C12s, not sure its worth ordering right now though.
     
  8. Mar 26, 2020 at 2:02 PM #8

    Spree610

    Spree610

    Spree610

    Forum Supporter TRF Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2020
    Messages:
    6
    Likes Received:
    1
    Wasn't so much of building for a challenge but I like to have a collection of different sizes, types, etc. of rockets when working with my cadets on model rocketry.
     
  9. Mar 26, 2020 at 6:01 PM #9

    BEC

    BEC

    BEC

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2009
    Messages:
    2,887
    Likes Received:
    135
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Auburn, WA
    No, I didn't mean that the MAV didn't go as high on a D16 as on a C12, but rather that the difference wasn't much and certainly didn't take good advantage of the additional 3 N-s of total impulse. Here are the two most-comparable flights' data:

    D16-4: https://flightsketch.com/flights/804/
    C12-4 earlier the same afternoon: https://flightsketch.com/flights/790/
     
  10. Mar 26, 2020 at 10:20 PM #10

    Bill S

    Bill S

    Bill S

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2019
    Messages:
    206
    Likes Received:
    38
    Gender:
    Male
    Wow. Big difference vs the claimed 250 feet on a C6-3. So I will definitely want to look at using a D16-4 or C12-4 if I can get ahold of some for a good price. Thanks. :)
     
  11. Mar 26, 2020 at 10:27 PM #11

    BEC

    BEC

    BEC

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2009
    Messages:
    2,887
    Likes Received:
    135
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Auburn, WA
    Yeah. As I mentioned above, I got 262 feet on a C6-3. The MAV, like the 1/200 RTF Saturn V, goes almost twice as high on a Q-Jet C12-4 over an Estes C6-3...even though the C12 only has 1 N-s higher total impulse (per certification data).

    This difference in performance between an Estes C6 and a Q-jet C12 is not as dramatic, though it IS still significant, in lighter models. For example, a regular Estes Alpha goes to about 1100 (https://flightsketch.com/flights/583/) feet on an Estes C6-5 and about 1300 feet (https://flightsketch.com/flights/582/) on a Q-Jet C12-6.

    (These data are all taken from FS Minis or PerfectFlite FireFlys flown aboard the models.)
     
    Bill S likes this.

Share This Page

Group Builder