Estes Summer of Pro Series II - Sneek Peek

[tfrielin]

Another vote for bringing back the Nike Smoke.
But for the love of God, please make the parts fit together better.
I know I've never been mistaken for a master modler, but the last two I built, the parts didn't seem to be machined properly. The fins especially were a b ##tch to fit in.

And I've always flown the NS on composites. I can see that BP motors might be a little underpowered. As it is with composites, I'm still juggling several F engine sizes to find the one that gets it going up straight and true.

Even with all that, I love the Nike Smoke---its looks and how (moslty) how it flies.

 

[Art Upton]

Another vote for bringing back the Nike Smoke.
But for the love of God, please make the parts fit together better.
I know I've never been mistaken for a master modler, but the last two I built, the parts didn't seem to be machined properly. The fins especially were a b ##tch to fit in.

And I've always flown the NS on composites. I can see that BP motors might be a little underpowered. As it is with composites, I'm still juggling several F engine sizes to find the one that gets it going up straight and true.

Even with all that, I love the Nike Smoke---its looks and how (moslty) how it flies.

I used an F60 Blue Thunder for a straight up flight. I do not know if they still make those?

 

[Back_at_it]

Another vote for bringing back the Nike Smoke.
But for the love of God, please make the parts fit together better.
I know I've never been mistaken for a master modler, but the last two I built, the parts didn't seem to be machined properly. The fins especially were a b ##tch to fit in.

And I've always flown the NS on composites. I can see that BP motors might be a little underpowered. As it is with composites, I'm still juggling several F engine sizes to find the one that gets it going up straight and true.

Even with all that, I love the Nike Smoke---its looks and how (moslty) how it flies.

I've only built one of the pro series Nike Smoke's but the fit was perfect on mine. Maybe I got a later kit.

Flies nicely on an F44-4 for low flights and works great on the F67. I don't think Estes has a BP motor that would effectively lift mine.

 

[tfrielin]

I used an F60 Blue Thunder for a straight up flight. I do not know if they still make those?

Apparently, I used an F32-6T composite before and it did ok.

I had one inadvertant "cross-country"flight that I think was caused by insuficient contact of the igniter with the propellent.

Next up I see I've got several F27-4R composites to try.

Maybe shoulda gone up to the F60??

In looking at the NS Estes instructions, it doesn't seem to recommend BP engines, just composites (F26-6J, F60-6T, G70...)

 

[SolarYellow]

The cone weights 8.5oz and it is a perfect fit for the LOC 4 inch tubing if you wanted to use that instead of Estes.

If you could measure the exposed length and approximate the diameter of the spherical blunting of the tip, those would be interesting stats to have.

Tubing stats:
LOC is 3.9 ID, 4.0 OD, 0.050 TH
Madcow is 3.9 ID, 4.0 OD, 0.050 TH
AeroTech is 3.9 ID, 3.98 OD, 0.040 TH
Estes must then be 3.9 ID, and we don't know what OD and wall thickness until someone measures and posts up.

(ETA: My measurement of an Estes DBRM 3-in cone shows it to be 3.017 in at the base, so I expect the difference between AT and LOC tubing ODs wouldn't be noticeable once everything is filled, sanded and painted.)

The AT black 4-in nose cone is polypropylene. I presume the white is the same. Reasonably pointy, 16 inches exposed length for a 4:1 fineness ratio:

AeroTech 4.0 inch Sumo Black Plastic Nose Cone - 11405

The same nose cone that is supplied with AeroTech rocket kits. 4.0 inch diameter x 16 inch length. This nose cone is made from blow molded plastic and has a shock cord attachment eyelet.

aerotech-rocketry.com

(It occurs to me that this would be excellent for a Wizard upscale.)

The LOC 3.9-in nose cone is polyethylene with a 3.19:1 fineness ratio. LOC web site says it weighs 5 oz. The photos of 4-in rockets on the LOC site indicate it has a modest blunting.

Madcow's cones are 16.5-in (4.13:1) and 9.5-in (2.38:1). The 9.5-in is stated to weigh 7 oz.; no weight is given for the 16-in. Note the Madcow long is right on the money for a scale Little John.

I've checked in with Estes regarding the material their 4-in cone is made from. If it's polystyrene, that would give it a cost advantage due to not needing to buy a $30 can of adhesion promoter to get paint and filler to stick to it. There are also sales and free shipping from Estes. Unfortunately, the body tube situation is poor on the Estes site.

LOC freight is expensive. I'd love it if AC Supply started carrying AT/Quest parts, or at least accepting special orders for them.

 

[jmasterj]

The [MDRM] cone is a perfect fit for the LOC 4 inch tubing if you wanted to use that instead of Estes.

Clearly you're right! I was thinking of the difference between Estes 3" tubes and everyone elses.

 

[tsmith1315]

I was thinking of the difference between Estes 3" tubes and everyone elses.

Aren’t their 2.5” and 2” also different?

 

[jmasterj]

Aren’t their 2.5” and 2” also different?

Yes, but we the community tend to call them different things so they don't get confused.

 

[tfrielin]

I used an F60 Blue Thunder for a straight up flight. I do not know if they still make those?

For what's it's worth, the Hobbylink site doesn't carry the F60.

 

[jmasterj]

For what's it's worth, the Hobbylink site doesn't carry the F60.

I think we're talking about the AT F50.

ThrustCurve Hobby Rocket Motor Data

Model and high-power hobby rocket motor data for flight simulation and reference.

www.thrustcurve.org

 

[Art Upton]

I think we're talking about the AT F50.

ThrustCurve Hobby Rocket Motor Data

Model and high-power hobby rocket motor data for flight simulation and reference.

www.thrustcurve.org

Thanks, it's that darn memory problem I have now in retirement.