Is it really a model rocket if you don't launch it?

[bobby_hamill]

Not flown = Model Rocket

Flown = Flying Model Rocket

 

[John Taylor]

(My rant lol)

Ok, I've been trying to research a couple of complex rockets for upcoming builds and I keep coming upon build threads that look AMAZING, but then die after the rocket is completed. Huh?

I even saw two TRFers in an old post saying that they were too afraid to fly the rockets and may never do so.

To me, it's not a "model rocket" if you don't launch it... I'd consider it a "rocket model". I'd love to see how others feel... maybe I'm nitpicking.

I've built many detailed model kits in the past, which I only planned on storing for display, but that allowed me to build them in great detail without worrying about possible damage.

Maybe part of my reason for ranting is because build threads like that feel like movies without an ending.
(Now watch me unintentionally do the same! )

---

I think it's not really a rocket unless it flies at least once. I have several collector's items that of course I don't want damaged.
An original Estes Sidewinder.
An original Estes Maxi Honest John
# 2166
An original Estes Maxi Force cluster
An original 4" Patriot Missle, the old Estes/North Coast co-op. effort
An original Estes Impulse cluster
An original Estes/North Coast Big Brute.
I fly all of them.

 

[John Taylor]

I'm starting to trend in this direction because as it turns out, the more work I put into the paint job, the more likely that rocket ends up in a tree or hung up on power lines. Then there are the rockets that fly up, and then never seem to ever come down -- just gone, never to be seen again.

Everybody likes to do it differently. I will make them look nice as practical. I'm not having an Auto Painter professionally paint them but I try. I will give it my best shot. I want it to look good even if it's gone after one flight. I enjoy the building and repair work as much as flying.

 

[KenECoyote]

I just feel that if you've built it beautiful, it looks even more beautiful in flight.

(Photo by Steve Lacker @ Slacker Studio)
#FreeTheRocket!

 

[ljwilley]

I don't think that it is valid to not fly a rocket because it is "too pretty to fly". I have always told rocketeers that they might as well get a plastic model that is not meant for flying if they don't want to fly it, so that when they let it sit on a shelf and collect dust for 10 years, it is at least doing what it was built to do. (Although I really think plastic models are actually for plastic model conversion, not sitting on shelves at all!) Anyway, ask yourself this: If people didn't take risks, would rocketry even exist?

 

[shockie]

If you build a model rocket and it's for display only ,then it's a rocket model. To qualify as a model rocket, it has to fly.

It's sorta like Bill Clinton asking what is a model rocket. It depends on what is is.

 

[Art Upton]

If you build a model rocket and it's for display only ,then it's a rocket model. To qualify as a model rocket, it has to fly.

It's sorta like Bill Clinton asking what is a model rocket. It depends on what is is.

Not really, it "Has to be able to fly", but it does not have to be flown.

I have 2 Estes Titan Gemini clones, one has flown , one has not. They are both model rockets, as if some day the one crashes I could fly the other. a Rocket Model "Cannot Fly"

 

[bjphoenix]

I don't think that it is valid to not fly a rocket because it is "too pretty to fly".

That's my explanation (excuse) when my paint jobs come out less than perfect, "I'm building it to fly not to look pretty on the shelf".

 

[Buster]

Never launch something you can’t afford to lose. However Fortune favors the Brave!

 

[techrat]

Never launch something you can’t afford to lose. However Fortune favors the Brave!

Has anyone thought of making the rocket intentionally ugly? Then it is guaranteed to come back.

I just bought a "pre owned" 5 foot tall, 4" diameter ... what looks like a modified LOC IV ... at the Potter NY URRF for the princely sum of $15. It was damaged, but I have since repaired it. It's hideous, looks like it was painted with whatever was left in numerous spray cans. I gave it a light sanding, epoxied what was busted, made a few other mods, but basically have kept it hideous. I'll likely own it forever. Named it "Cheap Thrills".

 

[Buster]

Has anyone thought of making the rocket intentionally ugly? Then it is guaranteed to come back.

I just bought a "pre owned" 5 foot tall, 4" diameter ... what looks like a modified LOC IV ... at the Potter NY URRF for the princely sum of $15. It was damaged, but I have since repaired it. It's hideous, looks like it was painted with whatever was left in numerous spray cans. I gave it a light sanding, epoxied what was busted, made a few other mods, but basically have kept it hideous. I'll likely own it forever. Named it "Cheap Thrills".

Good point. Buster’s First Law “When two items of equal utility are available the item of lesser appeal will prevail.”

 

[lakeroadster]

Has anyone thought of making the rocket intentionally ugly? Then it is guaranteed to come back.

I just bought a "pre owned" 5 foot tall, 4" diameter ... what looks like a modified LOC IV ... at the Potter NY URRF for the princely sum of $15. It was damaged, but I have since repaired it. It's hideous, looks like it was painted with whatever was left in numerous spray cans. I gave it a light sanding, epoxied what was busted, made a few other mods, but basically have kept it hideous. I'll likely own it forever. Named it "Cheap Thrills".

Pictures make it real...

 

[techrat]

Pictures make it real...

May I present "Cheap Thrills".... Sorry about the mess, it's a busy room.

 

[Buster]

May I present "Cheap Thrills".... Sorry about the mess, it's a busy room.

Put a motor in it, keep fins on it, it’ll fly. There are a lot labor intensive rockets with beautiful finishes which have never been seen again.

 

[BABAR]

The old Estes catalogs and other literature refer to the Estes models as "flying model rockets". So, a model rocket you fly is a "flying model rocket". If you don't fly it, it is a "static display model rocket". Both kinds are subsets of the more general term, "model rocket".

There is an easy solution to the, "it is so pretty I am afraid to actually launch it" problem: Build TWO of the model rockets. Keep one for display and fly the second.

interestingly enough, Mike Dorffler, who I never met but I believe was a designer for Estes and maybe Centuri, wrote an article On building the “show models” for Estes. IIRC, he said the models were meant for display only and used basswood Instead of balsa and took lots of other “alternative” techniques that made them beautiful and durable but specifically NOT flyable.

first and foremost, whoever builds a rocket it’s THEIRS, and i neither have nor want a say in whether they fly it or not.

that said, although not specified, for rocketry, for model plane, maybe less so for cars and boats, it seems like there SHOULD be two categories, “flyable” and “not flyable.” With the exception of the Estes Phantom, (may be others of which I am blissfully unaware), Flyable rockets are by definition designed to be flown by the consumers, the building usually implies some trade-offs to make it purty and still flyable. If you weren’t going to fly it, find a kit That ISN’T made to be flyable. so yeah, I think any flyable rocket kit should be built to be flown once, just to prove that the builder followed the engineering as well as cosmetic aspects of the build. Give it a least a little bit of sulphur fragrance in the display case.

but in this case, my opinion (even to myself) doesn’t count for beans. Let people do what they want. We each have far bigger fish to fry than worrying about what someone else does Or does not do with his or her personal rocket.

Although I don’t compete, I do like the NAR rule that all rockets in competitions, even the beauty comps, need to survive at least one flight.

still, don’t name your rocket Suicide King.

Open Body missile build for my Level 2

When are you going to fly her? You going to be in Lucerne in Jan? Bryce

www.rocketryforum.com

see post 64 and 88

whimper whimper

 

[Donnager]

Sorry about the mess...

You've got nothing to be concerned over. You should see my work area.

I tend to look at clutter different than debris.

 

[brockrwood]

You must be using some ACME Doping Agents... step outside the cave and get some fresh air, and take Scooby with ya. You can leave Shaggy, his brain is already turned to Dippity Doo.

Shaggy voiced by Casey Kasem the voice of American Top 40 radio. Rest in pesce Casey.

 

[Cape Byron]

The old Estes catalogs and other literature refer to the Estes models as "flying model rockets". So, a model rocket you fly is a "flying model rocket". If you don't fly it, it is a "static display model rocket". Both kinds are subsets of the more general term, "model rocket".

I’m older than dirt, so I make ‘Flying Model Rocket’ kits. Also helps people seperate the wheat from the chaff on EBay.

 

[jqavins]

I'm not going to read four and some pages of this, so I'll just give my answer.

"Model rocket", "model of a rocket", and "rocket model" are interchangeable terms except as used by personal preference, which, by the nature of such things, can't be said to be wrong if a term is used by one person contrarily to the preference of another.

My own preference is to use "model rocket" only for those that are designed and build using the design principles, materials, and techniques used to make flyable model rockets.

• If it is not flyable despite the use of those design principles, materials, and techniques then it is a model rocket still, but a failure. (Failures happen to us all. No judgement.)
• If it is indeed flyable, but unflown, then it is incomplete. Air time is more essential than paint. (Even if you're not someone who requires models to earn their paint but are just someone who's too lazy or too much of a procrastinator to finish a paint job before launch day. Don't judge me.)
• Either of these may still be lovely models of rockets and can be displayed with pride (honored shelf queens).

 

[RocketTree]

Accidently erased my original lengthy post, but after spending 3 years on the Saturn V, I think it will become a shelf queen. It has been upgraded with 29mm motor mounts, plywood rings etc. That would also be a great reason to build another one.

 

[BABAR]

Accidently erased my original lengthy post, but after spending 3 years on the Saturn V, I think it will become a shelf queen. It has been upgraded with 29mm motor mounts, plywood rings etc. That would also be a great reason to build another one.

Absolutely fine.

if you build another, would it be with intent to fly it, and if so, would you put more or less time into finishing it?