List of suppliers who state the airframe material on all rockets.

[Alex-Heffer]

I mentor new people into rocketry and am frustrated when they fall into the trap of purchasing a cardboard airframe rocket with a 54mm motor mount expecting it to handle a K motor. Surely in 2022 it's time for suppliers to be up front and specify the airframe material and thickness in their descriptions. Suppliers specify the airframe material when it's a stronger material but if it's cardboard or fibre the buyer is in the dark. This is a consumer rights issue because lighter materials will typically not last as long and a safety issue if you are planning to fly a high impulse motor in a rocket.

I don't have any Kit suppliers to add to the list. Do you ?

 

[user 35280]

LOC makes/sells all kinds of cardboard BT rocket kits that’ll handle a K or higher impulse motor.

 

[Titan II]

Ridiculous.

 

[prfesser]

There have been more than a couple of L3 flights on a LOC Bruiser or the like. All their 7.6" kits have paper tubes.

Tube material plus motor plus top speed plus rocket diameter (drag) all factor into survivability.

 

[CoyoteNumber2]

Alex, can you post a link to an example of a misleading site?

 

[user 35280]

Could be another troll posting.

 

[FredA]

A mentor with one post.....
And one who's never flown a cardboard rocket on a K.
For real?

 

[OverTheTop]

I mentor new people into rocketry and am frustrated when they fall into the trap of purchasing a cardboard airframe rocket with a 54mm motor mount expecting it to handle a K motor.

My most-flown rocket was a cardboard airframe and happily took any L motor I threw at it. No drama. Don't underestimate cardboard, if it is a type suitable for airframes. It is also easier for novices to work with.

If you really want the thickness just message the supplier. They are generally very helpful.

 

[DabCat]

If you're looking for a good one to try, wildman rocketry sells cardboard rockets, fiberglass rockets, and carbon fiber rockets and has a very good selection in all. All mention the materials used. Another good one is madcow rocketry. Madcow has very high quality cardboard kits and fiberglass kits in many different sizes.

As mentioned above, could you please list the manufacturer(s) you had troubles with? If there's a misunderstanding somewhere it could be pointed in the right direction.

 

[StreuB1]

What cardboard kit is out there with a 54mm MMT that cannot handle a K motor?

I've flown (long ago) the Caliber ISP, arguably the smallest cardboard rocket you can buy with a 54mm MMT, on a K550. It flew just fine.

Heck, its been 20 years since I lost that rocket and just posting about it makes me want to relive that. I'm inclined to buy one right now actually. It might actually be the beer that thinks this is a good idea but most certainly it will be my CC that is charged.

 

[samb]

Not a lot of love for the premise that cardboard can’t handle a K. And I certainly can’t buy any “consumer rights” business. But wasn‘t it fairly common for you OG high power fliers to laminate fiberglass cloth to a cardboard airframe ? For looks ? Longevity ? Strength ? Seems like the procedure was popular before fiberglass airframe tubes became more readily available.

 

[Buckeye]

If the OP is for real, go to Apogee Components. They give the material, dimensions, and photos for just about everything they sell, often better than the suppliers themselves.

 

[green dragon]

Not a lot of love for the premise that cardboard can’t handle a K. And I certainly can’t buy any “consumer rights” business. But wasn‘t it fairly common for you OG high power fliers to laminate fiberglass cloth to a cardboard airframe ? For looks ? Longevity ? Strength ? Seems like the procedure was popular before fiberglass airframe tubes became more readily available.

As one of the old timers...... glassing tubes was not the norm back in the day. some guys did it, some of us thought it was way over the top.

I Have gone to glassing / quasi-glassing lately as it DOES help immensely with surface finish.

Flown many cardboard rockets with K and a few L motors... including Mach 1.3

 

[RokitFlyr]

What "trap" ? All kits I've seen/built have a list of parts/materials. Not much of a mentor if ya can't read. Consumer rights issue? Really?
Never built a fiberglass kit. Been flying K's for yrs. in my Binder Design Excell+ and Certifier.

 

[lakeroadster]

I mentor new people into rocketry and am frustrated when they fall into the trap of purchasing a cardboard airframe rocket with a 54mm motor mount expecting it to handle a K motor. Surely in 2022 it's time for suppliers to be up front and specify the airframe material and thickness in their descriptions. Suppliers specify the airframe material when it's a stronger material but if it's cardboard or fibre the buyer is in the dark. This is a consumer rights issue because lighter materials will typically not last as long and a safety issue if you are planning to fly a high impulse motor in a rocket.

I don't have any Kit suppliers to add to the list. Do you ?

Research, research, research.

Caveat Emptor... If it doesn't specify materials... ask. If your new to the hobby, do your due diligence "before" you buy.

ps: You win the "Surely in 2022" 1st usage award... and don't call me Shirley..

....Tube material plus motor plus top speed plus rocket diameter (drag) all factor into survivability.

Rocket Science...

 

[John Kemker]

Used to have a Bruiser (not EXP) that I flew on K motors all the time. Everything from Aerotech reloadable K motors to Kosdon K motors. High thrust/short burn, low thrust/long burn, it didn't matter. Took a divorce to bring about the demise of that Bruiser.

 

[burkefj]

I've got a couple of large cardboard rockets that I fly on k 1100 and L1000 motors, they don't have any fiberglassing on them either, in fact I don't currently have any fiberglass air frame rockets.

 

[Five]

There have been more than a couple of L3 flights on a LOC Bruiser or the like. All their 7.6" kits have paper tubes.

Tube material plus motor plus top speed plus rocket diameter (drag) all factor into survivability.

Ive also purchased a couple loc kits and got a airframe that was weak(flimsy) and had creases.

 

[Five]

Ridiculous.

Why is that ridiculous? All he trying to ask is for the suppliers to stop selling junk kits. I myself have bought a couple kits from loc and got a airframe with creases in it. Believe it or not, i have even had bloody bandage inside one of the boxes it came in….Disgusting

 

[samb]

Ive also purchased a couple loc kits and got a airframe that was weak(flimsy) and had creases.

One bad experience with a damaged part doesn’t invalidate a whole class of materials. Did LOC make this right when you brought it to their attention ?

 

[samb]

Why is that ridiculous? All he trying to ask is for the suppliers to stop selling junk kits. I myself have bought a couple kits from loc and got a airframe with creases in it. Believe it or not, i have even had bloody bandage inside one of the boxes it came in….Disgusting

Not saying you don’t have a beef with LOC. I hope they made it right for you.

 

[StreuB1]

Not a lot of love for the premise that cardboard can’t handle a K. And I certainly can’t buy any “consumer rights” business. But wasn‘t it fairly common for you OG high power fliers to laminate fiberglass cloth to a cardboard airframe ? For looks ? Longevity ? Strength ? Seems like the procedure was popular before fiberglass airframe tubes became more readily available.

As another OG, glassing was not common at all and is a relatively new thing. Everyone flew cardboard unless you had money and could afford a Dynacom or Dangerous Dave fg kit. There was always PML with phenolic tubing as well but it was expensive compared to Loc; just below the midrange between Loc and the aforementioned fg kit suppliers. I never owned a PML kit, never had the money.

That being said, it was not uncommon though to do fg laminate reinforcing of centering ring to MMT/fin attachments as well as glassing the initial root pass of the fin to airframe intersection. Glassing the INTERIOR of couplers was also a thing as this was a more common failure mode for higher powered flights using cardboard. This is why Loc now sells the STIFFY tubes for couplers, which are fantastic and makes for the best AV bay that exists for cardboard airframes, in my opinion. Rockets could fold in half at the coupler under high G or mach flights, so we reinforced the interior of the coupler with fg and west.

To clarify, coupler failures were not "common" occurrences. Though when there was a failure on higher powered flights, it was usually due to failure of the fin/airframe intersection root or the coupler folding in half.

 

[tfish]

Maybe a tad to late into the new years celebration..to post a good question..that got twisted up down under and by the time it reached his key pad..... It had lost all of its.....
Alex..keep up the mentoring and have a safe New Year!

Tony

 

[lakeroadster]

Why is that ridiculous? All he trying to ask is for the suppliers to stop selling junk kits. I myself have bought a couple kits from loc and got a airframe with creases in it. Believe it or not, i have even had bloody bandage inside one of the boxes it came in….Disgusting

A bloody bandage? For real?

• Who did the kit come from, and
• Did you contact them?

 

[Five]

A bloody bandage? For real?

• Who did the kit come from, and
• Did you contact them?

It was a micro mag I purchased directly from loc.
I only emailed them. Never did get a response though.

 

[Five]

Not saying you don’t have a beef with LOC. I hope they made it right for you.

One bad experience with a damaged part doesn’t invalidate a whole class of materials. Did LOC make this right when you brought it to their attention ?

Nope

 

[Five]

Im not trying to bad mouth Loc but was just stating facts. I have been and will always be a customer of Loc Precision.
Anyways,
If I need a good solid airframe, Madcow is my first choice…if they have any kits in stock.

 

[GlueckAuf]

Hi Alex,

“New people” to rocketry (that's plain rocketry, NOT high-power rocketry) generally don’t consider, let alone actually fly, K-class motors until they've learned a thing or two about this hobby over the years, starting from the low- and mid-power realm. I suggest your mentoring might wisely include helping your newbies plan a realistic pathway to high power rocketry rather than starting at Level 2 purchases. There are far more--and far more important--things to learn about safety, construction, flying, recovery, and etiquette before the question of air frame material even becomes a significant issue.

 

[Five]

Research, research, research.

Caveat Emptor... If it doesn't specify materials... ask. If your new to the hobby, do your due diligence "before" you buy.

ps: You win the "Surely in 2022" 1st usage award... and don't call me Shirley..

Rocket Science...

Surely you cant be serious.

 

[lakeroadster]

Surely you cant be serious.

Roger that, Captain Over.