LOC VII for L3?

[loopy]

Hey all...so, I'm nowhere NEAR ready to start...I'm just getting my thoughts together, and am looking for validation, I guess?

Let me start by saying I've scratch built a few HPR rockets, and I like it, but when thinking of an L3 build, I'd like to keep it simple with design so I can focus more clearly on building it strong without having to incorporate design elements. I had long thought of using an existing kit as a basis for a scratch build, but it really ends up being the same thing as building a kit - I'm just using different fins, basically.

With that in mind, I happened across the LOC VII kit. I have built SEVERAL LOC/Precision kits, and I love them. My scratch builds are primarily LOC parts, so I'm quite familiar with them and how to construct them. When I saw this kit, I was very intrigued by it, and wheels started turning.

Has anyone built a LOC VII, and if so, what have you flown it on? I'm considering building one for my L3, and doing at least a tip to tip on the fins since they extend past the aft end of the body tube, so I'd like to reinforce them (and the body/fin joint and most likely the fin/motor tube joint as well) to withstand landing on frozen farm fields. The main question I have is will this kit stand up to an M motor with just reinforced fins? Will it stay out of the trans-sonic zone and under 12,000 feet on something like an M1297W or an M1500G?

Thanks in advance, everyone!

 

[maverickrocketry]

just spend your money building a fiberglass rocket. They are more robust and fly on bigger motors otherwise a cardboard rocket cant. Build a fiberglass rocket that can be your flagship rocket and it can fly on any large 54mm and bigger. my 2 cents

 

[mtnmanak]

While I agree that a nice fiberglass rocket like the Wildman Ultimate series is probably the best bet for a Level 3 cert, LOC 7.6" rockets can be used just fine. I did not use a cardboard rocket for my Level 3, but I have flown cardboard on Level 3 motors.

If I had to choose one, though, I would go with the Bruiser EXP. I have both a Bruiser EXP and a LOC VII. I have flown my Bruiser on an M motor and it hits about 600MPH to about 8000 ft on an M1500.

I have not flown my LOC VII on an M. It sims out to about 10,000 feet at Mach 1.1 on an M1500. That is pretty high and fast for a cert flight. You have to fly to your field, though.

 

[heada]

Do a tip to tip on the fins and any of the 7.5" LOC kits will work for a L3

 

[rharshberger]

It will do fine as an L3, but care must be taken to build properly, anybody can build a fiberglass rocket to easily handle L3 motors but a cardboard and wood rocket just takes a bit more attention to detail. Talk with the guys at LOC and they can make recommendations on what you need to do. A 7.5" rocket is draggy and not likely to exceed the speed of cardboard on the tamer L3 motors like the M1297 or similar thrust profile. As others have pointed out a FG rocket can take more powerful motors (and more expensive), but the upside of a properly built LOC VII is that it can fly on smaller motors (more affordable) with which it may get flown more often. My L3 cert rocket has flown on exactly two L3 motors, but its way more fun to fly on K's and L's. Cardboad vs Fiberglass is ultimately your choice and how you want to fly.

 

[loopy]

That’s exactly my thinking. I don’t want a massive and heavy fiberglass kit I can only fly on L3 sized motors. I want something that can handle the cert flight but still be able to fly it on other/more affordable stuff more often. Thanks!

 

[ThirstyBarbarian]

I’m going to defer to people who have experience with the LOC VII and have their L3 certification. But if I were going for my L3, and I were going to use a kit, the LOC VII is the kind of rocket I would be leaning toward. Something large and with some drag, but not necessarily very heavy.

It can definitely hold up to the right L3 motors and be flyable on L or K motors. I’ve watched people get their L3 on unreinforced cardboard LOC kits, but you can definitely fiberglass your fins and do a full tip to tip to be sure. You can even fiberglass the body tubes if you like. I think Rob at AMW Pro-X does that as a service. [email protected]

That rocket looks very cool to me. Very versatile. You can fly it in a few different configurations. Fly it with the full-sized dual deployment configuration, or fly it in the short configuration with a nose cone altimeter or motor eject. And they offer a lot of options for motor mount configurations too.

I’m sure you could pick an L3 motor that would keep to your preferred altitudes. I’m certain I’ve seen LOC kits on M motors below 12,000’. This is definitely the kind of flight I prefer — in fact, I prefer much lower. I wish the big Polecat 10” and 12” rockets were still being sold.

EDIT: I own a LOC Warlock and have built a removable payload section for dumping out monkeys and candy. When the payload section is installed, it’s about the same size as a LOC VII, but it’s limited by the Warlock’s 38mm motor mount. I’m also a partial co-owner of a second-hand 12” diameter Polecat Thumper. I love these big rockets, and I prefer flying them to relatively low altitudes. If/when anything happens to my Warlock, I’ll probably get a LOC VII to replace it. And if anyone were to start manufacturing large 12” diameter rockets like the Thumper again, I’d probably buy one so I could build it myself. But there’s a good chance I’d never fly it on an L3 motor. You don’t have to be an L3 to enjoy that kind of rocket.

 

[jd2cylman]

I’ve a LOC VII in the basement fully built, just waiting on paint and a few details. I’ve got 4 different motor mounts for it. 54mm, three 54mm cluster, 75mm, and a 98mm. I’ve got 3 K250’s already purchased. I’ve got a L952 already for another flight. The 54 and 75 haven’t been sorted yet. But I’m sure I’ll find something. I need to weight it sometime. I’m still thinking of doing tip to tip on the fins, but haven’t totally committed to it yet.

 

[StreuB1]

LOC VII would be a great L3 bird. No need for crazy construction, we didn't have that 25 years ago and look what was flown back then! Do fin root glass if you want, soak the leading 3" if airframe with thin CA to harden and toughen it up. Do a modular MMT like Adrian did so you can have fun with it and do dumb clusters....because its fun.

Fiberglass can also be done without going with an Ultimate. The Wildman Demon 5 ( I HAVE ONE AND ITS AWESOME!) is a great flyer and you can fly it on big J's up to M's with ease. Its also not enormous. The other option is the Demon 150 (just finishing mine at the moment) which is a 6" FG rocket, but its not as huge as an Ultimate. You could also do an Ultimate Punisher which again is a 6" FG rocket, but its not huge either. Like the Demon 5 and the 150, the Punisher also uses Head End Deployment so you don't have a complete payload bay. So, its shorter and weighs less than a full Ultimate, but is still a big boy. Both the Demon 150 and the Ultimate Punisher will fly on K's and with a 98mm MMT, you have LOTS of options from K's to N's.

I will hopefully be flying my Demon 150 next Saturday on a K1999N for its maiden flight. Should go only a few K's and should rip off the pad and be nice and loud but not go very far.

 

[AlexBruccoleri]

You need to consult with your TAPs or L3CC but if this is just an early plan then I recommend a different kit. I do not recommend the LOC VII or any rocket with swept back fins for a cert 2 or 3 flight. One of the requirements is the rockets needs to be in fly-again condition after the flight and those fins put a lot of stress on the joins during landing….even a perfect one. There is a good chance you will crack the joint. I recommend the Bruiser and reinforce the fillet with some fiberglass cloth.

Edit: I did not fully read the original post. Loopy understands the issue with swept back fins. None-the-less I would go with the Bruiser EXP to reduce the chances of a failure.

 

[Titan II]

If you have not bought it yet, I suggest the Bruiser EXP (without glass IMO). Loosing the cert breaking a fin on landing would suck.

 

[JackC]

I recommend the HyperLoc 1600 or the Bruiser EXP. If you don’t mind adding nose weight, the Patriot Missile is a nice flyer and a very pretty rocket. I also agree you want to stay away from rockets that have the fin edges angle down below the motor retainer of a rocket.

During an L3 Cert flight I reviewed, the flyer had a Black Brant that landed somewhat hard even though the chute deployed perfectly. There where cracks in the fillets because of the way the downward fin tips hit the ground.

You have enough to think about for your Cert flight. The fin tip issue should not be one of them.

 

[JackC]

That’s exactly my thinking. I don’t want a massive and heavy fiberglass kit I can only fly on L3 sized motors. I want something that can handle the cert flight but still be able to fly it on other/more affordable stuff more often. Thanks!

There are a lot of fiberglass rockets that can fly well on some powerful K motors and 54 mm L motors that can be built for a 75mm M motor certification flight.The full scale ARCAS or a half scale IQSY Tomahawk are great rockets that can fly 54mm motors with an adapter. They look great and fly well plus they don’t have to break your bank on the motors you want to buy!

 

[loopy]

I’m going to defer to people who have experience with the LOC VII and have their L3 certification. But if I were going for my L3, and I were going to use a kit, the LOC VII is the kind of rocket I would be leaning toward. Something large and with some drag, but not necessarily very heavy.

It can definitely hold up to the right L3 motors and be flyable on L or K motors. I’ve watched people get their L3 on unreinforced cardboard LOC kits, but you can definitely fiberglass your fins and do a full tip to tip to be sure. You can even fiberglass the body tubes if you like. I think Rob at AMW Pro-X does that as a service. [email protected]

That rocket looks very cool to me. Very versatile. You can fly it in a few different configurations. Fly it with the full-sized dual deployment configuration, or fly it in the short configuration with a nose cone altimeter or motor eject. And they offer a lot of options for motor mount configurations too.

I’m sure you could pick an L3 motor that would keep to your preferred altitudes. I’m certain I’ve seen LOC kits on M motors below 12,000’. This is definitely the kind of flight I prefer — in fact, I prefer much lower. I wish the big Polecat 10” and 12” rockets were still being sold.

EDIT: I own a LOC Warlock and have built a removable payload section for dumping out monkeys and candy. When the payload section is installed, it’s about the same size as a LOC VII, but it’s limited by the Warlock’s 38mm motor mount. I’m also a partial co-owner of a second-hand 12” diameter Polecat Thumper. I love these big rockets, and I prefer flying them to relatively low altitudes. If/when anything happens to my Warlock, I’ll probably get a LOC VII to replace it. And if anyone were to start manufacturing large 12” diameter rockets like the Thumper again, I’d probably buy one so I could build it myself. But there’s a good chance I’d never fly it on an L3 motor. You don’t have to be an L3 to enjoy that kind of rocket.

Exactly - I'm not going to fly a lot of L3 motors, so I don't want an insanely heavy rocket that I can only fly on huge motors. I LOVE LOC kits, and really love the design of this one. I'm really leaning this way for my cert, I just want to hear from those that have built this and flown it so I have a better idea of what this thing actually weighs when built so I can have a better idea of what I'd be looking at from an altitude/speed perspective on a baby M for certification.

You and I share a lot of the same philosophies on rockets...lol... I don't like losing sight of my rockets when they fly.

 

[loopy]

I recommend the HyperLoc 1600 or the Bruiser EXP. If you don’t mind adding nose weight, the Patriot Missile is a nice flyer and a very pretty rocket. I also agree you want to stay away from rockets that have the fin edges angle down below the motor retainer of a rocket.

During an L3 Cert flight I reviewed, the flyer had a Black Brant that landed somewhat hard even though the chute deployed perfectly. There where cracks in the fillets because of the way the downward fin tips hit the ground.

You have enough to think about for your Cert flight. The fin tip issue should not be one of them.

I'm not as concerned about the fins on landing, as I will have fiberglass on the fin/motor joint as well as a tip to tip over the body tube once the fin can is installed in the body tube. I have a 3" upscale Sizzler that I routinely fly, and it has rear swept fins (swept MUCH farther back than these, and tapered to a point rather than a flat trailing edge like the VII) and it flew about 10 times before I started getting cracks in the fillets. That rocket had no fiberglass reinforcement on it at all, and it held up much better than I ever thought it would (it now has fiberglass reinforced fillets).

I don't know...I just really love the design of this rocket, and see SO many people getting L1 and L2 certs on the LOC IV, I thought it would be cool to use the LOC VII for an L3.

 

[JackC]

I'm not as concerned about the fins on landing, as I will have fiberglass on the fin/motor joint as well as a tip to tip over the body tube once the fin can is installed in the body tube. I have a 3" upscale Sizzler that I routinely fly, and it has rear swept fins (swept MUCH farther back than these, and tapered to a point rather than a flat trailing edge like the VII) and it flew about 10 times before I started getting cracks in the fillets. That rocket had no fiberglass reinforcement on it at all, and it held up much better than I ever thought it would (it now has fiberglass reinforced fillets).

I don't know...I just really love the design of this rocket, and see SO many people getting L1 and L2 certs on the LOC IV, I thought it would be cool to use the LOC VII for an L3.

Of course you should run the design by your TAPs or L3CC and pick whatever design you like based on your desires and their consultations.

 

[AlexBruccoleri]

I'm not as concerned about the fins on landing, as I will have fiberglass on the fin/motor joint as well as a tip to tip over the body tube once the fin can is installed in the body tube. I have a 3" upscale Sizzler that I routinely fly, and it has rear swept fins (swept MUCH farther back than these, and tapered to a point rather than a flat trailing edge like the VII) and it flew about 10 times before I started getting cracks in the fillets. That rocket had no fiberglass reinforcement on it at all, and it held up much better than I ever thought it would (it now has fiberglass reinforced fillets).

I don't know...I just really love the design of this rocket, and see SO many people getting L1 and L2 certs on the LOC IV, I thought it would be cool to use the LOC VII for an L3.

You certainly can make this work if you put enough effort into reinforcing the rocket. As myself and others point out, it adds extra worry for your cert attempt, but it is doable and I suspect your TAPs or L3CC will be okay with it. If you love this design, then go for it!

 

[RocketmanAleks]

I'm not as concerned about the fins on landing, as I will have fiberglass on the fin/motor joint as well as a tip to tip over the body tube once the fin can is installed in the body tube. I have a 3" upscale Sizzler that I routinely fly, and it has rear swept fins (swept MUCH farther back than these, and tapered to a point rather than a flat trailing edge like the VII) and it flew about 10 times before I started getting cracks in the fillets. That rocket had no fiberglass reinforcement on it at all, and it held up much better than I ever thought it would (it now has fiberglass reinforced fillets).

I don't know...I just really love the design of this rocket, and see SO many people getting L1 and L2 certs on the LOC IV, I thought it would be cool to use the LOC VII for an L3.

I did my L1 on a LOC-IV, and I think an L3 on an LOC-VII would be epic!