# Quest Starter Set Arrived

### Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

#### Kruegon

##### Well-Known Member
So I swore up and down that I'd be getting one of the RTF starter sets. It has now arrived. Got it yesterday afternoon. Tiny little launch pad. Quest launch controller. A pack of motors with igniters. And two RTF rockets.

A MMX Saturn V and a MMX Shuttle Discovery. Time to move on down in the world.

As soon as I can purchase more motors, I'm going to start building a couple of MMX rockets. I've got a few downscales in my head. For simplicity's sake, my first few builds will most likely be BT-5 based. I'll work on getting smaller after I get things moving.

#### hcmbanjo

##### Well-Known Member
The Saturn V and Shuttle will be unstable unless you increase the fin area on the Saturn V.
I've never figured out how to get the Shuttle to fly straight.

Your plan to build your own MMX rockets is a good one.
Best bet, keep the launcher and controller then pick up some Micro Max models from FlisKits.
Those fly well and stable! My personal favorite is the Honest John.
https://modelrocketbuilding.blogspot.com/search/label/FK Honest John

Last edited:

#### Micromeister

##### Micro Craftman/ClusterNut
TRF Supporter
there are a number of different Saturn-V LPB's (Little Plastic Bricks) out there. The original Quest Saturn-V has way to small fins but is easily fixed using the clear package material it can in. See Photo below. These little clear triangles are attached with CA. Once applied the Saturn-V is instantly stable.
If you got one of the later run Saturn-V's with Large grey fins the model is stable without adding the clear triangles. (See photo below).
I have a number of LPB Quest shuttles, Never had a problem flying them. It's not a very good flying model but it is stable out of the box.

Building your own MMX models is by far the best. You might want to start out with a couple real builder kits from Fliskits. All of their Micro to the Maxx kits are first rate and fly well. I really like flying Fliskits "Tiny Triskelion", the unique fin can "Doo-Hickey", for micro Scale the Fliskit "Honest John" is a very good base starter kit. With a little extra work it can be tuned into a competition quality Scale model.

Perhaps after you've built a couple scratch built models you may want to add some of the over 150 1-page plans from the MicroMaxx yahoo group files section. OBTW over the last 16 years it has been found the the best comprimise "size-mass-performance" is the T3 (.375" OD) body tubing. Just so you know the minimum MMX motor tube size is T2+ (.281" OD) which make some very light weight very high flying models but also somewhat limits the amount of detail that can be added.

Hope this helps.

Last edited:

#### Kruegon

##### Well-Known Member
I've been staring down the two HoJo kits for a while. I love the HoJo. And I'm working on several upcoming HoJo kits. Adding two MMX kits to the list would be nice.

I am planning a fair series of scale MMX models. Time to find some more scale drawings. I also need to figure out the best way to add weight to balsa nose cones. Several of mine are going to need it if they're going to be true scale.

#### dhbarr

##### Amateur Professional
I've been staring down the two HoJo kits for a while. I love the HoJo. And I'm working on several upcoming HoJo kits. Adding two MMX kits to the list would be nice.

I am planning a fair series of scale MMX models. Time to find some more scale drawings. I also need to figure out the best way to add weight to balsa nose cones. Several of mine are going to need it if they're going to be true scale.
At a guess, a small drill bit and a single tungsten bead. They come in lots of sizes, and this is a case where the density actually matters (e.g. ensuring the weight is minimized / placed as far forward as possible)

#### Micromeister

##### Micro Craftman/ClusterNut
TRF Supporter
I also need to figure out the best way to add weight to balsa nose cones. Several of mine are going to need it if they're going to be true scale.
I Use a dremel to hollow out balsa cones to allow adding #9 or #12 lead shot mixed with epoxy. #9 lead shot is a bit easier to find, each bead is .05g with a .080" dia. sure makes getting the least amount of mass as far forward as possible. Tungesten beads are a bit better but Way more expensive and much harder to find in tiny shot sizes. As it is actually heavier then Lead it's a better choice if it can be found at some sort of reasonable price

#### dhbarr

##### Amateur Professional
Mix-n-match casting tungsten beads into a lead matrix is hopefully on my summer experimentation schedule

Watch out as some tungsten beads are actually epoxy/resin w/ tungsten powder fill.

#### hcmbanjo

##### Well-Known Member
Here's another way to add nose weight.
The BT-5 nose cones from BMS have holes already drilled in the base.
You can also drill holes yourself, just don't go too deep and through the nose cone side.

I cut off nail heads so the remaining pointed end is about 5/8" long.
Drop in some glue and push them into the outside three holes.

#### Micromeister

##### Micro Craftman/ClusterNut
TRF Supporter
Mix-n-match casting tungsten beads into a lead matrix is hopefully on my summer experimentation schedule

Watch out as some tungsten beads are actually epoxy/resin w/ tungsten powder fill.
Oh man:
Just got of the phone with the ONLY US manufacturer of Tungsten Alloy beads. 90% Tungsten 10%Copper. 1.5mm (.059") run $170.00 per Pound. minimum order 1lb. 2mm (.079") replacement size for #9 Lead Shot run$112.10 per pound.
Sorry those prices are just Way to expensive to use a nose weight. I use Tungsten Bullet worm weights for Bass fishing but they are not only way to expensive to use for Mod-Roc Ballast they are also to large to use in anything Micro Maxx size. I guess one could use a single and grind off others to get close but man that is some tough material.

All that said; I'll stick with #9 & #12 Lead shot. Once mixed in epoxy it is no longer a environmental concern.

Lead shot also require a bit less to get the same CG shift by moving the mass further up in the nose. Yeap! when building micro models every 10th of a gram counts. If skidish about using lead there are always Steel/copper BB's, Much larger in diameter but also usable. Split shot fishing weights (still lead). and don't forget about good old modeling clay. Not very heavy but if you have the room it can be used.

One last thing: When building Micro Models. keep overall frontal area in mind as well as model mass. BT-5 really is the outside largest body/nose that should be flown on a single MMX-II, if Clustering 2-3 or more MMX-II's then we can get away with BT-20 and sometimes even BT-50 size rockets.
As with All rocketry overall mass and frontal area are the largest performance reducing factors to be considered.
As mentioned earlier if your looking for optimum size to performance you should look hard a T3(.375") and T4(.448") Body tube sizes. BT-5 should be a last choice.

#### dhbarr

##### Amateur Professional
Did they happen to mention the approx. weight per bead? Trying to get an idea for per-bead cost

#### TopRamen

##### SA-5
Oh man:
Just got of the phone with the ONLY US manufacturer of Tungsten Alloy beads. 90% Tungsten 10%Copper. 1.5mm (.059") run $170.00 per Pound. minimum order 1lb. 2mm (.079") replacement size for #9 Lead Shot run$112.10 per pound.
Sorry those prices are just Way to expensive to use a nose weight. I use Tungsten Bullet worm weights for Bass fishing but they are not only way to expensive to use for Mod-Roc Ballast they are also to large to use in anything Micro Maxx size. I guess one could use a single and grind off others to get close but man that is some tough material.

All that said; I'll stick with #9 & #12 Lead shot. Once mixed in epoxy it is no longer a environmental concern.

Lead shot also require a bit less to get the same CG shift by moving the mass further up in the nose. Yeap! when building micro models every 10th of a gram counts. If skidish about using lead there are always Steel/copper BB's, Much larger in diameter but also usable. Split shot fishing weights (still lead). and don't forget about good old modeling clay. Not very heavy but if you have the room it can be used.

One last thing: When building Micro Models. keep overall frontal area in mind as well as model mass. BT-5 really is the outside largest body/nose that should be flown on a single MMX-II, if Clustering 2-3 or more MMX-II's then we can get away with BT-20 and sometimes even BT-50 size rockets.
As with All rocketry overall mass and frontal area are the largest performance reducing factors to be considered.
As mentioned earlier if your looking for optimum size to performance you should look hard a T3(.375") and T4(.448") Body tube sizes. BT-5 should be a last choice.
I did an MMX BT-5 Sparrow AIM-7F, and while it looks great on the pad, it also looks about the same when it hovers for half a second about 25ft. off the pad.
I wish I'de put all that effort into either a true MMX scale AIM-7 or a 13mm. I even made the fins from just paper, but at something like 20g. it is just too heavy for what is available commercially for motors.
I removed the recovery gear to save a few grams, and when I get more motors, will see what it looks like as a nose-blow recovery model.
It is certainly stable though, as it is my only model that actually hovers.
I was too ashamed to share the video even though some might have thought it was cool.

She is pretty though:

Last edited:

#### TopRamen

##### SA-5
Did they happen to mention the approx. weight per bead? Trying to get an idea for per-bead cost
:lol:oint:

#### dhbarr

##### Amateur Professional
:lol:oint:
Worth a shot . I come up with 1.7mm^3 for a 1.5mm D sphere, less about .2mm^3 for the core; .03g for the bead.

About 15k beads per pound, or 1.3 cents per bead, probably 10c from a reseller. Anyone want to double check me?

#### Kruegon

##### Well-Known Member
My idea of starting at BT-5 is simply about getting used to detailed work on such a small level. Of course the idea is to ultimately build them in min diam versions or close to it.

I'll be ordering my first batch of parts in about a week. Maybe two. If I can find a scale drawing, I'm hoping to build a BT-3 PAC-3. I need to know the details if I'm going to build them to true scale.

#### Kruegon

##### Well-Known Member
I did an MMX BT-5 Sparrow AIM-7F, and while it looks great on the pad, it also looks about the same when it hovers for half a second about 25ft. off the pad.
I wish I'de put all that effort into either a true MMX scale AIM-7 or a 13mm. I even made the fins from just paper, but at something like 20g. it is just too heavy for what is available commercially for motors.
I removed the recovery gear to save a few grams, and when I get more motors, will see what it looks like as a nose-blow recovery model.
It is certainly stable though, as it is my only model that actually hovers.
I was too ashamed to share the video even though some might have thought it was cool.

She is pretty though:

View attachment 295047

Ok. How did you manage the beveled detail with paper fins? That would be very useful for some extremely detailed micro rocs. Especially for beginners.