Rouse-Tech Releases Tail Cone Closures

[Newsbot]

San Jose, CA - Rouse-Tech is pleased to announce the availability of our new Monster Motors 38mm, 54mm and 75mm tailcone rear closures. The new closures are 100% compatible with all AeroTech-compatible hardware. "Our customers have been asking for hardware to help them maximize altitude, so...

More...

 

[tfish]

Tony likes this....

 

[Aksrockets]

Great! I wonder what the prices will be...
Any vendors have these in stock?

Alex

 

[crossfire]

I was wondering where I can by them? I don't see them listed on Rouse Tech web site.
gp

 

[dixontj93060]

Sweeetttt!!!!

 

[MarkII]

What everyone else said, and then some! Really interested in these items.

 

[fyrwrxz]

Just when you thot you didn't need anything else...some smart a$$ comes up with ANOTHER "ohhh,can't live without that" thing! And I'll need another case for that too. And a rocket to put it in. Maybe an altimeter. Shockwave nose cone? Better shoes for recovery. And a bigger car to get all that to the launch. "See honey? Isn't that cool? And it's only $15,000..."

 

[JStitz]

Now..now fyrwrxz, they work on your Aerotech casings.
Am I the only one that slapped his head for not seeing this design before?

 

[jpummil]

I asked Tom Rouse about RT possibly making these a few months ago. He replied back that he was working on it and sent a couple 3D CAD files. I didn't feel at liberty to post them at the time, but yes sweet is right.

Maybe just a length and a minor diameter for each so we can start toying with sims in OR or Rocsim? :gavel:

 

[Worsaer]

I really like the concept, but I don't understand how they work with motor retainer systems.... Can someone fill in the blanks for me?

 

[JStitz]

I'm not a Nosecone/Tailcone expert but... I figured these were for just off a 38mm-54mm-75mm airframe.
These will look funny loaded into your already tail-coned rocket.
I'm still not sure how these are retained.

 

[dixontj93060]

I really like the concept, but I don't understand how they work with motor retainer systems.... Can someone fill in the blanks for me?

The application is for high altitude (or high velocity) flights in minimum diameter airframes. In those applications some combination of friction fit and/or internal bulkhead retention is used.

 

[Wayco]

I really like the concept, but I don't understand how they work with motor retainer systems.... Can someone fill in the blanks for me?

Looks to me like it IS the rear closure, thread it on over the nozzle and it's done. Will have to build a rocket around this tailcone. This would be a perfect match for that new screw on internal motor retention that Aero Pac makes:
https://www.aeropack.net/min_dia_retainers.asp
Anybody found a dealer with these in stock yet?

 

[new2hpr]

Now the next question is:

Is the OD of the taper equal to common airframe OD (for best airflow), or motor casing OD (to fit internally on those staging with the motor as coupler)?

Inquiring minds want to know.
-Ken

 

[Felix]

Do anyone know if the 54mm tailcone closure is compatible to loads that use the smaller nozzle (like the J99 Warp Nine longburn)?
I fear not, as these normaly require the small nozzle aft closure...

regards,
Felix

 

[Felix]

Bummer, the J99 would have been sweet with the tailcone closure... Maybe someday with some kind of adapter-ring.

Thanks for the comparison Mark!

best regards,
Felix

 

[Rocketjunkie]

Bummer, the J99 would have been sweet with the tailcone closure... Maybe someday with some kind of adapter-ring.

J99's have been discontinued. Cato issues.

 

[beezwax]

Thought I would update this thread for any others like me who have been hoping/waiting for the 38mm tailcone closure to be reissued. I contacted the folks at Rouse-Tech and unfortunately they said they are NOT planning to redesign or re-attempt certification for the 38mm closure.

On a related note, What's Up Hobbies actually does have some of the first batch 38mm tailcone closures in-stock and for sale. Obviously since they failed certification you may be prevented from using them at any sanctioned club launch and probably would not be covered by any of the national liability insurance should something go wrong. But if you're involved in research launches or experimental motors you may want to snap one up while you can. Turning out a slightly longer nozzle might be all it takes to negate any "Krushnic Effect" if that is in fact what caused them to fail.