Square Rockets _ Newway Space Models

[KerryQuinn]

I picked up a square-tube rocket at NSL2009 this weekend from a company called Newway space models that just started producing these kits. They have 3 models out. I built the "4 Square" model. Went together easily. The kit includes color directions (which still need a little work). The kit also included sandpaper, a half-Q-tip for gluing,a fishing swivel for parachute attachment and water slide decals as well as square centering-"rings". The square tubes are VERY thick walled, and the overall rocket weight is pretty high (2.9 oz). The 4 Square is a "tube" fine rocket which uses square tube fins (and a square launch lug) and a solid-balsa-nose-pyramid. I saw a couple of these rockets launched at NSL 2009 and they seemed to be stable. One warning, the square tube stock is not only heavy, but also has a very "grooved" exterior in addition ot pronounced "spirals" that requires a combination of heavy fill and/or sanding to smooth out.

After I get a chance to fly this model, I'll post a formal review over in EMRR.

Kerry Quinn
FoxValleyRocketeers
Woodstock, IL

 

[BobCox]

I picked one up at NSL as well. I haven't even finished unpacking my car yet and you've already got yours assembled and painted. What did you do, build it in the car on the way home?

 

[Green Arrow]

And how come you didn't? :y:

 

[BobCox]

I don't have enough hands to do that. Sure, I could steer with my knees and build the rocket with two hands, but then I wouldn't be able to yap on my cell phone like everybody in the cars around me.

 

[Green Arrow]

yes you can! It's called blue tooth!

 

[powderburner]

It will be interesting to see how these BT materials stand up to use. Hopefully you will get at least ten (maybe 20?) launches out of the thing, if it has typical model rocket longevity, and you should be able to make an assessment of the BT strength along the way. Hopefully the square cross-section will not weaken from repeated ejection charge "abuse" but we will still be interested to hear back from you. Keep us posted?

 

[deandome]

I got the Mark 4 @NSL for $16...here are all the models & the company's website: https://www.newwayspacemodels.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=54&Itemid=1

The BT material is EXTREMELY strong...I mean like compared to Estes tubes, it's like phenolic vs. toilet paper tubes. He had it made for him, it's not repurposed from something else. And I dunno what you're talking about, as the 'charge abuse' (internal pressure) created by a properly-fitted balsa nose cone...even at speed....is non-existant.

My only gripe is the DIY, tie-yer-own plastic chute, but then again, I don't use plastic chutes even if they're pre-made. But the shock cord is Kevlar, so that makes up for it. Nice decals...laser-cut fins....good insructions (maybe even great), all in all, they're very well done kits.

He mentioned they would be doing mid-power versions soon (THEN we can start talking pressure/fatigue). I like what he's doing, but the skeptic in me has me thinking if people want/like square BTs, crafting them out of paper/balsa/basswood/even fiberglass would be a cinch for most hobbyists.

It will be interesting to see how these BT materials stand up to use. Hopefully you will get at least ten (maybe 20?) launches out of the thing, if it has typical model rocket longevity, and you should be able to make an assessment of the BT strength along the way. Hopefully the square cross-section will not weaken from repeated ejection charge "abuse" but we will still be interested to hear back from you. Keep us posted?

 

[KerryQuinn]

One thing I did not mention is that I noticed that the "tube fins" of the "4 Square" rocket fit inside the main body tube - sort of like a "coupler" - So this gives you the option of extending the square tubes, making payload sections, staged rockets, etc.

The square tube stock is VERY strong and stiff - but I think that it will be interesting to see what happens during the ejection charge - since you will be essentially pressurizing a square tube... and that is very different from pressurizing a round tube (!)

 

[GuyNoir]

Boy, that was FAST!

We expect you to bring the bird to the Fox Valley Rocketeers meeting next week! (hint, hint).

I picked up a "Mark 4" and hope to have it done in time for our June launch.

 

[AstronMike]

but I think that it will be interesting to see what happens during the ejection charge - since you will be essentially pressurizing a square tube... and that is very different from pressurizing a round tube (!)

Well, I fly a lot of square and triangular bodied gliders of different sizes, and make the ejection charges do differed tasks as well, such as ejecting pistons, burn strings, rear ejection, forward ejection, etc, and they all work just fine.

The only caveat, as with a round body tube, is to make sure your charge(s) are sufficient for pressurizing the internal volume you have, and to ensure that whatever you are trying to 'move' via the charge actually functions easily.

 

[EMRR]

After I get a chance to fly this model, I'll post a formal review over in EMRR.

Kerry Quinn
FoxValleyRocketeers
Woodstock, IL

Great... I just added them in my Vendors list (for the next update).

Some unique looking rockets.

 

[Huge Blues]

I like the Two By Four.

Must have one.

 

[KerryQuinn]

I flew the "4 Square" rocket from Newway Space models today.
I've submitted the review the EMRR, but thought I would list a couple highlights here as well.

The manufacturer recommends B4-4, B6-4 and C6-5.
I flew B6-4 and C6-5 (succesfully) and for fun I tried to eek out an A8-3 (unsuccesfully - no time for chute deploy before impact).

The manufacturer does not list an expected altitude. I ran WRASP simulations
and also flew one flight with an altimeter - I'll post those results elsewhere in this forum - in particular I was interested to see what the best drag coeff and "diameter" to use in the computer simulation to match the actual results.
(best: drag =0.9, diameter = 1.66" note: the tube is 1.375"x1.375" so 1.66" is half way between the 1.375" and the tube diagnal measurement).

The B and C flights were great - slow liftoffs (probably due to high drag of the tube fins). Deploys were all nose down, 1sec+ after apogee however. I think the best engine choice would actually be a C6-3 for this rocket (based on eyeball and WRASP simulation). My B6-4 flight was to 194 feet per altimeter. My C6-5 flight was to 452' per WRASP (seems about right)

This rocket is built like a tank - stiff/strong tubing and tons of bond area between the square tube fins and square body tube. My A8-3 impacted on a tube fin - it bent maybe 1/8" and I just bent it back and flew it again.

Note that I did scorch the parachute on the third flight - I was using 4 squares of QuEST blue wadding on these flights - it is hard to block the "corners" - this may be the main issue with this style of rocket.

 

[KerryQuinn]

I have logged a total of 9 flights so far on the "4 square" model.

Obeservations:

1) This rocket is built like a tank. I expect it to last indefinitely. No sign of problems from "pressurizing a square tube".

2) Mfg recommends B4-4, B6-4 and C6-5, but I recommend B6-2 and C6-3.

3) I gave up trying to block the square tube with wadding, and instead just wrap the chute and shroud lines in wadding (like a chute protector).

4) The unusual shape of this rocket attracts attention at launches.

-Kerry