Sub Minimum Diameter custom build. Estes F-15-6 engine. 29mm lower tube, 24 mm upper tube. ASP Rocketry 25-29 spacers/Engine block and Fin set. Transition was done with a filet of glue. 23 inches tall. Is Sub minimum diameter the right term?
A 29 mm to 25 mm transition... that's a pretty small glue fillet if you think about it. Wood glue would work fine.I'm interested to hear what glue that you used to form a transition?
Tite Bond wood glue. It took 3 layers to get that result. Best part is I used 29mm heavy duty tubes I had laying around for 12 years as an Engine tube. I almost threw those away 100 times.I'm interested to hear what glue that you used to form a transition?
Lots of detail in this thread,https://www.rocketryforum.com/threads/18-mm-motors.158722/ including making motors and trial and error testing.
According to your sim, there is a tube around the motor so this is not sub minimum.
Works for me. Do you have research access?Hmm.. the link you posted to the thread doesn't seem to work.
Tripoli. These are research motors. How else can I get an 18 mm, 80 N-s motor I made the motors. Just a good way to fly them. With a pad weight just over 4 oz, no waiver neededSo is this "The" definition of sub-minimum, or "Your" definition of sub-minimum? I've searched... and can't find the definition?
Doesn't attaching fins and body tubes onto a motor violate NAR rule #2? Or is this being built in accordance to a different code, like HPR?
2. Motors. I will use only certified, commercially-made model rocket motors, and will not tamper with these motors or use them for any purposes except those recommended by the manufacturer.
Does the manufacturer endorse using the motor as the airframe.. and is it capable of handling the loads applied to it?
Additionally... I guess I don't understand all the work for a rocket that will only fly once?
Works for me. Do you have research access?
Additionally... I guess I don't understand all the work for a rocket that will only fly once?
Better to have Launched and Lost, than to have never Launched at all.
Better to have Launched and Lost, than to have never Launched at all.
Don't you enjoy building and flying rockets?
Go Bears..Well I'm glad you figured out what you like. I hope to recover every rocket, and always want a straight and stable flight. If all I ever did was launch low flyng A engine rockets for fear of losing them I wouldn't even bother with Model Rockets. . I launched 3 rockets already this weekend. One fell in water, recovered, ruined, rebuilt using some of the parts, and is getting launched as a test rocket today, less than a 24 hour turn around with paint. One rocket was the best flight and video I ever had, one got lost in the clouds. I think I had a lot of fun, maybe I was wrong. I'm going out shortly to send up 4 more including 2 Estes Generic E2X my co-workers kids decorated. It will be their first launch and the fact they decorated them has them extra excited. I may send up a 5th E-Engined rocket if the skies are clear, and I hope to retrieve it. I'm not rich but the expense isn't even an issue, I spent more on drinks and snacks at the Cubs home opener game at Wrigley Field than the last 10 rockets I've launched. I enjoy every flight, every time, and never regret a launch. I hope I never get too serious or limited in Model Rocketry, it's too much fun. Good luck, may all your launches be stable, no Cato's, and succesfully recovered.
So is this "The" definition of sub-minimum, or "Your" definition of sub-minimum?
Enter your email address to join: