What did you do rocket wise today?

The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Tried out designing and making a static 1/3 scale papercraft replica of a favorite model rocket, as a compact memento for the display shelf. Think I'll do several more.
View attachment 692357
Back in the late 70's, I made 8mm composite A & B motors that would power your model.
 

Attachments

  • 20250112_083529[1].jpg
    20250112_083529[1].jpg
    1.8 MB
Last edited:
Tried out designing and making a static 1/3 scale papercraft replica of a favorite model rocket, as a compact memento for the display shelf. Think I'll do several more.
View attachment 692357
Fun. Looks like you could fly it on MMX motors, if you chose to do so. For reference, the usual sort of BIC pen made these days seems to be just the right size for a minimum diameter body tube. I mean the ones with the somewhat more flexible tubes, usually, but not always, white. As opposed to the old, clear ones that could snap or shatter.
 
Back in the late 70's, I made 8mm composite A & B motors that would power your model.
With a B motor in that little thing, if the fins held up, bet it could get to a substantial fraction of the altitude that the original would reach on a D12-0/D12-7 combo!
Fun. Looks like you could fly it on MMX motors, if you chose to do so. For reference, the usual sort of BIC pen made these days seems to be just the right size for a minimum diameter body tube. I mean the ones with the somewhat more flexible tubes, usually, but not always, white. As opposed to the old, clear ones that could snap or shatter.
Yup, it being a 1/3 scale model of a 24mm motor rocket, a 6.5mm diameter MMX would fit in there... though it might be tight since, like on the original, fin attachment is through-the-wall. As for a model of an 18mm motor rocket, 1/3 scale would make that a smidge too small for MMX. But indeed these will just be static models, with the scale chosen because it's the smallest I could make it for display while still keeping the models an enjoyable size to build with decent fidelity.
That said, I couldn't resist one good hand toss "flight" across a carpeted room. It held up OK and of course flew quite stably. :)
 
You could get some MMX tubes and a nose cone, and just make an even smaller one that works. ASP rocketry and erockets sell MMX tubes, and a few others that I can't remember.
 
With a B motor in that little thing, if the fins held up, bet it could get to a substantial fraction of the altitude that the original would reach on a D12-0/D12-7 combo!
After motor burnout we never saw the rocket again unless something broke. I made some experimental 18x70mm 41 N*sec F motors for Estes in 1978. Vern was impressed with the static tests, but the paper flight tests all shred. The fiberglass rockets held together, but again we saw nothing of the flight until parachute deployment. All of the streamer recovery rockets were never seen or found. One rocket came in ballistic, and we heard the impact. We did see two of the parachute rockets deploy, but they drifted for miles and eventually we lost sight of them. Today, with GPS radio tracking they would be fun.
 
Assembled the Mottle Rocket from BnB.
View attachment 692549

Problem.
View attachment 692550

Launch rod does not clear the nose cone overhang.
Emailed BnB this morning, waiting for a response.
Laters.
It might not need more launch rod than that, I've seen bottle rockets that just need to be upright...in or against anything. I have never built one of this style rocket so am not familiar with them using TRA/NAR approved motors and recovery system.
 
Today I finished 3d printing some nose cone parts for my 4" mailing tube rocket. I printed the top part from TPU rubber filament, so that it won't break if it hits a rock, or lands wrong. I don't have the screws to put it together yet, but I will order some.
1000001149.jpg1000001148.jpg
 
I did the final step in building my new Bullet Bobby XXL, the external fin fillets. They were done in JB Weld like last time. This time they are not as thick as the original ones were, but will be just as strong, I believe.

Next up is either my LOC IV X2, new LOC EZI-65, new LOC Vulcanite, MAC Performance Arcas. Everyone who reads this, give me your opinion as to which I should build next.
I just bought a LOC EZI-65 I will recert level 1 with so it is my vote.
 
Yesterday was our club small field launch- Dallas Area Rocket Society in Arlington, TX. I flew 3 rockets and took 428 photos. Of those I got reasonable photos of 58 launches, most posted on the NAR facebook page. I estimated we had at least 90 launches, D impulse and below at that small field.

Here is John Palmer's completely scratch built Mercury Redstone.

DSC_3566b.jpg
 
Hi Folks;
I just finished this one, This is Steampunk, an all glass kit from One Bad Hawk. It is a 3" airframe, 54 mm mount, redundant dual recovery. Weighs in at 8 pounds, sans motor. The kit comes with the lettering pictured, the other markings are Sticker Shock of course. Mark also did the lettering for the kits. I'm getting backed up on rockets that haven't flown yet.
Jim
DSC00760.JPGDSC00756.JPGDSC00767.JPG
 
Hi Folks;
I just finished this one, This is Steampunk, an all glass kit from One Bad Hawk. It is a 3" airframe, 54 mm mount, redundant dual recovery. Weighs in at 8 pounds, sans motor. The kit comes with the lettering pictured, the other markings are Sticker Shock of course. Mark also did the lettering for the kits. I'm getting backed up on rockets that haven't flown yet.
Jim
View attachment 692639
Stunning!

Are the fins paint (and what technique if so) or more of Mark's graphics handiwork?
 
I hope this doesn't happen if the rocket actually flies but I recall an old adaged that the nicer the rocket looks, the more likely the paint job is going to get royally dinged up. That's why I tried to use big main chutes to drop the "nice" paint jobs down on the farm fields as soft as possible. If high-flying, was dual deploy. If 1000', o.k. I'd use as big as I could get away with and considered the walk good exercise.
 
Launch rod does not clear the nose cone overhang.
Emailed BnB this morning, waiting for a response.
BnB got back to me.
The top of the launch rod is supposed to rest under the lip of the nose cone.
Suggested that he put that info in the instructions.

And, I received the Der Red Max from Amazon.

Laters.
 
I hope this doesn't happen if the rocket actually flies but I recall an old adaged that the nicer the rocket looks, the more likely the paint job is going to get royally dinged up. That's why I tried to use big main chutes to drop the "nice" paint jobs down on the farm fields as soft as possible. If high-flying, was dual deploy. If 1000', o.k. I'd use as big as I could get away with and considered the walk good exercise.
It will fly and it well get beat up. The paint is automotive urethane over polyester primer surfacer with a 2K clear coat. Pretty durable but well shy of invincible. The main will deploy @ 1000', it will be a 48" CD 2.2 toroidal. It will be flown at the Kloudbusters field which is mostly fairly soft. The downside is that my rockets always get an errant transmission from NASA telling them to gather and return soil samples.
Jim
 
I received my McMaster/Carr order, so I can start rigging up some rockets! Pretty impressive next-day shipping. I put in an order at Wildman for some recovery items. It looks like my Mach1 Chimera 98 will be shipping in the next day or two.

2025 is looking good so far!
 
I received my McMaster/Carr order, so I can start rigging up some rockets! Pretty impressive next-day shipping. I put in an order at Wildman for some recovery items. It looks like my Mach1 Chimera 98 will be shipping in the next day or two.

2025 is looking good so far!
Same here!

Of course, McMaster-Carr ships from Atlanta, so it's a bit closer to me...
 
Back
Top