Why Aren't Their Any RTF/ARTF Mid-Power Rockets?

[deandome]

I've been active in RC vehicles (nitro Monster Truck & a mini-electric truck) for about 4 years. As many of you might know, RC vehicles and planes (particularly park flyers) have REALLY been getting popular in the last decade. I'm talking a MASSIVE influx of new hobbyists...ask any hobby store owner if you haven't seen this for yourself.

The reason for this is/was the emergence of RTR (ready-to-run) and RTF (ready-to-fly) product offerings (ARTR & ARTF too..the 'a' standing for "ALMOST"...the vehicle/planes all put together, but they let you choose the motor and/or electronics). I mean, Traxxas (who makes the T-Maxx truck I have) went from being NOBODY 10 years ago to being THE largest seller of radio control vehicles...simply by being the first to offer top-quality RTRs when everyone else was selling bare-bones (no radio/motors/engines) kits. Soon, those kit-firms (Kyosho/Tamiya/Losi/Associated) jumped into RTRs as well, and the hobby is still exploding because of it.

In rocketry, Estes has indeed jumped on this bandwagon & sells several pre-made/pre-finished rockets...several packaged along w/launch systems. I don't know the numbers, but I'm guessing they've been VERY successful, particularly in bringing new hobbyists that had been put off with the idea of buliding a kit. Many people live in condos/apts...they can't easlily whip out spray paints for decorating....they don't want to hassle with fin attachment. They just want to be able to go to the park w/their kids and launch some rockets.

THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT!!

Please don't reflexively say that in mid-power, you don't want such technically/creatively-challenged people in your hobby (god knows there are still 'kit-snobs' in RC!!)!! I would think & hope that we all want this hobby to GROW & our favorite mfgs. & vendors to flourish, and the best way to do that, obviously, is to bring more people into the fold.

To do that, you can sit back & let people trickle in as they already are, OR, you can learn from the amazing success other hobbies are enjoying and try to bring in deep-pocketed people who are too busy and/or too inept to build a kit (and honestly, I think it's the priming/sanding/painting that puts people off more than the assembly itself).

Yes, there might be some concern about safety...if they can't build a kit, how can we trust them to do reloads & follow launch safety guidelines? But just like me, many/most of them will seek out others for help & advice. After all, we'd be talking $250-350 for a RTF AT Initiator starter set...people don't spend that kinda cash & then go out & launch in a baseball field surrounded by trees & houses!!

GARY...has AT looked into this? You'd obviously be the most likely well-positioned to do this. I'd imagine an Initiator that's assembled and PAINTED...all you'd need do is perhaps join 2 body tubes (a true RTF would be a packaging/shipping nightmare!!) and throw on a chute.

SOMEBODY should give this a try!! It's revolutionized the RC world...probby did a world of good for Estes, ergo, the first one to do it in mid-power WILL enjoy great success.

Dean

 

[TeenRocketNerd]

I would speculate that their are no RTF mid power, b/c many people would probly feel unsafe having every tom, dick, and harry that likes rockets, but doesn't understand the fundamentals of it, having models that large, and using motors that are that much more powerful... Also, I would say that by the time you are ready for mid-power, you are probly into some reloads...which can be dangerous if you've never done it before, and don't do it properly...So, if you have people that don't even know how to build mpr's, or are too lazy to do so, I shutter to think about these same people, and reloads (because SU's get to be pricey in mpr) I. personally wouldn't feel right shelling out $35-50 for a kit that all I had to do was put a motor in, pack a chute in, and watch... That's just my two cents...

 

[MarkM]

I agree and have a few other things. First, I think it might be more difficult and certainly pricier for a company to offer RTF mid-power rockets. I'm not sure if the quality/durability/strength of a 'machine built' mpr would be up to snuff and if so, considerably more than the current $30-$50 for kits. People might not be willing to pay that extra money. Besides, I think one of the main reasons is that most people that get into mpr (and hpr) is not just for the launching, but for the enjoyment and satisfaction of the build. To watch a rocket that you assembled by hand (although the parts may have been all precut and laid out) blast off the pad under the power of a big motor is very satisfying. So combining these two presumptions there might not be a RTF mpr market large enough for manufacturers to make it worth their effort or, more importantly, their investment to offer RTF mid-power rockets.

Originally posted by TeenRocketNerd
I would speculate that their are no RTF mid power, b/c many people would probly feel unsafe having every tom, dick, and harry that likes rockets, but doesn't understand the fundamentals of it, having models that large, and using motors that are that much more powerful... Also, I would say that by the time you are ready for mid-power, you are probly into some reloads...which can be dangerous if you've never done it before, and don't do it properly...So, if you have people that don't even know how to build mpr's, or are too lazy to do so, I shutter to think about these same people, and reloads (because SU's get to be pricey in mpr) I. personally wouldn't feel right shelling out $35-50 for a kit that all I had to do was put a motor in, pack a chute in, and watch... That's just my two cents...

 

[deandome]

Besides, I think one of the main reasons is that most people that get into mpr (and hpr) is not just for the launching, but for the enjoyment and satisfaction of the build.

Yes...that's a large part of the reason people who DO join the hobby do so. But I'm talking about getting the people who shy away for that same reason!

People said the same thing about the RC stuff..painting your own bodies lets you express yourself...laying out stringers & ribs is better & more satisfying than buying foam wings. "We don't want fly-by-night newbies messing up our hobby".

But the reality proved to be that once they got in...they GOT IN!!! They learned how to tune a nitro engine...they learned the rules & courtesies demanded in group surroundings...they join the clubs...they start buying & painting bodies and building kits.

The vast majority of RTR/RTF buyers quickly turn into REAL hobbyists, and in doing so, they're creating monster growth...literally creating new companies and driving existing ones (my god, the number of companies who sprouted up solely to make Traxxas accessories & 'hop-ups' is mind-boggling!!).

The premium on a RTF mid-power would probby be $30-50 over a kit. Would people her in TRF buy them? NO!!! But would the well-heeled papa see an initiator RTF starter set at his LHS & think his son would go ape at X-Mas? YES!!

That's my point...to bring new people in, figuring 90% of them will get sucked into the whole scene & the other 10% will just launch a few times then put it on the shelf. Hull...Aerotech's Fin'Lock system makes their kits ALMOST ARTF already!! Like I said, if they were painted & decorated, that alone would push them to the point I'm talkin' about.

The one concern I do see, business-wise, is that it'd be hard to find/use U.S. LABOR to build them. In RC, everything's done in Asia (mostly China)..not just because of the cheap labor, but that's also where most of the stuff is manufactured. In mid-power, I THINK most stuff, is made in the US (does AT get their plastic parts from asia??). So it'd be hard for, say, Giant Leap to make a RTF Talon 2 that would cost less then $160 unless they ship them back 'n forth to asia/mexico/etc.

Still 'n all, AT is kinda like the Estes of mid-power, so they could probby expect the same level of success Estes has had with their RTF stuff...and I'm guessing AT KNOWS exactly how well they've done (or not) & could figure if it'd be profitable or not (And I KNOW they must have looked into this already!!!!).

 

[Batman]

My guess is it is simply the logistics of package and shipping them safely. RTF cars and trucks can still be packaged fairly efficiently, and the packaging seems like a relatively small farction of the total cost. Since rockets are so much cheaper for a comparably sized one, the addtional costs would probably be far more lopsided. Just my guess.

Personally, I would never trust a rocket that I didn't build myself. One of my favorite aspects of rocketry is the freedom there is to "do it your own way". I have never built any rocket since my estes days that was truly stock and by the directions. I'm not sure my changes always make them better, but they make them my own.

 

[strudleman]

My feeling is this: Mid-Power rocketry is the 'next step'. I don't think we should encourage newcomers to skip over the first step (for the reasons already listed in this thread). Buy an Estes RTF and catch the rocketry bug that way. If you want to increase activity in mid-power, then the mid-power companies need to do something about this. I never see AT kits at the hobby shop. Or LOC, or anyone but Estes and Quest. I was a BAR for a solid year before evening HEARING about MPR and HPR. There's just no marketing out there.

 

[Countdown Hobbies]

Mid Power ARF's are not only possible but on the minds of people who make MPR kits...

 

[deandome]

Originally posted by Countdown Hobbies
Mid Power ARF's are not only possible but on the minds of people who make MPR kits...

THANKS!!!

It seemed like I was peeing into the wind there for a while!

It's not rocket science (that NEVER gets old here, does it? ) ...mfgs can keep doing what they're doing & sales will stay level (hopefully). Or then can explore new niches & look for new markets/customers and GROW!!! Lionel came out with their Fastrack track (snap together plastic track base...allows you to put up a layout on carpet/tear it apart/rebuild/etc...and the purists scoffed "building your permanent layout with real track is half the fun". Now, you're hard pressed to find a Lionel starter kit w/standard track.

Again, Traxxas became THE market-share leader....(from non-existance in about 5 years!!) by pioneering high-performance RTRs. Do purists scoff at them? ABSOLUTELY!! They don't care...they're too busy outselling their competitors 2-3:1 to the point where they now own/sponsor a REAL monster truck team in the Monster Jam series!! https://www.t-maxx.com/tmaxxmt/tmaxxmt_truck.htm

 

[MarkM]

Originally posted by strudleman
My feeling is this: Mid-Power rocketry is the 'next step'. I don't think we should encourage newcomers to skip over the first step (for the reasons already listed in this thread). Buy an Estes RTF and catch the rocketry bug that way. If you want to increase activity in mid-power, then the mid-power companies need to do something about this. I never see AT kits at the hobby shop. Or LOC, or anyone but Estes and Quest. I was a BAR for a solid year before evening HEARING about MPR and HPR. There's just no marketing out there.

My thoughts exactly.

Deandome: You're comparing RTR RC's to ARF rockets. IMO, that's comparing apples to oranges with regards to safety issues. While MPR's may not be in themselves be very dangerous in the wrong and inexperienced hands of a true beginner who knows zero about the hobby (and never flown even a ARF low power rocket) a lot of inherent dangers can creep into a launch. By contrast, these same 'dangers' are virtually non-existant in RC cars. Granted, even the most experienced rocketeer has his problems and can pose a danger (that's why we have the safety regs to minimize the effects), but that danger-factor is multiplied several fold with a inexperienced/ uneducated (in rocketry) flier. It's just an opinon, but I wouldn't trust the average Joe walking in off the street, buying a mpr RTF kit for his kid's B-day and putting it the air just because he thinks it will be cool without knowing anything about what he's getting into. Low power is a completely different story. Perhaps I'm wrong, but I think someone just getting into mpr who has to assemble the kit themselves will often (though certainly not always) look/ask for help on methods for the best success on his construction; just look at all the questons we get from rocketeers transitioning from LPR to MPR or HPR. In this instance, the safety issue is minimized more so than for an ARF.

 

[roadkill]

What I find mostly rewarding in the fields of rocketry is scratch building, how first

Having a vague idea blossom into a concept of a beautiful flying machine...
Then the mental challenge to figure out, plot and plan, backtrack and deviate until the goal of how to build what was a mere glimpse of imagination, softly backlit and just so gently fogged...
The skills of hand, glimpse in the eye, all the tools and materials, technique, next enters the dance of creation....
...Until on a brilliant column of fire, she finally breaks her chains with mother Earth for a flash of freedom in the sky....
Oh, the joy !

Still,
Methinks the RTF's would be a good thing for the hobby in general, to each her (or his) own, I suppose...

Happy St.Patricks Day to all !

 

[deandome]

Sorry, I disagree...

Construction expertise and finishing prowess does NOTHING to help you be more safety conscious, indeed putting a kit together really doesn't even help you understand rocketry fundementals in the slightest!! You're just following steps in a manual, there's no "the cord is attached to the motor tube because it prevents tube 'zippering' that may occur if your delay is wrong" tips, or anything like that. If there were dozens of moving parts, like in a RC car/plane, you could in fact glean some "so THIS is why this is done this way" insights, but in rocketry, it's just putting pieces together!!

Puting together a MPR is no different than putting together an Estes kit (actually, those are much HARDER, IMO...slotted tubes make fin allignment a breeze in comparison to LPRs!!). So if they've done well at attracting new hobbyists w/RTFs, what's the big deal w/extrapolating them to MPRs?? PLEASE don't say "they're more dangerous"....that's debatable. There's not that much difference between an E and F/G, "boom-wise", and I'd think that improperly attached fins would be more common in LP & you'd get all sorts of dangerous flyaways when they fall off.

And it's insulting to say that just because you choose to go RTF that means you're gonna be reckless & try to light your motor w/a Bic lighter!!! In fact, I'd think convenience-minded newbies would be MORE careful than people who think they know what they're doing (but really don't!).


Come to think of it, RTFs will most certainly be much MORE safe...for the user AND for those around him!! Think about it...you KNOW that the RTF will fly perfectly; the fins & guides are perfectly alligned/attached, etc. Barring me setting the rod at a 45 deg. angle (and figuring I'm probby starting w/single-use motors), there's ZERO danger (and of course, you'll stop & HELP me if something looks off, launch-safety wise) When I go to my first launch w/my Strong Arm & Talon 2, howthehull do you know if I properly engaged all the Fin Locks? If I used enough epoxy on my Talon 2 fins? If I put in a vent hole so I don't lawn-dart into your skull?

The fact that you don't have a workbench, tons 'o building supplies and the desire to glue pieces together & spend HOURS/days priming/sanding/painting/masking should NOT be a hurdle that prevents people from enjoying this hobby!!! The people who could afford a RTF starter set ain't gonna be idiots..they have lots of disposable income & got it by being smart (most of 'em!). The building process doesn't do squat to make someone be safe & careful when it comes to usage...please don't draw the conclusion that it does!! Again, they may START with an RTF, but once they're sucked in, you KNOW their next purchase will be a kit!!

 

[trogdor]

I don't think an MPR rocket in the hands of a total noob is any more dangerous than a 40 size plug-and-play plane would be, yet those planes are selling right now. I just think it comes down to money.

There's 10 (or 50 or more?) times as many RC people as rocket people and with a moderate size Aerotech KIT costing 100 bucks or thereabouts and basically being a couple tubes and a few pieces of plastic and some nylon I just don't see a market for the 200 dollar finished MPR ARF. Just not enough volume to bring the price down to compare with todays Chinese made planes.

Also, building a rocket kit is NO comparison to building an RC plane. The plane could take weeks and almost all rockets could be built easily in a weekend with a couple days to mask and paint.

Just my opinion.

 

[Pat Butler]

I think it has more to do with the marketplace. Most people interested in mid-power are probably coming up from low power kits. They're more likely to want to build their own kit. Those sorts of people form the bulk of the buying public for mid-power kits. Granted, some people would like to jump right into mid-power, but I think they are in the minority and would result in very few sales of such kits.

 

[Chilly]

I know almost nothing about the R/C hobby, other than I'm very interested in getting started just to combine it with HPR for boost gliders.

I'm familiar with some of the more elaborate R/C models that use miniature gas-turbine engines. Is it fair to say that's a comparable leap in difficulty and skill to MPR/HPR? Is there a certain point (size, speed, T/W ratio) that it would be unsafe or uneconomical to have a ready-to-fly R/C airplane? If so, I'd think F and G motors could be a similar threshold in rocketry. Certainly H and above, without question.

 

[trogdor]

whoa, to approach the complexity of the non-trainer turbine model, I think you'd need a clustered, level 3 multistage rocket with dual deployment, tracking and video cameras!

Here's a neat video:

https://www.teamrcpilot.com/vids/jetcrash.mpg

I do think the true MPR F and G motor model is where they should go but still, not enough of a market I think. and to sand and spray paint?! The planes at least have iron on covering that a skilled person could do rather quickly, but waiting for paint and all that for the perfect finish the fillets etc... the planes use hot glue thats quick... just too much time to be cheap enough.

 

[AlexM]

I don't see why there wouldn't be a market for this kind of thing. A lot of people just go in and spend 300-400 dollars on their first R/C setup, instead of working their way up with a little park flier first. I think these kind of people would not hesitate for a 200 dollar MPR ARF kit. No one knows the market, because nothing like this has ever been on the market (Excluding the Initiator Starter Set, which isn't ARF), or at least anytime recently.

I also agree that there is a lot more potential for damage with a .40 or so trainer aircraft than any MPR rocket. Most people who spend that kind of money on a setup are not going to go out and try shootin' it at fences... they bought it to launch. How often do you see some guys outside crashing their expensive R/C planes into the ground?

Also notice the lack of legislation on the R/C hobbyists. Part of it is because there is less perceived danger, but most of it is because the sheer size of the hobby and the number of people doing it.

Just because we enjoy the building part of rocketry does not mean that everyone does, once again proven by the numbers of RTF/ARF planes sold every year. Some people just enjoy the smoke and fire.

www.rcuniverse.com has over 233,000 members right now, all because of the people that bought R/C Airplanes/Boats/Cars etc. In my opinion, this shows that people are actually interested in learning a tad more about something before they go play around with a couple hundred dollars.

I believe that a MPR ARF starter set would sell, and would cause a boom in this hobby the same way that R/C ARF kits caused a boom in that industry.

 

[deandome]

AT rockets wouldn't need fillets (they don't now!!), nor, I believe, paint!! They could get the fins & nosecones in colored plastic & use a Monokote-type wrap insted of body paint. I believe the Estes RTFs are like that.

Cool video...is that indeed a turbine engined plane (rather than a ducted fan)? It looks kinda small for a turbine, but I guess they are making 'em smaller. Still, the engines alone go for about $1500 and up..definitely not for the faint of heart, and DEFINITELY not RTF friendly!!

But honestly, skill level isn't nearly as much as a factor in rocket FLYING/LAUNCHING and/or RC cars as it is in planes. Hull, I could buy a Level 3 rocket & launch it safely & successfully right now!! And if I did, I'd think you'd prefer it was a new PML RTF one rather than built by me!!

I'm GUESSING Aerotech will offer a RTF rocket/starter set within the year. Will it revolutionze the hobby? Hopefully, if not, well...it ain't that big an investment for them as opposed to, say, LOC/PML/GIantLeap, where the parts are now pretty much handmade/hand-fabricated. AT has the molded fin/part expertise down, and they've engineered the kits to be super-easy to assemble...that's a huge built-in advantage!!

 

[Fore Check]

Without necessary picking a "side of the fence" to be on in this issue -

I certainly hope that whoever does take the step of offering a RTF MPR rocket would offer a wonderfully *stable* design. Estes has offered in the past, and continues to offer, a few RTF models that are either not stable or marginally stable at best. They are simply horrible rockets. If you took similar flight events and scaled them up to be under, say F or G impulse, you have a dangerous situation on your hands.

 

[wwattles]

I'm going to chime in on this one with the angle of legality. LPR rockets can be launched in many localities without notifications, clearances, etc, and nobody gets hurt. Many cities/counties say otherwise, and require paperwork in advance.

The problem comes in when you have the aforementioned inexperienced newbie who takes his new toy, walks down to the local park, and fires the thing off, without ever bothering to look at any of the safety instructions in the pamphlet that comes with the rocket. Instructions? Who needs those? It's a RTF, right? Screw the darn instructions, I'm gonna fly this thing!

Here in California, I'd venture to say that we probably have at least a dozen grass fires every year started by said newbies who are only using LPR sets and Estes motors, but didn't bother to read the safety guidelines. Heck, I knew a guy at my last job who did just that, by launching with his grandkids and not reading the directions.

How much more dangerous will it be for someone to go and buy a MPR, with a lot more "knockdown power" who decides to go buy one or two of these, and launches it in a very dangerous manner?

What happens when people start going out and launching MPR at their local parks and aren't following the safety rules, and people start getting hurt, property starts getting damaged, and the FAA starts getting PIREPs from aircraft that are being aimed at by some jerk with a toy MPR?

Some things to think about.

WW

 

[Countdown Hobbies]

A "RTF" rocket would be a bad idea... but an "ARF" would be a good one... this way those who like flying more than building (yes they do exist, and yes thats ok) could have something that fits them better. Its just a matter of expanding your customer base...

An ARF that doesnt need paint and minor assembly would be great and get more people into MPR... it would be even better to put reccomended AT SU and RMS motors on the packaging... really help them through the proccess....

I think it would work...

 

[AlexM]

Yes, but generally, people that spend that much are going to at least glance at the instructions. The rocket does need to be designed as to not require a notification. With the issue of grass fires, a MPR rocket isn't gonna make a bigger fire that a Estes RTF model, especially with an appropriately designed blast deflector.

As for property damage, I believe this would be as much, if not more of an issue with R/C. I know at least three people who have crashed their R/C planes into some building, and that is gonna cause a lot more damage than a MPR rocket.

Originally posted by wwattles
I'm going to chime in on this one with the angle of legality. LPR rockets can be launched in many localities without notifications, clearances, etc, and nobody gets hurt. Many cities/counties say otherwise, and require paperwork in advance.

The problem comes in when you have the aforementioned inexperienced newbie who takes his new toy, walks down to the local park, and fires the thing off, without ever bothering to look at any of the safety instructions in the pamphlet that comes with the rocket. Instructions? Who needs those? It's a RTF, right? Screw the darn instructions, I'm gonna fly this thing!

Here in California, I'd venture to say that we probably have at least a dozen grass fires every year started by said newbies who are only using LPR sets and Estes motors, but didn't bother to read the safety guidelines. Heck, I knew a guy at my last job who did just that, by launching with his grandkids and not reading the directions.

How much more dangerous will it be for someone to go and buy a MPR, with a lot more "knockdown power" who decides to go buy one or two of these, and launches it in a very dangerous manner?

What happens when people start going out and launching MPR at their local parks and aren't following the safety rules, and people start getting hurt, property starts getting damaged, and the FAA starts getting PIREPs from aircraft that are being aimed at by some jerk with a toy MPR?

Some things to think about.

WW

 

[cjl]

I would argue that a MPR can do more damage than a RC.

Think of it this way. A FAST RC is 100-120mph (RTF)
A SLOW MPR is at least 200mph, a fast one is 500mph.


Energy goes up proportional to V^2

 

[Countdown Hobbies]

possible damage has nothing to do with it... you can drown in 1" of water... should we stop pools from being made...??? People can cause problems with any size rocket and it might actually be more dangerous if this person that doesnt like to build tried and makes and unsafe and dangerous rocket... at least this way the rocket itself will be safe...

 

[AlexM]

Yes, but if a rocket comes down on a roof, it will probably just crumple the rocket. If a metal engine runs into a roof at 100 miles per hour, it is gonna do a lot more damage. Sure the energy goes up, but the rocket parts are not going to be as strong as a well made building. And since it is a kit, stability problems will be minimal.

Originally posted by cjl
I would argue that a MPR can do more damage than a RC.

Think of it this way. A FAST RC is 100-120mph (RTF)
A SLOW MPR is at least 200mph, a fast one is 500mph.


Energy goes up proportional to V^2

 

[Chilly]

I think it comes down to an entirely different approach to the R/C hobby and rocketry.

If RTF R/C planes are that popular, it's fair to say that most of the enjoyment of that hobby comes from flying, and the personal control of the vehicle.

Mid and high-power rocketry is much more about building. Let's face it, unless you're into R/C glide recovery there is ZERO personal involvement in the flight. Once you've built the rocket, loaded the chute, prepped the motor, loaded it on the pad, and armed the electronics, once the button is pushed that's it. You're done. Sit back, cross your fingers, and watch. The real purpose of the hobby is in the design, build, and preparation. The launch may be the most fun for many, but it's just the icing on the cake and validation of all your work.

 

[agrippo]

I'm not sure if the Giant Leap "Thunderbolt 38" would be considered mid power but it is advertised as an ARF. I have this rocket and I built it in one evening and prepped and painted it the next day.

I've flown it on some pretty small 29mm "H" motors so maybe it would be considered mid power.

Check it out: https://www.giantleaprocketry.com/ click on products at the top of the page then kits on the left and then click on the ARF link provided.

They offer some other ARF kits as well such as the Firestorm 54 which I also have.

Just for the record I love both rockets. They are well built and fly great.

Andrew Grippo

 

[Stymye]

I don't see the comparison between a rtf rc/car or plane, and a rocket
how would you manufacture a rocket to utilise prefinished and replaceable parts, would the fins attach with screws?would the motormount screw into place?
most rtf's aircraft are foam or plastic premolded and prefinished .can you design a midpower rocket from prefinished plastic moldings of tubes that is simply completed by screwing or rubberbanding it together?

the typical materials and techniques in midpower rocket are completely different than whats in an rc truck..RC trucks have painted bodys and anodised components. carbonfiber and aluminum that can be screwed together and often easily up-graded with parts and motors from a plethora of aftermarket companys.If little Johnny breaks a wing on his first rtf plane ,most likely dad can simply buy a replacement wing ,prefinished , and have it flying again in no time.

it's not that easy, I'd like to see rtf midpower rockets but that would be a heck of an investment and gamble.

 

[jimn]

From what I have observed:

Most people don't know that MPR/HPR even exists. They are unlikly to see a launch, because they are held out in the boonies for safty reasons. RC is popular, at least in part, because it is popular. That is, people see other people doing RC, or see models at the hobby store and they want to get into it too.

Rocketry is seen by many people as a kids activity. They flew "toy" rockets way back when, but then moved on to other activities. They are surprised that adults are out there flying.

It is also very confusing, at least at the start. You have to know that X rocket takes a Y reload that needs a Z casing etc. Probably more than some people want to deal with.

It is not an activity for everyone. There is a lot of preperation for a flight that does not last very long. There is a fair chance that something will go wrong with a flight and the rocket lost or damaged. Not everyone is willing to put up with this.

Jim

 

[Rock_It]

.

 

[Stymye]

I think It's true most people have no idea about rocketry basics let alone midpower rockets.

The first question that most of my co-workers have asked is if the rockets can be used more than once.?!