This must mean that they are still making the kits and the new version has all the needed clay and clear instructions.
Anyone bought the new version yet?
-Fred Shecter NAR 20117
I saw one last weekend. I told the owner to add yet more clay.
He was very proud to be an SS1 owner.
And this was based on what?
Did you actually see some fly that had already had more clay added? Is this a necessary modification? If so, did you contact Estes (as Fred did the first time through) to let them know about the stability problems?
David Erbas-White
2 was bad. 4 is the "upgrade". 6 makes the rocket "more stable".
I happen to like "dynamically stable" rockets.
No.
No.
No.
This is one of those kits smart collectors will hoard. ESPECIALLY the now "old" Version 1.0.
Jerry
One was flown at the NIRA launch this weekend, but I didn't see the flight. Don't know if it was old or new.
I bought a couple at the last HL 40% off sale, but haven't opened one to see if it's 2 or 4 pats.
How many pats did the real SSO have?
Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD!
Two.
Ohhhhh! A horder!
Randy
I represent, uh, I mean I resent that remark! :-)
John
Bravo? If Estes had tested their product a bit better, then there would not have been a stability problem in the first place. Seems simple to me.
Probably but I'm glad they are at least trying to raise the bar a little lately with the new line of X prise kits.
You'd think with all the companies out there now that are trying to compete with Estes, some of them would come up with at least the base line of the NASA, Russian and European rockets. Titan, Redstone, Atlas, Gemini & Saturn, Sputnik, Vostok, Proton, Soyuz, Diamant, Ariane.
Anyone here ever seen the G-I-E Super Booster? Find it on the internet and give it a look. THAT would be some kind of awesome kit!
Randy
There are already more than a few companies catering to that market. (A market, which includes *me*, "big time"). I don't really consider it a matter of "competing" with Estes...as Estes seems totally uninterested in scale/historical kits. They seem to be concentrating on the pre-fab, plasticized, no-building-skills-required, non-historical market...directed towards today's pre-fab, plasticized, no-building-skills-having-nor-desiring, non-historically-interested kids.
:o)
I saw on fly this past Sunday that had the two pats. It did a nice big bellyflop from about 20 feet, but it looked good on the pad before the flight. I've got one ready to go and I guarantee that I'll overdo it on the clay, just based on what I saw on Sunday.
I've seen several flights go just as you described. I'd think doubling the weight from 2 to 4 pats would be more than sufficient to correct the problem. I have not built or flown one myself but when I started doing my own designs from scratch, I learned early on that a marginally stable rocket can fly perfectly stable on an A but go totally crazy on a C and that's what it sounds like to me. It's marginal on minimum power and not stable with more thrust.
Randy
More power in a fixed volume means more weight. Tail weight. Did it stabilize in mid-flight too?
Jerry
More thurst does not make it unstable.
More weight in the aft end from the heavier C motor will move the center of gravity aft. The C.G. needs to be in front of the cneter of pressure for stable flight.
You can either add nose weight or add tail fins (or make the rocket longer).
For the Estes SS1, 4 butter pats of clay is perfect for safe and stable flight using a C motor.
-Fred Shecter NAR 20117
Correct. I didn't say what I meant to say very well.
What I should have said was going from an A engine to a C, in an effort to get the most thrust possible, you could have a stable A flight but a crazy C flight, because you would automatically add more weight. In a short stubby rocket that's usually a problem without some mods. And the extra thrust of a C engine would make the unstable flight even worse.
And yes, we've probably all seen rockets that fish tailed off the rod but stabilized and had decent flights as the bp was exhausted. A little scary at first but turned out ok.
Randy
Time. I have so many ideas but so little time. I am working on solutions to cutting the time per kit so that I can ship quicker and develop some of the many kits I'm working on.
mike
There a few small companies trying to take up some of the slack but is there a single entity making a complete line of NASA kits? I know there are a few making a kit here or there, but not a full line.
I don't understand why any company making Estes type kits doesn't have a standing base line of NASA and Russian rockets. Maybe 5 or so of each, then offer the other level 1-3 kits.
Having owned a small company for over 20 years, I know the logistics problems a small company has. Still, in time it could be done. It's not because the competition is too stiff or there isn't a market.
Randy
It is mostly due to the "must have it NOW" mindset our culture/society is in now. That is why Estes has gone so overboard on RTF kits. Making a nice historical scale model takes more time than most kids want to spend nowadays. That is why scale modeling is now almost exclusively an adult hobby. Sad...and frustrating...but the "hobby shop" market is a small blip on the radar to many companies. They look at the K-Mart/Target/Walmart numbers.
The market for scale models of this stuff is very small, and seems to be getting smaller all the time. For example, one of the ABSOLUTE BEST sources of (non-flying) scale models like this is at:
There are occasionally new things that come out, or new companies that come on the market, but again, it's usually because of a love of the hobby more than the ability to actually make any money. Again, in the scale model market (non-flying), a new one is at:
I remember as a (small) kid complaining to my mom that there was 'nothing to do' on some rainy days. In those days, while there were certainly things 'to do', it wasn't far off the mark on a really rainy day with no friends available -- so if I had a model or something, that was a big deal. We didn't have such a thing as video games, we only got a couple of channels on our small black and white TV, and I wasn't allowed to touch my dad's stereo system or LPs. These days, every kid has a CD player or MP3 player, a wealth of video games, and 247 channels of TV -- not to mention all of the 'scheduled activities' that they're thrown into.
BTW, I'm not associated with either of the above two companies other than as a VERY satisfied customer, and hopefully those who are into flying scale rockets might be interested in some of these non-flying ones.
David Erbas-White
PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.