D12-0 highest thrust BP booster?

Is anyone making a 24mm black powder motor that could be used in a typical motor-to-motor staging configuration with a higher thrust than the Estes D12-0? I used to see posts about a D20. Is that motor out of production?

Reply to
Richard Watts
Loading thread data ...

The FSI D20 is long out of production. If Estes made a 24mm D40 in the E9 casing, it would be like a scaled down FSI E60.

Let Estes know we want 24mm D40's. The guys in Penrose get to play with them!

And note to Barry: it is 1.4S!!

Jerry

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

motor-to-motor staging configuration with a higher thrust than the Estes D12-0? I used to see posts about a D20. Is that motor out of production?

I for one think there's a place for such on that middle ground between model rockets and high power. A place where larger kits and motors walk the edge of needing a NOTAM without crossing it, thus making the "big stuff" available to the casual flyer without scaring them away with needless paperwork and regs. The more that step to that line, the more will step over it into HPR and the hobby will grow. So why stop with D's? I've found kids really love watching E flights. Estes used to have a BP E9-0 booster.

Chuck

Reply to
Zathras of the Great Machine

The FSI "D20" is long gone, as are it's brethren with which many people moved from 1/2A-D MR to larger stuff in them good ol' days. I miss E5's and F7's!

Reply to
Mike Dennett

I agree that a lot can be done between model rocketry on the low end and HPR on the high end....

staged EFG's,.clustered EFG's with dual deployment and electronics is certainly doable with both BP and AP...... and at less than 3.3 lbs too......Large Model Rockets are cool....and non NOTAM......although getting a HPR waiver is usally no big deal.........

what this world needs is a DOT definition for a large model rocket motor say up to 113-125? by having a DOT classification, the motor could be shipped perhaps without hazmat.....

somehow link 113-125g LMR motors to a new CSPC definition...allowing 18 yr olds for LMR.....

I don't understand why the NAR resists this idea...... If you had a 62.5g model rocket, and a 113-125g large model rocket definition, then you could then get a DOT HPR motor definition > 125g....

It opens up a new front in the war against the BATFE.....I beleive that we need to fight them on more than 1 front.....

If we succeeded in getting DOT definitions for mr/lmr in the short term(2-5yrs), then the BATFE would have to completely reaccess their policies.....

The question is : "how receptive to these ideas would the Bush admin DOT be?

I sure wish we had more of a choice in the marketplace when it comes to BP DE/FG motors...... Estes could do a lot here if they would introduce some additional motors models and use their financial resopurces to puch for a LMR motors designation..... For exmaple, they could perhaps re-introduce tgheir old NCR line of kits, along with new basic staged and clustered models to use additional DEFG BP motors......Is the market there?

shockie B)

Reply to
shockwaveriderz

Because I suggested it in 1984. They implemented PART of it (125g MR total propellant limit, 125g FAA limit).

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

I start talking high power and alot of folks seem to feel it's more bother than it's worth because they hear of the regs and waivers and such. Thus if we give them a "big" toy with "big" motors and no Big Brother hassles to be phobic about, hey, they'll be happy as clams. Once they see the step from model to mid-power is larger than mid to HPR, they'll be less daunted by it. The one sport launch I did with a friend ended that way. All he had was 13mm stuff and 1 C powered model. I fired off an E-powered rocket for a scout pack there (they'd come to fly too) and impressed them all. On the way home my freind started asking about getting his level 1.......... Dangle the tangible in front of them and watch how far they go chasing the carrot.

Chuck

Reply to
Zathras of the Great Machine

Thank Tripoli Thank NAR Thank Aerotech Thank Animal Motor Works Thank Cesaroni Technology Inc. Thank Loki Research Thank Rosenfield Consulting Services (first and foremost) Thank Ellis Mountain

Thank them often.

Jerry

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

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.