Estes Executioner Help Requested

Hi,
Am modifying an Executioner to a "Hexecutioner". Yeah my 11y/o son is into Harry Potter and said I'm putting a "hex" on the model.
I am going to use this as a level one certifying model with an H 220. Before you say I'm nuts, the only thing I am using from the kit is the nosecone and fins. I bought an heavy duty BT-80 and 29mm engine tube from BMS. I also had them cut 6 plywood centering rings for the engine tube. So I am not being a wuss here. :) I built up the base of the nosecone with body putty to compensate for the increased thickness of the body tube and make it more aerodynamic. My only problem is I am not trusting of the little plastic connection for the shock cord and parachute. I was thinking of making a plug I could epoxy to the center hole with Devcon plastic epoxy or J & B weld. Anyone have any suggestions for putting a more secure scew eye on a plastic nose cone for added insurance for the higher forces the ship may be subjected to? Thanks.
Kurt Savegnago
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Kurt wrote:

What I do is cut a suitable hole in the shoulder of the cone and use a needle nose pliers to position the nut and washer for the eye bolt. Then I dab a little epoxy over the nut to secure. Works great.
Ted Novak TRA#5512 IEAS#75
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
nedtovak wrote:

Hey,
That sounds great. Have a Farm King store down the street that has all sorts of hardware. Will have to explore this. Thanks.
Kurt Savegnago
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I can't recall if the kit has Ply fins or balsa. But at this point you'd have been better off buying a nose cone and cutting your own fins to fit the new TTW dimensions.

Not really necessary. I've built several rockets using LOC 2.6" tube and the Estes cones, including my Super Ranger and Maxi Windy City Special. Unless you're within a meter or two of the rocket, you'd never notice the shoulder mismatch.

The key to any of the nose cones with the plastic eyelet is to NEVER connect more than ONE thing to the eyelet. If you run a quick-link through the eyelet, then connect your chute and shock cord to the eyelet, and you haven't filled the nose cone with a bunch of lead or clay to make it stable, you will be fine. If you connect both chute and shock cord seperately to the eyelet, then at deployment the chute will pull one way, the rocket the other, and the eyelet WILL break.
    Bob Kaplow    NAR # 18L    TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD"         >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD! <<< Kaplow Klips & Baffle:    http://nira-rocketry.org/LeadingEdge/Phantom4000.pdf www.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/ www.nira-rocketry.org www.nar.org
This is a country which stands tallest in troubled times, a country that clings to fundamental principles, cherishes its constitutional heritage, and rejects simple solutions that compromise the values that lie at the roots of our democratic system. -- Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall, 1972
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Bob Kaplow wrote:

No problem here Bob. The fins are plywood and TTW. I just had to sand the root a bit as it was sized for 24mm. A balsa cone would be an alternative but I think I'll try your recommendations below.

Eh, I like to make it look as perfect as possible even up close. :) I still haven't had the perfect paint job yet but I am doing alot better in the finish department in my old age. Besides I like to play with putty.

Had that happen with a small Nova Payloader. Got all the pieces back and on that one, since it is so small, I was able to epoxy plywood in the payload section and screw in a screw eye.
Another way to look at it would be to tie the nosecone part way up the shock cord and run the chute off a link at the end of the cord. Might be easier than butchering up the cone for a screw eye.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I've got a dual-deployment HPR bird with an Estes 2.6" cone on it. As Bob K. mentioned, I didn't worry anout the mis-match, I just used it as-is. As for connecting it to the rocket, I took mine and drilled a hole in the bottom next to the hole that was already there so I could connect it up with a 1/8" quicklink.
Then attach the 'chute downstream of the cone on the recovery harness, so it won't stress the connection on the cone. That's all you really need. It's held up fine to H-180's, I-211's and one CATO.
I also have a 29MM Executioner that I connected the cone using the stock eyelet. Lotsa mid-power flights and one crash later, the cone is hanging in there fine. The 'chute on this one is also connected down the harness to take the stress off the eyelet.
--
Joe Michel
NAR 82797 L2
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Guys,
Thanks, Such a simple remedy for my stupid question. Was stuck with the "tie everything to the eyelet" mentality I couldn't see around it. Just keep the main deployment force off the cone is the answer.
Kurt Savegnago
J.A. Michel wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Kurt wrote:

6 CRs is certainly overbuilt. 3 is sufficient. 2 is enough. even with yellow glue instead of epoxy.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Cliff Sojourner wrote:

Yeah probably overkill on the mount but I figure the weight would cut down on the altitude. Have a friend who lives in the middle of a farmland area and may consider in the future seeing if I could get a waiver from the FAA and do some launches from there in the spring and fall. Will need to see a sectional chart and see if any airways are nearby.
Kurt Savegnago
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.