Re: Best 38mm Motor?

I wasn't there when it didn't happen. 8-)

You'd have to ask someone who was there when it didn't...

-dave w

Unfortunately, "if it smells like s#$t, looks like S#$t, and sounds like s#$t when it hits the floor; well, you do the math". (;-)

Dave W. wrote:

Yep, single-use is definitely the best way to go, especially for multi-motor flights. However, the per-flight cost is much cheaper for reloads, once you have the hardware. Pro38's system is a nice middle ground, combining the convenience of a SU and the lower cost of a reload -- and even the cases are cheap since there are no costly end closures.

Oh, puh-leeze!

Why stop there? Why not require the user to build everything from scratch? That would sure keep out the riffraff.

Asking the question in that form implies that it is to be presumed that they did... interesting logic, that!

-dave w

Yeah, really... I've seen some actually suggest single use motors such as the Aerotech 29mm H124J for level 1 attempts, specifically because of the greater simplicity. The cert candidate is expected to select and assemble a workable rocket, and demonstrate basic flightoperations, not try for a certain "degree of difficulty" threshold (other than the specified motor impulse range itself).

(Unfortunately, I haven't seen any H124's lately...)

-dave w

Here are a couple reasons why I went with Aerotech:

1. More motor choices. Pro38 gives you a choice of 13 different motors with 2 formulations and Aerotech gives you 21 different motors with 4 formulations. Some people say that all the different formula's are for is show, but they also give the motors different burn charateristics which is handy when you want a rocket to perform in a specific manner. Most of the rockets I design are specifically made for 2 motors(not always the same 2) but one for making it rip off the pad and go out of site, and another to keep it a little more sane for days that the wind is up a little bit.
2. Price. Both the places that I purchase motors from have Pro38's more then Aerotechs for a comparable sized motor. Now Aerotech casings(w/ closures) are quite a bit more then Pro38's(about the same without closures). But after 5-7 flights that savings is negated.

I also wouldn't say that putting together Aerotech engines is a headache. I have only put together about 7 and it doesn't take much time at all.

The one Pro38 I did use was a pain to clean up after(the liner burned through during flight but didn't damage the case).

No it doesn't, but I am a person that likes to know how something works and also I don't like trusting someone else to do things for me. I haven't heard of any problems with Pro38 reloads but I would rather have the raw components and put them together myself the let a machine do it(or however Pro38 assembles their motors). Borrowing components or letting others put things together has always cost me in the end.

You will soon... :-)

Gary

You will soon... :-)

Gary

Dave W. replied:

There was an investigation which showed that they did indeed occur. I see no reason to assume, as you did, that the people involved with the investigation were lying or falsifying evidence.

Yeah, once you've done it a few times you get to where you can almost put them together in your sleep. On the other hand, when it's 115 degrees and no shade, it's sometimes handy to have CTI motor available and save the AT assembly for another occasion.

cool, I have a number of rockets that I would put one of these in(but too afraid of losing a casing to put in a H128)

If it lands outside the UK, does it still count?

you know of one problem with pro38's :)

heh, twice. shock cord and (supposedly) motor mount adapter.

the supposed adapter failure was a much better video

I recently purchased some J350, J420, and K185 reloads, post fire Utah production.

Tom

I think you mean "can't be", precisely for this reason BTW.

Jerry

Exactly.

It is in the unwritten rule spromulgated at the moment before denial "for cause".