Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ghrocketman
I'd like to see someone purchase TLP and upgrade the kits to what they should have been in the first place. Ditch the paper transitions, replace them with ALL balsa turned parts (cones, transitions, reducers), and include a FULL Decal package. THAT and ONLY that would make the kits worthwhile.
I don't want to hunt all over the place to make a kit 'complete'.....EVER.
|
Those "upgrades" would be *nice* (in a way) BUT would completely change the design of the kit (and therefore the cost). The missiles that the TLP kits were based on were mostly unstable (stability via active control) whereas in about 99.9995% of our model rockets, we rely on *PASSIVE* stability via fins to maintain the "pointy end forward" in flight... The TLP kits were stable because of the lightweight construction and weight savings of paper transitions and such coupled with noseweight. Simply replacing these lightweight paper components with heavier balsa or other material components would completely change the CG/CP relationship, requiring redesign of the kit for stable flight. A lot of the TLP kits were already at the hairy edge of stability in the first place-- I've read a lot of reviews and build threads where people tried "beefing up" TLP kits to the standard "anti-tank round" construction of the typical HPR or "Mid power" kits on the market and found that the rocket was either completely unstable, terribly underpowered, or both... Adding more noseweight to restore stability is one solution, but that then doubles the "underpowered" part; grafting in larger motors (which are of course heavier) then complicates the stability problems, because you're adding weight in the back, exactly where you DON'T want it to improve stability margins!
The TLP kits were elegantly designed to use MODEL ROCKET construction (lightweight tube and materials) to make a fairly large model rocket that would fly STABLY using "mid-power" size motors... messing with that fine balance, unless one was an EXPERT model rocket designer, usually ended poorly.
Lots of people badmouthed the TLP kits because of their "lightweight construction" and such, BUT, that USED to be the hallmark of an excellent designer-- building the rocket as lightly as possible but still strong enough to survive the rigors of flight... as G. Harry Stine put it, "building strong enough to survive the "speed of balsa"...
Most of these loudmouth HPR guys that whine the most and badmouthed the TLP kits were just the types that think everything should be slathered in fiberglass and epoxy and weigh a ton, and shove a bigger HPR motor in it to compensate... IOW, if it's not built like an anti-tank round, they don't think it's a "real" rocket... If it isn't designed to swap in the biggest motors you can possibly shove into the holes, it's not a "real rocket"... IOW, the "hold my beer and watch this" crowd...
Not saying it CAN'T be done, just saying it'd be something TOTALLY different than how the TLP kits were designed... essentially you'd be starting with a clean sheet on the design...
I WILL agree with you 100% on the decals... IMHO they should have AT LEAST included a painting and graphics sample sheet/guide so that you could scan in the sheet and make your own decals, and know how to paint the thing to match the prototype...
Later! OL J R
