I agree, particularly regarding "the why of average thrust selection and delay selection." Because the current generation of model rocketeers does consist mostly of neophytes, the Estes catalogs should be printed (on paper as well as online) with the "how and why" supplement pages that were included in the older Estes (and Centuri, and other companies') catalogs. Little updating of these would be necessary (and in many cases, no updating would be needed). For example:
The illustrated "Model Rocket Engines and Specs" section in the Centuri catalogs (see:
http://www.ninfinger.org/rockets/no...a/79cen042.html ) showed, in comparative (non-mathematical) graphical form, the consequences of using the wrong total impulse and delay. Their "Flight Manual" (see:
http://www.ninfinger.org/rockets/no...a/79cen044.html ) included a brief but complete explanation (including thrust-time graphs) of the motor specifications and how they are properly selected, and it also covered model rocket construction, decor scheme application, recovery systems, staging, clustering of motors, etc., and:
The late 1960s Estes catalogs contained a similar "Model Rocket Manual" (it was their 'Yellow Pages,' see:
http://www.ninfinger.org/rockets/no...a/69est048.html ), which was updated and, in the 1994 catalog, was included under the title of "Model Rocketry Technical Manual" (see:
http://www.ninfinger.org/rockets/nostalgia/94est32.html ). Also:
Quest Aerospace printed (and may still offer in their bulk-packaged kits, although a cursory look through their website didn't show it--but they offer more items than are listed on their website) a brief, illustrated pamphlet-type brochure called the "Astra Mini Manual of Model Rocketry," which served (or serves) the same purpose, being a primer on model rocketry. In the case of the Centuri and Estes informational supplements, Estes could, at least to start with (especially since Centuri owns Estes, on paper), simply include links to these scanned online documents on their website. The Ninfinger Productions Model Rocketry website (see:
http://www.ninfinger.org/rockets/rockets.html ) also contains scans of two useful Cox model rocketry academic publications, which Estes--which bought Cox--could also provide links to on their website (all of these publications would also be of historical interest, as well as being informative and useful).
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Jerry Irvine
Releasing a B8-0 is a good idea technically. Not so sure about marketing.
Having a B4-6 variant of the C motor would be an interesting market test and perhaps should be released with no 0 or 2 delay at all. The B4-6 was a major go-to motor for our entire rocket club of 500 members and certainly is justified to be re-released. 4,6
The C5 was a Centuri thing for the fantasy series die cut kits they released. Centuri was not offering 24mm motors at the time which would have been better motors for those rockets.
All of the above except a C4-4,6 would use existing tooling. Perhaps it would use B4 tooling and be produceable.
One advantage of the current system is reduced confusion and reduced retail SKU's. Those are significant positives for the sorts of consumers Fred runs into all the time. People clueless as to WHY you would want lower or higher thrust or delays. Just plugging in what the package says. And not having too many surpurfluous choices allowing a wrong choice out of ignorance. Even GH complains about not being able to get all wanted motors locally now.
If the catalog reintroduced the why of average thrust selection and delay selection then some of these choices might not only be welcome, but successful among a market that is 60% newbies.
Jerry
|