07-07-2011, 02:02 PM
|
 |
Dazed and Confused
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: TN
Posts: 11,624
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ghrocketman
There is literally nothing a C6-3 can do that the C5-3 does not do better.
Many rockets that are marginal on the C6-3 are fine performers on the C5-3.
Two examples are the full-stack Estes #1284 Space Shuttle and the Estes/Semroc Mars Lander.
It was a stupid decision by Estes to ever discontinue the C5-3 and keep the C6-3 in the line.
Estes had one bad batch of C5-3 motors that went "explodo" on every launch and instead of FIXING THE PROBLEM, they just discontinued the motor.
They got it backwards; the one that survived should have been the one discontinued.
|
I'd like to have them both, but like you, if I had to choose one or the other I'd choose the C5-x.
However, there is the issue of a 7 second delay. The current C6-7 is just about filled to the top. The C5-x has more propellant and it is cored, both contributing to a need for more space in the casing than a C6-7. A 7 second might not fit. My vintage C5-3S (Centuri labeled) motors are filled as full in the casing as my current C6-7's. Estes could cut the amount of propellant, like the classic D11-9, but then we'd have the whiners that would complain about the motor being crippled or dumbed down.
__________________
I love sanding. 
|