#11
|
||||
|
||||
With a C5-3 the Mars Lander and Space Shuttle hit maybe 250', with the C6-3 it is even lower.
With the old Cox D8-3, they both hit maybe 350', making for a longer and nicer flight.
__________________
When in doubt, WHACK the GAS and DITCH the brake !!! Yes, there is such a thing as NORMAL, if you have to ask what is "NORMAL" , you probably aren't ! Failure may not be an OPTION, but it is ALWAYS a POSSIBILITY. ALL systems are GO for MAYHEM, CHAOS, and HAVOC ! |
#12
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Only you can answer that question because it comes down to what you enjoy personally. What is your favorite aspect of a flight? Never let ANYONE else set YOUR standard. Randy http://www.vernarockets.com http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00HHJHOK6 http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00O14ET8K http://www.amazon.com/dp/B01CX1UPCG |
#13
|
||||
|
||||
[QUOTE=ghrocketman]With a C5-3 the Mars Lander and Space Shuttle hit maybe 250', with the C6-3 it is even lower.
With the old Cox D8-3, they both hit maybe 350', making for a longer and nicer flight. You are talking about bulkier models here, with the Honest John or Nike Zeus they would almost fly out of sight on a C6-0 and a C6-6 for the Nike Zeus while the HJ flew on a C6-6 as well putting them almost out of sight. Anything beyond that one could just as easily determine to be a 'waste' of time and money possibly even losing a model altogether. So in the end making a rocket fly 'better' on a larger engine is a generalization rather than something being tangible or specific. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|