New Plan -- Longneck
 

The thread on the "E"-powered ThunderRoc got me started thinking (dangerous, you all know that! :eek: ) about coming up with an appropriate design for BARCLONE...

I think everyone will like the name, anyway... :D

SEMROC components for the nose cone and body tubes, but there's a mix of custom-built pieces and some Estes pieces. I used a 6" length of BT-50 for the motor tube...

The main body tubes are 30" lengths of ST-175. Carl doesn't have these listed as "In Stock" yet, just as "Coming Soon". The hollow tube coupler shown in the list has to be made from a length of ST-175 tubing, 4" long, split and a strip taken out. Easier to do than to tell you how to do it...

No launch lugs for this bird; you need a launch tower to be effective, as the rocket doesn't reach flight speed until it gets about 60" off the ground. Composite motors only.

Enjoy!

Craig McGraw

So how long is it?! :)

Total length is 101.7". It uses three lengths of tube, with separation between the top two. Two 24" parachutes for recovery listed, but you might reduce this to a single chute.

Craig

New Plan -- USS Swinington
 

OK, folks, this is what happens when one person suggests a name, and another puts two of his few, underworked brain cells in contact with each other...

Jay suggested the name "Kick A Pig", and I went hog wild...

This model was going to be a flying football, aka "pigskin"...

Fat chance...

The name is pronounced "Swine-ing-ton", sounds like "Lexington"...

These drawings are by no means complete. They're only posted here to give you an idea of a simple concept that has gone horribly bonkers...

For example, there is no hatch designed in for the parachute to escape through. And, the center tube is longer than any existing tube of that diameter -- it needs to be divided into at least two. There is no launch lug yet -- it is supposed to be the full length of the main body, centered inside the core inside tube and large enough for a 1/4" diameter rod. The nacelles have no real structure, and need some additional bracing. They are supposed to act as tube fins at the end of those pylons.

Believe it or not, the simulator says it doesn't need that lower pylon, but it would require about 8 oz of mass at the tip of the nose without it.

The composite motors in the flight simulation are the only recommended motors at this time. Yes, you must use 4 of them!

So fry up some ham and eggs, dig out a DVD of the Muppets' Swine Trek skits, and Enjoy!

Craig McGraw

New Plan -- Thunder Stick
 

Well, this seems to be a very popular rocket series...

This is not a modification to the Longneck. The Longneck uses ST-175 tubes...

Sorry 'bout the confusion I may have caused before...

The fins are 30% enlargements of the Thunder Bird patterns, and the nosecone is a new SEMROC BC-1364 rounded-ogive (the simulation file shows an elliptical shape, only because it doesn't have a correct profile for this cone).

The paint scheme remains the same as the original Thunder series.

Enjoy!

Craig

Thunder Goony
 

Hey, it had to happen. :D

Anyone want to try for a decal for this? Uses original size Thunder Roc fins, a single BT-60 (which I have since I bash Mean Machines for Thunder Rocs), a Baby Bertha could supply the nose cone and engine mount.

Lance,

Not to steal your Thunder :p , but how about this version, which uses the Baby Bertha nose cone and 9" body tube?

Craig...

Why not just call it "Thunder Goon"?

OK. Here it is...

Craig

Or Thunder ****y. :D :eek:

I liked the 18" because it still hinted at the "longness" of the Thunder series, but had the squashed "been-chasing-parked-cars" look of the other goonies. I have since tried the color separation at 6" red, 12" white and it looks a lot better that way too. :)

As for a name, I also (re)considered "Goony Roc" which may be more appropriate since the fins and BT diameter are the same.

This is fun. :D I wonder how I'm going to talk my wife into letting me buy this program once the trial period runs out. :rolleyes:

I shrunk the length because we had just seen one at 18" earlier, and because most of the Goony series from Jim Flis were short-bodied...

Now, here's one for you and Jay...

The Thunder Pig, aka Thunder Swine... :eek:

Starting point is the Fat Boy...

Craig...

New Plan -- Caesarus
 

Whew-wee! :D

Had to take a quickie break from the barnyard for a while... :p

This is an Estes-diametered model, similar to the Empyria-class ships, but smaller. The engine shrouds and the canopy are hollow balsa, but could be created from vacuum-formed styrene to make the model lighter. The simulations show it will fly as-is, with reasonable performance.

Enjoy!

Craig McGraw

Brings a whole new meaning to the phrase "when pigs fly"! :p

How about "Watching... for pigs on the wing..." :rolleyes:

Craig...

You know I HAD to mention something about pink flying objects... :D

I presume everyone's heard that TPF is getting together -- INCLUDING Waters :eek: -- for a benefit concert hosted by Bono...

First time in 25 years with all four on the same stage -- at the same time -- not trying to sue the bangers out of each other...

I wonder if the reunion will last as long as it takes Titebond III to dry? :p

Of course, we all know hell froze over back in 1995, so I suppose this was ultimately inevitable... :rolleyes:

Anyone care to come up with some Pink-sounding names? Keep in mind "Interstellar Overdrive" has already been claimed by at least one fellow BAR on this forum...

Care for a rocket called a "Relic"?

Or how about "The Pict"?

Or even "Eugene's Axe"?

Lasers...

Craig...

Ha! :D Taking from the Animals album, how about Thunder Dog? (There's no need to fear, Thunder Dog is here!) :rolleyes: Okay, I'm just being corny.

As far as Floyd themes go, maybe Crazy Diamond (a "cone of death" with triangle fins). I'll have to look through my CD's and come up with some more.

Thunder Dog is a good name... Like TurboDog is a good name for a brew... :D

Crazy Diamond is also good...

Sky Gig...

Arnold's Laundry...


Craig

New Plan -- Eugene's Axe
 

Not a pig on the wing, or a pig in a poke, either...

Watch out for the Axe Man, Eugene, as this bird takes to flight!

RS8 says it's stable to over 900' with a D12.

Enjoy!

Craig McGraw

I'm thinking this Floyd reunion is going to be like the Guess Who reunion of a few years back. Everyone will have their own quadrant of the stage to prowl and none of the others will be allowed to cross predetermined lines. No looking at one another either. Sounds good on paper, but I'll call it a success when an album of new, collaborative material shows up in stores. Shall I start holding my breath? :rolleyes:

Crazy Diamond
 

How's this? ;) A little more nose weight could be added for assured stability. :D No engine lock, friction fit with tape. (KISS principle) Oops, just noticed, no launch lug either. :o I'll have to fix that.

At one scout launch several years ago, one of the boys who was into rockets cut out some cardboard fins and a conical nose from some thin cardstock he found in his Mom's station wagon and glued them to an A10-3T along with a launch lug. I was helping another prep his rocket and did not see him put it on the pad and launch it. It went up about 50 ft and then started doing loops, nose diving into the ground and then popping the ejection charge. ALL the kids then wanted to do more of those, but I put a stop to that. I later told one of the adults that stuff like that is better left to those with delusions of grandeur enhanced by a few beers (not that I'm ever guilty of stunts like that! :D )

Here's Crazy Diamond updated with a little more nose weight, a launch lug, and no A8-3 recommended. If I actually build this, I will definitely do a swing test and add nose weight as needed, then weigh the model, put the actual values back into RockSim and see what happens.

Lance, I'd drop the B4-4 as well. Go with the B6-4 to achieve the lower deployment velocity.

Minor adjustments to make:

1. When loading engines, remember that the amount of motor hanging out the end is only 0.25", instead of 0.5". You are placing the thrust block 2.5" from the end of the tube...

2. Make the nose cone solid balsa. Anyone who builds this plan will probably order the cone from BMS. If your RS part database shows "G10" as the material for this component, it's wrong...

3. Move the nose weight just aft of the shoulder on the nose cone. This being a solid balsa cone, the easiest place to put this weight is under the screw eye, in the form of washers. Don't forget to add the screw eye as a mass object, too. I don't see too many builders hollowing out a balsa cone, or custom-molding a fiberglass cone, for something like this.

This looks like it would be a fun model to build and fly. I've made the corrections mentioned above on the copy I have here. Shall I send it to BARCLONE for public posting?

Craig

I was actually thinking to use the Estes PNC-20Y (P/N 070323) with modeling clay inside, since I have a few of those here at home. (Bought for the X-24 Bug clone before I discovered Moldin' Oldies and Semroc ST-7's.)


By all means. I can think of no greater honor. :D By the way, my last name is Ladd.

I just wonder how many other builders have that cone laying around, minding its own business? :rolleyes:

Maybe Moldin' Oldies will whip this cone up. Scott says there's a big update about to hit the website, so maybe this cone is now available in resin? Don't know if that will bring the weight up, though...

The balsa cone with the additional weight added to the shoulder worked on the simulation, so I would guess the stability range of the model is wide enough to cover the differences.

I'll get the RKT file sent to the BARCLONE file queue tonight; Scott has been busily working all of the YORS sites with updates, so it'll be posted along with a bunch of others.

Backburner for now, I'll try to create the PDF to go along with this plan after the holiday has passed.

Craig..

...And I just realized Estes still has (or had) this cone in production -- for the Yankee. Doh! :eek:

Craig...

The Estes PNC-20 nose cone 4 pack includes 2 of these also as well as 2 PNC-20A's. That's how I got mine. :) (Now I gotta design something to use the 20A's.) ;)

I've built a stretched Totally Tubular from, IIRC, 3 kits, and it flies great. The tube fins are alternating blue and yellow, as is the BT. The launch lug is mounted between the outside of two of the tube fins and is barely visible in the second picture. Another option might be to glue the launch lug to the inside of one of the tube fins, adjacent to where that fin is glued to the body tube.

-John T., NAR #84553

New Plan -- 1987 Estes Catalog Parts Demo
 

Big name for this rocket, huh?

Thanks to Geoffrey Kerbel for this suggestion (from the OldRockets list), and to whoever originally designed it for Estes back in the '80s...

There are a few minor parts not shown in the RKT file, or in the 3D image, as there is no simple (or complicated, for that matter) way to draw them in. Mostly fiddly bits like the tip probes and the "T" tail piece of balsa at the top of the vertical fin.

One important note: This design brings up a bug in the RockSim program. Notice the orientation of the tube fins in the 2D (plan) view. Then, compare that to what the 3D (solid model) view shows. The tube fins are 180 degrees out of sync, and this is consistent no matter what radial position is given.

Don't try to fly this model with anything less than the C6-5. There's just way too much drag in this model to reach a respectable altitude on anything A or B. I also wouldn't suggest a D or E motor, as this would require additional ballast in the nose. Overall, this is not a very good design, and I might try tweaking it a bit to get some better performance out of it. Example -- those forward fins do not help the model, they actually hurt by destabilizing the model. They need to be greatly reduced, as their best function is strictly for looks.

Enjoy!


Craig McGraw

How about this one?
http://www.dars.org/jimz/estp741.htm
Page two, lower left-hand corner. I've had the parts for almost a year. (In fact, I first worked on it while in Gulf Shores on vacation last August.)

New Plan -- 1971 Custom Parts Catalog Demo
 

This one flies without needing ballast, but again, not on anything less than a C6-5. It's a pig...

It looks better with the nose cone in the simulation, as opposed to the Mercury capsule. More like a family member with the Taurus...

The fins are approximated, and I chose to use three fins. I don't know what the original was supposed to use, looks like it might be four, but that would only add weight. Rocksim says three is all it needs...

Craig...

I didn't think you'd be able to resist that challenge. I've laid in a supply of C5-3's that I plan to fly it on. I was a little iffy about the C6-5. I've got mine laid out as a three fin rocket. The fins are HUGE!
I call it the Cosmik Debris. :D (Dinah-Mo-Humm didn't quite fit for some reason.)

The C5-3 will only give you a 25' altitude advantage over the C6-5, and a 500 fps acceleration rate versus a 314 fps rate. However, this is interesting -- the deployment velocity with the C5-3 is 25 fps, while the C6-5 allows a 40 fps deployment rate.

You thus have a choice: Do I shred now, or shred later? :eek:

Good name. Fits the concept, I think. Another SPEV...

Craig...

I was just thinking along the lines of clearing the rod.

1987 Estes Catalog Parts Demo
 

Hey Scott! When I did the design work on RS 7 I had no problem with the "fiddly" parts. The body side tubes are also in the proper positions on the main body tube in each of the other views on the sim. Is there a problem with version 8?
I tweaked the program myself and came up with much larger rear fins and smaller front fins than you show. Mine also shows all the little "fiddley" parts quite well except for the sub fins. They are included in the calculations for C/P and C/G but only show up on the end view and in the center of the main body tube. Strange quirk of the program. My flight sims show 190' with a B6-4 and 450' with a C6. A 3 delay will be on the way up and a 5 delay will be on the way down. A C5-3 will get it up over 500' if you have those engines. All the flights show the rocket as stable.
Here are my sims. If anyone is interested in the full file ,you can get them from me. Just send an email for the RKT file and I should be able to send it direct. You can reach me at blkgtx@cox.net.

New Plan -- Stretch Limo 741 Demo
 

I didn't even check that out. :eek: Thanks for reminding me.

Try out this variation. A little more exciting in appearance, I think... :D

Craig...

I don't suppose you could wrap the RKT file up into a ZIP and post it as an attachment here, could you? I'd like to compare your RS7 file to the RS8 file I came up with.

I'm always tring to steal... (hack, sputter) Uh... LEARN new techniques... :D

Craig...

Just checked the sims with both motors...

C6 requires 80" of rod...
C5 requires 31"...

A real PIG of a rocket!

75" and 31" respectively for the Stretch Limo version, too...

PIGGIES, nothin' more than PIGGIES...

Craig "Pork Fat rocks, it just don't roll" McGraw

Could be worse! :( How so he asks! :) It could be raining!!!! :o Actually, your post brings up the image of the USS America by Centuri. I have one I fly quite a bit and it is always a nail bite'er on any C engine. However I have just come into two composite D10 motors that I think will make this bird actually FLY!!!!! :p