Oh, yep, that is a typo. Should be the full 12” of my ruler PLUS the 4.344” of the second measure beyond the 12” length of the ruler for a full length of 16.344”. Sorry about that.

As for selling, well you can probably guess the answer would be no but I appreciate the offer.

I normally do full kit content photos of all kits (well the ones that are open of course) before building them, not that I intend to build this one. But I will add to that photo list the particular ones you requested above.

The file sizes, in some cases, for emailing are pretty large. I’ll have to check a bit later (I’m on an iPad right now away from my main computer), but some may exceed 20mb, which I think is my email provider limit. Do you have a drop box somewhere, or maybe I can resampe the largest ones so they can be emailed.

Earl

Thanks for the quick clarification on that BT length.

About the offer... I had to try. You can bet I'll be cloning it (stock). Ok... A few pointers. Look carefully at the face card and the instructions... They seem to not be the same rocket. The engine hook placement is to put it lightly... Weird. I point it out in the event you're going for the match the original look.

You've got my email address right? I have a onedrive folder if needed.

I literally was taking a break from working on my sim of Toby Vanderbeek's Cherokee-H kit, when I was on the phone with a friend, and saw the email notification of this thread getting action. My friend had to deal with me geeking out on the new scans.

Thanks!

It would appear in this first version of the Cherokee-D face card art that they were using a preproduction model of the rocket. The face card model seems to show either a motor or motor tube projecting from the base of the rocket (and I don’t even see a motor hook at all on the model). But, it is the same face card as shown on Jerry Fortin’s site for this first version of the kit. See this link: http://www.seateddimevarieties.com/...torials/k47.htm

Is onedrive a drop folder/box of some type? If so, I’d rather use that than email, all things equal. If that is what it is, PM with the pathway and I’ll try that.

Earl

Thank you, Earl, for sending us these plans!

Isn't the Cherokee-D nose the same as the Arcas? a secant ogive

The Cherokee-D and Arcas used the BNC-55AC then later used the PNC-55AC.
FAR more were produced with the plastic cone.

Hi Earl,

Thanks for the files... They're posted up on flickr now .

I've measured and cleaned up the decals some.



They're at 400 DPI, and you can download the original .png file from flickr. Unfortunately flickr's images for sharing (such as here) are converted to .jpg images. The original .png file doesn't have the blotchy appearance of a .jpg file.

Quick question... Can you take some measurements on the width of the engine hook and the fins. I have my ideas, but I want to confirm them.

Thanks!

Fin stock thickness is the standard 3/32” stuff.

And the engine hook is the standard ‘original’ kind of hook at .0955” wide by 2.85” long. I say ‘standard’ engine hook, as later on Estes started using some engine hooks (maybe like late 70s or very early 80s) that were standard length, but the material was wider and maybe just a tad bit thicker (stiffer). Centuri used them too in some kits at about the same time, but by then those kits were probably being packaged in Penrose anyway. But the one included in this kit was like the good ol’ standard run of the mill engine hook. Still nice and shiny though.

Earl

Ok, just did a quick measurement of one of the ‘wider’ engine hooks, as mentioned above. This particular hook was from a Centuri Magnum Jayhawk, which was introduced in 1980 and ran until ‘83.

Whereas a standard engine hook material is .0955” wide, these later engine hooks that Estes and Centuri started using in some kits (and maybe it was just in the D powered kits) are .1260” wide. However, material thickness seems to be just about the same. I was thinking that the material in the vigger hooks might be a bit thicker, but no; the additional stiffness with the bigger hook is apparently completely because of its wider material, not thicker material.

But looking at the two hooks side by side, it is very obvious one is wider than the other. This comparison really has nothing to do with the Cherokee-D kit being discussed here; however, since I mentioned the wider engine hook above, I just got curious and wanted to see just how much wider those hooks were.

Earl

Edit -- Photo added to show comparison of different widths of engine hooks over the years. By the way, the one on the left is the one from this Cherokee-D kit. It's 'normal' size. The one of the right is one of the 'wider' engine hooks.

Ok, here are photos of the nose cone.

Nose cone exposed length is 5.37". The shoulder is .558". The photos have the ruler, but it is very hard to tell the precise dimensions directly from the photos (and in the photo socketted to the body tube, it appears as though the end of the ruler is not even with the exposed base of the cone, but it is).

And for what it is worth, the tip of the nose cone looks pretty intact; in other words, it does not appear to have sustained any 'blunting' injuries that might compress that very tapered tip.


Earl