O/T: Chas, were you sweating pretty good along about 2:15 Saturday afternoon?

O/T Answer: Yes...yes I was. I was waiting to mow the lawn and thinking how they didn't deserve to win and they get another chance due to a missed free throw. After the game Cindy asked why I wasn't happy about the Buckeyes winning. She didn't see the game. : (

JP had a great comment on getting his B14's and other motors, too. I suspect that we will see that. Haven't read the artcile on the Estes development of Mabel, but I would imagine that Carl and Krew will have improvements over their first machine from way-back-when. The big trick is to make it simple to convert over to other motor and casing types. One advantage to starting fresh.

Chas

That would be fine with me *IF* there were certified T boosters.

But, Estes used to make the shorties from the standard motors by cutting an inch off the casing after they were loaded . So, if 1/2A6-0 or A8-0 boosters are made in 18mm size, they could be cut to length after the fact. Same with A5-2 or A5-4's.

If its done at the point of manufature, it's OK but if we do it, it's "modifying the motor" and we still can't use them at sanctioned launches.

Thanks to all! This is another great thread.

I was camping with the troop this weekend and then recovering from taking two days off! So I am a little late to the party.

We had independently arrived at the consensus opinion that we have to produce engines to fit and fly in our existing kits first. The fewer kits we produce that send our customers to Wal-Mart to get engines, the better we will be. It is painful now to attend an event like Astronomy Days and spend most of the time explaining how they still have to make a trip to Wal-Mart to get parts we don't sell. It is not as bad at a national event like NARAM, but it is really bad a a local event.

The census of engines we recommend for our current and planned kits are:

C6-x 55
B6-x 50
A8-x 43
D12-x 12
E9-x 8
B4-x 6
C11-x 5

So... the 18-70 C6, B6, and A8 have to be first, but the same first crop will also produce:

C5-x
B14-x
A5-x
3/4C19-x
B8-x

in a full range of booster engines as well.

Part of the reason for the low numbers of "T" engines in the census is the poor range of available engines. If the "T" engines were there, we would have had more kits around them. As Doug has said, the B14-x can be flown in many exising designs, but it opens up designs that we would like to see designed around it. As we can get a wider range of engines, the designs are not so limited like they are now. A good example is the Super Kits. They would be a disaster if flown with C6-3 engines, but fly great on C5-3 engines. Almost all two stage rockets will fly better with a B14 or 3/4C19 in the bottom stage.

So this is a case of chicken v. egg. If we can get a lot more eggs, we will have a bigger crop of chickens.

I have read this whole thread twice. There is some great market research in here!

__________________
Carl McLawhorn
NAR#4717 L2
semroc.com

Cool. I get to be the first one to say "YES!"
I had to bite my tongue at our last Quark launch. One of my fellow Quarkers was talking about all the cool stuff that's come out of Semroc recently. I kept my comments to "You ain't seen nothing yet."

__________________
Bill Eichelberger
NAR 79563

http://wallyum.blogspot.com/

I miss being SAM 0058

Build floor: Centuri Design Contest F-150 Hurricane Estes - Low Boom SST Semroc - Marauder, Shrike, SST Shuttle

In paint: Canaroc Starfighter Scorpion Estes F-22 Air Superiority Fighter, Multi-Roc, Solar Sailer II Semroc Cyber III

Ready to fly: Estes - Solar Sailer II Semroc - Earmark, Groonie Der V 1/2

I'll second Bill's enthusiastic endorsement...

This is a good, workable, and flexible range of power.

__________________
Craig McGraw

BARCLONE Rocketry -- http://barclone.rocketshoppe.com
BARCLONE Blogsite -- http://barclone.wordpress.com
BARCLONE Forum -- BARCLONE Forum

BARs helping BARs

SAM 0044
AMA 352635

I like the fact your willing to take this thing head on Carl! No pussy footin' around, just working away at the competition one bite at a time. I get the impression Semroc ain't foolin' round this time. If Semroc is to be taken seriously and wants to be on the same playing field as Estes, Quest, or AT, it makes perfect sense to manufacture motors that work with their own kits. If prices are competitive, motors are more reliable(no mystery ejection charges), better effects, then I don't see marketing and sales being a problem. Offering kits (mostly) through direct sales hasn't hurt Semroc thus far, I don't think motors will be an exception. There is actually more competition with selling kits than there is with motors, so I don't foresee a problem. There is a risk just starting out, as there is with anything. Quality, price, and service will outweigh the negative, just as it has in the past.

I know that SEMROC will advertise in Sport Rocketry and Launch magazine. Any thoughts on what other magazines would give the biggest results for the bucks (don't say BANG!)?

Gee, Carl, scouting magazines? Popular Science? Whatelse?

Chas

When I was at AeroTech, we had a marketing firm perform a survey to see what magazines our client base was reading and, therefore, where we should be advertising.

Answers: Soldier of Fortune and Playboy.

I kid you not.

Couldn't convince Gary to advertise in either of them!

Bob

Here's a thought: Rocketry kinda goes hand-in-hand with computers, right? How about engineering mags, like Circuit Cellar Ink?

__________________
Craig McGraw

BARCLONE Rocketry -- http://barclone.rocketshoppe.com
BARCLONE Blogsite -- http://barclone.wordpress.com
BARCLONE Forum -- BARCLONE Forum

BARs helping BARs

SAM 0044
AMA 352635

I bet you couldn't get him to pay for any more outside market research after that, either

When the data falls so far away from the expected range, it's easy to reject it (even if it's correct).

Doug