#11
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
I concur with that last statement. I don't think they (meaning John Boren and whoever may have been helping him at the time) simply repackaged the upper stage of the Sasha (and changed the motor mount to 18mm) without test flying it on all the motors on the face card. But they are flying well above sea level there in Penrose or Pueblo, so there is some difference in performance. That said, that altitude estimate seems about as far off as it is for the Super Orbital Transport. What is the estimated weight for the ESAM from the face card (if given)? I know I seldom hit the estimated weights, but my builds are usually not much over the estimates. For example, Estes calls out on their web site 5.4 ounces for the SOT. Mine came in at 5.7.
__________________
Bernard Cawley NAR 89040 L1 - Life Member SAM 0061 AMA 42160 KG7AIE |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
There's no weight listed on either face card and being a HL exclusive the ESAM isn't posted on Estes website.
But the Red Nova is listed on the website and the official estimated weight is 85g. So considering both rockets were built by me with the same gluing and painting techniques I would expect my ESAM weight to be correct and not grossly over. I'm at about 250 foot elevation and I know drag racers love Vegas motor speedway because that 2,000 foot elevation is at the sweet spot where the air is thin enough to reduce drag but still thick enough to produce power. But I wouldn't think that would be enough of a factor for a safe launch- but then I'm not a rocket scientist. There's obviously something amiss considering the ESAM is larger and heavier than the Red Nova no matter how its assembled. The ESAM is one of my favorite rockets nowadays and gets launched often, I'm hoping someone else will chime in with their own ESAM statistics. |
#13
|
||||
|
||||
I have always found Estes max altitude estimates WILDLY optimistic.
__________________
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, TURMOIL, FIASCOS, and HAVOC ! |
#14
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
These days, an Estes A8 motors is really about an A3. That probably happened when the A8 was switched to the 1/2A6-A8-B4 sized nozzle. There are a couple of other Estes motors that really don’t match their average thrust designation such as the A10. I would consult the motor data from the NAR S&T site for more correct info.
__________________
'Til next time, Mike Toelle NAR 31692 L1 SAM 0373 |
#15
|
||||
|
||||
I am guessing that an A10-3T would be better than an A8-3 for a low Big Bertha flight since the casing is lighter.
Bill
__________________
It is well past time to Drill, Baby, Drill! If your June, July, August and September was like this, you might just hate summer too... Please unload your question before you ask it unless you have a concealed harry permit. : countdown begin cr dup . 1- ?dup 0= until cr ." Launch!" cr ; Give a man a rocket and he will fly for a day; teach him to build and he will spend the rest of his days sanding... |
#16
|
||||
|
||||
I am wondering about an expert build with minimal glue and no paint. If the fins aren't sanded perfectly it can cause more drag.
___ |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Alright I dug through my parts rockets box and pulled out a decommissioned Crossfire.
Little bit of glue and we're in business. Looks like same ID as a quarter. $3.25 in change brought it upto 106g. Any bets on the results of tonight's launch with a B4-4? |
#18
|
||||
|
||||
The A10 is a lot closer to a "10" than the A8 is to a "8".
Still calling the A8-x an A8-x is a BAD JOKE.
__________________
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, TURMOIL, FIASCOS, and HAVOC ! |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Alright so this was a brute force caveman trial but I think it proves a point.
Reclaimed Crossfire ISX (structurally sound). $3.25 in quarters jammed into it bringing it upto 106g. B4-4. Motor hook bent out of the way for a rear engine eject (since the quarters blocked off the motor tube). Choosing a black and silver rocket for a dusk launch probably wasn't the best choice but it's still visible. https://youtu.be/gbDiZlSv8yM Hard to tell in the video but it landed downhill from the launch pad so that was a few additional feet of drop (ESAM landed a little uphill). |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
The estimated weight for the ESAM is listed in the instructions - page 6, below the launch/flight/recovery diagram - 3.1 oz/87.8 g. Edit. Mine, with recovery gear, weighs 3.5 oz - I don’t build particularly light and mine has a kevlar leader, triple length woven elastic shock cord.
__________________
John Scott B. NAR #102949/L1 |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|