I heard a rumour that the B6-0s have been discontinued- can anyone help
before I start building a model which uses them? Is there a B-class
substitute? Thanks all.

Yes, they' were discontinued last year.  C11-5 were discontinued at
the same time.  I've not found another source of B6-0, but I still
have a couple of packs left.

Phil

Rats. I'd wanted to do a parallel-stage with C and two Bs, and I think three
Cs would be a bit powerful.
"Phil"  wrote in message
news:1184161475.677460.45180@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> Yes, they' were discontinued last year.  C11-5 were discontinued at
> the same time.  I've not found another source of B6-0, but I still
> have a couple of packs left.
>
> Phil
>

I've just done a parallel and had the same issues.  To get the
boosters to fall off while the main engine was burning I opted for 2 x
C6-0 with an E9-6 main engine.  I scaled it up from thne intended BT60
to BT70 to increase drag to keep the altitude down, then put a
transition to a BT 80 parachute section.

It looks fairly big, doesn't fly too high, and works a treat.

Phil

Yes, they' were discontinued last year.  C11-5 were discontinued at
the same time.  I've not found another source of B6-0, but I still
have a couple of packs left.

Phil

Rats. I'd wanted to do a parallel-stage with C and two Bs, and I think three
Cs would be a bit powerful.
"Phil"  wrote in message
news:1184161475.677460.45180@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> Yes, they' were discontinued last year.  C11-5 were discontinued at
> the same time.  I've not found another source of B6-0, but I still
> have a couple of packs left.
>
> Phil
>

I've just done a parallel and had the same issues.  To get the
boosters to fall off while the main engine was burning I opted for 2 x
C6-0 with an E9-6 main engine.  I scaled it up from thne intended BT60
to BT70 to increase drag to keep the altitude down, then put a
transition to a BT 80 parachute section.

It looks fairly big, doesn't fly too high, and works a treat.

Phil

I hadn't even thought of burn duration, thanks for reminding me.
The snag is, my sustainer is an existing rocket which wouldn't take a 24mm.
motor without surgery, even if a D motor weren't too powerful. It's scale,
as well, and there's no scope for a fat chute section.
I suppose a C4 sustainer might help me but no-one seems to carry them. Going
down to A boosters sounds a bit weedy.
Oh well, I've only wasted paper so far. Thanks for you help.
"Phil"  wrote in message
news:1184187515.032186.80180@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> I've just done a parallel and had the same issues.  To get the
> boosters to fall off while the main engine was burning I opted for 2 x
> C6-0 with an E9-6 main engine.  I scaled it up from thne intended BT60
> to BT70 to increase drag to keep the altitude down, then put a
> transition to a BT 80 parachute section.
>
> It looks fairly big, doesn't fly too high, and works a treat.
>
> Phil
>

Silly me, there isn't an A booster. Is there?
"Mark Dunn"  wrote in message
news:fqydnYaOv7IVdAjbnZ2dnUVZ8taknZ2d@bt.com...
> I hadn't even thought of burn duration, thanks for reminding me.
> The snag is, my sustainer is an existing rocket which wouldn't take a
24mm.
> motor without surgery, even if a D motor weren't too powerful. It's scale,
> as well, and there's no scope for a fat chute section.
> I suppose a C4 sustainer might help me but no-one seems to carry them.
Going
> down to A boosters sounds a bit weedy.
> Oh well, I've only wasted paper so far. Thanks for you help.
> "Phil"  wrote in message
> news:1184187515.032186.80180@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> > I've just done a parallel and had the same issues.  To get the
> > boosters to fall off while the main engine was burning I opted for 2 x
> > C6-0 with an E9-6 main engine.  I scaled it up from thne intended BT60
> > to BT70 to increase drag to keep the altitude down, then put a
> > transition to a BT 80 parachute section.
> >
> > It looks fairly big, doesn't fly too high, and works a treat.
> >
> > Phil
> >
>
>

Yes, they' were discontinued last year.  C11-5 were discontinued at
the same time.  I've not found another source of B6-0, but I still
have a couple of packs left.

Phil

Rats. I'd wanted to do a parallel-stage with C and two Bs, and I think three
Cs would be a bit powerful.
"Phil"  wrote in message
news:1184161475.677460.45180@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> Yes, they' were discontinued last year.  C11-5 were discontinued at
> the same time.  I've not found another source of B6-0, but I still
> have a couple of packs left.
>
> Phil
>

I've just done a parallel and had the same issues.  To get the
boosters to fall off while the main engine was burning I opted for 2 x
C6-0 with an E9-6 main engine.  I scaled it up from thne intended BT60
to BT70 to increase drag to keep the altitude down, then put a
transition to a BT 80 parachute section.

It looks fairly big, doesn't fly too high, and works a treat.

Phil

I hadn't even thought of burn duration, thanks for reminding me.
The snag is, my sustainer is an existing rocket which wouldn't take a 24mm.
motor without surgery, even if a D motor weren't too powerful. It's scale,
as well, and there's no scope for a fat chute section.
I suppose a C4 sustainer might help me but no-one seems to carry them. Going
down to A boosters sounds a bit weedy.
Oh well, I've only wasted paper so far. Thanks for you help.
"Phil"  wrote in message
news:1184187515.032186.80180@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> I've just done a parallel and had the same issues.  To get the
> boosters to fall off while the main engine was burning I opted for 2 x
> C6-0 with an E9-6 main engine.  I scaled it up from thne intended BT60
> to BT70 to increase drag to keep the altitude down, then put a
> transition to a BT 80 parachute section.
>
> It looks fairly big, doesn't fly too high, and works a treat.
>
> Phil
>

Silly me, there isn't an A booster. Is there?
"Mark Dunn"  wrote in message
news:fqydnYaOv7IVdAjbnZ2dnUVZ8taknZ2d@bt.com...
> I hadn't even thought of burn duration, thanks for reminding me.
> The snag is, my sustainer is an existing rocket which wouldn't take a
24mm.
> motor without surgery, even if a D motor weren't too powerful. It's scale,
> as well, and there's no scope for a fat chute section.
> I suppose a C4 sustainer might help me but no-one seems to carry them.
Going
> down to A boosters sounds a bit weedy.
> Oh well, I've only wasted paper so far. Thanks for you help.
> "Phil"  wrote in message
> news:1184187515.032186.80180@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> > I've just done a parallel and had the same issues.  To get the
> > boosters to fall off while the main engine was burning I opted for 2 x
> > C6-0 with an E9-6 main engine.  I scaled it up from thne intended BT60
> > to BT70 to increase drag to keep the altitude down, then put a
> > transition to a BT 80 parachute section.
> >
> > It looks fairly big, doesn't fly too high, and works a treat.
> >
> > Phil
> >
>
>

Mark-

Would the boosters fall off your model at burn-out as they do with 
Phil's model? If so, maybe you could use B6-2's?

No more "A" boosters, not since Estes discontinued the A10-0.

Mark Dunn wrote:
> I hadn't even thought of burn duration, thanks for reminding me.
> The snag is, my sustainer is an existing rocket which wouldn't take a 24mm.
> motor without surgery, even if a D motor weren't too powerful. It's scale,
> as well, and there's no scope for a fat chute section.
> I suppose a C4 sustainer might help me but no-one seems to carry them. Going
> down to A boosters sounds a bit weedy.
> Oh well, I've only wasted paper so far. Thanks for you help.
> "Phil"  wrote 
>> I've just done a parallel and had the same issues.  To get the
>> boosters to fall off while the main engine was burning I opted for 2 x
>> C6-0 with an E9-6 main engine.


-- 
Steve Humphrey
(replace "spambait" with "merlinus" to respond directly to me)

On a related note, is there any alternative slowmatch available given
that PIC is, or soon will be, discontinued as well?

The reason it's related is that it might be possible to use B6-2's on
drag-separated boosters.  To prevent the boosters from falling off if
they ignite slightly later than the sustainer, they could be secured
with threads to which are attached suitable lengths of slowmatch.  The
slowmatch should be good for about 1 second of burn, after which it
burns through the thread and releases the boosters, whose thrust should
be burning out at about the same time.  (OK, slightly earlier.)  And
about 2 seconds after that, the boosters deploy their recovery systems.
I haven't tried this myself but I've seen John do it with his big
Blackbird parallel-staged rocket.  (His boosters used clusters of C6-3's
but the principle is the same.)

Another point is that B6-0's have been discontinued before, then brought
back.  See if Malcolm or Alan still have them in stock.  It may be that
other vendors in the US have large stocks, so Estes can't sell them, and
are waiting for existing stocks to be moved before they resume production.

Failing all else, use C6-0's anyway and see if you can fly the rocket on
Fairlie Moor instead of the regular field at Kelburn.

-- 
        "It'll be fine.  I've done this before." - M. Garibaldi
-------------+------------------------------+----------------------------
  Adrian Hurt | E-mail: adrian@macs.hw.ac.uk |
              | UKRA:   1026                 | Orangutan in space: 5/8/01

This rocket will be parallel-staged but with a second stage, so I don't
think I want the boosters hanging around.
I hope to be emulating Adrian's retention system fron Thunderbird and the
coupler arrangement from Rheinbote.
Re the former, what stops the boosters from taking off themselves if they
light early?
"Adrian Hurt"  wrote in message
news:1184263343.481253@glencoe.hw.ac.uk...
> On a related note, is there any alternative slowmatch available given
> that PIC is, or soon will be, discontinued as well?
>
> The reason it's related is that it might be possible to use B6-2's on
> drag-separated boosters.  To prevent the boosters from falling off if
> they ignite slightly later than the sustainer, they could be secured
> with threads to which are attached suitable lengths of slowmatch.  The
> slowmatch should be good for about 1 second of burn, after which it
> burns through the thread and releases the boosters, whose thrust should
> be burning out at about the same time.  (OK, slightly earlier.)  And
> about 2 seconds after that, the boosters deploy their recovery systems.
> I haven't tried this myself but I've seen John do it with his big
> Blackbird parallel-staged rocket.  (His boosters used clusters of C6-3's
> but the principle is the same.)
>
> Another point is that B6-0's have been discontinued before, then brought
> back.  See if Malcolm or Alan still have them in stock.  It may be that
> other vendors in the US have large stocks, so Estes can't sell them, and
> are waiting for existing stocks to be moved before they resume production.
>
> Failing all else, use C6-0's anyway and see if you can fly the rocket on
> Fairlie Moor instead of the regular field at Kelburn.
>
> -- 
>         "It'll be fine.  I've done this before." - M. Garibaldi
> -------------+------------------------------+----------------------------
>   Adrian Hurt | E-mail: adrian@macs.hw.ac.uk |
>               | UKRA:   1026                 | Orangutan in space: 5/8/01

Yes, they' were discontinued last year.  C11-5 were discontinued at
the same time.  I've not found another source of B6-0, but I still
have a couple of packs left.

Phil

Rats. I'd wanted to do a parallel-stage with C and two Bs, and I think three
Cs would be a bit powerful.
"Phil"  wrote in message
news:1184161475.677460.45180@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> Yes, they' were discontinued last year.  C11-5 were discontinued at
> the same time.  I've not found another source of B6-0, but I still
> have a couple of packs left.
>
> Phil
>

I've just done a parallel and had the same issues.  To get the
boosters to fall off while the main engine was burning I opted for 2 x
C6-0 with an E9-6 main engine.  I scaled it up from thne intended BT60
to BT70 to increase drag to keep the altitude down, then put a
transition to a BT 80 parachute section.

It looks fairly big, doesn't fly too high, and works a treat.

Phil

I hadn't even thought of burn duration, thanks for reminding me.
The snag is, my sustainer is an existing rocket which wouldn't take a 24mm.
motor without surgery, even if a D motor weren't too powerful. It's scale,
as well, and there's no scope for a fat chute section.
I suppose a C4 sustainer might help me but no-one seems to carry them. Going
down to A boosters sounds a bit weedy.
Oh well, I've only wasted paper so far. Thanks for you help.
"Phil"  wrote in message
news:1184187515.032186.80180@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> I've just done a parallel and had the same issues.  To get the
> boosters to fall off while the main engine was burning I opted for 2 x
> C6-0 with an E9-6 main engine.  I scaled it up from thne intended BT60
> to BT70 to increase drag to keep the altitude down, then put a
> transition to a BT 80 parachute section.
>
> It looks fairly big, doesn't fly too high, and works a treat.
>
> Phil
>

Silly me, there isn't an A booster. Is there?
"Mark Dunn"  wrote in message
news:fqydnYaOv7IVdAjbnZ2dnUVZ8taknZ2d@bt.com...
> I hadn't even thought of burn duration, thanks for reminding me.
> The snag is, my sustainer is an existing rocket which wouldn't take a
24mm.
> motor without surgery, even if a D motor weren't too powerful. It's scale,
> as well, and there's no scope for a fat chute section.
> I suppose a C4 sustainer might help me but no-one seems to carry them.
Going
> down to A boosters sounds a bit weedy.
> Oh well, I've only wasted paper so far. Thanks for you help.
> "Phil"  wrote in message
> news:1184187515.032186.80180@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> > I've just done a parallel and had the same issues.  To get the
> > boosters to fall off while the main engine was burning I opted for 2 x
> > C6-0 with an E9-6 main engine.  I scaled it up from thne intended BT60
> > to BT70 to increase drag to keep the altitude down, then put a
> > transition to a BT 80 parachute section.
> >
> > It looks fairly big, doesn't fly too high, and works a treat.
> >
> > Phil
> >
>
>

Mark-

Would the boosters fall off your model at burn-out as they do with 
Phil's model? If so, maybe you could use B6-2's?

No more "A" boosters, not since Estes discontinued the A10-0.

Mark Dunn wrote:
> I hadn't even thought of burn duration, thanks for reminding me.
> The snag is, my sustainer is an existing rocket which wouldn't take a 24mm.
> motor without surgery, even if a D motor weren't too powerful. It's scale,
> as well, and there's no scope for a fat chute section.
> I suppose a C4 sustainer might help me but no-one seems to carry them. Going
> down to A boosters sounds a bit weedy.
> Oh well, I've only wasted paper so far. Thanks for you help.
> "Phil"  wrote 
>> I've just done a parallel and had the same issues.  To get the
>> boosters to fall off while the main engine was burning I opted for 2 x
>> C6-0 with an E9-6 main engine.


-- 
Steve Humphrey
(replace "spambait" with "merlinus" to respond directly to me)

On a related note, is there any alternative slowmatch available given
that PIC is, or soon will be, discontinued as well?

The reason it's related is that it might be possible to use B6-2's on
drag-separated boosters.  To prevent the boosters from falling off if
they ignite slightly later than the sustainer, they could be secured
with threads to which are attached suitable lengths of slowmatch.  The
slowmatch should be good for about 1 second of burn, after which it
burns through the thread and releases the boosters, whose thrust should
be burning out at about the same time.  (OK, slightly earlier.)  And
about 2 seconds after that, the boosters deploy their recovery systems.
I haven't tried this myself but I've seen John do it with his big
Blackbird parallel-staged rocket.  (His boosters used clusters of C6-3's
but the principle is the same.)

Another point is that B6-0's have been discontinued before, then brought
back.  See if Malcolm or Alan still have them in stock.  It may be that
other vendors in the US have large stocks, so Estes can't sell them, and
are waiting for existing stocks to be moved before they resume production.

Failing all else, use C6-0's anyway and see if you can fly the rocket on
Fairlie Moor instead of the regular field at Kelburn.

-- 
        "It'll be fine.  I've done this before." - M. Garibaldi
-------------+------------------------------+----------------------------
  Adrian Hurt | E-mail: adrian@macs.hw.ac.uk |
              | UKRA:   1026                 | Orangutan in space: 5/8/01

This rocket will be parallel-staged but with a second stage, so I don't
think I want the boosters hanging around.
I hope to be emulating Adrian's retention system fron Thunderbird and the
coupler arrangement from Rheinbote.
Re the former, what stops the boosters from taking off themselves if they
light early?
"Adrian Hurt"  wrote in message
news:1184263343.481253@glencoe.hw.ac.uk...
> On a related note, is there any alternative slowmatch available given
> that PIC is, or soon will be, discontinued as well?
>
> The reason it's related is that it might be possible to use B6-2's on
> drag-separated boosters.  To prevent the boosters from falling off if
> they ignite slightly later than the sustainer, they could be secured
> with threads to which are attached suitable lengths of slowmatch.  The
> slowmatch should be good for about 1 second of burn, after which it
> burns through the thread and releases the boosters, whose thrust should
> be burning out at about the same time.  (OK, slightly earlier.)  And
> about 2 seconds after that, the boosters deploy their recovery systems.
> I haven't tried this myself but I've seen John do it with his big
> Blackbird parallel-staged rocket.  (His boosters used clusters of C6-3's
> but the principle is the same.)
>
> Another point is that B6-0's have been discontinued before, then brought
> back.  See if Malcolm or Alan still have them in stock.  It may be that
> other vendors in the US have large stocks, so Estes can't sell them, and
> are waiting for existing stocks to be moved before they resume production.
>
> Failing all else, use C6-0's anyway and see if you can fly the rocket on
> Fairlie Moor instead of the regular field at Kelburn.
>
> -- 
>         "It'll be fine.  I've done this before." - M. Garibaldi
> -------------+------------------------------+----------------------------
>   Adrian Hurt | E-mail: adrian@macs.hw.ac.uk |
>               | UKRA:   1026                 | Orangutan in space: 5/8/01

Mark Dunn wrote:
> This rocket will be parallel-staged but with a second stage, so I don't
> think I want the boosters hanging around.
> I hope to be emulating Adrian's retention system fron Thunderbird and the
> coupler arrangement from Rheinbote.
> Re the former, what stops the boosters from taking off themselves if they
> light early?

Blocks of balsa.  The ones on the sustainer have lugs:
http://www.macs.hw.ac.uk/~adrian/thndrbrd/aftlugs.jpg

And those on the boosters have tubes to fit:
http://www.macs.hw.ac.uk/~adrian/thndrbrd/afttubes.jpg

Not only do these stop the boosters from flying off, it is through these
blocks that force from the boosters is transferred to the sustainer,
making them actual boosters and not just effects fireworks. :)

-- 
        "It'll be fine.  I've done this before." - M. Garibaldi
-------------+------------------------------+----------------------------
  Adrian Hurt | E-mail: adrian@macs.hw.ac.uk |
              | UKRA:   1026                 | Orangutan in space: 5/8/01

Right. I've seen them of course, but have just rotated them through 180° in
my mind so that they work.
The bottom sustainer lugs point downwards, the top ones upwards, is that
correct?
"Adrian Hurt"  wrote in message
news:1184315268.603423@glencoe.hw.ac.uk...
> Mark Dunn wrote:
> > This rocket will be parallel-staged but with a second stage, so I don't
> > think I want the boosters hanging around.
> > I hope to be emulating Adrian's retention system fron Thunderbird and
the
> > coupler arrangement from Rheinbote.
> > Re the former, what stops the boosters from taking off themselves if
they
> > light early?
>
> Blocks of balsa.  The ones on the sustainer have lugs:
> http://www.macs.hw.ac.uk/~adrian/thndrbrd/aftlugs.jpg
>
> And those on the boosters have tubes to fit:
> http://www.macs.hw.ac.uk/~adrian/thndrbrd/afttubes.jpg
>
> Not only do these stop the boosters from flying off, it is through these
> blocks that force from the boosters is transferred to the sustainer,
> making them actual boosters and not just effects fireworks. :)
>
> -- 
>         "It'll be fine.  I've done this before." - M. Garibaldi
> -------------+------------------------------+----------------------------
>   Adrian Hurt | E-mail: adrian@macs.hw.ac.uk |
>               | UKRA:   1026                 | Orangutan in space: 5/8/01

Yes, they' were discontinued last year.  C11-5 were discontinued at
the same time.  I've not found another source of B6-0, but I still
have a couple of packs left.

Phil

Rats. I'd wanted to do a parallel-stage with C and two Bs, and I think three
Cs would be a bit powerful.
"Phil"  wrote in message
news:1184161475.677460.45180@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> Yes, they' were discontinued last year.  C11-5 were discontinued at
> the same time.  I've not found another source of B6-0, but I still
> have a couple of packs left.
>
> Phil
>

I've just done a parallel and had the same issues.  To get the
boosters to fall off while the main engine was burning I opted for 2 x
C6-0 with an E9-6 main engine.  I scaled it up from thne intended BT60
to BT70 to increase drag to keep the altitude down, then put a
transition to a BT 80 parachute section.

It looks fairly big, doesn't fly too high, and works a treat.

Phil

I hadn't even thought of burn duration, thanks for reminding me.
The snag is, my sustainer is an existing rocket which wouldn't take a 24mm.
motor without surgery, even if a D motor weren't too powerful. It's scale,
as well, and there's no scope for a fat chute section.
I suppose a C4 sustainer might help me but no-one seems to carry them. Going
down to A boosters sounds a bit weedy.
Oh well, I've only wasted paper so far. Thanks for you help.
"Phil"  wrote in message
news:1184187515.032186.80180@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> I've just done a parallel and had the same issues.  To get the
> boosters to fall off while the main engine was burning I opted for 2 x
> C6-0 with an E9-6 main engine.  I scaled it up from thne intended BT60
> to BT70 to increase drag to keep the altitude down, then put a
> transition to a BT 80 parachute section.
>
> It looks fairly big, doesn't fly too high, and works a treat.
>
> Phil
>

Silly me, there isn't an A booster. Is there?
"Mark Dunn"  wrote in message
news:fqydnYaOv7IVdAjbnZ2dnUVZ8taknZ2d@bt.com...
> I hadn't even thought of burn duration, thanks for reminding me.
> The snag is, my sustainer is an existing rocket which wouldn't take a
24mm.
> motor without surgery, even if a D motor weren't too powerful. It's scale,
> as well, and there's no scope for a fat chute section.
> I suppose a C4 sustainer might help me but no-one seems to carry them.
Going
> down to A boosters sounds a bit weedy.
> Oh well, I've only wasted paper so far. Thanks for you help.
> "Phil"  wrote in message
> news:1184187515.032186.80180@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> > I've just done a parallel and had the same issues.  To get the
> > boosters to fall off while the main engine was burning I opted for 2 x
> > C6-0 with an E9-6 main engine.  I scaled it up from thne intended BT60
> > to BT70 to increase drag to keep the altitude down, then put a
> > transition to a BT 80 parachute section.
> >
> > It looks fairly big, doesn't fly too high, and works a treat.
> >
> > Phil
> >
>
>

Mark-

Would the boosters fall off your model at burn-out as they do with 
Phil's model? If so, maybe you could use B6-2's?

No more "A" boosters, not since Estes discontinued the A10-0.

Mark Dunn wrote:
> I hadn't even thought of burn duration, thanks for reminding me.
> The snag is, my sustainer is an existing rocket which wouldn't take a 24mm.
> motor without surgery, even if a D motor weren't too powerful. It's scale,
> as well, and there's no scope for a fat chute section.
> I suppose a C4 sustainer might help me but no-one seems to carry them. Going
> down to A boosters sounds a bit weedy.
> Oh well, I've only wasted paper so far. Thanks for you help.
> "Phil"  wrote 
>> I've just done a parallel and had the same issues.  To get the
>> boosters to fall off while the main engine was burning I opted for 2 x
>> C6-0 with an E9-6 main engine.


-- 
Steve Humphrey
(replace "spambait" with "merlinus" to respond directly to me)

On a related note, is there any alternative slowmatch available given
that PIC is, or soon will be, discontinued as well?

The reason it's related is that it might be possible to use B6-2's on
drag-separated boosters.  To prevent the boosters from falling off if
they ignite slightly later than the sustainer, they could be secured
with threads to which are attached suitable lengths of slowmatch.  The
slowmatch should be good for about 1 second of burn, after which it
burns through the thread and releases the boosters, whose thrust should
be burning out at about the same time.  (OK, slightly earlier.)  And
about 2 seconds after that, the boosters deploy their recovery systems.
I haven't tried this myself but I've seen John do it with his big
Blackbird parallel-staged rocket.  (His boosters used clusters of C6-3's
but the principle is the same.)

Another point is that B6-0's have been discontinued before, then brought
back.  See if Malcolm or Alan still have them in stock.  It may be that
other vendors in the US have large stocks, so Estes can't sell them, and
are waiting for existing stocks to be moved before they resume production.

Failing all else, use C6-0's anyway and see if you can fly the rocket on
Fairlie Moor instead of the regular field at Kelburn.

-- 
        "It'll be fine.  I've done this before." - M. Garibaldi
-------------+------------------------------+----------------------------
  Adrian Hurt | E-mail: adrian@macs.hw.ac.uk |
              | UKRA:   1026                 | Orangutan in space: 5/8/01

This rocket will be parallel-staged but with a second stage, so I don't
think I want the boosters hanging around.
I hope to be emulating Adrian's retention system fron Thunderbird and the
coupler arrangement from Rheinbote.
Re the former, what stops the boosters from taking off themselves if they
light early?
"Adrian Hurt"  wrote in message
news:1184263343.481253@glencoe.hw.ac.uk...
> On a related note, is there any alternative slowmatch available given
> that PIC is, or soon will be, discontinued as well?
>
> The reason it's related is that it might be possible to use B6-2's on
> drag-separated boosters.  To prevent the boosters from falling off if
> they ignite slightly later than the sustainer, they could be secured
> with threads to which are attached suitable lengths of slowmatch.  The
> slowmatch should be good for about 1 second of burn, after which it
> burns through the thread and releases the boosters, whose thrust should
> be burning out at about the same time.  (OK, slightly earlier.)  And
> about 2 seconds after that, the boosters deploy their recovery systems.
> I haven't tried this myself but I've seen John do it with his big
> Blackbird parallel-staged rocket.  (His boosters used clusters of C6-3's
> but the principle is the same.)
>
> Another point is that B6-0's have been discontinued before, then brought
> back.  See if Malcolm or Alan still have them in stock.  It may be that
> other vendors in the US have large stocks, so Estes can't sell them, and
> are waiting for existing stocks to be moved before they resume production.
>
> Failing all else, use C6-0's anyway and see if you can fly the rocket on
> Fairlie Moor instead of the regular field at Kelburn.
>
> -- 
>         "It'll be fine.  I've done this before." - M. Garibaldi
> -------------+------------------------------+----------------------------
>   Adrian Hurt | E-mail: adrian@macs.hw.ac.uk |
>               | UKRA:   1026                 | Orangutan in space: 5/8/01

Mark Dunn wrote:
> This rocket will be parallel-staged but with a second stage, so I don't
> think I want the boosters hanging around.
> I hope to be emulating Adrian's retention system fron Thunderbird and the
> coupler arrangement from Rheinbote.
> Re the former, what stops the boosters from taking off themselves if they
> light early?

Blocks of balsa.  The ones on the sustainer have lugs:
http://www.macs.hw.ac.uk/~adrian/thndrbrd/aftlugs.jpg

And those on the boosters have tubes to fit:
http://www.macs.hw.ac.uk/~adrian/thndrbrd/afttubes.jpg

Not only do these stop the boosters from flying off, it is through these
blocks that force from the boosters is transferred to the sustainer,
making them actual boosters and not just effects fireworks. :)

-- 
        "It'll be fine.  I've done this before." - M. Garibaldi
-------------+------------------------------+----------------------------
  Adrian Hurt | E-mail: adrian@macs.hw.ac.uk |
              | UKRA:   1026                 | Orangutan in space: 5/8/01

Right. I've seen them of course, but have just rotated them through 180° in
my mind so that they work.
The bottom sustainer lugs point downwards, the top ones upwards, is that
correct?
"Adrian Hurt"  wrote in message
news:1184315268.603423@glencoe.hw.ac.uk...
> Mark Dunn wrote:
> > This rocket will be parallel-staged but with a second stage, so I don't
> > think I want the boosters hanging around.
> > I hope to be emulating Adrian's retention system fron Thunderbird and
the
> > coupler arrangement from Rheinbote.
> > Re the former, what stops the boosters from taking off themselves if
they
> > light early?
>
> Blocks of balsa.  The ones on the sustainer have lugs:
> http://www.macs.hw.ac.uk/~adrian/thndrbrd/aftlugs.jpg
>
> And those on the boosters have tubes to fit:
> http://www.macs.hw.ac.uk/~adrian/thndrbrd/afttubes.jpg
>
> Not only do these stop the boosters from flying off, it is through these
> blocks that force from the boosters is transferred to the sustainer,
> making them actual boosters and not just effects fireworks. :)
>
> -- 
>         "It'll be fine.  I've done this before." - M. Garibaldi
> -------------+------------------------------+----------------------------
>   Adrian Hurt | E-mail: adrian@macs.hw.ac.uk |
>               | UKRA:   1026                 | Orangutan in space: 5/8/01

Yes, they' were discontinued last year.  C11-5 were discontinued at
the same time.  I've not found another source of B6-0, but I still
have a couple of packs left.

Phil

Rats. I'd wanted to do a parallel-stage with C and two Bs, and I think three
Cs would be a bit powerful.
"Phil"  wrote in message
news:1184161475.677460.45180@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> Yes, they' were discontinued last year.  C11-5 were discontinued at
> the same time.  I've not found another source of B6-0, but I still
> have a couple of packs left.
>
> Phil
>

I've just done a parallel and had the same issues.  To get the
boosters to fall off while the main engine was burning I opted for 2 x
C6-0 with an E9-6 main engine.  I scaled it up from thne intended BT60
to BT70 to increase drag to keep the altitude down, then put a
transition to a BT 80 parachute section.

It looks fairly big, doesn't fly too high, and works a treat.

Phil

I hadn't even thought of burn duration, thanks for reminding me.
The snag is, my sustainer is an existing rocket which wouldn't take a 24mm.
motor without surgery, even if a D motor weren't too powerful. It's scale,
as well, and there's no scope for a fat chute section.
I suppose a C4 sustainer might help me but no-one seems to carry them. Going
down to A boosters sounds a bit weedy.
Oh well, I've only wasted paper so far. Thanks for you help.
"Phil"  wrote in message
news:1184187515.032186.80180@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> I've just done a parallel and had the same issues.  To get the
> boosters to fall off while the main engine was burning I opted for 2 x
> C6-0 with an E9-6 main engine.  I scaled it up from thne intended BT60
> to BT70 to increase drag to keep the altitude down, then put a
> transition to a BT 80 parachute section.
>
> It looks fairly big, doesn't fly too high, and works a treat.
>
> Phil
>

Silly me, there isn't an A booster. Is there?
"Mark Dunn"  wrote in message
news:fqydnYaOv7IVdAjbnZ2dnUVZ8taknZ2d@bt.com...
> I hadn't even thought of burn duration, thanks for reminding me.
> The snag is, my sustainer is an existing rocket which wouldn't take a
24mm.
> motor without surgery, even if a D motor weren't too powerful. It's scale,
> as well, and there's no scope for a fat chute section.
> I suppose a C4 sustainer might help me but no-one seems to carry them.
Going
> down to A boosters sounds a bit weedy.
> Oh well, I've only wasted paper so far. Thanks for you help.
> "Phil"  wrote in message
> news:1184187515.032186.80180@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> > I've just done a parallel and had the same issues.  To get the
> > boosters to fall off while the main engine was burning I opted for 2 x
> > C6-0 with an E9-6 main engine.  I scaled it up from thne intended BT60
> > to BT70 to increase drag to keep the altitude down, then put a
> > transition to a BT 80 parachute section.
> >
> > It looks fairly big, doesn't fly too high, and works a treat.
> >
> > Phil
> >
>
>

Mark-

Would the boosters fall off your model at burn-out as they do with 
Phil's model? If so, maybe you could use B6-2's?

No more "A" boosters, not since Estes discontinued the A10-0.

Mark Dunn wrote:
> I hadn't even thought of burn duration, thanks for reminding me.
> The snag is, my sustainer is an existing rocket which wouldn't take a 24mm.
> motor without surgery, even if a D motor weren't too powerful. It's scale,
> as well, and there's no scope for a fat chute section.
> I suppose a C4 sustainer might help me but no-one seems to carry them. Going
> down to A boosters sounds a bit weedy.
> Oh well, I've only wasted paper so far. Thanks for you help.
> "Phil"  wrote 
>> I've just done a parallel and had the same issues.  To get the
>> boosters to fall off while the main engine was burning I opted for 2 x
>> C6-0 with an E9-6 main engine.


-- 
Steve Humphrey
(replace "spambait" with "merlinus" to respond directly to me)

On a related note, is there any alternative slowmatch available given
that PIC is, or soon will be, discontinued as well?

The reason it's related is that it might be possible to use B6-2's on
drag-separated boosters.  To prevent the boosters from falling off if
they ignite slightly later than the sustainer, they could be secured
with threads to which are attached suitable lengths of slowmatch.  The
slowmatch should be good for about 1 second of burn, after which it
burns through the thread and releases the boosters, whose thrust should
be burning out at about the same time.  (OK, slightly earlier.)  And
about 2 seconds after that, the boosters deploy their recovery systems.
I haven't tried this myself but I've seen John do it with his big
Blackbird parallel-staged rocket.  (His boosters used clusters of C6-3's
but the principle is the same.)

Another point is that B6-0's have been discontinued before, then brought
back.  See if Malcolm or Alan still have them in stock.  It may be that
other vendors in the US have large stocks, so Estes can't sell them, and
are waiting for existing stocks to be moved before they resume production.

Failing all else, use C6-0's anyway and see if you can fly the rocket on
Fairlie Moor instead of the regular field at Kelburn.

-- 
        "It'll be fine.  I've done this before." - M. Garibaldi
-------------+------------------------------+----------------------------
  Adrian Hurt | E-mail: adrian@macs.hw.ac.uk |
              | UKRA:   1026                 | Orangutan in space: 5/8/01

This rocket will be parallel-staged but with a second stage, so I don't
think I want the boosters hanging around.
I hope to be emulating Adrian's retention system fron Thunderbird and the
coupler arrangement from Rheinbote.
Re the former, what stops the boosters from taking off themselves if they
light early?
"Adrian Hurt"  wrote in message
news:1184263343.481253@glencoe.hw.ac.uk...
> On a related note, is there any alternative slowmatch available given
> that PIC is, or soon will be, discontinued as well?
>
> The reason it's related is that it might be possible to use B6-2's on
> drag-separated boosters.  To prevent the boosters from falling off if
> they ignite slightly later than the sustainer, they could be secured
> with threads to which are attached suitable lengths of slowmatch.  The
> slowmatch should be good for about 1 second of burn, after which it
> burns through the thread and releases the boosters, whose thrust should
> be burning out at about the same time.  (OK, slightly earlier.)  And
> about 2 seconds after that, the boosters deploy their recovery systems.
> I haven't tried this myself but I've seen John do it with his big
> Blackbird parallel-staged rocket.  (His boosters used clusters of C6-3's
> but the principle is the same.)
>
> Another point is that B6-0's have been discontinued before, then brought
> back.  See if Malcolm or Alan still have them in stock.  It may be that
> other vendors in the US have large stocks, so Estes can't sell them, and
> are waiting for existing stocks to be moved before they resume production.
>
> Failing all else, use C6-0's anyway and see if you can fly the rocket on
> Fairlie Moor instead of the regular field at Kelburn.
>
> -- 
>         "It'll be fine.  I've done this before." - M. Garibaldi
> -------------+------------------------------+----------------------------
>   Adrian Hurt | E-mail: adrian@macs.hw.ac.uk |
>               | UKRA:   1026                 | Orangutan in space: 5/8/01

Mark Dunn wrote:
> This rocket will be parallel-staged but with a second stage, so I don't
> think I want the boosters hanging around.
> I hope to be emulating Adrian's retention system fron Thunderbird and the
> coupler arrangement from Rheinbote.
> Re the former, what stops the boosters from taking off themselves if they
> light early?

Blocks of balsa.  The ones on the sustainer have lugs:
http://www.macs.hw.ac.uk/~adrian/thndrbrd/aftlugs.jpg

And those on the boosters have tubes to fit:
http://www.macs.hw.ac.uk/~adrian/thndrbrd/afttubes.jpg

Not only do these stop the boosters from flying off, it is through these
blocks that force from the boosters is transferred to the sustainer,
making them actual boosters and not just effects fireworks. :)

-- 
        "It'll be fine.  I've done this before." - M. Garibaldi
-------------+------------------------------+----------------------------
  Adrian Hurt | E-mail: adrian@macs.hw.ac.uk |
              | UKRA:   1026                 | Orangutan in space: 5/8/01

Right. I've seen them of course, but have just rotated them through 180° in
my mind so that they work.
The bottom sustainer lugs point downwards, the top ones upwards, is that
correct?
"Adrian Hurt"  wrote in message
news:1184315268.603423@glencoe.hw.ac.uk...
> Mark Dunn wrote:
> > This rocket will be parallel-staged but with a second stage, so I don't
> > think I want the boosters hanging around.
> > I hope to be emulating Adrian's retention system fron Thunderbird and
the
> > coupler arrangement from Rheinbote.
> > Re the former, what stops the boosters from taking off themselves if
they
> > light early?
>
> Blocks of balsa.  The ones on the sustainer have lugs:
> http://www.macs.hw.ac.uk/~adrian/thndrbrd/aftlugs.jpg
>
> And those on the boosters have tubes to fit:
> http://www.macs.hw.ac.uk/~adrian/thndrbrd/afttubes.jpg
>
> Not only do these stop the boosters from flying off, it is through these
> blocks that force from the boosters is transferred to the sustainer,
> making them actual boosters and not just effects fireworks. :)
>
> -- 
>         "It'll be fine.  I've done this before." - M. Garibaldi
> -------------+------------------------------+----------------------------
>   Adrian Hurt | E-mail: adrian@macs.hw.ac.uk |
>               | UKRA:   1026                 | Orangutan in space: 5/8/01

Mark Dunn wrote:
> Right. I've seen them of course, but have just rotated them through 180° in
> my mind so that they work.
> The bottom sustainer lugs point downwards, the top ones upwards, is that
> correct?

Yes.  The basic idea is that the boosters clamp onto the sustainer and
can't separate until their nose-cones are blown off.  Another small
balsa block on each booster engages a slot in the sustainer to make
sure that the booster main body can't slip back.

Take a look at my page about the model Thunderbird, which explains the
booster attachment system in detail:
http://www.macs.hw.ac.uk/~adrian/thndrbrd/

-- 
        "It'll be fine.  I've done this before." - M. Garibaldi
-------------+------------------------------+----------------------------
  Adrian Hurt | E-mail: adrian@macs.hw.ac.uk |
              | UKRA:   1026                 | Orangutan in space: 5/8/01

On Jul 12, 7:02 pm, Adrian Hurt  wrote:
> On a related note, is there any alternative slowmatch available given
> that PIC is, or soon will be, discontinued as well?

I believe the answer is yes, there is a similar alternative.

Niall

Yes, they' were discontinued last year.  C11-5 were discontinued at
the same time.  I've not found another source of B6-0, but I still
have a couple of packs left.

Phil

Rats. I'd wanted to do a parallel-stage with C and two Bs, and I think three
Cs would be a bit powerful.
"Phil"  wrote in message
news:1184161475.677460.45180@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> Yes, they' were discontinued last year.  C11-5 were discontinued at
> the same time.  I've not found another source of B6-0, but I still
> have a couple of packs left.
>
> Phil
>

I've just done a parallel and had the same issues.  To get the
boosters to fall off while the main engine was burning I opted for 2 x
C6-0 with an E9-6 main engine.  I scaled it up from thne intended BT60
to BT70 to increase drag to keep the altitude down, then put a
transition to a BT 80 parachute section.

It looks fairly big, doesn't fly too high, and works a treat.

Phil

I hadn't even thought of burn duration, thanks for reminding me.
The snag is, my sustainer is an existing rocket which wouldn't take a 24mm.
motor without surgery, even if a D motor weren't too powerful. It's scale,
as well, and there's no scope for a fat chute section.
I suppose a C4 sustainer might help me but no-one seems to carry them. Going
down to A boosters sounds a bit weedy.
Oh well, I've only wasted paper so far. Thanks for you help.
"Phil"  wrote in message
news:1184187515.032186.80180@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> I've just done a parallel and had the same issues.  To get the
> boosters to fall off while the main engine was burning I opted for 2 x
> C6-0 with an E9-6 main engine.  I scaled it up from thne intended BT60
> to BT70 to increase drag to keep the altitude down, then put a
> transition to a BT 80 parachute section.
>
> It looks fairly big, doesn't fly too high, and works a treat.
>
> Phil
>

Silly me, there isn't an A booster. Is there?
"Mark Dunn"  wrote in message
news:fqydnYaOv7IVdAjbnZ2dnUVZ8taknZ2d@bt.com...
> I hadn't even thought of burn duration, thanks for reminding me.
> The snag is, my sustainer is an existing rocket which wouldn't take a
24mm.
> motor without surgery, even if a D motor weren't too powerful. It's scale,
> as well, and there's no scope for a fat chute section.
> I suppose a C4 sustainer might help me but no-one seems to carry them.
Going
> down to A boosters sounds a bit weedy.
> Oh well, I've only wasted paper so far. Thanks for you help.
> "Phil"  wrote in message
> news:1184187515.032186.80180@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> > I've just done a parallel and had the same issues.  To get the
> > boosters to fall off while the main engine was burning I opted for 2 x
> > C6-0 with an E9-6 main engine.  I scaled it up from thne intended BT60
> > to BT70 to increase drag to keep the altitude down, then put a
> > transition to a BT 80 parachute section.
> >
> > It looks fairly big, doesn't fly too high, and works a treat.
> >
> > Phil
> >
>
>

Mark-

Would the boosters fall off your model at burn-out as they do with 
Phil's model? If so, maybe you could use B6-2's?

No more "A" boosters, not since Estes discontinued the A10-0.

Mark Dunn wrote:
> I hadn't even thought of burn duration, thanks for reminding me.
> The snag is, my sustainer is an existing rocket which wouldn't take a 24mm.
> motor without surgery, even if a D motor weren't too powerful. It's scale,
> as well, and there's no scope for a fat chute section.
> I suppose a C4 sustainer might help me but no-one seems to carry them. Going
> down to A boosters sounds a bit weedy.
> Oh well, I've only wasted paper so far. Thanks for you help.
> "Phil"  wrote 
>> I've just done a parallel and had the same issues.  To get the
>> boosters to fall off while the main engine was burning I opted for 2 x
>> C6-0 with an E9-6 main engine.


-- 
Steve Humphrey
(replace "spambait" with "merlinus" to respond directly to me)

On a related note, is there any alternative slowmatch available given
that PIC is, or soon will be, discontinued as well?

The reason it's related is that it might be possible to use B6-2's on
drag-separated boosters.  To prevent the boosters from falling off if
they ignite slightly later than the sustainer, they could be secured
with threads to which are attached suitable lengths of slowmatch.  The
slowmatch should be good for about 1 second of burn, after which it
burns through the thread and releases the boosters, whose thrust should
be burning out at about the same time.  (OK, slightly earlier.)  And
about 2 seconds after that, the boosters deploy their recovery systems.
I haven't tried this myself but I've seen John do it with his big
Blackbird parallel-staged rocket.  (His boosters used clusters of C6-3's
but the principle is the same.)

Another point is that B6-0's have been discontinued before, then brought
back.  See if Malcolm or Alan still have them in stock.  It may be that
other vendors in the US have large stocks, so Estes can't sell them, and
are waiting for existing stocks to be moved before they resume production.

Failing all else, use C6-0's anyway and see if you can fly the rocket on
Fairlie Moor instead of the regular field at Kelburn.

-- 
        "It'll be fine.  I've done this before." - M. Garibaldi
-------------+------------------------------+----------------------------
  Adrian Hurt | E-mail: adrian@macs.hw.ac.uk |
              | UKRA:   1026                 | Orangutan in space: 5/8/01

This rocket will be parallel-staged but with a second stage, so I don't
think I want the boosters hanging around.
I hope to be emulating Adrian's retention system fron Thunderbird and the
coupler arrangement from Rheinbote.
Re the former, what stops the boosters from taking off themselves if they
light early?
"Adrian Hurt"  wrote in message
news:1184263343.481253@glencoe.hw.ac.uk...
> On a related note, is there any alternative slowmatch available given
> that PIC is, or soon will be, discontinued as well?
>
> The reason it's related is that it might be possible to use B6-2's on
> drag-separated boosters.  To prevent the boosters from falling off if
> they ignite slightly later than the sustainer, they could be secured
> with threads to which are attached suitable lengths of slowmatch.  The
> slowmatch should be good for about 1 second of burn, after which it
> burns through the thread and releases the boosters, whose thrust should
> be burning out at about the same time.  (OK, slightly earlier.)  And
> about 2 seconds after that, the boosters deploy their recovery systems.
> I haven't tried this myself but I've seen John do it with his big
> Blackbird parallel-staged rocket.  (His boosters used clusters of C6-3's
> but the principle is the same.)
>
> Another point is that B6-0's have been discontinued before, then brought
> back.  See if Malcolm or Alan still have them in stock.  It may be that
> other vendors in the US have large stocks, so Estes can't sell them, and
> are waiting for existing stocks to be moved before they resume production.
>
> Failing all else, use C6-0's anyway and see if you can fly the rocket on
> Fairlie Moor instead of the regular field at Kelburn.
>
> -- 
>         "It'll be fine.  I've done this before." - M. Garibaldi
> -------------+------------------------------+----------------------------
>   Adrian Hurt | E-mail: adrian@macs.hw.ac.uk |
>               | UKRA:   1026                 | Orangutan in space: 5/8/01

Mark Dunn wrote:
> This rocket will be parallel-staged but with a second stage, so I don't
> think I want the boosters hanging around.
> I hope to be emulating Adrian's retention system fron Thunderbird and the
> coupler arrangement from Rheinbote.
> Re the former, what stops the boosters from taking off themselves if they
> light early?

Blocks of balsa.  The ones on the sustainer have lugs:
http://www.macs.hw.ac.uk/~adrian/thndrbrd/aftlugs.jpg

And those on the boosters have tubes to fit:
http://www.macs.hw.ac.uk/~adrian/thndrbrd/afttubes.jpg

Not only do these stop the boosters from flying off, it is through these
blocks that force from the boosters is transferred to the sustainer,
making them actual boosters and not just effects fireworks. :)

-- 
        "It'll be fine.  I've done this before." - M. Garibaldi
-------------+------------------------------+----------------------------
  Adrian Hurt | E-mail: adrian@macs.hw.ac.uk |
              | UKRA:   1026                 | Orangutan in space: 5/8/01

Right. I've seen them of course, but have just rotated them through 180° in
my mind so that they work.
The bottom sustainer lugs point downwards, the top ones upwards, is that
correct?
"Adrian Hurt"  wrote in message
news:1184315268.603423@glencoe.hw.ac.uk...
> Mark Dunn wrote:
> > This rocket will be parallel-staged but with a second stage, so I don't
> > think I want the boosters hanging around.
> > I hope to be emulating Adrian's retention system fron Thunderbird and
the
> > coupler arrangement from Rheinbote.
> > Re the former, what stops the boosters from taking off themselves if
they
> > light early?
>
> Blocks of balsa.  The ones on the sustainer have lugs:
> http://www.macs.hw.ac.uk/~adrian/thndrbrd/aftlugs.jpg
>
> And those on the boosters have tubes to fit:
> http://www.macs.hw.ac.uk/~adrian/thndrbrd/afttubes.jpg
>
> Not only do these stop the boosters from flying off, it is through these
> blocks that force from the boosters is transferred to the sustainer,
> making them actual boosters and not just effects fireworks. :)
>
> -- 
>         "It'll be fine.  I've done this before." - M. Garibaldi
> -------------+------------------------------+----------------------------
>   Adrian Hurt | E-mail: adrian@macs.hw.ac.uk |
>               | UKRA:   1026                 | Orangutan in space: 5/8/01

Mark Dunn wrote:
> Right. I've seen them of course, but have just rotated them through 180° in
> my mind so that they work.
> The bottom sustainer lugs point downwards, the top ones upwards, is that
> correct?

Yes.  The basic idea is that the boosters clamp onto the sustainer and
can't separate until their nose-cones are blown off.  Another small
balsa block on each booster engages a slot in the sustainer to make
sure that the booster main body can't slip back.

Take a look at my page about the model Thunderbird, which explains the
booster attachment system in detail:
http://www.macs.hw.ac.uk/~adrian/thndrbrd/

-- 
        "It'll be fine.  I've done this before." - M. Garibaldi
-------------+------------------------------+----------------------------
  Adrian Hurt | E-mail: adrian@macs.hw.ac.uk |
              | UKRA:   1026                 | Orangutan in space: 5/8/01

On Jul 12, 7:02 pm, Adrian Hurt  wrote:
> On a related note, is there any alternative slowmatch available given
> that PIC is, or soon will be, discontinued as well?

I believe the answer is yes, there is a similar alternative.

Niall

On Jul 13, 8:17 pm, Adrian Hurt  wrote:
> Mark Dunn wrote:
> > Right. I've seen them of course, but have just rotated them through 180° in
> > my mind so that they work.
> > The bottom sustainer lugs point downwards, the top ones upwards, is that
> > correct?
>
> Yes.  The basic idea is that the boosters clamp onto the sustainer and
> can't separate until their nose-cones are blown off.  Another small
> balsa block on each booster engages a slot in the sustainer to make
> sure that the booster main body can't slip back.
>
> Take a look at my page about the model Thunderbird, which explains the
> booster attachment system in detail:http://www.macs.hw.ac.uk/~adrian/thndrbrd/
>
> --
>         "It'll be fine.  I've done this before." - M. Garibaldi
> -------------+-----------------------------+---------------------------
>   Adrian Hurt | E-mail: adr...@macs.hw.ac.uk |
>               | UKRA:   1026                 | Orangutan in space: 5/8/01

I've cribbed extensively from that already, for which thanks.
Incidentally, the top two Google results for 'booster attachment' are
your Titania and TB pages.
My other concern with using Cs would be that the booster thrust
doesn't drop off before the sustainer's, which might hinder the
separation a bit.

Yes, they' were discontinued last year.  C11-5 were discontinued at
the same time.  I've not found another source of B6-0, but I still
have a couple of packs left.

Phil

Rats. I'd wanted to do a parallel-stage with C and two Bs, and I think three
Cs would be a bit powerful.
"Phil"  wrote in message
news:1184161475.677460.45180@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> Yes, they' were discontinued last year.  C11-5 were discontinued at
> the same time.  I've not found another source of B6-0, but I still
> have a couple of packs left.
>
> Phil
>

I've just done a parallel and had the same issues.  To get the
boosters to fall off while the main engine was burning I opted for 2 x
C6-0 with an E9-6 main engine.  I scaled it up from thne intended BT60
to BT70 to increase drag to keep the altitude down, then put a
transition to a BT 80 parachute section.

It looks fairly big, doesn't fly too high, and works a treat.

Phil

I hadn't even thought of burn duration, thanks for reminding me.
The snag is, my sustainer is an existing rocket which wouldn't take a 24mm.
motor without surgery, even if a D motor weren't too powerful. It's scale,
as well, and there's no scope for a fat chute section.
I suppose a C4 sustainer might help me but no-one seems to carry them. Going
down to A boosters sounds a bit weedy.
Oh well, I've only wasted paper so far. Thanks for you help.
"Phil"  wrote in message
news:1184187515.032186.80180@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> I've just done a parallel and had the same issues.  To get the
> boosters to fall off while the main engine was burning I opted for 2 x
> C6-0 with an E9-6 main engine.  I scaled it up from thne intended BT60
> to BT70 to increase drag to keep the altitude down, then put a
> transition to a BT 80 parachute section.
>
> It looks fairly big, doesn't fly too high, and works a treat.
>
> Phil
>

Silly me, there isn't an A booster. Is there?
"Mark Dunn"  wrote in message
news:fqydnYaOv7IVdAjbnZ2dnUVZ8taknZ2d@bt.com...
> I hadn't even thought of burn duration, thanks for reminding me.
> The snag is, my sustainer is an existing rocket which wouldn't take a
24mm.
> motor without surgery, even if a D motor weren't too powerful. It's scale,
> as well, and there's no scope for a fat chute section.
> I suppose a C4 sustainer might help me but no-one seems to carry them.
Going
> down to A boosters sounds a bit weedy.
> Oh well, I've only wasted paper so far. Thanks for you help.
> "Phil"  wrote in message
> news:1184187515.032186.80180@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> > I've just done a parallel and had the same issues.  To get the
> > boosters to fall off while the main engine was burning I opted for 2 x
> > C6-0 with an E9-6 main engine.  I scaled it up from thne intended BT60
> > to BT70 to increase drag to keep the altitude down, then put a
> > transition to a BT 80 parachute section.
> >
> > It looks fairly big, doesn't fly too high, and works a treat.
> >
> > Phil
> >
>
>

Mark-

Would the boosters fall off your model at burn-out as they do with 
Phil's model? If so, maybe you could use B6-2's?

No more "A" boosters, not since Estes discontinued the A10-0.

Mark Dunn wrote:
> I hadn't even thought of burn duration, thanks for reminding me.
> The snag is, my sustainer is an existing rocket which wouldn't take a 24mm.
> motor without surgery, even if a D motor weren't too powerful. It's scale,
> as well, and there's no scope for a fat chute section.
> I suppose a C4 sustainer might help me but no-one seems to carry them. Going
> down to A boosters sounds a bit weedy.
> Oh well, I've only wasted paper so far. Thanks for you help.
> "Phil"  wrote 
>> I've just done a parallel and had the same issues.  To get the
>> boosters to fall off while the main engine was burning I opted for 2 x
>> C6-0 with an E9-6 main engine.


-- 
Steve Humphrey
(replace "spambait" with "merlinus" to respond directly to me)

On a related note, is there any alternative slowmatch available given
that PIC is, or soon will be, discontinued as well?

The reason it's related is that it might be possible to use B6-2's on
drag-separated boosters.  To prevent the boosters from falling off if
they ignite slightly later than the sustainer, they could be secured
with threads to which are attached suitable lengths of slowmatch.  The
slowmatch should be good for about 1 second of burn, after which it
burns through the thread and releases the boosters, whose thrust should
be burning out at about the same time.  (OK, slightly earlier.)  And
about 2 seconds after that, the boosters deploy their recovery systems.
I haven't tried this myself but I've seen John do it with his big
Blackbird parallel-staged rocket.  (His boosters used clusters of C6-3's
but the principle is the same.)

Another point is that B6-0's have been discontinued before, then brought
back.  See if Malcolm or Alan still have them in stock.  It may be that
other vendors in the US have large stocks, so Estes can't sell them, and
are waiting for existing stocks to be moved before they resume production.

Failing all else, use C6-0's anyway and see if you can fly the rocket on
Fairlie Moor instead of the regular field at Kelburn.

-- 
        "It'll be fine.  I've done this before." - M. Garibaldi
-------------+------------------------------+----------------------------
  Adrian Hurt | E-mail: adrian@macs.hw.ac.uk |
              | UKRA:   1026                 | Orangutan in space: 5/8/01

This rocket will be parallel-staged but with a second stage, so I don't
think I want the boosters hanging around.
I hope to be emulating Adrian's retention system fron Thunderbird and the
coupler arrangement from Rheinbote.
Re the former, what stops the boosters from taking off themselves if they
light early?
"Adrian Hurt"  wrote in message
news:1184263343.481253@glencoe.hw.ac.uk...
> On a related note, is there any alternative slowmatch available given
> that PIC is, or soon will be, discontinued as well?
>
> The reason it's related is that it might be possible to use B6-2's on
> drag-separated boosters.  To prevent the boosters from falling off if
> they ignite slightly later than the sustainer, they could be secured
> with threads to which are attached suitable lengths of slowmatch.  The
> slowmatch should be good for about 1 second of burn, after which it
> burns through the thread and releases the boosters, whose thrust should
> be burning out at about the same time.  (OK, slightly earlier.)  And
> about 2 seconds after that, the boosters deploy their recovery systems.
> I haven't tried this myself but I've seen John do it with his big
> Blackbird parallel-staged rocket.  (His boosters used clusters of C6-3's
> but the principle is the same.)
>
> Another point is that B6-0's have been discontinued before, then brought
> back.  See if Malcolm or Alan still have them in stock.  It may be that
> other vendors in the US have large stocks, so Estes can't sell them, and
> are waiting for existing stocks to be moved before they resume production.
>
> Failing all else, use C6-0's anyway and see if you can fly the rocket on
> Fairlie Moor instead of the regular field at Kelburn.
>
> -- 
>         "It'll be fine.  I've done this before." - M. Garibaldi
> -------------+------------------------------+----------------------------
>   Adrian Hurt | E-mail: adrian@macs.hw.ac.uk |
>               | UKRA:   1026                 | Orangutan in space: 5/8/01

Mark Dunn wrote:
> This rocket will be parallel-staged but with a second stage, so I don't
> think I want the boosters hanging around.
> I hope to be emulating Adrian's retention system fron Thunderbird and the
> coupler arrangement from Rheinbote.
> Re the former, what stops the boosters from taking off themselves if they
> light early?

Blocks of balsa.  The ones on the sustainer have lugs:
http://www.macs.hw.ac.uk/~adrian/thndrbrd/aftlugs.jpg

And those on the boosters have tubes to fit:
http://www.macs.hw.ac.uk/~adrian/thndrbrd/afttubes.jpg

Not only do these stop the boosters from flying off, it is through these
blocks that force from the boosters is transferred to the sustainer,
making them actual boosters and not just effects fireworks. :)

-- 
        "It'll be fine.  I've done this before." - M. Garibaldi
-------------+------------------------------+----------------------------
  Adrian Hurt | E-mail: adrian@macs.hw.ac.uk |
              | UKRA:   1026                 | Orangutan in space: 5/8/01

Right. I've seen them of course, but have just rotated them through 180° in
my mind so that they work.
The bottom sustainer lugs point downwards, the top ones upwards, is that
correct?
"Adrian Hurt"  wrote in message
news:1184315268.603423@glencoe.hw.ac.uk...
> Mark Dunn wrote:
> > This rocket will be parallel-staged but with a second stage, so I don't
> > think I want the boosters hanging around.
> > I hope to be emulating Adrian's retention system fron Thunderbird and
the
> > coupler arrangement from Rheinbote.
> > Re the former, what stops the boosters from taking off themselves if
they
> > light early?
>
> Blocks of balsa.  The ones on the sustainer have lugs:
> http://www.macs.hw.ac.uk/~adrian/thndrbrd/aftlugs.jpg
>
> And those on the boosters have tubes to fit:
> http://www.macs.hw.ac.uk/~adrian/thndrbrd/afttubes.jpg
>
> Not only do these stop the boosters from flying off, it is through these
> blocks that force from the boosters is transferred to the sustainer,
> making them actual boosters and not just effects fireworks. :)
>
> -- 
>         "It'll be fine.  I've done this before." - M. Garibaldi
> -------------+------------------------------+----------------------------
>   Adrian Hurt | E-mail: adrian@macs.hw.ac.uk |
>               | UKRA:   1026                 | Orangutan in space: 5/8/01

Mark Dunn wrote:
> Right. I've seen them of course, but have just rotated them through 180° in
> my mind so that they work.
> The bottom sustainer lugs point downwards, the top ones upwards, is that
> correct?

Yes.  The basic idea is that the boosters clamp onto the sustainer and
can't separate until their nose-cones are blown off.  Another small
balsa block on each booster engages a slot in the sustainer to make
sure that the booster main body can't slip back.

Take a look at my page about the model Thunderbird, which explains the
booster attachment system in detail:
http://www.macs.hw.ac.uk/~adrian/thndrbrd/

-- 
        "It'll be fine.  I've done this before." - M. Garibaldi
-------------+------------------------------+----------------------------
  Adrian Hurt | E-mail: adrian@macs.hw.ac.uk |
              | UKRA:   1026                 | Orangutan in space: 5/8/01

On Jul 12, 7:02 pm, Adrian Hurt  wrote:
> On a related note, is there any alternative slowmatch available given
> that PIC is, or soon will be, discontinued as well?

I believe the answer is yes, there is a similar alternative.

Niall

On Jul 13, 8:17 pm, Adrian Hurt  wrote:
> Mark Dunn wrote:
> > Right. I've seen them of course, but have just rotated them through 180° in
> > my mind so that they work.
> > The bottom sustainer lugs point downwards, the top ones upwards, is that
> > correct?
>
> Yes.  The basic idea is that the boosters clamp onto the sustainer and
> can't separate until their nose-cones are blown off.  Another small
> balsa block on each booster engages a slot in the sustainer to make
> sure that the booster main body can't slip back.
>
> Take a look at my page about the model Thunderbird, which explains the
> booster attachment system in detail:http://www.macs.hw.ac.uk/~adrian/thndrbrd/
>
> --
>         "It'll be fine.  I've done this before." - M. Garibaldi
> -------------+-----------------------------+---------------------------
>   Adrian Hurt | E-mail: adr...@macs.hw.ac.uk |
>               | UKRA:   1026                 | Orangutan in space: 5/8/01

I've cribbed extensively from that already, for which thanks.
Incidentally, the top two Google results for 'booster attachment' are
your Titania and TB pages.
My other concern with using Cs would be that the booster thrust
doesn't drop off before the sustainer's, which might hinder the
separation a bit.

Yes, they' were discontinued last year.  C11-5 were discontinued at
the same time.  I've not found another source of B6-0, but I still
have a couple of packs left.

Phil

Rats. I'd wanted to do a parallel-stage with C and two Bs, and I think three
Cs would be a bit powerful.
"Phil"  wrote in message
news:1184161475.677460.45180@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> Yes, they' were discontinued last year.  C11-5 were discontinued at
> the same time.  I've not found another source of B6-0, but I still
> have a couple of packs left.
>
> Phil
>

I've just done a parallel and had the same issues.  To get the
boosters to fall off while the main engine was burning I opted for 2 x
C6-0 with an E9-6 main engine.  I scaled it up from thne intended BT60
to BT70 to increase drag to keep the altitude down, then put a
transition to a BT 80 parachute section.

It looks fairly big, doesn't fly too high, and works a treat.

Phil

I hadn't even thought of burn duration, thanks for reminding me.
The snag is, my sustainer is an existing rocket which wouldn't take a 24mm.
motor without surgery, even if a D motor weren't too powerful. It's scale,
as well, and there's no scope for a fat chute section.
I suppose a C4 sustainer might help me but no-one seems to carry them. Going
down to A boosters sounds a bit weedy.
Oh well, I've only wasted paper so far. Thanks for you help.
"Phil"  wrote in message
news:1184187515.032186.80180@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> I've just done a parallel and had the same issues.  To get the
> boosters to fall off while the main engine was burning I opted for 2 x
> C6-0 with an E9-6 main engine.  I scaled it up from thne intended BT60
> to BT70 to increase drag to keep the altitude down, then put a
> transition to a BT 80 parachute section.
>
> It looks fairly big, doesn't fly too high, and works a treat.
>
> Phil
>

Silly me, there isn't an A booster. Is there?
"Mark Dunn"  wrote in message
news:fqydnYaOv7IVdAjbnZ2dnUVZ8taknZ2d@bt.com...
> I hadn't even thought of burn duration, thanks for reminding me.
> The snag is, my sustainer is an existing rocket which wouldn't take a
24mm.
> motor without surgery, even if a D motor weren't too powerful. It's scale,
> as well, and there's no scope for a fat chute section.
> I suppose a C4 sustainer might help me but no-one seems to carry them.
Going
> down to A boosters sounds a bit weedy.
> Oh well, I've only wasted paper so far. Thanks for you help.
> "Phil"  wrote in message
> news:1184187515.032186.80180@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> > I've just done a parallel and had the same issues.  To get the
> > boosters to fall off while the main engine was burning I opted for 2 x
> > C6-0 with an E9-6 main engine.  I scaled it up from thne intended BT60
> > to BT70 to increase drag to keep the altitude down, then put a
> > transition to a BT 80 parachute section.
> >
> > It looks fairly big, doesn't fly too high, and works a treat.
> >
> > Phil
> >
>
>

Mark-

Would the boosters fall off your model at burn-out as they do with 
Phil's model? If so, maybe you could use B6-2's?

No more "A" boosters, not since Estes discontinued the A10-0.

Mark Dunn wrote:
> I hadn't even thought of burn duration, thanks for reminding me.
> The snag is, my sustainer is an existing rocket which wouldn't take a 24mm.
> motor without surgery, even if a D motor weren't too powerful. It's scale,
> as well, and there's no scope for a fat chute section.
> I suppose a C4 sustainer might help me but no-one seems to carry them. Going
> down to A boosters sounds a bit weedy.
> Oh well, I've only wasted paper so far. Thanks for you help.
> "Phil"  wrote 
>> I've just done a parallel and had the same issues.  To get the
>&