PDA

View Full Version : Outlander May Be Going OOP


dwmzmm
11-01-2007, 12:14 AM
Don't know if any noticed in one of my post in TRF, but at the Maker Faire in Austin, TX
several Saturdays ago, I was told by one of the Estes representative that the Outlander
kit is being discontinued. Thought I'd give you all the "heads up" before it becomes another
OOP product.....

Royatl
11-01-2007, 08:49 AM
...I was told by one of the Estes representative that the Outlander
kit is being discontinued. Thought I'd give you all the "heads up" before it becomes another
OOP product.....

Wouldn't be surprising. It's lasted at least two years longer than I thought it would.

Rocket Doctor
11-01-2007, 12:01 PM
It's that time of year for dropping kits and introducing new ones. There were supposed to be three kits per month coming out, that certainly didn't happen.

The Estes representative was Anne Grimm, Director of Edeucation, she use to live in Dallas.

dwmzmm
11-01-2007, 12:34 PM
It's that time of year for dropping kits and introducing new ones. There were supposed to be three kits per month coming out, that certainly didn't happen.

The Estes representative was Anne Grimm, Director of Edeucation, she use to live in Dallas.


Actually, it was John Boren who told me....

lurker01
11-01-2007, 01:45 PM
Wouldn't be surprising. It's lasted at least two years longer than I thought it would.


Roy,

Just me, but the Outlander is very undesirable. I only bought one when people were converting them to Mars Landers. Now that Semroc has the Mars Lander, I just see no use for my Outlander... not even to build or to use parts from it for other rockets.

Robert

tbzep
11-01-2007, 02:40 PM
I built one and flew it to Mars. I bought all of mine for the same reason as Robert. Semroc came out with their ML before I ever started on one also. I had to do something with them so I decided on a mission to Mars. ;)

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y283/tbzep/Rockets/Outlander.jpg

Leo
11-01-2007, 02:54 PM
Now thats nice :)

Royatl
11-01-2007, 03:36 PM
Roy,
Now that Semroc has the Mars Lander, I just see no use for my Outlander... not even to build or to use parts from it for other rockets.

Robert

I'm with you there. We had a few show up at launches a couple of years ago, but after their sub-optimal flights (admittedly helped by the current trend toward over-building) they never showed up again.

Still, though I know of three Semroc ML's in our club, I've seen none of them fly. One person has said he's afraid to fly his in any kind of wind.

D Ritchie
11-01-2007, 04:27 PM
Still, though I know of three Semroc ML's in our club, I've seen none of them fly. One person has said he's afraid to fly his in any kind of wind.

That would be me, based on my initial launch! The first flight was okay, but the second was in a light breeze and sent the thing into figure eights and a rather hard impact with the ground. I've repaired the damage and am hoping for another go this week.

ON TOPIC: I never liked the Outlander. It just struck me as a cheap knockoff of the ML. I'm wondering just how much of a collectible it will be viewed as.....

barone
11-01-2007, 05:13 PM
That would be me, based on my initial launch! The first flight was okay, but the second was in a light breeze and sent the thing into figure eights and a rather hard impact with the ground. I've repaired the damage and am hoping for another go this week.

ON TOPIC: I never liked the Outlander. It just struck me as a cheap knockoff of the ML. I'm wondering just how much of a collectible it will be viewed as.....
Well...since I picked up a few of them waaaayyyyyy below retail....... ;)

dwmzmm
11-01-2007, 05:42 PM
I got an Outlander on clearance at Hobby Lobby a while back for only $5, so it was natural
for me to take advantage of this offer (it was the last Outlander kit on the shelf). Should
I build it, I'm going to paint mine similar to the Mars Lander paint scheme (as shown in
that beautiful picture several posts before this one....).

Also, I'll use the D engine for power, having seen several Outlanders fly (barely) on the C6.
The logic is to learn from the mistakes of others (if not your own).....

CraigF
11-01-2007, 06:36 PM
Hmm, I'm just the opposite, I prefer the look of the Outlander over the ML. I don't see any other reason to "fly" either of them besides if you like their looks... I haven't built the "O" yet, still looking at it. Sure doesn't look like it would fly well, looks like one of those things where you put the biggest engine you can in, and just totally blast it up there since there are no aerodynamic qualities. I'm not surprised people over-build them though, they look like they need it because it's easy to believe they're going to take a beating coming down.

You're lucky you have discount/clearout rocket kits in the U.S. Just doesn't happen in Canada, prices start at over U.S. list here. They are never cleared out, that's why you can sometimes find real old stuff in some stores, and it's still expensive at the original Canadian retail price! I doubt anyone sells the "O" for much less than $30 here, and never will, even if they're still on the shelf in 5 years. That's why I only buy OOP kits in Canada, never current stuff.

I would be very surprised if any Estes rocket kit released in the "internet/eBay age" becomes a true collectible, if you mean it being uncommon and very desirable. From what I've seen, there's tons of everything Estes even remotely desirable released since ~96/97 when eBay/web really started to explode. Desirable stuff from just 2-3 years before that was already very expensive by '96.

sandman
11-01-2007, 08:28 PM
Hmm, I'm just the opposite, I prefer the look of the Outlander over the ML. I don't see any other reason to "fly" either of them besides if you like their looks... I haven't built the "O" yet, still looking at it. Sure doesn't look like it would fly well, looks like one of those things where you put the biggest engine you can in, and just totally blast it up there since there are no aerodynamic qualities. I'm not surprised people over-build them though, they look like they need it because it's easy to believe they're going to take a beating coming down.

You're lucky you have discount/clearout rocket kits in the U.S. Just doesn't happen in Canada, prices start at over U.S. list here. They are never cleared out, that's why you can sometimes find real old stuff in some stores, and it's still expensive at the original Canadian retail price! I doubt anyone sells the "O" for much less than $30 here, and never will, even if they're still on the shelf in 5 years. That's why I only buy OOP kits in Canada, never current stuff.

I would be very surprised if any Estes rocket kit released in the "internet/eBay age" becomes a true collectible, if you mean it being uncommon and very desirable. From what I've seen, there's tons of everything Estes even remotely desirable released since ~96/97 when eBay/web really started to explode. Desirable stuff from just 2-3 years before that was already very expensive by '96.

Instead of paying retail it may be worth the trouble for you to take a 3 hr drive to Sarnia, cross the Blue Water Bridge to Port Huron and go the the Hobby Lobby. I can supply you with some 40% off coupons! Hobby Lobby takes Canadian money at par now

It's only 20 minutes away for me.

CraigF
11-01-2007, 08:58 PM
Sandman: are you in Canada? Or do you mean you're 20 mins. from a HL? Do you know that in Canada they tax you on the value of the item before coupon or rebates *if the fact you used a coupon is on the store receipt* (it almost always is), not on the price you actually paid...bastards!

I did some calculations before, and even with my reasonably fuel-efficient car, I'd have to buy a hell of a lot of stuff to make the trip financially worthwhile. My last few orders have been with AC Supply, and with their 33% discount from list, and the shipping costs to Canada plus the taxes etc., I end up paying about full U.S. list overall. I do not mind that AT ALL. It's the mindset of years of paying 50% or 100% over list (plus 15% taxes on that) that makes list price (all-in) totally acceptable! And I'm a cheap bastard to boot. Everything is expensive in Canada, U.S. list price is usually a relative bargain. In fact, I see some places now making a big deal they "only" charge full U.S. list price...

barone
11-01-2007, 09:31 PM
I got an Outlander on clearance at Hobby Lobby a while back for only $5, .....
What....you only got one? :eek:

barone
11-01-2007, 09:32 PM
And I'm a cheap bastard to boot....
That's okay...I've been called a "Cheap SOB" ;)

dwmzmm
11-01-2007, 09:57 PM
What....you only got one? :eek:

Yeah, that was the very last Outlander kit they had available (now you can see why I got
it immediately). The bag appeared to have been opened, but once I got home and checked
the contents, everything is there. I also bought a Blue Ninja that was in the clearance section with the Outlander; couldn't see anything wrong with it until I went through the
stuff. Found the engine lock ring was missing (a quick e-mail to Estes customer service
resulted in receiving, free, the entire plastic fin can assembly parts to replace the lock
ring). The Blue Ninja is one of my favorite sport/demo models now....

sandman
11-01-2007, 10:19 PM
Sandman: are you in Canada? Or do you mean you're 20 mins. from a HL? Do you know that in Canada they tax you on the value of the item before coupon or rebates *if the fact you used a coupon is on the store receipt* (it almost always is), not on the price you actually paid...bastards!

I did some calculations before, and even with my reasonably fuel-efficient car, I'd have to buy a hell of a lot of stuff to make the trip financially worthwhile. My last few orders have been with AC Supply, and with their 33% discount from list, and the shipping costs to Canada plus the taxes etc., I end up paying about full U.S. list overall. I do not mind that AT ALL. It's the mindset of years of paying 50% or 100% over list (plus 15% taxes on that) that makes list price (all-in) totally acceptable! And I'm a cheap bastard to boot. Everything is expensive in Canada, U.S. list price is usually a relative bargain. In fact, I see some places now making a big deal they "only" charge full U.S. list price...

No, I'm not in Canada but I'm close! I'm on the west shore of Lake Huron in Michigan right across from Grand Bend. I'm 20 minutes away from Hobby Lobby in Port Huron.

Most Canadians come to Port huron to fill up on gas at $3 a gallon.

They may have some rocket items in their "clearance" aisle.

I'll stop and look tomorrow when I'm driving home.

Rocket Doctor
11-02-2007, 12:26 PM
It's official the OUTLANDER has been discontinued, if sales fall for a particular kit, it's history, it could be one year or 20 or more, sales dictate if it stays or goes.

ghrocketman
11-02-2007, 02:30 PM
I think sales would have been helped if they had either made an 18mm SU BP engine capable of flying this thing decently (such as the OOP C5-3) or made it 24mm from the get go and had the C11-3 and D12-3 as reccommended motors.
This thing does NOT fly decently or even modestly safely on a C6-3.
The only 18mm engines this will turn in a decent flight with are Aerotech 18mm composite SU and RMS full 20 n-sec D engines.

Rocket Doctor
11-02-2007, 03:08 PM
Let me tell you, if you followed the Estes Forum, I tried my best to get "requested" motors brought back............didn't happen !!!

They should have brought back the Mars Lander, you can't substitute for the real thing.

I guess you can consider this one as rge Edsel of model rockets.......

CraigF
11-02-2007, 05:13 PM
"the real thing"? Well, I think Estes could have easily re-issued the ML with a lot less work. It sure is a LOT easier to build too. I guess I'm one of those who wants to see new things, and not just reissues to please us old farts. I do realise that from most reports it's the basic 3-4FNC designs that are the breadwinners though.

Anyway, it's noted that I should build the O for 24mm. I was thinking it would be a great candidate for 18mm RMS as it surely could use the boost, plus it would be really hard to lose the casing with it. Have lost way too many of those, and are EXPENSIVE now, from putting them in things that don't really "need" them.

Rocket Doctor
11-02-2007, 08:57 PM
What's easy for us long time rocketeers, is not that easy for them ! I guess that they wanted something "new", which is not always the best choice.

Rockets come and rockets go, that's the nature of the hobby. At least the Interceptor came back and an added attraction, the 1350 D/E.

stantonjtroy
11-02-2007, 09:10 PM
Glad I read in here as I just recently got an Outlander for my son. Estetically not my cup of tea but he thinks it's the coolest looking thing ever. KIDS! :p Anyway, having read this thread we'll definatelly build it with a 24mm mount. Thanks for the heads up.

Ltvscout
11-02-2007, 10:23 PM
My hobby industry insider just got the new December 1st, 2007 Estes price list. The Outlander is still on it.

dwmzmm
11-02-2007, 10:26 PM
My hobby industry insider just got the new December 1st, 2007 Estes price list. The Outlander is still on it.

Yes, my guess is the Outlander will still be in the catalog/price listing until the stock runs
out. John Boren told me the kit is no longer being produced, so I take that to mean when
it's gone, it's gone. When I asked why, the answer was the Outlander just isn't selling....

Green Dragon
11-03-2007, 12:07 PM
I agree, the Outlander is NOT the best looking design ...

Bought mine for the parts for a Lander clone, but now the Semroc kit is out, will have to grab one instead ( was thinking go ahead with the clone build, since I already destroyed R2 for the BT100 , but.... )

If the Outlander is truly OOP, might have to save the opened kit for ' someday build' ... it's funny how it was comared to the Edsel ( ? by RD ) , as my dad has a 58 Edsel.. noone wanted em back then, but today collectors would kill for one .

Same with some things we / I are cloning - 3fnc stuff that we did not care about back in the day, now we're cloning those - and other ' orphans' like the D.A.R.T. , etc...

So someday someone will be nostalgic fo rthe Outlander, go figure :)

~ AL

chanstevens
11-03-2007, 03:10 PM
Hooooooorrrraaaayyyy!

Ding dong, the [female dog] is dead!

I was excited by the Outlander design, jumped on one right away, but after I got done and put it on the scale, it was obvious the thing might not even make it off the rod on a C6. IIRC, Estes :"list" weight on it, plus the motor, is more than 50% over their max recommended liftoff weight for a C6-3.

I got one flight out of it on a C6-0, and THAT was too long a delay--it smashed to pieces on the ground under thrust.

This, and the Cosmos Mariner are to me the most disappointing flyers I've ever seen out of Estes. I did wind up picking up two more, though, to beef up to 24mm and to finish in the ML scheme with Sirius's decals, so looks like they can't blame the slumping sales on me. Well, except for word of mouth... :rolleyes:

CraigF
11-03-2007, 03:34 PM
I wonder if people have complained after failure with recommended engines, and got a replacement kit? Maybe they should give out free D-conversion kits to those who ask... mainly because I want a couple for mine, I don't have the parts here and am not sure what numbers to order. :)

Tom Swift
11-08-2007, 01:29 PM
I never thought much of the Outlander until I saw it with the NASA-style finish shown here (http://www.rocketryforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=38888&d=1176153910). Sweet! For the full thread see here (http://www.rocketryforum.com/showthread.php?t=35115)

If my build queue wasn't already so long (and my wallet already so empty), I'd buy one. I've still got a few C5-3s waiting for just such an occasion.

Doug Sams
11-08-2007, 03:21 PM
I got one flight out of it on a C6-0, and THAT was too long a delay--it smashed to pieces on the ground under thrust.<ROFL> Sorry for your loss, but you certainly have a funny way of describing it. My first take with the OL was that 24mm power was a must. I even had custom rings made up by BMS and distributed them to several DARS members although I can't say any of us ever actually got ours finished :(

The rings included the four small holes for the landing gear. My problem is that I keep redesigning the bird in my head and have thus never gotten around to building it. Sometimes you gotta shoot the engineers and start production...

My design change goals included: 1. 24mm MMT, 2. Improved landing gear attachment to minimize wiggle and twisting of the legs, 3. Repairability by being able to separate the lower section. A 4th goal, for one of my stash, was to upgrade the landing gear to be articulated ala the moon lander.

Goal #2 would forego the need for the custom rings and instead use some sort of hinges - store bought or fabricated - to tighten the wiggle and twist.

Now you see why I need to shoot the engineer...

Doug

CPMcGraw
11-08-2007, 04:50 PM
...Goal #2 would forego the need for the custom rings and instead use some sort of hinges - store bought or fabricated - to tighten the wiggle and twist...

Robart "Hinge Points" for RC aircraft. They're designed to mount in a drilled hole instead of a slot, like typical "piano hinge" style hinges. Made of a solid plastic, some have metal hinge pins and some have simple plastic pins. There's also a 1/2A sized version which could work, but the mid-sized version for .40 sized AC would not be too large...

dwmzmm
11-08-2007, 06:13 PM
Thanks for all those upgrade suggestions, guys. I'm following closely as I want to build mine
so it can get respectable flights and last a long time (like my vintage Mars Lander, one that
I've had since 1971)....

CraigF
11-08-2007, 06:56 PM
^ I used to think that way too. Do you think you'll be alive in 36 years? If you are, do you think the flying condition of your Outlander will be of major consideration? :D I say wreck 'em while you can, but not intentionally of course. OTOH, from what I've read so far, the flights of the Outlander sound perfect for 80/90-something eyes and retrieval ability...

Gingerdawg
11-09-2007, 09:31 AM
BobH48 had a easy method of modding the outlander to 24 mm without changing the centering rings. Seen here: http://www.rocketryforum.com/showpost.php?p=121931&postcount=8

CraigF
11-09-2007, 02:47 PM
^ Thanks for the info! That looks easy enough, the fewer CRs that need their hole enlarged the better for me.

dwmzmm
11-10-2007, 07:15 AM
^ I used to think that way too. Do you think you'll be alive in 36 years? If you are, do you think the flying condition of your Outlander will be of major consideration? :D I say wreck 'em while you can, but not intentionally of course. OTOH, from what I've read so far, the flights of the Outlander sound perfect for 80/90-something eyes and retrieval ability...

My vintage Mars Lander DID nearly wreck itself several times after I became a BAR in
2003; I flew it for the first time (after being mothballed for some 22 years) at JSC in early
February 2004 (great flight). Next flight was closer to home a few weeks later; it suddenly
went unstable by fishtailing and zigzagging through the air before landing neatly upright on
all fours (while the smoke delay was still burning!) - had only minimal damage. Next flight
was at a HPR launch -- this time it REALLY went unstable -- which puzzled me as I'd never
had this problem with my Mars Lander before. I solved this by adding nose weight to the
balsa nosecone and it now flies perfectly. A really durable and superb model, if one is to ask
me.....