Ask Mike

[MDorffler]

My name is Mike Dorffler. Some of you know me, or know of me. I have been a model rocket kit designer with Estes Industries for nearly 40 years. I have over these years developed three camera systems, several launch controllers and launch pads, over 250 produced model rocket kits, several rocket motors, and several rocket related electronic items, all for this hobby we collectively enjoy. I have had lunch with Buzz Aldrin, Scott Carpenter, Joe Johnson and John Dyksta, Grant McQuen, and even Lee Van Cleef and Charlie Bronson, during the course of Estes business. I have made motors for movie special affects such as Firefox, aided in FBI criminal investigations, and even designed the model rocket launch system now in use at Space Camp.

I first started at Estes when the main plant at Penrose had just been completed and the parking area was still gravel. I worked with and helped build the company with Vern and Gleda, Bill Simon, Ed Brown, Gene Street, Wayne Kellner, Bill See and several other wonderful people and close friends. Over the years I have witnessed the many changes of management and ownership, and lived through the periods of company success and those of struggle.

As the time is approaching for me to exchange my modeling knives and body tubes for a fishing rod, I felt it might be worthwhile to offer to share my many experiences and rocketry knowledge base with the YORF forum members. With this post today I am opening the “Ask Mike” forum for the purpose of offering you the opportunity to ask me anything you like related to Estes model rocketry history, model rocket kit development, kit designers, Estes personalities, or what happened when. I’ll share what we found worked and what didn’t, why certain black powder types work for motors and why others don’t, or even what manufacturing tolerances that must absolutely be maintained for certain components.

And then there is so much to tell about the intensity and incredible work ethic of the many people who I have had the pleasure of working with at Estes. These people are the ones responsible for bringing all of you the hobby of model rocketry in a way none of you have any concept of. Many are gone now but you should know about them. And then there are the antics of the R&D guys who purposely and shamefully tested the patience of Emma, our beloved custodian.

There is much Estes history to tell and for the YORF members to learn. This forum is therefore for you, the forum members to enjoy, and I hope all members eventually gravitate to it. Because I want our exchanges to generally be light in nature, I must request the following;

This forum is for the purpose of sharing information, not for bashing Estes Industries. If you want to vent your distain or anger at Estes Industries for any reason, don’t do it on my forum as I will refuse to answer. I will not answer any questions regarding any aspect of the financial operation of Estes Industries. If you want to vent your anger at the government, write a letter to your local newspaper editor, don’t post it on my forum. Be civil. You will get far more information from me that way.

Okay, who has a question?

[A Fish Named Wallyum]

We're Not Worthy!!! :d

[Leo]

Mike, welcome aboard.

I must say it is great seeing you here. I look forward to many threads relating to Estes rocketry, from the past to the present :)

[A Fish Named Wallyum]

Antics. We're all about antics. How about a story or twenty?

[SEL]

Mike,

Thanks for joining the forum and giving us this opportunity to pick your brain.

Being a motor junky, I would love to see photos and hear about motors that you've designed
and tested, what propellants were used, what worked and what didn't, and why the ones that worked and weren't produced weren't produced.

Thanks,

Sean

[mycrofte]

I would like to know why R&D takes so long. Kinda makes it hard to jump on some things doesn't it?!?

P.S. When you do trade it all in for the fishing pole, can I have your job?

[foose4string]

Mike, welcome. I look forward to reading this segment of the forum.

With over 250 of your designs that went into production, what was your favorite? Which design was the most successful in terms of numbers? What was your least favorite design(or one that came back to bite you in the rear?)

[rstaff3]

I too will thank you up-front for taking away from your valuable fishing time here!

I'm also interested in motors, mostly the ones we can't buy (at least currently :)) at our friendly neighborhood hobby store.

Oh, I'm also curious whether you will fly any rockets after you retire? I.e. is rocketry both a hobby and work or has the latter beat the prior out of you?

[DeanHFox]

I was gonna ask what your favorite design was, but foose beat me to it...

So, I'll go in this direction...of all the "personalities" or "celebrities" you've met in your tenure at Estes...which one inspired you the most? And why?

(and, if you don't mind this question...of everyone you met, which person was most unlike what you expected them to be?)

:)

Thanks for taking time to share your memories with us. Your efforts at Estes gave me a wonderful lifetime hobby...here's hoping that spending a little time in our corner of the Web will enrich yours a bit, too! :)

[Jerry Irvine]

I have an actual question. When Gary R and I visited Estes on the way to NARAM PA you rushed out to give us news about 110 film availability for the Astrocam that was "incorrect". What's up with that?

Am I correct a 24mm E case D20-0,3,6,9 is practical?

There is a feature on this site that records the original designer for Estes kits. Would you please commit an hour a month for three months to composing an email clarifying as many of those as possible?

May I take you fishing during the next five summers? I would ask Mary Roberts to join us, but she scares me. She can totally handle a gun and dress her prey, and I'm not so sure she considers me human. ;)

Jerry

[sandman]

Mike, I'm real glad you are here!!! WELCOME!

WOW! Where do I begin?

I guess everybody on this forum knows, especially through my kits, that I am a scale nut.

My impressions of Mike D is you are too. ;)

First question for today.

In your tenure at Estes did you ever come up with a scale design that you were excited about but just never made it to production or even the light of day?

Second question.

I know you did a lot of designs but specifically what was your favorite "scale" design?

[Rocketflyer]

Hello Mike. Thank you for your time and willingness to post and answer questions.

My questions are mainly about motors. Has the overall performace of some of "todays" motors diminished since the motors of the past? It seems that the "C" impulse motors are a little weaker than the bygone days (then again it could be memory loss on my part :o ).

Secondly, why have the longer delays for the 13mm motors been discontinued? A 3 sec delay in most little rockets usually results in shredded chutes, etc.

Thank you once again. I really look forward to hearing of your time and experiences at Estes. The knowlege, insights and asides will be priceless to all of us, I'm sure! :D

[tbzep]

How did you go about designing the Cineroc ? Was it a kitbash of a regular movie camera, or did you have to design every single part?

[scigs30]

Mike, Welcome.
1. Can you give us some finishing tips used by Estes to build catalog modes, also do catalog models actually fly?
2. What was the actual color of the Estes Scrambler last produced in 1977?

[tbzep]

2. What was the actual color of the Estes Scrambler last produced in 1977?

It's too late, you've already painted it!

[dwmzmm]

Wow, Mike, welcome aboard!! Had the feeling that something really great was about to happen here.

I was the one who traded several e-mails back in 2004 regarding the Cineroc. Your suggestions and tips proved very valuable. Afterwards, managed to fly it three times, got
very good footage on the second flight, but got destroyed on the third flight due to the core
engine's ignition failure. Subject is on another thread posted a while back.

Again, welcome and we're looking forward to learning about the history of this wonderful
hobby, Estes, and the people behind it.

[Rocket Doctor]

Can you list all of the kits that you have designed and that were made into kits?

What was your favorite one and what was your least favorite one.?
?
What about the Classic Series and the WM Sustainables?

Will motors, especially boosters be availabe at WM for the above mentioned kits?

[Jerry Irvine]

Mike,

Please tell Barry I have juice to proffer ORM-D for BP, APCP, and APCP/KPCP, a Jerrypro from the 80's.

Jerry

[MDorffler]

Of course you are, Bill. Keep posting.

[Royatl]

My name is Mike Dorffler. Some of you know me, or know of me. I have been a model rocket kit designer with Estes Industries for nearly 40 years. I have over these years developed three camera systems, several launch controllers and launch pads, over 250 produced model rocket kits, several rocket motors, and several rocket related electronic items, all for this hobby we collectively enjoy.

Welcome Mike, and bravo!

Only last August did I finally get my hands on my own copy of your initial contribution to the hobby, a Cineroc (I have a long story somewhere else on YORF about mowing lawns to buy one in 1971 only to have the funds diverted to a 35mm camera to cover my trip to NARAM 13 that year).

When it went away in the mid 70's, the scuttlebutt was that Estes could no longer obtain the motors used in it. I thought this was a rather odd reason, as from my examination of John Langford's and Mike Myrick's Cinerocs (usually after they had crashed!), the motors looked like standard issue motors you could find in Allied or Lafayette catalogs back in the day.

My first question: Was motor un-availability the real reason the Cineroc was discontinued?


(and of course, by "motors" I mean the small electric ones, for our readers who are more easily confused! :) )

[MDorffler]

Mike, welcome aboard.

I must say it is great seeing you here. I look forward to many threads relating to Estes rocketry, from the past to the present :)

Thnks, Leo. I'm looking forward to hearing from rocketeers everywhere.

[Royatl]

How did you go about designing the Cineroc ? Was it a kitbash of a regular movie camera, or did you have to design every single part?

Gee zep!
All you had to do to get that answer was join the NAR last year and get Sport Rocketry Magazine! :)

[dwmzmm]

My first question: Was motor un-availability the real reason the Cineroc was discontinued?

I've also wondered about that; I "do" have the two electric motors from my two crashed
Cinerocs. Also have enough pieces & components to "rebuild" another one, if I can just get
around to doing just that (will have to refresh my soldering skills)......

[MDorffler]

Antics. We're all about antics. How about a story or twenty?

Bill - I'll probably write the longer replies later in the evenenings - I don't leave Penrose until late in the day. Be patient and I'll be sure to tell a few cool tales.

[dwmzmm]

Gee zep!
All you had to do to get that answer was join the NAR last year and get Sport Rocketry Magazine! :)

Bingo!

[MDorffler]

Mike,

Thanks for joining the forum and giving us this opportunity to pick your brain.

Being a motor junky, I would love to see photos and hear about motors that you've designed
and tested, what propellants were used, what worked and what didn't, and why the ones that worked and weren't produced weren't produced.

Thanks,

Sean

Sean - I will do that - got to get through this first group of posts first, then will swing around and write more.

[SEL]

Sean - I will do that - got to get through this first group of posts first, then will swing around and write more.

Fair enough.

S.

[tbzep]

Gee zep!
All you had to do to get that answer was join the NAR last year and get Sport Rocketry Magazine! :)

I'm a member, but I don't remember reading an issue with that in it. I guess my wife picked it up and did something with it by mistake. :eek:

[MDorffler]

Antics. We're all about antics. How about a story or twenty?

Okay, how about this......

Wayne Kellner, is in my opinion the premium model rocket designer of all time, was a Monty Python and MAD magazine fanatic. I always wondered why he didn't try to write a skit or two for MP.

Wayne relieved stress by suddenly dropping what he was doing and going into a spontanios 'Monty Python' skit, then when it was over would just go sit down again like nothing had happened.

He always had all kinds of different stuff on top of one of his file cabinets, one of them being a plastic DC-3 that none of the parts were glued together. He would hold it up in one hand, vibrate his throut with the other (severe flight vibration) and then would say something like;

Suh!, the left engine is on fire...
No it's not..it's just something in your eye that's blurring your vision...
But Suh, the flames are getting bigger.....
(he shakes one of the wings off)
Suh, the left wing has fallen off.....
No Smedley, that can't happen...this plane was built in the USA!
Stupid Americans, now the other wing has fallen off...

And Wayne would go though this until all the parts were on the floor. He would pick them up, stick them back together, put the DC-3 bck on the file cabinet and go sit down.

Some of you who have copies of some of the Model Rocket News with front pages that Wayne did. I'll go into that later as well.

[MDorffler]

I have an actual question. When Gary R and I visited Estes on the way to NARAM PA you rushed out to give us news about 110 film availability for the Astrocam that was "incorrect". What's up with that?

Am I correct a 24mm E case D20-0,3,6,9 is practical?

There is a feature on this site that records the original designer for Estes kits. Would you please commit an hour a month for three months to composing an email clarifying as many of those as possible?

May I take you fishing during the next five summers? I would ask Mary Roberts to join us, but she scares me. She can totally handle a gun and dress her prey, and I'm not so sure she considers me human. ;)

Jerry

Jerry - help me here - I'm an old guy - what was it I was supposed to have told you aboout 110 film thet was incorrect?

[MDorffler]

I would like to know why R&D takes so long. Kinda makes it hard to jump on some things doesn't it?!?

P.S. When you do trade it all in for the fishing pole, can I have your job?

Be a little more specific - what part of R&D do you feel takes so long?

[MDorffler]

Mike, I'm real glad you are here!!! WELCOME!

WOW! Where do I begin?

I guess everybody on this forum knows, especially through my kits, that I am a scale nut.

My impressions of Mike D is you are too. ;)

First question for today.

In your tenure at Estes did you ever come up with a scale design that you were excited about but just never made it to production or even the light of day?

Second question.

I know you did a lot of designs but specifically what was your favorite "scale" design?

Yes, I put in an awful lot of time into a really nice Ariane 4 only to be side-swiped by their corporate suits who demanded we pay a 10% royalty. Estes by principle, doesn't pay royalties on either rockets or planes funded by taxpayers. We have always considered scale kits as free advertising and promotion for those affiliations wherever they may be. We still can't legally produce the Ariane without paying a royalty.

[MDorffler]

Hello Mike. Thank you for your time and willingness to post and answer questions.

My questions are mainly about motors. Has the overall performace of some of "todays" motors diminished since the motors of the past? It seems that the "C" impulse motors are a little weaker than the bygone days (then again it could be memory loss on my part :o ).

Secondly, why have the longer delays for the 13mm motors been discontinued? A 3 sec delay in most little rockets usually results in shredded chutes, etc.

Thank you once again. I really look forward to hearing of your time and experiences at Estes. The knowlege, insights and asides will be priceless to all of us, I'm sure! :D

This is a great question. This sould make for interesting excahnges with the engine guys here.

Many of you may not realize that there has never been two like batches of black powder ever made. That includes the one that may have been made yesterday, and the batch made today on the same equipment, and from materials from the same bags or sacks.

Terry - feel welcome to jump in on this if you think I miss something----

While potassium nitrate stays relatively constant, both the sulfer and charcoal change ever so slightly from lot to lot. The charcoal is the ingredient that has the greatest overall control over the burn rate of a particular batch. Hickory has historically been the preferred source of charcoal, but woods such as pine can in a pinch be uased as well.

Trees as a species morph over time, which side of the hill they were grown on and where they were harvested changes, the ingrediants in the soil changes, and so does the temperature while they were growing. The variables are staggering that affect the tree before the wood is harvested. And do you use the branches or the truck, or both? Then there is the process of heating the wood to produce the charcoal. Getting to repeatable charcoal for black powder is a serious issue.

To get to your essential question - yes, black powder made today is 'slower' than it was ten years ago, and it's getting slower. That changes the burn rate of our motors just as it does everyone else's motors. We do burn rate tests on every single lot of powder we buy to characterize it. We press and burn a lot of motors in this process. We have to know how many clicks to adjust engine manufacturing equipment in order to maintain the NAR impulse standards we have always adhered to.

Does this help?

[InFlight]

Mike,

Thanks for joining the forum and sharing your life with us!

That was a great story about Wayne Kellner. Monty Python was/is still fun to watch. :D


1. How did you and Wayne come up with the Goonybirds?

2. What inspired you to design the Blue Bird Zero?

PS: the BBZ is one of my favorites!

.

[MDorffler]

Welcome Mike, and bravo!

Only last August did I finally get my hands on my own copy of your initial contribution to the hobby, a Cineroc (I have a long story somewhere else on YORF about mowing lawns to buy one in 1971 only to have the funds diverted to a 35mm camera to cover my trip to NARAM 13 that year).

When it went away in the mid 70's, the scuttlebutt was that Estes could no longer obtain the motors used in it. I thought this was a rather odd reason, as from my examination of John Langford's and Mike Myrick's Cinerocs (usually after they had crashed!), the motors looked like standard issue motors you could find in Allied or Lafayette catalogs back in the day.

My first question: Was motor un-availability the real reason the Cineroc was discontinued?


(and of course, by "motors" I mean the small electric ones, for our readers who are more easily confused! :) )

Roy - there wer a number of issues that all came about in a short amount of time that helped put the Cineroc down.

Yes, there was the motor issue. The manufacturer got up and evaporated. Our search for a replacement did not go well. I designed the film advance around a certain motor that ran at 'X' rpm at at 'Y' current. Then the case had a specific mounting method and the plastic of the camera were designed to match. If a suitable motor was found with different mounting, then we woul have to go back and spend the money to correct the molds.

Secondly, the original lens mold was one of a kind. We had that tool made just for the Cineroc. It certainly was not an Edmunds lens as so many have speculated. We had lost first one, then two of the four cavities by carelessness of the manufacturer. Then they played a numbers game with us to try to increase the price of the lens with only two healthy cavites.

Then the people who processed the film said they didn't want to do it anymore. We couldn't find anyone anywhere who would custom process little 10' lengths of Super 8 film.

Then on top of this came the new Damon management with their cost cutting games. That pretty well ended any hope to put some money into repairing Cineroc tooling.

And pretty much everyone who wnated a Cineroc had bought one by then and sales were down. So it was many things that ended the Cineroc. Sure was a great product though.

[InFlight]

Originally Posted by Jerry Irvine
...May I take you fishing during the next five summers? I would ask Mary Roberts to join us, but she scares me. She can totally handle a gun and dress her prey, and I'm not so sure she considers me human. JerryMary Roberts is a very nice person.

My wife can totally handle a gun and dress her prey, so I guess I don't see a problem with this :chuckle:

.

[rokitflite]

Hi Mike,

Thanks a lot for your tremendous contributions to this hobby. I have to say that it is your fault and your fault alone (bashing you not Estes) that I am as deeply involed in this hobby as I have become. I was mildly interested in the hobby in the late 70s and early 80s... Then I attended one of the Pearl River model rocket seminars in NY. That is where I met Herb Desind and saw his Cineroc films for the first time. I began hunting for a Cineroc like crazy and actually ended up getting one from Oakie Six out of your returns department while I was on a tour of Estes. That got me looking at the older designs and as a result the large collection and interest I have in the hobby today.

No questions, just a big "THANK YOU"!

-Scott Branche

[MDorffler]

Mike, welcome. I look forward to reading this segment of the forum.

With over 250 of your designs that went into production, what was your favorite? Which design was the most successful in terms of numbers? What was your least favorite design(or one that came back to bite you in the rear?)

Honestly, this is a hard one for me. I don't really have one design that stands out as my favorite. I have always preferred my kits with simple lines and simple decors over the rest. Kits such as the Optima and Scorpian come to mind.

While Bill Simon is the original creator of the Estes Alpha, my conversion of that kit from balsa to all plastic helped place it as the all time best seller. While we kept both kits in the line, the numbers produced and sold of the original kit simply fell through the floor. We have sold several million of the plastic Alpha since the early 70's. And we have re-tooled the plastics with no changes many times. They just wear out seeing so many molding cycles.

The kit I have always wished I hadn't done was the Swat. I thought that a camo scheme on a large Satellite Interceptor would be super cool. It wasn't.

[scigs30]

Will Estes ever go back to the Red and white Alpha III?

[tbzep]

What was the competition with Centuri like for you guys doing all the designing? Were there many designs (not just rockets) that were meant to directly compete with a specific product they produced, or vice versa? I know the products eventually intermingled, so I'm referring to the days before that happened. Mr. Estes said he always had a friendly respect and competition with Mr. Piester as a company, but I never saw anything specific printed about it.

[MDorffler]

Mike,

Thanks for joining the forum and sharing your life with us!

That was a great story about Wayne Kellner. Monty Python was/is still fun to watch. :D


1. How did you and Wayne come up with the Goonybirds?

2. What inspired you to design the Blue Bird Zero?

PS: the BBZ is one of my favorites!

.

1. That'a MAD magazine again. We were eating lunch one day when Wayne pointed to one the vehicles in 'Spy Vs Spy' and grinned. We grabbed a couple pieces of paper, some colored pencils, and the Gonny Birds were born. I think many of you know by now that what we created was nothing like they ended up. We did fat flying German fighters and Buzz Bombs and other cool characterzations. The damon suits turned them into bunny rabbits.

2. I did the Blue Bird Zero over one weekend. Marketing on Friday wanted a new starter outfit rocket by Monday morning, so that's what I did - fully painted and decored. There's lots of Red Max in the design in case you hadn't seen it.

I like it too. I have the BBZ packaging artwork framed and hanging in my home office.

[MDorffler]

Can you list all of the kits that you have designed and that were made into kits?

What was your favorite one and what was your least favorite one.?
?
What about the Classic Series and the WM Sustainables?

Will motors, especially boosters be availabe at WM for the above mentioned kits?

Doc - gotta pull out all my catalogs to make that list - and trying to remeber all the disigns I did that were never accepted as kits is truly an impossible task. From the early 70's to the mid 90's I usually submitted about 12-15 new designs each yearly marketing meeting that weren't accpeted. I have wished many times I had at least kept a photo of each.

As I had posted earlier, I truly don't have a favorite. The Swat is the one I would like to forget.

With most of the HR-4040 issues taken care of, we are now back on track to produce the Classics. While I did all the mechanical work to get them physically ready, Mike Fritz has tackeled re-writing all the instructions and following up on the paperwork. They're in the pipe, Ken - just a little while longer....

I did the original Sustainable series of 20 models in 6 days. Once marketing decided which models they wanted, it took another 30 or so days to do all the specifications, laser cut patterns, decors, etc. Again, Mike Fritz handled the paperwork and instructions.

We began shipping the first 3 last week. We will ship the remainer in 2 more lots of 4 later in the year. That's the plan anyway. Hopefully there isn't an HR-4041 brewing.

Yes, there will be more motors - paperwork is in process now.

[MDorffler]

Hi Mike,

Thanks a lot for your tremendous contributions to this hobby. I have to say that it is your fault and your fault alone (bashing you not Estes) that I am as deeply involed in this hobby as I have become. I was mildly interested in the hobby in the late 70s and early 80s... Then I attended one of the Pearl River model rocket seminars in NY. That is where I met Herb Desind and saw his Cineroc films for the first time. I began hunting for a Cineroc like crazy and actually ended up getting one from Oakie Six out of your returns department while I was on a tour of Estes. That got me looking at the older designs and as a result the large collection and interest I have in the hobby today.

No questions, just a big "THANK YOU"!

-Scott Branche

Scott - Oakie Six is one of the finest people I have ever known or worked with. You had a rare treat when you met here.

[MDorffler]

Will Estes ever go back to the Red and white Alpha III?

If I had my way we would do just that. We shall see.

[A Fish Named Wallyum]

The kit I have always wished I hadn't done was the Swat. I thought that a camo scheme on a large Satellite Interceptor would be super cool. It wasn't.

:chuckle: :chuckle: Nothing personal, but I agree completely. Then again, I thought the Spacemaster was cool in black and white, but less so in the color catalog.

[A Fish Named Wallyum]

I reiterate each of my questions as if stated for the first time ever. Reply to each paragraph in a separate message.

Jerry

I have more.


Yes your worship. :rolleyes:

[MDorffler]

What was the competition with Centuri like for you guys doing all the designing? Were there many designs (not just rockets) that were meant to directly compete with a specific product they produced, or vice versa? I know the products eventually intermingled, so I'm referring to the days before that happened. Mr. Estes said he always had a friendly respect and competition with Mr. Piester as a company, but I never saw anything specific printed about it.

Ya know, we never thought much about what Centuri was doing as far as designs go. We of course paid attention, but I think it was closer to they were a 'Chevy' and we were a 'Plymouth' sort of competition. I don't ever remember we felt as though they produced a new kit design that needed to be answered. When we first saw their Saturns though, it did wake us up. I personally always felt they ate out lunch on the V. Damon was driving our bus right then and we had very little money to spend for kit tooling. Lee hadn't yet sold to Damon so his use of money for tooling was much differnt than ours. And by the way, it was Keith Niskern who was responsible for their V and IB. Great guy, and I miss him.

[tbzep]

Thanks for coming here and letting us pick your brain! :cool:

Since you mentioned you are nearing retirement, do you think you will still fool around with rocketry as a hobby, or are you burned out after almost 40 years and think you will walk away from it completely?

[MDorffler]

I too will thank you up-front for taking away from your valuable fishing time here!

I'm also interested in motors, mostly the ones we can't buy (at least currently :)) at our friendly neighborhood hobby store.

Oh, I'm also curious whether you will fly any rockets after you retire? I.e. is rocketry both a hobby and work or has the latter beat the prior out of you?

I normally try not to think rockets from Friday evening to Monday morning. I have shift my attention to my family and other interests for awhile. Rockets are cool, but I have to catch a break here and there.

Will I fly rockets when I retire? Don't know for certain, but am thinking about trying to give you guys a serious run in scale at NARAM. Never had the time to do that before.

[dwmzmm]

I normally try not to think rockets from Friday evening to Monday morning. I have shift my attention to my family and other interests for awhile. Rockets are cool, but I have to catch a break here and there.

Will I fly rockets when I retire? Don't know for certain, but am thinking about trying to give you guys a serious run in scale at NARAM. Never had the time to do that before.

Are you a member of the NAR?

[MDorffler]

What was the competition with Centuri like for you guys doing all the designing? Were there many designs (not just rockets) that were meant to directly compete with a specific product they produced, or vice versa? I know the products eventually intermingled, so I'm referring to the days before that happened. Mr. Estes said he always had a friendly respect and competition with Mr. Piester as a company, but I never saw anything specific printed about it.

To add to this, there was never anything but cordial relations between Estes and Centuri. Vern and Lee got along well, but always like to play one up on each other when ever possible. But they are both great guys and believed they keyed off each other. There was never any reason for them to be at odds. It would have been counter productive.

On the lighter side, Wayne got out his electric eraser and had a ball with one of Lee's Enerjet ads. It was an ad where Lee is sitting at a desk holding an Enerjet motor in his hands. Wayne erased out Lee's hands and face and drew in bandages, then changed the name to 'EnerBlast' at the top. There was also a small cameo on the wll as I remember of a model in flight. He drew in a star burst on top of the model implying it was blowing up, obviously by an
'EnerBlast' motor. Wayne showed it to Vern, who sent a copy to Lee - which didn't go over well as I remember.

[MDorffler]

Are you a member of the NAR?

I haven't been for many years. I have not been to an NAR function since I flew the Cineroc proto at NARAM at the Air Force Acadamy in 1969.

[snaquin]

Mike,

Can you tell us more about the two stage carrier for the Cineroc used for the first flight in 1968? What Mini-Max engines did you select for this flight?

I noticed the fins were very similar in design to the first stage fins of the Astron Delta and that this carrier appears to have used three fins instead of four like the Omega.

Also the NARAM-11 carrier vehicle appears to be another original design. What can you tell us about your experimentation with different engines and design considerations that went into the various carrier vehicles you designed.

The Omega was always one of my favorite rockets. It would be interesting to know how you came about reaching that final production design.

Oh, and welcome to the forum!

Thanks!

:)

.

[scigs30]

Mike, I just opened up a vintage Blue Bird Zero Kit and building it in the projects section. This is cool design.
http://www.oldrocketforum.com/showthread.php?p=67492#post67492

[Initiator001]

Mike,

To repeat what others have said, welcome to YORF and thank you for taking the time to reply to our questions.

My question concerns 'Products which were announced but never released'.

I am curious about the stories behind two rocket kits which were announced in Estes catalogs but never made it to the hobby shop.

I would like to know the story/history of the Battlestar Galctica Cylon Raider kit (# 1313) featured in the 1979 catalog (You may remember that catalog, I think there was some rocket camera on the cover... ;) ).

The other kit was announced in the 1980 catalog, the Black Hole Cygnus Probe Ship (#1351).

I have been curious about what happened to these two models for nearly thirty years. Were any prototypes made? How close did they get to production? What stopped their release?

I look forward to your reply and thank you for your time.

Bob Sanford

[Leo]

Wow, this is just fantastic. Waking up in the morning and reading this thread is just fantastisch! :)

@Scott: You better have full control over your Server with tripple back-ups and all, don't want anything to have happen like on the "other forum" or else I will personally fly over from Germany and gag you :D

Mike,

I'll start with my questions by moving away from black powder rockets and direct you to the "Cold Power" line.

- What was your involvement in the Cold Power line?
Wayne Kellner told me via Bill Simon that you designed the Shark CP, correct?

- The Cold Power line only lived for a short time. Was it a successful series for Estes?
If not what were the problems keeping the CP series afloat?
I would guess manufacturing the CP engines wasn't an easy task cost wise. Or did FREON kill the product line?

- What was more popular, the flying rocket line or the Land Rocket line?

- Did you fly any CP rockets and if so with success?

- How was Vern Estes involved in the CP Line or his attitude toward them, him coming from the BP side e.g.

- Any special tidbits about the history of the CP Line within Estes that you could share?

[Rocketflyer]

To get to your essential question - yes, black powder made today is 'slower' than it was ten years ago, and it's getting slower. That changes the burn rate of our motors just as it does everyone else's motors. We do burn rate tests on every single lot of powder we buy to characterize it. We press and burn a lot of motors in this process. We have to know how many clicks to adjust engine manufacturing equipment in order to maintain the NAR impulse standards we have always adhered to.

Does this help?


Thank You Mike. I just learned a great amount of info from your post.
BTW that Wayne Kellner skit with the DC-3 was beyond priceless. :chuckle:

So, I have another question about motors. As the burn time increases, does this mean more propellant charge in the casing? Could this mean a longer casing than the "standard" 70mm?

[foose4string]

This is a great question. This sould make for interesting excahnges with the engine guys here.

Many of you may not realize that there has never been two like batches of black powder ever made. That includes the one that may have been made yesterday, and the batch made today on the same equipment, and from materials from the same bags or sacks.

Terry - feel welcome to jump in on this if you think I miss something----

While potassium nitrate stays relatively constant, both the sulfer and charcoal change ever so slightly from lot to lot. The charcoal is the ingredient that has the greatest overall control over the burn rate of a particular batch. Hickory has historically been the preferred source of charcoal, but woods such as pine can in a pinch be uased as well.

Trees as a species morph over time, which side of the hill they were grown on and where they were harvested changes, the ingrediants in the soil changes, and so does the temperature while they were growing. The variables are staggering that affect the tree before the wood is harvested. And do you use the branches or the truck, or both? Then there is the process of heating the wood to produce the charcoal. Getting to repeatable charcoal for black powder is a serious issue.

To get to your essential question - yes, black powder made today is 'slower' than it was ten years ago, and it's getting slower. That changes the burn rate of our motors just as it does everyone else's motors. We do burn rate tests on every single lot of powder we buy to characterize it. We press and burn a lot of motors in this process. We have to know how many clicks to adjust engine manufacturing equipment in order to maintain the NAR impulse standards we have always adhered to.

Does this help?

This probably explains why I've had C6 motors with identical delay times, manufactured within a year or two of each other, and didn't "look" the same. The caps were in very different locations in relation to the top of the casing. One was near the very end and one was recessed by about 1/4 inch. I flew them back to back and could see no major difference in performance. That's just good QC. Sure, we get reports if a bad motor every now and then -nozzle blow through , overzealous ejection charge, weak ejection charge, etc. but those are rare occurances indeed.

[tbzep]

Did the ladies that filled our mail orders really keep up with what we owed? :p

It seems like every time I ordered there was a price increase or I miss added and I owed them a nickel, or a quarter. I always added that to my next order, but I bet Estes ate a considerable amount of profit by being kind to us kids and shipping our orders anyway.

BTW, I don't know if it was the Colorado air or what, but I absolutely loved and will forever remember the smell that wafted out of the boxes shipped from Penrose. To me, that is the true scent of rocketry instead of spent BP motors.

[ghrocketman]

+1 to wanting to know what the deal was with the Batllestar Galactica Cylon Raider and the Black Hole Cygnus Probe Ship.
Were prototypes ever built and do any photos exist for either ?
What was the reasoning for those making the catalogs but never being sold ?
I have never been able to get ANY sort of satisfactory information about either of these.

Also, how about the Centuri "Magnum-D" Tomahawk ?
Any information as to why this one made the 1981 catalog but was never produced ?

[Royatl]

Mike,

I have been curious about what happened to these two models for nearly thirty years. Were any prototypes made? How close did they get to production? What stopped their release?

I look forward to your reply and thank you for your time.

Bob Sanford

Dag nab it!! You stole my ideas for today's question!

[EchoVictor]

Wow! This is a nice surprise. Mike, another voice of thanks for joining our little madhouse and sharing your thoughts. It is greatly appreciated!

As most folks around here know, I'm the resident sci-fi/exotic design nut. The more tubes / fins / antennae / laser cannon / etc., the better. In regards to these designs, I have two questions;

1) What would be your 2 or 3 favorite sci-fi/fantasy designs, and what were their inspirations?

2) How well do the sci-fi kits sell compared to standard designs (1 out of every 10, 1 out of every 50, etc.)?

Thanks a ton,
Eric

[shockwaveriderz]

This is a great question. This sould make for interesting excahnges with the engine guys here.

Many of you may not realize that there has never been two like batches of black powder ever made. That includes the one that may have been made yesterday, and the batch made today on the same equipment, and from materials from the same bags or sacks.

Terry - feel welcome to jump in on this if you think I miss something----

While potassium nitrate stays relatively constant, both the sulfer and charcoal change ever so slightly from lot to lot. The charcoal is the ingredient that has the greatest overall control over the burn rate of a particular batch. Hickory has historically been the preferred source of charcoal, but woods such as pine can in a pinch be uased as well.

Trees as a species morph over time, which side of the hill they were grown on and where they were harvested changes, the ingrediants in the soil changes, and so does the temperature while they were growing. The variables are staggering that affect the tree before the wood is harvested. And do you use the branches or the truck, or both? Then there is the process of heating the wood to produce the charcoal. Getting to repeatable charcoal for black powder is a serious issue.

To get to your essential question - yes, black powder made today is 'slower' than it was ten years ago, and it's getting slower. That changes the burn rate of our motors just as it does everyone else's motors. We do burn rate tests on every single lot of powder we buy to characterize it. We press and burn a lot of motors in this process. We have to know how many clicks to adjust engine manufacturing equipment in order to maintain the NAR impulse standards we have always adhered to.

Does this help?


Mike, I'm stunned that you would even consider asking me that. Or that you even know who I am. All my knowledge about BP motors is book knowledge. You and Ed actually did it. If I had my life to live over again I think I could have spent 40 years happily working as Mabel operator at Estes.....

First let me congratulate you on almost 40 years of service with Estes Industries and to the model rocketry industry as a whole.
Its a rarity these days that a person gets to work for a single company their entire carer anymore.

Since you are one of the all time, if not all time, prolific model rocket designers of all time
I can't help but wonder if it had something to do with your childhood in Hastings, NB; a mere 135 miles from where Orv Carlisle invented model rocketry.


So what ever happened to your 1963/4 4th place Design Contest entry, the Rodini??



terry dean

[Jerry Irvine]

First let me congratulate you on almost 40 years of service with Estes Industries and to the model rocketry industry as a whole.

Since you are one of the all time, if not all time, prolific model rocket designers of all time
I can't help but wonder if it had something to do with your childhood in Hastings, NB.

terry dean

I concur. Your service is appreciated even from the non star struck among us. God bless you for the Cineroc.

How about that D20?

Jerry

In my 5-6 grade classes I used Comet, Sizzler, Alpha 1, Centurion, Maxi-alpha 3.

[marslndr]

Wow, This is great stuff!

Thanks Mr. Dorffler, first for what you have done for the hobby and second for taking the time to be here and share the history.

My first question is can you shed any light on the history of the Mars Lander? What was the inspiration? Is it true that Martin Marrietta was involved in the design?

Ok that was 3 questions. Sorry.


Mark

[mycrofte]

Be a little more specific - what part of R&D do you feel takes so long?

Well, not just R&D alone. When Barry Tunick answered some questions, he said some rockets took 12 to 14 months from idea to packages out the back door. So, I thought I would ask about it from your point of view.

Do you guys take that long? Or is that through a whole process of deciding and marketing stuff you don't mess with?

[Mark II]

Did the ladies that filled our mail orders really keep up with what we owed? :p

It seems like every time I ordered there was a price increase or I miss added and I owed them a nickel, or a quarter. I always added that to my next order, but I bet Estes ate a considerable amount of profit by being kind to us kids and shipping our orders anyway.

BTW, I don't know if it was the Colorado air or what, but I absolutely loved and will forever remember the smell that wafted out of the boxes shipped from Penrose. To me, that is the true scent of rocketry instead of spent BP motors.
Holy cow - you remember that too?!?! I thought that I was the only one who noticed it! :) I was always afraid to bring it up, because I assumed that no one would know what I was talking about. Wow, that was the scent of rocket power!

MarkII

[tbzep]

Holy cow - you remember that too?!?! I thought that I was the only one who noticed it! :) I was always afraid to bring it up, because I assumed that no one would know what I was talking about. Wow, that was the scent of rocket power!

MarkII

I have an extremely strong memory connection of rocketry due to that that smell. Every now and then I'll smell something that is similar, but not exactly like the smell I got when I opened those boxes from Penrose, and the memories absolutely flood into my head.

I also have a strong memory connection to rocketry with the smell of fresh mowed grass. I was mowing when my first ever box from Penrose arrived. Every single time I mow the lawn, I can close my eyes and remember the exact moment my mailman pulled into the driveway instead of stopping at the mailbox. I can remember the time of day, weather, temperature, were I was in the yard, the fact that my mother made me go back outside and finish mowing without letting me open the box, what the mailman said to me, etc. Every time I mow today, I get an extreme urge to go inside and look at a rocketry catalog, build, or fly a rocket. Maybe this should be a new thread. :)

[Doug Sams]

Every time I mow today, I get an extreme urge to go inside and look at a rocketry catalog, build, or fly a rocket. Maybe this should be a new thread. http://forums.rocketshoppe.com/images/smilies/smile.gifEver consider changing your name to Pavlov? http://forums.rocketshoppe.com/images/smilies/biggrin.gif

Doug

.

[mperdue]

I don't recall ever sniffing the boxes I got from Estes - you guys need to get out more often... :)

Mario

[tbzep]

I don't recall ever sniffing the boxes I got from Estes - you guys need to get out more often... :)

Mario

LOL! I didn't have to sniff. The aroma surrounded me and lifted me until I slipped the surly bonds of earth. :cool:

Sincerely,

Pavlov

[SEL]

I have an extremely strong memory connection of rocketry due to that that smell. Every now and then I'll smell something that is similar, but not exactly like the smell I got when I opened those boxes from Penrose, and the memories absolutely flood into my head.

I also have a strong memory connection to rocketry with the smell of fresh mowed grass. I was mowing when my first ever box from Penrose arrived. Every single time I mow the lawn, I can close my eyes and remember the exact moment my mailman pulled into the driveway instead of stopping at the mailbox. I can remember the time of day, weather, temperature, were I was in the yard, the fact that my mother made me go back outside and finish mowing without letting me open the box, what the mailman said to me, etc. Every time I mow today, I get an extreme urge to go inside and look at a rocketry catalog, build, or fly a rocket. Maybe this should be a new thread. :)

Same here - there's the smell, and then there's not being able to look at a Gyroc and not remember that it's the first rocket I ever got off the ground, or seeing a Skyhook, and not remembering that it was the coolest looking rocket that I received in my first order. And then there's not being able to look at a Astron Scout and not remember it burning on the Tilt-a-Pad after some 'big kids' came by while I was having trouble launching it and said "We'll get that motor lit for you! Hey, Jimmy - got a match?" :eek: :eek: :eek:

S.

[Mark II]

LOL! I didn't have to sniff. The aroma surrounded me and lifted me until I slipped the surly bonds of earth. :cool:

Sincerely,

Pavlov
It's more Ebbinghaus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Involuntary_memory) than Pavlov.

For some strange reason, I keep wanting to name my cloned Astron Sprite "Madeleine"... ;)

MarkII

[MDorffler]

[QUOTE=snaquin]Mike,

Can you tell us more about the two stage carrier for the Cineroc used for the first flight in 1968? What Mini-Max engines did you select for this flight?

I noticed the fins were very similar in design to the first stage fins of the Astron Delta and that this carrier appears to have used three fins instead of four like the Omega.

Also the NARAM-11 carrier vehicle appears to be another original design. What can you tell us about your experimentation with different engines and design considerations that went into the various carrier vehicles you designed.

The Omega was always one of my favorite rockets. It would be interesting to know how you came about reaching that final production design.

Oh, and welcome to the forum!

Thanks!


The original Cineroc carrier was designed around stock Centuri parts. Estes had not yet made the heavier wall body tubing and diameters I needed. I used the F97 Mini-Max booster under an F97-7 upper stage. By today's propellant regulations it was an 'illegal' use of motors.

And the overall design was more of an Aerobee than anything else. The Aerobee series has always seemed to me to look like what a rocket is supposed to look like.

The bird I flew at NARAM 11 was just something I had stuck together to fly the prototpe cameras at the plant. I put a coat of orange paint on it and a couple decals to dress it up a bit just before NARAM. That particular flight at the Acadamy was the first time I actually caught the chute being expelled while seeing the inside of the body tube falling straight back.

Also note I drove back to Penrose and developed that film by hand ala shaking a martini in a standard 35mm developing can, dried it, then drove back to NARAM to show it in the Estes trailer.

The Omega was nothing special as a design per se. It really has no history to it. I turned my attention to the carrier rocket after we released the tooling for the Cineroc. I needed addition stability so went for the 4-fin deisgn. Having an extra fin aids modelers to end up with a 'straighter' fin alignment than with only 3. Having crooked fins under a Cineroc makes for spinning and blurry footage.

I then painted it white, just as I do with all my deisgns, stared at it a bit and decided on the blue and black decal scheme for the fins. I added the Cineroc decal to the second stage and it was done. Total design time: maybe 20 minutes.

[MDorffler]

Mike, I just opened up a vintage Blue Bird Zero Kit and building it in the projects section. This is cool design.
http://www.oldrocketforum.com/showthread.php?p=67492#post67492

Some designs are pleasing while some are not. The BBZ is just one of those designs that works.

[rokitflite]

The Omega was nothing special as a design per se. It really has no history to it. I turned my attention to the carrier rocket after we released the tooling for the Cineroc. I needed addition stability so went for the 4-fin deisgn. Having an extra fin aids modelers to end up with a 'straighter' fin alignment than with only 3. Having crooked fins under a Cineroc makes for spinning and blurry footage.

I then painted it white, just as I do with all my deisgns, stared at it a bit and decided on the blue and black decal scheme for the fins. I added the Cineroc decal to the second stage and it was done. Total design time: maybe 20 minutes.

Good Lord... All of these great designs that we worshiped for years and the design story is basically "I fell asleep with some parts on my bed, rolled over them a couple of times in my sleep, woke up and there she was..." You have a gift Mike! :D

[MDorffler]

Mike,

To repeat what others have said, welcome to YORF and thank you for taking the time to reply to our questions.

My question concerns 'Products which were announced but never released'.

I am curious about the stories behind two rocket kits which were announced in Estes catalogs but never made it to the hobby shop.

I would like to know the story/history of the Battlestar Galctica Cylon Raider kit (# 1313) featured in the 1979 catalog (You may remember that catalog, I think there was some rocket camera on the cover... ;) ).

The other kit was announced in the 1980 catalog, the Black Hole Cygnus Probe Ship (#1351).

I have been curious about what happened to these two models for nearly thirty years. Were any prototypes made? How close did they get to production? What stopped their release?

I look forward to your reply and thank you for your time.

Bob Sanford

Hey Bob, here's what happened;

Our marketing guys went and made a licensing deal with Hollywood on the Galactica series. They signed us up for the Viper and the Cylon without consulting us guys at all. We got a memo telling us what they had done and we needed to get started. Keith Niskern started the Viper while the rest of us sratched our heads how to do the Cylon. An undercambered semi-disk just isn't that aerodynamic, especially when it has bump like things all over the top side.

But we gave it a shot thinking maybe we could find a way to make it drive straight. We made a relatively accurate pattern and vacuum-formed several pieces for flight testing. We found right away it was a dead end to make go straight with the motor underneath. It would chase you all over the parking lot. But we already knew that was going to happen - we needed to show the marketing guys first hand what they bhad gotten us into. So we tried to sell them on the idea of putting it on the side of a long black BT-50 like a big base fin, and added a sub-fin for lateral stability. That was about all we could do. Marketing frowned, but presented it to Hollywood who of course said no. That was the end of the Battlestar Cylon. Sorry guys.

The Cygnus Probe got killed by the Disney marketing people too. This was after we had actually produced about 5,000 kits and were in the warehouse ready to ship. Disney, after the initial approvals in the early work, decided to change their mind, They didn't like Wayne's rendition afterall, hated the kit panel, and didn't like the decal either. They decided it wasn't represenative enough of the movie vehicle and since they had the final word, it was killed. We had considered changing the name and repackaging it but decided it wouldn't work. End of Cygnus. Sorry again, guys.

[MDorffler]

Wow, this is just fantastic. Waking up in the morning and reading this thread is just fantastisch! :)

@Scott: You better have full control over your Server with tripple back-ups and all, don't want anything to have happen like on the "other forum" or else I will personally fly over from Germany and gag you :D

Mike,

I'll start with my questions by moving away from black powder rockets and direct you to the "Cold Power" line.

- What was your involvement in the Cold Power line?
Wayne Kellner told me via Bill Simon that you designed the Shark CP, correct?

- The Cold Power line only lived for a short time. Was it a successful series for Estes?
If not what were the problems keeping the CP series afloat?
I would guess manufacturing the CP engines wasn't an easy task cost wise. Or did FREON kill the product line?

- What was more popular, the flying rocket line or the Land Rocket line?

- Did you fly any CP rockets and if so with success?

- How was Vern Estes involved in the CP Line or his attitude toward them, him coming from the BP side e.g.

- Any special tidbits about the history of the CP Line within Estes that you could share?

Hey Leo,

I had very little to do with the Cold Power project. Your right that I did the Shark, but had other things going on at the time. The project was primarily Bill Simon's and Larry Renger's.

We had bought the rights to Vashon's designs but fett they needed a few improvements. To use their approach the rocketeer had to have his hands right under the motor to pull the release pin. Even though the Freon really didn't scare us as a safety issue, there was the thought that a youngster could possible get it sprayed back in his face and we didn't feel comforatble with that. Anyway, Estes rockets are remotely launched so that's what Bill and larry designed. It worked quite well. They also developed the pressure bleed off system to deploy the chute.

But overall the Cold Power product line, rockets or cars, just were not accepted well by the public. And then the issues of the Freon beging environmentally not a good thing caused us to just put the stuff in a box and put it on a high shelf, and go back to what we did best and that is black powder.

[MDorffler]

Thank You Mike. I just learned a great amount of info from your post.
BTW that Wayne Kellner skit with the DC-3 was beyond priceless. :chuckle:

So, I have another question about motors. As the burn time increases, does this mean more propellant charge in the casing? Could this mean a longer casing than the "standard" 70mm?

That was just a warmup to what Wayne did with the DC-3. I haven't told you about when he flew the Channel with it disintegrating piece by piece or when he added the element of fire.....

And yes, when you use the 'slower' powder, the grain has to lengthen. 'Slower' means less ISP, while of coruse 'fast' powder refers to higher ISP. But in model rocket motors the total shift in ISP is not an overall problem. As mentioned, you either add powder or subtract it. The standard 70mm case length has the margins in place to be able to get the full 10 newtons even with the 'slow' powder.

[MDorffler]

Did the ladies that filled our mail orders really keep up with what we owed? :p

It seems like every time I ordered there was a price increase or I miss added and I owed them a nickel, or a quarter. I always added that to my next order, but I bet Estes ate a considerable amount of profit by being kind to us kids and shipping our orders anyway.

BTW, I don't know if it was the Colorado air or what, but I absolutely loved and will forever remember the smell that wafted out of the boxes shipped from Penrose. To me, that is the true scent of rocketry instead of spent BP motors.

There were many times when the girls could tell the order was from a small person by the handwriting. If there was no money and the order was small they would send it anyway. There were several 7-year olds who got a free model rocket from Estes. And like yourself, there were many envelopes with a nickle or a quarter and an apology. It was great.

And that smell? I think is was probably leftover printing chemicals from the AB Dick presses - sorry. On the other hand it might have been Penrose air with a slight trace of sulpher, and a pinch of essence of Prairie Dog mixed in.

[CPMcGraw]

Mike,

It's great that you've decided to join our asylum. We keep extra straight-jackets on hand for the "very special cases"... :D

I know Estes has had the Oracle for a few years, but was there ever any discussion about revising the old Cineroc as a DV? With some of the DV cameras available today, like the one Hobby Lobby is selling (FlyCamOne MkII), the imagery is sharp and clear with high frame rates. Do you think such a "bring back" might have an appeal with today's crowd?

[MDorffler]

Wow! This is a nice surprise. Mike, another voice of thanks for joining our little madhouse and sharing your thoughts. It is greatly appreciated!

As most folks around here know, I'm the resident sci-fi/exotic design nut. The more tubes / fins / antennae / laser cannon / etc., the better. In regards to these designs, I have two questions;

1) What would be your 2 or 3 favorite sci-fi/fantasy designs, and what were their inspirations?

2) How well do the sci-fi kits sell compared to standard designs (1 out of every 10, 1 out of every 50, etc.)?

Thanks a ton,
Eric

1. The Interceptor and Mars Lander - probably the same as about 80% of the rest of you guys.
2. The sci-fi kits have always done very well. But temper that with their success depends greatly on the execution of the design and decor. The rocketeer has to connect with it when he first sees it. As an example, the Centuri 'Super-Kits' didn't do well at all. And I blame that squarely on graphics that just didn't work at all. We learned early that when a father and son walk into a hobby shop and buy their first model rocket, it will be the 'cool' one with antennas and pilot canopies on it over the sport model every time.

[MDorffler]

Mike, I'm stunned that you would even consider asking me that. Or that you even know who I am. All my knowledge about BP motors is book knowledge. You and Ed actually did it. If I had my life to live over again I think I could have spent 40 years happily working as Mabel operator at Estes.....

First let me congratulate you on almost 40 years of service with Estes Industries and to the model rocketry industry as a whole.
Its a rarity these days that a person gets to work for a single company their entire carer anymore.

Since you are one of the all time, if not all time, prolific model rocket designers of all time
I can't help but wonder if it had something to do with your childhood in Hastings, NB; a mere 135 miles from where Orv Carlisle invented model rocketry.


So what ever happened to your 1963/4 4th place Design Contest entry, the Rodini??

Don't remember what happened to the Rodini. I flew my field mice in that thing several times and they just kept making babies like popcorn. I flew them again, and they made more babies. My mom had a real problem with my rocket-biology expiriements especially when they got out of the cage.

[MDorffler]

Wow, This is great stuff!

Thanks Mr. Dorffler, first for what you have done for the hobby and second for taking the time to be here and share the history.

My first question is can you shed any light on the history of the Mars Lander? What was the inspiration? Is it true that Martin Marrietta was involved in the design?

Ok that was 3 questions. Sorry.


Mark

Mark - the ML was another great model by Wayne Kellner. I watched him develope it over about 6 months. I can't speculate where he got the idea. Most of his designs were straight from his creative mind - not keyed off what he may have seen. And Martin marietta had absolutely nothing to do with Wayne's work on that kit. That myth is pure fantasy.

[MDorffler]

Well, not just R&D alone. When Barry Tunick answered some questions, he said some rockets took 12 to 14 months from idea to packages out the back door. So, I thought I would ask about it from your point of view.

Do you guys take that long? Or is that through a whole process of deciding and marketing stuff you don't mess with?

A typical new Estes kit cn takes roughly 9 months to a year from creation to the hobby shop shelf. I will spend more time on the process later, but the design has to be built, test flown, costed, all specifications drawn or written, sample parts received, checked, and built into the next flight generation, the instructions have to be written and illustrated, the package verbage created and cheked over for correctness, and the package desinged and proofed. Then there is getting the appropriate bar codes, sizing the shipping packages, and all the other stuff just to get it from Penrose to your building table.

So rarely is the model design time the pacing item. It's all the other stuff that can trip you up to try to make a promised shipping date. As the designer, you are always smack in the middle of all these other processes that thins your avaiable time from designing more models.

[Bob Kaplow]

Mary Roberts is a very nice person.

My wife can totally handle a gun and dress her prey, so I guess I don't see a problem with this :chuckle:

.

You should have seen Mary Roberts handling a whip at NARAM-29.

[Bob Kaplow]

LOL! I didn't have to sniff. The aroma surrounded me and lifted me until I slipped the surly bonds of earth. :cool:

Sincerely,

Pavlov

Every time I open one of my old blue tubes (I flew some at NARAM-50 last summer) I take a good sniff inside. There is something satisfying about the smell of classic BP motors that are older than many of the folks posting on this forum.

[Bob Kaplow]

I'd like to know more about the history of the model Mike Helmund rescued from the dumpster, the "scale" model of the Vulture from Salvage-1. Who built it, and why didn't it ever become a product? Was it just the series cancellation? How did it fly?

[Bill]

I'd like to know more about the history of the model Mike Helmund rescued from the dumpster, the "scale" model of the Vulture from Salvage-1. Who built it, and why didn't it ever become a product? Was it just the series cancellation? How did it fly?


I wanted to build this one for a Future/Fiction entry. In my research, I came across this...

http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Launchpad/9782/salestes.html


Bill

[Rocketflyer]

Mike, I think it would be cool to start a new thread for the Kellner stories. This way you can just add to the posts, and we get to read some great stories and laugh our tails off.
It must have been a great way to break tension. Did that DC-3 ever make it across the channel?

I'm so happy you are willing to share all of this info. Thank You just doesn't seem to be enough.

[Eagle3]

Thanks for joining the forum and offering to share your experiences. I really appreciate the time and patience in answering questions that I am sure many of us have had for many many years.

I'd like to make a suggestion to the membership that I hope makes Mike's forum easier to follow. If you have a question that you feel may spark a discussion, please ask it in new thread. That should make following conversations a little easier when they're split out rather than buried in countless other questions and sidetracked conversations. I'll start off it off with this thread, Design of the Month (http://forums.rocketshoppe.com/showthread.php?p=67632#post67632)

[Shreadvector]

We have a pair of DC-3s that flies out of Long Beach CA to Catalina Island every day. I can see it out the window if I'm looking, but I can hear it.

http://www.catalinaflyingboats.com/



Mike, I think it would be cool to start a new thread for the Kellner stories. This way you can just add to the posts, and we get to read some great stories and laugh our tails off.
It must have been a great way to break tension. Did that DC-3 ever make it across the channel?

I'm so happy you are willing to share all of this info. Thank You just doesn't seem to be enough.

[Rocketflyer]

We have a pair of DC-3s that flies out of Long Beach CA to Catalina Island every day. I can see it out the window if I'm looking, but I can hear it.

http://www.catalinaflyingboats.com/


Ya, the DC-3, aka the Charlie 47 (C-47) Skytrain is/was a real work horse.

Here's a real "Catalina"

[ghrocketman]

Mike,
Based on the info you gave us about the Black Hole Cygnus Probe Ship, there were in fact kits produced; were they then subsequently scrapped ?
If the kits were produced, there must have been instructions/plans to build them.
Did this kit use any "exotic" parts such as plastic moldings or was it basically a bunch of rings, tubes, dowels, and other bits/pieces ?

Any way one could obtain a "parts list" or some other manner to attempt to create this "never existed" one ?

[InFlight]

You should have seen Mary Roberts handling a whip at NARAM-29. :eek: :eek: :eek: :chuckle: kool...

[Bob Kaplow]

I wanted to build this one for a Future/Fiction entry. In my research, I came across this...

http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Launchpad/9782/salestes.html


Bill

I found that stuff years ago. Mike "salvaged" the model from the dumpster. I'm pretty sure it was in the box of "cool stuff" he brought to a NIRA meeting during his time in the Chicago area.

I'm looking for its history from the late 70s when it probably was made. Who built it? Why? What's the rest of the story?

[A Fish Named Wallyum]

Thanks for joining the forum and offering to share your experiences. I really appreciate the time and patience in answering questions that I am sure many of us have had for many many years.

I'd like to make a suggestion to the membership that I hope makes Mike's forum easier to follow. If you have a question that you feel may spark a discussion, please ask it in new thread. That should make following conversations a little easier when they're split out rather than buried in countless other questions and sidetracked conversations. I'll start off it off with this thread, Design of the Month (http://forums.rocketshoppe.com/showthread.php?p=67632#post67632)

Great idea. :cool:

[Der Red Max]

The Cygnus Probe got killed by the Disney marketing people too. This was after we had actually produced about 5,000 kits and were in the warehouse ready to ship.:eek: Where are those kits now?!
I hope they're not sharing landfill space with the Atari E.T. video games.
Even if they are, let me know where - I'll take my shovel!:D

[Davidtmp]

Eagle 3, it is a good idea, but then you have lots of threads for Mike to have to go to for different reasons. I am sure they want to have him go to one place for questions and answers.

[Der Red Max]

Eagle 3, it is a good idea, but then you have lots of threads for Mike to have to go to for different reasons. I am sure they want to have him go to one place for questions and answers.They?
Eagle3 is "they"!

[SEL]

Eagle 3, it is a good idea, but then you have lots of threads for Mike to have to go to for different reasons. I am sure they want to have him go to one place for questions and answers.

They would all be in the 'Ask Mike' forum, just under separate headings - much more organized.

http://forums.rocketshoppe.com/forumdisplay.php?f=33
S.

[genimijim]

Mr Dorffler

Welcome to the forum and thank you for your time.

What was your age when you joined Estes Industries?

Did you think you would stay with them as long as you did?

If the classic series go over good will Estes put out more classics?

Where do you see Estes and model rocketry in 10 years?

Jim

[Davidtmp]

They would all be in the 'Ask Mike' forum, just under separate headings - much more organized.

http://forums.rocketshoppe.com/forumdisplay.php?f=33
S.
Well, yeah that would make sense. I really need some sleep.

[MDorffler]

Mike,
Based on the info you gave us about the Black Hole Cygnus Probe Ship, there were in fact kits produced; were they then subsequently scrapped ?
If the kits were produced, there must have been instructions/plans to build them.
Did this kit use any "exotic" parts such as plastic moldings or was it basically a bunch of rings, tubes, dowels, and other bits/pieces ?

Any way one could obtain a "parts list" or some other manner to attempt to create this "never existed" one ?

All the kits were scrapped. I think we pulled the blow-mold cone and the tubing but the rest went into the incinerator.

I have a copy of the instructions, patterns, and the rest of it in my files. It really would be great to see you guys build copies in different sizes and power, and normally I would be happy to post this and share it for you guys to use. But unfortunately the last time I thought I was doing you guys a favor by posting my personal sketches of kit ideas, they were turned into kits by other manufacturers.

[MDorffler]

Mr Dorffler

Welcome to the forum and thank you for your time.

What was your age when you joined Estes Industries?

Did you think you would stay with them as long as you did?

If the classic series go over good will Estes put out more classics?

Where do you see Estes and model rocketry in 10 years?

Jim

Jim - I'm a front-line 'Baby-Boomer' born in 1946. I joined Estes in 1968 so you might get out your calculator and punch in the numbers to figure out ages and dates, etc.

I had no idea of how long I would stay or where my life was going at that time. I enjoyed very much working with Vern, Bill, Gene. and Wayne, and the rest of the people at the company. They became my second family apart form my wife and young son. So I was fortunate to have a great relationship with those who were on the opposite ends of my daily 20-minute drive. That more than anything is why I have stayed these many years.

And yes, if the rocketeers are happy with the first group of the classic releases, we will continue the series.

I would be less than honest if I expressed that the hobby of model rocketry is healthy and stable. We need more involvement of NAR, and school programs by all the manufacturers. And the hobby needs a shot of public space awareness that can only be supplied from a new realistic NASA program. A few more really cool Sci-Fi movies wouldn;t hurt either.

[MDorffler]

I found that stuff years ago. Mike "salvaged" the model from the dumpster. I'm pretty sure it was in the box of "cool stuff" he brought to a NIRA meeting during his time in the Chicago area.

I'm looking for its history from the late 70s when it probably was made. Who built it? Why? What's the rest of the story?

Bob, we started on the project, but as I recall there might have been only two or three episodes aired, so we pretty much figurerd out is wasn't going to fly (pardon the pun). So it looks like Mike Hellmund has the only evidence we put any effort into it at all. I didn't know he kept it. It really was clunky anyway. That's what you get when Hollywood producers design spcaecraft with no working knowledge and then write really stupid scripts.

[SEL]

All the kits were scrapped. I think we pulled the blow-mold cone and the tubing but the rest went into the incinerator.

I have a copy of the instructions, patterns, and the rest of it in my files. It really would be great to see you guys build copies in different sizes and power, and normally I would be happy to post this and share it for you guys to use. But unfortunately the last time I thought I was doing you guys a favor by posting my personal sketches of kit ideas, they were turned into kits by other manufacturers.

Oh.... Which ones?

Sean

[A Fish Named Wallyum]

Oh.... Which ones?

Sean

I'm guessing Goonies. :rolleyes:

[Jerry Irvine]

But unfortunately the last time I thought I was doing you guys a favor by posting my personal sketches of kit ideas, they were turned into kits by other manufacturers.

I for one see the Estes POV on this one. I had a frequent poster directly clone a kit I designed with no compunction or recompence.

Is the entire concern liability, or would a direct to consumer limitation with a 10-15% of wholesale royalty industry norm solve it, as I suspect.

Jerry

How about that D20? I saw a Lander on person at NARCON San Diego bigger than me.

[Ltvscout]

I have a copy of the instructions, patterns, and the rest of it in my files. It really would be great to see you guys build copies in different sizes and power, and normally I would be happy to post this and share it for you guys to use. But unfortunately the last time I thought I was doing you guys a favor by posting my personal sketches of kit ideas, they were turned into kits by other manufacturers.
Mike,

I have a number of plans from different manufacturers up on Ye Olde Rocket Plans that the manufacturer has asked me to add a disclaimer preventing the use for commercial purposes. Here's an example for the Quest plans I have online:

These plans are for Personal Use Only! Quest Aerospace, Inc. reserves all commercial use rights.

Instead of posting the plans to the forum, send them direct to me and I can put them up on YORP with that disclaimer.

[Rocket Doctor]

Mike

Can you tell us about your first interview with vern before joining Estes?

Do you still have the original prototype for the Cineroc and the Omega?

Do you have any "mint" Cinceroc's and Omega's in your collection?


FYI

The Cineroc was my all time favorite rocket, also, I did a TV commercial many years ago for the Hobby Industry of America and footage from my Cinceeroc was used in it, receiving a bronze award in competition.
It had to do with model rockets, RC planes, RC Cars, RC Boats and crafts.

Thanks

RD

[gpoehlein]

Mike

Can you tell us about your first interview with vern before joining Estes?

Do you still have the original prototype for the Cineroc and the Omega?

Do you have any "mint" Cinceroc's and Omega's in your collection?


FYI

The Cineroc was my all time favorite rocket, also, I did a TV commercial many years ago for the Hobby Industry of America and footage from my Cinceeroc was used in it, receiving a bronze award in competition.
It had to do with model rockets, RC planes, RC Cars, RC Boats and crafts.

Thanks

RD

I agree, RD - the Cineroc was Awesome! When I was originally in rocketry back in 73 and 74, I desperately wanted one - I could never afford it, so I never got one.

Personally, I wish Estes would release a video capsule that looked like the Cineroc. That would be too cool for words!!! :D

(BTW, I also seriously coveted the Rocketronics transmitter and several of the Cold Power rockets, but couldn't afford them either - I was lucky to buy the few Estes and Centuri rockets I did.)

Greg

[MDorffler]

How about that D20?

Jerry - of what D20 do you speak?

[MDorffler]

Mike

Can you tell us about your first interview with vern before joining Estes?

Do you still have the original prototype for the Cineroc and the Omega?

Do you have any "mint" Cinceroc's and Omega's in your collection?

RD

Doc - I can write a great deal on the subject of working with Vern and of the Cineroc. Hopefully I can touch on the more important points over several posts.

My first interview with Vern nearly did not happen. After Vern had asked me to come to speak with him about developing my camera for Estes, my wife and I made the drive from Nebraska over one afternoon. We showed up at the plant at nine the next morning as requested, and then sat in the lobby almost three full hours waiting for Vern to get off the phone. I was ten minutes from getting up and leaving. I told the wife maybe we should just go on down to Phoenix instead.

Vern was a gentlemen, and I kept my irritation with having to wait so long under control. We talked about where he wanted to take Estes, asked me what I thought I could add in addition to the camera, and general chit chat about model rocketry.

I think I was probably already hired before I showed up for the interview because he asked if I could move my family and start work in aout two weeks. Uh, yeah, I suppose I could do that.... and then he pointed downstairs and said I needed to fill out a questionaire (it asked things like how much beer I drank per week) and that was it. It was a little eerie....I felt more like I had just been inducted into the Marines.

I spent an hour or so with Bill Simon and Gene Street, then went down the stairs to see my wife still sitting where I left her, and told her I now worked for Vern, we got in the car, and drove back to Nebraska. And that my friends is pretty darn close to how my interview went that started all my years as a model rocket kit designer.

Both my original camera, and the last working Estes prototype were stolen. I have no idea where the original Omega carrier is. It was flown, photo model copies were made, and it was probably tossed out.

Yes, I have several mint Cinerocs, and Camrocs as well. But no Omegas.

[Jerry Irvine]

In this thread I have asked you if a 24mm E9 casing 19.9 N-s D 20-3 (and 0, 6, 9 second delay) is practical for Estes to make?

Jerry

[MDorffler]

In this thread I have asked you if a 24mm E9 casing 19.9 N-s D 20-3 (and 0, 6, 9 second delay) is practical for Estes to make?

Jerry

Jerry - I wouldn't try it. We have to make sure the intial igniton spike stays within a maximum peak pressure. If you exceed it, the case expands to break the bond between the BP and the case. If the bond goes, so does the motor.

[Jerry Irvine]

Jerry - I wouldn't try it. We have to make sure the intial igniton spike stays within a maximum peak pressure. If you exceed it, the case expands to break the bond between the BP and the case. If the bond goes, so does the motor.

It would require a design like the Estes B8, FSI D18, or FSI F100, all of which were long term viable BP motors. Fred pointed out in the Barry thread such a motor if in use would increase larger rocket flight safety in small fields. It might have to be designed on the lower end of your typical pressure range and propellant mass adjusted accordingly.

The longer case and core give more bond length than a D12 by a large margin.

The interesting bit is it is under the USPS and 1.4S limits and mostly uses existing parts and packaging, and, is already compatible with a variety of stock kits.

Jerry

[Rocket Doctor]

Mike

What would you consider the most interesting project that you have worked on?

How long has it been that you have worked at Estes?

Can you comment on the changes at Estes from when Vern owned it, to Damon, to TCW and to the present?

Do you have a "museum" at your house as does Vern?

How many of your prototypes do you have?

Thanks
RD

[MDorffler]

Mike

What would you consider the most interesting project that you have worked on?

How long has it been that you have worked at Estes?

Can you comment on the changes at Estes from when Vern owned it, to Damon, to TCW and to the present?

Do you have a "museum" at your house as does Vern?

How many of your prototypes do you have?

Thanks
RD

1. Doc - I think it is a given that I have worked on many interesting projects with Estes over these many years. I would seriously have to think about which one of so many I felt the most interesting. This is hard because I have enjoyed virtually every project I have been involved with. When the guys here on the forum ask about the kits I have done they don't undertsatnd that I have also been responsible for projects such as COX 049 motor changes, engine manufacturing improvements, and the electronics that have gone into many COX RC airplanes. It is a raw truth that I have in one way or another touched almost every product that has been shipped out Estes doors. This is not a point of ego, it is a truthism.

2. As mentioned in an earlier post, I started at Estes in October of 1968. I was not yet 22 years old.

3. I will comment at a later date the differences in the management styles of the various owners/managers of the company.

4. I do not have a museum of my accomplishements in my home. That would in my opinion be a a form of self-worship. I know who I am, but I fully reject any concept or form of self hero worship. I am very good at what I do, and that is all I need to accept when I lay me head down at night to go to sleep. I would think that this would be the same for any other hard working human being.

5. I have very few samples of the products I have developed over so many years. It has been my responsibility to create product for the company, and that is what I am paid a salary to accomplish. I don't need any trophy for my accomplishments other than my memories, my family, and my good friends.

[Rocket Doctor]

Mike

You are very modest, it's not self worship, rather, in my opinion, a part of model rocket histroy. As you know , much of the history has been lost or forgotten.

As we enter the 51st year of the hobby, many changes have been made over the years, not only motors and kits but assorted products as well.

I think most of us would agree, that the Cineroc and Omega would be high on the list of what you have done.
RD

[rstaff3]

I agree, it isn't self worship to want things you've developed. If it was me I'd have stuff I did and from others, as available. You could even think of it as part of your retirement as I'm sure there are plenty of people who'd be willing to take the stuff off your hands :D

[Jerry Irvine]

As Mike pointed out he spent an entire career putting those products out for an EMPLOYER for a SALARY. They weren't his to keep.

I have a suggestion. You think Mike is cool and deserves to have samples of some of his work. I agree. Give him birthday and Christmas presents for the next three years of the particular items on his wish list. You have spent a lifetime collecting these things. Pay forward. You might be surprised how little he really wants hanging around the house. He may wish for a fishing outfit.

Jerry

[Rocket Doctor]

As Mike pointed out he spent an entire career putting those products out for an EMPLOYER for a SALARY. They weren't his to keep.

I have a suggestion. You think Mike is cool and deserves to have samples of some of his work. I agree. Give him birthday and Christmas presents for the next three years of the particular items on his wish list. You have spent a lifetime collecting these things. Pay forward. You might be surprised how little he really wants hanging around the house. He may wish for a fishing outfit.

Jerry

Jerry

Mike didn't develop a fishing pole.
Like I mentioned previously, it's model rocket history, and, unless it's preserved, it will be lost.

At least the Smithsonian has a collection of early MR items, including some of the first carlise motors, if they didn't have them, who knows.

And as I pointed out, it certainly isn't self worship to have your models that your created, and, I'm sure that his employer wouldn't mind giving them up as a token of their appreciation.

RD

FYI
I would certainly like to have the first models that I built 45 years ago, and the ones that were lost or broken.

[Jerry Irvine]

When I heard the comments that a bunch of stuff went into the incinerator (licensed materials not withstanding), and a bunch more went to the bins, including prototypes by the hundreds, it made my heart sink.

Then I remembered at U.S. Rockets we basically did the same thing because we didn't have the storage space and nobody cared enough to store it for us. More free advise, worth far more than the price. Offer the next owner free collectible artifact retrieval and storage services.

Jerry

[MDorffler]

Gentlemen,

Several of the posts I have read here over the last few days have used wording that I find unacceptable. I will remind each of you that this is MY forum. I make the rules for this forum, and I explained those in my first posting.

One of those was my request for civility. I also asked that I wished to maintain a 'light' atmosphere. It seems some of you cannot read, or would rather press forward your own agendas instead.

If you are not interested in what I am more than happy to share with you, or would rather talk past me rather than to me, then I ask that you leave this forum and go somewhere else. If this request is too complex for you to understand, or you simply don't feel you are willing to offer any form of simple respect to others, then I will simply shut this forum down. Okay?

Mike

[dwmzmm]

Jerry

Mike didn't develop a fishing pole.
Like I mentioned previously, it's model rocket history, and, unless it's preserved, it will be lost.

At least the Smithsonian has a collection of early MR items, including some of the first carlise motors, if they didn't have them, who knows.

And as I pointed out, it certainly isn't self worship to have your models that your created, and, I'm sure that his employer wouldn't mind giving them up as a token of their appreciation.

RD

FYI
I would certainly like to have the first models that I built 45 years ago, and the ones that were lost or broken.

I still have my very first model bought and built from 40 years ago, the Astron Alpha (fully
retired from flight status). :)

[Jerry Irvine]

Did the rumored C10 become the now accepted C11?

Thanks for your service to our lifetime of fun.

Jerry

[rstaff3]

Mike,

Did Estes have a policy about retaining stuff from your R&D work as long as it didn't interfere with their interests (ie that you keep it for 30 years vs giving to a competitor?) For instance a prototype of a kit that went into production? Or stuff you thought was cool but didn't cut it for production or other reasons. Just curious. I wouldn't have taken anything if my employer's policies said not to. But if not....

[luke strawwalker]

Mike,
Big fan of your work, very impressive stuff you've come out with over the years and I really appreciate what you've given to the hobby and to me. Please don't let some of the 'stonger personalities' around here put you off... it's typical of the forums (ALL forums no matter how much to the contrary they try to deny it) :D

I would add to the chorus singing the praises of the Cineroc. It sadly had disappeared not too long before I learned about and joined the hobby, but I ALWAYS wanted one! I even hacked up (and I mean HACKED) an old 8 mm movie camera as a teenager trying to get something that would work (never did). From what I've seen, heard, and read, the Cineroc was a truly magnificent piece of engineering.

I would also like to add my 'second' to the call someone made for a digital product in a Cineroc-style housing. That would be a REALLY nice piece of hardware.

I was wondering if you could comment on the Oracle or Astrovision products. I was VERY interested in these when they came out, but when I started reading about the limited video quality and VERY short recording intervals, no sound, and other limitations of the products, compared to folks just modifying pencams and stuff and getting somewhat better results with sound, I felt that was a better way to go. The current problems I've heard with their download software not playing well with Windows Vista only compounds things. I want to make clear I'm not knocking the product, as it's an EXCELLENT way to introduce youngsters and newbies to video payloads, but I was just wondering why these cameras are so limited in their capabilities considering the advances in digital camera and storage technology over the last several years, and is Estes considering advancing the capabilities of these rocket cameras (or introducing new ones) to take advantage of the progress that's been made in digital camera and data storage capabilities??

Thank you again for all you do, and for taking time to share and discuss with us!
OL JR :)

[MDorffler]

Did the rumored C10 become the now accepted C11?

Thanks for your service to our lifetime of fun.

Jerry

The C10 became the C11.

[MDorffler]

Mike,

Did Estes have a policy about retaining stuff from your R&D work as long as it didn't interfere with their interests (ie that you keep it for 30 years vs giving to a competitor?) For instance a prototype of a kit that went into production? Or stuff you thought was cool but didn't cut it for production or other reasons. Just curious. I wouldn't have taken anything if my employer's policies said not to. But if not....

The company has always had a policy that if you design a product outside our product line on your own time, then you are welcome to profit from it however you like. But if you design a model rocket on your own time, you can fly it or put it on the shelf, but certainly not offer it to a competiter. It's a policy adhered to by probably most all companies.

I design several electronic assembly kits for Royal Electronics, and ACE R/C in the early 80's. As Estes wasn't into R/C or electronics at that time I was free to do so. Not so now.

[MDorffler]

Mike,

I would also like to add my 'second' to the call someone made for a digital product in a Cineroc-style housing. That would be a REALLY nice piece of hardware.

I was wondering if you could comment on the Oracle or Astrovision products. I was VERY interested in these when they came out, but when I started reading about the limited video quality and VERY short recording intervals, no sound, and other limitations of the products, compared to folks just modifying pencams and stuff and getting somewhat better results with sound, I felt that was a better way to go. The current problems I've heard with their download software not playing well with Windows Vista only compounds things. I want to make clear I'm not knocking the product, as it's an EXCELLENT way to introduce youngsters and newbies to video payloads, but I was just wondering why these cameras are so limited in their capabilities considering the advances in digital camera and storage technology over the last several years, and is Estes considering advancing the capabilities of these rocket cameras (or introducing new ones) to take advantage of the progress that's been made in digital camera and data storage capabilities??

OL JR :)

First, a question......did the beagle make it past the first test flight?

We have had far more problems getting to market with the Oracle than about any project in the last 5 years. The fewer of them I have to look at the happier I am.

We went through a number of vendors trying to find a source for the electronics, and then a vendor who wouldn't keep changing the costs from one day to the next. Then we had serious QA problems with some of the electronics, and then we had a series so bad they had to be tossed. We finally got all that ironed out. But I think you will find many of us have simply wished we had gone about it in an entirely different way.

I'm hoping there is some level of time later this summer I can go back and look at a video camera system again. At least now I know NOT what to do.

[dwmzmm]

Mike, did you design the video cams on the boosters of the NASA rockets we've seen lately?
Namely, the rear-viewing videos of the Deltas, Space Shuttles, etc., that can be seen on the
NASA websites. Wondering as I recall reading somewhere a few years back that you were the designer of those video equipment.

[rstaff3]

It's a policy adhered to by probably most all companies.



Sounds LESS restrictive than the few I'm familiar with. My son recently found some stuff he thought I'd like for rocketry...and he wasn't even allowed to take it out of the trash. Unfortunately, not worth a trip to the landfill.

[MDorffler]

Mike, did you design the video cams on the boosters of the NASA rockets we've seen lately?
Namely, the rear-viewing videos of the Deltas, Space Shuttles, etc., that can be seen on the
NASA websites. Wondering as I recall reading somewhere a few years back that you were the designer of those video equipment.

No. But I wished I had. The credit for the NASA 'Cineroc 'concept belongs to my bud Marc Lavigne (known as MOOSE by some). He is responsible for selling the NASA suits to use on board cameras on the Deltas for instant visual flight parameters. The cameras are built by an independant company whose name I can't think of at the moment. The Atlas team followed, and now we are seeing video on the Shuttles. I have been told the Russians have done so as well but have not seen any of those videos.

Marc put my signature on the optics hood of the camera flown on the Mars Oppertunity flight. That humbled me pretty good. It is great to think something I did all those years ago for model rocketery has now been transferred to the real thing for precisely the same reason - watch events on a rocket flight from the rocket itself.

[Jerry Irvine]

No. But I wished I had. The credit for the NASA 'Cineroc 'concept belongs to my bud Marc Lavigne (known as MOOSE by some). He is responsible for selling the NASA suits to use on board cameras on the Deltas for instant visual flight parameters. The cameras are built by an independant company whose name I can't think of at the moment. The Atlas team followed, and now we are seeing video on the Shuttles. I have been told the Russians have done so as well but have not seen any of those videos.

Marc put my signature on the optics hood of the camera flown on the Mars Oppertunity flight. That humbled me pretty good. It is great to think something I did all those years ago for model rocketery has now been transferred to the real thing for precisely the same reason - watch events on a rocket flight from the rocket itself.


Congrats. Moose is a good dude. Flown with him many times.

The E15 and E30 were announced at the same time. The E15 became the E9, so what happened to the E30? Did it make marketing pre-announce and fail QC or did a change of mind happen in marketing?

I of course think the D20 should fill that void. :D

Here is a link to Moose. :)

Jerry

cites:

http://v-serv.com/crp/CRm/4-83/CRm.4-83.18.w.gif

http://v-serv.com/crp/CRm/4-83/CRm.4-83.19.w.jpg

http://v-serv.com/crp/CRm/4-83/CRm.4-83.20.w.jpg

http://v-serv.com/crp/CRm/4-83/CRm.4-83.21.w.jpg

http://v-serv.com/crp/CRm/4-83/CRm.4-83.22.w.jpg

http://v-serv.com/crp/CRm/1-83/CRm.183.20.w.jpg

http://v-serv.com/crp/CRm/1-83/CRm.183.22.w.jpg

BP ASB motor thrust curves and performance (Rogerjet, Microjet) using Estes grains in fiberglass SU motors:

http://v-serv.com/crp/CRm/4-83/CRm.4-83.13.w.jpg

Hope that cheers you up Mike.

[GregGleason]

Mike,

I have really enjoyed your posts and consider your recollections of historical value to the hobby. It deserves our gratitude and thanks.

My questions:

You are a walking treasure of MR history. Have you ever considered writing a book, on this history, based on your experiences?

What project(s) are you most proud of at Estes?

Did you ever have a "I really wish we had done that" project?

Greg

[Shreadvector]

http://www.eclipticenterprises.com/index.php

Fly them funky rockets....

:D


No. But I wished I had. The credit for the NASA 'Cineroc 'concept belongs to my bud Marc Lavigne (known as MOOSE by some). He is responsible for selling the NASA suits to use on board cameras on the Deltas for instant visual flight parameters. The cameras are built by an independant company whose name I can't think of at the moment. The Atlas team followed, and now we are seeing video on the Shuttles. I have been told the Russians have done so as well but have not seen any of those videos.

Marc put my signature on the optics hood of the camera flown on the Mars Oppertunity flight. That humbled me pretty good. It is great to think something I did all those years ago for model rocketery has now been transferred to the real thing for precisely the same reason - watch events on a rocket flight from the rocket itself.

[Bob Kaplow]

No. But I wished I had. The credit for the NASA 'Cineroc 'concept belongs to my bud Marc Lavigne (known as MOOSE by some). He is responsible for selling the NASA suits to use on board cameras on the Deltas for instant visual flight parameters. The cameras are built by an independant company whose name I can't think of at the moment. The Atlas team followed, and now we are seeing video on the Shuttles. I have been told the Russians have done so as well but have not seen any of those videos.

Marc put my signature on the optics hood of the camera flown on the Mars Oppertunity flight. That humbled me pretty good. It is great to think something I did all those years ago for model rocketery has now been transferred to the real thing for precisely the same reason - watch events on a rocket flight from the rocket itself.

I'll always refer to those shots as "Moose-Cam"

[Rocket Doctor]

Mike

If you can comment on these questions.

What inspired you into developing the Cineroc?
How did you get into electronics?
What happened to the original Mabel?
What happened to the balsa turning machines?
What happened to the Cox RTF molds?

Thanks

RD

[Doug Sams]

The Omega was nothing special as a design per se. It really has no history to it. I turned my attention to the carrier rocket after we released the tooling for the Cineroc. I needed addition stability so went for the 4-fin deisgn. Having an extra fin aids modelers to end up with a 'straighter' fin alignment than with only 3. Having crooked fins under a Cineroc makes for spinning and blurry footage.

I then painted it white, just as I do with all my deisgns, stared at it a bit and decided on the blue and black decal scheme for the fins. I added the Cineroc decal to the second stage and it was done. Total design time: maybe 20 minutes.Sometimes, genius comes without sweat. The looks of the Omega are simply outstanding. I remember seeing it the first time in the catalog all those years ago and was drawn to it much the same way as the Cherokee-D. Both rockets have the dual features of simplicity and beauty.

So whether you sweated the styling details for weeks and weeks or only took 20 minutes, it's an awesome looking rocket to be proud of.



Doug

.

[Rocketflyer]

Mike. Sorry to have gone off topic with the "Catalina" post. It was an aside, and not meant to bypass you. I apologize as being one of the offenders. It is your column and I respect that.

Your posting and info is really looked forward to here at YORF. I don't think you realize just how much this is true. The inside stories are what is so lacking. The clarifications and misunderstandings that can be cleared up is just what everyone wants to know and hear about. The stories about the people you worked with, like the Wayne stories, are just what we are looking for. It makes these folks come alive and more vivid to us, especially to those of us who never really knew but a name. Please, share those stories.( I'd still like to know if Wayne got that DC-3 across the channel. :chuckle: )

Jack Komorowski
NAR 4619 L2
TRA 5434
SoJARS Sec #593
(sojars.org)

[Initiator001]

We have had far more problems getting to market with the Oracle than about any project in the last 5 years. The fewer of them I have to look at the happier I am.

We went through a number of vendors trying to find a source for the electronics, and then a vendor who wouldn't keep changing the costs from one day to the next. Then we had serious QA problems with some of the electronics, and then we had a series so bad they had to be tossed. We finally got all that ironed out. But I think you will find many of us have simply wished we had gone about it in an entirely different way.

I'm hoping there is some level of time later this summer I can go back and look at a video camera system again. At least now I know NOT what to do.

Mike,

I realize the Oracle may have been quite a troublesome product to develop and bring to market but I think it is GREAT! :)

I have bought and flown three Oracle cameras using three different boosters (See attached picture). You may recognize the two-stage booster I built for one of the cameras. ;)

For the price point and what the Oracle does I think it is a notable accomplishment.

Bob

[rokitflite]

Both my original camera, and the last working Estes prototype were stolen. I have no idea where the original Omega carrier is. It was flown, photo model copies were made, and it was probably tossed out.

Yes, I have several mint Cinerocs, and Camrocs as well. But no Omegas.

Mike, my guess is that Bob Sanford has both of them somewhere... :eek:

[cas2047]

Mike - Thanks for taking the time to do this. Your insights and recollections are fascinating.
I know you could be spending your time doing other things so the time you spend here is very much appreciated.

Frank

[MDorffler]

Sometimes, genius comes without sweat. The looks of the Omega are simply outstanding. I remember seeing it the first time in the catalog all those years ago and was drawn to it much the same way as the Cherokee-D. Both rockets have the dual features of simplicity and beauty.

So whether you sweated the styling details for weeks and weeks or only took 20 minutes, it's an awesome looking rocket to be proud of.



Doug

.

Thanks Doug, for the compliments. Hopefully I can continue creating more models like the Omega in the future. And possibly a new camera as well.

[MDorffler]

Mike - Thanks for taking the time to do this. Your insights and recollections are fascinating.
I know you could be spending your time doing other things so the time you spend here is very much appreciated.

Frank

Thank you Frank. Hopefully before I decide to go fishing, I can offer the modelers additional insights in to Estes history and product development.

[MDorffler]

Mike,

I realize the Oracle may have been quite a troublesome product to develop and bring to market but I think it is GREAT! :)

I have bought and flown three Oracle cameras using three different boosters (See attached picture). You may recognize the two-stage booster I built for one of the cameras. ;)

For the price point and what the Oracle does I think it is a notable accomplishment.

Bob

Bob, as I have mentioned to the other guys, I might be developing a new and better camera. Stay tuned.

[MDorffler]

Mike,

I have really enjoyed your posts and consider your recollections of historical value to the hobby. It deserves our gratitude and thanks.

My questions:

You are a walking treasure of MR history. Have you ever considered writing a book, on this history, based on your experiences?

What project(s) are you most proud of at Estes?

Did you ever have a "I really wish we had done that" project?

Greg

Greg, I have indeed been thinking about writing a book about the Estes R&D, Estes history, and some other neat model rocketry related stuff.

There are several projects I have worked on at Estes I have thoroughly enjoyed. Designing the radio systems for the COX airplanes, the 'Sure-Start' mod to the 049, and of course the F62 motor and the cameras.

While I did have some in the "I really wish we had done that" most were of the type that were presented to the marketing people that they failed to grasp as a new product catagory - such as the big Maxi Mercury Redstone.

[Jerry Irvine]

Thank you Frank. Hopefully before I decide to go fishing, I can offer the modelers additional insights in to Estes history and product development.

You know what might work even better? Sit down with a note pad and take some notes this evening and tomorrow, sit down in front of a computer tomorrow afternoon/evening and write a monologue about those notes. I am sure your thoughts would be interesting to most/all of us.

That way you are not constrained by replying to specific questions, such as, but not limited to, D20's, digitally recording history, or identifying landfills for archeological extractions.

If you write a book I will commit to buying 100+ copies for libraries.

Jerry

Smile, be happy. :D

[Rockit Right]

Wow - a Maxi Mercury would be a gem.

As a kid, I once saw the Centuri Little Joe II in a hobby shop, and since then I have had this goal. At that time it was beyond my reach, and even today, the ebay sales are not reasonable.

Could there be any potential of a Maxi Mercury, Little Joe II or Orion in the horizon?

Thanks

[luke strawwalker]

Bob, as I have mentioned to the other guys, I might be developing a new and better camera. Stay tuned.

Waiting with baited breath!!! :D

I hope I didn't come across as belittling the products, as that was not my intent, just merely personal 'observations'. I was VERY glad to hear that Estes had come out with a movie camera rocket again, after the sad demise of the Cineroc.

Knowing how NOT to do something is often half the battle, or so my experience has been... like Thomas Edison and his 2,000 failed attempts at the carbon black impregnated cotton thread filament light bulb-- he didn't fail; he just discovered 2,000 ways how NOT to make a light bulb!

I REALLY have enjoyed the Astrocam, since nobody's mentioned it. The Astrocam is a WONDERFUL camera; I've flown a couple of them to pieces. It is REALLY an ingenious design and does a terrific job. Could you give us a little background on it's development, and maybe why the 110 film format was chosen over 35 mm format?

Thank you! OL JR :)

[scigs30]

Mike, I am currently building the Ricochet, Star Stryker, Taser Twin and Crossbow. I notice the plans now call for Testors Lacquer paints, how does R&D like this new formula of paint?

[Initiator001]

Mike, my guess is that Bob Sanford has both of them somewhere... :eek:

I'll never tell! :D ;)

BTW, Scott, was that Jimmy Hoffa I saw in a picture of your 'collection'? :eek:

Bob

[Initiator001]

Bob, as I have mentioned to the other guys, I might be developing a new and better camera. Stay tuned.

Cool!

If you can figure out a way for the camera to use some sort of removable memory card (SD or XD) as is used in digital cameras or cell phones, that would make the logistics of using the camera much easier.

Bob

[Rocketflyer]

Hi Mike,

Two questions in one. Two of my all time favorites, the Cherokee D and the Sprint.
Who designed these two? Any story behind them?
Thanks for any input.

Jack

[scooterkool]

Hi,
Thanks for all your great work!
This question has been bugging me since 1977.
There is the Alpha III rocket and the Alpha rocket, what happened to Alpha II ?? :confused:

[Jerry Irvine]

Hi,
Thanks for all your great work!
This question has been bugging me since 1977.
There is the Alpha III rocket and the Alpha rocket, what happened to Alpha II ?? :confused:

Don't forget the FROG either.

Jerry

[Der Red Max]

... what happened to Alpha II ?? :confused:I thought I saw a couple of these in photo's of rokitflite's collection on the previous TRF.

Don't forget, there was an Estes 40th Anniversary Edition Alpha IV as well.

[MDorffler]

Mike - Thanks for taking the time to do this. Your insights and recollections are fascinating.
I know you could be spending your time doing other things so the time you spend here is very much appreciated.

Frank

Thank you Frank, you are most welcome. Your compliments are the motivation that fuels me to develop more new Estes product.

[MDorffler]

Wow - a Maxi Mercury would be a gem.

As a kid, I once saw the Centuri Little Joe II in a hobby shop, and since then I have had this goal. At that time it was beyond my reach, and even today, the ebay sales are not reasonable.

Could there be any potential of a Maxi Mercury, Little Joe II or Orion in the horizon?

Thanks

Hi Jim - I have four big scale models in the cooker all at this writing. I switch back and forth as files are completed and models built so there is no down time. One of the four should be a real surprise.

And yes I would love to get to the models you mention. Hopefully my mouse won't blow a bearing or my CAD program puke before I can get to them.

[MDorffler]

Waiting with baited breath!!! :D

I hope I didn't come across as belittling the products, as that was not my intent, just merely personal 'observations'. I was VERY glad to hear that Estes had come out with a movie camera rocket again, after the sad demise of the Cineroc.

Knowing how NOT to do something is often half the battle, or so my experience has been... like Thomas Edison and his 2,000 failed attempts at the carbon black impregnated cotton thread filament light bulb-- he didn't fail; he just discovered 2,000 ways how NOT to make a light bulb!

I REALLY have enjoyed the Astrocam, since nobody's mentioned it. The Astrocam is a WONDERFUL camera; I've flown a couple of them to pieces. It is REALLY an ingenious design and does a terrific job. Could you give us a little background on it's development, and maybe why the 110 film format was chosen over 35 mm format?

Thank you! OL JR :)

You didn't answer my question - did the beagle make it or buy the farm? I see him standing there, but that could be a plaster standin......

The Astrocam was at the time the most logical way to replace the Camroc. I did in fact build several 35mm camera prototypes as well. The problem at the time was the 35 was going to take considerably more tooling, weigh more, and therefore could'nt be flown as high. There is no purpose to a rocket camera unless you can fly it to at least 500 feet. The diameter of a 35 is going to be 2" minimum. That's a lot of frontal area for a C motor to push through with a 12 exposure 35mm cartridge at right at 1 ounce itself. You can orient the cartridge about any direction, but you have to be able to orient the full face of the frame to be exposed within the camera. I also considered 1/2 frame 35, but many of the film processors refused to deal with it.

It takes mechanisms in a 35 design to get the film moved to where you want it to expose it, get a shutter system crammed in there, add a film re-winder, make it robust, and then under a maximum weight of roughly 2.5 ounces.

The 110 choice made all those problems go away. The frontal area was low, the film weight was low, and the film advance and shutter mechanisms were realtively simple. I admit I did fight it for some time because of the small film format. But when you weigh the complexities and the greater altitude you can reach with the 110, it really was a no brainer.

Maybe I'll go back to the cubbord and see if my 35mm protos are still in there.......

[MDorffler]

Mike, I am currently building the Ricochet, Star Stryker, Taser Twin and Crossbow. I notice the plans now call for Testors Lacquer paints, how does R&D like this new formula of paint?

What you choose to paint with is of course your choice. You certainly don't have to use what we mention in any of the instructions. The new Testors series are essentially metalics with a real wet look when dry. I don't recommend them for everything you build. But we had gotten some of the Testors during the time I was ready to decor these models, and hey, it looked pretty darn good. When i stood one set of models done with the same colors in Krylon, the Testors won out.

But I did find that the Testors does not have the control that Krylon does. I ended up putting heat lamps in the spray booth, and used a warm water bath for the cans. I shot the models at about 12-14" with really light passes and constant, constant rotation. I spaced the heat lamps about 2 feet overhead with the purpose of forcing some of the solvent out of the paint droplets before they got from the nozzle to the rocket. This took a couple days to work out. If Sring had been here at that time I would have shot them outside, the preferred Estes painting technique. Lots of light, and heat.

[MDorffler]

Hi Mike,

Two questions in one. Two of my all time favorites, the Cherokee D and the Sprint.
Who designed these two? Any story behind them?
Thanks for any input.

Jack

Jack - The Cherokee was designed by Gene Street, our graphic artist until the late 70's. Gene always claimed to be 1/4 Cherokee, so that's how the kit got its name. The 'D' part is from the fact that the Cherokee was the first Estes 'D' powered kit.

You can always pick out one of Gene's instruction sheets when you see all those little horizontal lines drawn in an assembly step behind the main subject. I used to razz him about that and he would tell me that the Earth's rotation moved the paper horizontal under his pen. Then I would remind him he was sitting facing west, whereby I was asked to go away. We, like everyone else, always got along well. That is why we could always insult each other at will and survive.

We lost gene a few years ago. I miss him.

The Sprint was my creation. There were at that time several noted rocketeers in the hobby starting to use their heads in design for altitude competion. The 3.5:1 to 5:1 ogive cones were being argued as to which was more efficiaent and lowest drag, and base boat-tails began to appear as well. Then there were arguments over the lowest drag fin designs and wind tunnel testing. So I took what I thought was the best combination and created the Sprint. The model really does scream especially when you do a fly-off with a standard but very well finished Alpha. Ignite them at the same time and watch the difference in drag keep the Sprint going upward after the Alpha has started to fall.

[MDorffler]

Cool!

If you can figure out a way for the camera to use some sort of removable memory card (SD or XD) as is used in digital cameras or cell phones, that would make the logistics of using the camera much easier.

Bob

Bob - I would probably gravitate toward taking one very high resolution photo per flight, download into an SD, then launch again. Take the SD home shove it in the PC and download the day's flights.

[MDorffler]

Hi,
Thanks for all your great work!
This question has been bugging me since 1977.
There is the Alpha III rocket and the Alpha rocket, what happened to Alpha II ?? :confused:

Good question - don't reacll the Alpha II every coming into being. I'll have to check on it for you and report in a couple days.

[jadebox]

Hi,
Thanks for all your great work!
This question has been bugging me since 1977.
There is the Alpha III rocket and the Alpha rocket, what happened to Alpha II ?? :confused:

There's information about the Alpha II in the thread at:

http://forums.rocketshoppe.com/showthread.php?t=2936

-- Roger (who saved up his allowance for several months to buy an Omega/Cineroc all those years ago ....)

[Jerry Irvine]

That thread lists

That's the Alpha III. The original line-up goes like this:

K-25 Alpha (balsa NC and fins)
1225 Alpha (same as K-25)
Alpha II (for educators only, balsa fins, may have used either balsa or plastic NC)
Alpha III (plastic NC and fin unit)
Alpha IV (anniversary edition, identical to the III)

But does not mention the Citation Quasar which was yet another Alpha.

I believe the II is the FROG.

Jerry

[scooterkool]

Gotcha on the Alphas (I-IV), next time I will use the search function rather than bother the king, many humble apologies..... :eek:

[Jerry Irvine]

Who designed the Citation series?

Who did the packaging for the Citation series?

Can Estes please re-release the Citation Patriot and the Estes Goblin?

I liked the Comet and Sizzler for 5-6 grade rocket classes.

Jerry

[Shreadvector]

Not "FROG".


"F.R.O.G.S."

Mailed to science teachers in the 1970's.

The box said something on the outside like "Open immediately your F.R.O.G.S. are inside." Designed to get the attention of science teachers am get them to open the box right away. Nobody wants to have dead frogs in their junk mail pile...


Don't forget the FROG either.

Jerry

[Shreadvector]

Since someone will ask: "Fun Rocketry Or Great Science" = "F.R.O.G.S."

[pantherjon]

Since someone will ask: "Fun Rocketry Or Great Science" = "F.R.O.G.S."
Thank you..I was going to ask!:chuckle:

[ghrocketman]

The Alpha II was for Educators Only.
The only difference beween the two rockets is that all dimensions shown for the Alpha II are Metric. ZERO differences in parts other than the kit header panel.

[Rocketflyer]

Thank You Mike. :) Now for the sci-fi questions, if I may. How did the Trident model come about? If there was a slick Sci-Fi, with the pass-through ejection, this was it. Also the Starlight was a cool rocket and flew very well. (Can you tell these were my two Sci-Fi's? :chuckle: )

Thanks for all the great info so far. This is a rare treat indeed.

[luke strawwalker]

You didn't answer my question - did the beagle make it or buy the farm? I see him standing there, but that could be a plaster standin...... (snip)

.......

Sorry... Thought the question was rhetorical... Not sure what 'Beagle' you're referring to...

If you're talking about the "Beagle" spacecraft to Mars, it crashed IIRC...

If you're talking about everybody's favorite cartoon beagle, Snoopy, he gets shot down by the Red Baron every Halloween but makes it back through enemy lines to friendly territory to fly again... (sorry love that cartoon)

Other than those two, no beagles really jump to mind (except those four Limeys that didn't sing very well but were immensely popular for some reason back in the 60's... LOL) :chuckle:

Have a good one! OL JR :)

[InFlight]

The Alpha II was for Educators Only.
The only difference beween the two rockets is that all dimensions shown for the Alpha II are Metric. ZERO differences in parts other than the kit header panel.
This Alpha II kit does not look like an Educators Only kit, I could be wrong... ebay Listing (http://cgi.ebay.com/Vintage-Estes-Astron-ALPHA-II-Model-Rocket-Kit-EK-25_W0QQitemZ200333868135QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?hash=item200333868135&_trksid=p3911.c0.m14&_trkparms=72%3A1240|66%3A2|65%3A12|39%3A1|240%3A1318|301%3A0|293%3A1|294%3A50)

.

[jdbectec]

[QUOTE=luke strawwalker]Sorry... Thought the question was rhetorical... Not sure what 'Beagle' you're referring to...

I believe he is referring to your avatar. Yes, I know it is a basset hound, I own a Beagle.

[luke strawwalker]

You didn't answer my question - did the beagle make it or buy the farm? I see him standing there, but that could be a plaster standin......

The Astrocam was at the time the most logical way to replace the Camroc. I did in fact build several 35mm camera prototypes as well. The problem at the time was the 35 was going to take considerably more tooling, weigh more, and therefore could'nt be flown as high. There is no purpose to a rocket camera unless you can fly it to at least 500 feet. The diameter of a 35 is going to be 2" minimum. That's a lot of frontal area for a C motor to push through with a 12 exposure 35mm cartridge at right at 1 ounce itself. You can orient the cartridge about any direction, but you have to be able to orient the full face of the frame to be exposed within the camera. I also considered 1/2 frame 35, but many of the film processors refused to deal with it.

It takes mechanisms in a 35 design to get the film moved to where you want it to expose it, get a shutter system crammed in there, add a film re-winder, make it robust, and then under a maximum weight of roughly 2.5 ounces.

The 110 choice made all those problems go away. The frontal area was low, the film weight was low, and the film advance and shutter mechanisms were realtively simple. I admit I did fight it for some time because of the small film format. But when you weigh the complexities and the greater altitude you can reach with the 110, it really was a no brainer.

Maybe I'll go back to the cubbord and see if my 35mm protos are still in there.......

I see your point... forgot that the 110 film is rolled up on one side in it's own 'mini-magazine' on one side and only has to be 'pulled' to the take-up reel as it's wound after exposing. I can see where 35mm film with it's leader, requiring a winding spool in the rocket, would complicate matters. I bet it was a doosey getting the focus, aperature, and shutter speeds to work with such a small negative as 110 has. It does an amazing job considering... :)

I take it from the conversation being limited to "C" motors that the thought of a BT70 or BT80 35mm camera lifted by a "D" powered booster was "off the table" as far as the company was concerned?? Using a rocket similar to the Omega going to two stage "D" power, or a cluster, or even clustered "C" motors wasn't in the cards?? I would tend to think that such a camera would have been a great 'follow on' product for more 'advanced rocketeers' who had 'done all they could do with the Astrocam'. I flew my original Astrocam on it's factory booster until the plastic fins finally pooped out, and then switched it over to Maniacs and flew on D power from then on, and had REALLY nice results. When my first Astrocam finally got knocked out of whack from too many hard landings, and the mirror shifted so that about 1/3 to 1/2 the picture was the dreaded 'black haze' of the camera body side, I bought one of the pre-fab Astrocams that I flew quite a bit, before I got out of rocketry for awhile. Now our only local camera shop has gone under and even THEY didn't stock 110 anymore... (when a camera supply doesn't have 110 who does?? :rolleyes: )

My first Astrocam I built by hand, and very carefully followed the instructions and it did really well for a long time. My second was prefab... Why the decision to go prefab on the camera?? To make it more 'entry level'?? Just curious...

Thanks again for all you do and have done! We ALL appreciate it! OL JR :)

[barone]

[QUOTE=luke strawwalker]Sorry... Thought the question was rhetorical... Not sure what 'Beagle' you're referring to...

I believe he is referring to your avatar. Yes, I know it is a basset hound, I own a Beagle.
I noticed he (luke strawwalker) posted right after this and may have missed this post so this gives him another opportunity...... :D

[Rocketflyer]

Luke, did the Force leave you? :chuckle: The "Beagle" in your Avatar, JR, that Beagle.





Sorry... Thought the question was rhetorical... Not sure what 'Beagle' you're referring to...

If you're talking about the "Beagle" spacecraft to Mars, it crashed IIRC...

If you're talking about everybody's favorite cartoon beagle, Snoopy, he gets shot down by the Red Baron every Halloween but makes it back through enemy lines to friendly territory to fly again... (sorry love that cartoon)

Other than those two, no beagles really jump to mind (except those four Limeys that didn't sing very well but were immensely popular for some reason back in the 60's... LOL) :chuckle:

Have a good one! OL JR :)

[Doug Sams]

This Alpha II kit does not look like an Educators Only kit, I could be wrong... ebay Listing (http://cgi.ebay.com/Vintage-Estes-Astron-ALPHA-II-Model-Rocket-Kit-EK-25_W0QQitemZ200333868135QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?hash=item200333868135&_trksid=p3911.c0.m14&_trkparms=72%3A1240|66%3A2|65%3A12|39%3A1|240%3A1318|301%3A0|293%3A1|294%3A50) .Ray,

Did you notice the kit #, EK-25? My take is the prefix E refers to Educator.

Doug

.

[InFlight]

Ray,

Did you notice the kit #, EK-25? My take is the prefix E refers to Educator.

Doug

.Good point Doug! that is a terrible photo so I can not actually see if it really is a EK-25 but he does mention it in the description.
I didn't expect to see fancy art work on an Educator kit.

.

[mperdue]

I own a Beagle.
Really? A couple of Beagles live in my house but I can't honestly say there either I or my wife own them. - in fact the opposite seems true. :)

[luke strawwalker]

[QUOTE=luke strawwalker]Sorry... Thought the question was rhetorical... Not sure what 'Beagle' you're referring to...

I believe he is referring to your avatar. Yes, I know it is a basset hound, I own a Beagle.


OH, THAT!!! (slaps forehead)... :rolleyes: I didn't even think about that...

That's the closest I could get to the X-15 Cruise Basselope for an avatar... maybe a black program new version to supersede the old X-15 Cruise Basselope... :chuckle:

Back when I was in high school, I worked in the library (how many 6-1, 250 lb. librarians do YOU know?? LOL:) At least our librarian joked, we would have far less overdue books! :)) Anyway, I read a lot and we had a couple of the "Bloom County" cartoon compendiums (I collected the Farside Galleries myself) and that pic was in it... with a huge blazing red stamp "TOP SECRET" across the top of the page... very blueprint like, basically the same as below but the cartoon compendium version had two sidebars straddling the picture, with the 'mission timeline' for the X-15 CB, and it really set it off... the "deployment phase" featured a soldier pointing toward Russia and yelling "SIC 'EM" while standing beside the open kennel carrier with the dog's nose sticking out... the "cruise phase" had the basselope happily bounding across the countryside with his lethal payload on his back, the "launch phase" showed the basselope stopping at the top of a hill overlooking the Red walls of the Kremlin and the Onion Dome spires of Moscow, wagging his tail, which released the rubber band launching the atomic bomb over his head and lobbing it into the city with a loud "ZING", and of course, the "enjoy a milkbone in a Commie-free world phase" with the basselope sitting in the ruins, happily munching a dog treat...

About the funniest thing I ever saw, and so I printed it off on the copy machine (which I got to use for free and was constantly playing with; I taped a string to a dollar bill and pulled it across the scanner bed as it was copying it to 'stretch' my money... and pulled it the other way to 'pinch' my pennies.... :) ) and I carried it in the clear front cover of my binder all through high school.... Interesting how the funniest things in life are usually just a little too close to the truth, especially considering the near hysteria of the "Red scare" and the ensuing arms buildup and Ronald Reagan's Star Wars defense system, and all the other stupidity that was going on in the mid-80's when I was in high school...

Given the kneejerk reaction and some of the complete stupidity I've seen since 9/11, I adopted it as my avatar and signature line....

Didn't dawn on me that's what Mike was talking about... :) Later! OL JR :)

[MDorffler]

Thank You Mike. :) Now for the sci-fi questions, if I may. How did the Trident model come about? If there was a slick Sci-Fi, with the pass-through ejection, this was it. Also the Starlight was a cool rocket and flew very well. (Can you tell these were my two Sci-Fi's? :chuckle: )

Thanks for all the great info so far. This is a rare treat indeed.

At the time when the Trident and Starlight came about, the R&D group was ramping up in staff members. The team consisted of Bill Simon, Gene Street, Bill See, and yes, Vern added his skills as well. The Starlight was a creation of Bill See, who also designed the original Estes Saturn V. I remember Gene and Bill trying to decide which of the two actually designed the Trident. They both worked on that kit together. Gene, as I have mentioned previously, did the Cherokee D and also did the original 1:70 Saturn IB.

[MDorffler]

[QUOTE=jdbectec]

Didn't dawn on me that's what Mike was talking about... :) Later! OL JR :)

Okay, Okay, I messed up. I know rockets, not dogs. It sure looked like a Beagle (the short legged kind) so that's what I went with. Sorry.

[MDorffler]

I take it from the conversation being limited to "C" motors that the thought of a BT70 or BT80 35mm camera lifted by a "D" powered booster was "off the table" as far as the company was concerned?? Using a rocket similar to the Omega going to two stage "D" power, or a cluster, or even clustered "C" motors wasn't in the cards?? I would tend to think that such a camera would have been a great 'follow on' product for more 'advanced rocketeers' who had 'done all they could do with the Astrocam'. I flew my original Astrocam on it's factory booster until the plastic fins finally pooped out, and then switched it over to Maniacs and flew on D power from then on, and had REALLY nice results. When my first Astrocam finally got knocked out of whack from too many hard landings, and the mirror shifted so that about 1/3 to 1/2 the picture was the dreaded 'black haze' of the camera body side, I bought one of the pre-fab Astrocams that I flew quite a bit, before I got out of rocketry for awhile. Now our only local camera shop has gone under and even THEY didn't stock 110 anymore... (when a camera supply doesn't have 110 who does?? :rolleyes: )

My first Astrocam I built by hand, and very carefully followed the instructions and it did really well for a long time. My second was prefab... Why the decision to go prefab on the camera?? To make it more 'entry level'?? Just curious...

Thanks again for all you do and have done! We ALL appreciate it! OL JR :)

Always remember we design products for two markets - Mass and Hobby. Mass being your Wal-Marts and Toys-R-Us.

If I start a kit today for instance I pretty much know wheter it's going to be a hobby model such as scale, or whether it is for a new starter outfit, which means you guys aren't going to be interested.

The Astrocam started off intended as purely a hobby item. But our marketing guys showed it to the mass accounts who wanted it as a starter outfit. While you guys bought and used them in different boosters and different motors, the mass side ordered and sold a staggering 50K of them nearly every year until just a few years ago. Let me repeat that...50,000 Astocams PER YEAR....one of the greatest money making products in the history of Estes Industries.

We sold so many that we re-tooled it twice. The molds wore out (primarily because the vendor cranked up the cylce time to make more profit and in doing so heated the tooling too far which eventually breaks down the steel). On the second re-tooling it was decided to make it fully assembled to remove any construction errors.

Youre question regarding using D motors with a 35mm camera does indeed solve the weight and drag issues. But when you think about it one D for one photo gets rather expensive. That approach isn't going to work in mass - and I would think we would soon start getting questions and /or complaints about the cost per flight.

So here are the 35mm options; 1) Fly it with a 'C' for a single 200' flight photo 2) Fly it to 500+' on a 'D' for a single photo, or 3), build it as a motorized sequence system and fly it on an 'F' and shoot the entrie roll per flight ala rear view akin to a Cineroc.

What do you guyes think?

[chanstevens]

50 THOUSAND Astrocams a year? Good golly, I'll bet that kit is single-handedly perpetuating the 110 film industry as well as the developers. I think it's been a couple of years, but the last time I took a roll of 110 into Walgreen's, they gave me a really dirty look and told me it would be special order, about 10 days, and cost $15-20. I stopped taking pics about then...

[Jerry Irvine]

So here are the 35mm options; 1) Fly it with a 'C' for a single 200' flight photo 2) Fly it to 500+' on a 'D' for a single photo, or 3), build it as a motorized sequence system and fly it on an 'F' and shoot the entrie roll per flight ala rear view akin to a Cineroc.

What do you guyes think?

I think motor driven and an F. Film is still better than digital overall and I think you could have the diameter down to maybe 1.7" or so which makes the C option impractical, a clustered D option optimal and an EFG option optimal.

If you go digital 1080i right now with solid state capture and save, you probably can do it for 1/3 the mass, 1/2 the diameter, and fly it on BCD quite easily.

I think the first consumer size rocket in-flight HD image video ever broadcast on television was the "Smash Lab Trailer Episode" demo flight.

I have seen NCR F's and G's, was an E mold ever made?

If you did a D20 / E24 engine starter outfit you could go both ways, digital and analog in the same box with two different payloads, to make even more money gross than the Astrocam did, on lower unit volume.

Jerry

[InFlight]

....So here are the 35mm options; 1) Fly it with a 'C' for a single 200' flight photo 2) Fly it to 500+' on a 'D' for a single photo, or 3), build it as a motorized sequence system and fly it on an 'F' and shoot the entrie roll per flight ala rear view akin to a Cineroc. What do you guyes think? I would go with number 3 but that's just me. :D

.

[jadebox]

I don't think it makes sense to consider a film camera. A digital camera could be smaller and lighter would be able to take more photos (or video) during each flight. With the kinds of optics and the high-shutter speed you'd need for use in a small rocket camera, the digital camera is likely to take at least as good photos as a film camera. There has been a lot of work done on improving video from small digital cameras because of their wide-spread use in cell phones.

I like the Oracle, although the video quality is poor and the lack of sound is a big minus. I'd like to see it replaced with a small video camera with a higher frame rate and better resolution (plus sound, of course). It would be really cool if it could "pre-record" video (or stills) to a buffer for a second until launch is detected then save the pre-recorded video and start recording. That way every recording would start a second before lift-off and include the whole flight.

After seeing the amazing design of the Cineroc, I'm sure Mike could build a camera like I described above from string and sealing wax.

-- Roger

[A Fish Named Wallyum]

Not "FROG".


"F.R.O.G.S."

Mailed to science teachers in the 1970's.

The box said something on the outside like "Open immediately your F.R.O.G.S. are inside." Designed to get the attention of science teachers am get them to open the box right away. Nobody wants to have dead frogs in their junk mail pile...

This is where my Alpha II came from. :cool:

[Jerry Irvine]

This is where my Alpha II came from. :cool:

I told you so. Does that make me "your majesty" or a "king"? :)

I hope Mike goes digital with a mini-USB interface and a SD or Memory Stick pro card as well. Multiple flights ought to be able to be saved as files like a digital camera does and since Apple is now buying millions of CMOS 5.2 megapixel pickups for iPhone3 and they use a micro depth Zeiss lens, I agree the string and wax Dorffler could really do something even small enough for a B6-4. I would love to see it on a "Goblin" carrier!

Buy the parts from Apple.

Just Jerry

[dwmzmm]

The Astrocam started off intended as purely a hobby item. But our marketing guys showed it to the mass accounts who wanted it as a starter outfit. While you guys bought and used them in different boosters and different motors, the mass side ordered and sold a staggering 50K of them nearly every year until just a few years ago. Let me repeat that...50,000 Astocams PER YEAR....one of the greatest money making products in the history of Estes Industries.

We sold so many that we re-tooled it twice. The molds wore out (primarily because the vendor cranked up the cylce time to make more profit and in doing so heated the tooling too far which eventually breaks down the steel). On the second re-tooling it was decided to make it fully assembled to remove any construction errors.



Those numbers (the Astrocam sales) doesn't surprise me one bit; several years ago, just
when the Christmas season was about the get underway, at the Wal - Mart my wife works
at, they had tons of Astrocam Starter Sets set up on the shelves and in special display boxes
in the aisle (near the toy section) for (I think) $19.99 each. I went every now and then to
check on the displays to get an idea of how these were selling. By the time it was a few days
before Christmas, those Astrocam Starter Sets were all gone (as were all the engines). BTW, my wife even bought me one, too :D . Told her thanks, but I didn't really need another
launch pad!!

[A Fish Named Wallyum]

I told you so. Does that make me "your majesty" or a "king"? :)


A queen? :eek:

[dwmzmm]

Mike:

Can you fill us in on the development and the popularity (or lack of) of the STAR TREK models
Estes put on the market, the USS Enterprise & Klingon Battlecruiser models? From a personal standpoint, I thought these were excellent models and were a joy to build and fly
(and display).

[foose4string]

Digital with removable media would be the way to go in my opinion. Small footprint, big file storage, and you're not forced to download pics when the memory fills up or before the cam loses power. No special software to load in order to interface with the cam. Simply pop out the memory card/usb stick and insert into your favorite card reader or usb port when you get home. Computer knows how to handle the files if they are saved in standard formats- jpeg and mpeg . Lenses are small enough these days(as Jerry pointed out) to fit in even the tiniest of nosecones. Who wants to pay for developing when you can view jpeg or mpeg for free on the computer? Solid firmware for the camera is a must- memory card formatting, resolution selection(not critical), both jpeg and mpeg modes, storage indicator.

Film would be cool for the nostalgia factor, but isn't exactly the best solution for modern times and C power.


A digital cam can work if it's done carefully. Certainly won't be as cheap to engineer, procure, and assemble as a mechanical film device, but judging by the price of digital cameras and card memory these days, it could probably be done for a price between the Oracle and Astrovision.

Now, supposing you/we chose option 3 for your 35mm sequence system(which WOULD be cool in an Astrocam kind of way)...where is that F motor going to come from? Are you trying to tell us something Mike? :D

Didn't anyone else catch that? ;)

And, have you ruled out clustered carrier vehicle? Not exactly a mass market item, but then neither were two of the options you presented.

[Jerry Irvine]

A queen? :eek:

I love Queen.

I heard the "licensing opportunities" were overall a bust. I saw a whole lot of Paramount and Lucasfilm licensed product in a little store CHAIN called "Pic N Save", now known as Big Lots.

Too any units for a well endowed rocketeer even with access to the distribution center in Rancho Cucamonga, CA to buy them all!!

<<
12434 4th St
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
(909) 899-2511
>>

Just Jerry

[Royatl]

So here are the 35mm options; 1) Fly it with a 'C' for a single 200' flight photo 2) Fly it to 500+' on a 'D' for a single photo, or 3), build it as a motorized sequence system and fly it on an 'F' and shoot the entrie roll per flight ala rear view akin to a Cineroc.

What do you guyes think?

I vote, reluctantly, for ditching film altogether (speaking as an old time film photographer who loves his Canon 20D). A 3MP sensor saving to a memory card. I think you mentioned it might be easier inserting and downloading to the card when its on the ground. Is that due to g-forces possibly causing spotty connection to the card while in flight?

[scooterkool]

I stumbled across this a couple of months ago-

"When the CVS Camcorder first came to our attention, we quickly realized the potential for this very inexpensive and light weight device. Our first thought was to launch it on a model airplane, but many people had already done that.

When we realized no one had yet launched one in a rocket, we set out to be the first. The rocket of choice was the Estes X Prize Canadian Arrow. It has a very large nose cone to house the camera and takes D size engines standard." :eek:

More here (including video):
http://www.csh.rit.edu/~soup/cvscam/

[mycrofte]

I liked the one with no mirror the best. You can see the curve of the Earth in it.

[A Fish Named Wallyum]

I liked the one with no mirror the best. You can see the curve of the Earth in it.

Oh, so now you're going to try to tell me the earth is round? :chuckle:
Don't blame me when you go sailing off the edge while recovering your rocket.

[mperdue]

Just in case anyone missed it, my contribution to video rocketry was covered in the Jul/Aug 2008 issue of LAUNCH Magazine (http://launchmagonline.com) . It's easy to see what rocket inspired my build. The Cineroc-Omega is one of the best rockets I've ever owned. Although not shown in the pictures, the camera can also make use of a memory card that is accessed through a removable panel on the side opposite the lens.

BLOG entry with video (http://launchmagonline.com/blogs/hobby-rocketry/100-mdwb-october2008)

Mario

[foose4string]

Just in case anyone missed it, my contribution to video rocketry was covered in the Jul/Aug 2008 issue of LAUNCH Magazine (http://launchmagonline.com) . It's easy to see what rocket inspired my build. The Cineroc-Omega is one of the best rockets I've ever owned. Although not shown in the pictures, the camera can also make use of a memory card that is accessed through a removable panel on the side opposite the lens.

BLOG entry with video (http://launchmagonline.com/blogs/hobby-rocketry/100-mdwb-october2008)

Mario

I did in fact miss that. That looks exactly like the type of thing that could be marketed. Maybe you should. Nice job Mario. Was the assembly documented in Launch?

[mperdue]

I did in fact miss that. That looks exactly like the type of thing that could be marketed. Maybe you should. Nice job Mario. Was the assembly documented in Launch?
I'm guessing that you don't read LAUNCH very much since most of my articles are build articles. :) The article covers the build of the camera but not the booster. I don't really know how I managed to skip the booster part of the build but, in my defense, I had to undergo a series of surgeries last year and spent most of my time taking pain medication so I'll blame it on the drugs. I did manage to create a logo for the camera though - also a tip of the hat to the product that inspired my build.

Mario

[foose4string]

I'm guessing that you don't read LAUNCH very much since most of my articles are build articles. :) The article covers the build of the camera but not the booster. I don't really know how I managed to skip the booster part of the build but, in my defense, I had to undergo a series of surgeries last year and spent most of my time taking pain medication so I'll blame it on the drugs. I did manage to create a logo for the camera though - also a tip of the hat to the product that inspired my build.

Mario

No, don't have a subscription (hangs head in shame). I have bought a couple back issues in the past, but that's the extent of it. The booster looks great, but it's the camera part that I was interested in.

What a great tribute to the original(top and bottom). ;)

[luke strawwalker]

I would go with number 3 but that's just me. :D

.

Yep... motorized on a cluster or F, G type booster... OL JR :)

Edit: see below... :)

[luke strawwalker]

Digital with removable media would be the way to go in my opinion. Small footprint, big file storage, and you're not forced to download pics when the memory fills up or before the cam loses power. No special software to load in order to interface with the cam. Simply pop out the memory card/usb stick and insert into your favorite card reader or usb port when you get home. Computer knows how to handle the files if they are saved in standard formats- jpeg and mpeg . Lenses are small enough these days(as Jerry pointed out) to fit in even the tiniest of nosecones. Who wants to pay for developing when you can view jpeg or mpeg for free on the computer? Solid firmware for the camera is a must- memory card formatting, resolution selection(not critical), both jpeg and mpeg modes, storage indicator.

Film would be cool for the nostalgia factor, but isn't exactly the best solution for modern times and C power.


A digital cam can work if it's done carefully. Certainly won't be as cheap to engineer, procure, and assemble as a mechanical film device, but judging by the price of digital cameras and card memory these days, it could probably be done for a price between the Oracle and Astrovision.

Now, supposing you/we chose option 3 for your 35mm sequence system(which WOULD be cool in an Astrocam kind of way)...where is that F motor going to come from? Are you trying to tell us something Mike? :D

Didn't anyone else catch that? ;)

And, have you ruled out clustered carrier vehicle? Not exactly a mass market item, but then neither were two of the options you presented.

AMEN!!! OL JR :)

[danfrank]

So here are the 35mm options; 1) Fly it with a 'C' for a single 200' flight photo 2) Fly it to 500+' on a 'D' for a single photo, or 3), build it as a motorized sequence system and fly it on an 'F' and shoot the entrie roll per flight ala rear view akin to a Cineroc.

What do you guyes think?

Hi Mike,
I would go with option 3, especially since simple model rockets go up to 3.3 pounds now and need no FAA notification. I think option 3 would give the best quality with the least price, but with one caveat... Please make it with a glass lens if possible. One of the weak points of the Cineroc is it's plastic lens which seems to degrade as time passes.

Which leads me to my question: It looks like there were 2 versions of the Cineroc, an earlier one that had no reinforcements (2 plastic "ribs") running the length of the main frame, and the later ones that had these 2 "ribs" molded into the main frame. Do you remember when (what month / year) Estes switched over to the more durable plastic frame?

One more thing... Kodak is releasing a color negative film stock called "Vision 3 250D" which is ASA 250, daylight balanced which will be perfect for fliers of the original Cineroc. It is ASA 250. daylight balanced, and has an exposure latitude of + or - 3 stops. will work great with the fixed apature Cineroc. It will be available in Super 8. Won't be able to project it though.

Thanks again for your contributions to Model Rocketry... Daniel

[John Brohm]

Mike,

...

I have bought and flown three Oracle cameras using three different boosters (See attached picture). You may recognize the two-stage booster I built for one of the cameras. ;)

...

Bob

Nice job on the boosters, Bob. This is what I did with my Oracle camera:

[dwmzmm]

Hi Mike,
I would go with option 3, especially since simple model rockets go up to 3.3 pounds now and need no FAA notification. I think option 3 would give the best quality with the least price, but with one caveat... Please make it with a glass lens if possible. One of the weak points of the Cineroc is it's plastic lens which seems to degrade as time passes.

Which leads me to my question: It looks like there were 2 versions of the Cineroc, an earlier one that had no reinforcements (2 plastic "ribs") running the length of the main frame, and the later ones that had these 2 "ribs" molded into the main frame. Do you remember when (what month / year) Estes switched over to the more durable plastic frame?

One more thing... Kodak is releasing a color negative film stock called "Vision 3 250D" which is ASA 250, daylight balanced which will be perfect for fliers of the original Cineroc. It is ASA 250. daylight balanced, and has an exposure latitude of + or - 3 stops. will work great with the fixed apature Cineroc. It will be available in Super 8. Won't be able to project it though.

Thanks again for your contributions to Model Rocketry... Daniel

Daniel!

Great to see you here at YORF!! Welcome and I know you're gonna love it here. Take care.

[Doug Sams]

Nice job on the boosters, Bob. This is what I did with my Oracle camera:Outstanding, John. I love it!

Doug

.

[snaquin]

Nice job on the boosters, Bob. This is what I did with my Oracle camera:

John that looks great!

.

[WillMarchant]

Excellent thread, Mike! Thanks for taking the time to come play with us.

The "technical reports" and the "technical manual" that Estes produced are still amazing products. But I'm less of a fan of the revised version(s) of the technical manual. Anyway, were you involved in that end of the business?
Best wishes,
Will

[MDorffler]

Hi Mike,
I would go with option 3, especially since simple model rockets go up to 3.3 pounds now and need no FAA notification. I think option 3 would give the best quality with the least price, but with one caveat... Please make it with a glass lens if possible. One of the weak points of the Cineroc is it's plastic lens which seems to degrade as time passes.

Which leads me to my question: It looks like there were 2 versions of the Cineroc, an earlier one that had no reinforcements (2 plastic "ribs") running the length of the main frame, and the later ones that had these 2 "ribs" molded into the main frame. Do you remember when (what month / year) Estes switched over to the more durable plastic frame?

One more thing... Kodak is releasing a color negative film stock called "Vision 3 250D" which is ASA 250, daylight balanced which will be perfect for fliers of the original Cineroc. It is ASA 250. daylight balanced, and has an exposure latitude of + or - 3 stops. will work great with the fixed apature Cineroc. It will be available in Super 8. Won't be able to project it though.

Thanks again for your contributions to Model Rocketry... Daniel

Daniel - those ribs were added maybe 3 to 4 months after we began Cineroc shipments. Some modelers were snapping the frames just pushing them into the outer shell.

I know that there are several individuals still flying Cinerocs. When I first heard about it some time ago I wasn't aware you could still get Super-8 film stock. Then a little more investigation showed me that you can indeed still buy it and there are labs to process it. I did do investigations to see if it might be practical to revive the Cineroc because of it, but we would have had to setup again to load cartridges etc. It just wasn't going to work.

Since then I haven't kept up on what filmstock might be available. It's interesting to learn about Vision system. If I thought there was enough interest I might load cartridges here at the house for the modelers, and arrange processing and digital conversion.

Mike

[MDorffler]

Excellent thread, Mike! Thanks for taking the time to come play with us.

The "technical reports" and the "technical manual" that Estes produced are still amazing products. But I'm less of a fan of the revised version(s) of the technical manual. Anyway, were you involved in that end of the business?
Best wishes,
Will

Hi Will - I was not involved to any serious degree on the technical manuals. There are a few more that I feel are needed and would really writing, but I simply do not have the time. It's awful to have so many things that need to get done and just can't get to them

Mike

[WillMarchant]

There are a few more that I feel are needed and would really writing, but I simply do not have the time.

I expect we'd love to see what's behind door A, Mike! :) Care to make a list?

[scigs30]

Mike, I have noticed that Estes seems to be using white body tubes over the brown tubes, is there any special reasons for this? I like the brown tubes but will go along with the masses :) David
P.S.....I bought all 4 of the new rockets at Walmart and have them built. These are great rockets minus the plain white parachute. I am now waiting for my Testors lacquer paints to come in so I can paint them. Once again great rockets.

[MDorffler]

Mike, I have noticed that Estes seems to be using white body tubes over the brown tubes, is there any special reasons for this? I like the brown tubes but will go along with the masses :) David
P.S.....I bought all 4 of the new rockets at Walmart and have them built. These are great rockets minus the plain white parachute. I am now waiting for my Testors lacquer paints to come in so I can paint them. Once again great rockets.

We went to the white for several very good reasons. First, they look a whole lot better than the ugly plain brown. Second, you can actually see your pencil marks on the tube for fin alignment and such. And then there is the added help popping the intensity of first color coat. Personally, I don't have the time to lay down a couple coats of white to cover the brown before adding color.

The white parachute was a reluctant stop-gap. There was an issue with the supplier of the chutes that made us pull our hair out and we simply had to meet our ship date obligations to Wal-Mart. All chutes going forward will be translucent red-orange in color.

The HR-4040 regulations that Estes must follow to be legal. One of those is 100ppm of lead in any part of each kit. The printing inks for the chutes contain a level of lead that was too close to the minimum level to feel comfortable. So we went to the solid color material to eliminate the ink issue altogether.

[MDorffler]

I expect we'd love to see what's behind door A, Mike! :) Care to make a list?

Will, I'd love to make you a list but it keeps growing.

Truly, I think you guys are going to be very impressed with what will be coming from Estes throughout the rest of this year, and through all of next year.

[snuggles]

Hi Mike, thanks for taking the time to answer our questions.
My question is this....
Is there any chance that Estes will remake the checkerboard parachutes???
Those were the coolest (in my opinion)
Mark T

[Jerry Irvine]

On that note, is it practical for Estes to get past HR-4040 on some products by simply saying "recommended for ages 13 and up"?

Jerry

[Gus]

Mike,

Over your 40 years at Estes how has the hobby, in general, changed and how has that affected what you, personally, do for Estes?

I know how the hobby has appeared to change to me, but I'm interested in the perspective of those of you who have actually been designing rockets to sell. Obviously you are trying to capture the flavor of the market at any given moment so I'm interested in hearing how that's changed during your tenure at Estes.

[rokitflite]

Mike,
It sounds like a lot of cool things are gonna happen soon... If Estes is sold, doesn't that kinda cancel out any future plans? :(

[dwmzmm]

Mike,
It sounds like a lot of cool things are gonna happen soon... If Estes is sold, doesn't that kinda cancel out any future plans? :(

I think that depends on who buys Estes.

[scigs30]

Mike, Thanks for answering my question re: white body tubes. My next questions are as follows.
1. The traditional Estes rubber shock cord and paper mount system has worked great for me. I have recently replaced 1 shock cord so far from a Manta Bomber from the mid 80's, and it was not too hard. Has Estes looked into other shock cord systems or are you satisfied with what has been working for the last 40+years? I did not like the elastic cords as much as the rubber cords.
2. Will Estes ever go back to the customers cutting out the parachute and tying knots?

[Moon Shot]

Mike,

When will Estes be releasing the USS America kit? I have keep hearing that is is comming...but when. Can you give us a sneak peak of the kit?

[Royatl]

2. Will Estes ever go back to the customers cutting out the parachute and tying knots?

Gosh, I hope not! That is the absolute worst part about building a model rocket! I'm not fond of the thread they use, but it seems to work well (had one of the pre-made 12" chutes on my Der Big Red Max yesterday open at high speed with no problems whatsoever!).

[tbzep]

Gosh, I hope not! That is the absolute worst part about building a model rocket! I'm not fond of the thread they use, but it seems to work well (had one of the pre-made 12" chutes on my Der Big Red Max yesterday open at high speed with no problems whatsoever!).

I'd much rather assemble chutes than sand. :eek:

[pantherjon]

I'd much rather assemble chutes than sand. :eek:

And I would much rather sand then assemble chutes! :p :chuckle:

Tell you what, send me your rockets and I will sand them if you assemble all my parachutes! Deal?.. :chuckle:

[tbzep]

And I would much rather sand then assemble chutes! :p :chuckle:

Tell you what, send me your rockets and I will sand them if you assemble all my parachutes! Deal?.. :chuckle:

That's a deal! :cool:

[scigs30]

I sand as little as possible. I like cutting out the old parachutes and assembling them. I like them so much my local hobby store had a box full of old 12,18 and 24 inch parachutes, I made an offer and bought them all. I am crazy......

[scigs30]

I sand as little as possible. I like cutting out the old parachutes and assembling them, part of the nostalgia for me. I like them so much my local hobby store had a box full of old 12,18 and 24 inch parachutes, I made an offer and bought them all. I am crazy......

[Rocketflyer]

I sand as little as possible. I like cutting out the old parachutes and assembling them, part of the nostalgia for me. I like them so much my local hobby store had a box full of old 12,18 and 24 inch parachutes, I made an offer and bought them all. I am crazy......


Yes. We noticed the 'one you' quoted the other "you." :eek: :chuckle:

[MDorffler]

Hi Mike, thanks for taking the time to answer our questions.
My question is this....
Is there any chance that Estes will remake the checkerboard parachutes???
Those were the coolest (in my opinion)
Mark T

Well Mark, the probability of Estes ever printing parachutes again of any design continues to edge closer to never. We placed our own lower limit number of acceptable lead ppm 10 clicks lower than what is required only to learn some states may halve the number again. What all this means is that with the acceptable HR-4040 lead content hovering near zero for the printing ink for our chutes, all you have to have is one spot check of one parachute that the printing vendor mixed in a few millileters of some 'bad' ink to get your butt in a wringer.

That's why for now we will use chutes in all kits without any printing. In the event the agencies causing all manufacturers these headaches wake up, we may indeed return to printed chutes.

[MDorffler]

On that note, is it practical for Estes to get past HR-4040 on some products by simply saying "recommended for ages 13 and up"?

Jerry

Using ages to try to protect yourself is one course you can try. However the question that really sets the bar is "can a 12-year old use your product without necessary adult supervision?" The answer for Estes is obiously yes. Cub Scouts, (isn't there a Scouts Merit Badge for rocketry) 4-H kids, and school kids use our kits and the many of those are 12 or younger.

Imagine going into court and in your defense for being fined you say "our model rocket kits aren't for kids" and then the prosecutor holds up one of the Estes or Centuri catalogs of say the 70's, and points to a picture of a kid, such as Ricky Piester holding a model rocket, and says "so what has changed in these 30 years - are your rockets now too dangerous for kids - is that what you're saying?

So the age issue just isn't going to work for Estes due to our past history. Vern built our business on the kids (like YOU guys) and like myself, and I don't personally see a practical way around it with regards to HR-4040.

[MDorffler]

Mike,

Over your 40 years at Estes how has the hobby, in general, changed and how has that affected what you, personally, do for Estes?

I know how the hobby has appeared to change to me, but I'm interested in the perspective of those of you who have actually been designing rockets to sell. Obviously you are trying to capture the flavor of the market at any given moment so I'm interested in hearing how that's changed during your tenure at Estes.

Gus, this will take a few paragraphs to answer. If you allow me a couple days, I'll write it out.

[MDorffler]

Mike,
It sounds like a lot of cool things are gonna happen soon... If Estes is sold, doesn't that kinda cancel out any future plans? :(

As Dave says, it all depends on who the new owners are. I would offer they would be foolish, no matter who they may be, to mess with what we already have in the works.

[MDorffler]

Mike, Thanks for answering my question re: white body tubes. My next questions are as follows.
1. The traditional Estes rubber shock cord and paper mount system has worked great for me. I have recently replaced 1 shock cord so far from a Manta Bomber from the mid 80's, and it was not too hard. Has Estes looked into other shock cord systems or are you satisfied with what has been working for the last 40+years? I did not like the elastic cords as much as the rubber cords.
2. Will Estes ever go back to the customers cutting out the parachute and tying knots?

1. Every time I install a shock cord in a body tube it strikes me that maybe I should take a look at whether the method couldn't be improved a tad bit. But the folded mount (created by Bill Simon) continues to work quite well. If it didn't I would have already done something about it. It really is hard to beat. It's easy to make, and as long as you use enough glue forced into the paper like mache, it will last the life of the model.
I hated the elastic cord with a passion. It came about due to a cost-cutting program edicted by the home office that included using card stock for fins. The elastic has been gone for some time now and it aint coming back.

2. No. The cost to have the chutes already assembled is well worth helping with a successful build of a kit by a new rocketeer.

[MDorffler]

Mike,

When will Estes be releasing the USS America kit? I have keep hearing that is is comming...but when. Can you give us a sneak peak of the kit?

The USS America is on the Classics list - should be early next year. Sorry it's taking so long, but the list of kits is long and I have just so much time.

[scigs30]

Mike, It looks like Estes is discontinuing the Designer special, is there going to be a replacement? I have always liked the older kits where you knew what was inside the box. The newer designer special was more like a grab bag and you never knew what you were going to get.

2. Who builds the rockets for the catalog picture?
David

[Phred]

Hello Mike,

Thanks for taking the time to read and reply to our nosey questions. Thanks as well for all of your work at ESTES. I have had a lifetime of enjoyment and have passed the hoibby on to my nieces and nephews.

Phred

[BAR_Daddy]

Hello Mike!

Thanks a bunch for answering our questions.

I have been building and flying mostly Estes rockets (I said mostly) since 1975.

I have a request not a question.

BRING BACK THE PERSHING 1A!!!! :D

I now return you to your regularly scheduled forum...


(thanks again for your time)

[Rocket Doctor]

Go to ebay and look up item #370193114622
You will find a MINT Cineroc there up for bid.

[Jerry Irvine]

I have been building and flying mostly Estes rockets (I said mostly) since 1975.


I have a full decade on you. I guess I was squarely in the Vern and Gleda days.

Jerry

We will "arrive" when even Estes has BT-150 kits and 24mm KP/AP/CP motors, shipped as 1.4C and ORM-D-AIR. Key word, motors.

[MDorffler]

Mike, It looks like Estes is discontinuing the Designer special, is there going to be a replacement? I have always liked the older kits where you knew what was inside the box. The newer designer special was more like a grab bag and you never knew what you were going to get.

2. Who builds the rockets for the catalog picture?
David

Dave - we're looking at offering part sets in a different way. Hopefully, what we have in mind should be more helpful to scratch building than what we have offered in the past. There is an awful lot on the projects table at Estes right now. This is just one of them.

As to the catalog photos, it has only been within the last year that we have gone to (ugh..dare I say it) computer graphic representations. Until now, I or another victum, was called to duty to build and finish all the catalog and package models. Now, I create the model in 3D in the machine as an *.obj file, create the decal decor, and then the VG department combines and finishes out the artwork.

For those of you who have detected my lack of love for balsa nose cones, you might well consider having to sand and seal 3 of each of 12-20 models to photo quality for a new catalog. It requires one to live in a face mask and aluminum oxide for about 3 weeks. This was common for us not that many years ago. It severely tests your love of building model rockets.

[MDorffler]

Hello Mike,

Thanks for taking the time to read and reply to our nosey questions. Thanks as well for all of your work at ESTES. I have had a lifetime of enjoyment and have passed the hoibby on to my nieces and nephews.

Phred

Thanks Phred, your comments are sincerely appreciated.

[MDorffler]

Hello Mike!

Thanks a bunch for answering our questions.

I have been building and flying mostly Estes rockets (I said mostly) since 1975.

I have a request not a question.

BRING BACK THE PERSHING 1A!!!! :D

I now return you to your regularly scheduled forum...


(thanks again for your time)

Okay, but can I take just a few hours rest first?

[MDorffler]

Go to ebay and look up item #370193114622
You will find a MINT Cineroc there up for bid.

But Doc, I already have a case of them sitting right here......