#1
|
||||
|
||||
Estes “Follow Apollo”
Estes had a “Follow Apollo” promotion in during the Apollo lunar program. The idea being to launch a model rocket on the same day as a Saturn-V Apollo mission.
Seems like they mentioned it in Model Rocket News. But of the few scans of old issues I looked in, I do not see it there. Can anyone post a link to anything in MRN or elsewhere about Estes “Follow Apollo”? I did find a link to this brochure: The rest of the pages to it are found on a link on this page: http://www.vintageestesrockets.com/...tron-markII.htm But I do not recall seeing that brochure back then. I thought I saw Follow Apollo in MRN or some other Estes publication. For that matter, does anyone have a better scan of that brochure? The scan is pretty small, have to enlarge it to 200% for most of the text to be readable.
__________________
Contest flying, Sport flying, it's all good..... NAR# 18723 NAR.org GeorgesRockets.com Georges'CancerGoFundMe: https://www.gofundme.com/f/help-geo...ay-fight-cancer |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
George-
My memory of this is about the same as yours. I have the old issues of MRN and think this went about as far as the Cylon Raider kit did...a bit of hoopla then nothing.
__________________
When in doubt, WHACK the GAS and DITCH the brake !!! Yes, there is such a thing as NORMAL, if you have to ask what is "NORMAL" , you probably aren't ! Failure may not be an OPTION, but it is ALWAYS a POSSIBILITY. ALL systems are GO for MAYHEM, CHAOS, TURMOIL, FIASCOS, and HAVOC ! |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
You should try filling out and sending in that application form. With a note apologizing that it got stuck on the bottom of your "to do" pile...for almost 46 years.
Heck, I wasn't even alive when Apollo 14 happened.
__________________
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
MRN Vol 11 No 1 had a special 'Follow Apollo' order form insert, but no reference in the copy itself to 'Follow Apollo 14'.
MRN Vol 11 No 2 did have a short reference to 'Follow Apollo 15', with a suggestion to launch a rocket (any rocket, not necessarily a Saturn V) within two weeks of the planned launch date for Apollo 15 of July 26. Joe |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
This must be why I couldn't find the order form Vol 12 No 2 had a similar blurb about following Apollo 16. |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
Also: Vol 12 No 4 'Follow Apollo 17'.
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
Thanks for the replies.
The only one I’ve found online was Vol. 12 #4, for Apollo-17 But that was very fitting, because Sunday, 44 years later, I Followed Apollo 17 with a flight of my own model, to the minute! And that is why I was asking about Estes' Follow Apollo promotion here. But unlike the original Follow Apollo, I didn’t fly the day the mission launched. Because Sunday the 11th was not the 44th anniversary of the launch. Here’s my re-creation of what Apollo-17 did on December 11th, 1972: “Challenger” with Eugene Cernan and Harrison Schmitt, landed at 2:55 PM EST. This model’s first takeoff was before 2:55 PM EST, and last landing was after 2:55, so it was flying (or maybe just landed) at 2:55). It was too cold to mess around with trying to land at exactly 2:55, and I wanted to try a few landings on the same battery so as to try to get some good landing footage “kicking up some dust” (yeah, a quote from Apollo-11, but all the landings dealt with the dust). And hey, one of those landings might have been at 2:55. Here it is higher up: Here is a link to a YouTube video of the Apollo-17 anniversary model flights/landings: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YqrBkXjkWgY The 1/16 scale model, which I’ve posted about elsewhere, is a “work in progress”, getting more accurate over time. A recent upgrade was a facelift for the crude Ascent Stage, till the pretty Ascent stage is done up. Have a mold curing for casting more accurate landing pads. More info on the model here: http://tinyurl.com/LunarModuleQuad Next "Follow Apollo" Lunar Landing I'll try for, weather permitting, will be Feb 5th, Apollo 14.
__________________
Contest flying, Sport flying, it's all good..... NAR# 18723 NAR.org GeorgesRockets.com Georges'CancerGoFundMe: https://www.gofundme.com/f/help-geo...ay-fight-cancer Last edited by georgegassaway : 12-13-2016 at 12:52 AM. |
#8
|
||||
|
||||
Very cool, George!
Joe |
#9
|
||||
|
||||
Very impressive, George !
It's amazing what can be done with micro R/C equipment now for so little $$. When I first got into R/C aircraft in 1978 equipment was totally reliable, but other than the EXTREMELY expensive Cannon R/C micro gear, R/C gear was still quite bulky and heavy.
__________________
When in doubt, WHACK the GAS and DITCH the brake !!! Yes, there is such a thing as NORMAL, if you have to ask what is "NORMAL" , you probably aren't ! Failure may not be an OPTION, but it is ALWAYS a POSSIBILITY. ALL systems are GO for MAYHEM, CHAOS, TURMOIL, FIASCOS, and HAVOC ! |
#10
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Thanks. Yes, R/C gear used to be so big and heavy, at least for digital. My first R/C gear was an ACE "Baby" rudder-only system with a magnetic actuator. IIRC it was about 1.5 to 2 ounces all-up. I made a rudder-only R/C B/G in May 1980 which was my first successful R/C B/G. By August, I got a Cannon 2 channel flight pack and built a model for it. 1.5 ounces for 2 servos and one receiver, plus 1.25 ounces for the 110 4.8V mAh Nicad pack, for around $200. Used that in a 144 sq in R/C B/G that flew so nicely that I had my first R/C thermal flight, over 10 minutes, which was stunning as i'd never even flown an R/C sailplane in a thermal before. Nowadays, for R/C gear that will work very reliably for E6 powered R/C R/G's, the servos are 5 grams each, long-range receiver about 6 grams, and 110 mAh LiPo 7.4V Battery pack weighing about 7 grams, for an all-up weight of 23 grams (I will note the servos are Dymond D-47's that can accept 7.4 volts. Most other servos fry their feedback pots on 7 volts so would need to add a 5V voltage regulator). The total cost for those components would be about $80. Of course there is much smaller radio gear, and lighter, which can be suited for lower power R/C RBG's. And less expensive servos than the D-47's ($20 each), but they are superb servos with great quality, reliability, and power for their size/weight. Some of the tiniest servos have reliability issues (like dying). And some of the ultra-cheap Rx's have crappy range, and I do not mean ones meant for indoors or “park flyers”, I mean ones that are supposed have "full range" that crap out at 1000 feet or less. To end this message..... I made up an animated gif of the last landing on Sunday.
__________________
Contest flying, Sport flying, it's all good..... NAR# 18723 NAR.org GeorgesRockets.com Georges'CancerGoFundMe: https://www.gofundme.com/f/help-geo...ay-fight-cancer |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|