Impressions on Estes "Mean Machine" or "Phoenix"?

Impressions on Estes "Mean Machine" or "Phoenix"?

Post by Todd Lainhar » Tue, 28 Oct 1997 04:00:00



Finishing up Comanche 3, I'm looking towards my next project as I work
myself back into the hobby (moving towards larger rockets).  I'm attracted
to both of these rockets, and am looking for impressions both pro and con.

Pro for Phoenix is that it's a sharp looking rocket, it looks to be large,
and doesn't have a huge max altitude (a consideration for most of my launch
sites).

Pros for Mean Machine is that it is large, and might offer a slow liftoff
due to size.  I'm guessing that max altitude isn't that great (another plus
right now).

Anything else you might want to share?

    -- Todd

 
 
 

Impressions on Estes "Mean Machine" or "Phoenix"?

Post by john.w. lyngd » Tue, 28 Oct 1997 04:00:00


Quote:


>Subject: Impressions on Estes "Mean Machine" or "Phoenix"?
>Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 17:58:47 GMT
>Finishing up Comanche 3, I'm looking towards my next project as I work
>myself back into the hobby (moving towards larger rockets).  I'm attracted
>to both of these rockets, and am looking for impressions both pro and con.
>Pro for Phoenix is that it's a sharp looking rocket, it looks to be large,
>and doesn't have a huge max altitude (a consideration for most of my launch
>sites).
>Pros for Mean Machine is that it is large, and might offer a slow liftoff
>due to size.  I'm guessing that max altitude isn't that great (another plus
>right now).
>Anything else you might want to share?
>    -- Todd

Phoenix - Tends to break lower fins on landing, but looks great, nice decals,
and flies well. I fly mine with ATF24-4 reloads.

Mean Machine - Nice stable rocket. Not much for decals, so I'd just scratch
build this rocket from several lengths of BT-60 and a nosecone,

        John Lyngdal
        NAR 69264 L2

 
 
 

Impressions on Estes "Mean Machine" or "Phoenix"?

Post by J Stuckma » Tue, 28 Oct 1997 04:00:00


I have the Equinox from Custom - a copy of the MM. It has cool slow
smokey lift-offs. It always is fun to watch and get lots of comments. I
use an 18" nylon chute. It gets about 600' on a D12-5 and will float
alot farther than you might think! I would not suggest going any smaller
with the chute.
 Ted C also had a couple of suggestions that I agree with 100% - build
it so it breaks in the middle to help with storage and transportation.
The Broadsword is great for D powered flights that don't get too high. I
would suggest buying the parts to clone a BS. If you get the fin
template for thr Big Bertha from Jimz's site scale it up 159% on a
copier and you have the fin for the BT-80 Broadsword. Use 2 sections of
BT80 & a PNC80B and you've just cloned a BS.

Jim Stuckman
--
See our model rocketry site at:
http://w3.nai.net/~stuckman/html/rocketry.html

 
 
 

Impressions on Estes "Mean Machine" or "Phoenix"?

Post by Mark Simpso » Tue, 28 Oct 1997 04:00:00


some deleted.

Quote:

> MM indeed is _very_ hard to launch out of sight. It goes higher than you'd
> expect, though.  And, if your problem is a small field, be aware that it
> floats like crazy--even on an 18" chute it will go 300 yards on a mild
> breeze.  In my experience, it  nearly always floats farther away than my
> Comanche on two  3" x 30" streamers--even when the latter is launched full
> up as a D12/C6/C6.

Agreed.  My MM drifts farther than any other Estes rocket I have flown.  

More deleted

Quote:

> For bigger and lower, my favorite is Broadsword (if you can find one).
> Silver Comet is another great choice.  Both of these go up slower than a
> MM.  I've never had a scary low flight from either.

Besides the Broadsword and Silver Comet, the Atlantic Rockets 2.6" V-2
(formerly Mountainside V-2) is a great small field flier.  The Estes
Sidewinder and Fat Boy also are good for consistent performance on a
small field.
Mark Simpson
NAR 71503 Level I
 
 
 

Impressions on Estes "Mean Machine" or "Phoenix"?

Post by Todd Lainhar » Tue, 28 Oct 1997 04:00:00


Quote:
-----Original Message-----

Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets

Date: Tuesday, October 28, 1997 12:29 AM
Subject: Re: Impressions on Estes "Mean Machine" or "Phoenix"?

>(A copy of this message has also been posted to the following newsgroups:
>rec.models.rockets)



>>Pro for Phoenix is that it's a sharp looking rocket, it looks to be large,
>>and doesn't have a huge max altitude (a consideration for most of my
launch
>>sites).

>Hmmm, this from a guy who flies a Comanche? :-)

Haven't flown it yet!  But you can be sure that I'll start one stage at a
time... :-)

>Don't build the Phoenix too heavy or its max altitude will be less than
>its safe altitude!  That's the skinny from this group.  I'm building mine
>as a 3D cluster as a fix for that....

That's good to know.  How would I build it too heavy?  I use "Fill and
Finish" as a "sanding sealer" (great advice from this group, BTW), auto
primer as paint primer, and then enamel from an air brush.

>MM indeed is _very_ hard to launch out of sight. It goes higher than you'd
>expect, though.  And, if your problem is a small field, be aware that it
>floats like crazy--even on an 18" chute it will go 300 yards on a mild
>breeze.  In my experience, it  nearly always floats farther away than my
>Comanche on two  3" x 30" streamers--even when the latter is launched full
>up as a D12/C6/C6.

>Smaller chutes on MM risk body tube kinking.

>If you try this one, consider extending the Motor mount beyond at least
>the first BT joint (add a centering ring for strength).  Also consider
>building it to break at the middle instead of at the NC (easier to ship
>and store and less likely to pick up a bow by leaning against a wall or
>resting on its fins and NC in the hot sun.

>For bigger and lower, my favorite is Broadsword (if you can find one).
>Silver Comet is another great choice.  Both of these go up slower than a
>MM.  I've never had a scary low flight from either.

Well, I think that you've talked me out of MM :-).  I'll give the Silver
Comet a try.  I've seen Broadsword mentioned, but haven't run across it.

>Of course, if you want scary low and slow, you could try a Venus Probe!

I think I have worse.  I built an E2X for my son - "Flash"  (glittery
payload section) - and thought the thing would drop on my head with an A8-3
just as the ejection charge fired.  Scary rocket...

    -- Todd

 
 
 

Impressions on Estes "Mean Machine" or "Phoenix"?

Post by Todd Lainhar » Wed, 29 Oct 1997 04:00:00


Quote:

>Agreed.  My MM drifts farther than any other Estes rocket I have flown.

This is good to know.  For this reason, I'll have to cancel on this.

Quote:

>Besides the Broadsword and Silver Comet, the Atlantic Rockets 2.6" V-2
>(formerly Mountainside V-2) is a great small field flier.  The Estes
>Sidewinder and Fat Boy also are good for consistent performance on a
>small field.

V2?  I vaguely recall building a V2 as a kid - perhaps it was a Centauri
rocket?  I'll check out the Atlantic rocket, assuming it's LPR.  Thanks for
the tip.

    -- Todd

 
 
 

Impressions on Estes "Mean Machine" or "Phoenix"?

Post by CDR Michael Dobs » Wed, 29 Oct 1997 04:00:00


Quote:

> MM indeed is _very_ hard to launch out of sight. It goes higher than you'd
> expect, though.  And, if your problem is a small field, be aware that it
> floats like crazy--even on an 18" chute it will go 300 yards on a mild
> breeze.  In my experience, it  nearly always floats farther away than my
> Comanche on two  3" x 30" streamers--even when the latter is launched full
> up as a D12/C6/C6.

Heh!  You should see the MM on "F" power.  I saw one launched this summer at
the NARHAMS Middletown, MD launch site.  It used mylar streamer recovery
instead of the chute, one dark and one silver, IIRC.  It also had a
sparkly metalic paint job.  It went well out of sight.  We heard the
ejection charge and the flapping of the streamers long before we could
see it as it dropped.  The silver streamer and metalic paint caused bright
flashes from the sun as it fell which is how we located it in the sky.
Very nice flight and successful recovery.

Mike
--
CDR M. Dobson                      | System Admin info.usuhs.mil

Armed Forces Radiobiology          |
Research Institute                 | I don't have enough rank to speak for DoD

 
 
 

Impressions on Estes "Mean Machine" or "Phoenix"?

Post by Andr » Wed, 29 Oct 1997 04:00:00



reads:

Quote:
>Finishing up Comanche 3, I'm looking towards my next project as I work
>myself back into the hobby (moving towards larger rockets).  I'm attracted
>to both of these rockets, and am looking for impressions both pro and con.
>Pro for Phoenix is that it's a sharp looking rocket, it looks to be large,
>and doesn't have a huge max altitude (a consideration for most of my launch
>sites).
>Pros for Mean Machine is that it is large, and might offer a slow liftoff
>due to size.  I'm guessing that max altitude isn't that great (another plus
>right now).
>Anything else you might want to share?
>    -- Todd

If you ever put your rockets on display, the Mean Machine is a
MUST, although I have not yet seen the pheonix (haven't been at
the hobby much lately) you may want to wait on that for later.

Do you have any stunt flyers???

 
 
 

Impressions on Estes "Mean Machine" or "Phoenix"?

Post by jordan soldier valle » Wed, 29 Oct 1997 04:00:00


How about getting extra BT-60 at the hobby shop and making a "Meaner
Machine"....

Or is anything (non-HPR) longer than six feet getting silly....

-DGH-

 
 
 

Impressions on Estes "Mean Machine" or "Phoenix"?

Post by Yitah W » Thu, 30 Oct 1997 04:00:00


Quote:



> >Subject: Impressions on Estes "Mean Machine" or "Phoenix"?
> >Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 17:58:47 GMT

> >Finishing up Comanche 3, I'm looking towards my next project as I work
> >myself back into the hobby (moving towards larger rockets).  I'm attracted
> >to both of these rockets, and am looking for impressions both pro and con.

> >Pro for Phoenix is that it's a sharp looking rocket, it looks to be large,
> >and doesn't have a huge max altitude (a consideration for most of my launch
> >sites).

> >Pros for Mean Machine is that it is large, and might offer a slow liftoff
> >due to size.  I'm guessing that max altitude isn't that great (another plus
> >right now).

> >Anything else you might want to share?

> >    -- Todd

> Phoenix - Tends to break lower fins on landing, but looks great, nice decals,
> and flies well. I fly mine with ATF24-4 reloads.

> Mean Machine - Nice stable rocket. Not much for decals, so I'd just scratch
> build this rocket from several lengths of BT-60 and a nosecone,

>         John Lyngdal
>         NAR 69264 L2

an F24-4?

I've used an F24-10W (24/40 RMS) with good luck.  Ejection is
past apogee, but a great flight.  I would estimate a 7 or 8 second
is ideal, but I guess it depends if you've made any modifications that
made your much heavier

Mine was all stock - some balsa reinforcement on the motor mount
Centering Rings, but that's it.

Yitah Wu

Check out my Rocket and Auction page at:

http://www.mich.com/~ywu/rocket.htm

 
 
 

Impressions on Estes "Mean Machine" or "Phoenix"?

Post by N'kar » Thu, 30 Oct 1997 04:00:00


Quote:

> How about getting extra BT-60 at the hobby shop and making a "Meaner
> Machine"....

> Or is anything (non-HPR) longer than six feet getting silly....

> -DGH-

You might want to step up the power a bit.  Anyone ever seen a F or G
with less than 20ns?  Of course there is always the AT E15.
 
 
 

Impressions on Estes "Mean Machine" or "Phoenix"?

Post by Jay G. Calver » Thu, 30 Oct 1997 04:00:00


Quote:

> How about getting extra BT-60 at the hobby shop and making a "Meaner
> Machine"....

> Or is anything (non-HPR) longer than six feet getting silly....

> -DGH-

I've done this with the Custom "Equinox" kit, which is almost an exact
knockoff for the Mean Machine, but with somewhat different fins (and
dual 18" chutes instead of a single 24").  The total length is about 8
feet!  I used a bulkhead to have the rocket break between the 3rd and
4th tubes, for easy transport, which has the added benefit of creating a
36" long payload compartment (which I can put a sonic beeper into).  I
also replaced the chutes with a 48" (yes, 48") chute which I made out of
one of those ultra-thin metalized emergency "blankets" (less than $2 at
Walmart).  It gave a VERY slow descent on its maiden flight last week on
a C5-3 in an adapter, but then again the thing only went up 100-150
feet.  I plan on swapping chutes when I use more power.

BTW: I would NOT recommend trying a C6-3.  Rod tip velocity was marginal
(20-30 ft/sec) with the C5-3, and there was a slight tilting as it left
the pad.  The C6-3 has even less initial kick in the pants to get a
heavy bird moving (although the AVERAGE thrust of the C6-3 is a little
higher).

I used epoxy and dowel rods to reinforce the fins and motor mount.  I
plan on using the recommended D12-5 next, then Aerotech E15-7W SU and
various RMS 24/40 E and F reloads.  I may even try CHAD staging with a
D12-0 booster as suggested in a previous post by Adrian Hurt.  (Can I
get confirmation from anyone that this will not compromise stability on
the Equinox?)

BTW, I used to own an epoxy reinforced, but otherwise stock, Mean
Machine.  I flew it twice on C5-3s, once on a D12-5, and then lost it on
a E15-7W.  The computer says it went about 1600 feet.  I still don't
know if the ejection charge failed, or if it was TOO strong and blew out
the shock cord mount.  At any rate, it was last seen heading west and
downward (couldn't tell if there was a nose cone attached...), and
probably crashed into the thick of the woods several hundred yards
downrange.  We looked, but no luck.  Never paint a rocket "Forest
Green"!

I'd recommend using an extra long, extra strong shock cord, and use
something sturdy (like an extra BT60 tube coupler) to anchor the shock
cord in the airframe.

Good luck with your stretch MM!

Jay
--

NAR#71767 / CTRA-NARCONN#200
"My CG has moved aft of my CP.  No wonder I'm unstable!"

 
 
 

Impressions on Estes "Mean Machine" or "Phoenix"?

Post by David Wincheste » Fri, 31 Oct 1997 04:00:00


I just ordered a Comanche-3 and would be interested in any advice.
I considered ordering two, since it seems these things fly away like
pet birds when they have a chance.  Such a high flyer for such a low
price, I could not resist.

--
====================
 david winchester        

====================



Quote:
> Finishing up Comanche 3, I'm looking towards my next project as I work
> myself back into the hobby (moving towards larger rockets).  I'm
attracted
> to both of these rockets, and am looking for impressions both pro and
con.

> Pro for Phoenix is that it's a sharp looking rocket, it looks to be
large,
> and doesn't have a huge max altitude (a consideration for most of my
launch
> sites).

> Pros for Mean Machine is that it is large, and might offer a slow liftoff
> due to size.  I'm guessing that max altitude isn't that great (another
plus
> right now).

> Anything else you might want to share?

>     -- Todd

 
 
 

Impressions on Estes "Mean Machine" or "Phoenix"?

Post by Ted Cochr » Fri, 31 Oct 1997 04:00:00



Quote:

>I just ordered a Comanche-3 and would be interested in any advice.
>I considered ordering two, since it seems these things fly away like
>pet birds when they have a chance.  Such a high flyer for such a low
>price, I could not resist.

If you go to deja news and search this group on "Comanche" [and "Commanche" :-)]

You'll see tons and tons of posts, mostly on ensuring successful staging.

--tc

My opinions only.
Email responders please read and translate email address.

 
 
 

Impressions on Estes "Mean Machine" or "Phoenix"?

Post by Wolfram v.Kipars » Sun, 02 Nov 1997 04:00:00



Quote:

> How about getting extra BT-60 at the hobby shop and making a "Meaner
> Machine"....

Anyone scale-up a Mean Machine?

Quote:

> Or is anything (non-HPR) longer than six feet getting silly....

SuperRoc - definitely silly.  Can be fun if your rocket doesn't crimp.

--
Wolfram v.Kiparski
NAR 28643

Get the rec.models.rockets FAQ at: http://dtm-corp.com/~sven/rockets/rmrfaq.toc.html