Except for the length of the side strakes, all the fins were the same ones used in the old Quest X-15 kit.
Look close at the USAF in this bottom view picture. There's a little silvering of the decal. It looks like the decal didn't adhere around the "A". Oh well!
Two words describe this: Mag Nificent!
ReplyDeleteI like it! It turned out rather nicely, and definitely Goonier than the Estes kit you'd mentioned in a previous blogpost:
ReplyDeletehttp://modelrocketbuilding.blogspot.com/2016/12/estes-bring-back.html
The Estes "NASA X-15" kit (first appearing in the 1988 catalog) leave you scratching your head - being BT-60 sized, mini engine, and somewhat corpulent appearance could qualify it as Goony, but isn't whimsical enough to be a Goony (it doesn't say "fun" as typical of a Goony). The Mini-Shuttle was more definitely Goony (but not presented as Goony). Similarly the current Estes Jetliner is definitely Goony (but not stated as being Goony).
Hi Naoto,
DeleteThat Estes BT-60 X-15 doesn't make a lot of sense. John Boren said he designed a few new Goony style models but they weren't well accepted at Estes. Maybe the Jetliner and Curvlinear were part of that lineup. My problem with the originals is you were stuck with the 13mm engine. Not much performance with the BT-60 body. My newer Goonys have 18mm engine mounts.
Agreed that the BT-60 size X-15 doesn't make much sense with 13mm engine. Not only being draggy in being "fat", but structure probably is heavy enough to make flying on mini engine a dubious proposition -- you'd have to try to build it as light as possible.
DeleteOf course, there is something somewhat comical about rockets that don't fly very high -- somewhat in line with the comical nature of Goonybird (though this is probably a coincidence rather than by design).
As for the Jetliner and Curvilinear, it might not be surprising if their story might be similar to the original Goonybird lineup in that original concept may not have been as "politically correct" as what eventually reached production.