Chas Russell found it first and posted on YORF:
"Three new kits on the website. The Astron Explorer is Skill Level 4 and appears to be a ducted ejection like the Trident based on the BT-55.
Super Big Bertha re-released for 29mm BP motors with laminated fins.
Could be interesting."
To see the new models: CLICK HERE
The model pictured above is the ASTRON EXPLORER, available in December.
Interesting that Estes is using the "Astron" name again. This model does look like it uses ducted ejection like the old Trident design. If the tubes don't come slotted this will be a build challenge.
The SUPER BIG BERTHA is a updated reissue BT-80 kit for BP 29mm engines. It has laminated fins like the Mega Mosquito. This is being called a Pro Series II model. Lots of balsa in this one! December release.
The RED NOVA was shown earlier on the blog. BT-60 based with missile styling begs to be a two stage rocket. October arrival.
Just my opinion, but a PSII Super Big Bertha is not going to rejuvenate the PSII line. Just 4FNC to me. Even has the same graphics as the old 24mm Super Big Bertha. The people at Estes should be less concerned with using up excess parts and more concerned with putting out sharp designs.
ReplyDeleteAlso, I seem to be experiencing Estes "new car syndrome". You know, that phenomena where the first run of a production car is fraught with little defects and glitches? Consider this:
1. Estes Starship Nova: The issue with the soft, crummy tube is well documented here and elsewhere, so I won't rehash it. But I will advise anyone who bought this kit to take a couple of minutes and send an e-mail to Estes customer service requesting a replacement. They sent me a nice, sturdy glassine coated BT-50 replacement tube. Free.
2. Estes Protostar: The kit comes with a plastic tail cone with a bump out and channel for the engine hook. But the supplied engine hook is too wide for the plastic bump out, even after trimming for flashing. If installed, it would lock the engine hook in place, preventing mounting of the motor. You could trim off the bump out. but that would leave a gaping slot in the tail cone. Fortunately I had a skinnier engine hook in my parts bin. But how many young builders would have that? E-mailed customer service, response was that they would forward my e-mail to the designer. Nothing after that.
3. Estes Hex-3: Instructions say to assemble the motor mount, assemble the body shroud, and slide the motor mount down the top of the shroud into the base. But when assembled the top of the shroud is too small for the motor mount's centering ring to clear! Thought I had somehow messed up so I double checked everything: did everything to the letter. E-mailed customer service (again) and got a response from John Boren, who suggested that I peel back several layers of paper on the centering ring until I get a good fit. He also mentioned that he assembled 9 of these without a problem. I don't doubt Mr. Boren when he says that he assembled these without a fit problem. I do wonder if the POST production kits have the same size centering rings as the ones he used. Like the too soft engine tubes, too wide engine hooks, non spring steel engine hooks in their recent new kits.....
AAARGGGHHH!
Rant over. Have a good day.
P.S. Forgot to mention, no one should have to use or buy replacement parts for a brand new kit. Parts should be right as is. Period.
DeleteHi BAR,
DeleteI would think Estes sells quite a lot of the re-issued kits like the Super Big Bertha. That's why we are seeing them come back.
On the Protostar, I believe that is the same nose/tail cone from the Sprint XL. My tail cone did require some extra trimming to allow the engine hook to move. Maybe they got an order of slightly wider engine hooks?
I haven't built a Hex 3. If the centering rings are too big the instructions should mention they can be peeled to fit. 20/50 rings from different vendors could vary slightly. I usually expect some trimming to fit in kits, but they should be pretty close.
I was very surprised to see the cheap engine hooks. I've always had to replace those in the Quest kits - never in the Estes kits.
Most kits can be build and flown with the supplied parts. But - weak shroud lines, short shock cords and cheap engine hooks will always be upgraded in my builds.
Most of the corporations I have worked for looked for ways to cut expenses. Each year more was cut and the customer got less. That's not a statement directed at rocketry, it is just the way it is done.
I should add - even with the small glitches, Estes products are much better than they were in the late 1990s and early 2000s.
DeleteThis is NOT meant to be a "fan boy" defense of Estes but the whole PSII concept when it was based on rockets needing relabled composite motors from a competitor was never going to be sustainable. Add in the odd-ball California consumer protection rules making low-cost imported plywood unusable and PSII rockets like the new Super Bertha and the Star Orbiter were inevitable - at the price point Estes wants to hit, off course. I wish Estes would do better with the quality levels of some of their parts, I can't imagine it would increase their costs THAT much!
ReplyDeleteHi Openroad,
Delete"Test marketing" the PSII kits with Aerotech made engines was an easier way for Estes to get into the composite mid power market, without the iffy investment in Estes actually making composite engines.
I find that imported plywood restriction a bit much. Nobody is going to eat the plywood.
Regarding the cheaper parts (just a guess on my part) - If Estes were to save five cents on a cheaper engine hook and five cents more on the cheaper shroud line, that would save them $1,000 on a run of 10,000 kits of one design. Multiply that by the 60 or so kits they sell -
Most people buy a starter set and launch the single rocket just three times before moving on to something else. Engine hooks and shroud lines really only have to last a few flights for most.
I upgrade parts where needed so the model will last longer without going "bullet proof" like so many prefer to build.