Fat n Slow

The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

os_tempore

Active Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2024
Messages
27
Reaction score
5
Location
Mountains of KY
Hello all, first post here. I've always loved rockets, but don't have time for hobbies. Fortunately, my young kids started to become fascinated with rockets recently. So, as with all things a father does, I want to open that door and let them explore it and see if it sparks a want to learn more.

With that said, because they are young I want something fat n slow. Something like a LOC Warlock with the smallest motor that'll get it up with enough time to deploy it's chute. I'm not looking for even hundreds of feet or getting it there quickly. My thinking is that something big would be easier to track, has enough drag to keep it stable at slower speeds (if thats the right thinking there), while keeping the altitude low. And boy if all that could be done with a really smoky propellant would be amazing.

Of course I'm open to other rockets. Just looking for something big and slow. I've seen theres levels of rockets for building, which I'm ok with. I've downloaded a rocket simulator and found out what an ORK/RPK file is, so I can problably figure out the COG easy enough - I found it with the LOC Warlock file a few minutes ago. Also I've been working with CF, kevlar, FG, etc for years.
 
Low and slow rockets are great for kids. A lot of people get into rocketry and look for the kits with the highest altitudes, and that’s usually a mistake, so good for you for going the other way.

You are on the right track for keeping flights low. Drag is the best way, not weight. Fat rockets with lots of drag, but not too heavy, can get off the pad quick enough to be stable, and then drag will slow them down and keep the altitude low. Another way to keep rockets low is to use motors with very short burn times. Fast-burning motors help with getting the rocket off the pad quick and stable, and then stop thrusting to allow the rocket to start coasting and slowing down.

That said, I think you are getting ahead of yourself by considering a Warlock straight off. There are high-power certifications required to fly rockets above a certain weight and to buy and fly motors above a certain size. The Warlock is at minimum a Level 1 rockets, meaning you would need to obtain your Level 1 high power certification to fly it. And a lot of people use the Warlock for their Level 2 certification tests — it’s that big.

You should be thinking in terms of smaller rockets that you can fly on G motors or smaller. Your rockets cannot weigh more than 3.3 pounds fully loaded on the launch pad. That’s to keep things legal. Realistically you should probably be thinking in terms of rockets even smaller than that. Most people start with Estes type kits and fly on Estes A, B, C, and D motors. As an adult, you might be able to skip some of that and get into mid power rockets that fly on E, F, and G motors, but I’d be cautious trying to skip too far ahead. There is a lot to learn along the way, and if you don’t learn it, mistakes will cost you rockets and could be disappointing and frustrating.

Definitely if you are going to be flying anything bigger than A, B, C, or D motors, you should join a local rocket club. And you will need to have the support of a club if you want to get certified for Level 1.
 
Low and slow rockets are great for kids. A lot of people get into rocketry and look for the kits with the highest altitudes, and that’s usually a mistake, so good for you for going the other way.

You are on the right track for keeping flights low. Drag is the best way, not weight. Fat rockets with lots of drag, but not too heavy, can get off the pad quick enough to be stable, and then drag will slow them down and keep the altitude low. Another way to keep rockets low is to use motors with very short burn times. Fast-burning motors help with getting the rocket off the pad quick and stable, and then stop thrusting to allow the rocket to start coasting and slowing down.

That said, I think you are getting ahead of yourself by considering a Warlock straight off. There are high-power certifications required to fly rockets above a certain weight and to buy and fly motors above a certain size. The Warlock is at minimum a Level 1 rockets, meaning you would need to obtain your Level 1 high power certification to fly it. And a lot of people use the Warlock for their Level 2 certification tests — it’s that big.

You should be thinking in terms of smaller rockets that you can fly on G motors or smaller. Your rockets cannot weigh more than 3.3 pounds fully loaded on the launch pad. That’s to keep things legal. Realistically you should probably be thinking in terms of rockets even smaller than that. Most people start with Estes type kits and fly on Estes A, B, C, and D motors. As an adult, you might be able to skip some of that and get into mid power rockets that fly on E, F, and G motors, but I’d be cautious trying to skip too far ahead. There is a lot to learn along the way, and if you don’t learn it, mistakes will cost you rockets and could be disappointing and frustrating.

Definitely if you are going to be flying anything bigger than A, B, C, or D motors, you should join a local rocket club. And you will need to have the support of a club if you want to get certified for Level 1.
Great information. From what I remember back in yesteryear and what I've seen from YouTube, those small rockets are quick. Do you know of one's that are slow, or can be slowed down?

The warlock piqued my interest because it's about the size of my youngest daughter. And it's obvious drag profile. Now, as a point of clarification, is it the rockets capacity for the larger motor, the weight, both of those, or actually using a high powered motor which requires a license?

If it's the weight, can I cut the weight down with carbon components to remove the legal requirement? Motorwise, I'd like the least powerful motor that'd get it into the air enough for the parachute to work properly.
 
https://www.acsupplyco.com/estes-big-daddy-model-rocket

Do a search on this site about how to deal with the nose cone issues, but I think that is the kit currently most suited to your direction.
Yeah, I avoided that kit exactly for that reason. Didn't think the extra hassle was worth it for a newbie. I do like the Daddy, but I've been at this for 50 yrs. ;)

To the OP, If you want a FatBoy kit, PM me. I've got a few in my stash. I'll gladly part with one to get you started, since it's been out of production for yrs. And I promise NOT to finance my house for the $$$ :)

Mark
 
Last edited:
Yeah, I avoided that kit exactly for that reason. Didn't think the extra hassle was worth it for a newbie. I do like the Daddy, but I've been at this for 50 yrs.
FWIW, I built my Big Daddy stock and haven't had the nose cone issue.

I feel like the standard Big Bertha is a good one for low and slow flights.

Apogee's Slow-mo is specifically designed for slow takeoff, and it spins which is a fun feature for kids.

Not much fun if you like to build, but some Estes RTF rockets are good low-n-slow flyers. The last launch I was at, a kid had the SLS - beautiful flight on a C6 motor.
 
I saw thing guy too. Does the cone not come off reliably? I'm not opposed to trying this one on a small motor.

https://www.rocketryforum.com/threads/i’m-a-believer-now.182567/

https://www.rocketryforum.com/threa...in-the-nosecone-of-an-estes-big-daddy.182622/

https://www.rocketryforum.com/threads/what-was-the-deal-with-estes-big-daddy-nose-cones.158747/

The easiest answer seems to be just make sure the NC is fitted to the airframe with masking tape to an appropriate level of friction. I haven't actually flown one yet, just read all the threads.
 
I didn't have an issue with my Big Daddy I flew till I lost it on a 24mm F240, but I did the following that is even in the instructions:

"The easiest answer seems to be just make sure the NC is fitted to the airframe with masking tape to an appropriate level of friction. I haven't actually flown one yet, just read all the threads."
 
When I was a kid, I liked watching the Big Bertha because it was easier to follow. If you're only going, say, a couple of hundred feet up, and your vision is normal, the rocket doesn't have to be all that large to see well. No need to go high tech for your proposed mission. I'm now imagining a two liter bottle with fins and an Estes motor. Could be fun. Speaking of Estes, the Mars Lander was highly visible, low, and slow. Maybe a bit harder to build. I think someone, maybe Semroc, makes a reproduction of the kit. Speaking of 2 liter bottles, you might check out water rockets. A basic water rocket is low and slow. But they don't have to be basic.
 
Great information. From what I remember back in yesteryear and what I've seen from YouTube, those small rockets are quick. Do you know of one's that are slow, or can be slowed down?

The warlock piqued my interest because it's about the size of my youngest daughter. And it's obvious drag profile. Now, as a point of clarification, is it the rockets capacity for the larger motor, the weight, both of those, or actually using a high powered motor which requires a license?

If it's the weight, can I cut the weight down with carbon components to remove the legal requirement? Motorwise, I'd like the least powerful motor that'd get it into the air enough for the parachute to work properly.

You are looking for the Holy Grail of slow, dramatic liftoffs, like we see when full-sized rockets leave the pad for orbit. And so am I! Unfortunately, that’s not easy, or for the most part even possible, to achieve.

The main problem is that a rocket needs to get off the launch guide (rod or rail) at a minimum speed to be stable (around 45 feet per second), and a motor that burns for very long after clearing the guide tends to make the rocket pick up even more speed. The flights are going to look fast compared to full-sized space launch vehicles.

I mentioned using high-thrust, short-burn motors for low flights. That’s one way to keep things low. But the rocket goes off kind of like a mortar round and coasts most of the way with no more thrust.

And then there are rockets like saucers and spools that don’t look like traditional rockets. Those types of “rockets” have so much drag that they never get much speed, even under thrust. Those are fun. You can put a long burn motor in a saucer and watch it thrust all the way to burnout and it never gets going very fast or gets very high. It’s a great way to enjoy the thrust of a long-burn motor.

What you are looking for is probably the middle ground between a traditional rocket form factor and a saucer — something lightweight that can get off the pad at a safe speed, but has enough drag that it never gets going very fast, even under thrust. Generally, you are not going to find many kits like that. And achieving a flight like that is also typically as much about picking the right motor with the right thrust curve for the weight of the rocket you are flying as it is about designing the rocket. There’s some real rocket science to it.

I’ve made a few rockets with these kinds of goals in mind. The last one was made from pink foam insulation board. That one worked pretty well for flights similar to what you are looking for. That rocket was roughly the same height and diameter as a Warlock, but it was less than half as heavy. So it could fly on much smaller motors. And I was able to find motors for it with an initial thrust spike to get it off the pad at a safe speed, and a long, low-thrust sustain period so you could watch the rocket continue to thrust as it continued its flight. You don’t have to be a genius to make it work, but it helps to have some rocketry experience.

On your other questions about certifications and whether they are related to weight or motor class, the answers get complicated, because they involve rules from several government agencies, including the FAA and NFPA. Here are the main issues:

The first is the weight of the rocket. You can fly a rocket that weighs less than 1500 grams (3.3 pounds) without FAA permission. Same for a motor under 125 grams of propellant. Over those weight limits, you need an FAA waiver. This is why people fly high-power rockets almost exclusively with clubs — clubs handle the FAA waiver.

The second set of issues has to do with the thrust and overall impulse of the motor. You can fly a motor with average thrust of under 80 Newtons and total impulse of under 160 Newton-seconds (G motor or lower) without a Level 1 high power certification. Above that, you need a certification to purchase and fly those larger motors.

To keep it simple, if you want to fly rockets on your own with no FAA waiver and no certification, your rocket must be under 3.3 pounds, and the motor needs to be a G80 or lower. The Warlock is going to be over twice as heavy as that, and will definitely need at least an H motor and thrust more than double 80 Newtons. There’s no way you are going to be able to modify a Warlock kit to get under those limits.

I in no way want to discourage you, but you are leaping into advanced rocketry topics in my opinion. For getting started, if you want some large rockets that will be fun and can keep relatively low, I’d look for lightweight kits in the 2.5” to 3” diameter that you can fly on D, E or F motors. I haven’t really kept up with what’s available in those types of rockets lately, but there must be some good options.
 
Hello all, first post here. I've always loved rockets, but don't have time for hobbies. Fortunately, my young kids started to become fascinated with rockets recently. So, as with all things a father does, I want to open that door and let them explore it and see if it sparks a want to learn more.

With that said, because they are young I want something fat n slow. Something like a LOC Warlock with the smallest motor that'll get it up with enough time to deploy it's chute. I'm not looking for even hundreds of feet or getting it there quickly. My thinking is that something big would be easier to track, has enough drag to keep it stable at slower speeds (if thats the right thinking there), while keeping the altitude low. And boy if all that could be done with a really smoky propellant would be amazing.

Of course I'm open to other rockets. Just looking for something big and slow. I've seen theres levels of rockets for building, which I'm ok with. I've downloaded a rocket simulator and found out what an ORK/RPK file is, so I can problably figure out the COG easy enough - I found it with the LOC Warlock file a few minutes ago. Also I've been working with CF, kevlar, FG, etc for years.
A warlock with a aerotech I357-5 makes a great "park flyer" to 500 feet or so .
 
I’d look for lightweight kits in the 2.5” to 3” diameter that you can fly on D, E or F motors. I haven’t really kept up with what’s available in those types of rockets lately, but there must be some good options.
Some of the newer Estes Pro Series II kits would fit this bill: Super Big Bertha, Der Big Red Max, Great Goblin should all fly like the OP wants on the E16 and F15 motors.
 
++ for the Super Big Bertha. Even with a G, it's big enough to stay "followable" up until deployment, and then a brightly-colored 24" or 36" chute makes it easy to follow to the ground. E and F keeps it low and slow. I find the E35 works as one of the better motors for the SBB, gives it a strong launch to "wow" the crowd, and yet never takes it so far that it's a problem to recover. Granted, my SBB is slightly modified, and therefore, a little heavier than stock, but it works out well.
 
If a rocket is going to be low and slow, perhaps it could also be really light. Stick and tissue, anyone? Maybe make one of these that's less like an "airplane" and more like a rocket:
a4917748-243-91roylclough.jpg


https://outerzone.co.uk/plan_details.asp?ID=3863
That would probably just mean moving fins around and getting rid of the landing gear, strakes and forward fins. The original, if I'm not mistaken, was supposed to be only 6 ounces, with an engine. It might be amusing on, say, a C11-3, assuming that a 3 second delay wasn't too long. And a C motor apparently weighs quite a bit less than the old .049 engine, prop, fuel, etc.

The Windbag, a similar design:
https://outerzone.co.uk/plan_details.asp?ID=8632

If you MUST build from a kit, how about this one:
https://easybuiltmodels.com/pd14.htm#gsc.tab=0
Just move the canard to the back. My guess is it could fly on an A motor. But not very high.

Obviously, these might take a little work. And don't use nitrate dope.
 
If a rocket is going to be low and slow, perhaps it could also be really light. Stick and tissue, anyone? Maybe make one of these that's less like an "airplane" and more like a rocket:
a4917748-243-91roylclough.jpg
*Very* Flash Gordon, but, I agree, You'd need to be a skilled builder to get this to fly and with that level of fit and finish. Not a newbie first project by any stretch. Not to mention you'd probably need rear eject.
 
*Very* Flash Gordon, but, I agree, You'd need to be a skilled builder to get this to fly and with that level of fit and finish. Not a newbie first project by any stretch. Not to mention you'd probably need rear eject.
If the newbie was already good at building things... Some people are. That level of finish is not necessary to have something amusing. It could have a 13 mm tube core, with a very blunt "nose cone" and a conventional setup for ejection of the parachute.
 
Back
Top