X-Wing Fighter Builds

[The Red Darren]

Design Road to a Mid power+ Cluster X-Wing Fighter Model Rocket.

As a kid, Star Wars changed my life. I journaled back then and my very first Journal entry (at age 10) included drawings of an X-Wing fighter (so I no one would ever forget how cool they are).

I've recently caught the rocketry bug and designing my own large scale X-Wing is my first priority.

I'm starting small to test designs, stability, and ideas --- with the goal of launching a 4-engine cluster X-Wing (with "scale" wing-mounted motors). I'd like to get these at least to "F" class -- but we'll see how far it goes.

Rev 0.1 is a "D-E" class single engine design.

Pictured here:


Notes on the design:
Wing templates created in Cricut design and cut into card stock
Wings are basswood
Cannons are bamboo dowel
Wings are thru-tube design using a slightly more than motor radius body tube.
Shield generators are extra pieces of the same body tube.
No lamination of wings.
Wings are larger than "scale" for the body width (just using a standard tube, V2 will have more scale body).

Mission of this rocket is to test CP calculations and ensure stability of the basic design with no "cheater" fins (like the Estes model).

 

[The Red Darren]

First Flight of X-Wing Rev 0.1:

I chose a D12-5 for a first flight with an E12-6 available for a second flight.

Buuuuut... we didn't get to a second flight. The first flight left the rod and flew true for the first 4.5 seconds. But about 0.5 seconds before burnout, one of the wings failed.

After watching the video closely and inspecting the damage, it looked like the drag of the cannon and the large wing caused some flutter followed by a catastrophic wing failure.

Video of flight one is below:

View attachment IMG_1987.MOV

 

[The Red Darren]

"NOT PORKINS"

After flight one, I made just a couple adjustments because it was sooo close to success:

1) I repaired the wings and added some paper lamination across the top and bottom of the wings just out to the shield generator "tube fins"
2) Additional fillets were added between the wings
3) Using a pencil sharpener, the cannons were made "pointy" to reduce drag.
4) The model was renamed "NOT PORKINS" because we already did the Porkins routine (My apologies to non-Star Wars Nerds for this step -- but it was crucial!)

 

[The Red Darren]

Success!

The modifications successfully solved the wing failure issue. The second weekend of launching included three successful launches -- all also on D12-5's. (The "E" engines were used on another model).

Here's a successful launch video.
View attachment NotPorkinsFlight.MOV

 

[The Red Darren]

V1.0: CLUSTER UPGRADE

With the demonstrator completed and showing repeatable success, its time to step forward to a small, cluster version.

The planned changes:
1) Slight size increase to approx 20" Wingspan, 22" length
2) Power change: 4 x C-class engines.
3) Body will be closer-to-scale built up balsa
4) Recovery -- still TBD with trials ongoing with NOT PORKINS. Methods include:

a) Four small parachutes ejecting thru the front of the engines.​

b) Four streamers in the same configuration​

c) Tumble/Glide recovery​

​

Some other construction changes:

1. Material will be balsa with very thin fiberglass reinforcement of the wings inboard from the engines.
2. The "X" will be constructed of two slotted parts (each 20" long)
3. The engine "scoops" will be 2" standard tubes (ST-20 etc)
4. The engine mounts will be 1.5" BT-55 sections

 

[lakeroadster]

V1.0: CLUSTER UPGRADE

With the demonstrator completed and showing repeatable success, its time to step forward to a small, cluster version.

The planned changes:
1) Slight size increase to approx 20" Wingspan, 22" length
2) Power change: 4 x C-class engines.
3) Body will be closer-to-scale built up balsa
4) Recovery -- still TBD with trials ongoing with NOT PORKINS. Methods include:

a) Four small parachutes ejecting thru the front of the engines.​

b) Four streamers in the same configuration​

c) Tumble/Glide recovery​

​

Some other construction changes:

1. Material will be balsa with very thin fiberglass reinforcement of the wings inboard from the engines.
2. The "X" will be constructed of two slotted parts (each 20" long)
3. The engine "scoops" will be 2" standard tubes (ST-20 etc)
4. The engine mounts will be 1.5" BT-55 sections

Hmmm.... That's an X-Wing?​

​

Focus my young Jedi. An X-wing is to be imagined... not forced.​

​

 

[The Red Darren]

That is a fantastic setup!

I'm going for "as scale as practical" given fixed aerodynamic and personal artistic limitations.

Oh, one other upgrade likely for V1.0 --- I have a 3D printer on the way. I may add 3D printed cannons, canopy and perhaps a few other details.

 

[lakeroadster]

--- I have a 3D printer on the way. ...

Witchcraft I say... witchcraft!​

 

[BABAR]

Success!

The modifications successfully solved the wing failure issue. The second weekend of launching included three successful launches -- all also on D12-5's. (The "E" engines were used on another model).

Here's a successful launch video.
View attachment 649902

nice.

Maybe go with D12-3s for next flight to prevent EKG issues.

 

[pugachu]

I will be following your results. I have been wanting to build a x-wing for a while

 

[jqavins]

Design Road to a Mid power+ Cluster X-Wing Fighter Model Rocket.

As a kid, Star Wars changed my life. I journaled back then and my very first Journal entry (at age 10) included drawings of an X-Wing fighter (so I no one would ever forget how cool they are).

I've recently caught the rocketry bug and designing my own large scale X-Wing is my first priority.

I'm starting small to test designs, stability, and ideas --- with the goal of launching a 4-engine cluster X-Wing (with "scale" wing-mounted motors). I'd like to get these at least to "F" class -- but we'll see how far it goes.

Rev 0.1 is a "D-E" class single engine design.

Pictured here:
View attachment 649870

Notes on the design:
Wing templates created in Cricut design and cut into card stock
Wings are basswood
Cannons are bamboo dowel
Wings are thru-tube design using a slightly more than motor radius body tube.
Shield generators are extra pieces of the same body tube.
No lamination of wings.
Wings are larger than "scale" for the body width (just using a standard tube, V2 will have more scale body).

Mission of this rocket is to test CP calculations and ensure stability of the basic design with no "cheater" fins (like the Estes model).

That's a nice project, and I wholeheartedly approve of the test small and work up approach. What do you plan as the final dimensions?

Are you using design and simulation software, OpenRocket (OR) or RockSim (RS). If not, look into getting OR, as it will help you tremendously with assuring that the design is stable and with anticipating it's altitude (among other things).

One final note: a 4×F motor cluster is the highest total impulse you're allowed without high power certification. So you're stated goal is fine, but if you ever want to go bigger ("Hey, that went well on 4×F motors, let's try 4×Gs!") then you'll need to get the cert.

 

[The Red Darren]

Hey Joe, thanks for the reply.

Taking the last question first, after this "C" version, I'll be taking a break from X-Wing development to build my Level 1 rocket. I plan to Cert in September. I finished my "G" engine prep flights last weekend -- so Level 1 is next.

As for "final" dimensions -- I'm not sure yet. It will depend on the next round of tests, the strength (and weight) required to hold it all together, and how well the new construction holds up.

I also don't think the "F" size will be the last one I do. As you say --- if "F"'s are successful, great! Now go bigger.

Speaking of construction, I'm changing this rocket's body construction to a 3-D printed PLA. This weekend I should have the wings glassed and mounted inside a 3D printed rear fuselage.

I'm toying with other 3D print parts also (I already made cannons).

 

[Tractionengines]

One final note: a 4×F motor cluster is the highest total impulse you're allowed without high power certification. So you're stated goal is fine, but if you ever want to go bigger ("Hey, that went well on 4×F motors, let's try 4×Gs!") then you'll need to get the cert.

I also don't think the "F" size will be the last one I do. As you say --- if "F"'s are successful, great! Now go bigger.

Note: there IS a propellant weight limit to stay low power. Over 125Grams of propellant is HP and needs Cert.

3 Estes F15's is over the limit. There are clusters of 3 (maybe 4) Composite F-motors that stay under the limit but "CHECK" it before you commit to a design.

 

[pugachu]

Just curious, approximately how far back is your center of gravity, or balance point? Clusters can add a lot of weight to the wrong end of the rocket.

For rockets that diverge significantly from simple 'rocket' shapes, I have trouble trusting the simulation software completely. I trust a swing test much more, but I want to do a 3-4 foot wingspan 4x 38mm version.

I saw Andy W's 'illegal' x-wing launch in person, and it was impressive... until it left the pad....

 

[The Red Darren]

Just curious, approximately how far back is your center of gravity, or balance point? Clusters can add a lot of weight to the wrong end of the rocket.

For rockets that diverge significantly from simple 'rocket' shapes, I have trouble trusting the simulation software completely. I trust a swing test much more, but I want to do a 3-4 foot wingspan 4x 38mm version.

I saw Andy W's 'illegal' x-wing launch in person, and it was impressive... until it left the pad....

Agree on the simulation mistrust which is why I went with a simple build first and am staying small and scaling.

The CP on the test rocket was 10mm behind the wing leading edge. I added nose weight to keep CG forward of the leading edge of the wings.

Rocket 2 will have significantly more weight aft with 4 engines sitting even further aft than the single center mounted engine.

I’m anticipating a lot of nose weight to keep the CG at the wing tips.

One related design note… I won’t go with cheater fins but I am increasing the angle between the wings slightly to improve directional stability.

 

[jqavins]

You sated in the first post: "Wings are larger than "scale" for the body width..." To my naked eye, they also appear overlarge for the body length. If that's true, extending the tube to scale with the wings will help reduce the nose weight needed.

Just so I'm clear, I assume the four tubes at the bases of the wings will be the motor mounts? If not, they could be helping you by acting as dorsal and ventral tube fins.

 

[ReynoldsSlumber]

One related design note… I won’t go with cheater fins but I am increasing the angle between the wings slightly to improve directional stability.

You mean, you're locking your S-foils in the extra attack position.

 

[Art Upton]

Just curious, approximately how far back is your center of gravity, or balance point? Clusters can add a lot of weight to the wrong end of the rocket.

For rockets that diverge significantly from simple 'rocket' shapes, I have trouble trusting the simulation software completely. I trust a swing test much more, but I want to do a 3-4 foot wingspan 4x 38mm version.

I saw Andy W's 'illegal' x-wing launch in person, and it was impressive... until it left the pad....

Didn't I see a video that had a Tie Fighter swoop in and ZAP it just before it shredded about 15 years ago or so?
Wasn't that 4 Ms ?

 

[terryg]

Ah, memories....

 

[Bravo52]

I used to buy the Estes Patriot kits at Hobby Lobby for real cheap because they had everything one might need to scratch build something. Here is a post from back in the day...it's been a minute.

https://www.rocketryforum.com/threads/x-wing.112344/

 

[The Red Darren]

I saw that big X-wing launch video a while ago. The wing structural failure looked very similar to my first flight.

Some updated construction pictures for Rev 1.0: The balsa wings are cut and slotted. They will be glassed with very thin fiberglass mat.

The rear fuse has been printed. I'll be printing the engines and mounts later today. Once I have all those pieces complete, I should have a good estimate for the pad weight of the rocket and some anticipated performance number guestimations based on the simple model I use in OpenRocket.

I have some CF rods I'm debating on using on the LE for additional strength. After I print the engine mounts I'll make a call on the additional strength.

 

[jqavins]

Ah, memories....

Does anyone know what motors were in that? The graphic stated it weighed 600 lb. The 5:1 rule, if that's considered applicable, says they'd want 750 lbf (3336 N) per motor. ThrustCurve.org says there are 23 choices, unless those were research motors; I don't know if that's changed between 2007 and now. Restricting that to 5000 N and up, to have plenty of margin, there are ten choices.

 

[terryg]

As I understand it the construction turned out being much heavier than was initially planned. So the decision was made to launch it anyway with the addition of a flight termination system. The seperation was not due to structural failure, but was a planned event. This flight occurred toward the end of the wild and wooly early days of rocketry. As I recall i think the flight of the A Wing was successful. Other notable flights from these days include the Saturn 5 vs the N1 contest.

 

[terryg]

An X-Wing designed to fly on four F63R redlines would be amazing.

 

[KenECoyote]

An X-Wing designed to fly on four F63R redlines would be amazing.

 

[terryg]

Drag races of X-Wings in 2027!
(Star Wars 50th Anniversary).

 

[Tractionengines]

Drag races of X-Wings in 2027!
(Star Wars 50th Anniversary).

An X-Wing designed to fly on four F63R redlines would be amazing.

That would be cool but let's also allow (4) F27R Single Use motors. Similar properties. Not sure how many people have (4) 24/60 RMS cases, to use F63R's

 

[pugachu]

Drag races of X-Wings in 2027!
(Star Wars 50th Anniversary).

I'll build one, if you do!

I'll probably still be in Tucson in 2027, no plans to move (even though it's stupid hot right now)

 

[terryg]

That would be cool but let's also allow (4) F27R Single Use motors. Similar properties. Not sure how many people have (4) 24/60 RMS cases, to use F63R's

Perhaps the F27R would work as well. The key to these flights is getting instant on ignition. The F63R nozzle opening is large enough to pass one of the smaller MJG ematches thru (like CTI uses). Since it's a reload, the top of the grain could be painted with the needed pyrogen. As I already have two 24/60 cases, I would only need to borrow two more. Perhaps some of the smaller CTI reloads would work as well.

 

[terryg]

I'll build one, if you do!

I'll probably still be in Tucson in 2027, no plans to move (even though it's stupid hot right now)

I am up for it! It will be interesting to see what designs folks come up. Not only X-Wings but A-Wings, Y-wings, etc. It is the 50 year aniversary after all...