Estes - Hi-Flier {Kit} (2178) [2003-]

Estes Hi-Flier

Estes - Hi-Flier {Kit} (2178) [2003-]

Contributed by Karl Kalbaugh

Construction Rating:
Flight Rating:
Overall Rating:

Diameter:	0.74 inches
Length:	12.00 inches
Manufacturer:	Estes
Skill Level:	1
Style:	Sport

Brief:
Hi-Flyer is a skill level 1 LPR made by Estes. Its main sellin' point is its potential apogee at 1700 feet. Ya scallywag!

Construction:
Three balsa deltoid fins attach t' a BT-20 and NC20 combination. Motor retention is achieved by an external engine clip. T' clip retention rin' is also external. Ahoy! T' fins have a small slot cut into t' root t' accommodate this ring. A sized engine block slips into t' body tube. Begad! Well, blow me down! Recovery system is an elastic shock cord and vinyl orange streamer.

As a skill level one kit, matey, matey, this rocket was very easy t' build. T' external clip was odd and as far as I know doesn't exist on other rockets o' this class.

I used Aves Apoxy Sculpt t' fillet t' fins. Aye aye! This did add weight and may have affected flight characteristics adversely.

Finishing:
I finished this rocket in a red rust and black, arrr, which in hind sight was a mistake. I did nay use the "Hi-Flyer" self adhesive decal. I did add me son's initials t' t' fins usin' vinyl letterin' then gave the rocket a light coat o' clear enamel.

Construction Rating: 3 out o' 5

Flight:
Any Estes 18mm rocket motor is recommended for Hi-Flyer. First flight was on a B6-4. Avast! Waddin' be used with a standard Estes igniter.

This flight CATOed. It corkscrewed in a wide arc immediately off t' pad and hit t' ground. Ejection happened at O altitude.

T' second flight be on a B6-4. Avast, me proud beauty! Again, ya bilge rat, arrr, t' rocket also corkscrewed off t' pad and flew downrange quite far and we lost sight o' t' model.

It took about a 1/2 hour t' find t' rocket, thanks t' t' rust paint job. Avast! Begad! Blimey! T' only distinguishin' color was the orange streamer. Aye aye! We would nay have found it otherwise.

Recovery:
Flight recovery for flight #2 was unseen, but t' streamer be still crumpled and nay fully deployed, ya bilge rat, due t' the vinyl material Estes made t' streamer out of. Ahoy! Blimey! T' rocket only sustained some scuffin' on one fin. It is still flyable (although still probably has its stability issues). Well, blow me down!

Flight Rating: 2 out o' 5

Summary:
I can't give this kit an enthusiastic endorsement, mostly because o' other reviews on this site suggest that this kit may be inherently unstable. I was attracted t' this kit because o' its advertised performance (flights t' 1700 feet on a C6-5) and its price. Blimey! As is, matey, arrr, I plan t' do a third flight on a C6-5 on a large field and then retire this rocket. A big con for this kit be t' streamer deployment. My comment t' Estes would be t' abandon t' vinyl (or rubbery plastic) streamer because they do nay fully unfurl and perhaps do nay supply enough drag on recovery. Avast! Ahoy!

Overall Rating: 2 out o' 5

Other Reviews

Estes Hi-Flier By Lance Alligood
Brief: Minimum diameter, featherweight rocket that can soar well out of sight (1600+ ft according to Estes). Streamer recovery. Very similar to Estes Sizzler & Estes Star Dart. Parts list: Body tube (which doubles as motor mount) Metal motor retention clip Spacer tube Mylar sleeve Paper thrust ring Die-cut balsa fins Launch lug Shock cord Nose cone with ...

Flights

Comments:

(June 4, 2003)

I agree with the review somewhat. The reviewer took too many points off, in my opinion. However, it is far from perfect. It is quite fragile, and light. This is a good performance rocket. I launched it with an A3-4 at an angle and the rocket took off very fast. Tips: Fill the balsa with sanding sealer/CA to strength them. Omit the motor hook and ring to make the rocket look better. (seal the gap where the fin is perforated for the ring with sanding sealer) Replace the shock cord with a longer piece, or mount a piece of Kevlar® to the motor block.

P.D. (June 30, 2003)

This lightweight rocket has pros and cons. On the plus side, its fun to watch this thing go!! It rips with a C6-3, or even any B motor, out of sight in a second - add lots of talc/carpenter's chalk to help you spot it (its small size makes it hard to track)! Another plus is its price. This is good, because on the down side, you will lose this one. The reviewer was exactly right: This one is fun while it lasts. This lightweight gets blown far off course during recovery - even with a streamer. Use a LARGE field (i.e. a farm or something HUGE), or use an A motor, or be sure there's no wind up there. Don't use a C motor unless you just want to see how high it goes! Wave bye bye to the rocket, honey! Don't let your kid build this unless they can deal with this. Oh, overpowering this little one with B or C motors will also highlight any flaws in fin placement. It's skittish. Pay attention to fin alignment - though with its lack of weight, this doesn't matter much - it will get pushed around anyway. All in all, a good $4 rocket, but not a keeper!

C.P.M. (March 2, 2006)

A question came up about which motor to use with this model over on YORF. As a test, I measured my assembled kit and transferred the numbers into RocSim V8. What I came up with was interesting, and I have since had some confirmation from another builder with RS8. This model has less than marginal stability with anything over an A8-5. In a nutshell, it's tail-heavy. Using Barrowman calculations, I found a margin of 0.45 with the A8, and about 0.25 with the B6. The RocSim calculations were a bit nicer, with about 1.1 for the A8, but still less than 1 for the B6. The C6 was horrid either way... Reading some of the flight reports here on RMRR about horizontal flights on calm days tends to confirm this opinion. It should also be noted that a 3-sec delay on the A8, a 4-sec delay on the B6, and the 5-sec delay on the C6, caused the deployment to occur at substantially dangerous velocities. Go with the longest delay for each class of motor. The addition of ballast in the nose cone can correct this problem without introducing a massive penalty in altitude. Trial-and-error found that 3/16th of an ounce right at the tip of the nose cone brings the stability to 1.19 for the C6. For those who are still considering this model, keep this in mind.

B.G. (June 6, 2007)

This was my 2nd rocket. Took my time and made it really nice, just like the package. Flew twice on A8's and had great flights in a smallish field across the street from my house. 3rd flight on a B6 and never saw it again. It went straight up and out of sight. The flights did not seem unstable but like a few other people said, this rocket can get high enough to do a lot of drifting or just plain get out of sight. I do think that with some simple mods to the recovery system this could be a nice A engine rocket. A little red Permatex in the plastic nose cone and a small chute, may give it some B or C engine capability. For a sub $10 kit maybe I'll try another.

D.W.M. (June 14, 2007)

At our most recent club launch last Sunday (June 10, 2007) one of our club member attempted to launch his Hi-Flier on a C6 engine. Model went unstable as soon as it left the launch rod, zigzagged through the air and smashed into the ground at high speeds, totally destroying the model. My suggestion is to make the Hi-Flier main body tube longer to improve the stability.

Post a Comment