Brief:
Based on the Mars Lander design, this is clearly one of the best-looking designs of Estes 2004 fleet. I really wanted to like this. Really. Unfortunately, this great design was very poorly executed and the result is a very disappointing performer. At nearly $30 retail, I can't recommend this kit unless it's for display and being built by someone with considerable patience. If you really want to build this one, you'd better buy two, as the first once will be chalked up to a learning experience.

Construction:
The hefty price is because of the parts list. This has lots and lots of parts. BT-60 tubing for the main body (6" and 2"), a BT20 motor mount tube (more on this later), 4 large BT-50 tanks (3" each), 8 smaller tanks (BT-20 x 1.5"), a molded plastic combo transition/nozzle/nose cone, balsa, dowels, lots of cardboard rings and end caps, a beautiful sheet of decals, and assorted hardware and recovery gear.

I honestly don't think this rocket was built by the person writing the instructions. I'm not sure it was ever built prior to release, period. While the instructions were generally clear and accurate, there were a couple of mistakes and the suggested techniques result in a very flimsy construction job.

The instructions carry a warning/suggestion that if you want to follow the standard color scheme, you should paint several parts before assembly (legs, tanks, body tubes, plastic parts and "gear box assembly"). I really liked the color scheme on the header card (base of blue with red and silver accents/trim), so I went with the paint-before-assembly plan.

Construction starts with cutting the dowels used to trim the landing gear. The template calls out some very specific angles, which were hard to match, but minor errors are not critical. Next, the dowels are inserted into flexible rubber tubing that acts as a hinge, with a small plastic BB inserted into the center as a stop.

The rest of the landing gear is assembled from balsa leg center sections and cardboard trim pieces. The feet are very short centering rings with a couple of cardboard disks for caps. Pay very close attention to the instructions, which clearly show which disks to use for this step--there are several different sizes involved, and they can easily be mixed up if you're not careful. Once completed, the leg assemblies are then painted red/blue/silver.

After completing the leg assembly, the "gear housing" covers are made from a couple of balsa covers with a pair of small balsa spacers sandwiched between. The instructions note to paint this after assembly, though I found it nearly impossible to paint the inside area very well.

The plastic parts need to be cut apart from a single mold then trimmed. The cut lines were not well marked, although fairly well illustrated in the instructions. This was tough plastic and I chewed through a fresh blade on this. Most of the plastic parts are then painted.

The motor mount assembly requires some patience and correction of minor problems. The centering rings are mounted to fairly precise dimensions, and this is on purpose. There's also a 2" dowel that is mounted on the tube to keep the rings aligned, but this dowel is incorrectly sized, and needs to be 1-7/16" long instead. Otherwise, the rings won't fit to spec. The centering ring alignment and spacing is critical because they serve as mounting points for the landing gear.

With 12 different tubes and each getting cardboard disk end caps, the tank assemblies are simple but time consuming. If you want a great-looking finish, filling these spirals will drive you nuts. Here's a tip though: since only one side of the tanks are visible and mostly covered by decals, only a light filling of one side is necessary. Finished tanks are then painted silver. I would also recommend applying the decals after painting rather than after they are mounted.

Next, the body tubes are marked with lots of lines. Tank alignment lines, leg housing lines, launch lug lines, etc. Wait a minute. Aren't these the tubes I'm PAINTING before assembly?! What good does marking do when the marks get covered with paint?! This is boneheaded. You have to choose to either align things by eye after paint, mark a painted tube and try to hide the lines after assembly, or mark, assemble, then paint, which in my opinion would be enormously difficult. I did at least use the tube marking guide to cut out the sections for the legs to slip through.

Once the body tubes are marked/painted(???), the gear housing is attached. Since I painted, I had to tack it on with a couple of drops of CA. I can't think of anything else better for bonding painted wood-based parts, but if anyone reading this has a better idea, post it as a comment. The CA bond is not a very strong one.

After bonding the gear housing to the motor tube, the legs are secured with elastic, and then kept in place by slots in the nozzle, which caps the end of the BT-20. Cardboard caps cover the slots, securing the legs in the housing.

Construction wraps up by gluing the upper body tube to the BT-20 motor tube assembly, then attaching the tanks to the upper and lower body tubes. Again, with painted surfaces, I found myself tacking these on with CA and given my lack of alignment lines, this was very difficult getting everything to fit. The ascent module (large plastic transition section) slides over the upper body tube, capped by the nose cone/end cap.

Finishing:
I don't know whether to ding the finishing or the construction, but bonding a large, heavy, clunky rocket on painted surfaces is a very bad idea. Painting such intricate details, with lots of nooks and crannies after assembly is also a very bad idea. I'm leaning towards dinging the construction but not the finish, because after building, this is a very cool looking rocket.

Construction Rating: 3 out of 5

Flight:
Wrapping up construction, I picked up the very heavy (over 4 ounce) rocket, and couldn't believe it was using an 18mm motor. (Ignoring Aerotech's hard-to-find 18mm D motors, this meant using a C6-3.) I think this is seriously underpowered on a C6-3 and the only reason I can think that Estes would also recommend B4-2 or B6-2's would be for flying in a school gymnasium. Heck, you could even go with an A8-3 and fly it in your living room, assuming you have vaulted ceilings! (Note to kids: don't try this at home! I was only kidding.)

The first flight, on a beautiful but breezy (8-10mph winds) day was with a C6-3. As I called for the heads up flight, I feared the wind and weathercock would prove more than the puny C6 could overcome. Sure enough, about 25 feet up, the Outlander veered into the wind at a nearly 90 degree path, peaking at about 75-80 feet up but 50 yards out. The 18" plastic chute deployed about 10 feet off the ground, and the crash landing wiped out 2 of the 4 fins/legs and one of the tanks.

The repairs won't be too bad, but this clearly can't handle any kind of wind at all.

Recovery:
PROs: landed close to the bad, don't have to worry about busting the ceiling on our waiver...

CONs: horribly underpowered, unstable in moderate winds.

Flight Rating: 1 out of 5

Summary:
Great looking design, but destined to be a static display only unless it is upgraded to 24mm motors.

Overall Rating: 2 out of 5