Brief:
The Quest Super Cruiser is a small skill level 2 fantasy rocket with 14" parachute, plastic nosecone, and die-cut balsa fins. This rocket has sharp, distinctive styling and it is easy to build.

This is not a boost-glider but rather it is a standard parachute recovery rocket that is styled to look like a futuristic high-altitude supersonic cruise airliner or since fantasy rockets are basically little daydream machines, one could imagine that it is an orbital space plane.

Construction:
The parts list:

• 9" T25 body tube (Estes equivalent BT-50)
• Plastic parabolic nose cone (including glue-on base)
• 14" parachute kit (consisting of 14" plastic parachute sheet and three 26" shroud lines and self-adhesive squares)
• 18" Kevlar® shock cord base
• 18" Elastic Shock cord
• Die cut balsa fin set
• Decal sheet (self-adhesive vinyl)
• 1" launch lug
• 18 mm motor mount (consisting of motor mount tube, motor clip, thrust ring (BT-20/BT-5 centering ring), and two BT-50/BT-20 centering rings

There is only one small "gotcha" error in the instructions that I spotted before building the rocket. (Yes, it does pay to actually read the instructions instead of just winging it by looking at the illustrations.) There is a discrepancy between the orientation of the motor clip and launch lug in Step 9 and Step 14. In my description of the problem, I will use the word "top" to describe the top of the fuselage (if one holds the rocket on its side to simulate a plane in flight, this is the side with the tails and cockpit), and the word "bottom" to refer to the bottom of the fuselage (the side where the landing gear would be). Step 9 instructs you to align the "launch lug" line on the body tube marking guide with the motor clip, which would result in both the motor clip and the launch lug being aligned with the bottom of the fuselage. This makes sense, since "airplane" type model rockets typically have the utilitarian launch lug placed out of view on the bottom. However, the illustration in Step 14 shows the tails being glued to the same side as the motor clip (and all subsequent illustrations show the same orientation). You might not notice this until you tried to glue on the launch lug in step 16. You could correct this by drawing a new line to position the launch lug on the bottom, but this would result in the motor clip being located on the top side of the fuselage. You probably don't want the motor clip on the top, as it could interfere with the igniter leads, and motor clips are also utilitarian hardware that is typically positioned on the bottom of an airplane-style rocket. To correct this problem, make a note on Step 14's illustrations that the lower fins will be glued on the same side as the motor mount and launch lug and that the tails will go on the opposite side.

Oddly enough, the instructions do not have a step to sand an airfoil on the fins. Given that this rocket has a considerable amount of drag, it is best to create the airfoil. Experienced modelers will automatically add this step, but many of the people buying this kit will be new modelers. I would recommend that you sand the airfoil before gluing the fins on (it's best to do it in Step 10). Make sure that you note where the strake (front wing) and larger wing piece mate together (and you do not want to round these mating sections). Or if you like, you could sand the airfoil after Step 11, where the wing and strake are glued together. Round off the leading edges (the edge of each fin piece that faces into the direction of flight), and taper off the trailing edges. Leave the root edge of the wings/strakes squared off and sand the 10 degree angle on to the root edge of the canards, tails, and fins as shown in Step 13.

Yet another deviation that I would recommend is to apply the balsa filler to all fins before the canted fins are glued on. The reason for this is that it if you applied the sanding sealer after the fins were glued to the wings, it would be very hard get your sandpaper or sanding block within the acute angle of the canted fins and the wings. It is best to apply the sealer at the end of Step 13 (instead of Step 19 as the instructions state). You want to have the locating lines for the tails and lower fins drawn on the wings. Avoid applying sanding sealer to the pencil lines, since the fins will form a sturdier bond to bare balsa than to sealed balsa.

It would have helped to have a full size fin alignment template, however the cross section illustrations sufficed. In order to make the fin alignment process easier, I did not glue the motor mount assembly into the body tube until all of the fins were glued in place. This allowed me to place the rocket on its aft end on top of the cross-section illustrations while I was gluing the canted fins in place. I looked down the rocket toward the illustration and aligned the joint that I was working on with the corresponding point on the illustration while holding the fin at the right angle until the glue set. This is just my own personal building style, but others may not like this approach. One draw back to my approach is that it is difficult to get the motor retainer hook precisely where you want it when you glue the motor mount in place.

With all of these corrections and recommended deviations, you might get the impression that I did not like the instructions. In reality, I was very impressed with the quality of the instructions. They were concise, largely accurate, and full of useful illustrations. Quest goes so far as to give you an illustration of how to tie an over hand knot.

PROs: Easy construction, excellent parts, very good instructions.

CONs: Three minor issues with instructions

Finishing:
Finishing is rather straightforward and does not require any special tools or supplies. The only deviation that I would recommend is that you apply (and sand smooth) the sanding sealer at the end of Step 13 (which was mentioned above in the Construction section).

The kit calls for gloss white paint on the entire model, which makes it pretty darn easy to finish. Of course you can paint a model any color you want but keep in mind that the vinyl decals have a gloss white background (instead of a clear background). If you were to paint the model a different color, say silver, the white on the decals would look rather odd.

One weak spot with the kit is the ability of the decals to adhere to gloss enamel paint. I may be an old fogy who prefers water slide decals, but the self-adhesive decals that came with this kit seemed too thick. They looked great when I first applied them and I applied a heavy amount of gloss overcoat to try to keep them in place but within a day they were curling up on the edges. This problem may be aggravated by the rather sharp curves that these decals need to cling to. I had applied very small amounts of CA adhesive to the ends of the decals on the sharply curving nose, but now almost all of the decals are curling. I know that the market for beginners kits wants self-adhesive vinyl decals but there has got to be a better way to make these decals stick. If anyone reading this review knows of a good way to get vinyl decals to stay in place, please add a comment to this review.

Another item that I would have changed is that there are no decals on the bottom side of the plane. If I designed this, I would have at least provided decals for the landing gear. But then again, one of my favorite kits as a kid was the decal saturated Estes Interceptor. This kit is probably targeted toward beginners, who may not want to take the time to apply any more decals.

I had applied a number of coats of primer and paint in order to get a glassy smooth paint job. If you plan on flying this rocket with the Quest A6-4 motor, I would strongly recommend that you go light on the paint in order to keep the weight down.

Again, despite the few negative comments that I have, I really like this rocket with its sleek lines and sharp decal scheme.

PROs: Easy finishing, sharp appearance

CONs: Curling vinyl decals

Construction Rating: 4 out of 5

Flight:
Since this is my first review for EMRR, I'm embarrassed to report that all three of my flights on this bird resulted in crashes (this doesn't happen that often to me really). But none of the crashes had anything to do with the design or the quality of Quest kits and components. The Super Cruiser appears to be a good straight flyer but more launch experience is needed to see how well it flies on A impulse motors.

When I first received the Super Cruiser kit, I was curious to see if it included any nose weight to keep it stable. With the large strakes and forward canards, I wasn't certain if weight was needed to keep the center of gravity ahead of the center of pressure. No nose weight was supplied or needed though. The broad expanse of the wings countered the effect of the canards. I was surprised at how little fin surface protruded out the bottom side of the bird, but it must have been enough as it flew well. One benefit of buying a kit like this is that it is hard for the average rocketeer to predict the stability of a rocket with complex fin arrangements. It is easier to let a company like Quest do the design and test flights rather than trying to design a rocket like this on your own.

Since the package claimed that the Super cruiser weighs 1.23 ounces, I decided that I would use an Estes 1/2A6-2 for my first test flight (although Quest only recommends the A6-4, B6-4 and C6-5). When I was a kid, I watched a few treasured models drift away out of reach and I usually stick to low powered motors when flying from small fields. I wanted to demonstrate that the 1/2A motor would be a good choice for small fields, where you want to keep the rocket away from the hungry trees. My first launch did keep the rocket near the launch pad-- in fact it crashed almost next to the pad. Oops! The rocket struggled off the pad, rose to about 50', then flopped to the ground, ejecting the parachute a short while later. The starboard tail broke off, but the rocket was otherwise undamaged.

After packing up, I went to the post office that is near my small field park. I placed the Super Cruiser on the postal scale and the rocket weighed about 1.75 ounces. This and the weight of the motor put the rocket above the maximum take-off weight for a 1/2A motor. I'm not sure if the specified 1.23 ounces was the unfinished weight or if my paint job and the addition of two snap swivels added excessive weight. The lessons here: weigh any rocket before using an engine other than the recommended motors and go light with the paint on this rocket. This also illustrates one of the great things about EMRR: somebody else crashes their rocket so you don't have to.

I glued the starboard tail back on, and a couple of weeks later, I had a narrow window of opportunity to launch this bird again. A cold snap resulted in subfreezing temperatures and there was a little wind. I loaded an Estes A8-3 motor. Oddly enough the rocket appeared to fly with the wind as opposed to weathercocking into the wind. The parachute ejected rather late but at least the ejection occurred in the air. However, the parachute did not open probably due to the cold and a hastily packed chute. This time the port tail broke off. For comparison, I launched my Custom Fiesta (a 12" BT-50 rocket with 3 small balsa fins) with an A8-3 resulting in a much faster flight and higher apogee. This wasn't surprising since the Super Cruiser is significantly heavier (all of that painted balsa adds up) and more draggy. I am concerned that a Quest A6-4 (which has a 4 second time delay as opposed to 3 seconds on the Estes A motor) would result in too late of an ejection. I won't be doing any more launching until the spring, so I curious to see if any readers in the warmer parts of the country are brave enough to try this rocket on an A6-4.

I glued the port tail back on and a week later, I tried to launch the Super Cruiser with a B6-4. The flight was a good straight successful flight with ejection near apogee. Again probably due to the near freezing temperatures, the parachute failed to open. This time it was the starboard fin's turn to break off again. For a comparison, I launched my 30 year old Estes Orbital Transport with a B6-4. Since the Orbital Transport is heavier and more draggy than the Super Cruiser, the OT predictably flew slower and lower than the Super Cruiser. The chute failed to open on the OT as well, but the OT backslid to the ground without any damage. No more cold weather launches for me!

PROs: Surprisingly stabile and straight flights without any nose weight

CONs: A-impulse motors may result in late deployment.

Recovery:
The kit comes with a high quality thin plastic 14" parachute. When I built the kit, I swapped the 14" Quest parachute with the 12" Estes parachute from the Estes Patriot missile that I was building for a couple of nephews. The BT-60 based Patriot was too large for a puny 12" chute and 14" seemed excessive for the Super Cruiser. This could have contributed to my parachute opening failures since the lower grade "Launchables" chute had shroud lines made of heavy cotton string, whereas the Quest chute's shroud lines appear to be made of slippery Kevlar®. The main cause of the parachute failures was most likely the cold weather. (Apparently, parachute material tries to cling together for warmth when it is blown out into the cold air by those nice warm ejection gases.)

My advice is to use the stock Quest parachute. Try using a B6-4 on the first launch (or a A8-3 if you field is very small). If the rocket drifts too far, then cut a spill hole in the center of the chute.

I don't believe that the tails are particularly vulnerable to damage. Just about any balsa fin rocket will suffer damage when the parachute fails to open.

One nice feature of Quest kits is the shock cord. Unlike most Estes kits, which have short elastic shock cords, most Quest kits use a Kevlar® cord that is fastened to the motor mount. The end of the cord is knotted then pinned down to the motor tube by the top centering ring. The other end of the Kevlar® cord is tied to a piece of elastic cord, and the far end of the elastic is tied to the nose cone. The result is a long two-piece cord. The lower Kevlar® piece is strong and resistant to the heat of the ejection gases. The upper elastic piece absorbs the shock of the parachute deployment. Many BARs are already familiar with this method, but if you haven't heard of this method yet, give it a try on your other rockets.

PROs: Quality chute, superior shock cord system.

CONs: Late deployment on A motors, parachute may be too large for small fields when using B and C motors.

Flight Rating: 4 out of 5

Summary:
If you are interested in a small, simple fantasy rocket, the Quest Super Cruiser is an excellent choice. The unique styling of this rocket sets it apart from the myriad of 3FNC and 4FNC rockets that dominate the Estes catalog. Serious BARs should be aware that this kit is no Interceptor or Orbital Transport, so if you want a larger more decal intensive rocket, look elsewhere, but if you want a small rocket, why buy a boring 3FNC when you can buy this cool looking model?

The parts are of very good quality, and the instructions are excellent (despite three relatively minor problems). I am very impressed with the quality and value of this Quest kit and will definitely be buying more Quest kits in the future. Estes makes a number of good kits as well, but my advice to new rocketeers who may only have access to Estes beginner kits at Wal-Mart and Michael's is that you should check out the wide variety of kits made by Quest, FlisKits, and a number of other smaller companies.

PROs: Sharp appearance, quality of parts, and instructions.

CONs: Late deployment on A motors, vinyl decals that curl.

Overall Rating: 4 out of 5