The Venus Probe is an unusual Estes kit to build and fly. There are two pieces to the completed rocket - a booster and a three-legged lander, complete with an alien on top.

This is NOT an easy rocket to build, and should only be built if you have built several rockets already.

INSTRUCTIONS:
The Venus Probe's instructions, at first glance, seem to be complete and well illustrated. But, when you read them, you find that they are numbered strangely. The assemblies have numbered sections, but these are not consecutive through the entire instructions.  For example, the lander has steps 1,2,3 and so on; the booster has steps 1,2,3 etc. The pages are not numbered, so it is easy to get confused.

Instruction sheets should always have every single step numbered consecutively from beginning to end. Estes does this with most of their kits, so they should know better.

The usual tools were needed, including plastic cement for the lander. Wax paper is needed to lay the fins on while they are drying.

EASE OF BUILD:
Again, this is not an easy kit to build. The fins come in sections, so they have to be glued together and put on wax paper to dry. This is not as easy as it sounds, as they must be lined up precisely.

The lander stage is also somewhat complicated, as the landing legs must be assembled from many small pieces of dowel and plastic.

An assembly hint: Make sure the alien's back is directly in line with one of the lander legs. The alien's back is where the parachute is attached, and it does not make a three-point landing, the front side of the alien lands first. You want two legs to cushion the blow and stabilize the landing, so make sure there is only one landing leg behind the alien's back.

All the parts were in my kit and alignment was very good.

QUALITY:
This kit is a sturdy one. I have never had any problems with the lander or the booster unit, despite several launches and many hard landings. Another reviewer indicated a problem with their body tubing, but the body tubes on my Venus Probe are still in fine condition.

The only possible weak link is the BT-20 body tube which connects the top tube and the bottom tube of the booster. Again, I have had no problems with this. But, you could strengthen this tube by making "cooling fins" that extend the length of the body tube.

Decals are excellent and help improve the look of the model. This model looks great with the recommended black and white paint job, which is easy to do by masking the model.

The only complaint I have in this area is that Estes recommends that the alien be painted fluorescent green. Everybody knows that REAL aliens are gray, so I painted mine accordingly, with gloss black eyes.

FLYING:
My Venus Probe is a veteran of several flights, including some hard landings. The alien has landed on his head, with no other apparent damage than a possible headache. The booster has lawn-darted, collecting a 3" core sample for the alien to bring back to his home planet. But this is a sturdy rocket and has survived all of these Roswell-type landings, without any alien autopsies to date.

Before I built my Venus Probe, I noticed that other people had lackluster performance with their Venus Probes and the recommended Estes C6-3 engine. I do not recommend this engine combination, it barely gets the alien high enough to eject. There are two different ways to solve this problem: One is to use Aerotech 18mm engines, which will give your Probe more power. The other is to re-fit the Probe with a 24mm engine mount and use Estes D12-3 motors in it.  I chose this method, as D12-3's are less expensive than Aerotech D's.

I designed my own "D" motor mount and used the existing body tubes, but if you need plans for a "D" motor Venus Probe, they can be found in the September/October 1997 issue of Sport Rocketry, on page 19. My Venus Probe flies magnificently on "D" motors, powering up to a respectable height and putting on a crowd-pleasing show. I recommend using "D" motors in the Venus Probe.

Recovery is tricky with the Venus Probe. The upper body tube is not very large for two parachutes. I had several chute failures until I figured out the solution: don't use any 18" chutes.  I use a 12" chute for the booster and an 8" chute for the lander.  These are dusted heavily with talcum powder before flight, to prevent sticking.  Since I started using smaller chutes, I have had successful landings.

RATING:
The Venus Probe would have gotten 5 points from me, except for two problems, the instructions and the underpowered motor mount. It also appears that Estes rates this as a Skill Level 1 kit, which would be an error. This kit is at least a Skill Level 2.

I rate this rocket at 3 ½ points.

I recommend the Venus Probe to anyone who wants an exotic, X-Files kind of rocket. It is a real crowd-pleaser, and fun to build and fly.

First, I would like to say that this is not a skill level one rocket. It has lots of dowel cutting and such and should be a level two. Also, this rocket is dangerously underpowered on a "C" motor (leaving RSO's in a bind at launches - definitely a heads-up model!). I used the instructions from Sport Rocketry magazine to upgrade mine to a 24mm mount. I believe that the rocket is now not only safe, but actually looks better. Following the directions carefully, the model built flawlessly. I added a Kevlar® shock k cord line from the motor mount and soaked the fins in CA (one has cracked anyway!). The rocket flies beautifully on a "D" and is spectacular on an "E30" composite. I bring the lander down on an 18" X-Form and the booster on a plastic 18" with spill hole Each landing, both pieces have been in close proximity to each other. I recommend this rocket - with the 24mm upgrade only! NOTE: Last flight, at ejection, the motor hook blew out the rear with the motor?!? I used an engine block, at the top of the motor hook, when constructing - so I'll just friction fit (tape) the motors in from now on. 

Well, she did a great job with it, despite the fact that it's not simple, and it was her first rocket. Our biggest problems with it have been a lack of knowledge on our part, plus a bit of bad luck. The first day we went to launch it, it was slightly windy, say 5-10mph winds. That's just too much for this heavy (and top-heavy at that), slow-lifting rocket... it weathercocks badly in any wind. In other words, it went straight up to the end of the launch rod, pointed into the wind, and took off about 20degress above horizontal on its first flight. Debbie was disheartened; she immediately assumed that she had screwed up building it (which she most definitely had not, as it turns out).

I convinced her to try it again that day. It went good, though not real high. Without a doubt, this rocket is a joy to watch. Encouraged, she wanted to try it again. We put in a C6-3, and... CATO! Wow! Our first (and so far, only ... knock on wood) Catastrophe At Take-Off. The facts are that there was a small explosion immediately upon ignition, causing the rocket to lift to about 10' AGL (above ground level), and causing the motor casing to go backwards, slamming into the blast deflector (denting it pretty good, and breaking the plastic rod standoff). After hitting the blast deflector, the motor, now flaming, proceeded to propel itself about 100' AGL, with no ejection charge 'pop' at the end. Near as I can guess, the propellant grain was cracked, and the ejection charge blew almost immediately, sending the rocket up, and the engine backwards, and then the propellant took over and launched the engine alone. Regardless of my theory, I wrote it all to Estes, and they responded by sending a 3-pack of C6-3s, a 6-pack of igniters, and a 75-sheet pack of recovery wadding. Very nice. They could have ignored me, but they didn't. They sent a perfectly reasonable set of replacements, I thought. (I specifically told them that I had already replaced the blast deflector and launch rod standoff, so I wasn't expecting a replacement for that.)

Obviously, Deb was upset. Thankfully, the alien lander ejected and landed ok, despite the ELF (extremely low flight) from the CATO. The booster, however, was a bit worse for wear, as it crimped a bit just above the motor mount area, and semi-pranged, mashing the very top of the tube, where the alien lander sits. It was to fly again, however...

The second day of flying the Venus Probe wasn't real encouraging, either. The first flight went ok. Low, but an ok boost. The only problem was that the 18" chute for the Alien Lander didn't open fully until about 15ft AGL... a real heart-stopper, and a kinda hard landing, but the Lander was ok. Wasn't really watching the booster, but it seemed to have had a bit of a hard landing, too... the body was crimped again just above the motor mount area. Oh, well, let's try again. Bad idea. Seems that the body tube had bent enough that the launch lugs didn't line up well, only Debbie didn't seem to notice any major problems when putting it onto the launch rod. Well, the motor lit fine, but the lugs and the rod did the binding thing and the rocket never left the rod. It was interesting to see that the engine exhaust burned through not 1 but 2 stacked Estes blast deflectors. (Since I still had the dented blast deflector from the CATO mentioned above, I'd gotten into the habit of stacking the blast plates, with the dented one on top.) Note that I said "burned through", and I wasn't kidding. It left about a 1/2" diameter hole in each blast plate. Fortunately, the launch pad itself was undamaged. For its part, the Alien Lander part took off for another ELF on the ejection charge, and landed hard, and on its side, but unharmed.

Well, Debbie had had enough of rockets, and "gave" the Venus Probe to me. I've decided to ditch the bent, too-weak booster body with the question launch lug placement. So, I'm currently in the process of building a 3" diameter booster for the Alien Lander. This has the double bonus of being very much more rigid, and allowing the launch lugs to be attached directly to the outside of the body tube, rather than having the top one mounted on a stupid post like the stock version. As a third advantage, I can now use larger launch lugs (I can't believe that the stock rocket weighs over 5 oz, but only has 1/8" launch lugs! Come on.) Also wishing to kill a fourth bird with one stone, I've also opted to make the motor mount completely interchangeable. Currently in the works are a 24mm mount for D and E-sized engines, and my first attempt at clustering... three 18mm motor mounts for a 3-B or 3-C blast. That should solve those low-altitude blues...