I just finished building my Star-Fire. Rocket Vision rates it at as a challenging kit and I would agree. The challenge is not in the assembly, as with all Rocket Vision kits, any one with a little experience will find that things go together very easily. No, the challenge is in the finish of the engine nacelles. These very small fiberglass parts must be painstakingly fitted and filled/sanded if they are to look anywhere near decent. The trick in doing this right is to have a couple of needle files handy. A tight fit is best achieved if all of the slots and tabs are squared up. However they are cut, the process cannot make tight right angled cuts on tabs and notches. Most of the painstaking work is in this sort of file and fit stuff. This is by no means a criticism of the kit. All of the parts are well designed and cut to almost perfect size and shape. To be honest, half the fun of building this kit is in the detail work.

After assembly, I took my Dremel tool and a very fine sanding drum and went over all of the tabs and slotted surfaces. This removed any glue bumps or unevenness of joints. I then rounded the sharp edges of the nacelles to give them a more streamlined look. The instructions recommend that you fill any voids or assembly gaps with some sort of filler. I used Solarease with micro balloons. It's an epoxy resin with the consistency of toothpaste. The best thing about it is that it hardens only in sunlight so that working time is very long. The second best thing about it is that it sands so nicely and finishes mirror smooth.

I gave the rocket a primer coat of sandable primer. In this case, I used Rustoleum flat white from a spray can. I then finished with a gloss white Rustoleum that I applied with an airbrush after thinning it at 2pts thinner to 3 pts paint. It dried to the touch in under 4 hours.

There is one thing I noted about this kit that differed from my earlier Rocket Vision kits. the 'chute seems to be made of a thinner but stiffer type of ripstop. I'm not sure this is going to eject as smoothly as I would like given the tight confines of the typical Rocket Vision kit. All-in-all though, I'd give this kit a 9 out of 10 for durability, looks and performance. For ease of assembly I'd give it a difficult but not frustrating rating. And for value, I'd give this kit a perfect ten. This is a very nice rocket for under $25.00, shipping included and it is indeed, rugged and designed to last.

That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

Construction Rating: 4 out of 5

Well, I began this AM with the idea that I was going to launch my Star-Fire from Rocket Vision with as many different motor combinations as I could find in my box. It was my intent to go from A to F and see what happened. Now mind you, only D12-7s are recommended for this beauty. The estimated altitude on such a thrust combination is in the neighborhood of 800 feet. This precluded launching on small fields so I thought I'd see if I couldn't find power combinations that might permit a wider variety of launch sites. Thinking that I needed a baseline for reference, I chose a D12-7 for the first launch of the day. After prepping the rocket I took note of the conditions and made an entry in my flight book.

Rocket..............Star Fire
Motor...............D12-7, Estes solar ignitor, 12 volt ignition, wrapped tape retention and thrust ring
Recovery.........10" nylon parachute
Wadding.........none, uses Nomex® shield
Weather.........5,000 Sct , E12,000 Bkn Vsby unlmtd, Temp, 85 Wnd SW@ 4G10 kts RMKS ACSL OVR MTNS S
Flight..............near instantaneous ignition, straight boost, no weathercocking. Rocket arched down wind slightly, at apogee, nose cone popped off, but no 'chute deployment. Rocket went into a shallow flat spin and fell hard onto the ground (packed dirt).

Damage consisted of two broken wing-tip fins and a main fin loosened at the body-tube. Clearly, my fillet failed. No other damage. Rocket is repairable and will fly again. Careful post-flight analysis finds fault with the Nomex® shield. While the idea is excellent, the actual shield takes up a great deal of space in the BT. In addition, the material is coarse and rather thick. As a result it is very "draggie" for want of a better word. ( Sure, I know, it "has a high friction coefficient" but that sounds too over-the top)

I was worried about this having seen this exact same failure in 2 out of eight earlier flights with Mach Busters and another of the Rugged Rocket line. You have to be very careful in packing the recovery system. There is just not much room in these rockets. In the future, I may abandon the Nomex® shield altogether in favor of good ol' wadding. I seem to have difficulty in using this feature with any degree of reliability. Others may and do, fair much better but I just can't seem to get the hang of it.

Flight Rating: 4 out of 5

In short, the rocket flew beautifully. It was a straight, clean, non-rotating boost. Although recovery went astray, the rocket was RUGGED. I've seen few rockets that could survive a flat-spin onto hard packed dirt and need so little in the way of repair. These are very good rockets and I highly recommend them.

Overall Rating: 4 out of 5