[Planet News] Risk of Impact Injury Prompts Recall of Estes Model Rockets
|
|
Thread rating:  |
Planet News - 28 Sep 2007 19:49 GMT For Immediate Release Firm’s Recall Hotline: (800) 576-5811 September 28, 2007 CPSC Recall Hotline: (800) 638-2772 Release #07-For Clearance CPSC Media Contact: (301) 504-7908
WASHINGTON, D.C. – The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with the firm named below, today announced a voluntary recall of the following consumer product. Consumers should stop using recalled products immediately unless otherwise instructed. (To access color photos of the following recalled products, see CPSC’s Web site at www.cpsc.gov.)
Name of Product: X-15 Flying Model Rockets
Units: About 80,000
Manufacturer: Estes-Cox Corp., of Penrose, Colo.
Hazard: The model rocket’s side or engine retainer ring can separate and cause the rocket to fall without the nose cone separating and the parachute deploying, posing a risk of an impact injury to nearby consumers.
Incidents/Injuries: Estes-Cox has received seven reports of the side or engine retainer ring separating and the nose and parachute failing to release and 25 reports of the retainer ring being lost during flight, including one report that a consumer was struck in the arm, requiring surgery.
Description: This recall involves the X-15 flying model rocket, a 1:44 scale version of the North American Aviation hypersonic rocket plane. The model rockets are about 13.5-inches long and have a wingspan of about 5 inches. The rockets are black and yellow, and have the number 66670 on the tail. The rockets were sold individually (item #1890) and as part of a starter kit (item #1412). The item number is printed on the product’s instruction sheet and above the bar code on the product’s packaging.
Sold at: Hobby stores and other retailers nationwide from June 2005 through July 2007 for between $16 and $36.
Manufactured in: China
Remedy: Consumers should stop using the recalled rockets immediately and contact Estes-Cox for instructions on receiving a replacement product.
Consumer Contact: For additional information, contact Estes-Cox at (800) 576-5811 between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. MT Monday through Friday, or visit the firm’s Web site at www.estesrockets.com.
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission is charged with protecting the public from unreasonable risks of serious injury or death from more than 15,000 types of consumer products under the agency’s jurisdiction. Deaths, injuries and property damage from consumer product incidents cost the nation more than $700 billion annually. The CPSC is committed to protecting consumers and families from products that pose a fire, electrical, chemical, or mechanical hazard. The CPSC’s work to ensure the safety of consumer products - such as toys, cribs, power tools, cigarette lighters, and household chemicals – contributed significantly to the 30 percent decline in the rate of deaths and injuries associated with consumer products over the past 30 years.
To report a dangerous product or a product-related injury, call CPSC’s hotline at (800) 638-2772 or CPSC’s teletypewriter at (800) 638-8270 or visit CPSC’s Web site at www.cpsc.gov/talk.html. Consumers can obtain this release and recall information at CPSC’s Web site at www.cpsc.gov.
 Signature At first there was just one planet. And then there were two...
Rocketry Planet (http://www.rocketryplanet.com) and now Our Planet (http://our.rocketryplanet.com)!
Fred Wallace - 29 Sep 2007 14:09 GMT Don't you just love it: Another US company feeling the sting, as a result of getting sucked into producing products through the China junk making connection. I wonder if NAR insurance will pay out, if another product related accident causes liability. I can hear the lawyers already, salivating at the earning potential. I know, shouldn't be so cynical.
> For Immediate Release Firm’s Recall Hotline: (800) 576-5811 > September 28, 2007 CPSC Recall Hotline: (800) 638-2772 [quoted text clipped - 60 lines] > visit CPSC’s Web site at www.cpsc.gov/talk.html. Consumers can obtain > this release and recall information at CPSC’s Web site at www.cpsc.gov. Tim Smith - 29 Sep 2007 15:29 GMT > Don't you just love it: Another US company feeling the sting, as a result > of getting sucked into producing products through the China junk making > connection. I wonder if NAR insurance will pay out, if another product > related accident causes liability. I can hear the lawyers already, > salivating at the earning potential. I know, shouldn't be so cynical. RSO's take notice!
Tim
Darrell D. Mobley - 30 Sep 2007 00:01 GMT > Don't you just love it: Another US company feeling the sting, as a > result of getting sucked into producing products through the China junk > making connection. I wonder if NAR insurance will pay out, if another > product related accident causes liability. I can hear the lawyers > already, salivating at the earning potential. I know, shouldn't be so > cynical. Careful, Fred. There are even more hobbyists who are just dying for a chance to call someone a xenophobe. :-\
 Signature At first there was just one planet. And then there were two...
Rocketry Planet (http://www.rocketryplanet.com) and now Our Planet (http://our.rocketryplanet.com)!
Fred Wallace - 30 Sep 2007 00:54 GMT >> Don't you just love it: Another US company feeling the sting, as a >> result of getting sucked into producing products through the China [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Careful, Fred. There are even more hobbyists who are just dying for a > chance to call someone a xenophobe. :-\ You should not fear that which is based on fact in evidence. However, some of my best friends are foreign and my Swiss Army watch is actually made in Switzerland. (:-)
Tweak - 01 Oct 2007 13:25 GMT > > Don't you just love it: Another US company feeling the sting, as a > > result of getting sucked into producing products through the China junk [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Careful, Fred. There are even more hobbyists who are just dying for a > chance to call someone a xenophobe. :-\ Anyone know where I can get some lead cheaply?
 Signature Tweak
Phil Stein - 01 Oct 2007 17:34 GMT >> > Don't you just love it: Another US company feeling the sting, as a >> > result of getting sucked into producing products through the China junk [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >> >Anyone know where I can get some lead cheaply? I use concrete. Disposing of it is more friendly to the environment, it's easier to find and it's cheaper.
Tweak - 01 Oct 2007 17:49 GMT > >> > Don't you just love it: Another US company feeling the sting, as a > >> > result of getting sucked into producing products through the China junk [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > I use concrete. Disposing of it is more friendly to the environment, > it's easier to find and it's cheaper. But will the Chinese ship it to you, and include it for free with your favorite toys?
I thought not.
(I'm gonna smack you with a clue by four, Phil)
;-)
 Signature Tweak
Phil Stein - 01 Oct 2007 19:47 GMT >But will the Chinese ship it to you, and include it for free with your >favorite toys? [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >;-) That lead was probably supposed to be in bullets that the US Government bought from the Chinese. I'm trying to figure out what they did with the chicken missing from the chicken and broccoli I ordered.
Tweak - 01 Oct 2007 20:07 GMT > >But will the Chinese ship it to you, and include it for free with your > >favorite toys? [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > they did with the chicken missing from the chicken and broccoli I > ordered. Painted it with lead paint and sold it as toys, of course.
 Signature Tweak
Eekamouse - 30 Sep 2007 02:30 GMT > I wonder if NAR insurance will pay out, if another product related accident causes liability. Why would NAR insurance have to pay anything?
NAR insurance covers NAR members and NAR sanctioned launches, it doesn't cover Wal-Mart customers who buy Estes RTF X-15 plastic junk.
I doubt more than 0.1% of these X-15's were purchased by NAR members, anyway... and 99% of THEM are going to recognize a problem and fix it before flying a faulty rocket, anyway.
p.s. Estes, if you're reading this... the classic metal "engine hook" is an elegant, reliable motor retention system proven through hundreds of millions of launches. It is still the predominant retention system for a reason - it works. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Plastic twist-lock retaining rings are weak and prone to user error, and degrade (i.e. melt) with repeated use. Don't wait until some product liability lawyer has to point out this obvious fact to you in court.
Fred Wallace - 30 Sep 2007 03:37 GMT >>I wonder if NAR insurance will pay out, if another product related accident causes liability.
> Why would NAR insurance have to pay anything? > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > p.s. <SNIPPED> So are you saying that to few NAR members will or have used this product @ NAR sanctioned launches to be concerned? Where did you come up with the 0.1% figure--guess work or based on fact in evidence? I doubt the latter. As someone else has stated, "RSO's take notice". While I agree, NAR has no liability for Joe bag of doughnuts, rocket launching in the city park, NAR section events are a different matter all together.
Fred
Eekamouse - 30 Sep 2007 18:47 GMT > Where did you come up with the 0.1% figure--guess work or based on fact in evidence? The same place you got the theory that NAR insurance might have to pay out where it's clearly a product liability issue.
I pulled it out of my a.s.
There were 80,000 units involved. There are HOW MANY active NAR members? Of these, HOW MANY own these X-15's?
Fred Wallace - 30 Sep 2007 19:27 GMT >>Where did you come up with the 0.1% figure--guess work or based on fact in evidence? > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > There were 80,000 units involved. There are HOW MANY active > NAR members? Of these, HOW MANY own these X-15's? My speculation on a potential outcome, in this case, is based on fact in evidence as previously explained, which you snipped out; "While I agree, NAR has no liability for Joe bag of doughnuts, rocket launching in the city park, NAR section events are a different matter all together".
When you spit out numbers, be prepared back it up; which you just did. Nothing more to say on the issue, unless pushed. Please move on.
John Wickman - 29 Sep 2007 17:31 GMT > For Immediate Release Firm's Recall Hotline: (800) 576-5811 > September 28, 2007 CPSC Recall Hotline: (800) 638-2772 [quoted text clipped - 65 lines] > Rocketry Planet (http://www.rocketryplanet.com) and now Our Planet > (http://our.rocketryplanet.com)! Hey, all rocketry can be dangerous, even water rockets. Check out the link below or search "Toy Rocket" on google video. This guy wasn't struck in the arm, but in a more vulnerable spot. I bet he was walking funny after this incident. :-0
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2259210955102989371&q=toy+rocket&total= 357&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0
John Wickman
Phil Stein - 29 Sep 2007 18:33 GMT >Hey, all rocketry can be dangerous, even water rockets. Check out the >link below or search "Toy Rocket" on google video. This guy wasn't [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >John Wickman This calls for a NAR blue Ribbon Commission. ;-)
R J Talley - 29 Sep 2007 22:44 GMT Is this really any worse than those Star Wars X-Wing fighter gizmos with the all plastic bodies and the steel dart in the nose? Or, how about the infamous unstable shuttle or as it was otherwise known, the "hey, heads up" rocket. In case you forgot, it's the one Fred and company out at the Santa Fe Rec area would not permit at their launches. Dang, I wish Estes would pull its head out of their you-know-whats and make good rockets again. I'm tired of plastic skill level "zip" kits.
 Signature R J Talley Teacher/James Madison Fellow "What? Me Worry? Alfred E Newman
stealthboogie - 30 Sep 2007 10:50 GMT > Is this really any worse than those Star Wars X-Wing fighter gizmos with the > all plastic bodies and the steel dart in the nose? Or, how about the [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > pull its head out of their you-know-whats and make good rockets again. I'm > tired of plastic skill level "zip" kits. Aside from my other opinion on this topic... I'm in agreement in that I hate the "level 0" (aka RTF) kits. They are just another example of the liberal "dumbing down of America".
DSC'
Phil Stein - 30 Sep 2007 15:22 GMT >> Is this really any worse than those Star Wars X-Wing fighter gizmos with the >> all plastic bodies and the steel dart in the nose? Or, how about the [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > >DSC' Do you know how many people grab an RTF complete with launch pad, controller & motors off the shelf and go fly the same day? Then they are hooked on rocketry. I don't know how many but I did that with my son and we both got into it. I don't think we're the only ones.
R J Talley - 30 Sep 2007 19:27 GMT You have a point Phil. I just wish there were more of the old skill-type kits. There seems to be so much plastic being flown. It has it's place but the actual buildable kits took so much imagination and patience.... I actually got more out of building the kit than flying it. I long for more of that.
 Signature R J Talley Teacher/James Madison Fellow "What? Me Worry? Alfred E Newman
Phil Stein - 30 Sep 2007 23:52 GMT >You have a point Phil. I just wish there were more of the old skill-type >kits. There seems to be so much plastic being flown. It has it's place but >the actual buildable kits took so much imagination and patience.... I >actually got more out of building the kit than flying it. I long for more of >that. People have to start somewhere - RTF is an easy way to start. Anyone serious will get tired of RTF pretty fast.
Tater - 01 Oct 2007 02:28 GMT > You have a point Phil. I just wish there were more of the old skill-type > kits. There seems to be so much plastic being flown. It has it's place but you can always go to JimZ's site and scratchbuild.....
built a couple that way myself, but there are others besides Estes who do some great kits.
Phil Stein - 01 Oct 2007 14:09 GMT >> You have a point Phil. I just wish there were more of the old skill-type >> kits. There seems to be so much plastic being flown. It has it's place but [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >built a couple that way myself, but there are others besides Estes who >do some great kits. Like Qwest, Dr. Zooch, Flis and asTater said - many others
R J Talley - 02 Oct 2007 01:16 GMT That's pretty much what I do these days.
 Signature R J Talley Teacher/James Madison Fellow "What? Me Worry? Alfred E Newman
stealthboogie - 03 Oct 2007 01:39 GMT On Sep 30, 10:22?am, Phil Stein <PSt...@ArielSystems.spamsks.net> wrote:
> Do you know how many people grab an RTF complete with launch pad, > controller & motors off the shelf and go fly the same day? Then they > are hooked on rocketry. I don't know how many but I did that with my > son and we both got into it. I don't think we're the only ones. BINGO! I've seen your construction techniques and I think they're crap - which kinda of makes my point that RTF's suck, because kids (er um Dads) don't learn early on how to build correctly... if at all.
Case in point... how does one attach rail buttons to an M powered Rocket? Why with wood screws through cardboard tubing of course. ;)
Doug
Phil Stein - 03 Oct 2007 11:46 GMT >On Sep 30, 10:22?am, Phil Stein <PSt...@ArielSystems.spamsks.net> >wrote: [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > >Doug Difference between you and I is that I get the facts before I start typing. Another example of you being a little man with a big keyboard.
Bob Kaplow - 01 Oct 2007 19:53 GMT > Is this really any worse than those Star Wars X-Wing fighter gizmos with the > all plastic bodies and the steel dart in the nose? Or, how about the [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > pull its head out of their you-know-whats and make good rockets again. I'm > tired of plastic skill level "zip" kits. Those star wars x-wing suckers were dangerous. NIORA once had 6 cub scouts hsow up with them. 5 didn't survive one flight, and one punched a hole through someone's sun shade. IIRC it was the first time we ever banned a model. But I remember the X-15 from back inthe 70s when it first came out. After seeing one lawn dart in an asphalt parking lot and survive undamaged I dubbed it the "most dangerous model rocket ever made". Nothing has changed.
 Signature Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L >>> To reply, there's no internet on Mars (yet)! <<< Kaplow Klips & Baffle: http://www.nira-rocketry.org/Document/Phantom4000.pdf www.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/ www.nira-rocketry.org www.nar.org
Sir, if I was building a weapon of mass destruction, you wouldn't be able to find it.
shreadvector - 01 Oct 2007 20:23 GMT On Oct 1, 11:53 am, kaplo...@encompasserve.org.mars (Bob Kaplow) wrote:
> In article <46fec618$0$24313$4c368...@roadrunner.com>, "R J Talley" <o...@ca.rr.com> writes: > [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > Sir, if I was building a weapon of mass destruction, > you wouldn't be able to find it. Bob, Are you talking about the mini Estes X-15 from the 70's or the Cox 18mm motor powered X-15 from the 70's? The Cox version is the one recently re-introduced with the COX eliminated from the mold. Performance of Cox and Estes labelled items are identical per many flights by Bob Sanford over several decades.
The Rocket Scientist - 01 Oct 2007 21:07 GMT > On Oct 1, 11:53 am, kaplo...@encompasserve.org.mars (Bob Kaplow) > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > Performance of Cox and Estes labelled items are identical per many > flights by Bob Sanford over several decades. I bought one of the Estes/Cox X-15's back when Estes first re- introduced them in the 80's. It was a piece of fecal matter. It was poorly constructed (I mean, it was glued together crookedly!) and when flown with the recommended motor, it land-sharked! I mean, it looked like the landing scene of "When Worlds Collide" only with dirt instead of snow. I complained to Estes and panned it in PARA's newsletter. You can see how far my complaint got.
Bill Sullivan
Phil Stein - 02 Oct 2007 13:36 GMT >> On Oct 1, 11:53 am, kaplo...@encompasserve.org.mars (Bob Kaplow) >> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] > >Bill Sullivan Hey Bill-
There's a PARA launch this Sunday. Hope you can make it.
Phil
The Rocket Scientist - 02 Oct 2007 20:46 GMT > On Mon, 01 Oct 2007 13:07:21 -0700, The Rocket Scientist > [quoted text clipped - 48 lines] > > Phil I promise not to bring the X-15. :-)
PhillipCannatti - 08 Oct 2008 23:05 GMT I need to talk to the 'Rocket Scientist' (Bill Sullivan) about the Estes-Cox X-15. I would like to learn more about complaint to Estes and op-ed in PARA's news letter. PCannatti@GodwinRonquillo.com
>> On Oct 1, 11:53 am, kaplo...@encompasserve.org.mars (Bob Kaplow) >> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > >Bill Sullivan randyolb@windstream.net - 01 Oct 2007 23:49 GMT We have a Cox X-15 and never had a problem with the retainer. The problem comes from the bt being so small, tight and internally snag prone, after 2 flights I decided to never let anyone (the kids) other than myself fly prep it. It flys well and looks great but Bob is right, if the chute fails it could puncture a car hood.
Randy www.vernarockets.com
R J Talley - 02 Oct 2007 01:22 GMT Bob Sanford, now that's a blast from the past. I bought one of his Flippy-Fin folding fin cans about 10 years ago. The rocket built from it was tube launched on a G55 Dang, dang dang and double dang, that was one cool rocket.
 Signature R J Talley Teacher/James Madison Fellow "What? Me Worry? Alfred E Newman
shreadvector - 02 Oct 2007 17:27 GMT > Bob Sanford, now that's a blast from the past. I bought one of his > Flippy-Fin folding fin cans about 10 years ago. The rocket built from it was [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Teacher/James Madison Fellow > "What? Me Worry? Alfred E Newman Bob is a Blast from the Present. He attends MANY launches all year long as well as NARAM virtually every year.
He autographs Initiators as well. I can supply a Sharpie if needed.
Bob Kaplow - 03 Oct 2007 04:41 GMT > Bob, Are you talking about the mini Estes X-15 from the 70's or the > Cox 18mm motor powered X-15 from the 70's? The Cox version is the one > recently re-introduced with the COX eliminated from the mold. > Performance of Cox and Estes labelled items are identical per many > flights by Bob Sanford over several decades. They were both equally bad :-(
 Signature Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L >>> To reply, there's no internet on Mars (yet)! <<< Kaplow Klips & Baffle: http://www.nira-rocketry.org/Document/Phantom4000.pdf www.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/ www.nira-rocketry.org www.nar.org
Sir, if I was building a weapon of mass destruction, you wouldn't be able to find it.
Larry Curcio - 30 Sep 2007 17:03 GMT Oh my God! We better recall Little League Baseball too!
-Larry (Imprisoned his 10-year-old to protect him from moths) Curcio
R J Talley - 30 Sep 2007 19:32 GMT Don't laugh, there have been legal issues surrounding baseball. There is for example, a safer ball for kids under 13 to use but parents have refused to use it because, (this is really precious) it can't be hit as far! Of course, it is still plenty lively but it is also measurably safe to be beaned on the sconce with too. Having coached Little league for many years I can tell you, kids who play ball are going to be hit and some of those kids are going to be hurt badly. Moving to a safe ball during the developing years of a kid's athletic ability is smart. Unfortunately, parents often get their priorities wrong.
 Signature R J Talley Teacher/James Madison Fellow "What? Me Worry? Alfred E Newman
Al€x Mericas - 01 Oct 2007 17:18 GMT > beaned on the sconce with too. Having coached Little league for many years I > can tell you, kids who play ball are going to be hit and some of those kids > are going to be hurt badly. Moving to a safe ball during the developing > years of a kid's athletic ability is smart. Unfortunately, parents often get > their priorities wrong. Too many parents enroll their kids in sports for the parent's benefit. Too many parents do everything for the parent's benefit.
I can see the benefit of safer equipment during the developing years. I'd rather see a kid stay in baseball but not hit home runs than quit baseball because he/she was beaned a few times by a regulation hard ball. This is no different than the progression of T-ball, coach pitch, kid pitch.
Mark Hamilton - 30 Sep 2007 21:19 GMT > Oh my God! We better recall Little League Baseball too! > > -Larry (Imprisoned his 10-year-old to protect him from moths) Curcio Yeah. When was the last time a rocket did this?
http://www.thestate.com/local/story/187629.html
Mark E. Hamilton NAR #48641-SR
Tater - 30 Sep 2007 04:48 GMT > Name of Product: X-15 Flying Model Rockets heh, I got a quest one on the shelf waiting for building.
currently elbows deep in repair of a Hobbylabs blackbird, anyone know where the CG is supposed to be?
stealthboogie - 30 Sep 2007 10:32 GMT > > Hazard: The model rocket's side or engine retainer ring can separate and > cause the rocket to fall without the nose cone separating and the > parachute deploying, posing a risk of an impact injury to nearby consumers.Manufacturer: Estes-Cox Corp., of Penrose, Colo. Yup... I'm scared... a "A", "B", "C" ??? powered rocket coming at me. Give me a Freaking break. You know I'm so f.cking sick of you a.shole liberals that want to help me and the "children". Quick Lets get Dan Rather on the story. ;)
DSC
Phil Stein - 30 Sep 2007 15:17 GMT >> > Hazard: The model rocket's side or engine retainer ring can separate and >> cause the rocket to fall without the nose cone separating and the [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >DSC You Doug-
Give it a rest before some Liberal comes up there and teaches you some manners. Aside from and not wanting to have a MD C poke me in the eye, that I agree with what you're saying.
Phil
X-Plane Fan - 19 Oct 2007 21:29 GMT > For Immediate Release Firm's Recall Hotline: (800) 576-5811 > September 28, 2007 CPSC Recall Hotline: (800) 638-2772 [quoted text clipped - 65 lines] > Rocketry Planet (http://www.rocketryplanet.com) and now Our Planet > (http://our.rocketryplanet.com)! This really isn't something new with this X-15 model. The original release of this by Cox many years back resulted in the same issue. Really easy fix though, just split the model right on the seam, place a cardboard tube inside which fits the smaller engines (no cutting necessary) glue the two halves back together and you have one great flying rocket. I have some 40+ successful flights on mine.
Tony
|
|
|