Adjusting Aerotech delays

  Quoted Text Here  

Trying to set a new standard for spewing shit Brian?
At least you are good at SOMETHING.

Oh well, so much for distracting people from bickering with some humor....
Too bad, so sad.

  Quoted Text Here  
:)

Then I got exactly what I wanted, twice, by chance?
Both would have zippered or worse (plastic chute) if I would have followed the instructions exactly. Interesting. I have three more of the same vintage E18W-10's left. Gonna have to see how they behave.
  Quoted Text Here  

  Quoted Text Here  
Phunnie, eh?

Jerry Irvine wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
How do you "know" that? Where's your proof?
  Quoted Text Here  
Hogwash! I fly lots of AT motors and have found their delays to be very reliable. I've also seen plenty of AT motors flown by others without having any delay problems.
This is just another example of Jerry making up crap just to slam a perceived "enemy".


In article snipped-for-privacy@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com, snipped-for-privacy@aol.com at snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote on 6/8/05 2:15 PM:
  Quoted Text Here  
Thanks for the feedback Ray!
Jerry, consider this a challenge. Please stop badmouthing AeroTech/RCS and start speaking positive things. You might be pleased and surprised at the results.
FYI, The product being produced by the Cedar City facility and crew is superb. Warranty issues are currently running less than 1% for AeroTech products...actually closer to 0.1%. Also, most dealer orders are being filled within 1-2 weeks, many in just a few days.
Gary

Gary wrote,
  Quoted Text Here  
You too huh? :-) I love QC stats.
Anthony J. Cesaroni President/CEO Cesaroni Technology/Cesaroni Aerospace http://www.cesaronitech.com / (905) 887-2370 x222 Toronto (941) 360-3100 x101 Sarasota (410) 571-8292 Annapolis
wrote on 6/8/05 2:15 PM:
  Quoted Text Here  

  Quoted Text Here  
That is sensationally good news.

On Thu, 09 Jun 2005 01:13:52 GMT, "Gary C. Rosenfield"
  Quoted Text Here  
If Jerry wasn't slamming you, people might get suspicious.

  Quoted Text Here  
It is not slamming to discuss well known "anecdotal" evidence. I respect Gary's reporting of his REPORTED reliability figures. But I know as well as anyone many defects are simply not reported.
Well, except on rmr.
Jerry

Jerry Irvine wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
It IS slamming when you allege that "bonus delays" are "common", despite the fact that you're the only one who thinks they are common. No one else so far has backed that claim. It's also slamming when you falsely assert that a manufacturer is violating NFPA regs just because one person reported slow ignition of an old motor.
i

  Quoted Text Here  
They are more common than Aerotech is reporting.
Due to the sheer volume of motors, reports of failures are common.
  Quoted Text Here  
However, it is true and not only for a single old motor report either.
Your misdirection aside.
Jerry

Jerry Irvine wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
I'm not talking about what AT reports, I'm talking about what I've witnessed and what other flyers have witnessed. I've seen no evidence to support your claim that bonus delays are "common", and no one but you seems to be claiming it.
  Quoted Text Here  
No, it is NOT true. You have failed to produce a shred of evidence showing that NFPA regulates the speed at which a motor comes up to pressure after it has been ignited. You can't, because there is no such reg. All you've done is quote the code regulating launch systems and igniters.
On top of that, you've also conveniently ignored the fact that any manufacturer's motor could experience a slow ignition due to age, a weak igniter, a misplaced igniter, or other factors. I've witnessed more than one occasion where your own motors have been slow coming up to pressure -- another fact you casually dismiss in your hypocritical attempt to badmouth AT.
,

"Gary C. Rosenfield" wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
What's the typical turnaround time for warranty replacements?
Could the instructions be changed to include the liner's length? Or another doc added to the web site with that info?
Dean

In article snipped-for-privacy@null.com, Dean at snipped-for-privacy@null.com wrote on 6/15/05 10:31 AM:
  Quoted Text Here  
Usually a few days to a week. Contact Craig at snipped-for-privacy@aerotech-rocketry.com.
  Quoted Text Here  
How's this?
RMS-18/20 2.093 RMS-24/40 2.030 RMS-29/40-120 4.140 RMS-R/C 18/20 2.100 RMS-R/C 24-20-40 2.030 RMS-R/C 32/60-100 2.860 RMS-29/60 1.538 RMS-29/100 2.538 RMS-29/120 3.548 RMS-29/180 5.298 RMS-29/240 7.058 RMS-29/360 10.780 RMS-38/120 1.875 RMS-38/240 3.750 RMS-38/360 5.625 RMS-38/480 7.500 RMS-38/600 9.375 RMS-38/720 11.250 RMS-38/1080 16.875 RMS-54/852 6.950 RMS-54/1280 10.280 RMS-54/1706 13.610 RMS-54/2560 20.270 RMS-75/2560 11.062 RMS-75/3840 16.375 RMS-75/5120 21.688 RMS-75/6400 27.000 RMS-98/2560 6.625 RMS-98/5120 12.688 RMS-98/7680 18.750 RMS-98/10240 24.813 RMS-98/15360 36.938 RMS-98/18000 44.375
I'll add it to the site eventually.
Gary

snipped-for-privacy@aol.com says...
  Quoted Text Here  
I don't think I have ever seen a H123-S that wasn't short. Some of them VERY short.

  Quoted Text Here  

  Quoted Text Here  
What he said. I've had a handful of "un-bonus" delays, all on 38mm WL reloads.
    Bob Kaplow    NAR # 18L    TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD"         >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD! <<< Kaplow Klips & Baffle:    http://nira-rocketry.org/LeadingEdge/Phantom4000.pdf www.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/ www.nira-rocketry.org www.nar.org
This is a country which stands tallest in troubled times, a country that clings to fundamental principles, cherishes its constitutional heritage, and rejects simple solutions that compromise the values that lie at the roots of our democratic system. -- Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall, 1972

kaplow snipped-for-privacy@encompasserve.org.TRABoD (Bob Kaplow) wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
So long as they are under 2 seconds short they are "legal".
Short of what one might ask?
Jerry
"That is absolute bs & shouldn't happen (except to maybe a few people that we know.)"