Altering motors

I'd say that adding a little BP as a staging aid is as legitimate as using those "staging wick" igniters that some manufacturers had supplied in the past.

Consumable materials added for the purpose of igniting the motor so that it may burn in the manner intended by the manufacturer should not be viewed as "modifications"... otherwise one might argue that using a dipped e-match instead of a copperhead to light an Aerotech motor is "unsafe because it differs from the manufacturer's intended configuration..."

-dave w

Well, I have kind of looked at it in that light too but everyone is so concerned with violating the rules and insurance requirements. I just don't want to be a violator. We need to play by the rules so to speak, but there are times when the rules aren't clear. Kind of comes down to who you talk to, and on what day. The answer might be different tomorrow.

Randy

It is NOT modifying the motor and the rocket is still electrically ignited.

That's friggin phunnie!

And who narcs on you And who judges you And if ANYONE at all is checking the validity of the claims.

I agree. The examples given (adding bp to ignite a sustainer; using dipped igniters) do not alter the form or function of the motor in any way.

I'd like to know who that everyone is ? The rocket Gastapo ?

Your opinion is not determinitive.

I think the situation is that some of us see rockets as inherently "nearly illegal" (i.e., closely related to things which the government is so determined to have its regulatory way over that one doesn't even want to think of daring to argue the matter), and are therefore desperate to have a carefully-defined "niche of special permission within the universe of generic prohibition" such that they can reassure themselves that their hobby won't end up with them "guilty of being accused" of some sort of "Explosives" or "Fireworks" violation.

In other words, we become like children, desperate for defined rules to assuage our fears of "getting in trouble", instead of like Americans, selective about giving that "consent of the governed" from which the government "derives its just power".

-dave w

VERY well said, sir.

Jerry

I think you defined the rules lawyers in that post.

However, that does not explain in any way, why hobbies that deal with items that are 3478% more dangerous then rockets don't act the way we do.

When was the last time the 50 Caliber BMG club acted like the rockeeters ?

How about the high power rifle club ?

or those guys that party in texas with night full auto gun shoots and tanerite targets ?

Now before you think that's silly, your city, or any other, has more gun club members then rocket club members.

They play with more potent toys then we do, yet the rocket guys are always hang wringing about stuff and they dont.

THIS SHOULD BE IN THE FAQ.

Needlepoint club.

You just answered your own question. There are millions of gun owners and only a few thousand high power rocketry hobbyists. They have more clout than we do. They also have one of the rights specifically mentioned in the Bill of Rights.

And despite those two obvious advantages, gun owners are still heavily regulated.

That's Tripoli's fault for imposing and enforcing LEMP requirements on ALL motor vendors who make motors BORN REGULATED as a result. The net effect is the death of lone rangers (90-95% of the market) due to INTERNAL club rule.

Jerry

My only concern was the LCO/RSO at a club launch. Not the feds, etc. I just want to comply with the rules we have all had for the last 40 years. No more, no less.

Randy

The CLUB rules change regularly, mostly toward the vague or worse. The INTERPRETATION of the club rules changes DAILY.

There is no 40 years except in Federal regulations, and the "spirit of the safety code", which is singularly responsible for the EXEMPLARY safety record of consumer rocketry.

Jerry

Seems we're in saying the same thing and in agreement on this much and that's what prompted the original question.

Absolutely we agree. The spirit is what I'm want>I'd say that adding a little BP as a staging aid is as legitimate as using

Which pretty much was what I wanted another opinion on. There really shouldn't be a reason to deny a flight opportunity, based on adding a small amount of 4F to the top of a C6-0, to aid in ignition of the next stage.

I know there are several Randy

If I were RSO, I'd say that you were probably reducing the risk of a lawn dart due to an unignited upper stage...

-dave w

Declare it an igniter helper and you should be good.

NAR does not require cert of igniters.

Jerry

This is beyond FAQ fodder. It is religion. For that we certainly have G Harry Stine and his collegues to thank.

His first safety code gave "motor making tips" BTW.

Jerry

Have 6 stiff drinks in his honor. He would have.