alternative to Hatch/Kohl 724 in the works

You mean we only get one? That's it?

THE WORLD IS COMING TO AN END!

AAAAAAGH!

Zooty

(running and hiding in cellar)

They won't even do the sorry part, but it sounded funny in my head.

Joel. phx

But Radar is a meek, skinny, little guy.

CHUP: Cloud Chamber Users Permit

My little Alpha source will be so disappo>On 24 Jul 2003 20:42:43 -0700, snipped-for-privacy@tda.com (Brad Hitch) wrote: >

CHUP: Cloud Chamber Users Permit

My little Alpha source will be so disappo>On 24 Jul 2003 20:42:43 -0700, snipped-for-privacy@tda.com (Brad Hitch) wrote: >

CHUP: Cloud Chamber Users Permit

My little Alpha source will be so disappo>On 24 Jul 2003 20:42:43 -0700, snipped-for-privacy@tda.com (Brad Hitch) wrote: >

You really are a fool aren't you. Isn't the law suit ONLY for APCP? What about all the other propellant systems out there that either are used, or could be used?

Rocketry is not just about the NAR and TRA, nor is it just about model and high power rocketry. Amateurs and experimenters are the real people that need to be protected, just as much or more so then high power fliers. If every person who wanted to experiment with a new idea needed to jump through a billion legal hoops to develop a new useful technology, nothing would ever get done.

Letting the NAR supposedly fix our problems will set rocketry back who knows how many years. If the NAR had their way every person who so much as mixes up a sugar propellant motor would be thrown in jail.

Pax

HEEEEERE kitty, kitty, kitty....

"Joel Corwith"

---------

Key word here is... page three.

HDS

How do you support such a statement?

You should take your own advice: "You really are a fool aren't you. Isn't the law suit ONLY for APCP?"

-John

Hardly. That might have been the attitude 20 years ago, but not for a LONG time now. NAR has changed BIG TIME since the late 80s regarding new and different technologies. It probably started when G Harry made his little speech at NARAM-29 (plus or minus a couple). I was shocked at how fast NAR accepted reloadable motors. Faster than TRA.

Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD!

Is that a new Estes rocket, on an old E? : )

Randy

YANKEE! ; )

Randy

So maybe it was a little bit of an exaggeration, but I still don't belive that they like the idea now. They certainly don't want AM/EX at their launches. My earlier statement might be a couple years old, but I haven't seem anything that showed they are all for AM/EX now. Seems they tolerate it's existance only because they have to and people haven't been dropping dead like crazy.

I guess it doesn't matter either way, but regardless, letting a hobby organization fix all of private rocketry is a bit foolish either way.

Pax

Point. I suspect that the BATFE is not concerned at all about recreational rocketry, but that using rocketry for education and R&D scares the hell out of them. While we like to point out the educational and scientific benifits of hobby rocketry, that may be counter productive.

Alan Fear is the mind killer.

Both NAR and TRA charters define their scope as COMMERCIALLY MADE rocket motors. NAR follows it's rules. TRA does not. NAR has no problems with what I do outside their activities. And doesn't ask 98% of the organization to subsidize overpriced insurance for the 2%.

Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD!

What scares the hell out of the JBGTs is what kook might do with big rocket motors. But using them in illegal acts is already illegal. And the BATFE is not authorized to regulate delivery trucks, or you'd need a BATFE permit to rent a truck or fly an airplane or mail a package.

Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD!

Hey, I resent that. I've lived up north my whole life, and I don't drink unsweetened tea ( yuk). If you haven't figured it out by now, Tod.................is.................just................plain............ .....weird ;-)

That is my belief, as well; It's the rockets, stupid...

I have been trying to figure out which Department actually assesses terrorist threats given the HSA reorganization and the obvious incompetence of the DOJ in assessing hobby rocket motor threats. BATFE went over to Justice, but it is not listed as a Division under the Department of Homeland Security.

I was struck by a "mission" statement at the atf.gov site:

It says that, "ATF's mission is to protect this country and its citizens from the threat of terrorism and violent crime."

That's not BATFE's job according to the CFR which established their jurisdiction over "Commerce in Explosives". Violent crime; okay. Terrorist threats; no way.

Essentially, BATFE is responsible for regulations promoting a safe and efficient industrial/economic infrastructure for items under their control, and to help fight organized crime. Implementing infrastructure regulations based upon changing and poorly perceived terrorist threats is contrary to maintaining a stable and efficient infrastructure. No doubt, temporary regulations may be required and necessary. But those can be enacted by DHS on an as-needed basis.

It is counter-productive to have a regulatory agency in the business of terror threat assessment. The ATF had it's own enforcement division precisely because of the unique nature of BATFE regulatory impact.

Having BATFE doing terrorist assessment and basing regulatory decisions on terror threats is playing directly into the hands of the terrorists; their actions are changing our society in fundamental ways as we react, by way of infrastructure regulations, to their threats, real or perceived. And the skewed perception of those threats exhibited by BATFE/DOJ in regards to hobby rocket motors demonstrates the subsequent regulations will be just as skewed and ineffective. GIGO.

I'm about to communicate this view to my elected officials. Thoughts or comments?