anyone see this? ATF trying to say motorsa are not PADs

And there is always Hybrids. No Permit Required.

.

You implementing your policies almost got you thrown in jail..

I agree.

HPR was killed by the model rocketry folks.

Had HPR simply had any national advocate association with ethics and courage, HPR would have achieved its early promise. It was at critical mass in 1992.

It is, however, well dead now.

Jerry

That is next on the ATF hit parade. Intended use.

ken: can you point me to any online resources regarding this?

shockie B)

What do they intend to do? Define the production of thrust by the release of flowing gas (however produced) as an instance of "functioning by explosion"?

I guess all the jet airplanes and kids' balloons would need User Permits then!

:)

-dave w

by bastard birth, I meant that the technology and the product that resulted, grew faster than the regulatory environment could handle....so reloads, mpr/hpr reloads outstripped the regulations on the books at the time, circa

92(?) and the orgs were slow to move on the regulatory front, while allowing the above products, hence rocketry appered on the BATFE's regulatory radar.... I wasn't involved with rocketry back then but I think the above is accurate... AT came out with products that could not be defined as model rocketry products, At sued the NAR to allow these new products without there being any regulatory framework for them to exist.....

you can fill in the historical record if you so desire...

shockie B)

They are changing 27 CFR 555.141-a-8. That reg section reads:

27 CFR 555.141 exemptions (a) (8) Gasoline, fertilizers, propellant actuated devices, or propellant actuated industrial tools manufactured, imported, or distributed for their intended purposes.

I might have posted it before.

Reg Jerry

No they didn't.

The only "outstripping" was Aerotech shipping RMS "brand" reloadables BEFORE they were classified for DOT shipment.

They did that (as 1.4) for YEARS from 1990 to early 1994.

AT and HPR magazine (TRA) put HPR on the ATF radar:

I was.

NFPA meetings TRA BOD meetings Founding or pioneering efforts on LMR, HPR, CSFM, NFPA, etc.

fetch

That's pure speculation at best (more likely, just plain ol' BS). But even if TRA had 4-10 times as many members as it currently does, that still doesn't translate into changed ATF/DOT policies. Your focus is misplaced -- you keep trying to change TRA/NAR instead of ATF/DOT.

No. My policies (installed LMR and HPR to begin with) addressed the issues raissed as concerns BATF at NFPA meetings in private conversations (of no interest to either NAR orTRA).

My policies address issues that have since become of preeminent concern.

My policies would have CERTAINLY maintained and increased the customer base of "consumer HPR" (zero access). Resulting in 900% more folks to advocate and defend our current position.

You are simply wrong. Constituency matters.

Jerry

No, 62.5 will kill the hobby. Not because no one will get permits, but because not enough will get permits. You won't even be able to get in the front door and get your feet wet without a permit. And how many new rocketeers are we going to get if the price of admission is surviving the JBGTs "Spanish Inquisition"?

Without enough fliers, the manufacturing and supply chain, for motors, kits, GSE, electronics, etc. all goes away. Leaving nothing for the few that do have the permits.

No, the futire of HPR once we have a 62.5g limit for everything is build your own. And I can GUARANTEE you that more folks will get hurt, perhaps die, as a result of our governments overregulation.

Or underground manufacturers will illegally make, sell, and ship motors as aircraft parts.

Prohibition never solves problems.

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

I'm sure the JBGTs are hard at work on that problem too.

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

How exactly will the 62.5 g limit "kill the hobby" ? Model rockwetry has had a defacto 62.5 g limit for what 30-40 years now, and I don't see estes planning on going out of business anytime soon. As far as it perhaps "killing" HPR, I would submit that most people right now who want to do HPR, that are NAR/TRA members fall into 2 categories: 1. those doing HPR without Leup and 2. those doing HPR with Leup. I would submit that over 50% of the current NAR/TRA membership that are certed L1 or above already have their Leup.....The number is probably higher, but in their infinite wisdom, both the NAR/TRA have decided it is better NOT to know this number.....(You can't very well carry on a membership donated lawsuit if the majority of the L1+ certed NAR/TRA members already have an Leup, now can we?)

I am also getting really tired of your JBGT references as that just goes to show me that ANY viewpoint that you might put worth will already be biased....give it a rest BOB, waco and ruby ridge are ancient history......

The nmanufactureres wil adjust their outputs and pricing levels depending on what the maket will bear. Economics 101... If the demand lessens, then AT, being a defacto monopoly will raise their prices according.. as far as the cottage home industry, with its poor record, I'm sure we can do without another home brewed HPR manufacturer, I mean the rockets all look alike anyway......

and no the future is Not Amateur Rocketry, As I have put forth before and as the recent CPSc actions shown, AR people will not even be allowed to purchase what they need to do HPR AR.....

we have seen the future of consumer sport rocketry and it looks alike like

1970 BP model rocketry to me.... deal with it and get on with your life....

shockie B0

shock wrote:

And what evidence do we have that similar incidents won't be "future history" also? Was there any high-profile management purge at the BATF over those? Has there been any substantive evidence that the Federales _don't_ consider those events to be "business as usual"?... that they _wouldn't_ do the same sort of thing in another situation?

BATF probably doesn't even think they have anything to be ashamed of, with respect to Waco... "They killed a Federal Law Officer in self-defense - of _course_ that justifies the death by fire of a house full of people.."

-dave w