ATFE Test Results At Hill AFB Reported

the complete article is as follows:

from ATFE Completes Hobby Rocket Tests ATFE "Not Dangerous To Planes - Dangerous To Ground Targets"

at

Where is the actual news report, or are we just in the heads up mode on the ARSA web page?

Fred

Ismaeel Abdur-Rasheed wrote:

so lets review shall we:

so lets review:

in their infamous letter to the senate judiciary claiming that high power rockets could be used to shoot down airliners, their tests show that was not true.... they also stated that they could be used as anti-tank weapons from

So now they say HPR could be used to drop CBW agents ......well so could, airplanes, model airplanes, model helicopters,passenger vehicles, pedestrians, homing pigeons, hot air balloons, kites,mosquitoes,etc etc etc.........So if they want the capital Mall area of DC to be CBW free, why not just BAN everything from its vicinity? DOHHHH.....

and we all know that just about anything you place in a vessel can be made to explode, nothing new there....isn't there a 50lb BP exemption for shooters? I mean that stuff is used to make more bombs than APCP ever has or will be used.....Why can't we have a 50lb exemption on APCP for rocketry purposes? same difference to me...

I do hope that if and when the orgs etc do rebut the new claims they are sure to point out their earlier invalid and down right lying claims made.....

shockie B)

and to think my tax dollars paid for these bozos to coem to these conclusions....the mind boggles.....

Nothing earthshattering here.

They discovered that rockets can deliver a payload. Wow. So can a Ryder truck, and it's much more accurate, holds a lot more, and requires no federal license.

They discovered that you can put APCP in a sealed container and cause an explosion. Big whoop. You can do the same thing with propane, gasoline vapors, and even grain dust.

I'm SOOO glad we are wasting our tax dollars on regulating hobby rocket motors.

And it just warms my heart that those stupid democratic senators eat this stuff up, and make a big show out of protecting us all from such clear dangers.

Yea I know it's on the ARS site, but seriously, I'm looking for the news feed, or ATF's PA release.

Fred

Phil Ste>

Before I believe this, I would want to see it from a reliable source.

Someone must have seen the "The Rock" too many times.

JD

I think we'll see a nationally syndicated news item before too long

no, I don't "know", but since the article mentions that a reporter released the information I take that as a strong indication that he is working on something for publication

- iz

W. E.Fred Wallace wrote:

What about trebuchets and model aircraft and slings and catapaults and bowling balls and suicide deliverers and bows and arrows?

Hmmm?

Or at least it must have been reported to them that way.

Just as the van story was reported through 2 at minimum trusted rocketeers with mil contacts. If that is also true, fine, but if not then they were subjected to falsified stories to feel free to report.

By "trusted" sources no less.

Since falsifications NOT under orders in that environment is a federal crime perhaps the solution to truth finding is to bring charges.

There's good news here! Yes, good news!

ATF did not completely fabricate a Hollywood propaganda film.

Or at least they must have failed so miserably at it that they decided to simply report the facts with as much spin as they figured they could get away with.

If the ATF had their way, there would be no 50lb BP exemption. They can't touch it -- that's the difference.

What will be interesting an analyzed carefully, is the comparison between the ATF PA news release and the report released through the Justice Department, in response to the senate (Enzi's) request for proof.

Fred

Ismaeel Abdur-Rasheed wrote:

IMO, reasonable weight limits is the path we need to explore in earnest, as one way or another, like it or not, APCP will be an ATFE regulated substance. However, our safety record is better than the amateur fireworks groups and sporting firearms activities, both in numbers and percentages of member comparisons. In fact, APCP fueled rocket related incidents, involving personal injury and serious property damage, directly related to rocketry, is almost nil. If those two groups can have a "recreational" 50lb limit on BP, sport rocketry should be able to have an equal to or greater weight limit of "unregulated/exempt" APCP.

Fred

Phil Ste>

The difference is that firearms groups have the lobby power of a millions-strong organization, and we have the lobby power of a fractious, infighting couple of thousand-strong set of organizations.

The difference has nothing to do with whether or not anything is explosive or dangerous.

Then David, what do you propose for a workable and resonable solution, that is based on todays reality?

Fred

David wrote:

Are you saying there is no hope?? If so, I find that less than an exceptable position.

Exactly.

We cannot even agree on the obvious 27 CFR 555.141-a-8.

Especially those entrusted with representing our interests!!

Agree completely!!! What's the hang-up with AP and PP?

I just don't get it...