Bunnell Blast invitation to all....

NEFAR http://www.nefar.net /
NEFAR is a rocketry organization the encompasses National Association of Rocketry Section #563 and Tripoli North Florida (TRA Prefect #35), as
well as an independent experimental rocketry group. Who is welcome? All interested rocketeers and their families. We currently hold low, mid, and high power rocket launches (A - M impulse motors) at the Clegg sod farm in Bunnell, FL.
NorthEast Florida Association of Rocketry cordially invites all interested rocketeers to attend our 5th annual Bunnell Blast.....
November 11-12 2006
No launch fees for Bunnell Blast... instead we would prefere a donation, to be used to give to the owners of the sod farm. they do not lease to us or rent.. our way of saying thank you for supporting the hobby...
On site porta potty...... 15 pads..... Scouts will be there to provide a hot lunch and cold drinks.... Large raffle mid day both days..... On site vendors.. 1)New Horizons Hobbies.. motor source and more, must be LEUP holder to purchase restricted motors, please pre order to ensure delivery contact Dennis Welch snipped-for-privacy@aol.com 2) Giant Leap rocketry rep Bernie Lalime for your construction needs contact snipped-for-privacy@aol.com
Come and help make it a weekend worth remembering........
Contact any of the club officers for more info.....
Keep em Flying
Bill Baldwin L2 VP NEFAR snipped-for-privacy@alltel.net
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Bill wrote:

Why is it that some vendors who sell "restricted" motors have a contingency plan for people who don't have permits and other vendors do not? If the ATF said its permissible for a club to appoint an individual as the licensed point-of-contact to service the needs of users who do not have or can not get a permit, why the deviation? What is the definition of "restricted" today? Is this definition used across the board?
I think there is a real need for the national bodies to develop some kind of contingency plan that can be used nationwide. We talk about the irregular and inconsistent application of the rules by the ATF, yet there is as much irregular and inconsistent behavior from one club launch to another.
Some of you are probably going to say wait until October and see what happens. What about the people who can't fly today?
--
Rocketry Planet hobby rocketry news, feature articles, news archive,
discussion forums, live chat, free auctions, launch calendar and the
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The problem is that the ATF has never said that. They've said they said it, but they didn't actually say it. :-)
-- Roger
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Roger Smith wrote:

That's a little semantic, isn't it? It's in writing that they say they have ok'ed that approach. So why not use it until regulatory relief is in place?
Here's my problem: You have one group of fliers who are serviced by vendor "A". Over here at this other site is a group of fliers serviced by vendor "B".
Both groups are made up of an average crowd: a few users with a LEUP and a larger group who live in apartments or whose single-family dwelling can't qualify for storage.
In the first group, vendor "A" or a designated LEUP holder is anointed by the club as the paperwork point of contact, and everyone flies.
In the second group, vendor "B" either doesn't work with the club or doesn't know he can work with the club and none of the LEUP holders work with the club or doesn't know they can work with the club so unlicensed fliers can participate.
There is nothing different from the first group and the second group, only the mindset, approach and agreement between the vendor and club. If the two groups are geographically close, fliers from the second group would go to the first group's launches, participate and leave thinking the second group's launches suck. The first group flourishes and grows the second whithers and dies.
If the national bodies want their hobby to thrive and expand, then they are going to have to help their local sections and prefects avoid becoming like group two. They are going to have to encourage them to be like group one, to act and perform like group one.
I don't understand why we are still waiting to do this when there is always the possibility that things may not turn out the way we want.
--
Rocketry Planet hobby rocketry news, feature articles, news archive,
discussion forums, live chat, free auctions, launch calendar and the
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I hope the ATF is really trying to find a way to work with us, but in spite of what they said (that they said), it's not legal for someone to give explosives to someone who doesn't have a permit.

I assume the NAR and Tripoli are researching the possibility of taking advantage of the ATF's comments. But we can't just rush into things and face the possibility of serious legal problems.
-- Roger
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Roger Smith wrote:

That is my thought too, but I was called an alarmist and hyperbolic for saying so.

Well, it all starts with discussion. I think it would be a good idea if the national bodies are researching the possibility that they let their constituents know before the constituents take action on their own. But at least we should be able to talk about it.
--
Rocketry Planet hobby rocketry news, feature articles, news archive,
discussion forums, live chat, free auctions, launch calendar and the
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.