Cato was right

quilly:

I agree 100% percent with your central point that the job and responsibility of motor certification should be all that the NAR or TRA does. They should act as "gatekeeper" cops, asking for USDOT paperwork,LEUP,CPSC paperwork,etc..... Their only job is to test the motors, and make sure they are safe for use by consumers. Its the job of the USDOT,BATFE,CPSC,NFPA, whoever to provide the enforcemnet function not the NAR's nor the TRA's. But as we all know, the NAR nor the TRA will say or do this, because of one person, "the person whose name shall not be spoken". Prior to "the person whose name shall not be spoken" decided he wanted to get into the illegal motor manufacturing ripoff and scam, I'm sure both NAR and TRA never asked for all of the above described paperwork, because the NAR and TRA have consistently told their membership: we are not an enforcement agency.

And now the NAR is doing just what it believes with these czech delta motors: they aren't requiring any USDOT paperwork, LEups,CPSC paperwork,nfpa compliance etc and allowing these motors to be used by selective people at selective times at selective places. But you know If I start making motors or you start making motors, or "the person who shall not be named" shows up they will still function as the Gatekeeper and will never allow our motors to be used or sold.

Basically what the NAR is telling its membership with this new policy is this: You will not be kicked out of the NAR for using uncertfied motors at NAR venues, as long as we selected the uncertifed motors to be used and who they will be used by. What they ARENOT telling its membership is this: Although you may be 100% aok with the NAR, you will still be in violation of the NFPA regulations if they are effect; you will be in violation of USDOT hazmat classification, CPSC marking and Labeling, etc. And the ONLY WAY you can be in violation of NFPA,USDOT,CPSC.BATFE or alphabet soup agency is if somebody sees what you are doing and tells on you. SO the NAR is putting its own membership at risk, at this. When the USDOT and CPSC enforcemnt comes down on these Czech delta motors( and it will), the enforcement will not be against the NAR: it will be against the individual NAR members who are caught using,selling,distributing,transporting these motors among themselves. The good news is these fed agencies will probbaly charge these people with Civil penalties al "the one whose name shall not be spoken"... but then criminal liability is also not out of the question. The NAR hasn't exactly provided its membership here with FULL DISCLOUSRE over the exposed risks they are placing their selective members at.

terry dean

the people shouting these words the loudest are no doubt the ones with the most to hide......

terry dean

NAR will be using

labeling. Is history

Terry,

Instead of trying so hard to be a jerk, why don't you take advantage of this beautiful, hot sunny day, and go out and actually fly some rockets?

John was not the cause, nor even much of a catalyst, for the loss of the field in Perry. The main problem was the neighbors of the field complaining about various things. Had we been a bit smarter and more diplomatic we'd have had the field for five more years, though we'd be losing it now as they're about to build a water park on the site. If Cato were truly vindictive, he would still be in the thick of it today. He's obviously let go of it.

It's good to know there has been improvement in Johns character. The degree John was a catalyst, I guess, is subjective in appearance and fact. As you indicate, there were other circumstances that helped cause the field loss. But, to minimize Johns effect on the decision, is quite a stretch. Just my somewhat biased opinion..(:-)

Fred

Roy Green wrote:

Therein lies the problem -- inconsistent rules, and inconsistent application of them. The playing field MUST be level.

Back to inconsistent treatment. If you're one of the golden few, you get one set of rules. Everyone else gets another. THAT is the problem.

NAR's not responsible for enforcement of those. They're responsible for enforcement of their own rules. If their rules happen to match a TLA, then so be it, but NAR is only enforcing that agency's rules, because they happen to match their own.

There HAS to be transparency, and folks have to know they'll all get treated the same. If you walk in with a special request and get turned down, then if I walk in with the same request, I should get turned down as well, as should any other member with the same request.

My guess is if you or I walked in and asked to fly those Czech motors at a NAR launch, we'd be told NO, and have the safety code waived in our face as the reason why.

-Kevin

BS * 100

Ted Novak TRA#5512 IEAS#75

shockwaveriderz wrote:

So, you're condemning the NARBOT based on a guess. When you've made your request and been turned down, let us all know...

OK, I'll bite.

I requested that the BOT revisit the issue of not being able to fly (for example) C5-3 motors (and soon C11-0 motors) based on the fact that the manufacturer discontinued making them, not because of any real or perceived safety issue. I was turned down, and I believe fallaciously (i.e., the arguments put forth by Mark Bundick are not salient).

david:

and whats this new policy decisi>

No, I'm basing it on a recent event -- the NAR President was asked to consider allowing NAR members to fly CERTIFIED motors at TRA Research launches, assuming that TRA approved it. The NAR President refused, claiming that it was a violation of their Safety Code.

So, apparently it's not acceptable for NAR members to fly certified motors at a launch whose offset distances, etc are more stringent than NAR's, but it is okay for select NAR members to fly uncertified motors at a NAR launch. Without violating the Safety Code.

-Kevin

Saw several of those fly this weekend...

I believe you are correct. But we'll find out for sure at NARAM.

I've made a similar request before. Someone else made that same request which appears in the same board minutes a few paragraphs earlier. The answer was still no. But since we've changed precedent, I will ask yet again at the association meeting at NARAM-48.

C5-3s and a few other motors got a 2 year reprieve.

But other motors that have just been decertified (NCR, Kosdon) got no such reprieve. Yet another double standard.

The NARBOT would turn down ANYONE flying those motors if they had a USR label on them. That's not a guess, it's a FACT. And it demonstrates a double standard. (NO, I'm not a USR fan, and would be VERY concerned if NAR ever allowed a USR motor to be used at a launch)

The NARBOT should not have made an exception in the safety code for a single vendor, and for a few individuals. That too is a FACT.

No matter what NAR/NARBOT says about TRA and EX (now called "research"), these motors couldn't even be flown at TRA "Research" launch, nor any other TRA sponsored launch with TRABOD. Not an opinion, it's a FACT.

This, by far, is the craziest thing I've seen NARBOT do - even after they allowed Kosdon Motors to remain certified, even after TRA decertified then due to a question about their usage at an NSL a few years back! (Hi Dave! Some folks don't forget!)

We, as a hobby, have invested how much in the lawsuit? Now it's become "public knowledge" that the NARBOT has approved the use of uncertified motors, coming from a questionable source, and transported (shipped) in questionable manor! Anybody out there that doesn't think this might come into play on any of the 7 counts still in debate with the ATF? - remember, the appeal was only for 1 of the 7!)

The NARBOT should be called >

It's time to impeach the NARBOT. A "vote of confidence" for the entire lot.

The NARBOT approval to allow "a few people" to fly motors made by a Czech manufacturer without any certification, which were imported and transported with the US under questionable conditions, is clearly, without a doubt, not good for NAR and is in violation of the NAR Safety Code.. I guess it depends on what the definition of "is" is!

"The weenies want their contest motors, and damn the rules", seems to be how NARBOT works these days. What a shame....

NAR screwed up big time with the whole Kosdon mess, so why should this suprise me?

Which **WILL** happen at the NAR annual meeting in Phoenix in August.

The problem with that is who would run to take their place? Jerry Irvine? I've already submitted agenda items for Phoenix to reverse this decision, turn the matter over to NAR S&T as it should have been in the first place, to censure the baord for their improper action, and to discipline any members that violated the NAR safety code this weekend at NSL.

For each instance of Czech substitute USR...

Depends on who the weenie is. Plenty of other NAR weenies have been told NFW when asking for similar certification issues. But now we have a new precedence on which to get support.

Perhaps. TRA screwed up worse on this one. Either the motors were legal, or they weren't. If they weren't, neither organization should have certified them. If TRA really discovered after the fact that they were illegal, they should have IMMEDIATELY pulled their certs, not given then time to be used up.