Court Ruling - Why are we happy

Ok I've just read the HPR/Tripoli report and don't follow many threads here, .....but
I am not sure why we are so happy about the PAD ruling when it obviously
clear that we LOST the main and biggest point for getting regulatory relief......our propellant was ruled to deflagrates and so falls under ATF's authority. Does this mean the reloadable market is dead and only single use or assembled motors get relief.
Koen
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Ok I've just read the HPR/Tripoli report and don't follow many threads here, .....but
I am not sure why we are so happy about the PAD ruling when it obviously clear that we LOST the main and biggest point for getting regulatory relief......our propellant was ruled to deflagrate and so falls under ATF's authority. Does this mean the reloadable market is dead and only single use or assembled motors get relief.
Koen
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Koen O. Loeven" wrote:

Not sure I agree with you... it appears to me that the complaint was crafted as it was in order that _any_ of its subsections, if granted, would in itself provide valuable relief - i.e. - propellant actuated devices are exempt whatever BATF may "list as explosives"; and it's been ruled that that exemption does apply to us. (Similarly, if only the count regarding "listing as explosive" had been granted, that would have provided relief even if the count regarding "propellant actuated devices" had been the one to be denied.)
-dave w
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

If that count were refiled under a different theory as I have privately suggested, we could still prevail on that one as well.
Jerry
--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to: snipped-for-privacy@gte.net>
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Hello Koen,
On Tue, 11 May 2004 06:51:04 -0400, "Koen O. Loeven"

Who says we're happy?
Been muddling it over myself and I suppose the only loose end with APCP that couldn't get reconciled was the munition quality finely ground stuff. Sigh... To kick the dead horse, wish those around when the original verbiage came out tended to it back then rather than leaving it for us to live with...

Earlier, we had a thread and FWIW, several (including myself) are interpretting that reloads and single use motors are exempt. Reloadable components are impotent until assembled. The nonsense of restacking of reload grains into larger forms falls apart when the l/d ratio exceeds about 17 'ish (or there abouts) and suggestions of recasting grains into a larger diameter collapses.

Regards, Andy
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Intended use.

You officially SUCK.

--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to: snipped-for-privacy@gte.net>
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Hello Koen,
On Tue, 11 May 2004 22:22:21 -0400, "Koen O. Loeven"

Koen,
No offense intended to you but don't be another brick in the wall with the others. What you point out is academically correct and operationally meaningless.
Playing cards, notably the diamonds and hearts, can be decomposed and processed to yield nitro-glycerine. Morning glory seeds can be processed to yield lysergic acid diethylamide. The bible can be selectively (mis)quoted and (mis)interpreted as a document of hate and deceit. While a reload grain may contain APCP, it is impotent in the partially assembled form and as others remind us, the manufacturers of said hobby rocket fuel grains made sure that in their partially assembled form, any long haired exercise to construct a menacing product would fall into the category of nice to know but why bother...
I've a hunch the BATFE agent (no doubt obedient to their superiors) in the field has an eye for the common sense of things. I wonder if they're as bewildered with some of their policymakers as we are.
Take care,
Andy
p.s. One thing we did discuss a couple threads back that you may have missed that this whole process was new to alot of us "nerds" and that we really should be ready next time around.
<snip>

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
No offense taken....could not say the same for the rather rude remarks of others. I am simply trying to learn. frankly with government agencies involved and where the rulings leave this sort of thing open to interpretation...i would be willing to bet these issues might not be interpreted our way in implementation...that's all. and btw you're right in that many agents out there are quite reasonable.
Koen

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Koen O. Loeven wrote:

the way I read it was, the court declined to rule on whether APCP should be on the BATFE's list or not. not decided, that's different; the door is still open on that one.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
<< I am not sure why we are so happy about the PAD ruling when it obviously clear that we LOST the main and biggest point for getting regulatory relief......our propellant was ruled to deflagrates and so falls under ATF's authority. >>
Not when it's used in Propellent Actuated Devices -- like rocket motors.
<<Does this mean the reloadable market is dead and only single use or assembled motors get relief. >>
Nope. Propellent loads for PADs are also exempt, just like the propellent loads for a nailgun are exempt.
Of course, the ATF may have to be dragged kicking and screaming into accepting this reality.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@aol.com (RayDunakin) wrote:

Or the users could simply assert their rights. Proactively, persistently, politely.
A fight is not the only available method of correction.
Sometimes the word, "please", actually works. Or polite education.
You would never know it from rmr (or NAR/TRA).
Jerry
--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to: snipped-for-privacy@gte.net>
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@aol.com (RayDunakin) wrote:

Do you have an ATF permit? Have you tried it first hand?
I am relaying personal experience, not hypothetical theory.
Successful experioence.
Jerry
--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to: snipped-for-privacy@gte.net>
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Jerry Irvine wrote:

Just speculation during private conversation among friends. No actual official information. Like Ray, I don't wish the ATF on anyone, including you. However, to believe the feds don't share information, is ludicrous.
Fred
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Thanks to my "friends and collegues" they have more information stored on me than ANYONE.
Jerry
--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to: snipped-for-privacy@gte.net>
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Jerry Irvine wrote:

IMO and experience, stored information is only as good as it's verifiable factual content. I am often alerted by speculation, but decide based on fact. This may supprise you, but after our conversation last night, I started thinking, has ATF ever busted a hobby rocketeer or motor manufacture, for possession or manufacture violation of ATF regulations?. Off the top of my head and to my knowledge, the answer is NO; a speculation fact for now. We will see, with some research, over the next couple of days, if speculation can be supported by stored fact.
Fred
Fred
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Jerry Irvine wrote:

Nope, that was ALL your doing.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
<< Rumor has it, you may soon have an experience again.>>
I hope not, regardless of what Jerry's doing or how tempting it may be to see him put in his place. The ATF is extremely toxic and unstable with a bad habit of not distinguishing between friend and foe. They're like a truckload of hornets' nests AND a "dirty bomb" combined. They're already on the warpath against rocketry, they've been dealt an embarrassing loss in court, and they're probably spoiling for a case that could be used to cement their regulatory position against us or harm us politically.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@aol.com (RayDunakin) wrote:

Besides.
Fred lied.
Fred?
--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to: snipped-for-privacy@gte.net>
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Jerry "Big Fine" Irvine wrote: << Besides. Fred lied. >>
Dang Jerry, you just keep _begging_ people to sic the Feds on you. Even a toddler has sense enough to avoid something hot after getting burned once. Maybe if you have any money left after paying off that huge DOT fine, you could buy a clue.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
RayDunakin wrote:

Some folks never learn Ray. They claim to have multi-million dollar businesses, and if left alone, could do great things for the hobby. Unfortunately, past history of their activities, appear to gives little support to their exaggerated claims to fame. I guess we will see what happens. Although I have no great expectations for that particular individual, regardless of the verbal support of a few drones. I wonder how much those individuals have invested, of their capital, in the "great things", past or future???
Fred
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.