[F-FT] Regarding Aerotech RMS motor delays

Thank you

It's not a sale contract. It is an AHJ.

It MUST be in writing.

Non-negotiable.

I agree. IIRC the premise for this discussion was someone that wanted to eject right at apogee which required 1 second accuracy.

Nope. Requires a specific 2 second range since 4 seconds was too coarse.

-----snip-----

Hmmm...gotta disagree (or at least question here) Quoting David who quoted Bunny, now that Gary has published instructions on how to achieve infinitely variable delays on RCS (and by extension, AT) delay grains, the process is automatically accepted by NAR and is completely legal for use when flying under NAR insurance coverage whether at an NAR-sanctioned launch or as an individual flyer.

John

If you order a motor from Aerotech, say a 29mm 240 white lightning M delay. you will get an approx 10 second delay. That is what is certified for SALE.

The END USER is now allowed to MODIFY the certified FIXED DELAY motor per manufacturer recommended instructions (thank you Gary), but the manufacturer is not allowed to sell it pre-modified. Ie an 8s delay.

Jerry

This should be in the FAQ.

-----more snippage (my bit bucket is filling rapidly-----

Well, yeah. Echoing Bob Kaplow on one of these rapidly-mutating threads, the best of all worlds would be if the manuafcturers would supply only their longest delay, which we flyers would then modify (by drilling per their published instructions) to the particular delay time (+/- 20%) needed for the particular rocket we intend to fly it in at a particular location in space and time.

John

Verbal statements aren't worth the paper they're written on. Ask any lawyer.

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

Yea but you can't say that they never hold up in court.

modification

You're confusing two different issues here: single-use composite motors, and single-use black powder motors. There's no reason to prohibit drilling delays on single-use composites. BP motors employ very different materials and construction, making it impractical and potentially unsafe to modify their delays.

You weren't the only one, so quit trying to take credit for something that has nothing to do with you. Bob K. has also repeatedly made posts saying that AT should officially authorize the delay mod. Many others have said the same thing, though without repeating it so incessently.

They should. It would save money for everyone, and make it possible to get the correct delay every time. As it is now, the user is stuck with a delay that may be too short, and has to try to scrounge up the correct delay column replacement if he needs a longer one.

I suspect this had more to do with the individual who was in charge of testing at that time.

reflexive

Yes.

Really? When. I need to see this!

List 10.

Here's some -

I'm going to be nice. You do it. Remember not to take liberties with the truth.

Please go ahead.

If we can agree on SOMETHING, that will be less to argue about.

Jerry