[F-FT] RMS delay question/comment

All I can say is that's what I was told by more than one BOD member. No one can dispute the results.

Who? When? Where?

Why was I not ever notified?

Seriously.

Ask them. I have a hard time believing you don't know this. Remember at one point, I tried to convince tham to recertify you? All you have to do is comply withthe rules every other manufacturer complys with. They're on the TMT web page.

(Bob

Whose were they?

Jerry, you've never met ALL the requirements, which is why you can't get your motors certified. Period, end of story.

You mean like the Ellis made J350s that had huge cato rates. By your argument here, the certification of those J350s was invalid and should have been immediately pulled. So why did it happen to Jerry and not to AT?

That's the problem with a double standard, isn't it.

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

Show me the motor test reports!

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

If he didn't meet the requirements, why were USR motors ever tested and certified in the first place? Same for Kosdon? EIther they were legal, and should not have been dumped, or they were illegal in the first place, and never should have been approved. TRA can't ahve it both ways.

Because it's legal documentation and must be preserved. What if someone sues Jerry tomorrow and asks for the TMT data to back up their claims in court. They better be able to produce FULL documentation for every motor they've ever certified. WHich would be very interesting for those motors they certified without testing in the mid 90s...

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

Still haven't seen an naswer from Ray...

Ray, have you been violating the safety code by modifying AT delays at NAR/TRA launches prior to this weeks announcement from AT?

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

I disagree with that.

The money as currently priced is fine for a commercial operation (with a non-loss expectation), since most of current fees are really donations with high "profit".

If they simply followed the rules as written they wold have fewer requirements and at least four vendors I am aware of would have "access to the market" all of a sudden.

That is sufficient incentive that even a DOUBLING of fees would be trivial.

However I predict the TRA and NAR policies would change "just in time" to try to frustrate them.

Fortunately not all cert decisions are on price. Past ethics matter too.

Yes.

He flies waiverless with HPR motors, and publishes the results in the "independent" HPR Magazine. Most TRA clubs don't even do that.

Jerry

Ironically they were. The "powertech" motors were never suitable for cert standards at the time certs were granted. I used another subcontractor.

Even the very first (and last) large ($20k+) production batch of Powertech motors were taken by you and "kept in trust" (and incidentally ALSO resold).

I, for one, don't know, and I, for one, feel/felt (and am pretty sure I said so at the time) that they should have been decertified.

I've had no experience with the Ellis motors, by the way, but I was at a launch in December were some new Ellis motors were available (I think they were in the 'E' class), and I was considering stocking up on some because they fit my needs for a couple of rockets -- a couple of other guys bought some, and the first one I saw went up and CATO'd spectacularly. Remembering the J350 problems, I decided that I'm not going to go with the Ellis motors for now...

David Erbas-White

OK, what about this scenario -- they believed that everything was correct, but on further review found that the paperwork/numbers/whatever were not complete or were fraudulent (and this is a pure hypothetical, I'm using your scenario). Once they've determined that they shouldn't have been certified in the first place, are they just supposed to say "Oops" and go on their merry way? Or do they take action to correct it by either decertifying the motors and/or giving the manufacturer an opportunity to correct the deficiency.

David Erbas-White

That scenario does not apply because there were no paperwork requirements to "change" or "fraudulate".

Note: there were never any mis dated motors BTW.

Just because an organization didn't follow its rules in the 90s doesn't mean they shouldn't follow them today. Was the same management in place the whole time?

Lots of organization have rules that get broken until someone enforces them. My employer has a rule that says nobody can have wallpaper or custom screensavers on desktop computers. Nobody enforces the rule today. It would probably take new management to get the rule enforced.

Brian Elfert

In this case the cert (paperwork) rules were followed. Nice try.

How about because Jerry was caught trying to mislead by backdating motors.

The AT J350 situation was something that I don't think anyone thought of. In retrospect if the same situation were to occur I hope the motors would be retested - at least by the manufacturer if nothing else.

-----snip-----

Once an organization has been demonstrated to have failed to follow their own rules I lose faith in their credibility forever. Like Regan said "trust but verify". It would take an independent audit before I would accept anything from TRA at face value.

Then it is a bad rule and needs to be cancelled. Otherwise you have stepped over and are now tobagganing down the slippery slope at full speed. "I ignore the custon screensaver rule. I think I'll ignore the Web surfing rule. Hey, lets open a webstore right from the cube."

John