[F-FT] RMS delay question/comment

What kind of certs did CTI and Loki need to go thru when they released there motors with the ability to use a "delay adjustment tool".

Surely S&T and TMT didn't just test the unmodified delay and leave it at that.

Did they take a 10 sec delay and change it for 5 secs and test it, or something like that? I doubt that there was zero testing of delay modification!

I can't see how you can possibly say that when you release a delay mod tool, TMT and/or S&T won't need to be involved at all...

They've tested the current motors with the documented delays (calm down Kaplow... give me this one), but it seems that some certifiting authority needs to say "yup, if you drill 2 seconds off a 10 second delay as per the manufacturer's instructions, it does perform within the required parameters"

Gary, I hate to say it, but RCS (a different company in a different facility than the AT that submitted many of these motors for cert) (remember the good old ellis J350 thing...) is kind of a "bull in a china shop" these days when it claims "we'll allow this change but TMT/S&T doesn't need to be involved!"

In article zxo5e.71$ snipped-for-privacy@news.uswest.net, AZ Woody at snipped-for-privacy@here.not.email wrote on 4/7/05 11:21 PM:

You're assuming too much.

As I mentioned, I've already said more than I should have. When you see the product you'll understand.

Gary/RCS

"tool to modify delay times" is not a stange concept to rocket scientists, or even those of us that just fly rockets

"not having TMT involved" is also not a stange concept, as JI talks about it every 5 minutes, it seems, and Kaplow claims they never were involved.......

What have I assumed?

You let the cat out of the bag Gary, and therefore, "you got some 'splainin to do"... (tell me again how the ellis production of the j350 didn't result in a motor that required user mods not to Cato?)

And then there was the good old "red liner" thing..........(Newbies, google this one...)

There's two more advantages that spring to mind:

First, because taking additional shots costs nothing more, you are able to vastly over-shoot your subject, greatly increasing the odds of getting that one "perfect" shot simply by virtue of having more chances to do so.

Second, since digital cameras have displays, you can quickly spot that you did something dumb (like have your finger in front of the lens, or not notice that someone was moving when you snapped the picture, or chose the wrong exposure settings, etc.) while you still have a chance to fix the problem and take another shot. With a film camera, you'd know you had a problem a week later when you get your pictures back from Costco, and it's a week too late to do anything about it.

Instant gratification is nice, but taking more photos without paying for them, and being sure I *got* the photos I wanted while I still have the chance to take them again if I didn't get them the first time, these are the real advantages of digital.

Mind you, photo CDs are cool, too.

- Rick "Digital convert" Dickinson

techniques to

Yeah, I know about those problems faced by potential manufacturers. However, Jerry was talking about "barriers to entry" in relation to increasing market size. To me, that indicates the "barriers" he mentioned were not at the manufacturer's end, but at the customer's end.=20

=F8

Once again you are wrong.

Waht's that matter Jerry? Do you think anyone is that interested in you getting slammed for being the weasel that you are enough to create a filter? Hate to tell you but it's not all about Jerry.

Oh and wipe your face.

jerry, explain the above answer to ray's post.

Did you forget Phil; This is all about Jerry, AKA "big fine"

"I remember a conference call with DOT where laughter and comments about the stupidity of an individual shipping 200lb of class one hazmat, (rocket motors), labeled as "model airplane parts", resulting in a $40 gran fine to the business with employee count of less than two (2) individuals. Also during that call, it was mentioned by one DOT official; "the actions of this one individual probably closed the door on DOT relaxing any of the present regulations or shipping exemptions as applied to the shipment of hobby rocket motors".

I wonder what else "big fine" has done for the hobby lately?? (:-("

jerry, This is an important question. Just what part of the above post by you is helpful or positive?

Now where's your HPR list and this time, from the consumer perspective.

Not according to the Reply Gary himself posted!

Calm down Phil. Grow a polite gene.

I have no direct first hand info so I am free to speculate.

It is an electronic device that is adjustable with a pot or something and not a pyro delay at all.

How am I doing so far Gary?

Watch out for rmr!

Well, they were involved, just not in doing their stated duty.

NAR actually tests what it says it tested. That's why it actually has the data to publish on motor firings and delays. TMT does not. Read the tea leaves.

He was clearly wrong on that one and it seems he is not "publicly admitting" it either.

Ditto

Spitting out samples for the fertility clinic. 8-)

Let him go. It makes him feel important when he sucks up to people he admires. I don't mind - as long as he wipes his face when he's finished.

Yea - you are about to gete advice from Big Fine Jerry Greenspan.

In article snipped-for-privacy@corp.supernews.com, Jerry Irvine at snipped-for-privacy@gte.net wrote on 4/8/05 8:15 AM:

Haven't thought about that too much, but I would say regulatory uncertainty/ignorance/overkill (re: local AHJ and ATFE) and flying field availability issues top the list.

DOT, CPSC, NFPA and the national user groups are not a significant barrier.

Gary/RCS

I have proposed specific fixes.

That's rich.

And so wrong.