FAA Waiver question

Phil Stein wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  

You left out a few questions, like "Who flew the G?" and "Are you now, or have you ever been, a 'basement bomber'?" If you're going to conduct a witchhunt, at least get it right. ;)
Check with some of the early members of TRA for tips on witchhunts. TRA was formed to get away from that crap in the NAR. Let's hope we haven't gone full circle and become what we once detested.


  Quoted Text Here  
Ray,
If you are not going to answer the question, just say so. That will end most of the noise anyway.

On 21 Nov 2005 10:50:12 -0800, " snipped-for-privacy@aol.com"
  Quoted Text Here  
That's what I (and everyone else) thought. If that's not bad enough, you've stolen one of Jerry's answers.

Phil Stein wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
Great, In that case, I don't think we need another FAQ.. :)

  Quoted Text Here  
Are you driving a Chevy now?
; )
Randy www.vernarockets.com

  Quoted Text Here  
I had one of those from a rental place. What a POS!! (Piece Of S...)

  Quoted Text Here  
I have a friend that has one and it was a lemon to say the least. For months he wanted it to catch fire, be stolen, anything to get rid of it. One day he called me the happiest I had ever seen him. It had been stolen.
He called back the next day to say it had been returned. They actually brought it back. I thought he was going to cry.
Randy www.vernarockets.com

On 20 Nov 2005 21:08:29 -0800, " snipped-for-privacy@aol.com"
  Quoted Text Here  
Those are all your statements, not mine. You seem to want to have an argument with yourself. You seem to be fixated on the word "cavalier". Maybe I did not make the perfect choice of phrases. OTOH, I think I would call your musings above "irresponsible", rather than "cavalier". Get over it. Fly two LMRs with proper notification; you'll feel better.
  Quoted Text Here  
No, I was simply responding to your posts and questions. If you want mud slinging, you should address those messages by others that you personally have flown LMR without FAA notification, and possibly HPR as well.
Alan

Ray has posted links to his pics on many forums. Some of these pics have been from HP birds, by his own admission. I know what it takes in time to get a waiver, and unless Ray planned his flights (and launchsite) well in advance, he's been flying without the proper waivers. In the same way that another poster (who will remain nameless) sponsored launches without waivers. Be it one bird, or 100, launching without a waiver, when one is required, is wrong....
"no one will notice if I only launch one or two" is not a reason to ignore the law...
wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
conducting

  Quoted Text Here  
Accusations... Facts... Are you actually contributing anything here?

  Quoted Text Here  
Hmmm.
They are in FAR 101 for a reason.

snipped-for-privacy@everywhere.com wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
Yes, it's all about making it possible to track you down if you cause an incident. But if you really believe it has anything to do with safety, please explain how. We all know that the NOTAMs don't keep aircraft out of the launch area, and in fact many here have reported that NOTAMs often _attract_ aircraft. The safety of the launch is still up to the person launching, who is required to check for aircraft and hold the launch if any aircraft present a hazard.
Consider this common scenario: An individual is launching a LMR in a remote area. The sky is clear, with visibility to the horizon, and there are no aircraft within sight. In what way, exactly, does that launch become unsafe if the person did not notify the FAA? In what way would notification make it any safer than it already is?
Once again, let me remind everyone that this is only a discussion of the merits of the regulation. It is not an admission, confession, advocacy, or anything else.
n

wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
It's simple Ray, and I'm surprised you don't understand it. It's not only for the saftey of your lanch, but also for the saftey of those in the plane. If the proper paperwork is filed, some planes will stay out the the area. For small planes, you might not see them as they are only a speck in the sky when you want to launch, but by the time your birds reach 5000' AGL, the plane could be close.
  Quoted Text Here  
Then it's THEIR problem and not yours!
  Quoted Text Here  
But without the proper FAA approval, any problem is 100% the responsibility of the launcher and not the responsibility of the folks in the plane.
Ray, all I've read seems to be your way of justifying your own flights without proper notification and/or waivers from the FAA. Face it Ray, while you might get neat photos of launches, you need to play by the rules, and not just launch at "a neat place" when you find one.

AZ Woody wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
Some? Unless it keeps every plane out of the area, it's still going to be the flyer's responsibility to make sure their are no aircraft in range before launching.
  Quoted Text Here  
Maybe if you're blind and deaf.
  Quoted Text Here  
Yeah, tell that to the FAA if you are stupid enough to launch when there is an aircraft in the way. It won't matter whether you have a NOTAM or a waiver -- it will be your butt that gets nailed to the wall, not the pilot's.
  Quoted Text Here  
Even WITH the FAA's approval, it is the responsibility of the person launching the rocket to make sure that there are no aircraft in range. If you don't believe me, PLEASE, ask the FAA!
  Quoted Text Here  
So, anyone who questions a law is automatically guilty of violating it? You need to take a remedial course in basic logic. That's not too surprising though, coming from someone who thinks we should all bend over for the ATF.
P

  Quoted Text Here  
No. Several folks have asked you to describe the conditions under which you took PUBLIHED photos. Now set aside the "attitude", and simply decribe those conditions so everyone will move on.
Unless TRA calls the FAA after you.

snipped-for-privacy@everywhere.com wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
Wow, published photos -- there must have been a crime involved! Better check the hobby magazines a little more carefully. You'll find that there are "published photos" and reports of LMR and high power launches in every issue, yet none of them include proof that the launches were conducted 100% legally.
Ask for proof of legality from everyone who posts or publishes a launch report. When you demand and get documented proof from everyone in the hobby that every rocket flown has been 100% legal, then maybe I will consider your request.
i

  Quoted Text Here  
I take that as a no. People will harass you endlessly now and I am moving on. You are slippery Ray.

snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
No, Ray, you tap-dance around the issue when we all know what you're doing.
It's as simple as this... The FAA is one government agency that works well with us. When people launch without following the (painfully simple) process, it puts ALL of us at risk of having problems with the FAA in the future. It's even worse when people publish information making it obvious as to what they're doing.
Play by the rules, whether you like them or not, or don't be surprised when it starts causing YOU problems.
-Kevin

I was surprised and very grateful for the Principal Operations Inspector person I spoke with. He had no earthly idea what models rockets, large model rockst or high power rockets were. He told me this was the first time he worked on waivers for rockets although he had done so for everything else.
We went over the FAR 101 regulations line by line and and I explained the diferences in propellant weights and overall weights so he clearly could see the difference. He finally agree that as long as model rockets were flown in accordance with the NAR Model Rockety Safety Code, that Model rockets were indeed totally exempt from FAA purview.
He also agree that all that was needed in my case was the LMR notification procedures to my local airport. And he didn't have to, but he went to his supervisor to verify everything (and they agreed ) and finally he actually called up the TAC manger at the local airport and informed him of their decsision and their reasoning.
This guy was willing to listen to me all the way and even took up for me. You can't get much better service from a federal agency than this. now if only the BATFE were as willing to talk and discuss.
shockie B)
wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  

shockwaveriderz wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
Yes, the FAA folks are great to deal with.
My contact, in Minneapolis, goes way beyond what one would expect, as well. I've contacted him to find out who I need to get in touch with for a notifcation launch only to have him tell me he'll take care of it for me.
This past June I actually learned something interesting... March through June, the folks in Minneapolis were taking it on faith that we had a waiver when I called in to activate it, because they couldn't find their copy. It wasn't until June that they let me know they couldn't find it; I gave them the info on who had signed it, they called around, and finally found their copy.
You don't get that kind of treatment without a history of working with them. We've been launching at the same site for years, so they know us.
-Kevin