Has Battle Park been cancelled because of TRA?

Besides your other lies, it took 2 weeks to resolve and it was not looking good till the last minute.

I criticize TRA for a lot of SPECIFIC things but being raked over the coals by an insurance company is not one of them.

Jerry

Try to stay on topic, Jerry. Has the Battle Park launch been canceled or not?

I got an email from the Maryland/ Delaware club notifying members (plenty of whom would have gone to the Culpeper launch) that the Culpeper/ Battle Park launch WAS cancelled for this weekend. I was in the middle of writing an email to one of the Virginia club officers when I got interupted. I'll still do that & report back here with his answer. -- Richard "& I was itchin' to launch there this weekend" Hickok

I've been told by one of the gentlemen running the show that they are going to try and fly on Saturday. The Porta Johns were canceled so there will not be facilities. The question going around now is whether it'll be EX or Sport. Still waiting the answer.

Eric F.

Thanks for the update. Any other launches anywhere canceled because of the insurance deal?

Sounds like TRA handled the problem.

Sounds like you are squarely on BOTH sides of the fence at the same time.

TRA is one of the only organizations keeping us all together regardless of your efforts to bring them down.

Learn to lead.

Noz' I'm afraid that you are misinformed.

Although "a few good men" have recently been elected to the TRA board, the legacy they inherited is one far from one of TRA leadership acting to "[keep] us all together"

from my 2003-12-05 06:31:47 PST post to thread "Re: ARSA info request for Izzy", regarding TRA's looking out for our interests

the excerpt starts with a response to the previous poster denying that TRA impeded the legislative initiative (S.724 as introduced)

-- > There was no "stalling". There were brief delays while pending > lawyers' approval. These were fully justified and their effect > on the letter writing campaign was insignificant.

they did much more than simply "stall". On many occasions they used ROL announcements and other venues to effect a 'standing order' not to take any action "at this time", which was indefinitely in some cases. At least one initiative was entirely unsupported by using this tactic.

additionally, at the most critical juncture (the Senate Judiciary Committee meeting), JW had called for rocketeers to write the Chairman and all the other committee members. This was in recognition of the FACT that committee members act on behalf of the nation as a whole, not exclusively in the interests of their home states. [otherwise every committee would require 50 members, lest the committee decisions reflect the interests of a handful of states. Which states should decide Defense issues, for example? ]

yet when the TRA/NAR alliance finally made the request to their memberships to write letters, they aked only people in Committee members particular states to take action; and strongly discouraged people from other states from participating as they would be ignored, devalued, or even be a source of "annoyance" to the Senators.

as a result of this policy, the opportunity to demonstrate to all SJC members how many were affected by their decisions, and what their specific arguments were in support of S.724 was lost.

this was the single most destructive position TRA/NAR took during the various campaigns.

another example of "undermining" that was not limited to mere "delays", was TRA's possession of the DOJ/BATFE letter to Senator Hatch, SJC Charirman. They had obtained this by whatever means, yet failed to respond in a timely fashion, failed to notify the membership of the opportunity to and importance of responding, and failed to forward it to JW so ARSA and its supporters could act.

John eventually obtained the letter through other channels, but several days later, and just 3 days before [what was to be] the final hearing. Even so, John responded substantively under the considerably shortened time he had available. His responses ultimately resulted in the DOJ withdrawing the letter, but only after the SJC was influenced to allow the Hatch-Kohl substitution to take place.

Had JW been given this letter by TRA immediately, and had TRA supported JW's call for an "all states" fax/call campaign to every SJC member, I firmly believe the outcome would be very different [i.e.; the Hatch-Kohl substitution would never have taken place, and the matter would have continued to be deliberated in the SJC, or sent to the floor of the Senate without the SJC's recommendation.

these are the sources of indignation among those who understand the reality of what actually transpired during these campaigns

this is false. They were aware of John's intent before it was drafted, but insisted that control the content. Their control would have resulted in a bill unrecognizable from SB 724, with weight limits that would constitute implicit agreement with the BATFE's position that APCP was dangerous (if not explosive), and that BATFE oversight was necessary.

SB 724's justifiable blanket exemption for non-explosive rocketry materials is the only way to expell the BATFE

no, they were acting in their best interests. A blanket exemption would have implications for the NFPA codes that maintain the TRA/NAR franchise on motor and user certifications. If rocketry materials and the rockets that house them are exempt by virtue of them not being dangerous, what would the justification for those codes be? They would be reduced to what they should be - fire codes, to provide reasonable protection to people and property from a flammable solid.

as I said earlier in this post, had TRA/NAR not undermined the effort, and had they acted to represent the interests of all rocketeers faithfully, we would have had far more control going onto the floor, and would have the grass-roots support (and the ability to weild it in a focused, responsive fashion) throughout its life in the Senate and beyond (to the HR and the President's desk).

For these reasons and the reasons I posted prior, TRA is the most destructive influence in rocketry in decades.

The solution is a simple stroke of the pen.

Jerry

This should be in the FAQ.

Not unless he's been listening to you. ;)

Bull.

If this is the case Jerry, then why do you seem so bent on getting your motors certified by TRA and attending LDRS? Hey - I'm not a dancer - just a rocket scientist, but you do seem to spend an awful lot of time & energy biting the hand that feeds you... so to speak. If you don't agree with TRA (and/or NAR) and think you have a better idea, then by all means instead of wasting yours & our time by whining about how you've been wronged (etc,etc,etc) - START YOUR OWN ROCKET association, make your own rules, start you own motor certification program (there is nothing in NFPA 1127 that would preclude this), get your own insurance coverage - and hold your own launches, at which flyers could then buy your product and fly it. Lead, Follow, or get out of the way.

I mean, I have been reading rmr for... well since 1996, and you've been a broken record of the same old dribble. Wolf! Wolf!... really there's a wolf behind you! Right....

Would that be Funny Asinine Questions?

Doug (aka Cheetah)

NAR # - Yeah got one TRA # - Yeah got one SSI # - Ditto EIN # - What's that? got one anyway.

If I am there and I am either a member OR a person with vendor influence, that simple stroke of the pen has a chance of being proposed and even less likely, adopted. If I am totally unengaged nobody will do it because any attempt by members to do so has been thwarted by several well honed techniques of the BOD.

Here is how the NAR responds to that "whining".

National Association of Rocketry Board of Trusteeís Meeting July 31, 2003 ñ August 4, 2003

Develop HPR Marketing - Responding to Jerry Irvineís request to ìmass-market HPRî, the Board would be happy to respond to any specific plans for such marketing from all members. The Membership and Sport Services Committees would be directed to review any such plans and recommend specific action items for adoption by the Association.

USPS Motor Shipping Regulations - Based on a request by Jerry Irvine, the President was directed to seek out knowledgeable members who have worked with USPS regulations to determine what relief might be obtained to allow NAR members to ship motors via USPS for their personal use. The President will report to the Board at the February 2004 meeting.

Now given that SOME of my proposals are being listened to in the near term and already adopted in the past (NAR LMR, NAR HPR), it would seem I am not wasting my time. Only running into stubborn and in some cases obviously corrupt officials as is the case with at minimum 1/3 of the TRA BOD.

Jerry

What's the FAQ maintainer got to do with this :-)

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

he once accused me of being a pedaphile (I presume to discourage my participation in an ASTRE yahoo group)

although I admit that my wife is ten years my junior, she was 23 when I married her!

- iz