[history] MR-LMR-HPR-?

The first major era of model rocketry was pioneered by Carslile, Estes, Stine and Reese. This era ushered in what can only be described as a revolutionary change in consumer rocket safety, access, use in schools and use in local parks.

The second era of model rocketry was pioneered by Kline, Irvine, Rosenfield and others whereby increased rocket size, power, technology, and variety motivated increased toleration by NAR and FAA.

The third era has not yet been defined. But so far it is looking to be radically increased regulation and radically reduced participation.

It has been over 20 years since #2 and over 40 since #1.

The time is neigh.

Jerry Irvine

Reply to
Jerry Irvine
Loading thread data ...

No it's not. The time is whinny...

And it's Carlisle...

CAR - leese - lay...

Jeez...

tah

Reply to
hiltyt

Poor jerry.

Reply to
Dave Grayvis

You are part of the low tide.

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

Can't wait for it to merge into Model & High Power Anti-Gravity Beasts.... :-) Big trees from little seeds...Who's pioneering this effort???

MR-LMR-HPR-AGRAV

Reply to
CJC

Honestly?

Whoever picks up the ball. I'm retired. Remember?

And based on my email . . . somebody will.

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

No, Waite, I think Irv was the pioneer, especialy with a marketing assist by Lee.

Reply to
Alan Jones

schools

technology,

Depends on the outcome of the court case. If we win, it'll be a whole new era of growth for the hobby.

If we lose, it'll drastically alter the hobby and radically reduce participation. If HPR survives at all it will only be at a few locations, hosted by clubs with large on-site magazines. The reduced market will kill off some manufacturers and dealers, and force massive price increases on those who remain. Anyone who can't get storage, or can't/won't get a LEUP, will either be forced out of the hobby or be driven underground, dependent on homemade and/or black market motors.


Reply to
raydunakin

Or go to non-"explosive" alternatives such as hybrids and liquids...

-dave w

Reply to
David Weinshenker

Personally, I'm pursuing both hybrids and amateur motors. I won't get a LEUP (screw the ATF-- fascists!!) and the fact that a preferred propellant is over-regulated hardly seems like the "end of it all". It seems fairly straightforward to shoot HPR without APCP. Maybe this prohibition can be a good thing-- forcing the next stage in technology onto the main floor... I do support the legal efforts to get the ATF to step off, but don't believe my participation in the sport is defined by the outcome of those efforts.

BTW-- the fact that I detest the ATF doesn't mean I'm operating outside the law. A little ingenuity and a bit of thought, and it's amazing what can be accomplished. Legally.

The sky is *not* falling. And lemonade can be goooood.......

Kevin OClassen NAR 13578

Reply to
Kevin OClassen

If only that were actually true.

"Live the life style. Employ existing exemptions."

- Jerry Irvine

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

I'm not sure I agree with your doom and gloom predictions... I think this is purely NAR/TRA propaganda that is used by the major orgs to continue their lawsuit....

Over in the UK they have much stricter controls on APCP motors then even the BATFE wants over here: in the UK ANY APCP motor is considered an explosive with the requiste licenses and magazines required. Even with that heavy burden, if you talk to any of the UK rocketeers they will tell you that over the past 10-15 years or so, HPR has actualy grown: and the deciding factor that has stunted growth somewhat has been the lack of available motors due not to their overly restrictive explosives laws, but due to the fact of their EU CE marking requirements( you can think of CE marking as the equivalent of our DOT requirements for testing and classification-EX numbers) and the fact that major UK HPR companies just haven't put in any order lately for AT/RCS motors due to this CE marking requirement. Once the CE marking gets sorted out, they will have a plenthora of APCP motors to use.

Theres no doubt the future holds price increase but thats more a function of the marketplace than any onerous manufacturing requirements.

I will suggest that those people who have LEUP will continue to get LEUP.....I will also suggest that those that refuse to get LEUP will still refuse and will go on to alternate forms of rocketry: whether it be Hybrids(my bet) or AR....although the CPSC seems to have started a push to tighten the AR market as of lately...and if the laws become so onerous for HPR that people will just not hassle with it all, theres always model rocketry to fall back on......HPR may be eventually banned in this country but Model Rocketry will live forever....

And I hope I don't live to see the day when people decide to break the laws to use black market motors, but I think we have already gone there and done that.....

If the HPr market dries up here in the USA sue to over-regulation you can always move to Canada or the UK, Switzerland or the Netherlands where HPR seems to more welcome and I would submit is actually growing....

shockie B)

Jerry Irv> The first major era of model rocketry was pioneered by Carslile, Estes,

schools

technology,

Depends on the outcome of the court case. If we win, it'll be a whole new era of growth for the hobby.

If we lose, it'll drastically alter the hobby and radically reduce participation. If HPR survives at all it will only be at a few locations, hosted by clubs with large on-site magazines. The reduced market will kill off some manufacturers and dealers, and force massive price increases on those who remain. Anyone who can't get storage, or can't/won't get a LEUP, will either be forced out of the hobby or be driven underground, dependent on homemade and/or black market motors.


Reply to
shockwaveriderz

Membership figures are not propoganda. They are real.

Not exactly.

There are exempt classes by UN number where there are no storage requirements or posession limits at all.

The only caveat is they have to be 100% pre-manufactured.

No TRA-EX, no major modifications.

Yes.

( you can think of CE marking as the

NO!!

That is their HSE.

This message is repleat with examples of what I said in email to you. You speak before vetting ANYTHING at all.

Your posts cannot be trusted. That is not a personal attack, but a fact.

Jerry

massive clueless rants left in for the amusement of experts.

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

Last membership figures I saw for the NAR at least shows a steady number....

thats not what HSE tells me... HSE tells me that ALL APCP motors are explosives.....

what do you mean by No here? I was making an analogy..... DOT farms out its testing to 4 entities here in the USA for UN number classification, .... CE marking for civil explosives is the essentially the exact same thing in the UK by the HSE.... The HSE does the testing (or other CA does the testing ) and the CE marking results in UN numbers assignment... The test done for Ce marking is essentially the same tetst the DOt require per the UN tests manual.....

You're the person that doens't know what he talking about.... I am in contact with HSE about certain issues and thats what they tell me...I have also done extensive study and research on CE marking.....

At least I know better than to ship rocket motors as model aircraft parts....what does that say about you vetting anything?

dohhhh

shockie B)

Reply to
shockwaveriderz

What ever for ?

Reply to
AlMax

I think Big Fine should have been an expert by the time he earned his name. He'd really have to be stupid if he didn't - but then again his name should tell you something. 8-)

Reply to
Phil Stein

He's 'helping' Big Fine get everything straighened out. 8-)

Reply to
Phil Stein

I stand corrected.....for some odd reason some AT/RCS reloads in the 54mm range are indeed exempt from explosives licenses.... but they still require a registered explosives store (ie magazine) and require the UK RCA certificate......

formatting link
shockie B)

Reply to
shockwaveriderz

Apple Computer grew something like 400%.

Perhaps NAR could manage 20?

Jerry

No.

... The test

No.

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

Good question.

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.