bob/art, whoever you are:
Long after HPR has become banned/outlawed or so reduced in numbers that
nobody left will care, model rocketry will still be here.
I don't know that the TRA makes its membership numbers available, but I was
under the impression that their membership has had some decline too over the
past few years. SO its not a just a NAR problem.
The only reason for being that the TRA has is HPR: if theres no HPR, there
won't be any reason for the TRA. On the other hand, if heres was no HPR,
while it would significantly impact the NAR, the NAR has model rocketry to
fall back on.
Also NAR membership is about 4.5K, not less than 3K, while TRA membership
levels are approx 4K .
As far as "where the money is"... I would think that Estes sales alone, are
probably of a magnitude more than all of HPR combined.
The NAR is not protecting " the BP interests"; the NAr protects "its
interest", just as TRA protect its interests; its the BP interests that sit
on the NFPA that made the NFPA 1127, lets get real, the model rockety
manufacturers have no love lost for HPR; they would just as soon as it
disappear as fast as it appeared. They think the NAR/TRA lawsuit is a waste
of time and money and a lost cause. Why do you think Estes/Quest, arguely
the 2 biggest model rocketry manufacturers, could care less about the
NAR/TRA lawsuit? Because they don't have a dog in the fight, that's why. Now
of course they won't tell you this publicly, but they will say it in
private.
You are going have to stop drinking or smoking or whatever it is, that
provides the impetus for these raving rants.
get your facts straight first then come back and spew.
shockie B)
wrote:
I think Quest / Bill does care about the lawsuit. And Estes SHOULD. A person
who is into HPR buys and flies a whole lot more Estes / Quest motors than
the typical Questes customer who is in the hobby for 2 months. Without the
influence of HPR on our hobby, we'll have less kids involved.
--
Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L >>> To reply, there's no internet on Mars (yet)! <<<
Kaplow Klips & Baffle: http://nira-rocketry.org/Document/MayJun00.pdf
www.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/ www.nira-rocketry.org www.nar.org
When Fascism comes to America, it will come wrapped in an American flag.
So if we get our magazine editor to hijack our magazine, and then rip off
our members for 10 years, issue bogus motor certs, throw out members that
piss off the BOT, change our bylaws behing the members backs, and elect
felons and drug abusers to the board, we'll get our glory days back?
I think not.
--
Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L >>> To reply, there's no internet on Mars (yet)! <<<
Kaplow Klips & Baffle: http://nira-rocketry.org/Document/MayJun00.pdf
Seriously doubt that Ray. lunarlos appears to to have a far better
grasp of reality compared to Art's rantings. Not by much though :)
Ted 'sun did a *fine* job on my dome today' Novak
TRA#5512
IEAS#75
Ok, I was worried when you said ART all by it's self.
I prefer the use of last names now since the stock value of my first name
has gone to heck in a hand basket ;-)
Art Upton
Today was the deadline. It might take few minutes to see how big a
landslide it was before the results are posted!
AZ "I have a beard, but I'd not use whiskers for recovery" Woody
Frank's suspension had nothing to do with the election. He was holding
a private launch at the same time and (virtually) the same place as
ROC's launch. The ROC folks considered this an interference with their
launch. They also thought he didn't have a waiver. Frank was reinstated
a short time after the suspension when he showed that he did indeed
have a waiver, and promised not to conduct his launches at the same
time as the ROC launches.
e
Excactly. Frank was kicked out based on a bogus, drummed-up charge. It's
easy to look up the NOTAMs issued for waivers, either by phone or over the
'net.
The TRA BOD could have *communicated* with Frank and asked that he send them a
copy of the waiver for the kangaroo court hearing.
Are TRA chapters given a monopoly over rocket launches on a given day?
Glen Overby
Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.