JC, TRA and the future of rocketry

[ cross-posted from ROL ]
John Cato's' responses inline (posted with permission). As you will see from his closing remark, he will not be engaging this interactively so
debate efforts to debate are wasted.
John speaks with authority with respect to historical events, about which almost everyone is ignorant. That handful of people who know the truth will have to transcend their own agendas (what JC refers to as 'rationalization') to grasp his motives
I will acknowledge in advance, that some will feel that this is an inopportune time to resurrect the past. Especially a past that may put the "experimental" branch of the hobby in a negative light.
The fact is that the deficiencies in national leadership has put, and will continue to put the hobby at risk. Deficiencies which precipitated BATFE involvement.
If we are to proceed into a future where amateur rocketry in all its manifestations is recognized as safe and legal, we must take responsibility for creating that reality and consensus.
This is what JC is saying. This is what John Wickman is leading us in. That is the "relationship" which eluded Ray.
JC admits that his concerns re: noncommercial motor manufacture are personal. But those concerns, and others, must be addressed in the minds of congress, so that that future can be realized.
- iz
Ray Dunakin on 11/23/2003 2:35 AM said:
> Anyone who screws with someone else's launch has serious problems, to say the least.
Like who? Those TRA members up north of me who jeopardized the financial future of the landowner (theirs and mine - one in the same) and the future of my site here by holding a clandestine and illegal 'EX' launch - not telling a single soul outside the 13 who attended (including the other two clubs whose future there was put in just as much jeopardy as my own site)?
Is that 'who'?
Yeah - I agree -- they've got serious problems.
> I find it curious that you should mention Mr. Cato this way, since by his reckoning all EX rocketry is illegal (and he apparently feels the same about HPR). Kind of puts him at odds with you and John Wickman, as well as just about everyone else in the hobby.
I've always said (and started to again after your post below - almost predicting Ray's response - which, as you see above, he fulfilled my prophesy)...
... at any rate, I've always said that this hobby can do whatever it wants provided two (and ONLY two) conditions are met:
1) it must be safe (or, alternately, conducted in such a manner that anomalous events are rendered inert in their ability to cause harm to those a) not participating and/or b) not aware of the risk they may be under, even if participating - or any property they may own or control)... and...
2) it must be legal (to the absolute BEST of the organizer's ability to determine (this additional condition is what 'nails' far too much of the 'efforts' here)).
As regards Item #1, I must confess I am not completely sure mixing propellant in a KitchenAid is the best thing - nor 'slicing' the grains on a Craftsman 'chop saw'. This stuff is like a grenade - it's safe until it's NOT safe and then it REALLY is not safe. It very well may involve a grasp of chemistry equivalent to at least a year of college level training and education. The problem I see is that far too much 'rationalization' is utilized to justify doing what one wants. It could still be 'safe' in that context -- but the one thing that kills it dead in the water is the fact that a lot of who practice this ABSOLUTELY WILL *NOT* admit that rationalization is going on here...
... and, in that, I rest my case. If they can't ADMIT the weakness (and potential harm) from that kind of mental process, then they have categorically proven that they are unqualified to be undertaking this activity. It can change - they can be 'safe' - but until they can simply "be honest", they can't claim they are qualified.
As regards Item #2, 'breaking the law' simply voids the insurance (such that it is -- and I frankly believe TRA is lying about ANY kind of insurance for this stuff). I mean, TRA's own documents and webpages say it very clearly - violating the bylaws (that require compliance with "all federal, state and local laws, ordinances, rules, regulations..." etc.etc.etc.) as a condition for insurance coverage - and then VIOLATING those self-same 'laws, ordinances, rules, regulations...' makes them the biggest hypocrites since God knows when. I might could even learn to keep my mouth shut and tolerate such incredibly unprofessional behavior - EXCEPT the fact that something in excess of 99.99% of the launch sites in this country are NOT owned by the hobbyists using it. In other words, somebody ELSE is laying it on the line for them to 'play' with their 'toys' - and assuming the potential life-destroying liability...
... and yet these hobbyists will represent to these landowners that what they are doing is a 'fine, upstanding' endeavor -- CREATING the impression in this landowner's mind that - additionally (and, at a minimum) what they are doing is LEGAL and their (this landowner's) future is being protected by *some* kind of insurance.
That is lying. Plain and simple.
That is not (necessarily) 'illegal'.
It is not necessarily 'unethical' (altho I consider it such).
It is *immoral*.
If one cannot conduct themselves in this hobby at a higher plane of behavior than to engage in what any decent and sane and rational human would consider 'immoral' behavior, then the option is simple - you don't do it.
Want to do 'EX' (in a state or locale that disallows it)? Get some insurance that will cover you EVEN IF you still 'break the law'. Then tell that landowner the truth.
If anyone wonders why I feel a need to keep distant from all this insanity - it is because I frankly absolutely canNOT tolerate such low standards of professionalism and integrity - and to think that some low-life actually gets in the position of *leadership* in this hobby and then ENCOURAGES this very behavior...
... well.... not this 'dude'.
No.
If that "puts me at odds" with the whole damn World... so be it.
-- john.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Let's at least come to unanimous agreement on this point so the path forward is clear and easy.

Pissing match snipped.
--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to: snipped-for-privacy@gte.net>
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Ismaeel Abdur-Rasheed wrote:
<< John Cato's' responses inline (posted with permission). As you will see from his closing remark, he will not be engaging this interactively so debate efforts to debate are wasted. >>
Then why the hell are you posting it? Just to help him get in "the last word"? And why are you cross-posting it here, when the original post was on ROL?
<< John speaks with authority with respect to historical events...>>
He can "speak with authority" all he wants, it doesn't change the fact that he's wrong.
<<...about which almost everyone is ignorant. >>
And just how knowledgeable are you, Iz? You've only been in this hobby what, a year? Yet you're putting all your trust in the crackpots on the fringes of the hobby.
<< If we are to proceed into a future where amateur rocketry in all its manifestations is recognized as safe and legal, we must take responsibility for creating that reality and consensus >>
Bull.
<< JC admits that his concerns re: noncommercial motor manufacture are personal. >>
Yes, and he stick them and the rest of his "concerns" back up the orifice he pulled them from.
John Cato put crayon to paper and scribbled: << If anyone wonders why I feel a need to keep distant from all this insanity

Better work a little harder at "keeping distant".
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@aol.com (RayDunakin) wrote:

He is probably "right" but he is not "politicically popular" and he ignores "non-enforcement zones" and "substantial compopliance".
He is probably right that everything he stated was technically ilegal. Everything is.

Jerry
--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to: snipped-for-privacy@gte.net>
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
responses inline
- iz
RayDunakin wrote:

the thread on ROL was specifically about RMR, and its culture. John Cato is a part of its history. I post it here for the record.

you may disagree with his actions, but your assessment is not pertinent to the historical fact

you, like John DeMar, have no idea who I am or what my level of discernment engages

your remark belies what John refered to as "that kind of mental process". There is an objective reality, Ray, and it constrains our freedom to act without ill consequence.

disrespect for or denial of the "concerns" of others is what precipitated this crisis. Listen, understand, and address the concerns; or educate to alleviate them.

the issues are in our path, Ray. Dead in our path. There is no 'distance' you can keep from them and still get past them.
deal with them
- iz
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I'm pretty sure that is illegal on rmr.

Head in sand is why there is a mess to fix.
Or ignore while it festers.
Jerry
--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to: snipped-for-privacy@gte.net>
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@aol.com (RayDunakin) wrote:

Not literally true.
He is opposed to ILLEGAL EX rocketry and in particular that proffered by TRA whose insurance requires the activity "be legal", if the insurance exists at all.
As you are probably aware it is very diffuicult to fully comply. Errortech for example spent some $250k to rebuild an entirely new facility that can have a mere 2000 pounds (4 drums) of AP on site at any time.
I know at least a dozen EX guys who have that much in their garage or barn.
Cato who has an excessively vociferous posting style and an excessively detailed opinion of what constitutes compliance, does offer advise on how to actually comply to his own standards, which are bout 3 light years above Tripoli's.
Rather than employ ANY of them, his critics attack ALL of them. Nobody who is citing the law chapter and verse can possibly be that wrong.

Not even the law 27 CFR 555.141-a-8
Jerry
--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to: snipped-for-privacy@gte.net>
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
don't let my official affiliations fool you
I am an analyst, engineer and manager by profession of 22 years. If I cannot establish rapport with insiders and identify significant problem areas in an organization within three months, I would not be worth my salary.
Since I turned my attention to the legislative and political issues affecting rocketry some 9 months ago, I have learned enough to know that the national organizations have hoodwinked more than a few, and have an agenda that prioritizes their continuity and influence above the future of "amateur" rocketry and the interests of vendors, site owners and members.
what you call the fringes define the parameters, while what you might feel is mainstream would be what? TRA party line? Aerotech market dominance? support of 0.9 lbs of "model rocket motors" in "recreational model rockets" as a validation of BATFE oversight?
take a step back Ray, .... way back.
- iz
RayDunakin wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

This should be in the FAQ and mandatory reading for all rocketeers.

--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to: snipped-for-privacy@gte.net>
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Iz wrote: << I am an analyst, engineer and manager by profession of 22 years. If I cannot establish rapport with insiders and identify significant problem areas in an organization within three months, I would not be worth my salary. >>
So with which "insiders" have you established a rapport? Cato certainly isn't an "insider", by any stretch of the imagination. Jerry hasn't been an insider for a long time, currently he's just an EX guy who is still crying over his inability to legally sell motors. Wickman is another EX guy with a grudge against TRA. Hmm, I think I see a pattern here -- anyone who has an axe to grind is an "insider". Right.
<< what you call the fringes define the parameters, while what you might feel is mainstream would be what? >>
It certainly isn't anyone who believes that all high power and EX is illegal and should be immediately shut down until things conform to his own unique definition of "legality".
Which reminds me, you still haven't said anything about how Cato's wacko beliefs jibe with your own support for both EX and high power. Or is the fact that he also hates TRA the only thing that matters to you?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@aol.com (RayDunakin) wrote:

Why is it anyone who uses objective fact to expose and criticize your idols must therefore be "crying", "grudge", "ax to grind"?

And you have suspended logic and rational thought to initiate your own diatribe.
Jerry
--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to: snipped-for-privacy@gte.net>
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
yes I did, you just weren't paying attention. See below your comment.
- iz
RayDunakin wrote:

Ismaeel Abdur-Rasheed wrote:
> If we are to proceed into a future where amateur rocketry in all its > manifestations is recognized as safe and legal, we must take > responsibility for creating that reality and consensus. > > This is what JC is saying. This is what John Wickman is leading us in. > That is the "relationship" which eluded Ray.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Eluded Ray twice in the time span of 3 posts :)
--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to: snipped-for-privacy@gte.net>
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
(RayDunakin) writes:

I can't speak for "iz", but I got actual TMT test data from Cato when he WAS an insider. And I got actual TMT test data from someone on Sue McMurrays committee when (s)he was an insider [Alas, all I kept was the data, and I don't even remember the name of the person who sent it to me, probably just as well for him or her.] That is how I was able to determine how many AT motors were tested during the 3 year gap; the data file names are sequential. There was only a 17 motor gap unaccounted for. No matter how you slice and dice it, 17 tests can't account for around 60 certifications of new motors, including all of the AT hybrids, the 98mm line, and much more released and claimed to be certified over that 3 year period.
Which brings up this question: what happened to the motors AT submitted for TRA TMT certification if they weren't tested. Were they converted to personal use? That would certainly lend credibility to Jerry Irvine's claim of what happened to him.
The truth is that I still don't trust Jerry. That an organization could be so corrupt as to make his claims look plausable is simply amazing. Yet TRA is so corrupt an organization that I have absolutely no choice to believe a lot of what Jerry says.
    Bob Kaplow    NAR # 18L    TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD"         >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD! <<< Kaplow Klips & Baffle:    http://nira-rocketry.org/LeadingEdge/Phantom4000.pdf www.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/ www.nira-rocketry.org www.nar.org
Save Model Rocketry from the HSA! http://www.space-rockets.com/congress.html
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Bob Kaplow wrote:

Some of the stories he's told are so weird I doubt anyone would make them up... which gives a bit of clarity as to TRA's possible motive regarding their apparent campaign to keep him discredited... that way, when he reveals that they're up to something, the plan is that the revelation could be dismissed as "just another one of Jerry's wild stories!"
-dave w
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Plausible deniability.
Rogers' mantra.
Suspended disbelief.
Rogers' mantra.
Just Jerry
--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to: snipped-for-privacy@gte.net>
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
kaplow snipped-for-privacy@encompasserve.org.TRABoD (Bob Kaplow) wrote:

Sucks, eh?
Jerry

--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to: snipped-for-privacy@gte.net>
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
kaplow snipped-for-privacy@encompasserve.org.TRABoD (Bob Kaplow) wrote:

STILL R O F L ! ! minutes later.
--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to: snipped-for-privacy@gte.net>
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Bob K wrote: << I can't speak for "iz", but I got actual TMT test data from Cato when he WAS an insider. >>
Regardless of whether his claims regarding motor testing are true or not, it has nothing to do with Cato's insistence that all high power and Ex is illegal and should be immediately ceased.
<< And I got actual TMT test data from someone on Sue McMurrays committee when (s)he was an insider [Alas, all I kept was the data, and I don't even remember the name of the person who sent it to me, probably just as well for him or her.] >>
You got "some" test date from an unnamed source who was not the person in charge of testing, just an underling. Why would that person give it to you, unless they had an ax to grind either against TRA or Sue? How do you know you got all of the date, and that the date was not altered in anyway?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@aol.com (RayDunakin) wrote:

I noticed you find it easy to view TRA and its leaders as victims of "bad vendors", but almost impossible to view vendors as victims of "bad TRA and its leaders", even though 100% of the hard evidence supports the latter proposition.
Time for logic class.
Jerry
--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to: snipped-for-privacy@gte.net>
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

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.