JC, TRA and the future of rocketry

Courtesy? ROL? Bah!
Reply to
Jerry Irvine
Loading thread data ...
I didn't see any dates in there and as LDRS is mentioned I'm assuming it's been at least a couple of years, based on your invite record. How 'bout this. Write the TMT with this list of issues, ask that they be addressed to ensure that your forthcoming motors will be certified in a timely manner.
How 'bout a third party watches the tests and gets a floppy with the data?
That just sounds dirty. If the manufacturer can't make the test, how about having a third party who would physically put them on the test station.
Is there still money owed? Does it even out against a damaged test stand?
If TRA's insurance requires verification of 1125 (23?) and use the LEMP insure that requirement. Doesn't NAR send someout out to view the site? Is there some other way? Could you not certify them via NAR?
The TMT would have to answer to why the one provided was not approved.
I take it it wasn't the current TMT members as they don't drive wagons.
Took me a minute to realize MNOPQ was not an acrynom :) Let's worry about the bigger guys later.
There's no denying there's been issues. Is it better to sit n spin? Taking action would at least put them in the hot seat, no?
I double dare ya.
Joel. phx
Reply to
Joel Corwith
Oh I did. I have two "supporters" now inside TRA BOD and every internal overture they have made has also been rebuffed, so my chances from "outside" seem slim indeed.
"We won't do it that way."-two different TMT chairs.
Tried that too.
Nice tries so far!
TRA agrees they owe me money. But refuse to pay.
What would make them short of a 3 year lawsuit? TRA doesn't "have to" DO anything. They certainly proved that with HPR magazines and with ATF wackiness.
Let's worry about the bigger guys FIRST. That is the clearest paperwork and in fact DOT even allows classification BY DEFAULT in that range so there could NEVER be a claim they are not approved by any stretch.
The proper action was to go indy.
The next chapter is to sue and on some date certain will be the last date to sue for the largest collection of prior acts. I will sue then. My advise to TRA is to settle out of court.
They have never taken my advise yet.
Jerry
Reply to
Jerry Irvine
You sound like you know these folks...
Ask them if they'd accept for certification a "US Rockets" branded motor manufactured to order for Jerry by a supplier - ACS Reaction labs or whoever he gets his propellant from these days - with established transport hazard classifications (either 1.3C, 1.4C, or "not even class 1 in small quantities") for their propellant formulations, or would they blow him off with complaints that "Jerry's not the actal physical manufacturer" [that rule needs to be changed to permit outsource brokers to certify product lines for sport use: whether or not that was the actual intent, it sure _looks_ like blatant and clumsy "Jerry-mandering" that TRA ought to be embarrassed... ] or "the hazard classification isn't in 'US Rockets' name".
-dave w
Reply to
David Weinshenker
Unless Aerotech burns down and hires Ellis to make them :)
Unless Kosdon by Aerotech is desired by TRA BOD :)
The ONLY non-exception is me.
Reply to
Jerry Irvine
Except some things disappear (or are hard to find). The warning about widespread ATF enforcement action (which put a damper on Memorial Day plans) or the June 1 "staying legal" which backed off and had suggestions on what the ATF would or would not do. I can't find those on the website (although I have the June 1 item stored).
Ismaeel Abdur-Rasheed wrote:
Reply to
Alex Mericas
Jerry, Jerry, think about this for a minute... do you _really_ want to spend large amounts of money for the "privilege" of spending large amounts of time in the company of _lawyers_??
-dave w
Reply to
David Weinshenker
Yep.
Reply to
Jerry Irvine
John took over TRA TMT when it was doing nothing and NFPA was about to yank the motor testing franchise out from under TMT. In 3 months he did what his predecessor never did, actually TEST and CERTIFY motors. And presented his work to engineers, scientists, and fire chiefs on the NFPA in a credible manner.
Then he found out about the corruption in TRA, how the BOD was changing the rules regularly, without informing the members. All of this was totally outside the TRA charter and bylaws. [Compare the "proposed" bylaws published in 1996 to the original bylaws published in the 80s. The 1996 edition is what TRA operated under as early as 1991, in total secrecy] He became a whistle-blower. For this he was removed from TMT, replaced by someone who in three years did nothing, and eventually quit TRA in disgust just as his expulsion letter from His Royal Higness Bruce the First was in the mail.
Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD!
Reply to
Bob Kaplow
Yes, he did accuse them of that. And yes, he does have proof of that. As do I, but not to the extent that John does. It's amazingly obvious if you look at what data was presented by TMT after John left.
What's disgusting is that Johns charges were totally ignored by TRA, NAR, and even NFPA. And repeated requests to TRA TMT for SPECIFIC data to validate certifications done in the 1994-1997 time frame have never produced any hard data that the motors in question were actually tested. Because they weren't.
I have some internal TMT data that shows that between John Cato's removal as TMT chair until Sue McMurray took over 3+ years later, exactly 17 Aerotech motors were tested by TMT. Given that it takes 3-12 test firings to certify a new motor, only 1-5 new AT motors could have been legitimately tested in that period. Yet there were about 60 (98mm, hybrids, etc) added during that period. Once I calculated it would have taken around 200 tests to account for all the new motors added over that period. Yet they did 17 tests.
What about other manufacturers? BTSOOM! I don't have the data for them. But I'd be willing to bet my motor budget for next year that they played the same game with other motor vendors as they did with AT.
BTW, this motor test fraud predates John Cato. In 1992 Chuck Rogers claimed that TRA TMT had tested and certified ALL of the AT consumer 18mm, 24mm, and 29/40-120 reloads. The truth is the ONLY motor of this class ever test fired by TMT, at least as of 1996 was ONE D24-10. Not one pack. Not one of each delay type. ONE MOTOR. Chuck Rogers lied to the NAR by stating that all these motors weree certified. And from 1994 on TRA continued these lies by falsly certifying dosens of motors without testing them.
John and I have made these claims continiously since the mid 90s. Ray (and Chuck Rogers and Bruce Kelly and Tom Blazanin, and other TRA lackies) and other TRA apologists, I'll gladly issue a retraction of this claim, never make it again, and personally apologize to all those I've mentioned. All it will take is PROOF that TRA actually tested all of the motors it claimed it certified during the 90s. I want the actual motor firing data, and proof that it was collected when the certifications were made. And a DAP listing from the TMT compyuter showing all the tests done by TMT. Just thedata that should be available from any legitimate testing organization. Simple enough?
The fact that no one has produced this data in a decade is proof positive that TRA TMT and TRA BOD is a corrupt bunch of liars. Everyone involved in this fraud should be permanently expelled from the organization, and if possible, charged with criminal fraud. And any current board member that continues the cover-up is just as guilty as those who perpetrated this fraud a decade ago.
Note: During the time in the late 90s that Sue McMurray ran TRA TMT, I have absolutely NO QUESTION that everything done by her group was totally legitimate and above board. I still haven't heard why she left, or what has happened since she left.
Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD!
Reply to
Bob Kaplow
But it WAS about EX. TRA was representing their insurance at the time as covering EX activities, and that they were fully legal. This is not true. In fact, the sod folks were never even told that EX activities were being conducted there. John saw fraud, and blew the whistle.
What is indefensible is that TRA undertook this fraud in the first place. I'm really sorry that folks lost a good fling field as a result. But the blame lies with the TRA BOD, not with John Cato.
Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD!
Reply to
Bob Kaplow
They didn't even do that. They denied the fraud and still do.
Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD!
Reply to
Bob Kaplow
I've got absolutely no idea of what is going on now. I can state with 100% certainty that between 1991 and 1993, and again between 1994 and 1997 MANY motors that TRA claimed were certified were not tested by TMT. That is an indisputable FACT.
Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD!
Reply to
Bob Kaplow
Nor does it mean leave fraudulent certifications on the books. Nor does it mean failure to take any disciplinary action against those who lied. Nore does it even mean to not admit that the certifications were bogus. TO date TRA has never even admited the truth, that some previous certifications were fraudulent.
Ask your TRA BOD why they still keep this a secret?
Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD!
Reply to
Bob Kaplow
If 'telecom company L" submits a "telephony device" to UL for testing, the paperwork says "company L". All the paperwork says "company L". If company T from Sweden actually manufactured all the components, the paperwork says "company L". If there's a problem, it falls on "company L".
Did the "owner" of US Rockets (not a corporation, yes?) submit the paperwork with all the appropriate contact information, or was this all done by a 'third party'?
What exactly has occurred here, I don't know. I don't believe the full story has appeared. Yes, it would be nice to get to the bottom of the story and who did what, said what, screwed whom... But it would also be nice to cut the soapopera crap and have more motors available in the market.
Joel. phx
Reply to
Joel Corwith
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!
Reply to
Bob Kaplow
I am not aware that any paperwork would have to change if company E made motors for company A. Without the physical evidence, would you agree that Aerotech clearly owned their own EX numbers and all the other appropriate documents 'in their name' prior to the fire?
There you go, you should be able to get a clear ruling on how the paperwork must be filled out. Line up all the stuff needed and ask what isn't square.
No Jerry, you're exceptional! ;)
Joel. phx
Reply to
Joel Corwith
What he said. last time I posted to an ROL forum, under my own name, in line with the established thread, the posts were deleted by the "moderator".
And when the folks that run ER/ROL contracted with me to pay for a specified article, and I wrote that article, it was stalled until it was no longer relivant, then "rejected" after it was too late to publish it elsewhere. BTW, they contacted me for the article, and gave me the topic, not the other way around.
Any one promised money from ER in return for an article should get guaranteed payment in advance of wasting time writing that article. From my experience, there's a good chance they'll bury your material and never pay for it.,
Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD!
Reply to
Bob Kaplow
hey, when I talk to myself I look myself in the eye (in the mirror)
that was I can judge if I'm lying or not
;o)
- iz "I don't need no steekin' sock pupper"
John DeMar wrote:
Reply to
Ismaeel Abdur-Rasheed
That would be great. Please ask TMT to provide the test data for the 18/24/29mm consumer reloads as tested in 1992. I'd love to see anything beyond one D24-10 firing.
Ditto for the AT 98mm RMS motors and hybrids certified in the 1994-1997 range. Or any of the other motors certified by TMT between the Cato era and the McMurray era. And don't forget to include the results of all the delay tests for the motors that have delay and ejection.
Let me make it worth someone's effort to get this. Produce all the data I've asked for, and I'll donate $1 per motor data set to the TRA legal fund (or the next round of save rocketry or whatever else we agree on) in your name. Based on my earlier estimates, that's up to $200 for each paragraph listed above.
Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD!
Reply to
Bob Kaplow

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.