JC, TRA and the future of rocketry

I've been wondering about her myself - her departure seemed rather sudden and silent, and rated only the most perfunctory of announcements in the "Tripoli Report" - a few brief paragraphs that didn't really provide much at all in the way of background. Did she just get burned out on the job, or was there some kind of falling-out?

-dave w

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

John Wickman makes his own observations

I do not see the merit in proposing that he make a specific one to provide you with a position to manipulate. His position regarding the fallacious DOJ/BATFE grounds for rocketry regulation is well documented on the ARSA site. Rocketry should be legal, and that is what we are working towards. The truth about rocketry's safety, and the reflection of that fact in law, has a positive bearing on insurability.

a "legal" practice of rocketry, and an insurance coverage that is effective [in its protection of siteowners and participants] due to the that legal practice is what John Cato demanded.

how is that not clear? What purpose would additional information serve?

BTW: to correct your statement - I am not an "appointed internet contact". I said "I stepped up to facilitate communication", and my performing that function has agreement where it is necessary.

- iz

RayDunak> George Gassaway wrote:

Or certify through CAR.

Ted Novak TRA#5512

I'm not a member of TRA so asking for club records would pull as much weight as Jerry. I'm certain they have an inclining of what's going on and perhaps a TRA member could verify that this data does or does not exist.

Frankly, I don't know what the manufacturer's certification requrements are (is was were). Do they require testing every variation, or only verify a sampling to ensure the sample matches the manufacture's tests? What are NARs requirements, do they differ?

What is the line of chairs (including years) for TMT? How about NAR?

And what if they come back and say 'yup, we didn't actually test them'? Still produce the $200?

Joel. phx

I have answered this, your problem lies in your failure to understand John Cato's position

JC did not say HPR/EX should be illegal, he said legal HPR/EX should be practiced. Make it legal, then practice it.

His observations were that what was practiced was not legal, therefore the insurance was not effective, therefore the rights of siteowners (and financial protection for launch participants) were not protected - and that was immoral

unfortunately many others share your misapprehension in this regard

- iz

RayDunak> In what way does this do anything to resolve the ambiguity of your support for

And JC's comments to the sod farm company weren't "ban rocketry", they were "maybe rocket flying should be limited to certified consumer motors - it's not clear that the 'experimental' stuff is legal, and that might cause trouble with the insurance if there were an accident."

According to published reports, the actual reason for the field closure was on the recommendation of the local manager, who didn't have any problem with the EX activity, but was concerned about the model rocket kids who tended to outfly the site with small rockets on big motors, and then damage trees on neighboring farms trying to retrieve them.

-dave w

I don't know the 'reason' either, but one would think that if the chair is expected to run motor tests, they ought not be allergic to AP?

Joel. phx

Those silly geese think of everything:

"3.2 Motors of Foreign Manufacture Motors of foreign manufacture may be considered for CAR certification testing only where no CAR, Tripoli, NAR or other reciprocal association certification test facility exists in the country of manufacture."

And where you make a mistake is: All based on an architect's interpretation of the law. Not an attorney's. Not a state fire marshall's. Not an officer of the law's. Nope, an architect whose legal conclusions were in complete disagreement with all the above.

But it took him about a gigabyte of crap to say what you just did in one under 1k post :)

None of this ever makes it into the reactive poster's posts.

You haven't been given a cease and desist notice yet? :)

In hindsight, actually three chairs.

I would be VERY interested in videoing the whiole thing.

At least they refunded me the $1000 cert fee advance I paid several months later after they "got rid of" the motors of course without communicating with me about it in any way first.

Some they insisted DOT take them (DOT is not in the confiscation business, they are in the fine business) Instead of getting fined or repremand I received a very nice apology. The others vaporized into Kane's universe somewhere.

a.

Done. Email me.

Jerry

CAR has a rule that states if there is a certifying agency in your home country they will not certify there. If they change that internal rule I also have the Canadian approvals in place needed to implement that plan.

Jerry

It was a precondition of TRA accepting CAR certs. :)

In addition, he was no longer a member of TRA, had little if any information on TRA insurance, and probably had axes to grind. Hell from what I was told, he no longer launched rockets.

Fred

Kurt Kesler wrote:

I'll match $10 for each of your $1.

They are the same and they are excessive but I have always cheerfully coimplied.

Nope. The payment is for the data supporting certifications that were already approved ONLY.