JC, TRA and the future of rocketry

As a great wise man once said, "Can't we all just get along?"

I have PUBLISHED the documents and denied any responsibility for the documents run through AeroTech's fax machine with the fax number still on top. Certainly those falsified papers were NEVER tendered to either TRA or NAR by me or any OEM.

But if that is the basis for the ban then it seems I have a cause of action against any person or firm in that chain of posession, presumably TRA, AT and whatever third party might be involved.

Jerry

Bob K wrote:

BS. That's as polite as I can put it.

But you seem EAGER to make excuses for TRA. Just can't get your mind are ound the objective appearance they are inherently evil?

Jerry

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

ah, ... no

it proves they were corrupt

- iz

RayDunak> Bob K wrote:

this conversation is my own, originating on ROL with subject of RMR culture and personalities.

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.

my, aren't we generous (selectively, that is when it comes to excusing TRA)

Ray, falsified certification has both serious safety and insurance implications. That puts siteowners, launch participants and spectators at risk. At risk of injury, property damage, and the resulting liability.

but, what the hell. They were just "ramping up".

do you even listen to yourself sometimes?

remove the guilty from the Board, expell them from TRA, and let them consider themselves lucky that they are not being charged with criminal behavior.

- iz

RayDunak> Repeating it over and over doesn't make it a fact. Proof does. However, even if

George,

you really should lighten up ;o)

when you make deductions from levity, you are clearly waaay to high strung, d0od!

- iz

GCGassaway wrote:

It's hard to avoid the impression that that's _exactly_ what's been going on - and that all the stuff about "papers not in order" is mostly (and possibly completely) just a clumsy excuse.

-dave w

But it did start a debate with real facts about irregularities that actually really exist being exposed (again).

Funny thing is George, you fixate on a check I bounced and paid for almost 2 decades ago but you have no interest in MOTOR CERTIFICATION IRREGULARITIES in the present day even though certified motors are the very centerpiece of your model rocket religion and life purpose.

Those are some mighty screwed up priorities.

Jerry

You took that damn logic class. What's wrong with you? Why weren't you edumicated in a CA public school like Ray?

Jerry

Ray,

really, do you ever listen to yourself?

resp> Bob K wrote:

let me spell this out for you, real simple-like

fraudulent certification renders insurance void, and launches illegal under NFPA rules for commercial launches. Do some research.

of course! why should any data be valid if it doesn't support your position? Hello!!! Earth to Ray!!! Its been said that TRA admitted they didn't do all the testing they claimed to have done during the period. Or don't you believe them either?

You're asking, basically, what does Wickman think of Cato? (I have no idea whether their paths would have crossed much...)

-dave w

I have already responded to this request in a previous post. Fetch.

- iz

GCGassaway wrote:

while I cannot say whether JW and JC have ever communicated directly, I can say that there is an indirect relationship between positions pending by ARSA, and expertise held by John Cato

sorry, I couldn't resist ;o)

- iz

David We> GCGassaway wrote:

ARSA does not need any spokesman other than John Wickman

when I repost material from an ARSA site, that will John's material unless I am specifically posting such material, I am responsible for my own remarks the degree to which my own remarks coincide with John's positions is for the reader to discern, given the context of his previously published comments (and which are preserved historically on the ARSA site)

that should resolve any ambiguity

P O I N T

"Suspended disbelief." - Charles E. Rogers

Ramping up for 20 years?

no comment