Loki Research motors at LDRS

If you don't know by now, you're an f'in retard.

Wondering aloud what vendor that might have been...

Similar to NARAM in Vegas. Bought a bunch of AT reloads that the TRA president claimed were certified. Turns out he lied, the motors never were certified, and I was stuck with a bunch of useless reloads.

Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD!

Not useless... just can't fly them at a NAR or TRA launch. BTW... I'm sure there a "Estes" motors that have decertified (and can't be flown at NAR or TRA launches) , so lets get off the soap box Bob.

Doug

But HOW they became decertified is TOTALLY different and did not involve fraud.

I doubt it. I gave mine to someone who uses them for "M" ignitors.

Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD!

There's a difference between old expired / decertified and never having been certified in the first place.

And thanks to the lies, ther were sold and flown at an NAR launch.

Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD!

You donated a set to the Naram-45 auction.

I certainly don't recall doing so. Maybe someoen else did. I assume you bought them. What were they and how were they packaged?

Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD!

In your case, 40 gran to the man, hey what the deal? We know the deal.... You weren't legal, aren't legal, and never will be legal to sell "your " motors; wherever you get them..

Fred, had a great time at LDRS, and yes, I launched a rocket on a LOKI

54mm Star Grain, "FREE" demo motor. A$$ kicking flight..

That was a DOT issue... Jerry was talking about ATF user/manufacturer permits above, not DOT shipping classification! Do "Judge Walton" and "27 CFR 55.141" (latterly 27 CFR 555.141) mean anything to you?

(And did anyone notice that it was shortly after the Status Hearing on the BATF case that you and others started getting really shrill about hounding Jerry about his DOT hassles, even though you clearly were aware of them previously?)

It's almost as if you all were trying to divert attention from the fact that the judge said that we don't have to "get legal" with respect to BATF permits for our propellant actuated devices. What is your interest in obfuscating that? Why are you trying to stand up for a position that the BATF already lost? Do you _want_ to give the BATF grounds to argue that the exemption is moot because "everyone is still applying for licenses and permits anyway"...?

-dave w

Not true. I stumbled across the DOT fine when I did a Google on Jerry's name. Someone here accused him of being a convicted felon & I was trying (not real hard) to see if there was any truth to it. Anyway the fine poped up at that time. It had nothing to do with BATF.

Keep dreaming. Maybe you should get a job with one of the presidential candidates. They can always use someone to put their spin on things. They pay better than Jerry.

I wondered who would answer first, Jerry or his chief driveling drone.. (;-)

You are so focused on na na na na that it is apparant why you counter worked "for me" with DOT.

Jerry

[whether] "Mr. Irvine has complied with the instructions provided him, with no response from your office unless he has taken liberties with the truth, there are problems he has failed to disclose, resulting in a delay in the response from you or your office, and or both."

- W.E. "Fred" Wallace, MDRA 6-26-01 letter to DOT

Almost??

You KNOW why. He **IS** the mole. See below.

[whether] "Mr. Irvine has complied with the instructions provided him, with no response from your office unless he has taken liberties with the truth, there are problems he has failed to disclose, resulting in a delay in the response from you or your office, and or both."

- W.E. "Fred" Wallace, MDRA 6-26-01 letter to DOT

Pardon me for stating the obvious:

"In addition, the Court finds that the ATF's pronouncement that sport rocket motors are not PADs is invalid because it was made without compliance with the notice-and-comment rulemaking procedures of the OCCA and the APA."

27 CFR 555.11, Propellant Actuated Device. Any tool or special mechanized device or gas generator system which is actuated by a propellant or which releases and directs work through a propellant charge.

27 CFR 555.141 exemptions (a) (8) Gasoline, fertilizers, propellant actuated devices, or propellant actuated industrial tools manufactured, imported, or distributed for their intended purposes.

QED

"On the other hand, the only reason an individual vendor needs any kind of BATF-related "license" for exempt PAD's is if he's getting them from a manufacturer who still insists on distributing them under the auspices of the "licensee/permittee" system in the first place...

- David Weinshenker

Like LOKI. Like RCS. Like AMW.

Phil had a good time too & flew a Loki J528 "FREE DEMO MOTOR." It was a Jerry kicking flight - er I mean ass.

Bullshit. You think because someone has a good time & doesn't mention you it's a nanana? See a doctor!!

What's wrong with Fred saying this? You have been known to 'exaggerate."

So does EVERYTHING have to do with Jerry?

Phil?

Jerry

To an official? On speculation?

Are you really that stupid you have to ask?

You tell me. Fred says he had a good time & you turn it into him nyanyanyaing Jerry. Sounds to me like it does - according to you.

I just wanted to see your answer. I don't think Fred tried to cause you any trouble.

You brought me up.

Phil?

(echo)

It was:

Are you really that stupid you have to ask?

So you ARE a retard.

Resolved.

Jerry

Only in your mind.

you are the one that lied about your status with the DOT.