NAR Board votes to violate Safety Code!



Yea, Shockies being this years JI
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
You forgot that maybe he's not familiar with weenies that whine and pull "facts" out of their ass.
Phil
On Tue, 23 May 2006 11:22:16 -0400, "shockwaveriderz"

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I need to clarify some on my remarks regarding FAI tetsting and certfication of model rocket used at FAI events.
I had previously said that motors used in FAI World Cup competitions, have to be tested prior to use. It turns out this is not the case. You are on "the honour system" as was just told to me with a longtime FAI competitor. Basically the motors are only tested at the WSMC (World Space Modeling Championships) which are held on a every other year basis, so they are tested once every 2 years. I might add that in WC events, there is no prohibition against using your handmade motors....ie amateur rocketry style. And since they wouldn't be tested anyway, nobody would know. Over in East Euope not alot of distinction is made between model rocketry and amatuer rocketry as it is here. Both the Polish and former Yugoslavia modlers have a long tradition of AR dating to the mid to late 50's and in fact alot of them transitioned to model rocketry in that time frame.
terry dean

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

No, I'm not. In fact, if the team had asked the NAR to grant reciprocal certification to FAI motors, as it did with TRA and CAR, and it followed those same procedures, and put them on the combined motor certification list, I'd be 100% behind this action. But instead it voted to allow "selected members" to violate the Safety Code. That is outside the scope of the NAR. There is no "selected members" class established in the bylaws. All members must pledge to follow the NAR safety code at all times:
Section 8: A person or organization having expressed his (its) desire for membership shall become a member of the appropriate class upon satisfaction of the Membership Committee as to his (its) sincerity of purpose and good reputation, upon affixing his (its) name to a statement pledging to serve and abide by the Safety Code(s) of the Association in all non-professional rocket activities, and upon payment of dues required by these By-Laws.

Since there is no legal way to import and distribute these motors made overseas within the US without DOT paperwork, I'd have to say yes. Their very presence in this country is evidence that something is improper.
--
Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L >>> To reply, there's no internet on Mars (yet)! <<<
Kaplow Klips & Baffle: http://nira-rocketry.org/Document/MayJun00.pdf
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
What I find entertaining about this whole thing is that some members of the NAR BoT just about had kittens when it was suggested that NAR members be allowed to fly at TRA Research Launches, provided that the NAR members ONLY fly certified motors.
The reason it wasn't even a discussion point? It doesn't follow NFPA 1127.
Now, NAR has decided that it's okay to toss NFPA 1127 so a few folks can fly FAI Contest motors.
So, it's important for a very limited number of members who can get their hands on FAI motors to be able to fly them at NSL, but it's not important to open more launch opportunities to NAR members to fly within existing NAR rules, or rules that are more strict?
-Kevin
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Yup. The same minutes say NO to allowing dual NAR/TRA clubs to host EX launches, say NO to NAR members flying old motors that were NAR certified, then do an about face and say that "selected members" can violate the NAR Safety Code if the Pope gives their event a special blessing.
But they make no mention that flying uncertified motors at NAR events with the Pope's blessing still invalidates their NAR insurance.
--
Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L >>> To reply, there's no internet on Mars (yet)! <<<
Kaplow Klips & Baffle: http://nira-rocketry.org/Document/MayJun00.pdf
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Bob Kaplow wrote:

Interesting...
So, they want to claim that they can tell my club we cannot host Research launches, because we're dual NAR/TRA? I don't think so.
What we do under the guise of Tripoli is none of their business. Just like what we do under the guise of NAR is none of Tripoli's business.
We just know that, due to NAR's unwillingness to allow their members to fly only certified motors under rules more strict than NAR's, we hold a few launch days a year that our NAR-only members cannot participate in.
-Kevin
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
kaplow snipped-for-privacy@encompasserve.org.mars says...

Ya, but watch out for those 1970 B14's! Those are DANGEROUS! Sheesh! You are right, a bunch of hypocrites.
--
Scott D. Hansen
WOOSH NAR Section #558 http://www.wooshrocketry.org
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I have to retract that statement. It seems that issues were either overlooked or not examined sufficiently by the board. I've heard from some trustees who wish to reexamine this issue. I suspect others are busy this weekend and not aware of the furor of the past couple days.
BTW, the B14s aren't certified any more. But some of my blue tube motors are still certified and flyable at NARAM this summer. I'll be sure to fly at least one.
--
Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L >>> To reply, there's no internet on Mars (yet)! <<<
Kaplow Klips & Baffle: http://nira-rocketry.org/Document/MayJun00.pdf
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Bob Kaplow wrote: snip>

snip
Another oddity of the certification codes. I can't fly a B-14, or a B2, but I can fly an A8-3 from one of my "diamond" packages. The A8-3 was last tested by S and T on March 25, 1995. As were a number of other Estes motors.
When motors are decertified is there some sort of signal that they get from S and T that changes how they perform? That suddenly makes them untrustworthy? Just wondering. ;) QM
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 25 May 2006 19:49:13 -0700, "Quilly Mammoth"

I think it's as important that they stick by the rules that they make. If a rule doesn't make sense, remove it and allow EVERYONE the benefit of its removal - not just a few. Also, if they felt that it really is a safety issue to abide by a particular rule, why are they allowing people to circumvent it?
Phil
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I guess if you name is "Langford" you can do whatever you want......
If Joe Blow had asked , bet they'd a told him "NO WAY"

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

Frankly, I think this problem started with the WAY John worded his request. What I don't understand is why the board didn't see the problem and fix it.
John shouldn't have asked the board to allow the Prez to waive the NAR Safety Code. That request violates the NAR Bylaws.
He should have asked NAR S&T to grant reciprocal certification to FAI motors. That makes it a technical discussion like the recent one with reciprocal certification with CAR, and is fully compliant with the NAR Bylaws and Safety Code.
Just like in so many other situations, if you ask the wrong question, to get the wrong answer.
--
Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L >>> To reply, there's no internet on Mars (yet)! <<<
Kaplow Klips & Baffle: http://nira-rocketry.org/Document/MayJun00.pdf
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Safety Code. That request violates the NAR Bylaws. <<
He didn't (but it wouldn't have, even if he did).

motors. <<
Well, yeah. We're recognizing the FAI certification for use for FAI-specific activities, with lots of additional restrictions, as opposed to having blanket policy recognizing FAI certifications.
--tc
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@earthlink.net writes:

As I said in prvate email, that's not what the minutes reflect. And that's not what a couple board members who were at the meeting conveyed to me.
--
Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L >>> To reply, there's no internet on Mars (yet)! <<<
Kaplow Klips & Baffle: http://nira-rocketry.org/Document/MayJun00.pdf
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I'm going to make a radical proposal here folks.
As some of you may be aware, John Langford is the founder and current president of Aurora Flight Sciences, and I assume a majority stockholder in his company.
As such Mr. Langford has what amounts to a pretty good income. My recommendation to Mr. Langford, is to take a small percenatge of that income, or even perhaps get his company to legally import these czech delta motors into the USA and pay for their US DOT explosives testing and NAR certfication. See, I beleive that John is really sincere when he says he is concerned about the competitive disadvantge the USA team has been at for more than 30 years now. He could even set it up as a wholly owned subsidairy of AFS.
terry dean

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Did Mr. Lankford give you this information or are you pulling iy out of your ass?
Phil
On Mon, 22 May 2006 15:24:22 -0400, "shockwaveriderz"

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

What information are you referring to? The only part of Terry's email that raised any eyebrows for me was the last paragraph. Oh and it is Dr. Langford not Mr. Lankford. Do try and get it together :-)
--

snipped-for-privacy@hotmail.com

> Phil
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Shockie said Mr. I guess he can't get anything right. Anyway to avoid confusion, I'll refer to him as Lankford.
As to where Shockie gets his info, I'd put my money on him pulling it out of his ass.
Phil
wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Just curious... Are you a NAR member?
--

snipped-for-privacy@hotmail.com

"Phil Stein" < snipped-for-privacy@ArielSystems.spamsks.net> wrote in message
  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.