NAR Certification Dates

TRA not publishing delay data as some people thinnk they should looks good compared to the following. COuld there be a conspiracy at NAR too?
From NAR web site http://nar.org/NARsandt.html : S&T not only tests new engine offerings, but re-tests each approved engine type once in every three-year cycle to ensure repeatability and help identify creeping degradation in manufacturing or distribution practices. In addition, S&T collects and reduces data from motor malfunction reports sent in by consumers, using this data to trigger special testing of questionable engines and engine lots.
From http://nar.org/SandT/NARenglist.shtml AT Motor / Date tested
F12 94- APRIL-9 F13 94- APRIL-16 F16 94- APRIL-16 F20 96-NOVEMBER-9 F22 92- JULY-18 F10 95-SEPTEMBER-3 F23 99-FEBRUARY-21 F24 94-FfEBRUARY-27 F25 95-SEPTEMBER-3 F32 95-SEPTEMBER-3 F37 97-JULY-5 F39 94-APRIL-9 F40 93-JUNE-13 F50 95-SEPTEMBER-3 F52 98-AUGUST-29 F72 95-SEPTEMBER-2
ESTES A8 95-MARCH-25

You seem to have missed a "curious" part of the NAR motor certs.. The Kosdon motors certified by NAR. For some time after TRA TMT dropped cert for these (for just cause, IMHO), NAR kept them on their cert list. Infact they are still on the "combined" list on the NAR site!
from the NAR website http://nar.org/SandT/pdf/CombinedList.pdf
I think this, and Phil's list of clearly "outdated testing" list is more of an issue than if TMT or S&T doesn't publish if a 6 second delay really tested at 5.75 seconds!
Kaplow.. Seems you need to "sink your teeth" in NAR S&T for now, as there is documented PROOF that they are not living up to your requirements TODAY and not a problem from 10 years back! (The "combined list" off the NAR website is from March of this year, and Frank has not had motors to submit for atleast 3 years!)
"Kaplow's who live in glass houses shouldn't throw crap at TRA" Well he can, but is just made to look like a fool!
Motors that were last tested 11 years ago, do not fit into consumer protection period of motors that have last their cert, now do they Bob!
  Quoted Text Here  

So what exactly is the purpose of this post? It said nothing!
Dude, get for real already.

Sorry Greg.. It seems to be you that doesn't get the point. I wonder if Kaplow will?
OK Greg.. I'll make it simple for you.
1) Kaplow is attacking TMT for what he thought were problems from years ago, which he has no proof of.
2) Phil and I presented problems with NAR S&T that are in existance today ( no cert in 11 years when the S&T policy is recert every 3 years, and the whole Kosdon mess...)
3) Why doesn't Kaplow fix TODAYS problem with S&T instead of harping on things which are either 10 years old or are the same problem he's claiming with TRA TMT?
Greg.. Step back from the Kaplow Koolaid, and put down the purple shroud... You can keep the Nikes....
  Quoted Text Here  

  Quoted Text Here  
I've again (recently) requested the delay data from TMT, and have yet to get a response. Similar requests to S&T were responded to in a day, and to CAR in less than an HOUR!
  Quoted Text Here  
I've pointed out the missing S&T data to the right folks, and have a commitment that they will update the missing data.
The Kosdon "mess" was not created by NAR, but by TRA refusing to comply with their agreement with the NAR to recognize all NAR S&T motor certs.
Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L >>> To reply, there's no internet on Mars (yet)! <<< Kaplow Klips & Baffle:    http://nira-rocketry.org/Document/MayJun00.pdf www.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/ www.nira-rocketry.org www.nar.org
The problem with governments is that citizens need to keep them on a short leash; unfortunately the nature of the beast is such that governments can usually arrange it so that only they hold their own leash.

and the purpose of your post is??
Greg Cisko wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  

to complain.

AZ Woody wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
Some of those motors are clearly marked as "Denotes certification for general use expires December 31, 2005." on the NAR Engine List web page ( http://nar.org/SandT/NARenglist.shtml ). Just out of curiosity, did anyone contact NAR S&T to see if the dates listed are, in fact, the most recent testing dates?
Mario

  Quoted Text Here  
This means the main cert expired and they are in the three year (whatever) grace period. I presume they cold be renewed anytime with mere motors and money.
Centuri did that with long OOP motors by consistently renewing the certs. Just got ta keep a stash of motors just for recert.
I have consistently asked simply to renew old certs so motors already out there from years ago can be flown at launches.
Jerry

wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
TMT or S&T would be happy to IF you complied with the manufacturers requirements that everyone else does. They have told me that.

Phil Stein wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
Hey, they even told "big fine" that...

On Wed, 13 Jul 2005 16:55:00 -0400, "W. E. Fred Wallace"
  Quoted Text Here  
Yea but when he reminded himself, he didn't believe it because even he knows that HE TAKES LIBERTIES WITH THE TRUTH.

Phil , Sorry I have to say this about a certain person whom I shall not name but WE know. " He can't handle the truth!"
  Quoted Text Here  

Jerry Irvine wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
Why would you need to re cert, and how could you, if you no longer have motors and no longer make them?

On Wed, 13 Jul 2005 07:10:58 -0500, Mario Perdue
  Quoted Text Here  
If you read the page from the link above, you will see it was last updated 3/5/2005.
This is for the guys that bitch that TMT takes to long after testing to update their pages and the ones that bitch about delay testing. This is what is posted as the official word. Since they have set the standard for how they expect everything to be done, I'm playing by their rules. I assume there is not a NAR exclusion in those rules.

  Quoted Text Here  
I just did.
Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L >>> To reply, there's no internet on Mars (yet)! <<< Kaplow Klips & Baffle:    http://nira-rocketry.org/Document/MayJun00.pdf www.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/ www.nira-rocketry.org www.nar.org
The problem with governments is that citizens need to keep them on a short leash; unfortunately the nature of the beast is such that governments can usually arrange it so that only they hold their own leash.

TRA unilaterally declared all Kosdon motors decertified. They also decided to renege on the agreement with NAR and stopped recognizing the NAR certification of Kosdon motors. So we have the curious situation that TRA claims to honor all motor certifications by NAR.
Except for the Kosdon motors.
There is not a single Kosdon motor that was tested and certified by TRA on the NAR combined list. Only those that were tested by NAR. TRA can decide to pull the certifications for motors that TMT tested but they cannot decertify motors tested by NAR S&T.
AZ Woody wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  

  Quoted Text Here  
Apparently they can or did. Right?

Greg Cisko wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
The motors are still certified by NAR S&T. TRA has simply chosen not to honor their agreement with NAR. That doesn't make them decertified. You can fly them on a NAR range but not on a TRA range.

Or did NAR fail to honor their agreement with TRA? Kosdon was not complying with manufacturing requirements, and believe it or not, was uncovered due to a NAR NSL! Kosdon was not datestamping his reloads (required by 1127) and didn't have the permits to manufacture them. This was during the early days of "Kosdon by AT", and though he was not supposed to be making "commercial" motors per the agreement, it was common knowledge that he was. It was similar to the JI decerts, but in the case of Kosdon, fliers were given to the end of the flying season to burn them. There was no way to use the "3 year CPA" stuff, as there was no way to determine when a reload was manufactured.
The original point however, as Kaplow is so convinced that TMT isn't following rules, is that the NAR certified Kosdons have not been retested in well over 3 years (the S&T "rule") and they "officially" are no longer being manufactured, yet seems to have no cert expiration.
  Quoted Text Here