NFPA 112? Questions

hey, I care!

just like Pravda

still waiting on five more HPR issues in 2003, and its mid-December

testing motor delays? Ahh, sure, John Cato did those ahile back .. yeah, that's the ticket!

- iz

Reply to
Ismaeel Abdur-Rasheed
Loading thread data ...

you mean there is someone who is willing to insure the antics of teenage boys? I'm gunna need alot of additional coverage! ;)

- iz

Jerry Irv>>"Duane Phillips" wrote:

Reply to
Ismaeel Abdur-Rasheed

opression vilification

POINT!

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

the goose not

Not quite following you here. What "illegal" motors did I have where? Did I actually fly them at an NAR/TRA launch?

I've certainly had uncertified motors in my possession. Like AT reloads I bought based on Chuck Rogers lie that they were all certified, only to find out otherwise. I ended up giving away those propellant grains to someone who could use them as ignitors in big motors. Oh, yes, I do have a couple Jerry motors in my collection too.

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

Reply to
Bob Kaplow

If the red liners were different than the white liners, then yes.

And I did forget at least one thing. The nozzle change that initially affected all the 29mm and 38mm BJ reloads, but may have covered others by now.

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

Reply to
Bob Kaplow

Wow! That's even more bizare than I'd have thought. I hope they at least gave you a few reloads for paying their fee.

BTW, even though the certification was beign withheld, were they shipping G12s? Or did they just gear up the manufacturing after you paid the fee?

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

Reply to
Bob Kaplow

I will say with full clarity what my arrangement is.

Manufacturer: "The OEM" (undisclosed corporate name except to a certifying authority with clear evidence the application is about to be approved) Generally not made public even after cert.

My ownership: 0%

My role: consulting as to motor design, some process control, some manufacturability. This way I get paid whether or not TRA or NAR gives them the runaround and sucks hundreds of thousands of dollars of capital out of the firm (as was done with Powertech and with DPT).

Distributor: "The licensee of U.S. Rockets"

My ownership: 0%

My role: to consult as to marketing, packaging, sales, distribution and political firewalls (generally successful as our sales exceed errortech).

Consultancy: "the consultant of contracts and key information"

My ownership: 0%

My role. To give of my time and knowledge freely, typically 6-8 hours a day in front of a computer. The income from the consultancy goes 100% into trust and I never see a dime. I am however allowed to spend as much money on small vendors wares at launches as I want and the wares are typically tested, expended for fun by members of my friends and family and used to encourage others to buy those wares from small vendors. This is why I was often seen at LDRS buying most of the surplus stock at the end of LDRS. They needed the working capital and it was a low on the radar way to give it to them. I have also used funds from the trust to fund an insurance pool I formed. I have used it for regulatory reform costs (as apart from litigation).

Dealership: U.S. Rockets Dealer (a Jerry Irvine Proprietorship)

Ownership: 100%

My role: to sell inert products and exempt products only to model rocketeers outside of NAR and TRA evil empires, to sell HPR/Am/Ex/Mil/Commercial products and consulting. Create web pages. Post on rmr. Run ads in Sport Rocketry. Run ads in HPR when allowed (never). Run ads on ROL when allowed (never). Run ads in ER when alowed (never). Host launches. Attend launches when allowed (rarely).

Based on even a basic understanding of rocket business you know my net income from these particular activities to be nearly zero after expenses. Good thing I am set for life, eh?

And does not need one as I stated in my LEMP free OEM example.

An OEM who TRA refused to accept because they falsely assumed I owned it (not that that should matter of course). And persisted in that claim after they were shown the ownership papers.

ACS has the classified propellant. They cannot be bothered with "dabs of propellant", and based on the 36" motors they make I have no problem understanding why. I made (had made) about 10 6 inch motors from the left over propellant from a single 36 inch grain segment pour.

Scarey.

Hence "pallets of motors" and also why TRA no way wants USR on the market. It would be flooded instantly. We would have to do something silly like invite hundreds of people to come launch with us at large group launches like the "Fest" launches with ~3000 people at them 3 times a year, but at perhaps 10 sites around the country. That would truly suck, eh?

Jerry

Merry Christmas. Love your children excessively. Say pleasant and helpful things to unpleasant and mean people.

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

I should get another dog and name it "US Rockets"...

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

Reply to
Bob Kaplow

EX-8611103

formatting link
(not marketed to consumers)

Rather you didn't and I said why in email. The document is designed to be used "on its face". It never expires.

I have no problem with your asking them this so long as it is not in conection with ACS in particular.

The other 50+ EX numbers are off the table until TRA and NAR both accept the first one.

That involves paying a simple (excessively huge and California specific) fee for a permit. Classification entails sending photos and lists (such as my web page does) so if they are involved in an incident they can be identified.

I have in the past and it was ignored. One thing at a time. EX numbers must be recognized by TRA and NAR to proceed to spending any money, even your money.

Jerry

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

They are required by NFPA regs to do batch testing that everybody knows doesn't really happen. That provision should be eliminated as unenforceable.

Instead, ANY mechanical change should require full recertification.

That is enforceable as everyone is instantly aware of mechanical changes.

You still cannot force TRA and NAR to follow the rules but at least it will be obvious they are not.

Jerry

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

That would annoy me. Make it a cat :)

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

"Don't ask, don't tell." - William Jefferson Clinton

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

I don't know what Jerry's issues were in e-mail, but I urge you to be careful about waking another sleeping giant. Your questions should be as generic as possible so they don't garner too much interest while still getting you the information you need.

Bob

Reply to
baDBob

"Isvestia nyet Pravda; Pravda nyet Isvestia."

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

Reply to
Bob Kaplow

Really? Care to enlighten? Do you think TRA/NAR want to certify Jerry-motors? What actions have they taken to advance this? What is it exactly you understand?

Any and all requirements that have nothing to do with actual safety and performance validation of the motor.

Is this a rhetorical switch? You make it sound as if you agree...

It is not just specific wrong rules, but the actions of the enforcers that go along with the rules.

Specifically, as stated before (but I see you desire redundancy...): Any and all requirements that have nothing to do with actual safety and performance validation of the motor.

It is Joel, not that you noticed... or care. You just want it to go away. But guess what, it not only is NOT going away... the squeaky wheel has gained momentum.

Why don't you open up your head and do a little googling? Try this: first google with the attitude that Jerry is wrong... find stated proof. Next google with the attitude that Jerry is right... find stated proof. It is amazing what a fair and open investigation results in...

or, you can do as you suggest here...

~ Duane Phillips.

Reply to
Duane Phillips

That would annoy me. And my wife is alergic to them.

But I could go for a cat named "Payload", or perhaps "Wadding" or even "Dog Food".

Besides, they aren't bad if you skin 'em, fillet 'em, marinate 'em and grill 'em. They taste like chicken (Hi Kurt!)...

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

Reply to
Bob Kaplow

have US Rockets motors made in Canada, eh?

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

Reply to
Bob Kaplow

No, but I still see a lot of his stuff when others reply and quote it.

Reply to
RayDunakin

Can't repost from the listserv without permission. But the basic info has all been given here already, including invalid DOT papers, no LEMP, illegally shipping motors in unmarked boxes via air, etc.

They know they were illegally shipped. If they accept them that way, they are accomplices to that. Furthermore it would dereliction of their duty to the members and just plain irresponsible to approve motors that are being illegally shipped.

Gary Rosenfield hasn't been on the BOD in several years, and I'm pretty sure he wasn't on it at the time Kosdon's motors were decertified.

If motor certs were designed to prevent competition with Aerotech, it sure isn't working. CTI, AMW and Ellis all have managed to get certified with APCP motors and are making heavy inroads into AT's market. As have the various hybrid makers.

Reply to
RayDunakin

WRONG! The illegally shipped motors are NOT returned, and in fact I believe they were handed over to the authorities.

Reply to
RayDunakin

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.