on TRA disclosure

False. There is no certification requirement except that imposed or promulgated by the clubs themselves.

Everything you say is false.

and TRA/NAR certification has what to do with compelling perpetual memnership?

- iz

No one's compelling you to be a member. If you don't like TRA/NAR, you can go fly rockets under the amateur or professional rocketry regs. Or in your case, just continue _not_ flying rockets.

because of NFPA requirements, they have no option beyond maintaining perpetual membership in either TRA or NAR, apart from disgarding the umbrella provided under NFPA codes where adopted and seeking alternative means to comply with other applicable laws as you say

but this choice is unnecessary, and exists solely because of organizational policy to compell membership as a requirement for maintaining certification.

actually there are two distinct issues here. The first is that indy fliers may have their own insurance, perhaps both personal liability and an indy group policy similar to MDRA's. In this case, neither the TRA or NAR insurance is necessary.

the second is that the organizations may impose additional conditions [beyond that which is required by NFPA codes] on rocketry activities which are unacceptable to indy fliers. Yet the membership of both orgs requires that those conditions be complied with.

TRA from

"I agree to pursue my advanced rocketry activities in conformance with the Association's By-laws and Safety Code, and that I will be an active member of the Association to the best of my ability"

NAR from

"I pledge to conduct all my sport rocketry activities in compliance with the NAR Model Rocket Safety Code and the NAR High Power Safety Code."

conformance to these conditions, which are subject to change by the organizations and which can be in excess of the NFPA code requirements, is not required by law in NFPA adoptive states. Yet the organizations would have indy fliers subjected to them regardless. This is not consistent with the stated mission, [ from

]

"dedicated to the advancement and operation of amateur high power rocketry"

it is dedicated to the advancement of an organizational agenda, to be imposed on everyone seeking to comply with certification requirements in NFPA adoptive states, and seeking to obtain motors as certified flyers from the motor dealer network

if indy flyers are not using TRA/NAR launch facilities or insurance, what benefits are you providing that they should be compelled to pay for? Especially if they do not agree with your policies regarding regulation? They want only to satisfy the conditions imposed by the NFPA code in adoptive states so that they can obtain motors and fly legally. Those conditions are as follows.

from NFPA 1127, 2002 Ed. [excerpted for editorial review]

--

5.4.1 Certification of a user shall require both of the following: (1) Proof that the user is at least 18 years old (2) Proof that the user possesses a level of knowledge and competence in handling, storing, and using a high power solid-propellant rocket motor and high power rockets that is acceptable to the certifying organization

So you agree that there _are_ other options for doing rocketry, you just don't like them?

If they don't agree, they can start their own club and set their own policies.

It's not a "Tripoli" agenda, it's a "high power rocketry" agenda. As you yourself have pointed out, the purpose of TRA is "...the advancement and operation of amateur high power rocketry".

Who elected you to this role? TRA isn't your property, you're working against the will of the vast majority of members, and you aren't even a high power flyer. You're more like the ATF, just another outsider trying to impose your will on us in a divisive and destructive way.

Nope. It is PUBLIC property. Literally.

There are no other options to doing "High Power Rocketry" per NFPA-1127.

This attitude is why TRA does not act in the public interest.

Just to clear the air; Quoted from the MDRA membership application:

(Membership in MDRA will allow a member to fly sport rocketry, powered by both Certified Motors and Experimental Motors and work on Certification of TRA and NAR Levels 1, 2, or 3. Certification is not required to be a member of MDRA, but all members must follow the motor certification rule for flying both Certified and Experimental. The rule is, Level 1 H-I, Level 2 J-L, Level 3 M and above. If a member is not Certified Level 1, G motors or below are allowed to be used.)

The bottom line, in order to launch rockets at MDRA launches above G impulse, all MDRA members will attain and maintain the appropriate TRA and/or NAR HPR certification levels: the requirement is not debatable and vigorously enforced.

Fred

Ismaeel Abdur-Rasheed wrote:

what liability? is that the same liability a DMV examiner has when a licensed driver has an accident? or the same liability the states licensing board has when a professional's work results in property loss or injury?

that argument doesn't wash

if the certification was honest, and the flyer was not a TRA/NAR (and not even a member) there is no liability for the org.

or are you saying that there is a liability for the org when even paid members engage in indy activities, which by virue of not being under org supervision are suspect; or should all such be entirely prohibited under org rules so as to limit the orgs liability?

how does paying the org membership dues lessen their liability, Ray? Does TRA insurance cover indy practices by members conducted in compliance with NFPA codes but NOT conducted in accordance with "superfluous" TRA rules? No, it does not! The insurance is contingent upon the orgs safety code.

so your claim of liability is a farce, Ray. It is only about money.

spoken as a true rocketry advocate ... NOT!

ahem! John Cato was sent to the NFPA so that his credentials and professional integrity as a Registered Architect (someone intimately familiar with Building and Fire codes) could be used as leverage to gain NFPA recognition for TRA. This strategy was successful.

that was, of couse, before TRA decided that JC's integrity was inconvenient when they wanted to publish fraudulent motor certification lists. That was a bit too much integrity for their liking!

TRA did not do "all the groundwork to make these types of rocketry activities legal". Individuals did. Where are they now, Ray? How many have been used and discarded when their purpose was served?

review your history, Ray. Your naivete is shocking!

TRA/NAR for all practical purposes currently hold a joint monopoly on user (and motor) certification. Rather than conduct those certifications in compliance with NFPA codes (law only in adoptive states) to allow rocketry to flourish, they exploit their positions to enforce their own agenda on rocketry at large.

this is corrupt, and an abuse of power

and your reaction is to give the victims the finger

nice, Ray. Is this what your mentors are telling you to post, or is this your own disdain for rocketeers who don't tow the party line?

in no way, shape, or form is it a "HPR agenda". You, and apparently the one writing the material on your teleprompter, have no clue what "the advancement ... of amateur high power rocketry" looks like!

not a clue

- iz

I volunteered, like any good member would. No thanks necessary, it is a "labor of love".

of members,

no, it is a nonprofit corporation which operates in the public trust and for the benefit of its members (of which I am one), and according to its charter (AOIC), for the benefit of rocketry at large

I am facilitating that function

the "vast majority of members" are oblivious to the mischief which has transpired. I promise you, you will see how their "will" registers once they have access to all the facts.

that is irrelevant to my contribution in this regard, and a pitiful attempt to discredit me. If you notice, I posted so much myself here on RMR as soon as TRA members started using it for that purpose.

[ see my Sat, 10 Jan 2004 16:15:53 GMT post in thread "the trial of iz" at ]

actually I, along with my predecessors and many others since, are more like Morpheus trying to free you from the Matrix

- iz

yes, thanks

but that does not prevent any other group from having different operating conditions

MDRA serves as an illustration that it is both possible and practical for an indy club to handle its own site, insurance and logistics. Completely.

if certification did not require org membership (which is not required in NFPA code or state law in adoptive states), non-TRA/NAR members could organize their own launches free from org policies in excess of NFPA codes.

an attractive goal for some, I'm sure

- iz

My disdain is for Johnny Come Lately cretins who's only talent is making trouble and causing harm to the hobby. And NO ONE tells me what to say! We TRA members are not the mindless sheep that you think we are.

Yeah, yeah, the self-appointed Savior of Rocketry.

LOL!! It figures you'd reference that inane piece of crap.

Yep, and they can conduct launches without certification too, if they so desire. They just can't do it under the codes for High Power rocketry. They'd have to use the regs covering amateur or professional rocketry.

Or if they wanted to, they could create their own certification program. After all, there's nothing in the NFPA codes that says only TRA/NAR can do certs.

And until you or someone else actually tries this, don't give us that tired old BS about how the Evil TRA/NAR/NFPA would never allow it.

And still remain affiliated with national organizations, such as NAR and TRA.

Once again, irrelevant to our origination, which you referenced...

Fred

if they so choose, ... or not

but IS relevant to the discussion of requirements under NFPA adoptive states, which can be legally met without organizational affiliation if orgs do not [ab]use their positions as recognized certification authorities to compell membership when the Indy flyer/club does not intend to use org resources (as they have their own)

- iz