on TRA disclosure

If a club has to get an exception to a model rule (and MDRA is a major typical club) the rules are broken.

Reply to
Jerry Irvine
Loading thread data ...

Implications? About the same as them winning the lawsuit on PAD exemption grounds, except 724 would have taken more power away from BATFE insofar as future administrative law is concerned.

Survival and dominance. By that, I infer you to mean the members of the BOT/D are fixated on maintaining their positions of power within the corporations in order to simply exercise power and control over rocketeers and the rocketry industry. Since they have no intrinsic legal authority or power as an NPO, they invented the concept of motor certification to gain control over the motor industry and implemented NFPA codes to give legal authority to that certification program. To gain power over individual rocketeers, membership and user certifications were imposed which constrain members to follow the legal mandates of their NFPA codes as well. And not only NFPA, but BATFE regulations are also used in their power grab since the BOT/D mandates "unnecessary" compliance with BATFE regulations as well. They use laws and regulations, some of their own making, simply to remain in, and exercise, power. These laws and regulations are actually having an adverse impact on rocketry (as evidenced by declining memberships in those very organizations), but the BOT/D are unconcerned and their continuing actions are simply dictated by your two "agenda" items; survival and dominance.

Before I go on, I'd like to know if I have interperpreted your "agenda" list and it's implications correctly. Have I? If not, could you clarify it a little?

Reply to
Gary

This should be in the FAQ.

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

Take off your own blinders Bob, and see if you really agree with Iz's agenda for eliminating flyer and motor certs as well as any and all efforts to achieve workable rocketry regulation. Do you really want an org representing rocketry who's only response to the NFPA, ATF, DOT etc is a raised middle finger? Do you really believe that's an effective approach? Do you think the NAR would have succeeded in making modrocs legal by doing that? Does any of this matter to you, or do you only care that you get revenge on TRA and to hell with the consequences?

You mention John Cato, and I know you still rant endlessly about a few motors that you think were not properly certified a decade ago. But do you really believe Iz cares about that beyond using it as a way to stir up trouble? He's made it very clear that he is opposed to motor certs entirely. Do you share this goal with him?

And you mentioned Jim -- I assume you mean that foul-mouthed, bigoted, disbarred lawyer. Why would you even want to associate yourself with likes of him??

Reply to
RayDunakin

You know, I just realised that this is a perfect example of why it's a waste of time dealing with you, Jerry and Iz. You're like all conspiracy theory nuts. If you can't find evidence to support your theory, you claim it's being suppressed. If you get the evidence and it doesn't fit your theory, you claim it's been tampered with.

TRA was right to dump you and they should dump Iz too.

Reply to
RayDunakin

Bull. Just the opposite, as a matter of fact.

Reply to
RayDunakin

It will be interesting to see you testify to that in court.

With proper cross-examination of course.

Conspiracy theories you have generated aside, you are blindly apologetic of TRA policy, practice and even obvious failure.

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

Ray. I just want to know something. How come everybody (posting) but you is blind?

Which one does that? YOURS is the only mouth that is coming from.

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

I like your thinking!

- iz :)

Reply to
Ismaeel Abdur-Rasheed

this is true

- iz

Reply to
Ismaeel Abdur-Rasheed

liar

liar

from my 2003-11-25 01:11:22 PST post in thread "Re: JC, TRA and the future of rocketry" [

formatting link
]

Reply to
Ismaeel Abdur-Rasheed

there is credible physical evidence which supports the eye-witness accounts

the only conspiracy here is the one created years ago to conceal it

yes, silence and discredit the malcontents by expulsion and renunciation

very effective use of human resources, Ray :(

thank God you're not in the teaching profession

- iz

Reply to
Ismaeel Abdur-Rasheed

o? you mean to say that you are coaching others?

or they have attempted to coach you and you rebuffed them?

I really find your "ground of being" tragic. I can recommend a few good "cults" if you like ;)

- iz

Reply to
Ismaeel Abdur-Rasheed

I fail to understand your line of reasoning??? What/whos rules are broken?

Fred

Jerry Irv>

Reply to
W. E. Fred Wallace

This back & forth sniping between Ray & Iz sure makes them both look stupid.

Do you two think you are accomplishing anything?

Reply to
Phil Stein

Gary wrote in news:%LiUb.175206$Rc4.1325105@attbi_s54:

Unbelievable. Were you there at the time, or is this morning after conspiracy theorization?

From my recollections, it's clearly the latter.

Motor certification was undertaken to provide a level playing field for competition, and to provide some degree of assurance of safety. The latter, in conjunction with the NFPA initiative, was also intended to provide a basis for self regulation of the hobby.

Your conspiracy theories dishonor the memory of Harry Stine, who was instrumental in both motor certification and the adoption of NFPA codes to make it possible for model rocketeers to fly relatively unburdened in most states.

len.

Reply to
Leonard Fehskens

You said you might have to go to your state FM to get an exemption to NFPA model code.

As such the NFPA model code is brooken (as opposed to hard state law or club rules).

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

You know what I think?

I think they are BOTH "posting to protect newbies"(from each other), yet NO newbies are tuned in.

IMHO.

Jerry

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

I was THERE (1966 to present) and he is correct.

That is "mostly a good thing". I am probably one of the few here that think motor certs for CONSUMERS (over the counter motors) is a good thing. It just has way too many bells and whistles attached now. It really only needs to be a performance reporting system and nothing more.

G Harry regularly entered competitions with "hot" motors. So while he was party to the system being installed he also regularly bypassed it. He was a rebel! Remind you of anyone?

I have hung out with and competed with Harry Stine. He had some quirks Len. He was wacky.

But nobody can dispute he almost single handedly inspired MILLIONS OF YOUTH to take up science and math and become very impressive people from astronauts to war heroes to inventors to good people.

I am hard pressed to think of anyone who has influenced more minds in a positive direction.

Jerry Irvine

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

Jerry Irvine wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@corp.supernews.com:

I knew Harry from when I was in junior high school. I flew with him, helped him run the NAR out of his basement. Harry wrote a letter of recommendation to MIT for me (I got in). Harry was a typical engineer, and "wacky" in the sense that most people perceive engineers to be different. But he was no "wackier" than many of the frequent "contributors" to this list.

len.

Reply to
Leonard Fehskens

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.