Open letter ISP/AT

Unfortunately, AT may not get the chance since they have put their assets up for auction. All anyone has to do is bid more that Gary can afford to offer for AT assets and you get AT, providing you can comply with the regulatory permits and licenses.

Regards,

Mark Saunders BSD High Power Rocketry Glendale, AZ

formatting link
snipped-for-privacy@bsdrocketry.com

623-486-5655
Reply to
Mark Saunders
Loading thread data ...

Sounds like the "existing permits and licenses" are included in the sale. as part of the value of the business - in which case "compliance" would essentially involve purchasing and operating the enterprise intact (rather than selling it off piece by piece), so that the "'person' that made the 'explosives'" that were originally approved for shipping will clearly remain in existence, and the approvals would therefore remain valid.

-dave w

Reply to
David Weinshenker

I Know What You Mean ! !

I can't believe all the 'Evil Vultures' that circled around my yard sale last week...

Offering PENNIES ON THE DOLLAR for all that good stuff I can't afford to keep anymore.

I can't help it if I have too many bills and not enough money, they should PAY ME MORE.

And another thing...

Those bidders on eBay and ROL - Stinking Vultures ONE AND ALL!!!

GOD, I hate being played for a fool !

-Bruce OBrien

Reply to
Bruce OBrien

Stop playing people for the fool Bruce!

Reply to
Snicker do

Remove the reload from the motor and you have an aluminum tube. Does any other motor maker on the planet use aluminum tubes (of the same type and size) for their motors? Yes, everyone. Why is it any sort of stretch to say company C can use a commercially available machined aluminum tube for their reloads?

formatting link

Reply to
Snicker do

So, you're saying that if a convicted felon, or someone with terrorist links buys the company, you really think the "existing permits and licenses" will still convey to the new owner, and the "approvals would therefore remain valid."???

Reply to
Vince

Yep. Only the actual handler of the materials need have a background check. And then only for non-exempt explosives. Aren't rights great?!

Jerry

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

Ever consider profitability?

Reply to
Phil Stein

Yes - if you use the correct tools. (a BFH)

Reply to
Phil Stein

Lots and lots of epoxy will help.

Reply to
Dave Grayvis

formatting link
Ask and you shall receive

RDH8

Reply to
Robert DeHate

Friends of yours thinking of bidding? :)

Might have to "petition for relief of disabilities" regarding any BATF permits, but as long as the company itself remained intact under new ownership, the DOT "classification and approval" (i.e., EX-numbers) for the propellant formulas would still be valid.

-dave w

Reply to
David Weinshenker

hey phil... I have heard and or read that the labor costs to manufacture EFG SU or reloads are almost prohibitive.....I don't know if this applies to both SU and reloads.....perhaps it only applies to SU motors? IF so I say discontinue SU and lets just go to an all reload solution.....and that smaller motors are the "loss-leaders" for the larger HIJKLMN....... as the labor costs are lower on the bigger motors and the margins are larger on the bigger motors....

I do know right now the H motor costs are comparable to some FG motor costs if you do a price/performance analysis.....

This is what I have been told and read in here primarily...

It seems to me that if you sold large quantities of small engine versus small quantities of larger motors that you would make more money on the smaller motors as you are selling on a order of magnitude greater than the larger motors being sold....say 1,000,000 EFG versus maybe 10,000 JKL .....? I'm no economist so I really don't know of course...

shockie B)

Reply to
shockwaveriderz

in AMerica if you snooze you lose......pretty simple.... shockie B)

Reply to
shockwaveriderz

How about a crankshaft? I'll bet Mr Goodwrench doesn't have an oil filter for my Civic. Want to talk standards. Just about every Honda car for at least the past 2 decades uses the same oil filter. But it's still unique to Honda.

No, I'm challenging the idea that every other industry is compatible between manufacturers. The automotive industry is a perfect example that this is far from true.

The downside of compatibility is sameness. If AT became the "standard" for reload technology, we'd not have the ease of snap rings, nor the quick load convenience of the PRO-38. And we'd be forever stuck with one technology.

Any one still running S100 bus in their PC?

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

Reply to
Bob Kaplow

Not on my car. Which is never again going to be Dodge or Chrysler :-(

I would like to see you put Corvette Goodyear Eagles on my Civic!

As I just posted, that will end innovation in design. AT was first. Say their hardware became standard. No snap-rings ever. No PRO-38s either.

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

Reply to
Bob Kaplow

LOL! Nicely done. Was considering the same thing myself.

Mike Fisher

Reply to
Mfreptiles

Good point. Which Craftsman battery pack will fit my Makita cordless drill?

Can an IBM Thinkpad laptop use Dell battery packs? Or docking stations?

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

Reply to
Bob Kaplow

I agree on 24/29 mm reloads and SU. I fly nothing else except a very few BP 18's. and will likely not even go L1 any time soon due to no NAR chapter within 125 miles or so and don't care too much for the latest rendition (lack of communication mostly) of the local Tripoli club as well as the rising cost of membership by leaps and bounds. (15.00 to 40 something to 62.00 in 3 years-NAR + my option..Tripoli club fees which are also rising) Sure I'd like to fly a few G's and above every now and then but couldn't really afford very many and don't have so many places to launch. Besides...without the mid sized motors a company is ensuring that the BP A-D launchers of today and tomorrow will likely never fly the big motors. Cut out the middle and both ends may die. High overhead and low revenue for mid power ? maybe but without one you'll likely not feed the other. Dwindling future HP flyers as a result of very little or no mid power will help no one now or later.

Scott Hart NAR# 79232

Who has launched very little of anything since AT started getting scarce right after he lost his 24MM case at about the same time.

--------------------------------------------------

Re: Open letter ISP/AT Group: rec.models.rockets Date: Tue, Jan 27, 2004, 4:42pm From: snipped-for-privacy@wk.nospam.net (Dlogan) =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0I fully support compatibility between manufacturers. It works in the rest of the world, why not with rocketry? My concern though, is what Len has pointed out. One hundred percent of my flying is with 29mm G and lower, and mostly single use. I am working towards L1, but even with that, most all of my flying will be low to mid power. The selection for E,F,and G motors with out AT, is extremely slim. Especially since what hardware I currently have is AT's. If AMW purchases AT, will the 24mm and 29mm line of motors and reloads be continued? David Logan NAR#79313 "Leonard Fehskens" wrote in message news:Xns947C811BDF112lenfehskenshpcom@16.105.248.153... "paul" wrote in news:t7Kdna9uf6S snipped-for-privacy@adelphia.com: Wouldn't it be nice to know that most any load you wanted was available for the hardware you currently owned?? Don't forget that a lot of the appeal of AT's product line was to users of SU F and G impulse motors, and the smaller SU motors OEMed for Apogee. len.

Reply to
S H

Precisely.

Unfortunately, it is precisely this range that seems to scare off manufacturers with respect to product liability claim exposure: I guess that's less of a problem with HPR motors (despite the greater potential inherent physical hazard of a larger motor) since they're more of a "specialty market" item, while F and G motors, being "model rocket" sizes, are considered "consumer products", for which the maker seems in general to be expected to assume a greater proportion of risk on behalf of the user.

(The screwy world of our present legal climate, I guess - companies are willing to treat each other like people, while actual individual people are considered mere "consumers" and treated more like children!)

-dave w

Reply to
David Weinshenker

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.