pros and cons list for Pro38 and Aerotech engines.

Forwarded from www.mars-rocketry.com I would appreciate any input on this
I have been looking into HPR engines lately and decided to write a
pros and cons list for Pro38 and Aerotech engines.
Pro38
Pros: simpler to assemble Adjustable delay cheaper hardware
Cons: Can only use Pro38 motors Canadian company(not sure if this is a con)
Aerotech:
Pros: can use reloads from different companies Aerotech and Dr. Rockets cases are interchangable
Cons: Bankrupt company(I know he will probably emerge from bankruptcy but has to be listed) set delay black powder for ejection is seperate and might be messy in the field
This is just a small list that I am hoping to add to later. If you have any additions or changes to make please feel free to reply to this.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Pro for AT... 4 types of propellant!
Con for Pro38... Only 2 types of propellant

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Also I heard a rumor that AMW will be making reloads for the pro38 stuff!
Not sure if this is a Pro though since AMW reloads are a little on the pricy side.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 2 Jan 2004 12:48:27 -0500, "Tim Summers"

AMW motors have a higher ISP I'm told. You get what you pay for. Have fun!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I can confirm the rumour. The "colors" will be priced similar to Proxx stuff now so it will be more variety for not much more cost and far better availability and shiping than AMW could ever achieve.
Jerry
Disclaimer: I do NOT work or speak for CTI or AMW and any rumor I spread is as likely to be false or way jumping the gun as true and immediate.
But can you show me any examples of where I was wrong and the information was floating for more than a week? :)
--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to: snipped-for-privacy@gte.net>
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
AMW & CT announced that they would use interchangable hardware for some sizes motors.
Wonder how that going. Anthony can you hear me????
Phil
On Fri, 2 Jan 2004 12:48:27 -0500, "Tim Summers"

Phil Stein
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
<< Also I heard a rumor that AMW will be making reloads for the pro38 stuff! Not sure if this is a Pro though since AMW reloads are a little on the pricy side. >>
And so far, AMW reloads aren't CSFM approved, so you can't get or use them in California. Of course, that's not a problem if you're not in CA.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

stuff!
pricy
in
So the problem is, as you see it, people living in CA?
;)
Joel. phx

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Good one!!! ;-)
More like too many people living in California..
We'll be exporting some soon to other welfare states..
Tell them the "Govenator" sent 'ya..
T

them
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 2 Jan 2004 12:46:30 -0500, "Tim Summers"

But they're working on changing that... :-) When AT reloads first came on the market, I doubt they had more than one or two types of formulations. (Redlines are - what - a couple of years old...?)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@NOSPAM.rogers.com (Len Lekx) wrote:

Two
--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to: snipped-for-privacy@gte.net>
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Tim Summers wrote:

Pro 54
Motor ejection at the K level Infinitely adjustable delays

A Canadian company which stands behind everything they make. I believe that might be a pro.

--

Chuck Rudy

VooDoo Digital Productions
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Just like USR.

Yes and yes.
But they have no LEMP so they cannot be TRA certified.
Jerry
--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to: snipped-for-privacy@gte.net>
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Cool, haven't heard that claim before. What's the USR delay adjustment tool like?

Now you're slinging bull again, Jerry. They have the Canadian equivalent of a HEMP (an even higher standard than a LEMP) and they ARE certified.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
RayDunakin wrote:

While I fully understand that they have an 'HEMP', and agree that it is probably a higher standard than a 'LEMP', and fully agree that they are competent, capable, etc., could you please point me to the citation (either in TRA bylaws, or in US Law), that provides that a Canadian HEMP supercedes any American requirements for a US LEMP?
I ask this, because, for example, my wife had a heck of a time getting her undergraduate degree from an overseas university accredited, despite the fact that she ended up getting a Masters at CalTech and a Masters at USC, with honors, and on scholarship. You see, here in America we simply don't seem to accept the fact that other countries may be able to accomplish things in the same fashion that we are able to, and so we tend to not give credence to foreign certifications. (for the humor impaired, this is an attempt at wry witticism).
That's why I'd like to find out what legal equivalence there is for this Canadian certification.
Oh, while you're at it, Ray, please point to the LEGAL (not TRA mandated) requirement of the LEMP comes from...
David Erbas-White

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
<< While I fully understand that they have an 'HEMP', and agree that it is probably a higher standard than a 'LEMP', and fully agree that they are competent, capable, etc., could you please point me to the citation (either in TRA bylaws, or in US Law), that provides that a Canadian HEMP supercedes any American requirements for a US LEMP? >>
I don't know. As far as the law goes, I have no doubt that Canadian permits for Canadian manufacturers are accepted by the US government. I believe that Anthony stated as much when this subject was brought up a few weeks ago.
As for motor certification, I believe the TMT requirements are posted on TRA's website. I haven't looked at them lately, but I seem to recall that the last time this was brought up there was considerable whining from the usual parties about how "it only says LEMP, so they shouldn't be certified!"
<< Oh, while you're at it, Ray, please point to the LEGAL (not TRA mandated) requirement of the LEMP comes from... >>
If you want specific cites of specific regulations, ask the ATF. I'm neither a lawyer nor an ATF agent. My understanding of the situation is this:
1. ATF requires a LEMP for manufacturers of "low explosives" 2. ATF considers APCP to be a "low explosive"; hence 3. ATF requires a LEMP for manufacturers of APCP.
Whether or not APCP really is an explosive is another issue.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@aol.com (RayDunakin) wrote:

Nope. The permits are not. The products of the permits are.

Only because it does say that.

I did.
They said under 27 CFR 555.141-a-8 all rocket motors and motor reloading kits are PADS and EXEMPT from the permits and regulations of the ATF. This is reflected in NFPA-1127 and 1125 as it only asks for permits if 27 CFR itself does, which it does not. ATF is "thinking" of changing that in the future but have not even started yet.

--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to: snipped-for-privacy@gte.net>
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@aol.com (RayDunakin) wrote:

A 1/8" drill bit, a ruler and masking tape. High tech and only recently possible with new technology,eh?

Bull? Watch this!
http://www.tripoli.org/tmt/TMT_Policy_etract.shtml
2-2.2 In addition to the above the applicant must obtain and submit an "EX" number assigned for a particular propellant formulation by the U.S. Department of Transportation/ Research and Special Programs Administration (US DOT/RSPA). This agency issues this number on a recommendation by the Bureau of Explosives (BOE), Canada Center for Mineral and Energy Technology/Canadian Explosives Research Laboratory (CANMET/CERL), or any other agency approved by the competent authority of the United States. The recommendation for classification is given when the applicant provides propellant and other required information for testing.

Explosive Manufacturer's license prior to acceptance of motors for testing. This requirement is by Tripoli Board motion and vote on 23 January 1994.<<
Glad to enlighten with a CITE.
Mere Jerry
"Truth exists. Only lies are invented." - Georges Braque
"Jerry in my opinion is trying real hard to produce wanted, needed products and alternatives to enhance the rocketry hobby. having US Rockets added back into the competitive mix will do nothing but GOOD for the general consumer. I have never expressed my opinion on political issues before in this or any newsgroup but gee whiz, enough is enough already!" - William Barzee
--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to: snipped-for-privacy@gte.net>
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Only reason I put that under con was because of the US governments love of changing regulations. If the US changed the regs to prevent Pro38 engines to get into the US(unlikely), I would be sitting with hardware that I couldn't get reloads for. After Tater posted it here I realized how negative the statement sounds to Canadians but believe me, it was not intended.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.