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.
They do not. Look here:
-- Joe Michel NAR 82797 L1
Personally, I don't really care what TRA thinks. If that means I fly independent so be it. I will probably be doing so anyways since I want to try my hand in EX.
Look:
Comprehensive NAR/TRA Motor Certification List
June 22, 1993
CC Designation Mfgr Dur Avg Th TI Rating Type Pro Group E6-0,4,8 USR 6.7 6.0 40.0 100.0 Exp AP NAR E10-0,4,8 USR 4.0 10.0 40.0 100.0 Exp AP NAR E25-0,4,8,12 USR 1.6 25.0 40.0 100.0 Exp AP NAR E55-0,5,10,15 USR 0.7 55.0 40.0 100.0 Exp AP NAR F9-0,4,8 USR 5.6 9.0 50.0 62.5 Exp AP NAR F10-0,4,8 USR 8.0 10.0 80.0 100.0 Exp AP NAR F20-0,4,8,12 USR 4.0 20.0 80.0 100.0 Exp AP NAR F80-0,5,10,15,20 USR 1.0 80.0 80.0 100.0 Exp AP NAR G25-0,5,10,15 USR 4.8 25.0 120.0 75.0 Exp AP NAR
Sorry, but I go to the source. Not the vendors website.
Bob
They light so fast that I've heard RSOs getting ragged at for launching too early........the anticipated count of hitting the button at 1 is not needed for ProXX, just hit the button and it lights.....no lag at all
After you do one, you've done them all......no need for instructions on the second launch
Easy, easy, easy clean up
Consistent delay timing
The vendor FABRICATED/EDITED it? Seriously?
Jerry
Sorry dude....but your wrong.
Ive had Brand new freshly manufactured black jack motors since late October. Als Hobbies had a ton and so did Commonwealth.
Has anyone brought this up directly with NAR to find out if you can use D.R. hardware and if you can to see if they can change the wording. Or would that be as productive as ramming your head against a brick wall??
As someone who criticizes NAR for a lot of SPECIFIC things, I find in this area they are actually cooperative and helpful.
Jerry
ok, I didn't originaly post it, so I can't be sure of the basis.
my question, Do other reloads fit aerotech cases? regardless if AT will stand behind them.
PRO38
Pros,
great for clusters and air starts.
Use Orxl match, heck light 4 on an airstart, no worries.
light them as second stages, No worries.
/ArtU
At least AT has the cert documents there for us to see. And you accuse them of fabricating them. You post links to documents on vserv all the time, that you say proves you got hosed or whatever. I guess you could fabricate those documents as well, huh? Your creditability is caw-caw Mr. Irvine.
I'm much more inclined to believe AT then a confirmed blowhard like you.
-- Joe Michel NAR 82797 L1
Series Loadmaker Certs (mostly) DOT Class DOT-E (if) ATF* RMS-18 AeroTech Yes 1.4S 7887 Exempt RMS-24 AeroTech Yes 1.4S 7887 Exempt RMS-29 AeroTech Yes 1.4S 7887 Exempt RMS-29 U.S. Rockets No (refused) 1.4C 7887 Exempt RMS-38 AeroTech Yes 1.4C 7887 Exempt RMS-38 U.S. Rockets No (refused) 1.4C 7887 Exempt RMS-54 AeroTech Yes 1.3C 10996 LEUP RMS-54 U.S. Rockets No (refused) 1.4C 7887 Exempt RMS-54 CTI Pending 1.4C 7887 LEUP RMS-75 AeroTech Yes 1.3C 10996 LEUP RMS-75 U.S. Rockets No (refused) 1.4C 7887 Exempt RMS-75 CTI Pending 1.4C 7887 LEUP RMS-98 AeroTech Yes 1.3C 10996 LEUP RMS-98 U.S. Rockets No (refused) 1.4C 7887 Exempt RMS-98 CTI Pending 1.4C 7887 LEUP
- CTI is OEM also for AMW brand
- USR shares an OEM with other final brands.
- If I have misstated any 1.4C which should be G I am sorry.
Jerry
This should be in the FAQ.
Nope.
I asked.
Period.
here are the CTI 64.5g reloads and expirations as of 11/15/3
265H110-13A 6-30-03 TRA 402I170-15A 7-31-03 TRA 670J300-15A 6-30-03 TRA 800J360-15A 6-30-03 TRA137G60-12A 3-31-05 TRA
540I240-15A 6-30-04 TRA- iz
Darren J L> Damian, check with Pete, but he gave me the impression that we
For the uneducated...
SARCASM
SYLLABICATION: sar·casm PRONUNCIATION: särkzm NOUN:1. A cutting, often ironic remark intended to wound.
Bob
AT hardware only for a G-64? Dr. Rocket doesn't even make that case. I use Dr. Rocket hardware, and I will continue to use it, no matter what you and Jerry say. So will everyone else. Why don't you email Bunny and tell us all what he says, since you are so worried about it.
-- Joe Michel NAR 82797 L1
Everyone knows Dr. Rocket hardware will keep being used and will do so in full comfort. The POINT is it is TECHNICALLY illlegal under the conditions as they exist with the myriad of rules and policies PUT IN PLACE by NAR and TRA.
Some people simply advocate fewer rules. Is that so much to ask given rocket associations can actually decide how many rules are needed then author (or edit/eliminate) them accordingly?
Seriously.
The second issue is Aerotech is allowed to "slide" in a variety of ways by both NAR and TRA and U.S. Rockets (or its OEM's) are subjected to scrutiny superior to national security.
It is hypocritical, unfair, and blatant restraint of trade and some day people are going to get tired of this shit and sue.
Lawsuits are harmful to all parties except for the attorneys (and their children's college funds) or the rare and elusive "clear victor".
Jerry
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.