Re: cost to certify

HPR Certification is a great tool for the orgs to keep members. I don't have a problem with this policy. If you want to fly HPR at a NAR or Tripoli
sanctioned launch, that's the way it is. This amounts to nothing more than a bunch of whiners (You, IZ, etc.) who are too damned cheap to pay the membership dues. Rocketeers are a small group, and membership in the NAR (I'm not sure about the TRA) has remained basically flat. What you propose would cause membership to drop, which is not a good thing. Think about it.
-- Joe Michel NAR 82797 L2 http://home.alltel.net/jm44316 /
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Since when is successfully flying rockets, "jumping through silly hoops"? I don't think it is any big deal for the level 3 flyer who has let their cert lapse, to come back and fly some small rockets again. In fact, I've heard of a couple of them that did all three re-certs in the same day.
If successfully flying a rocket in the same class that they were already certified in scares them away, then they have bigger problems.
I'm all for permanent certs, however, I don't think you made your point with that argument.
Mike Fisher
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@aol.com (Mfreptiles) writes:

A level 3 certification is a pain in the rear if you have already done it once. You can't fly an already built rocket. You have to design and build a new rocket. (At least you are supposed to. I suppose your original TAP member could just sign the paperwork again on an existing rocket.)
This doesn't necessarily mean certifications should be for life.
Brian Elfert
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
<< A level 3 certification is a pain in the rear if you have already done it once. You can't fly an already built rocket. You have to design and build a new rocket. >>
Wrong. You do not have to build an entirely new rocket to cert Level 3. You can even use the same rocket that you used to get your Level 2 cert.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Why? It should be easier the second time around. My personal view on this is that you get your cert to fly within that power class. If it is just a one time deal, why bother? Unless you just want the merit badge. Most merit badge types go away quietly after getting them.
Mike Fisher
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
J.A. Michel wrote:

if you want to fly at a NAR or Tripolu sanctioned launch, I agree
no one is suggesting that nonmember certifications be a ticket to sanctioned events, they are simply a means to comply with NFPA 1127 so that one may purchase, posssess and use HPR motors legally

as I have said, I am a member of both organizations even though I abstain from certification under the current rules (*requirements* for membership and forced expiration upon lapse of that membership)
I also said that I would remain a member provided that that membership did not constrain my activities not conducted under the auspices if the organizations
so your cheap shot has no basis

TRA membership has declined significantly. I believe Bob K. has some figures

if there were a drop, it would be only to the extent that people have been members in response to the extortion (membership requirement for certification artificially imposed when it had no basis in law or code)
if an organizations value proposition is attractive, the individual would become, and remain a member (as I am and have said I would)
whether it is for any given individual is a matter of personal judgement
it will put the onus of making their value propositions attractive on the organizations, as they will no longer have extortion as a means to get and keep members
that is as it should be

I just did
- iz
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Iz said:

Yes it does. The name of the thread is "Cost to Certify". One of the first things that Farrell mentioned when he started this thread is that it cost 62.00 to be a NAR member. So tell me this Iz, if the cost of membership is not a factor, then what are you guys complaining about, huh? It has everything to do with money.
-- Joe Michel NAR 82797 L2 http://home.alltel.net/jm44316 /

Tripoli
thing.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Only when it's convenient.
On Sun, 11 Apr 2004 22:13:25 -0500, "J.A. Michel"

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
YOu have this all figured out. It's time to start your own organization.
On Mon, 12 Apr 2004 03:54:34 GMT, Ismaeel Abdur-Rasheed

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 12 Apr 2004 03:54:34 GMT, Ismaeel Abdur-Rasheed
Now that you are getting into certification fees, how much of that fee goes to the person who signs as a witness to the certification requirements have been met? This person is clearly at a greater risk of getting sued, than the NAR which only issues the certificate and maintains the list. If there was any liability from fraudulent or inappropriate certification it would almost certainly be that of the witness. Since the witness is at risk of being sued, the witness should get compensation for taking that risk.

Since a certification flight is likely to occur at an NAR launch, I think it is not unreasonable to require the cert candidate to be a NAR/TRA member with insurance at the time of the cert flight. Any additional fee should be small. OTOH, there is no reason that non members could not be certified at other venues, and/or for a higher cert fee.

That depends on what *maintain* a list of certified users is taken to mean. If it is taken to mean the current address and status (e.g active, deceased) of the certified user it could be very expensive. ( just take a look at states that are required by law to maintain a list of registered sex offenders, who are even required to notify authorities of any change of address.) In the case of NAR membership, members are mailed a publication monthly (SR and MR bimonthly) and members are further required to renew with current information annually. In other words, maintaining a current address for members is done "automatically", but this may be an additional maintenance cost for non members. This maintenance cost would still be less that the cost of a junior membership. Regardless, I still think certification of non members and/or continued certification of one time members will be a good thing for sport rocketry.

Hm, well, I'd go for a $12.50 annual subscription to SR! I'm not so keen on the idea of a certificate sufficing. It is not a wallet card that enables you to purchase HPR motors. Rather it is your listing on an official list of certified users maintained by the certifying org. To carry the same authority in a certificate, it would probably at least have to be signed by an authorized NAR officer and notarized.

Alan
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Ismaeel Abdur-Rasheed" wrote | J.A. Michel wrote: | | > Iz said: <baby snip> | > | > Yes it does. The name of the thread is "Cost to Certify". One of the first | > things that Farrell mentioned when he started this thread is that it cost | > 62.00 to be a NAR member. So tell me this Iz, if the cost of membership is | > not a factor, then what are you guys complaining about, huh? It has | > everything to do with money. | | $30 more than covers the cost of administrating the certification | | (Ferrell suggested the equivalent of one years dues for a year's | opportunity to successfully complete the certification, which I also | find reasonable) | | there are no recurring costs for non-member certification | | $12.50 annually more than covers the cost of an optional confirmation | subscription, for those non-members who would like to be able to have | their certification confirmed by the issuing org, otherwise the | certificate itself suffices | | no membership dues, no pledge of allegiance, no policies in excess of | regulation | | - iz |
Heck, I'd pay $100 cert for each level and a $20 retest fee if I stepped on my crank during the attempt. It's just that after watching TRA/NAR flailing around the last couple of years, there's no way I'll ever see my way clear to become a member of either org.
p.s. to "Mark" (mburgga1<at> earthlink.net), re the "vote" thread and your comment to _Renee_ Wheeler's post as well as your multiple posts: You do tend to demonstrate a certain lack of reading comprehension prowess. Maybe every cert should include a basic language usage and comprehension test. . .
--
TK

Cogito ergo Bibo


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

on
flailing
Maybe
.
\\PC_MODE=OFF Excuse me, you want to kiss my what, "Magpie King"?
I read stupid crap too quickly.... guilty. Life's too short. Trust me. An' byte me if ya don't like it.
But don't change the rules cert rules on my account...
Oh, wait.... reading comprehension, ciphering, and 'memberin' is what the Level II cert is ALL about!!!
(Or didn't ya know). \\PC_MODE=ON

Er... in your case... "Bibo ergo sum".
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
<snippage> | | Oh, wait.... reading comprehension, ciphering, and 'memberin' is what the | Level II cert is ALL about!!!
So, who'd /you/ have to pay off then?
| | > | > Cogito ergo Bibo | | Er... in your case... "Bibo ergo sum".
Hey, it pays the bills.
Warm hugs, and congratulations on learning not to top-post,
TK
--
Cogito ergo Bibo


Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I diagree with you Ferrell..
Drivers License are not issued for ever.... they expire after aset time period and you have to renew the license.....what about hunting and fishing permits? they ahve to be renewed on a yearly or multi year basis. What about CDL? I don't know...but I assume that they also have to be renewed at some point....same for a boaters license,etc.... Almost any licnse has some form of continuing education or renewal attached to it... Why should it be any diffrent for a person that wants to "fly and buy hpr" . So lets see if I have this correct, you have no problem with having to get a state explosives permit where required, and no problem with a BATFE LEUP where required, but you can't stand the thought of paying a few bucks to either the NAR/TRA for the privilege to "fly and buy hpr" If that your basic position?
My suggestion is this...IF you do not want to be a member of either the NAR/TRA but you still want to "fly and buy hpr" ,then my suggestion is use NFPA 1127 to your advantage.....Go before your State Fire Marshall and explain to him that you want your state to drop adoption of NFPA 1125/1127...... And in place you would like him to set up a Licensing and permit scheme based upon soemthing like CA has....... It shouldn't be all that difficult to convince him that once he sets this State run "fly and buy hpr" program up in place of the old NFPA codes, that he should allow you to receive a HPR Cert License once and pay for it and never pay for it or renew it again......I'm sure he will see the logic and monetray gain to be expected from such a program......
Face it ....the only REAL problem you have is with being a member of either the NAR or the TRA...thats what it boils down to.....

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

I think you missed the point. I do not "need" a driver's license to buy a car, I do not "need" a hunting or fishing license to buy a deer rifle or trout lure, I do not "need" a CDL to buy a truck for my business, I do not "need" a boater's license to buy a ski boat, but I do "need" (practically speaking) to be a member of a national rocket club (NAR/TRA) to buy an "H" motor. I do believe the state or the feds have the right to ask for certain (reasonable?) licenses (permits) before I engage in certain activities. This goes whether I like what they ask me for or not. But NGO's do not have that right. I'll say it again as I've said on other threads. It is just not right for a private club (NAR/TRA) to make itself into (or be made into by others) part of the public law of the land. This point has absolutely NOTHING to do with whether I love (I like NAR) or hate NAR/TRA (I belong to both, & would still belong to as least one even if it was not mandatory to buy HPR motors). It has nothing to due with not wanting to pay club dues. I spent more for the 2 motors I used in my last rocket flight than NAR & TRA membership dues combined, so I'm not about to argue over having to spend 60 bucks or whatever for membership. Rather, it is a matter of justice, a principle upon which the good ole' USA was founded. In the last 200+ years many Americans have died so I can live in a just society, and I'm not about to give that up without a fight. So for me, there is a principle here that is far larger than the question about buying rocket motors. You think I'm an unrealistic dreamer? Fine. So were the pilgrims. The wolf won't ever be at peace with the lamb in this life, but that's no excuse for us not to try to do things more justly for all. Larry Lobdell Jr.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
larry: would you have any objection to having to get a license to "fly and buy HPR" from say the FAA? versus the NAR/TRA ? Such that you paid No membership fee to the NGO NAR/TRA but you did paid a license fee to the GO FAA?
How about the BATFE? Would you object to having to get a license from the BATFE to "fly and buy HPR" ? versus paying a membership fee to the NAR/TRA ?
Can you answer yes or no to these simple basic questions?
As far as Non-Governmental Organizations go, here in Kentucky for at least 15 years we have what are called Quasi-Governmental organziations.... They are combination public/private corporations.... They make rules and regulations that apply to the residents of the state of Kentucky.... I consider the NAR/TRA to be quasi-governmental organziation too...except they are National in nature not State in nature.....
I don't know where you live, but here in KY I do think you need to show proof of a drivers license and also Car insurance before you can purchase a vehicle....... And I would say on average that KY is pretty backwards considering other states.....
shockie B)

fishing
about
some
form
any
I
explosives
but
for
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
It seems to me that this is easily solvable...
If you have certified, you should be able to purchase (for life) based on the certification. If you want to fly, you must be 'current' according to the relevant rules of the organization that you are claiming as the certification organization.
This allows for the 'purchase' of the items, but just as with your drivers/fishing license, you can't use them unless you're current.
This would have the beneficial impact (perhaps) of increasing motor sales, just as folks may buy their fishing lures or hunting gear during the 'off' season.
This also negates the insurance arguments as the person isn't insured unless they are current.
Finally, if someone is launching that rarely, it gives the ability to purchase engines and supplies, get ready, and then do their 're-cert' launch (if needed) without jumping through additional hoops (if they're only going to launch once that year, that's their 're-cert' flight...).
Any comments?
David Erbas-White
Larry Lobdell, Jr. wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Larry Lobdell, Jr. wrote:

<snip>
here here!
- iz
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
<< I do not "need" a driver's license to buy a car, I do not "need" a hunting or fishing license to buy a deer rifle or trout lure, I do not "need" a CDL to buy a truck for my business, I do not "need" a boater's license to buy a ski boat, but I do "need" (practically speaking) to be a member of a national rocket club (NAR/TRA) to buy an "H" motor. >>
That's because those items are not regulated, restricted materials. Like it or not, the government considers high power rocket motors to be restricted material. Not just the ATF either, but CPSC, NFPA, state fire marshals, etc. They require some form of control over who can obtain and use these motors.
<< I do believe the state or the feds have the right to ask for certain (reasonable?) licenses (permits) before I engage in certain activities. This goes whether I like what they ask me for or not. But NGO's do not have that right. I'll say it again as I've said on other threads. It is just not right for a private club (NAR/TRA) to make itself into (or be made into by others) part of the public law of the land. >>
So you'd rather have the Feds (or states) setting up the cert programs? Do you really think they'd be less expensive and less restrictive? And how would you get each state to institute their own program? How would you like being required to go through a different cert process everytime you fly in another state?
Look at what the ATF is doing -- do you think their requirements are better than joining a club and going through the NFPA cert process?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Nope. Here's proof!
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets Subject: Re: [FELONY by official] Date: Sun, 11 Apr 2004 16:05:16 GMT 11 Apr 2004 09:05:16 PDT)
27 CFR Part 555 Sec. 555.141 Exemptions.
"(a) General. Except for the provisions of Secs. 555.180 and 555.181, this part does not apply to:"
27 CFR 555.141 quite clearly says that materials exempted under it are exempt from everything in part 555 except for the plastic explosives stuff in 180 and 181. The samples regulations are in 555.110.
The BATFE therefore exercised an unlawfull use of power in requiring Aerotech to provide finished model rocket motors. They could have requested samples of the cast propellant but not the finished motors.
But it is fairly obvious that they wanted the motors for purposes other than identification. Which is what the samples law is about.
David wrote:

explosive.
--
David W. Schultz
http://home.earthlink.net/~david.schultz
  Click to see the full signature.
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.