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

formatting link

Reply to
J.A. Michel
Loading thread data ...

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

Reply to

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

Reply to
Ismaeel Abdur-Rasheed

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.....

Reply to

No, it's just a revolving door for people who join just long enough to get their cert, then leave.

The fact that the non-member is not covered by insurance which is provided to members does NOT alleviate the liability risk. If the non-member causes an accident or commits a criminal act involving rocketry materials, the organization that certified him (thereby allowing him access to those materials) WOULD be sued! And the individual in question would have contributed next to nothing towards the cost of maintaining liability insurance.

Reply to

That's precisely what Iz wants. Remember, his real reason for this anti-TRA/NAR crusade is simply to destroy TRA/NAR. It doesn't have anything to do with "reform". It's just revenge -- the orgs didn't jump fast enough or high enough when Wickman snapped his fingers, so they must be destroyed.

Reply to

I thank everyone for their comments.

I thought we could take it as an axiom among rocketeers that less regulation was better then more regulation. Many of the regulations that govern us are difficult to change (via US congress, BATFE suits, or NFPA guidelines). OTOH, for some regulations rocketeers are given the power to increase or decrease the extent of the regulation themselves (the specifics of cert granting by NAR/TRA for example). These latter regulations are relatively easy to change, a vote of the NAR BOT, for example.

So now Iz and I have presented the rocketry community, at the request of Mark Bundick, a proposal to lessen regulations completely within the law. But there seems to be a small vocal group that is saying "No! No! we want MORE regulation than the law requires!! We demand MORE regulation!"

I'm stunned.

I'm starting to feel like Jerry Irving :-). I literally can't believe this.

I have a PhD in Mathematics. Being a member of the American Mathematical Society and the Mathematical Association of America were both of help to me in achieving this "cert". I no longer belong to either organization, and I don't belong to the Alumni Association of the university that granted me this "cert". Should my PhD be taken away from me? (Note, my PhD is a condition for my current employment so having it taken away would have real consequences for me).

Another one of my hobbies is bladesmithing. The American Bladesmith Society has rather rigorous tests for granting Journeyman certifications and then granting Master Bladesmith certifications. Knives and swords sell more, typically, when made by a Master Bladesmith. There is a membership requirement in order to take the VERY DIFFICULT tests, but once granted the certification is always honored regardless of continued membership in the American Bladesmith Society.

People have brought up many government licensing procedures (drivers, boaters, pilots, EMT, etc.) and then ask "why shouldn't it be like that?" I answer "Because it doesn't _have_ to be like that". NAR is not the government. We should all be yelling "Yeah!!!". Why can't it be like my PhD or a Master Bladesmith certification? Just because something _is_ the way it is, doesn't mean that is the way it _ought_ to be (this is the infamous is/ought fallacy).

No one has made a compelling case (not even close, IMHO) why paying the NAR or TRA a fee every year should be a requirement for me being able to buy a HPR motor. I, like Iz, think there is value in being a member of NAR, but I should not be _required_ to be a member in order to buy a HPR motor. If this were not the case, I would have no interest in this issue whatsoever.

Take care,

Ferrell Wheeler Sunderland, MD

Reply to
Ferrell Wheeler

Tripoli and NAR are supposed to promote the rocketry hobby.

Why would anyone renew TRA or NAR if certification was lifetime? The only reason to be a member would be if your local flying field requires TRA or NAR insurance.

If Tripoli and NAR ceased to exist, how would new flyers get certified unless there was a new organization handling crtifications?

Brian Elfert

Reply to
Brian Elfert

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

Reply to
Brian Elfert

Anyone willing to do an L3 should be prepared for the "cost of doing business".

I always get a kick out of the guy who wants to do an L3 for under $300, then never flies another again. What's the purpose other than it appearing to be a big d*ck contest.The guys who do this always win the BD contest 'cause they're the biggest d*cks around.

This cheapens the achievement for others.

It's an achievement, not some Napleonic, megalomaniacal, "look at me, LOOK AT ME!!!" 15 minutes in the limelight.

Come to think of it, it's the cost of doing business for all certs: 0 through 3. I say that we should be more concerned if monies become "mysteriously" misappropriated.

I wish anyone good luck in this environment if they want to start their own orgs. because this fairy tale'd be the only way someone could enact that.

I got a better idea: why don't you start an org that's FREE and charge people royalties for, saaaaaay, mentioning the org's name? Ya know, kinda like a rocketry ASCAP?

Cost o' doin' business, bro...

Reply to

You have provided me no compelling reasons why there should not be some entity thats provides user and or motor certification authority.... You have provided me no compelling reasons why a person should not be a member of either the NAR or TRA if the person wishes to "fly and buy hpr"©® .... ...

Ferrell, as I see it you have 3 choices:

  1. Assuming you live in MD, get your State Fire Marshall to resind the applicable NFPA codes and institute a state sponsored version of same... This is not adding regulation, this is just changing from one regulator to another... OR better yet, see if you can talk the State Fire Marshall into not only rescinding the applicable NFPA codes, but in addition, convince him that the state doen't even need a state certification program .....then theres no regulation....

  1. Make your own motors......You can then fly all the AR HPR that you want to and you need NO user nor motor certs...This way you not only don't have to pay anybody a membership fee, you also do not have to pay any user certification fees, plus the cost of making your own HPR motors will be much less than if you purchase and use commercial motors.... It sounds to me this is your idea world that you want so why not just do it? No regulation whatsoever not to mention at a very low cost...

  2. move to a non compliant NFPA state that has a HPR vendor or become one yourself and sell and use your own HPR motors .... In Non compliant NFPA states, there is no regulation of HPR per the NFPA 1127, plus you don't even have to join a National organization to "fly and buy hpr"©® ... so again this is the best of your needs: no membership fees, no cert fees, no regulations, again what you desire....

Look both the NAR and the TRA provide a service: certification of both user and motors....why? Primarily for Safety reasons..... If you don't want to play, don't pay..... shockie B)


Reply to

I think there are two issues with your proposal.

First, it would reduce the revenue for the organizations, which would reduce benefits and/or increase costs (again). Sure, it might bring in a couple of people who used to fly rockets, and the only reason they don't now is because they have to get re-certified. But it would cause a lot of people to have no need to renew ever year. It would have a large negative impact, not a positive one as you suggest.

Second, you are focused on lifetime certification, not lifetime membership. There's a big difference. You have to be a current member (or lapsed less than 1 year) to fly HPR at a NAR sanctioned event. What's the big deal about recertifying if your membership lapses? Let's say an ex-level 1 guy wants to re-join. All he has to do is fly a Level 1 rocket, and he's back. No additional cost. If he doesn't want to fly H and I motors, he doesn't even have to re-certify. Now a level 2 guy. He has to take a test, too. Wow, have you looked at that test? If someone can't pass that test with 15 minutes of studying, I don't want them flying big rockets around me or my family. If he doesn't want to fly level 2, he doesn't have to certify! Level 3 guys - I can't imagine there are many of those who are going to let a minor thing such as certification effect their decision to get back in the hobby or not.

If you don't want to fly at NAR events, you don't have to be certified anyways. Just make your own motors. If you want to buy motors, join the NAR. It seems to me that you're basically looking for a free ticket here - lifetime benefits from the NAR certification process - but only have to pay for one year.

That's my opinion.

-- David

Reply to

Boy. That was pretty egotistical. What do you care 'why' the other guy climbs the mountain. For some it's a journey for others its the view.

Doesn't cheapen it for me. Why does it cheapen it for you.

Umm, yes it is. And for the attempt to day it will be another 15.

Joel. phx

Reply to
Joel Corwith

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.

Reply to
Larry Lobdell, Jr.

Of course. But sometimes one must accept certain regulations or rules in order to avoid worse regulations or other problems. Giving certs to non-members creates at least two big problems: Ongoing liability for the org without ongoing income to pay for it; and loss of members resulting in higher expenses and less political power for the remaining members.

And what problem does this solve? You don't want to pay dues to support the orgs that made your cert possible, that's _your_ problem, not mine.

You have other options available to you. You can start your own org and have it become accepted as a certifying authority. You can do amateur rocketry, and make your own motors. You can get a pyro ops license in your state and any other necessary permits to do professional or educational rocketry.

Right. NAR (and TRA) are not the government. They don't have unlimited funds, and they don't have freedom from lawsuits. They also don't have to give away member priviledges to non-members.

It's not a requirement. You can exercise your other options as described above. And you haven't made a single argument as to why TRA/NAR should give away member priviledges to non-members.

Reply to

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)

Reply to

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:

Reply to
David Erbas-White

no we have a problem with being *compelled* to be a member when no such requirement exists to fly legally

by requiring membership the organization in turn compells you to follow their policies in excess of law, regulation, rule or code

they also "hold hostage" that certification and "members" who do not care to tow the party line are in peril of both loss of membership and certification

there are many examples among the expatriats

decouple certification from membership, and people will choose freely to become memberships or not based on the value proposition the organizations offer

- iz

Reply to
Ismaeel Abdur-Rasheed

if the organization cannot offer a value proposition to attract and retain members, that is their failure

requiring continuous membership without an individual's agreement with the value proposition, by abusing the authority to withold or rescind certification when you are the only recognizing certificating organizations, is an abuse of that status

it does not serve the individual, and seeks to serve the organization (or the agenda of its leaders) at the individual's expense

I have given a number of real world examples that debunk this falsehood

if the organization grants certification by means of a responsible process and in good faith, there is no liability

- iz

Reply to
Ismaeel Abdur-Rasheed


I have never said any such thing

which only confirms my observation that you do not understand what you read

- iz

Reply to
Ismaeel Abdur-Rasheed

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.