Re: cost to certify

JI:
The BATFE unlawfully exercising its powers? Thats nothing new....look at WACO...... shockie B)


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

I just provided proactive action and schultz posted the cite to prove it.

--
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
Jerry Irvine wrote:

(snipped)
How does the PAD exemption have any effect on state law?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
shockwaveriderz wrote:

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
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Sucks for you.
On Sun, 11 Apr 2004 03:30:39 GMT, Ismaeel Abdur-Rasheed

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Iz wrote: << no we have a problem with being *compelled* to be a member when no such requirement exists to fly legally >>
Boohoo. Do what TRA did -- start your own org. Then you can pass out free certs like cheap candy at a Shriner's parade if you want.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
<< Note, this is a FANTASTIC recruitment device. >>
No, it's just a revolving door for people who join just long enough to get their cert, then leave.
<< There is no liability issue. None! Since a person is a member while trying to cert, they are covered by the _secondary_ insurance of NAR. A non-member does not have the _secondary_ insurance that NAR offers to members. >>
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.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
RayDunakin wrote:

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
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Joe M. wrote: << What you propose would cause membership to drop, which is not a good thing.

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

liar
I have never said any such thing
which only confirms my observation that you do not understand what you read
- iz
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
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
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
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....
2. 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...
3. 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)

No!
regulation!"
this.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
<< I thought we could take it as an axiom among rocketeers that less regulation was better then more regulation. >>
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.
<< NAR is not the government. >>
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.
<< 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. >>
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.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
RayDunakin wrote:

{ I addressed these points directly in other posts ]

the organization should earn its members by a free-market process, by offering an attractive value proposition
if people believe that the way the organizations weild their "political power" serves their interests, that enhances the value proposition for those individuals
Ray, your insistence on these points is beginning to appear that you consider that the organizations are perceived as having no real value apart from certificating; and that they will lose members in droves once the organizations can no longer exploit the NFPA requirement to compell membership
why is it so unthinkable that the organization be subject to the same market conditions as an other corporation in the free world?

more "who cares about what you want/need/care about" Ray babble

impractical in the near term
why not use the organizations that coauthored the requirement to implement it fairly? It would be infinitely faster!
and regulatort relief and improving the general conditions in which rocketry is conducted are "good things", aren' they Ray?

they are quasi-governmental in role by virtue of their position on the NFPA rule-making body, and as recognized certificating organizations in the codes they themselves coauthered
they should "do the 'right' thing", and not abuse their positions (granted to themselves) to exploit rocketeers and extort their money and allegiance

you give away nothing
individuals earn their certification my their own merits, by demonstrating "knowledge and competence" as required by NFPA 1127
I and others have presented a number of reasonable methods by which any costs of administering the certification program can be funded
- iz
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
That's already been suggested several times. He wants to "fix" the organizations.
On Sun, 11 Apr 2004 13:24:04 -0400, "shockwaveriderz"

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

Is that like taking your tomcat to the vet?
-dave w
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Are you saying he has no balls?
On Sun, 11 Apr 2004 14:13:45 -0700, David Weinshenker

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

Why does their form of organization make a hill of beans difference, except your specific suggestion would PREVENT them from primarilly lobbying, of course!
In fact, the one thing we do know to a certainty is the non-profit and BoT model definitely does NOT work or is COUNTERPRODUCTIVE.
Why in hell would anyone duplicate known bad policies and outcomes?
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
I added ......or whatever...... If they want to be a political lobbyer than they should incorporate to take advantage of that..
shockie B)

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

The best way to take advantage of that is to NOT incorporate at all.
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

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.