Ok...how about a counter proposal...have the manufacturers become
ISO9001 certified to perform their own testing. That would eliminate
any possibility of abuse wouldn't it ? The cost of ISO certification
might well be a wash when compared against the existing certification
process but we should probably do a KTA analysis to confirm that.
Boiled down, here's our situation. We are a fringe group who like to
fly model rockets of various sizes. Ain't nobody gonna get rich selling
us the whoosh generators we need but at the same time we need to
know that the motors we use are safe and perform reliably.
Smaller motor suppliers could (for a fee) submit their products to an
ISO certified company testing for a mutually-agreeable fee.
I think what I am driving at is consolidation of a motor certification
process which I perceive is fragmented across the different organizations
who are acting out of narrow self-interests, rather than what is best for
the sport of model rocketry as a whole. So, you are correct. I am looking
for a 'monopoly' to replace the extant 'competition'. Regardless of which
organization (or none at all) we choose to affiliate with, our motor
should all stem from the same source data.
John<=Κn't we all just get along ?
It is a conflict of interest for a manufacturer to do the testing. I
know because I have been on the receiving end of "mistreatment".
I can help start it, donate equipment, help write a procedure manual,
but cannot "do it". Or won't.
I ran for TRA BOD once (didn't try very hard). I did not run a second
time because I saw what Gary Rosenfield did while on the TRA BOD. It was
unethical IMHO. YMMV.
Since then we have seen even far more gross examples of malfeasance by
board members, particularly Kelly and Rogers and to a lesser extent
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to: firstname.lastname@example.org>
ROBERT L. WEISS, ESQ. BAR #118796
1001 Partridge Drive, Suite 105,
Ventura, CA 9 3 003
Attorney for: Plaintiff, Franklin Kosdon
Bob Kloss, Brian Teeling, & John Lee
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR THE COUNTY OF VENTURA
FRANKLIN KOSDON; BOB P. KLOSS;) Case No. 117435 )
BRIAN TEELING; and JOHN LEE )
JERRY IRVINE, individually, )
and dba U.S. ROCKETS; )
JERRY IRVINE, dba POWERTECH; )
DOES 1-50, INCLUSIVE )
Defendants , ) ....
Where is Chuck's name mentioned?
I did not say He never was, Chuck and Korey left on good terms with
you, several years before.
They had no involvement in the trial, with the exception of, Chuck's
brief appearance as a plaintiff witness.
Specifically, what would be Chuck's motive?
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.