> > On 12 Apr 2004 14:44:59 GMT, email@example.com (Mfreptiles) wrote: > >
> > I'm trying to figure out why everybody is
> > >fixated on ARSA, and not all of the other groups doing the same thing. > >
> > You say "everybody". Often when a whole bunch of new posters appear
> > and seem to be fixated on one topic, it pays to read the headers of
> > their posts carefully. There may not be as many of them as you think. >
> Not to correct you but it's not "whole bunch of new posters" it's a "whole
> bunch of new posts appear". They're from the same person.
> All trying to troll Iz.
And a few others by the same poster, trying to provoke Jerry.
You're very observant!
AR is not a felony......well probably not in most states and
the only laws AR people may be violating is the one about making propellant
in a zoned residential area....
If the rockets they build weigh more than 3.3 lb and contain more than 4.4
oz of propellant all they need is a FAA waiver..... I think...
The fact that APCP is now considered an explosive by the BATFE thus
requiring a LEUP is another can of worms...... I would assume that due to
the recent court ruling that if you home brew motors with APCP that you are
limited to make only "model rocketry" size motors.... without an LEUP......
anything bigger and you should probably get a LEUP ......
ever hear of the IBC, the International Building Code which is law probably
in all 50 states? Or the IFC, the International Fire Code or NFPA1, The
Uniform Fire Code?
From the rocketry standpoint, NFPA 1122, 1125 and 1127 are explicity
referenced in 'Chapter 34 - Explosive and Fireworks' of the Intl Fire Code
"§3401.1.4 Rocketry. The storage, handling, and use of model and high
powered rockets shall conform with the requirements of NFPA 1122, NFPA 1125,
and NFPA 1127."
from NFPA 1125:
4.1.1 The manufacture of any rocket motor shall be conducted
in accordance with this code.
4.1.2 The manufacture of any rocket motor shall be prohibited
in any residence or dwelling, or in any inhabited building
in an area zoned as residential by the local building authority
and building codes in effect.
4.1.3 The manufacturer of any rocket motor shall be in compliance
with 29 CFR 1910.119.
The definition of "rocket motor" as used here is defined as:
3.3.26 Rocket Motor. As used in this code, the term rocket motor means model
rocket motor or high power rocket motor.
what is their definition of a model rocket or high power rocket motor?
188.8.131.52 High Power Rocket Motor. A rocket motor that has more than 160
N-sec but no more than 40,960 N-sec of total impulse,
or that produces an average thrust of greater than 80 N, or that contains
greater than 62.5 g (2.2 oz) of propellant.
184.108.40.206 Model Rocket Motor. A rocket motor that has a total impulse of no
greater than 160 N-sec, an average thrust of no
greater than 80 N, and a propellant weight of no greater than 62.5 g (2.2
what is their definition of "Manufacture" ?
3.3.15* Manufacture. The preparation of propellant, delay, and ejection
compositions and the loading and assembly of
model or high power rocket motors and igniters and any other alteration of
their pyrotechnic components.
You will notice that NO mention is made in any of the definitions as to
whether they are talking about commercially made motors ONLY or if the
definition also include non commercially made motors, or as we all know
them, AR/EX motors made by individuals....
My question is this: when is a model rocket motor not a model rocket motor?
and when is a high power rocket motor not a high power rocket motor.?
Does the fact that a company makes a model rocket motor and is commercial in
nature the same as a individual who makes his own model rocket motors for
his own use mke any difference? Does this NFPA 1125 apply to both or only
the former? same questions for HPR motors? There are some that interpret the
above to mean that it only applies to commercially made motors, not AR/EX
motors.... You be the judge......
See I hate this ambuguity.... Where can we turn to to get a legal
interpreattion of this? the NAR/TRA ? Nope they will not interpret even for
their own memebrship what a passge means or doesn't mean, even though they
are the people who wrote it in the 1st place? SO the only person that can
and will legall interpret the NFPA codes, are your State Fire Marshalls, so
in esssence it is possible to conceivably get 50 different interpretation of
a point in the nFPA codes..... not good.... I think the NAR/TRA needs to
appoint soemthing like a ombudsman to intrepret members questions about the
NFPA codes.... At least the NAR does have a NFPA Committee Chairman who may
be able to fill that role, not sure if the TRA has any standing Committees
that do anything....
I'm sorry, I don't see what the issue is in regards to the last few
comments. Nothing presented suggests it's a felony to manufacturer
propellant in a residential area, only in an inhabited building.
The appropriate generic term you are looking for is "TRA drone".
TRA drone: a TRA fan who does more damage to the TRA's online image than
Jerry or Iz could dream of by posting a constant stream of untruths
fixated on a narrowly limited list of subjects viewed by the fan as
being anti-TRA... generally Jerry, Iz, or ARSA.
Well, as noted they have a distinct tendency to drone on monomaniacally,
flatly refuse to actually discuss the fear, uncertainty, and doubt
they're trying to raise with their posts, and generally engage in hit
and run tactics... you might find it easier to ignore. But since the
drones nymshift constantly all you can really do is recognize the source
the 20th or 30th time it comes around :)