Re: Rocket mishap at ARSA launch?


> > On 12 Apr 2004 14:44:59 GMT, snipped-for-privacy@aol.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.
>
> Abdul
> Flya
> Mohammed
> s
> Karl
>
> All trying to troll Iz.
And a few others by the same poster, trying to provoke Jerry.
You're very observant!
Reply to
Mark
Loading thread data ...
That was rather the point I was trying to make. Hence "There may not be as many of them as you think". ;-)
Reply to
Darren J Longhorn
AR is not a felony......well probably not in most states and jurisdictions... 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 ......
shockie B)
Reply to
shockwaveriderz
Roger that.
Mike (guilty of feeding the troll) Fisher
Reply to
Mfreptiles
Dang that speed reading. Sorry.
Joel. phx
Reply to
Joel Corwith
Based on Altopia?
I read RMR maybe once every several weeks. I've posted twice in the past 5-6 years and just recently joined in the discussions because it seemed important.
You guys are whacked!
FLyA
Reply to
FLyA on the PlaYA
I am not aware of any laws making it illegal to make a 'rocket propellant' (whatever that is) in a 'zoned residential area'.
What is "Rocket Propellant"?
Reply to
Mark
"Forte Agent 2.0/32.646" might also have been a contributing element in that perception. (For the record, "Dave Grayvis" appears to be someone different.)
-dave w
Reply to
David Weinshenker
I've used the same Forte Agent for years. Like I said before I just look in every now and then.
Ciao!
FLya
Reply to
FLyA on the PlaYA
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 (IFC) thus:
"§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?
3.3.26.2 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.
3.3.26.4 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 oz).
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......
rant on/
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....
rant off/
shockie B)
Reply to
shockwaveriderz
SNIP
You said Rocket Propellant.... my question was about 'Rocket Propellant'.
These codes are for Rocket "Motors".
Reply to
Mark
But none-the-less - EXCELLENT references... and saved in the archives. ;)
Reply to
Mark
No problem.
Reply to
Darren J Longhorn
Of course you have! Except of course Agent 2.0 was only released last month. Before that you were using 1.92/32.572
Reply to
Darren J Longhorn
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.
Joel. phx
Reply to
Joel Corwith
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.
Reply to
Chuck Stewart
The problem with being an amateur agent provocateur....
How can you tell a TRA drone is lying? They posted.
Reply to
Chuck Stewart
"TRA Drone"... noted... thanks. I suppose they're to be ignored?
Reply to
Mark
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 :)
Reply to
Chuck Stewart
Excellent advice.
Further, have noticed that I'm drawn to the 'politics' of NAR and TRA. How the heck can I avoid that... I just want to talk about the Rockets... Technology... etc. ;(
Reply to
Mark

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.