Re: ROL NEWS--AeroTech Assets Sold at Bankruptcy Auction

I'm not sure that I agree with your assessment. The death of an AT employee wasn't the FD's fault. Isn't that the source of at least one of the lawsuits? And according to the Fire Marshall, AT was at least partially responsible for the second fire as well.

"The first one, which was accidental, started in the manufacturing process and resulted in the death of one of its employees.

The second blaze was sparked when water ignited a barrel of magnesium and destroyed the entire building. The State Fire Marshall's Office says that the barrel was improperly stored, and the explosion was not a result of the firefighting effort.

"Whether the sprinkler or hose contributed to the barrel that wasn't sealed correctly, you can't say it's the Clark County firefighters' fault," said Thom Relly, Clark County Manager. "I think it's ludicrous, and I don't think that is supported by the report"

There are also creditors that are going unpaid and it seems that AT gets to chug along without consequence. That sucks, IMHO.

Mark Simpson NAR 71503 Level II God Bless our peacekeepers

BS

BS

Even if you claim the barrel was "improperly stored". But given the series of events, we will never know.

BS.

Of course it is not supported by the self-serving report!

AT was dissolved. Those are consequences. Death.

why does the Tripoli BoD need to "approve" other manufacturers making reloads for AT cases?

there only concern should be whether the reload/case combination passes the NFPA-mandated test regimen

patent infringement (is such even applies) is a legal/business issue between the two manufacturers

warranties are a consumer concern and therefore a manufacturer business issue

neither are regulatory [surrogate] an issue

unless perhaps TRA is trying to control the rocket motor market

hmm, what are the chances?

- iz

not to mention the impact it would have on product already in the distribution pipeline

- iz

1:1

So you're maintaining your convictions and not purchasing brand A products (renamed or otherwise), correct?

Joel. phx

if you are worried about your reloads CATOing, send them to me :)

At the time, I believe that AT raised concerns of saftey.

I agree

True. TRA wisley didn't get involved with this.

True

I doubt it. Why would they?

Then why did they decertify ANY motors?

Correct.

Mark Simpson NAR 71503 Level II God Bless our peacekeepers

We WILL honor all warranties that were in house prior to the sale and we WILL solve any problems that arise with products already "in the pipeline". We WILL continue to stand by our products regardless of ownership and the name it is/was sold under.

The comments regarding AMW and CTI reloads in our hardware will open a big can of worms. This is another subject all together.

Joe

I don't see that it's different. AT went from NV to TX to UT without recertification. It went from owned by Gary to owned by investors and now back to owned by Gary without recert or new paperwork.

I don't see how it's any different than USR. It just confirms a double standard from TRA...

Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD!

I think that AT is past due for their triannual motor recertifications anyway.

Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD!

We all knew _that_...

-dave w

What motors did they decertify? I've heard of manufacturers being decertified for not complying with requiremnents. Of course that decertifies the motors but, it still they didn't decertify the motors did they?

Your sentence did not make sense.

this should be in the FAQ

- iz

Thanks Joe, I suspected that would be the case, but the question needed to be asked.

RDH8