Re: The AT auction

I told you so.

I told you so.

I told you so.

I told . . . wait! Oh shit!

I emailed Mark on this within the last 2 hours BTW.

Point!

Okay, and I told you so.

Point!!

make this guy a NFPA seatholder!

Jerry

Reply to
Jerry Irvine
Loading thread data ...

No it increased but standardized regulations.

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

I'm sorry, but I don't understand the reasoning here. Can you elaborate on why the NAR, a consumer organization, should simulataneously become a trade association?

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Mark B. Bundick mbundick - at - earthlink - dot - net NAR President www - dot - nar - dot - org

"A dark night in a city that knows how to keep its secrets, but high above the quiet streets on the twelfth floor of the Acme Building, one man is still trying to find the answers to life's persistent questions. Guy Noir, Private Eye."

Reply to
Mark B. Bundick

Maybe not a trade association per-se but some of the "benefits" such as advocating that APCP and BP should be treated as the non-detonable materials they are.

HPRMADA was a debacle.

Jerry

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

NFPA CODES, Erik, which are now included law in many (most?) places. Certified motors. Certified users. Buyers. Sellers.

Connect the dots.

Then go back and look at the argument.

~ Duane Phillips.

Reply to
Duane Phillips

This is the obvious reason sales have dropped over the past 7 years.

911 was a blip AT fire was a blip

The trend is real.

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

In this case, the interests of the members and the manufacturers coincide.

-dave w

Reply to
David Weinshenker

I hear ARSA has no user or motor certification requirements. Join ARSA.

Reply to
Dave Grayvis

Duane, Show me any mention of NAR or TRA!!!!! Any mention in or NAR or TRA in the Text of the code. Doesn't exist.

It does say certified, but does not specify WHO!!!

When members wanted to shoot high power they started TRA, now when members want to launch with no motor or user certs, let them start their own club!!! How hard is that???

New wants, new desires, new club! Wouldn't that be easier than tearing apart a club to try to achieve this?

Connect the dots... (New Club)

Go back to the argument... (New Club)

Erik Gates

certification

complaints.

Reply to
Erik Gates

I don't mean that the NAR should become a trade association. Although since you've back pedaled on the scientific/educational purpose to embrace consumer rocketry, that may not be a stretch. An interest was expressed in easing DOT shipping restrictions on rocket motors. You punted or passed the buck. I suggest that the availability, including shipping, of safe sport rocket motors is central to the needs of NAR members. The NAR should see to those needs by forming a committee (or perhaps the BOT itself) to work with (or petition, or lobby congress, etc.) the DOT on matters of shipping and transportation of sport rocket motors. I believe the NAR would be in a better bargaining position with the DOT because the NAR is more concerned with safety and motor availability, especially the shipping of motors, than a true trade association, which is more concerned with the bottom line of profits. Additionally, this would enable the NAR to stay in the loop and even in control of such efforts. It would be more difficult to tweak things after the fact if the DOT and a trade association negotiated a separate agreement. The NAR must represent the interests of members over manufacturers, but the NAR should not shy away from efforts that benefit all.

Alan

Reply to
Alan Jones

How many battles do you think they can handle at one time??? How much power over government agencies do you think they have?? NAR and TRA would love to reduce the regulations and restrictions imposed on rocketry by the government but there's only so much they can do.

And as AR becomes more popular, it will attract more attention from regulatory agencies, just as high power did when it went from a handful of participants to thousands. When that happens, what club will you then cast blame on?

No one can, or should, force Jerry to get his act together and do things legitimately.

Why should non-members get the same priviledges as members, while putting the members at increased liability?

TRA/NAR do not control the NFPA process, nor do they control the desires of the various regulatory agencies.

Reply to
RayDunakin

I disagree with your logic. But what you say may be inevitable if the current clubs do not change policy. However, as the current clubs have substantial impact on the hobby as a whole, I will not relent, nor will many others, until these clubs either champion the hobby instead of turf guarding, or die.

These statements made by the President of NAR have only solidified... no, cemented my opinion.

I refuse to submit to an LEUP. I refuse to sign a document that asks me to give up other forms and expressions of rocketry to sustain the club monopolies in membership, distribution, legislation, and commerce models.

I pray TRA and NAR _do_ merge... it would clean up the some of the most blatant problems, *and* open the door to a viable new club to be the "other" club. But I do not believe this will happen either... as the major 2 groups would lose a seat on the NFPA and other places.

Just as in 2-party politics, a third party or club is never going to have a lot of clout. This is not a product brand. It is politics. In the end, the group with the most identifiable cohesive message will lead. If TRA does not merge with NAR, it (TRA) is as good as dead. It no longer has any significant differences from NAR, and has a very poor message otherwise... especially when it does not set the concerns of its' membership as top priority... (e.g.: magazine, equal motor cert. handling, etc...)... AND it's membership is still declining...

Terminal cancer...

I am fairly sure I will never join, as I am fairly sure TRA will not come to terms with reality and make significant progress enough for me to consider it.

A small wording on the NAR safety code is all that keeps me from rejoining them... but I find that wording unworkable, as I would have to damage my own integrity to sign it. I *know* I will fly rocket motors not sactioned by NAR. However, unlike TRA, NAR has legacy, name recognition, and integrity that will likely weather the storm. For the most part, I respect the NAR. I have very high regard for Mark B. I know that much of this situation is not fairly placed solely on him or the board... membership in general must accept some of that responsibility.

I am not even one of those actively pursuing action on either organization. But I personally don't give TRA more than 5 more years before it is through.

And I personally disagree with your supposition that one must leave to effect a change. It only serves to illustrate how unweildy and inflexible the program has become.

What some call destroying, others call changing for the better. But change is rarely painless... or choose not to change, and dwindle in disbelief, blaming all those complainers out there for breaking things, when in reality, it is the inflexibility and turf-guarding of the groups that is choking themselves.

~ Duane Phillips.

P.S.: I do build rockets... from scratch... and fly... regularly. I am currently involved in teaching yet 3 more new scouts how to make mile busters. I still occasionally go out to the local club launch and watch them fly... when they don't cancel them due to lack of interest... I have even helped pay for mid/HP engines for people I don't even know, just so my scouts could see somebody elses rocket and feel the thunder. But for the long term, I am still a lone ranger, and hold elevated insurance levels for this and other purposes... too bad our mile busters, which range in size from 3 feet to 8 feet, will only be seen by a few.

implementable

organization,

Reply to
Duane Phillips

What's that got to do with TRA/NAR? That's an ATF requirement, not ours.

NAR may have wording which might require this, but TRA does not.

Which "problems" are you referring to? Both organizations have nearly the same policies.

Don't hold your breath.

Who cares?

Ok, so you're not a member of either group, and don't plan to become one. So why should either of these orgs pay any attention to you?

And since you are apparently flying whatever you want without either group, what are you complaining about??

Reply to
RayDunakin

What Ray said. Hope you are getting the proper FAA wavers, when needed.

Fred

Reply to
W. E.Fred Wallace

ATF lawsuit. Battle for the obvious at very high cost. Alternate strategy? Live the 27 CFR 555.141-a-8 lifestyle in practice.

Kyte legislative representative. Huge cost for negative benefit and with what amounts to deficit spending by NAR.

Unilateral ability to simply follow the law (which they are NOT employing).

Unilateral ability to edit NFPA-1122,1125,1127.

Unilateral ability to take the advise of its longest in busiuness vendors on how to grow this pig and get more revenue and members, thus lesislative support too.

Simply tolerate the work of others to decriminalize rocketry that they obviously refuse to do.

I don't care if you are inclined to shoot the messenger, declare what I say DOA or even are in a state of suspended belief. What I just posted is true.

Jerry

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

And recently accelerated that this week as well.

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

They do, but the NAR is adversarial to manufacturers and members with its policies, and as a "well administered" organization takes pride in how well the machine is operating while it does it too.

By comparison, the German death camps were really efficient too.

Jerry

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

It does in fact list NAR and TRA in the footnotes as the recognized certification AHJ's.

We're talking NFPA codes here which are now law in 36 states or so.

This is a relatively new development in the past 3 years or so.

Jerry = TRA012 so I consider myself an expert on the topic.

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

Hope or believe?

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

This should be in the FAQ.

Reply to
Phil Stein

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.