Re: The AT auction

It could be argued that once one has been certified (since there is no specific membership requirement in 1127) that one remains a "Certified User" indefinitely for NFPA purposes, independent of current membership in an association. (A similar argument can be made with respect to motor certification... I'll have to dig out my old Tripoli Safety Code pamphlet and review the exact definitions of "Certified Motor" and "Certified User", but I don't think 1127 can be construed to imply that formerly-listed motors turn into "Illegal Fireworks" or something.)

-dave w

Reply to
David Weinshenker
Loading thread data ...

Wrong, wrong wrong. The organizations exist to provide benefits to their members. They are under no legal, moral, or ethical obligation to provide their benefits to nonmembers. If they wish to benefit nonmembers, that is perfectly fine, but not required. Being a tax exempt organization does not make you a public service, available to all.

Reply to
Christopher Deem

really, Ray? Tell us then:

what precisely is a "model rocket motor" ?

what precisely is a "recreational model rocket" ?

the problem arises from the definitions

you are not at liberty to alter a commercially produced motor and simply declare that it is "outside the scope of" high power rocketry. It remains high power rocketry so long as commercially produced motors in the specified impulse range, either individually or combined, are used to propell a rocket; or where a rocket weight exceeds a specific threshold regardless of the size[s] of the commerically produced motor[s].

NFPA 1127, 2003 ed. (excerpted for editoriall review)

--

1.3 Application. This code shall apply to the design, construction, limitation of propellant mass and power, and reliability of high power rocket motors and motor components produced commercially for sale or for use by a certified user for education, recreation, and sporting competition.

3.3 General Definitions.

3.3.15.1 High Power Rocket. A rocket vehicle that

(1) is propelled by one or more high power rocket motors; or

(2) is propelled by a combination of model rocket motors having an installed total impulse of more than 320 N-sec (71.9 lb-sec); or

(3) is propelled by a combination of model rocket motors having more than a total of 125 g (4.4 oz) of propellant weight; or (4) weighs more than 1500 g (53 oz) with motor(s) installed.

3.3.17.1 High Power Rocket Motor. A rocket motor that has more than 160 N-sec (36 lb-sec) but no more than 40,960 N-sec (9208 lb-sec) of total impulse, or an average thrust greater than 80 N, or more than 62.5 g (2.2 oz) of propellant, and that otherwise meets the other requirements set forth in NFPA 1125, Code for the Manufacture of Model Rocket and High Power Rocket Motors.

4.5 High Power Rocket Motors and Motor Components.

4.5.1* Only certified high power rocket motors or motor reloading kits or motor components shall be used in a high power rocket.

4.5.2 A single-use high power rocket motor shall not be dismantled, reloaded, or altered.

4.5.3 The components of a reloadable high power rocket motor shall not be altered.
Reply to
Ismaeel Abdur-Rasheed

This changes when an organizational "service" becomes necessary to operate legally. Should this be a "restricted membership benefit"? (How would you feel if you had to join the AAA to keep your driver's license?)

-dave w

Reply to
David Weinshenker

yep

and Judge Walton reads just fine, too :)

- iz

Reply to
Ismaeel Abdur-Rasheed

by this reasoning TRA should prohibit motor deliveried except directly launches, with mandatory seizure of all unexpended motors at the end of the launch

Jerry's right (again), Ray

you should put the bong down

the "orgs"? "orgs" don't do work, individual people do work

so these individuals were who, exactly?

you can start with with Jerry Irvine and John Cato, and work from there

- iz

Reply to
Ismaeel Abdur-Rasheed

while your membership money is being squandered (or worse) and your freedoms diminished

way to go, Ray!

- iz :(

Reply to
Ismaeel Abdur-Rasheed

The orgs provide many services to the public, such as rocketry-related educational encouragement and assistance. The rocketry activities of the members also benefits the public at large by encouraging rocketry research, invention, and the promotion of interest in rocketry related careers. Even ARSA has acknowledged the fact that sport rocketry activities benefit the public, and used it to promote the Enzi bill.

However, these orgs do not exist solely for the benefit of the public, nor are they required to provide the same benefits and priviledges to the public that are enjoyed by the members.

This is true of other non-profit orgs as well. For instance, a youth group such as the Boy Scouts may have facilities and events that are available only to members. Likewise, non-members cannot earn Merit Badges.

They are the only two currently recognized, but the NFPA codes clearly indicate that other organizations could become certifying authorities.

Then start your own org, pass out free certs to non-members, and take on the risk yourself.

Correct, but membership fees cover the cost of providing liability insurance to handle that risk.

Which also must be renewed periodically...

There's a big difference: Driver's licenses are issued by a state agency, and the state is protected from lawsuits.

Reply to
RayDunakin

ah, no

the national rocketry organizations have a privileged status thanks to the regulations they coauthored

it is reasonable (if not incumbent) that people insist that these organizations do not abuse their authority to the detriment of rocketry and rocketeers

you still cannot fathom the FACT that TRA and NAR are not "clubs". They are nonprofit organizations with 501(c)3 status acting in [ostensibly] in the public trust

further, their respective charters impose upon them an obligation to provide benefit to rocketry at large

observe:

from By-Laws of the National Association of Rocketry at

formatting link
The purpose of the National Association of Rocketry, hereafter called the Association, shall be to aid and encourage by all suitable means all people interested in model rocketry and its related sciences.

Reply to
Ismaeel Abdur-Rasheed

for example, this recieved Thu, 8 Apr 2004 03:05:32 PDT

"I'm an ex-TRA member and quit in '96 (you can guess why). Good luck and good work on setting NAR and TRA strait."

- iz

Reply to
Ismaeel Abdur-Rasheed

ah! how refreshing!!!

thanks, Dave

that is a very interesting point you made

observe:

NFPA 1127, 2002 Ed. (excerpted for editorial review)

--

5.4.2 The certifying organization shall maintain a list of all persons it has certified as high power rocket motor users.

5.4.2.1 The list of certified users shall be updated not less than once every 30 days.

5.4.2.2 Upon request and receipt of applicable fees, if any, confirmation of an active member?s user certification shall be provided to the following:

(1) Law enforcement official or authority having jurisdiction

(2) Manufacturer of high power rocket motors and motor reload kits

(3) Retailer licensed to sell, distribute, or offer for sale high power rocket motors and motor reloading kits

Reply to
Ismaeel Abdur-Rasheed

And this is a surprise after hundreds of truly mindless posts, how?

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

In todays email I received:

"Keep up the great work... don't let 'em get you down."

Just one random day.

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

It is also conclusive proof that cancelling or expiring someone's cert status is illlegal. Handy.

Jerry

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

Hmmm... if _that's_ what he was asking, no wonder he managed to muddy up the waters with DOT!

Shouldn't the papers have been in the name of the propellant supplier who originally had the propellant type "Examined and Classified", rather than the "downstream" motor distributor?

-dave w

Reply to
David Weinshenker

All I got was "enlarge your penis" and "viagra for sale"....

Oh Well

Erik

:-)

Couldn't resist

Reply to
Erik Gates

while not a "public service", they are "public benefit corporations" (as opposed to "mutual benefit" or "religious" corporations)

in the case of Tripoli Rocketry Association, it is "organized exclusively for charitable and educational purposes within the meaning of section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code" as per ammendment to the Articles of Incorporation Article III Section G. adopted October

27th, 1990, filed with the State of Alaska December 13, 1990

IRS says in Publication 557 (Rev. May 2003) at

formatting link
The term educational relates to:

  1. The instruction or training of individuals for the purpose of improving or developing their capabilities, or 2. The instruction of the public on subjects useful to individuals and beneficial to the community.
Reply to
Ismaeel Abdur-Rasheed

I repeat:

not anytime soon, Ray

in the meantime, I see that you are perfectly content to have rocketry held hostage by two self-serving organizations who abuse the status granted them by the NFPA when they extort membership from rocketeers simply wishing to meet the requirements to fly legally

you didn't read far enough ...

protect it from what, Ray? you're imaginary boogie man

I stated the conditions under which the organization would be found to have been operating in good faith. They are not difficult. A suit would not succeed (and would unlikely be even attempted) if those conditions were met

now if you plan to issue fradulent user certifications as you DID produce fraudulent motor certifications, then yes, you should be worried

but then you have no business doing certifications at all, do you, RAY?

- iz

Reply to
Ismaeel Abdur-Rasheed

I repeat once more for your benefit:

not anytime soon, Ray

in the meantime, I see that you are perfectly content to have rocketry held hostage by two self-serving organizations who abuse the status granted them by the NFPA when they extort membership from rocketeers simply wishing to meet the requirements to fly legally

- iz

Reply to
Ismaeel Abdur-Rasheed

Not if Jerry or US Rockets was previously granted shipping exemptions as Jerry had previously indicated, over the years. I did expect to find exemptions, as I know he shipped motors in the past, but NADA... BTW, there was noting on the previous owner either. So all that shipping of 1.3c Jerry did in the past, without a proper shipping exemption and shipping 1.3 in improper shipping containers, etc., are all violations of DOT shipping rules. Go to ABMR, there is more recent indications of continued shipping of 1.3c through the USPS, although not a DOT violation, a big time USPS No No. Jerry must have a sore dick; he sure steps on it a lot. BTW, how did you receive, What form of shipping) that "big motor" you claim to have received from Jerry and fired?? Think before you answer..

Reply to
W. E.Fred Wallace

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.