Rocoon Project - Put a Rocket in Space

What committees? Details?

What is your real name, real address and other details (private email is fine, wouldn't want to "out" you or anything!

Jerry

Then the total of your response is moot... BTW it's AST not OST. I suggest you you research the AST site... then respond here.

Cheetah

is no "say-so" by anyone other than FAA itself. Anyone can get a

Does not address the issue of the topic - "rockoon". Again... it's quite a different animal to get a waiver for an "untethered balloon", farless a license from the AST to reach space.

Cheetah

Want an analogy? The feds just banned Ephedra... when in reality more people die from (over the counter) cold medicines. ???

Fact is... I don't see a problem with the AST requiring a dispersion report of where you expect a balloon/rocket to go and subsequently land (crash).

Which - nothing personal Jerry - but you do not represent all endeavors of rocketry. Unless you have had to deal with Rockoons & the AST personally then this topic is beyond your scope. Get it?

Cheetah

AST... or OCST just to be "ANAL".

TRA & CATS changed everything... my understanding is that, in exchange to get a "waiver from license" to the 15 sec limit TRA & NAR there is now a limit of 25k altitude. That is... you want to go above

"In this Joint Communication to members of the National Association of Rocketry and the Tripoli Rocketry Association, we'd like to pass along some additional news regarding FAA waivers.

Recently, you may have noticed that your waiver requests were being routed through offices in Washington DC.

This was because the responsibilities for oversight of the Office of Commercial Space Transportation (OCST) had recently been transferred to the FAA. The FAA was seeking to establish a clear policy about how to handle requests under that Act versus more general sport rocketry waiver applications.

After a review of the two activities, FAA Headquarters has issued the following guidance for their regional offices.

If your waiver application is for:

altitudes below 25,000' above ground level;

rocket motor(s) with less than 200,000 lb-sec (~889,000 N-sec) total impulse;

rockets with non-metallic airframes;

rockets with ballistic coefficients (gross liftoff weight divided by frontal area) of less than 12 lbs/in2

then local offices may continue to issue waivers without routing the request through Washington for review.

We recommend you make note of the four points above in the comments on the waiver application, along with noting your compliance with the Model Rocket and High Power Safety Codes. Experience shows that including these items will help speed the waiver process with a minimum of delay.

Additionally, the FAA has formally agreed to extend the exemption from OCST oversight for TRA-sponsored experimental launches. The specific terms and conditions applying to the exemption will be noted in the sanction request for TRA members organizing such launches. This extension is the direct result of much effort by TRA Board member Dick Embry, who worked with Randy Repcheck of the FAA.

We expect no further regulatory action from the FAA as regards sport rocket flying, but will continue to maintain our contacts within the agency and keep an eye out for any future developments.

We thank you for your patience as we worked through this issue with the FAA.

Mark B. Bundick, NAR Bruce E. Kelly, TRA "

Opinion? or based on any knwowledge of AST regulations?

Cheetah

Non germain to the topic at hand... and that is flying Rockoons in (US) airspace or airspace controlled by the AST.

To that extent NAR & TRA have no control (in fact NAR or TRA have no control over NON NAR or TRA sponsored launches)... the entity that probably will have control is the AST. I suggest to those that wish to contribute to "this" topic -become versed in the AST regulations

Cheetah

My D**k is Bigger than yours committee? Otherwise known as I know everything rocketry... right.

Sorry you will need a supeona... ;)

Cheetah

Ray spews all kinds of crap.

Snip nothing.

It is HYPERCRITICAL to note this is a message from TRA/NAR NOT FAA!!!

This is from proven hyper-morons.

1. BOTH organizations officially demand ATF permits despite the clear legal exemptions, and lawsuit, and lawyers opinions on SAME. TO THE OPPOSITE!!!

1. NAR President publicly states motors over 62.5g are subject to regulation and when called on it JUSTIFIES it.

These men cannot be trusted.

Need I even go into the long list of Kelly alleged frauds?

No. I need not.

Jerry

Since I have BOTH had dealings with AST, and with Rocoons (mine worked however which may disqualify me from your consideration), now what?

Who are you again?

1. snipped-for-privacy@aol.com?
2. Rocketweb?
3. Cheetah?

Jerry

"Would you please send me JUST your catalog, no free stuff! Thanks."

- AJ Prater

"Personally, I would prefer to know that I wasn't going to the moon on top of a pile of fertiliser!"

- Daniel Phillips (criticizing solid motors)

Or a real name and an honest basis for asking (ie need to know).

Jerry

Why do you keep claiming your agenda is the only agenda (on rec.models.rockets)?

Rocoons good. Implementations to date at Lucerne GOOD, elsewhere BAD. Deal with it. :)

Just Lucerne Host Jerry

Yes, please, say no more.

Thank you very much. I never received this communication to members of the NAR. This should be included in the NAR Member Handbook.

Alan