ROL NEWS--AeroTech Announces Certification of Three New Reload Kits

Promising?

More like illegally asked and he never agreed to comply with the obviously (and now proven by a judge) requests by TRA.

Jerry

"Illegally" How?

In violation of a court order now!!

When did a court of law, rule that TRA could not ask for federal permits?

Hey, it could happen. ;) This example was chosen to make the NAR/TRA appear more negligent, and thus more exposed to lawsuits. But less "stretchy" examples can still result in increased insurance claims resulting in increased, insurance rates or cancellation.

"Significant" accidents. The kind that results in damage to property or injury to people, resulting in insurance claims and lawsuits.

Yes, of course they are following the safety code. The issue is accidents arising from bad certified motors used responsibly, not good motors used irresponsibly.

Alan

I think Ray's point is that if they are following the safety code, then a motor malfunction wouldn't really damage anyone.

-dave w

OK, one more time, for the smooth brained:

John tested and certified a bunch of motors during his tenure. Let's just look at one example of what happened after he was booted from TMT. Lets take as an example the Aerotech M1939W. John certified IIRC the XXL delay only. When Tom took over, all delay references were dropped, and ALL M1939W motors, regardless of delay became certified. So now we've got 4 motors certified that were never tested. With John's name attached to the alleged testing. Repeat this several dozen times.

Beyond this it appears that some other certs were granted without testing, but without forcing TMT to produce all data from 1994-1997 we'll never know for sure. We do know that they lied about some bogus certs, but not which ones.

With all the claims of bogus certs, all they had to do to totally refute John and my claims was to produce a single data file for one of these tests. They never did. I leave it to the reader to try to figure out why they didn't take this simple step to permanently silence and discredit John and myself.

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

Not at all. For several years, TRA TMT claimed that the AT H128 was a G motor, and the G75 was an H motor. A simple examination of the data for those motors would show that this is impossible. Yet they never went back to double check for errors. When finally retested by Sue McM, it was discovered that the G was really a G and the H was really an H. But for 3 years TRA allowed folks to L1 cert using G75s but not H128s.

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

So you're saying that TRA certifiend his motors knowing he didn't have the required permits, but "promised" to get them. Would they then certify USR motors if Jerry "promised" to get the permits later?

I don't understand why USR motors were decertified for lack of paperwork instantly, while Kosdon motors were given a several month grace period?

I don't understand why TRA failed to honor their agreement with NAR to accept NAR certifications, but still expects NAR to accept TRA certifications?

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

Agreed. But why should the organization even accept the remote possibility of this happening. What would the response of TRAs insurance company, or NFPA be if they knew that TRA was issuing bogus certs without actually testing the motors?

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

Hardly true. "Bonus delays" are a perfect example. Fly a rocket with an I161S that should eject 6 seconds after burnout. Except the S is really an L and it doesn't eject until 14 seconds after burnout. Which is unfortunately

TRA TMT still doesn't report delay accuracy. So we still don't know if a motor that is supposed to have a 10 second delay has a 10 second delay, or maybe 8, 12, 27, or 2.

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

Well, they could try to weasel out of a claim if they were to establish that the damage wouldn't have occurred with a properly-tested-for-certification motor...

-dave w

It is obvious to me that even the (well publicized) hint of bogus certs should set off alarm bells everywehere if certs matter at all, or if the relevent people were paying attention at all. One or both of those conditions must not exist.

Jerry

Point!!

Yes you do.

Yes you do.

Well known ethical vacancy.

What court order makes it illegal to ask for a LEMP?

Even if it were unnecessary, it wouldn't be illegal.

They ARE party to their OWN suit!

My point is, if they follow the safety code there shouldn't _be_ any "significant accidents" from faulty motors. That's the whole point of the safety code -- to minimize risk in the event of a motor failure.

Aloha, How about if we start listing the bonus delay on the NAR motor malf forms? I know that TRA doesn't care about the NAR malf forms, but if they got enough of them in the mail something might happen.

Larry

How would Cato know they were never tested, since he was no longer with TMT?

Personally, I think it's ridiculous to force a manufacturer to waste a butt-load of M motors just to test all the possible delay times.