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

I wrote:

Jerry replied: << No there wasn't. >>
Yes, there was! I was there, dipstick! Lots of people were talking about boycotting Vulcan in response to that incident.

<< Not. >>
So you feel Vulcan and Estes were justified in concocting that bogus video and sending it to ATF, DOT, CSPC, and who knows how many other agencies? That's very enlightening, Jerry. When you ship unclassified hazmat labeled as "model aircraft parts" and someone reports it, they're a "narc". But when someone dumps a pile grains and BP into a box, sets it on fire, misrepresents what occurred and then sends video to every government agency in the book in order to stir up trouble for a competitor (which only resulted in bringing down a load of crap on the whole hobby), then that's ok in your book??

<<Total bullshit. >>
Prove it, Big Fine.

<< Not that YOU are aware of as a CONSUMER.>>
Well, we ARE discussing consumer motors, Jerry.
<< And delays>>

<< Ask experts. >>
I already have.

<< Nope. >>
Prove it.
<< You are simply full of crap. >>
And you simply deny the facts, without presenting a shred of evidence for doing so.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@aol.com (RayDunakin) wrote:

In the very, very small market of folks exposed to Chuck Rogers' launch to launch dog and pony show to libel Vulcan.
When asked questions at his attack at my launch he avoided each question I asked. He obviously could not withstand truthful inquiry.

So you feel AT was justified RELEASING RMS for general consumer sale while:
1. There were still laws expressly forbidding metallic motors, including RMS specific systems made for the 18mm "traditional model rocket" market.
2. The system was not DOT approved and would not be for years into the future. However Vulcan's was.
3. There was no provision for cert much less certs.
4. The people who developed reloadable systems BEFORE Gary (USR and Vulcan) were withholding releases pending the rule changes.
As you have seen, by jumping the gun Gary did indeed get market dominance, and apparantly from you a postfacto forgiveness for widespread lawviolations.

Hypocrite. See above. 2.

--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to: snipped-for-privacy@gte.net>
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"4. The people who developed reloadable systems BEFORE Gary (USR and Vulcan) were withholding releases pending the rule changes."
Seems almost funny that Skippy lost out for attempting to follow rules. Seems he lost his focus for the rules shortly after that.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

:)
--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to: snipped-for-privacy@gte.net>
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Chad wrote: << Seems almost funny that Skippy lost out for attempting to follow rules.>>
You should know better than to believe his nonsense.
<< Seems he lost his focus for the rules shortly after that. >>
Not quite. In May 1991, he wrote an editorial for the Tripoli Report in which he proposed limiting model rocketry to "non-metallic motors", which would have prevented the use of AT reloadables. He also proposed separating metallic motors from "high power" rocketry, into a special "Amateur rocketry" classification.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@aol.com (RayDunakin) wrote:

It was a discussion of an EXISTING rule, not adding one.

Special?
Jerry
--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to: snipped-for-privacy@gte.net>
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@aol.com (RayDunakin) wrote:

All you have to do is look to your own local newsletter covering Ocotillo launches for 1990 where we demoed the Irvine reloadable.
Jerry
--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to: snipped-for-privacy@gte.net>
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Jerry Irvine wrote:

NO! That was a Kosdon reloadable, designed and manufactured by Frank Kosdon, with no input from you or us rockets.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Dave Grayvis wrote:

I thought the so-called "Kosdon reloadable" style motor _was_ originally designed by Jerry...?
-dave w
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
David Weinshenker wrote:

No, It was Frank 100%, jerry 0%
As with everything else, later jerry claimed credit.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I'm not surprised.
On Sat, 26 Jun 2004 22:16:54 -0700, David Weinshenker

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Yes.
--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to: snipped-for-privacy@gte.net>
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Dave W. wrote: << What, two isn't enough? >>
No it isn't. Not when you make a sweeping statement claiming that "nearly every manufacturer of solid rocket motors in this country" is uninterested in the hobby market because of the cert requirements.
<< Hobby rocketry is enough of a niche market that we have no freakin' business making a distinction between "small time wannabes" and "manufacturers"... >>
Again, you specifically stated "manufacturers". Not some guy who makes motors for himself and occasionally sells some to his buddies. That's not a manufacturer.
<< we should be _encouraging_ "small-time" suppliers to come forward with new products >>
I agree.
<< instead of setting policies intended to keep out those who aren't "legitimate" (i.e., "established" and "corporate") enough.>>
Not "established and corporate", just legal. Anyone who cannot manufacturer and ship motors legally can't expect the hobby orgs to give them their official approval. If you don't like the legal requirements, the proper target of your complaints should be the government agencies that impose those requirements.
<< And don't go bleating about "government requirements" >>
You can call it bleating, but those government requirements are a fact whether you agree with them or not.
<< Imagine if NAR/TRA had an outreach program to assist new manufacturers through the DOT testing process to establish their propellants as "suitable to be shipped safely"...>>
Are you suggesting that Jerry's whole problem is that he's waiting for TRA/NAR to lead him by the hand 'cause he can't figure out how to get his propellent tested and approved by DOT?
Seriously, I bet if you asked any manufacturer or would-be manufacturer, they'd tell you that the biggest obstacle to complying with DOT and ATF regs is the expense. That's something the orgs can't help them with. The most the orgs could do is lobby for reduced regulations on manufacturers, and right now their limited resources are tied up just trying to reduce the regs on consumers.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@aol.com (RayDunakin) wrote:

According to the law it most certainly is.
When did TRA become superior to the law?
Especially for no particular reason?
Jerry

You disagreed above!!!!!!
You are a MORON.

--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to: snipped-for-privacy@gte.net>
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I wrote: << Again, you specifically stated "manufacturers". Not some guy who makes motors for himself and occasionally sells some to his buddies. That's not a manufacturer.>>
Jerry replied: << According to the law it most certainly is. >>
You're half right. According to the law, some guy making motors to sell to his buddies is an _illegal_ manufacturer unless he has all the necessary local, state and federal permits.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
RayDunakin wrote:

OK, what's the difference between someone who makes motors to sell to his buddies (with such permits as may actually be required) and a "manufacturer"?
-dave w
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
David Weinshenker wrote:

A commercial facility.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

That does not result in motor certs. Even when the authorities approve the facility.
--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to: snipped-for-privacy@gte.net>
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Jerry Irvine wrote:

Learn to read. The question was; "OK, what's the difference between someone who makes motors to sell to his buddies (with such permits as may actually be required) and a "manufacturer"?
No One said anything about motor certs.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

NFPA-1127
plonk.
--
Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA
Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to: snipped-for-privacy@gte.net>
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.