ROL NEWS--RCS Offers Propellant Chemicals and Binder Calculator

September 17, 2003 Web posted at: 2:00 PM EDT

(ROL Newswire ) -- RCS Rocket Motor Components, Inc. is now offering a number of non-hazmat chemicals for EX-rocketry applications at competitive prices, some of which are not available from any other EX-rocketry suppliers. All chemicals are fresh virgin material, not scrap or surplus.

These materials can be found on the RCS "Products" page under the "Propellant Chemicals" heading, and there are links posted next to each listing for downloading the corresponding technical data sheets and MSDS.

For those experimenters who have difficulty determining the proper NCO:OH (curative to polymer) ratios for their propellants, RCS has created a handy Excel spreadsheet calculator that makes your binder calculations fast and accurate. The file may be downloaded from the RCS website at no charge.

See the RCS website at:

formatting link

Source: ROL Newswire Service

Reply to
ROL News
Loading thread data ...

Well it looks as if EX has been fully adopted by Rosenfield. First he forced EX out by limiting manufacturer choices with his consumer rocket monopoly engineered with TRA and NAR by adopting a variety of policies not called for by law and some called to NOT exist under law, of which those small com[panies could not or refused to meet - because they were illegal.

So now the very thing MR and HPR was designed to minimize - home brew motors - is mass marketed by Rosenfield, the very person who forced the market into being.

Monopolies rock!

Jerry

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

the only problem with EX is that its illegal in any state that has = adopted the IBC......or has adopted the IFC which adopted NFPA =

1122/1125/1127 because of the following from NFPA 1125:

4.1.1 The manufacture of any rocket motor shall be conducted in = accordance with this code...

4.1.2 The manufacture of any rocket motor shall be prohibited in ANY = residence or dwelling,or in any inhabited building in an area zoned as = residential by the local building authority and building codes in = effect..

I'm sure I will get disagreements from those who do not equate = manufacture with make...when you "make" a rocket motor are you also = "manufacturing it" and vice versa?=20 make: n.=20 1.. The act or process of making; manufacturing.

What I don't understand is this code (NFPA 1125) was created with the = major input of the NAR/TRA and of course Gary Rosenfield....But Gary R. = owns RCS and is pushing propellant chemicals and components for = individuals to make their own motors in violation of NFPA 1125........

If NFPA 1125 outlaws EX, then doesn't it also outlaw AR as AR is EX = isn't it? I mean AR people make their own rocket engines right?

Folks don't shoot the messenger.......

shockie B)

Reply to
shockwaveriderz

IBC......or has adopted the IFC which adopted NFPA 1122/1125/1127 because of the following from NFPA 1125:

Doesn't NFPA1125 specifically apply to the manufacture of "consumer" motors to be certified for use according to the provisions of 1122/1127? Or does it claim applicability to _any_ rocket motor creation?

If I'm machining hardware which is to become part of a liquid motor, does 1125 claim jurisdiction over that??

-dave w

with this code...

or dwelling,or in any inhabited building in an area zoned as residential by the local building authority and building codes in effect..

with make...when you "make" a rocket motor are you also "manufacturing it" and vice versa?

input of the NAR/TRA and of course Gary Rosenfield....But Gary R. owns RCS and is pushing propellant chemicals and components for individuals to make their own motors in violation of NFPA 1125........

I mean AR people make their own rocket engines right?

Reply to
David Weinshenker

What I don't understand is this code (NFPA 1125) was created with the = major input of the NAR/TRA but TRA has, and supports EX rocketry... in = violation of NFPA 1125 ..or does it? from the Tripoli EX Rules 2002:

3.2.6 Experimental Motor. Any non-certified, non-commercial motor, made = by individuals for their own

personal, non-commercial use.

4.2 Disclaimer

4.2.2 The Tripoli Rocketry Association does not regulate, approve, or = officially support or endorse any

propellant manufacturing or fabrication process, or in any way imply = such approval.

4.2.3 The Tripoli Rocketry Association does not endorse or provide any = safety codes for the selfmanufacture

of any propellant.

4.3 Legality

4.3.1 The Tripoli Rocketry Association does not claim Experimental = Rocketry to be legal in every

municipality or in every state.

4.3.2 Participants in the Tripoli Research program shall comply with all = local, municipal, state, and federal

regulations where said activities are conducted.

If NFPA 1125 outlaws EX, then doesn't it also outlaw AR as AR is EX = ,isn't it? I mean AR people make their own rocket engines right?

Folks don't shoot the messenger.......

shockie B)

Reply to
shockwaveriderz

P R E C I S E L Y.

Posting these facts will of course subject you to attack.

Jerry

Reply to
Jerry Irvine
1.1 Scope.

1.1.1* This code shall apply to the manufacture of model and high power = rocket motors designed, sold, and used for the

purpose of propelling recoverable aero models.

1.1.2 This code shall apply to the design, construction, limitation of = propellant mass and power, and reliability of model

and high power rocket motors and model rocket and high power = motor-reloading kits and their components.

1.1.5 This code shall not apply to the manufacture, transportation, and = storage of rocket motors by the United States military

or other agencies or political subdivisions of the United States.

3.3.26 Rocket Motor. As used in this code, the term rocket motor means = model rocket motor or high power rocket motor.

4.1.1 The manufacture of any rocket motor shall be conducted in = accordance with this code.

4.1.2 The manufacture of any rocket motor shall be prohibited in any = residence or dwelling, or in any inhabited building

in an area zoned as residential by the local building authority and = building codes in effect.

4.1.3 The manufacturer of any rocket motor shall be in compliance with = 29 CFR 1910.119

From all of the above its clear to me that NFPA 1125 applies Only to = Model Rocket and High Power Rocket engines..

So when it states a 4.1.1, 4.1.2,4.1.3 and says ANY ROCKET MOTOR, 3.3.26 = defines that ROCKET MOTOR means Model Rocket motor or High Power Rocket = motor and they are defined as:

3.3.26.4 Model Rocket Motor. Arocket motor that has a total impulse of = no greater than 160 N-sec, an average thrust of no

greater than 80 N, and a propellant weight of no greater than 62.5 g = (2.2 oz).

3.3.26.2 High Power Rocket Motor. A rocket motor that has more than 160 = N-sec but no more than 40,960 N-sec of total impulse,

or that produces an average thrust of greater than 80 N, or that = contains greater than 62.5 g (2.2 oz) of propellant.

When a person self-manufactures(makes) his/her own personal Rocket = Motor, it would also normally fall in to one of the above 2 defintions: = Model Rocket or High Power Rocket motor.......Obviously people can = self-manufacture(make) Rocket Motors that are outside the = scope(definition) of what a Model Rocket or a High Power Rocket Motor = is....

I might add that NFPA 1125 also defines manufacture as:

3.3.15* Manufacture. The preparation of propellant, delay,and ejection = compositions and the loading and assembly of

model or high power rocket motors and igniters and any other alteration = of their pyrotechnic components.

The code does not seem to discern between ''consumer/commercial" and = "non-consumer/non-commercial" model rocket or high power rocket motors. = The only difference between the two in my mind is that "consumer" Model = Rocket and High Power Rocket motors are also Certffied Model Rocket or = High Power rocket motors, whereas, "non-consumer" (ie EX,AR,etc) model = rocket or high power rocket motors are not certified....

Per your 2nd question, the answer is NO, NFPA 1125 has nothing to do = with Liquid Fuel rocket motors as far as I can see...

adopted the IBC......or has adopted the IFC which adopted NFPA =

1122/1125/1127 because of the following from NFPA 1125:

accordance with this code...

residence or dwelling,or in any inhabited building in an area zoned as = residential by the local building authority and building codes in = effect..

manufacture with make...when you "make" a rocket motor are you also = "manufacturing it" and vice versa?

the major input of the NAR/TRA and of course Gary Rosenfield....But Gary = R. owns RCS and is pushing propellant chemicals and components for = individuals to make their own motors in violation of NFPA 1125........

isn't it? I mean AR people make their own rocket engines right?

Reply to
shockwaveriderz

I have always interpreted this as the amateur rocket out.

But since neither NAR nor TRA nor errortech (Aero Technology Company) regognize 27 CFR 555.141-a-8 either (and demand ATF permits for all users, dealers, manufacturers) there is not assumption of cogent thought.

Plus as with ANY code written by NAR/TRA/Rosenfield it is internally inconsistent, inconsistent with law, inconsistent with field practice, and has provisions to perpetuate monop[olies.

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

ok Jerry, answer me this: If I self-manufacture for my own personal use, an exact duplicate of any = commercially made,certified, model rocket or high power rocket motor, = does NFPA 1125 apply or not?=20 I gather that NFPA 1125 was intentionally left vague concerning what an = amateur or experimental model rocket or high power rocket motor is or = isn't on purpose.....It defines Model Rocket Motor, high power rocket = motor, certified rocket motor, hybrid rocket motor,etc but it doesn't = define what an amateur or experimental rocket motor may be Who's responsibility is it to interpret and enforce the provisions of = the various NFPA codes anyway? If a person doesn't follow them, is it = the NAR/TRA job to act as an enforcement agency? I don't think so....The = only responsible party at that point is the state that has adopted into = law said NFPA code(s).........And we all know (or at least hope) that = the state is way too busy with more important things than to go around = looking for people makiing their own motors.....On the other hand, since = it was the NAR/TRA who developed and wrote the NFPA codes, you would = think that you should be able to at leat ask them what their = organizations interpretation of specific sections of the code actually = mean or apply to....I challenge the NAR and TRA to publicly state what = their position is on home brew model rocket or high power rocket = motors....and of course they never will....although I will personally = email Mark Bundick to see if I can get a statement from him and the NAR = concerning this....... somebody that is in the TRA might try the same = with their Prez......don't hold your breath..

shockie B)

"Jerry Irvine" wrote in message = news: snipped-for-privacy@news.verizon.net...

1122/1125/1127 because=20

"manufacturing it"=20

Reply to
shockwaveriderz

I would have to say not since NAR and TRA have self defined themselves as the arbitrars of what constututes a manufacturer and till they bless you you can make the very best motors on the planet, in the greatest VARIETY, AT THE LOWEST PRICE, AND THE BEST AVAILABLILITY. LIKE MINE FOR EXAMPLE.

I doubt it. Based on the objectively moronic behavior of Rosenfield and Bundick and NAR and TRA generally, I believe we can attribute this to stupidity, not maliciousness. Well, except the mixer specs and the

1122/1127 offset distances which were malicious. I was there.

ALL Local, state, county regulators who adopt this series of abortions as "model code". Model my ass.

They assume that responsibiltuiy with NO jurisdiction whatsoever and have been put on notice by ATF already to stop it, which they refused. Yet another poke in the eye with a sharp stick to ATF which is a horriffic mistake.

The real enforcers on a practical level are county fire and hazmat employees. We have seen how "well trained" hazmat employees operate under actual emergency conditions with the errortech debacle. They make HUGE, PREDICTIBLE, and COUNTER TRAINING mistakes (hence the ONLY reason errortech was not charged with crimes).

For the stated purpose of DISCOuRAGING DIY motor making BTW.

Everytime they have they have lumped amateur rocketry into MR and HPR as a contiguous chunk and called it legal to the extent of local permission. ON a state level local permission is GOD. The RSO model works.

I challenge them to shut the f*ck up before they stick yet another foot in their overstuffed mouth.

None of this conversation is even barely tolerated by either TRA or NAR.

Jerry

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

Exactly, so why make an issue of it??

Interpreting the law is not their job.

Why should they? Why do some people insist on getting an "official" statement from some organization about every little thing?? If there's something in the NFPA codes or state laws or any other regulations that you don't feel comfortable with, then you can make the decision for yourself whether or not to risk doing whatever activity you happen to think might be against the regs. Don't try to force someone else to make that decision for you in a way that will force it on everyone else.

As for Jerry, as a major proponent of AR/EX, I fail to understand why he would agree with your assessment that it is illegal.

Reply to
RayDunakin

Poke in the eye to an authority, any authority, is Gary's style.

No, in this case WRITING it to be interpreted is, and they muffed that very badly.

They should plead the 5th to avoid criminal prosecution.

Ask TRA. They asked for "rulings" from ATF, DOT, FAA and many others with "loaded questions" as a means to justify their attacks on USR, Kosdon, ACS, Wood and others.

But in the reverse TRA and NAR make interpretations OPPOSITE the human readable form of the regs then ENFORCE IT all to the damage of consumers, vendors, manufacturers.

TRA/EX is clearly illegal. (check the laws to verify)

Ex/Am is another story altogether.

Jerry

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

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.