The denver blast gets even worse..........

You CAN rely on them to make the record as adverse as possible.

This should be in the FAQ.

Did they charge Estes' neighbor with the same when he burned down a couple hundred thousand dollars worth of motors?

I certify you as an expert.

Do everyone a favor: Stop saying "hobby rocketry" and instead say "Model Rocketry" or "High Power Rocketry" or "Model and High Power Rocketry".

Also, refer to his activities (once known and confirmed) as "Amateur Pyrotechnics" or "Amateur Rocketry" and be sure to point out that even for those specific types of activities, he may not have followed normal safety protocols.

-Fred Shecter NAR 20117

Unfortunately, this proves that the general public _will_ assume that an explosion of this type could happen to anyone involved in any kind of rocketry.

I don't think people are going to be looking at Estes or Aerotech stuff when they say that. They're going to be sitting on their couch watching the TV or reading the newspaper and aren't going to attribute the blast to either company.

It's simply the perception of the hobby as a whole. I think most people don't know of the differentiation we make between Amateur Rocketry, Model Rocketry and High Power Rocketry.

Glen Overby

Correct. And I wonder how many of them are sitting there thinking, "Whoa! There's a guy in my neighborhood who does rockets too. I don't want an explosion like that around here -- maybe I should call the authorities."

WE could all set off a huge explosion. Then when nobody hears another, people will say, hey those rocket guys really got their stuff together.

Jerry

Which is EXACTLY why we need to use the correct terminology and make it VERY clear to folks the difference between "Model Rockets", "High Power Rockets" and "Amateur Rockets". Most folks have some knowledge of "Estes type rockets" and they simply need to know that the simple differences between "Model Rockets" that you can buy at the toy store and the other types.

Terms like "Hobby Rockets" are as useful as "Hobby Grenades" or "Hobby Cars" or "Hobby Airplanes". Notice I didn't mention "Hobby Horses"....

-Fred Shecter NAR 20117

I agree 100% with you Fred.....when we in the hobby use ambiguous terms, its ok, but when the police authorities use the same ambiguous terms without being precise in their language, its not okay.....I say its not okay on either side...The fact that the typical person in the hobby knows what we are talking about doesn't make it right..its a question of education for the general populace....If the only "rocketry" that appears on the publics radar is "model rocketry" and then we lump in HPR, AR,etc into that we are just setting ourselves up for the consequences of not using precise language... People need to be educated that Model Rocketry has a precise legal meaning in almost all 50 states and has been around for almost 50 years with no serious injuries..... High Power Rocketry is a form of Extreme model rocketry that has been around for what? 20-25 years? Amateur Rocketry can be argued to have been around as long as Chinese fireworks.... NONE of the rocketry forms above are FIREWORKS......at least in the eyes of the law enforcement people.... But of course we all know there are people and forces within our hobby that wants to "muddy" the waters..... they want the general public to think that all rocketry is the same, hence the ambiguous legally meaningless marketing terms like consumer or hobby or sport rocketry......This is why almost every article written in the past 2 years on our battle with the forces of evil, aka BATFE, have used the word " model rocketry"....when we all know of course that the real battle with the BATFE is over high power rocketry..... I submit that this intellectually dishonest strategy will come back to haunt us ...............

shockie B)

"Fred Shecter" wrote in message news: snipped-for-privacy@news.boeing.com...

"Amateur Rockets".

Good luck. HUD & the entire Manufactured Home industry have been trying to get the press and the public to stop calling all prefabricated homes "Trailers" for 50 years and "Mobile Homes" for 35 years. The fact that a home is 32 feet wide by 80 feet long, securely bolted to a cinder block foundation below the frost line doesn't slow them down. Even 4 section Cap Cod style 2 story models are still maligned by anyone who saw them arrive on wheels before they were assembled. Even the NOAA weather radio still advises people to abandon "cars & mobile homes" during severe weather. It's the hardest thing in the world to fight - laziness. Broadcasters and newspaper writers use "familiar terms" until they are forced to change. It's just something that takes a lot of work. Neutrodyne

You must be related to Kerry. You just took both sides of the same issue. Unlike him you did it in the same paragraph!!

You can't be President!

Bunch of BS snipped.

We need George Carlin.

He ridiculed the use of the term "near miss" for aircraft. After years of Him doing the routine in stand up and on recording the FAA now uses the term "near collision".

-Fred Shecter NAR 20117

But it took massive repetition from a public figure with media access and who appears before congress.

Short of that they would NEVER have changed.

Jerry

None of those distinctions seem to matter here, since it appears that the guy was doing fireworks, not rocketry.

I think it's a very useful term. It's an easy way to refer to all forms of rocketry at once.

Right, so why the need to distinguish between the different forms? The correct place to draw a distinction in this case is between rocketry and fireworks.

BTW, I've never much cared for the term "high power rocketry". It's like the phrase "assault rifle". People hear that and get the wrong impression.

Why? Hobby rocketry is an accurate term. He stated that hobby rocketry has an excellent safety record, and it does. Why confuse the public with meaningless distinctions that owe their existence primarily to arbitrary boundary drawing and political infighting within the hobby? Does the general public care about the distinction between motors with 62.5 grams and those with 62.6 grams of propellant? Should they?

All of us are engaged in the hobby of amateur rocketry. We are (for the most part) non-professionals, and engage in our rocketry activities for recreation, not as a job. Calling what we do "amateur rocketry", "sport rocketry" or "hobby rocketry" is an extremely accurate characterization, and one that, IMHO, should be encouraged to reduce the divisiveness that is far too common.

Amateur pyrotechnics is a term I would probably agree with, based on what I have heard of the circumstances. I don't think I'd lump his activities in with those of the rest of us amateur rocketeers, however.

G. Harry was a great pioneer, and he accomplished many worthwhile goals. Getting rocketry recognized as distinct from fireworks in the laws of most states is a laudable acheivement that I do not want to denigrate, in any way. However, although I understand the reasons behind it (especially in historical context), I feel that the time has come for us to move beyond the irrational fear of all motor-making that he instilled and promoted for so many years.

Is black powder motor making dangerous? It sure can be! The thought of hammering black powder into a tube gives me the willies just to think about. Can it be done safely? It sure can be! Witness the new edition of David Sleeter's book for many great examples.

Is it possible for someone with no idea what he's doing to get hurt working with energetic materials he doesn't understand? Of course it is! I'd hate to see the result of some teenager shoving matchheads into a used CO2 cartridge. Likewise, I'd hate to see the result of someone smoking near spilled gasoline.

But, there is now a large body of accumulated knowledge and information, readily available, to allow anyone with the time and inclination to safely make a wide variety of motor types, including AP-based composites, hybrids, sugar motors, and even black powder motors. Lumping all motor-making activities in with the typical "basement bomber" stereotype of a kid playing with matchheads and metal pipes is just plain silly.

Likewise, promoting the mindset that only commercially-manufactured motors are safe does nothing but stifle innovation. We don't find new motor technologies without people (usually starting as hobbyists) having ideas and testing them out. Large existing companies, with huge capital investments in existing technologies, have little or no reason to explore new directions. There's a lot of very good reasons we don't have non-blackpowder motors available from Estes. Likewise, there's a lot of great reasons behind the fact that RATT and HyperTEK have produced hybrid motors.

Experience has also shown, over the last couple of decades, that, when flown according to a basic safety code (electrical ignition from a distance being the main point), non-commercial motors are no more dangerous than any other type. When a motor fails, whether home-brew or store-bought, it fails in predictable ways, and it is *trivial* to minimize the chance of anything unsafe happening as a result. the same safety code that protects us against commercial motor mishaps works just as well to protect us against non-commercial motor mishaps.

Forgive me for ranting. I'm just quite sick of the petty bickering over meaningless distinctions that have meaning only to the various factions within the hobby of rocketry.

- Rick "Can't we all just get along?" Dickinson

well let me give you a very good example on why we should the correct term at the correct time.....Its appears that this Sgt. Rick McMorran has been using the term "amateur" rocketry (which it appears the guy who blew himself was doing as he was mixing chemicals to make rocket propellants) with the Media, but the Media, has insisted on reporting it as "model rocketry"... Why ? Because they have no idea, being outside the hobby that model rocketry is not the correct term to be used when describing a person who mixes their own propellants.............They are associating people who roll their own as being involved in model rocketry... and this simply is not true..... and why are they usng this term? Because we have not done our job pointing out that model rocketry is commerical motors and amateur rocketry is making your own motors..... The media doesn't know the difference between the two.... I don't want the BATFE using this explosion as one of their statistics saying model rockets was the cause of this explosion to be used against model rocketry at some future date... when it was actually amateur rocketry .....and this isn't about shifting the blame from model rocketry to amateur rocketry per the 1950's....If this guy had been actually using Estes BP motors and blew himself up then it would be appropriate to say he as use rocket motors that are used in model rocketry.....words and definitions matter......

shockie B)

"Rick Dickinson" wrote in message news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com...