Unstuck in Time.......

One of the advantages to be the Shockwaveriderz, is that from time to time I have the privilege to go into the future for small periods of time......really.....no joke.....
Yesterday in another post I wrote the following:
"Ya know.....In a post from several months ago I seriously suggested that the NAR and the TRA should consider opening additional fronts on the war on the BATFE. And make no mistake, this is a WAR.... and its a TAKE NO PRISONERS WAR.....and it doesn't matter if we win in court, the BATFE will appeal...and it doesn't matter if we win on appeals, cause the BATFE will appeal this ALL THE WAY TO THE SUPREME COURT.... so at beast we are looking at what? 3-7 more years of litigation ? AND then of course there S.724....
Well with the presidential elections just 1 year away, and the "Dumb &Dumber senators" senate hold and the Bush DOJ and the Bush HSA/BATFE all aligned against it, the earliest we will see any movement on it is late Spring 2005.....and does anybody really thing we have a snowball's chance in hell of getting any positive results against this unholy trinity? In today's post 9-11 political environment? Dream on.....
heres my prediction, HPR will someday be absolutely and totally outlawed and banned or it will be SO severely restricted and controlled that only a precious few will even make the effort.... Remember, you heard it here first ....."
anyway, I just came back from June 2005, and I just thought that I might share with everybody how the NAR/TRA lawsuit progressed against the BATFE, what happened with NPRM968, and our Legislative efforts,etc.....
So I thought I would do alittle time skimming to see how well my prediction came out.... If you don't want to know the future, then I suggest you stop reading now........
1st of all, GW BUSH won the election ......
Judge Reggie B, Walton is a 3 time Presidential political appointee.....he was appointed to his various positions as a judge, among other positions, by Reagan, Bush 1 and now Bush 2. He owes his entire judicial career to Republican Presidents.....
Anyway, basically what happened was this....... Judge Walton basically sat on the NAR/TRA vs BATFE lawsuit until early in 2005 when NPRM 968 went into effect.......
This resulted in a partial gutting of the NAR's case against the BATFE.....specifically count 1......was dismissed.... In retrospect, it became clear what NPRM968 was designed, for.... to do legally what they ahd been accused of doing illegally ....
This left only Counts 1 and 3 for the court to deal with.....
The court agreed with the BATFE that rocket engines were not PADs, so we lost that count.. the court also agreed with the BATFE that APCP was an explosive, so we also lost that count......
I might add that the NAR/TRA due to financial constraints both agreed not to pursue any further legal action against the BATFE as far as Counts and 2 were concerned.....they agreed that it would be better to now concentrate on Legislative remedies.......
I might add that S.724 is still on hold by the "dumb and dumber" senators and the Bush BATFE/DOJ...... so it is effectively dead and buried......
Fast Forward to 2008....Hilary Clinton has been elected the first female President......the "dumb and dumber" senators still will not let any legislation that has to do with raising the APCP rocket motor limit to be raised...
the Clinton DOJ/BATFE has issued an NPRM requiring a LEUP for any purchases of APCP rocket motors over 30 gr.......
HPR has been effectively dead now for 3 years......
The TRA finally became bankrupt and went out of business....
The NAR lost over 50% of its adult membership but due to TRAC 2002-2008, they have been able to attract more leader members to help offset this loss somewhat......
well folks there you have it.....its sad but its true...
shockie B(
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
David wrote:

Say hello to John if you see him on the flip side......he's such a madcap! :-)
http://www.johntitor.com /
Chuck

--

Chuck Rudy

VooDoo Digital Productions
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Ok Shock,
Who won the next 5 World Series and Super Bowls???
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 11 Oct 2003 01:02:26 GMT, "Eric F."

That info would generate enough funds to, well, use your imagination...
--
Patrick Harvey
NAR 81752 L2
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 11 Oct 2003 01:05:08 GMT, IceAge

Yeah, and what does he do? He brings back a report on the legal claptrap.
What a ditz.
Odds on the presidential election in '04 according to a UK betting site are:
Republicans - 8/15 Democrats - 11/8
NOT a big money maker.
Zooty
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The casting og the movie? So we have say Lawrence Fishburn as governor right now :)
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
Shockie predicted: << The court agreed with the BATFE that rocket engines were not PADs, so we lost that count.. the court also agreed with the BATFE that APCP was an explosive, so we also lost that count...... ...Fast Forward to 2008....Hilary Clinton has been elected the first female President.... >>
Man Shock, you are one pessimest dude!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
ray: some might call it pessimissim..I prefer to call it being realistic.... I think most people in the hobby are in denial....
shockie B)

we
female
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
But unless you do something to CHANGE the most likely outcome, it is just pessimism. What are your top 1 or 2 recommendations (that we are not doing now)?
-- David

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
david:
well the most important recommendation that I can think of is to get the 62.5 gr raised to either a unified 113 or 125 per FAA regulations..
To do this we would have to open up several new fronts in the war on the BATFE..
for example: 1. Go to the NFPA and get 62.5 g raised to 125g 2. Go to the DOT and get 62.5g raised to 125g 3. Go to the CSPC and get 62.5 g raised to 125g 4. Go to the USPS and get 62.5g raised to 125g
Now why is it so important that we get the 62.5g restriction raised to 125g?
Well the most important reason is because the BATFE itself says it is importnat to them:
"To ensure consistency, ATF coordinates its use of terms in our regulations with other Federal agencies and industry associations. The term "toy propellant device", formerly contained in Department of Transportation regulation 49 CFR 173.100(u), was used by ATF in determining the exemption under 27 CFR 55.141(a)(7).
The 62.5 grams propellant weight limit is also referenced by the Consumer Product Safety Commission regulation 16 CFR Section 1500.85(a)(8)(u). The National Fire Protection Association Code for Unmanned Rockets (NFPA 1122) also uses 62.5 grams to define model rockets. Therefore, ATF's regulation of rocket motors containing over 62.5 grams of propellant is consistent with all Federal agencies involved as well as those States that rely on the NFPA standards for their regulations."
Read the above and replace 62.5g with 125g......
So if the CSPC said 125g, the NFPA said 125g, the DOT said 125g, well according to the BATFE's own public pronoucements and logic, they would implement 125g......
Let me ask the question this way.... Right now if we lose the lawsuit, nprm968 goes into effect and we get no substantive progress on legislation, anybody wanting to use a rocket motor than contains greater than 62.5 gwill be required to undergone the BATFE reglatory hoops.... Which means if you want to purchase any rocket motor greater than an G, a LEUP will be required. If we replaced 62.5g with 125g then we could legally purchase small H motors and at least cert L1. SO even though Mid to high HPR might become severely regulated by the BATFE , at least low HPR and cert to L1 would still be avilable to all legally without a LEUP.....So you could at least legally purchase and fly all the H powered models that you want to...
And once we raised this 62.5g to 125g....wait a few years and then goto 187.5g.... and wait a few more years then goto 250g ??
Now I can see people accusing me of being too optimistic with my above statements......
shockie B)

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

Yes.
OR have DOT designate a new class of "consumer rocket motor" inclusive of motors, reloads, igniters, ejections, fuses, etc. Assign a UN number and exempt it from any special packaging under 25KG per box (or 50, a small shipment by common descriptions)

This is for children unattended so it should coincide with the MR limit and no more. However the "recommended ages" should be as they are now. Tiered. 10- C, 14- E, 18- G, 21- H, or adult supervision as stated.

Or use the existing 1 lb Flammable solid reg and ship to that with permission (per individual slug, however contained).

--
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
shock... Should I start dumping all my projects and related hardware now? I don't think so. I'll do what I can to promote rocketry in my community and enjoy it w/o feeling concerned that the bottom might (no one knows for sure) drop out of the hobby, someday. Your "realistic" attitude does nothing but tell me that you're ready to give up on the hobby. If you feel the ship is sinking, try helping bail the water out. We need to stick together on this or we'll go to the bottom for sure.
Stones

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

Does that even include things that would actually put off shockie's day of reckoning?
1. NAR take all references to 62.5g out of safety codes and NFPA codes.
2. UNIFIED model roocket weight limit of 125g.
3. TRA and NAR simply FOLLOW THE LAW and NEVER ask for ATF permits for any transaction or activity surrounding rocket motors or reloads.
4. Have this industry GROW BALLS.
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
what am I doing for my hobby: Well even though I have this realistic POV that HPR wil be banned someday, in the meantime I am the President of the BluesRockS NAR section in Kentucky. I am the person that approached both landowners, tlaked to them at length, so that our section can have a HI capable field and a LM capable field. I am the person that has filled out and sent in the paperwork for waivers to 5000' for the small field and 10000ft with callin windows to the larger field. I am doing all of this to help grow NAR rocketry in this state so the 40 current members will hopefully this time next year be 80 members. We have 2 L2 and 5 L1 members in out section.....with plans for more... We support all forms of model rocketry,large model rocketry and high power rocketry from micromaxx to M..... I am the person creating a hobby shop poster that will be placed in most hobby shops in KY. I am a volunteer mentor/observer for the TARC program here in Ky. I have send TARC materials to 5 local high schools.... I hope to be able to certify L1 this coming year if financials allow
I am one of the few NAR members who consistently lambast our NAR/TRA leadership for not raising the 62.5 gr limit to 125g... and in another post I will explain why that is so important to us..... I evidently am one of the few people in rocketry that can hold multiple opposing views of thought in my head at the same time....
This is what I am doing for my hobby currently....and will be doing for the foreseeable future, the lord willin' and the creeks don't rise.........
shockie B)

so
an
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
<< some might call it pessimissim..I prefer to call it being realistic.... >>
OK then, what's your rationale for believing that the court will side with ATF? And what do you think should be done about it? Please don't say, "Drop the lawsuit", as that would be the height of idiocy.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
ray: I stated my rationale in the first post.
Judge Reggie B. Walton is a 3 time Presidential political appointee...Reagan,Bush1,Bush2.... He owes his livelihood to republic administrations.....You seriously think he will rule against the wishes of the people that put him in his position..... Alot of people seem to think that this is about who is right and who is wrong, as pertains APCP being an explosive or not....The facts don't matter in this case anymore...It has become bigger than that...It has been caught up in the Post 911 hysteria regarding the bogus War on Terrorism...
And as I have before and I'll say it again: Even if we do win the lawsuit......Do you thing the BUSH DOG/BATFE will accept this judges pronoucement? Hell No, I can already hear this administration railing against liberal judges failing to do their part on the war on terrorism...... Its a sure bet, the DOJ/BATFE will pursue this case in court as long and as far as they can..... People refuse to accept the fact that Federal Government has unlimited financial resources, the NAR doesn't.....
And while we sit around waiting for an appeals court or Supreme Court to hear and rule on this lawsuit, the Legislative effort is DEAD..... As long as the BUSH/DOJ/BATFE is against this Bill and we have the Twin Towers of irresponsibility in the senators from NY and NJ, the legislative effort is dead until at least 2009....... Why would the Bush/DOJ/BATFE suddenly do an about face and support any raising of the limit? That would be completely contrary to their War on Terrorism....
So while we sit around and wait for a lawsuit bottled up, and a legislative effort that was dead before it was even born, the BATFE put forth the vehicle, NPRM968, which effectively guts Count 4 which says that the ATF's civil regulation of individuals who purchase and store rocket motors that use more than 62.5 grams of APCP fuel is invalid because the ATF failed to provide notice and an opportunity for comment when it decided to regulate such rocket motors. What do you think the purpose of NPRM968 is? To show the court that yes, they did go through the notice and opportunity for comment when they decided to regulate rocketry. NPRM will go into effect long before we see any lawsuit or legislative relief.......
Ray you know what I would like to see? We have all heard that 80% of membership of the NAR is C divsioners, adults....And I think perhaps as many as 60% of that number is certed as L1 or above..... I would like to know what percentage of those adult NAR mambers who are L1 or above have LEUP.....If it is a high percentage then we have already lost anyway......Why? because that is what the BATFE lawsuit, NPRM968 are al about anyway.....they want us to have LEUP to purchase store and use HPR rocket motors.....
So if 80% of the adult NAR members who are L1 and above already have LEUP, what are we fighting forand against? Are these people turncoats? Are they traitors to the cause? Or do they see the writing on the wall? I will suggest that they are being realistic......
shockie B)

ATF?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
<< Judge Reggie B. Walton is a 3 time Presidential political appointee...Reagan,Bush1,Bush2.... He owes his livelihood to republic administrations.....You seriously think he will rule against the wishes of the people that put him in his position... >>
I'm not so naive as to think that it couldn't happen that way, but by the same token I'm not so cynical as to believe that it WILL happen that way. Yes, there are a lot of cases where judges base their rulings more on politics than on facts or law, but there are also plenty of cases where they do the opposite. And on the whole, I think it's far more likely that a Republican judge would make decisions based on law, not politics. I think a liberal judge would be more likely to base his decisions on political agendas.
<< Do you thing the BUSH DOG/BATFE will accept this judges pronoucement?>>
Maybe, maybe not. I certainly don't see what would be gained by giving up now.
<<Hell No, I can already hear this administration railing against liberal judges failing to do their part on the war on terrorism... >>
Well now that would be pretty hard to do, since as you pointed out this judge was appointed by Reagan and Bush.
<< And while we sit around waiting for an appeals court or Supreme Court to hear and rule on this lawsuit, the Legislative effort is DEAD... >>
On that, I agree. Which is why we need more than ever to stay the course with the lawsuit. It's our only remaining hope.
<< What do you think the purpose of NPRM968 is? To show the court that yes, they did go through the notice and opportunity for comment when they decided to regulate rocketry. >>
Duh. We all know that. But it doesn't negate the other counts, and it does mean that they have to respond to every argument against the 62.5g limit. Every responce they give can be used against them, since they don't have a single fact in their favor.
<< NPRM will go into effect long before we see any lawsuit or legislative relief... >>
Yes, that's likely the case.
<< So if 80% of the adult NAR members who are L1 and above already have LEUP, what are we fighting for and against? >>
I doubt that many HPR flyers have a LEUP. It's not necessary for every single flyer to have one, at least at this time. As long as they fly with a club, and the club has at least one person with a LEUP, that person can purchase and "supervise" the use of HPR motors.
So why are we fighting? Because the solution I just mentioned is not a perfect one. There will be those fly alone or with a group that doesn't have a LEUP-holder. And because the ATF could close that loophole at some later date if they aren't stopped now.
BTW, you still haven't told us what your solution to the problem is. Do you have one, or do you simply think we should all give up and quit the hobby?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
ray: In a earlier post in this thread to David, I make one proposal which I think would help somewhat.... and No I'm not saying we should give up or give in... what I am saying is we need to seriously start thinking about the endgame..... We need to start thinking,discussing and planning now for what may come......We can't just allow things to happen and then react to them....(I hate this word) We need to be proactive......hence my 125g suggestion in another post in this thread....I look upon this as offensive flanking maneuvers... our strategy up to now has been head-on...what happens when an immovable object hits an irresistible force...? Nothing? they cancel each other out? Raising the 62.5 go in the interim time period before NORM 968 goes into effect would go a long way towards making the BATE putout more time and energy and effort on their part.....in defending their groundless positions.. This would bring DOT/FAA/CUSP/NAPA into the equation and the BATE would have to deal with all these entities.....At least it would keep the BATE on their toes and give them notice that we aren't going to go away without a fight on all fronts.....
shockie B)

the
same
there
on
opposite.
would
be
now.
judge
to
with
yes,
decided to

mean
single
LEUP,
single
and
perfect
date
you
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Only been sayin that for 4+ years now :)
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
<< No I'm not saying we should give up or give in...>>
Good :)
<<what I am saying is we need to seriously start thinking about the endgame..... We need to start thinking,discussing and planning now for what may come...>>
Ok, that I can agree with. I suspect it is already being done to some degree, at least the planning of possible responses and strategies.
<<Raising the 62.5 go in the interim time period before NPRM 968 goes into effect would go a long way towards making the BATE putout more time and energy and effort on their part.....in defending their groundless positions.. This would bring DOT/FAA/CUSP/NAPA into the equation and the BATE would have to deal with all these entities....>>
I wonder if we have the resources? TRA's spread pretty thin already.
I also wonder if how much difference it would actually make in the long run. The ATF's choice of 62.5g is purely arbitrary and based only on a limitation set for children. Raising the bar for children's motors would be difficult and probably would be ignored by the ATF. Even if they altered their stance to fit a 125g limit, that's still not much help for us.
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.