When are motors to be de-certified?

No, I mean the paperwork did not exist.!

acknowledges

Now you are talking very close to where I live. There *is* a problem here of unequal treatment. There is a problem of supply chains being restricted.

Certify motors for performance, and let the rest take care of itself. This was the original intent of certifications. It has turned into something else entirely. That should not be the purpose of the orgs. The orgs should be the hobby's rep. against further regulation, not supporting such. It is not their duty to verify anything else about the motor. Any thing else steps into commerce and industry regulation, which is NOT the purpose of the Orgs, which is exactly why it is a very substantial component of trade restriction.

But as I see it, nobody *wants* to sue, unlessed given no other alternative. We just want to be able to have the motors to enjoy the hobby. I also do not want AT taken down or stopped in motor distribution. But I will use the recent history of the handling of AT by the ORGs, as it highlights dramatically the inequality of their current "enforcement" stance. It is not equal, and the enforcement in the first place is not the business of the ORGs.

It is a stinking catch 22! I cannot *vote* for long-term change in the org if I don't belong to it, but joining it forces me to abide *at least medium term* to things that are wrong, and having further heads to claim further empowers the bad situation. It is a extremely frustrating situation.

~ Duane Phillips.

You are making my point for me. That TRA's decision to cert based on properwork is arbitrary and inconsistent. Sometimes paperwork is required, sometimes not, and it all depends on how the TRA board feels about you at the moment.

Philip

Agreed. I tell no one to shut up. I tell no one to go somewhere else,

*unless* they are in my person or legal space, as I also have a right not to listen. I have the right to a "kill file". I choose not to use it at this time.

No one should ever be parted from a group for opinions they possess and strive for. They may be parted if for libel or slander, as applied to the group... but only if proven in a way agreed upon by the members of the group. The group, after all, has *some* extremely limited reasonable right to not listen, and progress with the goals of the group.

~ Duane Phillips.

What about for being an insufferable pain in the rear? I think everyone reaches for the Preparation H at some point...

It is a Requierement of all manufactures now.

You told me to go to ALT.KOOKS!

What do you think the ACS test report from Dr. Chang at the Bureau of Explosives is all about? The tests indicated that the material, although energetic and combustible, could not be made to detonate under any reasonable provocation... you could pop it with blasting caps or build a fire under it, and it would sit there and burn up just fine, no problem; and it wouldn't even go off consistently on the drop weight test with the machine set on "high"... the conclusion was that the material only needed an "explosives 1.3C" hazard classification in pieces

3 inches x 3 feet or larger, but not in smaller pieces.

-dave w

Which instead of being used by the rocket industy to benefit all was shunned and attacked as invalid.

Years later.

-dave w

I'm trying to draw out the discussion (in a civil and intelligent manner) in order to help understand how to help resolve our current dilemma...

-dave w

Which dilemma would that be?

Seriously.

Motor availability? Regulation (DOT, ATF, etc.)? Kurt's sense of humor (or lack thereof)? Or something else buried in one of these threads?

And do we need to discuss for "the now" or for "the future"?

You are correct, sir! Let's talk about the future of now.

John

Cato's not a "whistle-blower", he's a twit who demands that others meet _his_ definition of "legality" and "morality" even when he is directly contradicted by AHJ's, insurance agencies, or anyone else. And he fails to apply those same standards to himself, when it suits him.

Dave,

Address the issue, or save us the response. Your posts do make no sense in the present context....

Amen, brother. Preach on!

Gotta give kurt an Amen on that one... Having been on both sides of the fence, the war gets pretty tiring if you don't have a dog in the fight.

Philip

No Dave, that was me (PhilipD). Not Duane.

Like I said earlier. Follow the steps in order:

1. Read (This is a critical one that you keep skipping)
2. Comprehend
3. Engage brain
4. Respond.

PhilipD (Not Duane)

That's great, Ray! I ask you specifically what he did, and you return to name-calling. You do, of course, realize that this type of response undermines your credibility in other threads as well, don't you?

David Erbas-White