why are hybrids regulated?

Ok, so I'm looking at the NAR-CAR-TRA combined motor listing, and I notice that ALL G size hybrids are considered HPR, which means in essence that you
have to have an L1 to use them. Will a vendoe even sell a G hybrid to somebody that doen't hold an L1, or is all that is needed is that you be 18 yrs of age or older?
I realize of course there are some model rocket motors that are considered HPR because they fall outside the definitions of a model rocket motor( to wit: G33/G75J/G101/G104).
Why is this? I mean where did the NAR-CAR-TRA-NFPA get the authority to include non-explosive and non-flammable solids rocket engines into the NFPA codes?
I understand that hybrid rockets require electrical ejection charge ignition so there is some degree of complexity involved, but you should not regulate an item based on its complexity.
I mean NFPA1125 states that motors to be certfied must be either explosives or flammable solids. I don't believe that hybrids fall into either of those classification. AND of course neither do water rockets that are also semi-regulated by the NFPA codes. Whats up with this? SO have the NFPA codes de-volved(?) to basically regulate rockets of any sort or fashion? I mean NFPA codes don't regulate hydrogen power model rocket (yet)... or air rockets...yet.or....
I have a novel suggestion: once we finally get the BATFE regulation out of rocketry, lets turn our attention to making sure OUR elected representatives on the NFPA committee, reduce as much regulation as possible from the NFPA codes.
shockie B)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
The logic is that hybrids are more complicated than typical rocket motors. You are dealing with compressed gas, which involves different handling techniques. Some regulation is appropriate, in my opinion.
Nitrous oxide itself is not a cryogenic or a toxic material, and is not classified as a flammable gas. Its handling characteristics are very similar to CO-2, so the techniques for handling it safely can be derived from procedures used to recharge soda fountains and similar devices. You have to be careful not to release it carelessly, or you can get frostbite from touching metal surfaces over which it is flowing or impinging. Hoses are also a problem; they can whip around and whack you.
Then, of course, the fact that you have to use electronic deployment.
I can sell an H hybrid to someone who is planning to use it for his Level 1. Other than that, you need to be Level 1 before I can sell you a hybrid of any size.
I really don't have a problem with this setup. After all, self-regulation is what has brought us our excellent safety record. I know there has been some discussion of a separate hybrid safety code, but it was decided that it wasn't necessary. I wouldn't be averse to seeing a new safety code for hybrids from either NAR or Tripoli; I'm sure there would be plenty of chance for input and discussion. We've learned a lot about hybrids since I fired my first H70 in 1999.
Doug Pratt www.pratthobbies.com
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
shockwaveriderz wrote:

Why not just email the 'elected representatives' directly?
Ted Novak TRA#5512 IEAS#75
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
You can't be serious. Hybrids are a highly energetic device that can propel a significant mass to high velocities and altitudes. They also are quite capable of exploding BTW. If the rocketry sanctioning bodies hadn't had the foresight to implement some safety standards and there was an accident, you can be sure that the feds would step in. I have that directly from at least one senior inspector at the federal level. Hybrids are not toys. If these rules didn't exist, our HPR group would not make or sell them.
Anthony J. Cesaroni President/CEO Cesaroni Technology/Cesaroni Aerospace http://www.cesaronitech.com / (941) 360-3100 x101 Sarasota (905) 887-2370 x222 Toronto

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
by that reasoning then , Anthony, DEF model rocket hybrids should also be regulated requiring a L1. Is that your position? I guess what irritates me most is the certifying bodies can't seem to acurrately delinate what is or isn't a model rocket motor.
why would the feds step in to regulate hybrids, if they haven't stepped in, in 50+ years to regulate Amateur Rocketry?
shockie B)

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
How many DEF hybrids are produced commercially? Think about why not, economics included. If someone wants to spend the time, cost and effort to go that route and keep the NFPA and CPSC happy along the same lines that are accepted for modroc motors, great. The market is almost zero for the cost involved. It's unlikely to happen. Hybrids will most likely be regulated at some point in the near future in any event.
HPR and mid power is a small niche' hobby and the participant level continues to decline. TRA membership is down to around the 3000 number and it's anyone's guess what percentage of that are active. We have seen a significant decline in sales over the past three years. Paul Robinson at AMW is a friend of mine and reports much the same thing. Fortunately HPR is not our day job. Dealers are also feeling the squeeze. My guess is that AT has also experienced similar trends.
So if DEF hybrids are sold as toys, how many do you think will sell and how will it help the sport? Hybrid sales have dropped by 60% over the past three years BTW, even though they're not regulated, so you may want to consider that as well.
In short, what's your point?
Anthony J. Cesaroni President/CEO Cesaroni Technology/Cesaroni Aerospace http://www.cesaronitech.com / (941) 360-3100 x101 Sarasota (905) 887-2370 x222 Toronto

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Is it true some one used a weenie for fuel in a hybrid? If it is,shockie had better watch out. Sorry Shockie - I can't resist it when you troll for comments. Now, you want some cheese with that whine. 8-)
On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 23:27:22 GMT, "Anthony Cesaroni"

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

The solution to the expanded growth of the hobby as well as manufacturer growth and vendor growth is reduced regulation, not more barriers to entry. If a consumer wants to purchase a hybrid rocket motor, making them 1) join a national organization, 2) gain organizational certification, and then 3) purchasing the hybrid rocket motor, are too many hurdles to benefit the user, the manufacturer or a reselling vendor. I would venture to say that the hobby trends you are discussing are primarily the result of "anticipated" additional regulatory oversight AND the national organizations' multi-leveled certification programs. Hobby rocketry enjoyed many years of positive growth until the hobby organizations tried to impliment their own version of regulatory oversight via these structured certification programs. As a result, the hobby organizations have dug themselves a deep hole that they may never recover from.
You don't enjoy sustained growth of a hobby by making it harder for the participants to enjoy.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

This shoud be in the FAQ.

--
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

Good to have you back, Jerry.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Hey, when did you get out??? Now that should be in the FAQ... (:-)
Jerry Irvine wrote:

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

ROTFL!
--
Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L >>> To reply, there's no internet on Mars (yet)! <<<
Kaplow Klips & Baffle: http://nira-rocketry.org/Document/MayJun00.pdf
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Hey Jerry how have you been? Is your sentence up or do they let you on the net once in a while.
Phil
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Letting me on the 'net would be dangerous.
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:

POINT!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Jerry Irvine wrote:

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

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

They gave it to themselves, via the NFPA.
According to industry representatives, AKA hobby associations, they feel *someone* has to be in charge to prevent the federal authorities from *taking* charge. It's seen as a form of self-policing. But it didn't work, as evidenced by the BATFE regulatory excursion into the rocketry hobby. Some of the self-policing may be just as over-reaching as the BATFE regulatory oversight.
Back during the Louie Freeh days of ATF, there was a call to reign in duplicated agencies (or is it more accurately labeled "duplicitous"?) and all of a sudden agencies like the ATF were trying to justify their existence rather than being absorbed into other Department of Justice agencies. So they extended their reach.
Also, consider the growth of "experimental" rocketry, where hybrids grew from. Experimental rocketry groups teach that you can make your own motors (albeit with a kitchen mixer in normally crowded preparation facilities such as hotels and convention centers) and that you don't need any national hobby organization affiliation or certification level to make and launch these motors. And, we're not talking about small motors either, rather motors up to and larger than are commercially available to the hobby populace at large.
This offshoot is viewed as "non-self-policing", and the national organizations view this as detrimental to the safe growth of the hobby. On the surface, this makes sense. It is also nonsensical in the fact that it is a form of hobby censorship.
If the ATF is in charge, then they insure their survival. If the hobby organizations are in charge, they insure THEIR survival. If no one is in charge, the hobby may not have a chance for survival. Which one is best? It depends on who you ask.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Good luck. After reading the rest of the replies to this post, I am reminded of the state of regulatory oversight back in 1998 when I wrote the special report "GETTING LEGAL: Regulatory Issues Shaping Our Hobby" (http://www.rocketryonline.com/special_report.shtml or http://www.uhostme.com/images/archive/special_report.shtml when ROL deletes the report). It reported on vendors not wanting to sell motors to people who weren't certified with a national organization when the flyers were within their legal grounds for wanting to purchase and use them.
There are NO federal regulations that prevent you from purchasing or flying hybrid rocket motors. But, if the state you live in has adopted NFPA 1127 into its fire code, then state law may require you to abide by these seemingly arbitrary regulations.
Consider: you can purchase gasoline, a very volatile chemical, just about anywhere -- provided you put it into an approved container. But you don't have to join the American Automobile Association and be certified an AAA Level 1 Gasoline User in order to burn gasoline. Oddly enough, anyone can also purchase a nitrous oxide performance kit for their automobile. And, anyone who has done so, equipped with the approved containers, can purchase the nitrous oxide gas to put in their newly-equipped nitrous oxide-enhanced automobile. Certainly there is greater danger with a nitrous oxide-enhanced automobile (burning gasoline, no less) to have an accident than there is with a hybrid rocket, yet no one has to be certified to do so.
On the other hand, to purchase a "hybrid rocket motor" (read: a few pieces of aluminum, paper and plastic), you must belong to a national rocketry organization (i.e. pay more money) and jump through their hoops (i.e. pay even more money) to prove that you are capable of not killing yourself. It doesn't make the situation any safer for you, but it does give the industry a cushion to fall back on in the event of a lawsuit or regulatory claim.
Again, this is even more fuel for the proponents of "experimental" build-your-own motors. In the end, you will have more luck getting the federal government off hobby rocketry's back than you will repealing NFPA regulatory recommendations, since now you much sue 50 states instead of just Washington, DC. But those seeking additional regulatory oversight can always find some entity somewhere willing to do so.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
shockwaveriderz wrote:

I can't find the reference, but I know Tripoli and NAR fixed this when G hybrids became available. You do not need to be L1 to fly a G hybrid but you do have be be 18 or supervised by an adult.
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.