Why are the test results so old?

I was reviewing over the test results pages on the NAR web site and there seems to be an awful lot of motors that don't have test data within the last three years. I thought that motors had to be re-certified every three years.

Also, for the I300, it says "Uses AeroTech RMS-38/440 Reload System and AeroTech I300 Reload Kit. No substitutions allowed." What the heck is a 38/440 Reload System? Guess the Dr. Rocket 38/480 is not allowed?

Bob

Reply to
baDBob
Loading thread data ...

What's good for the goose is NOT good for the gander. Welcome to NAR and TRA.

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

What's sauce for the goose is ipecac for the gander.

Reply to
Bored

I was reviewing over the test results pages on the NAR web site and there seems to be an awful lot of motors that don't have test data within the last three years. I thought that motors had to be re-certified every three years.

Reply to
GCGassaway

NFPA 1125, 2001 Ed. (excerpted for editorial review)

8.3 Listing of Certified Rocket Motors and Motor-Reloading Kits.

The authority having jurisdiction shall maintain a current and complete list of all those rocket motors and motorreloading kit types that are certified as complying with the standards and requirements detailed in Sections 8.1 and 8.2 and shall make copies of this list available to citizens and public safety officials who request it.

- iz

GCGassaway wrote:

Reply to
Ismaeel Abdur-Rasheed

Come on Iz.. As you say, "it says maintain a list", not publish the on the NAR web page. However, if the list is maintained on the web, it should be as current as possible.

Fred

Ismaeel Abdur-Rasheed wrote:

Reply to
W. E. Fred Wallace

Tripoli totally violates that one en masse!

NAR at least has a procedure in place that works more often than not.

But definitely does NOT comply fully with this provision they authored, codified, had adopted and now breaches.

And THEY are the ones refusing to cert my motors despite the paperwork I have produced to them, to the general public, and at all times on demand.

Let's see:

Unclean hands Unreasonably withheld fraud trade restraint under color of authority

I am being intentionally imprecise legally to NOT invoke a need to make a demand on them for this stuff. But it's all out there in spades right this second.

Earth to TRA and NAR, "please come in". I promise to get on my knees and beg physically so your egos can be served while you are following the law.

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

shall make copies of this list available to citizens and public safety officials who request it.

SHALL CITIZENS

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

Is not the list published in Sport Rocketry on a semiannual schedule??

Fred

Reply to
W. E. Fred Wallace

That is something else that should be reviewed, especially in light of the current economic state of our hobby.

Reply to
Kurt Kesler

That's probably a typo - IIRC, the I300 actually does load in 38/480 size hardware.

-dave w

Reply to
David Weinshenker

I'll go one further Fred and admit that it does not specify publication of any performance data in this requirement. It is merely a list of manufacturer/motors.

and yes, "who request it?" can be satisfied by fulfilling requests in made writing to the organization. The website is a 21st century convenience and extremely useful, but not mandated.

NFPA 1125, 2001 Ed. (excerpted for editorial review) :

3.2.5* Listed. Equipment, materials, or services included in a list published by an organization that is acceptable to the authority having jurisdiction and concerned with evaluation of products or services, that maintains periodic inspection of production of listed equipment or materials or periodic evaluation of services, and whose listing states that either the equipment, material, or service meets appropriate designated standards or has been tested and found suitable for a specified purpose.

- iz

W. E. Fred Wallace wrote:

Reply to
Ismaeel Abdur-Rasheed

It's official and that is the point.

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

Izzy logic failed:

NFPA 1125, 2001 Ed. (excerpted for editorial review)

8.3 Listing of Certified Rocket Motors and Motor-Reloading Kits.

The authority having jurisdiction shall maintain a current and complete list of all those rocket motors and motorreloading kit types that are certified as complying with the standards and requirements detailed in Sections 8.1 and 8.2 and shall make copies of this list available to citizens and public safety officials who request it.

Reply to
GCGassaway

  1. You SNIPPED the part where he said NAR was probably in compliance. That was disingenuous.
  2. You saying the above in no way means izzy stated or implied it. That was disingenuous.

That makes you a disingenuous troll, as opposed to merely the simple kind.

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

Jerry Irvine lied:

  1. You SNIPPED the part where he said NAR was probably in compliance. That was disingenuous.

I'm not so sure that the PDF data files on the website would be changed after recert, unless there was some significant change in the motor specs or performance. Because that PDF data is meant to provide "rocket science" type info for fliers (N-sec, thrust curves, masses). It is not posted there for the purpose of listing the last recert date, particularly when the only significant change to the PDF would be dates.

If that is not enough for you, then I suggest you send an e-mail to Jim Cook or Jack Kane at NAR S&T.

Reply to
GCGassaway

"clearly intended" ? you have a very active imagination, George, bordering on paranoia. Give it a rest.

- iz

Reply to
Ismaeel Abdur-Rasheed

If you are repetitious enough does that make you more correct?

Actually, independent of any prior post, NAR is NOT following the NFPA regs.

I offer for your respectful consideration George:

  1. NFPA-1125 does not specifically demand a LEMP for all cases. It asks for compliance with 27 CFR which MAY include obtaining a LEMP.

Then we refer to 27 CFR 555.141-a-8 and indeed no such permit is required for materials exempt under any of several exemptions one of which is 27 CFR 555.141-a-7 (4 UN numbers) and another one is 27 CFR

555.141-a-8 (propellant actuated devices generally and widely).
  1. I have asked NAR to reconsider the position of specifically requesting a LEMP (or any ATF permit) in consideration that there are instances where it is not required by 27 CFR. NAR has agreed to investigate the issue. I appreciate that. I also cited the very lawsuit papers they proffered in the NAR/TRA/ATF lawsuit as further evidence my position is on firm ground. It was lodged with the NAR with proper and due consideration. I appreciate that more than you know.

Thank you Mark Bundick.

Thank you very much, please hurry, and Merry Christmas.

(who was disingenuous there, Mr. Lying

Repetition retained for clarity of emotional state and motive.

None of this addresses any other requirement NAR might reasonably have.

Jerry

NAR 24333 in good standing

Thusly:

Minutes of the NAR 2003 Board meeting (Waco) [excerpts]

NFPA Code Changes - The Board directed the President to instruct Jerry Irvine to work with NAR NFPA representative Pat Miller to review requests to change various aspects of NFPA Codes 1122, 1125 and 1127 and report to the Board with recommendations.

Develop HPR Marketing - Responding to Jerry Irvineís request to ìmass-market HPRî, the Board would be happy to respond to any specific plans for such marketing from all members. The Membership and Sport Services Committees would be directed to review any such plans and recommend specific action items for adoption by the Association.

USPS Motor Shipping Regulations - Based on a request by Jerry Irvine, the President was directed to seek out knowledgeable members who have worked with USPS regulations to determine what relief might be obtained to allow NAR members to ship motors via USPS for their personal use. The President will report to the Board at the February 2004 meeting.

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

I agree George has an active imagination, improper predispositions, an emotionally unstable basis, and of course paranoia.

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.