HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: hack@arabia.uucp (Edmund Hack)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
Subject: Re: DOT Bans Reloads (temporarily?)
Date: 29 Jul 1992 18:50:34 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Lockheed ESC, Houston

In article <1992Jul29.155656.24146@rsd0.rsd.dl.nec.com> buzz@rsd.dl.nec.com (Buzz McDermott) writes:
>In article <1992Jul28.210614.3479@cbfsb.cb.att.com>, hrbob@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (robert.e.wiersbe) writes:
>|> I just found out that as of yesterday the DOT has declared ALL reloads G and 
>|> above as "Banned Hazardous Substances" and will not let Aerotech or 
>|> Distributers ship them. It is unclear how long this will last. I wonder if
>|> this will affect things at NARAM?
>
>This is another good example of why Tripoli and NAR have to work together.
>Neither organization is strong enough to find government red-tape alone.
>Both organizations want HPR to continue.
From what I have read on Compu$erve (CI$), the NAR has a well connected and
experienced law firm in D.C. working with the CPSC on clarifying the
status of G engines and (possibly) reloads. In fact, one of the lawyers
working with CPSC was the boss of the guy handling the G engine/ reload
classification.  The NAR leadership has called for calm and patience in
dealing with this situation.

>
>Now, about what you found out....
>
>Did the ruling just cover RMS technology?  Did they rule on G expendables?
>Did they rule on under-G reloads?
>
>Also, does anyone know if current HPR disposables (H & up) are, in fact,
>'Banned Hazardous Substances' or something else? In other words, does this
>ruling put reloads in the same class as HPR disposables or something even
>worse?
I don't think that the status of H & up has changed at all - they still
are class B items.

According to some messages on CI$, one of the HPR dealer/distributors
got a call from someone asking to buy some Gs and HPR engines, posing as
model rocketeers.  When they showed up at the storefront and attempted
to buy the items, he asked for NAR or Tripoli membership card as a
condition of sale (good for him!).  They produced DOT IDs and asked to
buy anyway.  He called the DOT and some other people before selling the
engines/devices to them to see if it was legal to sell to them.  They
bought the items, told him that a determination on classification would
be done in a week or so.  In the interim, he's stopped shipping some of
his stock.

As a side note, Estes posted a statement favoring classification of G
engines as Model Rocket motors.  No position on reloadables, however.

-- 
| Edmund Hack - Lockheed Engineering & Sciences Co. - Houston, TX
| hack@aio.jsc.nasa.gov    SpokesPersonp(Me,or(NASA,LESC)) = NIL
|   **** Papoon for President! You Know He's Not Insane!! ****
From: cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
Subject: Re: HPR Attitudes Towards Model Rocketry
Date: 24 Jul 92 01:50:08 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.

In article <1992Jul23.212416.8393@axis.dsg.ti.com>, barrett@add.itg.ti.com writes:
> P.S.  CD, I realize now that my example of the guy who was not too
> enthusiastic at my suggestions may have sounded like a "who asked you
> anyway?" situation.  Fair call on your part.  I really was trying to be
> helpful.  Maybe too helpful?

No, that's not what I meant.  Here's this guy with probably lots of
AeroTech stuff in stock.  He's just learned (with you or without you)
that if a customer builds the kit like the manufacturer says, he's
going to be an unhappy customer real soon.  Hey, you were just the
messenger, but he felt like shooting you anyway.
-- 

cdt@pdp.sw.stratus.com      --If you believe that I speak for my company,
OR cdt@vos.stratus.com        write today for my special Investors' Packet...
From: cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
Subject: Re: HPR Attitudes Towards Model Rocketry
Date: 22 Jul 92 19:50:07 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.

In article <1992Jul22.052152.16088@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com>, billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson) writes:
> cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares) writes:
> : Here's a good question.  What do you think the NAR needs to do to improve
> : its HP program?
> 
> I am not sure it does. The major complaint I have is the $5 fee that is
> required for each step up in certification. I could see such a fee, for
> one day - such as a person stepping up sequentially through H, I, and J
> certifications at the same launch. I do not see how there can be any more
> paperwork involved in processing such a procedure.

The fee covers the administrative overhead involved in adding you to the
certification lists that go to the manufacturers, and mailing you a new 
license.  (See the next part.)

> This brings up another question: I do not recall the rules from my manual,
> but can a person do such a step-up? Or do they have to send in the paperwork
> for one level and wait for confirmation to be returned before they can do the
> next higher level certification? 

One can do such a step-up only at a sanctioned launch, where the CD is 
authorized to act as the NAR's agent to accept your certification and
provide you with a coupon good for the purchase of the next level of
motor at his meet only.  Otherwise, theoretically, you could not do the
step-up in one day because, lacking certification, no one would sell you 
the motor you needed to do the second level.  You bring up a good point --
when you can do multiple steps at a sanctioned launch (like a Regional
Sport Launch, NARCON, etc.) then we could charge a flat $5, since we only
have to do your paperwork once at HQ.  I'll float that one by Pat and
see if I can't get an answer for you.
-- 

cdt@pdp.sw.stratus.com      --If you believe that I speak for my company,
OR cdt@vos.stratus.com        write today for my special Investors' Packet...
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
From: hrbob@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (robert.e.wiersbe)
Subject: DOT Bans Reloads (temporarily?)
Summary: The title tells the story....
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 21:06:14 GMT

I just found out that as of yesterday the DOT has declared ALL reloads G and 
above as "Banned Hazardous Substances" and will not let Aerotech or 
Distributers ship them. It is unclear how long this will last. I wonder if
this will affect things at NARAM?

Bob Wiersbe	NAR# 44588	hrbob@ihlpb.att.com
From: cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
Subject: Re: HPR Attitudes Towards Model Rocketry
Date: 23 Jul 92 18:08:02 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.

In article <1992Jul23.142755.2177@axis.dsg.ti.com>, barrett@add.itg.ti.com writes:
>   Sometimes this was not as well received as it was intended.  Case in
> point:  there was a guy who works for a hobby shop that sells Aerotech
> kits.
> I asked him if he had made the "appropriate" modifications to the kits 
> that would make them "better".
> He was not too excited to learn this (I don't if it was due to the fact
> that he sells Aerotech stuff or what).  Sad to say that by the end of the 
> first day he had not ONE model that was flyable.  He was so mad...

How would YOU feel to discover that you were selling bunches of kits that
wouldn't work as advertised for the average modeler without benefit of
"secret" information?
-- 

cdt@pdp.sw.stratus.com      --If you believe that I speak for my company,
OR cdt@vos.stratus.com        write today for my special Investors' Packet...
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
From: hrbob@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (robert.e.wiersbe)
Subject: More DOT/Reload Information
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 22:04:22 GMT

Here's more information about the reload situation:

Reloads are "Forbidden" (official DOT term) and can NOT enter interstate
commerce. They can't be shipped as Class B or anything else. You can still
buy and use them, so if you are near a distributer that has them, stock up!
Or you can drive to Las Vegas and buy all you want, you just can't mail order 
them.

UPS will not ship Class B Explosives at all, but Federal Express will to 
certain places (is that what you were talking about Bill?). But since DOT says
NO, they can't anymore.

Don't expect this situation to be resolved anytime soon (like the next few
weeks). It's been a long time coming, I guess.

Bob Wiersbe	NAR# 44588	hrbob@ihlpb.att.com
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
From: cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
Subject: Re: HPR Attitudes Towards Model Rocketry
Date: 23 Jul 92 20:33:05 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.

In article <1992Jul23.172023.13349@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com>, billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson) writes:
> See C.D.'s response to my posting. It appears that this can only be done
> at sanctioned meets, at present. Whether "the guy" is willing to do this
> or not is immaterial if doing so violates the guidelines that have been
> set up.

The problem is not that "the guy" is violating the guidelines, but that
whoever is selling you the intermediate engine is violating the law.  The
CD is not an authorized agent of the Association without a sanction, and
therefore cannot authorize you to purchase these engines legally.
-- 

cdt@pdp.sw.stratus.com      --If you believe that I speak for my company,
OR cdt@vos.stratus.com        write today for my special Investors' Packet...
From: cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
Subject: Re: Astro-Blaster Glider under construction: questions
Keywords: construction Glider rocket questions building
Date: 22 Jul 92 02:25:45 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.

In article <9yamx_a.tstark@netcom.com>, tstark@netcom.com (Timothy Stark) writes:
>      Help! I have a problem with the glider. I tried to bond the balsa
> wood's nose but it does not work because glue is not good. What glue
> do you recommened to bond the parts to form the nose? I tried with
> adhesive glue but it does not work because balsa wood is too strong to
> separate from bonding. Please reponse me as soon as possible. Thanks!

I figured I'd leave this posting alone for a couple of days and see if
anyone else understood it.  No one has responded.  I don't understand it
either.  In particular, I have no idea what "balsa wood is too strong to
separate from bonding" means.  Maybe if you re-post your questions you
can get somebody to answer it.
-- 

cdt@pdp.sw.stratus.com      --If you believe that I speak for my company,
OR cdt@vos.stratus.com        write today for my special Investors' Packet...
From: pfeiffer@nmsu.edu (Joe Pfeiffer)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
Subject: Re: Altitude, Current records, Supersonic flight
Date: 21 Jul 92 16:04:48 GMT
Organization: NMSU Computer Science

In article <1992Jul20.162825.27406@cs.ucf.edu> dlw@engr.ucf.edu (Chip Wuerz) writes:


   Designing single and multistage supersonic rockets are a little tricker
   than that of subsonic rockets.  For example, it has already been pointed 
   out that the center of pressure changes. 
   To make sure the rocket will still be stable when supersonic you need a 
   more stable rocket to account for CP and CG migration.
   Also, it is important note that most flight simulation programs use
   subsonic formulas for various parameters and calculations.

Thanks for the report -- very interesting!

I didn't understand something, though -- since at supersonic speeds CP
migrates back, and since CG can only migrate forward as the fuel is
expcended, why is a ``more stable'' rocket required?

-Joe.
From: cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
Subject: Re: HPR Attitudes Towards Model Rocketry
Date: 23 Jul 92 18:12:49 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.

In article <1992Jul22.220805.4474@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com>, billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson) writes:
> cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares) writes:
> : One can do such a step-up only at a sanctioned launch, where the CD is 
> : authorized to act as the NAR's agent to accept your certification and
> : provide you with a coupon good for the purchase of the next level of
> : motor at his meet only.  Otherwise, theoretically, you could not do the
> : step-up in one day because, lacking certification, no one would sell you 
> : the motor you needed to do the second level.  You bring up a good point --
> : when you can do multiple steps at a sanctioned launch (like a Regional
> : Sport Launch, NARCON, etc.) then we could charge a flat $5, since we only
> : have to do your paperwork once at HQ.  I'll float that one by Pat and
> : see if I can't get an answer for you.

Pat responds:

  The idea behind the stepped program, C.D., is to get the folks accumstomed
  to flying at the different levels.  We have been somewhat flexible about
  this in the past and if a modeler qualifies at the J level in one day
  I see no reason why to charge that person $15.  The $5 fee covers the
  new licenses and the administrative time to process the app.

I'll add this benefit to the Regional Sport Launch handbook.
-- 

cdt@pdp.sw.stratus.com      --If you believe that I speak for my company,
OR cdt@vos.stratus.com        write today for my special Investors' Packet...
From: jack@rml.UUCP (jack hagerty)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
Subject: My Fax Runneth Over
Keywords: Engough Already!
Date: 28 Jul 92 06:03:30 GMT
Organization: Robotic Midwives, Ltd., Livermore, CA

A public thank you to Buzz McDermott and C.D. Tavares for responding
so quickly for my reqest for a copy of the Pink Book Scale rules.

I returned today to find my fax machine had vomited all over the
desk and onto the floor. A wonderful sight!

Thanks, guys.

- Jack
Organization: Doctoral student, Urban and Public Affairs, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 12:35:47 -0400 
From: Lawrence Curcio <lc2b+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Impending Disaster

I just got my NARAM notification yesterday, 12 days after the deadline.
Oh well, flights are hard to get anyway. Have a nice time.
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
From: dlw@engr.ucf.edu (Chip Wuerz)
Subject: Re: Tripoli Membership
Summary: A response from a reader
Organization: engineering, University of Central Florida, Orlando
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 20:08:02 GMT

After several mail bounces, I decided to post this here.


Hi Victor,

	Tripoli is a high power rocketry organization (H-O, motors).
This organization was formed as a research corporation to allow
members to buy and fly B class explosive motors.

Yearly dues, which includes the magazine, is $40.
Make check payable to 'Tripoli'.
Send the check to (call and get an application first):

Tripoli Rocketry Association, Inc.
PO Box 339
Kenner, La  70063-0339

This is the new address for Tripoli Headquarters!

Scot Dingman runs headquarters, he can be reached at

Scot Dingman  (504) 467 - 1967

To get info on where you can get the magazine only, call

Bruce Kelly (801) 225 - 3250 (he is the editor).

Either of these individuals can give you info on the organization
or the magazine.

Welcome to the world of high power,
(Note: this hobby can be very addictive)

			Chip

PS if you need more info mail me again!

Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets

Having recently gotten back into rocketry, this time both high-powered as well
as model, can anyone steer me in the right direction for source material on
rockets and missiles?  

I prefer to scratch build scale models of rockets and missiles from around
the world, and a "Jane's Missiles" type of book (does one of these exist?)
would help alot. Most important are complete dimensions and photos (for 
paint scheme and decals) of the rockets.  Finned-type rockets (Nike, Patriot,
etc.) are better than "guided missile" (finless) types such as Polaris,
Atlas, Titan, etc.) because I don't like to have to add non-scale fins to
a display model in order to fly it.

Recently finished a Phoenix kit and now I'm hooked!

Either post a response or Email any inputs. (cross-posted to sci.military)

Thanks,


______________________________________________________________________________
Bo Viger           Internet:bo@hpfcmvab.FC.HP.COM       Hewlett-Packard
                   UUCP:[hplabs|hpfcse]!hpfcmvab!bo     3404 East Harmony Road
                                                        Ft. Collins, CO 80525
______________________________________________________________________________

Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
From: pfeiffer@nmsu.edu (Joe Pfeiffer)
Subject: Re: HPR Attitudes Towards Model Rocketry
Organization: NMSU Computer Science
	<1992Jul22.052152.16088@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 15:08:51 GMT

In article <1992Jul22.052152.16088@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com> billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson) writes:


   This brings up another question: I do not recall the rules from my manual,
   but can a person do such a step-up? Or do they have to send in the paperwork
   for one level and wait for confirmation to be returned before they can do the
   next higher level certification? 

Earlier this summer, I missed a chance to get HPR certified (there was
a launch, somebody with the authority to certify was there, I had two
weeks notice to build a rocket, a friend of mine & his son & my son &
I had a fishing trip planned...).  Anyway, ``the guy'' told me he
would be happy to ratchet me up several steps in a day.

-Joe.
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
From: barrett@add.itg.ti.com
Subject: Re: HPR Attitudes Towards Model Rocketry
Organization: Texas Instruments, Austin, Tx.
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 92 14:27:55 GMT

  Buzz, I was at the DARS Launch too.  I did not see any flagrant US vs
THEM behavior that you mentioned.  In fact, I did see quite a bit of NAR
members that wanted information on HPR could get a good bit of mentoring
from some more experienced Tripoli members.

  Sometimes this was not as well received as it was intended.  Case in
point:  there was a guy who works for a hobby shop that sells Aerotech
kits.  He was set right up next to me.  He had done some very nice work
on his models and was quite proud of them (as well he should).  I asked
him if he had made the "appropriate" modifications to the kits that
would make them "better".  He did not understand and then I went on to
explain my experiences with Aerotech models and how I had figured out
some simple changes to the motor mount/engine-hook/baffel-system that
would increase reliability and flexibility.  I also explained that I had
lost 2-3 models in the process of learning this information.  He was not
too excited to learn this (I don't if it was due to the fact that he
sells Aerotech stuff or what).  Sad to say that by the end of the first
day he had not ONE model that was flyable.  He was so mad that he would
not even acknowledge my presence as I methodically prepped my rocket as
he was loading his pieces into his car.  I can only hope that he learned
and was willing to pass on his FIRST HAND experience to others.

  As far as your comment about Tripoli members not paying attention to
RSO warnings about errant "model rockets" I know that I would always
look to see what the problem was.  Lawn darts ALWAYS get my attention,
snarled 'chutes on a 5oz rocket do not.

  As far as safety goes I asked the RSO why the model rocket pad was so
close to the LCO table (25').  I felt that launching any rockets that
close was a safety issue.  They were launching E and F engines from this
pad (also R/C boost gliders)!  The RSO said that was all that was
REQUIRED for "model rockets".  I thought that this was a good example of
"rules" overriding common sence.

  Don't get me wrong, I had a great time.  This was a well run launch.
You guys did a GREAT job.  I know that I will be back.

  I just wanted to say that there is a gap in experience between most
Tripoli members and NAR HPR enthusiasts.  Sometimes the Tripoli member
does act a little arrogant, sometimes the NAR member is not very
receptive to well entended advise.  This is a human condition that has
no correlation with organizational charters.

  BTW:  the @#$%&* that is running for a Tripoli board position on an
Anti-NAR platform will not get MY vote.


Stu Barrett  TRA# 1277 NAR# 4341
-- 
X-From: 702872
<----------------------------------------------------------------------------->
<									      >
<	Karl Nordman			TIMSG:  KNOR			      >
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
From: hrbob@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (robert.e.wiersbe)
Subject: Re: HPR Attitudes Towards Model Rocketry
Organization: AT&T
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 16:25:11 GMT

In article <1992Jul23.212416.8393@axis.dsg.ti.com> barrett@add.itg.ti.com writes:
<good stuff deleted>
>
>
>  - The Aerotech MMTs are really poor.  After a few flights, they tend
>to burn up!  I use Phenalic(sp?)  MMT on all my rockets now.
>
>  - The baffle system needs to be inspected before EVERY launch.  It
>tends to get clogged up and will eventually cause the ejection to vent
>side ways through the side of the rocket (which then becomes a lawn
>dart!).  Take a 1/4 wooden dowel and drill a hole in the end and epoxy a
>1" pin or small nail to the end.  Poke holes in the wire mesh to keep it
>porous.  You will have to replace the wire mesh with a "chore boy" after
>6-10 launces.  Unfortunately the old mesh tends to weld itself to the
>plastic piece at the top so this is a pain.  You really can't use
>wadding because the shock cord is attached to the forward bulkhead
>(unless you move the attachment point ala LOC).
>
>Stu Barrett TRA# 1277 NAR# 4341
>-- 

I've got an Aerotech Mustang that's flown over 15 times, and the only repair
I had to do was glue a fin back on after the 8th flight. I built it per the
instructions, with no modifications, using epoxy. It's one of my favorites,
though I'm convinced it'll fail next time because I mentioned it....

Bob Wiersbe		NAR# 44588           hrbob@ihlpb.att.com
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
From: dlw@engr.ucf.edu (Chip Wuerz)
Subject: Re: New Tripoli Headquarters
Organization: engineering, University of Central Florida, Orlando
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 18:18:11 GMT

The new Tripoli Headquarters is run by Scot Dingman

The address is:

Tripoli Rocketry Association, Inc.,
PO Box 339
Kenner, LA 70063-0339

*****************************************************************************

Chip Wuerz  TRA #681
Electrical Engineering Dept.
University of Central Florida
Orlando, FL  32826

Chip Wuerz
2272 King Johns Court
Winter Park, FL 32792

(407) 382 - 6058
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
From: spiegl@rtsg.mot.com (Mark Spiegl)
Subject: Re: LDRS XI, BALLS Launches
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 01:50:25 GMT


dlw@engr.ucf.edu (Chip Wuerz) writes:


>***************** LDRS XI ************ 

>This years LDRS XI (Large Dangerous Rocket Ships) and BALLS (Big As!
>Load Lifting Suckers) launches should contain some very interesting launches.

Is the LDRS/BALLS launch in the same spot as last year? I have the 
Tripolitan maps/directions from 06/91, but I have not seen the write-up 
for this year.


    ^     
   |U|     Mark Spiegl
   |S|     Motorola Inc.
  /|A|\    spiegl@rtsg.mot.com
  ~~U~~    

.