From: paul@taniwha.UUCP (Paul Campbell)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
Subject: Re: DOT/CPSC/FAA Situation
Date: 20 Aug 92 04:40:37 GMT
Organization: Taniwha Systems Design

In article <10490013@hpfcmgw.FC.HP.COM> bo@hpfcmgw.FC.HP.COM (Bo Viger) writes:
>hrbob@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (robert.e.wiersbe) writes:

>>  Has anyone talked to a distributer or tried to order reloads and run
>>into problems?  

Yes - but then that's because no one's selling mail order to CA because of
the new CA law ...

>>  I for one, have stopped buying ANY Estes and Vulcan Products.  Quest
>>and Apogee products are better anyway.  Until I get some answers on the
>>rational of "the video" I am ACTIVELY promoting Quest products to my
>>cubscout pack and local hobby stores.

I'm doing the same ..... I've also got an 'Estes - Just Say No' bumper
sticker on my car ....

>>However, the NAR and Tripoli are on top of this.  The NAR is closely
>>working with the FAA to have the total mass and total fuel mass limits
>>raised to match the sporting code.  This should result in a proposed

>Yes, but is NAR helping with the DOT ban on reloads? I think not. In fact,
>a hard-core NAR officer has been identified with having initiated the

>>On the CPSC/DOT situation, the NAR does not blame Estes and the "video"
>>for the current regulatory actions.  They think they know what touched
>>this off and know that the current actions predate the video at NFPA
>>meeting.  They have a very well connected law firm working with the CPSC
>>and (now) DOT to clarify and educate the agencies.  (The lawyer handling
>>this is the former boss of the CPSC guy in charge of this!)  What the NAR
>>wants us to do now is to sit tight and wait for a call for action.

>Apparently not all NAR intends to work towards solving the current HP
>bans in place, as my above note points out. And will the infighting within
>Tripoli stop long enough for a real organizational effort to take place?

It looks like the infighting may have finished - at least for now. At LDRS
it was decided that Tripoli would set up a fund - funded from donations
from members, vendors, and manufacturers that would be used as a pool to
fund legal actions (probably through the law firm you mentioned above)
on behalf of all of us (not just one or two manufacturers) - NAR will also be
involved and eventually the fund will probably end up administered by the
model rocket trade organization once it gets going enough - the idea is
to go for the DOT first and eventually FAA/CPSC/NFPA etc later.

Gary from ISP/AeroTech gave us the whole sordid story of what's happened 
over the past few months - much of which has been related here. The current
state of the DOT is that there are some investigators nosing around and while
this is happening AeroTech is voluntarily not shipping stuff - it's still legal
for you to carry your own stuff around - the issue is 'Interstate Commerce'.

As was pointed out if DOT bans HP motors it's going to get really wierd - you
will be able to freely ship large amounts of black powder or live amunition
but not composite reloads - which are far safer.

	Paul
-- 
Paul Campbell    UUCP: ..!mtxinu!taniwha!paul     AppleLink: CAMPBELL.P

	How do you tell when George Bush is lying?
	You read his lips ...
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets