From: hrbob@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (robert.e.wiersbe)
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets
Subject: Re: More DOT/Reload Information
Date: 19 Aug 92 21:36:02 GMT
Organization: Texas Instruments, Austin, Tx.

============================ Bob's Post =============================
  The way I found out about this was I tried to order some H128 reloads
from Rocketman in Peoria, they told me that they couldn't ship them to
me because DOT won't let them.  (Again, this is what I was told).  I
don't know whether this is because Rocketman didn't have them in stock
and couldn't get them from ISP, or if they just couldn't send them to
me.

  I posted the above message, and got a call from Mike Platt of
Microbrick who confirmed it.  I posted a follow up with the information
I got from Mike.

  Today I got a reply from Mark Bundick (he's on the NAR Board) to my
question about the status of reloads (he just got back from NARAM).
Here's his reply:

    The CPSC issues that have been raised may be resolved this week, at
    least relative to G engine shipments. I'll know by the end of NARAM.
    As for other motors, the short run practical impact is, in all
    likelihood, that you'll be stuck picking up motors and reloads at
    launches. The distributor community apparently thinks they can continue
    to distribute product this way, though I suspect the DOT will want them
    to become regulated carriers in some form or the other.  Part of our
    problem right now is we don't understand why the DOT is pushing so
    hard on this particular product.

  Has anyone talked to a distributer or tried to order reloads and run
into problems?  (or is it just me?)  It seems like Mark knew what I was
talking about, and I didn't talk to him until yesterday.  That's all I
know.

Bob Wiersbe     NAR# 44588      hrbob@ihlpb.att.com

========================== My Reply ==================================

  Bob, I have talked to a distrubutor in Texas, Gulf Coast Rocketry.
Mike Reiner said that ISP called him last week and said that he should
not ship any ISP reloads interstate (he can ship within Texas tho').
That is all that I have to report wrt first hand experience with this
issue.  I hope that NAR and Tripoli get their ducks lined up wrt all of
the different regulatory agencies.

  The thing that bugs me is WHY did Vulcan and Estes distribute "The
Video" in the first place? I understand that ISP reloads were not even
used (Vulcan propellants were used) AND the contents of the box was
heated to ~450 degrees f beforehand.

  Were they doing a public service to "blow the whistle" on a dangerous
situation?  If so, why not use ISP materials since they are the only
market player to speak of?  Or were they trying to screw up the market
in order to play catch up (possibly driving ISP out of business as
well)?  Or was it a more personal thing directed towards Gary
Rosenfield?

  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.

Stu Barrett  TRA# 1277  NAR# 4341
Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets