 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups General ModelsRailroadsRocketsRadio Controlled Air ModelsHelicoptersLand ModelsWater ModelsModelGeeks.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Model Forum / General / Rockets / May 2004Rocket Builders - WIVB television item
Spotted this item: http://www.wivb.com/Global/story.asp?S=1891043 about an hour from now at 5pm EST Mon 24 May, if I read it right. Rocket Builders (May 24, 2004) - - The model rocket hobby is a blast for everyone from kids to scientists and engineers. But one man's fun is Uncle Sam's fear. The federal government would like to enforce the regulations requiring permits - even going so far as to fingerprint rocketeers. Could this really keep someone from "launching" a terrorist device, or is this a countdown to the end of a popular hobby? Buffalo Rocket Society President Lloyd Wood said, "Yea, they may be big and yea they may go up high, but they are very lightly constructed, they don't take a lot of abuse, and to make them into a weapon would be next to impossible." Monday night on News 4 at 5, George Richert introduces us to the rocket builders who are fighting to keep their sky high dreams from being grounded. Let us all know if they continuously use the term "Model Rocket" to talk about "High Power Rockets". -Fred Shecter NAR 20117 -- """Remove "zorch" from address (2 places) to reply. > Spotted this item: > http://www.wivb.com/Global/story.asp?S=1891043 [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > rocket builders who are fighting to keep their sky high dreams from > being grounded. << Let us all know if they continuously use the term "Model Rocket" to talk about "High Power Rockets". >> To the average Joe on the street, it's all the same thing. What we call "high power rockets" are really just big models. > To the average Joe on the street, it's all the same thing. What we call "high > power rockets" are really just big models. I'd rather they think of them as big models than small missiles any day. Mark E. Hamilton NAR #48641-SR ARSA #418 > > To the average Joe on the street, it's all the same thing. What we call "high > > power rockets" are really just big models. > > I'd rather they think of them as big models than small missiles any day. Besides, "High Power Rockets" is a confusing term to outside-the-hobby folks who may have at least encountered Estes-size stuff but aren't familiar with the history of the development of larger sport rockets. After all, "high power" rockets are basically rockets too big to officially be "Model" rockets (as formally defined within the hobby) but too small to be anything else. (Actually, I've found that "high power model rockets - like the little Estes ones, but larger" does a pretty good job of communicating a reasonably accurate impression to "outsiders"). -dave w << Besides, "High Power Rockets" is a confusing term to outside-the-hobby folks who may have at least encountered Estes-size stuff but aren't familiar with the history of the development of larger sport rockets. >> Exactly! Although I do hope they _show_ some high power stuff when they talk about it. <<(Actually, I've found that "high power model rockets - like the little Estes ones, but larger" does a pretty good job of communicating a reasonably accurate impression to "outsiders"). >> Yeah, that's how I prefer to describe it too. Especially since "high power" tends to bring up connotations of "danger". Adding the word "model" negates that somewhat -- it clues people in to the fact that it's not NASA or military grade stuff. > > > To the average Joe on the street, it's all the same thing. What we call > > > "high [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > -dave w Before the term HPR, the terms were MRT (Model Rocket Technology) and Experimental. Experimental has been munged by TRA-EX so badly it is now polluted and nearly unuseable for anyone anytime. Model Rockets has been expanded to include heavier rockets and G motors so it is a logical step for it to ascilimate what we now call HPR into a unified civil/sport/consumer rocket field. The only opposition to that would be from the "traditional model rocket" companie, who have always hated HPR, who can continue to call themselves "traditional model rockets" and continue to publish cheater versions of the safety code that only discloses the existence of power levels they happen to manufacture and sell. Commerce Jerry  SignatureJerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net> Please bring common sense back to rocketry administration. Produce then publish. http://www.usrockets.com My articles valuable? Donate http://tinyurl.com/2hmgv > > > I'd rather they think of them as big models than small missiles any day. > > [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > Experimental has been munged by TRA-EX so badly it is now polluted and > nearly unuseable for anyone anytime. > Commerce Jerry Yea Jerry, Tell us how your shipping 200lb of HPR rocket motors as model airplane parts did anything but "mug and pollute" the hobby? Even after you were told, by many and DOT, your shipping activities are illegal, you continued to openly sell, ship, and advertise rocket motors in commerce. You gave the hobby great press!! Rather than take your case to court or use available administrative processes, you thumb your nose at authority and slather the hobby with your criminal defiance, resulting in a government agency dumping on your ignorant a$$. Yea, you did us all a great service. I hope you show at LDRS this year, as I want to see the look on your face as I repeat this message eyeball to eyeball. If you are a no show, as I expect you will be, maybe one of your drones will step up to the plate, but I doubt it, not many still in your camp. You da man Jerry, making an ignorant stand, 40 grand to the DOT man; lost on appeal....we now know the deal... Fred > You gave the hobby great press!! Actually, there seems to have been no publicity at all regarding Jerry's DOT hassles, except for the venom that has been dribbled on this newsgroup regarding the matter. From DOT's perspective, the whole affair is just one "enforcement action" (and probably a relatively minor one) among many, many such... i.e., no more newsworthy than an individual citation run through Night Traffic Court and disposed of with a routine fine. -dave w > > You gave the hobby great press!! > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > -dave w Fred and his surrogates also posted the DOT appeal order thus introducing it to the "rocket public". That was a choice. Jerry SignatureJerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net> Please bring common sense back to rocketry administration. Produce then publish. http://www.usrockets.com My articles valuable? Donate http://tinyurl.com/2hmgv > Fred and his surrogates also posted the DOT appeal order thus > introducing it to the "rocket public". > > That was a choice. > > Jerry Was that his choice? I know that you chose to label several hundred pounds of rocket motors as "model aircraft parts". Why? Why did you make that choice? > > > You gave the hobby great press!! > > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > Jerry You are a lier.. I did not post any of the DOT judgement. However, you activly posted excerpts of it as it pertained to comments made by me. But hey, it is a public document and if I would of run into it first, I would of posted a link. So Jerry, Tell us how your shipping 200lb of HPR rocket motors as model airplane parts did anything but "mug and pollute" the hobby? Even after you were told, by many and DOT, your shipping activities are illegal, you continued to openly sell, ship, and advertise rocket motors in commerce. You gave the hobby great press!! Rather than take your case to court or use available administrative processes, you thumb your nose at authority and slather the hobby with your criminal defiance, resulting in a government agency dumping on your ignorant a$$. Yea, you did us all a great service. I hope you show at LDRS this year, as I want to see the look on your face as I repeat this message eyeball to eyeball. If you are a no show, as I expect you will be, maybe one of your drones will step up to the plate, but I doubt it, not many still in your camp. You da man Jerry, making an ignorant stand, 40 grand to the DOT man; lost on appeal....we now know the deal... Fred > > > > You gave the hobby great press!! > > > [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > me. But hey, it is a public document and if I would of run into it > first, I would of posted a link. So what is your position anyway? Both sides of every fence? > after you were told, by ... DOT, your shipping activities are > illegal, 4-1-04 > you continued to openly sell, ship, and advertise rocket > motors in commerce. Direct lie. > Rather than take > your case to court or use available administrative processes, 4-1-04wasaJUDGEMENTfollowingmyemployingtheappealprocess!! Is everything you utter a direct lie (properly spelled), a misrepresentation, or a personal attack? > you > thumb your nose at authority and slather the hobby with your criminal > defiance, And libel. And trade libel. Because you at miniumum believe I am in commerce. > I hope you show at LDRS this year, as I want to see the look on your > face as I repeat this message eyeball to eyeball. You are hereby informed. Do not harass me. > If you are a no > show, as I expect you will be, maybe one of your drones will step up [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Fred Just Jerry SignatureJerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net> Please bring common sense back to rocketry administration. Produce then publish. http://www.usrockets.com My articles valuable? Donate http://tinyurl.com/2hmgv > > > > > You gave the hobby great press!! > > > > [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > > So what is your position anyway? Both sides of every fence? You got me, I am a centrist.. > > after you were told, by ... DOT, your shipping activities are > > illegal, [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Direct lie. Are you having elusions again Jerry?? I still have your direct email solicitation.. > > Rather than take > > your case to court or use available administrative processes, [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Is everything you utter a direct lie (properly spelled), a > misrepresentation, or a personal attack? I'll let others be the judge, if you want... Please have your attorney contact me ; please, please, please... > > you > > thumb your nose at authority and slather the hobby with your criminal > > defiance, > > And libel. Please have your attorney contact me ; please, please, please... > And trade libel. Because you at miniumum believe I am in commerce. Please have your attorney contact me ; please, please, please... > > I hope you show at LDRS this year, as I want to see the look on your > > face as I repeat this message eyeball to eyeball. > > You are hereby informed. Do not harass me. Please have your attorney contact me ; please, please, please... > > If you are a no > > show, as I expect you will be, maybe one of your drones will step up [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Just Jerry If you don't like it stuff it. Or; Please have your attorney contact me ; please, please, please... Just Fred > If you don't like it stuff it May I have it stuffed quietly and with no threats of violence or harassment? Please? Jerry SignatureJerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net> Please bring common sense back to rocketry administration. Produce then publish. http://www.usrockets.com My articles valuable? Donate http://tinyurl.com/2hmgv >>If you don't like it stuff it > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Jerry Absolutely no one has threatened you or harassed you, what are you talking about?? Specifically? > > If you don't like it stuff it > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Jerry I do not threaten you or anyone else with violence, but have been known to respond to it, rather violently, when it comes my way.. Call it harassment if you wish, but if you and your few remaining drones, shut your yaps, the noise level will follow. Fred > > > If you don't like it stuff it > > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Fred You are the leader not the follower. 1. You asked ME if you could "help" with DOT. 2. You turned ME in to DOT in cooperation/coersion with Allen and TRA. 3. YOU rescinded your offer to store motors that were legally and properly shipped to any site NEAR the launch site. Note a common theme? YOU. Jerry SignatureJerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net> Please bring common sense back to rocketry administration. Produce then publish. http://www.usrockets.com My articles valuable? Donate http://tinyurl.com/2hmgv > 3. YOU rescinded your offer to store motors that were legally and > properly shipped to any site NEAR the launch site. How could they have "legally and properly shipped" if you have no legitimate DOT paperwork? How were they marked?, as "model aircraft parts"? Is that even legal? > How? Address the gauntlet fool. SignatureJerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net> Please bring common sense back to rocketry administration. Produce then publish. http://www.usrockets.com My articles valuable? Donate http://tinyurl.com/2hmgv Jerry Irvine wrote: > In article <40B55A40.5B624579@olg.com>, > "W. E.Fred Wallace" <wallacewe@olg.com> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > > Jerry I never offered to store motors for you; to even suggest otherwise, is a flat out lie.. As for as the other comments; twisted half truths, which I guess makes them a lie also.. However, I like the leader part. Fred Is this the same Jerry that calls other people pussy? Don't worry - no one is going to hurt you. ocket@gte.net> wrote: >> If you don't like it stuff it > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >Jerry > Is this the same Jerry that calls other people pussy? No I say "don't be a pussy." Someone who attributes their own intended behavior to that which is labeled as causing pussydom, claims I CALLED them a pussy when they were only CHOOSING to be a PUSSY after a suggestion NOT to :) A distinction with a significant difference. Jerry > Don't worry - no one is going to hurt you. > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > > >Jerry SignatureJerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net> Please bring common sense back to rocketry administration. Produce then publish. http://www.usrockets.com My articles valuable? Donate http://tinyurl.com/2hmgv >>Is this the same Jerry that calls other people pussy? > [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] >>> >>>Jerry Hey jerry, don't be a pussy. > > No I say "don't be a pussy." > > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > > > A distinction with a significant difference. > Hey jerry, don't be a pussy. Missing element. Brain disengaged again, eh? SignatureJerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net> Please bring common sense back to rocketry administration. Produce then publish. http://www.usrockets.com My articles valuable? Donate http://tinyurl.com/2hmgv > > > No I say "don't be a pussy." > > > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Missing element. Brain disengaged again, eh? Hey Brian. Put . . . the . . . bong . . . down . . . SignatureJerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net> Please bring common sense back to rocketry administration. Produce then publish. http://www.usrockets.com My articles valuable? Donate http://tinyurl.com/2hmgv > > You gave the hobby great press!! > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > -dave w What a sweet kiss Dave, keep egging Jerry on; maybe the next time he will do time.. Forty grand to the man, not out of line, just a routine fine.. Fred > keep egging Jerry on; maybe the next time he will do time.. You'd like that, wouldn't you? Pimping for your dear friend Bubba again, I suppose... when the line between "the Resistance" and "collaborators with the Occupation" gets drawn, I guess we know what side you're on... (and your feelings get all hurt when I call you a "narc"... you've got a thin skin about something that's a bloody accurate description about where you seem to actually stand in our War against Overregulation... hint: appeasement is _not_ an acceptable tactic.) > Forty grand to the man, not out of line, just a routine fine.. By DOT standards, I bet it is... anyone got stats? -dave w >>keep egging Jerry on; maybe the next time he will do time.. > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > -dave w According to jerry's claims to the DOT, DPT annual income was less then $10,000 a year. the fine was four times that, but you think that's routine? > According to jerry's claims to the DOT, DPT annual income was less then > $10,000 a year. the fine was four times that, but you think that's routine? No, just obviously contrary to DOT policy and the law. Hence why a lawsuit is mandatory. No 2000 people contrubuting either like NAR/TRA had :) Just Jerry! SignatureJerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net> Please bring common sense back to rocketry administration. Produce then publish. http://www.usrockets.com My articles valuable? Donate http://tinyurl.com/2hmgv << No, just obviously contrary to DOT policy and the law. Hence why a lawsuit is mandatory. >> So why didn't you file a lawsuit, instead of getting busted for shipping unclassified hazmat labeled as "model aircraft parts"? > << No, just obviously contrary to DOT policy and the law. Hence why a lawsuit > is mandatory. >> > > So why didn't you file a lawsuit Sounds like he's planning to (based on what he's posted) in order to seek actual judicial review of an administrative order. -dave w > > << No, just obviously contrary to DOT policy and the law. Hence why a > > lawsuit [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > -dave w You act as if they are either listening or caring. They do neither. SignatureJerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net> Please bring common sense back to rocketry administration. Produce then publish. http://www.usrockets.com My articles valuable? Donate http://tinyurl.com/2hmgv >><< No, just obviously contrary to DOT policy and the law. Hence why a lawsuit >>is mandatory. >> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > -dave w Do you need a kleenex or a napkin or something? > Do you need a kleenex or a napkin or something? Hey Brian, how about a brain transplant to one not so wired and fixated on attacking without producing. SignatureJerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net> Please bring common sense back to rocketry administration. Produce then publish. http://www.usrockets.com My articles valuable? Donate http://tinyurl.com/2hmgv << Sounds like he's planning to (based on what he's posted) in order to seek actual judicial review of an administrative order. >> Why didn't he sue first? You do not have to be busted for deceitfully-labeled shipping before you can sue. BTW, why do you answer everytime someone asks Jerry a question? Let him post his own answers, if he has any. > BTW, why do you answer everytime someone asks Jerry a question? Let him post > his own answers, if he has any. Tattoo needs to earn his keep. > << Sounds like he's planning to (based on what he's posted) in order to seek > actual judicial review of an administrative order. >> > > Why didn't he sue first? You can't. No "jurisdiction" until the system has "played itself out". That is something that probably SHOULD be changed as well as a public defenders office for administrative actions and governmental claims generally. > You do not have to be busted for deceitfully-labeled > shipping before you can sue. > > BTW, why do you answer everytime someone asks Jerry a question? Let him post > his own answers, if he has any. SignatureJerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net> Please bring common sense back to rocketry administration. Produce then publish. http://www.usrockets.com My articles valuable? Donate http://tinyurl.com/2hmgv > You can't. No "jurisdiction" until the system has "played itself out". More jerry baloney! << You can't. No "jurisdiction" until the system has "played itself out". >> Major logic flaws there, Jerry. If that were true, and you really needed to be busted before you could sue the DOT to change their rules, then why did you try to hide the true nature of the package's contents? If you _wanted_ to be busted so that you could challenge DOT's rules, you would have openly shipped the material without false labeling. Secondly, if indeed you _wanted_ to be busted in order to challenge DOT, you should be thanking the people who notified DOT, instead of cursing them. > << You can't. No "jurisdiction" until the system has "played itself out". >> > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > DOT, > instead of cursing them. You are irrational. SignatureJerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net> Please bring common sense back to rocketry administration. Produce then publish. http://www.usrockets.com My articles valuable? Donate http://tinyurl.com/2hmgv Big Fine wrote: << You are irrational. >> No, you're just in denial. You said yourself that you had to be busted by DOT in order to "get jurisdiction" to sue them. You've tried to paint yourself as some martyr for the cause of reducing DOT regulation. If any of that were true, you would not have falsely labeled that shipment, and you would have _wanted_ to get busted so that you could "get jurisdiction" (your words) to challenge DOT. > Big Fine wrote: > << You are irrational. >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > to get busted so that you could "get jurisdiction" (your words) to challenge > DOT. You are irrational SignatureJerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net> Please bring common sense back to rocketry administration. Produce then publish. http://www.usrockets.com My articles valuable? Donate http://tinyurl.com/2hmgv > > keep egging Jerry on; maybe the next time he will do time.. > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > in our War against Overregulation... hint: appeasement is _not_ > an acceptable tactic.) If you haven't figured it out; I don't like folks who attempt to involve others in their illegal activities, as Jerry did. As for as what jerry a$$ kissers think of me, I care less. However, I have yet to have anyone, of significant stature, in the rocket community, provide the type content you indicate, in any form of communication. > > Forty grand to the man, not out of line, just a routine fine.. > > By DOT standards, I bet it is... anyone got stats? The DOT web pages contains many examples.. > -dave w Fred, the DOT narc..(:-) By Skippy standards (income of the business he doesn't "own" but is one of the "less than 2" employees), it's a BIG fine..(4x the yearly income of the business) If Skipply was bringing in $500k a year, the fine would have been adjusted accordingly! > > Forty grand to the man, not out of line, just a routine fine.. > > By DOT standards, I bet it is... anyone got stats? > > -dave w > By Skippy standards (income of the business he doesn't "own" but is one of > the "less than 2" employees), it's a BIG fine..(4x the yearly income of the > business) If Skipply was bringing in $500k a year, the fine would have been > adjusted accordingly! The maximum fine was $57,500 (ie Boeing or Microsoft). Anybody wonder why it is so high FOR ANYONE in the first place? Ido. > > > Forty grand to the man, not out of line, just a routine fine.. > > > > By DOT standards, I bet it is... anyone got stats? > > > > -dave w SignatureJerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net> Please bring common sense back to rocketry administration. Produce then publish. http://www.usrockets.com My articles valuable? Donate http://tinyurl.com/2hmgv > The maximum fine was $57,500 (ie Boeing or Microsoft). > > Anybody wonder why it is so high FOR ANYONE in the first place? Ido. Of course you do! Do you think it has anything to do with you labeling rocket motors as "model aircraft parts"? << Anybody wonder why it is so high FOR ANYONE in the first place? >> Because they don't want people intentionally shipping hazmat illegally -- duh! > > By Skippy standards (income of the business he doesn't "own" but is one of > > the "less than 2" employees), it's a BIG fine..(4x the yearly income of the [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Jerry Daa, jerry shipped 200 lb of rocket motors, (class 1 hazmat), shipped as model airplane parts, (no hazmat classification), daaa..... Forty grand to the man, not out of line, just a routine fine.. Fred I don't wonder. It's obvious that they are very much against people doing this and they want to discourage people from doing it. Expensive lesson aye Jerry. Next time you can call & ask me what I think. Being the nice guy that I am, I'll just charge 25% of the the max fine. >> The maximum fine was $57,500. >> >> Anybody wonder why it is so high FOR ANYONE in the first place? Ido. >> >> Jerry Two words are key here: "willful violation" > I don't wonder. It's obvious that they are very much against people > doing this and they want to discourage people from doing it. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > >> > >> Jerry > Two words are key here: > > "willful violation" One man's wilful is another man's "I have the papers to prove it". That has NOTHING to do with the baseline sheer magnitude of the fines. Have you noticed that DOT and EPA alone are net revenue generators through fines? Jerry > > I don't wonder. It's obvious that they are very much against people > > doing this and they want to discourage people from doing it. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > >> > > >> Jerry SignatureJerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net> Please bring common sense back to rocketry administration. Produce then publish. http://www.usrockets.com My articles valuable? Donate http://tinyurl.com/2hmgv > > Two words are key here: > > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Jerry What's that make you, fuel for the generator?? >>>Two words are key here: >>> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > What's that make you, fuel for the generator?? Based on jerry's track record on such matters, the DOT will have to hunt jerry down, to even get a penny from that weasel. Big Fine wrote: << One man's wilful is another man's "I have the papers to prove it". >> What papers do you have that give you DOT's approval to ship APCP as "model aircraft parts"? << Have you noticed that DOT and EPA alone are net revenue generators through fines? >> I wouldn't be surprised. Nor would I disagree that many of their regs are excessive and/or unnecessary. > > Have you noticed that DOT and EPA alone are net revenue generators through > > fines? > > I wouldn't be surprised. Nor would I disagree that many of their regs are > excessive and/or unnecessary. Including the ones requiring propellant (in the forms and formulas found in sport rocketry products) to be shipped as "Class 1 Explosives"... -dave w Dave W. wrote: << Including the ones requiring propellant (in the forms and formulas found in sport rocketry products) to be shipped as "Class 1 Explosives"... >> Yes, that may be an example of an excessive regulation. But Jerry has never said that he shipped the stuff illegally to get around the excessive regulations. He insists that he was/is legal. Even now, after being hit with a huge fine, he still argues about it. It's like speeding. I often exceed the speed limit when I drive, and I can give you plenty of reasons why it's perfectly safe to do so. I can also point out that in most cases, the speed limits are intentionally set too low in order to increase income from fines. I would actively campaign to have the speed limits increased, if I thought it had a snowball's chance to succeed. What I _won't_ do is claim that speeding is legal when it clearly is not. Nor will I blame the AAA or the cop or the manufacturer of my car or the station where I bought my gas, or anyone else. I accept the risk that I may (and sometimes do) get busted. > Dave W. wrote: > << Including the ones requiring propellant (in the forms and formulas found [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > a > huge fine, he still argues about it. At least till I win the lawsuit :) Jerry SignatureJerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net> Please bring common sense back to rocketry administration. Produce then publish. http://www.usrockets.com My articles valuable? Donate http://tinyurl.com/2hmgv >>Dave W. wrote: >><< Including the ones requiring propellant (in the forms and formulas found [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Jerry What lawsuit? Jerry wrote: << At least till I win the lawsuit >> Yeah, if you win a lawsuit against DOT, then you can say that what you did was legal. However, I can't imagine any court in the nation would say it's legal to ship flammable solids mislabled as inert "model aircraft parts". BTW, have you actually _filed_ that lawsuit yet? > > > Have you noticed that DOT and EPA alone are net revenue generators > > > through [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > -dave w Such aquestion . . For a dedicated troll . . . SignatureJerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net> Please bring common sense back to rocketry administration. Produce then publish. http://www.usrockets.com My articles valuable? Donate http://tinyurl.com/2hmgv << you've got a thin skin about something that's a bloody accurate description about where you seem to actually stand in our War against Overregulation.. hint: appeasement is _not_ an acceptable tactic.) >> Getting fined $40k for deceptive labeling and illegal shipping is acceptable? How can that even be considered a "tactic" in this "war against overregulation"? Regardless of whether or not you think it was OK for Jerry to be shipping illegally, it still doesn't make any sense as a "tactic" to achieve change in the regulations. They aren't going to change the regs just 'cause Jerry got caught shipping hazmat labeled as "model aircraft parts". > Actually, there seems to have been no publicity at all regarding Jerry's > DOT hassles, except for the venom that has been dribbled on this newsgroup > regarding the matter. I guess you don't see the same newsgroups/web forums/chat rooms I do! The hobby it laughing at Skippy! Even more than before the ruling came out! ("Model airplane parts"!="APCP")=$40k fine" This should be in the FAQ! The "king" was told he's wearing no clothes, but still claims he wasn't caught naked as he had his head up his butt, and was therefore partially covered! > The "king" was told he's wearing no clothes, What king? SignatureJerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net> Please bring common sense back to rocketry administration. Produce then publish. http://www.usrockets.com My articles valuable? Donate http://tinyurl.com/2hmgv >>The "king" was told he's wearing no clothes, > > What king? That's what he meant. Notice the quote there Skippy...king, in quotes! (and lower case) You're more the Court Jester these days! (no quotes, you'll note, but caps are used) Figured you'd understand this as you are a "magazine publisher" (note the quotes this time!) Skippy, please drop me an email if you ever make it back to the real world, and if you can afford the Inet after paying $40K you owe for your own foolishness! > >>The "king" was told he's wearing no clothes, > > > > What king? > > That's what he meant. >> > To the average Joe on the street, it's all the same thing. What we call >"high [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > >-dave w Dave and Ray Exactly my intent when I gave the interview! To the uninitiated......these are all model rockets. I specifically mentioned that these larger model rockets were constructed out of basically the same materials as the smaller model rockets...........cardboard tubes, plastic nose cones, plywood (rather than Balsa wood) fins, with some fiberglass materials possibily substituted for any of these. I also mentioned that we used fiberglass cloth and epoxy resin to strengthen some of the basic materials and minimal amounts of metal The interviewer was a very nice lady.She knew next to nothing about models.....of any type! The first rocket she got to film and see fly was a 7.6" dia, 10' upscale of the Estes Patriot.......on a home made Red M motor (thanks to Rich Pitzeruse:-)! After seeing the beast fly, we showed her how lightly the rocket was constructed and what it was made of. After doing this, it was clear to us that she understood that these rockets are models and not possible terriost weapons. I also mentioned the fact that most of the military weapons people see on TV are GUIDED. Our model rockets are not and would be real dificult to make so. I also explained the fact that our model motors only burn for a few seconds.....hense spend most of the flight de-excellerating. To make an effective weapon........a rocket not only has to be steerable but it has to have a motor that burns long enough to get it to a target. I then explained the difference in cost between Rich's "Patriot" and a shoulder fired "Stinger" Missle and asked her "if we COULD make an effective weapon out of our model rockets........why does the government spend so much to make there's?" I think, by the time she left, she completely understood. I haven't seen the interview yet (shown in another city) but some of our guys will tape it. I have heard (from people who did see it) that it was very sympathitic to our side. Some people from their station will probably be at LDRS, too. Normally, I'm not real happy about giving interviews about hobbies. Past experience has always shown that stations are really only interested in the "crash and burn" stuff. This is the 3rd interview (and the longest:-) I've given on rocketry and I must say that I have been pleasently surprised and happy with all three. I hope that trend continues:-)! Lloyd Wood BRS President/Prefect LDRS 23 LD/RSO << After doing this, it was clear to us that she understood that these rockets are models and not possible terrorist weapons. >> << I have heard (from people who did see it) that it was very sympathetic to our side. >> Good job, Lloyd! Sounds like something positive for a change.. Great job Loyd. Fred > >> > To the average Joe on the street, it's all the same thing. What we call > >"high [quoted text clipped - 54 lines] > BRS President/Prefect > LDRS 23 LD/RSO Cool! I wish I could have seen it! -Rich > The interviewer was a very nice lady.She knew next to nothing about > models.....of any type! The first rocket she got to film and see fly was a 7.6" [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > to us that she understood that these rockets are models and not possible > terriost weapons. > I'd rather they think of them as big models > than small missiles any day. Speaking of model rockets, why do we call them model rockets? It's not that I'd want to change the name - it's way too well established in the lexicon - but they're _real_ rockets, not models of real rockets (except in the case of scale rockets). When I hear the term "model car", I expect it to be a model of a real car, but not a functioning automobile. OTOH, our model rockets are indeed functioning rockets. I can't think up a better term, but "model" seems misleading. Doug > > > I'd rather they think of them as big models > > than small missiles any day. > > Speaking of model rockets, why do we call them model rockets? So it's closer to the accurate term "model aircraf tparts". > It's not that > I'd want to change the name - it's way too well established in the lexicon - [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > functioning rockets. I can't think up a better term, but "model" seems > misleading. Sport Rockets. Civilian Rockets Hobby Rockets. "Model Rocket" has become a "legal term". > Doug SignatureJerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California 91711 USA Opinion, the whole thing. <mail to:01rocket@gte.net> Please bring common sense back to rocketry administration. Produce then publish. http://www.usrockets.com My articles valuable? Donate http://tinyurl.com/2hmgv > Speaking of model rockets, why do we call them model rockets? I agree. I've got a lot of pictures of rockets on my screen saver at work, from my 2X Mars Lander to a 1:1 scale Ariane. People's first question is invariably 'Are they real rockets?' Well, yes, they are, followed by a long explanation. (Most people at work have learned not to get me started talking about rockets, unless they've got an afternoon to kill ;) ) Heck, all of us here could build a 1:1 scale Arcas, and a few could probably get similar performance characteristics from it. But, calling them model rockets is probably better, image wise. Mark E. Hamilton NAR #48641-SR ARSA #418 what we have here is, failure, to communicate............................ shockie B) > Let us all know if they continuously use the term "Model Rocket" to talk about "High Power > Rockets". [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > > rocket builders who are fighting to keep their sky high dreams from > > being grounded. You've got your dirt in the sheriff's hole.... -- """Remove "zorch" from address (2 places) to reply. > what we have here is, failure, to communicate............................ > shockie B) [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > > > rocket builders who are fighting to keep their sky high dreams from > > > being grounded. >http://www.wivb.com/Global/story.asp?S=1891043 >about an hour from now at 5pm EST Mon 24 May, if I read it right. >Rocket Builders DRAT! I wanted to see that, and I *missed* it! Lloyd - you were *supposed* to let us know when it aired!!! :-) > DRAT! I wanted to see that, and I *missed* it! > > Lloyd - you were *supposed* to let us know when it aired!!! >:-) Len Sorry about that:-)! The first I heard of it was when I received the E-mail message that was the start of this thread. Shortly after that Pat Waite called and said he'd seen it. Hopefully someone taped it:-)! We can then watch it at one ot the launches. Lloyd >and said he'd seen it. Hopefully someone taped it:-)! We can then watch it at >one ot the launches. Hope so. Being a news program, it likely won't be re-run anytime soon... << Hope so. Being a news program, it likely won't be re-run anytime soon... >> One of our local stations, channel 10, has a great feature. On cable channel 15 they run the most recent news over and over, so if you miss it the first time you can see it later. > Hopefully someone taped it:-)! We can then watch it at > one ot the launches. > > Lloyd I will find out friday eve if my cousin was able to tape it. If so, maybe I can get Ray to MPEG it. Doug BRS Inc. - Secretary |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.