 |
 | 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 / August 2005Ellis J228-6 TRA Decertified
TRA website states "Decertified For Quality". Anyone here have any problems with this motor? I don't remember ever having a motor decert listed at TRA like that before. http://www.tripoli.org/tmt/JMotors.shtml I have an Ellis K600 I bought back in March or April before the Manchester, TN Southern Thunder launch. I noticed a bunch of these for auction this past weekend at ROL. Can't fly it at a sanctioned launch because it never did get a cert. __________________ Steve Naquin TRA 677 L2 > TRA website states "Decertified For Quality". Anyone here have any > problems with this motor? I've flown this motor many times succesfully. I followed directions from my dealer on how to use it. I use a small twiggy from quick burst and put the ignitor 2/3 the way up the motor. I've seen two fail in use by, one by using large ignitor in it that had lots of ommph and nad one putting the ignitor all the way up to the top of the motor. In article <LM6dnZ2dnZ0YaFCJnZ2dnbWrl96dnZ2dRVn-052dnZ0@buckeye-express.com>, > > TRA website states "Decertified For Quality". Anyone here have any > > problems with this motor? [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > I use a small twiggy from quick burst and put the ignitor 2/3 the way up the > motor. Huh? That is bogus. > I've seen two fail in use by, one by using large ignitor in it that had lots > of ommph and nad one putting the ignitor all the way up to the top of the > motor.  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. (too late) Produce then publish. http://www.usrockets.com Ebay. http://tinyurl.com/6wlp8 >In article ><LM6dnZ2dnZ0YaFCJnZ2dnbWrl96dnZ2dRVn-052dnZ0@buckeye-express.com>, [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >> of ommph and nad one putting the ignitor all the way up to the top of the >> motor. Don't you think this confirms that there is a problem? A small igniter part way up will bring the motor up to pressure more slowly - sounds like someone knows there is a problem. > >In article > ><LM6dnZ2dnZ0YaFCJnZ2dnbWrl96dnZ2dRVn-052dnZ0@buckeye-express.com>, [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > igniter part way up will bring the motor up to pressure more slowly - > sounds like someone knows there is a problem. And that certification stands. Isn't TRA perfect? 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. (too late) Produce then publish. http://www.usrockets.com Ebay. http://tinyurl.com/6wlp8 >> >In article >> ><LM6dnZ2dnZ0YaFCJnZ2dnbWrl96dnZ2dRVn-052dnZ0@buckeye-express.com>, [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > >And that certification stands. Isn't TRA perfect? To me the following means it cannot be used- The J228 is hereby decertified immediately for sanctioned use due to much higher than allowed motor failures. Multiple instances of these motors have lost either end upon ignition and once, I've personally seen the case shatter, which could be construed as contrary to NFPA1125's requirement for frangible failure. The debris did not, however, exceed the maximum distance limit, and I only know of the single occurrence of this type, hence this motor is not considered a major safety problem. I do consider it, under our motor use and testing policy, a major quality problem which Mr. Ellis has failed to address, through requests by me and his vendors, again contrary to our requirements for continued certification. > > Don't you think this confirms that there is a problem? A small > > igniter part way up will bring the motor up to pressure more slowly - > > sounds like som eone knows there is a problem. > > And that certification stands. Wrong. Read the announcement -- the motor has been decertified. ° > Don't you think this confirms that there is a problem? A small > igniter part way up will bring the motor up to pressure more slowly - > sounds like someone knows there is a problem. Sounds like Ellis should do what Rocketflite did on their BP motors: The ignitors had a red STOP flag at the proper insertion depth. SignatureBob Kaplow NAR # 18L >>> To reply, there's no internet on Mars (yet)! <<< Kaplow Klips & Baffle: http://nira-rocketry.org/Document/MayJun00.pdf www.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/ www.nira-rocketry.org www.nar.org You need only reflect that one of the best ways to get yourself a reputation as a dangerous citizen these days is to go about repeating the very phrases which our founding fathers used in the struggle for independence. -- Charles A. Beard > Sounds like Ellis should do what Rocketflite did on their BP motors: The > ignitors had a red STOP flag at the proper insertion depth. Good idea. Problem is Ellis STOPed suppling ignitors with their motors about a year ago. fun ones are the E12 and F20 ellis 24mm motors. find an ignitor to fit inside them that will fire them. > Problem is Ellis STOPed suppling ignitors with their motors about a year > ago. > > fun ones are the E12 and F20 ellis 24mm motors. find an ignitor to fit > inside them that will fire them. Can't be much worse than the Apogee/Aerotech B7, C4 et al. I made really tiny wire wrap ignitors that fit them. I bet they'd even fit a MicroMaxx nozzle if it were deeper! SignatureBob Kaplow NAR # 18L >>> To reply, there's no internet on Mars (yet)! <<< Kaplow Klips & Baffle: http://nira-rocketry.org/Document/MayJun00.pdf www.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/ www.nira-rocketry.org www.nar.org You need only reflect that one of the best ways to get yourself a reputation as a dangerous citizen these days is to go about repeating the very phrases which our founding fathers used in the struggle for independence. -- Charles A. Beard >> Problem is Ellis STOPed suppling ignitors with their motors about a year >> ago. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > tiny wire wrap ignitors that fit them. I bet they'd even fit a MicroMaxx > nozzle if it were deeper! yea, that gets them to fit inside, now what to make that thor's propellent light ;-) hint, you won't be able to fit enough pyrogen on the wire wrap head and still fit in the nozzle to get a 100% ignition rate. once in a while you can get lucky. The >ignitors had a red STOP flag at the proper insertion depth. So does Jerry's women > The >>ignitors had a red STOP flag at the proper insertion depth. > So does Jerry's women Snicker :-) SignatureBob Kaplow NAR # 18L >>> To reply, there's no internet on Mars (yet)! <<< Kaplow Klips & Baffle: http://nira-rocketry.org/Document/MayJun00.pdf www.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/ www.nira-rocketry.org www.nar.org You need only reflect that one of the best ways to get yourself a reputation as a dangerous citizen these days is to go about repeating the very phrases which our founding fathers used in the struggle for independence. -- Charles A. Beard > The >>ignitors had a red STOP flag at the proper insertion depth. >So does Jerry's women Actually, Jerry's women aren't women and that isn't a flag. ;-) > In article > <LM6dnZ2dnZ0YaFCJnZ2dnbWrl96dnZ2dRVn-052dnZ0@buckeye-express.com>, [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > That is bogus. It may be so, but that is the manufactures recomendation. Now, I'm not being an Ellis Apologist at all. As Phil pointed out, it makes the motor take longer to come up to pressure. It seems that if you fast start a thors hammer motor, the nozzle will toss out the back. so , here was my point. if the motor works as instructed by the manufacture, but people are not reading the instructions does that make the motor bad ? or is it that the motor does not work as others do, so it's intrinsicly bad ? I just might agree with that ,see this below --------------------------------------------- I witnessed a sale of one of an ellis motor. the dealer told the customer to be sure and read the instructions on ignition so the motor would work ok. The customer came back with a CATO. the dealer asked the customer if he read the instrucitons on ignitor placement, he said: Yes I did, I placed the ignitor at the top, just as the instructions say to. Well, they didn't, but the customer was simply knowing how he used other motors. Anyway the dealer set him up with a pro38 or something and he got a good flight in. > It may be so, but that is the manufactures recomendation. > > Now, I'm not being an Ellis Apologist at all. > > As Phil pointed out, it makes the motor take longer to come up to pressure. Rocketflite used to recommend nozzle end ignitions of their deeply cored BP motors. Lighting old FSI F100s the same way increased their reliability as well. SignatureBob Kaplow NAR # 18L >>> To reply, there's no internet on Mars (yet)! <<< Kaplow Klips & Baffle: http://nira-rocketry.org/Document/MayJun00.pdf www.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/ www.nira-rocketry.org www.nar.org You need only reflect that one of the best ways to get yourself a reputation as a dangerous citizen these days is to go about repeating the very phrases which our founding fathers used in the struggle for independence. -- Charles A. Beard >TRA website states "Decertified For Quality". Anyone here have any >problems with this motor? I don't remember ever having a motor decert [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >Steve Naquin >TRA 677 L2 Here's the word. Watch for the ROL newsflash - around New Years. To all, After numerous attempts of contact, including unanswered questions in regard to dubious quality of some motors, I have no choice but to announce three motor de-certifications. Two of the motors in question are the M1000 and the L600 76MM reloadable motors manufactured by Ellis Mountain Motor Works. These motors lose their manufacturing for Tripoli use certification as of 31 August 2005. As this is strictly an administrative decertification, they will go on a three year 'burn only' certification expiring 1 Sept 2008. Any plans to use these motors will require proof of manufacture prior to 1 Sept 05 for sanctioned use. The J228 is hereby decertified immediately for sanctioned use due to much higher than allowed motor failures. Multiple instances of these motors have lost either end upon ignition and once, I've personally seen the case shatter, which could be construed as contrary to NFPA1125's requirement for frangible failure. The debris did not, however, exceed the maximum distance limit, and I only know of the single occurrence of this type, hence this motor is not considered a major safety problem. I do consider it, under our motor use and testing policy, a major quality problem which Mr. Ellis has failed to address, through requests by me and his vendors, again contrary to our requirements for continued certification. All of these motors can be certified again, if Mr. Ellis presents them properly for certification, and in the case of the J228, with appropriate empirical test data and positive steps to get this motor back to a reliable standard. I also need to reiterate the status of another of Mr. Ellis's motors, the K600, single use 54 MM. This motor failed violently on the test stand in January due to a characteristic prevalence to over pressure at the ignition event. This motor has never been certified, although it has been offered for sale with many vendors. They received no indication the certification was still pending, or due to his non-communication to solve a problem, not actively applied for. I urge all to insure NAR, Tripoli or CAR motor certification status is known or present on all motors/documentation to be used at sanctioned events. There been also much hearsay on some other motor of Mr. Ellis's in regards to quality. I will take appropriate action on those motors as justified by reception of MESS reports and subsequent failure for the manufacturer to address each instance accordingly, but I need these reports to make a fair judgment and I have no others received to date. Again, I feel I have given Mr. Ellis every opportunity to address these issues, but neither I nor Tripoli will allow quality issues to continue without active efforts to fix them. Regards, Paul Holmes Chairman, Tripoli Motor Testing > >TRA website states "Decertified For Quality". Anyone here have any > >problems with this motor? I don't remember ever having a motor decert [quoted text clipped - 70 lines] > > Chairman, Tripoli Motor Testing Phil Thanks for your reply. I checked my records and I received the K600 back on January 28th this year. Certification was pending as stated at that time on the TRA website. Don't get me wrong, nobody forced me to purchase it. I assumed it would receive approval like the many before it (mistake) and get to fly that motor this summer at Southern Thunder. According to an email I sent to Paul Holmes all Mr. Ellis needed to do was submit another sample motor for testing (and not have it fail on the test stand). I sent several emails to Mr. Ellis throught the link on his website inquiring about the K600 certification, not a single reply. His non-communication seems to filter down to the end users as well. Guess I learned a valuable lesson and I'll certainly show it with my future motor purchases as well. What are the guys going to do with the J228 motors that are decerted? Can't fly it at a sanctioned launch. Can't ship it back to a vendor legally and might have bought one from an on site vendor at a launch clear across the United States. I feel sorry for those guys. __________________ Steve Naquin TRA 677 L2 > >TRA website states "Decertified For Quality". Anyone here have any > >problems with this motor? I don't remember ever having a motor decert [quoted text clipped - 70 lines] > > Chairman, Tripoli Motor Testing Phil Thanks for your reply. I checked my records and I received the K600 back on January 28th this year. Certification was pending as stated at that time on the TRA website. Don't get me wrong, nobody forced me to purchase it. I assumed it would receive approval like the many before it (mistake) and get to fly that motor this summer at Southern Thunder. According to an email I sent to Paul Holmes all Mr. Ellis needed to do was submit another sample motor for testing (and not have it fail on the test stand). I sent several emails to Mr. Ellis through the link on his website inquiring about the K600 certification, not a single reply. His non-communication seems to filter down to the end users as well. Guess I learned a valuable lesson and I'll certainly show it with my future motor purchases as well. What are the guys going to do with the J228 motors that are decerted? Can't fly it at a sanctioned launch. Can't ship it back to a vendor legally and might have bought one from an on site vendor at a launch clear across the United States. I feel sorry for those guys. __________________ Steve Naquin TRA 677 L2 > According to an email I sent to Paul Holmes all Mr. Ellis needed to do > was submit another sample motor for testing (and not have it fail on > the test stand). Phunnie!! > I sent several emails to Mr. Ellis through the link > on his website inquiring about the K600 certification, not a single > reply. ROFL!! His non-communication seems to filter down to the end users as > well. Guess I learned a valuable lesson and I'll certainly show it > with my future motor purchases as well. What are the guys going to do > with the J228 motors that are decerted? Can't fly it at a sanctioned > launch. Can't ship it back to a vendor legally and might have bought > one from an on site vendor at a launch clear across the United States. > I feel sorry for those guys. Why don't you distrust the certification process too? > __________________ > Steve Naquin > TRA 677 L2 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. (too late) Produce then publish. http://www.usrockets.com Ebay. http://tinyurl.com/6wlp8 >> According to an email I sent to Paul Holmes all Mr. Ellis needed to do >> was submit another sample motor for testing (and not have it fail on [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] >> Steve Naquin >> TRA 677 L2 Why is that funny? Stopping and attempting to prevent situations like this is what the cert process is designed to do. IMO, it did its job. > > According to an email I sent to Paul Holmes all Mr. Ellis needed to do > > was submit another sample motor for testing (and not have it fail on [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > Why don't you distrust the certification process too? I know I'm not happy about the fact that if the K600 motor failed on the test stand in January and was listed on the TRA website as "motors igniting soon" why were these still being sold almost five months later at HPR launches? Again I know I should have waited until it passed cert testing so it's my own fault there, like I said I learned a valuable lesson. I can't say how many were produced but I can tell you a vendor was selling these through the ROL auctions this past weekend along with the J228 motors plus those sold at HPR launches. Where's protection for the consumer? If Mr. Ellis had no intent of certifying this motor why produce them and put it through distribution and only submit "ONE" for testing? Maybe I'll just give it to the BATFE next time they come to check my magazine and tell them I don't need it since I can't use it ..... What does the consumer now do with the J228 he bought last week and paid shipping, hazmat ect. for that he can't legally return ship to the distributor or manufacturer? __________________ Steve Naquin TRA 677 L2 > > __________________ > > Steve Naquin [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Produce then publish. http://www.usrockets.com > Ebay. http://tinyurl.com/6wlp8 > I know I'm not happy about the fact that if the K600 motor failed on > the test stand in January and was listed on the TRA website as "motors > igniting soon" I think the results of all testing sessions should be made available to club members as soon as practical after the testing session. My guess is that Paul tested the motor, it failed, he gave the manufacturer time to resubmit and he (Ellis) did not. >why were these still being sold almost five months later > at HPR launches? Vendors are free to sell whatever they like whenever they like. Caveat emptor. It's not TRA or NARs place to police what the vendors sell. > Again I know I should have waited until it passed > cert testing so it's my own fault there, like I said I learned a > valuable lesson. Yep, don't buy vapor ware or vapor certs. > I can't say how many were produced but I can tell you a vendor was > selling these through the ROL auctions this past weekend along with the > J228 motors plus those sold at HPR launches. Where's protection for > the consumer? The protection is the certified motor list. What else can there really be? > If Mr. Ellis had no intent of certifying this motor why > produce them and put it through distribution and only submit "ONE" for > testing? It sounds like he submitted two and one failed. I can't guess why he did not follow up. Perhaps there was a design issue that has yet to be resolved. Maybe he's just busy with other motors? > Maybe I'll just give it to the BATFE next time they come to check my > magazine and tell them I don't need it since I can't use it ..... > What does the consumer now do with the J228 he bought last week and > paid shipping, hazmat ect. for that he can't legally return ship to the > distributor or manufacturer? I think there is a way for the original shipper to issue a return shipment label to the customer, but I haven't tried this myself yet. Someone will still have to pay the hazmat fee (again). It sux for all involved. Still, having to eat the cost of the motor is better than having it destroy one of your rockets too. -Jeff Motor mfg's submit motors and they get tested 3 to 6 months later. Why does it take so long? . I think if TRA or NAR can't get the motor tested within 30 days it should get a temporary cert so it can be used. There isn't much incentive to develop new motors when it will take 6 months to get it on the cert list. There are many motors that are certified and have not been added to the lists. . >> I know I'm not happy about the fact that if the K600 motor failed on >> the test stand in January and was listed on the TRA website as "motors [quoted text clipped - 47 lines] > > -Jeff In the US there is only 1 person who tests motors. Paul Holmes, but you already knew that. Paul is unpaid for his work for TMT. In Canada there are multiple people who can do certifications for motors, and less manufactures. I think all tests are done at CTI. I think thats part of the reason CTI got so many motors tested in such a short period of time a while back. I have been to a few testing sessions where Paul tests motors, and it is a long, hot job. Remember its Arizona, and it is hot year round (almost), and deathly hot in the summer! We fall into a different catagory, and that may be why I have no complaints right now with TMT. We have our own stand which we Must Use for testing our motors right now. TMT doesn't have one large enough for large hybrids, so we got his full attention the 2 times which he came down so far this year. I havn't heard any suggestions though... Do any of the other manufactures have a gripe??? Tom Sanders Contrail Rockets I'm not a mfg. No relation to Bob Ellis > In the US there is only 1 person who tests motors. Paul Holmes, but > you already knew that. Paul is unpaid for his work for TMT. [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > Tom Sanders > Contrail Rockets oops... No problem. I get a lot of his mail. None of it nice lately. As a dealer though my experience with EM Motors has been good. I have been selling them for two years and only had one I69 fail (nozzle). I think there may have been a couple G motors here and there but they must have contacted Bob directly. The only real problem I have had was with the E motors. Igniters wouldn't fit in them. Bob took them back from me at a launch. . . . > oops... >The only real problem I have had was with the E motors. Igniters wouldn't >fit in them. Bob took them back from me at a launch. I found one of every three first fire JR would fit in them. >In the US there is only 1 person who tests motors. Paul Holmes, but >you already knew that. Paul is unpaid for his work for TMT. You forgot Jack Kane, who has been testing motors twice as long as TMT has existed. Glen Overby >>In the US there is only 1 person who tests motors. Paul Holmes, but >>you already knew that. Paul is unpaid for his work for TMT. > > You forgot Jack Kane, who has been testing motors twice as long as TMT has > existed. It's not just Jack. There's a whole group of CMASS volunteers involved in NAR S&T motor testing. They've been doing the job since the early 80s IIRC SignatureBob Kaplow NAR # 18L >>> To reply, there's no internet on Mars (yet)! <<< Kaplow Klips & Baffle: http://nira-rocketry.org/Document/MayJun00.pdf www.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/ www.nira-rocketry.org www.nar.org Homeland Security Administration: The Gestapo of the 21st Century >It's not just Jack. There's a whole group of CMASS volunteers involved in >NAR S&T motor testing. They've been doing the job since the early 80s IIRC Wow! My mistake. My apologies to the CMASS motor testers. I wasn't aware of more than Jack (lead) and the various people who've been S&T secretary over the years. Hey - writing about the S&T motor testing group would make for a really neat Sport Rocketry article. Glen I should have said Tests motors for TMT USA. NAR has a different group of people, but IIRC, they don't test Hybrids at this time. NAR USA, and TMT Canada both have other testers, but the primary person doing testing for HPR in the US is Paul as i understand it. I should have said Tests motors for TMT USA. NAR has a different group of people, but IIRC, they don't test Hybrids at this time. NAR USA, and TMT Canada both have other testers, but the primary person doing testing for HPR in the US is Paul as i understand it. > In the US there is only 1 person who tests motors. Paul Holmes, but Incorrect. Ther is another whole group of people in MA that also test motors. SignatureBob Kaplow NAR # 18L >>> To reply, there's no internet on Mars (yet)! <<< Kaplow Klips & Baffle: http://nira-rocketry.org/Document/MayJun00.pdf www.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/ www.nira-rocketry.org www.nar.org Homeland Security Administration: The Gestapo of the 21st Century Are the motors tested officially recognized as a Certified motor by TMT, Tripoli, and NAR. Tom > I havn't heard any suggestions though... Do any of the other > manufactures have a gripe??? > Tom Sanders > Contrail Rockets Sure, I have a gripe: The last time I sent motors in Paul said there would be a delay of one week, 'cause he was too busy testing somebody's hybrids. ;-) -Jeff Sorry, if thats the case... TMT doesn't have a test stand large enough for hybrids over about a K Impulse, or about 200-300 N/s Average (As i was last told by Paul), so we have to use our big stand, and while it is "mobile," Its not exactly easy to move around, espicially to Phoenix (200 Miles away). I think it worked out that that weekend he was able to travel and the next weekend he got to testing your motors as i recall. The thing is, we have a lot of new motors that have been developed over the past few months since our last testing session, and we would like them tested, but it is still to hot. Even a good number of our 38mm motors can't be tested on the TMT stand because they are over the 300N/S limit... Tom > Motor mfg's submit motors and they get tested 3 to 6 months later. Why does > it take so long? [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > There are many motors that are certified and have not been added to the > lists. It's not always that bad. The last batch of motors that Loki Research sent to TMT were tested within two weeks. There seem to be two main things that slow the process down: One, Paul's business forces him to travel a fair amount. Two, it's too frigg'n hot in Arizona to test motors for several months of the year. Short of finding another person in a different location to do the testing, there's not much that can be done. -Jeff Taylor Has anybody else tested the L motor that became an M to see if the stand is accurate? . . . >> Motor mfg's submit motors and they get tested 3 to 6 months later. Why >> does it take so long? [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > -Jeff Taylor > > Motor mfg's submit motors and they get tested 3 to 6 months later. Why does > > it take so long? [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > in a different location to do the testing, there's not much that can be > done. I don't know. Wouldn't NAR, TRA and/or most states recognize a trusted testing authority such as UL? > -Jeff Taylor > > [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] > > I'm sure they would. Just one little problem -- UL doesn't have any history of testing motors like these. Additionally, I've got to believe that UL (which is in it to make money) would be charging far more than NAR/TMT (which is volunteer run and registered as a non-profit). I've just had to go through some testing on a product for international use with an (unnamed) testing authority. Lest you think that the BATFE bureaucracy is bad, we've been trying to get this product 'certified' for over two years. The latest go around was on the order of: Them: "Your (blank) is at 99.9% of the allowed level" Us: "Well, no, it's at 79.9% of the allowed level, and we've factored in the allowed 20% tolerances" (and bear in mind the design had to be changed 3 times to get our (blank) to that low a level). Them: "Well, that's pretty close to the limit, you know." Us: "Yes, but we all agreed that the line had to be drawn somewhere, and that's where the legal authorities draw that line." Them: "Well, our inspector thinks that's too close for us to approve it." Us: (after consultation with the customer, who simply needs to get this finished) "OK, then what amount is acceptable to you?" Them: "Well, he thinks he can approve it at 95% after factoring in tolerances." Us: (realizing that we have to change the design yet one more time) "OK, but can we get that in writing???" Them: "Sure." (of course, we had agreed more than a year ago on the previous limit, etc., etc., And bear in mind that we have to foot the bill for this back-and-forth, the re-design, etc. It's unfortunately the nature of bureaucracies... (and before anyone jumps in to say we should have fought it, this was the customer's choice -- he simply needs to get the product out, it doesn't make any money sitting on the certification bench). David Erbas-White > I've just had to go through some testing on a product for international > use with an (unnamed) testing authority. Lest you think that the BATFE We have a division with a product at that place as well, pending cert, If it's the name similar to an insurance company. >>>Motor mfg's submit motors and they get tested 3 to 6 months later. Why > [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > >>-Jeff Taylor UL doesn't test for product performance, They test for product safety/failure modes. It's not likely that UL or anybody else could test motors as quickly and economically as TRA or NAR do. > > It's not always that bad. The last batch of motors that Loki Research > > sent to TMT were tested within two weeks. There seem to be two main [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > I don't know. Wouldn't NAR, TRA and/or most states recognize a trusted > testing authority such as UL? Sure, but who'd pay for it? UL testing requires megabucks. 8 >> It's not always that bad. The last batch of motors that Loki Research >> sent to TMT were tested within two weeks. There seem to be two main [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > I don't know. Wouldn't NAR, TRA and/or most states recognize a trusted > testing authority such as UL? I'm sure they would. If the manufacturer were willing to pay several hundred thousand to UL for the testing, as opposed to the $25-35 that they currently pay for NAR or TRA testing. For a $100 motor that they sell maybe 100 per year, that would add at least $1000 per motor to the price. WOuld you buy them? for 11x the current price? SignatureBob Kaplow NAR # 18L >>> To reply, there's no internet on Mars (yet)! <<< Kaplow Klips & Baffle: http://nira-rocketry.org/Document/MayJun00.pdf www.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/ www.nira-rocketry.org www.nar.org It had become an universal and almost uncontroverted position in the several States, that the purposes of society do not require a surrender of all our rights to our ordinary governors; that there are certain portions of right not necessary to enable them to carry on an effective government, and which experience has nevertheless proved they will be constantly encroaching on, if submitted to them; that there are also certain fences which experience has proved peculiarly efficacious against wrong, and rarely obstructive of right, which yet the governing powers have ever shown a disposition to weaken and remove. Of the first kind, for instance, is freedom of religion; of the second, trial by jury, habeas corpus laws, free presses. -- Thomas Jefferson > For a $100 motor that they sell maybe 100 per year, that would add at least > $1000 per motor to the price. WOuld you buy them? for 11x the current price? An Ellis motor????? 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. (too late) Produce then publish. http://www.usrockets.com Ebay. http://tinyurl.com/6wlp8 > > I know I'm not happy about the fact that if the K600 motor failed on > > the test stand in January and was listed on the TRA website as "motors [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > is that Paul tested the motor, it failed, he gave the manufacturer time > to resubmit and he (Ellis) did not. I agree. Why weren't all TRA members privy to that letter posted above from TMT before now. Nothing in the Tripoli Report or Tripoli website about it. That was the first time I saw anything about it. How much time is enough time for the manufacturer to resubmit a motor for testing if the other(s) failed? I really don't know ..... > >why were these still being sold almost five months later > > at HPR launches? > > Vendors are free to sell whatever they like whenever they like. Caveat > emptor. It's not TRA or NARs place to police what the vendors sell. Although I never bought mine at a launch, I'm certainly free to do that. I can buy a non-certified commercial manufacturered motor at the launch that failed on the test stand eight months earlier. Is this a problem or potential problem? I guess not, no one said it can't be sold at the launch, only you can't fly it if you do buy it. > > Again I know I should have waited until it passed > > cert testing so it's my own fault there, like I said I learned a [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > did not follow up. Perhaps there was a design issue that has yet to be > resolved. Maybe he's just busy with other motors? Maybe, but we can only speculate since he doesn't respond to TMT or the consumers that bought his motors. Since he has a six month window of opportunity for testing it gives him enought time to sell all his stock and make his money without recourse if the motor fails testing. Yep, that's the system but I don't have to like it ..... My point: Don't buy it if it hasn't passed cert even if it's in testing. I know I won't. It would be good business practice for the manufacturer to communicate what his intentions are. > > Maybe I'll just give it to the BATFE next time they come to check my > > magazine and tell them I don't need it since I can't use it ..... [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > -Jeff > Maybe, but we can only speculate since he doesn't respond to TMT or the > consumers that bought his motors. Since he has a six month window of [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > It would be good business practice for the manufacturer to communicate > what his intentions are. I'm not sure I understand this. Does this actually mean that TMT "certs" motors on receipt, prior to testing, pending the results? someone please correct me and tell me I'm misunderstanding this. If so, this is nothing short of BOGUS. Make that fraudulent. It's a system designed to encourage the Jerry's of the world. What's gonna happen when motor causes an accident because TRA "certified" it before actually testing it? You can't "certify" a motor, and then 6 months later pull an Emily Latella and say "never mind". Any one stuck with one of these bogus motors should demand a refund from whoever sold it and/or made it, and not worry about how to return it to its source. SignatureBob Kaplow NAR # 18L >>> To reply, there's no internet on Mars (yet)! <<< Kaplow Klips & Baffle: http://nira-rocketry.org/Document/MayJun00.pdf www.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/ www.nira-rocketry.org www.nar.org Homeland Security Administration: The Gestapo of the 21st Century > > Maybe, but we can only speculate since he doesn't respond to TMT or the > > consumers that bought his motors. Since he has a six month window of [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > motors on receipt, prior to testing, pending the results? someone please > correct me and tell me I'm misunderstanding this. Sorry I may not have been clear on this. The K600 motor never did get certified and never was. I think someone else mentioned it may take 3 - 6 months to pass through testing after it is submitted. It's being sold to vendors and consumers in the meantime so there is basically a 3 - 6 month window of opportunity to unload your stock. If something is wrong with the motors or for whatever reason it doesn't get a cert, everyone is stuck. Except Mr. Ellis, he got paid. I'm not trying to grind this point into the ground so don't misunderstand me. But I do see a problem here. I know how to avoid it in the future but buyers beware. I bought many other EM motors pre-cert and they all got the certs but this type of situation can happen. I also wish I had thrust curves for at least half of them ..... Steve Naquin TRA 677 L2 > If so, this is nothing short of BOGUS. Make that fraudulent. It's a system > designed to encourage the Jerry's of the world. What's gonna happen when [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Homeland Security Administration: The Gestapo of the 21st Century > But I do see a problem here. > I know how to avoid it in the future but buyers > beware. I bought many other EM motors pre-cert and they all got the > certs but this type of situation can happen. Yes, there is a problem. Either the dealer didn't tell the customer the motor was uncertified, or the customer falsely assumed that there was no risk to buying an uncertified motor. Any dealer selling uncertified motors should at least let the customer know the motor isn't certified. And any customer who knowingly buys an uncertified motor must be willing to accept the risk that the motor may never be certified and may not be reliable. I've got to say that I'm getting a distinctly negative impression of Ellis motors. First there was the problem with the Aerotech replacement motors being spongy. Then, they came out with some 'E' motors that sounded pretty good -- but I went to a launch were they were flying some, and the first two I saw CATO'd. Now, there is the (dual) problem of this motor certification, and the manufacturer's lack of response/communication regarding it. It doesn't leave me wanting to even TRY their motors at this point. David Erbas-White > I've got to say that I'm getting a distinctly negative impression of > Ellis motors. First there was the problem with the Aerotech replacement [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > David Erbas-White David. kinda sorta feeling the same myself. Too bad cause I love to cluster 24/29mm su motors and EM had some diversity in that arena. Ted Novak TRA#5512 IEAS#75 >> I've got to say that I'm getting a distinctly negative impression of >> Ellis motors. First there was the problem with the Aerotech [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > David. kinda sorta feeling the same myself. Too bad cause I love to > cluster 24/29mm su motors and EM had some diversity in that arena. I'd add that I physically was holding my money in my hand to purchase the 'E' motors (I was going to pick up about 9 of htem) when I heard the call for the first launch of one -- turned around, watched it CATO, put my money back in my wallet and decided to see how more flights went. Within a few minutes the second one occurred, and I haven't looked at ANY of the Ellis motors since. I just have no desire to be a guinea pig like that. David Erbas-White I have seen several fly. They usually would cato several hundred feet up. Bob purchased what I had on hand back. >>> I've got to say that I'm getting a distinctly negative impression of >>> Ellis motors. First there was the problem with the Aerotech replacement [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > David Erbas-White > I have seen several fly. They usually would cato several hundred feet up. > Bob purchased what I had on hand back. Hi Chad, Curious, where those the white labels with no manufacture date or the newer black labels with the born on dates ? I've flown many and still have lots of the white labeled ones. those did not cato, yet anyway for me. Black label. >> I have seen several fly. They usually would cato several hundred feet up. >> Bob purchased what I had on hand back. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > not > cato, yet anyway for me. Black label with date. I was the ginue pig. Some blew on the pad, others blew at or near propellant burnout. I tried the rest, now I'm sticking with the best - Aerotech. No replies to my e-mails. Local vendor replaced the first batch of blown motors with more from the same date... Signature-Fred Shecter remove zorch two places to reply Current eBay auctions: http://search.ebay.com/_W0QQgotopageZ1QQsassZshreadvectorQQsorecordsperpageZ25QQ sosortorderZ1QQsosortpropertyZ1 > Black label. >>> I have seen several fly. They usually would cato several hundred feet [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >> not >> cato, yet anyway for me. > Black label with date. I was the ginue pig. Some blew on the pad, others > blew at or near propellant burnout. > No replies to my e-mails. Local vendor replaced the first batch of blown > motors with more from the same date... Thanks for the info Fred and Chad. The lack of communication between the manufacture, customer and TMT is what is bothering me most about this. I guess I'll be glad my old non-dated white labels aren't blowing up and just finish them off when I can. > Curious, where those the white labels with no manufacture date or the newer > black labels with the born on dates ? Isn't Tripoli concerned about misdating? They do not seem concerned about faulty motors or uncertified motors being widely distributed. 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. (too late) Produce then publish. http://www.usrockets.com Ebay. http://tinyurl.com/6wlp8 >>Curious, where those the white labels with no manufacture date or the newer >>black labels with the born on dates ? > > Isn't Tripoli concerned about misdating? That's why the new ones have dates. DUH. > They do not seem concerned about faulty motors or uncertified motors > being widely distributed. > > Jerry jerry, HOW STUPID ARE YOU? This whole thread is about the decertification of faulty motors. Why do you sell uncertified motors? > I've got to say that I'm getting a distinctly negative impression of > Ellis motors. I told yo uso. > First there was the problem with the Aerotech replacement > motors being spongy. Then, they came out with some 'E' motors that [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > David Erbas-White 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. (too late) Produce then publish. http://www.usrockets.com Ebay. http://tinyurl.com/6wlp8 >>I've got to say that I'm getting a distinctly negative impression of >>Ellis motors. > > I told yo uso. Well, you also told Us you had fifty or so EX numbers. We know that was a lie. you Also said that you were a legal manufacturer, but given the fact that you are a felon, not only can't you possess class B explosives it's not possible for you obtain the required permits to manufacture them. Yet, you still sell rocket motors on your web site. >>First there was the problem with the Aerotech replacement >>motors being spongy. Then, they came out with some 'E' motors that [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >> >>David Erbas-White >Well, you also told Us you had fifty or so EX numbers. We know that was >a lie. He probably wasn't lying. Only problem is that they were someone else's numbers. 8-) > > I've got to say that I'm getting a distinctly negative impression of > > Ellis motors. > > I told yo uso. Just to clarify, that was David who said that, not me. My own impression of Ellis motors is slightly positive, so far. Whether it becomes fully positive or more negative depends on how my remaining Ellis motors perform. :) > > But I do see a problem here. > > I know how to avoid it in the future but buyers [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > willing to accept the risk that the motor may never be certified and > may not be reliable. I see more to the problem than just that. The letter from Tripoli testing that Phil sent along states "This motor has never been certified, although it has been offered for sale with many vendors. They received no indication the certification was still pending, or due to his non-communication to solve a problem, not actively applied for". "Many vendors" have or had it and are stuck with inventory. Why isn't everyone involved better informed about the certification process? Is there a proceedure in place for this at the vendor level? No indication the certification was still pending, not actively applied for - I wonder at what point in time did the vendor come to realize his inventory on that item just became worthless. __________________ Steve Naquin TRA 677 L2 >> > But I do see a problem here. >> > I know how to avoid it in the future but buyers [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] >Steve Naquin >TRA 677 L2 Sounds like Ellis pulled a quick one on everyone. I don't think dealers or consumers are accustomed to having to verify that they are buyiing a certified motors - they just assume that they are. If there is anyone to find fault with, I think it is Ellis. > Sounds like Ellis pulled a quick one on everyone. I don't think > dealers or consumers are accustomed to having to verify that they are > buyiing a certified motors - they just assume that they are. If there > is anyone to find fault with, I think it is Ellis. I've been flying for a while now, I don't recall this ever happening with any other manufacturers motors where the motors were completely into distribution and in the hands of consumers this many months after a failed cert test on the stand. Looks to me like the vendors selling some of these motors found out when we did that it wasn't going to get a cert. Can you buy an AeroTech motor before it has been certified or is this just an Ellis thing? __________________ Steve Naquin TRA 677 L2 > > Sounds like Ellis pulled a quick one on everyone. I don't think > > dealers or consumers are accustomed to having to verify that they are [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > a cert. Can you buy an AeroTech motor before it has been certified or > is this just an Ellis thing? You could if AT was selling them. There's nothing to prevent any manufacturer from selling uncertified motors. Dealers should make sure the motors they buy are already certified prior to buying them, but apparently some don't. Of course there are so many motors available these days, from so many different manufacturers, it would be easy to have one fall through the cracks. The dealer knows the manufacturer has a bunch of motors that are certified, and just assumes that all the motors he gets from that manufacturer are certified. >> Sounds like Ellis pulled a quick one on everyone. I don't think >> dealers or consumers are accustomed to having to verify that they are [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >Steve Naquin >TRA 677 L2 I've never heard of it happening with Aerotech. There is nothing that prevents this from happening. Now it's just one more thing we have to watch closely. It could have happened to me or almost anyone else just as easily. I remember recently, a hybrid manfacturer was selling their casings before tthe motor was tested. Then when they were tested and approved, they started shipping the fuel grains. THis is a non story since everything went off as planned. > I've never heard of it happening with Aerotech. There is nothing that > prevents this from happening. Now it's just one more thing we have to > watch closely. It could have happened to me or almost anyone else > just as easily. You haven't been around long enough. I had at least a dozen packs of uncertified AT MR reloads. I returned most of them to the AT rep for replacement / refund, but never got anything in return. I ended up giving a bunch of uncertified 18mm reload grains to a friend to use as ignitors in his M motors. SignatureBob Kaplow NAR # 18L >>> To reply, there's no internet on Mars (yet)! <<< Kaplow Klips & Baffle: http://nira-rocketry.org/Document/MayJun00.pdf www.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/ www.nira-rocketry.org www.nar.org It had become an universal and almost uncontroverted position in the several States, that the purposes of society do not require a surrender of all our rights to our ordinary governors; that there are certain portions of right not necessary to enable them to carry on an effective government, and which experience has nevertheless proved they will be constantly encroaching on, if submitted to them; that there are also certain fences which experience has proved peculiarly efficacious against wrong, and rarely obstructive of right, which yet the governing powers have ever shown a disposition to weaken and remove. Of the first kind, for instance, is freedom of religion; of the second, trial by jury, habeas corpus laws, free presses. -- Thomas Jefferson > >> Sounds like Ellis pulled a quick one on everyone. I don't think > >> dealers or consumers are accustomed to having to verify that they are [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > I've never heard of it happening with Aerotech. Then you are simply not paying attention. > There is nothing that > prevents this from happening. Now it's just one more thing we have to [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > approved, they started shipping the fuel grains. THis is a non story > since everything went off as planned. 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. (too late) Produce then publish. http://www.usrockets.com Ebay. http://tinyurl.com/6wlp8 >Then you are simply not paying attention. Unlike you, I don't claim to know everything. Also, I haven't been doing rockets forever. > I've been flying for a while now, I don't recall this ever happening > with any other manufacturers motors where the motors were completely [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > a cert. Can you buy an AeroTech motor before it has been certified or > is this just an Ellis thing? As I've posted, Aerotech has sold MANY uncertified motors over the years. I'd have to check their current product list against all the certs to see if there are any currently uncertified motors offered for sale. With all the certification changes as a result of the fire and the relocation, it wouldn't suprise me if something slipped through the cracks again. SignatureBob Kaplow NAR # 18L >>> To reply, there's no internet on Mars (yet)! <<< Kaplow Klips & Baffle: http://nira-rocketry.org/Document/MayJun00.pdf www.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/ www.nira-rocketry.org www.nar.org It had become an universal and almost uncontroverted position in the several States, that the purposes of society do not require a surrender of all our rights to our ordinary governors; that there are certain portions of right not necessary to enable them to carry on an effective government, and which experience has nevertheless proved they will be constantly encroaching on, if submitted to them; that there are also certain fences which experience has proved peculiarly efficacious against wrong, and rarely obstructive of right, which yet the governing powers have ever shown a disposition to weaken and remove. Of the first kind, for instance, is freedom of religion; of the second, trial by jury, habeas corpus laws, free presses. -- Thomas Jefferson > Sounds like Ellis pulled a quick one on everyone. I don't think > dealers or consumers are accustomed to having to verify that they are > buyiing a certified motors - they just assume that they are. If there > is anyone to find fault with, I think it is Ellis. In the past, Aerotech sold plenty of motors that weren't certified. I haven't gone through the current cert list and their current product list to see if they are currently selling anything that isn't certified. It clearly points out the ened for "buyer beware", and for making both consumers and dealers more aware of what uncertified motors are being sold by manufacturers. My previous experience with AT was that the dealers had no clue that some of the reloads sold by AT were NEVER certified. The B6, C4, and C6-5 were NEVER certified. (the -3 and -7 were certified) Others, such as the D24, D9-4, E11-5, and E23-5 were sold for a long time before they were ever certified. SignatureBob Kaplow NAR # 18L >>> To reply, there's no internet on Mars (yet)! <<< Kaplow Klips & Baffle: http://nira-rocketry.org/Document/MayJun00.pdf www.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/ www.nira-rocketry.org www.nar.org It had become an universal and almost uncontroverted position in the several States, that the purposes of society do not require a surrender of all our rights to our ordinary governors; that there are certain portions of right not necessary to enable them to carry on an effective government, and which experience has nevertheless proved they will be constantly encroaching on, if submitted to them; that there are also certain fences which experience has proved peculiarly efficacious against wrong, and rarely obstructive of right, which yet the governing powers have ever shown a disposition to weaken and remove. Of the first kind, for instance, is freedom of religion; of the second, trial by jury, habeas corpus laws, free presses. -- Thomas Jefferson ' >> But I do see a problem here. >> I know how to avoid it in the future but buyers [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > willing to accept the risk that the motor may never be certified and > may not be reliable. NFPA 1127 (TRAs own safety code) prohibits the sale of uncertified motors. So obviously such a transaction would not be permitted at any TRA event. SignatureBob Kaplow NAR # 18L >>> To reply, there's no internet on Mars (yet)! <<< Kaplow Klips & Baffle: http://nira-rocketry.org/Document/MayJun00.pdf www.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/ www.nira-rocketry.org www.nar.org It had become an universal and almost uncontroverted position in the several States, that the purposes of society do not require a surrender of all our rights to our ordinary governors; that there are certain portions of right not necessary to enable them to carry on an effective government, and which experience has nevertheless proved they will be constantly encroaching on, if submitted to them; that there are also certain fences which experience has proved peculiarly efficacious against wrong, and rarely obstructive of right, which yet the governing powers have ever shown a disposition to weaken and remove. Of the first kind, for instance, is freedom of religion; of the second, trial by jury, habeas corpus laws, free presses. -- Thomas Jefferson > > Yes, there is a problem. Either the dealer didn't tell the customer the > > motor was uncertified, or the customer falsely assu med that there was [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > NFPA 1127 (TRAs own safety code) prohibits the sale of uncertified motors. > So obviously such a transaction would not be permitted at any TRA event. Yes, it's against the rules, but unless everyone involved was as anal as you and carried a current, up-to-the-minute list of certified motors with them at all times, it's still possible for an uncertified motor to slip through the cracks either accidentally or intentionally. t > Yes, it's against the rules, but unless everyone involved was as anal > as you and carried a current, up-to-the-minute list of certified motors > with them at all times, it's still possible for an uncertified motor to > slip through the cracks either accidentally or intentionally. The only place to fix the problem is at the manufacturer: They need to stop making, distributing, and selling motors that haven't been certified. The NAR can and has come down on manufacturers that mark their motors NAR certified when they are not. TRA needs to do the same. And consumers need to "look for the label" when buying motors. SignatureBob Kaplow NAR # 18L >>> To reply, there's no internet on Mars (yet)! <<< Kaplow Klips & Baffle: http://nira-rocketry.org/Document/MayJun00.pdf www.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/ www.nira-rocketry.org www.nar.org "For as adamant as my country has been about civil liberties during peacetime, it has a long history ... of failing to preserve civil liberties when it perceived its national security threatened." -- former Supreme Court Justice William Brennan >> Yes, it's against the rules, but unless everyone involved was as anal >> as you and carried a current, up-to-the-minute list of certified motors [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >certified when they are not. TRA needs to do the same. And consumers need to >"look for the label" when buying motors. Can anyone tell us if the uncertified ones were in fact labeled as certified? If that is the case, I think something should be done to get their money back - weather the motor is shipped back or not. > > Yes, it's against the rules, but unless everyone involved was as anal > > as you and carried a current, up-to-the-minute list of certified motors [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > certified when they are not. TRA needs to do the same. And consumers need to > "look for the label" when buying motors. To my knowledge, there is no label to indicate whether a high power motor is certified. > > > Yes, there is a problem. Either the dealer didn't tell the customer the > > > motor was uncertified, or the customer falsely assu med that there was [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > t How? Either it is certified or not. One would think people would be LATE to hear about certified motors, not EARLY. 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. (too late) Produce then publish. http://www.usrockets.com Ebay. http://tinyurl.com/6wlp8 >>>>Yes, there is a problem. Either the dealer didn't tell the customer the >>>>motor was uncertified, or the customer falsely assu med that there was [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > Jerry jerry, Are any of the motors on the usr web site certified? I didn't think so. Yet, you continue to sell them. > > Yes, it's against the rules, but unless everyone involved was as anal > > as you and carried a current, up-to-the-minute list of certified motors > > with them at all times, it's still possible for an uncertified motor to > > slip through the cracks either accidentally or intentionally. > > > How? As I said in my last post, when the motor comes from a manufacturer who has many certified motors, the dealers, buyers and RSOs may assume that the motor is certified without actually checking it. I > >> But I do see a problem here. > >> I know how to avoid it in the future but buyers [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > NFPA 1127 (TRAs own safety code) prohibits the sale of uncertified motors. > So obviously such a transaction would not be permitted at any TRA event. Or by any TRA member, TRA certified manufacturer (except Aerotech, Ellis, AMW, Loki...) or TRA centric dealer. 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. (too late) Produce then publish. http://www.usrockets.com Ebay. http://tinyurl.com/6wlp8 >>>>But I do see a problem here. >>>>I know how to avoid it in the future but buyers [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > Jerry jerry, Are you a TRA member? Are you a TRA certified manufacturer? Are you a TRA centric dealer? you don't seem to have a problem with selling and distributing your uncertified rocket motors. |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message