mid-power

mid-power

Post by Tony Beldi » Mon, 15 Aug 1994 17:30:18



 bgc> Just like to remind everyone that there is a prett big gap between
 bgc> Estes A-D engines, and "HPR" which covers H-M engines.  This gap,
 bgc> sometimes called "HPR-lite", using E-G engines,

I thought it was called "mid-power" rocketry.

 bgf> lacks a lot of the troubles associated with HPR (eg engines are
 bgf> readilly available by mail order, it isn't under attack by BATF,

BATF?  I'm all too familiar with "America's Gestapo" from my shooting
activities, but what is their hangup now with rockets?

 bgc> kits are less than $100, and more readilly available than true HPR
 bgc> kits, etc, etc...)  You'll still run into the problem where an FAA
 bgc> waiver is required to launch anything over 1lb...

Drat!

Anyhow, I think you may be right about the advantages of mid-power rocketry.  I
am planning to start out with a G powered kit or two before working my way up
to real high power.  In fact, I think G power might prove adequate to explore
much of what interests me, like staging, photography, electronics, radio
tracking, etc.

 
 
 

mid-power

Post by bill nels » Fri, 19 Aug 1994 00:33:18


:  bgc> Just like to remind everyone that there is a prett big gap between
:  bgc> Estes A-D engines, and "HPR" which covers H-M engines.  This gap,
:  bgc> sometimes called "HPR-lite", using E-G engines,
:
: I thought it was called "mid-power" rocketry.

No. Model Rocketry has always covered through F motors, although such were
scarce. G motors, in composites, straddle the weight limit - so are in a
gray area,

:  bgf> lacks a lot of the troubles associated with HPR (eg engines are
:  bgf> readilly available by mail order, it isn't under attack by BATF,
:
: BATF?  I'm all too familiar with "America's Gestapo" from my shooting
: activities, but what is their hangup now with rockets?

The are involved with the regulation of explosive substances, which is what
rocket motors contain. Their present interpretation of the regulations is
that only Model Rocketry motors are exempt from their control.

:  bgc> kits are less than $100, and more readilly available than true HPR
:  bgc> kits, etc, etc...)  You'll still run into the problem where an FAA
:  bgc> waiver is required to launch anything over 1lb...
:
: Drat!

There are many HPR kits that cost far less than $100. As far as I am
concerned, every one of them is a far better deal than the outrageous
prices charged for the flimsy Estes stuff.

Many of them will weigh under 1 pound, and will fly on D or larger motors.

: Anyhow, I think you may be right about the advantages of mid-power rocketry.  I
: am planning to start out with a G powered kit or two before working my way up
: to real high power.  In fact, I think G power might prove adequate to explore
: much of what interests me, like staging, photography, electronics, radio
: tracking, etc.

Buy a rocket that will also fly on H power. You will still be able to fly it
on F and G motors.  Remember that the larger G motors are considered to be
HP motors - and are regulated/restricted.

Bill

 
 
 

mid-power

Post by Dave=Funk%Comm=Prod%PCPD=.. » Fri, 19 Aug 1994 23:56:31


Quote:
>: BATF?  I'm all too familiar with "America's Gestapo" from my shooting
>: activities, but what is their hangup now with rockets?

>The are involved with the regulation of explosive substances, which is what
>rocket motors contain. Their present interpretation of the regulations is
>that only Model Rocketry motors are exempt from their control.

No " present interpretation of the regulations" at all! Class B explosives have
always been regulated.  

Tripoli's views are only partially correct in as far as permits and licenses go,
but that doesn't and didn't change the storage requirments, which is were
the big problems are.

Nothing new about the use and handling of Class B explosives.  The only ones
"Waco-ing" high power rocketry is it's participants.  Not the ATF.

It's the law, always has been.  

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+   David Funk                            The opinions and information   +
+   TRA# 1462                             stated here are mine and not   +
+   NAR# 54612                            those of my employer.          +
+                                                                        +
+   Compaq Computer Corporation           (713) 374-8085  wk             +
+   ATTN: David Funk  MS130705            (713) 374-6464  fax            +
+   20555 SH. 249                         (713) 251-7953  msg            +
+   Houston, Texas  77070-2698                                           +
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

 
 
 

mid-power

Post by countdown.. » Sat, 20 Aug 1994 15:30:50


Quote:

>No " present interpretation of the regulations" at all! Class B explosives have
>always been regulated.  

>Tripoli's views are only partially correct in as far as permits and licenses go,
>but that doesn't and didn't change the storage requirments, which is were
>the big problems are.

>Nothing new about the use and handling of Class B explosives.  The only ones
>"Waco-ing" high power rocketry is it's participants.  Not the ATF.
>It's the law, always has been.  

     Not this can of worms again! Ever hear of "Propellant Actuated Devices"?
Which does common sense tell you high power motors are, PAD's or explosives
(Estes E's excepted)?

COUNTDOWN HOBBIES
3 P.T. Barnum Square
Bethel, CT 06801-1838
203-790-9010
Kevin Nolan
NAR 16148; TRA 0943
CTRA/NARCONN

 
 
 

mid-power

Post by bill nels » Sun, 21 Aug 1994 01:32:29


:  
: >It's the law, always has been.  
:  
:      Not this can of worms again! Ever hear of "Propellant Actuated Devices"?
: Which does common sense tell you high power motors are, PAD's or explosives
: (Estes E's excepted)?

"Common sense" has nothing to do with it - as is usual for most laws passed
by our various legislatures.  The point was, rocket motors have always been
listed as explosive devices. There was just an exemption written for certain
types of such motors. The matter to be worked out is just which sizes motors
fit this exemption - which (if I recall correctly) specifically stated "model
rocketry" and "model rocket motors".

Whether you feel that there should be any regulation, in the first place, is
beside the point.

Bill

 
 
 

mid-power

Post by TE.. » Tue, 23 Aug 1994 13:19:45


Quote:
> >: BATF?  I'm all too familiar with "America's Gestapo" from my shooting
> >: activities, but what is their hangup now with rockets?

> >The are involved with the regulation of explosive substances, which is what
> >rocket motors contain. Their present interpretation of the regulations is
> >that only Model Rocketry motors are exempt from their control.
> No " present interpretation of the regulations" at all! Class B explosives
> Tripoli's views are only partially correct in as far as permits and licenses
> but that doesn't and didn't change the storage requirments, which is were
> the big problems are.
> Nothing new about the use and handling of Class B explosives.  The only ones
> "Waco-ing" high power rocketry is it's participants.  Not the ATF.
> It's the law, always has been.  

   Heard from another member that mr Irvine's house was 'burgled' of all of
his HPR motors (He calls it a 'raid'). The scuttle***I heard is that this
is what caught BATF's attention & started them wanting to require
burgle-proof bunkers for all AHPR materials....
 
 
 

mid-power

Post by Larry Smi » Wed, 24 Aug 1994 00:41:57


Quote:
>Re: BATF: The plot thickens

                    ^^^^^^^^

Never seen anyone type with a lisp before.

--

A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take
everything you have.  -- Barry Goldwater.  Liberty is not the  freedom to do
whatever we want, it is the freedom to do whatever we are able. -- Me.

 
 
 

mid-power

Post by bill nels » Wed, 24 Aug 1994 01:26:59


: > but that doesn't and didn't change the storage requirments, which is were
: > the big problems are.
: > Nothing new about the use and handling of Class B explosives.  The only ones
: > "Waco-ing" high power rocketry is it's participants.  Not the ATF.
: > It's the law, always has been.  
:
:    Heard from another member that mr Irvine's house was 'burgled' of all of
: his HPR motors (He calls it a 'raid'). The scuttle***I heard is that this
: is what caught BATF's attention & started them wanting to require
: burgle-proof bunkers for all AHPR materials....

Nope. That incident at Jerry Irvine's house is ancient history, and has
nothing to do with the attention that HPR is currently receiving. That is
due, more than anything else, to the rapid growth that the hobby has been
experiencing in the last year or so.

Bill

 
 
 

mid-power

Post by Mark Johns » Tue, 23 Aug 1994 20:00:46


Quote:

>Which does common sense tell you high power motors are, PAD's or explosives
>(Estes E's excepted)?

Too bad government agencies are not bound by the strictures of common
sense...I recall a while back that BATF was arguing with Gary Rosenfield
of AeroTech that a rocket motor didn't become a "propellant actuated
device" until actually installed in a rocket vehicle. Up until that time
it was a "propellant actuated contrivance" and hence subject to BATF
regulation. Absurd, you say? Not to the government.

They have since backed at least a little bit away from that position,
per a conversation I had recently with GR.
------------------

Mark Johnson                       USnail: AT&T Global Information Solutions

Voice: (316) 636-8189 [V+654-8189]         3718 N. Rock Rd.
                                           Wichita, KS  67226

 
 
 

mid-power

Post by Dave=Funk%Comm=Prod%PCPD=.. » Wed, 24 Aug 1994 05:24:50


Quote:
>>No " present interpretation of the regulations" at all! Class B explosives have
>>always been regulated.  

>>Tripoli's views are only partially correct in as far as permits and licenses go,
>>but that doesn't and didn't change the storage requirments, which is were
>>the big problems are.

>>Nothing new about the use and handling of Class B explosives.  The only ones
>>"Waco-ing" high power rocketry is it's participants.  Not the ATF.

>>It's the law, always has been.  

>     Not this can of worms again! Ever hear of "Propellant Actuated Devices"?
>Which does common sense tell you high power motors are, PAD's or explosives
>(Estes E's excepted)?

Class B explosives are and always have been regulated.  Period.  Every high
power motor I've ever purchased has been labeled Class B.

So common sense says that if it's labled Class B, then it's not a PAD.

Government doens't operate on common sense.  Just the laws and regulations
on the books.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+   David Funk                            The opinions and information   +
+   TRA# 1462                             stated here are mine and not   +
+   NAR# 54612                            those of my employer.          +
+                                                                        +
+   Compaq Computer Corporation           (713) 374-8085  wk             +
+   ATTN: David Funk  MS130705            (713) 374-6464  fax            +
+   20555 SH. 249                         (713) 251-7953  msg            +
+   Houston, Texas  77070-2698                                           +
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

 
 
 

mid-power

Post by kaplo.. » Wed, 24 Aug 1994 03:29:31


Quote:

> Nothing new about the use and handling of Class B explosives.  The only ones
> "Waco-ing" high power rocketry is it's participants.  Not the ATF.

Not totally true. The "orange book" that the BATF is currently distributing
does *NOT* have some of the stuff published in the latest Tripoli Report,
from which it is quoted from. Either the article is hogwash, or the BATF has
changed some of the orange book, but not updated what they are sending out.
How are we supposed to know what the laws are, when they don't give the
right (or consistent) information. Sounds like the IRS help line. Wait a
minute, the IRS and BATF are both under the same department. Dear
Bill/Janet/et.al. ... Clean your own ***ing house before you bother us
private citizens!!!


USPO:   HealthCare COMPARE Corp. 3200 Highland Ave Downers Grove, IL 60515
TPC:    (708) 241-7919 x5327            ICBM:   4149'48" North 880'51" West

        BATF: Doing to Model Rocketry what they did to Waco, Texas :-(

Disclaimer: If this message is caught or killed, the secretary will disavow
any knowledge of my actions. These bits will self destruct in 5 seconds....

 
 
 

mid-power

Post by countdown.. » Wed, 24 Aug 1994 15:02:56


Quote:

>Class B explosives are and always have been regulated.  Period.  Every high
>power motor I've ever purchased has been labeled Class B.

>So common sense says that if it's labled Class B, then it's not a PAD.

>Government doens't operate on common sense.  Just the laws and regulations
>on the books.

     Up until last March, the ATF themselves told us, Gary Rosenfield, and
others that our high power motors were
considered by ATF to be PROPELLANT ACTUATED DEVICES, out of their jurusdiction.
We've been over this before, and folks are going to think & believe what they
want. That's my story, & I'm sticking to it.

COUNTDOWN HOBBIES
3 P.T. Barnum Square
        Bethel, CT 06801-1838
203-790-9010
Kevin Nolan
NAR 16148; TRA 0943
CTRA/NARCONN

 
 
 

mid-power

Post by Dave=Funk%Comm=Prod%PCPD=.. » Thu, 25 Aug 1994 06:43:26


Quote:

>     Up until last March, the ATF themselves told us, Gary Rosenfield, and
>others that our high power motors were
>considered by ATF to be PROPELLANT ACTUATED DEVICES, out of their jurusdiction.
>We've been over this before, and folks are going to think & believe what they
>want. That's my story, & I'm sticking to it.

Send me a copy of the letter, on Treasury letterhead, with an authorized signature.
The local offices say Class B explosives are regulated.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+   David Funk                            The opinions and information   +
+   TRA# 1462                             stated here are mine and not   +
+   NAR# 54612                            those of my employer.          +
+                                                                        +
+   Compaq Computer Corporation           (713) 374-8085  wk             +
+   ATTN: David Funk  MS130705            (713) 374-6464  fax            +
+   20555 SH. 249                         (713) 251-7953  msg            +
+   Houston, Texas  77070-2698                                           +
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++