Age was far less important than the fact they had been stored in a non
temp controlled environment near a river, where it regularly got up to
120 deg in the warehouse., then below zero in the winter. This level
oof temp cycle can make propellants extremely variable in
On Thu, 14 Jun 2001 21:12:38 -0500, Kevin Trojanowski
>Remember the explosion on the USS Iowa? The gunpowder bags used to fire
>the rounds were one of the principal areas of investigation; apparently,
>due to their age, they were a possibly a little more sensitive.
>> I may be off base but doesn't the military still use hardware from the
>> Korean war era? I assume that the armament does not "expire"?
>> Just my $.02
>> > > Actually, yes. After reading some of the discussions here on rmr, I
>> > > that there would be some logical, technical explanation of why TRA/NAR
>> use 3
>> > > years instead of 5. I don't know, something like small gremlins hatch
>> in the
>> > > APCP after 3 years and begin eating the AP so that the motor no longer
>> > performs
>> > > up to specs. ;-) You know something logical.
>> > > Perhaps, there was even a political motive behind the 3 year choice. Or
>> > maybe a
>> > > personal one to get free motors (skim them from the test lot).
>> > > If it was arbitrary, I would have thought that the manufacturers would
>> > have been
>> > > petitioning NAR/TRA long ago to change the 3 year rule and reduce costs
>> > > decert worries.
>> > I believe the 3 year rule was a compromise from the rule-loving weenies
>> > who wanted annual testing. Also purely arbitrary and overkill.
>> > Permanant approvals are technically justified so long as any change in
>> > motor design warrants a new test or perhaps even m y proposal of approving
>> > entire lines of motors with a representative sample of motors.
>> > Jerry
>> > > Bob
>> > > >> Also, rule 3-4.4 drives a manufacturer to redesign a motor that
>> > deviates from
>> > > >> the sample test criteria and performance limits within 5-years. Why
>> > isn't the
>> > > >> TRA/NAR certification life this same 5 years? If the motor hasn't
>> > > >deteriorated
>> > > >> in 5-years, does NFPA give it an unlimited life or only another 5
>> > > >> Any thoughts?
>> > > >Arbitrary rules
>> > > >TRA ignores rules generally.
>> > > >Were you expecting a different answer?
>> > --
>> > Jerry Irvine, Box 1242, Claremont, California USA
>> > Bring common sense back to rocketry administration.