Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 2/11/2006 8:38:01 AM EDT
Link Posted: 2/11/2006 8:39:33 AM EDT
good to hear!
Link Posted: 2/11/2006 8:40:33 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/11/2006 8:41:02 AM EDT by warlord]
I guess this is confirmation of what many of us on this board already knows, they make up rules and regs as they go along, and sometimes those rules make absolutely zero sense, the agency is arbitrary and capricous.
Link Posted: 2/11/2006 8:47:49 AM EDT
Link Posted: 2/11/2006 8:48:38 AM EDT

Originally Posted By HeavyMetal:
www.hobbyspace.com/nucleus/index.php?itemid=924


The problem in this case is that ATFE's explanation for its determination that APCP deflagrates lacks any coherence. We therefore owe no deference to ATFE's purported expertise because we cannot discern it. ATFE has neither laid out a concrete standard for classifying materials along the burn-deflagrate-detonate continuum, nor offered data specific to the burn speed of APCP when used for its 'common or primary purpose.' On this record, the agency's decision cannot withstand judicial review.



I don't know what that means, but just the sound of it scares the bejeebers out of me.
Link Posted: 2/11/2006 8:49:32 AM EDT
Link Posted: 2/11/2006 8:50:32 AM EDT
Link Posted: 2/11/2006 8:52:16 AM EDT
Link Posted: 2/11/2006 11:00:48 AM EDT
i LOVE when the ATF gets bitch slapped by the judicial system. Too bad it doesnt happen more
Link Posted: 2/11/2006 5:17:58 PM EDT
A rare setback for this overreaching agency.
Link Posted: 2/11/2006 5:20:26 PM EDT
Fellas, please remember to call it by its true name: ATFE.
Link Posted: 2/11/2006 5:21:43 PM EDT

Originally Posted By HeavyMetal:
It also shows that there are some smart Judges out there too.



A smart one..............in a field of THOUSANDS.........
Link Posted: 2/11/2006 5:25:24 PM EDT

The problem in this case is that ATFE's explanation for its determination that APCP deflagrates lacks any coherence. We therefore owe no deference to ATFE's purported expertise because we cannot discern it. ATFE has neither laid out a concrete standard for classifying materials along the burn-deflagrate-detonate continuum, nor offered data specific to the burn speed of APCP when used for its 'common or primary purpose.' On this record, the agency's decision cannot withstand judicial review.

Link Posted: 2/11/2006 5:28:13 PM EDT

ATFE has neither laid out a concrete standard for classifying XXXXXXXXXXXXXX, nor offered data specific XXXXXXXXXXX....


Well, at least they are consistent.
Link Posted: 2/11/2006 5:31:50 PM EDT
BAN MODEL ROCKETS!!!!

It's for the children.
Link Posted: 2/11/2006 5:35:47 PM EDT

Originally Posted By shop_rat45:
BAN MODEL ROCKETS!!!!

It's for the children.


more like a surface to surface missile with a solid rocket.
some of these rockets go thousands of feet carry payloads close to 100# and travel many miles down range. i would just as soon not have them flying about.

.
Link Posted: 2/11/2006 5:41:58 PM EDT

Originally Posted By hk940:

Originally Posted By shop_rat45:
BAN MODEL ROCKETS!!!!

It's for the children.


more like a surface to surface missile with a solid rocket.
some of these rockets go thousands of feet carry payloads close to 100# and travel many miles down range. i would just as soon not have them flying about.

.



And those rockets require FAA clearance to be launched, and many of those that you are talking about can be flown in only one or two locations on specific dates. One of those locations is White Sands Missile Range. I don't see any cause for concern.
Link Posted: 2/11/2006 5:43:44 PM EDT

Originally Posted By hk940:

Originally Posted By shop_rat45:
BAN MODEL ROCKETS!!!!

It's for the children.


more like a surface to surface missile with a solid rocket.
some of these rockets go guns shoot thousands of rounds per minute feet carry payloads close to 100# 30 round clips and have bullets that travel many miles down range. i would just as soon not have them flying about on the street.

.



I guess we should only have hunting rockets huh?
Link Posted: 2/11/2006 5:45:37 PM EDT

Originally Posted By hk940:

Originally Posted By shop_rat45:
BAN MODEL ROCKETS!!!!

It's for the children.


more like a surface to surface missile with a solid rocket.
some of these rockets go thousands of feet carry payloads close to 100# and travel many miles down range. i would just as soon not have them flying about.

.


Hey! Go ban semiautos while you're at that.
Link Posted: 2/11/2006 5:47:04 PM EDT

Originally Posted By SkyCatII:

Originally Posted By hk940:

Originally Posted By shop_rat45:
BAN MODEL ROCKETS!!!!

It's for the children.


more like a surface to surface missile with a solid rocket.
some of these rockets go thousands of feet carry payloads close to 100# and travel many miles down range. i would just as soon not have them flying about.

.



And those rockets require FAA clearance to be launched, and many of those that you are talking about can be flown in only one or two locations on specific dates. One of those locations is White Sands Missile Range. I don't see any cause for concern.



+1 we get notams on the launches here.
Link Posted: 2/11/2006 5:52:25 PM EDT

Originally Posted By hk940:

Originally Posted By shop_rat45:
BAN MODEL ROCKETS!!!!

It's for the children.


more like a surface to surface missile with a solid rocket.
some of these rockets go thousands of feet carry payloads close to 100# and travel many miles down range. i would just as soon not have them flying about.

.



Sounds like the same demonizing that the 50 BMG gets... You should go to work for the other side. You've got the patter down to a T.
Link Posted: 2/11/2006 5:52:46 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/11/2006 5:55:53 PM EDT by Krazny13]
This is good news to those of us who build and launch model rockets.

This is what I have been able to gather from a couple places:

Basically the ATF was saying that the solid fuel rocket motors we use were explosive devices, and thus we needed the same licenses to use them as mining companies, Demo companies, etc. (Basically forcing 99% of the hobby to stop launching cause we couldn't afford the licenses and the storage requirements.)

The engines burn propellent for thrust, then there is a delay, followed by a small explosive that deploys the recovery system. The recovery charge was supposedly what the ATF was basing its ruling on, even though its far less than a 1/4 oz in weight.

Currently you can buy the engines at a hobby shop for $10-$12 for a 3 or 4 pack, depending on size. (A-E) Anything larger requires a license from the National Model Rocketry group, whose name escapes me at the moment. (IMRA maybe?)


And the majority of the rockets are not SAM's. They are MAYBE a pount and they can go up just over 3,000 feet. Most don't break 1,500 without a second stage. Some are capable of carrying an egg. The larger ones can go higher, but require FAA launch clearance from special locations, like White Sands.
Link Posted: 2/11/2006 5:58:15 PM EDT

Originally Posted By hk940:

Originally Posted By shop_rat45:
BAN MODEL ROCKETS!!!!

It's for the children.


more like a surface to surface missile with a solid rocket.
some of these rockets go thousands of feet carry payloads close to 100# and travel many miles down range. i would just as soon not have them flying about.

.



Link Posted: 2/11/2006 5:58:53 PM EDT
So basically this is a hobby for the serious and not terrorists?
Link Posted: 2/11/2006 6:07:19 PM EDT
Yeah. Kinda like guns.
Link Posted: 2/11/2006 6:07:42 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Sub-MOA:
Sounds like the same demonizing that the 50 BMG gets... You should go to work for the other side. You've got the patter down to a T.



Yep.

I can easily visualize those EXACT words coming out of either Dianne Feinstein's or Sarah Brady's pie-holes...
Link Posted: 2/11/2006 6:12:49 PM EDT

Originally Posted By hk940:

Originally Posted By shop_rat45:
BAN MODEL ROCKETS!!!!

It's for the children.


more like a surface to surface missile with a solid rocket.
some of these rockets go thousands of feet carry payloads close to 100# and travel many miles down range. i would just as soon not have them flying about.
.



Yeah I would just as soon not have America turn into the land of scared little pussies everytime someone goes 'boo' but by the look of things I'm not going to get my wish either.



Fuckin' amazing what you get on the board these days.
Link Posted: 2/11/2006 6:15:18 PM EDT
Link Posted: 2/11/2006 6:26:44 PM EDT
LOL

Sounds like All Things Fun said "Ban this because it's dangerous. Trust us." and the courts said "No."
Link Posted: 2/11/2006 6:30:41 PM EDT
Trying a new sig.
Link Posted: 2/11/2006 6:36:38 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/11/2006 8:49:40 PM EDT by BillofRights]

Originally Posted By hk940:

Originally Posted By shop_rat45:
BAN MODEL ROCKETS!!!!

It's for the children.


more like a surface to surface missile with a solid rocket.
some of these rockets go thousands of feet carry payloads close to 100# and travel many miles down range. i would just as soon not have them flying about.

.




Yeah and if (God Forbid) they ever figure out how to attach those Pre-Ban Lawn Darts to the business end of their missiles, we would have untold WMD raining down on our streets.

Thank God you and the ATFE are looking out for our welfare.
Link Posted: 2/11/2006 6:38:29 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Krazny13:

And the majority of the rockets are not SAM's. They are MAYBE a pount and they can go up just over 3,000 feet. Most don't break 1,500 without a second stage. Some are capable of carrying an egg.



And what if that egg had been injected with a deadly virus, eh?
Link Posted: 2/11/2006 6:40:33 PM EDT
Based on the judge's statement regarding the ATF's expertise, I'd say that now there's a court precedent.

Link Posted: 2/11/2006 6:44:50 PM EDT
You still have to get FAA clearence for the fun stuff.

We where afriad of lunching a rocket we built in 2002, do to homeland security stuff.

It had a ceicling aroud 2000ft and had a electronic guidence system in it.
Link Posted: 2/11/2006 6:53:42 PM EDT

Originally Posted By AyeGuy:

Originally Posted By Krazny13:

And the majority of the rockets are not SAM's. They are MAYBE a pount and they can go up just over 3,000 feet. Most don't break 1,500 without a second stage. Some are capable of carrying an egg.



And what if that egg had been injected with a deadly virus, eh?



There are probably more guarunteed methods of delivering a deadly egg payload than strapping it to a model rocket and pushing the button. It didn't get my green army man into space, and it surely wont drop that egg right where you want it.
Link Posted: 2/11/2006 7:04:10 PM EDT

Originally Posted By TheRedHorseman:
good to hear!



a big +1
Link Posted: 2/11/2006 7:24:29 PM EDT

Originally Posted By hk940:

Originally Posted By shop_rat45:
BAN MODEL ROCKETS!!!!

It's for the children.


more like a surface to surface missile with a solid rocket.
some of these rockets go thousands of feet carry payloads close to 100# and travel many miles down range. i would just as soon not have them flying about.


+1

You could shoot down an aircraft with one of those things. Ban them all.
Link Posted: 2/11/2006 8:13:37 PM EDT
all i am saying is it's an excellent delivery vehicle for an ABC warhead.
Link Posted: 2/11/2006 8:20:40 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/11/2006 8:21:52 PM EDT by HeavyMetal]
Link Posted: 2/11/2006 8:26:55 PM EDT
Link Posted: 2/11/2006 8:32:35 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/11/2006 8:33:11 PM EDT by Sub-MOA]

Originally Posted By hk940:
all i am saying is it's an excellent delivery vehicle for an ABC warhead.



As opposed to a pickup or a backpack? (or an RC aircraft )

Link Posted: 2/11/2006 8:33:25 PM EDT

Originally Posted By hk940:
all i am saying is it's an excellent delivery vehicle for an ABC warhead.



Better to be silent and thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.
Link Posted: 2/11/2006 8:33:26 PM EDT

Originally Posted By hk940:
all i am saying is it's an excellent delivery vehicle for an ABC warhead.



Link Posted: 2/11/2006 8:42:11 PM EDT

Originally Posted By hk940:
all i am saying is it's an excellent delivery vehicle for an ABC warhead.



Quite right, senator feinstein.
Link Posted: 2/11/2006 8:53:34 PM EDT

Originally Posted By hk940:
all i am saying is it's an excellent delivery vehicle for an ABC warhead.




Why would ABC need a warhead? They don't need a warhead, they deliver their weapons directly into our homes via network TV.
Link Posted: 2/11/2006 9:07:50 PM EDT

Originally Posted By hk940:
all i am saying is it's an excellent delivery vehicle for an ABC warhead.



I think you'd have a better chance of dropping your "warhead" onto yourself than onto your target.
Link Posted: 2/11/2006 9:18:37 PM EDT
I filled the nose cone with gun powder as a kid once...

Link Posted: 2/11/2006 9:26:51 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/11/2006 9:27:49 PM EDT by liberals-R-retarded]
Link Posted: 2/11/2006 10:04:06 PM EDT
Does this mean that people do not need to get a LEUP to buy bigger rocket motors such as H-L motor sizes. It will mak my life easier.
Link Posted: 2/11/2006 10:18:53 PM EDT

Originally Posted By hk940:
all i am saying is it's an excellent delivery vehicle for an ABC warhead.



Umm...that you chucky?
Link Posted: 2/12/2006 8:18:00 AM EDT
A good buddy of mine at work got out of model rocketry several years ago.
He stated that the hassle, badgering, hounding, needling, frog-hair splitting by the BATF was beyond putting up with.
It was so bad, he sold his stuff and got out of the hobby altogether.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top