DavidMcCann
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 15, 2016
- Messages
- 2,656
- Reaction score
- 180
Gonna quit when I'm behind
Last edited:
Let me make things clear right off because I can see where this discussion is headed . I am completely biased and non supportive of a single manufacture for the sake of this discussion. Mark the letter that you posted is from TRA / NAR . It states that THEY are aware of a growing problem with CTI's VMAX motors and delay snuffing , and require electronic deployment as a solution to a larger problem. I don't see anywhere in the letter any type of evidence that CTI either cares or knows of the problem , or even that they acknowledge the problem with a possible solution . I believe what some people are asking , especially with the MESS reports , about are the manufactures ( CTI in this case ) seeing the reports ? Also , if there is a known problem with a certain type of motor , why are they still allowed to be sold to the general market. Off the top of your head , how many people that fly vmax motors that come with a delay for motor ejection are on this form , and are able to see this message from TRA / NAR ? How many LPR flyers that are buying E/F/G motors that may not be at large launches to fly them do not know they need electronic deployment ? I believe that ALL VMAX motors should be sold as plugged only until a solution to the problem can be found .
Eric
Eric, I have an email out to the person who runs Motorcato.org to see if I can find out if the manufacturers, or a subset of them, are on the distribution list. Best I can do at the moment.
As to communications, that is always an issue to reach all people potentially involved/infected. No single method will get it done. I will use TRA as an example. For a long time the only comms would be in the form of High Power Rocketry magazine, and likely an annual mailing for the elections of BOD members. Then they started the mail list, which worked well for a time. Email lists though are not easy to archive etc making searching them a bit trying. Also, many email providers filters mass email distribution as spam so some people signed up for the list stopped getting the emails. Then came the TRA forum. A good idea in theory that likely has not panned out as intended from a volume participation standpoint.
If you have suggestions as how to improve the distribution of information such as the CTI announcement being discussed here or perhaps the how and why of MESS reports please shoot me a PM.
.The letter is one piece of evidence. As I said previously, I am attempting to verify if CTI received this letter or other communications. To this end, I have an email out to Anthony Cesaroni. I will report back what I find out.
I propose that once a month , each vendor gets sent a email with only the motors that they have produced and have failed . It would be a very easy spread sheet to set up and just a simple click and send . This way there is no denying the fact that they will have real time ( to a degree ) data and other then that , there is not much more anybody can do . Mark works hard behind the scene and this hobby should not drive him away because of having to do to much after hours.
Eric
I propose that once a month , each vendor gets sent a email with only the motors that they have produced and have failed . It would be a very easy spread sheet to set up and just a simple click and send . This way there is no denying the fact that they will have real time ( to a degree ) data and other then that , there is not much more anybody can do . Mark works hard behind the scene and this hobby should not drive him away because of having to do to much after hours.
Eric
I do not have any further updates on the communications issue that I can share. Suffice it to say that considerable efforts were expended on communicating this to CTI. This was mentioned earlier by Steve Shannon, President of Tripoli, and expounded upon by him to me. Some might not take that as proof, but I have known Steve for 10 years under some occasionally trying circumstances, and his word is proof enough for me on the subject.
David,
The data are just what was presented in first hand reports in this thread and complaints made directly to TMT and S&T.
When the delay problems first appeared, efforts were made to contact CTI about them. Then the fire happened which was a terrible thing for CTI and of course affected their priorities. Then this thread with several first hand reports (no longer anecdotal) of delay snuffing. Following a short discussion, NAR and TRA realized they had to act to limit how Vmax motors are used at our launches. It's that simple.
As far as wondering what the bylaws say, why don't you read them? They're on the TRA website.
There are no deep dark secrets here. We just want to make sure that correspondence between us and manufacturers is kept private so we can discuss things frankly. Companies and organizations such as ourselves communicate differently when they have an expectation that their conversations will be held confidential as opposed to having everything recorded and released publicly.
Unfortunately, by respecting that confidentiality we leave ourselves exposed to wild speculation and accusations by people who just want to stir the pot.
Thank you Steve.
If the data is so damning that the motors have to be restricted, I can't understand why it can't be shared.
Unfortunately, by respecting that confidentiality we leave ourselves exposed to wild speculation and accusations by people who just want to stir the pot.
Personally, I think we should try to revise the NFPA to require motor manufacturers to provide data on production numbers to the testing orgs.
Enter your email address to join: