About Certifying Reloads and Cases

1)What is the approx cost to certify an M motor for instance?

2) How many successful tests of each required or will 1 test suffice?

3) What cooperation is needed to: Use an existing M reload by 1 manufacturer to be fired in another manufacturer's case?
Does this require cooperation of the reload maker? i.e. I assumed Gary may not have (or needed to) cooperate in the certifying of CTI reloads in his AT hdw.

4) Is it safe to say that if you want to do cross-compatibility, only the reload manufacturer HAS to cooperate?

5)For snap-ring cases: I know that a partial ruling was made by TRA but has the cross compatibility ruling now include ALL snap-ring cases?
You would think so if the assumption that everyone copied Frank's design although there have been changes / improvements with lengths, groove locations, nozzle and fwd closure designs across all the current manufacturers.

Interesting, 96 views but no one has any answers or comments?

Dave A said:

Interesting, 96 views but no one has any answers or comments?

Click to expand...

Probably because only 5-6 people know that answer.

Some of the questions are answered in the Standards & Testing Committee Motor Testing Manual of the NAR:

https://www.nar.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/ST-MotorTestingManual.pdf

1)What is the approx cost to certify an M motor for instance?
Single Use:$25.00 per motor type; Reloadable: $40.00 per motor type.

2) How many successful tests of each required or will 1 test suffice?
two for M motors, for smaller 3

3)
Applicant must be an authorized representative of the manufacturer; motors may
not be submitted for certification testing by other parties, except per 2.1.3 below.

Dave, I had some of the answers too. I wanted to verify them before answering you, but have had time the last few days.

Additional costs to consider. The manufacturer needs to provide hardware to testing org. New case comes out it needs to be provided. If you come out with a new propellant, I believe it would need to be run through DOT testing.

I think the cross certification deal works, but could cause a few issues. Let's say you have a CTI load in an AT case and it experiences a CATO destroying the case. Assuming it was found to be an issue that would be a warranty issue, whose hardware do
you get? Same could have happened flying any combination of Loki/AWM/Gorilla/Kosdon/

markkoelsch said:

Assuming it was found to be an issue that would be a warranty issue, whose hardware do you get?

Click to expand...

CTI is quite clear on that:

In the event of a warranty claim where a ProX™ grain is used in a compatible motor case, we replace (on a case by case basis) the hardware with our ProX™ brand hardware, not a monetary refund or a case from the original manufacturer.

Click to expand...

Aerotech makes the local, high-volume dealer provide the case as part of their "great deal" with them. Does any other manufacturer do this?

Dave A said:

1)What is the approx cost to certify an M motor for instance?.....

Click to expand...

can you be specific on what you want to cross-certify?

I would like to see AT 75mm reloads certified in snap ring cases. Why?
1)AT hdw is getting scarce and am not that sure if that issue has been resolved. It's more expensive anyway.
2) Gary could sell more reloads, they are cheaper per Newton than ANY other comparable reload. There is a lot of snap ring hdw out there.
3) All you need is the Prox adapter and the o-ring for the inside of the nozzle holder, ALL AT parts in the reload are used. You also use the AT seal disc.
4) Did I say it's cheaper and you don't wear out your AMW nozzle?

M-1297 in Kosdon 6000 case with Prox spacer.

Dave A said:

I would like to see AT 75mm reloads certified in snap ring cases....

Click to expand...

this really would be up to AT to do the certification.

Dave A said:

....1)AT hdw is getting scarce ...

Click to expand...

talk to your local CTI dealer to see if something can be done about the hardware.

Mentioned in a thread the other day - ATGM said the 98 mm hardware is shipping this week. Only size that was an issue I believe. That and some 38 mm closures which are shipping too.

Dave A said:

I would like to see AT 75mm reloads certified in snap ring cases. Why?
1)AT hdw is getting scarce and am not that sure if that issue has been resolved. It's more expensive anyway.
2) Gary could sell more reloads, they are cheaper per Newton than ANY other comparable reload. There is a lot of snap ring hdw out there.
3) All you need is the Prox adapter and the o-ring for the inside of the nozzle holder, ALL AT parts in the reload are used. You also use the AT seal disc.
4) Did I say it's cheaper and you don't wear out your AMW nozzle?

Click to expand...

Could just fly as EX, no?

I will be flying them as EX, we are fortunate that our club allows them to be flown all days of the meet.
Other clubs are not that fortunate and would be nice if they were certified for regular use.

Dave A said:

I will be flying them as EX, we are fortunate that our club allows them to be flown all days of the meet.
Other clubs are not that fortunate and would be nice if they were certified for regular use.

Click to expand...

Any current Prefect should know it is no longer an issue at TRA launches because since LDRS 31, TRA allows concurrent Research/Commercial activities at TRA launches.

Bob

Awesome, I did not know that.

bobkrech said:

Any current Prefect should know it is no longer an issue at TRA launches because since LDRS 31, TRA allows concurrent Research/Commercial activities at TRA launches.

Bob

Click to expand...

That is true if the club elected to make all their launches research only. We still have one launch that is commercial only for the first two days. There are still TRA launches that are commercial only.

cwbullet said:

That is true if the club elected to make all their launches research only. We still have one launch that is commercial only for the first two days. There are still TRA launches that are commercial only.

Click to expand...

I think bob's point is, there's really no reason to have a commercial launch anymore.

dumb question (1) How does this affect minors. I thought at research launches kids are not allowed? True? My son (aka 'the boy') has his Tripoli mentor cert, for him is this his ticket in?

Dumb question (2) research launch in California? How does that work.

Dumb questions (2.5) How do hybrids fit into this for EX? Specifically California.

Mike K

There are still reasons for Tripoli commercial launches. It has to do with who is allowed out on the pads. The Central VA group hosts the Battle of the Rockets launch and we do those as commercial launches because of the difference in pad access for commercial vs. research launches. I would agree that most of the reasons for Tripoli commercial launches has been eliminated with the new rules, but not all. I think it comes down to pad access now.

cwbullet said:

That is true if the club elected to make all their launches research only. We still have one launch that is commercial only for the first two days. There are still TRA launches that are commercial only.

Click to expand...

Certainly the launch director has the right to further restrict pad access at research launches, however the standard TRA pad access rules are published here.

https://www.tripoli.org/Portals/1/Documents/Safety Code/OPSC 2013 v1.0.pdf

kramer714 said:

dumb question (1) How does this affect minors. I thought at research launches kids are not allowed? True? My son (aka 'the boy') has his Tripoli mentor cert, for him is this his ticket in?

Dumb question (2) research launch in California? How does that work.

Dumb questions (2.5) How do hybrids fit into this for EX? Specifically California.

Mike K

Click to expand...

1.) For TRA HP participation junior members, the access rules for research launches are the same as for commercial launches: Minor TRA HP participation junior members access to the high power pads must be supervised.

2.) Research launches are not allowed in CA under CSFM regulations. A launch director could request an exemption from the CSFM office to waive the regulation but there should be no expectation that it would be granted.

3.) See 3.) above.

Handeman said:

There are still reasons for Tripoli commercial launches. It has to do with who is allowed out on the pads. The Central VA group hosts the Battle of the Rockets launch and we do those as commercial launches because of the difference in pad access for commercial vs. research launches. I would agree that most of the reasons for Tripoli commercial launches has been eliminated with the new rules, but not all. I think it comes down to pad access now.

Click to expand...

Not really. AFAIK there is no longer a TRA prohibition concerning the colocation of a concurrent TRA commercial/research launch. The only difference is the HP pad access requirement for minors and invited guests. At a TRA commercial launch, access to the HP pads is permitted for minors or invited guest only when supervised by a senior TRA member. At a TRA research launch, high power pad access is further restricted so that invited guests and non-TRA minors can not access the (research) HP pads. A careful reading of the TRA HP Safety policies suggests simply setting up a row of L1 HP pads for commercial H-J motor use fulfills all TRA commercial HP launch requirements for minors and invited guests without violating the TRA research HP pad access requirements.

Bob

bobkrech said:

Not really. AFAIK there is no longer a TRA prohibition concerning the colocation of a concurrent TRA commercial/research launch. The only difference is the HP pad access requirement for minors and invited guests. At a TRA commercial launch, access to the HP pads is permitted for minors or invited guest only when supervised by a senior TRA member. At a TRA research launch, high power pad access is further restricted so that invited guests and non-TRA minors can not access the (research) HP pads. A careful reading of the TRA HP Safety policies suggests simply setting up a row of L1 HP pads for commercial H-J motor use fulfills all TRA commercial HP launch requirements for minors and invited guests without violating the TRA research HP pad access requirements.

Bob

Click to expand...

I'm not disagreeing about the concurrent use of commercial and research pads, but without the resources to set up multiple pad sets like that, we still need the commercial launches. In our case, with the Battle of the Rockets competition, it has to do with pad access for children under 18 (there are high school teams competing) and invited guests (FOGE sponsors) that need to access pads. Since the competition allows motors up to K, and require use of the away cell trailer launcher (there is only one) for heavier rockets, setting up two ranges is out of the question. A commercial launch is the only option.

With that said, that is the only commercial launch we run these days unless there are special requests and circumstances.