city parks admin ban model rocketry, open to establishing guidelines,

I always like to dress properly for solemn occasions like city council meetings. :wink:

Here you go. https://www.mossyoakproperties.com/Property/PropertyDetails.aspx?property_listing_id=16796&rn=209956 This is a nice country drive about 1 hour north of North Little Rock. Give the realtor a call. He might know someone in the area that would allow you to fly on their property. What do you have to lose?

Cheers

I would be curious if they charged a fee for soccer. The park near me has a rental fee to play softball, baseball, soccer, but I've flown rockets there and never had a problem. I've seen people flying R/C airplanes there, too. The fee may only be to reserve the field but I have no idea.

tmacklin said:

Here you go. https://www.mossyoakproperties.com/Property/PropertyDetails.aspx?property_listing_id=16796&rn=209956 This is a nice country drive about 1 hour north of North Little Rock. Give the realtor a call. He might know someone in the area that would allow you to fly on their property. What do you have to lose?

Cheers

Click to expand...

Who wants to drive an hour north if there is a large location within 10 minutes.

I have strong issues with making up rules to stop legal activities. We are a free republic. They were concerned about
the issue of danger to property and others. They learned that the activity was not dangerous and then present these onerous rules.

We'll go to the Parks Commission Board Meeting and object to points of the rule.

what are the thoughts about involving the local news reporting, newspaper or other?

bkcoph1 said:

what are the thoughts about involving the local news reporting, newspaper or other?

Click to expand...

Well, my thoughts are that going to the press may be the only method by which the individual citizen has any redress of grievance as noted in the First amendment. If you can find a sympathetic venue and shine the spotlight of public attention on your problem, others may take note and ad their voices to yours and put pressure upon these otherwise unaccountable bureaucrats. It's unfortunate that the "free republic" you mention only reflects the way things used to be, not as they now are. Very sad in my opinion.

As for driving an hour north to obtain the liberty to pursue happiness, I'd personally rather do that than butt heads with butt heads. But then again, I'm a country boy. Good luck to you.

What I would like is your permission to e-mail / call the 2 policy makers (Jeff Caplinger/ Ian Hope) and let them know what I think about their policy. Trouble is by time I get done with them you'll most likely have to find another location.

rcktnut said:

What I would like is your permission to e-mail / call the 2 policy makers (Jeff Caplinger/ Ian Hope) and let them know what I think about their policy. Trouble is by time I get done with them you'll most likely have to find another location.

Click to expand...

LOL! Amen to that brother!

In my city we have both state and city parks. There are two state parks that are conducive to flying airplanes, one of those two is suitable for LPR. However, operating toy or model rockets or aircraft in NYS parks is banned without a permit. I do have a permit to fly R/C aircraft through a local club at one of those parks. The state will not issue permits for the 2nd one (the one suitable for LPR). They will, and have, shown up at times to a) kick people out of the 2nd field, and b) check permits at the 1st field

I called the city parks dept about flying in some of their larger parks - roughly 4.5 acres. After their initial shock of someone calling and asking for permission, their response basically was "Why are you asking for permission to use the park as a park? Go ahead and use it. It's a park. That's what it's there for" It's nice that someone gets it...

Missouri public areas run by the Department of Conservation specifically ban model rocketry. That's almost any park outside of a town.

The city of North Little Rock, AR has a Mayor-City Council form of government. This body has the ultimate power of the purse as well as the responsibility to create and vote on local ordinances. All departments within your city are subordinate to this body and this body, the mayor and city council, are subordinate and accountable to the people who elected them. If the parks department is being uncooperative, lobby your council persons and mayor.

https://www.northlr.org/government/officials.asp

One again, good luck.

bkcoph1 said:

Can anyone make any recommendations?

Limiting to C size motors,
Requiring $50 tax
Requiring pre activity approval

Click to expand...

1. Show them the FAA classification of a class one rocket, tell them you would like to use that as a guideline. If they want any HPR out of the ordinance, agree to G limit. Show them an Estes catalog, should be able to get at least E impulse motors. Tell them it allows you to fly slightly bigger models safely and they don't fly any higher than a C powered model, and are actually easier to track and recover than the lower powered rockets.

2. An authorization permit is not the worst thing if needed to fly, they may feel that the cost should be the permit holders responsibility, but once received should be for as long as you want it, and not have to be renewed each year. One permit holder at a launch should be all that is needed, other flyers at the time can launch under your permit.

3. Requiring a permit every time you wish to launch is about the worst possible part of this proposal. Explain to them that the weather is the main factor as to when you can fly. Waiting up to 3 days for an answer is bull. Tell them you would like to be able to make a last minute decision to launch on a nice calm day/ evening if the field is not in use. I'd work on that no weekends also, what is the difference if nobody else is using the field?


As the proposal is written now, it leaves little to be desired. You should be able to go to your cities council meeting and state your case to them since they ultimately decide on making the proposal a code. It may take more time before a final resolution, but you don't have to much to lose the way it is now.

tmacklin said:

The city of North Little Rock, AR has a Mayor-City Council form of government. This body has the ultimate power of the purse as well as the responsibility to create and vote on local ordinances. All departments within your city are subordinate to this body and this body, the mayor and city council, are subordinate and accountable to the people who elected them. If the parks department is being uncooperative, lobby your council persons and mayor.

https://www.northlr.org/government/officials.asp

One again, good luck.

Click to expand...

Better answer: ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Form a club, have the club pay the $50 annual permit fee, and then let the club members and their guests launch for $1 a day, or let members purchase a season pass for $5-$10. You're not trying to get rich, just pay for expenses.

Better yet, get 5 people to form a NAR section, use $5M NAR insurance policy as leverage to lock in your club rights to use the park and have the club pay the $50 annual launch permit fee and the money back using the launch fee system.

BTW: As Ken said, we pay real dollars for our CMASS launch site permits which amounts to ~$3,000 per year or about $20 per member per year for ~ 14 launch days ($200 to $300 per day) so I don't think $50 for an annual permit is too bad.

tmacklin said:

The city of North Little Rock, AR has a Mayor-City Council form of government. This body has the ultimate power of the purse as well as the responsibility to create and vote on local ordinances. All departments within your city are subordinate to this body and this body, the mayor and city council, are subordinate and accountable to the people who elected them. If the parks department is being uncooperative, lobby your council persons and mayor.

Click to expand...

The reality is, as one author put it, that "some pigs are more equal than other pigs," or something...like that. From previous posts, there is an abutting land-owner (Herr Pfeiffer?) that they appear to be very concerned about appeasing. Since this guy seems to be swinging a lot of local weight, the odds of Joe-Blow Rocket Guy by himself swaying anybody isn't going to do it.

rcktnut said:

1. Show them the FAA classification of a class one rocket, tell them you would like to use that as a guideline. If they want any HPR out of the ordinance, agree to G limit. Show them an Estes catalog, should be able to get at least E impulse motors. Tell them it allows you to fly slightly bigger models safely and they don't fly any higher than a C powered model, and are actually easier to track and recover than the lower powered rockets.

2. An authorization permit is not the worst thing if needed to fly, they may feel that the cost should be the permit holders responsibility, but once received should be for as long as you want it, and not have to be renewed each year. One permit holder at a launch should be all that is needed, other flyers at the time can launch under your permit.

3. Requiring a permit every time you wish to launch is about the worst possible part of this proposal. Explain to them that the weather is the main factor as to when you can fly. Waiting up to 3 days for an answer is bull. Tell them you would like to be able to make a last minute decision to launch on a nice calm day/ evening if the field is not in use. I'd work on that no weekends also, what is the difference if nobody else is using the field?

As the proposal is written now, it leaves little to be desired. You should be able to go to your cities council meeting and state your case to them since they ultimately decide on making the proposal a code. It may take more time before a final resolution, but you don't have to much to lose the way it is now.

Click to expand...

I agree a lot with this. Again, anybody you can get on your side (schools, boy/girl scouts, etc.) to get better terms would likely be a big help. Does NAR have anything like "Model Regulations" (model as in template) for cities/local authorities? Since so much is written into FAA regs, I'm guessing not, but it seems to time for assuming cities and towns will just treat model rocketry with "common sense" may be a thing of the past.

When it comes to rockets, the FAA, your state and your municipality require you to obtain the permission of the landowner before you launch any rockets, and it ain't your land. It's the city's land and they administer the land for public use, and you are one of many users. If they have a municipal code that says you need a permit, you need a permit. You may not think it makes any sense, but it is the local law.

The city is rightfully concerned that something bad might happen if you land a rocket on abutting property and it does damage. Why? Because they are legally liable for it since the rocket was launched from city property. As the ones responsible for the land, and the use of the land, they are legally liable if your rocket causes injury or property damage when it is launched from a public park, and this is the reason why I suggest you form a NAR section and be covered under the NAR $5M group liability coverage. This relieves the city from is major concern, that they will have to pay money if you screw up because you do not have the resources to pay.

City government is there to serve everyone, not just you, and when it comes to liability, they have to protect everyone from your activities on their property. If you are civil, and can explain how you want to use the park safely, understand their concerns, and act responsibly, I seriously doubt you will have problems getting access to the park.

NAR does have handouts to help you make your case to the city. https://www.nar.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Sport-Rocket-Safety-Handout.pdf is a simple handout that outlines the safety of the hobby. https://www.nar.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/MRSafetyCode.pdf is the model rocket safety code that is applicable in a 50 states.
The NAR website has a lot more information. https://www.nar.org/

Bob

you can not launch anything larger than a D motor on that site and still be covered by the NAR insurance. according to the code the minimum size needed for an E motor is a square 1000' per side.
Rex

Thanks Bob, The Estes people sent a good handout and I found a pdf from NAR about sport rocketry.

One of the Parks board members is a pilot and is concerned that the park lies within FAA Class C airspace.

Your point about governance is well spoken, but, the activity is a legal hobby or sport, and they allow kite flying, picnicking, geo caching, and many other activities without permitting or fees.

https://www.nar.org/pdf/hobby_overview.pdf,

The Estes handout is their: Estes Model Rocketry & Engine Information

From a February 19, 1979 letter from Canada’s Chief Inspector of Explosives, concerning the reason for deregulation of model rocketry in that country, “Throughout the years, not one disabling accident has been reported in approved activities. It has long been realized that the engines and igniters themselves present no significant hazard in themselves even if abused or involved in an external fire”. More than three decades later this statement still holds true. Consider the following facts about Estes model rocketry and Estes engines:

I left the rest off as its 3 pages.

Rex R said:

you can not launch anything larger than a D motor on that site and still be covered by the NAR insurance. according to the code the minimum size needed for an E motor is a square 1000' per side.
Rex

Click to expand...

but, you can use timers and other flight computers to minimize the drift under silk (nylon).

bkcoph1 said:

but, you can use timers and other flight computers to minimize the drift under silk (nylon).

Click to expand...

No that is minimum launch site dimensions. Any thing less means no insurance coverage. I did not know the size of your field, what is it? Must admit though seems a bit large for an E. F&G motors same dimension.

I've got a number of rockets that rarely land more than 50' from the pad w/o electronics(F12,F22,F50) but, a rules fanatic would still have kittens if I were to launch them from that park, and that is what you will have to contend with, close scrutiny. your space just isn't wide enough(under the code) to allow any motor bigger than a D.
Rex

1650' x 650' is what he said earlier.
Rex

Burns Park Soccer Quad (with 5 fields)

remeasured, 1350ft north to south and 650 west to east

Wait a minute! How can any governmental body enforce any law or ordinance before it has been enacted????? I searched the codes for the City of North Little Rock, AR and found NOTHING that specifically prohibited the flying of model rockets within that city at the present time. I say go fly your rockets using the common sense that God gave you and let the burden of proof be upon them. If a cop issues you a citation, it will have to specify the law or ordinance that you violated. They'll have to make one up in the field!

It has often been said that "we are a nation of laws, not of men". Since when do the police have legislative powers?

I know of at least one lawyer who posts on this forum. Perhaps he could comment on this subject?


Or maybe they do: https://forums.vwvortex.com/showthr...9-drivers-in-3-years-for-not-speaking-English

tmacklin said:

Wait a minute! How can any governmental body enforce any law or ordinance before it has been enacted????? I searched the codes for the City of North Little Rock, AR and found NOTHING that specifically prohibited the flying of model rockets within that city at the present time. I say go fly your rockets using the common sense that God gave you and let the burden of proof be upon them. If a cop issues you a citation, it will have to specify the law or ordinance that you violated. They'll have to make one up in the field!

Click to expand...

Nuisance laws probably would be their first choice, especially on public property.

This regulation is tough. After what they have been presented, all these hoops are clearly a way to make it too much hassle to use it like you wanted. The point was to have a place to just go launch when your schedule and the weather lined up, right?

I feel your pain. With 4 children's activities and schedules, a club that is an hour and a half away, might as well be in Japan. I'm very glad to have a place close by.

bkcoph1 said:

View attachment 246889

Burns Park Soccer Quad (with 5 fields)

remeasured, 1350ft north to south and 650 west to east

Click to expand...

You have to admit, it's a tempting looking field. Good corners to use variable to the wind direction, now out of the northwest, but in the summer out of the southwest. Wind's usually less than 5 for the most part.