Fine. Just ask yourself if your whole company should be fired because of one bad decision. We need more vendors, not fewer.
This I agree with. Be care what you wish for guys. California may only have a single vendor.
Fine. Just ask yourself if your whole company should be fired because of one bad decision. We need more vendors, not fewer.
OK. Many of you are very passionate about this and better informed than I. Has anyone besides the OP written to AT and expressed these feelings? I guarantee that concerned letters from AT customers (the more the better) will be much more effective than an impromptu boycott from this forum. And you'll give AT the chance to make it right. Unless you all just enjoy trashing a company for sport...in which case, carry on, it's a free internet.
OK. Many of you are very passionate about this and better informed than I. Has anyone besides the OP written to AT and expressed these feelings? I guarantee that concerned letters from AT customers (the more the better) will be much more effective than an impromptu boycott from this forum. And you'll give AT the chance to make it right. Unless you all just enjoy trashing a company for sport...in which case, carry on, it's a free internet.
Agreed. I am still going to burn AT because I like them. Besides, it nows seems a good way to instantly become peculiar.
And in a similar vein Browning Firearms Co. announced the public sale of fender mounts for their M2 50 Cal. Machinegun along with ammo belt guides that will fit most popular makes and models of Pickup Trucks and SUVs.
Raytheon; makers of the famous Tomahawk cruise missile, has announced collapsible launch rails that fit in the beds of all. . .
The Atomic Energy Commission. . .
And in a similar vein Browning Firearms Co. announced the public sale of fender mounts for their M2 50 Cal. Machinegun along with ammo belt guides that will fit most popular makes and models of Pickup Trucks and SUVs.
Raytheon; makers of the famous Tomahawk cruise missile, has announced collapsible launch rails that fit in the beds of all. . .
The Atomic Energy Commission. . .
Keep it civil...
I really think they're getting everything they deserve here. Whatever the actual intent, this stunt was ill conceived, and poorly executed.
There is an Aerotech Open Thread going on right now with Charlie Savoie ATs General Manager
https://www.rocketryforum.com/showthread.php?125657-AeroTech-Open-Thread
Give Charlie credit for making himself available. Those of you who might still be on the fence about your "one-strike-and-out" policy should check out the thread.
Can someone tell me what Jet Hitch is? I googled it but all it had was boating stuff that has nothing to do with rockets.
Strike two was the answer to my question that the 38mm was going to go all RMS-EZ only, that mean I will most likely be flying 18 to 29mm AT and switching my 38mm to Loki. Don't get me wrong I love AT products is a bummer that the one I just invested the most in is changing in a direction that I'm not willing to go.
There is nothing stopping bubba from strapping a rocket motor to his truck. The regulation on certifications to buy motors are self imposed by the hobby community not the government. Granted they are opening them self up for a law suit and I really don't see them selling.
Strike two was the answer to my question that the 38mm was going to go all RMS-EZ only, that mean I will most likely be flying 18 to 29mm AT and switching my 38mm to Loki. Don't get me wrong I love AT products is a bummer that the one I just invested the most in is changing in a direction that I'm not willing to go.
That I do not understand- for a single closure, which allows faster assembly, you are going to stop flying motors you admittedly like?
I yield to your grammar nazism. I didn't speak clearly. From the context, one could infer that I was concerned about losing the ability to stuff reloads in my Dr. Rocket's hardware if both the standard reload and RMS-EZ product lines were eliminated.old_dude, I'm going to play grammar nazi! Referring to reloads and DMS(disposable motor system) is kinda not right, yes?
Yeah,
I don't understand this either. The RMS-EZ is simple and easy to adjust the delay. Your first reload comes with a free new closure and delay drill tool, so no big expense there.
I encourage you to try them before you dismiss them.
Adrian
For the record the only single piece I don't have to fly RMS-EZ is the Universal Delay Drilling Tool (which isn't expensive even if I have to buy it, if its free so much the better).
I am fully aware that the Forward Closure Ring from the 38mm RAS is one of the Forward Closures that can be used with the RMS-EZ
The reason I don't want to fly the RMS-EZ's is that I LIKE assembling the regular reloads since it requires paying attention to what I am doing,the same reason I build rockets the way I do, I like doing complicated (or not simple) things right the first time.
If I wanted to fly CTI type reloads then I would have bought CTI hardware and reloads, IMO RMS-EZ now is inferior to CTI simply due to the fact that CTI motors light so much easier without special tricks like hopped up igniters to guarantee they light first shot every time.
The only thing AT RMS-EZ reloads have over CTI reloads is AT makes better hardware In My Opinion.
I usually only get two of my own flights in per day which won't change anytime soon since I fly on a budget and I do nearly all the prep work for my two of my three children's rockets (ages 6,4, and 4 months), they are just getting started in rocketry.
Did I mention I like assembling all the parts of a standard RMS reload???
Please understand I am not offended by everyone's comments and am open to discussion, a I also am not the type to hold a grudge, once I have had my say its forgotten (its my opinion and you <whoever, not specifically you Adrian> isn't changing it).
For the record the only single piece I don't have to fly RMS-EZ is the Universal Delay Drilling Tool (which isn't expensive even if I have to buy it, if its free so much the better).
I am fully aware that the Forward Closure Ring from the 38mm RAS is one of the Forward Closures that can be used with the RMS-EZ
The reason I don't want to fly the RMS-EZ's is that I LIKE assembling the regular reloads since it requires paying attention to what I am doing,the same reason I build rockets the way I do, I like doing complicated (or not simple) things right the first time.
If I wanted to fly CTI type reloads then I would have bought CTI hardware and reloads, IMO RMS-EZ now is inferior to CTI simply due to the fact that CTI motors light so much easier without special tricks like hopped up igniters to guarantee they light first shot every time.
The only thing AT RMS-EZ reloads have over CTI reloads is AT makes better hardware In My Opinion.
I usually only get two of my own flights in per day which won't change anytime soon since I fly on a budget and I do nearly all the prep work for my two of my three children's rockets (ages 6,4, and 4 months), they are just getting started in rocketry.
Did I mention I like assembling all the parts of a standard RMS reload???
Please understand I am not offended by everyone's comments and am open to discussion, a I also am not the type to hold a grudge, once I have had my say its forgotten (its my opinion and you <whoever, not specifically you Adrian> isn't changing it).
Enter your email address to join: