I chose to make the announcement in as many places as I could in order to get the word out, but that makes it difficult to participate in all of the discussions that follow. This is what I posted yesterday on the TRA forum, which I would encourage everyone in Tripoli to follow. There we have slightly more freedom to discuss internal business (although that hasn’t been part of this discussion).
This wasn't a sudden decision, even though it might seem so to those affected by it. As I've explained before it included bits and pieces of discussions held online, in person with people, conversations with other board members, several emails back and forth among board members, and finally a motion, discussion, second and vote during the most recent board meeting.
Why not allow a "grace period?" That's simple. Once we (on the board) have agreed that something has the potential to be dangerous, we have a responsibility to do something. Delaying our response to a possibly unsafe condition could be negligent. I think the question asked by the family of an injured person would go like this: "You knew about this and still allowed it to continue?" I don't want to have to answer that question. Yes, it is inconvenient and I am sorry for that. Sometimes safety related things are. I'm old enough to remember people complaining mightily about safety belts.
In answer to the suggestion that we should provide data showing that the electronic devices are unsafe: No, we don't have to prove that a magnetic switch or any other kind of switch is unsafe before prohibiting the way something is used at one of our launches. It's up to the manufacturers to show how they are safe. Now before you go accusing me of saying these devices are unsafe, I'm not. I'm saying that they are being used in ways the board never anticipated when we approved the WiFi switch at LDRS 36. What sold us on the WiFi switch was security, optical isolation, the need to trigger two solid state devices and the fact that every time it powers up it's in the OFF position. We never anticipated that users would begin carrying rockets to the RSO table with the power to the WiFi switch on. We were thinking about the increased safety provided by the WiFi switch while putting the rocket on the rail and then arming it from a safer distance and not up on a ladder. We also never anticipated that other devices, such as the magnetic switch, would be assumed to be equivalent.
But we absolutely know that completely disconnecting the battery from the firing elements is safe and works in all instances, for all devices, without having to create special instructions for each. That's easier for our RSOs and Launch Directors.
Regarding the magnetic switch, I've heard from users who will not use them again and I've heard from people who bought one for every rocket they have. I've heard from Adrian that they come up in the last state they were in and I've heard from a few users that they come up with their outputs on every time power it applied. What is the actual power on status?
Some of you have complained that you've seen rockets fail during recovery and that is where we should place our worry. This isn't an "exclusive or"; we have plenty of worry to go around. Bad recoveries are a problem that need to be addressed, not by simply moving rockets further out, but by increasing the likelihood that a parachute comes out. But this is a case of comparing higher probability and low actual risk of injury against something that is lower probability but higher risk of injury. With proper range management, bad recoveries have an extremely low probability of striking someone, whereas when ejection charges go off or sustainer motors light with multiple people around, the probability of injury is much higher. When that happens in the spectator area or at the RSO table, the chance that there will be more people nearby is much higher. That is what this rule is intended to prevent - unexpected problems near other people. Somebody on TRF poked fun at this, claiming that he wasn't afraid of being struck by a plastic nose cone. I am, and I'm afraid of others being struck, even on small models. But it might not be the nose cone. It could be flash burns, eye damage, or hearing loss.
And finally, if you are seeing or hearing discharges at peoples tables while they are prepping, they are doing something wrong. To blame that on mechanical switches points to either using the wrong switch or using the switch wrong. All charges must be inhibited until at the pad and pointing up in a safe direction.
A friend I have yet to meet suggested today that we need to create some definitions and performance criteria specific to our hobby, against which we can evaluate switches (mechanical and electronic) used for rocketry. If we do that I would probably ask him to serve as chair and I would ask for the manufacturers of switches and avionics (specifically those which control energetics in rockets) to volunteer to serve on the committee under him. This would not be a quick process, but perhaps it would help our members. Other deliverables might be boilerplate wiring suggestions.
He also told me that I needed a new can of worms, having opened up this one. He's probably right.
