4F black powder

rocket sok
SilicdyneTRF
Onebadhawk
Wildman Rocketry
The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
One could argue that the charge wells in a rocket are muzzle loading cannons. Just cannons that are inside the rocket and fired electronically.
 
Winston said:
I'm more than pretty sure. My question is then, "Why is this allowed to stand?" Potential felons who are not so only by luck should be demanding that NAR and Tripoli join forces to fix this instead of ignoring the issue. The allowance of a 1lb can of BP for use as a gas generator in a "safety device" (rocket recovery system) without the insane requirement for a magazine to store it and a LEUP is a no-brainer. Stop playing the odds because, eventually, someone's going to lose.

EDIT: with the NAR/Tripoli "APCP as explosive" lawsuit against the BATFE, there was a commercial constituency of APCP motor manufacturers behind it as well as a groundswell of HPR fliers who realized it would greatly harm the sport. Not so with the BP recovery issue where the amount of BP sold for that purpose is minuscule and, therefore, is of no interest to BP manufacturers. Fixing this one will rely entirely upon NAR and Triploi members demanding it.
Click to expand...

These are good points. I don't have the answers. It is ridiculous to be able to own powder for a firearm, but not for something as regulated as hpr.
 
cavecentral said:
One could argue that the charge wells in a rocket are muzzle loading cannons. Just cannons that are inside the rocket and fired electronically.
Click to expand...

We are not a rocketry forum. We are all here to promote the safe use of antique firearms.
 
Winston said:
I'm more than pretty sure. My question is then, "Why is this allowed to stand?" Potential felons who are not so only by luck should be demanding that NAR and Tripoli join forces to fix this instead of ignoring the issue. The allowance of a 1lb can of BP for use as a gas generator in a "safety device" (rocket recovery system) without the insane requirement for a magazine to store it and a LEUP is a no-brainer. Stop playing the odds because, eventually, someone's going to lose.

EDIT: with the NAR/Tripoli "APCP as explosive" lawsuit against the BATFE, there was a commercial constituency of APCP motor manufacturers behind it as well as a groundswell of HPR fliers who realized it would greatly harm the sport. Not so with the BP recovery issue where the amount of BP sold for that purpose is minuscule and, therefore, is of no interest to BP manufacturers. Fixing this one will rely entirely upon NAR and Triploi members demanding it.
Click to expand...

Going to court against the BATFE is useless. You're just wasting money. You'd be better off giving "election donations" to the right people and having them change it. That's the reason it is the way it is now......the NRA gave the money to the right people to make it happen. It's corruption any way you look at it, and that seems to be the american way.
 
The federal govn has deep pockets and will drag it out till you are in the poor house.
 
Davidtmp said:
Going to court against the BATFE is useless. You're just wasting money. You'd be better off giving "election donations" to the right people and having them change it. That's the reason it is the way it is now......the NRA gave the money to the right people to make it happen. It's corruption any way you look at it, and that seems to be the american way.
Click to expand...

The NRA (of which I am a Lifetime Member) is primarily a Civil Rights lobbying organization with the Civil Right being the Second amendment. Unfortunately, there is no such Constitutional protection for hobby rocketry. Taking black powder away from muzzleloading firearms constitutes an infringment upon this Right. Keeping the wolves at bay is not corruption. It's Citizen Activism at work and protected by the First amendment.

I need to cut them a check.
 
Last edited:
BP included in reloads is regulated as part of the reload, just as BP in motors and motor ejection charges is.

For electronic ejection, you can be provably legal using 4F BP by getting a LEUP and a magazine. Many of us have gone that route.

The difference between the APCP case, over which we sued and won, and the BP case, is that BP regulation and the firearm exceptions are written into the statute, whereas APCP was not.
 
Rrwjr said:
I don't know much about firearms so I opted to just tell the shop what I needed it for ( they asked) and I offered to show them my NAR card. They somewhat impolitely told me they wouldn't sell it to me. Apprently, since they didn't see a bunch of future sales coming from me on shooting supplies they can be choosey on who to sell it to.
Click to expand...

Sucka!

NEVER tell anyone the truth! Always tell them what they want/need to hear. "My grandpa died and left me a fortune. I am a new black powder pistol hobbiest, why do you ask?" is what they want/need to hear.
 
tmacklin said:
The NRA (of which I am a Lifetime Member) is primarily a Civil Rights lobbying organization with the Civil Right being the Second amendment. Unfortunately, there is no such Constitutional protection for hobby rocketry. Taking black powder away from muzzleloading firearms constitutes an infringment upon this Right. Keeping the wolves at bay is not corruption. It's Citizen Activism at work and protected by the First amendment.

I need to cut them a check.
Click to expand...

NRA Lifetime as well. I send them a check every month to the Political Victory Fund (NRA-PVF) or the Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA). I do it because somebody has to...guess I'm the mythical "George".
 
Ematches are also regulated items. Calling them 'ejection starters' does not change the regs.

Since I've been involved in fireworking, I've learned to make BP. It's ridiculous to pay $25/can + hazmat for crap quality powder. If I have $1 tied up in a pound I'd be surprised. Still illegal to transport without a license, though. If you made it on site it would be legal to use in a rocket...

Kevin O
 
Nessalco said:
Ematches are also regulated items. Calling them 'ejection starters' does not change the regs.

Since I've been involved in fireworking, I've learned to make BP. It's ridiculous to pay $25/can + hazmat for crap quality powder. If I have $1 tied up in a pound I'd be surprised. Still illegal to transport without a license, though. If you made it on site it would be legal to use in a rocket...

Kevin O
Click to expand...

That is crazy.
 
Our hobby is rocketry. It's ALL crazy.


Sent from my iPhone using Rocketry Forum
 
Have any rockteers ever been arrested, fined, warned, or otherwise hassled by any agency for having or using black powder?
 
Exactimator said:
Have any rockteers ever been arrested, fined, warned, or otherwise hassled by any agency for having or using black powder?
Click to expand...

Not specifically black powder but I got this https://www.sciencemadness.org/talk/viewthread.php?tid=3927 for purchasing certain items including books on the topic. I'm fascinated by the obsession of certain agencies of government with regard to a low explosive that was invented by the Chinese at least 1,000 years ago, especially considering the fact that there are numerous mixtures and compounds available in everyday commerce that are potentially much more devastating. Gasoline comes to mind.
 
I am a citizen of the State of California. I support two thirds of the countries welfare recipients. Guns are bad. That being said, I waltzed (that is not looked down upon here but gun owning is) into Walker 47 LLC in Anaheim and purchased a pound of Goex 4F black powder. I felt...wonderful. I briefly considered buying a flintlock and decided to go home and paint my rocket with another layer of primer instead. Almost ready to start final paint.

Tom
 
cavecentral said:
One could argue that the charge wells in a rocket are muzzle loading cannons. Just cannons that are inside the rocket and fired electronically.
Click to expand...
Which is why I mentioned earlier in this thread that a miniature civil war mortar barrel as ejection charge carrier would serve as an "antique firearm", but then I also pointed out that cannon aren't even specifically mentioned in the poorly written law defining "antique firearms" and are instead relying solely upon the definition of what an antique firearm isn't.
 
Exactimator said:
Have any rockteers ever been arrested, fined, warned, or otherwise hassled by any agency for having or using black powder?
Click to expand...
Don't know and doesn't matter. Eventually, the wrong set of circumstances may lead to it. Then, you're either a felon or bankrupted to prevent yourself from becoming one, assuming that's even possible and I don't think it is because a rocket is in no way an "antique firearm."
 
Ted Cochran said:
BP included in reloads is regulated as part of the reload, just as BP in motors and motor ejection charges is.

For electronic ejection, you can be provably legal using 4F BP by getting a LEUP and a magazine. Many of us have gone that route.

The difference between the APCP case, over which we sued and won, and the BP case, is that BP regulation and the firearm exceptions are written into the statute, whereas APCP was not.
Click to expand...
If you rent your abode, especially if it's a multiple occupancy structure like an apartment, good luck with that magazine.

A possible workaround, assuming you can even be granted a LEUP with a rental abode address, would be to just use someone else's magazine to store a mutli-party-owned can of 4F, like a club magazine and a club can of 4F. Is that even possible, ignoring the fact that it's a ridiculous restriction when an "antique firearm" owner can have, what, up to 50 lbs of BP without being required to store it in a magazine or possess a LEUP?
 
In a police state, the "law" is whatever the policeman thinks it is. When the policemen can pull off a caper like "Fast & Furious" and make a clean getaway, no activity no matter how harmless is safe. If you need a contemporaneous example of the hypocrisy involved, try this: https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow...career-20140327,0,4920941.story#axzz2xBVs4SA4

Nice scheme. Disarm the law abiding citizens while arming the gangsters. Makes perfect sense. :rant:
 
Last edited:
Davidtmp said:
Going to court against the BATFE is useless. You're just wasting money.
Click to expand...
It worked with the successful NAR/Tripoli lawsuit against the ridiculous "APCP as explosive" characterization by the BATFE. However, the BP in antique firearms exemption is a statute, so I don't think the BATFE would be the primary target of any effort to get it changed.

You'd be better off giving "election donations" to the right people and having them change it. That's the reason it is the way it is now......the NRA gave the money to the right people to make it happen. It's corruption any way you look at it, and that seems to be the american way.
Click to expand...
Which is why I've made comments here multiple times that people need to join hobby-related organizations like the NAR or Tripoli if they don't want their sport regulated to nothing! The "no added value" excuse for not joining either of those organizations is destroyed by the fact that there is only power in numbers and organization. If it weren't for that NAR/Triploi lawsuit against the BATFE, we'd be in sad shape right now. If it weren't for the AMA, I suspect the RC aircraft sport would be much more regulated to a ridiculous extent than it is now.
 
I wonder if all of this is a moot point, given what I found regarding pyrodex in place of true BP: https://www.pratthobbies.com/info_pages/pyrodex/pyrotest.htm

According to these guys, smokeless will work if it's given additional containment. Although I haven't personally tried, I hope to get to Sportsman's warehouse this weekend after the Desert Heat launch to pick up some Pyrodex P (finest "grind") and give it a whirl with some ground tests! Will let you know how it goes!
 
soopirV said:
I wonder if all of this is a moot point, given what I found regarding pyrodex in place of true BP: https://www.pratthobbies.com/info_pages/pyrodex/pyrotest.htm

According to these guys, smokeless will work if it's given additional containment. Although I haven't personally tried, I hope to get to Sportsman's warehouse this weekend after the Desert Heat launch to pick up some Pyrodex P (finest "grind") and give it a whirl with some ground tests! Will let you know how it goes!
Click to expand...

BATFE recently clarified that Pyrodex and other BP substitutes are treated as explosives, just the same as BP. See the opening summary of their 2013 list of explosives.
 
wfcook said:
BATFE recently clarified that Pyrodex and other BP substitutes are treated as explosives, just the same as BP. See the opening summary of their 2013 list of explosives.
Click to expand...

Yes, and that makes perfect sense as all such mixtures are designed to function by explosion (deflagration). The gas (CO2) produced takes the path of least resistance and is what propels the ball or bullet down the barrel. A substitute is just that, something that works more or less the same as the real McCoy. The big difference is what is being propelled; one is potentially lethal and the other makes the BATFE fearful. Don't forget, this agency began as an instrument of prohibition. That's what they do...prohibit stuff.

I'm done. Sorry to have hijacked this thread, but that's just how I roll.
 
Winston said:
It worked with the successful NAR/Tripoli lawsuit against the ridiculous "APCP as explosive" characterization by the BATFE. However, the BP in antique firearms exemption is a statute, so I don't think the BATFE would be the primary target of any effort to get it changed.

Which is why I've made comments here multiple times that people need to join hobby-related organizations like the NAR or Tripoli if they don't want their sport regulated to nothing! The "no added value" excuse for not joining either of those organizations is destroyed by the fact that there is only power in numbers and organization. If it weren't for that NAR/Triploi lawsuit against the BATFE, we'd be in sad shape right now. If it weren't for the AMA, I suspect the RC aircraft sport would be much more regulated to a ridiculous extent than it is now.
Click to expand...

I've heard quotes of nearly a million dollars to fight that fight. I don't think anyone is looking forward to doing that again.
 
Maybe the "shortage" of powder and substitutes is a GOOD thing! There are a few non-pyro deployment mechanisms out there, but they're pricey. This will hopefully spur invention and democratization of the technology, bringing the cost down. I, for one, would love to shed the stink and and "danger" of the bp, particularly when flying with my kids.


Sent from my iPhone using Rocketry Forum
 
tmacklin said:
In a police state, the "law" is whatever the policeman thinks it is. When the policemen can pull off a caper like "Fast & Furious" and make a clean getaway, no activity no matter how harmless is safe. If you need a contemporaneous example of the hypocrisy involved, try this: https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow...career-20140327,0,4920941.story#axzz2xBVs4SA4

Nice scheme. Disarm the law abiding citizens while arming the gangsters. Makes perfect sense. :rant:
Click to expand...

There was much celebration by the populace today in Cali however paper shredders in and around the state Capital were working overtime. One can only hope there will be more dominoes falling soon.
 

Similar threads

R3verb
Help sizing BP charges for a BT-60 tube
Replies
6
Views
380
R3verb
R3verb
scschulte
Question on types of Black Powder for ejection charge
Replies
15
Views
3K
RocketRev
RocketRev
J
HPR separation charges
Replies
9
Views
686
JamesBenMoore
J
utkan.kya
I want to adapt the ejection charge, whose material I don't know, to FFFFG black powder
Replies
2
Views
408
utkan.kya
utkan.kya
B
Question about igniting backup B.P. charges
Replies
10
Views
2K
OverTheTop
OverTheTop

Latest posts

Back
Top