Then he doesn't understand the rule nor the reason for it. Which may or may not help you change his mind...It is not the bulb he says is illegal it is the fuse.
Then he doesn't understand the rule nor the reason for it. Which may or may not help you change his mind...It is not the bulb he says is illegal it is the fuse.
The rule that kc9rod quoted is unclear. It says "I will launch my rockets with an electrical launch system and electrical motor igniters". By including the adjective "motor", I could argue that the intent was that the igniter should directly light the motor, and not be used indirectly by, for example, lighting a fuse, a flash pan, or a spider that then ignites the motor. The final clause could indeed be read as implicitly forbidding all such intermediary igniters; if it was intended that they be permitted, the final clause is unnecessary and confusing. The fact that it's there implies that the "electrical launch system and electrical motor igniters" is the complete and comprehensive list of items that can be used to ignite the motor. What other purpose does the clause serve, what other ignition systems does it prohibit given the "electrical launch system" requirement?
Phrasing the rule as: "I will launch my rockets with an electrical launch system using only electrical motor igniters" would more clearly eliminate using any intermediate devices (fuses, etc) in motor ignition. Conversely, eliminating the final clause and phrasing the rule as "I will launch my rockets with an electrical launch system. " would get rid of any confusion about such intermediate devices - they wouldn't be explicitly prohibited, and there would be no dangling question of whether they were implicitly prohibited. Frankly, I'm more in favor of removing the clause.
I would, however, bow to the wisdom of the long-term rocketeers as to the actual meaning here; just pointing out that it's not written as clearly as it could be.
Enter your email address to join: