NFPA letter ballot

The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

jFlds

Well-Known Member
TRF Supporter
Joined
Nov 12, 2010
Messages
609
Reaction score
325
Interesting reading. This is the letter ballot out for comment on proposed changes and verbage. The "FEL" is interesting. I was not aware there was a change in the designation of an LEUP?


TO: NFPA Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics
FROM: Joanne Goyette, Administrator, Technical Projects
DATE: October 26, 2011
SUBJECT: NFPA 1127 ROC TC Letter Ballot (A2012)
_______________________________________________________

Found here....

https://www.nfpa.org/Assets/files/AboutTheCodes/1127/1127_A12_ROC_ballot.pdf
 
The interesting thing with this is the addition of rules regarding drag races (see page 8)

-Kevin
 
Submitter: David Schultz, Arlington, TX "The biggest difference is in the treatment of the 16× K550 launch. 600' seems a bit close for my tastes (I would prefer to be in the next county) while 2000' is acceptable for this sort of insanity."

I take it this moron hasn't been to a well organized launch? If he wants to be in the next county, why doesn't he stay there and leave us alone? Every drag race I have attended has been run like a well oiled machine.

Also according to the new rule only 2 N motors can be drag raced at one time.

"Mass launches with a total installed impulse of greater than 40,960 N-s are prohibited"

I guess we would have blown his panties off at MWP9 :y:
 
Last edited:
The only issue I have with giant drag races is having enough eyes on the sky for falling debris or ballistic rockets. Certainly not an issue at a place like MWP or LDRS. So naturally of course this is a non issue so long as everyone at the launch understands the "STAND UP AND PAY ATTENTION" announcement from the LCO.

Clubs ought to have the freedom to determine whether or not they need to set the pads further out than normal and it should not be mandated by NFPA. I would be far more concerned over a minimum diameter I drag race at 100' from the flight line (can you say shreds?) than a M drag race at 500' with 10" Polecat Thumpers.
 
Last edited:
It's the result of the voting, from the looks of it.

And they didn't take David's proposal outright; they modified the proposal, and took the modified version.

Take the total installed impulse of all rockets in the race, and push the rockets out to the distance for a complex rocket of that impulse. Or 1.5 times the maximum expected altitude.

-Kevin
 
It's the result of the voting, from the looks of it.

And they didn't take David's proposal outright; they modified the proposal, and took the modified version.

It is the ballot for the committee to vote on comments to the proposals.

Sounds complicated but it isn't.

The NFPA codes are on a three year revision cycle. Each revision cycle goes something like:

1) Solicit proposals to revise the rules.
2) NFPA Pyro committee meets to discuss all proposed changes.
3) They vote and issue a Report On Proposals and solicit comments.
4) The committee meets again and discusses any comments.
5) They vote and issue a Report On Comments. (They are voting now.)
6) The final version is published and takes effect at that time. (around May or June it looks like)

What they are voting on is a change from the rule they had approved at the ROP stage. There was going to be a new mass launch rule but there were aspects of that rule that I didn't like so I submitted a comment. The committee didn't like all of what I said but did revise the original proposal.

Anyone can take part in the process by submitting proposals or comments at the appropriate times.
 
It's the result of the voting, from the looks of it.

And they didn't take David's proposal outright; they modified the proposal, and took the modified version.

Take the total installed impulse of all rockets in the race, and push the rockets out to the distance for a complex rocket of that impulse. Or 1.5 times the maximum expected altitude.

-Kevin

but the 40,960 Ns rule stands?



Braden
 
"The Committee did not accept the modification of the limitation for 40,960 Ns because the submitter did not provide technical rationale in the submitted substantiation with the comment."

Sorry,I missed this part of the Statement. No, I did not fly in the drag race. I'm working towards my L3. I still might not launch in a drag race of that caliber, but I'd like to think it should not be regulated out of existence.
 
Has anyone ever read the inside cover of any of the NFPA documents? Underlined for your convenience...They don't stand by any of the policies developed in their documents....interesting....

IMPORTANT NOTICE ABOUT THIS DOCUMENT
NFPA codes, standards, recommended practices, and guides, of which the document contained herein is one, are
developed through a consensus standards development process approved by the American National Standards Institute.
This process brings together volunteers representing varied viewpoints and interests to achieve consensus on fire and other
safety issues. While the NFPA administers the process and establishes rules to promote fairness in the development of
consensus, it does not independently test, evaluate, or verify the accuracy of any information or the soundness of any
judgments contained in its codes and standards.
The NFPA disclaims liability for any personal injury, property or other damages of any nature whatsoever, whether
special, indirect, consequential or compensatory, directly or indirectly resulting from the publication, use of, or reliance
on this document. The NFPA also makes no guaranty or warranty as to the accuracy or completeness of any information
published herein.
In issuing and making this document available, the NFPA is not undertaking to render professional or other services for
or on behalf of any person or entity. Nor is the NFPA undertaking to perform any duty owed by any person or entity to
someone else. Anyone using this document should rely on his or her own independent judgment or, as appropriate, seek
the advice of a competent professional in determining the exercise of reasonable care in any given circumstances.
The NFPA has no power, nor does it undertake, to police or enforce compliance with the contents of this document.
Nor does the NFPA list, certify, test or inspect products, designs, or installations for compliance with this document. Any
certification or other statement of compliance with the requirements of this document shall not be attributable to the
NFPA and is solely the responsibility of the certifier or maker of the statement.
NOTICES
All questions or other communications relating to this document and all requests for information on NFPA procedures
governing its codes and standards development process, including information on the procedures for requesting Formal
Interpretations, for proposing Tentative Interim Amendments, and for proposing revisions to NFPA documents during
regular revision cycles, should be sent to NFPA headquarters, addressed to the attention of the Secretary, Standards
Council, National Fire Protection Association, 1 Batterymarch Park, P.O. Box 9101, Quincy, MA 02269-9101.
Users of this document should be aware that this document may be amended from time to time through the issuance of
Tentative Interim Amendments, and that an official NFPA document at any point in time consists of the current edition of
the document together with any Tentative Interim Amendments then in effect. In order to determine whether this
document is the current edition and whether it has been amended through the issuance of Tentative Interim
Amendments, consult appropriate NFPA publications such as the
National Fire Codes
Subscription Service, visit the NFPA
website at www.nfpa.org, or contact the NFPA at the address listed above.
A statement, written or oral, that is not processed in accordance with Section 5 of the Regulations Governing Committee
Projects shall not be considered the official position of NFPA or any of its Committees and shall not be considered to be,
nor be relied upon as, a Formal Interpretation.
The NFPA does not take any position with respect to the validity of any patent rights asserted in connection with any
items which are mentioned in or are the subject of this document, and the NFPA disclaims liability for the infringement of
any patent resulting from the use of or reliance on this document. Users of this document are expressly advised that
determination of the validity of any such patent rights, and the risk of infringement of such rights, is entirely their own
responsibility.
Users of this document should consult applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations. NFPA does not, by the
publication of this document, intend to urge action that is not in compliance with applicable laws, and this document may
not be construed as doing so
 
Has anyone ever read the inside cover of any of the NFPA documents? Underlined for your convenience...They don't stand by any of the policies developed in their documents....interesting....

Neil.... I deal with NFPA alot in other areas, Mostly NFPA is kind of like sneezing with diareah..

The reason NFPA doesn't take responsibility is that it is a blanket code, not safe for all use.. For instance if a firemarshal in one state applies NFPA standard, which is bad for his state and "actual" requirements... IE Causes a brick fire separation wall, which collapses under a quake and kills someone... the"code official"who required the wall cant blame nfpa.
(i bet everyones thinking... but there are people who know better... I say, yes they are... but it pays more to move on and let the stupid is and stupid does alone and go on to the next job... )= i see it all the time.

A lot of states are starting to reverse the NFPA adoptions for this very reason the codes are dangerously confusing minutia....
 
Really? Which ones? If you mean IFC, well, IFC is based on NFPA codes.

Hi John, okay so you got me, they arent issuing a "we were wrong" this all no longer applies...
(except my legislation slipped in some fun rewording that makes me wonder)
 
Why on earth would ANYONE make suggestions to modify rules with NFPA??? These rules once they come down from there would be VERY hard to change! Wouldnt it make much more sence to self regulate at the national club level? All this seems to do in my opinion is invite outside people who dont really fully understand our hobby to regulate us! :shock: Thanks but no thanks! Jim
 
Why on earth would ANYONE make suggestions to modify rules with NFPA??? These rules once they come down from there would be VERY hard to change! Wouldnt it make much more sence to self regulate at the national club level? All this seems to do in my opinion is invite outside people who dont really fully understand our hobby to regulate us! :shock: Thanks but no thanks! Jim

I suggest you read the ROP (link posted earlier). When you do you will discover:

1) It isn't all outside people. (Check the list of pyro committee members.)
2) All of the proposed changes came from the NFPA committee.
 
David all Im really trying to say here is that I strongly feel we do a pretty good job in both Tripoli and the NAR of keeping people safe that are attending launches ! I think that there are many out there that feel that putting drag races a half mile out takes away some of the excitement of it . I just dont want my hobby regulated to death to protect me from myself , it is rocketry not a book club and Im fully aware that when I attend a launch I need to pay attention to whats going on!:2:
 
David all Im really trying to say here is that I strongly feel we do a pretty good job in both Tripoli and the NAR of keeping people safe that are attending launches ! I think that there are many out there that feel that putting drag races a half mile out takes away some of the excitement of it . I just dont want my hobby regulated to death to protect me from myself , it is rocketry not a book club and Im fully aware that when I attend a launch I need to pay attention to whats going on!:2:

I agree wholeheartedly with jis2. If people want to be in the next county during a rocket drag race, instead of right at the launch, that's their choice. No one is forcing them to attend the launch. They can always leave and come back.
 
I agree wholeheartedly with jis2. If people want to be in the next county during a rocket drag race, instead of right at the launch, that's their choice. No one is forcing them to attend the launch. They can always leave and come back.

If someone wanted to launch an M motor from 50 ft away, would you let them do it and tell everyone who complains to leave and come back?

The safety codes we have were developed in steps over many years based on increased risk as the technology advances. This proactive self-regulation helps keep rocketry from disappearing, and keeps the insurance underwriters happy.
 
We (the hobby community) can ignore NFPA, and let the various agencies come up with it on their own, which is what will happen, or we can be part of the process, and try to keep some sensibility in it, as well as the input of those who understand what's going on.

-Kevin
 
If someone wanted to launch an M motor from 50 ft away, would you let them do it and tell everyone who complains to leave and come back?

The safety codes we have were developed in steps over many years based on increased risk as the technology advances. This proactive self-regulation helps keep rocketry from disappearing, and keeps the insurance underwriters happy.

I have no problem with the current code. If we followed another fellow's guide, we'd be launching from concrete bunkers a mile away.
 
Back
Top