Safety Incident from NSL:

[gldknght]

if I was going to implement something like that at a major launch I'd probably make it a separate table & personnel.

Probably a good idea.

 

[gldknght]

Good grief! Think about what you are saying. You want it to say something about removing the igniters in a designated area...

Rule 13:10 has absolutly nothing to do with the incident that this thread is about.

My point was, if there was a requirement for a disarm safety inspection after a launch fail / abort, the incident at that hotel may have been averted.

( I am a NAR member and we have not been informed if the incident rocket was the result of a failed launch attempt or on the way to a launch, or what, so I use the phrase "may have been averted")

I do agree, we should not need a rule that starters can only be in the motors when the rocket is vertical on the pad, ready for flight. We should not need a rule requiring starters to be removed from a rocket before leaving a designated area. But obviously common sense doesn't always prevail.

So I ask this question of all of you... no, Actually, I want you all to ask this of yourselves: How many more of these hotel incidents or similar situations are we prepared to tolerate?

Should we take steps now to do everything we can do to prevent even one more of these from happening?

 

[rharshberger]

Some clubs already have trouble getting enough volunteers for oversight, but if I was going to implement something like that at a major launch I'd probably make it a separate table & personnel.

Typically we are able to put new ignitors in at the pad while loading the next rack, except on the two busiest days of our SodBlaster event, then we require fliers to pull a misfire, and bring it back for a new pad assignment and RSO before going back out to the pads. The main reason for that policy is to maintain a steady flow cadence of flights with out interrupting the next scheduled rack and we may be one to two racks pre-assigned on a busy day. We do not use a different RSO or process, the flier just has to go back through the whole process a second time, they do get to keep the filled out flight card so we reuse that and change the pad and rack assignment.

 

[cerving]

If your rocket is on the pad, you can put an igniter in. If it's not, you can't. Pretty simple, really...

 

[OzHybrid]

If your rocket is on the pad, you can put an igniter in. If it's not, you can't. Pretty simple, really...

I agree that's what was trying to be conveyed -ish. But you did not mention that you can put an igniter in at a designated area. So, unfortunately, what you have just put in writing, is NOT true. This is why it's important to document a properly structured rule. Even an apparently simple rule can have trip hazards.

 

[Sooner Boomer]

My only comment about igniters is: there needs to be a rule for exceptions (or an alternative way...). The reason I say this is because the instructions for the Aerotech G69P is to install the igniter as part of the motor construction. This is a Warp9 end-burning motor. The igniter has to be installed under the aft fiber washer. There's no hole in the grain to insert the ignitor.

 

[OzHybrid]

My only comment about igniters is: there needs to be a rule for exceptions (or an alternative way...). The reason I say this is because the instructions for the Aerotech G69P is to install the igniter as part of the motor construction. This is a Warp9 end-burning motor. The igniter has to be installed under the aft fiber washer. There's no hole in the grain to insert the ignitor.

The manufacturer is on this forum @AeroTech. The rules are clear for the insertion of an igniter. What's their solution? Is it documented with the motor instructions? Why not?

 

[cwbullet]

That does create an issue. We often allow that exception as long as they notify the RSO. We tell them to bring the rocket for RSO and then take it from their car to the pad once the igniter is installed. This allows us to avoid the tent with a loaded motor.

My only comment about igniters is: there needs to be a rule for exceptions (or an alternative way...). The reason I say this is because the instructions for the Aerotech G69P is to install the igniter as part of the motor construction. This is a Warp9 end-burning motor. The igniter has to be installed under the aft fiber washer. There's no hole in the grain to insert the ignitor.

 

[Steve Shannon]

My only comment about igniters is: there needs to be a rule for exceptions (or an alternative way...). The reason I say this is because the instructions for the Aerotech G69P is to install the igniter as part of the motor construction. This is a Warp9 end-burning motor. The igniter has to be installed under the aft fiber washer. There's no hole in the grain to insert the ignitor.

1. Only high power motors are required to have the igniter out until at the pad or special preparation area.
2. For those cases where the igniter must be built into a high power motor, clubs should establish a special preparation area, away from spectators, where the motor should be assembled.

 

[AeroTech]

1. Only high power motors are required to have the igniter out until at the pad or special preparation area.
2. For those cases where the igniter must be built into a high power motor, clubs should establish a special preparation area, away from spectators, where the motor should be assembled.

Thank you Steve for that explanation.

 

[samb]

For those of you new to this thread you may have missed @jsdemar's summary of the incident that prompted the creation of this thread (post #31, emphasis added ):

The details of the incident have been discussed here and elsewhere. In the Tripoli Report article, Bob Brown is adding his personal observations at the time, and reminding Tripoli members to avoid similar mistakes. That's all. No new details.

J motor, igniter installed in 2nd stage, no shunt or disconnect, updating firmware, live energetics in a hotel room. Don't do that. All personal liability. Outcome could've been much worse.

 

[Art Upton]

My only comment about igniters is: there needs to be a rule for exceptions (or an alternative way...). The reason I say this is because the instructions for the Aerotech G69P is to install the igniter as part of the motor construction. This is a Warp9 end-burning motor. The igniter has to be installed under the aft fiber washer. There's no hole in the grain to insert the ignitor.

That is not a HPR motor. There are no NAR Model Codes that prevent starters from being the motor before it's on the pad. That is a HPR rule.

 

[Steve Shannon]

No exceptions are needed. Simply establish a special preparation table on the range where these special case motors can be assembled.

 

[rcktnut]

There are a lot of Hobbyline motors that are C-slots also. Trying to insert the igniter in the launch position is not very easy. I insert all my igniters in MPR motors before hitting the launch pad. The chance of an igniter going off without being "hooked up" has to be pretty close to impossible.

 

[UPscaler]

What seems like common sense to some of us may not be for those who may not be totally familiar with their electronics yet.

...or for those who think they're exempt from these common-sense understandings because they've been doing it for a long time and think they couldn't possibly have an issue

Braden

 

[Steve Shannon]

There are a lot of Hobbyline motors that are C-slots also. Trying to insert the igniter in the launch position is not very easy. I insert all my igniters in MPR motors before hitting the launch pad. The chance of an igniter going off without being "hooked up" has to be pretty close to impossible.

Once again, model rocket motors are not included in the rules requiring igniters to only be in place out on the range.

 

[Rob Campbell]

Shoddy Construction!!!

View attachment 604392

Look on the bright side. He just received several years supply of free dog barf!