[roc-chat] Re: [Bulk] Re: Youth Groups at ROCstocks
- From: Richard Dierking <richard.dierking@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: roc-chat@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 09:23:54 -0800
OMG; I really didn't wish to go down this road. However, I don't feel too
bad about it because I've brought this up a couple times before.
At ROC launches, the RSO is busy inspecting rockets and many times is
sitting at a table with their back to the range. This is a poor title for
this person. The RSO should be the RSO. Again, we're talking about
another position, but maybe not another person. One of the Board members
at the launch could be stationed by the LCO watching the PM and LCO and
running the range. The RSO should not be rushed and have the final say on
range operations. The RSO should appoint the rocket inspectors according
to their skill and knowledge. You shouldn't have someone that just got
their L2 inspecting a rocket with an M motor.
The order of authority at a launch should be: God, RSO, everyone else.
I usually, preface my statements with "I believe" or "in my opinion," but
this time, I'm saying, this is the way it should be.
Richard Dierking
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 9:07 PM, David Erbas-White
<derbas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>wrote:
> On 11/14/2012 9:01 PM, Richard Dierking wrote:
>
> Frankly, in my experience at ROC, the person most in charge of the launch
> at a given moment in time is the LCO. Technically, I don't recall that
> we've EVER had the person we call the RSO do anything other than be the
> 'rocket checker'.
>
> Of course, there's always yourself or Rick Dickinson or some other Board
> member who is really 'running' the launch for the day, and has authority of
> actual operations, but do we actually follow the official "RSO" protocol?
> I don't think so.
>
> For the youth groups, if we simply told the adults that for Low Power
> rockets the RSO is simply the "Rocket Checker", we probably wouldn't have a
> problem...
>
> David Erbas-White
>
>
> Please note that I said should be the same not "are the same." :-) My
> point for the document was that you don't just let someone be the RSO
> because you need a warm body in that position. So, is being a level 2
> really enough? Sorry, different topic.
> For some clubs, the RSO is in charge of the launch and delegates to others
> for inspecting rockets. So, sometimes, the RSO is truly the Range Safety
> Officer.
> For ROC the RSO is a rocket inspector.
> I guess ROC could have a RSO overseeing range safety and delegate to
> other people for rocket inspection, but whoops, that would be another
> position that would need to be filled.
>
> Richard
> On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 6:55 PM, David Erbas-White <
> derbas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> On 11/14/2012 6:44 PM, Richard Dierking wrote:
>>
>> Richard, that document is targeted towards high-power operation (please
>> refer to second paragraph of that document).
>>
>> In order to RSO for low power, one only has to know low power.
>> Otherwise, how would a section that only has a low power launch site (and
>> thus may have no high-power certified members) EVER be able to conduct a
>> launch?
>>
>> AFAIK, the only requirement is that the NAR Model Rocketry Safety Code be
>> followed. Realistically, I don't think there is ANY requirement for an RSO
>> at a low-power launch, unless there is something specifically required for
>> clubs/sections that I can't find on the site (the link to the 'safety' page
>> is broken). High power is a different kettle of fish...
>>
>> David Erbas-White
>>
>>
>> The qualifications for a low power should be the same. There's a
>> certain level of knowledge and experience you should have before inspecting
>> other people's rockets before flight. Model rockets (low power stuff) is
>> smaller and doesn't usually have the velocity of a high-power rocket, but
>> they can still cause injuries.
>>
>> Please refer to the following for NAR: http://www.nar.org/pdf/TSO.pdf
>>
>> Richard Dierking
>> On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 6:18 PM, RocketDog <rocket1dog@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>> what spell check...launch.
>>>
>>> *From:* RocketDog <rocket1dog@xxxxxxx>
>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, November 14, 2012 4:24 PM
>>> *To:* roc-chat@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> *Subject:* [roc-chat] Re: [Bulk] Re: Youth Groups at ROCstocks
>>>
>>> What certs are required for low power launces???? Any...
>>>
>>> *From:* Tom Hanan <tom.hanan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, November 14, 2012 3:42 PM
>>> *To:* roc-chat@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> *Subject:* [Bulk] [roc-chat] Re: Youth Groups at ROCstocks
>>>
>>> Level 2 cert LCO and RSO for the youth groups which only leaves PM and
>>> PA positions for Low Power volunteers. Looks like I am going to have to
>>> build something big enough to get level 2 certified before next years
>>> RocStock ;)
>>>
>>>
>>> On 11/14/2012 3:35 PM, Jim Wold wrote:
>>>
>>> We can use uncertified people for PM and PA but the RSOs need to be
>>> certified level 2.
>>>
>>> Jim Wold
>>>
>>> *From:* Tom Hanan <tom.hanan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, November 14, 2012 12:40 PM
>>> *To:* roc-chat@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> *Subject:* [roc-chat] Re: Youth Groups at ROCstocks
>>>
>>> Frankly Jim I talked to three other parents standing in line that said
>>> they would have stepped up if they did not have to deal with the high power
>>> stuff they felt they were not qualified to RSO/PM/PA. Wright or wrong the
>>> newbies and retreads like me see the low power stuff with a single rod size
>>> as exponentially easier ;) I know that's true from talking to a few scout
>>> leaders as well.
>>>
>>> And as I have said before, there is nothing more motivating to the
>>> average group leader or parent than shutting down the kids table!
>>>
>>> If we want the low power volunteers consistently step up we need to make
>>> it as easy as possible to volunteer to prevent the table from being shut
>>> down. I also think the group discount should only be available to groups
>>> who have leaders who sign that they are comfortable volunteering for low
>>> power RSO/PM/PA positions.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 11/14/2012 12:25 PM, bb.wolf2@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>>>
>>> We already have the ability to launch anywhere on the range while people
>>> are loading rockets at any other pads. If we have separate RSOs and pad
>>> managers we need more volunteers which we aren't getting enough of now. If
>>> Richard, Lee and I hadn't stepped up Sunday morning there would have been
>>> no flying. There was no one signed up and no interest.
>>>
>>> Jim Wold
>>>
>>> Sent from my HTC Inspire™ 4G on AT&T
>>>
>>> ----- Reply message -----
>>> From: "Tom Hanan"
>>> mailto:tom.hanan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<tom.hanan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> To: mailto:roc-chat@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <roc-chat@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Subject: [roc-chat] Re: Youth Groups at ROCstocks
>>> Date: Wed, Nov 14, 2012 12:10 pm
>>>
>>>
>>> A thought would be to always have separate low power an high power
>>> tables and volunteers at Roctober and RocStock. With the table manning
>>> priority going to low power at Roctober and high power at RocStock.
>>> Shutdowns affecting only the table that is short handed.
>>>
>>> No one is excluding any one group but the priority for each launch is
>>> well publicised and the need for volunteers to support each groups
>>> priorities encourages each group to man their tables.
>>>
>>> In my opinion we also need to look hard at what would be involved to
>>> support simultaneous loading of low power while launching high power. We
>>> already allow simultaneous loading of high power while loading and
>>> launching low power. I feel very strongly that this would go a long way to
>>> addressing the weather related launch congestion that lead to the anxiety
>>> the members experienced at RocStock this year.
>>>
>>> Each power group can decide how to best motivate volunteers to man their
>>> respective tables. The good news is that the lower volunteer confidence
>>> threshold for low power volunteers should allow them to recruit the larger
>>> numbers of volunteers needed to support the much larger number of low power
>>> flyers.
>>>
>>> I say that knowing that there are many members of ROC who have high
>>> power experience that would continue to be Johny on the spot to prevent a
>>> temporary shutdown of the kids table :)
>>>
>>> Its just who we are!
>>> ROC members are GREAT people!
>>>
>>> "Straw Hat" Tom
>>>
>>> P.S. my definition of Low Power is: Single stage, Single use A,B,C,D
>>> engine, <2000' AGL to minimize / simplify flight card complexity, checkout
>>> and safety / airspace concerns. Low Power Rockets recovered on the public
>>> side of the safety flags must demonstrate appropriate modifications to
>>> prevent future incursions into uncontrolled public areas. Questionable
>>> airframes should be launched on the small rod high power pads where more
>>> appropriate rocket review and safety buffer zones are available. NO low
>>> power hazmat rockets ;)
>>>
>>>
>>> On 11/14/2012 9:52 AM, David Erbas-White wrote:
>>>
>>> On 11/14/2012 9:32 AM, Richard Dierking wrote:
>>>
>>> Richard,
>>>
>>> I don't believe it is necessary (or possible, frankly) to discourage
>>> youth groups at ROCstocks.
>>>
>>> I would refer you to my previous comment where there should be 'windows'
>>> where there is no low-power flying at ROCstocks. I think the only
>>> additional work involved is a couple of big signs at the range head that
>>> say something like "Mid-to-high power only from 10AM to 11AM and 2PM to
>>> 3PM", or whatever works for that day.
>>>
>>> We need as many groups/people to join as possible in order to keep the
>>> hobby going.
>>>
>>> Perhaps a graduated payment scale for youth groups? One fee it they're
>>> going to fly and not help out, and a lower fee if they provide an adult
>>> and/or responsible kid over a certain age, for a specific timeframe, to
>>> assist with the launch?
>>>
>>> David Erbas-White
>>>
>>>
>>> I believe that youth groups should be discouraged from going to
>>> ROCstocks. Youth groups now have their own launch (ROCtober) in the best
>>> month for weather. I'm *not* saying no low power at ROCstocks. Just
>>> saying that large youth groups are taking over and it's actually not fair
>>> to the high-power flyers.
>>>
>>> These high-power flyers are primarily ROC Executive members.
>>>
>>> What have been the ROC Executive membership numbers been for say the
>>> last 5 years? What is the relationship between the number of low power
>>> flights, high power flights, and ROC Executive membership?
>>>
>>> Richard Dierking
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
Other related posts:
