[tccrockets] Re: Tripoli Rules 2012

  • From: Owen DeLong <owen@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: tccrockets@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2012 01:43:18 -0800

I think requiring them to be escorted/supervised is reasonable.

I think limiting it to 2 supervisees per certified supervisor, OTOH, is 
questionable.

As a SCUBA instructor I can easily supervise 4 brand new divers in Open Water 
with limited visibility. Supervising more than 2 uncertified assistants on a 
rocket range can easily and safely be done so long as they are properly briefed 
before entering the range.

Owen

On Feb 8, 2012, at 12:42 AM, James Dougherty wrote:

> Both the rules are good ones
> 
> There's no point in having someone who doesn't understand (or even care) 
> about the Tripoli safety codes out on the range.
> 
> For those of you who own firearms, this is why you dont let your comrades 
> traipse about on the range during a live fire exercise in adjacent ranges, 
> and dont even let the weapon in someones hand - you shut the whole range down 
> to prevent ricochet or misfires 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
> On Feb 7, 2012, at 5:29 PM, Owen DeLong <owen@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
>> The change seems specifically targeted at what you can use to light a motor 
>> and it makes sense. It seems to me that (although I would say it's still 
>> dangerous) you are also still allowed to use those switches to activate 
>> recovery pyrotechnics or anything else so long as it isn't lighting a motor.
>> 
>> It's a shame someone had to get injured to call attention to the hazards of 
>> this type of ignition system, but, really, it is a dangerous way to light 
>> motors and I think it's a good rule change.
>> 
>> OTOH, the updated spectator rule is unnecessary and I believe the existing 
>> rules were adequate and had they been followed, there wouldn't be an issue 
>> with "someone riding a bike that had no business being there just stopped by 
>> to see what was happening".
>> 
>> Just my $0.02.
>> 
>> Owen
>> 
>> On Feb 7, 2012, at 5:22 PM, Karl Baumheckel wrote:
>> 
>>> That is a good question.  I would say that you could still use a breakwire 
>>> for timer activation.  And in my opinion this is a more reliable method 
>>> than the G switch for what it's worth.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> From: "SCOTT B" <triptechb@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> To: tccrockets@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 7, 2012 2:15:59 PM
>>> Subject: [tccrockets] Re: Tripoli Rules 2012
>>> 
>>> Would this include activation of avionics using a breakwire for low 
>>> speed/g-force launches, or just using breakwires for lighting motors? 
>>> Scotty B.
>>> 
>>> --- On Tue, 2/7/12, AiRobert <airobert@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> 
>>> From: AiRobert <airobert@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Subject: [tccrockets] Re: Tripoli Rules 2012
>>> To: tccrockets@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Date: Tuesday, February 7, 2012, 11:01 AM
>>> 
>>> Yes these are switches used to for launch detect to start a second stage.
>>>  
>>> From: tccrockets-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
>>> [mailto:tccrockets-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gene Engelgau
>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2012 8:58 AM
>>> To: tccrockets@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Subject: [tccrockets] Re: Tripoli Rules 2012
>>>  
>>> I think a launch controller is a type of ignition system.  They may be 
>>> referring to cluster and staging ignition?  But yes, the TCC controller is 
>>> great as is...
>>>  
>>> -G
>>> 
>>> On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 8:24 AM, Jack Garibaldi <jackgaribaldi@xxxxxxx> 
>>> wrote:
>>> I still haven’t read it all but either way our launch system does not use 
>>> none of these
>>>  
>>> Jack G
>>>  
>>> From: tccrockets-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
>>> [mailto:tccrockets-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gene Engelgau
>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2012 5:57 AM
>>> To: tccrockets@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Subject: [tccrockets] Re: Tripoli Rules 2012
>>>  
>>> It references the switched in regards to motor ignition and seems to refer 
>>> to the launch controller:
>>>  
>>> 2-12.6 A rocket motor shall not be ignited by any of the following:
>>> a. A switch that uses mercury.
>>> b. “Pull wires” that disconnect or complete a circuit.
>>> c. “Pressure roller” switches
>>>  
>>> ----
>>>  
>>> It does not make reference to av-bar arming switches.
>>>  
>>> -G
>>>  
>>>  
>>>  
>>> On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 8:38 PM, Jack Garibaldi <jackgaribaldi@xxxxxxx> 
>>> wrote:
>>> Hey All I have attached the 2012 Tripoli sanctioned rules and we are a 
>>> Tripoli club so everyone needs to read them, print them carry them or 
>>> however you want to help enforce and use our newest rules, I will get time 
>>> this week to really study them but I noticed a couple of quick ones like
>>>  
>>> Section 2-18 Participation now reads in part:
>>> "Non-HPR Fliers are allowed in the High Power Launch Area if escorted by
>>> a HPR Flier. A HPR Flier may escort and be accompanied by not more than
>>> two (2) non-HPR fliers in the High Power Launch Area. The HPR flier
>>> escort is required to monitor the actions of the escorted non-HPR
>>> fliers, and the escort is fully responsible for those actions and for
>>> the safety of those escorted."
>>>  
>>> There are other changes.  For example, the use of mercury switches, pull
>>> wires, and roller switches have now been banned.  This means there are
>>> various products by different manufactures that can no longer be used
>>> for air-starts.
>>>  
>>>  
>>> I don’t want to due a review until I have had time to look the complete 
>>> pages over.
>>>  
>>> Jack G
>>> 
>>> 
>>>  
>>> --
>>> - Regards
>>> 
>>> Gene Engelgau
>>> KI6IBL, NAR 86770 / TRA 12243 - L3
>>> http://fruitychutes.com - Consumer and Aerospace Recovery Solutions
>>> Like us on Facebook!
>>> Follow us on Twitter!
>>> 408-499-9050
>>>  
>>> 
>>> 
>>>  
>>> --
>>> - Regards
>>> 
>>> Gene Engelgau
>>> KI6IBL, NAR 86770 / TRA 12243 - L3
>>> http://fruitychutes.com - Consumer and Aerospace Recovery Solutions
>>> Like us on Facebook!
>>> Follow us on Twitter!
>>> 408-499-9050
>>>  
>>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>>> Version: 8.5.455 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/4193 - Release Date: 02/06/12 
>>> 19:34:00
>> 

Other related posts: