LAKE JACKSON, Texas USA — QuickBurst is now offering what they claim is "an alternative to ATF regulated e-matches" with their new “Hot Coil Kit.”  According to David Bachelder, the owner of QuickBurst, you can fly dual deployment without a LEUP using his product.

Hot Coil Kits come to you with all the material required to build your own ejection charges. The kit comes with 10 cardboard canisters, 10 bulkheads, 10 feet of bonded pair shooting wire and enough nichrome wire to assemble at least 10 Hot Coils. Each order comes with complete instructions detailing construction.

Bachelder said he has bench tested many of the coils himself and has not had one failure. "They are very robust and practically indestructible," Bachelder stated. "Each and every one of them has functioned as designed and fired the ejection charge on cue."

You should know that the Hot Coils product requires higher current than ordinary e-matches — most altimeters manufactured today will not fire them. "However," Bachelder says, "the PerfectFlite HA45K and it’s robust firing current is perfectly suited for the job." Peter Lawall of PerfectFlite and Bachelder teamed up to make the Hot Coils Kit a reality. Bachelder added, "I thank Peter for his valued input, with out him this would not have been possible."

Hot Coil Kits are not regulated "in any way, shape form or fashion," Bachelder claims, and can be shipped USPS Priority Mail. Assembly will require a few skills — these are easily learned and can be accomplished by most anyone.

A few facts:

QuickBurst's new Hot Coils Kit, said to be "an ATF regulation-free alternative to e-matches."
1. The Hot Coils will not work with most altimeters.
2. Hot Coils work perfectly with altimeters, timers or stagers that can supply 5 amps of firing current for one second.
3. Hot Coils are not regulated, by anyone and can be shipped USPS Priority Mail.
4. The PerfectFlite HA45K is perfect for use with Hot Coils.
5. The cardboard canisters have a max capacity of about 2.5 grams of black powder.
6. You will need to learn to silver solder, though with the soldering products available today this is a breeze.
7. Hot Coils will work with smokeless powders. However using black powder and smokeless powders in rocketry requires an ATF permit. A permit is not required to purchase.
8. Many of the timers available today will also fire the Hot Coils.
9. Hot Coils can be enhanced with various dips. This will allow them to be used in conjunction with timers/stagers for sustainer ignition.
10. The HA45K and a fresh 9 volt alkaline (Duracell) will work fine. A fresh Duracell battery is recommended for each flight. A better battery choice is the 9 volt NiMH battery available from PerfectFlite.
11. The instructions supplied with each order details each and every step to success.
12. Using the PerfectFlite HA45K Bachelder has never had a failure.

Hot Coils Package deal: A PerfectFlite HA45K together with a Hot Coil Kit is only $90.00 plus shipping and handling. This is a limited offer. Please allow three weeks for delivery.

For more information, please contact This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it .

Website: http://www.quickburst.net

01-04-2007 08:56 PM  #1
Just Jerry Freeform rockets advocate   Joined: Aug 2006 Posts: 565	Regulation breeds innovation. Innovation breeds regulation. Regulation breeds innovation. I have a suggestion. Regulate less. Breed less hatred for the government. Just Jerry

01-08-2007 01:14 AM  #2
Clark Tripoli L2   Joined: Sep 2006 Posts: 15	You still need a LEUP Even though the these coils are not regulated the minute you hook them up to a black powder charge and stick em in a rocket you are required to have a LEUP. Even though anyone 21 or older can walk into a gun store and buy black powder without a LEUP, the Almighties that be at the BATF have stated that black powder use in rocketry does require a LEUP . What next? an explosives permit for Estes motors? Remember they are black powder based, not composite. So we're still stuck. I commend Quickburts and PerfectFlite for joining forces and trying to come up with an alternative but we're still not there yet.

01-08-2007 12:55 PM  #3
crontab Certified Level Three   Joined: Aug 2006 Posts: 204	There seems to be a pattern with QuickBurst's marketing, and it appears to be deceptive. In the opening paragraph, it states: "According to David Bachelder, the owner of QuickBurst, you can fly dual deployment without a LEUP using his product." Under the few facts, it states at number 7: "Hot Coils will work with smokeless powders. However using black powder and smokeless powders in rocketry requires an ATF permit. A permit is not required to purchase." That's deceptive. If an ATF permit is required in rocketry for black and smokeless powders, then you can not "fly dual deployment without a LEUP using this product." Perhaps the article needs to be renamed something else...

01-09-2007 07:16 AM  #4
QuickBurst Certified Level Three TRA   Joined: Aug 2006 Posts: 45	I don't understand your view. I am not deceptive. I tell you up front that the Hot Coil Kit is un-regulated. Then I tell you that black powder is. These are facts, how are they deceptive? If you tink I'm deceptive, talk to the ATF. They wrote the book on deceptive.

01-09-2007 12:39 PM  #5
crontab Certified Level Three   Joined: Aug 2006 Posts: 204	Quote: I don't understand your view. I am not deceptive. I tell you up front that the Hot Coil Kit is un-regulated. Then I tell you that black powder is. These are facts, how are they deceptive? If you tink I'm deceptive, talk to the ATF. They wrote the book on deceptive. Maybe this will help you: From your post on various email mailing lists: Quote: With the help of Peter Lawall from PerfectFlite I am pleased to announce there is now a way to avoid the ATF's regulation on e-matches and still fly dual deployment. From your post on TRF: Quote: Yes, you can fly dual deploy without a LEUP. Then according to you yourself, you CAN NOT fly dual deployment without a LEUP using your new product. Your own advertisements are deceptive in that respect. You may as well have been saying: Quote: COST Free Ejection Canisters With the help of Peter Lawall from PerfectFlite I am pleased to announce a COST free alternative to e-matches. See the Hot Coils on the QuickBurst website. A FREE alternative to e-matches. Note: Hot Coils are FREE, but there is a $1.50 handling fee for each one plus $6.00 shipping: Minimum order: groupings of 10. See: http://www.quickburst.net for the fine print. It's deceptive to say you can fly dual deployment without a LEUP and then tell us later in the small print that oh, yeah, well, you really do need a LEUP to fly dual deployment using my product, I was just kidding when I said you didn't. Your product is being touted as a regulation-free product, giving the impression that its USE is regulation free. You should state that you offer ejection charge canisters, and that the purchase of them is regulation free, not that you can "fly dual deploy without a LEUP."

01-09-2007 06:05 PM  #6
Rocket Flier Certified Level Three   Joined: Dec 2006 Posts: 104	Good to be wrong On the bright side it is wrong to state smokeless requires and LEUP and a review of the explosives regulations shows an exemption there as well for DD.

01-09-2007 10:40 PM  #7
crontab Certified Level Three   Joined: Aug 2006 Posts: 204	Quote: On the bright side it is wrong to state smokeless requires and LEUP and a review of the explosives regulations shows an exemption there as well for DD. I have seen nothing in the exemptions part of the explosives regulations that mentions dual deployment.

01-10-2007 12:51 AM  #8
Rocket Flier Certified Level Three   Joined: Dec 2006 Posts: 104	Quote: I have seen nothing in the exemptions part of the explosives regulations that mentions dual deployment. Subpart H (Exemptions) (8). http://a257.g.akamaitech.n...ov/2006/pdf/E6-13201.pdf Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 155 / Friday, August 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules Provides further details. Note H8 doesn't call out inflatable automobile occupant restraint systems or their more common term, airbags, either.

01-10-2007 01:02 AM  #9
Rocket Flier Certified Level Three   Joined: Dec 2006 Posts: 104	If you note subpart H (exemptions) (8), you will also note there is no indication of inflatable automobile occupant restraint systems (aka airbags). The August 11 Proposed rules may be of further assistance. http://www.atf.gov/explarson/hobbyrocket.htm

01-10-2007 02:05 PM  #10
crontab Certified Level Three   Joined: Aug 2006 Posts: 204	That document covers the proposed changes to the PAD exemption. That's not the explosive laws. I don't see anything referring to dual deployment as it refers to hobby rocketry.

01-10-2007 02:49 PM  #11
Rocket Flier Certified Level Three   Joined: Dec 2006 Posts: 104	Quote: That document covers the proposed changes to the PAD exemption. That's not the explosive laws. I don't see anything referring to dual deployment as it refers to hobby rocketry. There is nothing in the explosives law exempting airbags. Logic follows you must have an LEUP to drive your car to a launch. Interesting.

01-10-2007 03:25 PM  #12
crontab Certified Level Three   Joined: Aug 2006 Posts: 204	Quote: There is nothing in the explosives law exempting airbags. Logic follows you must have an LEUP to drive your car to a launch. Interesting. Incorrect. At least, not entirely correct. There are two parts of the federal legislative power: The actual law and the implementing regulations. Congress passes the laws, and then annoints ATF to implement the laws with regulations. In: http://tinyurl.com/gejpp, "ATF has classified certain products as propellant actuated devices: ...automobile occupant restraint systems..." Propellant actuate devices are specifically addressed in Part 55, Subpart H, Exemptions (a)(8). Therefore, airbags have now joined the description of items listed under H(a)(8). Look. There have been numerous mentions of airbags, et al. in the Federal Register and other documents with ATF themselves indicating that airbags are exempt. There has been ZERO mention in the Federal Register or any other official body about the use of black powder (OR smokeless powder for that matter) where ATF has stated it is exempt from federal regulation WHEN USED IN ROCKETRY. Likewise there has been zero mention by ATF or anyone else regarding exemptions for dual deployment. There is no point in leaving an end user with the impression that a particular practice is regulatorily safe when there is no evidence of the same. I see no point in leaving an end user hung out in the breeze with their pants down.

01-10-2007 04:38 PM  #13
Rocket Flier Certified Level Three   Joined: Dec 2006 Posts: 104	In the proposed changes, the ATF states that rocket motors are not PADs and goes on to describe what PADs are and why rockets motors are not. In part, "Because the hobby rocket motor is, in essence, simply the propellant that actuates the hobby rocket". By their own admission, an assembled hobby rocket is a propellant actuated device and exempt from regulation. An assembled DD payload is clearly a mechanical gas generating system making it an exempt pad. Smokeless is a component of ammunition. It is exempt. Use is not specified as a condition of the exemption. "(4) small arms ammunition and components thereof;" Blackpowder has been used for recovery for as long as the exemption has specified antique firearms. Yet, no posts of convictions, prosecutions, arrests, detentions, letters of clarification, phone calls or midnight raids reported regarding valid non-firearm use of BP (or smokeless powders). What happens to a group of firework people who legally made their own explosives (& blackpowder) and 'illegally' transported them to a club launch. Arrests? Jail time? Or a discussion of what is legal and requirements for storage. When someone was manufacturing and illegally selling a regulated component to non-LEUP holders. Arrest, jail time? No evidance? Everyone arrested at LDRS. Hanging out? FUD Pants down? FUD Can't use? FUD

01-10-2007 07:22 PM  #14
crontab Certified Level Three   Joined: Aug 2006 Posts: 204	Quote: By their own admission, an assembled hobby rocket is a propellant actuated device and exempt from regulation. There is NO acceptable position by ATF that a hobby rocket is a propellant actuated device. There is NO postings anywhere, let alone the Federal Register that a hobby rocket is a propellant actuated device. Just because you say it is so does not make it law, nor does it mean the ATF agrees with your position. You are propagating disinformation. Quote: An assembled DD payload is clearly a mechanical gas generating system making it an exempt pad. It may clearly be a mechanical gas generating system but that does NOT make it an exempt PAD. ATF says what is an exempt PAD, not you. Quote: Smokeless is a component of ammunition. It is exempt. Use is not specified as a condition of the exemption. "(4) small arms ammunition and components thereof;" Why are you discussing smokeless? We were talking about your claim that dual deployment is mentioned in the exemptions to the explosives laws. Quote: Blackpowder has been used for recovery for as long as the exemption has specified antique firearms. The speed limit has been broken since the day the first one was put into place, what effect does that have on whether or not it is a law? It does NOT make it legal! Mob mentality is why we are where we are. Quote: Yet, no posts of convictions, prosecutions, arrests, detentions, letters of clarification, phone calls or midnight raids reported regarding valid non-firearm use of BP (or smokeless powders). Why be a statistic? Why not abide by the law and stop worrying about it? No evidence of a crime doesn't mean a crime hasn't been committed. I don't understand the renegade mentality. Honestly, you are starting to sound like Jerry.

01-10-2007 07:45 PM  #15
Rocket Flier Certified Level Three   Joined: Dec 2006 Posts: 104	Quote: Why be a statistic? Why not abide by the law and stop worrying about it? No evidence of a crime doesn't mean a crime hasn't been committed. I don't understand the renegade mentality. We ARE abiding by the law and we will continue to fly rockets the way we have long before the fear mongers came ringing their bells. Looks like the name calling ends it. Have a nice day.

01-10-2007 08:16 PM  #16
crontab Certified Level Three   Joined: Aug 2006 Posts: 204	Quote: We ARE abiding by the law and we will continue to fly rockets the way we have long before the fear mongers came ringing their bells. Looks like the name calling ends it. Have a nice day. No, you are BREAKING the law, but the odds are in your favor that you will never be penalized for it. Continuing to fly rockets the way you have before ATF started tightening their belt will probably never be reason for them to make an example of you. That does not make you a law-abiding citizen - it makes you an insignificant risk. Should that change, the people you won't be hearing about are the ones that have choosen to steer clear of such situations. And I think it was more the heat than the comparison to Jerry that caused the kitchen to empty.

01-10-2007 10:20 PM  #17
Aphyle Hot HCl and rubber @ AM   Joined: Dec 2006 Posts: 103	Quote: Even though anyone 21 or older can walk into a gun store and buy black powder without a LEUP, the Almighties that be at the BATF have stated that black powder use in rocketry does require a LEUP . What next? an explosives permit for Estes motors? Remember they are black powder based, not composite. If you read the very long Q&A/Comment thing from ATF from last August (8-11-06?), you will get the sense that they would regulate black powder and black powder substitutes more than they do presently if they could, but Congress explicity wrote the rules on BP in 1975. The comment was raised about the 50 lbs of BP vs. the 62 g of APCP, and ATF's response to the comment and similar ones was not based on science at all, no testing, nothing. All they say is that Congress said 50 lbs of BP was okay, but since they didn't say anything about APCP, then ATF gets to decide. And they want to regulate it all, but then claim that they are cutting us a break by limiting non-regulated use to 62 grams. Also at risk of regulation are BP substitutes, like Pyrodex. Apparently, these share some chemistry with the NH4NO3/Sugar fuel mixes, which ATF is now cracking down on. IMHO, when I read the reasoning of ATF's responses, it seems like they were written by lawyers, not scientists. They are using a simple marketing technique, "branding" all rocket propellants as "explosive," such that anyone who is not knowledgeable will associate rocket propellants with explosions. Whoever controls the language will control the argument. Same thing goes for their rule that rocket engines are not PADs - they have to have a mechanism and be hand-held??? Air-bag cartridges and rocket engines should fall into the same category, but I don't need a LEUP since my car has six airbags, do I? Just some ramblings...

01-11-2007 06:23 PM  #18
QuickBurst Certified Level Three TRA   Joined: Aug 2006 Posts: 45	Well if smokeless powder is exempt, and Hot Coils are exempt, then my statement was true. Sounds like you can fly dual deploy with out a LEUP. Crontab .... go ahead and write your apology, I can't wait to read it.

01-11-2007 10:30 PM  #19
crontab Certified Level Three   Joined: Aug 2006 Posts: 204	Quote: Crontab .... go ahead and write your apology, I can't wait to read it. I apologize to the readers here that QuickBurst has to lie to its customers to generate enough hype to sell their products. Before I buy a *thing* from them, I would ask for a letter of clearance from the ATF that it was legal for me to use Hotcoils together with black power or smokeless powder as advertised without an explosives permit. So David, does this mean that you are going to remove the warning from your web page that an ATF permit is not required to purchase but is required to use Hotcoils?

01-12-2007 05:41 AM  #20
QuickBurst Certified Level Three TRA   Joined: Aug 2006 Posts: 45	About what I expected.

01-12-2007 11:09 AM  #21
Just Jerry Freeform rockets advocate   Joined: Aug 2006 Posts: 565	Quote: In the proposed changes, the ATF states that rocket motors are not PADs and goes on to describe what PADs are and why rockets motors are not. In part, "Because the hobby rocket motor is, in essence, simply the propellant that actuates the hobby rocket". By their own admission, an assembled hobby rocket is a propellant actuated device and exempt from regulation. An assembled DD payload is clearly a mechanical gas generating system making it an exempt pad. Smokeless is a component of ammunition. It is exempt. Use is not specified as a condition of the exemption. "(4) small arms ammunition and components thereof;" Blackpowder has been used for recovery for as long as the exemption has specified antique firearms. Yet, no posts of convictions, prosecutions, arrests, detentions, letters of clarification, phone calls or midnight raids reported regarding valid non-firearm use of BP (or smokeless powders). What happens to a group of firework people who legally made their own explosives (& blackpowder) and 'illegally' transported them to a club launch. Arrests? Jail time? Or a discussion of what is legal and requirements for storage. When someone was manufacturing and illegally selling a regulated component to non-LEUP holders. Arrest, jail time? No evidance? Everyone arrested at LDRS. Hanging out? FUD Pants down? FUD Can't use? FUD § 555.141 Exemptions. (a) * * * (10) Model rocket motors that meet all of the following criteria— (i) Consist of ammonium perchlorate composite propellant, black powder, or other similar low explosives; (ii) Contain no more than 62.5 grams of total propellant weight; and (iii) Are designed as single-use motors or as reload kits capable of reloading no more than 62.5 grams of propellant into a reusable motor casing.

01-12-2007 12:33 PM  #22
Paul53b Certified Level One   Joined: Dec 2006 Posts: 17	Idea Without wearing my lawyer hat, I'd like to make a comment and a suggestion. First, after reading the posts on this topic, what has been achieved other than an arguement over semantics? (So many forums degrade thusly) Second, could we better utilize all of this effort to constructively promote our cause? Certainly we must have the brainpower to really invent some new ideas... I would hope.

01-12-2007 03:06 PM  #23
QuickBurst Certified Level Three TRA   Joined: Aug 2006 Posts: 45	I agree. I'm done with it.

01-12-2007 03:57 PM  #24
Just Jerry Freeform rockets advocate   Joined: Aug 2006 Posts: 565	Quote: Without wearing my lawyer hat, I'd like to make a comment and a suggestion. First, after reading the posts on this topic, what has been achieved other than an arguement over semantics? (So many forums degrade thusly) Second, could we better utilize all of this effort to constructively promote our cause? Certainly we must have the brainpower to really invent some new ideas... I would hope. Based on my years of experience in rocketry and especially on the internet, you are incorrect. The only activity endorsed is sniping and personal attack. Any effort of actual outreach (U.S. Rockets, Irvine's Fest launches, flyrockets.com) are openly attacked by leaders of the clubs, by loud internet posters, and cause sufficient negative noise to attract heavy government scrutiny, to discourage the promoters, and taint the entire industry with a layer of sh**. However, on the good side, those efforts work like a charm and the industry is in RAPID decline Just Jerry

01-12-2007 07:05 PM  #25
Paul53b Certified Level One   Joined: Dec 2006 Posts: 17	And what have you done Jerry to help? (except from always being negative) Since in your view, everyone is pretty much incorrect... Anything positive?

01-12-2007 07:24 PM  #26
crontab Certified Level Three   Joined: Aug 2006 Posts: 204	Quote: I agree. I'm done with it. Paul's comments asked what had been achieved by this discussion and couldn't we use all this effort to constructive promote the hobby. If you agree with Paul, you would offer constructive solutions that would help all hobby rocketeers. By being "done with it" you are not agreeing, you are only stating that you won't contribute to constructive promotion. One of the best ways to stay off the ATF's radar screen is to stop prodding them in their cages. If you poke a bear long enough, it will retaliate. The verbiage "ATF free" is an automatic red flag demanding that they check to see if in fact a product IS ATF free. "An ATF permit is not required to purchase, store, possess, mail, manufacture or use Hot Coil Products. Hot Coil products are composed of unregulated materials." If that doesn't draw the attention of an ATF agent I don't know what will. I am just trying to offer a discussion of ways to take your products off the ATF radar screen. Given your recent interactions with the agency, I would be doing everything I could not to agitate the ATF. They already think you are "cute" and may like making examples of "cute" people. Why take this approach? I guess there is some truth to the statement that they is no such thing as bad PR.

01-12-2007 07:25 PM  #27
crontab Certified Level Three   Joined: Aug 2006 Posts: 204	Quote: And what have you done Jerry to help? (except from always being negative) Since in your view, everyone is pretty much incorrect... Anything positive? That's all Jerry does is talk about the past. I am still waiting to hear of anything constructive (legally) that he has done THIS century.

01-12-2007 10:35 PM  #28
Just Jerry Freeform rockets advocate   Joined: Aug 2006 Posts: 565	Quote: And what have you done Jerry to help? (except from always being negative) Since in your view, everyone is pretty much incorrect... Anything positive? Do you really want a list? It is pretty long. Lately for example (one example), I provided 18% of all the materials for the fundraiser for the NAR/TRA legal fund raffle. Okay I'll give a second. I provided legal advise to NAR and TRA which was immediately added to the next revision of the complaint. Ego and laurels aside, what is needed NOW is deregulation, lowering of barriers to entry of both consumers and manufacturers, and outreach. NAR, TRA and all of their clubs are really bad at outreach. Just Jerry BTW your characterization is false and does not comport with the posts made in this thread or more than one you can point to.

01-12-2007 10:56 PM  #29
ddmobley Administrator   Joined: Jul 2006 Posts: 2146	Quote: Lately for example (one example), I provided 18% of all the materials for the fundraiser for the NAR/TRA legal fund raffle. Okay I'll give a second. I provided legal advise to NAR and TRA which was immediately added to the next revision of the complaint. Ok. So you: Donated to a raffle. Reviewed the lawsuit documents and offered input. Jerry. You've contributed 15 minutes of your time. What ELSE have you done? Lately? Quote: Ego and laurels aside, what is needed NOW is deregulation, lowering of barriers to entry of both consumers and manufacturers, We need $1.00/gallon gasoline too. But, like deregulation, it AIN'T gonna happen. Next? Quote: and outreach. NAR, TRA and all of their clubs are really bad at outreach. What do you propose? You only seem to have a problem with the organizations that have a problem with you. What do you propose? Why not start a local club and champion outreach. Spread that outreach with regional chapters. Grow those chapters with national clusters. Expand those clusters with global growth. You can make a difference. Or, you can just talk about it. The choice is yours.

01-13-2007 12:34 AM  #30
Just Jerry Freeform rockets advocate   Joined: Aug 2006 Posts: 565	Quote: Ok. So you: Donated to a raffle. Reviewed the lawsuit documents and offered input. Jerry. You've contributed 15 minutes of your time. What ELSE have you done? Lately? I see your point. You want to minimize whatever I DID do. Okay. I choose not to say what else I have done lately. I choose to let results speak for themselves so your judgement is both irrelevent and if offered, positive. Quote: We need $1.00/gallon gasoline too. But, like deregulation, it AIN'T gonna happen. Next? Want, not need. I have something for that too, but it is not rocketry related. It is transportation related and the venue for that is the Federal Executive Branch and the Federal Legislative branch. Not rocketry online/planet. Quote: What do you propose? ... You can make a difference. Or, you can just talk about it. The choice is yours. Here we DO get to the crux of it, don't we? I have made SPECIFIC proposals at each of several levels: NAR club TRA club NAR safety code TRA safety code TRA motor cert policy NAR motor cert policy TRA/NAR consumer certification standards NFPA-1122 changes NFPA-1127 changes NFPA-1125 changes CSFM changes Keep in mind I was in the room where rules were indeed being made and changed in each and every case. People with a different agenda took the day. Hence the results we now see. If these folks, or any folks, were really open to an alternative WITHIN THEIR OWN power to change, immediately within their own jusrisdiction, all they need do is ask, or even less commitment, look at rmr posts wherein I detail those changes of internal club policy, and changes of policy of the "sport rocket caucus" of the NFPA (read NAR/TRA/Estes/Quest/Aerotech, HPRMADA). I have had the benefit of watching my collegues shoot themselves in the foot repeatedly, all the while I was jumping up and down screaming (not literally), then calming down and proposing specific, practical, alternative rules. Rejected. So now I say this: GFL. Your leaders hate consumer freedom. Live with it. I do. Just Jerry

01-13-2007 01:23 AM  #31
ddmobley Administrator   Joined: Jul 2006 Posts: 2146	Quote: I see your point. You want to minimize whatever I DID do. Not really. But resting on one's laurels isn't going to do a thing for tomorrow.

01-13-2007 09:24 PM  #32
Just Jerry Freeform rockets advocate   Joined: Aug 2006 Posts: 565	One way to overcome your perpetual skepticism and unnatural reversion to the personal, is to set an agenda forward all sides can at least agree on the goal of. To wit: Goals: #1 Outreach: To achieve increased awareness of and participation in consumer rocketry. #2 Regulation: To achieve decreased regulation and barriers to entry to consumers, manufacturers, and institutions. #3 Communication: To improve the civility, value and quality of communication within consumer rocketry. If Rocketry Planet were to have a sub-goal of forwarding these goals, and PROMOTE ideas which indeed do, or could quite likely do so, would be more positive than the threads I generally read here. Just Jerry

01-14-2007 12:11 AM  #33
ddmobley Administrator   Joined: Jul 2006 Posts: 2146	Quote: If Rocketry Planet were to have a sub-goal of forwarding these goals, and PROMOTE ideas which indeed do, or could quite likely do so, would be more positive than the threads I generally read here. This discussion is not about Rocketry Planet or Rocketry Planet's goals. Rocketry Planet is contributing nicely to the community, 24/7, including cash to the legal fund. The discussion was about, as are all posts you participate in (and hijack), about you.

01-14-2007 12:03 PM  #34
Just Jerry Freeform rockets advocate   Joined: Aug 2006 Posts: 565	Quote: The discussion was about, as are all posts you participate in (and hijack), about you. False, but you cannot be convinced to see the truth either. Just Jerry

01-14-2007 02:37 PM  #35
ddmobley Administrator   Joined: Jul 2006 Posts: 2146	Quote: False, but you cannot be convinced to see the truth either. I may not be convinced to see the truth, but I can be convinced to see the light. We'll see how things go without you around. Ta-ta!