Ez2cDave
Well-Known Member
Just how, exactly, would that "destroy the NAR" ?It would be impossible to conceive of a more efficient way to destroy the NAR.
Dave F.
Just how, exactly, would that "destroy the NAR" ?It would be impossible to conceive of a more efficient way to destroy the NAR.
Really ?I think the marketplace has spoken. The new competitors are coming up through STEM programs like TARC, ULA, and SLI.
https://www.nasa.gov/stem/studentlaunch/home/index.html
https://www.ulalaunch.com/about/new...announces-k-12-student-rocket-launch-payloads
https://rocketcontest.org/
The "hard-core competition types" I hang out and fly with agree there should be a Sport Range at NARAMs.Nonsense. The "hard-core competition types" I hang out with are perfectly happy to have and enjoy a sport range at NARAM.
I agree 100%.It would be impossible to conceive of a more efficient way to destroy the NAR.
It would be impossible to conceive of a more efficient way to destroy the NAR.
There are a few members in our club that organize a Fall and Spring NAR Competition meet at the local Club launch site on a different scheduled date from the sport launch. There is no club requirement that things have to be done this way. It has been found that this works out well. If a competitor wants to test a model on a sports launch date, they can. There are plenty of LPR and MPR launch pads at the sport launch and they can set up their own tower if they want.I agree 100%.
Steve,I would appreciate it if each of you here would forward me the names of any clubs willing to host NARAM, with or without a sport range, since we are currently having great difficulty finding ANY section willing to do so.
Steve Kristal
NAR Trustee
Steve,"Has the current NAR BoT and officers lost that 'member focused' thinking?"
The NAR is currently larger than it has ever been.
98% of our members do not compete.
98% of our members do not go to NARAM.
"Member Focused" thinking would suggest adding another NSL because that is what our members want, and reducing the resources devoted to what only 2% of the membership utilizes.
We are not prohibiting the hosts of NARAM from also running a sport range if they want to but the manpower requirements of running both for a week are way beyond what clubs are currently willing to commit to. So hosting a sport range is no longer a requirement of holding a NARAM.
I would appreciate it if each of you here would forward me the names of any clubs willing to host NARAM, with or without a sport range, since we are currently having great difficulty finding ANY section willing to do so.
And if you, personally, would volunteer to CD NARAM, that would be great as well.
One other comment. The FAI flyoffs will have more Juniors this year (27) than ever before. And many of those Juniors will stay to compete in NARAM, the largest Junior contingent at NARAM in years. Only 2 of the Juniors have done any NAR competition and all are new to trying out for the U.S. Team. A number of them had never flown a rocket before. Your U.S. Senior team, all NAR members, has made a huge commitment to recruiting Juniors by on- on-one mentoring, answering tons of questions, creating kits for airframes, streamers, holding Zoom get-togethers, Facetime lessons, and getting out and flying with these kids. We've actually figured out what works. And it had nothing to do with any of the solutions suggested in this thread.
Any of you intersted in starting up a similar effort for NAR competition, please let me know.
Thanks,
Steve Kristal
NAR Trustee
That makes me feel a little better about this.We are not prohibiting the hosts of NARAM from also running a sport range if they want to
Indeed!!My 'issue' with all of this as someone who tries to attend NARAMs for many different reasons was why there was no public announcement/discussion that the Sport Range at future NARAMs would be 'optional' for the host section? There is more to a NARAM besides just all the flying. What happens to the Manufacturers' Forum, Canon Auction, NAR Town Hall, etc. Will these be moved to the NSL as there will be more members able to attend these events?
What is the current schedule for BoT meetings and the URL to join the Zoom meetings ?Your current board meets monthly via Zoom and the meetings are open to anyone who wants to sit in.
Correct. I guess I might be called a “hard-core competitive type” and I have flown the Sport range at each of the three NARAMs I have attended. I hope this decision is not permanent for all NARAMs going forward. I enjoy flying all kinds of rockets and I know many rocketeers that feel the same. A blanket statement like that is just wrong.Nonsense. The "hard-core competition types" I hang out with are perfectly happy to have and enjoy a sport range at NARAM.
You can fly up to mid-range ‘H’ motors (about 240 N-sec/125 grams propellant) and 3.3 lb (1,500 gram) rockets without a waiver, if that’s a major issue.Rather than completely abolishing a NARAM sport range, why not simply limit the sport range to non-HPR G motors or lower based on field size/waiver?
NSL handles the big stuff, NARAM accommodates the smaller stuff.
Some, possible, "actionable" consequences . . . ( escalating ).As for “mandating” sections to hold regionals or otherwise face “actionable” consequences (of which I can only imagine would be something like losing one’s section standing), that thought vector seems at odds in a thread that, at the same time, seems to be decrying what is perceived to be an autocratic approach to decision-making.
This is voice of reason. Let the sport range support what the location will. Abolishing the Sport Range is scorched Earth thinking (or lack there of.... thinking that is)Rather than completely abolishing a NARAM sport range, why not simply limit the sport range to non-HPR G motors or lower based on field size/waiver?
NSL handles the big stuff, NARAM accommodates the smaller stuff.
Interesting. A bold manifesto to make NAR great again or a blueprint for organizational suicide? I vote the latter.Some, possible, "actionable" consequences . . . ( escalating ).
(1) The Section is ineligible to receive Grant Money, until they comply.
(2) Responsible Section Members are ineligible to fly at NARAM or NSL, until compliant.
(3) Suspend responsible Section Member's HPR certifications, for non-compliance.
(4) Place Section on "probation", with a time-limit to comply.
(5) Cancel Section charter, unless they comply. ( inform landowner of loss of insurance )
Who would want to "fight" hosting NAR Competition, to risk all of that
Frankly, a "Competition Requirement" should have been in place, in Section charters, right from the initial formation of the NAR.
Dave F.
The FAI solution was the fatroc: min length 50 cm, min diamter 40 mm over 50% of length, and that is for small motors. If you scale that up for M motors how big will be and will anyone wnat to fly them?Simple solution . . . Fly larger diameter rockets with "Baby M" motors.
Depending on the motor used, keeping things under 8,000' AGL should be easy !
Dave F.
I thought the whole thing was "Festival", and that little contest was just one small part of it. Maybe the new branding just did not stick as much as the historical name "NARAM". Presumably now that BoD meetings, elections, NRC, etc., are "mostly virtual" the physical event, by any name just no longer matters.Perhaps the resolution of the 'NARAM' issue is a matter of semantics.
If the national NAR event is 'competition only' then maybe a name change would apply.
Instead of NARAM-64 call it the National Association of Rocketry Annual Competition Launch (NARACL) or NARCOMP as in NARCOMP-2023.
This calls out specifically what the event entitles and spells out that this is a 'competition only' event.
The term/phrase "NARAM" belongs to ALL NAR members. It should only be used for a national event when ALL members, regardless of what type of rockets they fly, are welcome.
A "BDR" ( Big Dumb Rocket ), 10 feet to 12 feet long and 7.5 inches in diameter will remain sub-sonic and stay in the 8000' AGL +/- range on a "Baby M".The FAI solution was the fatroc: min length 50 cm, min diamter 40 mm over 50% of length, and that is for small motors. If you scale that up for M motors how big will be and will anyone wnat to fly them?
Until the advent of HPR, NARAM was always "competition only" ( LPR / MPR Sport Range was added later. HPR was added to NARAM ( can't remember the first year for HPR Sport Range ) after that.Perhaps the resolution of the 'NARAM' issue is a matter of semantics.
If the national NAR event is 'competition only' then maybe a name change would apply.
Instead of NARAM-64 call it the National Association of Rocketry Annual Competition Launch (NARACL) or NARCOMP as in NARCOMP-2023.
This calls out specifically what the event entitles and spells out that this is a 'competition only' event.
The term/phrase "NARAM" belongs to ALL NAR members. It should only be used for a national event when ALL members, regardless of what type of rockets they fly, are welcome.
Enter your email address to join: