<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1528" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Jim, the answer was it begins at center with the
straight line required at least 15 m before center.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Keith</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=jivey61@bellsouth.net
href="mailto:jivey61@bellsouth.net">jivey61@bellsouth.net</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A
title=nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org
href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA Mailing List</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Cc:</B> <A title=DaveL322@comcast.net
href="mailto:DaveL322@comcast.net">DaveL322@comcast.net</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, November 14, 2006 8:35
AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Masters
Square 8</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>We have worn out this thread..... It needs a name
change..... Retire "masters Square 8",... I still don't know where
it starts,and has nothing to do with lines between maneuvers or S &
G.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Jim Ivey</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=vicenterc@comcast.net
href="mailto:vicenterc@comcast.net">vicenterc@comcast.net</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A
title=nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org
href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA Mailing List</A> ; <A
title=nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org
href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA Mailing List</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Cc:</B> <A title=DaveL322@comcast.net
href="mailto:DaveL322@comcast.net">DaveL322@comcast.net</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, November 14, 2006 9:24
AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Masters
Square 8</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>I remember a Don's article in K-Factor. He was recominding to
write the scores in a separate piece of paper so we DON'T take our eyes off
the plane to write the score. I have been doing this since I read
the article. Now, it is easy for me to deduct points in the "no
man"s land". I do to all so there is not problem. It is very
common to see pilots adjusting in the "no man's land" for cross winds
by rolling the plane. It is clear in the rule book that the wings have
to be level. This is another example of "no man's land" judging.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Vicente "Vince" Bortone </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">--------------
Original message -------------- <BR>From: DaveL322@comcast.net <BR>
<DIV>In practice, I think the "no mans" land is being judged....maybe
subconsciously to an extent....just like high quality take offs and
landings, clean procedure turns and trim passes, etc, all "add to the
show".</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>If "no mans" land needs to be specifically addressed, then I agree it
should be done along the lines of what Ed has described.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I think the last thing pattern needs is a place for a subjective
score, or a category which can largely be subjectively scored - ie, any
kind of presentation score, overall flight score, style, appearance,
etc.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Regards,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Dave Lockhart</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">--------------
Original message -------------- <BR>From: Ed Deaver
<divesplat@yahoo.com> <BR>
<DIV>I am curious about this also. It is almost guaranteed if a
pilot makes a radical heading change in "no mans land" to be given a
fairly stiff downgrade. If the pilots "sneaks" it in (we all do it
ya know) but gets caught what downgrade to give.</DIV>
<DIV>My understanding in Pre-turnaround, a pilot was judged only while
in the box or while performing the maneuver show center. However,
we are flying turnaround now.</DIV>
<DIV>Maybe we need a rules proposal to incorporate something along the
lines of: Once in the box,
there is no dead zone and after the 15M straight line is drawn to end
the previous manuever, the next manuever begins. Or something
else, maybe 1/2 way between maneuvers establishes when the last
maneuver ends and the next begins. In this manner, all flight in
the box is judged and assigned a specific downgrade to a specific
maneuver.</DIV>
<DIV>Just a thought.</DIV>
<DIV>Ed<BR><BR><B><I>Keith Black <tkeithblack@gmail.com></I></B>
wrote:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">Looks
like we're leaving the discussion regarding what happens in 'no
man's<BR>land' as your example has nothing to do with lines between
two consecutive<BR>maneuvers. My deja vu was intended to switch to
something that could be<BR>related to more readily to provoke thought
and illustrate my point, it was<BR>supposed to be similar.<BR><BR>My
guess is that you're trying to bring smoothness and gracefulness
into<BR>play with your question. I for one would give both maneuvers
10 and would<BR>not deduct for the height difference. Since the end
maneuver is a height<BR>adjusting maneuver it seems perfectly
acceptable to adjust the height of the<BR>centered maneuver.<BR><BR>I
understand that there's an objective to fly all maneuvers a similar
size<BR>and ideally position, but I've never heard anything concrete
as to how to<BR>credit or debit for this. For me if someone flies the
tri! ! angle p erfect and<BR>the square perfect but at a 50' different
base line they're still both<BR>getting 10's.<BR><BR>That being said,
a few weeks back I was posting arguments in favor of
S&G.<BR>Unfortunately I'm not sure it's well enough defined for
pilots to get all<BR>the credit they may deserve. The only way to
truly credit for overall<BR>matched size, speed and positioning may be
to have a separate score/judge<BR>viewing the sequence as a
whole.<BR><BR>Keith Black<BR><BR><BR>----- Original Message -----
<BR>From: "Lance Van Nostrand" <PATTERNDUDE@COMCAST.NET><BR>To: "NSRCA
Mailing List" <NSRCA-DISCUSSION@LISTS.NSRCA.ORG><BR>Sent: Monday,
November 13, 2006 11:41 PM<BR>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Masters
Square 8<BR><BR><BR>> Let me call the example, because yours is
really just deja vu all over<BR>> again.<BR>><BR>> The pilot
performs two perfect center manuvers in a row. What they are<BR>>
doesn't matter but let's say they are the new triangle and then! th!
e< BR>&g t; golfball. The only thing is, the base altitude
for each is 50ft<BR>different.<BR>> Should this get a lower score
than another pilot that also flies the same<BR>> manuvers also
perfect but their base altitude is the same?<BR>><BR>>
--Lance<BR>><BR>> ----- Original Message ----- <BR>> From:
"Keith Black" <TKEITHBLACK@GMAIL.COM><BR>> To: "NSRCA Mailing List"
<NSRCA-DISCUSSION@LISTS.NSRCA.ORG><BR>> Sent: Monday, November 13,
2006 10:54 PM<BR>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Masters Square
8<BR>><BR>><BR>> >I completely disagree with you, this is
not a S&G issue. In my example I<BR>> > never said the drop
in altitude wasn't smooth and graceful. In fact, it<BR>> >
may<BR>> > well have been the most graceful and smooth loss of
altitude ever, but<BR>it<BR>> > still gets a downgrade based on
geometry.<BR>> ><BR>> > New example:<BR>> ><BR>>
> A pilot gets blown way too far in, s! o on th e l! ong lin e from
the end of<BR>the<BR>> > humpty to the square eight the pilot
very smoothly and gracefully blends<BR>> > in<BR>> >
rudder and moves the plane out about 75 yards. Fifteen meters prior
to<BR>> > center this crafty flier adjusts his track and
straightens the track<BR>out.<BR>> > You, however, being the
attentive judge that you are notice this sneaky<BR>> >
adjustment and judge it how? And on what grounds?<BR>> ><BR>>
> For me it's easy, you can't both fly a parallel track to the
flight line<BR>> > and<BR>> > adjust your distance from
the flight line by 75 meters, that's bad<BR>> >
geometry.<BR>> > Seems we teach the Sportsman this lesson in the
two straight flight<BR>> > segments. For a 75 meter adjustment
I'd probably take 1 point, maybe<BR>more<BR>> > depending on how
dramatic the adjustment in distance looked.<BR>> ><BR>> >
"But he straightened out 15 meters be! fore th e star! t of th e
square", you<BR>> > say,<BR>> > "what about the 'no man's
land'.<BR>> ><BR>> > "Don't care", I say, "we fly a
sequence, not a lot of individual<BR>> > maneuvers.<BR>> >
There is no 'no man's land'."<BR>> ><BR>> > Again I'm more
than willing to change the way I judge if Don or the<BR>> >
judging<BR>> > committee explain that I'm wrong, after all, what
do I know.<BR>> ><BR>> > Keith Black<BR>> ><BR>>
><BR>> > ----- Original Message ----- <BR>> > From:
"Lance Van Nostrand" <PATTERNDUDE@COMCAST.NET><BR>> > To: "NSRCA
Mailing List" <NSRCA-DISCUSSION@LISTS.NSRCA.ORG><BR>> > Sent:
Monday, November 13, 2006 6:43 PM<BR>> > Subject: Re:
[NSRCA-discussion] Masters Square 8<BR>> ><BR>> ><BR>>
>> 1/2 pt S&G<BR>> >><BR>> >> -----
Original Message ----- <BR>> >> From: "Keith Black"
<TKEITHBLACK@GMAIL.COM><BR>! > &g t;> To! : "NSRC A Mailing
List" <NSRCA-DISCUSSION@LISTS.NSRCA.ORG><BR>> >> Sent:
Sunday, November 12, 2006 11:32 PM<BR>> >> Subject: Re:
[NSRCA-discussion] Masters Square 8<BR>> >><BR>>
>><BR>> >> >I agree that the downgrade is lenient,
this didn't escape my<BR>attention.<BR>> >> > However, I'm
not sure by what other criteria/rule one would downgrade<BR>a<BR>>
>> > loss<BR>> >> > of altitude. Perhaps Don
could help here.<BR>> >> ><BR>> >> > Keep in
mind that the 15 foot drop you mention may not appear as much<BR>>
>> > of<BR>> > a<BR>> >> > drop depending
on the height of the plane and box positioning during<BR>> >>
> the<BR>> >> > drop. I'll be honest, right or wrong,
if I'm in the chair and I see a<BR>> >> > noticeable drop
I'll take 1/2 point, if it's really obvious drop I'd<BR>> >
take<BR>&g! t; > > > 1<!
BR>> >> > pt. Maybe I'm wrong, this is a good time to
set me straight and level<BR>> > ;-)<BR>> >> >
.<BR>> >> ><BR>> >> > OK Lance, so if you're
judging Sportsman and you see the plane drop<BR>20<BR>> >>
> feet<BR>> >> > on the straight flight out as it flies
from one end of the box to the<BR>> >> > other,<BR>>
>> > how would you score it. By your definition seems like
you have to<BR>give<BR>> > it<BR>> >> > a<BR>>
>> > 10 since the error would only be around 3 to 4
degrees.<BR>> >> ><BR>> >> > Keith
Black<BR>> >> ><BR>> >> ><BR>> >>
> ----- Original Message ----- <BR>> >> > From: "Lance
Van Nostrand" <PATTERNDUDE@COMCAST.NET><BR>> >> > To:
"NSRCA Mailing List" <NSRCA-DISCUSSION@LISTS.NSRCA.ORG><BR>>
>> > Sent: Sunday, November 12, 2006 10:32 PM<BR>! >
&g t;! ;> & gt; Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Masters
Square 8<BR>> >> ><BR>> >> ><BR>> >>
>> I don't think the rules support your claim that the 15m
entry/exit<BR>is<BR>> >> >> a<BR>> >> >>
minimum. I think you have just made up your own rule to
downgrade<BR>at<BR>> >> >> 1<BR>> >> >>
point per 15. However, this is very lenient downgrading because
to<BR>> >> >> get<BR>> > a<BR>> >> >
1<BR>> >> >> point downgrade by descending or ascending
at 15 degrees, over a<BR>100m<BR>> >> >> distance, the
plane would change altitude by 77 ft. A pilot<BR>changing<BR>>
>> >> altitude by 15 ft or so would only be making a 3
degree error.<BR>(note:<BR>> >> >> the<BR>> >>
>> box width at 150 meters is 600 meters).<BR>> >>
>><BR>> >> >> Therefore, if I l! ose 15 ft of
alt! itude a s I fly from the end of the<BR>> >> >
reverse<BR>> >> >> cuban into the stall turn (manuvers
1 and 2) this should hardly<BR>> > register<BR>> >>
> as<BR>> >> >> a downgrade.<BR>> >>
>><BR>> >> >> --Lance<BR>> >>
>><BR>> >> >> ----- Original Message -----
<BR>> >> >> From: "Keith Black"
<TKEITHBLACK@GMAIL.COM><BR>> >> >> To: "NSRCA Mailing
List" <NSRCA-DISCUSSION@LISTS.NSRCA.ORG><BR>> >> >>
Sent: Sunday, November 12, 2006 7:40 PM<BR>> >> >>
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Masters Square 8<BR>> >>
>><BR>> >> >><BR>> >> >> >I
agree with Don's description on the maneuver, this makes
perfect<BR>> > sense<BR>> >> > to<BR>> >>
>> > me. However, I really don't think it matters if you
visualize the<BR>>! >&g t; >> ! > ce nter<BR>>
>> >> > or<BR>> >> >> > the first
corner as the start because IMO any deviation in track,<BR>>
>> > altitude<BR>> >> >> > change or wing
bobble approaching the eight, whether 15 m or<BR>greater<BR>>
>> > from<BR>> >> >> > the theoretical
start of the eight is grounds for downgrade.<BR>> >> >>
><BR>> >> >> > This thinking goes to what Lance
was discussing as "no man's<BR>land".<BR>> > I'm<BR>>
>> >> > not<BR>> >> >> > sure there
is such a thing, I've always thought of the 15 m entry<BR>> >
line<BR>> >> > as<BR>> >> >> > a<BR>>
>> >> > minimum.<BR>> >> >> ><BR>>
>> >> > Let's take an example. A pilot comes out of the
Humpty Bump prior<BR>to<BR>> >> >> > the<BR>>
>! ;> & gt;> > fi! gure ei ght and draws a 15 m
straight line. Then they start<BR>loosing<BR>> >> >>
> altitude and continue dropping until 15 m before center
(Lance's<BR>> >> >> > theoretical<BR>> >>
>> > no man's land). I for one would deduct points from the
eight based<BR>> >> >> > on<BR>> >> >
the<BR>> >> >> > 15<BR>> >> >> >
degree rule. I don't think the spirit of the rules is
"anything<BR>> > goes",<BR>> >> > or<BR>>
>> >> > "it's not so bad" as long as it's not 15 m
before a maneuver<BR>starts.<BR>> > If<BR>> >> >>
> one<BR>> >> >> > does score this way then the
pilot that keeps a perfect line<BR>between<BR>> >> >
these<BR>> >> >> > two maneuvers will not be
rewarded for doing a better job.<BR>> >> >>
><BR>> >> >>! ; > Keith Black<BR>>! ;
>& gt; >> ><BR>> >> >> > -----
Original Message ----- <BR>> >> >> > From: "Lance
Van Nostrand" <PATTERNDUDE@COMCAST.NET><BR>> >> >> >
To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <NSRCA-DISCUSSION@LISTS.NSRCA.ORG><BR>>
>> >> > Sent: Sunday, November 12, 2006 8:07 AM<BR>>
>> >> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Masters Square
8<BR>> >> >> ><BR>> >> >>
><BR>> >> >> >> Don,<BR>> >> >>
>><BR>> >> >> >> Since it is the point of
this list to be nitpicky, let me say<BR>that<BR>> >> >>
>> when<BR>> >> >> > the<BR>> >>
>> >> plane is inverted at center it is at a point that it
will never<BR>> > return<BR>> >> >> >>
to,<BR>> >> >> >> therefore the actual center can
not be th! e start of the manuver.<BR>> &! gt;> >>
>> Granted,<BR>> >> >> >> the center is
part of the straight line that begins and ends all<BR>> >>
>> >> manuvers,<BR>> >> >> >> but it
is not part of the actual figure 8. So to be complete,<BR>> >
judging<BR>> >> >> >> starts 15m before the exit
of the final radius and ends 15m after<BR>> > this<BR>>
>> >> >> point. This encompases the center but is
not the actual beginning<BR>> > and<BR>> >> >>
>> ending.<BR>> >> >> >><BR>> >>
>> >> As for Stuart's comment, I think any downgrade
applied to what<BR>the<BR>> >> >> > airplane<BR>>
>> >> >> does when it is in "no man's land" falls in
the smoothness and<BR>> >> >> > Gracefulness<BR>>
>> >> >> category and should be! minima l. ("no
man's land" exists betwe! en<BR>& gt; > some<BR>> >>
>> >> manuvers that are far apart where the prior manuver
and its 15m<BR>> >> >> >> exit<BR>> >>
> line<BR>> >> >> >> end, but there is a long
space before the 15m entry line of the<BR>> >> >>
>> next<BR>> >> >> >> manuver.)<BR>>
>> >> >><BR>> >> >> >>
--Lance<BR>> >> >> >><BR>> >> >>
>> ----- Original Message ----- <BR>> >> >>
>> From: "Don Ramsey (CoxNet)" <DON.RAMSEY@COX.NET><BR>>
>> >> >> To: "NSRCA Mailing List"
<NSRCA-DISCUSSION@LISTS.NSRCA.ORG><BR>> >> >> >>
Sent: Saturday, November 11, 2006 7:40 PM<BR>> >> >>
>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Masters Square 8<BR>>
>> >> >><BR>> >> >> ! >>
;<BR>> >> >> >> &g! t; Lanc e,<BR>>
>> >> >> ><BR>> >> >> >>
> I believe it starts at center. Straight line before center
and<BR>> > start<BR>> >> > at<BR>> >>
>> >> > center. The reason I say that is rule 14.1
which says "Each<BR>time<BR>> >> >> >> >
the<BR>> >> >> >> > model<BR>> >>
>> >> > passes before the judges, a maneuver is
executed, except after<BR>> >> > takeoff<BR>> >>
>> > and<BR>> >> >> >> > landing." Of
course, some maneuvers start before center as the<BR>> >
slow<BR>> >> >> > roll,<BR>> >> >>
>> > etc. As for scoring, I'm not entirely sure it
matters.<BR>> >> >> >> ><BR>> >>
>> >> > Don<BR>> >> >> >>
><BR>! > &g t;> >> >> > ----- Original M!
essage ----- <BR>> >> >> >> > From:
<JIVEY61@BELLSOUTH.NET><BR>> >> >> >> > To:
"NSRCA Mailing List" <NSRCA-DISCUSSION@LISTS.NSRCA.ORG><BR>>
>> >> >> > Sent: Saturday, November 11, 2006 7:16
PM<BR>> >> >> >> > Subject: Re:
[NSRCA-discussion] Masters Square 8<BR>> >> >> >>
><BR>> >> >> >> ><BR>> >> >>
>> >> Lance<BR>> >> >> >> >>
You will have to have a entry line before the push to vertical<BR>>
> past<BR>> >> >> >> >> center.This is
where I think it starts... at the start of the<BR>> >
entry<BR>> >> >> > line.<BR>> >> >>
>> >><BR>> >> >> >> >> Jim
Ivey<BR>> >> >> >> >> ----- Original
Message -----! <BR>&g t; >> >> >> >> From:
"La! nce Van Nostrand" <PATTERNDUDE@COMCAST.NET><BR>> >>
>> >> >> To: "NSRCA Mailing List"
<NSRCA-DISCUSSION@LISTS.NSRCA.ORG><BR>> >> >> >>
>> Sent: Saturday, November 11, 2006 7:51 PM<BR>> >>
>> >> >> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Masters
Square 8<BR>> >> >> >> >><BR>> >>
>> >> >><BR>> >> >> >>
>>> OK,so where does the manuver begin and end? At center,
the<BR>> > radius<BR>> >> >> > after<BR>>
>> >> >> >>> center, at the first corner
initiation?<BR>> >> >> >> >>><BR>>
>> >> >> >>> --Lance<BR>> >>
>> >> >>><BR>> >> >> >>
>>> ----- Original Message ----- <BR>> >> >>
>> >>! ;> F rom: <JIVEY61@BELLSOUTH.NET><BR>>
>> >! > &g t;> >>> To: "NSRCA Mailing
List" <NSRCA-DISCUSSION@LISTS.NSRCA.ORG><BR>> >> >>
>> >>> Sent: Saturday, November 11, 2006 4:06
PM<BR>> >> >> >> >>> Subject: Re:
[NSRCA-discussion] Masters Square 8<BR>> >> >> >>
>>><BR>> >> >> >> >>><BR>>
>> >> >> >>> > Jason<BR>> >>
>> >> >>> > The way we are flying the 8 is
enter inverted and 1st loop<BR>> >> >> >>
>>> > (outside)<BR>> >> >> >>
>>> > to<BR>> >> >> >> >>>
> the<BR>> >> >> >> >>> > right of
center and next (inside) loop to the left of<BR>> >
center.The<BR>> >> >> > first<BR>> >>
>> >> >>>! > l oop<BR>> >> >>
>> >>> > ! is outs ide loop and 1st vertical segment
starts past<BR>> >> >> >> >>> >
center.Of<BR>> >> >> > course<BR>> >>
>> >> >> swap<BR>> >> >> >>
>>> > left and right for opposite flying
direction.<BR>> >> >> >> >>>
><BR>> >> >> >> >>> ><BR>>
>> >> >> >>> > Jim Ivey<BR>> >>
>> >> >>> ><BR>> >> >> >>
>>> > ----- Original Message ----- <BR>> >>
>> >> >>> > From: "JShulman"
<JSHULMAN@CFL.RR.COM><BR>> >> >> >> >>>
> To: "NSRCA" <NSRCA-DISCUSSION@LISTS.NSRCA.ORG><BR>> >>
>> >> >>> > Sent: Saturday, November 11, 2006
4:08 PM<BR>> >> >> >> &! gt;> > >
Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] Masters Square 8<BR>&g! t; > >
>> >> >>> ><BR>> >> >> >>
>>> ><BR>> >> >> >> >>>
>> Hi All,<BR>> >> >> >> >>>
>><BR>> >> >> >> >>> >> Does
the Square horizontal 8 start at center or just past<BR>> >>
> center?<BR>> >> >> >> >>>
>><BR>> >> >> >> >>> >>
Regards,<BR>> >> >> >> >>> >>
Jason<BR>> >> >> >> >>> >>
www.jasonshulman.com<BR>> >> >> >> >>>
>> www.shulmanaviation.com<BR>> >> >> >>
>>> >> www.composite-arf.com<BR>> >> >>
>> >>> >> -- <BR>> >> >> >>
>>> >> No virus fou! nd in t his outgoing
message.<BR>> >> >> >> >>&g! t; >
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.<BR>> >> >> >>
>>> >> Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.14.2/528
- Release<BR>> > Date:<BR>> >> >> >>
>>> >> 11/10/2006<BR>> >> >> >>
>>> >><BR>> >> >> >> >>>
>><BR>> >> >> >> >>> >>
_______________________________________________<BR>> >>
>> >> >>> >> NSRCA-discussion mailing
list<BR>> >> >> >> >>> >>
NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>> >> >> >>
>>> >>
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<BR>>
>> >> >> >>> ><BR>> >> >>
>> >>> >
_______________________________________________<BR>> ! >> ;
>> >> >>> > NSRCA-discussion mailing
list<BR>>! ; >& gt; >> >> >>> >
NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>> >> >> >>
>>> >
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<BR>>
>> >> >> >>><BR>> >> >>
>> >>>
_______________________________________________<BR>> >>
>> >> >>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list<BR>>
>> >> >> >>>
NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>> >> >> >>
>>>
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<BR>>
>> >> >> >><BR>> >> >> >>
>> _______________________________________________<BR>>
>> >> >> >> NSRCA-discussion mailing
list<BR>> >> >> >> >>
NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>> >> >&! gt; >
;> >>
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<BR>>
&g! t;> >> >> ><BR>> >> >>
>> > _______________________________________________<BR>>
>> >> >> > NSRCA-discussion mailing list<BR>>
>> >> >> >
NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>> >> >> >>
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<BR>>
>> >> >><BR>> >> >> >>
_______________________________________________<BR>> >>
>> >> NSRCA-discussion mailing list<BR>> >>
>> >> NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>> >>
>> >>
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<BR>>
>> >> ><BR>> >> >> >
_______________________________________________<BR>> >>
>> > NSRCA-discussion mailing list<BR>> >> >>
>! ; NSRCA -discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>> >> >>
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailma! n/listi
nfo/nsrca-discussion<BR>> >> >><BR>> >>
>> _______________________________________________<BR>>
>> >> NSRCA-discussion mailing list<BR>> >>
>> NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>> >> >>
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<BR>>
>> ><BR>> >> >
_______________________________________________<BR>> >> >
NSRCA-discussion mailing list<BR>> >> >
NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>> >> >
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<BR>>
>><BR>> >>
_______________________________________________<BR>> >>
NSRCA-discussion mailing list<BR>> >>
NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>> >>
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<BR>>
><BR>> > _______________! _______
_________________________<BR>> > NSRCA-discussion mailing
list<BR>> > NSRCA-dis! cussion @lists.nsrca.org<BR>> >
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<BR>><BR>>
_______________________________________________<BR>>
NSRCA-discussion mailing list<BR>>
NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>>
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<BR><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>NSRCA-discussion
mailing
list<BR>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<BR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>_______________________________________________<BR>NSRCA-discussion
mailing
list<BR>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</BLOCKQUOTE>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>_______________________________________________<BR>NSRCA-discussion
mailing
list<BR>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>