<DIV style="font-family:Arial, sans-serif; font-size:10pt;">second that. Been learning the new advanced sequence with my venus2.<BR><BR>--- jlachow@hotmail.com wrote:<BR><BR>From: Joe Lachowski <jlachow@hotmail.com><BR>To: NSRCA Mailing List <nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org><BR>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Small Models...goodforthefutureofthePatternEvent?<BR>Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 08:06:55 -0500<BR><BR>
The Venus II with a 120AX is an excellent choice. I'd take it anyday over a Quest 3D having flown both planes. Been flying the Venus II in the off season and it does a pretty decent 2007 Masters sequence.<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>
<HR>
> From: fhhuber@clearwire.net<BR>> To: nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>> Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2007 20:27:52 -0600<BR>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Small Models...goodforthefutureofthePatternEvent?<BR>> <BR>> Unfortunately... It looks like UltraRC has discontinued the Quest 3D... It <BR>> has been listing as out of stock for over 6 months and no emails to them <BR>> about an ETA of availability has been answered (I've e-mailed then once a <BR>> month.) Great plane for Sportsman and easily capable for ptacticing <BR>> Intermediate with a .91 2-stroke.<BR>> (and thats what I an powering with 900 Watts brushless. RTF @ 8 lb 6 oz)<BR>> <BR>> There's a .50 size Quest from NitroModels.com... looks like a miniature of <BR>> the Ultra RC .90 size. (might be a good First Sportsman plane... price is <BR>> right and the average .40 trainer's radio and engine should fly it)<BR>> <BR>> ***************<BR>> <BR>> Sportsman is mostly about the pilot learning what REALLY is level... and <BR>> learning to get consistant about handling a plane in varying conditions. <BR>> So, I don't see a need for a bonus or penalty based on aircraft size.<BR>> <BR>> As noted before, you can go to a contest and watch someone who has learned <BR>> the lessons Sportsman (Novice) is designed to teach flying a U-Can-Do-46 or <BR>> Ultra-Stick 60 beat people flying a Quest 3D or a 2 meter Pattern design.<BR>> <BR>> ----- Original Message ----- <BR>> From: "Ed Miller" <edbon85@charter.net><BR>> To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org><BR>> Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2007 10:11 AM<BR>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Small <BR>> Models...goodforthefutureofthePatternEvent?<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> > The scoring bonus is the key. It doesn't immediately wipe out anyone's<BR>> > equipment. When the TOC gave a bonus for bipes, they were unbeatable.<BR>> > Giving a small bonus to a .90 4C or .60 2C would over time help facilitate<BR>> > new folks to the smaller planes, even when their Masters or FAI mentor is<BR>> > flying the latest 2M ship. For the competitive types entering Sportsman<BR>> > they would have a leg up on everyone from the start. John Newbie can fly<BR>> > his .91 sized Surpass, Reactor, Quest, Groovy, the list goes on and<BR>> > instantly be at a competitive advantage against the 2M high dollar plane.<BR>> > Keep in mind just how many .90 sized "aerobatic arfs" are currently on the<BR>> > market. Far easier and more cost efficient for the manufacturers to <BR>> > build,<BR>> > pack and load in a carton then a 2M ship. Believe it or not the<BR>> > manufacturers look at the market also, folks at the 2M level jump from <BR>> > plane<BR>> > to plane depending on what the top guys fly. Not a great market to be in<BR>> > over the long haul to amortize costs if you are in the business to make <BR>> > $$.<BR>> > At the Sportsman ranks a 90 sized Quest with a small bonus over a 2M <BR>> > Impact<BR>> > would be killer. Thumbs on the sticks and fuel or electrons spent is what<BR>> > really wins but giving an advantage to the would be pattern flyer is our<BR>> > golden carrot. Folks need to stop thinking at the upper end levels and <BR>> > put<BR>> > themselves at the entrance door to the playground.<BR>> > Ed M.<BR>> > ----- Original Message ----- <BR>> > From: "Anthony Romano" <anthonyr105@hotmail.com><BR>> > To: <nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org><BR>> > Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2007 10:40 AM<BR>> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Small Models...goodfor<BR>> > thefutureofthePatternEvent?<BR>> ><BR>> ><BR>> >> That is why I suggested a scoring bonus no one gets turned away, no <BR>> >> extra<BR>> >> events, no one at a percieved disadvantage. Probably not that hard to<BR>> >> update<BR>> >> a scoring program to do it.<BR>> >><BR>> >> For what its worth the last five contest I have run we allowed anything <BR>> >> up<BR>> >> to 80" and the last two years any AMA legal airplane with no takers.<BR>> >><BR>> >> Anthony<BR>> >><BR>> >><BR>> >><BR>> >><BR>> >>>From: "Rex LESHER" <trexlesh@msn.com><BR>> >>>Reply-To: NSRCA Mailing List <nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org><BR>> >>>To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org><BR>> >>>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Small<BR>> >>>Models...goodfor thefutureofthePattern Event?<BR>> >>>Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2007 15:57:15 -0800<BR>> >>><BR>> >>>Georgie<BR>> >>>The problem with this theory is, what do we do with the guys now flying<BR>> >>>Sportsman and Intermediate with 2 meter planes.... I know of several<BR>> >>>guys that will be flying in both of these classes that own two or three 2<BR>> >>>meter planes each.... It would be pretty disasterous for them to find <BR>> >>>out<BR>> >>>that they can't use their planes.... Just shy of forcing them to quit,<BR>> >>>how<BR>> >>>do you want to handle this?<BR>> >>>I could see the smaller plane theory for Sportsman as a method to hook<BR>> >>>flyers, but on the other hand, I know quite a few guys in the local club<BR>> >>>that don't have any planes that would be small enough to fit the<BR>> >>>rules.....<BR>> >>>Probably the only fair way to handle this problem would be to create a <BR>> >>>new<BR>> >>>Sportsman class with limited size, and leave the other Sportsman class<BR>> >>>open to any AMA legal airplane... This way, we would be inviting anyone<BR>> >>>and everyone to fly, just like we are now doing in Sportsman by<BR>> >>>allowing any AMA legal plane to compete in that class..... Then, by<BR>> >>>adding another class to a contest, there comes the problems with <BR>> >>>logistics<BR>> >>>of running the contest and having enough qualified judges and such.....<BR>> >>>Theres no easy solution to any of this, one solution will cause many<BR>> >>>other<BR>> >>>problems.... It is however, very good food for thought.....<BR>> >>><BR>> >>>Rex<BR>> >>> ----- Original Message -----<BR>> >>> From: george w. kennie<mailto:geobet@gis.net><BR>> >>> To: NSRCA Mailing List<mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org><BR>> >>> Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2007 3:20 PM<BR>> >>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Small Models ...goodfor<BR>> >>>thefutureofthePattern Event?<BR>> >>><BR>> >>><BR>> >>> Jerry,<BR>> >>> The way I see it is, if there's a rule limit, the guy already knows it<BR>> >>> exists and he is not going to show up with something that violates the<BR>> >>> rules. Additionally, if he owns an Impact, he has already convinced<BR>> >>>himself<BR>> >>> that he's a proficient enough pilot to fly an Impact and therefore <BR>> >>> able<BR>> >>>to<BR>> >>> conclude that he will be more than capable with a smaller model when<BR>> >>> competing against a similar field.<BR>> >>> What guy do you know flying an Impact that doesn't have a stable of<BR>> >>>smaller<BR>> >>> planes that he plays around with. I'm not sure that it's an issue.<BR>> >>> JMO, Georgie<BR>> >>><BR>> >>><BR>> >>><BR>> >>> ----- Original Message -----<BR>> >>> From: "JFGREEN" <jf217green@cmc.net<mailto:jf217green@cmc.net>><BR>> >>> To: "'NSRCA Mailing List'"<BR>> >>><nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org>><BR>> >>> Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2007 1:53 PM<BR>> >>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Small Models ... goodfor<BR>> >>> thefutureofthePattern Event?<BR>> >>><BR>> >>><BR>> >>> > Dennis: Why a limit? What if an interested flyer shows up with an<BR>> >>>Impact<BR>> >>> > to<BR>> >>> > fly sportsman? Are we not going to let him fly? Sportsman doesn't<BR>> >>>limit<BR>> >>> > what you can fly now and it seems to work for those who are<BR>> >>>interested.<BR>> >>> > If<BR>> >>> > one isn't interested in competing, will creating limits on their<BR>> >>>options<BR>> >>> > help their interest? Jerry<BR>> >>> ><BR>> >>> > -----Original Message-----<BR>> >>> > From:<BR>> >>>nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org<mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org><BR>> >>> > [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of <BR>> >>> Dennis<BR>> >>> > Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2007 10:43 AM<BR>> >>> > To: NSRCA Mailing List<BR>> >>> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Small Models ... good for<BR>> >>> > thefutureofthePattern Event?<BR>> >>> ><BR>> >>> > Well at last a comment that to me makes some sense. If the <BR>> >>> perception<BR>> >>>from<BR>> >>> > the person wanting to start pattern is that in order to be<BR>> >>> competitive<BR>> >>> > and/or to look like they fit in is to have the latest full 2 meter<BR>> >>>pattern<BR>> >>> > plane then I agree a change is needed. I have had those very words<BR>> >>>said to<BR>> >>> > me by someone who was interested but did not want to spend the money<BR>> >>>to be<BR>> >>> > as they put it "competitive". Perhaps what we need to do is limit <BR>> >>> the<BR>> >>>size<BR>> >>> > of the plane for the entry-level classes. This takes out the feeling<BR>> >>>of<BR>> >>> > needing the latest and greatest, limits the cost and perhaps even<BR>> >>>tells<BR>> >>> > them<BR>> >>> > they can fly what they have now. I would never support telling them<BR>> >>>they<BR>> >>> > have to have a particular plane for the class. They have the freedom<BR>> >>>of<BR>> >>> > choice and by the time they are ready for advanced they will be<BR>> >>> hooked<BR>> >>>and<BR>> >>> > can go for the bigger, more expensive stuff if they choose.<BR>> >>> ><BR>> >>> > Dennis Cone<BR>> >>> ><BR>> >>> > -----Original Message-----<BR>> >>> > From:<BR>> >>>nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org<mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org><BR>> >>> > [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org]On Behalf Of Ed<BR>> >>>Miller<BR>> >>> > Sent: Friday, January 05, 2007 5:59 PM<BR>> >>> > To: NSRCA Mailing List<BR>> >>> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Small Models ... good for<BR>> >>> > thefutureofthePattern Event?<BR>> >>> ><BR>> >>> > The survey says.......... Only NSRCA 171 members responded, that in<BR>> >>> it<BR>> >>> > self<BR>> >>> > is another topic of discussion. Point is for the most part, the 171<BR>> >>>that<BR>> >>> > did respond are already hooked. This or any other survey I'm aware<BR>> >>> of<BR>> >>> > wasn't given to the target audience, Joe Newbie who may want to give<BR>> >>> > pattern, NSRCA and competition a try. We need to develop a strategy<BR>> >>>to<BR>> >>> > add<BR>> >>> > to that 171 number, folks that have yet to join the NSRCA.<BR>> >>> > There has been volumes written on this forum on how to attract the<BR>> >>> > "newbie",<BR>> >>> > some touting cost, size of planes, complexity of equipment and<BR>> >>>schedules<BR>> >>> > as<BR>> >>> > well as many other reasons as to why we encounter difficulty<BR>> >>> enlisting<BR>> >>>new<BR>> >>> > blood. One constant we can never change ( IMHO ), if an individual<BR>> >>>does<BR>> >>> > not<BR>> >>> > have competition in their blood, we aren't going to be able to turn<BR>> >>>them<BR>> >>> > to<BR>> >>> > the "dark side" short of a lobotomy.<BR>> >>> > On the other hand, there are those out there that might take the<BR>> >>>plunge<BR>> >>> > but<BR>> >>> > look at where pattern equipment evolution has gone in the last 15<BR>> >>>years<BR>> >>> > and<BR>> >>> > don't see where they fit in.<BR>> >>> > I wish I had a dollar for every OS 91 four stroke I see at fields<BR>> >>>every<BR>> >>> > weekend powering H9 P-51's, Sticks, H9 AT6's, etc. the list goes on.<BR>> >>> > Along<BR>> >>> > our infamous journey, pattern engine evolution has left behind the<BR>> >>>sport<BR>> >>> > flyer. For years the staple of sport and pattern flying was the .60<BR>> >>>2C.<BR>> >>> > Then came the 1.20 4C. Both engines were within the sport flyers<BR>> >>>grasp<BR>> >>> > and<BR>> >>> > if they took a foray into pattern and it didn't pan out, they could<BR>> >>>always<BR>> >>> > use that .60 2c or 1.20 4C in the sport plane ARF of the week.<BR>> >>> Engine<BR>> >>> > size,<BR>> >>> > price nor complexity generally was not an issue. An OS 61 FSR with <BR>> >>> a<BR>> >>> > muffler was great for a sport flyer and with a pipe made a <BR>> >>> formidable<BR>> >>> > pattern engine package back in the day. The original YS and Enya R<BR>> >>> 4C<BR>> >>>1.2<BR>> >>> > engines were reasonably priced, made good power and were reliable.<BR>> >>>They<BR>> >>> > were happy in the nose of a mid '90's pattern ship or a Sig 1/4 <BR>> >>> scale<BR>> >>> > clipped wing Cub.<BR>> >>> > Along comes the world of 1.4 to 1.6 pumped 2C, headers and CF pipes<BR>> >>> > costing<BR>> >>> > in excess of $700, 1.6 4C with headers, mufflers and 30% fuel <BR>> >>> costing<BR>> >>>way<BR>> >>> > over $800 to haul 2M Pregnant Guppy plane of the week around. Say<BR>> >>>what<BR>> >>> > you<BR>> >>> > will but today's politically correct 2M pattern power plant options<BR>> >>>are<BR>> >>> > for<BR>> >>> > the most part very specific to pattern and virtually nothing else<BR>> >>>along<BR>> >>> > with<BR>> >>> > being expensive. Sure the OS 1.6 is a "sport engine" at heart and <BR>> >>> at<BR>> >>>the<BR>> >>> > lowest end of the price spectrum but not in pattern trim with custom<BR>> >>> > headers<BR>> >>> > from Karl Mueller, Hatori ( yeah, try and get those from Tower ),<BR>> >>>Perry<BR>> >>> > pumps and take your pick of aluminum or CF pipes. The Imac/Giant<BR>> >>>scale<BR>> >>> > crowd have it easy, a DA 50 or 100 with some cans will power just<BR>> >>>about<BR>> >>> > anything you want to fly, whether it be aerobatic or scale. The <BR>> >>> only<BR>> >>> > difference is size. Relatively cheap fuel is readily available at<BR>> >>>your<BR>> >>> > local gas station. I guess 30% Nitro heli fuel is cheap compared to<BR>> >>>90%<BR>> >>> > Nitro fuel run in Top Fuel Dragsters so we don't have it all that <BR>> >>> bad<BR>> >>>:).<BR>> >>> > Put yourself in Joe Newbie's shoes, he figures he can always sell <BR>> >>> the<BR>> >>> > pattern airframe if he decides pattern isn't his cup of tea, but <BR>> >>> what<BR>> >>>does<BR>> >>> > he do with those expensive pattern specific lumps of aluminum, steel<BR>> >>>and<BR>> >>> > C/F<BR>> >>> > ?? Sure anything can be sold but at a great loss and to a small<BR>> >>>target<BR>> >>> > audience. Try and sell a R/E OS 140RX/header/pipe to a guy building<BR>> >>> a<BR>> >>>1/4<BR>> >>> > scale Cub. Or a $800 + single cylinder 4C, that same $$ can buy a<BR>> >>>twin<BR>> >>> > cylinder 4C with less power but a much quieter, sweeter sound, no<BR>> >>> > vibration<BR>> >>> > and I know first hand a whole lot less maintenance.<BR>> >>> > Though I have no intention of giving up my 2M planes and "expensive<BR>> >>> > pattern<BR>> >>> > specific lumps of aluminum, steel and C/F" whether they be 2C, 4C or<BR>> >>> > Electrons shortly I hope. However, I really believe if Sportsman <BR>> >>> and<BR>> >>> > possibly Intermediate were limited to .90 displacement, it would be <BR>> >>> a<BR>> >>> > positive step towards Joe Newbie giving pattern a shot. Hell, I bet<BR>> >>>he<BR>> >>> > already has a .91 Surpass...........<BR>> >>> > Ed M.<BR>> >>> > ----- Original Message -----<BR>> >>> > From: "Grow Pattern"<BR>> >>><pattern4u@comcast.net<mailto:pattern4u@comcast.net>><BR>> >>> > To: "NSRCA Mailing List"<BR>> >>><nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org>><BR>> >>> > Sent: Friday, January 05, 2007 7:47 PM<BR>> >>> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Small Models ... good for<BR>> >>> > thefutureofthePattern Event?<BR>> >>> ><BR>> >>> ><BR>> >>> >> John,<BR>> >>> >> I thought that you might be interested in this information.<BR>> >>> >><BR>> >>> >> In the 2005 NSRCA rules change survey (sent out in 2002) I compiled<BR>> >>>the<BR>> >>> >> following question with the intent of encouraging 60-90 sized<BR>> >>>completive<BR>> >>> >> airplane development.<BR>> >>> >><BR>> >>> >> Judging of distances<BR>> >>> >><BR>> >>> >><BR>> >>> >> Question-65<BR>> >>> >><BR>> >>> >> Should we therefore consider and AMA pattern contest rule change<BR>> >>> that<BR>> >>> >> states<BR>> >>> >> the pilot should make the plane appear to be at the size of a<BR>> >>> 2-meter<BR>> >>> >> plane<BR>> >>> >> being flown at 150-175 meters.?<BR>> >>> >><BR>> >>> >> YES = 71 NO = 100 RESULT = NO PROPOSED CHANGE .<BR>> >>> >><BR>> >>> >> I had been advised that the existing selection-and-intent of the <BR>> >>> FAI<BR>> >>> >> 150-metres rule was to create a relatively equal ease of visibility<BR>> >>>for<BR>> >>> >> 2M<BR>> >>> >> airplanes to the judges?? Whether that was true or not I admit to<BR>> >>>being<BR>> >>> >> very surprised when the idea was rejected so soundly by the survey<BR>> >>> >> respondents.<BR>> >>> >><BR>> >>> >> I had been thinking that the smaller planes would fare better if<BR>> >>> they<BR>> >>> >> were<BR>> >>> >> flown in a bit closer. Our rough math had shown that a 60-72"<BR>> >>>airplane<BR>> >>> >> would<BR>> >>> >> look just about right at 100-110-M.<BR>> >>> >><BR>> >>> >> What would the difference be for a 2-M airplane and a 1.5-M <BR>> >>> airplane<BR>> >>>if<BR>> >>> >> flown at their relative distances?<BR>> >>> >><BR>> >>> >> I also thought that the budding but slower electric planes of the<BR>> >>> day<BR>> >>> >> could<BR>> >>> >> use the closer in option and need less extreme (read expensive)<BR>> >>> power<BR>> >>> >> systems.<BR>> >>> >><BR>> >>> >> Regards,<BR>> >>> >><BR>> >>> >> Eric.<BR>> >>> >><BR>> >>> >><BR>> >>> >><BR>> >>> >><BR>> >>> >> ----- Original Message -----<BR>> >>> >> From: "John Ferrell"<BR>> >>><johnferrell@earthlink.net<mailto:johnferrell@earthlink.net>><BR>> >>> >> To: "NSRCA Mailing List"<BR>> >>><nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org>><BR>> >>> >> Sent: Friday, January 05, 2007 4:46 PM<BR>> >>> >> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Small Models ... good for the<BR>> >>> >> futureofthePattern Event?<BR>> >>> >><BR>> >>> >><BR>> >>> >>> There is no need to worry about rules changes at this time.<BR>> >>> >>><BR>> >>> >>> Those of us dabbling with smaller planes are doing it with the<BR>> >>>existing<BR>> >>> >>> rules. If winning trophies and satisfying judging problems are at<BR>> >>>the<BR>> >>> >>> top<BR>> >>> >>> of<BR>> >>> >>> your needs you will probably be best served with whatever is<BR>> >>>percieved<BR>> >>> >>> as<BR>> >>> >>> the latest & greatest equipment.<BR>> >>> >>><BR>> >>> >>> I have two boxes of trophies out in the shed. The smaller box is<BR>> >>>from<BR>> >>> >>> when<BR>> >>> >>> nobody better showed up. The larger box is from events that did <BR>> >>> not<BR>> >>>get<BR>> >>> >>> enough attendance to give away the trophies. I don't have strong<BR>> >>> >>> feelings<BR>> >>> >>> about either box!<BR>> >>> >>><BR>> >>> >>> I just want to fly more and enjoy it more. Right now that appears<BR>> >>> to<BR>> >>>be<BR>> >>> >>> with<BR>> >>> >>> a little smaller airplane!<BR>> >>> >>><BR>> >>> >>> John Ferrell W8CCW<BR>> >>> >>> "My Competition is not my enemy"<BR>> >>> >>> http://DixieNC.US<http://dixienc.us/><BR>> >>> >>><BR>> >>> >>> ----- Original Message -----<BR>> >>> >>> From: "george w. kennie" <geobet@gis.net<mailto:geobet@gis.net>><BR>> >>> >>> To: "NSRCA Mailing List"<BR>> >>><nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org>><BR>> >>> >>> Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 10:40 PM<BR>> >>> >>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Small Models ... good for the<BR>> >>> future<BR>> >>> >>> ofthePattern Event?<BR>> >>> >>><BR>> >>> >>><BR>> >>> >>>> Deano,<BR>> >>> >>>> When you reference " changing the shape of the event ", how deep<BR>> >>>are<BR>> >>> >>>> you<BR>> >>> >>>> suggesting things go? Are we losing sight of the fact that we <BR>> >>> are<BR>> >>>part<BR>> >>> >>>> of<BR>> >>> >>><BR>> >>> >>><BR>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________<BR>> >>> >>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list<BR>> >>> >>><BR>> >>>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org><BR>> >>> >>><BR>> >>>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion><BR>> >>> >>><BR>> >>> >><BR>> >>> >> _______________________________________________<BR>> >>> >> NSRCA-discussion mailing list<BR>> >>> >><BR>> >>>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org><BR>> >>> >><BR>> >>>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion><BR>> >>> ><BR>> >>> > _______________________________________________<BR>> >>> > NSRCA-discussion mailing list<BR>> >>> ><BR>> >>>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org><BR>> >>> ><BR>> >>>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion><BR>> >>> ><BR>> >>> ><BR>> >>> > _______________________________________________<BR>> >>> > NSRCA-discussion mailing list<BR>> >>> ><BR>> >>>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org><BR>> >>> ><BR>> >>>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion><BR>> >>> ><BR>> >>> > --<BR>> >>> > No virus found in this incoming message.<BR>> >>> > Checked by AVG Free Edition.<BR>> >>> > Version: 7.1.410 / Virus Database: 268.16.6/617 - Release Date:<BR>> >>>1/5/2007<BR>> >>> ><BR>> >>> ><BR>> >>> > --<BR>> >>> > No virus found in this outgoing message.<BR>> >>> > Checked by AVG Free Edition.<BR>> >>> > Version: 7.1.410 / Virus Database: 268.16.6/617 - Release Date:<BR>> >>>1/5/2007<BR>> >>> ><BR>> >>> ><BR>> >>> > _______________________________________________<BR>> >>> > NSRCA-discussion mailing list<BR>> >>> ><BR>> >>>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org><BR>> >>> ><BR>> >>>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion><BR>> >>><BR>> >>> _______________________________________________<BR>> >>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list<BR>> >>><BR>> >>>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org><BR>> >>><BR>> >>>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion><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>> >> Get live scores and news about your team: Add the Live.com Football Page<BR>> >> www.live.com/?addtemplate=football&icid=T001MSN30A0701<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>> ><BR>> > -- <BR>> > No virus found in this incoming message.<BR>> > Checked by AVG Free Edition.<BR>> > Version: 7.1.410 / Virus Database: 268.16.7/618 - Release Date: 1/6/2007<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><HR>Get the Live.com Holiday Page for recipes, gift-giving ideas, and more. <A>Check it out!</A>
_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
<A href="/eonapps/ft/wm/page/compose?send_to=NSRCA-discussion%40lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</A>
<A href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</A></DIV>