<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:st1="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 11 (filtered medium)">
<!--[if !mso]>
<style>
v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style>
<![endif]--><o:SmartTagType
namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="country-region"/>
<o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="State"/>
<o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="place"/>
<!--[if !mso]>
<style>
st1\:*{behavior:url(#default#ieooui) }
</style>
<![endif]-->
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:Arial;
color:navy;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
</head>
<body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=blue>
<div class=Section1>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Chris,<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Point taken.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Plenty of pilots have been downgraded
because the definition of the points in a point roll were not “pointy enough”
for a judge. I think part of the issue here is whether or not required
elements of a maneuver were present/detectable.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>In the past, if you saw a perfect maneuver
(10) containing a snap, but you did not see the “break” of a snap, you could:<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>a) award zero because a required element
was missing,<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>b) assume the break was there and you
missed it, and score the maneuver 10 (same as a pilot who also did the maneuver
perfect and did show a break).<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>The rules allow a downgrade to be applied
if the break is not visible – much better option than deciding between zero and
10.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Regards,<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Dave Lockhart<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<div>
<div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>
<hr size=2 width="100%" align=center tabindex=-1>
</span></font></div>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><font size=2 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Tahoma;font-weight:bold'>From:</span></font></b><font size=2
face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Tahoma'>
nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org] <b><span style='font-weight:
bold'>On Behalf Of </span></b>chris moon<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Sent:</span></b> Tuesday, June 17, 2008 12:15
PM<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>To:</span></b>
nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Subject:</span></b> Re: [NSRCA-discussion]
Snap entry in FAI</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><font size=2 face=Tahoma><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Tahoma'>Is it not the pilot's
responsibility to simply fly the maneuver as <br>
depicted? Why then must they exaggerate a portion to placate a judge <br>
who wants to see it their way? Our judging training materials <br>
distinctly say not to downgrade just because the maneuver is not done <br>
the way you like. The example was one pilot making sharp corners in a <br>
square loop vs another making larger more rounded corner. Both are <br>
correct and should be judged identically but can anyone argue that one <br>
way should be downgraded because it was not the way "you like it" <br>
Stalls, snaps and spins are no different. Not the way I like it = so <br>
what. If it is done correctly it is always a 10. I would think that if <br>
the other judges are consistently giving "normal" scores and I am <br>
zeroing or giving some nominal score, that there has to be an issue <br>
going on. Am I the only one who is consistently right in my thinking <br>
and everyone else is all wrong? Or, could it be the other way around?<br>
<br>
Chris<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<st1:State w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Del</st1:place></st1:State> wrote:<br>
> It is the "PILOTS" responsibility to fly the maneuver as
described per <br>
> the rules. If said pilots chooses to not make it obvious or <br>
> discernable to the judge then enjoy the score you should be awarded.<br>
> <st1:State w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Del</st1:place></st1:State><br>
><br>
> ----- Original Message -----<br>
> *From:* chris moon <br>
<mailto:cjm767driver_x0040_hotmail.com>> *To:*
nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<br>
> <br>
<mailto:nsrca-discussion_x0040_lists.nsrca.org>> *Sent:* Monday, June 16,
2008 5:11 PM<br>
> *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Snap entry in FAI<br>
><br>
> George - you have made an excellent point in that the interval may by<br>
> "minuscule" and not overly noticeable to everyone. It is
absolutely<br>
> wrong for some to claim that you must "show" them as judge an<br>
> exaggerated pitch up just to satisfy a personal interpretation of the<br>
> maneuver. Just as is is absolutely wrong for those judges to demand<br>
> another overly exaggerated pitch up as a stall entry to a spin<br>
> maneuver. It is never the job of the participant to exaggerate a<br>
> portion of a maneuver just to prove it exists, therefore your<br>
> usage of<br>
> the term "minuscule" in terms of the time interval between pitch
and<br>
> rotation is something we need to keep in mind.<br>
><br>
> Chris<br>
><br>
> george w. kennie wrote:<br>
> > My lip is becoming too painful from biting it, so I think I'm<br>
> going to<br>
> > stick my nose in here somewhere.<br>
> > I think I'm with Jon on this one.<br>
> > My logic, however flawed, tells me that if I am flying my plane<br>
> > straight and level and I input rudder, no matter how much, there<br>
> is no<br>
> > way that this input will induce a stall to the airframe.<br>
> Therefore, it<br>
> > seems to me, that the necessary force required to stall the main<br>
> > lifting surface must come from the elevator. It would further<br>
> seem to<br>
> > me that this input must, by it's very nature produce a pitching<br>
> > attitude to the fuselage whether positive or negative. So I<br>
> would have<br>
> > to conclude that the attitude "break" referenced by the
rule can<br>
> only<br>
> > refer to a "pitch" break and would be impossible to confuse
with an<br>
> > attitude change induced by the rudder seeing that the required<br>
> result<br>
> > is to stall the main wing.<br>
> > And yes Jon, I agree that it would be necessary to lead with the<br>
> > elevator in order to bring about this attitude change before<br>
> rotation<br>
> > is started, however miniscule the interval might be.<br>
> > Of course I'm still open to hearing other interpretations and their<br>
> > validations as these observations are strictly opinions.<br>
> > G.<br>
> ><br>
> > ----- Original Message -----<br>
> > *From:* Jon Lowe<br>
> > *To:* nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<br>
> ><br>
> > *Sent:* Monday, June 16, 2008 2:10 PM<br>
> > *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Snap entry in FAI<br>
> ><br>
> > Jim,<br>
> ><br>
> > I have no clue how you think all three axes can be initiated at<br>
> > the same time. You keep forgetting the part of the RULE, quoted<br>
> > verbatim below, that says the "fuselage break and separation
from<br>
> > the flight path" must happen "BEFORE THE ROTATION IS
STARTED". I'm<br>
> > NOT equating fueselage break to pitch break, it could break in<br>
> > pitch and/or yaw, if it doesn't start rotation at the same time.<br>
> > If you initiate all three axis at the same time, rotation WILL<br>
> > start at the same instant, and that is specifically NOT permitted.<br>
> > READ THE RULE! The judge MUST determine if the fuselage broke and<br>
> > separated from the flight path first, BEFORE the rotation started.<br>
> > If it didn't, he MUST severely downgrade.<br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> > Jon Lowe<br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> > -----Original Message-----<br>
> > From: Woodward, Jim (<st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">US</st1:place></st1:country-region>
SSA)<br>
> > To: General pattern discussion<br>
> > Sent: Mon, 16 Jun 2008 12:37 pm<br>
> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Snap entry in FAI<br>
> ><br>
> > Jon,<br>
> ><br>
> > I’m shocked - you are totally wrong here. Do not equate “fuselage”<br>
> > to “pitch” in the reading of this definition. As a judge you<br>
> > should NOT apply a “pitch-assessment” pass/fail criteria to<br>
> > judging FAI snap rolls. It is completely rejected. The plane and<br>
> > therefore “fuselage” must autorotate about the flight axis, which<br>
> > means that the nose and tail of the plane will move in a conical<br>
> > fashion. The pilot can initiate with all 3 axis at one time.<br>
> ><br>
> > It is the responsibility of the judge to determine if autorotation<br>
> > occurred, and not determine how or in what order the pilot did it.<br>
> ><br>
> > Thanks,<br>
> > Jim<br>
> ><br>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
> > *From:* nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org<br>
> ><br>
> > [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org<br>
> > ] *On Behalf Of<br>
> > *Jon Lowe<br>
> > *Sent:* Monday, June 16, 2008 1:21 PM<br>
> > *To:* nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<br>
> ><br>
> > *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Snap entry in FAI<br>
> > You are correct, as long as there is no roll induced at the same<br>
> > instant. I overlooked that possibility. Not sure how rudder alone<br>
> > will induce the "supposed to be in a stalled condition"
though!!<br>
> > There are many attitudes (e.g. 45 down on center) where a judge<br>
> > could not likely see a rudder departure alone first, and thus<br>
> > conclude that departure did not occur before the roll departure<br>
> > started. And a judge might also not see a pitch departure first on<br>
> > a end box upline snap, but he could see rudder first. It is VERY<br>
> > clear that simultaneous roll with either or both of the other axes<br>
> > departures is NOT allowed as others have tried to state here. I<br>
> > did say that pitch and yaw departure could happen simutaneously,<br>
> > in my original post, as long as roll doesn't occur at the same time.<br>
> > Jon Lowe<br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> > -----Original Message-----<br>
> > From: JShulman><br>
> > To: General pattern discussion<br>
> >><br>
> > Sent: Mon, 16 Jun 2008 11:22 am<br>
> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Snap entry in FAI<br>
> > Jon,<br>
> > I don't see where it says pitch break? Rudder first will show<br>
> > attitude break and separation from the flight path. So if one uses<br>
> > rudder and elevator first this is also correct.<br>
> > Regards,<br>
> > Jason<br>
> > www.jasonshulman.com<br>
> > www.shulmanaviation.com<br>
> > www.composite-arf.com<br>
> ><br>
> > -----Original Message-----<br>
> > *From:* nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org<br>
> ><br>
> > [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org<br>
> > ]*On Behalf<br>
> > Of *Jon Lowe<br>
> > *Sent:* Monday, June 16, 2008 12:11 PM<br>
> > *To:* nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<br>
> ><br>
> > *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Snap entry in FAI<br>
> > I suggest people re-read the definition ofsnap-rolls from the<br>
> > FAI sporting code. I did a few minutes ago. Here it is:<br>
> > "5B.7.5. *SNAP-ROLLS*<br>
> > A snap-roll (or flick roll/rudder roll) is a rapid<br>
> > autorotative roll where the model aircraft is in a stalled<br>
> > attitude, with a continuous high angle of attack<br>
> > Snap-rolls have the same judging criteria as axial rolls as<br>
> > far as start and stop of the rotation, and<br>
> > constant flight path through the manoeuvre is concerned.<br>
> > At the start of a snap-roll, the fuselage attitude must show a<br>
> > definite break and separation from the<br>
> > flight path, before the rotation is started, since the model<br>
> > aircraft is supposed to be in a stalled<br>
> > condition throughout the manoeuvre, If the stall/break does<br>
> > not occur and the model aircraft barrelrolls<br>
> > around, the manoeuvre must be severely downgraded (more than 5<br>
> > points). Similarly, axial<br>
> > rolls disguised as snap-rolls must be severely downgraded<br>
> > (more than 5 points).<br>
> > Snap-rolls can be flown both positive and negative, and the<br>
> > same criteria apply. The attitude<br>
> > (positive or negative) is at the competitor’s discretion. If<br>
> > the model aircraft returns to an unstalled<br>
> > condition during the snap-roll, the manoeuvre is severely<br>
> > downgraded using the 1 point/15 degree<br>
> > rule."<br>
> ><br>
> > Note that "the fuselage attitude must show a definite break<br>
> > and separation from the flight path, before the rotation is<br>
> > started..." That means that simultaneous pitch and rotation is<br>
> > specifically NOT permitted. I would interpret it as meaning<br>
> > that pitch and yaw could theoretically happen simultaneously,<br>
> > as long as no roll is involved. Sorry Matt, the rules as<br>
> > written do NOT allow actuation in all three axes<br>
> > simultaneously. The rule also states that a constant flight<br>
> > path has to be maintained.<br>
> ><br>
> > Let's face it, the only way to prevent severe downgrading from<br>
> > EVERY judge, not just some judges, is to have a pitch break<br>
> > first. Takes any question away.<br>
> > Jon Lowe<br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> > -----Original Message-----<br>
> > From: rcmaster199@aol.com<br>
> > To: nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<br>
> ><br>
> > Sent: Mon, 16 Jun 2008 10:46 am<br>
> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Snap entry in FAI<br>
> > A "Flick" and a "Snap" roll are the same roll in
full scale<br>
> > aerobatics parlance and reference material.<br>
> ><br>
> > Do these mean the same thing in model aerobatics? In my view,<br>
> > they do<br>
> ><br>
> > The latest FAI regs allow actuation of the three main axes<br>
> > simultaneously...that is, the regs don't specifically<br>
> > differentiate "Pitch Break" from other deviations. I don't<br>
> > think they specifically require that the model must rotate<br>
> > about it's flight path either, I don't believe (.....plane<br>
> > must rotate in a conical fashion about the fight axis....).<br>
> > The model would probably present the best if that's done, so<br>
> > pilots may want to consider that when executing the maneuver.<br>
> ><br>
> > In my take, a rapid Pitch is desired to preload the wing.<br>
> > Contrary to popular belief, both panels dot not have to stall<br>
> > for a snap to occur. Quite the opposite. Upon rudder<br>
> > deflection, the port panel will practically stall (lift much<br>
> > much less than the other panel) but the starboard panel must<br>
> > be lifting to create the autorotation. If both panels stall,<br>
> > the model will fall out of the sky for a distance and a snap<br>
> > would not occur at the correct moment in time<br>
> ><br>
> > MattK<br>
> ><br>
> > -----Original Message-----<br>
> > From: Woodward, Jim (<st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">US</st1:place></st1:country-region>
SSA)<br>
> >><br>
> > To: General pattern discussion<br>
> ><br>
> >><br>
> > Sent: Mon, 16 Jun 2008 8:47 am<br>
> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Snap entry in FAI<br>
> ><br>
> > Guys,<br>
> ><br>
> > I thought the FAI changes explicitly allowed flick rolls? The<br>
> > rule<br>
> > reads, "... fuselage attitude must show a definite break and<br>
> > separation<br>
> > from the flight path."<br>
> ><br>
> > It does not say, "MUST SHOW PITCH BREAK." Please DO NOT<br>
> > ERROUNIOUSLY<br>
> > APPLY A PASS/FAIL MAJOR DEDUCTION initial assessment to the<br>
> > snap roll.<br>
> > Watch the whole maneuver then render your score.<br>
> ><br>
> > A break and separation from the flight path simply means that<br>
> > the nose<br>
> > and tail of the plane must rotate in a conical fashion about<br>
> > the fight<br>
> > axis. Yaw, roll, and pitch can all break at the same moment if<br>
> > that is<br>
> > how the pilot does it.<br>
> ><br>
> > Hey :) some really handsome smart guy wrote some stuff at this<br>
> > link<br>
> > below about snap rolls to help clarify how they are done in IMAC.<br>
> ><br>
> > http://www.mini-iac.com/DesktopDefault.aspx?tabid=77<br>
> ><br>
> > thanks,<br>
> > Jim<br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> > _______________________________________________<br>
> > NSRCA-discussion mailing list<br>
> > NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<br>
> ><br>
> > http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<br>
> ><br>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
> > Get the Moviefone Toolbar<br>
> > .<br>
> > Showtimes, theaters, movie news, & more!<br>
> ><br>
> > _______________________________________________<br>
> ><br>
> > NSRCA-discussion mailing list<br>
> ><br>
> > NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<br>
> ><br>
> > http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
> > Get the Moviefone Toolbar<br>
> > .<br>
> > Showtimes, theaters, movie news, & more!<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>
> > Get the Moviefone Toolbar<br>
> > .<br>
> > Showtimes, theaters, movie news, & more!<br>
> ><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>
> ><br>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
> > I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users.<br>
> > It has removed 9842 spam emails to date.<br>
> > Paying users do not have this message in their emails.<br>
> > Try SPAMfighter for free now!<br>
> ><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>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
> It’s easy to add contacts from Facebook and other social sites<br>
> through Windows Live™ Messenger. Learn How.<br>
> <br>
<https: _x002f_www.invite2messenger.net _x002f_im _x002f__x003f_source="TXT_EML_WLH_LearnHow"/>><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>
> No virus found in this incoming message.<br>
> Checked by AVG.<br>
> Version: 8.0.100 / Virus Database: 270.3.0/1505 - Release Date:<br>
> 6/16/2008 7:20 AM<br>
><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>
<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'><font size=2
face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Tahoma'>
<hr size=2 width="100%" align=center>
</span></font></div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Tahoma'>Introducing Live Search cashback . It's search that pays
you back! <a
href="http://search.live.com/cashback/?&pkw=form=MIJAAF/publ=HMTGL/crea=introsrchcashback"
target="_new">Try it Now</a><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>