<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40" 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"><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6001.18063" name=GENERATOR><!--[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 name="State"
namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"></o:SmartTagType><o:SmartTagType
name="place"
namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"></o:SmartTagType><!--[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";
color:black;}
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";
color:black;}
pre
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";
color:black;}
span.EmailStyle19
{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;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:765079157;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:-1613729622 67698703 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715;}
@list l0:level1
{mso-level-tab-stop:.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level2
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:1.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0in;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0in;}
-->
</STYLE>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></HEAD>
<BODY lang=EN-US vLink=blue link=blue bgColor=white>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Jim,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I nominate you to the rules committee... please
report to Don Ramsey immediately if not sooner.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Wayne</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=jim.woodward@baesystems.com
href="mailto:jim.woodward@baesystems.com">Woodward, Jim (US SSA)</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A
title=nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org
href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">General pattern discussion</A>
</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Monday, June 30, 2008 7:15 AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Snap
entry in FAI</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV class=Section1>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">Hi John – GREAT
points.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">This is why I feel
that the snap-roll definition is totally out of whack. Using the ‘stall’
approach to formulating the definition, or any comparison to actual full scale
aerobatics, is totally unwarranted and not applicable to a pattern
plane. We need a “50-word-or-less” approach to this maneuver definition
and I’d like it to read something like this:<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">Snap Roll: The
model must autorotate through the described angular rotation in the direction
indicated by the maneuver description.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">Definitions:<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<OL style="MARGIN-TOP: 0in" type=1>
<LI class=MsoNormal style="COLOR: navy; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1"><FONT
face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">Autorotate: Model
demonstrates departure in all three flight axis which may occur
simultaneously. If the autorotation is perceived to be led by a pitch
break just prior to the autorotation, it is not cause for
downgrade.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT>
<OL style="MARGIN-TOP: 0in" type=a>
<LI class=MsoNormal style="COLOR: navy; mso-list: l0 level2 lfo1"><FONT
face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">Simultaneous: same
time.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT> </LI></OL>
<LI class=MsoNormal style="COLOR: navy; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1"><FONT
face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">Direction: Positive
snap-rolls pitch towards the canopy, Negative snap rolls pitch towards the
belly.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT> </LI></OL>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">Judging Notes:
The judge is looking for two things to occur for the maneuver to be fully
scorable: Autorotation and the correct direction. If there is
autorotation and the plane went the correct direction, the maneuver is score
able but subject to the 1 point per 15 degree rule. If the judge
perceived that the model rolled prior to the autorotation was initiated, the 1
point per 15 degree rule is applied. If the judge perceived that model
stopped autorotating prior to the completion of the described angular
rotation, the 1 point per 15 degree rule is applied. This is typically
referred to as “Aileroning in or out of a snap-roll.”
<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">Anyway – that’s my
take on it. Lets take all this arm-chair aerodynamic bologna out of the
definition and create something that is both flyable, and
judge-able.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">Thanks,<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">Jim<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=black size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt"> <o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: center" align=center><FONT
face="Times New Roman" color=black size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; COLOR: windowtext">
<HR tabIndex=-1 align=center width="100%" SIZE=2>
</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><FONT face=Tahoma color=black size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: windowtext; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma">From:</SPAN></FONT></B><FONT
face=Tahoma color=black size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: windowtext; 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>John Gayer<BR><B><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Sent:</SPAN></B> Sunday, June 29, 2008 11:46
PM<BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">To:</SPAN></B> General pattern
discussion<BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Subject:</SPAN></B> Re:
[NSRCA-discussion] Snap entry in FAI</SPAN></FONT><FONT color=black><SPAN
style="COLOR: windowtext"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P></DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=black size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=black size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">The only way to have a steady-state high alpha with a
low pitch attitude is to be descending with nose high. Alpha is based on
relative airflow.<BR><BR>I would like someone to explain how, if the wing, or
one panel, is stalled how the ailerons are continuing to control the direction
of rotation. If there is a stalled wing, then it will be the one with the
"down" aileron as that wing has the higher incidence angle. This stalled panel
would cause a roll contrary to the aileron deflection. This is actually what
happens when you get an oeverweight airplane too slow and add some surface
deflections. It will snap contrary to the aileron.<BR>As we perform snap rolls
in pattern, I do not believe there is any stall involved at all. The
manuver is all "smoke and mirrors". In which case the rulebook is always right
as it defines the maneuver to be performed. Perhaps flick roll is the better
name.<BR><BR>John<BR><BR><BR>chris moon wrote: <o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=black size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">Thanks <st1:State w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on">Del.</st1:place></st1:State> <BR>We are actually on the same page.
My points were directed more <BR>generally than towards anyone who is posting
to this topic. I just <BR>wanted to make it clear that personal preferences
are not a judging <BR>parameter and that exaggerated elements in order to
please someone who <BR>is looking pretty much only for certain elements of a
maneuver rather <BR>than the whole is also wrong. Also, I read posts where
people clearly <BR>don't understand the difference between aircraft pitch
attitude and <BR>angle of attack. Two very different things. I see time and
again <BR>people (yes, me too) get whacked for not showing some silly 40
degree <BR>nose up attitude in order to "prove" the plane stalled before
beginning <BR>a spin. A wing of course is flown by angle of attack and a plane
can be <BR>at a high angle of attack yet a "low" nose high attitude to the
ground. <BR>So, a high angle of attack and a true stall can occur at a
relatively <BR>low nose high attitude relative to the ground but how often is
it <BR>downgraded or zeroed because the judge does not know the difference
<BR>between the two? All of the time. I see and hear it all of the time.
<BR>"He could not have stalled because the nose was not high enough" Wrong,
<BR>wrong, wrong.<BR><BR>This link has some basic info for those who want to
read even more:<BR><A
href="http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/aerodynamics/q0165.shtml">http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/aerodynamics/q0165.shtml</A><BR><BR>I
also agree that judging is way better than before in just about every
<BR>respect. We can always make it better of course and these discussions
<BR>make some mad and some frustrated but enlighten others. If one does not
<BR>truly understand basic aerodynamics, then they cannot become a good
<BR>judge. The concepts of pitch attitude and angle of attack are key to
<BR>understanding stalls and snaps so they are key things that we all must
<BR>understand. Understanding the difference makes judging these maneuvers
<BR>so much easier.<BR><BR>AMA vs. FAI I also agree completely about having to
change gears when <BR>judging these classes back to back at a contest. Even
trying to keep <BR>the rules straight for the 2 types is difficult at
best.<BR><BR>I hope as well as others that you can continue participating in
pattern <BR>with us! We need everyone.<BR><BR>Chris<BR><BR><st1:State
w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Del</st1:place></st1:State> wrote:<BR>>
Chris...<BR>> Please!!! don't take this personally directed at/ _you_/ or
any _one <BR>> individual_. The list is a great medium to have
intellectually <BR>> stimulating discussion that often is
educational.<BR>> Judging is an arbitrary art. Do we all have the same
calibrated <BR>> eyeball? No.. But all judges should be seeing and judging
the same <BR>> maneuver with similar downgrades. Are all downgrades going
to be <BR>> identical.. Not realistically ~ No.. Is that the best we can
do.. <BR>> possibly..? The NSRCA has worked hard with many volunteers over
the <BR>> years trying to enlighten and improve the caliber of judging and
it is <BR>> much better than it was 20 years ago..<BR>> At this stage of
evolution when the judges are reduced to nit picking <BR>> shows how well
the judging has improved for the overall big picture. <BR>> Is it realistic
to stop the nitpicking.. It is part of the beast we <BR>> enjoy to
participate in.. Some terminology in the judging guide could <BR>> be
tweaked and improved on for those that like to over analyze. The <BR>> snap
by its very nature if often judged just on the merits of the snap <BR>>
itself which no judge should ever do. Entry and exit are also worthy <BR>>
of their focus. That snap in some cases happens in less than 1 sec. It
<BR>> is always going to have disparity in the scores just based on the
fact <BR>> not all eyes see and recognize all the details they need to
catch in <BR>> that sec. let alone feeling burnout or watery eyes etc. that
make a <BR>> judge miss something.<BR>> It is hard to expect all judges
to shift gears from FAI to AMA and <BR>> back again during the same day or
same contest. Dwindling numbers make <BR>> that a reality.<BR>> I will
always contend that your mission as a pattern competitor is to <BR>> show
the judges to the best of your ability what the rule books <BR>> describes.
As a pilot if you try to change your flying to what one <BR>> given judge
expects your are hurting yourself and your overall <BR>> performance. I
guess that is why they still insist on throwing out <BR>> some judges
scores at the major competitions. Wish it weren't so but <BR>> that is also
part of the process.<BR>> I personally didn't read anyone saying they were
judging by the way <BR>> they like it.. I may have missed some posts but
what I read, some were <BR>> showing, for clarification, that some
statements being made, where in <BR>> error and just trying to clarify what
the specific rule actually <BR>> states... Not what someone
interprets..<BR>> I have always had an issues in FAI judging when 2 pilots
flies <BR>> identical maneuvers and one flies consistently 5 degrees off in
<BR>> track/heading and the other flies on the rail do they both deserve a
<BR>> 10 if all elements in the maneuver have been done per the rules? Some
<BR>> argue that 1 point / 15 is applied before they get to a 15º error..
<BR>> others read it to mean that your don't give a down grade till at
least <BR>> 15º of track have been shown. Thankfully in AMA we have the 1/2
points <BR>> to work with.<BR>> So yes you are right that no judge is to
judge based on what they <BR>> prefer except when it comes to style and
presentation ~ the lower <BR>> criteria for downgrades.<BR>> ~~~ Who
gets the better score...? Dean Pappas once told us that the <BR>> one that
hides their corrections the best. That alone is another art <BR>> /subject.
So when judging ~~ do you best to be consistent and fair to <BR>> all..
When flying ~~ do your best to show the judges you do know how <BR>> to fly
the maneuvers without any detectable errors. Learn to hide your <BR>>
corrections.<BR>> I sincerely hoped I helped Chris. Feel free to comment on
or off list <BR>> as you feel apropos. I still love the sport and what it
has to offer <BR>> but am having to give it up ~~ possibly forever.. only
time can tell..<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:* <A
href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</A><BR>>
<BR><MAILTO:NSRCA-DISCUSSION _x0040_lists.nsrca.org="">> *Sent:* Tuesday,
June 17, 2008 12:15 PM<BR>> *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Snap entry in
FAI<BR>><BR>> 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<BR>> 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<BR>> 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<BR>> 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>> > *To:* <A
href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</A><BR>>
><BR>> > *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<BR>> 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<BR>> 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<BR>> 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<BR>> their<BR>> >>
validations as these observations are strictly opinions.<BR>> >>
G.<BR>> >><BR>> >> ----- Original Message -----<BR>>
>> *From:* Jon Lowe<BR>> >> *To:* <A
href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</A><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>> Klipped 4 reposting<BR>><BR>>
------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>><BR>>
_______________________________________________<BR>> NSRCA-discussion
mailing list<BR>> <A
href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</A><BR>>
<A
href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</A><BR><BR><BR><BR><o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P></MAILTO:NSRCA-DISCUSSION></MAILTO:CJM767DRIVER>
<DIV class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: center" align=center><FONT
face="Times New Roman" color=black size=3><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">
<HR align=center width="100%" SIZE=2>
</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=black size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">Earn cashback on your purchases with Live Search - the
search that pays you back! <A
href="http://search.live.com/cashback/?&pkw=form=MIJAAF/publ=HMTGL/crea=earncashback"
target=_new>Learn More</A> <o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P><PRE><FONT face="Courier New" color=black size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></PRE><PRE style="TEXT-ALIGN: center"><FONT face="Courier New" color=black size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt">
<HR align=center width="90%" SIZE=4>
</SPAN></FONT></PRE><PRE><FONT face="Courier New" color=black size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></PRE><PRE><FONT face="Courier New" color=black size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt">_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></PRE><PRE><FONT face="Courier New" color=black size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt">NSRCA-discussion mailing list<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></PRE><PRE><FONT face="Courier New" color=black size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt"><A href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</A><o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></PRE><PRE><FONT face="Courier New" color=black size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt"><A href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</A><o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></PRE></DIV>
<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>