<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:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" 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 12 (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]-->
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Malgun Gothic";
panose-1:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Malgun Gothic";
panose-1:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy;}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy;}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle21
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy;}
span.EmailStyle22
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</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 link=blue vlink=blue>
<div class=Section1>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Why don’t we just increase or remove the weight limit as
proposed?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>I believe the proposal was just for the AMA classes. That
is not including F3A.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Those people who want to fly F3A still have to meet the 5kg
weight limit since that weight is specified by FAI.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>We can have more people flying pattern as long as their plane
fits within the square box of 2m x 2m. Noise limit should still be
there to have some kind of limit on engine displacement. I don’t
think anyone will want to fly a plane that weighs around 20 pound even if it
fits within the box. Some planes designed for IMAC can also
be flown. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>For manufacturers, they may produce more pattern planes as long
as it fits in the box. They won’t have to spend so much for light
weight material(s). Most of us will be able to fly those. Some will
come with lower priced planes, some will come at higher prices. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>With the weight limit increased/removed, those of us who don’t
plan for F3A anytime soon will enjoy.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>How much to spend depends on us. If I like it, I don’t
have to look so hard as long as the plane fits in the 2m x 2m box.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>On a given wing span and length fatter or heavier plane flies
better? It may or may not.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>However, I don’t wish for it to happen, but doing this
(removing/increasing the weight limit) may divide the pattern in two groups. FAI
pilots and AMA pilots.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Ihncheol<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>
nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Lisa n
Larry<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Saturday, December 12, 2009 9:12 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> 'General pattern discussion'<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [NSRCA-discussion] This email list is flawed in my opinion.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy'>OK, here is the paradox…<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy'>Let’s just suppose for the moment that we increased the
weight limit to 12 pounds. Now the fuse is larger and wider than the current
design to create even more drag, the wings have a bit more squares, and the
engine is plenty powerful…We all know lighter flies better…<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy'>The paradox…”Wouldn’t you still spend the extra
for lighter servos, wing tube, LiPos, etc…to the tune of
$400+…” If true it contradicts your logic in that you would spend
the same $$$ for the same reason regardless of the weight limit.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy'>I believe the answer is “Yes”…<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy'>Paradox, or perhaps a bit circular in logical reasoning…IMHO<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy'>Larry Diamond<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'>
<hr size=2 width="100%" align=center>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>
nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Dave
Burton<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Saturday, December 12, 2009 5:57 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> 'General pattern discussion'<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [NSRCA-discussion] This email list is flawed in my opinion.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>OK, so how come I got to spend about $400.00+ more to lose 4-5
ounces from my Integral? (lighter servos, replacement CF gear and wing tube,
LiPo battery,)<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>My wife says 5K isn’t limiting MY cost.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>
nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Dave<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Saturday, December 12, 2009 6:48 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> 'General pattern discussion'<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [NSRCA-discussion] This email list is flawed in my opinion.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy'>Dave B,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy'>At this point, it IS limiting the cost.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy'>Regards,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy'>Dave L<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'>
<hr size=2 width="100%" align=center>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>
nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Dave
Burton<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Saturday, December 12, 2009 6:38 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> 'General pattern discussion'<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [NSRCA-discussion] This email list is flawed in my opinion.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Dave,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>What is the purpose of the 5K limit? Is it to limit cost? <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Dave Burton<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>
nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Dave<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Saturday, December 12, 2009 6:05 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> 'General pattern discussion'<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [NSRCA-discussion] This email list is flawed in my opinion.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy'>“</span>I’m having a little problem understanding the
logic of some of the anti-weight arguments. If you are one that feels a
pattern plane performs best with a YS 1.60 at 11 lbs then, by all means,
continue to compete with that setup. However, the weight increase would
allow others to take a hard look at alternate power sources whether it be gas
or electric.”<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal>*************Electric IS being flown now…and multiple
gasoline engines have been used (and still could be, and maybe are by some).<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal>“Remember, we are talking a weight limit increase and
not a size increase.”<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal>*************Bigger flies better. Pythons, Elans,
Prophecies, Arch Nemesis, etc…..all were/are 2M planes (ok, the Elan was
only 76”), and none are competitive today. Why? Because the
2M today is bigger (and cost more) because the displacement limited was lifted.
The 2M plane today is limited by weight…remove the weight limit,
and the 2M plane will again get bigger (and more expensive).<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal>“The added weight would probably also drive new
muffler, accessories, airplane designs, and put pressure on suppliers to
provide lighter weight and more powerful gas engines. The electric boys
could expand their battery alternatives. All are exciting prospects for
the NSRCA, which is admittedly hurting for new blood and interest.”<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal>*************Save the electrics (which don’t need any
help in my opinion), this is the exact same discussion made by proponents for
removing the engine limit. And the cheaper engines and gasoline engines
for pattern never materialized…the OS and YS simply got bigger (more
expensive) and the planes got bigger (more expensive).<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal>“As to cost, I think that argument is a
non-starter. When you factor in the cost of glow fuel versus gas or
electric power, 30% nitro is roughly 10 times more expensive than
gasoline. Do the math…a season of 100-200 flights with gasoline is
going to offset any perceived increase in equipment costs. Savings in
fuel also rapidly offsets the higher electric costs.”<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal>*************What is cheaper to buy and run… a 50cc or
100cc gas engine? There are viable gas engines now if that is your
preference.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal>There are ZERO instances in pattern history I know of where
increasing any limit resulted in anything other than an increase in cost.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal>Regards,<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal>Dave Lockhart<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'>
<hr size=2 width="100%" align=center>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>
nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Bob
Wilson<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Saturday, December 12, 2009 11:29 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> General pattern discussion<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [NSRCA-discussion] This email list is flawed in my opinion.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal>Personally, I’m for a weight increase, whether
it’s a pound or two or even unlimited as Dave advocates. I think it
would be good for the NSRCA by driving interest and new technology.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal>I’m having a little problem understanding the logic of
some of the anti-weight arguments. If you are one that feels a pattern
plane performs best with a YS 1.60 at 11 lbs then, by all means, continue to
compete with that setup. However, the weight increase would allow others
to take a hard look at alternate power sources whether it be gas or
electric. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal>Remember, we are talking a weight limit increase and not a
size increase. The 2-meter rule insures that the aircraft won’t
escalate in cost like we see at IMAC. However, if someone wants to design
a new biplane design to compensate for the added weight…so be it…go
for it.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal>The added weight would probably also drive new muffler,
accessories, airplane designs, and put pressure on suppliers to provide lighter
weight and more powerful gas engines. The electric boys could expand
their battery alternatives. All are exciting prospects for the NSRCA,
which is admittedly hurting for new blood and interest.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal>As to cost, I think that argument is a non-starter.
When you factor in the cost of glow fuel versus gas or electric power, 30%
nitro is roughly 10 times more expensive than gasoline. Do the
math…a season of 100-200 flights with gasoline is going to offset any
perceived increase in equipment costs. Savings in fuel also rapidly
offsets the higher electric costs.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal>Finally, the 5kg (11 lb) limit was established back in the
1930’s for Free Flight airplanes. Within the FAI/CIAM both RC Scale
and RC Helicopters recognized the need to change the rules. Both did that
with increases to 7kg and 6kg respectively. Certainly, pattern deserves
the same consideration.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal>Bob Wilson<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 10:02 AM, Gordon Anderson <<a
href="mailto:GAA@owt.com">GAA@owt.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal>Mike,<br>
<br>
Well said, I totally agree with your comments. I am one of the people who
rarely comment.<br>
<span style='color:#888888'><br>
--Gordon</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><br>
<br>
mike mueller wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal>I have a hard time with a lot of the feedback that
circulates on this email list. It's too limited by the amount of people who
respond and the ones who do are usually the same guys. I find some of the
ones that respond a lot to be closed minded and are never swayed by a good
argument.<br>
I would warn people that asking for an opinion here may have a very
different response than say RCU where you get a broader audience to sample
from. I wish there was a way to get more people to respond with opinions.
I fear many have been drivin away.<br>
I also wish we would all not be so quick to shoot down these opinions as
it results in less people asking for one and sharing any thoughts with us.<br>
I enjoy an open discusssion with a lot of people chiming in.<br>
I respect the opinions of everyone and do what I can to listen to the
points of both sides to form an opinion. Often the responses kill the
debate.<br>
Listening is a skill.<br>
There are times when some of you could be wrong.<br>
Thanks for letting me share my thoughts.<br>
Mike Mueller<br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
NSRCA-discussion mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" target="_blank">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion"
target="_blank">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a><br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal>_______________________________________________<br>
NSRCA-discussion mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" target="_blank">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion"
target="_blank">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>