Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 09:41 AM - Long body commanders? (Robert S. Randazzo)
2. 09:53 AM - Re: Long body commanders? (Ray Mansfield)
3. 09:53 AM - Re: Long body commanders? (WINGFLYER1@aol.com)
4. 10:02 AM - Re: Long body commanders? (CloudCraft@aol.com)
5. 10:32 AM - Re: Long body commanders? (Barry Collman)
6. 12:12 PM - Re: Long body commanders? (KenWHyde@aol.com)
7. 12:48 PM - Re: Long body commanders? (Robert S. Randazzo)
8. 12:53 PM - Re: Long body commanders? (CloudCraft@aol.com)
9. 01:21 PM - Re: Long body commanders? (Barry Collman)
10. 01:29 PM - Re: Long body commanders? (Robert S. Randazzo)
11. 02:02 PM - Re: Long body commanders? (nico css)
12. 02:33 PM - Re: Long body commanders? (Robert S. Randazzo)
13. 03:25 PM - Re: Long body commanders? (Moe)
14. 03:59 PM - Re: Long body commanders? (Barry Collman)
15. 05:13 PM - Matronics Email List Web Server Upgrade Tonight... (Matt Dralle)
16. 07:52 PM - A minor courtesy to one another (Robert S. Randazzo)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Long body commanders? |
--> Commander-List message posted by: "Robert S. Randazzo" <rsrandazzo@precisionmanuals.com>
Commanders-
I've been asked to performa a small research project related to the
autopilot that we are working to have STC'd for the commander fleet, and
I've been asked for a few fleet numbers. I need some help as follows:
-> Which of the 680 series commanders are long-body airplanes like the
685/690, etc?
-> Anyone have handy numbers as to how many of the long-body 680 and 685
airplanes are still active in service?
-> Anyone have handy numbers as to how many 690 - 1000 series commanders are
in service?
Thanks, guys...
I am working to convince the firm that they really should look to
incorporate the entire commander line in their STC efforts so that we can
have access to a new, lightweight digital autopilot for all commanders...
I'll keep you posted on my efforts.
Robert Randazzo
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Long body commanders? |
--> Commander-List message posted by: "Ray Mansfield" <hcourier@cox.net>
I fly a 680 FLP which is the long body.
RM
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2006 11:37 AM
> --> Commander-List message posted by: "Robert S. Randazzo"
> <rsrandazzo@precisionmanuals.com>
>
> Commanders-
>
> I've been asked to performa a small research project related to the
> autopilot that we are working to have STC'd for the commander fleet, and
> I've been asked for a few fleet numbers. I need some help as follows:
>
> -> Which of the 680 series commanders are long-body airplanes like the
> 685/690, etc?
>
> -> Anyone have handy numbers as to how many of the long-body 680 and 685
> airplanes are still active in service?
>
> -> Anyone have handy numbers as to how many 690 - 1000 series commanders
> are
> in service?
>
> Thanks, guys...
>
> I am working to convince the firm that they really should look to
> incorporate the entire commander line in their STC efforts so that we can
> have access to a new, lightweight digital autopilot for all commanders...
> I'll keep you posted on my efforts.
>
> Robert Randazzo
>
>
>
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Long body commanders? |
Please consider the straight 680 commander in your STC's Thanks Gil Walker
wingflyer1@aol.com
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Long body commanders? |
In a message dated 31-Jul-06 09:42:58 Pacific Daylight Time,
rsrandazzo@precisionmanuals.com writes:
Which of the 680 series commanders are long-body airplanes like the
685/690, etc?
Robert,
Sir Barry will undoubtedly have the stats on how many of each airframe are in
service.
As for models of long bodies, I'll toss out the following:
AC-680FL
AC-680FL(P)
AC-680T,V,W (turbine)
AC-681 (turbine model)
AC-685
AC-690, A,B,C,D (turbine)
AC-695, A,B (turbine)
They're all underType Certificate 2A4: (TCDS 2A4 Rev 46 Twin Commander
Aircraft Corporation
I think the bottom line is the potential market for the long bodies and that
equals number on airframes with old Bendix/Motorola or Collins autopilot
systems.
Good luck and thanks for blazing the trail.
Wing Commander Gordon
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Long body commanders? |
--> Commander-List message posted by: "Barry Collman" <barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk>
Hi Robert,
The Wing Commander obviously listed all the long-body Commanders.
My database shows the following numbers of each of those Models.
The first figure is those on the US Register and to the best of my knowledge,
still 'active'.
It might be prudent to use say 90/95% of these figures to allow for those that
are not 'active' in the true sense of the word.
The second figure is for those registered elsewhere in the World.
It might be prudent to use say 85/90% of these figures, as it is very difficult
to get good information from certain areas, such as South America.
Piston Models:
680FL - 38 / 34
680FLP - 10 / 5
685 - 29 / 12
Turbine Models:
680T - 2 / 0
680V - 20 / 9
680W - 13 / 8
681 - 18 / 26
690 - 17 / 34
690A - 102 / 89
690B - 121 / 73
690C - 55 / 50
690D - 13 / 18
695 - 29 / 43
695A - 33 / 50
695B - 10 / 3
Before anyone says "Not right, matey", these figures include Models converted to
another Model. So, although only 8 695B's were built, my figures include another
6 that were converted from 695A. Similarly, the 680T figure is low as many were
converted to 680V.
Regrettably, I will be unable to accept any legal liability if these figures are
proved to be wrong. In any event, "her indoors" has all the money ;-)
Very Best Regards,
Barry
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2006 5:37 PM
| --> Commander-List message posted by: "Robert S. Randazzo"
<rsrandazzo@precisionmanuals.com>
|
| Commanders-
|
| I've been asked to performa a small research project related to the
| autopilot that we are working to have STC'd for the commander fleet, and
| I've been asked for a few fleet numbers. I need some help as follows:
|
| -> Which of the 680 series commanders are long-body airplanes like the
| 685/690, etc?
|
| -> Anyone have handy numbers as to how many of the long-body 680 and 685
| airplanes are still active in service?
|
| -> Anyone have handy numbers as to how many 690 - 1000 series commanders are
| in service?
|
| Thanks, guys...
|
| I am working to convince the firm that they really should look to
| incorporate the entire commander line in their STC efforts so that we can
| have access to a new, lightweight digital autopilot for all commanders...
| I'll keep you posted on my efforts.
|
| Robert Randazzo
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Long body commanders? |
Barry,
Wondering if you have published a list of the 500 series Commanders as you
have here for the 680's?
Thanks,
Ken Hyde
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Long body commanders? |
WCG-
My "ultimate goal" is to convince them that it is worth covering the entire
commander line. Right now we have an agreement in principle to produce a
"on-time STC" to allow the AP-3C installation in the 685.... I'm working to
convince them that there is a long-sighted approach to this that involves
both ends of the commander fleet....
It's an argument that I have to make in stages...
Rob
_____
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
WINGFLYER1@aol.com
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2006 09:50
Please consider the straight 680 commander in your STC's Thanks Gil Walker
wingflyer1@aol.com
__________ NOD32 1.1685 (20060731) Information __________
This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
http://www.eset.com
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Long body commanders? |
In a message dated 31-Jul-06 12:49:32 Pacific Daylight Time,
rsrandazzo@precisionmanuals.com writes:
It's an argument that I have to make in stages...
Agreed. You may want to entice them with the idea that the AC-685 is really
the same airframe as the AC-690 series and that's got to be an attractive
market for them.
The Collins AP-105s aren't dead yet, but they'll be as hard to support as the
Bendix/Motorola M4 series in another 10 years.
Wing Commander Gordon
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Long body commanders? |
Hi Ken,
OK - here's a listing of the short-body Commanders, with the same
caveats as the earlier list! These, of course, are all piston Models:
500 - 43 / 10
500A - 30 / 9 (Including the Colemill "Super 300")
500B - 108 / 35 (Including those converted from 500A)
500S - 93 / 141
500U - 8 / 24
520 - 50 / 7
560 - 26 / 4
560A - 21 / 4
560A(HC) - 11 / 3
560E - 32 / 7
560F - 25 / 15
680 - 64 / 22
680E - 43 / 11
680F - 23 / 21
680F(P) - 17 / 5
720 - 3 / 0
A summary of these and the previous figures is:
Piston Models - 684 / 374
Turbine Models - 433 / 403
Total - 1117 / 777 (1,894 still 'active' from a total built of 3,170)
If the FAA Register database is checked for these figures, the
likelihood is they will not be the same. The reason is that many are
still showing on the "current" FAA Register, but were in fact exported
many years ago, or have been withdrawn from service or destroyed, but
the 'N' number has never been cancelled.
Very Best Regards,
Barry
----- Original Message -----
From: KenWHyde@aol.com
To: commander-list@matronics.com
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2006 8:12 PM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: Long body commanders?
Barry,
Wondering if you have published a list of the 500 series Commanders as
you have here for the 680's?
Thanks,
Ken Hyde
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Long body commanders? |
Gordon-
Before the heads of Chelton Aviation were killed in their accident- they had
apparently received 34 orders for this autopilot in 690 series airplanes...
They were planning to use our airplane to get the STC accomplished, so we're
using the 690 as a lever to get the 685 and 680(long body) series covered as
well.
Interestingly enough, the only reason why we didn't have the STC filed
before their accident was because they originally spec'd out the
installation based on a short body 680... We had to send back the correct
data/drawings/pictures for the installation to have them approved by their
engineering people for the long body airplane. We were (literally) waiting
on a signature only- and those poor fellows had a run of bad luck. So those
drawings and data exist- and with any luck we'll be able to convince the DAS
facility that they can act on them.
If this can be my contribution to the community- then I'll be quite happy...
and then i'll spend the rest of my time tooling around in N414C enjoying my
new autopilot. ;-)
Robert Randazzo
_____
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
CloudCraft@aol.com
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2006 12:53
In a message dated 31-Jul-06 12:49:32 Pacific Daylight Time,
rsrandazzo@precisionmanuals.com writes:
It's an argument that I have to make in stages...
Agreed. You may want to entice them with the idea that the AC-685 is really
the same airframe as the AC-690 series and that's got to be an attractive
market for them.
The Collins AP-105s aren't dead yet, but they'll be as hard to support as
the Bendix/Motorola M4 series in another 10 years.
Wing Commander Gordon
__________ NOD32 1.1685 (20060731) Information __________
This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
http://www.eset.com
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Long body commanders? |
Bob,
How were they killed? I googled and couldn't find an aviation accident that
involved Chelton employees.
Let me know.
Thanks
Nico
_____
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert S.
Randazzo
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2006 1:29 PM
Gordon-
Before the heads of Chelton Aviation were killed in their accident- they had
apparently received 34 orders for this autopilot in 690 series airplanes...
They were planning to use our airplane to get the STC accomplished, so we're
using the 690 as a lever to get the 685 and 680(long body) series covered as
well.
Interestingly enough, the only reason why we didn't have the STC filed
before their accident was because they originally spec'd out the
installation based on a short body 680... We had to send back the correct
data/drawings/pictures for the installation to have them approved by their
engineering people for the long body airplane. We were (literally) waiting
on a signature only- and those poor fellows had a run of bad luck. So those
drawings and data exist- and with any luck we'll be able to convince the DAS
facility that they can act on them.
If this can be my contribution to the community- then I'll be quite happy...
and then i'll spend the rest of my time tooling around in N414C enjoying my
new autopilot. ;-)
Robert Randazzo
_____
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
CloudCraft@aol.com
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2006 12:53
In a message dated 31-Jul-06 12:49:32 Pacific Daylight Time,
rsrandazzo@precisionmanuals.com writes:
It's an argument that I have to make in stages...
Agreed. You may want to entice them with the idea that the AC-685 is really
the same airframe as the AC-690 series and that's got to be an attractive
market for them.
The Collins AP-105s aren't dead yet, but they'll be as hard to support as
the Bendix/Motorola M4 series in another 10 years.
Wing Commander Gordon
__________ NOD32 1.1685 (20060731) Information __________
This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
http://www.eset.com
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Long body commanders? |
Nico-
NTSB link to this accident report:
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id 060502X00496
<http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id 060502X00496&key=1> &key=1
Apparently they were on a personal flight...
Robert
_____
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of nico css
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2006 14:01
Bob,
How were they killed? I googled and couldn't find an aviation accident that
involved Chelton employees.
Let me know.
Thanks
Nico
_____
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert S.
Randazzo
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2006 1:29 PM
Gordon-
Before the heads of Chelton Aviation were killed in their accident- they had
apparently received 34 orders for this autopilot in 690 series airplanes...
They were planning to use our airplane to get the STC accomplished, so we're
using the 690 as a lever to get the 685 and 680(long body) series covered as
well.
Interestingly enough, the only reason why we didn't have the STC filed
before their accident was because they originally spec'd out the
installation based on a short body 680... We had to send back the correct
data/drawings/pictures for the installation to have them approved by their
engineering people for the long body airplane. We were (literally) waiting
on a signature only- and those poor fellows had a run of bad luck. So those
drawings and data exist- and with any luck we'll be able to convince the DAS
facility that they can act on them.
If this can be my contribution to the community- then I'll be quite happy...
and then i'll spend the rest of my time tooling around in N414C enjoying my
new autopilot. ;-)
Robert Randazzo
_____
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
CloudCraft@aol.com
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2006 12:53
In a message dated 31-Jul-06 12:49:32 Pacific Daylight Time,
rsrandazzo@precisionmanuals.com writes:
It's an argument that I have to make in stages...
Agreed. You may want to entice them with the idea that the AC-685 is really
the same airframe as the AC-690 series and that's got to be an attractive
market for them.
The Collins AP-105s aren't dead yet, but they'll be as hard to support as
the Bendix/Motorola M4 series in another 10 years.
Wing Commander Gordon
__________ NOD32 1.1685 (20060731) Information __________
This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
http://www.eset.com
__________ NOD32 1.1685 (20060731) Information __________
This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
http://www.eset.com
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Long body commanders? |
Gents,
Another problem with the FAA data is that some (including mine) 680F(p)
models are actually listed as 680F models. Pressurization was an "add
on option" not a completely different model.
Moe
N680RR
680F(p)
----- Original Message -----
From: Barry Collman
To: commander-list@matronics.com
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2006 1:20 PM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: Long body commanders?
Hi Ken,
OK - here's a listing of the short-body Commanders, with the same
caveats as the earlier list! These, of course, are all piston Models:
500 - 43 / 10
500A - 30 / 9 (Including the Colemill "Super 300")
500B - 108 / 35 (Including those converted from 500A)
500S - 93 / 141
500U - 8 / 24
520 - 50 / 7
560 - 26 / 4
560A - 21 / 4
560A(HC) - 11 / 3
560E - 32 / 7
560F - 25 / 15
680 - 64 / 22
680E - 43 / 11
680F - 23 / 21
680F(P) - 17 / 5
720 - 3 / 0
A summary of these and the previous figures is:
Piston Models - 684 / 374
Turbine Models - 433 / 403
Total - 1117 / 777 (1,894 still 'active' from a total built of 3,170)
If the FAA Register database is checked for these figures, the
likelihood is they will not be the same. The reason is that many are
still showing on the "current" FAA Register, but were in fact exported
many years ago, or have been withdrawn from service or destroyed, but
the 'N' number has never been cancelled.
Very Best Regards,
Barry
----- Original Message -----
From: KenWHyde@aol.com
To: commander-list@matronics.com
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2006 8:12 PM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: Long body commanders?
Barry,
Wondering if you have published a list of the 500 series Commanders
as you have here for the 680's?
Thanks,
Ken Hyde
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Long body commanders? |
Hi Moe,
Yes, of course, that's right. The good folk at the FAA are sometimes
prone to not pigeon-holing things in the correct place.
Another 'jumble' is with the "Aero Commander 500 S" (FAA MMS code
0141107) and the "Rockwell International 500-S" (FAA MMS code 7630410)
where instead of a split at a certain serial number, it seems anything
goes into either one of these, regardless of the entity it was
manufactured under.
Sometimes, in their defence, they are often fed 'duff' info in the first
place though! (Not in your case, of course!!)
I'm not having a go at the FAA here, as they've always been helpful over
and above the call of duty to me and have had the patience of a Saint
sometimes!!
Sincere Best Regards,
Barry
----- Original Message -----
From: Moe
To: commander-list@matronics.com
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2006 11:17 PM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: Long body commanders?
Gents,
Another problem with the FAA data is that some (including mine)
680F(p) models are actually listed as 680F models. Pressurization was
an "add on option" not a completely different model.
Moe
N680RR
680F(p)
----- Original Message -----
From: Barry Collman
To: commander-list@matronics.com
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2006 1:20 PM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: Long body commanders?
Hi Ken,
OK - here's a listing of the short-body Commanders, with the same
caveats as the earlier list! These, of course, are all piston Models:
500 - 43 / 10
500A - 30 / 9 (Including the Colemill "Super 300")
500B - 108 / 35 (Including those converted from 500A)
500S - 93 / 141
500U - 8 / 24
520 - 50 / 7
560 - 26 / 4
560A - 21 / 4
560A(HC) - 11 / 3
560E - 32 / 7
560F - 25 / 15
680 - 64 / 22
680E - 43 / 11
680F - 23 / 21
680F(P) - 17 / 5
720 - 3 / 0
A summary of these and the previous figures is:
Piston Models - 684 / 374
Turbine Models - 433 / 403
Total - 1117 / 777 (1,894 still 'active' from a total built of
3,170)
If the FAA Register database is checked for these figures, the
likelihood is they will not be the same. The reason is that many are
still showing on the "current" FAA Register, but were in fact exported
many years ago, or have been withdrawn from service or destroyed, but
the 'N' number has never been cancelled.
Very Best Regards,
Barry
----- Original Message -----
From: KenWHyde@aol.com
To: commander-list@matronics.com
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2006 8:12 PM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: Long body commanders?
Barry,
Wondering if you have published a list of the 500 series
Commanders as you have here for the 680's?
Thanks,
Ken Hyde
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Matronics Email List Web Server Upgrade Tonight... |
--> Commander-List message posted by: Matt Dralle <dralle@matronics.com>
Dear Listers,
This evening I will be upgrading the Matronics Web Server hardware to a new Quad-processor
2.8Ghz Xeon system (yes, 4-physical CPUs!) with an Ultra 320 SCSI
Raid 5 disk system and 5GB of DDR2 RAM.
As with the older system, the new system will be running the latest version of
Redhat Linux. Most of the software configuration work is already done for the
migration, but I still have to sync all of the archive and forum data from the
old system to the new system. I am anticipating about 2 to 3 hours of downtime
for me to fully make the transition, although it could be considerable less
if everything goes according to plan.
The Matronics Webserver will be *UNavailable* from the Internet during the work,
and you will receive a time-out if you try to connect during the upgrade.
Email List Distribution will be *available* during the upgrade of the Web Server,
and List message distribution will function as normal.
This represents a significant performance upgrade for the Matronics Web Server
and you should notice nicely improved searching and surfing performance following
the upgrade!
Best regards,
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Administrator
Message 16
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | A minor courtesy to one another |
--> Commander-List message posted by: "Robert S. Randazzo" <rsrandazzo@precisionmanuals.com>
Commanders-
As a courtesy to one another, if you happen to have a system filtering your
email, please ensure that it is set up to receive email from this list.
It's growing a bit tiring to receive email back from the hundreds of various
email filtering scheme's asking me to confirm that I've sent email that has
been captured and is being held prisoner because you don't want to receive
junk mail.
If you signed up for this list- then make sure you get your mail without
further input from your fellow list participants!
Robert Randazzo
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|