Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:05 AM - Re: Survey Commanders (Bill Hamilton)
2. 04:11 AM - Re: Survey Commanders (Barry Collman)
3. 06:01 AM - Re: Survey Commanders (nico css)
4. 06:51 AM - Re: Survey Commanders (Richard & Jacqui Thompson)
5. 03:02 PM - Re: Survey Commanders (Craig Kennedy)
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: | Survey Commanders |
Folks,
To add a little to what Richard has said, and as a result of having been a
long standing member of the CASA Standards Consultative Committee.
Post WWII, a lot of work was done on fatigue in Australia, as the actual
life of an individual airframe varies enormously, depending on the
accumulation of fatigue damage, physical damage and corrosion damage.
This included a rig test to destruction of 100 sets of new P-51D wing sets
(left over after Korea), and this resulted in the "bell" curve used, to this
day, for likely fatigue life distribution in aluminium structures.
A desire to "lead the world" can be very expensive, if not very carefully
managed, and to say that some "over-reacted" is an understatement, at great
expense to many of us. However, the professional engineers of the day were
not entirely unjustified. Australia's "good weather" produces a lot of heat
turbulence, often well beyond design assumptions, as fitting a wide variety
of GA, commuter and military aircraft with recording "fatigue meters" has
shown. For a while, (and just for my own interest) I had a recording G meter
mid-ships under floor in AT-28D, 51-3588. It was instructive to compare the
tell-tale needle on the instrument panel G meter, and the recorder. The
panel meter always under-recorded peak G, and of course gave no measure of
duration.
A number of in-flight break-ups of airline aircraft, including 3 Vickers
Viscounts, spurred the efforts.
To add to the mix, until 1998, Australia had its own design and
certification rules, which, in the case of Aero-Commander, resulted in the
certification of aircraft at higher gross weights than the factory/FAA, the
higher weight certification included a spar strap.
When the (now) well known problems of the cold bent spar extrusions
surfaced, the AD spar straps were based on the existing Australian
certification.
One of the reasons then Department of Civil Aviation, DCA, took such a
detailed interest, was the fact that they had a fleet of Aero-Commander,
various models over the years. Richard's aircraft was delivered new to DCA.
The last models their successors used was the Commander 1000 (695A), one has
just changed hands in US.
The problems of the cold bent extrusions at the wing/body point is well
understood, the management by AD has been effective.
The problem of dissimilar metal corrosion in spar caps is (now) well
understood, but is/was a serious issue. The problems of off spec . material
has no answer, it must be replaced.
As all our aircraft get older, the results of corrosion becomes increasingly
important, if you have never found any, you haven't looked hard enough -
with the possible exception of Richard's aircraft, all the DCA/DOA aircraft
were ordered with US MilSpec corrosion protection, with all airframe
components chromate primed or anodised before assembly, with all drilled
fastener holes treated to a brush of primer before "wet" riveting.
As FAA produce "ageing aircraft" programs (Cessna SIDs) you will find a
remarkable similarity between the inspection hours nominated, and the long
standing Australian fatigue life/spar replacement ADs for C402 etc. Indeed,
some of the new FAA/Cessna figures are marginally less than the Au AD. As we
have pulled apart a few 402 for the SIDs, we have found some scary stuff.
There are some very high hour airframes in Australia, when Cessna published
the retirement life for the Conquest of 22,000 hours, I doubt they thought
it would have had much effect. In Australia, 9 aircraft were grounded.
If you have a look at the evolution of FAR 23 structural design standards,
you will see the increasing attention to fatigue life, from memory, the
Piper Tomahawk was the first aircraft certified after the first FAR 23
amendment to include fatigue justification, hence the wing life.
Take the AC structural ADs very seriously, none are unjustified. Having said
that, look at the Australian AD Richard put up, the life limits are two or
three times the equivalent for most Cessna /Piper, that's telling us
something.
Neither of the two in-flight breakups of AC-500U or S appears to be fatigue
related, being symmetrical downward bending failures just outboard of the
engine nacelles.
CASA (compared to FAA) is a problem, there have been some good changes in
the senior management in the last two
years, including several very competent people from the "Eastern Pacific
Rim", but it takes a long time to turn the ship of state around.
Cheers,
Bill Hamilton
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Richard &
Jacqui Thompson
Sent: Monday, April 28, 2008 4:37 PM
Subject: RE: Commander-List: Survey Commanders
Before you go Gulp.
Understand that CASA makes your FAA look totally professional. This paper
was written by an academic and as history has proved we have very strong
airplanes. Take note that the wing is essentially a fail safe design. If it
was not then a whole lot more airplanes would have crashed. One classic
example in the report is the case of ZK-BWA and the pictures. What was not
explained was that this aircraft had been badly damaged previously and not
repaired correctly. The other problem is that a lot of the corrosion found
in Aussie aircraft was due to the fact that they had been used in low level
coastal work and really had not been looked after. This paper also ends in
about 1995. I believe that in the 1999 the FAA had Twin Commander almost re
certify their wings at great expense, destroying numerous airframes.
Strangely enough they passed with flying colours. (which must have pissed
the FAA off no end). Even our wonderful CASA went on to their 8th amendment
of their AD on spar life
http://www.casa.gov.au/airworth/airwd/ADfiles/under/ac/AC-066.pdf . I
believe that a lot of accidents and especially in flight break ups have had
a lot to do with the airframe being stressed way beyond its limits, usually
in foul weather. You just have to do little thinking looking at the size of
the things tale and then imagine the loads it has to take especially if you
don't go with the flow and try to manhandle it in turbulence. You can break
anything if you try hard enough.
Cheers
Richard
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of nico css
Sent: Monday, 28 April 2008 10:57 AM
Subject: RE: Commander-List: Survey Commanders
<gulp>
_____
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of mike floyd
Sent: Friday, April 25, 2008 2:10 PM
Subject: RE: Commander-List: Survey Commanders
Read this:
http://www.casa.gov.au/airworth/papers/aerocommander.pdf
_____
From: WINGFLYER1@aol.com
Subject: Re: Commander-List: Survey Commanders
I have a 680. What caused the spars to break?
_____
Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S. used car listings at
AOL Autos <http://autos.aol.com/used?NCID=aolcmp00300000002851> .
" target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List
p://forums.matronics.com
blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
_____
Express yourself wherever you are. Mobilize!
<http://www.gowindowslive.com/Mobile/Landing/Messenger/Default.aspx?Locale=e
n-US?ocid=TAG_APRIL>
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List">http://www.matronic
s.com/Navigator?Commander-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
http://forums.matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
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: Survey Commanders |
Hello All,
Regarding ZK-BWA, I have a copy of the official Report into the
accident.
Richard is, of course, correct in saying that "this aircraft had been
badly damaged previously".
While being flown in the USA prior to delivery, it was subjected to "an
extremely heavy landing which necessitated structural repairs before the
aircraft could again be flown".
It was also evident that "structural defects had existed in the rear
spar caps of the starboard wing prior to the accident".
It was evidently the practice of the pilot to fly very low over Mount
Ruapehu to give his passengers a good look at a crater lake.
There is evidence to suggest that there was strong turbulence in that
area on the day of the accident.
There is a strong possibility that, due to turbulence, the propeller on
the starboard side had struck an isolated projection somewhere on the
top of the mountain. Severe engine vibration resulted from the now
unbalanced propeller blades and shortly afterwards, it encountered the
severe turbulence.
The starboard wing, which had already been weakened by three defective
spar caps, was subjected to stresses and loadings beyond its capacity to
withstand. There were instances known in the aircraft's history of
damage to the starboard wing. One was when the starboard prop struck a
metal stand while taxying with the engine running at high rpm. The tips
of all three blades were damaged and the aircraft was flown in that
condition. Takeoff and landing was effected on both engines, but it is
not known if the right prop was feathered during the flight, to
eliminate engine vibration. The prop damage was within repairable
limits.
On another occasion, the main gear was "forcibly extended when the
aircraft encountered sudden turbulence." Evidently, "under exceptional
positive gust loadings in the region of 6g the gear will be forcibly
ejected from the retract wells."
I am currently looking at Commander accidents where airframe
disintegration occurred, but am only a relatively small way into the
exercise.
However, so far expressions like "exceed design stress limits" seem to
appear on a very regular basis.
These are coupled with expressions like "spatial disorientation",
"severe turbulence" and "airframe icing".
So, Commanders do not fall out of the sky for no apparent reason, as of
course, we all know.
Best Regards,
Barry
----- Original Message -----
From: Richard & Jacqui Thompson
To: commander-list@matronics.com
Sent: Monday, April 28, 2008 7:36 AM
Subject: RE: Commander-List: Survey Commanders
Before you go Gulp.
Understand that CASA makes your FAA look totally professional. This
paper was written by an academic and as history has proved we have very
strong airplanes. Take note that the wing is essentially a fail safe
design. If it was not then a whole lot more airplanes would have
crashed. One classic example in the report is the case of ZK-BWA and the
pictures. What was not explained was that this aircraft had been badly
damaged previously and not repaired correctly. The other problem is that
a lot of the corrosion found in Aussie aircraft was due to the fact that
they had been used in low level coastal work and really had not been
looked after. This paper also ends in about 1995. I believe that in the
1999 the FAA had Twin Commander almost re certify their wings at great
expense, destroying numerous airframes. Strangely enough they passed
with flying colours. (which must have pissed the FAA off no end). Even
our wonderful CASA went on to their 8th amendment of their AD on spar
life http://www.casa.gov.au/airworth/airwd/ADfiles/under/ac/AC-066.pdf .
I believe that a lot of accidents and especially in flight break ups
have had a lot to do with the airframe being stressed way beyond its
limits, usually in foul weather. You just have to do little thinking
looking at the size of the things tale and then imagine the loads it has
to take especially if you don't go with the flow and try to manhandle it
in turbulence. You can break anything if you try hard enough.
Cheers
Richard
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of nico css
Sent: Monday, 28 April 2008 10:57 AM
To: commander-list@matronics.com
Subject: RE: Commander-List: Survey Commanders
<gulp>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of mike
floyd
Sent: Friday, April 25, 2008 2:10 PM
To: commander-list@matronics.com
Subject: RE: Commander-List: Survey Commanders
Read this:
http://www.casa.gov.au/airworth/papers/aerocommander.pdf
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
From: WINGFLYER1@aol.com
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2008 16:49:25 -0400
Subject: Re: Commander-List: Survey Commanders
To: commander-list@matronics.com
I have a 680. What caused the spars to break?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S. used car listings
at AOL Autos.
"
target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-Listp://foru
ms.matronics.comblank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
Express yourself wherever you are. Mobilize!
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List">http://www.mat
ronics.com/Navigator?Commander-Listhref="http://forums.matronics.com">h
ttp://forums.matronics.comhref="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">
http://www.matronics.com/c
http://forums.matronics.comhttp://www.matronics.com/contribution
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: | Survey Commanders |
That's true, Richard. And some balance in the perspective. Even the tail of
an airliner came off a couple of years ago due to excessive rudder input,
didn't it? And the fire-fighting planes also lost a few due to overstressing
or fatigue or both.
What I couldn't figure out is why the spar is bent forward. The simplicity
of having a straight spar should have outweighed the benefits that it might
have had (and I am not saying there weren't any, I am just ignorant) being
bent. Ted Smith had to know that it would induce torque on the spar.
Nico
<ungulp>
_____
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Richard &
Jacqui Thompson
Sent: Sunday, April 27, 2008 11:37 PM
Subject: RE: Commander-List: Survey Commanders
Before you go Gulp.
Understand that CASA makes your FAA look totally professional. This paper
was written by an academic and as history has proved we have very strong
airplanes. Take note that the wing is essentially a fail safe design. If it
was not then a whole lot more airplanes would have crashed. One classic
example in the report is the case of ZK-BWA and the pictures. What was not
explained was that this aircraft had been badly damaged previously and not
repaired correctly. The other problem is that a lot of the corrosion found
in Aussie aircraft was due to the fact that they had been used in low level
coastal work and really had not been looked after. This paper also ends in
about 1995. I believe that in the 1999 the FAA had Twin Commander almost re
certify their wings at great expense, destroying numerous airframes.
Strangely enough they passed with flying colours. (which must have pissed
the FAA off no end). Even our wonderful CASA went on to their 8th amendment
of their AD on spar life
http://www.casa.gov.au/airworth/airwd/ADfiles/under/ac/AC-066.pdf . I
believe that a lot of accidents and especially in flight break ups have had
a lot to do with the airframe being stressed way beyond its limits, usually
in foul weather. You just have to do little thinking looking at the size of
the things tale and then imagine the loads it has to take especially if you
don't go with the flow and try to manhandle it in turbulence. You can break
anything if you try hard enough.
Cheers
Richard
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of nico css
Sent: Monday, 28 April 2008 10:57 AM
Subject: RE: Commander-List: Survey Commanders
<gulp>
_____
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of mike floyd
Sent: Friday, April 25, 2008 2:10 PM
Subject: RE: Commander-List: Survey Commanders
Read this:
http://www.casa.gov.au/airworth/papers/aerocommander.pdf
_____
From: WINGFLYER1@aol.com
Subject: Re: Commander-List: Survey Commanders
I have a 680. What caused the spars to break?
_____
Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S. used car listings at
AOL <http://autos.aol.com/used?NCID=aolcmp00300000002851> Autos.
" target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List
p://forums.matronics.com
blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
_____
Express yourself wherever you are. Mobilize!
<http://www.gowindowslive.com/Mobile/Landing/Messenger/Default.aspx?Locale=e
n-US?ocid=TAG_APRIL>
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List">http://www.matronic
s.com/Navigator?Commander-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
http://forums.matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
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: | Survey Commanders |
Thanks for that Bill,
Have not seen you for a while.
My 680E has the primed interior and has very little corrosion. The only
place is on the engine trusses and that has been ground out under the
watchfull eye of my friendly Car35 guy. He reckons the amount taken out will
not make a rats arse difference to the overall strength of the truss. The
end is in sight, the old girl should be in the paperwork stages in a couple
of months. I am building a new hangar down at Wedderburn to house her. The
one I have there is not quite big enough, about a foot shy on span and about
3 foot shy on tail.
Cheers
Richard
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill
Hamilton
Sent: Monday, 28 April 2008 9:03 PM
Subject: RE: Commander-List: Survey Commanders
Folks,
To add a little to what Richard has said, and as a result of having been a
long standing member of the CASA Standards Consultative Committee.
Post WWII, a lot of work was done on fatigue in Australia, as the actual
life of an individual airframe varies enormously, depending on the
accumulation of fatigue damage, physical damage and corrosion damage.
This included a rig test to destruction of 100 sets of new P-51D wing sets
(left over after Korea), and this resulted in the "bell" curve used, to this
day, for likely fatigue life distribution in aluminium structures.
A desire to "lead the world" can be very expensive, if not very carefully
managed, and to say that some "over-reacted" is an understatement, at great
expense to many of us. However, the professional engineers of the day were
not entirely unjustified. Australia's "good weather" produces a lot of heat
turbulence, often well beyond design assumptions, as fitting a wide variety
of GA, commuter and military aircraft with recording "fatigue meters" has
shown. For a while, (and just for my own interest) I had a recording G meter
mid-ships under floor in AT-28D, 51-3588. It was instructive to compare the
tell-tale needle on the instrument panel G meter, and the recorder. The
panel meter always under-recorded peak G, and of course gave no measure of
duration.
A number of in-flight break-ups of airline aircraft, including 3 Vickers
Viscounts, spurred the efforts.
To add to the mix, until 1998, Australia had its own design and
certification rules, which, in the case of Aero-Commander, resulted in the
certification of aircraft at higher gross weights than the factory/FAA, the
higher weight certification included a spar strap.
When the (now) well known problems of the cold bent spar extrusions
surfaced, the AD spar straps were based on the existing Australian
certification.
One of the reasons then Department of Civil Aviation, DCA, took such a
detailed interest, was the fact that they had a fleet of Aero-Commander,
various models over the years. Richard's aircraft was delivered new to DCA.
The last models their successors used was the Commander 1000 (695A), one has
just changed hands in US.
The problems of the cold bent extrusions at the wing/body point is well
understood, the management by AD has been effective.
The problem of dissimilar metal corrosion in spar caps is (now) well
understood, but is/was a serious issue. The problems of off spec . material
has no answer, it must be replaced.
As all our aircraft get older, the results of corrosion becomes increasingly
important, if you have never found any, you haven't looked hard enough -
with the possible exception of Richard's aircraft, all the DCA/DOA aircraft
were ordered with US MilSpec corrosion protection, with all airframe
components chromate primed or anodised before assembly, with all drilled
fastener holes treated to a brush of primer before "wet" riveting.
As FAA produce "ageing aircraft" programs (Cessna SIDs) you will find a
remarkable similarity between the inspection hours nominated, and the long
standing Australian fatigue life/spar replacement ADs for C402 etc. Indeed,
some of the new FAA/Cessna figures are marginally less than the Au AD. As we
have pulled apart a few 402 for the SIDs, we have found some scary stuff.
There are some very high hour airframes in Australia, when Cessna published
the retirement life for the Conquest of 22,000 hours, I doubt they thought
it would have had much effect. In Australia, 9 aircraft were grounded.
If you have a look at the evolution of FAR 23 structural design standards,
you will see the increasing attention to fatigue life, from memory, the
Piper Tomahawk was the first aircraft certified after the first FAR 23
amendment to include fatigue justification, hence the wing life.
Take the AC structural ADs very seriously, none are unjustified. Having said
that, look at the Australian AD Richard put up, the life limits are two or
three times the equivalent for most Cessna /Piper, that's telling us
something.
Neither of the two in-flight breakups of AC-500U or S appears to be fatigue
related, being symmetrical downward bending failures just outboard of the
engine nacelles.
CASA (compared to FAA) is a problem, there have been some good changes in
the senior management in the last two
years, including several very competent people from the "Eastern Pacific
Rim", but it takes a long time to turn the ship of state around.
Cheers,
Bill Hamilton
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Richard &
Jacqui Thompson
Sent: Monday, April 28, 2008 4:37 PM
Subject: RE: Commander-List: Survey Commanders
Before you go Gulp.
Understand that CASA makes your FAA look totally professional. This paper
was written by an academic and as history has proved we have very strong
airplanes. Take note that the wing is essentially a fail safe design. If it
was not then a whole lot more airplanes would have crashed. One classic
example in the report is the case of ZK-BWA and the pictures. What was not
explained was that this aircraft had been badly damaged previously and not
repaired correctly. The other problem is that a lot of the corrosion found
in Aussie aircraft was due to the fact that they had been used in low level
coastal work and really had not been looked after. This paper also ends in
about 1995. I believe that in the 1999 the FAA had Twin Commander almost re
certify their wings at great expense, destroying numerous airframes.
Strangely enough they passed with flying colours. (which must have pissed
the FAA off no end). Even our wonderful CASA went on to their 8th amendment
of their AD on spar life
http://www.casa.gov.au/airworth/airwd/ADfiles/under/ac/AC-066.pdf . I
believe that a lot of accidents and especially in flight break ups have had
a lot to do with the airframe being stressed way beyond its limits, usually
in foul weather. You just have to do little thinking looking at the size of
the things tale and then imagine the loads it has to take especially if you
don't go with the flow and try to manhandle it in turbulence. You can break
anything if you try hard enough.
Cheers
Richard
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of nico css
Sent: Monday, 28 April 2008 10:57 AM
Subject: RE: Commander-List: Survey Commanders
<gulp>
_____
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of mike floyd
Sent: Friday, April 25, 2008 2:10 PM
Subject: RE: Commander-List: Survey Commanders
Read this:
http://www.casa.gov.au/airworth/papers/aerocommander.pdf
_____
From: WINGFLYER1@aol.com
Subject: Re: Commander-List: Survey Commanders
I have a 680. What caused the spars to break?
_____
Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S. used car listings at
AOL Autos <http://autos.aol.com/used?NCID=aolcmp00300000002851> .
" target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List
p://forums.matronics.com
blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
_____
Express yourself wherever you are. Mobilize!
<http://www.gowindowslive.com/Mobile/Landing/Messenger/Default.aspx?Locale
=e
n-US?ocid=TAG_APRIL>
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List">http://www.matron
ic
s.com/Navigator?Commander-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
http://forums.matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List
http://forums.matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
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: Survey Commanders |
When I had my pre-purchase inspection done on 747H I was told the dye penetrant
inspection was no longer valid and that the spar had to be xray's or sonigramed?
Further,that the dye itself was found to be causing corrosion. Anybody heard
this story. This was all done in October of last year.
Craig
WINGFLYER1@aol.com wrote: Ron, Thank you very much. I had the spars dye penetrated
about a year and a half ago prior to buying the airplane and everything
checked out o.k. Again thank you very much and if you have any other advice,I
would appreciate hearing from you. Gil
---------------------------------
Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S. used car listings at AOL Autos.
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! --
|