Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 05:39 AM - Re: KIS Sold (Richard Trickel)
2. 10:44 PM - Re: KIS Sold (Jason Hills)
3. 11:38 PM - Re: KIS Sold (Scott Stearns)
4. 11:39 PM - Re: KIS Sold (Scott Stearns)
5. 11:45 PM - landing gear material (Scott Stearns)
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 |
|
Jason
The plane was mostly built By Chuck Harrison and Steve Ruege who co own Com
posites Unlimited in Scappoose.- At the time they were long time employee
s of mine at High tech Compostes. Chuck started working for me at 17 though
-he had some experience already. We both worked together (different Dept.
) at Task Research in Santa Paula. He was my first employee and a quick lea
rner.- We are still good friends.-
The plane was built in Oxnard but test flown in Camarillo because Oxnard do
es not like test flying.- I remember it was a good flying plane but at fi
rst had some problems on the ground.- Seems to want to turn on its own..
- Really frustrated us but somehow fixed it.- It was a few years ago so
don`t rember all.- Dick kept it in at his house/airport in Florida.
Rich
Sometimes good to think about the past
--- On Wed, 10/27/10, jason@hills.org <jason@hills.org> wrote:
From: jason@hills.org <jason@hills.org>
Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold
Yeah, my understanding is it was largely built by "factory" guys. Someone e
lse has mentioned that one of the people familiar with its build may be up
in the Scappoose, OR area as well, but I've never followed up on that.
It is still yellow nose/cowling transitioning to white tail with a small bl
ue stripe(s) on the fuse and wings. The paint is showing some aging, but it
looks good from 10 feet away. It's lived in hangers most of the last 16 ye
ars I think. I'm the 4th, and I believe longest owner now (I bought in Marc
h 2005).
A few weeks ago I flew down to KCMA (from KPAE) with it. The log book has e
arly records of flying between KOXR and KCMA for some engine work. Assuming
it was test-flown somewhere down in that area.
It's a great plane. Looks good, flies well, is super economical, especially
for longer x-country travel, which is something I really enjoy.
...Jason
Oct 27, 2010 12:41:23 PM, kis-list@matronics.com wrote:
=================
JasonYea that was built mostly by chuck and Dick was fairly short so they p
ut thick seats in that also.- I think I also flew that plane.- Is it st
ill Yellow or did you paint it.RICH
--- On Wed, 10/27/10, jason@hills.org- wrote:
From: jason@hills.org
Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold
My plane was Richard Warden's tail-dragger (serial number 51 I believe), bu
t the seats are fairly thick. Worth looking into! Thanks.
...Jason
Oct 27, 2010 10:13:41 AM, kis-list@matronics.com wrote:
=================
JasonI am 6-2 and have no trouble.- I am not sure but do=B4t you have Kir
by jeffersons plane.- If so I know his seate were really fay > I did the
test flight and was scrunched pretty bad.- I would redo the seats.- Fol
low the manual and thind down the cushions.- when proper the back seat bo
tton is almost none existant.. Rich
--- On Wed, 10/27/10, Jason Hills- wrote:
From: Jason Hills
Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold
I haven't been in a Lancair 360, but I think the 235 is almost the same pla
ne. Somewhere between 235 and 360 they changed the tail to improve stall/sp
in characteristics, but I still would avoid stalls/spins in that family of
planes...
The cockpits are likely similar. Compared to the TR-1 the Lancair 235 recli
nes people more. I think that improves comfort for tall people. Width is sn
ug like the TR-1.
My biggest problem with my plane's cockpit is anyone over 6'1" or 2" just d
oesn't fit (half my friends who would like to go flying). They have to bend
their head sideways. At 6' I have to be careful what headset I use or the
band brushes the ceiling and transmits engine vibration to me. Annoying! My
Zulu works great as long as I'm left seat (right seat is 1/2" worse to cle
ar the transponder plate and fitting below the seat).
...Jason
On Oct 27, 2010, at 5:48 AM, Mark Kettering- wrote:
>
> Hi John,
>
> I think Scott answered 1 and 3.- I do not know how large the Lancair co
ckpit is.- I remember seeing a web page that listed cockpit widths someti
me ago but do not remember where.- Also width does not tell the whole sto
ry.- You really need to go and sit in them yourself to try them out for s
ize and shape.
>
> Mark
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>> From: John Petrie
>> Sent: Oct 26, 2010 10:53 PM
>> To: kis-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold
>>
>>
>> Mark,
>>
>> You make a very good argument for the TR-1. I have a few questions thoug
h:
>> 1. What do you mean by "...the wings tend to stay on"?
>> 2. How does the cockpit size compare to the Lancair?
>> 3. Is it really possible to fit an O-360 to the TR-1 and if so, what are
the
>> CG implications?
>>
>> John
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> From: Mark Kettering
>>> Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2010 21:47:04 -0400 (EDT)
>>> To:
>>> Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Scott,
>>>
>>> In many ways the RV 7 kits are the best kits in the world.- Fantastic
fit,
>>> instructions, factory support, third party support, options, resale val
ue and
>>> much more.- But they are not the best aircraft. They are little more
than a
>>> kit of 1960's designs like the Grummans or others.- Compared to a mor
e modern
>>> composite aircraft they really are not all that good of performers.-
They tend
>>> to be slower (for a given engine and stall speed), have less useful loa
d and
>>> even with being a great kit they still tend to cost a fair amount to fi
nish
>>> and take a fair amount of time.- Most of the RV 7s are over 1200 lbs
empty
>>> weight!- I think even your big engine IFR TR1 is well under 1000 lbs.
- Or was
>>> it well under 900 lbs?
>>>
>>> I know being part of the RV club has it's own draw but I think your pla
ne is a
>>> much better choice.- Yes there are problems with the TR1.- But at l
east the
>>> wings tend to stay on.
>>>
>>> Mark
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Scott Stearns
>>>> Sent: Oct 26, 2010 4:00 PM
>>>> To: kis-list@matronics.com
>>>> Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold
>>>>
>>>> An RV fastbuild kit hands down.- If you build the Cruiser then you'l
l have
>>>> that RV done in a year if you buy that fastbuild and FWF kits.
>>>>-
>>>> The lancair is a great airplane, but the cost is much higher for the k
it, the
>>>> engine, and the RG insurance will be a lot higher.- It is fast, but
the
>>>> landing speed is much higher too.- Unless you do a lot of long range
cross
>>>> country and don't plan on flying into any shorter strips, then I don't
think
>>>> you'll get a lot for the extra money.
>>>>-
>>>> Also, a well built RV is pretty easy to sell.- I kind of with I woul
d have
>>>> built an RV.-
>>>>-
>>>> Scott
>>>>
>>>> --- On Mon, 10/25/10, John Petrie- wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> From: John Petrie
>>>> Subject: KIS-List: KIS Sold
>>>> To: "KIS-List Digest Server"
>>>> Date: Monday, October 25, 2010, 9:08 PM
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> It=B9s been 14 years since I received my KIS Cruiser kit and 10 years
of
>>>> successful flying. However, the idea of the 4 seats being constantly f
illed
>>>> by my family appears to be more of a dream than a reality. As a result
, I
>>>> have just sold my plane and am now looking for a 2 place kit which I c
an
>>>> enjoy with my one son who is also passionate about aircraft. So, I was
hoping
>>>> someone on this list could give me some useful advice on which directi
on to
>>>> follow.
>>>> I am currently looking at either an RV7 or a Lancair 360. I really do
like
>>>> the speed of the Lancair, but also the simplicity of the RV.
>>>> Does anyone have any other better suggestions and advice?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks in anticipation.
>>>> John
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>&ghref="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?KIS-List" target=_blank>htt
p:/ - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS;- - - - - - ----Matt Dralle, L
ist Admin=====matronics.com/Navigator?KIS-List" target=_blank>h
ttp://www.matronics.com/=- - - - - - ---- MATRONICS sp;
- - - - - - A href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution" ta
rget=_blank>http://www=================
=====
le, List Admin.
=0A=0A=0A
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 |
|
Rich,
Thanks for the bit of historical color on my plane! Fun to hear a bit of
its past.
The first few years I had the plane it was a bit tricky in the landing
roll out. At one of my annual condition inspections, my A&P suggested we
replace the wheels, brakes and wheel pants with RV-8 parts. I picked up
about 5 kts in speed and the plane now rolls out nice and
straight/smooth on landing, it also shortened the take-off roll a bit.
We suspect the old brakes were dragging inconsistently leading to extra
drag and increased difficulty in slowing down and staying straight.
It was fun as I flew into Camarillo to think that my plane was returning
to visit its flight test area for the first time in a long while. I
barely snuck in the evening of Oct 2 before everything fogged up.
Actually I'd been planning on landing at Oxnard. The sun was setting and
as I went over Santa Barbara the weather was clear up ahead. A few
minutes later Oxnard had gone IFR so I changed my destination to
Camarillo. Entering the class D tower had two of us fly non-standard
patterns and land from the west as it looked like conditions were
deteriorating to the east. Not 15 minutes after landing Camarillo was
IFR as well. I was setup to fly an approach in if needed, but was glad I
didn't have to as I was running late to meet up with friends, and an
approach would have added a bit of extra time.
Of course I'd been delayed due to a wall of thunderstorms from San Louis
Obispo to Bakersfield that afternoon. Landed at Paso Robles for an hour
or so until it looked like I could sneak down along the coast. Amazing
to think that my day had started in cruddy weather up in Seattle where I
did an IFR departure, climbed through multiple layers and over the
cascades to avoid the crud in western washington and oregon. On to
Klamath Falls, OR for lunch and fuel, then the unplanned stop at Paso
Robles. The plane would have made the trip with just one fuel stop at
any of Klamath Falls, Redding or Red Bluff if the weather hadn't gotten
in my way. If it hadn't been so amazingly hot with an inversion I'd have
made even better time (it was a sweltering 75+ deg at 11,000 feet down
most of eastern Oregon and California that day, which made for higher
than normal engine temps and a bit of throttling back).
The weather was IFR the whole time I was down there. Eventually I talked
to a local CFII to get a sense of what ATC was likely to ask of me and
the plane and made an IFR departure out of KCMA for the return trip when
things weren't improving after lunch. Similar to what we get up in
Seattle, I was concerned about being to asked to fly IMC towards
mountains. The CFII recommended filing out the way I came in, and that
worked out well, breaking out on top around 7000 ft, soon I was GPS
direct to Redding VMC the whole way.
These airplanes truly are magical in their ability to eat up miles. For
$455 of 100LL I was able to fly roundtrip, avoid the hassles of
commercial airlines and the TSA, got to go on my own schedule, and was
able to finally add the state of California to my logbook. Vacations
don't get much better than that for me.
...Jason
On Oct 28, 2010, at 5:36 AM, Richard Trickel wrote:
> Jason
> The plane was mostly built By Chuck Harrison and Steve Ruege who co
own Composites Unlimited in Scappoose. At the time they were long time
employees of mine at High tech Compostes. Chuck started working for me
at 17 though he had some experience already. We both worked together
(different Dept.) at Task Research in Santa Paula. He was my first
employee and a quick learner. We are still good friends.
> The plane was built in Oxnard but test flown in Camarillo because
Oxnard does not like test flying. I remember it was a good flying plane
but at first had some problems on the ground. Seems to want to turn on
its own.. Really frustrated us but somehow fixed it. It was a few
years ago so don`t rember all. Dick kept it in at his house/airport in
Florida.
> Rich
> Sometimes good to think about the past
>
> --- On Wed, 10/27/10, jason@hills.org <jason@hills.org> wrote:
>
> From: jason@hills.org <jason@hills.org>
> Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold
> To: kis-list@matronics.com
> Date: Wednesday, October 27, 2010, 10:32 PM
>
>
> Yeah, my understanding is it was largely built by "factory" guys.
Someone else has mentioned that one of the people familiar with its
build may be up in the Scappoose, OR area as well, but I've never
followed up on that.
>
> It is still yellow nose/cowling transitioning to white tail with a
small blue stripe(s) on the fuse and wings. The paint is showing some
aging, but it looks good from 10 feet away. It's lived in hangers most
of the last 16 years I think. I'm the 4th, and I believe longest owner
now (I bought in March 2005).
>
> A few weeks ago I flew down to KCMA (from KPAE) with it. The log book
has early records of flying between KOXR and KCMA for some engine work.
Assuming it was test-flown somewhere down in that area.
>
> It's a great plane. Looks good, flies well, is super economical,
especially for longer x-country travel, which is something I really
enjoy.
>
> ...Jason
>
>
>
> Oct 27, 2010 12:41:23 PM, kis-list@matronics.com wrote:
>
> =================
>
>
> JasonYea that was built mostly by chuck and Dick was fairly short so
they put thick seats in that also. I think I also flew that plane. Is
it still Yellow or did you paint it.RICH
>
> --- On Wed, 10/27/10, jason@hills.org wrote:
>
> From: jason@hills.org
> Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold
> To: kis-list@matronics.com
> Date: Wednesday, October 27, 2010, 7:02 PM
>
>
> My plane was Richard Warden's tail-dragger (serial number 51 I
believe), but the seats are fairly thick. Worth looking into! Thanks.
>
> ...Jason
>
>
> Oct 27, 2010 10:13:41 AM, kis-list@matronics.com wrote:
>
> =================
>
>
> JasonI am 6-2 and have no trouble. I am not sure but do=B4t you have
Kirby jeffersons plane. If so I know his seate were really fay > I did
the test flight and was scrunched pretty bad. I would redo the seats.
Follow the manual and thind down the cushions. when proper the back
seat botton is almost none existant.. Rich
>
> --- On Wed, 10/27/10, Jason Hills wrote:
>
> From: Jason Hills
> Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold
> To: "kis-list@matronics.com"
> Date: Wednesday, October 27, 2010, 3:57 PM
>
>
> I haven't been in a Lancair 360, but I think the 235 is almost the
same plane. Somewhere between 235 and 360 they changed the tail to
improve stall/spin characteristics, but I still would avoid stalls/spins
in that family of planes...
>
> The cockpits are likely similar. Compared to the TR-1 the Lancair 235
reclines people more. I think that improves comfort for tall people.
Width is snug like the TR-1.
>
> My biggest problem with my plane's cockpit is anyone over 6'1" or 2"
just doesn't fit (half my friends who would like to go flying). They
have to bend their head sideways. At 6' I have to be careful what
headset I use or the band brushes the ceiling and transmits engine
vibration to me. Annoying! My Zulu works great as long as I'm left seat
(right seat is 1/2" worse to clear the transponder plate and fitting
below the seat).
>
> ...Jason
>
>
> On Oct 27, 2010, at 5:48 AM, Mark Kettering wrote:
>
> >
> > Hi John,
> >
> > I think Scott answered 1 and 3. I do not know how large the Lancair
cockpit is. I remember seeing a web page that listed cockpit widths
sometime ago but do not remember where. Also width does not tell the
whole story. You really need to go and sit in them yourself to try them
out for size and shape.
> >
> > Mark
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> >> From: John Petrie
> >> Sent: Oct 26, 2010 10:53 PM
> >> To: kis-list@matronics.com
> >> Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold
> >>
> >>
> >> Mark,
> >>
> >> You make a very good argument for the TR-1. I have a few questions
though:
> >> 1. What do you mean by "...the wings tend to stay on"?
> >> 2. How does the cockpit size compare to the Lancair?
> >> 3. Is it really possible to fit an O-360 to the TR-1 and if so,
what are the
> >> CG implications?
> >>
> >> John
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> From: Mark Kettering
> >>> Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2010 21:47:04 -0400 (EDT)
> >>> To:
> >>> Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Hi Scott,
> >>>
> >>> In many ways the RV 7 kits are the best kits in the world.
Fantastic fit,
> >>> instructions, factory support, third party support, options,
resale value and
> >>> much more. But they are not the best aircraft. They are little
more than a
> >>> kit of 1960's designs like the Grummans or others. Compared to a
more modern
> >>> composite aircraft they really are not all that good of
performers. They tend
> >>> to be slower (for a given engine and stall speed), have less
useful load and
> >>> even with being a great kit they still tend to cost a fair amount
to finish
> >>> and take a fair amount of time. Most of the RV 7s are over 1200
lbs empty
> >>> weight! I think even your big engine IFR TR1 is well under 1000
lbs. Or was
> >>> it well under 900 lbs?
> >>>
> >>> I know being part of the RV club has it's own draw but I think
your plane is a
> >>> much better choice. Yes there are problems with the TR1. But at
least the
> >>> wings tend to stay on.
> >>>
> >>> Mark
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>> From: Scott Stearns
> >>>> Sent: Oct 26, 2010 4:00 PM
> >>>> To: kis-list@matronics.com
> >>>> Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold
> >>>>
> >>>> An RV fastbuild kit hands down. If you build the Cruiser then
you'll have
> >>>> that RV done in a year if you buy that fastbuild and FWF kits.
> >>>>
> >>>> The lancair is a great airplane, but the cost is much higher for
the kit, the
> >>>> engine, and the RG insurance will be a lot higher. It is fast,
but the
> >>>> landing speed is much higher too. Unless you do a lot of long
range cross
> >>>> country and don't plan on flying into any shorter strips, then I
don't think
> >>>> you'll get a lot for the extra money.
> >>>>
> >>>> Also, a well built RV is pretty easy to sell. I kind of with I
would have
> >>>> built an RV.
> >>>>
> >>>> Scott
> >>>>
> >>>> --- On Mon, 10/25/10, John Petrie wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> From: John Petrie
> >>>> Subject: KIS-List: KIS Sold
> >>>> To: "KIS-List Digest Server"
> >>>> Date: Monday, October 25, 2010, 9:08 PM
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi all,
> >>>>
> >>>> It=B9s been 14 years since I received my KIS Cruiser kit and 10
years of
> >>>> successful flying. However, the idea of the 4 seats being
constantly filled
> >>>> by my family appears to be more of a dream than a reality. As a
result, I
> >>>> have just sold my plane and am now looking for a 2 place kit
which I can
> >>>> enjoy with my one son who is also passionate about aircraft. So,
I was hoping
> >>>> someone on this list could give me some useful advice on which
direction to
> >>>> follow.
> >>>> I am currently looking at either an RV7 or a Lancair 360. I
really do like
> >>>> the speed of the Lancair, but also the simplicity of the RV.
> >>>> Does anyone have any other better suggestions and advice?
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks in anticipation.
> >>>> John
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >&ghref="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?KIS-List"
target=_blank>http:/ - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS; -Matt
Dralle, List Admin=====matronics.com/Navigator?KIS-List"
target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/= - MATRONICS
sp; A href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution"
target=_blank>http://www================
======
>
>
>
>
>
> http://f= - List Contributionsp;
&bsp;-->
>
>
>
>
>
>
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 |
|
I live in Camarillo (KCMA).- I wish I would have know you were there I wo
uld have loved to see your airplane.- If you're down again let me know.
-
Scott
--- On Thu, 10/28/10, Jason Hills <jason@hills.org> wrote:
From: Jason Hills <jason@hills.org>
Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold
Rich,-
Thanks for the bit of historical color on my plane! Fun to hear a bit of it
s past.
The first few years I had the plane it was a bit tricky in the landing roll
out. At one of my annual condition inspections, my A&P suggested we replac
e the wheels, brakes and wheel pants with RV-8 parts. I picked up about 5 k
ts in speed and the plane now rolls out nice and straight/smooth on landing
, it also shortened the take-off roll a bit. We suspect the old brakes were
dragging inconsistently leading to extra drag and increased difficulty in
slowing down and staying straight.
It was fun as I flew into Camarillo to think that my plane was returning to
visit its flight test area for the first time in a long while. I barely sn
uck in the evening of Oct 2 before everything fogged up. Actually I'd been
planning on landing at Oxnard. The sun was setting and as I went over Santa
Barbara the weather was clear up ahead. A few minutes later Oxnard had gon
e IFR so I changed my destination to Camarillo. Entering the class D tower
had two of us fly non-standard patterns and land from the west as it looked
like conditions were deteriorating to the east. Not 15 minutes after landi
ng Camarillo was IFR as well. I was setup to fly an approach in if needed,
but was glad I didn't have to as I was running late to meet up with friends
, and an approach would have added a bit of extra time.-
Of course I'd been delayed due to a wall of thunderstorms from San Louis Ob
ispo to Bakersfield that afternoon. Landed at Paso Robles for an hour or so
until it looked like I could sneak down along the coast. Amazing to think
that my day had started in cruddy weather up in Seattle where I did an IFR
departure, climbed through multiple layers and over the cascades to avoid t
he crud in western washington and oregon. On to Klamath Falls, OR for lunch
and fuel, then the unplanned stop at Paso Robles. The plane would have mad
e the trip with just one fuel stop at any of Klamath Falls, Redding or Red
Bluff if the weather hadn't gotten in my way. If it hadn't been so amazingl
y hot with an inversion I'd have made even better time (it was a sweltering
75+ deg at 11,000 feet down most of eastern Oregon and California that day
, which made for higher than normal engine temps and a bit of throttling ba
ck).
The weather was IFR the whole time I was down there. Eventually I talked to
a local CFII to get a sense of what ATC was likely to ask of me and the pl
ane and made an IFR departure out of KCMA for the return trip when things w
eren't improving after lunch. Similar to what we get up in Seattle, I was c
oncerned about being to asked to fly IMC towards mountains. The CFII recomm
ended filing out the way I came in, and that worked out well, breaking out
on top around 7000 ft, soon I was GPS direct to Redding VMC the whole way.
-
These airplanes truly are magical in their ability to eat up miles. For $45
5 of 100LL I was able to fly roundtrip, avoid the hassles of commercial air
lines and the TSA, got to go on my own schedule, and was able to finally ad
d the state of California to my logbook. Vacations don't get much better th
an that for me.
...Jason
On Oct 28, 2010, at 5:36 AM, Richard Trickel wrote:
Jason
The plane was mostly built By Chuck Harrison and Steve Ruege who co own Com
posites Unlimited in Scappoose.- At the time they were long time employee
s of mine at High tech Compostes. Chuck started working for me at 17 though
-he had some experience already. We both worked together (different Dept.
) at Task Research in Santa Paula. He was my first employee and a quick lea
rner.- We are still good friends.-
The plane was built in Oxnard but test flown in Camarillo because Oxnard do
es not like test flying.- I remember it was a good flying plane but at fi
rst had some problems on the ground.- Seems to want to turn on its own..
- Really frustrated us but somehow fixed it.- It was a few years ago so
don`t rember all.- Dick kept it in at his house/airport in Florida.
Rich
Sometimes good to think about the past
--- On Wed, 10/27/10, jason@hills.org <jason@hills.org> wrote:
From: jason@hills.org <jason@hills.org>
Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold
Yeah, my understanding is it was largely built by "factory" guys. Someone e
lse has mentioned that one of the people familiar with its build may be up
in the Scappoose, OR area as well, but I've never followed up on that.
It is still yellow nose/cowling transitioning to white tail with a small bl
ue stripe(s) on the fuse and wings. The paint is showing some aging, but it
looks good from 10 feet away. It's lived in hangers most of the last 16 ye
ars I think. I'm the 4th, and I believe longest owner now (I bought in Marc
h 2005).
A few weeks ago I flew down to KCMA (from KPAE) with it. The log book has e
arly records of flying between KOXR and KCMA for some engine work. Assuming
it was test-flown somewhere down in that area.
It's a great plane. Looks good, flies well, is super economical, especially
for longer x-country travel, which is something I really enjoy.
...Jason
Oct 27, 2010 12:41:23 PM, kis-list@matronics.com wrote:
=================
JasonYea that was built mostly by chuck and Dick was fairly short so they p
ut thick seats in that also.- I think I also flew that plane.- Is it st
ill Yellow or did you paint it.RICH
--- On Wed, 10/27/10, jason@hills.org- wrote:
From: jason@hills.org
Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold
My plane was Richard Warden's tail-dragger (serial number 51 I believe), bu
t the seats are fairly thick. Worth looking into! Thanks.
...Jason
Oct 27, 2010 10:13:41 AM, kis-list@matronics.com wrote:
=================
JasonI am 6-2 and have no trouble.- I am not sure but do=B4t you have Kir
by jeffersons plane.- If so I know his seate were really fay > I did the
test flight and was scrunched pretty bad.- I would redo the seats.- Fol
low the manual and thind down the cushions.- when proper the back seat bo
tton is almost none existant.. Rich
--- On Wed, 10/27/10, Jason Hills- wrote:
From: Jason Hills
Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold
I haven't been in a Lancair 360, but I think the 235 is almost the same pla
ne. Somewhere between 235 and 360 they changed the tail to improve stall/sp
in characteristics, but I still would avoid stalls/spins in that family of
planes...
The cockpits are likely similar. Compared to the TR-1 the Lancair 235 recli
nes people more. I think that improves comfort for tall people. Width is sn
ug like the TR-1.
My biggest problem with my plane's cockpit is anyone over 6'1" or 2" just d
oesn't fit (half my friends who would like to go flying). They have to bend
their head sideways. At 6' I have to be careful what headset I use or the
band brushes the ceiling and transmits engine vibration to me. Annoying! My
Zulu works great as long as I'm left seat (right seat is 1/2" worse to cle
ar the transponder plate and fitting below the seat).
...Jason
On Oct 27, 2010, at 5:48 AM, Mark Kettering- wrote:
>
> Hi John,
>
> I think Scott answered 1 and 3.- I do not know how large the Lancair co
ckpit is.- I remember seeing a web page that listed cockpit widths someti
me ago but do not remember where.- Also width does not tell the whole sto
ry.- You really need to go and sit in them yourself to try them out for s
ize and shape.
>
> Mark
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>> From: John Petrie
>> Sent: Oct 26, 2010 10:53 PM
>> To: kis-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold
>>
>>
>> Mark,
>>
>> You make a very good argument for the TR-1. I have a few questions thoug
h:
>> 1. What do you mean by "...the wings tend to stay on"?
>> 2. How does the cockpit size compare to the Lancair?
>> 3. Is it really possible to fit an O-360 to the TR-1 and if so, what are
the
>> CG implications?
>>
>> John
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> From: Mark Kettering
>>> Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2010 21:47:04 -0400 (EDT)
>>> To:
>>> Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Scott,
>>>
>>> In many ways the RV 7 kits are the best kits in the world.- Fantastic
fit,
>>> instructions, factory support, third party support, options, resale val
ue and
>>> much more.- But they are not the best aircraft. They are little more
than a
>>> kit of 1960's designs like the Grummans or others.- Compared to a mor
e modern
>>> composite aircraft they really are not all that good of performers.-
They tend
>>> to be slower (for a given engine and stall speed), have less useful loa
d and
>>> even with being a great kit they still tend to cost a fair amount to fi
nish
>>> and take a fair amount of time.- Most of the RV 7s are over 1200 lbs
empty
>>> weight!- I think even your big engine IFR TR1 is well under 1000 lbs.
- Or was
>>> it well under 900 lbs?
>>>
>>> I know being part of the RV club has it's own draw but I think your pla
ne is a
>>> much better choice.- Yes there are problems with the TR1.- But at l
east the
>>> wings tend to stay on.
>>>
>>> Mark
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Scott Stearns
>>>> Sent: Oct 26, 2010 4:00 PM
>>>> To: kis-list@matronics.com
>>>> Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold
>>>>
>>>> An RV fastbuild kit hands down.- If you build the Cruiser then you'l
l have
>>>> that RV done in a year if you buy that fastbuild and FWF kits.
>>>>-
>>>> The lancair is a great airplane, but the cost is much higher for the k
it, the
>>>> engine, and the RG insurance will be a lot higher.- It is fast, but
the
>>>> landing speed is much higher too.- Unless you do a lot of long range
cross
>>>> country and don't plan on flying into any shorter strips, then I don't
think
>>>> you'll get a lot for the extra money.
>>>>-
>>>> Also, a well built RV is pretty easy to sell.- I kind of with I woul
d have
>>>> built an RV.-
>>>>-
>>>> Scott
>>>>
>>>> --- On Mon, 10/25/10, John Petrie- wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> From: John Petrie
>>>> Subject: KIS-List: KIS Sold
>>>> To: "KIS-List Digest Server"
>>>> Date: Monday, October 25, 2010, 9:08 PM
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> It=B9s been 14 years since I received my KIS Cruiser kit and 10 years
of
>>>> successful flying. However, the idea of the 4 seats being constantly f
illed
>>>> by my family appears to be more of a dream than a reality. As a result
, I
>>>> have just sold my plane and am now looking for a 2 place kit which I c
an
>>>> enjoy with my one son who is also passionate about aircraft. So, I was
hoping
>>>> someone on this list could give me some useful advice on which directi
on to
>>>> follow.
>>>> I am currently looking at either an RV7 or a Lancair 360. I really do
like
>>>> the speed of the Lancair, but also the simplicity of the RV.
>>>> Does anyone have any other better suggestions and advice?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks in anticipation.
>>>> John
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>&ghref="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?KIS-List" target=_blank>htt
p:/ - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS;- - - - - - ----Matt Dralle, L
ist Admin=====matronics.com/Navigator?KIS-List" target=_blank>h
ttp://www.matronics.com/=- - - - - - ---- MATRONICS sp;
- - - - - - A href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution" ta
rget=_blank>http://www=================
=====
http://f=- - - - - ---- List Contributionsp; - - -
- - - - - - - &bsp;-->
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?KIS-List">http://www.matronics.c
om/Navigator?KIS-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/con
tribution
=0A=0A=0A
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 |
|
I thought I wanted temperfoam too, but my interior guy (who does high end b
iz jets) talked me out of it.- Temper foam is like a rock when it's cold.
-
-
Scott
--- On Wed, 10/27/10, F. Tim Yoder <ftyoder@yoderbuilt.com> wrote:
From: F. Tim Yoder <ftyoder@yoderbuilt.com>
Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold
Be sure to use Temper Foam. I used 1" blue and 1" pink to get my seat as lo
w as possible and it is the best seat I ride in!
Tim
----- Original Message ----- From: <jason@hills.org>
Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2010 12:02 PM
Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold
>
> My plane was Richard Warden's tail-dragger (serial number 51 I believe),
but the seats are fairly thick. Worth looking into! Thanks.
>
> ...Jason
>
>
> Oct 27, 2010 10:13:41 AM, kis-list@matronics.com wrote:
>
> ========================
==================
>
>
> JasonI am 6-2 and have no trouble.- I am not sure but do=B4t you have K
irby jeffersons plane.- If so I know his seate were really fay > I did th
e test flight and was scrunched pretty bad.- I would redo the seats.- F
ollow the manual and thind down the cushions.- when proper the back seat
botton is almost none existant.. Rich
>
> --- On Wed, 10/27/10, Jason Hills- wrote:
>
> From: Jason Hills
> Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold
> To: "kis-list@matronics.com"
> Date: Wednesday, October 27, 2010, 3:57 PM
>
>
> I haven't been in a Lancair 360, but I think the 235 is almost the same p
lane. Somewhere between 235 and 360 they changed the tail to improve stall/
spin characteristics, but I still would avoid stalls/spins in that family o
f planes...
>
> The cockpits are likely similar. Compared to the TR-1 the Lancair 235 rec
lines people more. I think that improves comfort for tall people. Width is
snug like the TR-1.
>
> My biggest problem with my plane's cockpit is anyone over 6'1" or 2" just
doesn't fit (half my friends who would like to go flying). They have to be
nd their head sideways. At 6' I have to be careful what headset I use or th
e band brushes the ceiling and transmits engine vibration to me. Annoying!
My Zulu works great as long as I'm left seat (right seat is 1/2" worse to c
lear the transponder plate and fitting below the seat).
>
> ...Jason
>
>
> On Oct 27, 2010, at 5:48 AM, Mark Kettering- wrote:
>
>>
>> Hi John,
>>
>> I think Scott answered 1 and 3.- I do not know how large the Lancair c
ockpit is.- I remember seeing a web page that listed cockpit widths somet
ime ago but do not remember where.- Also width does not tell the whole st
ory.- You really need to go and sit in them yourself to try them out for
size and shape.
>>
>> Mark
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: John Petrie
>>> Sent: Oct 26, 2010 10:53 PM
>>> To: kis-list@matronics.com
>>> Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold
>>>
>>>
>>> Mark,
>>>
>>> You make a very good argument for the TR-1. I have a few questions thou
gh:
>>> 1. What do you mean by "...the wings tend to stay on"?
>>> 2. How does the cockpit size compare to the Lancair?
>>> 3. Is it really possible to fit an O-360 to the TR-1 and if so, what ar
e the
>>> CG implications?
>>>
>>> John
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> From: Mark Kettering
>>>> Reply-To:
>>>> Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2010 21:47:04 -0400 (EDT)
>>>> To:
>>>> Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hi Scott,
>>>>
>>>> In many ways the RV 7 kits are the best kits in the world.- Fantasti
c fit,
>>>> instructions, factory support, third party support, options, resale va
lue and
>>>> much more.- But they are not the best aircraft. They are little more
than a
>>>> kit of 1960's designs like the Grummans or others.- Compared to a mo
re modern
>>>> composite aircraft they really are not all that good of performers. Th
ey tend
>>>> to be slower (for a given engine and stall speed), have less useful lo
ad and
>>>> even with being a great kit they still tend to cost a fair amount to f
inish
>>>> and take a fair amount of time.- Most of the RV 7s are over 1200 lbs
empty
>>>> weight!- I think even your big engine IFR TR1 is well under 1000 lbs
. Or was
>>>> it well under 900 lbs?
>>>>
>>>> I know being part of the RV club has it's own draw but I think your pl
ane is a
>>>> much better choice.- Yes there are problems with the TR1.- But at
least the
>>>> wings tend to stay on.
>>>>
>>>> Mark
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: Scott Stearns
>>>>> Sent: Oct 26, 2010 4:00 PM
>>>>> To: kis-list@matronics.com
>>>>> Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold
>>>>>
>>>>> An RV fastbuild kit hands down.- If you build the Cruiser then you'
ll have
>>>>> that RV done in a year if you buy that fastbuild and FWF kits.
>>>>>
>>>>> The lancair is a great airplane, but the cost is much higher for the
kit, the
>>>>> engine, and the RG insurance will be a lot higher.- It is fast, but
the
>>>>> landing speed is much higher too.- Unless you do a lot of long rang
e cross
>>>>> country and don't plan on flying into any shorter strips, then I don'
t think
>>>>> you'll get a lot for the extra money.
>>>>>
>>>>> Also, a well built RV is pretty easy to sell.- I kind of with I wou
ld have
>>>>> built an RV.
>>>>>
>>>>> Scott
>>>>>
>>>>> --- On Mon, 10/25/10, John Petrie- wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> From: John Petrie
>>>>> Subject: KIS-List: KIS Sold
>>>>> To: "KIS-List Digest Server"
>>>>> Date: Monday, October 25, 2010, 9:08 PM
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> It=B9s been 14 years since I received my KIS Cruiser kit and 10 years
of
>>>>> successful flying. However, the idea of the 4 seats being constantly
filled
>>>>> by my family appears to be more of a dream than a reality. As a resul
t, I
>>>>> have just sold my plane and am now looking for a 2 place kit which I
can
>>>>> enjoy with my one son who is also passionate about aircraft. So, I wa
s hoping
>>>>> someone on this list could give me some useful advice on which direct
ion to
>>>>> follow.
>>>>> I am currently looking at either an RV7 or a Lancair 360. I really do
like
>>>>> the speed of the Lancair, but also the simplicity of the RV.
>>>>> Does anyone have any other better suggestions and advice?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks in anticipation.
>>>>> John
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> &ghref="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?KIS-List" target=_blank>h
ttp:/ - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS;- - - - - - ----Matt Dralle,
List Admin=========
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
le, List Admin.
=0A=0A=0A
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: | landing gear material |
Mainly for Rich and Mark...
-
Is there any chance my landing gear is not 7075?- I sent to to grove to h
ave the camber corrected (it's 8 degrees off on each wheel) and they are go
ing to anneal and heat teat it, but they said if it's not 7075 the heat tre
ating will ruin the gear.- I told them I was 99% sure it was 7075.
-
Thanks,
Scott
--- On Thu, 10/28/10, Richard Trickel <richard_trickel@yahoo.com> wrote:
From: Richard Trickel <richard_trickel@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold
Jason
The plane was mostly built By Chuck Harrison and Steve Ruege who co own Com
posites Unlimited in Scappoose.- At the time they were long time employee
s of mine at High tech Compostes. Chuck started working for me at 17 though
-he had some experience already. We both worked together (different Dept.
) at Task Research in Santa Paula. He was my first employee and a quick lea
rner.- We are still good friends.-
The plane was built in Oxnard but test flown in Camarillo because Oxnard do
es not like test flying.- I remember it was a good flying plane but at fi
rst had some problems on the ground.- Seems to want to turn on its own..
- Really frustrated us but somehow fixed it.- It was a few years ago so
don`t rember all.- Dick kept it in at his house/airport in Florida.
Rich
Sometimes good to think about the past
--- On Wed, 10/27/10, jason@hills.org <jason@hills.org> wrote:
From: jason@hills.org <jason@hills.org>
Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold
Yeah, my understanding is it was largely built by "factory" guys. Someone e
lse has mentioned that one of the people familiar with its build may be up
in the Scappoose, OR area as well, but I've never followed up on that.
It is still yellow nose/cowling transitioning to white tail with a small bl
ue stripe(s) on the fuse and wings. The paint is showing some aging, but it
looks good from 10 feet away. It's lived in hangers most of the last 16 ye
ars I think. I'm the 4th, and I believe longest owner now (I bought in Marc
h 2005).
A few weeks ago I flew down to KCMA (from KPAE) with it. The log book has e
arly records of flying between KOXR and KCMA for some engine work. Assuming
it was test-flown somewhere down in that area.
It's a great plane. Looks good, flies well, is super economical, especially
for longer x-country travel, which is something I really enjoy.
...Jason
Oct 27, 2010 12:41:23 PM, kis-list@matronics.com wrote:
=================
JasonYea that was built mostly by chuck and Dick was fairly short so they p
ut thick seats in that also.- I think I also flew that plane.- Is it st
ill Yellow or did you paint it.RICH
--- On Wed, 10/27/10, jason@hills.org- wrote:
From: jason@hills.org
Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold
My plane was Richard Warden's tail-dragger (serial number 51 I believe), bu
t the seats are fairly thick. Worth looking into! Thanks.
...Jason
Oct 27, 2010 10:13:41 AM, kis-list@matronics.com wrote:
=================
JasonI am 6-2 and have no trouble.- I am not sure but do=B4t you have Kir
by jeffersons plane.- If so I know his seate were really fay > I did the
test flight and was scrunched pretty bad.- I would redo the seats.- Fol
low the manual and thind down the cushions.- when proper the back seat bo
tton is almost none existant.. Rich
--- On Wed, 10/27/10, Jason Hills- wrote:
From: Jason Hills
Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold
I haven't been in a Lancair 360, but I think the 235 is almost the same pla
ne. Somewhere between 235 and 360 they changed the tail to improve stall/sp
in characteristics, but I still would avoid stalls/spins in that family of
planes...
The cockpits are likely similar. Compared to the TR-1 the Lancair 235 recli
nes people more. I think that improves comfort for tall people. Width is sn
ug like the TR-1.
My biggest problem with my plane's cockpit is anyone over 6'1" or 2" just d
oesn't fit (half my friends who would like to go flying). They have to bend
their head sideways. At 6' I have to be careful what headset I use or the
band brushes the ceiling and transmits engine vibration to me. Annoying! My
Zulu works great as long as I'm left seat (right seat is 1/2" worse to cle
ar the transponder plate and fitting below the seat).
...Jason
On Oct 27, 2010, at 5:48 AM, Mark Kettering- wrote:
>
> Hi John,
>
> I think Scott answered 1 and 3.- I do not know how large the Lancair co
ckpit is.- I remember seeing a web page that listed cockpit widths someti
me ago but do not remember where.- Also width does not tell the whole sto
ry.- You really need to go and sit in them yourself to try them out for s
ize and shape.
>
> Mark
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>> From: John Petrie
>> Sent: Oct 26, 2010 10:53 PM
>> To: kis-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold
>>
>>
>> Mark,
>>
>> You make a very good argument for the TR-1. I have a few questions thoug
h:
>> 1. What do you mean by "...the wings tend to stay on"?
>> 2. How does the cockpit size compare to the Lancair?
>> 3. Is it really possible to fit an O-360 to the TR-1 and if so, what are
the
>> CG implications?
>>
>> John
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> From: Mark Kettering
>>> Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2010 21:47:04 -0400 (EDT)
>>> To:
>>> Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Scott,
>>>
>>> In many ways the RV 7 kits are the best kits in the world.- Fantastic
fit,
>>> instructions, factory support, third party support, options, resale val
ue and
>>> much more.- But they are not the best aircraft. They are little more
than a
>>> kit of 1960's designs like the Grummans or others.- Compared to a mor
e modern
>>> composite aircraft they really are not all that good of performers.-
They tend
>>> to be slower (for a given engine and stall speed), have less useful loa
d and
>>> even with being a great kit they still tend to cost a fair amount to fi
nish
>>> and take a fair amount of time.- Most of the RV 7s are over 1200 lbs
empty
>>> weight!- I think even your big engine IFR TR1 is well under 1000 lbs.
- Or was
>>> it well under 900 lbs?
>>>
>>> I know being part of the RV club has it's own draw but I think your pla
ne is a
>>> much better choice.- Yes there are problems with the TR1.- But at l
east the
>>> wings tend to stay on.
>>>
>>> Mark
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Scott Stearns
>>>> Sent: Oct 26, 2010 4:00 PM
>>>> To: kis-list@matronics.com
>>>> Subject: Re: KIS-List: KIS Sold
>>>>
>>>> An RV fastbuild kit hands down.- If you build the Cruiser then you'l
l have
>>>> that RV done in a year if you buy that fastbuild and FWF kits.
>>>>-
>>>> The lancair is a great airplane, but the cost is much higher for the k
it, the
>>>> engine, and the RG insurance will be a lot higher.- It is fast, but
the
>>>> landing speed is much higher too.- Unless you do a lot of long range
cross
>>>> country and don't plan on flying into any shorter strips, then I don't
think
>>>> you'll get a lot for the extra money.
>>>>-
>>>> Also, a well built RV is pretty easy to sell.- I kind of with I woul
d have
>>>> built an RV.-
>>>>-
>>>> Scott
>>>>
>>>> --- On Mon, 10/25/10, John Petrie- wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> From: John Petrie
>>>> Subject: KIS-List: KIS Sold
>>>> To: "KIS-List Digest Server"
>>>> Date: Monday, October 25, 2010, 9:08 PM
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> It=B9s been 14 years since I received my KIS Cruiser kit and 10 years
of
>>>> successful flying. However, the idea of the 4 seats being constantly f
illed
>>>> by my family appears to be more of a dream than a reality. As a result
, I
>>>> have just sold my plane and am now looking for a 2 place kit which I c
an
>>>> enjoy with my one son who is also passionate about aircraft. So, I was
hoping
>>>> someone on this list could give me some useful advice on which directi
on to
>>>> follow.
>>>> I am currently looking at either an RV7 or a Lancair 360. I really do
like
>>>> the speed of the Lancair, but also the simplicity of the RV.
>>>> Does anyone have any other better suggestions and advice?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks in anticipation.
>>>> John
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>&ghref="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?KIS-List" target=_blank>htt
p:/ - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS;- - - - - - ----Matt Dralle, L
ist Admin=====matronics.com/Navigator?KIS-List" target=_blank>h
ttp://www.matronics.com/=- - - - - - ---- MATRONICS sp;
- - - - - - A href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution" ta
rget=_blank>http://www=================
=====
http://f=- - - - - ---- List Contributionsp; - - -
- - - - - - - &bsp;-->
=0A=0A=0A
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! --
|