---------------------------------------------------------- RV-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Thu 03/13/08: 15 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 05:32 AM - Re: Nuclear Energy (glen matejcek) 2. 07:09 AM - Re: Re: Nuclear Energy (Chuck Jensen) 3. 10:57 AM - Re: Death of the RV-12] (bert murillo) 4. 10:58 AM - Altrac... best price? (bert murillo) 5. 11:53 AM - Re: Death of the RV-12] (Sam Buchanan) 6. 12:50 PM - Re: Death of the RV-12] (John Jessen) 7. 01:41 PM - Re: Re: Death of the RV-12] (ptrotter@optonline.net) 8. 01:41 PM - Re: Death of the RV-12] (Sam Buchanan) 9. 02:04 PM - autopilots (linn Walters) 10. 02:14 PM - Re: Death of the RV-12] (Sam Buchanan) 11. 02:45 PM - Re: autopilots (Sam Buchanan) 12. 03:11 PM - Re: Death of the RV-12] (Paul Trotter) 13. 04:07 PM - Please change the subject line (Was Re: Death of the RV-12] (Ron Lee) 14. 04:31 PM - Re: Please change the subject line (Was Re: Death of the RV-12] (John Jessen) 15. 06:30 PM - Re: Nuclear Energy (Sherman Butler) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 05:32:32 AM PST US From: "glen matejcek" Subject: RV-List: RE: Nuclear Energy A couple quick points- first, as I understand it, there is now and has been for some time tritium in the Columbia river. This is apparently from the Navy's ship borne reactor graveyard. Not a direct correlation to the civil power industry, but an example of a permanent, highly toxic waste leak that wasn't supposed to happen, and won't get better by itself. Second, according to a friend who gave up nuclear power for professional aviation (okay; so his judgement isn't always so hot....) the biggest single real issue with nuclear power is the hydrogen embrittlement of the basic structure and plumbing of the equipment. It will all have to be replaced sooner or later, and what do you do with the scrap? I'm all for reasonable green and self sufficiency, but what does that mean? As ever, do not archive this drivel. glen matejcek aerobubba@earthlink.net ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 07:09:40 AM PST US Subject: RE: RV-List: RE: Nuclear Energy From: "Chuck Jensen" Hi, Glen, As Jerry Isler pointed out...don't confuse commercial nuclear power with Government weapons programs. The weapons programs (DOE/DOD) have been a mess and environmental-pig virtually since day one, though they are doing much better recently. In contrast, the Commercial Nuclear program is run to an altogether different standard. Though every industrial process is subject to environmental mishaps, they are few and far between for the commercial nuclear industry. Nuclear power plants, particularly pressurized water reactors (PWR) all produce tritium (hydrogen atom with extra proton) that you mentioned. However, to call tritium permanent and highly toxic is mistaken on all accounts. With a half-life of 12 years, tritium decays away rapidly which is the reason the Government keeps wanting to replenish its supply for warheads. As to it being highly toxic, this is simply not so. The beta radiation given off by tritium will not penetrate a piece of paper or your skin. It is only of interest when ingested. Even then, being water based, it is rapidly excreted from the body...especially if you help it along with a six-pack. As far as hydrogen embrittlement, it was thought to be a problem but turned out to be only a "theoretical" problem. A plant in the U.S. and two in Wales (Trawsfynydd) were shut down and the reactor vessel side walls in the vicinity of the highest flux area of the reactor, was cored and the stainless steel tested. There was no embrittlement, at least none that affected the integrity of reactor vessel. The piping in a nuclear plant will not become embrittled from neutron bombardment because there are no neutrons anywhere but in the reactor vessel. So, reactor embrittlement, like tritium, sound pretty ominous, but neither are of consequence to the safety of the plant or public. Now, if you would like to discuss the environmental safety of the DOE sites (Oak Ridge, Hanford, Savannah River, et al), that's an altogether different animal, but has nothing to do with commercial nuclear power used to produce electricity, so please don't confuse the two. If given the choice to live 10 miles down wind of a coal fired plant or a nuclear plant, the nuclear plant is the choice by a landslide. The coal fired plant actually emits more radiation than a nuclear plant because of the natural radioisotopes in coal that are continuously emitted into the air, along with sulfur, particulates and a potpourri of other chemicals. Nuclear is represented to be clean for a reason! Chuck Jensen -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of glen matejcek Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2008 7:29 AM Subject: RV-List: RE: Nuclear Energy A couple quick points- first, as I understand it, there is now and has been for some time tritium in the Columbia river. This is apparently from the Navy's ship borne reactor graveyard. Not a direct correlation to the civil power industry, but an example of a permanent, highly toxic waste leak that wasn't supposed to happen, and won't get better by itself. Second, according to a friend who gave up nuclear power for professional aviation (okay; so his judgement isn't always so hot....) the biggest single real issue with nuclear power is the hydrogen embrittlement of the basic structure and plumbing of the equipment. It will all have to be replaced sooner or later, and what do you do with the scrap? I'm all for reasonable green and self sufficiency, but what does that mean? As ever, do not archive this drivel. glen matejcek aerobubba@earthlink.net ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 10:57:02 AM PST US From: bert murillo Subject: Re: RV-List: Death of the RV-12] Sam: I also read the article, and agreed with you.. I intend to write to the FAA on this, using Van's suggestion, at the address given.. ;Hope every one will do so.. On anotehr topic, I believe you have the Altrac.. unit on your plane (planes?) Are yu happy with the unit? suggestions? and finally, are you aware of place to buy it, at better price than todays ...kind of steep for me...2 years ago was $1,200, now over 1,600 so every minute I wasit will cost me another $100..... thanks,, Bert rlv6a --- Sam Buchanan wrote: > > > jhstarn@verizon.net wrote: > > > > > Subject: Death of the RV-12 > > > > If you have not yet read the the RVator on line > you should. The 51% > > rule, quickbuild kits and the REAL fate of the > RV-12 are in the > > balance. Van attempts to put on a "happy face" > about the FAA latest > > train wreck but if you read pages 3 thru 7 you get > a clearer picture. > > To me it reads as step number one in getting rid > of the 51% violators > > by eliminating everyone involved, including those > who play by the > > rules. RV-12 ? ?, now only to be built as a > "clone". No choice of > > engines, radios, gauges or seat belts AND no > repairmans certificate > > either. You get one ONLY by attending the classes. > I guess I'll take > > the class so I can qualify IF & WHEN I build > another airplane. Where > > did I put all that stuff I had on the S-19 and > 601XL ? KABONG > > > Let's not be too hasty to sign the death warrant of > the amateur-built > RV-12. ;-) > > Vans is in a holding pattern until the FAA gets > their act together and > releases the new evaluation process of the 51% rule. > Until that new > process is released, Vans has no choice other than > to offer the RV-12 as > a S-LSA since at this point in time......there is no > way for ANYONE to > get a new kit classified as experimental amateur > built. As soon as the > FAA releases the new process, you can rest assured > Vans will make a > serious effort to offer an E-AB RV-12. > > The concern is the FAA may make the new evaluation > process so > restrictive that it will be difficult to classify a > kit that is as > advanced as the RV-12 as experimental amateur built. > Nobody knows at > this point how this will play out. But even if Vans > can't achieve this > goal, an individual builder could register an RV-12 > as E-AB provided he > can demonstrate to a DAR that he built as least 51% > of the plane, and > provided Vans offers the RV-12 as an E-AB kit. > > We need to sit tight while this matter is resolved > and not panic...yet. > > There was an interesting article in one of the > Oregon newspapers about > how the FAA had bungled this process by not > considering the impact on > some of Oregon's aircraft revenue (Lancair and > Epic). > > http://tinyurl.com/3a85ch > > The article states that the FAA may be taking an > expedited look at this > situation with the intent of clarifying things > somewhat. > > But......we're talking about the FAA......... > > Sam Buchanan > > > browse > Un/Subscription, > FAQ, > > Forums! > > Admin. > > > > > Looking for last minute shopping deals? ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 10:58:54 AM PST US From: bert murillo Subject: RV-List: Altrac... best price? Hi: Would appreciate any suggestions on buying the Altrac unit,for best price.... It seems it goes up by the minute,,, what a rip-off but we do better than the other guys.... thanks bert rv6a do not archive Looking for last minute shopping deals? ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 11:53:08 AM PST US From: Sam Buchanan Subject: Re: RV-List: Death of the RV-12] Bert, I used to fly the AlTrak but switched a couple of years ago to the Trio EZ-Hold. You probably won't be able to beat TruTrak's price on the AlTrak. The AlTrak works fine and is a stone-simple unit. If you want a device with more features you might look at the Trio line, but they will be more $$$$$'s. I doubt the AlTrak has ever been $1200. Sam =============== bert murillo wrote: > > Sam: > > I also read the article, and agreed with you.. > > I intend to write to the FAA on this, using Van's > suggestion, at the address given.. ;Hope every one > will do so.. > > On anotehr topic, I believe you have the Altrac.. > unit on your plane (planes?) > > Are yu happy with the unit? suggestions? and finally, > are you aware of place to buy it, at better price > than todays ...kind of steep for me...2 years ago > was $1,200, now over 1,600 so every minute I wasit > will cost me another $100..... > > thanks,, > > Bert > rlv6a ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 12:50:00 PM PST US Subject: RE: RV-List: Death of the RV-12] From: John Jessen Sam, why did you go the Trio route? I've looked at both TT and Trio to get a two axis solution. The Trio makes you cut two holes in your panel, which is somewhat a bummer. Is there some compelling reason for one over the other? You hear more about TT than Trio, of course. John -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Sam Buchanan Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2008 11:49 AM Subject: Re: RV-List: Death of the RV-12] Bert, I used to fly the AlTrak but switched a couple of years ago to the Trio EZ-Hold. You probably won't be able to beat TruTrak's price on the AlTrak. The AlTrak works fine and is a stone-simple unit. If you want a device with more features you might look at the Trio line, but they will be more $$$$$'s. I doubt the AlTrak has ever been $1200. Sam =============== bert murillo wrote: > > Sam: > > I also read the article, and agreed with you.. > > I intend to write to the FAA on this, using Van's suggestion, at the > address given.. ;Hope every one will do so.. > > On anotehr topic, I believe you have the Altrac.. > unit on your plane (planes?) > > Are yu happy with the unit? suggestions? and finally, are you aware of > place to buy it, at better price than todays ...kind of steep for > me...2 years ago was $1,200, now over 1,600 so every minute I wasit > will cost me another $100..... > > thanks,, > > Bert > rlv6a ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 01:41:04 PM PST US From: ptrotter@optonline.net Subject: Re: RE: RV-List: Death of the RV-12] John, I expect Trio will come out wiht a single unit dual axis system in the not too distant future. Paul ----- Original Message ----- From: John Jessen Subject: RE: RV-List: Death of the RV-12] > > Sam, why did you go the Trio route? I've looked at both TT and > Trio to get > a two axis solution. The Trio makes you cut two holes in your > panel, which > is somewhat a bummer. Is there some compelling reason for one > over the > other? You hear more about TT than Trio, of course. > > John > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Sam Buchanan > Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2008 11:49 AM > To: rv-list@matronics.com > Subject: Re: RV-List: Death of the RV-12] > > > Bert, > > I used to fly the AlTrak but switched a couple of years ago to > the Trio > EZ-Hold. You probably won't be able to beat TruTrak's price on > the AlTrak. > The AlTrak works fine and is a stone-simple unit. If you want a > device with > more features you might look at the Trio line, but they will be more > $$$$$'s. > > I doubt the AlTrak has ever been $1200. > > Sam > > =============== > > bert murillo wrote: > > > > Sam: > > > > I also read the article, and agreed with you.. > > > > I intend to write to the FAA on this, using Van's suggestion, > at the > > address given.. ;Hope every one will do so.. > > > > On anotehr topic, I believe you have the Altrac.. > > unit on your plane (planes?) > > > > Are yu happy with the unit? suggestions? and finally, are you > aware of > > place to buy it, at better price than todays ...kind of steep > for > > me...2 years ago was $1,200, now over 1,600 so every minute I > wasit > > will cost me another $100..... > > > > thanks,, > > > > Bert > > rlv6a > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 01:41:23 PM PST US From: Sam Buchanan Subject: Re: RV-List: Death of the RV-12] John Jessen wrote: > > Sam, why did you go the Trio route? I've looked at both TT and Trio to get > a two axis solution. The Trio makes you cut two holes in your panel, which > is somewhat a bummer. Is there some compelling reason for one over the > other? You hear more about TT than Trio, of course. > > John John, selecting an autopilot hinges on many variables as I'm sure you have found. My path to Trio equipment has been a process of evolution, not one giant leap. My first transition to an EZ-Pilot was facilitated by the way I could use the Navaid servo already installed in the plane. That and the fact the EZ-Pilot was light-years ahead of the Navaid made it a simple choice. When the EZ-Hold came available, I was ready for another upgrade, once again because it had far more capability than the AlTrak. Having two separate devices wasn't a problem for me since that it has always been that way with my panel. I have come to know the Trio guys personally and they are a top-notch operation, not only in technical savvy but in business and support matters. I can't imagine a company being more ethical in dealing with customers than Trio. There are other good vendors, but my experience with Trio has been superb. TruTrak is also a good vendor, and the AlTrak worked fine in my plane. My transition to Trio was a combination of my circumstances and timing. Your situation may lead you in different direction, depending on the mission profile of your plane and what you want to accomplish with your autopilot installation. Download the user manuals, do your homework, make the final decision, and enjoy whichever systems works best for you. :-) Sam Buchanan ================= ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 02:04:01 PM PST US From: linn Walters Subject: RV-List: autopilots Sam Buchanan wrote: snip > > TruTrak is also a good vendor, and the AlTrak worked fine in my plane. > My transition to Trio was a combination of my circumstances and timing. Would you be so kind as to elaborate? > Download the user manuals, do your homework, make the final decision, > and enjoy whichever systems works best for you. :-) All autopilots do the same thing. HOW they do it makes the difference between a 'good' and 'bad' autopilot. So, without trying each and everyone of them ..... what criteria can I glean from the user manuals???? I'll be looking for a 3-axis ..... and so far as I can figure it out ..... the bottom line is who likes what .... but they seldom say WHY ..... which makes me think it's all subjective. there must be something out there to differentiate between manufacturers. Linn ..... totally confused about the pricey stuff!! do not archive > > > Sam Buchanan ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 02:14:15 PM PST US From: Sam Buchanan Subject: Re: RV-List: Death of the RV-12] ptrotter@optonline.net wrote: > John, > > I expect Trio will come out wiht a single unit dual axis system in > the not too distant future. I think that is a safe statement to make. :-) As with all things pertaining to avionics, it is best to defer major purchases until the absolute latest time possible....new toys appearing all the time. Sam Buchanan ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 02:45:06 PM PST US From: Sam Buchanan Subject: Re: RV-List: autopilots linn Walters wrote: > > Sam Buchanan wrote: > snip > >> >> TruTrak is also a good vendor, and the AlTrak worked fine in my plane. >> My transition to Trio was a combination of my circumstances and timing. > > Would you be so kind as to elaborate? Well....I thought the first part of my post explained my circumstances. > >> Download the user manuals, do your homework, make the final decision, >> and enjoy whichever systems works best for you. :-) > > All autopilots do the same thing. HOW they do it makes the difference > between a 'good' and 'bad' autopilot. So, without trying each and > everyone of them ..... what criteria can I glean from the user > manuals???? I'll be looking for a 3-axis ..... and so far as I can > figure it out ..... the bottom line is who likes what .... but they > seldom say WHY ..... which makes me think it's all subjective. there > must be something out there to differentiate between manufacturers. > Linn ..... totally confused about the pricey stuff!! It is my opinion you cannot make an informed choice about autopilots (or any other complex component of your panel) without nailing down the mission profile of your plane. To make it even more complex, these days many of the expensive bits and pieces in the panel need to integrate and/or talk to each other. So not only do you need to decide which equipment will satisfy the needs of our flying, it behooves us to figure out how to end up with a panel where all the parts can work together to create a greater whole rather than being a collection of unsocial parts. :-) And I, or anyone else, can't make these decisions for somebody else because I probably have different expectations than other builders. We are blessed with having digital equipment from several vendors that works like a charm. It is unlikely you will end up with a "bad" autopilot if you do a modest amount of research. But which will work *best* for your plane? Ya gotta do your homework, and that means downloading manuals and spec sheets and seeing which systems best meet your budgetary and mission profile needs. A VFR pilot will be happy with a far simpler autopilot than the pilot who is going to be stuffing his plane into nasty weather and wants to be able to shoot every approach on autopilot the IFR system can possibly throw at him. The builder facing real budgetary constraints will have very different needs than the builder with a bottomless pocket. So....you gotta know what you want to do with the plane.....or do as some builders do, throw the most complicated, expensive toys they can find into the project. But if that builder is a VFR pilot, more than likely they are going to be quite unhappy with the complexity of their panel. Or even worse....the panel will result in an unsafe combination of aircraft and pilot (reference the tragic loss of an RV-10 earlier this year). Linn, don't know if I've cleared or muddied the water, but now you know why I said what I did. :-) Sam Buchanan ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 03:11:48 PM PST US From: Paul Trotter Subject: Re: RV-List: Death of the RV-12] It wouldn't surprise me to see something at either Sun 'N Fun or Oshkosh. Paul Sam Buchanan wrote: > > ptrotter@optonline.net wrote: >> John, >> >> I expect Trio will come out wiht a single unit dual axis system in >> the not too distant future. > > I think that is a safe statement to make. :-) > > As with all things pertaining to avionics, it is best to defer major > purchases until the absolute latest time possible....new toys > appearing all the time. > > Sam Buchanan > > ________________________________ Message 13 ____________________________________ Time: 04:07:41 PM PST US From: "Ron Lee" Subject: Please change the subject line (Was Re: RV-List: Death of the RV-12] Do not archive ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Jessen" Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2008 1:43 PM Subject: RE: RV-List: Death of the RV-12] > > Sam, why did you go the Trio route? I've looked at both TT and Trio to > get > a two axis solution. The Trio makes you cut two holes in your panel, > which > is somewhat a bummer. Is there some compelling reason for one over the > other? You hear more about TT than Trio, of course. > > John > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Sam Buchanan > Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2008 11:49 AM > To: rv-list@matronics.com > Subject: Re: RV-List: Death of the RV-12] > > > Bert, > > I used to fly the AlTrak but switched a couple of years ago to the Trio > EZ-Hold. You probably won't be able to beat TruTrak's price on the AlTrak. > The AlTrak works fine and is a stone-simple unit. If you want a device > with > more features you might look at the Trio line, but they will be more > $$$$$'s. > > I doubt the AlTrak has ever been $1200. > > Sam > > =============== > > bert murillo wrote: >> >> Sam: >> >> I also read the article, and agreed with you.. >> >> I intend to write to the FAA on this, using Van's suggestion, at the >> address given.. ;Hope every one will do so.. >> >> On anotehr topic, I believe you have the Altrac.. >> unit on your plane (planes?) >> >> Are yu happy with the unit? suggestions? and finally, are you aware of >> place to buy it, at better price than todays ...kind of steep for >> me...2 years ago was $1,200, now over 1,600 so every minute I wasit >> will cost me another $100..... >> >> thanks,, >> >> Bert >> rlv6a > > > ________________________________ Message 14 ____________________________________ Time: 04:31:57 PM PST US Subject: RE: Please change the subject line (Was Re: RV-List: Death of the RV-12] From: John Jessen Ron, you are correct. My fault. Do not archive. -----Original Message----- From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ron Lee Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2008 4:04 PM Subject: Please change the subject line (Was Re: RV-List: Death of the RV-12] Do not archive ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Jessen" Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2008 1:43 PM Subject: RE: RV-List: Death of the RV-12] > > Sam, why did you go the Trio route? I've looked at both TT and Trio to > get > a two axis solution. The Trio makes you cut two holes in your panel, > which > is somewhat a bummer. Is there some compelling reason for one over the > other? You hear more about TT than Trio, of course. > > John > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Sam Buchanan > Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2008 11:49 AM > To: rv-list@matronics.com > Subject: Re: RV-List: Death of the RV-12] > > > Bert, > > I used to fly the AlTrak but switched a couple of years ago to the Trio > EZ-Hold. You probably won't be able to beat TruTrak's price on the AlTrak. > The AlTrak works fine and is a stone-simple unit. If you want a device > with > more features you might look at the Trio line, but they will be more > $$$$$'s. > > I doubt the AlTrak has ever been $1200. > > Sam > > =============== > > bert murillo wrote: >> >> Sam: >> >> I also read the article, and agreed with you.. >> >> I intend to write to the FAA on this, using Van's suggestion, at the >> address given.. ;Hope every one will do so.. >> >> On anotehr topic, I believe you have the Altrac.. >> unit on your plane (planes?) >> >> Are yu happy with the unit? suggestions? and finally, are you aware of >> place to buy it, at better price than todays ...kind of steep for >> me...2 years ago was $1,200, now over 1,600 so every minute I wasit >> will cost me another $100..... >> >> thanks,, >> >> Bert >> rlv6a > > > ________________________________ Message 15 ____________________________________ Time: 06:30:00 PM PST US From: Sherman Butler Subject: RE: RV-List: Nuclear Energy John, Are you aware that the White House budget proposal cuts DOE clean-up funds, including Hanford. I have seen some good work cleaning up the DOE mess during the last 8 years, but all the failures that can happen from cost-plus or fixed fee contracts occur. The contractors are for-profit companies, with executive bonuses at stake, oversight can be gotcha excessive or non-existent, and all the Dilbert office dynamics. I embarrassed some shiny shoe townie engineers, and had to move on. However, the vast majority of the people working in the DOE system are trying to do the right thing and do a good job. And each election can drasticly change the mission. I worked at Yucca Mtn in 2003, and predict it will never open. Documents that should take 40 pages took one 2" ring binder an 2- 1" adendenums. Personally, it makes more sense to me to see fuel reprocessing, and 'burn' it in a reactor, than bury it. "John W. Cox" wrote: We live downstream of Hanford. I think everyone praising Nuclear needs to sign on first to placing their "Perfect" energy source waste in their Front Yard or Back Yard and leave the Western US alone. Even Nevada residents are smart enough that no amount of money makes the waste worth it. Case Closed. Do Not archive Sherman Butler RV-7a Wings N497GS reserved Carlsbad, NM --------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Other Matronics Email List Services ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Post A New Message rv-list@matronics.com UN/SUBSCRIBE http://www.matronics.com/subscription List FAQ http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/RV-List.htm Web Forum Interface To Lists http://forums.matronics.com Matronics List Wiki http://wiki.matronics.com Full Archive Search Engine http://www.matronics.com/search 7-Day List Browse http://www.matronics.com/browse/rv-list Browse Digests http://www.matronics.com/digest/rv-list Browse Other Lists http://www.matronics.com/browse Live Online Chat! http://www.matronics.com/chat Archive Downloading http://www.matronics.com/archives Photo Share http://www.matronics.com/photoshare Other Email Lists http://www.matronics.com/emaillists Contributions http://www.matronics.com/contribution ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.