Today's Message Index:
----------------------
0. 12:11 AM - [Please Read] Why I Have A Fund Raiser... (Matt Dralle)
1. 12:51 PM - Re: fuse (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E)
2. 03:50 PM - M14P Carb (Craig Payne)
3. 05:58 PM - Re: fuse (Brian Lloyd)
4. 05:58 PM - Re: fuse (Brian Lloyd)
5. 07:43 PM - Re: Yak'in Cross Country (netmaster15@juno.com)
Message 0
| 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: | [Please Read] Why I Have A Fund Raiser... |
Dear Listers,
Each year I like to explain why I have a Fund Raiser and also take the opportunity
to express why I think the List Services here provide a superior experience
over the commercial equivalents.
I use the List Fund Raiser each year to offset the costs involved with running
a high performance email list site such as this one. With the annual support from
the List members through the PBS-like Fund Raiser, I have found I can run
the entire site without having to inflect any of the members with those annoying
banner ads flashing up all the time trying to sell little-blue-pills or other
garbage nobody wants or needs. From the comments I've received over the years
regarding the Lists, the great majority of the members really appreciate the
non-commercialism of my List systems and don't mind my 'go-team-go' banter once
a year during November to encourage members to support the Lists.
I believe that the Lists services that I provide here offer many benefits over
the commercial equivalents in a number of ways. The first feature I believe to
be significant is that you cannot receive a computer v*rus from any of these
Lists directly. Each incoming message is filtered and dangerous attachments stripped
off prior to posting. I also provide a Photo and File Share feature that
allows members to share files and bitmaps with other members and everyone can
be assured that these files will be prescanned for any sort of v*rus before
they are posted. More recently, I have enabled limited posting of a number of
file formats including pictures and PDFs.
Another very important feature of this system in my opinion is the extensive List
Archives that are available for download, browsing, and searching. The Archives
go all the way back to the very beginning of each List and with the very
fast Search Engine, the huge size of some of the Archives is a non-issue in quickly
finding the data you're looking for.
And added just a couple of years ago is the new Email List Forum that allows members who prefer the Web BBS-style of List interaction. The beauty of the new List Forums is that they contain the exact same content that is distributed via email. Messages posted via email are cross-posted to the respective Forum and vice versa. The Forums also allow for another convenient method of sharing pictures and other files (http://forums.matronics.com ). Additionally, added recently is the List Wiki that allows members to build their own "Online List Encyclopedia" of sorts, documenting various aspects of their project for all to share ( http://wiki.matronics.com ).
I've been running email Lists and services under the matronics.com domain since
about 1989 starting with RV-List and 30 guys I knew and who where also building
RVs. It has grown into nearly 70 different aviation-related Email Lists and
an associated web site that receives over 34,000,000 hits each year!! Additionally,
the List Email system forwarded well over 77,000 postings last year, accounting
for an unbelievable 33,000,000 (yes, that's 33 MILLION) email messages
delivered to Matronics List subscribers! I think there's a lot of value in supporting
a service that has gone the long haul and is still providing and improving
a high quality service all _without any advertising budget_!
I have to admit running these Lists is a labor of love and I hope it shows in the
quality of the experience that you receive when you get a List Email Message,
Search the Archives, use the List Browser, or surf the Forums and Wiki sites.
The Lists will be here for a long time to come. If you just want to lurk a
while for free, that's great and I encourage you to do so. If you use, appreciate,
and receive value from these Lists, then please support them during the Annual
List Fund Raiser!
List Contribution Web Site:
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Thank you,
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Administrator
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 |
|
And for some reason the Russians put big fuses in the main electrical panel, and
then used switched circuit breakers to come off the main and feed the actual
equipment. Go figure.
And for Brian.... Just sitting here wondering what the electrical difference was
between a fusible link and an actual fuse. I guess the only real difference
is one has a holder and thus is USUALLY easy to swap out while the fusible link
requires a wire cutter and new crimps to repair? :-)
Actually most fuse holders I have seen go bad before the actual fuse ever fails!
Either corrosion attacks them, or the internal springs of some models causes
the structure to fail. This is true except for the very best types of military
models used in Govt. aircraft.
Some other things to ponder:
1. Some fuse holders are prohibited from being used in military aircraft since
they are made from PVC. Something to consider.
2. When a fusible link lets go, it means that the wire inside has MELTED. An
actual fuse has some kind of cover to protect that melting metal. A fusible link
has just the standard insulation. When using a fusible link vice a fuse,
placement of this link is critical as it is possible to achieve an open flame
for a split second when it fails. What is your view on that aspect Brian?
Mark Bitterlich
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ron Davis
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 19:57
Subject: RE: Yak-List: fuse
Fuses generally protect equipment. They come in fast-blow for electronics, slow
blow for things with a powerup surge, and normal. Wires are very tolerant of
short duration surges and are generally protected by circuit breakers
> From: brian-1927@lloyd.com
> Subject: Re: Yak-List: fuse
> Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 15:53:21 -0800
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
>
>
>
> On Nov 13, 2007, at 1:49 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point,
> MALS-14 64E wrote:
>
> > Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
> >
> > One comment. I want to replace that fuse with a circuit breaker
> > myself, but keep in mind that the "reaction time" of a fuse is
> > faster than the typical aircraft circuit breaker. Aircraft breakers
> > can easily withstand 150% of rated load for a few second before
> > blowing. Fuses react faster than that.
>
> And the issue is protecting the wiring. Go with a fusible link.
>
> --
> Brian Lloyd 3191 Western Drive
> brian HYPHEN 1927 AT lloyd DOT com Cameron Park, CA 95682
> +1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)
>
> I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
> - Antoine de Saint-Exupry
>
> PGP key ID: 12095C52A32A1B6C
> PGP key fingerprint: 3B1D BA11 4913 3254 B6E0 CC09 1209 5C52 A32A 1B6C
>
>
>
>
&======================
&g======================
>
>
>
________________________________
Connect and share in new ways with Windows Live. Connect now! <http://www.windowslive.com/connect.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_Wave2_newways_112007>
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 |
|
Interesting discussion on the M-14P carb lately. I'd like to say that *any* journeyman
mechanic, armed with the maintenance manual, should be able to properly
adjust these carburetors. Testing is part of it, as with any setup. I found
the aneroid chamber to be straight forward and easily adjusted using a dial indicator
and probe, once I figured out where the reference points were.
Like any carb, there are several circuits that operate during different running
conditions, each with it's own range of operation. There are 5 needles, jets
and adjustments that I use to "tweek". Right now, I have cut back on fuel flow
(and horsepower) throughout the range for economy purposes. Since the advent
of our chilly Florida winter, I haven't yet adjusted the idle circuit and now
get "stumble" when cold. I do believe that seasonal tuning would be necessary
to achieve maximum performance. Not really necessary on my CJ but Sukhoi's used
for competition and performances is quite another matter.
Sooo, if you are not a mechanic, it may be useful to cultivate a working relationship
with a local gearhead. Yes, I have had the whole carb apart and successfully
got it back together, but not on the first try.
Craig Payne
cpayne@joimail.com
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 |
|
On Nov 20, 2007, at 12:49 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry
Point, MALS-14 64E wrote:
> Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> And for some reason the Russians put big fuses in the main
> electrical panel, and then used switched circuit breakers to come
> off the main and feed the actual equipment. Go figure.
It makes sense. Protect the main feed from a gross overload and then
protect the individual circuits (you have to do that anyway). I am
talking about doing exactly the same thing but cheaper and more
reliably. An automotive fuse block that is protected by a fusible
link with individual fuse-protected circuits that are switched by
ordinary switches is both cheaper (by a LONG shot) and more reliable.
> And for Brian.... Just sitting here wondering what the electrical
> difference was between a fusible link and an actual fuse. I guess
> the only real difference is one has a holder and thus is USUALLY
> easy to swap out while the fusible link requires a wire cutter and
> new crimps to repair? :-)
Yes. Oh, and it won't fail in-flight for mechanical reasons. And how
often have you had to replace a fuse because it has blown to protect
the circuit and how often have you had to replace it because it has
failed, "I don't know why?"
> Actually most fuse holders I have seen go bad before the actual
> fuse ever fails! Either corrosion attacks them, or the internal
> springs of some models causes the structure to fail. This is true
> except for the very best types of military models used in Govt.
> aircraft.
Precisely. That is the advantage of a fusible link and the automotive
type fuse. The old 3AG-type fuseholder has very low pressure contacts
and is prone to failure from corrosion. The automotive ATO/ATC-type
fuse uses a high-pressure gas-tight contact (referring to the metal-
to-metal contact) that is unlikely to fail during a normal lifetime.
(Meaning, it will last longer than the rest of the parts in your
airplane.)
>
> Some other things to ponder:
>
> 1. Some fuse holders are prohibited from being used in military
> aircraft since they are made from PVC. Something to consider.
Consider that this is a different environment. We aren't flying
military aircraft in combat so there is less chance of having to deal
with in-flight fire.
> 2. When a fusible link lets go, it means that the wire inside has
> MELTED.
Same with a fuse.
> An actual fuse has some kind of cover to protect that melting metal.
And so does a fusible link.
> A fusible link has just the standard insulation.
No. The fusible links we use/make for aviation use are covered with a
glass-fiber high-temp covering that prevents any flame from escaping
and provides thermal insulation to prevent igniting nearby
components. The fusible link burns through without damaging anything
around it.
Here are pictures of how to fabricate a high-rel, high-safety fusible
link:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Fuses/Fusible_Links/
> When using a fusible link vice a fuse, placement of this link is
> critical as it is possible to achieve an open flame for a split
> second when it fails. What is your view on that aspect Brian?
It doesn't happen for the reasons listed above. A fusible link is
just as safe in its failure mode as is a fuse, perhaps more safe.
Fusible links aren't damaged by impact and are completely insulated.
You can drop a wrench on it and not have someone give you the
callsign "sparky". Fusible links are impervious to vibration and
moisture. I could go on and on but the bottom line is that a fusible
link is better and cheaper than a fuse.
And consider one other thing -- most standard (3AG) fuses and
breakers don't end up failing by doing their job of protecting the
circuit to which they are attached. They usually fail for
environmental reasons. Corrosion causes a high-resistance contact
which causes the fuse to get hot and fail at a lower current.
Breakers get "weak" with time. Going to automotive fuses and fusible
links reduces this type of failure to a very low level, resulting in
a more reliable electrical system over time. Add to that lower cost,
better availability, and greater simplicity, it is difficult to see
why anyone would want to keep going with more expensive, less
reliable components.
OTOH, a side panel filled with $50 circuit breakers sure looks cool!
But I can think of better ways to spend $750 than to protect 15
circuits and look cool.
There is still one place to use a breaker: use it in a circuit where
you might need to disable that circuit such as the alternator field
or the power feed to your autopilot servo. Other than that ...
Brian Lloyd 3191 Western Drive
brianl AT lloyd DOT com Cameron Park, CA 95682
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)
PGP key ID: 12095C52A32A1B6C
PGP key fingerprint: 3B1D BA11 4913 3254 B6E0 CC09 1209 5C52 A32A 1B6C
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 |
|
On Nov 20, 2007, at 12:49 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry
Point, MALS-14 64E wrote:
> Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> And for some reason the Russians put big fuses in the main
> electrical panel, and then used switched circuit breakers to come
> off the main and feed the actual equipment. Go figure.
It makes sense. Protect the main feed from a gross overload and then
protect the individual circuits (you have to do that anyway). I am
talking about doing exactly the same thing but cheaper and more
reliably. An automotive fuse block that is protected by a fusible
link with individual fuse-protected circuits that are switched by
ordinary switches is both cheaper (by a LONG shot) and more reliable.
> And for Brian.... Just sitting here wondering what the electrical
> difference was between a fusible link and an actual fuse. I guess
> the only real difference is one has a holder and thus is USUALLY
> easy to swap out while the fusible link requires a wire cutter and
> new crimps to repair? :-)
Yes. Oh, and it won't fail in-flight for mechanical reasons. And how
often have you had to replace a fuse because it has blown to protect
the circuit and how often have you had to replace it because it has
failed, "I don't know why?"
> Actually most fuse holders I have seen go bad before the actual
> fuse ever fails! Either corrosion attacks them, or the internal
> springs of some models causes the structure to fail. This is true
> except for the very best types of military models used in Govt.
> aircraft.
Precisely. That is the advantage of a fusible link and the automotive
type fuse. The old 3AG-type fuseholder has very low pressure contacts
and is prone to failure from corrosion. The automotive ATO/ATC-type
fuse uses a high-pressure gas-tight contact (referring to the metal-
to-metal contact) that is unlikely to fail during a normal lifetime.
(Meaning, it will last longer than the rest of the parts in your
airplane.)
>
> Some other things to ponder:
>
> 1. Some fuse holders are prohibited from being used in military
> aircraft since they are made from PVC. Something to consider.
Consider that this is a different environment. We aren't flying
military aircraft in combat so there is less chance of having to deal
with in-flight fire.
> 2. When a fusible link lets go, it means that the wire inside has
> MELTED.
Same with a fuse.
> An actual fuse has some kind of cover to protect that melting metal.
And so does a fusible link.
> A fusible link has just the standard insulation.
No. The fusible links we use/make for aviation use are covered with a
glass-fiber high-temp covering that prevents any flame from escaping
and provides thermal insulation to prevent igniting nearby
components. The fusible link burns through without damaging anything
around it.
Here are pictures of how to fabricate a high-rel, high-safety fusible
link:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Fuses/Fusible_Links/
> When using a fusible link vice a fuse, placement of this link is
> critical as it is possible to achieve an open flame for a split
> second when it fails. What is your view on that aspect Brian?
It doesn't happen for the reasons listed above. A fusible link is
just as safe in its failure mode as is a fuse, perhaps more safe.
Fusible links aren't damaged by impact and are completely insulated.
You can drop a wrench on it and not have someone give you the
callsign "sparky". Fusible links are impervious to vibration and
moisture. I could go on and on but the bottom line is that a fusible
link is better and cheaper than a fuse.
And consider one other thing -- most standard (3AG) fuses and
breakers don't end up failing by doing their job of protecting the
circuit to which they are attached. They usually fail for
environmental reasons. Corrosion causes a high-resistance contact
which causes the fuse to get hot and fail at a lower current.
Breakers get "weak" with time. Going to automotive fuses and fusible
links reduces this type of failure to a very low level, resulting in
a more reliable electrical system over time. Add to that lower cost,
better availability, and greater simplicity, it is difficult to see
why anyone would want to keep going with more expensive, less
reliable components.
OTOH, a side panel filled with $50 circuit breakers sure looks cool!
But I can think of better ways to spend $750 than to protect 15
circuits and look cool.
There is still one place to use a breaker: use it in a circuit where
you might need to disable that circuit such as the alternator field
or the power feed to your autopilot servo. Other than that ...
Brian Lloyd 3191 Western Drive
brianl AT lloyd DOT com Cameron Park, CA 95682
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)
PGP key ID: 12095C52A32A1B6C
PGP key fingerprint: 3B1D BA11 4913 3254 B6E0 CC09 1209 5C52 A32A 1B6C
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: | Yak'in Cross Country |
To Doc and Mark B.:
Thanks for both of your responses as to what"s "Legal" to carry. Since "
my" 1911 Colt 45 "may" have USN ancestry, and since I have come to
think of it as mine over the past 60+ years, I believe I'll refrain f
rom putting it .into the hands of a squadron armouror-even for the pur
pose of having him re-issue it. There is always the potential for some
energetic, over zealous second LT. to attempt reclamation. I'd hate to
lose a treasured family heirloom like this.
-- "Roger Kemp" <viperdoc@mindspring.com> wrote:
Well damned...needs to be!
Will see if I need the sealant after this evening. I am going to put fue
l in
her and see if it leaks! If it does, there is a ton of Pro Seal to scrap
and
sand off!
Doc
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bitterlich, Ma
rk G
CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 3:20 PM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Yak'in Cross Country
,
MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
But DOC... HE IS NOT IN THE AIR FORCE! :-) Heh heh....
Mark
P.s. I have a tube of sealant if you want me to send it.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Roger Kemp
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 15:28
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Yak'in Cross Country
No doubt, I have seen some unique weapons carried. Just for the fighter
aircrew, it is frowned on to have a personal weapon. Again I have seen
different carried and also know what happened to that weapon when it was
discovered. I would hate to lose a family heirloom.
Doc
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bitterlich, Ma
rk G
CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 1:40 PM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Yak'in Cross Country
--> Point,
MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
You are absolutely correct. However, with all due respect... The Air Fo
rce
has always been very fond of the rules. The Marine Corps is too, until
the
rules get in the way of accomplishing the mission, and then they go righ
t
out the window.
Fact is, it is well nigh impossible to tell the difference between a 191
1A1
=2E45 issued by the Govt., and a 1911A1 issued by the Govt.!!! If Cliff
's
weapon is indeed an original Govt. issued model, the very only person wh
o
could ever tell the difference is the Amorer. If that gent is willing t
o
draw up an "Issue Card" on the weapon, he is just about... Within a bare
fraction, of actually putting it BACK into Govt. service. Not quite...
And
yes, it would be not quite legal. However, if you take that route, the
Armorer checks it out and makes sure it is safe, and thereby accomplishe
s
the main mission, and also can come to get it when you no longer are all
owed
to carry it.
This is not an argument, it's just a statement of fact. "Zero Tolerance
" is
a matter of perspective and if you don't believe that, you ought to chec
k
out what SpecOps members carry, or better yet see examples of how indivi
dual
units have directly purchased things like weapon accessories, body armor
,
etc.
Typically when you are in a unit that is actually getting shot at and pe
ople
are ending up dead and wounded, "Zero Tolerance" tends to be something o
ther
than "Zero" anymore, and personally, that is a circumstance that I suppo
rt
as well.
Of course many people would call me a criminal for evening voicing such
an
view. Oh well.
Mark Bitterlich
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Roger Kemp
Sent: Friday, November 16, 2007 19:35
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Yak'in Cross Country
Mark,
The Guard is real touchy about "unauthorized" weapons in theater. The SP
s,
armorers, and commanders have a zero tolerance for that. Tradition and a
ll,
it is not worth the heartache. The Berreta 9 mm was/is the handgun of ch
oice
in the AF. At least that is what we are issued in the fighters.
Doc
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bitterlich, Ma
rk G
CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E
Sent: Friday, November 16, 2007 12:04 PM
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Yak'in Cross Country
--> Point,
MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
You did not ask me Cliff, but since I go where your son does on a regula
r
basis, I thought I'd fill you in on present day regulations.
There is no restriction from carrying any weapon you want to, as long as
it
is "Government Issued". There is a very clear and concise order PROHIBI
TING
anyone from carrying a "Personally owned weapon". The INTENT of these
orders is to prevent a lot of things that seem to have become important
since wars even so recent as Korea. The military does NOT want it's men
to
be armed without them knowing about it, and they say they can't be sure
of
the quality and there-fore the safety of privately made or owned weapons
.
Don't try to argue with these rules with common sense. Common sense rar
ely
if ever works with any military branch, or Govt. Office for that matter.
So that said, that does not mean you can NOT carry a .45 The .45ACP is
still issued as a carry weapon in many forms in the military. If you kn
ow
the right people, you could carry a Thompson sub-machinegun if you wante
d
to!
That said, if your 1911 Colt has Govt. Markings ... You son needs to get
to
know his units armorer. If you meet the right guy, you could simply have
him
check your weapon into the armorer and then ISSUE it to your son as
authorized. Not legal really... But things like that happen all the tim
e.
Mark Bitterlich
USMC Ret.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
netmaster15@juno.com
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2007 23:43
Subject: RE: Yak-List: Yak'in Cross Country
Doc or Brian,
My son just returned from Kandahar in Afghanastan; his Guard unit flies
C-130s. I asked him what kind of side arms he carried, he said he was on
ly
allowed to carry standard gov issue- whatever that was I don't recall. I
wanted him to carry my 1911 model Colt 45 which i've had since WW 2 ; i
t
appears not to be acceptable to the present day command;. from your
experience ,have YOU encountered such restriction? If so, what is the
reason ? Thanks for your response.
Cliff Umscheid
-- "Roger Kemp" <viperdoc@mindspring.com> wrote:
Yes, Berretta's. No Mark I have a Browning. It was easier to get parts f
or
at the time as we were converting from S&W .38's. Now those were pop gun
s.
Doc
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Brian Lloyd
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2007 6:53 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Yak'in Cross Country
On Nov 15, 2007, at 2:18 PM, Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point,
MALS-14 64E wrote:
> Point, MALS-14 64E" <mark.bitterlich@navy.mil>
>
> Absolutely. If I owned the Taurus Judge, I would recommend it over
> every other weapon to carry on a cross country. No question. I would
> be hard put to not bring along my Kimber .45ACP CDP though. I feel
> kind of naked without it. In Iraq I carry a 9mm popgun, probably the
> same as yours Doc! :-)
Why would anyone carry a 9mm, especially into combat?
--
Brian Lloyd 3191 Western Drive
brian HYPHEN 1927 AT lloyd DOT com Cameron Park, CA 95682
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)
I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
=C3=82- Antoine de Saint-Exup=C3=83=C2=A9ry
PGP key ID: 12095C52A32A1B6C
PGP key fingerprint: 3B1D BA11 4913 3254 B6E0 CC09 1209
5========================
========================
nbsp; (And Get Some
AWESO -Matt Dralle, List==========
==============;
- The Yak-List Email Fo=================
=======bsp;
&n========================
================
_____________________________________________________________
Apply now for a Discover Card!
0% intro APR on Balance Transfers.
<http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2122/fc/JKFkuJi7Dykd9lgSnxQGEQDRPk5
jTIK
dYLbD3gY7J4TRxIBgL9wWmv/>
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
_____________________________________________________________
0% Intro APR.
5% Cashback bonus and Fraud Protection. Apply now!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2121/fc/JKFkuJi7DSOY5EeLhGqLBRTk92W5
XuqlNhtfvw4cKoCxec4BvhNa0j/
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! --
|