Matronics Email Lists :: View topic - FAA Memorandum

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

FAA Memorandum - 8130.2F
Goto page 1, 2 Next

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Yak-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

alikatz(at)mbay.net
Guest

Posted: Tue Sep 18, 2007 7:22 pm Post subject: FAA Memorandum - 8130.2F

Operating_LimitationsArticle.doc

Description:

Download

Filename:

Operating_LimitationsArticle.doc

Filesize:

33.5 KB

Downloaded:

7853 Time(s)

dsavarese(at)elmore.rr.co
Guest

Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2007 4:01 am Post subject: FAA Memorandum - 8130.2F

After reading and rereading the FAA Memorandum  and relating it to the posting by WOA whereas WOA says in the announcement, "All  former military experimental exhibition aircraft in Groups I, II, and III  currently operating and with the flight proficiency 300/600 mile limitations on  their operating limitations must continue to operate under the issued  limitations until such time they get their operating limitations updated from  their local FSDO.

  

 However, within the Memorandum it states in the  second paragraph, "......Group I, II, III former military aircraft with a  special airworthiness certificate in the experimental category for the purpose  of exhibition (that's us!) are no longer required to comply with the 300  and 600 nautical mile proficiency flight required by Order 8130.2F, Change 3,  Paragraph 158."

  

 According to the Memorandum, the proficiency area  is eliminated, effective with the Memorandum.  Period...end of  sentence.   The Memorandum does NOT say anything about aircraft with  existing operating limitions must continue to operate under the existing  limitations until their OL's are changes.  The Memorandum DOES say,  "Owners/Operators of former military aircraft that currently have a special  airworthiness certificate in the experimental category for the purpose of  exhibition (that's us) may apply to have the above limitation  removed."  That paragraph refers to removing the limitation as  written in the OL's.  It does not mean the proficiency area limitation  as currently written in the existing OL's remains in effect until such time as  the OL's are reissued with the elimination of the proficiency area.  I  believe it is intended to mean the proficiency area is eliminated effective with  the Memorandum and one must apply to have the OL's revised to remove the  proficiency area statement (thus a rewrite/reissue of the OL's) from the  aircraft operating limitations.

  

 If the FAA wanted the aircraft with existing  experimental exhibition airworthiness certificates and operating limitations  to have to continue to comply with the 300/600 NM proficiency area,  they would have clearly stated that in the Memorandum.  But the Memorandum  clearly says "Group I, II, III former military aircraft with (that means  exisiting) a special airworthiness certificate in the experimental category for  the purpose of exhibition ARE NO LONGER REQUIRED TO COMPLY WITH THE 300  AND 600 NAUTICAL MILE PROFICIENCY FLIGHT REQUIRED BY ORDER 8130.2F, CHANGE  3."

  

 I will be contacting WOA sometime today and will  ask them why they interpreted the Memorandum to mean the 300/600 mile  proficiency area elimination only applies AFTER the OL's have been  reissued.  Why would the FAA want to create an unbelieveable mound of  paperwork for themselves by requiring existing OL's to be reissued before the  elimination of the proficiency area went into effect?  I believe the intent  of the Memorandum was to first, announce the elimination of the restriction  (300/600 mile proficiency area) and then, at the owner/operators request, update  their OL's to reflect the change.

  

 My recommendation is to carry a copy of the  letter with you just in case you get ramped checked.  If you do get into a  discussion with an FAA inspector, focus on the words "are no longer  required to comply".  It does not say "will no longer be required to comply  until after the existing operating limitions are reissued."

  

 Dennis

  

 



 ---

aerobaticgirl(at)yahoo.co
Guest

Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2007 5:59 am Post subject: FAA Memorandum - 8130.2F

Not sure why my post came out like it did, but my question is, does anyone know if this would apply to Yak 55s?  doesn't sound like it does,not being a former military a/c.

   

  Smash



    [quote][b]

jonboede(at)hotmail.com
Guest

Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2007 6:02 am Post subject: FAA Memorandum - 8130.2F

Our FSDO folks gave us a heads-up on this a few weeks ago.  They said that 

their preference would be for us to bring in our current OPS Lims and they'd 

be happy to re-write them with the 300 or 600 mile ring removed.



This is certainly a step in the right direction... how that the FAA has 

admitted that at least one of the limitations has done nothing for safety, 

perhaps we're on our way to eliminating some of the other ones, too.



[quote]From: "A. Dennis Savarese" <dsavarese(at)elmore.rr.com>

Reply-To: yak-list(at)matronics.com

To: <yak-list(at)matronics.com>

Subject: Re: FAA Memorandum - 8130.2F

Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2007 06:58:53 -0500



After reading and rereading the FAA Memorandum and relating it to the 

posting by WOA whereas WOA says in the announcement, "All former military 

experimental exhibition aircraft in Groups I, II, and III currently 

operating and with the flight proficiency 300/600 mile limitations on their 

operating limitations must continue to operate under the issued limitations 

until such time they get their operating limitations updated from their 

local FSDO.



However, within the Memorandum it states in the second paragraph, 

"......Group I, II, III former military aircraft with a special 

airworthiness certificate in the experimental category for the purpose of 

exhibition (that's us!) are no longer required to comply with the 300 and 

600 nautical mile proficiency flight required by Order 8130.2F, Change 3, 

Paragraph 158."



According to the Memorandum, the proficiency area is eliminated, effective 

with the Memorandum.  Period...end of sentence.   The Memorandum does NOT 

say anything about aircraft with existing operating limitions must continue 

to operate under the existing limitations until their OL's are changes.  

The Memorandum DOES say, "Owners/Operators of former military aircraft that 

currently have a special airworthiness certificate in the experimental 

category for the purpose of exhibition (that's us) may apply to have the 

above limitation removed."  That paragraph refers to removing the 

limitation as written in the OL's.  It does not mean the proficiency area 

limitation as currently written in the existing OL's remains in effect 

until such time as the OL's are reissued with the elimination of the 

proficiency area.  I believe it is intended to mean the proficiency area is 

eliminated effective with the Memorandum and one must apply to have the 

OL's revised to remove the proficiency area statement (thus a 

rewrite/reissue of the OL's) from the aircraft operating limitations.



If the FAA wanted the aircraft with existing experimental exhibition 

airworthiness certificates and operating limitations to have to continue to 

comply with the 300/600 NM proficiency area, they would have clearly stated 

that in the Memorandum.  But the Memorandum clearly says "Group I, II, III 

former military aircraft with (that means exisiting) a special 

airworthiness certificate in the experimental category for the purpose of 

exhibition ARE NO LONGER REQUIRED TO COMPLY WITH THE 300 AND 600 NAUTICAL 

MILE PROFICIENCY FLIGHT REQUIRED BY ORDER 8130.2F, CHANGE 3."



I will be contacting WOA sometime today and will ask them why they 

interpreted the Memorandum to mean the 300/600 mile proficiency area 

elimination only applies AFTER the OL's have been reissued.  Why would the 

FAA want to create an unbelieveable mound of paperwork for themselves by 

requiring existing OL's to be reissued before the elimination of the 

proficiency area went into effect?  I believe the intent of the Memorandum 

was to first, announce the elimination of the restriction (300/600 mile 

proficiency area) and then, at the owner/operators request, update their 

OL's to reflect the change.



My recommendation is to carry a copy of the letter with you just in case 

you get ramped checked.  If you do get into a discussion with an FAA 

inspector, focus on the words "are no longer required to comply".  It does 

not say "will no longer be required to comply until after the existing 

operating limitions are reissued."



Dennis



---

cliff(at)gesoco.com
Guest

Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2007 6:42 am Post subject: FAA Memorandum - 8130.2F

My recommendation is to simply submit the request and wait for them to 

ask questions.  More than likely the ASI receiving the request won't 

know the difference or much care.



It can be argued that all Soviet Union aircraft were "military" aircraft 

regardless of type.



At the root of this issue is the FAA's responsibility for "public safety". 

It would hard for them to argue that an experimental homebuilt Pitts 

with unrestricted range is inherently safer than a production built Yak-55.



Cheers,

Cliff



Sarah Tobin wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		   Not sure why my post came out like it did, but my question is, does 

 anyone know if this would apply to Yak 55s?  doesn't sound like it 

 does,not being a former military a/c.

  

 Smash



*

*

aerobaticgirl(at)yahoo.co
Guest

Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2007 7:06 am Post subject: FAA Memorandum - 8130.2F

Yeah I concur Cliff...I was gonna give it a go anyway...I got away with murder on my original Ops limits, conveniently leaving out several things, and the OKC FSDO signed off on it, so you never know, like you said, they will most likely sign what you give them.

   

  On another note....anyone been shopping Ebay for Yaks lately....my tornado ridden 55 that was rebuilt in Tx now got hurt again and is being auctioned off, think it's up to 13K now.

   

  Smash



Cliff Coy <cliff(at)gesoco.com> wrote:

  [quote]--> Yak-List message posted by: Cliff Coy 



My recommendation is to simply submit the request and wait for them to 

ask questions. More than likely the ASI receiving the request won't 

know the difference or much care.



It can be argued that all Soviet Union  [quote][b]

rvfltd(at)televar.com
Guest

Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2007 7:18 am Post subject: FAA Memorandum - 8130.2F

Could not find http://forms.faa.gov/forms/faa8130-6d.pdf/  anyone able to download the form?

 

 Doug Sapp

      [quote][b]

dabear(at)damned.org
Guest

Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2007 7:39 am Post subject: FAA Memorandum - 8130.2F

Take the last "/" off and it works or use this



_http://forms.faa.gov/forms/faa8130-6d.pdf_



Dabear



Doug Sapp wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   Could not find http://forms.faa.gov/forms/faa8130-6d.pdf/  anyone able 

 to download the form?



 Doug Sapp

 *

 *

craig(at)ustek.com
Guest

Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2007 7:41 am Post subject: FAA Memorandum - 8130.2F

http://forms.faa.gov/forms/faa8130-6d.pdf

  

 Here's the link, but I don't know why you'd want to file a new one  to change your OL's.  I would send in a copy of your original with the  other items.  If you don't have it, you can order a CDROM of all your  aircrafts paperwork from the FAA.



   From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com  [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Doug  Sapp

Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2007 11:17 AM

To:  yak-list(at)matronics.com

Subject: Re: FAA Memorandum -  8130.2F

 

Could not find http://forms.faa.gov/forms/faa8130-6d.pdf/   anyone able to download the form?



Doug Sapp

[quote]



href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List

href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com



[b]

dabear(at)damned.org
Guest

Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2007 7:58 am Post subject: FAA Memorandum - 8130.2F

How do you do  order the CDROM?



Craig Schneider wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   http://forms.faa.gov/forms/faa8130-6d.pdf

  

 Here's the link, but I don't know why you'd want to file a new one to 

 change your OL's.  I would send in a copy of your original with the 

 other items.  If you don't have it, you can order a CDROM of all your 

 aircrafts paperwork from the FAA.



 ------------------------------------------------------------------------

 *From:* owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com 

 [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *Doug Sapp

 *Sent:* Wednesday, September 19, 2007 11:17 AM

 *To:* yak-list(at)matronics.com

 *Subject:* Re: FAA Memorandum - 8130.2F



 Could not find http://forms.faa.gov/forms/faa8130-6d.pdf/  anyone able 

 to download the form?



 Doug Sapp

 *



 href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List

 href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com



 *

 *

 *

dsavarese(at)elmore.rr.co
Guest

Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2007 8:53 am Post subject: FAA Memorandum - 8130.2F

What does the Airworthiness Certificate  say?  Experimental, what?  If the Exhibition category is checked, then  yes it does apply.

 Dennis

  

 [quote]   ---

dsavarese(at)elmore.rr.co
Guest

Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2007 9:14 am Post subject: FAA Memorandum - 8130.2F

Craig,

 The reason is because the OL's and it's wording  must be in accordance with the current Order, 8130.2F.  Many OL's were  written when previous versions were in place.  Even though they are all  fundamentally the same, the FSDO Inspector is required to use the present  version of the Order when issuing new OL's.  Remember, any change to the  OL's requires issuance of a new airworthiness certificate as well because they  are married together.  That's why one must also submit the 8130-6,  Application for Airworthiness Certificate.

 Dennis

  

 [quote]   ---

jonboede(at)hotmail.com
Guest

Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2007 9:25 am Post subject: FAA Memorandum - 8130.2F

Ok, that was good for a chuckle.

It would be hard for them to argue LOTS of stuff... but they don't argue, 

they just hand down rules.

'Till we're not happy.  

 	  Quote: 	
		  From: Cliff Coy <cliff(at)gesoco.com>

Reply-To: yak-list(at)matronics.com

To: yak-list(at)matronics.com

Subject: Re: FAA Memorandum - 8130.2F

Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2007 10:41:01 -0400

My recommendation is to simply submit the request and wait for them to ask 

questions.  More than likely the ASI receiving the request won't know the 

difference or much care.

It can be argued that all Soviet Union aircraft were "military" aircraft 

regardless of type.

At the root of this issue is the FAA's responsibility for "public safety". 

It would hard for them to argue that an experimental homebuilt Pitts with 

unrestricted range is inherently safer than a production built Yak-55.

Cheers,

Cliff

Sarah Tobin wrote:

>Not sure why my post came out like it did, but my question is, does anyone 

>know if this would apply to Yak 55s?  doesn't sound like it does,not being 

>a former military a/c.

>  Smash

>

>*

>*

>

craig(at)ustek.com
Guest

Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2007 9:34 am Post subject: FAA Memorandum - 8130.2F

To order the CDROM with all the FAA filings on your aircraft, go to the following link and following instructions:

  

 http://162.58.35.241/e.gov/ND/airrecordsND.asp



 

  From: DaBear

Sent: Wed 9/19/2007 11:58 AM

To: yak-list(at)matronics.com

Subject: Re: Yak-List: FAA Memorandum - 8130.2F

 [quote]--> Yak-List message posted by: DaBear <dabear(at)damned.org>



How do you do  order the CDROM?



Craig Schneider wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   http://forms.faa.gov/forms/faa8130-6d.pdf

  

 Here's the link, but I don't know why you'd want to file a new one to 

 change your OL's.  I would send in a copy of your original with the 

 other items.  If you don't have it, you can order a CDROM of all your 

 aircrafts paperwork from the FAA.



 ------------------------------------------------------------------------

 *From:* owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com 

 [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *Doug Sapp

 *Sent:* Wednesday, September 19, 2007 11:17 AM

 *To:* yak-list(at)matronics.com

 *Subject:* Re: FAA Memorandum - 8130.2F



 Could not find http://forms.faa.gov/forms/faa8130-6d.pdf/  anyone able 

 to download the form?



 Doug Sapp

 *



 href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List

 href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com



 *

 *

 *


	






[b]

craig(at)ustek.com
Guest

Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2007 9:45 am Post subject: FAA Memorandum - 8130.2F

Dennis,



In talking this morning with the FAA, I will go the easy route first.  I will submit a letter to my FSDO asking to add an addendum (of which I will write and submit at the same time) to my OL's, striking the reference to the 300 mile.......   referencing and including the FAA memo dated Sept. 11.  In the past my FSDO has allowed addendums,  as it makes it much easier for him.



Craig



From: A. Dennis Savarese

Sent: Wed 9/19/2007 1:12 PM

To: yak-list(at)matronics.com

Subject: Re: FAA Memorandum - 8130.2F

Craig,

The reason is because the OL's and it's wording must be in accordance with the current Order, 8130.2F.  Many OL's were written when previous versions were in place.  Even though they are all fundamentally the same, the FSDO Inspector is required to use the present version of the Order when issuing new OL's.  Remember, any change to the OL's requires issuance of a new airworthiness certificate as well because they are married together.  That's why one must also submit the 8130-6, Application for Airworthiness Certificate

dsavarese(at)elmore.rr.co
Guest

Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2007 9:52 am Post subject: FAA Memorandum - 8130.2F

I just got off the telephone with AIR-230,  Aircraft Certification Branch in Washington who were the preparers of the  Memorandum.  I must admit, I was incorrect in my interpretation and the WOA  statements in the announcement are 100% accurate .  As it was  explained to me, if we presently have a certificated airplane in the  Experimental Exhibition category, until we apply for and receive a new  airworthiness certificate and updated operating limitations without the  proficiency area restriction, we're bound by our present OL's.

  

 So if you want to have your OL's updated to  eliminate the proficiency area, you either submit your paperwork to your local  FSDO or have a DAR do it for you.  Using the FSDO is free.  Using a  DAR is not, BUT it can be done much quicker.

  

 Best regards,

 Dennis

  

 [quote]   ---

l39parts(at)hotmail.com
Guest

Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2007 9:52 am Post subject: FAA Memorandum - 8130.2F

I don't want to start an argument, I want to give you something to think 

about.  There are FARs that require you have an airworthiness certificate 

and your ops limits are an attachment to it.



If my wife wrote a memo to her sister saying that I didn't need to comply 

with ops limit #17, do you think the ramp inspector would view that as 

trumping my airworthiness certificate's requirements?



The memo of interest is from one FAA office to another FAA office directing 

them to remove the proficiency limit of xxx miles from order 8130.2F.  I 

don't believe that it trumps the ops limits requirments either.  It does 

provide a basis for getting new ops limits without the limitation.



As you know, when 8130.2f is changed to a more restrictive stance, such as 

when they added the 300/600 mile limit, it didn't apply to the airplanes 

that already had ops limits without the mileage limit (the grandfathered 

airplanes).  It seems to me the same applies now.



The use of the term "former military aircraft" in the memo is curious.  FAA 

order 8130 says "Many of the aircraft applying for 

experimental-exhibition..." but the exp-exhibition certificate is certainly 

not limited to former military aircraft.



If I had a IAR-823 or a Yak-50, I'd ask FSDO for new ops limits based on the 

memo.  If they brought up the former military issue, I'd say it was 

certified under the same guidelines as former military and if walks like a 

duck and quacks like a duck...



I hope you find this useful.  I have no intention of responding to rebuttals 

or speculating on what any given FSDO will do.



[quote]From: "A. Dennis Savarese" <dsavarese(at)elmore.rr.com>

Reply-To: yak-list(at)matronics.com

To: <yak-list(at)matronics.com>

Subject: Re: FAA Memorandum - 8130.2F

Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2007 06:58:53 -0500



After reading and rereading the FAA Memorandum and relating it to the 

posting by WOA whereas WOA says in the announcement, "All former military 

experimental exhibition aircraft in Groups I, II, and III currently 

operating and with the flight proficiency 300/600 mile limitations on their 

operating limitations must continue to operate under the issued limitations 

until such time they get their operating limitations updated from their 

local FSDO.



However, within the Memorandum it states in the second paragraph, 

"......Group I, II, III former military aircraft with a special 

airworthiness certificate in the experimental category for the purpose of 

exhibition (that's us!) are no longer required to comply with the 300 and 

600 nautical mile proficiency flight required by Order 8130.2F, Change 3, 

Paragraph 158."



According to the Memorandum, the proficiency area is eliminated, effective 

with the Memorandum.  Period...end of sentence.   The Memorandum does NOT 

say anything about aircraft with existing operating limitions must continue 

to operate under the existing limitations until their OL's are changes.  

The Memorandum DOES say, "Owners/Operators of former military aircraft that 

currently have a special airworthiness certificate in the experimental 

category for the purpose of exhibition (that's us) may apply to have the 

above limitation removed."  That paragraph refers to removing the 

limitation as written in the OL's.  It does not mean the proficiency area 

limitation as currently written in the existing OL's remains in effect 

until such time as the OL's are reissued with the elimination of the 

proficiency area.  I believe it is intended to mean the proficiency area is 

eliminated effective with the Memorandum and one must apply to have the 

OL's revised to remove the proficiency area statement (thus a 

rewrite/reissue of the OL's) from the aircraft operating limitations.



If the FAA wanted the aircraft with existing experimental exhibition 

airworthiness certificates and operating limitations to have to continue to 

comply with the 300/600 NM proficiency area, they would have clearly stated 

that in the Memorandum.  But the Memorandum clearly says "Group I, II, III 

former military aircraft with (that means exisiting) a special 

airworthiness certificate in the experimental category for the purpose of 

exhibition ARE NO LONGER REQUIRED TO COMPLY WITH THE 300 AND 600 NAUTICAL 

MILE PROFICIENCY FLIGHT REQUIRED BY ORDER 8130.2F, CHANGE 3."



I will be contacting WOA sometime today and will ask them why they 

interpreted the Memorandum to mean the 300/600 mile proficiency area 

elimination only applies AFTER the OL's have been reissued.  Why would the 

FAA want to create an unbelieveable mound of paperwork for themselves by 

requiring existing OL's to be reissued before the elimination of the 

proficiency area went into effect?  I believe the intent of the Memorandum 

was to first, announce the elimination of the restriction (300/600 mile 

proficiency area) and then, at the owner/operators request, update their 

OL's to reflect the change.



My recommendation is to carry a copy of the letter with you just in case 

you get ramped checked.  If you do get into a discussion with an FAA 

inspector, focus on the words "are no longer required to comply".  It does 

not say "will no longer be required to comply until after the existing 

operating limitions are reissued."



Dennis



---

dsavarese(at)elmore.rr.co
Guest

Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2007 10:03 am Post subject: FAA Memorandum - 8130.2F

You're correct.  That's the only way to  go.  I was hoping they would have used the KISS method.  But no!   They had to make it difficult.  It would have been so easy to say, "Carry a  copy of the Memorandum in the aircraft".  Surely that would have sufficed  rather than creating this paperwork nightmare for the local FSDO's.

 Dennis

  

 [quote]   ---

dsavarese(at)elmore.rr.co
Guest

Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2007 10:15 am Post subject: FAA Memorandum - 8130.2F

No argument Ron.  You're analogy is accurate.

Dennis



---

brian-1927(at)lloyd.com
Guest

Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2007 4:33 pm Post subject: FAA Memorandum - 8130.2F

On Sep 19, 2007, at 10:12 AM, A. Dennis Savarese wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		   Craig,

 The reason is because the OL's and it's wording must be in  

 accordance with the current Order, 8130.2F.  Many OL's were written  

 when previous versions were in place.  Even though they are all  

 fundamentally the same, the FSDO Inspector is required to use the  

 present version of the Order when issuing new OL's.  Remember, any  

 change to the OL's requires issuance of a new airworthiness  

 certificate as well because they are married together.  That's why  

 one must also submit the 8130-6, Application for Airworthiness  

 Certificate.


	


And as to whether or not you need to get a new LOL, your point about  

it being married to the AC is significant. Your existing LOL is  

married to your AC. It currently has the 300nm limit on it therefore  

even tho' the 300nm limit has been rescinded, it still appears on  

your LOL and therefore is still a part of your OL. If you want it off  

you need a new LOL issued by the FSDO along with a new AC.



It matters because it is still on the piece of paper. You can't  

change that paper without changing the AC too. Remember, what is  

written on the piece of paper is *always* more important and  

significant than the rule book.

--

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-Exupéry



PGP key ID:          12095C52A32A1B6C

PGP key fingerprint: 3B1D BA11 4913 3254 B6E0  CC09 1209 5C52 A32A 1B6C

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Yak-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page 1, 2 Next
Page 1 of 2

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum