Return-Path: Received: from mtiwmhc12.worldnet.att.net ([204.127.131.116] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.1.8) with ESMTP id 2945001 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Fri, 23 Jan 2004 00:28:04 -0500 Received: from unknown (98.birmingham-01-03rs.al.dial-access.att.net[12.74.162.98]) by worldnet.att.net (mtiwmhc12) with SMTP id <2004012305275611200o4i4le>; Fri, 23 Jan 2004 05:27:56 +0000 Message-ID: <009801c3e171$93491460$62a24a0c@unknown> From: "Michael D. Callahan" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] FW: [VAF Mailing List] Engine Choice Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 23:27:19 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0095_01C3E13F.47DD98C0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0095_01C3E13F.47DD98C0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Greg, The fellow who sent this info to you obviously is operating on = hear-say, as he compares the rotary (as others often do) to a six = cylinder engine. This is a common mistake among those who don't = understand the engine. The comparison is because it has two three-sided = rotors, but it actually has more in common with a four-stroke four = cylinder. The myths about the rotary abound, and there are plenty of = folks waiting to propogate them. Tracy Crook, of RWS has pretty well sorted out all the torsional = issues, as well as most all the other difficulties of putting a rotary = in an RV. I'd personally be much more worried about losing a cylinder or = a mag on a Lycoming than any torsional problem inherent to the rotary. = Mike C. ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Greg Fuess=20 To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2004 9:23 PM Subject: [FlyRotary] FW: [VAF Mailing List] Engine Choice Guys, =20 Forgive me for beating a dead horse about torsionals. I have been = reading another list for (VAF and RV-7) ~2 years, and have anxiously = anticipated installing a 13B, and now instead a Renesis engine, in my = soon-to-start RV-7. Now, I am hearing things that cause me to question = my ability to make a sound decision in this regard, as this is the first = discussion of torsionals is the first I have heard. I am beginning to = question my ability to follow through on what I had taken to be the best = alternative engine choice. =20 I am therefore forwarding the most seemingly competent post (I am not = enough of an engineer to evaluate this) regarding this issue. My first = impressions were that rotaries were much less susceptible to torisionals = that regular engines, but recently that view has come into apparently = serious question, based on the statements below. =20 Appreciate your thoughts and comments. =20 Regards, =20 Greg Fuess =20 -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ----- From: midniteoyl2 [mailto:midniteoyl@wi.rr.com]=20 Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2004 4:46 PM To: vansairforce@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [VAF Mailing List] Engine Choice =20 Well, I had to ask an associate to clarify as I could no longer find=20 the resource I had gleamed my info from. Here is the e-mail I received back: ----------- ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Orion Technologies=20 To: midniteoyl@wi.rr.com=20 Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2004 3:38 PM Subject: rotary stuff Good morning Jim; You and those discussing it are correct - the rotary engine in an=20 aircraft application does have a unique torsional feedback=20 characteristic that can destroy the drivetrain or the engine itself. =20 Actually, it usually destroys the weakest link in the chain, which is=20 either the coupling or the reduction drive. The characteristic is actually not from wobbling rotors or probably a=20 dozen different theories that I've heard, it is actually several=20 items in the combination, generally found in the aircraft drive=20 configuration. The primary culprit is the mode shape and frequency=20 of the power pulses the engine puts out, characteristics that are=20 substantially differnet from those encountered in say a typical V-6,=20 an engine to which the rotary is often compared. This, coupled with=20 the mechanical characteristic of the reduction drive and the typical=20 prop's spring constant (especially metal props), results in several=20 possible modes of exitation which can severely affect the mechanical=20 components throughout. The problem with the engine/drive configuration is that the natural=20 frequency it often exites is relatively high and so, when things get=20 to the point of failure, there is little or no warning. Usually this=20 frequency occurs at or about 4,500 rpm. When Powersport started on their program of developing the=20 engine/drive combination, they ended up destroying a rather expensive=20 dyno before they realized the cause and fixed the problem. Their=20 solution is a very refined and optimized one in that they redesigned=20 and rebalanced the engine and shafting to meet the requirements of=20 their drive. Today, I'd say their reduction drive is probably the=20 best one on the market for the rotary engine. They are currently=20 selling just the drive for homebuilders and if I had a project that=20 needed a rotary engine, that's the one I'd use. Yes, it's a bit=20 pricey ($6,500) but I couldn't build a one-off any cheaper. In my work with Hayes Rotary Engineering, we also discovered the=20 problems associated with the engine. When Hayes originally installed=20 their dyno, they took the lesson from Powersport and installed a=20 reduction drive between the engine and the hydraulic pump, just in=20 case. The drive, a sprint car gear box rated at over 700 hp, was=20 mounted on the first test engine, an old and tired 12A. All the=20 preliminary tests went without a hitch but as soon as we started=20 testing just past 4,000 rpm, we heard a pop and everything suddenly=20 went quiet. The only indication that something went wrong was a=20 growing puddle of oil on the floor. It turned out that as soon as we hit about the 4,300 rpm point, the=20 torsional feedback literarly pushed the bearings out of the gear box,=20 straight through the sides. Today the dyno runs with a reduction drive I designed, along with a=20 torsional coupling we purchased from Vulcan. I probably wouldn't use=20 this coupling on an airplane as it is heavy and expensive (it is=20 designed for industrial diesel applications), but it is the=20 configuration that the engine/drive combination needs in order to=20 stay safe. There are two ways to address this issue but both involve addressing=20 the natural frequency of the entire drive system, not just the=20 engine. The Powersport method was to design a robust and very rigid=20 reduction drive, rebalance the engine, and keep everything as stiff=20 as possible, thus increasing the natural frequency of the system=20 beyond the foreseeable operating range. The second method is to develop a drivetrain that makes use of a=20 strong and durable coupling, which reduces the natural frequency=20 below the operating range of the engine. Furthermore, this coupling=20 should also incorporate a damping mechanism, that would allow the=20 system to absorb any possible feedback from any variation of=20 harmonics the drive might see. One note though, several companies out there are using a sprague=20 clutch to address this issue. Although this can work on the=20 torsionals, most of the companies have not done their engineering=20 homework and the sprague they selected is way below in capacity to=20 what the unit sees in this service. Also, when the sprague decouples=20 (throttle off) and thus allows the prop to freewheel, it develops an=20 effect equivalent to throwing out a parachute out of the airplane,=20 thus virtually eliminating any possible glide ratio. Personally, I=20 think this is an unacceptable and dangerous approach to the problem. Well, I think I sounded off enough - hope it's of some use to you. =20 If you have any further questions, give me a buzz. Bill ------------ Jim --- In vansairforce@yahoogroups.com, Charles Kuss =20 wrote: > Jim, > Would you mind sharing your info in this regard with > us? Not a slam. I'd just like to know where you'd > heard this, as it is not what I've heard/believed.=20 > The 2 rotor Mazda is comparable to a 6 cylinder 4 > stroke engine as regards power pulse overlap. I > realize that there is more to the story that simpy > that.=20 > If I'm mis-informed, I'd like to learn how and why. > Charlie Kuss >=20 > --- midniteoyl2 wrote: > > Will have to look it up again, but i believe the > > torsional vibrations=20 > > were worse in a rotary.. Power Sport Avaiation seems > > to be doing=20 > > thier homework on the problem however.. > >=20 > > My main opjection is lack of higher power (350+hp), > > and fuel=20 > > comsumption - especially if I mod it enough to get > > 350 hp. > >=20 > > Jim > >=20 > >=20 > > --- In vansairforce@yahoogroups.com, "Kevin H." > > =20 > > wrote: > > > What is seriously puzzling in this engine choice > > debate is..... > > >=20 > > > Many posts about Lycomings... dinasaurs > > > Many posts about Lyco-likes... Like a Lycosaurus > > > Many posts about the Subie..... a water cooled > > engine that is=20 > > reliable, and looks like a Lyco.... > > > Not one single post on the Mazda 13B Rotary.....=20 > > If a person spent=20 > > some time researching the reliability of an engine, > > where all the=20 > > reciprocatig parts never change direction, no cams, > > valves,=20 > > lifters, ....you all know what is a conventional > > engine... why=20 > > would a 13b Mazda (AKA Wankle) NOT be the wise > > choise for=20 > > an "EXPERIMENTAL"??? Torsional vibrations from the > > engine should be=20 > > less... PSRU should live longer... due to the fact > > that the major=20 > > torsionals should come from the prop.... YADA YADA > > YADA... I am=20 > > seriously researching this option... over the next > > couple of=20 > > years... From past experience... Rotarys are > > virtually=20 > > indestructible, they just couldn't meet smog > > emissions for the (C)ARB > > ((California)Air Resources Board) > > > replies welcomed with open arms!!! > > >=20 > > > Sincerely, > > > Kevin H. > > > ----- Original Message -----=20 > > > From: Paul Trotter=20 > > > To: vansairforce@yahoogroups.com=20 > > > Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2004 2:55 PM > > > Subject: [VAF Mailing List] Engine Choice > > >=20 > > >=20 > > > As has been seen by the numerous messages > > lately, choosing=20 > > > a "traditional" vs. "emerging" engine technology > > generates a lot=20 > > of=20 > > > (friendly) controversy. It has been pointed out > > several times=20 > > that=20 > > > this is a personal choice, as it well should be. > > But those of you=20 > > > who are so adamantly against the new engines > > should remember that=20 > > we=20 > > > are building "experimental" aircraft, and as the > > name so boldly=20 > > > states, the purpose is to experiment. Rather > > than deride those=20 > > who=20 > > > are going against tradition, we should thank > > them, for it is=20 > > their=20 > > > initiative, and yes, some risk, that brings the > > technology=20 > > forward. =20 > > > Without their efforts, there would be no > > advancement. Everyone=20 > > must=20 > > > decide their own level of risk when building > > their aircraft. =20 > > Very=20 > > > few would choose not use non-certified avionics, > > and this is also=20 > > a=20 > > > level of risk, although much less. Choosing an > > engine is just=20 > > the=20 > > > same, only a different risk level. When making > > any decision as=20 > > to=20 > > > what components to put in a plane, one should > > make as informed a=20 > > > decision as posible and weigh all the risks. In > > my case, I'll=20 > > > probably use the new high-tech avionics but stay > > with a standard=20 > > > Lycoming engine. Why? because I don't > > understand engine=20 > > technology=20 > > > well enough to make a reasonable decision, so I > > consider the risk=20 > > > too high to use a less proven engine. But I > > admire and thank=20 > > those=20 > > > who do because it is them that are really moving > > this industry=20 > > > forward. > > >=20 > > > Paul Trotter > > > RV-8 82080 Emp Kit=20 > > >=20 > > >=20 > > >=20 > > >=20 > > > Online help on this group at: > > > http://help.yahoo.com/help/groups/ > > >=20 > > >=20 > > >=20 > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor=20 > > > ADVERTISEMENT > > > =20 > > > =20 > > > =20 > > >=20 > > >=20 > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > ---------- > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > >=20 > > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vansairforce/ > > > =20 > > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an > > email to: > > > vansairforce-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > =20 > > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to > > the Yahoo! Terms of=20 > > Service.=20 > > >=20 > > >=20 > > >=20 > > >=20 > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been > > removed] > >=20 > >=20 > >=20 >=20 >=20 > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes > http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/signingbonus Online help on this group at: http://help.yahoo.com/help/groups/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ----- Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vansairforce/ =20 b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: vansairforce-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com =20 c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of = Service.=20 ------=_NextPart_000_0095_01C3E13F.47DD98C0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Greg,
    The fellow who sent this info to = you=20 obviously is operating on hear-say, as he compares the rotary (as others = often=20 do) to a six cylinder engine. This is a common mistake among those who = don't=20 understand the engine. The comparison is because it has two three-sided = rotors,=20 but it actually has more in common with a four-stroke four cylinder. The = myths=20 about the rotary abound, and there are plenty of folks waiting to = propogate=20 them.
    Tracy Crook, of RWS has = pretty well=20 sorted out all the torsional issues, as well as most all the other = difficulties=20 of putting a rotary in an RV. I'd personally be much more worried about = losing a=20 cylinder or a mag on a Lycoming than any torsional problem inherent to = the=20 rotary.  Mike C.
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Greg=20 Fuess
Sent: Thursday, January 22, = 2004 9:23=20 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] FW: [VAF = Mailing=20 List] Engine Choice

Guys,

 

Forgive me = for=20 beating a dead horse about torsionals.  I have been reading = another list=20 for (VAF and RV-7) ~2 years, and have anxiously anticipated installing = a 13B,=20 and now instead a Renesis engine, in my soon-to-start RV-7.  Now, = I am=20 hearing things that cause me to question my ability to make a sound = decision=20 in this regard, as this is the first discussion of torsionals is the = first I=20 have heard.  I am beginning to question my ability to follow = through on=20 what I had taken to be the best alternative engine=20 choice.

 

I am = therefore=20 forwarding the most seemingly competent post (I am not enough of an = engineer=20 to evaluate this) regarding this issue.  My first impressions = were that=20 rotaries were much less susceptible to torisionals that regular = engines, but=20 recently that view has come into apparently serious question, based on = the=20 statements below.

 

Appreciate = your=20 thoughts and comments.

 

Regards,

 

Greg=20 Fuess

 

From:=20 midniteoyl2 [mailto:midniteoyl@wi.rr.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 22, = 2004 4:46=20 PM
To:=20 vansairforce@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [VAF Mailing List] = Engine=20 Choice

 

Well, I had to ask an = associate to=20 clarify as I could no longer find
the resource I had gleamed my info=20 from.

Here is the = e-mail I=20 received back:

-----------

----- Original Message ----- =
From: Orion Technologies =
To: midniteoyl@wi.rr.com =
Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2004 3:38=20 PM
Subject: rotary=20 stuff


Good = morning=20 Jim;

You and those = discussing=20 it are correct - the rotary engine in an
aircraft application does have a unique torsional = feedback=20
characteristic that can = destroy=20 the drivetrain or the engine itself. 
Actually, it usually destroys the weakest link in = the=20 chain, which is
either = the=20 coupling or the reduction drive.

The characteristic is actually not from wobbling = rotors or=20 probably a
dozen = different=20 theories that I've heard, it is actually several =
items in the combination, generally found in the = aircraft=20 drive
configuration.  The=20 primary culprit is the mode shape and frequency =
of the power pulses the engine puts out, = characteristics=20 that are
substantially = differnet=20 from those encountered in say a typical V-6,
an engine to which the rotary is often = compared. =20 This, coupled with
the = mechanical=20 characteristic of the reduction drive and the typical=20
prop's spring constant=20 (especially metal props), results in several
possible modes of exitation which can severely = affect the=20 mechanical
components=20 throughout.

The = problem with=20 the engine/drive configuration is that the natural =
frequency it often exites is relatively high and = so, when=20 things get
to the point = of=20 failure, there is little or no warning.  Usually this=20
frequency occurs at or = about=20 4,500 rpm.

When = Powersport=20 started on their program of developing the
engine/drive combination, they ended up = destroying a rather=20 expensive
dyno before = they=20 realized the cause and fixed the problem.  Their=20
solution is a very = refined and=20 optimized one in that they redesigned
and rebalanced the engine and shafting to meet = the=20 requirements of
their=20 drive.  Today, I'd say their reduction drive is probably the=20
best one on the market = for the=20 rotary engine.  They are currently
selling just the drive for homebuilders and if I = had a=20 project that
needed a = rotary=20 engine, that's the one I'd use.  Yes, it's a bit=20
pricey ($6,500) but I = couldn't=20 build a one-off any cheaper.

In my work with Hayes Rotary Engineering, we also = discovered the
problems = associated with the engine.  When Hayes originally installed=20
their dyno, they took = the lesson=20 from Powersport and installed a
reduction drive between the engine and the = hydraulic pump,=20 just in
case.  The = drive, a=20 sprint car gear box rated at over 700 hp, was =
mounted on the first test engine, an old and = tired=20 12A.  All the
preliminary=20 tests went without a hitch but as soon as we started =
testing just past 4,000 rpm, we heard a pop and = everything=20 suddenly
went = quiet.  The=20 only indication that something went wrong was a =
growing puddle of oil on the=20 floor.

It turned out = that as=20 soon as we hit about the 4,300 rpm point, the =
torsional feedback literarly pushed the bearings = out of the=20 gear box,
straight = through the=20 sides.

Today the = dyno runs=20 with a reduction drive I designed, along with a =
torsional coupling we purchased from = Vulcan.  I=20 probably wouldn't use
this=20 coupling on an airplane as it is heavy and expensive (it is=20
designed for industrial = diesel=20 applications), but it is the
configuration that the engine/drive combination = needs in=20 order to
stay=20 safe.

There are two = ways to=20 address this issue but both involve addressing =
the natural frequency of the entire drive system, = not just=20 the
engine.  The = Powersport=20 method was to design a robust and very rigid
reduction drive, rebalance the engine, and keep = everything=20 as stiff
as possible, = thus=20 increasing the natural frequency of the system =
beyond the foreseeable operating=20 range.

The second = method is to=20 develop a drivetrain that makes use of a
strong and durable coupling, which reduces the = natural=20 frequency
below the = operating=20 range of the engine.  Furthermore, this coupling=20
should also incorporate = a damping=20 mechanism, that would allow the
system to absorb any possible feedback from any = variation=20 of
harmonics the drive = might=20 see.

One note = though, several=20 companies out there are using a sprague
clutch to address this issue.  Although this = can work=20 on the
torsionals, most = of the=20 companies have not done their engineering
homework and the sprague they selected is way = below in=20 capacity to
what the = unit sees in=20 this service.  Also, when the sprague decouples =
(throttle off) and thus allows the prop to = freewheel, it=20 develops an
effect = equivalent to=20 throwing out a parachute out of the airplane, =
thus virtually eliminating any possible glide = ratio. =20 Personally, I
think = this is an=20 unacceptable and dangerous approach to the=20 problem.

Well, I = think I=20 sounded off enough - hope it's of some use to you. =20
If you have any further = questions, give me a buzz.

Bill

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



Jim


---=20 In vansairforce@yahoogroups.com, Charles Kuss <chaskuss@y...>=20
wrote:
> Jim,
>  Would you mind sharing your info in = this regard=20 with
> us? Not a = slam. I'd just=20 like to know where you'd
>=20 heard this, as it is not what I've heard/believed. =
> The 2 rotor Mazda is comparable to a 6 = cylinder=20 4
> stroke engine as = regards=20 power pulse overlap. I
>=20 realize that there is more to the story that = simpy
> that.
>  If I'm mis-informed, I'd like to learn = how and=20 why.
> Charlie=20 Kuss
>=20
> --- midniteoyl2=20 <midniteoyl@w...> wrote:
> > Will have to look it up again, but i = believe=20 the
> > torsional = vibrations=20
> > were worse in = a=20 rotary.. Power Sport Avaiation seems
> > to be doing
> > thier homework on the problem=20 however..
> >=20
> > My main = opjection is=20 lack of higher power (350+hp),
> > and fuel
> > comsumption - especially if I mod it = enough to=20 get
> > 350=20 hp.
> >=20
> >=20 Jim
> >=20
> >=20
> > --- In=20 vansairforce@yahoogroups.com, "Kevin H."
> > <onesickpup@e...> =
> > wrote:
> > > What is seriously puzzling in this = engine=20 choice
> > debate=20 is.....
> > >=20
> > > Many = posts about=20 Lycomings...  dinasaurs
>=20 > > Many posts about Lyco-likes... Like a=20 Lycosaurus
> > = > Many=20 posts about the Subie.....  a water = cooled
> > engine that is =
> > reliable, and looks like a=20 Lyco....
> > > = Not one=20 single post on the Mazda 13B Rotary.....
> > If a person spent =
> > some time researching the reliability = of an=20 engine,
> > where = all the=20
> > reciprocatig = parts=20 never change direction, no cams,
> > valves,
> > lifters, ....you all know what is a=20 conventional
> >=20 engine...   why
>=20 > would a 13b Mazda (AKA Wankle) NOT be the = wise
> > choise for
> > an "EXPERIMENTAL"??? Torsional = vibrations from=20 the
> > engine = should be=20
> > less...  = PSRU=20 should live longer...  due to the fact
> > that the major =
> > torsionals should come from the = prop.... YADA=20 YADA
> > = YADA...  I am=20
> > seriously = researching=20 this option...  over the next
> > couple of
> > years... From past experience...  = Rotarys=20 are
> > virtually=20
> > = indestructible, they=20 just couldn't meet smog
> >=20 emissions for the (C)ARB
> >=20 ((California)Air Resources=20 Board)
> > > = replies=20 welcomed with open arms!!!
>=20 > >
> > = >=20 Sincerely,
> > = > Kevin=20 H.
> > = >  =20 ----- Original Message -----
>=20 > >   From: Paul Trotter
> > >   To: = vansairforce@yahoogroups.com=20
> > = >   Sent:=20 Tuesday, January 20, 2004 2:55 PM
> > >   Subject: [VAF Mailing = List]=20 Engine Choice
> > = >=20
> > >=20
> > = >   As has=20 been seen by the numerous messages
> > lately, choosing =
> > >   a "traditional" vs. = "emerging"=20 engine technology
> = >=20 generates a lot
> = > of=20
> > = >  =20 (friendly) controversy.  It has been pointed = out
> > several times
> > that
> > >   this is a personal = choice, as it=20 well should be.
> = > But=20 those of you
> >=20 >   who are so adamantly against the new=20 engines
> > should = remember=20 that
> > we=20
> > = >   are=20 building "experimental" aircraft, and as the
> > name so boldly =
> > >   states, the purpose is = to=20 experiment.  Rather
> >=20 than deride those
> = > who=20
> > = >   are=20 going against tradition, we should thank
> > them, for it is =
> > their
> > >   initiative, and yes, = some risk,=20 that brings the
> = >=20 technology
> >=20 forward. 
> = >=20 >   Without their efforts, there would be=20 no
> > = advancement. =20 Everyone
> > must =
> > = >   decide=20 their own level of risk when building
> > their aircraft.  =
> > Very
> > >   few would choose not = use=20 non-certified avionics,
> >=20 and this is also
> = > a=20
> > = >   level=20 of risk, although much less.  Choosing = an
> > engine is just =
> > the
> > >   same, only a different = risk=20 level.  When making
> >=20 any decision as
> = > to=20
> > = >   what=20 components to put in a plane, one should
> > make as informed a =
> > >   decision as posible = and weigh=20 all the risks. In
> = > my=20 case, I'll
> >=20 >   probably use the new high-tech avionics but=20 stay
> > with a = standard=20
> > = >  =20 Lycoming engine.  Why? because I don't
> > understand engine =
> > technology
> > >   well enough to make a = reasonable=20 decision, so I
> > = consider=20 the risk
> >=20 >   too high to use a less proven engine.  But=20 I
> > admire and = thank=20
> > those=20
> > = >   who do=20 because it is them that are really moving
> > this industry
> > >  =20 forward.
> > >=20
> > = >   Paul=20 Trotter
> > = >  =20 RV-8 82080 Emp Kit
> = > >=20
> > >=20
> > >=20
> > >=20
> > = >   Online=20 help on this group at:
> >=20 >   http://help.yahoo.com/help/gr= oups/
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >=20 >         Yahoo! Groups = Sponsor=20
> >=20 = >           &nb= sp;  =20 ADVERTISEMENT
> >=20 = >           &nb= sp; =20
> >=20 >        =
> > = >       =20
> > >=20
> > >=20
> >=20 >
>=20 >
>=20 = --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > ----------
> > >   Yahoo! Groups=20 Links
> > >=20
> >=20 >     a.. To visit your group on the web, go=20 to:
> >=20 >     http://groups.yahoo.= com/group/vansairforce/
> > = >      =20
> >=20 >     b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send=20 an
> > email=20 to:
> >=20 >    =20 vansairforce-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> > = >      =20
> >=20 >     c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject=20 to
> > the Yahoo! = Terms of=20
> > Service.=20
> > >=20
> > >=20
> > >=20
> > >=20
> > > = [Non-text portions=20 of this message have been
>=20 > removed]
> >=20
> >=20
> >=20
> =
>
>=20 __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus"=20 Sweepstakes
> http://hotjobs= .sweepstakes.yahoo.com/signingbonus




Online = help on this=20 group at:
http://help.yahoo.com/help/gr= oups/


Yahoo! Groups=20 Links

  • To visit your = group on=20 the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.= com/group/vansairforce/
     =20
  • To unsubscribe = from this=20 group, send an email to:
    vansairforce-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
     =20
  • Your use of = Yahoo!=20 Groups is subject to the Yahoo!=20 Terms of Service.=20

------=_NextPart_000_0095_01C3E13F.47DD98C0--