Return-Path: <marv@lancaironline.net>
Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net> (Marvin Kaye)
To: lml
Date: Fri, 31 May 2002 11:42:19 -0400
Message-ID: <redirect-1252793@logan.com>
X-Original-Return-Path: <harrelson@erols.com>
Received: from smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net ([207.172.4.62] verified)
  by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.0b1)
  with ESMTP id 1252639 for lml@lancaironline.net; Fri, 31 May 2002 08:22:55 -0400
Received: from 208-59-158-21.s21.tnt2.frdb.va.dialup.rcn.com ([208.59.158.21] helo=OFFICE)
	by smtp03.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #10)
	id 17DlQl-0006wT-00
	for lml@lancaironline.net; Fri, 31 May 2002 08:22:56 -0400
X-Original-Message-ID: <05a001c2089e$33b74920$46eca4d8@OFFICE>
From: "Bill & Sue" <harrelson@erols.com>
X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" <lml@lancaironline.net>
References: <list-1252623@logan.com>
Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Vacuum v all electric
X-Original-Date: Fri, 31 May 2002 08:25:03 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000


> So who are you going to listen to? The experienced pilots who have weighed
in
> here or the inexperienced ones?
>
Hmmm, seems to me, Jeff, that experienced people have weighed in on both
sides of the discussion. What are you trying to say?

Bill
harrelson@erols.com
N5ZQ,  LNC2/G, O-320,  dual vacuum and dual electric systems.