Date   

Re: Flames

Ron Triano <rondefly@...>
 

Say, Why don't you all grow up and stop this flaming thing. All that any
person wanting imfo on Q's, Dfly's, Q1's or any other project is to go into
the files section of that group and as Jim said type the question in and
walla, you will get answers. Remember these are experimental so research and
learn all you wish to then build it how you want. What works for some is not
the only and best way to go, If you can't follow rules like that maybe you
should be looking into a certified type and leave the repairs to someone
qualified. I think some of you just like to hear yourself talk.



Ron T



Sonerai ready to fly, Registered, now Airworthness


<http://bld01.ipowerweb.com/contentmanagement/websites/rtrianoc/page11.html>
http://bld01.ipowerweb.com/contentmanagement/websites/rtrianoc/page11.html

-----Original Message-----
From: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
chrishazlitt
Sent: Sunday, August 13, 2006 6:57 PM
To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Q-LIST] Re: Flames



I suppose, if you push hard enough those words might fit in my
mouth. What does cheap mean to you guys? Under 20K sounds cheap to
me with all of the money and work put into these machi

I think you might be measuring with your own yard stick on that one
friend!

-- In Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com> com,
rbarbour27@... wrote:

Jim - This guy Hazlitt is another one trying to acquire a Quickie
on the
cheap. Sometime in the recent past he must've received a
transfusion from one
of the other cheapskates who demanded that we more experienced
builders are
going to have to spoon feed them 'cause they came onboard late in
the
program.........yeah right! All the cheapskates have to do is
mimic the geezers by
buying all of the back issues of Q-talk and subscribe to the
upcoming issues.


Dick Barbour
Tri-Q-200 building
Rogers, AR





Re: Jim Patillo

Ron Triano <rondefly@...>
 

-----Original Message-----
From: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
Jim Patillo
Sent: Sunday, August 13, 2006 7:10 PM
To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Q-LIST] Re: Jim Patillo




Yor clueless my old pal! Its at the top of the message page just
before this one a box, in which you type your question and press
search and viola it appears! Oh by the way, its FREE. Now that's not
difficult is it?

Jim P.

Are you comin' up nex week?

--- In Q-LIST@yahoogroups. <mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com> com, larry
severson <larry2@...> wrote:


It's just these questions along with a handful of others are always
the ones asked from new people that get on this list. If you would
simply take the time to reserach the archives you would find 99% the
information you are looking for. Why not give it a try. If you then
can't find the answer ask away and you'll get the answer.
Last I checked, it costs $400 to get a chance to research the
archives. I plan on spending the money when I get ahead, but it isn't
a simple task of "go look it up", or maybe after 2 + years of hanging
around I still am clueless.


Larry Severson
Fountain Valley, CA 92708
(714) 968-9852
larry2@...


Re: Flames

GeneKnapp2@...
 

Can I suggest a 3 day seize fire
Yea, I agree!! Maybe we just need to turn off the oil drip ;o))

Geno


Quickie Project on ebay Item number: 270016275112

chrishazlitt <chrishazlitt@...>
 

Has alot of work already done:

Ebay Item number: 270016275112


Re: Fuel Vent Line

David J. Gall
 

Ya know, Bob, I thought about that too. Here's the way I see it: the lowest
pressure the carb can pull on the fuel line will be at high rpm with the
throttle closed. The highest ram pressure will be at max airspeed. Dive with
the throttle closed to purge the vent line. Not a good plan.

So there you are on climbout and the engine sags due to fuel starvation. The
rpm drops off, you push the throttle open, and the airspeed decays. What
good will it do to know that you would be able to clear the vent line at Vne
in a power-off dive if the powerlines ahead and every nerve fiber in your
body are screaming that you'd better add power and get the nose up?

I already know that the correct response to a power loss in climb is to push
the nose down to retain flying speed and that is already contrary to my
instincts. Please don't make me learn to hope for power restoration by
diving at the ground and chopping the throttle, too! I don't care if the
theory says there "ought to be" some combination of airspeed and throttle
setting (closed!!?) and rpm that will clear that slug of splashed fuel from
the vent line, I won't have time to diagnose that THAT particular problem
is, indeed, THE problem.

I would much prefer a fool-proof system that works in an intuitive way that
I can count on time and again to be reliable, predictable, and repeatable.
("Gee, would zero-gee help the ram pressure to purge the vent line," Robin
queried Batman as the Bat-plane plummeted perilously earthward.) If my fuel
tank vent line does NOT require me to perform acrobatics in order to restore
proper engine operation then I'm more likely to have time to apply carb heat
and squeeze the manual fuel pump bulb -- oh, yeah, we took that out of the
system last month, didn't we.... :)

Not to make too much light of the situation, your Pacer wing tank collapse
was caused by gravity feed PLUS pressure differential, working together, and
there's a good bit of head pressure from a Pacer's high wings to the
low-mounted carb. And there are other factors to consider. Even if the fuel
flow from that tank to the engine were shut off, simple contraction of the
fuel with decreasing temperature could have collapsed that tank. Top off an
already almost full tank in the morning, leave it setting in the sun all
day, then the mud dauber builds his nest in the fuel vent in the
afternoon... And you may never even have needed to start the engine!

As opposed to your Pacer's gravity feed PLUS pressure differential, purging
a slug of fuel from the QAC fuel tank vent requires determining the
difference between the action of gravity and the pressure differential,
working against each other, in other words, gravity MINUS pressure
differential.

In fact, the "gravity" portion of the equation might just be zero, or even a
little bit negative, if the slug of fuel in the vent line is taller than the
height of the fuel level in the header tank is above the carb inlet. So we'd
be left with just the pressure differential to move fuel through several
feet of small diameter (0.22") fuel line at approximately six gallons per
hour, or 0.85 ft/sec. Given that ram pressure at 60 mph is 1.5 inches of
water, and assuming that the carb is in the high pressure ram recovery
region of the cowl, the pressure difference available to drive the fuel flow
in climb might be quite small indeed. Certainly not equivalent to the head
pressure of approximately 14 inches of fuel (10 inches of water) that the
header tank normally gives....

I think you get my point by now. Thanks for helping me to have to think
through this problem. Now I know that there's another thing I want to do
differently on my airplane than what the plans call for.... :)


David J. Gall

-----Original Message-----
From: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com]
On Behalf Of Bob Farnam
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 3:01 PM
To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Q-LIST] Re: Fuel Vent Line

David,
No, not teasing! I agree as far as it goes. But there is
another factor to consider. As an unvented tank supplies fuel
through gravity flow, it will begin to pull a negative
pressure on the tank system. I know about this because a
Pacer of which I was part owner partially collapsed a wing
tank due to negative pressure because of a blocked (top)
vent. Now the question
is: Does the stagnation pressure due to ram air plus the
suction generated in the tank constitute enough pressure
differential to purge the fuel plug from the vent line? I may
see if I remember enough manometry to put some numbers to the problem.
Bob
-----Original Message-----
From: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of David Gall
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 1:04 PM
To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Re: Fuel Vent Line


Bob,

I think you and Mark are teasing me! :)

Well, OK, I'll bite.

If the vent tube were big enough to be able to pass bubbles
through a slug of
trapped fuel, I don't think you'd be able to get enough
bubbles per hour to
replace the five to six gallons per hour of fuel volume
your engine wants to
consume during climb.

You can't get bubbles through a soda straw, but you can
through a garden hose.
The diameter matters a lot. The tube from the main tank to
the header tank is
designed to do essentially what you suggest, but sized
appropriately to allow
fuel and air to flow simultaneously in opposite directions.
Dumb design, but
QAC apparently made it work.

The design parameter for the fuel tank vent line is that it
either be
impervious to fuel entering the line (ever - not realistic)
or else be capable
of performing its vent function when fuel gets into it. To
do that requires
that it either be self-purging when it gets fuel in it, or
that it be able to
flow air (in sufficient volume) even when there's fuel in
it. A short vent
line extending up from the top of the tank or filler cap
has the self-purging
capability with the added advantage that gravity works with
ram pressure to
purge the line in normal flight.

A long vent line extending down through the bottom of the
fuselage has the
distinct disadvantage of having gravity working against ram
pressure as
previously discussed. The pressure differential needed to
purge the line by
forcing fuel up into the tank is apparently not available,
so the line must
either be self-draining against ram pressure or else have a
shunt to capture
the fuel (up to some assumed reasonable amount) in a
secondary tank of some
kind for later return to the main tank. That is a bad idea
for lots of
reasons, so we're left with designing a self-draining vent line.

As already noted, the diameter of a tube has a big effect
on its ability to
pass air and fuel in opposite directions simultaneously.
The length of the
tube and the relative heights of its ends have an effect on
its ability to
trap and retain a slug of fuel (siphon effect). A short
length of small
diameter tubing at the airframe exit is tolerable because
ram pressure could
force a small slug of fuel up against the action of
gravity; likewise, a short
length of small diameter tubing is tolerable at the top of
the tank to "turn
the corner" and start the vent line in a downward direction.

Its the long vertical part of the small-diameter vent line
that is the problem
in the QAC design. This section of the vent line can hold a
slug of fuel just
like when you cap off the top of your soda straw and pull a
slug of your
favorite beverage up out of the cup. Try the same stunt
with a piece of 5/8"
tubing and you'll find all the soda (fuel) draining back
into the cup as you
withdraw the tubing.

So, replace the long vertical part of the fuel tank vent
line with a larger
diameter line and you should have a self-draining line that
is capable of
passing air even when there's a bit of fuel in it.

That's my opinion.

David J. Gall

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: bfarnam@pacbell.net
> To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Re: Fuel Vent Line
> Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2006 23:39:44 -0700 (PDT)
>
>
> Dave,
> I wonder if the pressure differential on the vent tube
with a fuel plug
> would
> allow bubbles to get through into the tank. Mark Summers
and I were
> discussing
> that last evening. What do you think?
> Bob F.


Re: Fuel Vent Line

David J. Gall
 

Mike,

I'm not advocating this installation at all: I'm trying to get people to see
the difficulties of it and to opt for the simpler vent going out the top of
the fuselage. We're all so used to seeing a fuel tank vent under the wing of
the Cessna we rent that we may not be putting much thought into the "simple"
act of "copying" that vent. Indeed, that vent is very different from the QAC
vent. And you're right, the transition from large diameter to small in my
suggestion does pose a potential problem.

Let me jump to the conclusion regarding your suggestion to use the filler
pipe as a catch tank. In essence, the Q2/200 fuel tank(s) are actually (in a
fluids sense) just one tank. The header tank is connected to the main tank
via the 5/8" standpipe down the middle, through which the "two" tanks
communicate both fuel and air.

The advent of the header tank is that it provides a reliable head pressure
to feed the carb. The header tank is kept full by the fuel transfer pump.
You can think of this transfer pump as a part of a "live" tank as opposed to
a passive tank. In a passive tank like on a Cessna, when the tank is nearly
empty the head pressure is still good because the bottom of the tank is
above the carb. In the Q2/200, the "bottom" of the tank is artificially
moved up to the level of the bottom of the header tank, because as the main
tank empties we transfer the fuel to the header. This "live" transfer makes
the tank seem to the carb (in a fluids sense) to be mounted higher in the
airframe.

Consider the act of filling the tank: If you fill the main tank until the
filler neck is full, doesn't the fuel also rise within the 5/8" standpipe to
the same level as in the filler neck? Now, mind you, I haven't got
operational experience with a Q2, but it seems to me that you either have to
run the electric fuel pump during refueling in order to fill the header
tank, or else the header tank fills when the fuel level reaches the top of
the 5/8" standpipe. Either way, when the header tank is full so is the 5/8
stand pipe and so is the filler pipe. Therefore, ANY vent connected to this
tank system anywhere had better be above the fuel level or it will have fuel
in it. Ergo, your proposed vent from the filler pipe would need to be just
as long (in the vertical dimension) as the existing vent from the header
tank. Moreover, the filler pipe vent would be just as susceptible to fuel
getting into it as the existing vent line is.

Keep up the good work,


David J. Gall

-----Original Message-----
From: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com]
On Behalf Of Mike Perry
Sent: Saturday, August 12, 2006 9:20 PM
To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Re: Fuel Vent Line

First, thanks to everyone who keeps writing on this issue.
Fuel starvation is one of the classic killers in early
flights of experimental aircraft and well worth a lot of attention.

Second, Dave Gall, you seem to be advocating a large diameter
down pipe narrowing to a small diameter tube as it exits the
airframe. I have concern we could still end up with a fluid
column trapped above the narrow vent tube. Perhaps some
experiments are in order.

(Lets see, mock up of fuel tank, 2 or 3 vent tube designs,
mount on top of the pickup truck, drive down the freeway at
100 mph, see if ram air pressure will clear the vent tube . .
. "Gee officer, I wasn't speeding . .
. this is a scientific experiment . . . yes, I'm working on
an airplane design . . . No, I'm not crazy. Well I don't
think I am . . . sure, I'll talk to the nice psych tech . . .
" NOT GONNA HAPPEN!)

Also, Dave you wrote: "or else have a shunt to capture the
fuel . . . in a secondary tank . . . That is a bad idea for
lots of reasons . . ." Here is an idea that might work:

Run a fuel vent line from the header to the fuel fill tube,
then a second vent line from the fuel fill to below the
canard. In essence, I am using the main fuel tank as the
"secondary tank" in your earlier suggestion. Drawback:
Complexity, weight. Advantages: short vertical in each of
two separate tubes, unlikely to develop a significant siphon
effect in either. Should develop positive pressure in main
and header tank in all situations.

In other words, why not replace a long vent line that can
generate significant negative pressure thru siphon effects
with two short vent lines much less vulnerable to siphon
effect negative pressure?

I will be off line for 36-48 hours (work) but look forward to
any comments when I get home.

Mike Perry
(18 months away from needing this question answered but still
very interested in a safe fuel system when I get there)


Re: Jim Patillo

Ron Weiss <ronweiss4@...>
 

--larry, when you click on to messages, look under the word message.
there will be 2 boxes...message# box and search box. ignore the
message # box. type in any subject you wish to look up in the search
box, then press go! all of the questions and answers regarding that
topic will come up, hence, your in the archive! good luck, Ron- In Q-
LIST@yahoogroups.com, larry severson <larry2@...> wrote:

At 07:10 PM 8/13/2006, you wrote:


Yor clueless my old pal! Its at the top of the message page just
before this one a box, in which you type your question and press
search and viola it appears! Oh by the way, its FREE. Now that's
not
difficult is it?
I am still clueless. I went to the group page, and found no way to
get to the archives. Must be simple in my old age.


Jim P.

Are you comin' up nex week?
With my wife. I need a whole lot more enlightenment, plus a bit of
fun, AND that great turkey.





Larry Severson
Fountain Valley, CA 92708
(714) 968-9852
larry2@...


Re: Chat?

Larry Severson
 

Ron:
I couldn't have said it better!

Larry Severson
Fountain Valley, CA 92708
(714) 968-9852
larry2@socal.rr.com


Re: Jim Patillo

Larry Severson
 

At 07:10 PM 8/13/2006, you wrote:


Yor clueless my old pal! Its at the top of the message page just
before this one a box, in which you type your question and press
search and viola it appears! Oh by the way, its FREE. Now that's not
difficult is it?
I am still clueless. I went to the group page, and found no way to get to the archives. Must be simple in my old age.


Jim P.

Are you comin' up nex week?
With my wife. I need a whole lot more enlightenment, plus a bit of fun, AND that great turkey.





Larry Severson
Fountain Valley, CA 92708
(714) 968-9852
larry2@socal.rr.com


Re: Chat?

Ron Weiss <ronweiss4@...>
 

--geez, you guys are brutal! it wasn't so long ago that i was looking
for the quick answers. some of us come around sooner or later. i left
this website in disgust a few years ago. it was my strong desire a love
for this airplane that brought me back with my tail between my knees.
since then a world of knowledge has opened up to me that was there all
the time! the ultimate coolness of this plane attracts anyone who is a
fan of aviation and the cost to own and operate is also atractive. it's
my feeling that if the Q 2 didn't have any handling issues they'd be
fetching the same price as a lancair or glassair! i can understand the
frustration of you oldtimers getting sick of the same old questions,
but , as long as this website is around, new guy's will surely ask them
and they'll get angry when flamed. this little fraternity is easy to
get into, ego aside, but, we're pilots! so eating a little crow is
difficult for us. a new guy is not going to ask the right questions,
he's going to ask the same questions as all of us did when we saw this
amazing airplane for the first time. we want one and we want it now!!!!
the truth is if we want a good one we have to build it! then the right
questions come to fruition. there are some oldtimers on this site that
have been here for years and still haven't flown yet. i don't know
about you,but when i get home from work i look foward to checking out
what's been said on the site. new or old at least there's activity.
questions or comments this is a pretty cool thing for all of us! if
your new and your reading this,these guys do have your best interest at
heart. you don't neccessarily have to ask the right questions, just
hang around long enough and you'll get it! the Q is the most beautiful
and exicting airplane around. to own one is a privilidge that most will
never know. mines not flying yet ,but, it's the center of my universe.
even know, the hanger at my airport is always buzzing with guys just
wanting to be close to its construction! wherever there's a Q there
will certainly be a crowd! Q's in one form or another are still
around,but , for how long? this website is the only glue holding these
planes togrther.... patience is key, or Q depending how you look at it.
Ron - In Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com, "Jim Patillo"
<logistics_engineering@...> wrote:



Pat,

Can we start a chat line on this site for builders in need of
immediate information? I know when I was building that would have been
a great asset.

Jim P.


Re: Chat?

Patrick Panzera <panzera@...>
 

If you old crusties wouldn't jump the newbies for asking questions
available in the archives, what you are asking for could be done right
here.

:)

Other than starting another Q list, I don't see how to do it.
Probably my shortcoming, I'm not really "in to" all the things available
from Yahoo.

Pat

-----Original Message-----
From: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of
Jim Patillo
Sent: Sunday, August 13, 2006 7:19 PM
To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Q-LIST] Chat?


Pat,

Can we start a chat line on this site for builders in need of
immediate information? I know when I was building that would have been
a great asset.

Jim P.


Re: Diesel Quickie

jeffs912ex@...
 

Hi Bruce,


Hey, look what I found in my "waiting to be sent folder" better late than
never.

The fellow who did the engine installations doesn't even know all the
answers you request. Rather than give you incorrect info I'll stick with just what
I remember, I wasn't taking notes. I'll bet someone did though . The first
diesel flown on this airframe was a 4 cylinder. The fuel burn was not known by
him, but he did say it would run on just about anything including peanut
oil. A very compact six cylinder is on the firewall now and is rated well over
100 hp. Test pilot Dave M. is scheduled for the honor of test flight, soon.
I'm sure you will see and hear more about this plane, it is a beautiful
example of an experimental aircraft. I think a better test bed for this engine is
a Q 200 at least you could punch it. That reminds me, good job Sam. Those
lawn darts have a bit of an advantage though. Thought I saw you at Doug's hot
dog roast, na maybe not.

Jeff Sell
Q-200 kit


Chat?

Jim Patillo
 

Pat,

Can we start a chat line on this site for builders in need of
immediate information? I know when I was building that would have been
a great asset.

Jim P.


Re: Jim Patillo

Jim Patillo
 

Yor clueless my old pal! Its at the top of the message page just
before this one a box, in which you type your question and press
search and viola it appears! Oh by the way, its FREE. Now that's not
difficult is it?

Jim P.

Are you comin' up nex week?

--- In Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com, larry severson <larry2@...> wrote:


It's just these questions along with a handful of others are always
the ones asked from new people that get on this list. If you would
simply take the time to reserach the archives you would find 99% the
information you are looking for. Why not give it a try. If you then
can't find the answer ask away and you'll get the answer.
Last I checked, it costs $400 to get a chance to research the
archives. I plan on spending the money when I get ahead, but it isn't
a simple task of "go look it up", or maybe after 2 + years of hanging
around I still am clueless.


Larry Severson
Fountain Valley, CA 92708
(714) 968-9852
larry2@...


Re: Jim Patillo

raoborg@...
 

I have not gone to the archives in the last few days because every time I try I get the answer connection failed or timed out. I checked all my settings and they are OK.The archives site is the only one I am having trouble with. Any suggestions? Raoul

--- larry2@socal.rr.com wrote:

From: larry severson <larry2@socal.rr.com>
To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Re: Jim Patillo
Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2006 17:30:42 -0700

It's just these questions along with a handful of others are always
the ones asked from new people that get on this list. If you would
simply take the time to reserach the archives you would find 99% the
information you are looking for. Why not give it a try. If you then
can't find the answer ask away and you'll get the answer.
Last I checked, it costs $400 to get a chance to research the
archives. I plan on spending the money when I get ahead, but it isn't
a simple task of "go look it up", or maybe after 2 + years of hanging
around I still am clueless.


Larry Severson
Fountain Valley, CA 92708
(714) 968-9852
larry2@socal.rr.com



_____________________________________________________________
Netscape. Just the Net You Need.


Re: Flames

chrishazlitt <chrishazlitt@...>
 

I suppose, if you push hard enough those words might fit in my
mouth. What does cheap mean to you guys? Under 20K sounds cheap to
me with all of the money and work put into these machi

I think you might be measuring with your own yard stick on that one
friend!

-- In Q-LIST@yahoogroups.com, rbarbour27@... wrote:

Jim - This guy Hazlitt is another one trying to acquire a Quickie
on the
cheap. Sometime in the recent past he must've received a
transfusion from one
of the other cheapskates who demanded that we more experienced
builders are
going to have to spoon feed them 'cause they came onboard late in
the
program.........yeah right! All the cheapskates have to do is
mimic the geezers by
buying all of the back issues of Q-talk and subscribe to the
upcoming issues.


Dick Barbour
Tri-Q-200 building
Rogers, AR



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Re: Flames

Larry Severson
 

At 05:38 PM 8/13/2006, you wrote:

Jim - This guy Hazlitt is another one trying to acquire a Quickie on the
cheap. Sometime in the recent past he must've received a transfusion from one
of the other cheapskates who demanded that we more experienced builders are
going to have to spoon feed them 'cause they came onboard late in the
program.........yeah right! All the cheapskates have to do is mimic the geezers by
buying all of the back issues of Q-talk and subscribe to the upcoming issues.
Guilty. I hope to get them soon, but retirement doesn't always leave one flush.


Larry Severson
Fountain Valley, CA 92708
(714) 968-9852
larry2@socal.rr.com


Re: Turbin Q2?

Larry Severson
 

At 10:57 AM 8/13/2006, you wrote:

Okay you Q2 guys don't laugh at me. But, has anyone put a turbin (and
I'm not talken about a midle-estern hat) in a Q2?
I saw a company (ATP now called something else) selling a complete set
up at Oshkosh 2001. It has 200hp, is light weight, and only about 25K.
They have put one in a RV4(?).
20 gal fuel tanks -> 20 gal/hr burn. Fun for a short time.


Larry Severson
Fountain Valley, CA 92708
(714) 968-9852
larry2@socal.rr.com


Re: Livermore Fly-in

Larry Severson
 

P.S. As Pat said we are 5 days and counting. It's getting late now so
please let us know "by reply on this list" who's coming so we can have
enough food on hand.
My wife and I will be attending, unfortunately in a spam can. Due to engine heating problems that I hope to have solved Monday, I will not have my 40 hours done.

Is there any one who can get us a lift to the Sat and Sun morning breakfasts? We will stay at one of the hotels next to LVK, so we can walk the rest of the time.


Larry Severson
Fountain Valley, CA 92708
(714) 968-9852
larry2@socal.rr.com


Re: Jim Patillo

Larry Severson
 

It's just these questions along with a handful of others are always
the ones asked from new people that get on this list. If you would
simply take the time to reserach the archives you would find 99% the
information you are looking for. Why not give it a try. If you then
can't find the answer ask away and you'll get the answer.
Last I checked, it costs $400 to get a chance to research the archives. I plan on spending the money when I get ahead, but it isn't a simple task of "go look it up", or maybe after 2 + years of hanging around I still am clueless.


Larry Severson
Fountain Valley, CA 92708
(714) 968-9852
larry2@socal.rr.com