I'm sure you've answered this 1000 times but...

The only reason I have not done that in the past is:

1. It would make me responsible for starting many new threads thus skewing the annual review figures.

1. If it's worth FAQ'ing it's worth rereading.

Jerry

This really should be in the FAQ.

Randy

TSBITF

:-(

this should be in the FAQ!

sorry, I couldn't resist ;)

- iz

Only use the string, "this should be in the FAQ" when you mean it. It is the only convention that has been in use.

If you are joking use any other string.

BTW, there is one or more HUGE batches of A10-0T motors circulating in the LA area that has a 50% or greater CATO rate. I did not buy them, so I don't know the whole story. The last batch I bought personally was last year and they were from 1973 or 1974 and they worked perfectly (about 60 motors). The bad batches are either from year X, Z or A and they may have been in a non-temperature controlled warehouse or garage in the

120 degree in-the-shade San Fernando Valley or they may have remained in the rocketeers car on repeated trips to Lucerne (and hit 200 degrees plus). They blow just after ignition in a classic blow-through manner which manages to ignite the next stage and give it some good impulse. We'll burn/blow-up as many as possible on 12/27.

-Fred Shecter NAR 20117

-- ""Remove "zorch" from address (2 places) to reply.

How about for jokes: "This should be in the FACK!"

-Shread Vector NRA #1 Paramount Leader

Or just abbreviate it as "FAQ you!"

So you pretty much do NAR certified fireworks shows now! Cool.

Good thing they do not certify USR motors. They make bad fireworks.

Jerry

FAQ you!

(I couldn't either :-) )

Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD!