Re: Why no MGs?

To:	mgs@autox.team.net
Subject:	Re: Why no MGs?
From:	ATWEDITOR@aol.com
Date:	Thu, 25 Sep 2003 16:47:52 EDT

In a message dated 9/25/03 4:40:48 PM, crenner@dynalivery.com writes:

<< it would be very unbureaucratic for a US agency to simply accept the 
certification of
another country >>

How true, and yet, somehow, they can do that for airplane certification.  Go 
figure.

Jay Donoghue

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
Re: Why no MGs?, (continued) Re: Why no MGs?, Paul Root Re: Why no MGs?, Paul M. Re: Why no MGs?, David Breneman RE: Why no MGs?, Lambdin, Mike Why no MGs?, DON SCOTT Re: Why no MGs?, LBCarCoMail Re: Why no MGs?, Paul Root Re: Why no MGs?, Max Heim RE: Why no MGs?, Chuck Renner Re: Why no MGs?, Barrie Robinson Re: Why no MGs?, ATWEDITOR <= Re: Why no MGs?, David Breneman Re: Why no MGs?, Max Heim RE: Why no MGs?, Lew Palmer Why no MGs?, Lew Palmer RE: Why no MGs?, Richard Rivenbark Re: Why no MGs?, James Nazarian Re: Why no MGs?, Telewest \(PH\) Re: Why no MGs?, Paul M.

Previous by Date:	Re: Headers or not?, David Councill
Next by Date:	Re: Tube Shock Conversion Kits, ATWEDITOR
Previous by Thread:	Re: Why no MGs?, Barrie Robinson
Next by Thread:	Re: Why no MGs?, David Breneman
Indexes:	[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]