Re: Re: Pro-Am definitions

From: Bill Carney <wcarneyjx_at_bellsouth.net>
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2010 12:22:56 -0700 (PDT)

Is the intent of this discussion to do away with the LPP Pro Am and replace it with an A-6 Pro Am? Shaking my head muttering why?

--- On Wed, 10/20/10, mark bennett <f1diddler_at_yahoo.com> wrote:


From: mark bennett <f1diddler_at_yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [Indoor_Construction] Re: Pro-Am definitions
To: Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, October 20, 2010, 2:29 PM


 











From: Bill Gowen <wdgowen_at_gmail.com>
To: Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wed, October 20, 2010 10:05:30 AM
Subject: Re: [Indoor_Construction] Re: Pro-Am definitions

 


<<I think only a few people can fly A6 for 6 minutes in the ordinarily available >>


Not criticizing the kicking around of options, but seems LPP proved itself attractive enough to draw the AMs.  Why bail on something reasonably easy/hard  yet with some indoor pizazz.
MB
Received on Wed Oct 20 2010 - 12:48:17 CEST