Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: Speaking of Focal Reducers

Expand Messages
  • pensack1
    Actually, the focal plane of the telescope does not change in diameter as a focal reducer is added, only the image scale changes, and that is why the field of
    Message 1 of 10 , Aug 3 4:55 PM
      Actually, the focal plane of the telescope does not change in diameter as a focal
      reducer is added, only the image scale changes, and that is why the field of view is
      larger (both true and apparent). A 35mm Panoptic, with a 38.7mm field stop
      vignettes slightly at f/10, but the light dropoff is not noticeable. At f/6.3, the baffle tube
      effectively limits the field of view and causes vignetting, but even then, it's not
      severe--merely noticeable.
      But, in both cases, the focal plane of the scope is the same size.
      If the illuminated focal plane shrank with the reducer, the image would shrink, but the
      true field of view would stay the same. The apparent field of view would have to
      shrink because the magnification went down(remember, TFOV=AFOV/M).
      Since it does not , but magnification goes down, true field goes up, which means that
      all that is happening is that the image scale has changed.
      The true picture is more complicated, since the cause of vignetting in an SCT can
      be too narrow a primary mirror, too small a secondary, too long baffles, or an
      eyepiece with a field stop larger than the fully illuminated focal plane.
      But the focal reducer does not reduced the size of the focal plane (if it did, no one
      would use one).
      Don Pensack



      --- In sct-user@yahoogroups.com, "John Mahony" <jmmahony@h...> wrote:
      > >From: "David" <Ginahoy@a...>
      > >
      > >--- In sct-user@yahoogroups.com, "ianhewitt2001" wrote:
      > >[snip]
      > > > I have a C11 (10yrs old) and a Meade 6.3 RC ...
      > >
      > >Ian,
      > >... keep in mind
      > >that any 2" eyepiece with a field stop larger than the clear aperture
      > >of the R/C (about 38mm) will experience vignetting. (Note: full
      > >aperture 2" eyepieces like the 30mm WideScan and 41mm Panoptic have
      > >an effective field stop of ~47mm).
      >
      > It's worse than that: since the reducer reducers the size of the focused
      > image, any EP with a field stop larger than 38*0.63 = 24mm will experience
      > some vignetting. Fortunately, the eye is pretty forgiving of mild
      > vignetting.
      > -John
      >
      > _________________________________________________________________
      > Overwhelmed by debt? Find out how to `Dig Yourself Out of Debt' from MSN
      > Money. http://special.msn.com/money/0407debt.armx
    • John Mahony
      Not true. Adding the reducer does not change what light rays make it through the rear port, except for some small change due to the fact that the primary has
      Message 2 of 10 , Aug 3 5:22 PM
        Not true. Adding the reducer does not change what light rays make it
        through the rear port, except for some small change due to the fact that the
        primary has to be moved forward to reach focus with the reducer.
        With the reducer, if a star image in the focal plane is more than 12mm from
        the center (ie, outside a 24mm diameter circle), then if you remove the
        reducer, the image plane goes back to its original scale, and this star
        image is now more than 12/0.63 = 19mm from the center, so it is outside a
        38mm diameter circle. But the rear port has about the same diameter as the
        lens aperture of the reducer, 38mm, so some of the rays forming that star
        image will be vignetted.
        Reversing that argument shows that vignetting with the reducer starts at
        24mm diameter at the focal plane, at a minimum. In an 8" SCT, considering
        the forward end of the baffle tube reduces the unvignetted field even
        further.
        -John


        >From: "pensack1" <Pensack1@...>
        >Reply-To: sct-user@yahoogroups.com
        >To: sct-user@yahoogroups.com
        >Subject: [sct-user] Re: Speaking of Focal Reducers
        >Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 23:55:22 -0000
        >
        >Actually, the focal plane of the telescope does not change in diameter as a
        >focal
        >reducer is added, only the image scale changes, and that is why the field
        >of view is
        >larger (both true and apparent). A 35mm Panoptic, with a 38.7mm field stop
        >vignettes slightly at f/10, but the light dropoff is not noticeable. At
        >f/6.3, the baffle tube
        >effectively limits the field of view and causes vignetting, but even then,
        >it's not
        >severe--merely noticeable.
        >But, in both cases, the focal plane of the scope is the same size.
        >If the illuminated focal plane shrank with the reducer, the image would
        >shrink, but the
        >true field of view would stay the same. The apparent field of view would
        >have to
        >shrink because the magnification went down(remember, TFOV=AFOV/M).
        >Since it does not , but magnification goes down, true field goes up, which
        >means that
        >all that is happening is that the image scale has changed.
        >The true picture is more complicated, since the cause of vignetting in an
        >SCT can
        >be too narrow a primary mirror, too small a secondary, too long baffles, or
        >an
        >eyepiece with a field stop larger than the fully illuminated focal plane.
        >But the focal reducer does not reduced the size of the focal plane (if it
        >did, no one
        >would use one).
        >Don Pensack
        >
        >
        >
        >--- In sct-user@yahoogroups.com, "John Mahony" <jmmahony@h...> wrote:
        > > >From: "David" <Ginahoy@a...>
        > > >
        > > >--- In sct-user@yahoogroups.com, "ianhewitt2001" wrote:
        > > >[snip]
        > > > > I have a C11 (10yrs old) and a Meade 6.3 RC ...
        > > >
        > > >Ian,
        > > >... keep in mind
        > > >that any 2" eyepiece with a field stop larger than the clear aperture
        > > >of the R/C (about 38mm) will experience vignetting. (Note: full
        > > >aperture 2" eyepieces like the 30mm WideScan and 41mm Panoptic have
        > > >an effective field stop of ~47mm).
        > >
        > > It's worse than that: since the reducer reducers the size of the focused
        > > image, any EP with a field stop larger than 38*0.63 = 24mm will
        >experience
        > > some vignetting. Fortunately, the eye is pretty forgiving of mild
        > > vignetting.
        > > -John
        > >
        > > _________________________________________________________________
        > > Overwhelmed by debt? Find out how to `Dig Yourself Out of Debt' from MSN
        > > Money. http://special.msn.com/money/0407debt.armx
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >Visit the sct-user home page at:
        >
        >
        >
        >http://members.aol.com/RMOLLISE/index4.html
        >Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >

        _________________________________________________________________
        MSN Toolbar provides one-click access to Hotmail from any Web page � FREE
        download! http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200413ave/direct/01/
      • Chuck
        What about a C11 with the larger rear opening? I use a Starlight crayford which screws right onto the larger opening with a Starsweeper .5x focal reducer in
        Message 3 of 10 , Aug 3 6:09 PM
          What about a C11 with the larger rear opening? I use a Starlight crayford
          which screws right onto the larger opening with a Starsweeper .5x focal
          reducer in my AP 2" Diagonal. Any idea what the amount of vignetting is
          with a 35mm Panoptic?

          Clear Skies,

          Chuck

          ----- Original Message -----
          From: "John Mahony" <jmmahony@...>
          To: <sct-user@yahoogroups.com>
          Sent: Tuesday, August 03, 2004 6:22 PM
          Subject: RE: [sct-user] Re: Speaking of Focal Reducers


          > Not true. Adding the reducer does not change what light rays make it
          > through the rear port, except for some small change due to the fact that
          the
          > primary has to be moved forward to reach focus with the reducer.
          > With the reducer, if a star image in the focal plane is more than 12mm
          from
          > the center (ie, outside a 24mm diameter circle), then if you remove the
          > reducer, the image plane goes back to its original scale, and this star
          > image is now more than 12/0.63 = 19mm from the center, so it is outside a
          > 38mm diameter circle. But the rear port has about the same diameter as
          the
          > lens aperture of the reducer, 38mm, so some of the rays forming that star
          > image will be vignetted.
          > Reversing that argument shows that vignetting with the reducer starts at
          > 24mm diameter at the focal plane, at a minimum. In an 8" SCT, considering
          > the forward end of the baffle tube reduces the unvignetted field even
          > further.
          > -John
          >
          >
          > >From: "pensack1" <Pensack1@...>
          > >Reply-To: sct-user@yahoogroups.com
          > >To: sct-user@yahoogroups.com
          > >Subject: [sct-user] Re: Speaking of Focal Reducers
          > >Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 23:55:22 -0000
          > >
          > >Actually, the focal plane of the telescope does not change in diameter as
          a
          > >focal
          > >reducer is added, only the image scale changes, and that is why the field
          > >of view is
          > >larger (both true and apparent). A 35mm Panoptic, with a 38.7mm field
          stop
          > >vignettes slightly at f/10, but the light dropoff is not noticeable. At
          > >f/6.3, the baffle tube
          > >effectively limits the field of view and causes vignetting, but even
          then,
          > >it's not
          > >severe--merely noticeable.
          > >But, in both cases, the focal plane of the scope is the same size.
          > >If the illuminated focal plane shrank with the reducer, the image would
          > >shrink, but the
          > >true field of view would stay the same. The apparent field of view would
          > >have to
          > >shrink because the magnification went down(remember, TFOV=AFOV/M).
          > >Since it does not , but magnification goes down, true field goes up,
          which
          > >means that
          > >all that is happening is that the image scale has changed.
          > >The true picture is more complicated, since the cause of vignetting in an
          > >SCT can
          > >be too narrow a primary mirror, too small a secondary, too long baffles,
          or
          > >an
          > >eyepiece with a field stop larger than the fully illuminated focal plane.
          > >But the focal reducer does not reduced the size of the focal plane (if it
          > >did, no one
          > >would use one).
          > >Don Pensack
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >--- In sct-user@yahoogroups.com, "John Mahony" <jmmahony@h...> wrote:
          > > > >From: "David" <Ginahoy@a...>
          > > > >
          > > > >--- In sct-user@yahoogroups.com, "ianhewitt2001" wrote:
          > > > >[snip]
          > > > > > I have a C11 (10yrs old) and a Meade 6.3 RC ...
          > > > >
          > > > >Ian,
          > > > >... keep in mind
          > > > >that any 2" eyepiece with a field stop larger than the clear aperture
          > > > >of the R/C (about 38mm) will experience vignetting. (Note: full
          > > > >aperture 2" eyepieces like the 30mm WideScan and 41mm Panoptic have
          > > > >an effective field stop of ~47mm).
          > > >
          > > > It's worse than that: since the reducer reducers the size of the
          focused
          > > > image, any EP with a field stop larger than 38*0.63 = 24mm will
          > >experience
          > > > some vignetting. Fortunately, the eye is pretty forgiving of mild
          > > > vignetting.
          > > > -John
          > > >
          > > > _________________________________________________________________
          > > > Overwhelmed by debt? Find out how to `Dig Yourself Out of Debt' from
          MSN
          > > > Money. http://special.msn.com/money/0407debt.armx
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >Visit the sct-user home page at:
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >http://members.aol.com/RMOLLISE/index4.html
          > >Yahoo! Groups Links
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          >
          > _________________________________________________________________
          > MSN Toolbar provides one-click access to Hotmail from any Web page - FREE
          > download! http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200413ave/direct/01/
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > Visit the sct-user home page at:
          >
          >
          >
          > http://members.aol.com/RMOLLISE/index4.html
          > Yahoo! Groups Links
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
        • John Mahony
          What s the lens diameter of the reducer? All you really have to do is look at the vignetting situation for an aperture that large at the rear of the scope,
          Message 4 of 10 , Aug 3 7:42 PM
            What's the lens diameter of the reducer? All you really have to do is look
            at the vignetting situation for an aperture that large at the rear of the
            scope, and then "reduce" the picture by half.
            Since the lens is very likely less than 2", your unvignetted field will be
            no larger than 1", while a 35 Pan would have a field stop around 1.6". That
            doesn't meant the results will look terrible, since the eye is so forgiving
            of vignetting, but with such a wide TFOV EP, I think you'll notice the
            vignetting.
            -John

            >From: "Chuck" <cscappaticci@...>
            >Reply-To: sct-user@yahoogroups.com
            >To: <sct-user@yahoogroups.com>
            >Subject: Re: [sct-user] Re: Speaking of Focal Reducers
            >Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 19:09:21 -0600
            >
            >What about a C11 with the larger rear opening? I use a Starlight crayford
            >which screws right onto the larger opening with a Starsweeper .5x focal
            >reducer in my AP 2" Diagonal. Any idea what the amount of vignetting is
            >with a 35mm Panoptic?
            >
            >Clear Skies,
            >
            > Chuck
            >
            >----- Original Message -----
            >From: "John Mahony" <jmmahony@...>
            >To: <sct-user@yahoogroups.com>
            >Sent: Tuesday, August 03, 2004 6:22 PM
            >Subject: RE: [sct-user] Re: Speaking of Focal Reducers
            >
            >
            > > Not true. Adding the reducer does not change what light rays make it
            > > through the rear port, except for some small change due to the fact that
            >the
            > > primary has to be moved forward to reach focus with the reducer.
            > > With the reducer, if a star image in the focal plane is more than 12mm
            >from
            > > the center (ie, outside a 24mm diameter circle), then if you remove the
            > > reducer, the image plane goes back to its original scale, and this star
            > > image is now more than 12/0.63 = 19mm from the center, so it is outside
            >a
            > > 38mm diameter circle. But the rear port has about the same diameter as
            >the
            > > lens aperture of the reducer, 38mm, so some of the rays forming that
            >star
            > > image will be vignetted.
            > > Reversing that argument shows that vignetting with the reducer starts at
            > > 24mm diameter at the focal plane, at a minimum. In an 8" SCT,
            >considering
            > > the forward end of the baffle tube reduces the unvignetted field even
            > > further.
            > > -John
            > >
            > >
            > > >From: "pensack1" <Pensack1@...>
            > > >Reply-To: sct-user@yahoogroups.com
            > > >To: sct-user@yahoogroups.com
            > > >Subject: [sct-user] Re: Speaking of Focal Reducers
            > > >Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 23:55:22 -0000
            > > >
            > > >Actually, the focal plane of the telescope does not change in diameter
            >as
            >a
            > > >focal
            > > >reducer is added, only the image scale changes, and that is why the
            >field
            > > >of view is
            > > >larger (both true and apparent). A 35mm Panoptic, with a 38.7mm field
            >stop
            > > >vignettes slightly at f/10, but the light dropoff is not noticeable.
            >At
            > > >f/6.3, the baffle tube
            > > >effectively limits the field of view and causes vignetting, but even
            >then,
            > > >it's not
            > > >severe--merely noticeable.
            > > >But, in both cases, the focal plane of the scope is the same size.
            > > >If the illuminated focal plane shrank with the reducer, the image would
            > > >shrink, but the
            > > >true field of view would stay the same. The apparent field of view
            >would
            > > >have to
            > > >shrink because the magnification went down(remember, TFOV=AFOV/M).
            > > >Since it does not , but magnification goes down, true field goes up,
            >which
            > > >means that
            > > >all that is happening is that the image scale has changed.
            > > >The true picture is more complicated, since the cause of vignetting in
            >an
            > > >SCT can
            > > >be too narrow a primary mirror, too small a secondary, too long
            >baffles,
            >or
            > > >an
            > > >eyepiece with a field stop larger than the fully illuminated focal
            >plane.
            > > >But the focal reducer does not reduced the size of the focal plane (if
            >it
            > > >did, no one
            > > >would use one).
            > > >Don Pensack
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >--- In sct-user@yahoogroups.com, "John Mahony" <jmmahony@h...> wrote:
            > > > > >From: "David" <Ginahoy@a...>
            > > > > >
            > > > > >--- In sct-user@yahoogroups.com, "ianhewitt2001" wrote:
            > > > > >[snip]
            > > > > > > I have a C11 (10yrs old) and a Meade 6.3 RC ...
            > > > > >
            > > > > >Ian,
            > > > > >... keep in mind
            > > > > >that any 2" eyepiece with a field stop larger than the clear
            >aperture
            > > > > >of the R/C (about 38mm) will experience vignetting. (Note: full
            > > > > >aperture 2" eyepieces like the 30mm WideScan and 41mm Panoptic have
            > > > > >an effective field stop of ~47mm).
            > > > >
            > > > > It's worse than that: since the reducer reducers the size of the
            >focused
            > > > > image, any EP with a field stop larger than 38*0.63 = 24mm will
            > > >experience
            > > > > some vignetting. Fortunately, the eye is pretty forgiving of mild
            > > > > vignetting.
            > > > > -John
            > > > >
            > > > > _________________________________________________________________
            > > > > Overwhelmed by debt? Find out how to `Dig Yourself Out of Debt' from
            >MSN
            > > > > Money. http://special.msn.com/money/0407debt.armx
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >Visit the sct-user home page at:
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >http://members.aol.com/RMOLLISE/index4.html
            > > >Yahoo! Groups Links
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > >
            > > _________________________________________________________________
            > > MSN Toolbar provides one-click access to Hotmail from any Web page -
            >FREE
            > > download! http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200413ave/direct/01/
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > Visit the sct-user home page at:
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > http://members.aol.com/RMOLLISE/index4.html
            > > Yahoo! Groups Links
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >Visit the sct-user home page at:
            >
            >
            >
            >http://members.aol.com/RMOLLISE/index4.html
            >Yahoo! Groups Links
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >

            _________________________________________________________________
            Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!
            http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
          • Chuck
            Thanks John, I think the lens is 2 , I m sure it vignettes but is definitely provides a wider field with the reducer than without ... Seems like it s worth
            Message 5 of 10 , Aug 4 5:47 AM
              Thanks John, I think the lens is 2", I'm sure it vignettes but is
              definitely provides a wider field with the reducer than without ... Seems
              like it's worth the tradeoff for my C11

              Clear Skies,

              Chuck

              ----- Original Message -----
              From: "John Mahony" <jmmahony@...>
              To: <sct-user@yahoogroups.com>
              Sent: Tuesday, August 03, 2004 8:42 PM
              Subject: Re: [sct-user] Re: Speaking of Focal Reducers


              > What's the lens diameter of the reducer? All you really have to do is
              look
              > at the vignetting situation for an aperture that large at the rear of the
              > scope, and then "reduce" the picture by half.
              > Since the lens is very likely less than 2", your unvignetted field will be
              > no larger than 1", while a 35 Pan would have a field stop around 1.6".
              That
              > doesn't meant the results will look terrible, since the eye is so
              forgiving
              > of vignetting, but with such a wide TFOV EP, I think you'll notice the
              > vignetting.
              > -John
              >
              > >From: "Chuck" <cscappaticci@...>
              > >Reply-To: sct-user@yahoogroups.com
              > >To: <sct-user@yahoogroups.com>
              > >Subject: Re: [sct-user] Re: Speaking of Focal Reducers
              > >Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 19:09:21 -0600
              > >
              > >What about a C11 with the larger rear opening? I use a Starlight
              crayford
              > >which screws right onto the larger opening with a Starsweeper .5x focal
              > >reducer in my AP 2" Diagonal. Any idea what the amount of vignetting is
              > >with a 35mm Panoptic?
              > >
              > >Clear Skies,
              > >
              > > Chuck
              > >
              > >----- Original Message -----
              > >From: "John Mahony" <jmmahony@...>
              > >To: <sct-user@yahoogroups.com>
              > >Sent: Tuesday, August 03, 2004 6:22 PM
              > >Subject: RE: [sct-user] Re: Speaking of Focal Reducers
              > >
              > >
              > > > Not true. Adding the reducer does not change what light rays make it
              > > > through the rear port, except for some small change due to the fact
              that
              > >the
              > > > primary has to be moved forward to reach focus with the reducer.
              > > > With the reducer, if a star image in the focal plane is more than 12mm
              > >from
              > > > the center (ie, outside a 24mm diameter circle), then if you remove
              the
              > > > reducer, the image plane goes back to its original scale, and this
              star
              > > > image is now more than 12/0.63 = 19mm from the center, so it is
              outside
              > >a
              > > > 38mm diameter circle. But the rear port has about the same diameter
              as
              > >the
              > > > lens aperture of the reducer, 38mm, so some of the rays forming that
              > >star
              > > > image will be vignetted.
              > > > Reversing that argument shows that vignetting with the reducer starts
              at
              > > > 24mm diameter at the focal plane, at a minimum. In an 8" SCT,
              > >considering
              > > > the forward end of the baffle tube reduces the unvignetted field even
              > > > further.
              > > > -John
              > > >
              > > >
              > > > >From: "pensack1" <Pensack1@...>
              > > > >Reply-To: sct-user@yahoogroups.com
              > > > >To: sct-user@yahoogroups.com
              > > > >Subject: [sct-user] Re: Speaking of Focal Reducers
              > > > >Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 23:55:22 -0000
              > > > >
              > > > >Actually, the focal plane of the telescope does not change in
              diameter
              > >as
              > >a
              > > > >focal
              > > > >reducer is added, only the image scale changes, and that is why the
              > >field
              > > > >of view is
              > > > >larger (both true and apparent). A 35mm Panoptic, with a 38.7mm
              field
              > >stop
              > > > >vignettes slightly at f/10, but the light dropoff is not noticeable.
              > >At
              > > > >f/6.3, the baffle tube
              > > > >effectively limits the field of view and causes vignetting, but even
              > >then,
              > > > >it's not
              > > > >severe--merely noticeable.
              > > > >But, in both cases, the focal plane of the scope is the same size.
              > > > >If the illuminated focal plane shrank with the reducer, the image
              would
              > > > >shrink, but the
              > > > >true field of view would stay the same. The apparent field of view
              > >would
              > > > >have to
              > > > >shrink because the magnification went down(remember, TFOV=AFOV/M).
              > > > >Since it does not , but magnification goes down, true field goes up,
              > >which
              > > > >means that
              > > > >all that is happening is that the image scale has changed.
              > > > >The true picture is more complicated, since the cause of vignetting
              in
              > >an
              > > > >SCT can
              > > > >be too narrow a primary mirror, too small a secondary, too long
              > >baffles,
              > >or
              > > > >an
              > > > >eyepiece with a field stop larger than the fully illuminated focal
              > >plane.
              > > > >But the focal reducer does not reduced the size of the focal plane
              (if
              > >it
              > > > >did, no one
              > > > >would use one).
              > > > >Don Pensack
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > >--- In sct-user@yahoogroups.com, "John Mahony" <jmmahony@h...> wrote:
              > > > > > >From: "David" <Ginahoy@a...>
              > > > > > >
              > > > > > >--- In sct-user@yahoogroups.com, "ianhewitt2001" wrote:
              > > > > > >[snip]
              > > > > > > > I have a C11 (10yrs old) and a Meade 6.3 RC ...
              > > > > > >
              > > > > > >Ian,
              > > > > > >... keep in mind
              > > > > > >that any 2" eyepiece with a field stop larger than the clear
              > >aperture
              > > > > > >of the R/C (about 38mm) will experience vignetting. (Note: full
              > > > > > >aperture 2" eyepieces like the 30mm WideScan and 41mm Panoptic
              have
              > > > > > >an effective field stop of ~47mm).
              > > > > >
              > > > > > It's worse than that: since the reducer reducers the size of the
              > >focused
              > > > > > image, any EP with a field stop larger than 38*0.63 = 24mm will
              > > > >experience
              > > > > > some vignetting. Fortunately, the eye is pretty forgiving of mild
              > > > > > vignetting.
              > > > > > -John
              > > > > >
              > > > > > _________________________________________________________________
              > > > > > Overwhelmed by debt? Find out how to `Dig Yourself Out of Debt'
              from
              > >MSN
              > > > > > Money. http://special.msn.com/money/0407debt.armx
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > >Visit the sct-user home page at:
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > >http://members.aol.com/RMOLLISE/index4.html
              > > > >Yahoo! Groups Links
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > >
              > > > _________________________________________________________________
              > > > MSN Toolbar provides one-click access to Hotmail from any Web page -
              > >FREE
              > > > download!
              http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200413ave/direct/01/
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > > Visit the sct-user home page at:
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > > http://members.aol.com/RMOLLISE/index4.html
              > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >Visit the sct-user home page at:
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >http://members.aol.com/RMOLLISE/index4.html
              > >Yahoo! Groups Links
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              >
              > _________________________________________________________________
              > Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!
              > http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > Visit the sct-user home page at:
              >
              >
              >
              > http://members.aol.com/RMOLLISE/index4.html
              > Yahoo! Groups Links
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.