[
Date Prev
][
Date Next
][
Thread Prev
][
Thread Next
][
Date Index
][
Thread Index
]
Re: <SPAM> [PSUBS-MAILIST] Re: acrylic viewport thickness
To
:
personal_submersibles@psubs.org
Subject
: Re: <SPAM> [PSUBS-MAILIST] Re: acrylic viewport thickness
From
: Michael Holt <
mholt@ohiohills.com
>
Date
: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 15:31:56 -0500
In-reply-to
: <
004f01c51b71$278c2ec0$1f0b0a0a@hboi.edu
>
References
: <
004f01c51b71$278c2ec0$1f0b0a0a@hboi.edu
>
Reply-to
:
personal_submersibles@psubs.org
Sender
:
owner-personal_submersibles@psubs.org
User-agent
: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 (ax)
Hugo Marrero wrote:
That's why I rather let the experts do that...
;)
They did. I think it was Claude Gongwer in a 1965 MTS publication who suggested the idea.
Mike
References
:
RE: <SPAM> [PSUBS-MAILIST] Re: acrylic viewport thickness
From:
"Hugo Marrero" <hmarrero@hboi.edu>
Prev by Date:
Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Re: acrylic viewport thickness
Next by Date:
Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Do it all yourself approach... is it sensible?
Previous by thread:
RE: <SPAM> [PSUBS-MAILIST] Re: acrylic viewport thickness
Next by thread:
Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Re: acrylic viewport thickness
Index(es):
Date
Thread