Return-Path: <marv@lancaironline.net>
Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net> (Marvin Kaye)
To: lml
Date: Mon, 13 May 2002 12:56:17 -0400
Message-ID: <redirect-1236456@logan.com>
X-Original-Return-Path: <jleonsmith@earthlink.net>
Received: from hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net ([207.217.120.22] verified)
  by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.0b1)
  with ESMTP id 1236427 for lml@lancaironline.net; Mon, 13 May 2002 12:24:02 -0400
Received: from 1cust69.tnt1.longview.wa.da.uu.net ([67.226.17.69] helo=smithscompaq)
	by hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #2)
	id 177IcF-0005DW-00
	for lml@lancaironline.net; Mon, 13 May 2002 09:24:03 -0700
X-Original-Message-ID: <004501c1fa9b$3e4579e0$4511e243@smithscompaq>
Reply-To: "Leon Smith" <jleonsmith@earthlink.net>
From: "Leon Smith" <jleonsmith@earthlink.net>
X-Original-To: "Lancair List" <lml@lancaironline.net>
Subject: PRISM Option
X-Original-Date: Mon, 13 May 2002 09:28:39 -0700
Organization: LNCE - N63LS
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400

George,

PRISM sounds like a logical interim and possibly long term solution to the
leaded fuel problem.  What kind of instrumentation changes will I have to
make to my panel to use it?  Will the VM-1000 still be sufficient?
Leon S.
ES IO-550N