Re: to be or not to be... - XCC Forum | Register | Login | Search History | Home | Messages |
to be or not to be... | flyby | 07:05 19-11-2001 | ||
Re: to be or not to be... | Olaf van der Spek | 17:35 19-11-2001 | ||
Re: to be or not to be... | will | 17:52 19-11-2001 | ||
Re: to be or not to be... | Godwin | 18:23 19-11-2001 | ||
Re: to be or not to be... | will | 18:29 19-11-2001 | ||
Re: to be or not to be... | flyby | 19:07 19-11-2001 | ||
Re: to be or not to be... | will | 19:10 19-11-2001 | ||
Re: to be or not to be... | flyby | 19:30 19-11-2001 | ||
Re: to be or not to be... | will | 19:32 19-11-2001 | ||
Re: to be or not to be... | flyby | 20:27 19-11-2001 |
> or prioritised; TS normals done *PROPERLY* first, then RA2
> normals tackled?
Fine with me... I'll re-focus my research in that direction then ;)
Home | Post | Users | Messages |