Jump to content
ale92

Alenia C-27J Spartan

Recommended Posts

In Australia dovrebbe essere andata....

 

Minister for Defence and Minister for Defence Materiel – Joint Media Release – New Battlefield aircraft for the Air Force

10 May 2012

 

Minister for Defence Stephen Smith and Minister for Defence Materiel Jason Clare today announced that the Government had agreed to purchase 10 Alenia C-27J Spartan Battlefield Airlift aircraft at a cost of $1.4 billion.

 

 

Fonte: http://www.minister.defence.gov.au/2012/05/10/minister-for-defence-and-minister-for-defence-materiel-joint-media-release-new-battlefield-aircraft-for-the-air-force/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

La scelta dell'Australia conferma la bontà del "prodotto" ....

 

"The C-27J was assessed by Defence as the aircraft which best met all the essential capability requirements and provides the best value for money .... It was assessed as being able to fly further, faster, higher while carrying more cargo and requiring a smaller runway than the other aircraft under consideration, the Airbus Military C-295."

 

Fonte .... qxui6q.jpg .... http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/australia-confirms-a14-billion-deal-for-10-c-27js-371648/

 

Tanto per usare una frase trita e ritrita .... sono parole pesanti come macigni che cadono sul groppone del velivolo concorrente ....

 

Ma ve ne sono anche per il C-130 ....

 

The C-27J has the capacity to carry significant load and still access small, soft, narrow runways that are too short for the C-130J or runways which are unable to sustain repeated use of larger aircraft.

In Australia, the C-27J can access over 1900 airfields compared to around 500 for the C-130 Hercules aircraft.

In our region, the C-27J will be able to access over 400 airfields compared to around 200 for the C‑130 Hercules aircraft.

 

Fonte .... 2j0hydi.jpg .... http://www.minister.defence.gov.au/2012/05/10/minister-for-defence-and-minister-for-defence-materiel-joint-media-release-new-battlefield-aircraft-for-the-air-force/

 

Alla faccia dell'USAF che parla di "prodotto di nicchia" ....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

C'è n'è di che meditare per i nostri amici yankees.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

C'è n'è di che meditare per i nostri amici yankees.

 

Ma anche per gli utenti di questo forum ;)

 

Nella pagina addietro era stato scritto tra le altre cose:

 

.... Air Force leaders now see the small cargo hauler as “a luxury it cannot afford in this era of cost-cutting.”

 

If the Spartan is an unaffordable luxury at $2B, it does beg the question of the JSF’s affordability at $395B.

 

We can afford the expensive one but not the cheap one?

 

Adesso senza andare a portarte qui l'infinita discussione sull'F-35, abbiamo almeno un esempio lampante di una forza armata USA che ha spinto, insieme alla beneamata Lockheed (beneamata per i più vecchi di noi fin dall'affare Antelope Cobler, guarda caso riguardante i C-130) per far intraprendere una strada meno efficace per puri interessi di lobbying, a scapito dell'efficienza complessiva delle FFAA del proprio Paese.

 

 

Era il Dakota il velivolo soprannominato "l'aereo che ha vinto la WW2"?

Edited by Scagnetti

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

La Lockheed, a quei tempi, pagò "mazzette" a tutti per poter piazzare i propri prodotti .... non soltanto per i C-130 (che erano, fra l'altro, l'unica scelta possibile in quanto l'europeo "Transall" non era assolutamente in grado di raggiungerne le prestazioni) .... ma anche per i "104" (se ben ricordo in Olanda e Giappone) .... e, mi chiedo tuttora, il "104" sarebbe stata l'unica opzione possibile ?

E chi, in Europa, ne aveva ordinato il maggior numero .... pagandone poi pesante pedaggio in catastrofiche perdite di velivoli e, purtroppo, vite umane ?

Tutto tranquillo su quel fronte e .... non vi fu alcunchè di irregolare in quel di Germania ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Era il Dakota il velivolo soprannominato "l'aereo che ha vinto la WW2"?

 

Era proporio lui.

Le molte migliaia di C-47 furono un grande "moltiplicatore di forze", come si ama dire oggi, trasportando di tutto, dappertutto.

Proprio quello che oggi è in grado di fare, meglio di qualunque altro velivolo, il C-27J.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

La scelta dell'Australia e le immancabili successive polemiche ....

 

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/canberra-defends-c-27j-decision-after-airbus-protests-371887/

 

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/asian-skies/2012/05/full-text-of-airbuss-statement.html

 

http://www.minister.defence.gov.au/2012/05/11/response-of-11-may-2012-provided-to-david-ellery-the-canberra-times-to-questions-asked-on-11-may-2012/

 

Un giornalista domanda, fra l'altro, al Ministro della Difesa australiano ....

 

Nine of these aircraft will be ones that the US is no longer taking. I understand the US price was around $30 – $31 million per unit – why are they costing us so much?

.... che così risponde ....

 

The aircraft being acquired by Australia are new build aircraft.

Auguriamoci sia vero .... B-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gli Australiani hanno già ampiamente spiegato come il C-27J sia decisamente superiore nel soddisfare i loro requisiti operativi principali e rappresenti la soluzione "best value for money", ossia il miglior valore di ritorno per il denaro speso.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Botta .... da parte di un Ministro Ombra .... :D

 

In the eyes of just about every other air force around the world the C-295 is not only considered to be the best value for money but also the most effective battlefield airlifter.

.... e meno male che non ha riproposto la rivitalizzazione dei "Caribou" ....

 

http://www.senatorjohnston.com.au/Media/MediaReleases/tabid/69/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/245/Opposition-questions-probity-of-C-27-purchase.aspx

 

 

Risposta .... da parte di un Ministro vero .... B-)

 

This is not a view shared by the Chief of Air Force or the RAAF.

 

http://www.minister.defence.gov.au/2012/05/16/minister-for-defence-media-release-opposition-disarray-over-the-c-27j-aircraft-acquisition/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Canada .... qualcosa comincia a muoversi ....

 

Would-be contractors team up for Canada’s Fixed-wing Search and Rescue effort 

 

By: Dave Majumdar (Ottawa - 12 hours ago)

 

Source: qxui6q.jpg

 

Hopes of filling Canada's fixed-wing search and rescue (FWSAR) requirement to replace its aging de Havilland Canada CC-115 Buffalo fleet are driving would-be contractors to cement partnerships with local companies.

 

Canada's minister of public works, Rona Ambrose, who oversees defence procurement, says that her department has setup a new FWSAR secretariat to consult with industry on the project.

 

21nnklu.jpg

©Canadian Forces

 

The creation of a new secretariat could be a sign that the moribund effort to replace the decrepit Buffalo is starting to gain momentum. Canada first signaled its intent to replace the antiquated twin-engined turboprop more than six years ago. The FWSAR programme will be a competitive procurement, Ambrose says. A "fairness monitor" will work to ensure the competition is open and fair, she adds. The contract, when it is awarded, will include training and support for at least 20 years.

 

The exact size and scope of the FWSAR tender is currently unknown, industry officials say. That is because the Canadian government has yet to finalize those requirements.

 

But Alenia Aermacchi, which hopes to bid its C-27J Spartan tactical transport, says that a draft request for proposal is expected in the fall of 2012. A contractor could be selected by 2014.

 

Alenia signed a letter of intent on 29 May to partner with General Dynamics Canada, Provincial Aerospace and DRS Canada on a potential FWSAR bid.

 

Meanwhile, Lockheed Martin, which plans to offer its C-130J, is partnering with local company Cascade Aerospace. The two companies signed a memorandum of understanding on 30 May at the CANSEC defence trade show in the Canadian capital Ottawa.

 

Jim Grant, Lockheed's air mobility vice president, says the C-130J is the ideal aircraft to conduct search and rescue (SAR) missions over Canada's rugged landscape. He points out that variants of the aircraft have been in service in Canada for decades and have already carrying out the SAR mission.

 

Other potential competitors include EADS CASA C-295, Viking Q400, or even the Bell/Boeing V-22 Osprey tilt-rotor.

 

.... ma, dati i precedenti, temo sarà dura .... :hmm:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Flight International" ha rettificato l'ultimo paragrafo dell'articolo ....

 

da ....

 

Other potential competitors include EADS CASA C-295, Viking Q400, or even the Bell/Boeing V-22 Osprey tilt-rotor.

a ....

 

Other potential competitors include EADS CASA C-295, Viking DHC-5NG, Bombardier Q400, or even the Bell Boeing V-22 Osprey tilt-rotor.

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/would-be-contractors-team-up-for-canadas-fixed-wing-search-and-rescue-effort-372492/

 

Forte concorrenza dunque ....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A proposito delle parti elettroniche contraffatte ....

 

Fonte .... 4hjxy.jpg ....

 

C-27J and C-130J Parts Linked to Counterfeit Mills

 

C-27J and C-130J transports are among the Air Force's weapons systems affected by the prevalence of counterfeit electronic parts in the Defense Department's supply chain, according to the Senate Armed Services Committee's newly issued investigative report on this issue.

 

For example, L-3 Display Systems discovered in November 2010 that the defective rate for a computer memory chip that it uses in cockpit displays in the C-27s and C-130s had more than tripled to 27 percent, states the report.

 

Further testing determined that the chip was "suspect counterfeit," notes the report.

 

"Unfortunately, L-3 Display Systems had already installed parts from the suspect lot on more than 400 of its display units," states the report.

 

(SASC report; caution, large-sized file.)

 

(See also SASC release accompanying the report.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alenia prevede che la produzione continui almeno sino al 2018-19 ....

 

Alenia Sees C-27J Production Through 2018-19 ....

 

We believe we might receive additional orders from other customers soon that will also extend the production line capability ....

Fonte .... 2l9tci8.jpg.... http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/awx_06_08_2012_p0-465954.xml

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Giordo afferma che le prospettate ulteriori vendite dell'aereo avverranno senza l'intermediazione del "FMS" ....

 

"With the support of the Italian government, we believe we might receive additional orders from other customers," Giordo says, adding that Alenia has spare production capacity.

Any such deals will be negotiated as direct commercial sales rather than using the US Foreign Military Sales mechanism, he says.

Fonte .... qxui6q.jpg .... http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/alenia-aermacchi-looks-to-build-on-australian-c-27j-success-372922/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Non so se questa domanda sia già stata fatta in questo post ma non ho trovato riferimenti sull'argomento

 

Tempo fa lessi su un forum americano, che l'ipotizzato sviluppo della versione gunship dello Spartan avrebbe benifciato anche di fondi italiani: si parlava dell'uso di cannoni più piccoli che sull'AC-130 ma comunque già in uso dalle FF.AA. dei due paesi (forse il 76?)...

 

A parte il fatto che poi tutto si è rivelato una bolla di sapone, causa tagli del DoD americano... Erano tutte cavolate? (Dopotutto a noi a che serviva un "Baby Spooky"?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Non so se questa domanda sia già stata fatta in questo post ma non ho trovato riferimenti sull'argomento

 

Tempo fa lessi su un forum americano, che l'ipotizzato sviluppo della versione gunship dello Spartan avrebbe benifciato anche di fondi italiani: si parlava dell'uso di cannoni più piccoli che sull'AC-130 ma comunque già in uso dalle FF.AA. dei due paesi (forse il 76?)...

 

A parte il fatto che poi tutto si è rivelato una bolla di sapone, causa tagli del DoD americano... Erano tutte cavolate? (Dopotutto a noi a che serviva un "Baby Spooky"?)

 

Mi sento di poter affermare con sicurezza che il 76mm Oto non è assolutamente compatibile con un impiego aeronautico, a maggior ragione con il C-27j, anche solo per ragioni di ingombro.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mi sento di poter affermare con sicurezza che il 76mm Oto non è assolutamente compatibile con un impiego aeronautico, a maggior ragione con il C-27j, anche solo per ragioni di ingombro.

 

No,no... Non volevo assolumente dire che si era parlato del 76 Oto, era solo una mia ipotesi (evidentemente sbagliata), visto che a quanto ho capito si parlava di un pezzo intermedio fra il 105 usato dallo Spooky (di certo troppo grosso) e la gatling da 25mm. Per questo mi era venuto in mente il 76, non essendoci molto altro in dotazione sia alle nostre FF.AA. che a quelle americane...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ancora a proposito delle parti elettroniche contraffatte ....

 

Chinese Microchips Are Considered Impossible To Regulate

 

By David Fulghum, Bill Sweetman, Jen DiMascio

 

Source: Aviation Week & Space Technology (June 04, 2012)

 

 

The potential for specialized microchips from China to find their way into U.S. computers and networks, or even into conventional Western weapons systems, isn't just a frightening prospect—it's a chilling reality.

 

The defense industry supply chain is rife with counterfeit parts, and efforts to police it are failing. The potential that these parts could compromise the quality of U.S.-made defense systems is bad enough, but on top of that Chinese components could offer a back door to cybersnoops, escalating the threat of cyberspying and intellectual theft.

 

The U.S. knows about the potential of such capabilities because it is conducting its own research in that rarified arena of cybercombat. Draper Laboratory, for example, has a long-running project to design ways of planting hostile circuitry inside what appear to be standard microchips. This could easily become—or may already be—a two-way street, since many avionics and military systems now include generic and commercial off-the-shelf chips built into custom processor boards.

 

A counterfeit chip might be a copy of a U.S.-designed chip, made in China and sold for commercial applications. It could find its way into U.S. aerospace and defense components because those industries' demands are tiny compared to commercial applications. Therefore, the only economical way to provide computing power is to use commercial chips.

 

The unknown is whether malicious hardware could be inserted in defense applications. Given the market in counterfeit chips described in the recently released Senate report, this is not likely. The report paints a picture of an aftermarket supplier base, comprising thousands of dealers in the U.S. alone, that has grown up because system manufacturers—aerospace, defense and others—need out-of-production chips to produce or repair systems designed years ago.

 

Some Chinese suppliers to U.S. distributors have responded to this demand by harvesting chips from scrapped devices. Counterfeiting can take the form of selling those devices as new, or re-labeling them with a higher performance grade. However, no mechanism is described by which specific batches of chips could be steered into crucial military applications.

 

A potential problem with demanding tighter standards and pedigrees for defense-related chips is that distributors could be forced to exit the defense market, eliminating what has been at least a partial solution to obsolescence issues.

 

The threat is real enough to worry Congress. A Senate Armed Services Committee investigation of the defense supply chain completed last week found about 1,800 cases of suspected counterfeit parts over a two-year period and estimates that the total number of suspect parts involved exceeds one million. The committee tracked 100 of those parts back through the supply chain and found that 70% originated in China.

 

The parts found their way into military products made by the nation's biggest contractors, including Lockheed Martin's Terminal High-Altitude Area Defense Missile and the C-130J cargo aircraft. Boeing products were impacted as well, including the AH-64 Apache and CH-46 Chinook helicopters, the C-17 cargo aircraft and the P-8A Poseidon. Other parts filtered into the Sikorsky SH-60B helicopter and Alenia's C-27J airlifter.

 

Raytheon's vice president for supply chain operations told lawmakers that sharing information about fake parts through the Government-Industry Data Exchange program (Gidep) “can help stop suppliers of counterfeit parts in their tracks.”

 

But the Senate report indicates that industry is still slow to come clean about counterfeits. When Boeing discovered counterfeits on the P-8A, the company only notified the Navy after a year and a half. And Lockheed Martin told Air Force engineers that suspected counterfeit parts in an L-3 display unit were “tested and found to be authentic but re-marked.” A six-month Air Force effort to keep tabs on the display units uncovered “several failures” including blank screens and lost displays that could have been caused by counterfeit parts.

 

“However, Lockheed Martin produced no documents indicating efforts by the company to determine why that particular display unit, or others, had failed,” the SASC report says. “Nevertheless, Lockheed Martin reported to the Air Force that 'no failures from Jan. 2011-June 2011 were attributed to the suspect lot.'” The Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) found a suspect part that is used in 176 different weapons systems including the B-52 bomber, F-15 Eagle, RQ-4 Global Hawk and A-10 Thunderbolt. Of 202 suspect parts identified by DLA in 2009 and 2010, only 15 were reported to the Gidep, four of those by DLA.

 

Counterfeit parts could undermine the weapons systems and further drive up costs, the report says.

 

So last year, the Senate Armed Services Committee passed legislation that requires contractors who supplied the counterfeit parts to be charged for reversing the damage. It seeks to ensure that companies buy their parts from trusted suppliers and mandates written notification of counterfeit parts.

 

In March, Frank Kendall, the Pentagon's acting acquisition chief, directed the Pentagon to establish testing and verification requirements, require that the military and industry report suspect parts to the Gidep and ensure that the Defense Department's agencies train their personnel to deal with counterfeits.

 

And while the findings of this report illustrate that counterfeits are “a very serious problem,” according to Sen. John McCain (Ariz.), the committee's top Republican, lawmakers are not taking corrective measures further than they did last year.

 

Committee Chairman Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) says no additional legislation is required at this point. “We're going to make sure it's very effectively implemented,” he says.

 

But to date, even industry officials greet efforts to police the flow of counterfeits into the Pentagon's vast supply chain with a shrug.

 

Long-running U.S. worries also concern the involvement of Chinese civilian telecommunications companies in military and information-warfare programs. A March 8 congressional report questioned the relationship between Huawei Technologies—which has twice been blocked from buying into U.S. telecommunications companies—and the People's Liberation Army (PLA) and ministry of state security.

 

In fact, the Huawei, Zhongxing and Datang organizations all received direct government funding for research and development of cyber, communications and intelligence-gathering systems, according to the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission. Other companies providing information security and computer network operations to the PLA have close ties to hacker groups.

 

The overlapping connections allow for penetration of international supply chains for electronics that support U.S. military, government and civilian industries, the report states. That connection offers the “potential to cause the catastrophic failure of systems and networks supporting critical infrastructure for national security and public safety,” it says.

 

The Pentagon's 2012 annual report to Congress on military and security developments in China identifies a strategy that embraces cyberspying and theft—that is not considered a military attack—while taking advantage of a “unique opportunity to focus on international development while avoiding direct confrontation with the United States,” it says. Beijing's goal remains aimed at “taking advantage of prolonging this window of opportunity . . . for peaceful development [while] sustaining economic growth.”

 

At the same time, the country's leaders are building a force capable of fighting and winning “regional wars,” the report says, “using information technologies that have been developed, refined and integrated to ensure continuity with China's military strategy.”

 

China's operational model is “active defense” which serves as the highest-level guidance to the PLA on how to fight and win wars. It emphasizes using precise and well-timed offensive operations, launched under favorable conditions to gain and maintain the initiative. Another key factor is “exploiting an opponent's most vulnerable weaknesses” which once again matches U.S. concerns about its vulnerable energy distribution pipelines, public utilities and a military that is hopelessly dependent on computers and cyber networks.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Operazioni dei C-27J dell'USAF in Afghanistan .... si chiude e tutti a casa ....

 

Spartanless ....

 

The Air Force is no longer operating C-27J Spartan airlifters in Afghanistan and currently has no plans to return them to that theater.

14ctz7k.jpg

The men and women of the 702nd Expeditionary Airlift Squadron gather for a group photo before the start of their deactivation ceremony.

The squadron was established in July 2011 and was deactivated on Monday.

The squadron supported tactical airlift requirements in support of operations in Afghanistan

(U.S. Army Photo - Sgt. Daniel J. Schroeder

Fonte -4hjxy.jpg- http://www.airforce-magazine.com/Features/airpower/Pages/box062212spartanless.aspx

Edited by TT-1 Pinto

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stati Uniti .... verso lo sblocco ?

Finmeccanica afferma che, a seguito dell'intervento di un comitato del Congresso, la decisione dell'USAF di chiudere il programma "JCA" potrebbe essere riconsiderata ....

 

Finmeccanica Eyes New U.S. Orders For C-27Js ....

Fonte - 2l9tci8.jpg - http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/awx_06_29_2012_p0-472546.xml

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nuova proposta di versione "gunship" .... si chiamerà MC-27J ....

 

212zt3o.jpg

 

Questa pagina di pubblicità è apparsa sull'ultimo numero di "Jane'S Defence Weekly" .... e mostra una nuova versione del C-27J che AleniaAermacchi presenterà in occasione del Salone Aeronautico di Farnborough che aprirà i battenti lunedi prossimo ....

 

Secondo un commento scritto da Craig Hoyle sul blog "The DEW Line" di "FlightGlobal.com", la presente proposta non avrebbe relazione con la precedente "Pretorian" di cui si parlò lo scorso anno a Le Bourget ....

 

Don't mistake this beastie for a previous Alenia proposal to develop an aircraft to support Italy's special forces requirements - this one is aimed squarely at the export market.

 

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2012/07/c-27j-to-turn-spooky-at-farnbo.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stati Uniti .... verso lo sblocco ?

Finmeccanica afferma che, a seguito dell'intervento di un comitato del Congresso, la decisione dell'USAF di chiudere il programma "JCA" potrebbe essere riconsiderata ....

 

 

Fonte - 2l9tci8.jpg - http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/awx_06_29_2012_p0-472546.xml

 

Gli Americani, e l'USAF in particolare, confermano una volta di più la loro condotta schizzofrenica nei confronti programma C-27J.

Dopo la lunga contesa tra USAF - US Air National Guard - Us Army sull'interruzione, dismissione o prosecuzione del programma, con la prima che cercava di sminuirne il valore e gli altri due servizi che ne esaltavano le qualità e la validità economica e, soprattutto, operativa, l'House Armed Services Committee del Congresso (l'equivalente della nostra Commissione Difesa della Camera) una quindicina di giorni fa sembrava avere chiuso la diatriba, almeno temporaneamente, stabilendo uno stanziamento aggiuntivo di 138 milioni di dollari per la prosecuzione del programma e proibendo all'USAF, inoltre, di usare qualsiasi somma di denaro nell'esercizio 2013 per "dismettere o ritirare dal servizio o preparasi a dismettere o a ritirare" i velivoli C-27J. Dopo il 2013 poi, l'eventuale ritiro della flotta sarebbe stato subordinato ad una serie di adempimenti, compresa una "analisi affidabile" dei costi di esercizio del velivolo da parte dell'Air Ntional Guard.

Fonte: Defence News http://www.defensenews.com/article/20120507/DEFREG02/305070011/HASC-Adds-...21/06/2012

 

Pochi giorni dopo, quasi per reazione, la doccia fredda dell'USAF che annuncia il ritiro anticipato dei C-27J dal teatro afgano, dove stavano dando una prova brillante (forse troppo) delle proprie capacità operative in un teatro tanto gravoso.

 

Adesso, l'annuncio di Finmeccanica della possibile ripresa degli ordini (forse corroborato proprio dalle direttive del Congresso USA e dalla dichiarazione dell'US Army secondo cui una flotta rodotta a 38 esemplari sarebbe insufficiente a coprire le necesità) e, addirittura, il rilancio con la proposta MC-27J.

E' una lotta dura, ma speriamo bene.......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Farnborough 2012 MC-27J gunship Spartan launched by Alenia Aeronautica and ATK

 

the gunship version of the Spartan is an ATK GAU-23 30mm precision weapon kit. It can be used to fire all types of NATO 30mm x 173 rounds, as well as the New Super 40 ammunition.

The kit is installed on the left hand side rear door and can be mounted in less than 4 hours.

 

img_3339.jpg?w=271&h=179img_3357.jpg?w=120&h=180

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...