Thanks Thanks:  135
Likes Likes:  262
Dislikes Dislikes:  11
Page 12 of 12 FirstFirst ... 2101112
Results 276 to 298 of 298
  1. #276
    C/S
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    380
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by EUFighter View Post
    The "stripper" CN-235 would be a potential route but a lot will also depend on the wiliness to deploy the assets.
    That is why I'd humbly suggest focusing on a strategic capability to get from Ireland to a secure airport in theatre where ever that maybe, offload IDF personnel and material using the in-situ air movements support crew from the larger coalition partner be it French, Spanish, British, Aussie, gas up and go home rather than have all the bother of tactical last mile stuff and hanging around. Job done. And there is nothing wrong with that.

    Quote Originally Posted by EUFighter View Post
    When the PC12's arrive hopefully we will not just have them flying around spotting Covid-19 infringements but that we get to deploy them at least on training exercises. The EU Battlegroups would be an opportunity but we could also do exercises with Sweden and Finland, the latter operate the PC12 in a liaison role so they might be interested in what we bring along!
    And if Ireland is going to deploy Air Corps assets to hang around for a few months in theatre one day in the future what the PC12's will bring is a far better and meaningful niche contribution than intra theatre light tactical.

  2. Thanks DeV thanked for this post
    Likes DeV liked this post
  3. #277
    Commandant Jetjock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,799
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Anzac View Post
    That is why I'd humbly suggest focusing on a strategic capability...
    A stand-alone strategic capability is beyond our reach politically and a combined capability with a group of other countries would also pose political problems here. Irish government's are simply not serious about defence. Token trumps actual capability in Irish defence acquisition.

    The reason the retention of the CN 235 is being pushed is that they are minimal cost to convert and already wholly owned. An opportunity retention, if you will, providing some capability rather than none. There will most likely be no alternative!

    We can paint ideal-world Tier 1 transport scenarios all day but they will never happen.

    Now on the other hand, if we can retain assets at minimal cost and prove them useful, then in 10 years there is a case to make. It is much easier to petition for the type of money required for replacement and enhancement of an existing capability, than for one that has never existed at all.

  4. Thanks Flamingo thanked for this post
    Likes ias, Tempest liked this post
  5. #278
    C/S
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    398
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Jetjock View Post
    A stand-alone strategic capability is beyond our reach politically and a combined capability with a group of other countries would also pose political problems here. Irish government's are simply not serious about defence. Token trumps actual capability in Irish defence acquisition.
    The reason the retention of the CN 235 is being pushed is that they are minimal cost to convert and already wholly owned. An opportunity retention, if you will, providing some capability rather than none. There will most likely be no alternative!
    We can paint ideal-world Tier 1 transport scenarios all day but they will never happen.
    Now on the other hand, if we can retain assets at minimal cost and prove them useful, then in 10 years there is a case to make. It is much easier to petition for the type of money required for replacement and enhancement of an existing capability, than for one that has never existed at all.
    Totally agree all AC procurement is based on the replacement model..

    If they can retain the CN-235's and prove them in some kind of transport role, then at some time in the future they will need to be replaced.
    Last edited by Charlie252; 22nd April 2020 at 15:25.

  6. Likes na grohmiti, EUFighter, meridian liked this post
  7. #279
    C/S
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    380
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Jetjock View Post
    A stand-alone strategic capability is beyond our reach politically and a combined capability with a group of other countries would also pose political problems here. Irish government's are simply not serious about defence. Token trumps actual capability in Irish defence acquisition.

    The reason the retention of the CN 235 is being pushed is that they are minimal cost to convert and already wholly owned. An opportunity retention, if you will, providing some capability rather than none. There will most likely be no alternative!

    We can paint ideal-world Tier 1 transport scenarios all day but they will never happen.

    Now on the other hand, if we can retain assets at minimal cost and prove them useful, then in 10 years there is a case to make. It is much easier to petition for the type of money required for replacement and enhancement of an existing capability, than for one that has never existed at all.
    Strategic air mobility can simply be operating a second hand narrow body Airbus viz A319/320 instead of a medium executive jet like a Lear 45 or Gulfstream.

    How is there political problems flying an aircraft that is there for global good? HADR operations into 3rd countries flatten by tropical cyclones, famines, earthquakes, forest fires ect. Repatriations of stranded nationals ....

  8. Thanks EUFighter thanked for this post
  9. #280
    C/S
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    380
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Charlie252 View Post
    Totally agree all AC procurement is based on the replacement model..

    If they can retain the CN-235's and prove them in some kind of transport role, then at some time in the future they will need to be replaced.
    Hopefully the IAC and the Irish government will seek advice from current air mobility operators and their experiences before they attempt to do anything.

  10. Thanks EUFighter thanked for this post
  11. #281
    Commander in Chief
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    6,166
    Post Thanks / Like
    Unfortunately the Replacement model in the past has not served us well at all.
    Gloster Gladiator was replaced during the Emergency by Spitfire/Seafire, we had 17 in 1952. The F16 of its day. We replaced them with? Nothing really, though the DH vampire got their role. Flont line modern prop interceptor replaced with armed advanced jet trainer. We got 7 vampires in the early 60s. We replaced them with 7 Fouga Magister in 1976, replacing a 1st gen jet trainer with a 1st gen Jet trainer.
    New pilots in the Air Corps during the emergency learnt to fly on a combination of aircraft. Lets ignore the unique circumstances there and say we Started into the Post war years doing basic flying training with 12 DH chipmunk, 2 more arriving in 1965. Three of these are still actively flying in Ireland. These were replaced in service with a total of 12 Siai SF260W Marchetti side by side piston prop armed trainers. These were retired from service in the Late 90s, many ending up as agressor aircraft for those who want to experience aerial combat, and have a big wallet. They were replaced with Nothing. When the Fouga retired it was directly replaced with 8 Pilatus PC9 tandem Turboprop armed trainers, with no lead in training aircraft.

    At one time in the 80s, we had 8 Alouette III, 2 Gazelle, 5 Dauphin Helis. (Total 15, not including GASU). We lost 1 Gazelle and 1 Dauphin, (Dh248 with loss of 4 crew, RIP, Gazelle with no injuries) which were replaced by 2 EC135 and just 6 AW139. 15 is just under double our current fleet of military helis.

    We started the Emergency with 9 Anson Mk1 Maritime Patrol/Transport aircraft. In 1946 we got 3 Avro Anson XIX.Twin engine military transport. All were retired by 1962, replaced with 4 DH dove in 1959 On their retirement We had 2 MPA Kingairs, plus one used for VIP transport, multi engine training. It was replaced by 2 Casa 235MPA. 9 is not equal to 2.

    Back to the 1940s again and the Emergency years saw us start with a total of 13 Hawker Hectors in the Army Co-Op role, replaced in 1939 by the Westland Lysander, six in total. The Lizzie was an STOL armed transport which you could also use for recce, I guess the PC12 is as close as we get to that today, if you strapped a few GPMGs to the underwing. Not sure how long they served for, but nothing did dedicated army Co-Op until 8 Rheims Cessna 172H arrived in 1972. So 13>6<8>4 with 4 representing the total of 4 PC12 we will shortly bear the roundel.
    If we replaced Like for Like, We should have a large fleet of modern Combat aircraft, not civil aircraft painted in military colours. But hey, somewhere along the way it was decided we needed VIP jets, and much of the Air Corps money in the 70s, 80s and 90s went to keep our international image in the VIP jet world flashy. How many Hercs could we have got for the Prise of a HS125/G3/G4?
    German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
    German 2: Private? I am a general!
    German 1: That is the bad news.

  12. Likes CTU, Jetjock, The real Jack liked this post
  13. #282
    Commandant Jetjock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,799
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Anzac View Post
    Strategic air mobility can simply be operating a second hand narrow body Airbus viz A319/320 instead of a medium executive jet like a Lear 45 or Gulfstream.

    How is there political problems flying an aircraft that is there for global good? HADR operations into 3rd countries flatten by tropical cyclones, famines, earthquakes, forest fires ect. Repatriations of stranded nationals ....
    Anything that could be perceived as a large government jet would be deeply unpopular and politically risky. Rightly or wrongly.

  14. #283
    Lieutenant EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    1,423
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by na grohmiti View Post
    Unfortunately the Replacement model in the past has not served us well at all.
    Gloster Gladiator was replaced during the Emergency by Spitfire/Seafire, we had 17 in 1952. The F16 of its day. We replaced them with? Nothing really, though the DH vampire got their role. Flont line modern prop interceptor replaced with armed advanced jet trainer. We got 7 vampires in the early 60s. We replaced them with 7 Fouga Magister in 1976, replacing a 1st gen jet trainer with a 1st gen Jet trainer.
    New pilots in the Air Corps during the emergency learnt to fly on a combination of aircraft. Lets ignore the unique circumstances there and say we Started into the Post war years doing basic flying training with 12 DH chipmunk, 2 more arriving in 1965. Three of these are still actively flying in Ireland. These were replaced in service with a total of 12 Siai SF260W Marchetti side by side piston prop armed trainers. These were retired from service in the Late 90s, many ending up as agressor aircraft for those who want to experience aerial combat, and have a big wallet. They were replaced with Nothing. When the Fouga retired it was directly replaced with 8 Pilatus PC9 tandem Turboprop armed trainers, with no lead in training aircraft.

    At one time in the 80s, we had 8 Alouette III, 2 Gazelle, 5 Dauphin Helis. (Total 15, not including GASU). We lost 1 Gazelle and 1 Dauphin, (Dh248 with loss of 4 crew, RIP, Gazelle with no injuries) which were replaced by 2 EC135 and just 6 AW139. 15 is just under double our current fleet of military helis.

    We started the Emergency with 9 Anson Mk1 Maritime Patrol/Transport aircraft. In 1946 we got 3 Avro Anson XIX.Twin engine military transport. All were retired by 1962, replaced with 4 DH dove in 1959 On their retirement We had 2 MPA Kingairs, plus one used for VIP transport, multi engine training. It was replaced by 2 Casa 235MPA. 9 is not equal to 2.

    Back to the 1940s again and the Emergency years saw us start with a total of 13 Hawker Hectors in the Army Co-Op role, replaced in 1939 by the Westland Lysander, six in total. The Lizzie was an STOL armed transport which you could also use for recce, I guess the PC12 is as close as we get to that today, if you strapped a few GPMGs to the underwing. Not sure how long they served for, but nothing did dedicated army Co-Op until 8 Rheims Cessna 172H arrived in 1972. So 13>6<8>4 with 4 representing the total of 4 PC12 we will shortly bear the roundel.
    If we replaced Like for Like, We should have a large fleet of modern Combat aircraft, not civil aircraft painted in military colours. But hey, somewhere along the way it was decided we needed VIP jets, and much of the Air Corps money in the 70s, 80s and 90s went to keep our international image in the VIP jet world flashy. How many Hercs could we have got for the Prise of a HS125/G3/G4?
    Missed a few like the Supermarine Walrus, one of which Serial No: N18 is now in the Fleet Air Museum. Very interesting history on that particular aircraft!
    That the Lysanders were better armed than the Fougars, so we will need a few guns and bomb racks on the PC-12s.
    That the Seafires and Vampires had 20mm cannons! Nothing that size in the Aer Corps today, we could try strapping a few Rhinos under the wings of the PC-9s.
    Actually the PC-9 only just matches the performance of the Seafire, and that 75 years later!

  15. Thanks na grohmiti thanked for this post
  16. #284
    Commander in Chief
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    6,166
    Post Thanks / Like
    I decided to leave the Walrus out, with its colourful history. The Emergency was a boom time for the Air Corps in terms of aircraft. Even if some were delivered free of charge by their former owners. It was to be expected that an air corps pilot would try to return the favour.
    German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
    German 2: Private? I am a general!
    German 1: That is the bad news.

  17. Likes sofa liked this post
  18. #285
    C/S
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    6,924
    Post Thanks / Like
    The AC begged to keep the other King Airs when 240 was kept but to no avail and they found out how good a King Air really is, as they had to fly the arse off it to meet commitments and for a while, it was the world's busiest King Air,apart from the RFDS in Oz,clocking up far more than the average KA ever did. The other KAs were sorely missed and if they get rid of the CN 235s, instead of keeping them as cargo lifters, they would simply be repeating an old mistake. Don't forget, if they are kept on, they won't be kept thumping around at low level over the Atlantic, which is the real killer of airframes. They'd be flying at the usual turbo prop altitudes and they still have plenty of life left in them and, as C252 has indicated, spares are plentiful for a bog-standard Casa. Another advantage of the Casa is that, like the King Air, it can use all the current airports in Ireland and even a lot of the smaller airfields so it can fulfil an emergency airlift on this island (in the vein of the airlift of IAA and IAC and AAIU personnel and equipment to Blacksod after the S-92 crashed). There are a wealth of uses for an airlifter on this island and off the island for the DF and the Casa's relatively small size is not a deal breaker.

  19. Thanks meridian, EUFighter thanked for this post
    Likes na grohmiti, ias liked this post
  20. #286
    Commander in Chief
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    6,166
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quick Question GTCC, without its usual hardware in the back, is the ramp and hold big enough to fit a cargo hold "can"?
    German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
    German 2: Private? I am a general!
    German 1: That is the bad news.

  21. #287
    Amadan Orion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Osborne's Very Very Broke Island
    Posts
    1,452
    Post Thanks / Like
    Pilatus PC-12 NG ??????????

  22. Likes na grohmiti liked this post
  23. #288
    C/S
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    6,924
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by na grohmiti View Post
    Quick Question GTCC, without its usual hardware in the back, is the ramp and hold big enough to fit a cargo hold "can"?
    It can take an 88 x 108 inch flat pallet, assuming you fit a roller floor. I'd imagine it can take some of the smaller "bins" that would fit an ATR or similar. Some of those bins are sized for 737 or A320 widths and can be carried in double rows on an A330. Some of them are custom made for specific aircraft. Incidentally, the roller floor and controls robs some of the weight and height but you'd take six tonnes, give or take, as max load. It's a very useful weight, when you think of moving six tonnes in a hurry. You can also configure them for half and half, which is a combined pax/cargo set up. The ordinary floor uses the standard seat rails as cargo tie down points so it's easy and quick to take seat rows out and refit for manually loaded cargo. It's also easy and quick to rig for parachuting (static line cables clip on in a matter of minutes). I've done both and it's genuinely a quick job that could be done during a turnaround. That's the beauty of it. I'd have to hand it to Casa on that front. The utility is well sorted. They made a few mistakes on the MPAs that bit the Air Corps, but those are long sorted so it'd be a no-brainer to keep them.

  24. Thanks na grohmiti, EUFighter, DeV thanked for this post
    Likes sofa, Sluggie, DeV, ias liked this post
  25. #289
    C/S
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    380
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Jetjock View Post
    Anything that could be perceived as a large government jet would be deeply unpopular and politically risky. Rightly or wrongly.
    The inverse now applies downunder in NZ - it did not used to be that way. If our Boeings were sold, and the NZ government bought two executive jets for politicians to jolly around like "rock stars and billionaires" - now that would be deeply unpopular. Not that long ago that may have happened, culling the P-3's was a distinct possibility, the public and politicians really didn't care if it happened or not.

    So what is different? Something that is not often recognised or even mentioned on defence forums / discussions, but an increasingly important aspect of the corporate culture of a modern defence force in this day and age. Public Relations.

    Downunder the majority of public now understand and have been deliberately messaged over the past few years that their defence force is an extension and enabler of "NZ Inc's" soft power in terms of trade and diplomacy and one of the key avenues for that is involvement in HADR ops - the NZDF even has a marketing campaign slogan "A Force for Good". The public here have no brook at all with the NZDF flying off to anywhere in the Asia-Pacific on a HADR mission with medical supplies, food, ect - or an Antartica science mission is support of "climate change" - they lap it up or at worst are fairly neutral. However, a politician flying on NZDF aircraft other than the PM internationally is now unheard of - the media will cook up a storm as a case of politicians misusing an important national asset - MATS is virtually a dead duck now.

    Is it that the Irish Defence Force are great at what they do but useless at communicating that greatness to the public which completely undermines the value of what they do to the nation state and their ability to get both public and political support for the required tools to do their job?

    A significant element in what the NZDF (and even better at it are the ADF who taught us this rat cunning comms approach) do these days is communicating to Joe and Jane Public and Jack and Jill Politician what they do and why they do it. An open invitation into the media, hugely active on social media, constant engagement with the community. In 10 years they have gone from near the bottom of the public service trust rankings to near the top.

    The only thing the NZDF changed is the Comms / PR strategy - doctrine is the same - yet the NZDF is in better shape and becoming better equipped. Using outfits like Clemenger BBDO to shape their messaging, having famous sportsman and celebrities train alongside or just hang out with the troops.

    A charm offensive or "Hearts and Minds" by a Defence Force is not just applicable during a SASO mission in East Timor or Mali but institutionally just as important for political and fiscal survival at home in this day and age.

  26. Thanks EUFighter, sofa thanked for this post
    Likes na grohmiti, EUFighter, Flamingo liked this post
  27. #290
    Recruit
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    198
    Post Thanks / Like
    The Air Corps has used the Casa in another transport tasking, this time to rotate personnel from the KFOR mission.

    https://twitter.com/IrishAirCorps/st...734510080?s=19

  28. Thanks na grohmiti, Tempest, EUFighter, DeV thanked for this post
    Likes Anzac, Shaqra, DeV liked this post
  29. #291
    C/S
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    380
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by pilatus View Post
    The Air Corps has used the Casa in another transport tasking, this time to rotate personnel from the KFOR mission.

    https://twitter.com/IrishAirCorps/st...734510080?s=19
    Good stuff lads! Keep up the PR. Change the public perception. Get them onboard for a bigger better stand alone air mobility capability!

  30. #292
    Recruit
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    198
    Post Thanks / Like
    Attachment 8773

    The Defence forces PR team must have read your post Anzac, they just posted this on their Instagram account. Perhaps they are trying to build their case for why they need to retain the cn235's or as you say develop the capability further.
    Last edited by pilatus; 23rd April 2020 at 12:12.

  31. Thanks EUFighter thanked for this post
    Likes Anzac liked this post
  32. #293
    C/S
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    6,924
    Post Thanks / Like
    Another way to keep the Casas would be to sub them out to a third party,like the garda helis, so that they are maintained 24/7/365 by civvies, flown by Donners, housed in the Don, with load supervisors supplied by the Don (and trained in the art by any civilian airline you care to name). That way, there's no issue with storemen or AC mechs or AC ATC throwing a strop or pulling a union meeting or not being able to do full 24/7/365 work, because shifts don't get paid OT in the DF. If you wanted to, you could position them to any regional airport on the island in an hour (even Weston) if there was an issue with parking......Ive been saying it since King Air days. The Casas are a walking advertisement for cheap, on-hand airlift and utility functions, that would be a valuable asset to the AC, the DF in general and the State as a whole.

  33. Thanks EUFighter thanked for this post
  34. #294
    Commander in Chief apod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Ass in the grass.
    Posts
    5,442
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by pilatus View Post
    Attachment 8773

    The Defence forces PR team must have read your post Anzac, they just posted this on their Instagram account. Perhaps they are trying to build their case for why they need to retain the cn235's or as you say develop the capability further.
    Linky no worky.
    "105,000 dead. 40,000,000 unemployed. Police murdering African-Americans. You’ve completed you’re mission. You’ve made America great. Now get the f**k out."

    - Rob Reiner.

    "Yes he's an idiot with zero common sense,and no social skills,but he IS my son.I just hope he never goes into politics.He'd be a disaster.

    - Mary Anne Trump

    #unfollowtrump

  35. #295
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    22,928
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by GoneToTheCanner View Post
    Another way to keep the Casas would be to sub them out to a third party,like the garda helis, so that they are maintained 24/7/365 by civvies, flown by Donners, housed in the Don, with load supervisors supplied by the Don (and trained in the art by any civilian airline you care to name). That way, there's no issue with storemen or AC mechs or AC ATC throwing a strop or pulling a union meeting or not being able to do full 24/7/365 work, because shifts don't get paid OT in the DF. If you wanted to, you could position them to any regional airport on the island in an hour (even Weston) if there was an issue with parking......Ive been saying it since King Air days. The Casas are a walking advertisement for cheap, on-hand airlift and utility functions, that would be a valuable asset to the AC, the DF in general and the State as a whole.
    Nothing to stop civvies striking

  36. #296
    C/S
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    6,924
    Post Thanks / Like
    In my experience, civvie contractors rarely, if ever, strike, whereas some of the inhouse version were very prone to play the union card and you got on their wrong side at your peril. I had one civvy storeman bring his union rep into the room when I was talking with a Lt-Col and he overruled the Officer on the subject of issue of tools. The Officer knew full well that if he insisted on me getting the tools, the storeman would have closed the place down. Another Storeman, when asked if he would bring spares to the hangar, as part of a reorganisation of Stores, refused point blank and threatened a strike. The hangar in question was Maritime, 20 feet from the Stores. I'll tell you, it was a serious breath of fresh air to move to an airline where storemen routinely delivered parts to the actual aircraft and apologised when they were unable to do so. Good storemen are worth their weight in gold,bad ones are a menace to the operation.

  37. Likes na grohmiti, CTU liked this post
  38. #297
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    22,928
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by GoneToTheCanner View Post
    In my experience, civvie contractors rarely, if ever, strike, whereas some of the inhouse version were very prone to play the union card and you got on their wrong side at your peril. I had one civvy storeman bring his union rep into the room when I was talking with a Lt-Col and he overruled the Officer on the subject of issue of tools. The Officer knew full well that if he insisted on me getting the tools, the storeman would have closed the place down. Another Storeman, when asked if he would bring spares to the hangar, as part of a reorganisation of Stores, refused point blank and threatened a strike. The hangar in question was Maritime, 20 feet from the Stores. I'll tell you, it was a serious breath of fresh air to move to an airline where storemen routinely delivered parts to the actual aircraft and apologised when they were unable to do so. Good storemen are worth their weight in gold,bad ones are a menace to the operation.
    So civvies within military environment are an issued

  39. #298
    C/S
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    6,924
    Post Thanks / Like
    Yes and no. Like all things associated with two differing work systems/mentalities, there will be days when everything runs smoothly and days when everything turns to shit. My experience of "good" civvies in the military is that they are more open to differing approaches to problem solving and will often bring a fresh approach to the table, whereas "bad" civvies are like the aforementioned storemen. Of course, there are "good" and "bad" military personnel, too. I had plenty of occasions when helpful people of all ranks stepped out from behind or under their pips and stripes, to get things done and equally, plenty of times when people hid behind their rank or the regulations to avoid work or simply to avoid giving a hand or speeding things up. Militaries are often too bound up by tradition/regulations/rank/red tape/closed mentalities and shoot themselves in the foot. That doesnt mean that civvies aren't capable of doing the same but, generally, a civvy will be more flexible and will try and get things done. Civilian organisations tend to try and pare away the old practises that waste time and money, as a matter of course, whereas militaries will perpetuate stupid shite because no-one says stop.

  40. Likes na grohmiti, B Inman, sofa, Turkey liked this post

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •