LCA News and Discussions

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 16 Dec 2010 21:00

Vina, Thanks. So the laser was used for ranging and scored a bullseye with a 25 kg practice bomb. Now translate that into real world 1000lb HSLD bomb with HMX(4x powerful than TNT) and same accuracy. This gives super hard target kill capablity to the LCA. One bomb, one target (OBOT). Awesome! Forget the A2A use it for A2G and no more PAKI hard targets in 72 hours with 3 sortie/day/plane rate.

ashokpachori · Post by **ashokpachori** » 16 Dec 2010 21:45

HMX(4x powerful than TNT)

Nowhere near.

R.E factor:
TNT = 1
HMX = 1.70

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 16 Dec 2010 21:49

The "flare" could be the flash of the bomb exploding. So much energy being released in a few microseconds causes a pretty bright flash. Besides the explosive may actually contain something to make it flash so the hit is visible from a distance despite smoke/dust. Important when a series of aircraft are doing this one after another.

ashokpachori · Post by **ashokpachori** » 16 Dec 2010 21:57

Besides the explosive may actually contain something to make it flash so the hit is visible from a distance despite smoke/dust

Its called flash powder.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 16 Dec 2010 22:39

Why don't we accept the tarmak pics and the texts that was reported, saying it was "practice bombs" ? Now if this is all chai-wala aspects, then forgive me as many may know what happened fIRST hand through him.

BTW, did it not the first pic depicts a red flag? and from the subsequent blast pic, the same flag blew into camera direction (blast pressure), and at a delta time when snapped was appearing like a ball?

vina · Post by **vina** » 16 Dec 2010 22:58

.To now install a refuelling system in such a tightly packed airframe for both MK1 and MK2,will be a real headache and require further redesigning and testing.If its endurance is only 45 mts.,what reasonable payload can it carry for G.Attack/close support ops and at what range/combat radius without refuelling?

Philip. Forget about what you read in the DDM or whatever. Real common sense and comparison with real world analogs like Gripen and M2K (aircrafts with similar fuel fractions) and comparable SFCs gives the LCA a ballpark of 500 to 600miles radius (around 800 to 960 km). For Pakistan specific jobs that is more than adequate .

Yes, it has far better range, payload and endurance than the Mig27 and the Jag for strike roles..Comparable to M2K and very nearly exact to the Gripen C/D.

Lets put some real world experience and flying hours on the platform in active squadron service and then the performance will become widely known through the rank and file.

Sid · Post by **Sid** » 16 Dec 2010 23:16

SaiK wrote:Why don't we accept the tarmak pics and the texts that was reported, saying it was "practice bombs" ? Now if this is all chai-wala aspects, then forgive me as many may know what happened fIRST hand through him.

BTW, did it not the first pic depicts a red flag? and from the subsequent blast pic, the same flag blew into camera direction (blast pressure), and at a delta time when snapped was appearing like a ball?

Because when jingos are on fire no amount of information can quench their thirst.

But during the Kargil period as well, IAF did dropped dumb bombs assisted by LDP.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 17 Dec 2010 00:18

aren't we talking about LCA weapons test?

rakall · Post by **rakall** » 17 Dec 2010 03:13

shiv wrote:
merlin wrote:
That 45 minutes, if true, must be for full internal fuel only. With drop tanks it should be more.
May not even be full internal fuel. The aircraft is being used for testing and will be packed with telemetry equipment. Recall that oddball view of R-73 being launched from a camera placed godknowswhere on the LCA. And note that PV-2 is being used - not one of the LSPs

From Tarmak's blog
http://tarmak007.blogspot.com/2010/12/b ... tores.html
Shri PS Subramanyam, Programme Director (CA) & Director, ADA said that on December 15, 2010, Tejas PV-2 aircraft piloted by Gp Capt (Retd) RR Tyagi dropped practice bombs on the target. Thus NFTC, ADA became the first to use the facility for weapon testing on Tejas. For this purpose, air-to-ground target and Range Safety Officer (RSO) bunkers were constructed at the range site. NFTC mobile telemetry with Test Director and critical system monitoring personnel were also positioned at the test range. The mobile telemetry was linked to the base station Bangalore, through BSNL fiber optic link to monitor the test aircraft data and video in real-time.

Good that we have Chitradurga activated... now they dont have to bomb SHAR for practice !!!

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 17 Dec 2010 06:20

ashokpachori wrote:
Besides the explosive may actually contain something to make it flash so the hit is visible from a distance despite smoke/dust
Its called flash powder.

Maybe it is, thanks. In fact if you watch the Vayu Shakti 2010 videos - the daytime explosions of munitions are highly non flashy - mostly puffs of dust, unlike the videos of Vayu Shakti 1989 that I have put on YouTube where fuel drums and/or rigged explosives have clearly been set up to please an audience that had dear late Rajiv Gandhi and his respected Shrimati Soniaji.

It think if one is looking for practice hits from a great distance - a flash is a useful indicator that something actually exploded because a puff of dust is all you will see even if a rock is dropped from an aircraft.

uddu · Post by **uddu** » 17 Dec 2010 08:40

May be during February 2009 or this year tests, the image of the bomb hitting few meters away from the target was released. So this time they have achieved further improvement in target accuracy down to a feet. Anyone got that image?
DRDO always confuses the faithfools. How come practice bomb is having explosives and how is that there is first explosion and then the target seen hitting and sending debris flying without the explosion in the second image. Total confusion onlee.

Now if the enlarged images are checked again it seems the images are in reverse. The explosion is that of the second image.

It seems, the bomb can be seen in the image when it hits the other side of the target (The camera seems placed on the opposite side from where the aircraft came, or surely not from the side the aircraft came to hit the target). In that the debris can be seen flying. Then comes the explosion. So this may be live bomb or a target bomb with small amount of explosives to determine the hit. The image don't seem Photoshopped as well since the flash is covering the area behind the target and also to the area to the right of it coming forward, while leaving the target visible. So this may be a live bomb test and the one that hit the target with pin point accuracy. The shock wave can also be seen just above the flash.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 17 Dec 2010 08:44

CCIP cannot give 100% 'within 3 feet' accuracy across a large number of drops I think. so maybe they tested many drops and released pic of one that was most accurate.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 17 Dec 2010 09:07

Philip wrote:Surely,when the need for in-flight refuelling for the IAF's aircraft was mooted,quite some time ago,why did this essential requirement for a light fighter like the LCA never excited the minds of our boffins? Where was everbody,IAF included,sleeping on the job? There is however another problem,the small number of air-tankers in service and planned.They cannot be everywhere and probably will receive prioroity refuelling our Flankers and MMRCAs first.

Relax Philip. The Tejas was always meant to get an IFR probe and it was accounted for in the initial design as a bolt on probe. There are pictures on the net of that. Its the additional drag that a bolt on probe brings that the IAF doesn't want and hence a retractable probe is what they want. And by the time the IAF gets MRCAs, the Tejas will have its IFR probe so there may be no such priority accorded to MKIs and MRCAs.

This underscores the remark made by an AM familar with the project that the LCA in current form can mainly serve for point defence.To now install a refuelling system in such a tightly packed airframe for both MK1 and MK2,will be a real headache and require further redesigning and testing.If its endurance is only 45 mts.,what reasonable payload can it carry for G.Attack/close support ops and at what range/combat radius without refuelling? I daresay that the MIG-27 has at least an equal or even better range and is definitely better armoured.Armour is essential for the GA role as both A-10s and SU-25s are heavily aroured to withstand smallarms/anti-aircraft fire and even missile damage. A twin-engined upgraded Jaguar might prove to be a better bet than the LCA for such a role.

Would it be a problem even if it doesn't have IFR till 2013? The MiG-21s never had it and the Bison still doesn't and won't till it starts retiring starting around 2015-18. Did the AM that you spoke to also tell you on how THAT (along with the fact that it has a measly 4 pylons of which 2 outboard are almost always occupied by drop tanks) makes it a point defence fighter and how that is a problem for the IAF ?

Anyway your point is moot, since the Tejas will have both IFR AND OBOGS which even the Mirage-2000s don't have as of now, and which puts a dent on the endurance as it is. My guess is that this (having to carry bottled oxygen) may be one factor that puts a 45 minute restriction (if that is even true that is) on the Tejas, since it is eventually supposed to have OBOGS and additional bottled oxygen may be difficult to fit in. So why bother with that when within a few years this won't even be a problem?

neerajb · Post by **neerajb** » 17 Dec 2010 09:17

Gaur wrote:Could it be just a flare? The pilot surely would not be able to spot a small pyramid. The real life targets are "much" larger. Perhaps the flare was just to aid the pilot in easier spotting of the target?

Is it so difficult to spot a large red circle with white crosshairs and a white pyramid with red flag at the top form the aircraft in broad daylight?

The real guys must be having a laugh at the various theories floating in BR, it's a plain simple 25 pound training bomb probably aimed with CCIP.

Cheers....

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 17 Dec 2010 09:35

^you bet.. look carefully and you can still see it is a distorted flag that appears to be round at the time of the snap. Wait for the video that was taken with optic fiber setup. Everything will be clear.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 17 Dec 2010 14:37

Tejas chitradurga tests are continuing. at 1.30pm two of them took off east and headed north. the first one had no bombs but two white drop tanks. I did not see the second one but heard the noise a few seconds later.

Udayan pathak · Post by **Udayan pathak** » 17 Dec 2010 15:05

LCA to get its initial operational clearance in January '11

http://www.brahmand.com/news/LCA-to-get ... /1/10.html

"The IOC is expected to come sometime around January '11 and it will be witnessed by Defence Minister A K Antony and IAF Chief Air Chief Marshal P V Naik in Bangalore," a senior Defence Ministry official said here Thursday.

I am confused is the IOC date 27 December or Jan 2011???

is this source credible?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 17 Dec 2010 15:55

the date may have slipped by a couple weeks...

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 17 Dec 2010 16:22

It will achieve IOC in dec and our babus will witness the official fly past in jan. Like they have passing out parades

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 17 Dec 2010 16:37

Kartik,the MIG-21s/Bisons were of a different era and most importantly available in very large numbers,the mainstay of the IAF's inventory,and thus could be spread out in most of our bases covering a wide area.Moreover,the idea of refuelling tankers never seemed to be a priority in the 70s era.The LCA touted as we all know as the world's smallest multi-role aircraft was designed two+ decades after the MIG-21 and it would've been prudent for the designers to have designed it with a retractable probe given its small size,limited internal fuel and notwithstanding drop tanks which reduce missiles/ordnance carried.
(One presumes/hopes that the LCA-N will have from the start a retractable refuelling probe,not another "bolt-on"!)

The LCA is never going to be built in such large numbers as our venerable MIG-21s and will by 2020 be inferior to many newer/upgraded current aircraft emerging and therefore will be best suited to point defence in select theatres.I'm sure that our upgraded Jaguars will complement the LCAs in service by then and will be expected to deliver more on the strike/GA role.

Udayan pathak · Post by **Udayan pathak** » 17 Dec 2010 18:05

http://tarmak007.blogspot.com/2010/12/j ... -tank.html

The word is just out that India's Light Combat Aircraft (Tejas) just jettisoned the first ever drop tank over the Aeronautical Test Range (ATR) in Chitradurga. Sources tell Tarmak007 that the flight was piloted by Gp Capt Suneet Krishna of NFTC and everything went ahead as planned. This is part of the ongoing last-phase trials of Tejas ahead of the IOC on December 27. Will update if any more info drops in.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 17 Dec 2010 18:50

so it was likely one of the two tejas that took off at 1.30pm today.

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 17 Dec 2010 20:04

There is not much difference between Dec 27 and Jan 2011. How does the IOC matter now? The IOC is just a ceremony which will take into account the schedules of the guests attending. Production is on (right?) for the remaining LSPs and the production aircraft.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 17 Dec 2010 20:24

Good job Singha. You are our spotter # 1

Vikram W · Post by **Vikram W** » 17 Dec 2010 23:21

so the IOC has been postponed by a couple of weeks ... BUT did no one notice how DRDO ~~weaseled~~ babudom-ed out and announced that the aircrafts will not be made available to IAF till mid 2011.

P.S. Subramaniam pulled another fast one on the taxpayer and IAF.

Also, remember , based on the schedule that was given in January this year ( let this be an end of year report card ) they were supposed to deliver LSP 5 in July , LSP 6 within a week of that , LSP 7 and 8 before the year was out. And we have not seen the naval Tejas fly yet. usually when a project is running late , an organisation tries to make amends by going faster , here all we get are commitments and further delays. I wish someone would hold them accountable for their milestone commitments.

arz kiya hai --- tarikh pe tarikh judge sahib, tarikh pe tarikh

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 17 Dec 2010 23:25

Take it easy. And dont start calling names.

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 18 Dec 2010 00:48

Vikram W - what a load of bull! The aircraft is ready and IOC is delayed only by a couple of weeks without the billions that the French and the Russians charged "extra" for their wares.

Also LCA/Arjun/P-17 etc are perhaps the only example of military purchases executed without corruption ie money exchanging hands for procurement. So the taxpayers are getting their money's worth in the LCA.

Narad · Post by **Narad** » 18 Dec 2010 01:08

Singha wrote:CCIP cannot give 100% 'within 3 feet' accuracy across a large number of drops I think. so maybe they tested many drops and released pic of one that was most accurate.

There are no visible signs of any drop prior to the hit in the pictures. Also, how many attempts can be done in a 20 minute mission?

Vikram W · Post by **Vikram W** » 18 Dec 2010 01:11

with due respects , I love the tejas program as much as the other guy.
I am alluding to is the way the agencies involved are able to skip deadlines and not face any music at all. Being a project manager myself , I know how one missed deadline in a multi agency project leads to delays both up and down the supply chain( the vendors who are creating inventories and the customer ( IAF in this case ) which is preparing facilities and resources in anticipation of the product)

I was not trying to be a pessimist , but I believe we should be critical and look back once in a while and take lessons. I was pointing out that the targets that were doled out at the beginning of the year ( and I listed them in my post) were far from met. Also , IOC was earlier understood to be a milestone where IAF would get the planes to play around with ( and the date set in stone at 27th dec). Yet quoting aviationweek (see link below ) the production aircrafts do not reach IAF till mid 2011. So ADA/DRDO/HAL are about ~3 aircrafts behind schedule.

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/ ... el=defense

Vivek - I do not understand what was "BULL" about the post . also, the billions that we gave the french or the russians have nothing to do with the project or the deadline.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 18 Dec 2010 01:51

For a legitimate schedule management, a critical path is absolutely essential. IOC is the critical path milestone that needs to be achieved. I am not sure sure what kindof PM people do, but one thing is sure that most PMs just fail to understand is the engineering methodology that is followed by an engineering firm that plays a big part in the process management. If the processes skips and delays, with valid reason, no amount of estimation can help you succeed and chest beat you have a point.

There are utter realities that all PMs fails to understand and keep find faults on many a schedule slippages. Try to include time factor from the methodlogy aspect., and include R&D methodlogy and processes into scheduling, to get more details of your critical path work break downs.

There may be some reality bites PMs will face. For that understanding, one needs to be a techie rather a PM.

/OT.

Virupaksha · Post by **Virupaksha** » 18 Dec 2010 02:05

Vikram W,

You are confusing IOC with actual production of aircraft.

IOC is basically the go ahead of the sample. That is, the sample shown is okay to the customer, NOT that production will be started by then.

So when they said IOC is december 2010 and actual production to reach IAF as mid 2011, i.e. the time line is actual clear.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 18 Dec 2010 02:08

VikramW,

What is "bull" about your post is the lack of information but all the polemic.

Is it confirmed that the IOC is in January? Ok, You quote AWST as authoritative and then state January when another anonymous guy in some report says it - great but AWST is still saying December 27. Has it struck you that both dates are possible. And that the January date, could it be that for an event that marks so many years of efforts, some politicos & big wigs may be required to attend. Its pretty common for handover functions to be scheduled around when so and so is free. Arihant issue anyone.

Second, you note the aircraft will only be available mid-2011, ok but blame the developer. For this to be true, again, do you have any detailed information of the milestones that are involved as far as the production (first 20) aircraft are concerned & that these were missed thanks to the developer? Do you have data at hand that says what their avionics fit will be, what weapons they will carry, systems that will be onboard & that the developer messed up. So far, over the course of this year itself, in fact, relatively recently, we know the IAF wants newer missiles, in 2011, new EW systems are to be incorporated & there were even reports about how new systems may be brought in for FOC. This means design changes have to be made for the first batch as well to include any modifications going on. None of this was mentioned at the beginning of the year either.

Third, you seem to be a bit confused about what IOC means. You state "IOC was earlier understood to be a milestone where IAF would get the planes to play around with " - whereas it means nothing of the sort!! IOC means that the Tejas platform has reached a certain level of capability and has been certified by ASTE & CEMILAC & the IAF to meet IOC standards as decided by all three agencies & the developer! Thats it, nothing less, nothing more. The IAF getting aircraft to "play around with" is entirely different. That's tied to production of the IOC standard aircraft & as they are delivered, the IAF's squadron gets filled up to "play around with". It actually makes sense to fit out the first 20 aircraft & get their delivery underway only once IOC is cleared, otherwise if design changes were discovered, then what do you do with the aircraft already manufactured? You have to send them back to HAL & it will be tougher to make the changes once the aircraft is already made.

Then the newest LSP & the IOC standard aircraft will be used to go towards FOC. Again, this is some 2-3 years away. In between, its entirely possible the IAF may ask for more changes, putting a few months here or there, or the plans go awry and some delays occur. That's the point of development. This is not a build to print program as TOT aircraft are. Even there, delays are all too common. Scorpene, Hawk, T-90 - prominent examples.

Then, when you talk of schedules, lets consider other simpler programs and lets see whether you can inform us of whats going on. MiG-29 Upgrade. 2 Aircraft to be in Russia, this year, both pre upgrades to be flown by year end & definitive fitment to commence next year. Announced "at the beginning of the year" or "last year" by IAF, MOD, MiG. So, where are the MiGs? Is it possible that there have been slippages thanks to project complexity or in between additions? Or is it MiGs fault or the IAFs fault? Come on, tell us, about who is weaseling out and where babudom lies, or where accountability is to be fixed.

Mirage 2000 upgrade - "in negotiation" for the past who knows how many years. Yet to commence, yet to have the design finalized. Why? Accountability?

Sadly, your claim that you are a Project Manager and hence that explains everything, just comes across as braggadocio, unless you have details that add insight into whats going on & which add value to the discussion. You say "P.S. Subramaniam pulled another fast one on the taxpayer and IAF. " - back that up with facts, your own equal experience if you have it, not that you are a PM. Thats just idle talk and its not even being "critical" - its just coffee house talk where everyone is better than the other guy, all gas, no substance.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 18 Dec 2010 02:30

SaiK wrote:For a legitimate schedule management, a critical path is absolutely essential. IOC is the critical path milestone that needs to be achieved. I am not sure sure what kindof PM people do, but one thing is sure that most PMs just fail to understand is the engineering methodology that is followed by an engineering firm that plays a big part in the process management. If the processes skips and delays, with valid reason, no amount of estimation can help you succeed and chest beat you have a point.

There are utter realities that all PMs fails to understand and keep find faults on many a schedule slippages. Try to include time factor from the methodlogy aspect., and include R&D methodlogy and processes into scheduling, to get more details of your critical path work break downs.

There may be some reality bites PMs will face. For that understanding, one needs to be a techie rather a PM.

/OT.

Critical path issue is absolutely valid & a choice has to be made in the interest of the Tejas program objectives versus time.

I recall earlier this year, there was much talk of how a critical system was still not available and some such thing & hence ADA was being "critically assessed".

Later we get to know the LCA now has an indigenous autopilot in the last version that flew - again, ADA did not come out and blame the supplier (probably NAL for control laws, BEL/other labs for hardware) and just announced when the aircraft flew. Now the IAF would have known about this issue clearly, because they have regular monthly reviews as mentioned sometime back, plus ASTE guys would keep IAF in loop. So the decision was made to stick around for this critical system ..

ADA took it on the chin but the aircraft flew & now we have IOC coming around, if this was say an external private vendor, see JSF for example, any supplier problem is mentioned by the integrator and the blame is allocated upfront. Currently RR is taking it on the chin for engine troubles. Even supplier does PR about what is being done, so everyone is happy. Here media is bar few exceptions, anti LCA & nor does developer-supplier combine have professional media management. Gripen, Rafale have country specific websites, different languages, former pitching a plane that does not even exist but with so much "pretty stuff" that enthusiasts all over the net are touting its features.

In India, ADA barely ever acknowledges issues with its suppliers (except Parliamentary reports), its challenges, its problems and even enables a regular source of information & also, ends up with criticism. They have yet to learn how to play the media/public perception game. Another example is the date issue. Abroad, only when everything is A-ok, does the agency sign off on a date, and as we are seeing on JSF, EF and even others, that really does not mean much, as delays are common. But even then, they manage the perception, with regular articles and dripfeeding info so people know progress is being made. Here, some ADA guy will say, "probably by mid year, XYZ will fly" and media is anyways least bothered about being in loop about subsequent changes if any, and the organization takes it on the chin, again.

Basically, the Tejas is a R&D program, every aircraft so far has been a unique test article, with new features, non production variant items (telemetry) and so far. But the perception created and not dispelled by ADA is that this is just another integration project, either build to print or to be fitted out in xyz time, and why is that not happening.

I was reading some old issues of AFM, and the European aircraft guys make a big hue and cry about integrating each and every tiny widget and catalog every software release to the media to show progress. "We are at release 3.4.1, 3.4.2 is very complex and we are working on it". Here both due to an apathetic media, our "critics" are not aware of the amount of progress made by the LCA. No professional PR management at all to spoonfeed info to the public.

Vikram W · Post by **Vikram W** » 18 Dec 2010 02:56

Karan M wrote: What is "bull" about your post is the lack of information but all the polemic.

pray tell me how my humble review of ADA commitments counts as polemic. back in school , I learnt it was meant to be oneupmanship.

Karan M wrote: Mirage 2000 upgrade - "in negotiation" for the past who knows how many years. Yet to commence, yet to have the design finalized. Why? Accountability?

- are you sir, supporting my point here?

Karan M wrote:Sadly, your claim that you are a Project Manager and hence that explains everything, just comes across as braggadocio, unless you have details that add insight into whats going on & which add value to the discussion. You say "P.S. Subramaniam pulled another fast one on the taxpayer and IAF. " - back that up with facts, your own equal experience if you have it, not that you are a PM. Thats just idle talk and its not even being "critical" - its just coffee house talk where everyone is better than the other guy, all gas, no substance.
-

ad hominem and under the belt. we can take my PM skills OT.

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 18 Dec 2010 03:23

Vikram W,
Selective answering of Karan M's post while crying "ad hominem" and "under the belt" is all well and good, but I see little substance in your post. What are is your answer regarding your totally false statement on IOC. Also, as Karan M said, back up your statement ""P.S. Subramaniam pulled another fast one on the taxpayer and IAF. " with facts.

I hope your next post will contain less clever words and more facts.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 18 Dec 2010 03:24

ramana wrote:Good job Singha. You are our spotter # 1

....the relocation to Jatland aka Gurgaon robbed me of that title.......once upon a time, it was reporter hawabaaz from Dhurandhar News Network (DNN) (that is me) who broke all these stories.....the MMRCA contenders (reminds of the beautiful formation of EF and the tanker and these fighters peeling off over HAL airport), the running away from office for display at HAL day......

Just had to lift me head and allah used to bless me with sight of a/c taking off/landing from HAL.......the amazing, and at times scary, sight of large tpt a/c or airlines adjusting the approach/bearing during the final leg of descent...some of them did sway a lot during that phase........I miss that

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 18 Dec 2010 03:29

What do you call inductive informal fallacies?

srai · Post by **srai** » 18 Dec 2010 03:42

Singha wrote:so it was likely one of the two tejas that took off at 1.30pm today.

How about setting some cameras, especially for the next few weeks? This way we can end all speculations on what weapons are being carried for the final sets of weapon trails.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 18 Dec 2010 03:48

I don't think BR would be allowed private shoot of these trials.

Vikram W · Post by **Vikram W** » 18 Dec 2010 03:53

SaiK wrote:What do you call inductive informal fallacies?

unrelated generalizations