Bharat Rakshak

Consortium of Indian Defence Websites
It is currently 30 Apr 2016 00:09

All times are UTC + 5:30 hours




Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 4322 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34 ... 109  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: 28 Nov 2012 12:40 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 03 May 2012 22:34
Posts: 962
When did this JF-17 crash occur. Given that it was inducted without any sort of rigorous testing 1 is not too bad.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 28 Nov 2012 12:59 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 11 May 2005 06:56
Posts: 5329
Location: Move JNU to Dantewada. Profs will be closer to field work and students close to recruiters
wrdos wrote:
Therefore India is at a better basis of development, with open access to all available western opponents and subsystems, not like China that is sanctioned almost always.

India too was under sanctions , until very recently. The program that was most affected by sanctions was the LCA and hence the most delays. The J-10 was much further along (after all, it is an Israeli Lavi with the Chinese rubber stamp on it and a few modifications..), with most of the development already complete elsewhere (Israel) and still you guys botched it.

Doing real engineering from grounds up requires lot of trial, engineering and most importantly testing. Your ejection seat on the JF-17 , didn't work as advertised for example. There is a price that is always paid for short cuts.

Talking of which, look at the work the Indians did on this, along with actual pictures of canopy severing and a dummy ejecting (I got this from Googling from trying to find out what they have done in terms of infra and testing on this). If they are still looking to refine it and work out the kinks at this stage, just shows how painstaking it is.

There is a big difference between open societies such as India and US etc and China. You can read all about how the F-22's canopy wouldn't open and how they had to take a chains saw and cut open a couple of 100,000 dollars worth of gold plated canopy (literally) to get the pilot out. What do we know from China. Nothing. Other than rah-rah fan boy rants.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 28 Nov 2012 16:09 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 16 Nov 2011 22:31
Posts: 3171
Location: With/without/despite you - Andhera Chatega, Suraj niklega, Kamal khilega...[spare me, Kamal=Perfect]
wrdos wrote:
Therefore India is at a better basis of development, with open access to all available western opponents and subsystems, not like China that is sanctioned almost always.


Wrdos ji, so was India after the Shakti tests.


wrdos wrote:
Then why LCA is always late? You know J10 was a project started much later than the LCA but the latter has been in service 7 or 8 years already.

BTW, i don't mean to offend anybody. LCA is too small, it could be a nice bird if it could enter service around 2000. But by now,i.e. 2012, it is too small to support a country as big as India is.


Ok here is the data for you to meditate on:
From Opensource:
LCA Tejas Wing loading: 247 kg/m² (50.7 lb/ft²)
J-10 Wing loading: 381 kg/m² (78 lb/ft²)
F-18 Super Hornet - Wing loading: 94.0 lb/ft² (459 kg/m²)
F-16C Block 30 - Wing loading: 88.3 lb/ft² (431 kg/m²)

At Max. Combat Load (basically design limit)
LCA Tejas Wing loading: 13300/38.4 = 346 kg/m^2
J-10 Wing loading: 19277/33.1 = 582 kg/m^2
F-18 Super Hornet - Wing loading: 29937/46.5 = 643 kg/m^2
F-16C Block 30 - Wing loading: 19200/27.9 = 688 kg/m^2

Incremental Wing Load compared to competitor:
How loaded is J-10 compared to LCA Tejas : (582-346)/346*100 = 68%
How loaded is F-18 compared to J-10 : (643-582)/582*100 = 10%
How loaded is F-16 compared to J-10 : (688-582)/582*100 = 18%

F-18 and F-16 were rejected by Indians. If I remember correct these could not even take off in high altitude take off tests in Himalayas. Are you sure J-10 would fare any better.

FYI, the Combat radius envisaged for LCA Tejas is 500 km (ie. Full load, loiter, drop/fire in anger and dance around trees). I have attached a nice map for your benefit below.

http://s1339.beta.photobucket.com/user/ravi_g/media/Ranges/Approx500kmrangeofLCATejasassoughttobedeployed_DRDOpresentations.png.html?sort=3&o=0#/user/ravi_g/media/Ranges/Approx500kmrangeofLCATejasassoughttobedeployed_DRDOpresentations.png.html?sort=3&o=0&_suid=135409445147905922187750840688


wrdos wrote:
Let's make a bet. From now, no country would develop a new type of manned fighter, as small as LCA anymore.


I am sure you are happy with your choice bro. Congrats.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 28 Nov 2012 16:46 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 08 Oct 2009 17:28
Posts: 1179
ever since the nixon-deng compact China has received unprecedented industrial collaboration from the west.


I will simply not accept this nonsense from chicom sh*t about "how they have built things in a vacuum". it's utter nonsense. Let us not forget who GE has transferred advanced avionics to, who honeywell gave satellite bus techto and who was the recipient of programs such as Peace pearl. and these are some well known transfers I am highlighting.

It is equally well known that US big business and Chicom are joined at the hip.

It is we who have been denied tech and components and have been forced to buy entire systems from abroad.

Chicom propaganda on this forum has reached unprecedented levels.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 28 Nov 2012 18:05 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 03 Feb 2011 16:56
Posts: 1945
Location: Nuked State of Denialistan
We all seem to think, as described in articles that in the past three months, the whole LCA fleet was grounded due to one reason: the problem with the ejection of canopy relating to the seat.

That may very well have been the case, but there were a lot of other modifications being carried out on the LCA fleet. Keeping in mind the feb 2013 live firing exercises.

The different LCA'a were not of the same engineering levels since different modifications and tests were being carried out on each one. Also, a thourough check needed to be carried out on the airframes. Time consuming. So this was also a period were decisions were taken to freeze parameters of certain units, both HW and SW and bring all of them to a certain level, and also to consolidate the entire fleet as one. And it would be foolish on ADA/HAL's part to share details of this with the DDMs or me. :)

I would be surprised to see only one LCA taking part in the February exercise.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 28 Nov 2012 19:33 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Posts: 34026
Location: sky-high@saikanomie
sure thing.. we all can agree that they talked in detail only about the canopy<->helmet issue.. which probably was a planned thing along with a list of other things they had to do. 100%, those details will be kept hidden from public.

now, the good things are:
1. lessons learned should be documented and process matured.
2. mistakes corrected, and look forward for FoC.

all these knowledge gets transferred to AMCA.

we all should be happy with the lab boys to share the top 1 news in their list of things, whatever low priority they have kept for that. indirectly, meaning there might have been higher priority aspects that they fixed... mostly from extending the flight envelope for advanced missile launches, and higher Gs.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 29 Nov 2012 14:56 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 11 Jan 2009 00:14
Posts: 2671
Flight test update

from

LCA-Tejas has completed 1945 Test Flights Successfully. (24-Nov-2012).
(TD1-233,TD2-305,PV1-242,PV2-222,PV3-348,LSP1-74,LSP2-238,PV5-36,LSP3-75,LSP4-56,LSP5-107,LSP7-5,NP1-4)[/quote]

to

LCA-Tejas has completed 1947 Test Flights Successfully. (28-Nov-2012).
(TD1-233,TD2-305,PV1-242,PV2-222,PV3-348,LSP1-74,LSP2-238,PV5-36,LSP3-76,LSP4-56,LSP5-108,LSP7-5,NP1-4)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 29 Nov 2012 15:01 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 08 Aug 2008 16:48
Posts: 536
Bangalore Airspace is very Alive these days-choppers,Tejas,Jaguars,I guess apart from LCA testing they are also preparing for February Air exercise. Will love to see Tejas dropping some LGB on target with perfect accuracy.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 29 Nov 2012 15:07 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 47424
Location: Gaius Bangaloricus - leader of 39th legion
saw a sinister looking black dhruv yday around 5:30pm , silhouetted against the sun.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 29 Nov 2012 15:12 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 11 Jan 2009 00:14
Posts: 2671
Nashji Upgraded JAG with a cute nose flying around?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 29 Nov 2012 15:22 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 08 Aug 2008 16:48
Posts: 536
suryagji it was just a glimpse from bus so can't say much....


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 29 Nov 2012 16:55 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25
Posts: 8095
nash wrote:
Bangalore Airspace is very Alive these days-choppers,Tejas,Jaguars,I guess apart from LCA testing they are also preparing for February Air exercise. Will love to see Tejas dropping some LGB on target with perfect accuracy.


News on Derby, Python V or IV, R-73 would be even more awesome, especially if tests were carried in dogfight terms. Tejas role in peacetime and first few days will be CAP or scrambling and taking on attacking enemy fighters on Indian airbases.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 29 Nov 2012 16:58 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 47424
Location: Gaius Bangaloricus - leader of 39th legion
a small white painted bizjet of the IAI Astra type making frequent rounds these days.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 29 Nov 2012 20:02 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 28168
Location: Sanatana Dharma: The binding force of South Asia
wrdos wrote:
LCA is too small,


Small and loaded with composites. So it has a miniscule radar signature and will be virtually invisible to the naked eye. 4 LCAs can cover air defence for a 100 Km radius around a town or airfield or even an attacking army column. 30,000 square kilometers. It sips fuel and can loiter. That is value for money.

You seem to have forgotten that the only fighting experience the PLAAF has is with small Soviet fighters (MiG 15) in the Korean war, where they did well . Don't forget that the Chinese choice of humongous J 20 and medium size J-31 are centered around the engines available for them. If you had your own engines you would design fighters around them,


Last edited by shiv on 29 Nov 2012 21:49, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 29 Nov 2012 20:06 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 28168
Location: Sanatana Dharma: The binding force of South Asia
Singha wrote:
a small white painted bizjet of the IAI Astra type making frequent rounds these days.


That's a medium sized one actually (looks pretty big while landing off golf course) but I have never managed to identify it. My recognition skills do not extend to anything that has a civil application although this one looks suspiciously like some kind of electronic snooper. Is it an IAI Astra? Or Grumman Gulfstream? Wiki says IAF has both.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 29 Nov 2012 20:53 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 47424
Location: Gaius Bangaloricus - leader of 39th legion
you would get a better view, the one I saw seemed to be this shape and size (IAI Astra), but I am sure gulfstream has such jets too. both are SIGINT I think though some might be ARC(under RAW?) and some under IAF.
http://www.air-and-space.com/20061025%2 ... ff%20l.jpg


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 30 Nov 2012 10:22 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 14 Mar 2011 02:59
Posts: 219
Bheeshma wrote:
When did this JF-17 crash occur. Given that it was inducted without any sort of rigorous testing 1 is not too bad.


That is the one reported crash. What about all the others? :twisted:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 01 Dec 2012 09:55 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 08 May 2012 06:43
Posts: 1117
Is there a terrain following mode for EL/M-2032 based MMR, now that the lower segment in the IAF including Jaguars are being standardized on it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 01 Dec 2012 09:59 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 47424
Location: Gaius Bangaloricus - leader of 39th legion
imo TFR is not just the radar, the output of the radar has to be processed by the FCS and autopilot system and control adjustments made to follow the pilots set height . so unless the Jags FCS is also being changed to integrate fully with the radar I would doubt the automatic TFR is there. JAgs are said to be quite stable and designed for lo-lo-lo manual flight though TFR clearly helps in reducing pilot workload and in fog/bad weather. the Mirage2000D had a dedicated small radar antilope5 for this function iirc.

wiki on EL2032:
In Air-to-Ground missions, the radar provides very high-resolution mapping (SAR), surface target detection and tracking over RBM, DBS and SAR maps in addition to A/G ranging. In Air-to-Sea missions the radar provides long range target detection and tracking, including target classification capabilities (RS, ISAR).
----
we just got ourself a lot of maritime strike power if we apply the upgrade to entire Fleet and purchase a suitable ASM like harpoon!

--
Antelope 5/50 radar modes from 1992:

Antilope 5 and Antilope 50 possess six different modes:

Terrain Following (suivi de terrain), the radar sees up to 7 nm in front of the plane, allowing a 600kt speed at 200ft

Ground Mapping (cartographie), enables two submodes: VISUSOL gives a 160° (+/- 80°) map with 1/250,000 or 1/1,000,000 scales, while RESOL enables to magnify a part of the map from 2 to 50 times

Terrain Following + Ground Mapping (mode entrelacé)

Ground Target Ranging (télémétrie), effective range 8nm

Air-to-air (air-air), range 16nm, 160° wide sweeping, BoreSight and Slew submodes possible

Air-to-sea (air-surface), comparable to Ground Mapping


Last edited by Singha on 01 Dec 2012 10:03, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 01 Dec 2012 10:00 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Posts: 34026
Location: sky-high@saikanomie
I think not.. dunno, but LANTIRN from LM was provided to Israeli F16s. Also, they had a tie up with Grumman for TFTA (not the BR acro.. avoidance.)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 01 Dec 2012 10:47 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 08 May 2012 06:43
Posts: 1117
Lot of info, yes radar in TF/TA modes is just a feed for the FCS and the autopilot system, I am counting on the Nirbhay to proof this integration since its both unmanned and has endurance after similar number of tests that Brahmos was doing over the time. The claimed 500m AGL minimum flying altitude for subsonic Nirbhay doesn't give much hope, its a start though.

Tejas has got an FBW and perhaps last year an autopilot system as well
Jaguar also has an FCS and an autopilot system and being a phased out system in other air forces can we now have full access to the avionics?
MKI with its RCS issue was never talked in terms of lo-lo-lo flight
Rafale - Check


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 01 Dec 2012 11:20 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 47424
Location: Gaius Bangaloricus - leader of 39th legion
600 knots at 200 ft is pretty scary both for the pilot and the enemy. makes it almost impossible for any vshorad system to engage the plane. one flash and its gone.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 03 Dec 2012 19:07 
Offline
BRFite -Trainee

Joined: 03 Jul 2009 14:16
Posts: 53
Per Livefist

http://livefist.blogspot.in/2012/12/f-3 ... chief.html

Quote:
F-35? We Want The LCA Navy: Indian Navy Chief


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Dec 2012 21:06 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 26 Jul 2009 12:29
Posts: 802
Location: Invention is evolution, explosion is destruction.
Flight test update

from

LCA-Tejas has completed 1947 Test Flights Successfully. (28-Nov-2012).
(TD1-233,TD2-305,PV1-242,PV2-222,PV3-348,LSP1-74,LSP2-238,PV5-36,LSP3-76,LSP4-56,LSP5-108,LSP7-5,NP1-4)

to

LCA-Tejas has completed 1949 Test Flights Successfully. (29-Nov-2012).
(TD1-233,TD2-305,PV1-242,PV2-222,PV3-348,LSP1-74,LSP2-238,PV5-36,LSP3-77,LSP4-56,LSP5-109,LSP7-5,NP1-4)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Dec 2012 23:23 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 14 Jan 2012 18:00
Posts: 1964
Location: American Junction
^^The Navy is really a model to follow in supporting indigenous platforms. I hope the Army DGMF learns a lesson or two from the Navy.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Dec 2012 23:41 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Posts: 34026
Location: sky-high@saikanomie
wilson_th wrote:
Per Livefist

http://livefist.blogspot.in/2012/12/f-3 ... chief.html

Quote:
F-35? We Want The LCA Navy: Indian Navy Chief

That makes a huge difference! way to go IN. million salutes!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 09 Dec 2012 08:22 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 20 Dec 2004 21:45
Posts: 365
Rs 1,500 cr more for combat aircraft Tejas as HAL fails to meet targets


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 09 Dec 2012 09:13 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 02 Dec 2006 20:53
Posts: 686
If i am not wrong HAL was given funds to setup Production line for Tejas 4 to 5 Years ago , For 2 Years they didn't do any thing , then they started building the Production line , and from the last year they are wondering how to start the Production line , and the Saga goes on :( (Now some one will come and slam me and say you don't know how difficult it is to start a production line :rotfl: )


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 09 Dec 2012 10:42 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Posts: 2596
Location: Strength respects Strength
karan_mc wrote:
(Now some one will come and slam me and say you don't know how difficult it is to start a production line :rotfl: )


How many years of experience do you have in this said line ???


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 09 Dec 2012 11:19 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21
Posts: 3997
Sagar G wrote:
karan_mc wrote:
(Now some one will come and slam me and say you don't know how difficult it is to start a production line :rotfl: )


How many years of experience do you have in this said line ???

He is not building LCA!!! He does not need to answer that question. I am pretty sure he is answerable to the duties of his job.

People who are in charge of a project of national security, should be accountable and answerable to the claims that they make. Their can be slips for a project of that magnitude. But slips should not be the norm!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 09 Dec 2012 11:28 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Posts: 2596
Location: Strength respects Strength
indranilroy wrote:
He is not building LCA!!! He does not need to answer that question. I am pretty sure he is answerable to the duties of his job.


People here must always remember the bold part while making comments which they can't defend or justify.

indranilroy wrote:
People who are in charge of a project of national security, should be accountable and answerable to the claims that they make. Their can be slips for a project of that magnitude. But slips should not be the norm!


Slips are not a norm here but due to technological challenges being faced, people here should accept this simple fact instead of getting their undies in a twist and making smartass comments.

I am not happy with this news either but that doesn't give me a license to pooh pooh the people working on the project.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 09 Dec 2012 11:51 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 05 Dec 2008 22:23
Posts: 261
sankum wrote:

what this ajay shukla thinks, what HAL and DRDO are doin with this project? Are they discovering a new cooking recipy?.... Its our first such project, to design and develop a fighter aircraft. As the nature of project and our prior experiences, developing agiencies can't stick to a single project blue prints. Either you fund the project in a right way or not, but it a different kind of project of high uncertanity. Shukla saab need to understand these, or he just want a good TRP on his blog.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 09 Dec 2012 12:14 
Offline
BRFite -Trainee

Joined: 03 Sep 2007 18:16
Posts: 56
Location: Poor mans Ooty...
keshavchandra wrote:
Either you fund the project in a right way or not, but it a different kind of project of high uncertanity. Shukla saab need to understand these, or he just want a good TRP on his blog.

Can we safely assume that the first squadron at this rate would be up only by end 2014 or first half of 2015 and the second one only by yr 2018 !

Would the IAF be able to sustain its lethal bite till then... thinking aloud considering the rapidly depleting fleet strength with problems ??

Any opinions gurus ??


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 09 Dec 2012 12:22 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 02 Dec 2006 20:53
Posts: 686
Quote:
Air Marshal Pranab K Barbora, who retired as the IAF vice-chief two years ago, summarises the Air Force’s viewpoint: “HAL’s assembly line expertise is outdated by at least three decades. They have done nothing to upgrade their technology. Setting up a modern assembly line for the Tejas is far beyond HAL’s capabilities.”


smartass comments coming from Ex-air chief are very similar to mine

Quote:
Senior IAF officers express frustration that HAL has failed to set up a Tejas assembly line, though its primary activity for the preceding decades has been to build foreign aircraft on an assembly line under licence.



Quote:
So serious are the difficulties that ADA and HAL approached foreign aircraft manufacturers last year — including Eurofighter GmbH, which builds the Typhoon. The proposal to appoint a foreign consultant for the Tejas production line remains alive in the MoD.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 09 Dec 2012 12:58 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Posts: 2596
Location: Strength respects Strength
karan_mc wrote:
smartass comments coming from Ex-air chief are very similar to mine


Nope they are facts, what facts did you put in your posting ??? Please point out, also please answer my previous question to you since you seem to have immense knowledge in this field.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 09 Dec 2012 14:39 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 19 May 2010 10:00
Posts: 2415
I think that nobody has right to criticize HAL unless they have personally set up production line for a fighter. Even though HAL chief has not set up anything except push paper when he was appointed to head HAL. Hence it is permissible to head, manage and mess up HAL but not criticize. Anyway due to technology challenges involved HAL was working very hard for only 30 years and needs only another 100 years more to set up production line. I think HAL has done a fair job and one LCA every 2 years is adequate speed. I don't think I can do this personally, hence HAL is exceeding my ability, which is ok. HAL is great and doing super job with IJT, Rustom and the screw driver. The top management personal focus is not just about making money from sub contracting and importing components for screwing together. They do a lot, I will soon try to find out what!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 09 Dec 2012 15:00 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 03 Aug 2012 15:48
Posts: 727
^^^^^^^^^^^^^

+++1+++++ :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 09 Dec 2012 18:34 
Offline
BRFite -Trainee

Joined: 03 Sep 2007 18:16
Posts: 56
Location: Poor mans Ooty...
vic wrote:
I think that nobody has right to criticize HAL unless they have personally set up production line for a fighter. Even though HAL chief has not set up anything except push paper when he was appointed to head HAL. Hence it is permissible to head, manage and mess up HAL but not criticize. Anyway due to technology challenges involved HAL was working very hard for only 30 years and needs only another 100 years more to set up production line. I think HAL has done a fair job and one LCA every 2 years is adequate speed. I don't think I can do this personally, hence HAL is exceeding my ability, which is ok. HAL is great and doing super job with IJT, Rustom and the screw driver. The top management personal focus is not just about making money from sub contracting and importing components for screwing together. They do a lot, I will soon try to find out what!


Can i borrow a wee bit of your talent for "wit"

You have summed up something which is SAD but true.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 09 Dec 2012 22:28 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Posts: 34026
Location: sky-high@saikanomie
There needs to be success criteria defined for public consumption entirely different from project specific ones. At the very least as mission objective.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 10 Dec 2012 00:02 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 05 Dec 2008 22:23
Posts: 261
@ vic..
200% sad but true.
+ 1.....


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 4322 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34 ... 109  Next

All times are UTC + 5:30 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Feedfetcher, snahata and 35 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group