Scott Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 Off-topic post deleted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicog Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 Better screening of pilots? Better tracking of aircraft? Yes and Yes. The airlines probably will do the former, but they'll have to be forced to do the latter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goat Roper Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 Better screening of pilots? Better tracking of aircraft? Yes and Yes. The airlines probably will do the former, but they'll have to be forced to do the latter. Just wondering why the capability to turn off the transponder? Why not just hard wire it into the engine data system? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3NUMBAS Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 quote CANBERRA, Australia (AP) — Australia's prime minister said Wednesday that failure to find any clue in the most likely crash site of the missing Malaysia Airlines jet would not spell the end of the search, as officials planned to soon bring in more powerful sonar equipment that can delve deeper beneath the Indian Ocean. The search coordination center said Wednesday a robotic submarine, the U.S. Navy's Bluefin 21, had so far covered more than 80 percent of the 310-square-kilometer (120-square-mile) seabed search zone off the Australian west coast, creating a three-dimensional sonar map of the ocean floor. Nothing of interest had been found. The 4.5-kilometer (2.8-mile) deep search area is a circle 20 kilometers (12 miles) wide around an area where sonar equipment picked up a signal on April 8 consistent with a plane's black boxes. But the batteries powering those signals are now dead. Defense Minister David Johnston said Australia was consulting with Malaysia, China and the United States on the next phase of the search for the plane that went missing March 8, which is likely to be announced next week. Johnston said more powerful towed side-scan commercial sonar equipment would probably be deployed, similar to the remote-controlled subs that found RMS Titanic 3,800 meters (12,500 feet) under the Atlantic Ocean in 1985 and the Australian WWII wreck HMAS Sydney in the Indian Ocean off the Australian coast, north of the current search area, in 2008. "The next phase, I think, is that we step up with potentially a more powerful, more capable side-scan sonar to do deeper water," Johnston told The Associated Press. https://uk.news.yahoo.com/australia-signals-deeper-search-malaysian-jet-034037299.html#w2bTozE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F4UCorsair Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 (edited) Better screening of pilots? Better tracking of aircraft? Yes and Yes. The airlines probably will do the former, but they'll have to be forced to do the latter. Just wondering why the capability to turn off the transponder? Why not just hard wire it into the engine data system? As a bit of background, a transponder is known as a secondary radar; it's called IFF (Identification Friend or Foe) in the military. It doesn't transmit any information until it's 'triggered' by ground based (primary) radar, and then it transmits information to that radar station. Typically the information showing up on an ATC radar is callsign, altitude and speed, so it could appear like this MH370 callsign 150 altitude expressed as a flight level, i.e., 15,000 feet 484 speed expressed in knots In older technology ground based radars, without the above capabilities, a transponder paint shows up as a tiny triangle, and ATC determines which aircraft it is by requesting "squawk Ident(ification), the pilot/s press an 'Ident' button on the transponder, and the triangle flashes. The primary 'paint' from an aircraft appears as a small segment of a circle on the ATC radar screen, but primary paints don't generally show up when the target is beyond about 30 miles, hence transponders. Once outside the range of ground based radars, typically about 200 nautical miles (320 Kms) the transponder sends no information to ATC, so for much of the flight of MH370, it was out of range of ground radar, and even if the transponder was on, nothing would have been received. It was only switched off to avoid radar from the turn of almost 180 degrees, till well off the Malaysian coast to the west. The transponder needs to be turned off to change the code. If it's not, it 'squawks' continuously on the ground (with each sweep of the ground based radar), and in an airport with many aircraft parked, the radar screen would be cluttered by 'paints' from stationary aircraft. Also, if not turned off, the transponder squawks different codes as it's reset, and that creates huge confusion for the air traffic controllers. Imagine an aircraft approaching an airport, just a few miles out, on code 3456, and an aircraft on the ground readying for departure changing codes, and part of that process involves going through 3456. There would be radar paints showing two aircraft in close proximity, and in a high workload environment, confusion is the last thing needed. In some ATC environments/countries, an aircraft has its own dedicated code, at other times, a code comes with the flight plan, and occasionally a code change is requested by ATC. Some airlines now have Cockpit Voice Recorders' and Flight Data Recorders' circuit breakers in the E & E bay, under the floor in a big jet, and not accessible to pilots. The circuit protection is provided by thermal overloads so that in the event of an electrical fire, the circuit is shut down. The location is left to individual airlines when ordering, but I can see a time when Civil Aviation Authorities will mandate that they be out of reach of pilots. Pilots may also like that, because currently protocols established between crews, airlines, and CAA's, allow data to be accessed only if the pilots are incapable of giving evidence after an incident/accident. If inaccessible, pilots can't be accused of trying to 'doctor' the evidence by pulling CB's. Edited April 23, 2014 by F4UCorsair Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F4UCorsair Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 (edited) I forgot to mention another 'job' that transponders have. They are part of the TCAS (Traffic Collision and Avoidance System), and are interrogated by other aircraft, e.g., if two aircraft are approaching head on (but it can be from any angle, any calculated conflict) at the same altitude, the transponders interrogate each other, the circuitry determines what course of action is best, and a voice command is received in each aircraft, but it can never conflict. One aircraft will be told to turn left, and the other to turn right, or one to climb, and the other to descend. Interestingly, when TCAS was first introduced, a protocol hadn't been established, and controllers gave conflicting instructions to the aircraft. Pilots, conditioned to accepting ATC instructions, followed those, and couple of head ons resulted. Nowadays, controllers are ignored and ONLY TCAS commands are acted upon. TCAS is that accurate and reliable. Wikipedia makes some sense http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_collision_avoidance_system Edited April 23, 2014 by F4UCorsair Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
khaosai Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 I forgot to mention another 'job' that transponders have. They are part of the TCAS (Traffic Collision and Avoidance System), and are interrogated by other aircraft, e.g., if two aircraft are approaching head on (but it can be from any angle, any calculated conflict) at the same altitude, the transponders interrogate each other, the circuitry determines what course of action is best, and a voice command is received in each aircraft, but it can never conflict. One aircraft will be told to turn left, and the other to turn right, or one to climb, and the other to descend. Interestingly, when TCAS was first introduced, a protocol hadn't been established, and controllers gave conflicting instructions to the aircraft. Pilots, conditioned to accepting ATC instructions, followed those, and couple of head ons resulted. Nowadays, controllers are ignored and ONLY TCAS commands are acted upon. TCAS is that accurate and reliable. Wikipedia makes some sense http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_collision_avoidance_system Hi, The transponders on the latest generation of commercial aircraft does not need to be switched off to change code. The last time I did that was on a light aircraft which was a long time ago. The latest version of TCAS is excellent, but it does not give left and right commands, only vertical commands. It's remarkable that they have not found any debris, but hopefully they will locate the recorders soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RubbaJohnny Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 yahoo has reports of wreckage of SW Australia near Maragaret River The ites have been photographed and sent to WA Police https://malaysia.yahoo.com/ http://biglawnewsline.com/2014/04/could-this-unidentified-material-found-along-australian-coast-have-any-link-to-lost-malaysian-airlines-flight-mh730.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RubbaJohnny Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 bits claimed found nr Duncansby a lovely part of Maragret River http://biglawnewsline.com/2014/04/could-this-unidentified-material-found-along-australian-coast-have-any-link-to-lost-malaysian-airlines-flight-mh730.html yahoo malaysia also has links Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RubbaJohnny Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-04-23/material-washed-ashore-examined-for-links-to-flight-mh370/5407584?§ion=news Oz TV Perth reportsAuthorities are examining material that has washed ashore south of Perth to identify if it is related to the search for missing Malaysia Airlines flight MH370. Police from Busselton secured the material that was found 10 kilometres east of Augusta in the South West of Western Australia. The Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) is examining photographs of the material to see if it is related to the search for the aircraft. The ATSB has also provided the photographs to the Malaysian investigation team. The ABC has been told the material is metallic and about 2.5 metres long. WA Emergency Services Minister Joe Francis, a former submarine navigator, said it was possible the items found could have come from the missing flight. "It wouldn't surprise me if sooner or later ... if there was debris floating, it would end up on the West Australian coast," he told ABC local radio in Perth. "Weather systems in the southern hemisphere predominantly move in a clockwise direction, and this time of the year the Leeuwin Current is pretty much at its strongest. "Anything in that area over 50 days travelling at two knots, say four kilometres an hour, sooner or later is likely to have been caught up in it [the current]." Mr Francis stressed that he did not have any information to suggest the debris was from the missing flight. "I don't want to pre-empt anything that it may or may not have been," he said. "We're just guessing at the moment but I wouldn't be surprised, that's all." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuckamuck Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 Aussies stay tuned for hundreds of wreckage sightings of the west coast. Every bit of trash will be thought to be MH370. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catterwell Posted April 24, 2014 Share Posted April 24, 2014 Aussies stay tuned for hundreds of wreckage sightings of the west coast. Every bit of trash will be thought to be MH370. I found some mangosteens floating my khlong. Should I hand them over to the police? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeOboe57 Posted April 24, 2014 Share Posted April 24, 2014 As a bit of background, a transponder is known as a secondary radar; it's called IFF (Identification Friend or Foe) in the military. It doesn't transmit any information until it's 'triggered' by ground based (primary) radar, and then it transmits information to that radar station. Typically the information showing up on an ATC radar is callsign, altitude and speed, so it could appear like thisMH370 callsign 150 altitude expressed as a flight level, i.e., 15,000 feet 484 speed expressed in knots In older technology ground based radars, without the above capabilities, a transponder paint shows up as a tiny triangle, and ATC determines which aircraft it is by requesting "squawk Ident(ification), the pilot/s press an 'Ident' button on the transponder, and the triangle flashes. The primary 'paint' from an aircraft appears as a small segment of a circle on the ATC radar screen, but primary paints don't generally show up when the target is beyond about 30 miles, hence transponders. Once outside the range of ground based radars, typically about 200 nautical miles (320 Kms) the transponder sends no information to ATC, so for much of the flight of MH370, it was out of range of ground radar, and even if the transponder was on, nothing would have been received. It was only switched off to avoid radar from the turn of almost 180 degrees, till well off the Malaysian coast to the west. The transponder needs to be turned off to change the code. If it's not, it 'squawks' continuously on the ground (with each sweep of the ground based radar), and in an airport with many aircraft parked, the radar screen would be cluttered by 'paints' from stationary aircraft. Also, if not turned off, the transponder squawks different codes as it's reset, and that creates huge confusion for the air traffic controllers. Imagine an aircraft approaching an airport, just a few miles out, on code 3456, and an aircraft on the ground readying for departure changing codes, and part of that process involves going through 3456. There would be radar paints showing two aircraft in close proximity, and in a high workload environment, confusion is the last thing needed. In some ATC environments/countries, an aircraft has its own dedicated code, at other times, a code comes with the flight plan, and occasionally a code change is requested by ATC. Some airlines now have Cockpit Voice Recorders' and Flight Data Recorders' circuit breakers in the E & E bay, under the floor in a big jet, and not accessible to pilots. The circuit protection is provided by thermal overloads so that in the event of an electrical fire, the circuit is shut down. The location is left to individual airlines when ordering, but I can see a time when Civil Aviation Authorities will mandate that they be out of reach of pilots. Pilots may also like that, because currently protocols established between crews, airlines, and CAA's, allow data to be accessed only if the pilots are incapable of giving evidence after an incident/accident. If inaccessible, pilots can't be accused of trying to 'doctor' the evidence by pulling CB's. I have to correct some of your statements. Range of ground based primary radar for ATC is determined by the type of service it provides. Terminal radar serving for departures and approaches to one or several aerodromes usually has a range of around 60 NM. The range limitation is due to the fact that the antenna is used alternatingly for transmitting pulses and receiving the returning echoes. During the transmitting phase the duplexer switches off the receiver so no echoes are registered. This setup offers good angular and range resolution, meaning that two targets in close proximity will produce two different echoes as they are hit by different pulses or, when on the same line of position, hit by the same pulse when it has safely passed the closer target, sending back a distinct echo. It also offers a good update ratio with an rpm of 12 or more 360° revolutions per minute, allowing for lower ATC separation values between radar identified targets. You can increase the range by extending the time the receiver is listening but you will have to slow down the turning rate of the antenna to get enough hits at the maximum range. This however comes with a significant loss of angular and range resolution, so two aircraft in close proximity will show up as one. Secondary radar has no range limitations. The SSR antenna on a 60 NM radar dish will trigger and receive transponder codes far beyond the range of the primary radar. If you set the scope range of a 60 NM radar to 120 NM you will receive secondary returns up to the perimeter of your scope, while the primary echoes cease at the 60 NM range mark. The only limitation is the loss of energy of the pulse as it travels further from the antenna. As every ATC SSR antenna triggers every transponder within its "line of sight" there is a massive amount of information flying around. If for example 10 radar antennas interrogate 100 aircraft there are 10.000 responses triggered per minute if you assume an average of 10 rpm per antenna. While this was not a problem with the old Mode 3/A 4096 code transponders with Mode C (altitude) interlace, with the introduction of Mode S and its massive data output this can lead to trouble. The Netherlands temporarily had to introduce a "transponder off" order for visual uncontrolled flights (code 7000) because their ATC system could not handle all the data. You can provide radar control service to an aircraft beyond your range of primary radar by using the transponder response only. If the pilots of MH 370 knew that they were beyond the primary radar coverage of both the transferring and receiving ATC unit then switching off the transponder would have caused the target and label to disappear from the scope completely. Together with going "incommunicado" this should immediately have triggered an alert - including a closer look at lonely unidentified primary targets. But I do not want to speculate without knowing the facts in detail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P45Mustang Posted April 24, 2014 Share Posted April 24, 2014 "MH370 search: Investigators dismiss Australia debris"http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-27124532 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ignis Posted April 24, 2014 Share Posted April 24, 2014 makes one wonder why nobody did anything at the time ? News today http://news.uk.msn.com/uk/russian-planes-shadowed-by-raf-1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P45Mustang Posted April 24, 2014 Share Posted April 24, 2014 makes one wonder why nobody did anything at the time ? News today http://news.uk.msn.com/uk/russian-planes-shadowed-by-raf-1 I fail to see the connection with MH370? Passenger plane goes missing, send up military planes to go looking? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted April 24, 2014 Share Posted April 24, 2014 Oh, goodness, I am going to feel really bad for deleting some of the conspiracy posts if this is accurate.... Malaysia Flight MH370 May Have Landed Somewhere Else, Says International Search Team; Search May Have to Start Over April 23, 2014|12:02 pm The search for missing Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370 could possibly have to start all over again as members of the International Investigation Team say the plane may not have crashed in the southern Indian Ocean. Investigation sources told Malaysian publication New Strait Times that the team has not ruled out the possibility that the aircraft may not be where they have been looking. "We may have to regroup soon to look into this possibility if no positive results come back in the next few days ... but at the same time, the search mission in the Indian Ocean must go on," explained the sources. http://www.christianpost.com/news/malaysia-flight-mh370-may-have-landed-somewhere-else-says-international-search-team-search-may-have-to-start-over-118459/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulysses G. Posted April 24, 2014 Share Posted April 24, 2014 I was pretty sure a few weeks ago that they really have no idea where it is. That article confirms my fears. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P45Mustang Posted April 24, 2014 Share Posted April 24, 2014 Hmmm. One of my hunches on this was a failed or aborted 9/11 attack on KL. Noel O'Gara · Works at Retired MH370 was a victim of crime. First hijacked, then transponder and radio shut down, then it changed course back over Malaysia and proceeded on its planned terrorist mission. Air force 24/7 crews were alerted and tracked this rogue potential terrorist across the country to the Strait of Malacca. Their job is to scramble a fighter jet at the first sign of possible terror attack. The plane failed to make contact and it didnt respond to signals. Hishammuddin the defense minister was called from his bed in the early hours in a panic and asked how to respond. The potential 9/11 scenario was only an hour away from the Petronas Towers in KL. They knew at this stage that the plane was on a terrorist mission. He had to decide to shoot it down over the Straits or escort it out of Malaysian space. It was unthinkable to just do nothing. For some unknown reason they decided to hide the fate of this flight. They spent the next four days clearing the debris before Hishammuddin revealed that the plane turned back. Once he started on the lie that the plane vanished there was no turning back and a litany of lies and misinformation has been coming from the authorities ever since he went off the rails. Seems plausible? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JesseFrank Posted April 24, 2014 Share Posted April 24, 2014 Oh, goodness, I am going to feel really bad for deleting some of the conspiracy posts if this is accurate.... If you were sincere in your comment, you could at least have ended your post with, Sorry 3 times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JesseFrank Posted April 24, 2014 Share Posted April 24, 2014 Hmmm. One of my hunches on this was a failed or aborted 9/11 attack on KL. Noel O'Gara · Works at Retired MH370 was a victim of crime. First hijacked, then transponder and radio shut down, then it changed course back over Malaysia and proceeded on its planned terrorist mission. Air force 24/7 crews were alerted and tracked this rogue potential terrorist across the country to the Strait of Malacca. Their job is to scramble a fighter jet at the first sign of possible terror attack. The plane failed to make contact and it didnt respond to signals. Hishammuddin the defense minister was called from his bed in the early hours in a panic and asked how to respond. The potential 9/11 scenario was only an hour away from the Petronas Towers in KL. They knew at this stage that the plane was on a terrorist mission. He had to decide to shoot it down over the Straits or escort it out of Malaysian space. It was unthinkable to just do nothing. For some unknown reason they decided to hide the fate of this flight. They spent the next four days clearing the debris before Hishammuddin revealed that the plane turned back. Once he started on the lie that the plane vanished there was no turning back and a litany of lies and misinformation has been coming from the authorities ever since he went off the rails. Seems plausible? How about your scenario is correct, but only with that difference that the hijacking is simulated ? Remember the pilot was a supporter of Anwar, and even attended the trial shortly before the flight, where Anwar unjustified to some got convicted ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P45Mustang Posted April 24, 2014 Share Posted April 24, 2014 It would be a very difficult thing for Malaysia to admit they shot it down, would it not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P45Mustang Posted April 24, 2014 Share Posted April 24, 2014 Hmmm. One of my hunches on this was a failed or aborted 9/11 attack on KL. Noel O'Gara · Works at Retired MH370 was a victim of crime. First hijacked, then transponder and radio shut down, then it changed course back over Malaysia and proceeded on its planned terrorist mission. Air force 24/7 crews were alerted and tracked this rogue potential terrorist across the country to the Strait of Malacca. Their job is to scramble a fighter jet at the first sign of possible terror attack. The plane failed to make contact and it didnt respond to signals. Hishammuddin the defense minister was called from his bed in the early hours in a panic and asked how to respond. The potential 9/11 scenario was only an hour away from the Petronas Towers in KL. They knew at this stage that the plane was on a terrorist mission. He had to decide to shoot it down over the Straits or escort it out of Malaysian space. It was unthinkable to just do nothing. For some unknown reason they decided to hide the fate of this flight. They spent the next four days clearing the debris before Hishammuddin revealed that the plane turned back. Once he started on the lie that the plane vanished there was no turning back and a litany of lies and misinformation has been coming from the authorities ever since he went off the rails. Seems plausible? How about your scenario is correct, but only with that difference that the hijacking is simulated ? Remember the pilot was a supporter of Anwar, and even attended the trial shortly before the flight, where Anwar unjustified to some got convicted ? I hear you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ignis Posted April 24, 2014 Share Posted April 24, 2014 makes one wonder why nobody did anything at the time ? News today http://news.uk.msn.com/uk/russian-planes-shadowed-by-raf-1 I fail to see the connection with MH370? Passenger plane goes missing, send up military planes to go looking? Plane that failed to give a signal, was entering Vietnam airspace, it was followed by so say Thai airspace, Malaysia and Indonesia, and others yet no one gave a thought to go and investigate... after all it could have been a terrorist attack on any of these Countries So connection yesterday + a few times in 2013, a plane failing to give a signal or acknowledge.. UK among other Countries send up a fighter plane to investigate [guess was night time and high ups that could have give such an order were all sleeping ?] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeverSure Posted April 24, 2014 Share Posted April 24, 2014 Oh, goodness, I am going to feel really bad for deleting some of the conspiracy posts if this is accurate.... Malaysia Flight MH370 May Have Landed Somewhere Else, Says International Search Team; Search May Have to Start Over April 23, 2014|12:02 pm The search for missing Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370 could possibly have to start all over again as members of the International Investigation Team say the plane may not have crashed in the southern Indian Ocean. Investigation sources told Malaysian publication New Strait Times that the team has not ruled out the possibility that the aircraft may not be where they have been looking. "We may have to regroup soon to look into this possibility if no positive results come back in the next few days ... but at the same time, the search mission in the Indian Ocean must go on," explained the sources. http://www.christianpost.com/news/malaysia-flight-mh370-may-have-landed-somewhere-else-says-international-search-team-search-may-have-to-start-over-118459/ It's OK Scott. None of us has a clue where it is. But some of us have been wondering and posting from the beginning if perhaps it was taken to N. Afghanistan or somewhere in that radius and put in a hanger. Why would be left to the conspiracy theorists. Who knows where it is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted April 24, 2014 Share Posted April 24, 2014 Oh, goodness, I am going to feel really bad for deleting some of the conspiracy posts if this is accurate.... If you were sincere in your comment, you could at least have ended your post with, Sorry 3 times. I am sincere, so here they are: Sorry, sorry, sorry. Actually, I don't think there were very many (if any) posts deleted simply for being conspiracy theories, at least not by me. It's hard to call something a conspiracy when nobody seems to have a firm clue on what happened to that plane. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JesseFrank Posted April 24, 2014 Share Posted April 24, 2014 Oh, goodness, I am going to feel really bad for deleting some of the conspiracy posts if this is accurate.... If you were sincere in your comment, you could at least have ended your post with, Sorry 3 times. I am sincere, so here they are: Sorry, sorry, sorry. Actually, I don't think there were very many (if any) posts deleted simply for being conspiracy theories, at least not by me. It's hard to call something a conspiracy when nobody seems to have a firm clue on what happened to that plane. Thank you 3 times, for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P45Mustang Posted April 24, 2014 Share Posted April 24, 2014 Well for me, if it's not in the Indian Ocean, I'd go for the Malaysia 'shoot down clean up story' as most likely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicog Posted April 24, 2014 Share Posted April 24, 2014 (edited) Which begs the question what was picked up four times pulsing at the appropriate interval and frequency to be a Black Box, and why would they be looking for it where they are? Ah, I get it. The Malaysians planted it there. And then moved it. Gosh I'm getting good at this making s*** up stuff. Edited April 24, 2014 by Chicog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted April 24, 2014 Share Posted April 24, 2014 Which begs the question what was picked up four times pulsing at the appropriate interval and frequency to be a Black Box, and why would they be looking for it where they are? Ah, I get it. The Malaysians planted it there. And then moved it. Gosh I'm getting good at this making s*** up stuff. Actually your not very good at making stuff up, but you are pretty good at sarcasm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts