Jump to content

Black Shark: First impression!


RedTiger

Recommended Posts

A while ago I said that I would post a track of my first flight just to see how well I could fly it with no training. Well, my first flight was in the instant action mission and I forgot to save the track. No matter, it was uneventful...mostly. :D Sorry if I'm rambling here, but I'd like to share my impressions.

 

First of all, I was surprised at how intuitive the aircraft is to fly. I have never, ever flown a helicopter, real or in a half-way decent simulator. Seriously guys, my only helicopter "sim" was Steel Talons in the arcade and Sega Genesis:

http://www.klov.com/game_detail.php?game_id=9785 :joystick:

 

From some of the descriptions at SimHQ from those that flew beta versions, I was expecting it to be somewhere between flying a crippled pig and brick. Not so! It took like a second to figure out how to make it go forward, but something just seemed to click between the cyclic and collective movement that seemed very natural. I was also expecting it to fall out of the sky the moment I banked a little hard, but it stayed nice and stable. Another eye-opener was the rudder. I somehow got the idea that the helicopter would spin like a top if I didn't apply constant rudder. This obviously isn't the case, maybe it would be for a helicopter without a coaxial rotor? I had to check a couple times to make sure I didn't have any type of easy flight model on.

 

My only problem was that I had no clue how to stop the damn thing. No, I don't mean land it and turn off the engine and avionics, I mean I don't really know how to make it stop moving forward! I flared a bit by pulling back on the cyclic and lowering the collective, but I don't exactly stop on a dime. I have mental images of helicopters coming to abrupt stops to land in movies and film clips from Vietnam. I kinda keep going for a kilometer or so before I start to get all kinds of beeps and horns warning me that I'm obviously going too slow. Maybe I should RTFM, maybe? ;)

 

The last thing I did was watch the familiarization training and took control at the end. I was very proud of myself for landing unscathed in what seemed to be a very rough and messy landing until I realized that invulnerability is turned on in the track. :doh: I watched in dismay as I made my helicopter flopped around like a fish, only to see it right itself automatically with no damage.

 

 

Oh, now I also see why Coyote is so picky when it comes to player-made 3D models. ;) :D

 

I'm going to get many hours of enjoyment out of this one. I can only dream what a DCS module for an F-15 or a Su-27 would be like!

 

:thumbup:


Edited by RedTiger
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I somehow got the idea that the helicopter would spin like a top if I didn't apply constant rudder. This obviously isn't the case, maybe it would be for a helicopter without a coaxial rotor? I had to check a couple times to make sure I didn't have any type of easy flight model on.

I'm not much of a mixer guy but helicopters, just like planes, are designed for balance at certain flight parameters. Helicopter should be (and probably most are:)) balanced so that i.e at near hover conditions and no wind you don't have to apply rudder. Same for low speed straight flight. At least not much of a rudder input. I wonder if there is an aircraft designed according to "we make it fly somehow, we give pilot a stick and it's his problem from now on:music_whistling:" rule :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well Bucic, you will always need pedal inputs in a helicopter. Especially conventional rotor layouts as you have to counteract the torque reaction from the main rotor.

 

With the Shark you have the co-axial design, but the lower blade generates less lift than the upper blade and you'll find that to fly the Shark "in balance" right pedal is required (in zero wind).

 

You have to remember, that really a Helicopter doens't want to fly. It would much rather crash and burn, you have to coax it into the air and as soon as you make a control input on one of the three, it will throw the other two controls out of "balance".

 

RT: You probably aren't being aggressive enough. You can stop the Shark pretty damn quick if you drop the collective and heave back on the cylcic

Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well Bucic, you will always need pedal inputs in a helicopter. Especially conventional rotor layouts as you have to counteract the torque reaction from the main rotor.

What I'm saying is when you hover and trim only cyclic and not make any pedal inputs you'll get slow rotation at most.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:D

Well Bucic, you will always need pedal inputs in a helicopter. Especially conventional rotor layouts as you have to counteract the torque reaction from the main rotor.

 

With the Shark you have the co-axial design, but the lower blade generates less lift than the upper blade and you'll find that to fly the Shark "in balance" right pedal is required (in zero wind).

 

You have to remember, that really a Helicopter doens't want to fly. It would much rather crash and burn, you have to coax it into the air and as soon as you make a control input on one of the three, it will throw the other two controls out of "balance".

 

I found that to be correct. When I used rudder to spin around, once I let go, I continued to spin in that direction. I had to rebalance with rudder in the opposite direction.

 

I guess what I was envisioning was more like the BF-109. Have you ever flown a half-way decent simulation of it? You must apply constant rudder to counteract the torque since there is no rudder trim if you want to keep it on the ball. This is what I imagined would be the case in Ka-50. What I should have done was thought of the P-38!

 

RT: You probably aren't being aggressive enough. You can stop the Shark pretty damn quick if you drop the collective and heave back on the cylcic

 

This is true. I wasn't aggressive.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team
My only problem was that I had no clue how to stop the damn thing. No, I don't mean land it and turn off the engine and avionics, I mean I don't really know how to make it stop moving forward! I flared a bit by pulling back on the cyclic and lowering the collective, but I don't exactly stop on a dime. I have mental images of helicopters coming to abrupt stops to land in movies and film clips from Vietnam. I kinda keep going for a kilometer or so before I start to get all kinds of beeps and horns warning me that I'm obviously going too slow. Maybe I should RTFM, maybe? ;)

 

 

:thumbup:

 

 

The main point is what speed the helicopter has before deceleration. If you have 100 or less kph the deceleration can be very fast... you can even consider it too fast when you are late to pull up collective to avoid sinking at low speed... vortex ring will do the rest. :)

If you have 250+ kph the helicopter will flare decelerating regardless of the collective at the low limit so you have to decide : faster deceleration with climb or in level flight but slower.

Ніщо так сильно не ранить мозок, як уламки скла від розбитих рожевих окулярів

There is nothing so hurtful for the brain as splinters of broken rose-coloured spectacles.

Ничто так сильно не ранит мозг, как осколки стекла от разбитых розовых очков (С) Me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you don't want to go 'too far forward' when decelerating from a high speed, and you don't want to go UP, turn - level altitude standard airspeed-wasting airplane turn. Make an orbit :)

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Yo-Yo & GG

 

Thanks for the info! I did try some orbits in the familiarization flight to slow down, but I was clumsy and still landed no where near where I intended, not to mention the fact that this "landing" would have been a crash without invincibility on. I found myself wishing for a window in the floor so I could see exactly what was underneath me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My 1st impression was.. 'OMG it's gonna take me 3 days of study to get the engines started and get airbourne'

 

Thank god for the LWin + Home 'cheat' :pilotfly:

 

I think i crashed within 20 seconds of getting airbourne!

i5-3570K @ 4.5 Ghz, Asus P8Z77-V, 8 GB DDR3, 1.5GB GTX 480 (EVGA, superclocked), SSD, 2 x 1680x1050, x-fi extreme music.



TM Warthog, Saitek combat pro pedals, TrackIR 4

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team
@Yo-Yo & GG

 

Thanks for the info! I did try some orbits in the familiarization flight to slow down, but I was clumsy and still landed no where near where I intended, not to mention the fact that this "landing" would have been a crash without invincibility on. I found myself wishing for a window in the floor so I could see exactly what was underneath me.

 

When landing, look out and down from the left window. There is a reason it is bigger than the right window!

Having problems? Visit http://en.wiki.eagle.ru/wiki/Main_Page

Dell Laptop M1730 -Vista- Intel Core 2 Duo T7500@2.2GHz, 4GB, Nvidia 8700MGT 767MB

Intel i7 975 Extreme 3.2GHZ CPU, NVidia GTX 570 1.28Gb Pcie Graphics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My biggest problem, with regard to basic flight in Ka-50, is Banking and the effects I experience after leveling off.

 

Basically, everytime I bank (even non-aggressive) when I level off I have to fight the heli to stay pointed straight. It seems like no matter what I have to fight the helicopter from Yawing away from my new heading. It's not calibration - I've tripple checked it (in the sim & in the sticks own control utility).

 

I guess it's just part of flying the Ka-50??? Normally I fight with it and when it seems like the heli has calmed down I retrim and then it seems like the heli is behaving like it should, but man, it puts up one heck of fight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reason why you are fighting the controls is because you did not retrim directly after changing direction. As long as you do not retrim the autopilot/flight control system assumes that you want to hold your original heading etc. and it takes actions to bring you back on that course. Trimming does not only fix the new position of your controls, it also tells the autopilot that you want to hold the current flight parameters. So either trim directly after changing direction, or even better, push the trim button for the duration of your maneuver and release it after you have set the new flight parameters. As long as the trim button is pressed the autopilot's stabiliziation function is disabled, and once you release the button the new flight parameters are stored.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I'm saying is when you hover and trim only cyclic and not make any pedal inputs you'll get slow rotation at most.

 

You are correct. Some helos like the MD (now Boeing) NOTAR designs can be pulled to a hover with your feet on the floor (not recommended:doh:).

 

I'm actually surprised at how laterally unstable the Ka50 is. Kaman, a US helo maker that has always preferred co-axial rotor designs, has made such stable choppers that they once had a PR campaign where they soloed a "houswife" after one flight with media watching. The Navy stopped using it as a trainer it was so easy and stable. The Ka50 gave that stability up for maneuverability.

Smokin' Hole

 

My DCS wish list: Su25, Su30, Mi24, AH1, F/A-18C, Afghanistan ...and frankly, the flight sim world should stop at 1995.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reason why you are fighting the controls is because you did not retrim directly after changing direction. As long as you do not retrim the autopilot/flight control system assumes that you want to hold your original heading etc. and it takes actions to bring you back on that course. Trimming does not only fix the new position of your controls, it also tells the autopilot that you want to hold the current flight parameters. So either trim directly after changing direction, or even better, push the trim button for the duration of your maneuver and release it after you have set the new flight parameters. As long as the trim button is pressed the autopilot's stabiliziation function is disabled, and once you release the button the new flight parameters are stored.

Interesting, so I should be retrimming even if I'm not using the autopilot? I've not begun to use the autopilot at all yet because I'm just trying to get used to how the shark handles under manual control. So, in my case, I should be retrimming for the sake of the flight control system? Am I understanding you correctly?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sovien,

How I understand it, when ever you make movements with the controls you should press the trim key until you are back to a stable flight , or desired flight. I have my trim key mapped to the pinky switch on the X52 and it works well so far. I also find hovering is much easier by pressing and releasing the trim key until I am in a stable hover. Almost like in hover mode with out the hover mode being engaged.

I hope this helps.

Bullet

  • Like 1

I7 4790K running at 4390 with a gigabyte board with 16 gigs of ram with an Asus gtx 660-ti and 2 tb of hard drive space on 2 wd hard drives. A X-65F Hotas with trackir4 and pro combat peddles. A kick butt home built machine unfortunately running a windows 7 OS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You should really always fly with the autopilot on. There is really no reason not to (unless maybe you just like the feeling of being punished).

 

When you turn by banking, you also need to coordinate the turn using the pedals. If you don't, then when you come out of the turn (stop banking) you will be pretty far out of trim and still sideslipping, which you'll need to fix by banking the opposite direction.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's how I fly normally.

 

Autopilot on with Bank, pitch and heading. (prefer not to use alt hold).

Flying to waypoint etc? with "R" Route mode.

 

With manouvers I hold trim until manouver is complete and then release it. recenter stick and retrim. Shark will fly perfect again.

Note: make sure you note your rudder input, since trimmer works for rudder too.

  • Like 1

Intel I7-10700K, Samsung 980 Pro 2TB NVMe, MSI Z490 ACE, RAM:64GB DDR4 3600, WIN 10-64, 1080Ti😩

Waiting on a good RTX

 

AH-64D|AV-88|A10CII|F15E|F16CM|FA18C|F14B|NV|PG|Syria|Synia

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the clarification guys! Can't wait to get back home and take the Ka-50 for another training run after work. I didn't realize that retrimming needed to be done after manuvering. Thanks again for pointing it out.

 

@AlphaOneSix- I guess it's just that I'm so used to flying Falcon (I know helios are totally different) I'm just so used to being in control of the a/c all the time...guess it's a control-freak issue for me :) I'm sure I'll use the autopilot more often once I get a good feeling for how the Ka-50 handles with my hand on the cyclic.

 

Thanks again all!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting, so I should be retrimming even if I'm not using the autopilot? I've not begun to use the autopilot at all yet because I'm just trying to get used to how the shark handles under manual control. So, in my case, I should be retrimming for the sake of the flight control system? Am I understanding you correctly?

 

The Ka-50's "autopilot" is actually a combination of a flight control systems and a true autopilot. It has four modes:

 

1. off

2. dampening of contol inputs

3. dampening + stabilization of flight parameters

4. automatic flight (or hovering)

 

In all modes you can intefere with the autopilot's inputs, the autopilot never takes full control of the helicopter. The autopilot is off when the blue buttons on the right panel are off. The autopilot dampens your control inputs when the blue buttons are on and the flight director is activated/the trim button is pressed. The autopilot dampens your inputs and stabilizes the currently trimmed flight parameters when the buttons are on and the flight director is off/the trim button is not pressed. Automatic flight/hovering is active when the blue buttons are on and the route/hover mode is enabled. Normal procedures include that you fly with the dampening and stabilization functions on. That's why you need to trim all the time in order to tell the autopilot which flight parameters it should maintain and stabilize.

 

Read the FAQ, there are some very helpful infos.


Edited by Acedy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well Bucic, you will always need pedal inputs in a helicopter. Especially conventional rotor layouts as you have to counteract the torque reaction from the main rotor.

 

With the Shark you have the co-axial design, but the lower blade generates less lift than the upper blade and you'll find that to fly the Shark "in balance" right pedal is required (in zero wind).

 

You have to remember, that really a Helicopter doens't want to fly. It would much rather crash and burn, you have to coax it into the air and as soon as you make a control input on one of the three, it will throw the other two controls out of "balance".

 

First of all mind the meaning of the word “always”. Even RT told you so that constant rudder input is not always needed in steady position (hover, very low speed level flight ahead...). Even without anyone's statement I'm willing to bet money on this. I'm talking about Ka-50. As I said I'm not into helicopters much but I highly doubt that it's defferent with conventional rotor system helis of latest generations (I.e not Mi-2).

 

as soon as you make a control input on one of the three, it will throw the other two controls out of "balance".

:D

I found that to be correct. When I used rudder to spin around, once I let go, I continued to spin in that direction. I had to rebalance with rudder in the opposite direction.

You are wrong/exagerate, Zorin. If you hover in Ka-50 and move cyclic side to side slightly it doesn't mean you will spin significantly.

RT, your example has nothing to do with the Ka-50 “never being stable” aka “it's always needed to apply rudder”. If an object doesn't stop from spinning you have initiated and sustained in a split of a second it doesn't mean it's unstable. It's just effect of momentum of inertia. When you made it stop the rudder input wasn't needed anymore.

 

I guess what I was envisioning was more like the BF-109. Have you ever flown a half-way decent simulation of it? You must apply constant rudder to counteract the torque since there is no rudder trim if you want to keep it on the ball. This is what I imagined would be the case in Ka-50. What I should have done was thought of the P-38!

 

This is true. I wasn't aggressive.

 

In Bf-109:

  • You have to strongly apply the rudder only when flying at high engine-propeller regimes.
  • Bf-109 is single prop thus momentum counteraction can come only from rudder/ailerons ; if it was twin-engine (counter rotating) the sum of momentums would be zero.
  • Additional phenomena in single-engine props is the spiral stream of air behind the propeller “which hits the side of fuselage and mainly vertical stabilizer

The only thing connecting these things is Newton's third law :P ... Aaa, you realised yourself you were wrong :/ Too late - I already wrote that...

 

The coaxial rotors momentum ratios can be tuned for hover conditions to make rudder inputs unnecessary. Same with thrust of the tail rotor. If it's not it most probably means designers chose to balance it for different flight conditions. Claiming that the momentums arent balanced just because they exist is not very reasonable and not necessarily true. I agree that the gate of helicopter stability is very narrow though.

 

I dare anyone to check the following:

  • hovering with no wind and only cyclick trimmed (rudder at neutral!), over flat terrain
  • push the cyclic forward and add collective to maintain altitude
  • I say there will be no significant changes in heading when flying, lets say, 20 kph.

 

You can also check additional cyclic movements side to side (same angle) but it's not part of the bet :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the term always was correct. Have you ever flown a helicopter?

 

From having flown a few hours in the Robinson R22 and the occasional play in a Longranger there's always an element of pedal being involved. With a conventional rotor layout you will require pedal to maintain a hover, because as you pull in collective power the torque reaction gets stronger so the helicopter wants to spin around left or right depending on whether the main rotor is clockwise or anti-clockwise in its rotation, therefore you need to apply more pedal to counteract it. And of course with a conventional layout the tail rotor actually generates a bit of lateral thrust too, so you then have to compensate for that as well. Which is why typically a conventional rotor helicopter will hover with one skid slightly low (certainly the light ones anyway).

 

Now turn the autopilot channels off and tell me if you still think I am exaggerating. With them switched off I think you'll soon see what I mean.

 

Edit:

Don't forget, that what is considered a small control input in a fixed wing, is considered a large control input in a heli... Certainly in civvy street you are taught to think the movements rather than actually make them. Yes undoubtedly as you get further up the scale in terms of size things become easier because of stability augmentation. Seriously, set yourself up ready to roll on the runway, turn off the AP channels and lift it into a hover. Now tell me, can you sit there and not tuch any of the controls?

 

Yes pedal input is minimal, but there's still an element of it that is required even with the coaxial design. If you just leave it sitting there it'll start drifting and of course with the AP channels off you will be wobbling all over the place like a drunk sailor onboard a boat in Force 9 winds.

 

And you have misquoted me...

 

I never wrote "I guess what I was envisioning was more like the BF-109....."


Edited by Zorrin

Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the term always was correct. Have you ever flown a helicopter?

 

From having flown a few hours in the Robinson R22 and the occasional play in a Longranger there's always an element of pedal being involved. With a conventional rotor layout you will require pedal to maintain a hover, because as you pull in collective power the torque reaction gets stronger so the helicopter wants to spin around left or right depending on whether the main rotor is clockwise or anti-clockwise in its rotation, therefore you need to apply more pedal to counteract it. And of course with a conventional layout the tail rotor actually generates a bit of lateral thrust too, so you then have to compensate for that as well. Which is why typically a conventional rotor helicopter will hover with one skid slightly low (certainly the light ones anyway).

 

Now turn the autopilot channels off and tell me if you still think I am exaggerating. With them switched off I think you'll soon see what I mean.

 

I have never flown a helicopter. Even as a passenger. But I have a good ovarall “feeling” for everything that flies. And I can't wait for someone to accept my challenge (the bet) to prove you wrong when it comes to Ka-50. * Note that I already stated that I'm talking about Ka-50 (mainly) and conventional helicopters of the latest generations * which R22 is obviously not. ** I also don't see the point of discussing an aircraft which has been designed to fly using flight control system (more or less sophisticated) characteristing with the system turned off. ** You may find few formidable aircrafts which won't fly without it at all. I assume even ground crew member (a mechanic) could setup Mi-2 controls so the pilot does not need to step on the pedal during hover. Again – I respect your RL experience but * *.

Edit:

Don't forget, that what is considered a small control input in a fixed wing, is considered a large control input in a heli... Certainly in civvy street you are taught to think the movements rather than actually make them. Yes undoubtedly as you get further up the scale in terms of size things become easier because of stability augmentation. Seriously, set yourself up ready to roll on the runway, turn off the AP channels and lift it into a hover. Now tell me, can you sit there and not tuch any of the controls?

Please, see ** **

Yes pedal input is minimal, but there's still an element of it that is required even with the coaxial design. If you just leave it sitting there it'll start drifting and of course with the AP channels off you will be wobbling all over the place like a drunk sailor onboard a boat in Force 9 winds.

See “my challange”. I think I should add what I mean by unsignificant heading change during hover in Ka-50 with rudder at neutral. Lets say... less than 1.5 degree per second?

And you have misquoted me...

I never wrote "I guess what I was envisioning was more like the BF-109....."

I'm very sorry.

 

I think you are absolutely right when it comes to older generation conventional helis but I would rather wait for someone to check this for Ka-50 while for latest generations helicopters it's up to further discussion which I would rather not continue. I would rather wait for someone with the explanation ready (for latest generations helicopters).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You cannot "set up the controls of a helicopter to fly hands off".

 

It's just not possible. The whole principle of helicopter flight dynamics do not allow that.

 

What about if the AP channels fail?

 

If you don't have Black Shark yet, then get it, and see for yourself. I've been tinkering with the Shark since early November, and have yet to find myself to either have the capability, or the weather conditions where I can comfortably hover it and let go of all the controls.

 

If you turn the AP channels off you will see for yourself that the Ka-50 is not dynamically stable. The AP channels help you because you do not have to make the fundamental control corrections to keep it stable.

 

Yes the co-axial design provides relative stability in the hover.

 

Whether the R22 is a modern design is irrelevant. It has a conventional rotor layout and suffers the same effects as the AgustaWestland AW139 (which for all intents and pruposes is "modern").

 

There is a huge gap between what a computer simulation and the real thing can teach you about feeling.

 

There is no way a conventional helicopter can be set up to hover with no control inputs. The whole point is that you as the pilot have to counteract what it's trying to do.

 

When it comes to aviation never assume. Assumptions get you killed, whether it's civil or military.

 

Now have you even flown DCS's Black Shark?

 

Yes it's the most realistic simulation out there. But it's not real, it is just a simulation. While I can categorically agree that there is nothing else that comes close to DCS in terms of fidelity and realism, it's not real. It cannot be, it's a simulation, when we get the "new engine" and real weather effects, the helis will become more affected by that, especially at low speeds.

 

Have you ever seen a single day where there has been no wind whatsoever? Sure you might get little pockets where you can't see the trees moving, but there's always wind of some kind or another. Very rarely (at least in the Southeastern UK) do you get those absolutley calm days, I think I have perhaps seen one of those such days in the last five years.

 

You either need to accept the real world factors that affect it, or look at it purely from a simulation point of view.

 

If you want to look at it from a DCS only perspective, then yes, you can probably leave the Shark in a zero-wind hover with no pedal inputs (is that realistic? Not really, see earlier statement with regard to weather).

 

When in any helicopter can you ever let go of everthing? Only if you have a deathwish. Even the DCS Shark manual explains that the autopilot never has full control of the Ka-50. Why? Well because it is dynamically unstable.

 

If you pull it into a hover and let go of everthing in zero wind (completely unrealistic, especially given the coastal area and valleys that we have been given in DCS Black Shark) and left unchecked it drifts to the right. How are you going to counteract that? Well either with a bit of left cyclic only or with a bit of pedal and cyclic, whatever you feel like doing. You say Tomahto, I say Tomato.

 

I strongly urge you to take up your own "challenge".

 

And on a side note, are you really sure you have a "good overal feeling"? How can you say that if you have never experienced it? Have you had the chance to fly a fixed wing aircraft?

 

Flying an aircraft that has no rudder trim, may or may not require constant rudder inputs. All depends on the individual aircraft. If it has a rudder trim tab that is fixed and you get her at the right speed then sure you can do minimal rudder inputs.

 

Yes you are right in saying that at high power setting the BF109 will require a lot of pedal to counteract the torque reaction from the propeller, and to a degree the propwash.

 

But if as you say it has no rudder trim, now I haven't flown a 109, nor ever had the chance to look at one up clsoe, then even at a cruise power setting it would require rudder input. Unless of course it has a fixed trim tab set specifically for the aircraft's cruise. And the correct positioning of that trim tab would then of course vary from aircraft to aircraft because of that great thing called human error. Not too mention that it's hardly practical to have an engineer clambering over the rear of your 109 to set the trim tab while you barrell along at 300-odd kilometres per hour eh?

Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...