 |
Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
byronmfox(at)gmail.com
Guest
|
 Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2016 6:41 am Post subject: Yak 52 Question from Australia |
 |
|
"I have a question that you guys may be able to help with: It seems there are some Yak-52s that have a lower G rating than others, and apparently (whether this is an Australian thing or not) are placarded with "No Aerobatics". Are you aware of this, and if so are there any mods that are used in the States to beef up the wing/center section on these planes? Apparently, the wings can be sent to Yak (Aerostar?) for reinforcing but that's all we're aware of."
Blitz Fox415-307-2405
| | - The Matronics Yak-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
GeorgeCoy
Joined: 02 Dec 2010
Posts: 310
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2016 7:17 am Post subject: Yak 52 Question from Australia |
|
|
The early aircraft developed spar problems and the yak design bureau modified the wing spars and the carry through spar to a stronger design. The later production aircraft and the aircraft with the service bulletins that were modified with the later spars are +7 -5 G aircraft. The aircraft that were not modified were reduced to +5 -3 G and used for non-aerobatic training. Many of the +5 - 3 aircraft are still around. The easiest way to see the difference is the triangular plate protruding under the wings at the point where the wing bolts to the aircraft. The +7 - 5 aircraft have a triangular plate about 8 inches on a side, while the +5 -3 aircraft have a small square box.
         The Aerostar factory no longer supports the Yak-52 aircraft and does not produce the parts for the upgraded spar any longer. The Motorstar factory in Romania was spun off from Aerostar in 1999 and still produces engines, overhauls engines, provides parts and supports the M14P engine series. Â
Regards,
George
From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Byron M Fox
Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2016 10:40 AM
To: LIst Yak
Subject: Yak 52 Question from Australia
"I have a question that you guys may be able to help with: It seems there are some Yak-52s that have a lower G rating than others, and apparently (whether this is an Australian thing or not) are placarded with "No Aerobatics". Are you aware of this, and if so are there any mods that are used in the States to beef up the wing/center section on these planes? Apparently, the wings can be sent to Yak (Aerostar?) for reinforcing but that's all we're aware of."
Blitz Fox
415-307-2405
| | - The Matronics Yak-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
byronmfox(at)gmail.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2016 8:02 am Post subject: Yak 52 Question from Australia |
|
|
Thanks, George. You're the fount.
Blitz Fox415-307-2405
On Jul 6, 2016, at 8:17 AM, George S. Coy <george.coy(at)gmail.com (george.coy(at)gmail.com)> wrote:
| Quote: | <![endif]--> <![endif]-->
The early aircraft developed spar problems and the yak design bureau modified the wing spars and the carry through spar to a stronger design. The later production aircraft and the aircraft with the service bulletins that were modified with the later spars are +7 -5 G aircraft. The aircraft that were not modified were reduced to +5 -3 G and used for non-aerobatic training. Many of the +5 - 3 aircraft are still around. The easiest way to see the difference is the triangular plate protruding under the wings at the point where the wing bolts to the aircraft. The +7 - 5 aircraft have a triangular plate about 8 inches on a side, while the +5 -3 aircraft have a small square box.
The Aerostar factory no longer supports the Yak-52 aircraft and does not produce the parts for the upgraded spar any longer. The Motorstar factory in Romania was spun off from Aerostar in 1999 and still produces engines, overhauls engines, provides parts and supports the M14P engine series.
Regards,
George
From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com (owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com) [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com (owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com)] On Behalf Of Byron M Fox
Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2016 10:40 AM
To: LIst Yak
Subject: Yak 52 Question from Australia
"I have a question that you guys may be able to help with: It seems there are some Yak-52s that have a lower G rating than others, and apparently (whether this is an Australian thing or not) are placarded with "No Aerobatics". Are you aware of this, and if so are there any mods that are used in the States to beef up the wing/center section on these planes? Apparently, the wings can be sent to Yak (Aerostar?) for reinforcing but that's all we're aware of."
Blitz Fox
415-307-2405
|
| | - The Matronics Yak-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bwade154(at)yahoo.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2016 8:43 am Post subject: Yak 52 Question from Australia |
|
|
Wing spar problems - completely not true There is wing spar modification history, but never a problem or failure. The 52 was designed as an +7/-5 g aircraft. In 1982, new limits were established limiting it to +5/-3 g until a factory upgrade was fitted, increasing the strength of the spar carry through. In 1986 (s/n 866501 and above) this modification was incorporated from the factory and the overhaul facilities began to incorporate the modifications during the late '80s. Since all 52s in service were required to be overhauled every five years, all servicable aircraft should have been upgraded by now. Of course, there were a few aircraft that did not receive the upgrade. It is easy to identify these aircraft since the modification yields a "pie slice" shaped bump on the underside wingroot fairings by the main spar. There is nothing wrong with non-modified, pre-86 52s, just respect the limitations. See my tips page for more info including an identification animation
Wing Spar Modification History
The 52 was designed as an +7/-5 g aircraft. In 1982, new limits were established limiting it to +5/-3 g until a factory upgrade was fitted, increasing the strength of the spar carry through (service bulletins 59 & 60). In 1986 (s/n 866501 and above) this modification was incorporated from the factory and the overhaul facilities began to incorporate the modifications during the late '80s. Since all 52s in service were required to be overhauled every five years, all servicable aircraft should have been upgraded by now. Of course, there were a few aircraft that did not receive the upgrade. It is easy to identify these aircraft since the modification yields a "pie slice" shaped bump on the underside wingroot fairings by the main spar. There is nothing wrong with non-modified, pre-86 52s, just respect the limitations. Later, the factory issued another modification (spar straps) to extend the service hours of the airframe (service bulletin 107).
The most known is the 59R/60R couple introducing a heavy main spar and stronger wing attachments, following the 1983 fatal accident in Vilnius attributed to the failure of the main spar. It was introduced as service bulletin in November 1986 both on the newly produced and overhauled aircraft. In fact, the Bacau factory began regularly implementing it from early 1987 and the overhaul facilities, in the early 1990-s, meaning that some of the aircraft produced before early 1987 and overhauled before 1992 may still have the original less solid spar. Conscious of this, the Yakovlev Design Bureau initially limited operation of these aircraft to G factor of +5/-3. As of today, the Bureau refuse to deal with the aircraft without the 59R/60R modification.
This is the most crucial and complex Yak-52 modification. It has to be performed using certified parts in a jig at a certified facility.
The next important is the bulletin 107BD.
Yakovlev Design Bureau Russia, 125315, Moscow, Leningradsky prospect, 68 okb(at)yak.ru Public relations and marketing tel. +7 (495)158-34-32
Shakhty Aviation Repair Plant Rostov reg., Russia
[*]JSC "TERMIKAS"[*]Liepu Str. 198, Vazatkiemis village, LT-59327 Prienai region, Lithuania[*]Phone: +370 319 60520[*]Fax: +370 319 60530[*]E-mail: secret(at)termikas.com (secret(at)termikas.com)[*]Web page: www.termikas.com
Disclaimer - All info was found on the NET but I do have a 5G airframe and the crossover main spar is noticeably smaller and the wing attach bolts are smaller. I've dealt with Termikas and Aerostar s.a. both were good experiences
Bill Wade Yak 52 N4450Y
From: Byron M Fox <byronmfox(at)gmail.com>
To: LIst Yak <yak-list(at)matronics.com>
Sent: Wednesday, July 6, 2016 10:40 AM
Subject: Yak 52 Question from Australia
"I have a question that you guys may be able to help with: It seems there are some Yak-52s that have a lower G rating than others, and apparently (whether this is an Australian thing or not) are placarded with "No Aerobatics". Are you aware of this, and if so are there any mods that are used in the States to beef up the wing/center section on these planes? Apparently, the wings can be sent to Yak (Aerostar?) for reinforcing but that's all we're aware of."
Blitz Fox415-307-2405
| | - The Matronics Yak-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
richard.goode(at)russiana
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 07, 2016 1:10 am Post subject: Yak 52 Question from Australia |
|
|
I agree with various postings from others, but I feel there is a need to emphasise that this is not a simple issue. The practicality is that the 52 is a tough aircraft, but in Russian DOSAAF service was flown extremely hard, and of course almost every flight was an aerobatic one. In consequence various structural problems occurred, and to each Yakovlev came up with a service bulletin to ensure structural integrity.
Unfortunately I hear too often people saying that their 52 "has the heavy spar", and is therefore cleared for any form of aerobatics! If only it were so simple. YDB issued a total of 114 service bulletins for the 52 – the majority of these being relatively trivial; referring to changes in the paperwork and so forth. But there are a number of these that we view as being critical for safety, and not just referring to the wing structure.
So the important ones are 18 – elevator counterweight; 28 – elevator counterweight bolts; 37 – aileron mounting; 59 (see below) – wing attachment brackets; 60 (see below) – wing centre section; 66 – bigger spar bolts; 70 – rudder mass balance; 80 – plate on rear spar; 87 – reinforcement of rear spar; 107 (again the below) – external spar strap.
Of these the critical ones are 59 and 60 – strengthening the wing mountings and the centre section, and 107.
The UK CAA has taken this whole issue seriously, and has had discussions with YDB, and now divides 52 is into four categories:
Without 59 and 60 – limited to +5 - 3G, non-aerobatic and total airframe life 1000 hours.
With 59 and 60 – +7.5- 5G; no flick (snap) manoeuvres and airframe life 5000 hours from new.
With 59/60 and 107 – again the same G limits, but fully aerobatic and also 5000 hours airframe life.
The fourth category is effectively the same as the third, and refers to later aircraft (114 series and later) which had all these modifications installed during manufacture.
Aircraft can be modified – although there is now a significant problem to obtain the 59 and 60 modification kits, and then move to a higher category. Also, the 59 and 60 modifications can only be installed using proper jigs and equipment, whereas 107, although quite complicated because of many different bolt sizes can be installed by a competent maintenance organisation.
I hope this helps!
Richard Goode Aerobatics
Rhodds Farm
Lyonshall
Hereford
HR5 3LW
Tel:Â +44 (0) 1544 340120
Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
www.russianaeros.com
From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Byron M Fox
Sent: 06 July 2016 15:40
To: LIst Yak
Subject: Yak 52 Question from Australia
"I have a question that you guys may be able to help with: It seems there are some Yak-52s that have a lower G rating than others, and apparently (whether this is an Australian thing or not) are placarded with "No Aerobatics". Are you aware of this, and if so are there any mods that are used in the States to beef up the wing/center section on these planes? Apparently, the wings can be sent to Yak (Aerostar?) for reinforcing but that's all we're aware of."
Blitz Fox
415-307-2405
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
| | - The Matronics Yak-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jbsoar(at)gmail.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 07, 2016 1:57 am Post subject: Yak 52 Question from Australia |
|
|
Richard-This is a very good explanation. Thank you.
On another subject, do you have any weight and balance data for the Yak 55M?
Thank you!
John Bergeson
On Thursday, July 7, 2016, Richard Goode <richard.goode(at)russianaeros.com (richard.goode(at)russianaeros.com)> wrote:
| Quote: |
I agree with various postings from others, but I feel there is a need to emphasise that this is not a simple issue. The practicality is that the 52 is a tough aircraft, but in Russian DOSAAF service was flown extremely hard, and of course almost every flight was an aerobatic one. In consequence various structural problems occurred, and to each Yakovlev came up with a service bulletin to ensure structural integrity.
Â
Unfortunately I hear too often people saying that their 52 "has the heavy spar", and is therefore cleared for any form of aerobatics! If only it were so simple. YDB issued a total of 114 service bulletins for the 52 – the majority of these being relatively trivial; referring to changes in the paperwork and so forth. But there are a number of these that we view as being critical for safety, and not just referring to the wing structure.
Â
So the important ones are 18 – elevator counterweight; 28 – elevator counterweight bolts; 37 – aileron mounting; 59 (see below) – wing attachment brackets; 60 (see below) – wing centre section; 66 – bigger spar bolts; 70 – rudder mass balance; 80 – plate on rear spar; 87 – reinforcement of rear spar; 107 (again the below) – external spar strap.
Â
Of these the critical ones are 59 and 60 – strengthening the wing mountings and the centre section, and 107.
Â
The UK CAA has taken this whole issue seriously, and has had discussions with YDB, and now divides 52 is into four categories:
Â
Without 59 and 60 – limited to +5 - 3G, non-aerobatic and total airframe life 1000 hours.
Â
With 59 and 60 – +7.5- 5G; no flick (snap) manoeuvres and airframe life 5000 hours from new.
Â
With 59/60 and 107 – again the same G limits, but fully aerobatic and also 5000 hours airframe life.
Â
The fourth category is effectively the same as the third, and refers to later aircraft (114 series and later) which had all these modifications installed during manufacture.
Â
Aircraft can be modified – although there is now a significant problem to obtain the 59 and 60 modification kits, and then move to a higher category. Also, the 59 and 60 modifications can only be installed using proper jigs and equipment, whereas 107, although quite complicated because of many different bolt sizes can be installed by a competent maintenance organisation.
Â
I hope this helps!
Â
Richard Goode Aerobatics
Rhodds Farm
Lyonshall
Hereford
HR5 3LW
Â
Tel:Â +44 (0) 1544 340120
Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
www.russianaeros.com
Â
From: [url=javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com');]owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com[/url] [mailto:[url=javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com');]owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com[/url]] On Behalf Of Byron M Fox
Sent: 06 July 2016 15:40
To: LIst Yak
Subject: Yak 52 Question from Australia
Â
"I have a question that you guys may be able to help with:  It seems there are some Yak-52s that have a lower G rating than others, and apparently (whether this is an Australian thing or not) are placarded with "No Aerobatics". Are you aware of this, and if so are there any mods that are used in the States to beef up the wing/center section on these planes? Apparently, the wings can be sent to Yak (Aerostar?) for reinforcing but that's all we're aware of."
| Quote: |
Thanks!
Best regards,
Mark Awad
Chief Executive Officer
Australian Warbirds Association Ltd
[url=javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','mark.awad(at)australianwarbirds.com.au');]mark.awad(at)australianwarbirds.com.au[/url]
 |
Blitz Fox
415-307-2405
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
|
| | - The Matronics Yak-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
byronmfox(at)gmail.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 07, 2016 5:31 am Post subject: Yak 52 Question from Australia |
|
|
Thanks for taking the time, Richard. Thorough explanation.
Blitz Fox415-307-2405
On Jul 7, 2016, at 2:09 AM, Richard Goode <richard.goode(at)russianaeros.com (richard.goode(at)russianaeros.com)> wrote:
| Quote: | <![endif]--> <![endif]-->
I agree with various postings from others, but I feel there is a need to emphasise that this is not a simple issue. The practicality is that the 52 is a tough aircraft, but in Russian DOSAAF service was flown extremely hard, and of course almost every flight was an aerobatic one. In consequence various structural problems occurred, and to each Yakovlev came up with a service bulletin to ensure structural integrity.
Unfortunately I hear too often people saying that their 52 "has the heavy spar", and is therefore cleared for any form of aerobatics! If only it were so simple. YDB issued a total of 114 service bulletins for the 52 – the majority of these being relatively trivial; referring to changes in the paperwork and so forth. But there are a number of these that we view as being critical for safety, and not just referring to the wing structure.
So the important ones are 18 – elevator counterweight; 28 – elevator counterweight bolts; 37 – aileron mounting; 59 (see below) – wing attachment brackets; 60 (see below) – wing centre section; 66 – bigger spar bolts; 70 – rudder mass balance; 80 – plate on rear spar; 87 – reinforcement of rear spar; 107 (again the below) – external spar strap.
Of these the critical ones are 59 and 60 – strengthening the wing mountings and the centre section, and 107.
The UK CAA has taken this whole issue seriously, and has had discussions with YDB, and now divides 52 is into four categories:
Without 59 and 60 – limited to +5 - 3G, non-aerobatic and total airframe life 1000 hours.
With 59 and 60 – +7.5- 5G; no flick (snap) manoeuvres and airframe life 5000 hours from new.
With 59/60 and 107 – again the same G limits, but fully aerobatic and also 5000 hours airframe life.
The fourth category is effectively the same as the third, and refers to later aircraft (114 series and later) which had all these modifications installed during manufacture.
Aircraft can be modified – although there is now a significant problem to obtain the 59 and 60 modification kits, and then move to a higher category. Also, the 59 and 60 modifications can only be installed using proper jigs and equipment, whereas 107, although quite complicated because of many different bolt sizes can be installed by a competent maintenance organisation.
I hope this helps!
Richard Goode Aerobatics
Rhodds Farm
Lyonshall
Hereford
HR5 3LW
Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
www.russianaeros.com
From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com (owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com) [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com (owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com)] On Behalf Of Byron M Fox
Sent: 06 July 2016 15:40
To: LIst Yak
Subject: Yak 52 Question from Australia
"I have a question that you guys may be able to help with: It seems there are some Yak-52s that have a lower G rating than others, and apparently (whether this is an Australian thing or not) are placarded with "No Aerobatics". Are you aware of this, and if so are there any mods that are used in the States to beef up the wing/center section on these planes? Apparently, the wings can be sent to Yak (Aerostar?) for reinforcing but that's all we're aware of."
Blitz Fox
415-307-2405
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
|
| | - The Matronics Yak-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GeorgeCoy
Joined: 02 Dec 2010
Posts: 310
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 07, 2016 6:52 am Post subject: Yak 52 Question from Australia |
|
|
Richard, I tried to be more general so other countries would not see and  start to adopt the British regulations. Our FAA defines aerobatics in a way that you cannot even do a 1G roll legally.
George
From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Richard Goode
Sent: Thursday, July 07, 2016 5:09 AM
To: yak-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: Yak 52 Question from Australia
I agree with various postings from others, but I feel there is a need to emphasise that this is not a simple issue. The practicality is that the 52 is a tough aircraft, but in Russian DOSAAF service was flown extremely hard, and of course almost every flight was an aerobatic one. In consequence various structural problems occurred, and to each Yakovlev came up with a service bulletin to ensure structural integrity.
Unfortunately I hear too often people saying that their 52 "has the heavy spar", and is therefore cleared for any form of aerobatics! If only it were so simple. YDB issued a total of 114 service bulletins for the 52 – the majority of these being relatively trivial; referring to changes in the paperwork and so forth. But there are a number of these that we view as being critical for safety, and not just referring to the wing structure.
So the important ones are 18 – elevator counterweight; 28 – elevator counterweight bolts; 37 – aileron mounting; 59 (see below) – wing attachment brackets; 60 (see below) – wing centre section; 66 – bigger spar bolts; 70 – rudder mass balance; 80 – plate on rear spar; 87 – reinforcement of rear spar; 107 (again the below) – external spar strap.
Of these the critical ones are 59 and 60 – strengthening the wing mountings and the centre section, and 107.
The UK CAA has taken this whole issue seriously, and has had discussions with YDB, and now divides 52 is into four categories:
Without 59 and 60 – limited to +5 - 3G, non-aerobatic and total airframe life 1000 hours.
With 59 and 60 – +7.5- 5G; no flick (snap) manoeuvres and airframe life 5000 hours from new.
With 59/60 and 107 – again the same G limits, but fully aerobatic and also 5000 hours airframe life.
The fourth category is effectively the same as the third, and refers to later aircraft (114 series and later) which had all these modifications installed during manufacture.
Aircraft can be modified – although there is now a significant problem to obtain the 59 and 60 modification kits, and then move to a higher category. Also, the 59 and 60 modifications can only be installed using proper jigs and equipment, whereas 107, although quite complicated because of many different bolt sizes can be installed by a competent maintenance organisation.
I hope this helps!
Richard Goode Aerobatics
Rhodds Farm
Lyonshall
Hereford
HR5 3LW
Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
www.russianaeros.com
From: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com (owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com) [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com (owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com)] On Behalf Of Byron M Fox
Sent: 06 July 2016 15:40
To: LIst Yak
Subject: Yak 52 Question from Australia
"I have a question that you guys may be able to help with: It seems there are some Yak-52s that have a lower G rating than others, and apparently (whether this is an Australian thing or not) are placarded with "No Aerobatics". Are you aware of this, and if so are there any mods that are used in the States to beef up the wing/center section on these planes? Apparently, the wings can be sent to Yak (Aerostar?) for reinforcing but that's all we're aware of."
Blitz Fox
415-307-2405
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
| | - The Matronics Yak-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
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
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
Get Email Distribution Too!
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
