Tracking down RAF Alconbury' Elusive RF-4C - DA.C
 

Go Back   DA.C > Ground Control > Military Model Aircraft

Like Tree4Likes
  • 1 Post By bobhenr
  • 1 Post By bobhenr
  • 1 Post By bobhenr
  • 1 Post By crstidham
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 1 votes, 3.00 average.
Old 01-11-2014, 10:16 AM   #1 (permalink)
Insane Collector
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Western Australia
Posts: 1,096
Question Tracking down RAF Alconbury' Elusive RF-4C

I'm trying to work out the history of some of my models. This RF-4C in particular is difficult to work out its squadron.



I know it was part of the 10 Tactical Reconnaissance Wing stationed at RAF Alconbury during 1967. However, due to the lack of squadron markings that followed three years later it is difficult to pin point the exact squadron this aircraft was in.

I have however narrowed the few squadrons of 10 TRW which this aircraft could belong to. They are: 1 Tactical Reconnaissance Squadron, 32 Tactical Reconnaissance Squadron and 30 Tactical Reconnaissance Squadron. A red marking on the top of the aircraft could be a squadron marking but I am not sure.



Any help in tracking down this elusive Phantom would be much appreciated.
Aardvark is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 01-11-2014, 01:24 PM   #2 (permalink)
Senior Collector
 
Mikael's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Prague
Posts: 286
Default Re: Tracking down RAF Alconbury' Elusive RF-4C

After some research, I found the original serial number (64-1077), and from there, it was fast.
According to this page http://www.abpic.co.uk/photo/1400985/no_pictures.php
This particular aircraft belonged to the 1st Tactical Reconnaissance Squadron.
Mikael is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2014, 01:47 PM   #3 (permalink)
Insane Collector
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Western Australia
Posts: 1,096
Default Re: Tracking down RAF Alconbury' Elusive RF-4C

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikael View Post
After some research, I found the original serial number (64-1077), and from there, it was fast.
According to this page http://www.abpic.co.uk/photo/1400985/no_pictures.php
This particular aircraft belonged to the 1st Tactical Reconnaissance Squadron.
And here I thought I had scoured the entire internet looking for this aircraft, clearly not.

Thank you.
Aardvark is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Old 12-26-2014, 12:34 PM   #4 (permalink)
Junior Collector
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Montana
Posts: 6
Default Re: Tracking down RAF Alconbury' Elusive RF-4C

I'm not a modeler but I ran across this site when I was doing a google search about RAF Alconbury. I was stationed there from 1967 to 1970, and worked on aircraft radios. I worked on this particular plane many a time in my three years. I can say that safely because I worked on every plane there many a time. And while I know I'm resurrecting a dead thread, I'm also hoping that the following information will be of interest.

This aircraft was still there in April, 1970, when I left.

I don't remember any of the planes having squadron markings. We remembered which plane belonged to which squadron by where they were parked on the base. The 1st TRW was on the south side of the runway, the other two in their locations on the north side.

The planes were slowly being repainted in Vietnam camouflage colors while I was there and I think they were all repainted by the time I left. So the color scheme in the photo was accurate in 1967, but probably not by 1970.

If I remember right, we had 60 Phantoms while I was there. Well, 59 because one had crash landed and was back in the states getting its wings put back on. But when it returned, we had 60. Then we lost 004 (we only used the last three digits of the tail number when referring to the aircraft) in 68 or 69, which crashed because the nose bay (normal full of cameras) was instead full of souvenirs from its flight to Germany and they caught on fire. The official reason was lightning strike. On a sunny day in England. I don't think so. But a colonel was the pilot and he died so they covered it up, I guess. (He had just recently converted to Phantoms from some other type of jet, and pulled the wrong handle on his ejection seat. He pulled the one that would have ejected him from the other type of craft. On the Phantom, it cut him lose from the ejection seat. He pulled the right handle shortly thereafter but was killed immediately because he wasn't fastened in.)

I used to have a little piece of the radio I'd reinstalled the day before it crashed. Taken from the crash site. But I lost it years ago.

And they lost 014 less than a month after I left, due to engine trouble. Those pilots had better luck getting out.

We were told that the base was the largest reconnaissance base in the world at the time. I've no idea how accurate that was. I'm pretty sure it was accurate for U.S. Air Force bases. Who knows what the Russians had.

I know that a lot of the planes ended up in the Idaho National Guard. I don't know if this was one of them though.

Great model. I still have a soft spot in my heart for the RF-4C and I'm very happy to see a plane I used to work on modeled with such care and precision. I'm impressed. You would have been a great crew chief.
Hornchurch likes this.
bobhenr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2014, 01:03 PM   #5 (permalink)
Too many models! (1500+)
 
FortunateSon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Honiara
Posts: 2,265
Default Re: Tracking down RAF Alconbury' Elusive RF-4C

Quote:
Originally Posted by bobhenr View Post
, which crashed because the nose bay (normal full of cameras) was instead full of souvenirs from its flight to Germany and they caught on fire. The official reason was lightning strike. On a sunny day in England. I don't think so. But a colonel was the pilot and he died so they covered it up, I guess.
Thanks for the stories! Very interesting and informative. i wonder what those gifts could have been!

The USAF in particular seems to have had an institutional penchant to cover up for its pilots who screwed up and died in doing so. The famous thunderbird "diamond crash" is a prime example of this where any ridiculous technical "explanation" was hastily thrown together (and then the report destroyed!) Part of that certainly had to do with "letting the dead be remembered as heroes", but it also had to do with the "pilot culture" that dominated the USAF for a very long time.

Now, the blame game is a bit blurred and sometimes even reversed. For example, there's the recent case of the F-22 pilot whose widow sued (and settled with, almost certainly for at least seven figures) lockheed martin and related parties after he crashed. She claimed a defective oxygen system - while the USAF claimed pilot error as the pilot, despite his training, failed to go to the emergency oxygen supply when the primary was cut off.
FortunateSon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2014, 01:25 PM   #6 (permalink)
Junior Collector
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Montana
Posts: 6
Default Re: Tracking down RAF Alconbury' Elusive RF-4C

The co-pilot, who survived, told the AF personnel who picked him up that there had been a couple of cuckoo clock (Hand carved the black forest or something. They were popular back then) in the camera compartment. That was also where crews would stuff their suitcases when they were going off to another base for a day or two. So putting things in the nose was normal. Something just went wrong.

The pilot who died had flown in Nam and was highly regarded, and people like to keep it that way.

The thing that irritated me about the AF response to the crash was all of their blame-game stuff. The base had just passed an IG inspection (an annual performance check that scares they crap out of the bosses) with flying colors, but just a few days after the crash, they came back and did another one. Because of the crash. Just about every squadron failed (including my own) and then we had to get a follow up, which we passed. Military politics like that were one of the reasons I got out.

I was stationed there when a crew chief at one of the other English bases (Lakenheath?)stole a C-130 and tried to fly it back to the states. HE was apparently having marital problems with his wave bak home and/or he was homesick plus he was drunk. The plane disappeared from radar at an unknown location (yea, right) and we wondered for a long time what happened to it. Even though the crew chiefs on my base were all gathered together a day or two later and told that if they ever try a stunt like that, they'll get shot down too. Hence I don't buy the official story that he crashed in to the english channel on his own. (HIs body washed up on a French beach later, but I don't remember how long after.)

I think being honest and saying that they shot him down over the English channel because he was headed towards France (with whom we had a testy relationship at the time) and worrying about innocent civilians being harmed in an crash would have been both rational and publicly acceptable.

By the way, most of the planes on our base spent the whole day flying over England, looking for the missing place, as if it could crash in England and go unnoticed by the locals. But it was a big show of American responsibility or something.

I may be misinformed, but we didn't think we were back when it happened.
Hornchurch likes this.
bobhenr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2014, 01:59 PM   #7 (permalink)
Insane Collector
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Western Australia
Posts: 1,096
Default Re: Tracking down RAF Alconbury' Elusive RF-4C

Welcome to DA.C, bobhenr!

Great stories!

I know that there is another Alconbury Phantom that is made by the same company (Hobby Master). It is depicted in a mid-1980's scheme but it served with 1 TRS. Maybe you worked on it as well (the last three digits on the tail number are "567")?
Aardvark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2014, 03:00 PM   #8 (permalink)
Junior Collector
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Montana
Posts: 6
Default Re: Tracking down RAF Alconbury' Elusive RF-4C

No, that tail number wasn't there when I was. When I was doing my Google search for RAF Alconbury related stuff, I saw pictures of quite a few Phantoms that weren't there when I was. Most of our planes were made in '64 (Hence the tail number on the model, 41077, started with the number 4, which indicated which year it was made. I forgot how they do it, but once the plane is 10 years old, new designating numbers/letters are added to indicate its age. Hence the 4 is always associated with the last year that ended with 4 unless there is a prefix before it indicating it is over ten years old. That's how it was when I was in. I've no idea it that is still the case. Or at least that's how it was explained to me when I got there). We had a few planes made in '66 (four, I believe), but nothing newer while I was there. Aircraft 41004 crashed in 68 or 69 but I don't remember a replacement aircraft coming in before I left. Then as I mentioned, another plane crashed shortly after I left. And I was told one was either damaged or destroyed at around that same time when the brakes let go during a ground engine test and the plane crashed in to something else. But I wasn't there so I don't know much, if anything, about that incident.

So apparently, either over time or to add strength to the squadrons, more planes were brought in later.

Having planes from different years caused logistic problems for us radio people, because the planes built in '66 had different UHF radios than the '64 models. So we had to keep two kinds of spares, and we had to have different test harnesses for the newer type radio. We were allowed only two spares for the '64 planes, and were told that we could have no more because spares were needed more in Vietnam and they, for obvious reasons, got priority.

We of course had two spares of the other radio. For four planes instead of 56.

But then we got a new guy who had been stationed at David Monthan AFB in Arizona, where they dispose of old planes and equipment. He'd never worked on Phantoms before (he'd been a B-52 guy), but when he saw the radios we used in the older planes, and found out we only had a couple of spares, he said that they were burying the same radio at David Monthan AFB by the hundreds, because they were deemed surplus.

I'd be less surprised to find that story true than false.
Hornchurch likes this.
bobhenr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2014, 03:26 PM   #9 (permalink)
Insane Collector
 
tripoli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Sylvania, Ohio, USA
Posts: 1,611
Default Re: Tracking down RAF Alconbury' Elusive RF-4C

Now, the blame game is a bit blurred and sometimes even reversed. For example, there's the recent case of the F-22 pilot whose widow sued (and settled with, almost certainly for at least seven figures) lockheed martin and related parties after he crashed. She claimed a defective oxygen system - while the USAF claimed pilot error as the pilot, despite his training, failed to go to the emergency oxygen supply when the primary was cut off.

In this case, the OBOGS (On board Oxygen Generating System) air support system in the F-22 had a known issue that sent toxins into the air supply for the pilots. Many were having symptoms of oxygen deprivation while flying and it seems this was the case with the Alaskan F-22 crash. The pilot had an emergency supply bottle but the way it was placed in the cockpit made it impossible for the pilot to actually turn it on. There was evidence he was trying to do so when he crashed into the ground. The Air Force was trying to cover up the issue that the OBOGS system was having issues as announcing to the world that the pilots were loosing their air supply would be a public relations disaster, as it turned out later to be. So, at the time, the USAF announced it as pilot error. So many pilots rushed to support his family and make it public, that the Air Force later conceded the issue of the OBOGS system malfunction. Worse, the core issue for the OBOGS system was not been totally nailed down, as even the fix with materials for the air hoses (thought to have a chemical reaction with other air supply materials) has not fixed the problem. The Air Force knows now the issue but the cost to repair the system amounts to 5 million per aircraft to fix. At 185 F-22's, its expensive. The Air Force has now budgeted for such but the upgrades are going slowly and quietly. In this case, it is an issue of the cost of repair as well the Air Force knowingly putting pilots at risk because of the embarrassment of the problem with their premiere fighter and the issue of finding the solution.

Quite a few pilots who came forward to make it known what was happening have seen their careers trashed over it due to the administrations don't tell or "we squash you" policy, part of what made this whole mess happen.
__________________
Jeff

Last edited by tripoli; 12-26-2014 at 03:29 PM.
tripoli is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2014, 08:12 PM   #10 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,594
Default Re: Tracking down RAF Alconbury' Elusive RF-4C

Quote:
Originally Posted by bobhenr View Post
No, that tail number wasn't there when I was. When I was doing my Google search for RAF Alconbury related stuff, I saw pictures of quite a few Phantoms that weren't there when I was. Most of our planes were made in '64 (Hence the tail number on the model, 41077, started with the number 4, which indicated which year it was made. I forgot how they do it, but once the plane is 10 years old, new designating numbers/letters are added to
USAF and US Army will put a 0 (zero) in front of the last 5 of the serial to tell it's a ten year old jet. With some aircraft like old Huey helicopters or KC-135s and C-130s it would also occur that you would find a 1, to tell it's a twenty year old aircraft.This way there wouldn't be a confusion with the newest aircraft sporting the same "last five".

When Tactical Air Command started painting the fiscal year on its aircraft, like "AF-64-077", there was no use for the 0 so much as the fiscal in combination with the last three would show its identity. Not fool proof though as for instance some F-4s would be 69-0252 and 69-7252. So even within the same fiscal year there were overlapping batches of last threes. But obviously this had to do with the surge in production because of the Vietnam war.

Many of the Alconbury RF-4s were transferred to Bergstrom AFB in Texas and to Zweibrucken in Germany.
17275 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2014, 08:17 PM   #11 (permalink)
Junior Collector
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Montana
Posts: 6
Default Re: Tracking down RAF Alconbury' Elusive RF-4C

We liked to refer to the planes by the last two digits of their tail number, but the '66 models overlapped. So we had 022, 023, 024 and 025 in the 64 models, and 422, 423, 424 and 425 in the 66's. So for those numbers we had to be more specific. As a guy who hated paperwork, I disliked having to write down one more number.

What I really hate is that i still remember those numbers 45 years later. Well, what I really hate is not knowing if I am remembering them right or not.
bobhenr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2014, 08:58 PM   #12 (permalink)
Diecast Quality Inspector
 
Adrian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: England
Posts: 3,549
Default Re: Tracking down RAF Alconbury' Elusive RF-4C

When first delivered to Alconbury in 1965, the RF-4Cs were pooled between the three squadrons within 10 TRW, so it was impossible to pin any one aircraft down to a squadron. It wasn't until the aircraft were camouflaged in 1968 that they were split into the three squadrons, given squadron badges on the intakes and painted with distinctive fin tip colours, red, yellow or blue. Hope this helps.
__________________
Adrian


The missing B.707s still needed to be done in 1/400: Uganda Airlines, Air Zimbabwe (rainbow scheme), Air Niugini.

DC-8s still needed to be done in 1/400: UAT, Iberia ('80s scheme), Air Ceylon, Surinam Airways, Air Spain, Seaboard World (-63CF)

Aeroclassics Comets still missing- Dan Air (4 & 4C), United Arab Airlines/Misrair/Egyptair, Kuwait AW, Sudan AW, East African AW, Saudi Royal Flt.
Adrian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-2014, 10:05 PM   #13 (permalink)
Junior Collector
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Montana
Posts: 6
Default Re: Tracking down RAF Alconbury' Elusive RF-4C

As I remember it, they were grouped by numerical order though. 000 through probably 020 to the 30th, the highest numbers to the 1st, and the ones in between to the 32nd. The tail numbers went up to the high 70's, maybe even into the 80's, and we didn't have that many planes. I don't remember any numbers in the 50's, for instance.

I didn't notice the fin color tips, but I don't doubt that they did that. I'm sure I noticed the squadron badges, but I have long since forgotten about it.

I believe our planes were flown over to Germany to get the camouflage paint jobs. At Alconbury, starting in 1969, there was a civilian contractor doing major system upgrades to not only our planes, but other RF-4C's from Germany. They were upgrading instruments and other stuff. Probably engines. Maybe ejection seats. I don't know for sure how much they changed but it took several weeks per plane. Maybe even a month or more. Our radios were not effected, so I didn't pay much attention. But it was major.

One of the German planes was test flown just fine after the overhaul, then sent back to that country, where the pilots found that they couldn't lower the landing gear. Since Phantoms have tail hooks, the bases that had hosted them had arresting cables at the end of the runway. For some reason the people making decisions instructed the pilot to do a belly landing with his tail hook down. With no experience in such matters, he hooked the wooden fence at the end of the runway instead (obviously to no avail) and then slid on his belly down the runway. I don't remember now if he caught the cable. But the backseater decided he'd had enough and just as the plane came to a stop, he ejected. The zero-zero system worked fine, but if I remember correctly, he broke his back pretty bad. The pilot walked away unharmed.
bobhenr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-27-2014, 12:09 AM   #14 (permalink)
Reft crosed trafficah
 
Jumper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Upland, CA
Posts: 909
Default Re: Tracking down RAF Alconbury' Elusive RF-4C

Modern AF practice still has the aircraft serial start with the Fiscal Year of purchase, and when you see the serial on the tail the first number is still dropped, but the 10-year issue mentioned here isn't practiced anymore - for example, when you see C-17A 00000174, the tail says 00174, but the AFTO 781 (aircraft maintenance records or 'forms') has the full serial, and the full serial is painted in fine print along the side of the fuselage. As was explained to me at Aircraft Maintenance school at Sheppard, the first two digits are the FY of purchase, and then the last series is the line item in that year's budget for the purchase. Boeing got cute with the C-17 line once they acquired McDonnell-Douglas, and from that point on the line item matched the production number of the aircraft - so 00-0174 was purchased in FY2000, and was the 174th production C-17 built.

But just showing where things can get confusing, I did my checkride at Altus (when I cross trained to LM) on 8000265, which you would assume was a 1998 model...nope, 88-0265, P-1, the first production C-17 built! It still has a number of weird fittings on the cargo floor that were originally for installing test instrumentation equipment and cameras for the C-17 flight test program in the early 90s.

Gotta love the AF.

Hey bobhenr - where in MT are you?
Jumper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-27-2014, 12:20 AM   #15 (permalink)
Junior Collector
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Montana
Posts: 6
Default Re: Tracking down RAF Alconbury' Elusive RF-4C

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jumper View Post

Hey bobhenr - where in MT are you?
In the Bitterroot, near Hamilton. South of Missoula.

I would have been amazed if the military used the same numbering system as it had in the 60's. It always seemed like they were changing things just for the sake of changing them, and I'm pretty sure nothing has been left unscathed since I was discharged.
bobhenr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-27-2014, 06:24 AM   #16 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,594
Default Re: Tracking down RAF Alconbury' Elusive RF-4C

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jumper View Post
= Boeing got cute with the C-17 line once they acquired McDonnell-Douglas, and from that point on the line item matched the production number of the aircraft - so 00-0174 was purchased in FY2000, and was the 174th production C-17 built.
It has become a common practice now within the USAF to put (part) of the manufacturer's serial number (or construction number/line number) into the Air Force serial number. You can see this with the F-22 and the new C-130s as well for instance.

What I found a very nice way of setting the Air Force serials was using the receiving unit's numbers in the serial. Lots of C-130s ordered in the late Eighties and Nineties had that. Take for instance the HC-130H 90-2103. It was delivered from the factory to the 210th ARS of the Alaska Air Guard.

But of course with all the budget slashed after the Iraq money pit all these aircraft were dispersed over the surviving units.

But referring to your C-17, 00-0174 was actually P74, no 74 built. No 174 is actually 07-7174.

Last edited by 17275; 12-27-2014 at 06:30 AM.
17275 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-27-2014, 12:59 PM   #17 (permalink)
Reft crosed trafficah
 
Jumper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Upland, CA
Posts: 909
Default Re: Tracking down RAF Alconbury' Elusive RF-4C

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard from Rotterdam View Post
But referring to your C-17, 00-0174 was actually P74, no 74 built. No 174 is actually 07-7174.
That's right, slip of memory. You'd think from actually working and flying on that airplane quite a bit while it was still at McChord, I'd have remembered that.

Oh well. It's only been 10 years...
Jumper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-28-2014, 10:07 AM   #18 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,594
Default Re: Tracking down RAF Alconbury' Elusive RF-4C

Haha, well we're not getting any younger are we?
17275 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2014, 11:39 AM   #19 (permalink)
Collector
 
yonny777's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Farnham, Surrey
Posts: 119
Default Re: Tracking down RAF Alconbury' Elusive RF-4C

Hi there, if you are after one then see the following link:
Details: RF-4C Phantom 11 - 10 TRW, USAF, Alconbury UK

Kind regards
yonny777 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2016, 03:19 PM   #20 (permalink)
Junior Collector
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Cincinnati
Posts: 1
Default Re: Tracking down RAF Alconbury' Elusive RF-4C

I was stationed at RAF Alconbury from 1971 to 1973. I was part of the 32nd TRS. I was the crew chief on 077 during this time. When I crewed the aircraft it had been repainted to camo.
The picture is very accurate regarding the flight line and the shelters in the background.
Hornchurch likes this.
crstidham is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2016, 02:16 PM   #21 (permalink)
Junior Collector
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Enola
Posts: 2
Default Re: Tracking down RAF Alconbury' Elusive RF-4C

64-1077 was assigned to the 32nd TRS both times that I was stationed at RAF Alconbury. The picture you posted was inside the 32nd parking area.
silverfox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2016, 03:22 PM   #22 (permalink)
Insane Collector
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Western Australia
Posts: 1,096
Default Re: Tracking down RAF Alconbury' Elusive RF-4C

Welcome to the forum, fellas.

It's good to get a definitive answer on which SQN she served in. I hope anyone who appreciates this model as much I do will find your information invaluable.
Aardvark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2016, 09:55 AM   #23 (permalink)
Junior Collector
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Foley
Posts: 1
Default Re: Tracking down RAF Alconbury' Elusive RF-4C

Just to add to your information when 64-1077 left Alconbury in 1970 it was assigned to the 148th TRW Duluth ANG. It was there until May of 1984 when it was reassigned to the 117th TRW Alabama ANG and remained there until it was retired the to boneyard on 14 April 1994.
RhinoCrewChief is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2020, 11:04 PM   #24 (permalink)
Junior Collector
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Enola
Posts: 2
Default Re: Tracking down RAF Alconbury' Elusive RF-4C

This Aircraft flew from RAF Alconbury, assigned to the 32nd TRS from 1971 up till the squadron was disbanded. I worked on this Aircraft numerous times while assigned to the 10 CRS, 32nd Flightline as a Aircraft Electro-Optical Sensor Repairman/Technician. I have the same airplane as part of my collection, 077 was one of the first nineteen RF-4C aircraft to arrive at RAF Alconbury.
silverfox is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:50 PM.

Latest Threads
 

Models of the Week
 



Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.