Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
FL510 Pros Vs Cons?  
User currently offlineFlyMatt2Bermud From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 563 posts, RR: 7
Posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 12624 times:

We fly at Flight Level 510 when it is operationally reasonable. Some like the idea others hate it. What is your opinion? This quick clip shows some instrument readings at FL510. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQXJdacySRg


"When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward" Leonardo Da Vinci
71 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineFX772LRF From United States of America, joined Apr 2009, 675 posts, RR: 12
Reply 1, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 12630 times:

I think it's a good idea as long as it is efficient. When operating at FL510 drops below being more efficient than being at say, FL400, then I think it becomes a pointless practice. Also, as exhibited in the video, I think it'd be best to have highly-experienced pilots operating the aircraft seeing as how an operating mistake could send you straight into a stall.

All in all, I like the idea of cruising at FL510.

Side note - is that you in the video?

-Noah  wave 



Cleared to IAH via CLL 076 radial/BAZBL/RIICE3, up to 3k, 7k in 10, departure on 134.3, squawk 4676, Colgan 9581.
User currently offlineFlyMatt2Bermud From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 563 posts, RR: 7
Reply 2, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 12624 times:



Quoting FX772LRF (Reply 1):
is that you in the video?

Yep, this was obviously unrehearsed, my son manned the camera! We can only get to FL510 when we have about 3:00 to 2:30 in fuel remaining and the ISA is colder than -3C. Specific range is high and the fuel burn very low, the noise level a nice quite level too. As long as the air is stable, no thunderstorms in close vicinity we consider going to FL510 with the object being to reduce our operational costs.



"When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward" Leonardo Da Vinci
User currently offlineKeta From Germany, joined Mar 2005, 448 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 12604 times:

Cool video! That's pretty much the highest you can get nowadays, no? Unless you contact Richard Branson, right 

Makes for a good idea of the magnitude of the coffin corner, too. I would love to see more and have more details!



Where there's a will, there's a way
User currently offlineFlyMatt2Bermud From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 563 posts, RR: 7
Reply 4, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 12575 times:



Quoting Keta (Reply 3):
Makes for a good idea of the magnitude of the coffin corner, too

Consider too, that with the stall speed at 162 KIAS, the stall protection system will activate prior to reaching stall speed so that makes the margin a little tighter.



"When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward" Leonardo Da Vinci
User currently offlineKELPkid From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 6428 posts, RR: 3
Reply 5, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 12511 times:



Quoting Keta (Reply 3):
That's pretty much the highest you can get nowadays, no? Unless you contact Richard Branson, right

Well, if you're young enough, you could try and become a US Air Force pilot and sign up for the U-2, FL800 (and above)!  Wow!



Celebrating the birth of KELPkidJR on August 5, 2009 :-)
User currently offlineEaa3 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 1033 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 12486 times:



Quoting FlyMatt2Bermud (Thread starter):
We fly at Flight Level 510 when it is operationally reasonable. Some like the idea others hate it. What is your opinion? This quick clip shows some instrument readings at FL510. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQXJd...cySRg

Why did the copilot have a mask on. Also: Is there less turbulence at that altitude then at 30-40,000 ft.

When flying at 510 you can probably get a more direct route then otherwise.


User currently offlineKELPkid From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 6428 posts, RR: 3
Reply 7, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 12474 times:



Quoting Eaa3 (Reply 6):
Why did the copilot have a mask on

FL510, time of useful consciousness if a rapid decompression occurs: 6-9 seconds.



Celebrating the birth of KELPkidJR on August 5, 2009 :-)
User currently offlineCorey07850 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 2528 posts, RR: 5
Reply 8, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 12443 times:

To be honest I don't think I've ever seen our Globals over 490. I'm not sure exactly why but there's generally not that much of an advantage cruising up there. 450+ does the trick most of the time.

BTW next time you guys are at the BDL service center, come upstairs and say hi


User currently offlinePGNCS From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 2858 posts, RR: 48
Reply 9, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 12441 times:



Quoting Eaa3 (Reply 6):
Why did the copilot have a mask on.

Someone needs to be on oxygen all the time above FL 410 due to extremely short time of useful consciousness considerations. Below is the FAR 91 information for those interested.

I have been there courtesy of the USAF and have no desire to go up there on anything that isn't rocket powered. Engine margins are often quite small, aircraft performance margins are critical, sitting for hours with an oxygen mask on is very unpleasant, and, finally, no aircraft that my company operates go that high. It wouldn't make sense to design most airliners to be strong enough to have adequate fatigue characteristics to climb that high when very little time would be spent up there (you would be unlikely to be light enough to get that high until very late in the cruise phase of flight).

I am delighted that many corporate aircraft can go that high as it gets them more direct routings and takes them out of our way (until top of descent, anyway); everything that can be done for congestion is good. I don't want to be the one going up there though.

http://www.faa.gov/pilots/training/a...n_education/media/ac%2061-107a.pdf

(3) Title 14 CFR section 91.211(b) requires pressurized aircraft to have at least a 10-minute additional supply of supplemental oxygen for each occupant at flight altitudes above FL 250 in the event of a decompression. At flight altitudes above FL 350, one pilot at the controls of the airplane must wear and use an oxygen mask that is secured and sealed. The oxygen mask must supply oxygen at all times or must automatically supply oxygen when the cabin pressure altitude of the airplane exceeds 14,000 feet MSL. An exception to this regulation exists for two-pilot crews that operate at or below FL 410. One pilot does not need to wear and use an oxygen mask if both pilots are at the controls and each pilot has a quick donning type of oxygen mask that can be placed on the face with one hand from the ready position and be properly secured, sealed, and operational within 5 seconds. If one pilot of a two-pilot crew is away from the controls, then the pilot that is at the controls must wear and use an oxygen mask that is secured and sealed.


User currently offlineDw747400 From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 1265 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 12398 times:



Quoting FlyMatt2Bermud (Thread starter):
Some like the idea others hate it. What is your opinion?

I think one of the biggest detractors is pilots who don't want to deal with the oxygen requirements.



CFI--Certfied Freakin Idiot
User currently offlineFLY2HMO From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 12388 times:

I really want to know how you pick who gets to put up with the mask for hours....

Rock, paper, scissors?

Heads, Tail?

 

I've been in the FAA altitude chamber in OKC. I think every pilot should go there. It's a great learning experience. yes 


User currently offlineDashTrash From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 1563 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 12367 times:

I've been to 510 twice in a Citation X. After 470, the airplane will no longer accelerate without descending. The best mach number I've been able to carry up that high has been .82. With that low mach number, the lesser fuel flow didn't make up for the loss in airspeed. The airplane is much efficient at 410-450.

You also can't get there under most conditions. Economy wise, if you want to put the longest legs possible on the airplane, climb to 410, then FLCH at .80 and eventually it will be at 510 as fuel burns off.


User currently offlineNjxc500 From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 243 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 12345 times:



Quoting PGNCS (Reply 9):
One pilot does not need to wear and use an oxygen mask if both pilots are at the controls and each pilot has a quick donning type of oxygen mask that can be placed on the face with one hand from the ready position and be properly secured, sealed, and operational within 5 seconds.

It appears many globals are equipped with a EROS MC20 quick donning mask. Does this mean that the other pilot would not normally be wearing a mask? Maybe the video filming is the same as the captain not being present?

Nick


User currently offlineFlyMatt2Bermud From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 563 posts, RR: 7
Reply 14, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 12338 times:



Quoting Eaa3 (Reply 6):
Why did the copilot have a mask on.

It meets the regulatory requirements!

Quoting FLY2HMO (Reply 11):

Rock, paper, scissors?

Good to be the aircraft commander on a two Captain ship!!!!

Quoting DashTrash (Reply 12):
After 470, the airplane will no longer accelerate without descending.

You are exactly correct. If we can't climb at Mach .80 then there is absolutely no reason to continue. In our aircraft (BD700) if you climb to high altitude under Mach .80 your aircraft will not accelerate and you will more than likely decelerate after the engines revert from Climb to Cruise mode. However, when conditions are ideal it is nice to be at FL510.

Quoting Eaa3 (Reply 6):
I am delighted that many corporate aircraft can go that high as it gets them more direct routings and takes them out of our way (until top of descent, anyway)

Yeah, we don't really get as many Direct To clearances as we expected, but you can count on flying to the entry point on the STAR (Standard Terminal Arrival) and plan your descent from there.



"When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward" Leonardo Da Vinci
User currently offlineNjxc500 From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 243 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 12327 times:



Quoting FlyMatt2Bermud (Reply 14):
In our aircraft (BD700) if you climb to high altitude under Mach .80 your aircraft will not accelerate and you will more than likely decelerate after the engines revert from Climb to Cruise mode.

I've heard the Global 5000 has better performance up to the ceiling, do you have any knowledge of this.


User currently offlineFlyMatt2Bermud From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 563 posts, RR: 7
Reply 16, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 12319 times:



Quoting Njxc500 (Reply 15):

I've heard the Global 5000 has better performance up to the ceiling, do you have any knowledge of this

You heard the Paper, Scissors, Rock theory? When it comes to climb performance it is ALL about weight and temperature. Bombardier 'target wise' hoped to hold the Basic Empty Weight down on the 5000 compared to the XRS. For some reason the scales did not oblige. Typically the 5000's are only 1,000 lbs lighter or so empty than the XRS's. However, I can tell you, full fuel for a 5,000 mile trip we can go straight to FL450. Ideally we run a long range cruise for the first 2 hours then you can take it to FL470 and run Mach. .85 which is nearly as efficient if not more as Long Range Cruise..



"When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward" Leonardo Da Vinci
User currently offlinePGNCS From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 2858 posts, RR: 48
Reply 17, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 12273 times:



Quoting Dw747400 (Reply 10):
I think one of the biggest detractors is pilots who don't want to deal with the oxygen requirements.

Have you ever sat in the seat with one on for four or five hours? Once you have, you'll know why it's highly unpopular.

Quoting FLY2HMO (Reply 11):
I really want to know how you pick who gets to put up with the mask for hours....

Rock, paper, scissors?

Heads, Tail?

Seniority!  

In all seriousness, in high altitude operations the pilots will normally alternate with each other as it is extremely uncomfortable and quite fatiguing.

Quoting Njxc500 (Reply 13):
Quoting PGNCS (Reply 9):
One pilot does not need to wear and use an oxygen mask if both pilots are at the controls and each pilot has a quick donning type of oxygen mask that can be placed on the face with one hand from the ready position and be properly secured, sealed, and operational within 5 seconds.

It appears many globals are equipped with a EROS MC20 quick donning mask. Does this mean that the other pilot would not normally be wearing a mask? Maybe the video filming is the same as the captain not being present?

No. When above FL410, one pilot must be on oxygen at all times, regardless of what type of masks are installed. At FL410 and below as long as both pilots are in their control seats nobody has to be on oxygen as long as the aircraft is equipped with compliant quick donning masks.

Quoting FlyMatt2Bermud (Reply 14):
Quoting Eaa3 (Reply 6):
Why did the copilot have a mask on.

It meets the regulatory requirements!

 checkmark 


User currently offlineEaa3 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 1033 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 12096 times:



Quoting PGNCS (Reply 17):
No. When above FL410, one pilot must be on oxygen at all times, regardless of what type of masks are installed. At FL410 and below as long as both pilots are in their control seats nobody has to be on oxygen as long as the aircraft is equipped with compliant quick donning masks.

I wonder. The A380 is approved for flight up to FL430. So in that case the pilots will need to wear masks.


User currently offlinePGNCS From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 2858 posts, RR: 48
Reply 19, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 12018 times:



Quoting Eaa3 (Reply 18):
Quoting PGNCS (Reply 17):
No. When above FL410, one pilot must be on oxygen at all times, regardless of what type of masks are installed. At FL410 and below as long as both pilots are in their control seats nobody has to be on oxygen as long as the aircraft is equipped with compliant quick donning masks.

I wonder. The A380 is approved for flight up to FL430. So in that case the pilots will need to wear masks.

Well so are the 767 and 747 (which can go even higher) among others, but if the aircraft is even modestly loeded it will very rarely be able to get up that high, and even then only at the very end of the cruise phase of flight. I would be surprised if the A-380 would be able to get up to FL430 very early on a typical leg. It's a fairly self-limiting problem in reality, as the time you can spend up there is normally relatively brief in most commercial airliners, unlike many military and corporate aircraft.


User currently offlineDw747400 From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 1265 posts, RR: 1
Reply 20, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 11998 times:



Quoting PGNCS (Reply 17):
Once you have, you'll know why it's highly unpopular.


I've worn a mask long enough to know why its unpopular, hence the comment! I'm not judging anyone for not wanting to do it... in fact, I sometimes wonder why a crew wants FL490 or FL510 when a lower altitude offers nearly the same economy.



CFI--Certfied Freakin Idiot
User currently offlinePGNCS From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 2858 posts, RR: 48
Reply 21, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 11958 times:



Quoting Dw747400 (Reply 20):
Quoting PGNCS (Reply 17):
Once you have, you'll know why it's highly unpopular.


I've worn a mask long enough to know why its unpopular, hence the comment!

Well it seems we agree 100%!  


User currently offlineKELPkid From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 6428 posts, RR: 3
Reply 22, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 11921 times:



Quoting Eaa3 (Reply 18):
I wonder. The A380 is approved for flight up to FL430. So in that case the pilots will need to wear masks.

Not necessarily. As I understand things, many civil aviation authorities around the world aren't nearly as restrictive on this as the FAA on this (for example, they would consider just having a pilot within arm's reach of a quick-donning O2 mask adequate...). As far as I know, no A380 yet produced has worn an N-number  



Celebrating the birth of KELPkidJR on August 5, 2009 :-)
User currently offlineAviopic From Netherlands, joined Mar 2004, 2681 posts, RR: 41
Reply 23, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 11860 times:

There is one con missing, Radiation.
From FL200 upwards the radiation(the whole spectrum) doubles every 2000ft or so, probably no problem for the occasional passenger but it might be something to think about for the daily driver.



The truth lives in one’s mind, it doesn’t really exist
User currently offline413X3 From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 1983 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 11853 times:

I would like to see more videos of the outside when flying that high, it would be nice to see what the view looks like from up there in the 50s

25 PGNCS : Fair enough. Other countries do have differing regulations, and I was discussing the US FAR's. If you can find other regulations that allow it, I hav
26 FlyMatt2Bermud : So let's go further on the subject of radiation. I would really appreciate some insight here!!
27 FlyMatt2Bermud : I would agree to wear a radiation tab monitor to collect data on this.
28 Aeroflot001 : Please Pardon my ignorance with this question but i want to be sure. I understand that when a decompression takes place all the air is sucked or blow
29 DashTrash : Yeah, you'd have the wind knocked out of you.
30 Tdscanuck : Your lungs are only capable of withstanding *very* small differential pressures. If you try to hold your breath during a high-altitude decompression,
31 Post contains links Rwessel : That's not true. And in fact is clearly impossible. At 20,000ft, radiation exposure is about 1 uSv/h. If it doubled ever 2000ft past there, an SR-71
32 Aviopic : I am no expert in this area. My info came from a 74 Captain who based himself on a study recently carried out in Germany. Thought he would know what
33 PGNCS : Actually, I agree with Rwessel that the numbers you posted in Reply 23 are too high, and I should have been more careful in my response. I didn't und
34 413X3 : I remember hearing about a study done by Fedex with pilots volunteering to wear a radiation meter and they didn't find any significant numbers.
35 Post contains images KELPkid : What do ETOPS issues and Thales pitot tubes have to do with flying up to FL510?
36 Aeroflot001 : Thankyou both for your input. Should a decomp happen at this altitude god forbid would the copilot be able to get the plane down quick enough to save
37 FlyMatt2Bermud : The aircraft certification process takes into consideration the time for the aircraft to descend under Emergency conditions to15,000 msl which is cons
38 cpd : Concorde (whose crews didn't have to wear the mask above FL410) had a device to measure radiation, and if it went into a particular zone on the dial,
39 FlyMatt2Bermud : Awesome! I wish I could get one of those radiation measuring devices.
40 Post contains images DashTrash : I really don't know. Those masks are only rated to 40,000 ft cabin altitude. With a rapid decompression, I think there is a chance the guy on the mas
41 Aviopic : I will try to get some new data on this. According the B74 Captain new insights are a lot worse then it was previous believed to be. What kind of rad
42 2H4 : If I ever become a famous rapper, that's going to be my stage name.
43 FlyMatt2Bermud : Can anyone elaborate on more radiation specifics?
44 brons2 : awesome pic dash trash, at FL510 you are way, way above the clouds!!
45 Post contains links Jambrain : See James May (from BBC top gear) at FL71 in a U2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6cZLfK4Zjk#t=6m10s
46 cpd : I remember a report that stated that the gauges' reading was greatly over-estimated. But in any case, a good safety measure to have from the days whe
47 Nomadd22 : Unless you're flying above FL20,000, or over the poles there's not that much to worry about radiation wise. Most non emf solar is blocked by the Van A
48 flymatt2bermud : Thanks for the link and info Rwessel!
49 Post contains images cpd : Back when Concorde was being designed, I'm pretty certain radiation was far from an exact science - and there were all sorts of funny myths and pract
50 flymatt2bermud : I am not so certain that there are any real conclusions from the information scientists have gathered over the years.
51 Post contains links and images elpinDAB : There is a great tool on APC to calculate the radiation that you received for a given flight: http://www.airlinepilotcentral.com/frame/radiation_prof
52 elpinDAB : I was actually stunned from the great difference between the flight envelopes of the C750 and Global 5000 at FL510, although, under the precise circum
53 flymatt2bermud : What is that margin? It is potentially an extremely dangerous envelope, pilots who choose to fly to those boundaries definitely need to be knowledgab
54 JamBrain : As a non pilot I am intrigued as to what happens when at FL51 you get into trouble, presumably it is far more difficult to recover from a stall at th
55 Post contains links flymatt2bermud : This is an excellent description of a stall. Look at the Deep Stall and you will see a good example of the characteristics and why. http://en.wikipedi
56 ElpinDAB : Hey Matt, Sorry for not making myself more clear. I was referring to the Vmo to Vs1 margin, which you refer to in the video as "coffin corner". I woul
57 Mir : Having done several high altitude stalls in a sim, I can say that they really are non-events if you recover properly. The recovery is the same as a s
58 flymatt2bermud : I was actually stunned at the great difference between the flight envelopes of the C750 and Global 5000 at FL510, although, under the precise circumst
59 DashTrash : Not really. That's the trade off for the high speed / altitude capability, and the reason for the slats. It's fairly squirrly, but not as bad the old
60 flymatt2bermud : Actually instrument readouts of the C750 at FL510. I know the C750 has a Vmo of M.92 but that is not it's limit at FL510. EDIT: O.K. I just found you
61 DashTrash : Maybe 195. The airplane won't accelerate up there, so whatever speed you level off with is what you're stuck with.
62 flymatt2bermud : The Global needs to be down to about 2:45 fuel remaining to get to FL510. It will accelerate to close to Vmo which at that ALT is approx M.855.
63 Max Q : Interesting, what happens if you are over the Himalayas with numerous mountains higher than 15000' ? !
64 tdscanuck : You hit the mountains, unless you've got a EGPWS system that's capable of actually commanding the flight controls. Hopefully, the flight crew regains
65 Max Q : Once again, too much automation, in an attempt to 'Pilot Proof' the Aircraft you end up with a system that can get you into more harm than it is tryi
66 tdscanuck : I'm not following you...if you have an un-automated airplane (vis a vis cabin altitude) and you decompress the cabin to greater than 15000' and the f
67 flymatt2bermud : I agree with you Tom, tis better to have the automation and chance someone will regain useful conscious than not.
68 Mir : Since terrain databases are commonplace these days, how difficult would it be to use said databases to limit descents. Hell, all you'd really have to
69 tdscanuck : Implement just this function isn't particularly difficult, especially on a FBW airliner. However, certifying it is a whole different matter because n
70 DashTrash : I might not have mentioned the EDM is an autopilot feature. It has to be on for the X to descend itself.
71 flymatt2bermud : Especially when you consider the chances of an actual rapid decompression event at altitude.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic FL510 Pros Vs Cons?
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Pros And Cons Of "Plugged" Windows posted Mon Oct 24 2005 21:41:45 by AT
MEL Vs CDL posted Fri Jan 29 2010 14:37:52 by Kimon
Fuel Jettison Procedure 741 Vs 744 posted Mon Jan 25 2010 10:40:52 by Kimon
Advice Needed: Operating Costs King Air C90 Vs 200 posted Sat Jan 23 2010 15:29:06 by FLY2HMO
VS G-VELD Seat Config Comparison posted Fri Jan 15 2010 21:06:19 by BOACVC10
Oceanic Clearance At Boston Center (vs Gander) posted Tue Jan 12 2010 21:17:12 by Ren41
Fadec Vs Fafc posted Mon Jan 11 2010 09:48:46 by Kimon
Vertical Tapes Vs Round Dials 747-200 posted Fri Jan 1 2010 13:51:56 by Kimon
Alliance 7200 GP Vs RR Trent 900 posted Fri Jan 1 2010 06:44:09 by Kimon
Atlas VS KSS posted Thu Dec 31 2009 13:39:11 by Kimon

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format