A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Rotorcraft
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Victimizing Aircraft Designers - An American Specialty? (wasFetters)



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old April 1st 09, 01:08 AM posted to rec.aviation.homebuilt,rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.owning,rec.aviation.rotorcraft
Dennis Fetters
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 108
Default Victimizing Aircraft Designers - An American Specialty? (wasFetters)

Maxwell wrote:
"Dennis Fetters" wrote in message
...

in limbo wrote:


Ask him who else he threatened in rotaryforum.com He was warned about
threatening people there a few times by the mods.


Why don't you ask me?

Someone on our forum was being an a-hole and mouthy to me. You know,
basically just like you brain-dead a-holes' do.

I didn't threaten him. I promised him that when I seen him I was going to
give him a good old fashion, and well deserved punch in the nose. You
know, like someone deserves when they are antagonizing someone. But, I did
it on the forum where everyone could see my intentions, and not sneaking
behind everyone with private emails. If I believe in something I don't
hide the fact that I do.

Since then, that person has calmed down and got off my back, and we have
been having very pleasant and constructive conversations on the forum, and
I read what he has to say in his posts with great interest.



Geez guys, get a room.

You're clearly the only ones that give a **** about this tiny bit of world
history, why can't you just email each other.


Speeeest! Maxwell..... Just in case you don't realize it, I'm not the
one asking the questions.... I'm just the one answering the questions.

It you don't like the questions being asked, then discuss that with the
ones asking the questions.

What? You guys around here so busy with this dyeing newsgroups that your
lacking band-width?????? LOL!
Ads
  #12  
Old April 1st 09, 01:26 AM posted to rec.aviation.homebuilt,rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.owning,rec.aviation.rotorcraft
Dennis Fetters
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 108
Default Victimizing Aircraft Designers - An American Specialty? (wasFetters)

Poultry in Motion wrote:
I don't run Glenns' website, he does, and I'm not privy to the reasons
why he does what he does.



Of course you are. You threatened him. He was your friend and defender,
but you dumped the friendship because he was too honest for you to deal
with. He spoke what was on his mind. He was direct in his criticism of
the Italians who built his CH-7, and that was after he'd been their
guest. Glenn got to know all the players personally, didn't he? You
needed to shut him up before he learned more about you.


You should write BS fiction stories.

Ok, if you don't get off this newsgroup I'm going to threaten you.

Lets see how good that really works. LOL!

I'm full of questions.


As we are showing here, that's not all...


Yes, insight too.


Keep guessing.... Insight has the four letter we're all looking for, so
your getting warm.

Keep the questions coming!
  #13  
Old April 1st 09, 02:01 AM posted to rec.aviation.homebuilt,rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.owning,rec.aviation.rotorcraft
Dennis Fetters
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 108
Default Victimizing Aircraft Designers - An American Specialty? (wasFetters)

Poultry in Motion wrote:
Ask him who else he threatened in rotaryforum.com He was warned about
threatening people there a few times by the mods.



Dennis, who else???

Fetters once threatened (and sued) a Mini-500 customer, Joe Rinke,
because Rinke began solving the Mini's problems. Rinke's activities
would have upset the RHCI business model, which relied on keeping
customers tightly controlled and dependent on Fetters alone for all
support. They were permitted to have helicopters only as good as Fetters
was willing, or able, to make them. No outside development, no outside
parts allowed. Fetters told them what to buy, and told them when it
would be mandatory.


Well, here is the real reasons I sued that little man for lying and
breach of contract. Besides, where is Joe Rinke today? Where is the
little savior? He went bust all the way around without a single working
prototype finished. What a bigmouth looser he turned out to be. I posted
this years ago;

Revolution Helicopter Report: Joe Rinke’s False Statements.
Greetings Newsgroup participants,
Joe Rinke has made several false statements concerning Revolution Helicopter
corp. to this Newsgroup, and in the information presently on his webpage for
Rinke Aerospace.

I feel it necessary to post the facts and prove his statements are false with
the evidence presented here in this report I compiled. What these people are
saying is being done to benefit themselves and they’re own cause through
slandering RHCI, and telling you, the public, lies.

I’m not here to badmouth or discredit anyone. I will simply let the evidence
speak for it’s self. I will not lower myself to the level that my detractors
have gone. I have no need to use profanity and name calling to defend myself.
I am a professional, and feel that I have always portrayed myself as one to
this news group. Any of the evidence I present can be checked and verified
with little effort. All of the quotes in this post are copied out of the
newsgroups, or I had permission to post.

Some of the Mini-500 detractors are trying to make Joe Rinke look like the
saver of the Mini-500, and this is far from the truth.

Joe Rinke wrote:

And if it's quality you're worried about, PLEASE DON'T BE!!! Our
manufacturing capabilities are housed in a 21,225 sq. ft. facility with
state-of-the-art machinery that currently manufacturers aircraft parts for,
among others, Allison Engine, General Dynamics, General Electric, Numatics,
Pratt & Whitney Aircraft, Rockwell International, Teledyne Ryan Aeronautical,
Textron-Lycoming, United Technologies, Williams International, as well as a
host of automotive companies and others.


In reality, there is no such thing as a Rinke Aerospace as he is portraying
it to be. Joe Rinke makes a living with an excavating business. Tinkering
with his Mini-500 is a part time hobby. The facilities he mentions is a place
where he has some machine work done. He doesn’t own these places as he leads
you to believe. He does a little business with them, but to say “our” is not
correct.

Further more, when you take a look at his Webpage, he tries to lead us all to
believe that the building shown in the picture is Rinke Aerospace. I attached
the picture at the bottom of this report, and you can clearly see that the
sign “Rinke Aerospace” is pasted onto the picture by computer.
Two other people that are guilty of deceiving this Newsgroup are Chuck Van
Thomme and Ed Randolph. They posted statements to these newsgroups that were
designed to mislead us all, for the benefit of Joe Rinke and to fool you into
feeling at ease to send him money, as if he was an established business in the
aerospace field.

Ed Randolph wrote:

I made a trip to Joe's shop = looks impressive but awfully noisy( hard on this
old mans ears as I didn't on headset or earmuffs).
Chuck Van Thomme wrote:

I was at their shop and they had 3 machines in already for conversions. Their
tool shop is unbelievable, estimated 10.5 million dollars worth of tool and
machines.It put Revolutions shop to shame.”
Chuck Van Thomme wrote:

HI RALPH I'm glad you took the time to go too Rinke's shop. NOW you know
what I'm talking about. When you see other gear boxes setting around that THAT
shop builds for the military YOU know its FIRST CLASS..”
Chuck Van Thomme wrote:

Ralph, If DF should ever go out of business,Rinke Aerospace can manufacture
ANY part of that helicopter and do a very high quality job at it. I believe
you were one of the guys that visited his shop, did'nt you?? I may be
wrong,but I thought you did. In the past there have been dozens of people that
have flown out to see his shop,and without a doubt ,I think everyone was
impressed.


In a post made by Ralph Raser, he told the truth about Joe Rinke’s aerospace
company. He went there and saw it, and said the word “ available”, which makes
all the difference in the world.

Ralph Raser wrote:

That's correct. Joe has a nice shop available to him.


It has been said that Joe Rinke is a liar by others in this Newsgroup. I can’t
disagree after having to deal with him, and when reading some of the ludicrous
claims he makes.

Joe Rinke wrote:

And regarding the amendment, obviously I know about this since, I was in court
that day with Dennis, when the Judge demanded that modifications be allowed to
the Mini since it is proven "unairworthy" in its original state! There is now
a precedent set in the Courts, requiring that since I am allowed to modify my
aircraft and fly it, in its modified state, that others be allowed to do so
too. Case law having been set, DF had no choice but to allow others to modify
their Minis. It's humorous, though, that after all this time and effort, DF
comes out and tries to look like it was his idea and that he's a "nice guy" by
allowing individuals to modify their Minis...funny!”


That entire statement was a lie. Joe Rinke takes credit for having forced
RHCI into giving our builders an amendment to allow them to modify they’re
Mini-500s. I sent this email to Mr. Dave Martin, editor of KitPlanes
magazine, and asked him to tell the world where I got the idea for the
contract modification. I made this amendment available so as to defuse Joe
Rinke’s attempts to scare people into a class action lawsuit. Now, proof of
the first part of his lie:

Dave Martin wrote:

26 Oct 1998
Dennis:
You have asked me to confirm that after the Dallas meeting on the Mini-500, I
suggested that you provide your customers relief from the threat of lawsuits
if they made modifications to their Revolution helicopter kits. The Dallas
meeting made clear that people were delighted with their Mini-500s except for
the technical problems they had experienced--and the restriction in their
sales contracts that precluded changes including those related to safety. I
noted that you and I had known each other a long time, that I don't normally
give business advice, but that I thought your company was at risk unless you
improved relations with your customers in this area.
Soon after our phone conversation, you confirmed that you were adopting the
idea and would be contacting your customers relating to changes to their
Mini-500s.
The idea was mine, and I was pleased with your positive response to it. You
have my permission to make this known.
Dave Martin, editor, KITPLANES


Next part of his lie: Joe Rinke stated that “the Judge demanded that
modifications be allowed to the Mini since it is proven "unairworthy" in its
original state.” As a matter of fact, this is the only thing the Judge said:
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
WESTERN DIVISION
REVOLUTION HELICOPTER CORP. )
INC., )
)
Plaintiff )
)
v. ) No. 98-0060-CV-W-9
)
JOSEPH P. RINKE, et al., )
)
Defendants. )
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION
FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER
On January 16, 1998, and February 27, 1998, hearings were held before this
court on the plaintiff’s request for a temporary restraining order against
defendant.
For the reasons stated at the February 27, 1998, hearing, and pursuant to
Dataphase Systems, Inc. v. C.L. Systems, Inc., 640 F.2d 109 (8th Cir. 1981),
the balance of equities so favors the plaintiff that justice requires the
court to intervene to preserve the status quo until plaintiff’s request for
preliminary and permanent relief can be decided.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that:
1) defendants Joseph Rinke and Rinke Aerospace Corporation are restrained
until further order of this court from modifying any Mini-500 aircraft owned
by them or anyone else;
2) defendants Joseph Rinke and Rinke Aerospace Corporation are restrained
until further order of this court from flying or otherwise operating any
modified Mini-500 aircraft owned by them or anyone else;
3) defendants are restrained until further order of this court from soliciting
business from Mini-500 aircraft owners for the purpose of selling kits for the
modification of any Mini-500 aircraft;
4) defendants are restrained until further order of this court from exhibiting
or displaying any modified Mini-500 aircraft;
5) defendants are restrained until further order of this court from
advertising any modification to a Mini-500 aircraft or attempting to induce
any owner of a Mini-500 aircraft to modify the aircraft;
6) plaintiff shall post with the Clerk of the Court a cash bond or a bond
with a surety approved by this court in the amount of $50,000 conditioned as
required by Rule 65, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure; and
7) on or before March 6, 1998, the parties shall file a Proposed Scheduling
Order suggesting a deadline for the close of pretrial discovery, the filing
of dispositive motions, a proposed time for a hearing on preliminary and
permanent injunctive relief and an estimate of the court time needed for this
hearing.
Signature, D. Brook Bartlett
United States District Judge
Kansas City, Missouri
March 3, 1998.

Let’s read that again;
“the balance of equities so favors the plaintiff that justice
requires the court to intervene to preserve the status quo
until plaintiff’s request for preliminary and permanent relief
can be decided.”

As a matter of fact, this case never went to court. It was turned over to a
“Mediator” to try and bring both parties to an agreement so that it wouldn’t
need to go to court. The Mediator has no power to make any decisions or
judgments of any kind. What Joe Rinke said about the judge ordering RHCI to
make contract amendments, or Case law being set was a whopping lie. The
entire event that Joe Rinke described above never happened........... funny,
all right.
RHCI made Joe Rinke sign an agreement to satisfy our relief. We did so in a
way that would still allow him to fly his mini-500, but not to market his
unproved and untested components that he was trying to sell to unwary
Mini-500 owners, that thought he really had an Aerospace business.
These people have said that I’m “sue-happy”. In reality, I am not at all. You
have seen these detractors slam RHCI, the Mini-500 and myself on many
occasions, even to the point of telling obvious lies and the year long
fueling of a Mini- 500 hate campaign. Yet, with all of this, I have not sued
any of them for these attacks. They admit they enjoy what they do, and seek
the largest audience possible in their attempts to damage us. They will
praise anyone that supports their cause, and condemn anyone sympathetic to
the point that drives them away. They even support Flygyros!! ;

Charles Greene wrote:

I doubt that those of us who go on & on about the Mini 500 want to go through
this. Besides, we want to have a large audience, influence public opinion,
boost our egos.
Ed Randoff wrote:

Esteban, Keep right on posting to this news group. This is America = Freedom
of speech for all . They know where the on /off switch is on their computer.
Ed #005”



We have proven with this evidence that Joe Rinke has lied and deceived this
Newsgroup on a number of occasions, and is presently misrepresenting his
business status and abilities. Both Joe Rinke and Fred Stewart said that I
stole ideas and designs from Rinke Aerospace. I will soon give evidence in a
new report that these statements are also false.
I hope that this report will give people the insight of what has really been
happening here. Thank you for your attention, and please remember to come to
the official Mini-500 builders meeting here at Revolution Helicopter Corp.,
February 6 and 7, 1999
Most sincerely,
Dennis Fetters
President
Revolution Helicopter Corp.

  #14  
Old April 1st 09, 02:10 AM posted to rec.aviation.homebuilt,rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.owning,rec.aviation.rotorcraft
in limbo
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13
Default Victimizing Aircraft Designers - An American Specialty? (wasFetters)

On Mar 31, 12:15*am, Poultry in Motion wrote:
Dennis Fetters wrote:
Poultry in Motion wrote:
Dennis Fetters wrote:
Yes, indeed Mr. Ryerson knows him well, he was the first one to
publish on his website the letter where Mr. Cicare admitted that the
two designs were different.


Never seen that. Did see pictures of you and your pal Glenn together.
Even a picture of you seated in "Miss Nina", Glenn's CH-7 Angel. Yes,
he owned your competitor's helicopter, not one of yours. But he was an
enthusiastic supporter of them all, including Mimi-500s.


Sorry you didn't pay more attention. I guess it you would have been more
informed of the real facts, you would not have showed everyone here on
the newsgroup how very little you know about everything you have talked
about related to me or the Mini-500. They all know now!


Then suddenly, all articles and pictures of Mini-500s, the entire
section, was pulled from the site. Replaced by a note that, due to
threats received, ( *UNMENTIONABLE* ) helicopters could no longer
appear on the site.


I don't run Glenns' website, he does, and I'm not privy to the reasons
why he does what he does.


Of course you are. You threatened him. He was your friend and defender,
but you dumped the friendship because he was too honest for you to deal
with. He spoke what was on his mind. He was direct in his criticism of
the Italians who built his CH-7, and that was after he'd been their
guest. Glenn got to know all the players personally, didn't he? You
needed to shut him up before he learned more about you.





So what's your point? This is exactly what I said. You just backed up
my side of the event?


Point --- Cicare's CH-6 helicopter was the Mini-500 prototype.


Answered on your other post;


"Oh that one, I guess you need to read!
That was what we were going to use as a prototype, but as I said Cicare
didn't do what he agreed, so even after I advertised we were going to
use his CH-6 as a prototype, that was when I assumed he was going to
live up to his part of the deal. He didn't, and I ended up having to
design the Mini-500 all by myself without the use of Cicares' help or
his CH-6, so the CH-6 never was used as the prototype after all. So the
first Mini-500 prototype turned out to be the first one I built.
Its that simple, and I wrote that before, as I said you just have to read."


I'm full of questions.


As we are showing here, that's not all...


Yes, insight too.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


To see what Glen has to say about Dennis just look at this vid.
UTubeGlennAR is Mr. Glenn Ryerson. He has removed his harsher
comments of Dennis F.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UvHd97648mE
  #15  
Old April 1st 09, 02:16 AM posted to rec.aviation.homebuilt,rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.owning,rec.aviation.rotorcraft
Dennis Fetters
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 108
Default Victimizing Aircraft Designers - An American Specialty? (wasFetters)

Mike Ash wrote:

In article ,
Dennis Fetters wrote:


I didn't threaten him. I promised him that when I seen him I was going
to give him a good old fashion, and well deserved punch in the nose. You
know, like someone deserves when they are antagonizing someone. But, I
did it on the forum where everyone could see my intentions, and not
sneaking behind everyone with private emails. If I believe in something
I don't hide the fact that I do.



I have basically no interest in the subject matter covered in this
thread, but this paragraph makes absolutely no sense. Saying that you
will carry out a harmful action against someone, such as punching them
in the nose, is the very DEFINITION of a threat.


I'm just terrible to be the first and only one to ever do that, I know.

I'm sure the people I did punch in the nose felt I was terrible too, but
they did at least regret opening their big-mouth and apologized afterwards.

People have to be held responsible for their actions when they slam
someone over the internet, and if you cause trouble with someone, don't
be surprised when someday that trouble is repaid, sometimes painfully.

I'm a brut, I know it, and I'm sorry. Children, even big ones, seem to
respect and remember the consequence of a good-old fashion whoop'en.
  #16  
Old April 1st 09, 02:18 AM posted to rec.aviation.homebuilt,rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.owning,rec.aviation.rotorcraft
Dennis Fetters
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 108
Default Victimizing Aircraft Designers - An American Specialty? (wasFetters)

Dan wrote:

Dennis Fetters wrote:
snip

I didn't threaten him. I promised him that when I seen him I was going
to give him a good old fashion, and well deserved punch in the nose.
You know, like someone deserves when they are antagonizing someone.



Now that is childish.

I'm no lawyer, but isn't conveying a threat on line a federal felony?

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired


Go for it;

FBI Headquarters in Washington, D.C.
Call (202) 324-3000 or write to the following address:
Federal Bureau of Investigation
J. Edgar Hoover Building
935 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20535-0001
  #17  
Old April 1st 09, 03:00 AM posted to rec.aviation.homebuilt,rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.owning,rec.aviation.rotorcraft
Dan[_12_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 451
Default Victimizing Aircraft Designers - An American Specialty? (wasFetters)

Dennis Fetters wrote:
Dan wrote:

Dennis Fetters wrote:
snip

I didn't threaten him. I promised him that when I seen him I was
going to give him a good old fashion, and well deserved punch in the
nose. You know, like someone deserves when they are antagonizing
someone.



Now that is childish.

I'm no lawyer, but isn't conveying a threat on line a federal felony?

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired


Go for it;

FBI Headquarters in Washington, D.C.
Call (202) 324-3000 or write to the following address:
Federal Bureau of Investigation
J. Edgar Hoover Building
935 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20535-0001


Just as a matter of curiosity does it make you feel like a man or
make what the other person said any less correct if you hit him? I'm not
saying the other guy was right or wrong in saying what he did, but
hitting him only proves you are unable to prove your point. As I said
before, it's childish and no different from any thug who shoots someone
for disrespecting him.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
  #18  
Old April 1st 09, 03:10 AM posted to rec.aviation.homebuilt,rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.owning,rec.aviation.rotorcraft
Dennis Fetters
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 108
Default Victimizing Aircraft Designers - An American Specialty? (wasFetters)

Dan wrote:

Just as a matter of curiosity does it make you feel like a man or make
what the other person said any less correct if you hit him? I'm not
saying the other guy was right or wrong in saying what he did, but
hitting him only proves you are unable to prove your point. As I said
before, it's childish and no different from any thug who shoots someone
for disrespecting him.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired


You know dan, it blows me away to see you acting like some righteous
person here. You got one of the biggest blow-hard mouths I've ever seen.
You have verbally victimized so many people here it can't be counted.

Go sell crazy somewhere else.

I've been punched in my nose before too, and deservedly so I might add.

Holy cow, you throwing rocks around?
  #19  
Old April 1st 09, 03:15 AM posted to rec.aviation.homebuilt,rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.owning,rec.aviation.rotorcraft
Dan[_12_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 451
Default Victimizing Aircraft Designers - An American Specialty? (wasFetters)

Dennis Fetters wrote:
Mike Ash wrote:

In article ,
Dennis Fetters wrote:


I didn't threaten him. I promised him that when I seen him I was
going to give him a good old fashion, and well deserved punch in the
nose. You know, like someone deserves when they are antagonizing
someone. But, I did it on the forum where everyone could see my
intentions, and not sneaking behind everyone with private emails. If
I believe in something I don't hide the fact that I do.



I have basically no interest in the subject matter covered in this
thread, but this paragraph makes absolutely no sense. Saying that you
will carry out a harmful action against someone, such as punching them
in the nose, is the very DEFINITION of a threat.


I'm just terrible to be the first and only one to ever do that, I know.

I'm sure the people I did punch in the nose felt I was terrible too, but
they did at least regret opening their big-mouth and apologized afterwards.


Beating an apology out of someone tends to invalidate the apology,
doesn't it?


People have to be held responsible for their actions when they slam
someone over the internet, and if you cause trouble with someone, don't
be surprised when someday that trouble is repaid, sometimes painfully.


Yes, people have to be held responsible for their actions. It's a
shame no one has held you responsible for yours and had you arrested for
battery. Perhaps you only like to beat on those who won't fight back. I
can only hope you wind up in jail or meet someone who will fight back.


I'm a brut, I know it, and I'm sorry. Children, even big ones, seem to
respect and remember the consequence of a good-old fashion whoop'en.


I'm not surprised you support child abuse. Maybe you will wind up in
a cell with a big man named Bubba who thinks you have a pretty mouth.

Fetters, I have take no side with you or against you over your
company's failure or your product. Your debate methods tend to convince
me you don't have the courage of your convictions sufficient to debate
point to point. I have seen you resort to verbal abuse and you admit to
physical abuse. These aren't the behaviours of a mature adult.

You seem to have made a lot of enemies. Your product may have been
the best ever produced, but the reason for your failures and enemies
will be easy to see next time you look in a mirror.

If I have offended you feel free to come punch me in the nose. All
you will have accomplished is to have assaulted a 100% disabled vet who
has no problem at all with pressing charges. There are men in the county
jail here who will be happy to see you.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
  #20  
Old April 1st 09, 03:17 AM posted to rec.aviation.homebuilt,rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.owning,rec.aviation.rotorcraft
Dan[_12_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 451
Default Victimizing Aircraft Designers - An American Specialty? (wasFetters)

Dennis Fetters wrote:

snip

You have verbally victimized so many people here it can't be counted.


You lie.

I've been punched in my nose before too, and deservedly so I might add.


Didn't solve anything, did it?

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

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

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Victimizing Aircraft Designers - An American Specialty? (wasFetters) Dennis Fetters Piloting 59 April 3rd 09 11:08 PM
Victimizing Aircraft Designers - An American Specialty? (wasFetters) Dennis Fetters Owning 59 April 3rd 09 11:08 PM
Specialty Tape Question Doug Hoffman Soaring 4 March 18th 07 04:03 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:15 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2020 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.