Key.Aero Network
Register Free

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 79

Thread: SWAMP GHOST SIEZED

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Victoria Australia
    Posts
    1,764

    SWAMP GHOST SIEZED

    B17 Swamp Ghost has been siezed by the PNG Government who now intend to legally investigate and pursue other recent recoveries


    http://www.thenational.com.pg/091406/nation3.htm

    PAC: Seize Swamp Ghost

    By JULIA DAIA BORE

    THE parliamentary Public Accounts Committee (PAC) yesterday told the National Museum and Art Gallery management that it had “no power” to sell the World War II aircraft – the B-17 E Flying Fortress dubbed the Swamp Ghost, or any war surplus materials to overseas buyers.
    The PAC said the war relics remained the rightful property of the PNG Government and its people; and that it could only be sold following normal Public Finance (Management) Act and/or by the financial instructions promulgated thereon.
    In saying this, the PAC yesterday ordered that the Swamp Ghost be immediately seized by the State and protected and preserved until a decision can be made as to its future.
    “The State (of PNG) still owns the Swamp Ghost and no effective contract of sale, salvage, removal or export has been formed nor could the museum do so,” PAC acting chairman Malcolm Smith-Kela said.
    “The museum cannot enter into contracts to bind the State. The museum is a corporation in its own right; but it is not an agent or representative of the State, particularly in respect to the sale, salvage, removal or export of State-owned property,” he said.
    He said any purported contract between foreign buyers, the Military Aircraft Restoration Corporation (MARC) and the PNG National Museum and Art Gallery to remove the Swamp Ghost aircraft “was illegal, unenforceable and invalid”.
    He told acting museum director Simon Puraituk that “as custodian of WWII aircraft, war surpluses and our artefacts, I’m dismayed that you have dealt in them in such a shabby way”.
    “The museum is looking after all these heritages, and what we are seeing right now is that the war relics and indigenous artefacts are being disposed of in a most dubious manner.
    “The committee has very carefully considered a large number of documents placed before it in relation to the dealing and export of the Swamp Ghost.
    “The committee is of the view that there has been a concerted attempt to illegally obtain State property by virtually any representation, promise or undertaking.”

    http://www.postcourier.com.pg/20060914/thhome.htm

    News
    Thursday 14th September , 2006


    Swamp Ghost sale halted

    THE Public Accounts Committee has disallowed the contract for the sale, salvage or export of the controversial Swamp Ghost aircraft. The PAC yesterday, in its interim findings, emphasised the Swamp Ghost is still the property of the State of Papua New Guinea and the National Museum and Arts Gallery is not an agent or a representative of the state to sell, salvage, remove or export state-owned property as the museum has no power to sell the Swamp Ghost or War Surplus material. The committee found the actions of the museum in selling the Swamp ghost as unlawful. The committee identified about 82 other aircraft or aircraft parts that have been exported from PNG. A large number of aircraft have been traced to private hands, museums and collectors and the committee found there has been an ongoing international trade in war surplus material illegally obtained and exported from PNG. The committee intends to refer transactions and salvagers and their agents or vendors who sell materials on the open market to the Royal Papua New Guinea Police Force, Foreign Police Forces and International Law Enforcement Agencies Some of those materials have been sold on the open market by salvagers The committee also found there were four major salvages that had been operating in the country with the assistance of the National Museum, although the museum had no power at all to action or permit salvage, removal or export of war surplus materials pursuant to the War Surplus Materials Act. The committee added that there were two and possibly three salvors operating in the country that have engaged in unlawful conduct while dealing with state property or selling it for their own profit.

    Regards

    Mark Pilkington
    "Never has a Country so Big!, owed so Much!, to those who Flew!"

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Posts
    605

    Ownership Issues

    This is an interesting legal point, perhaps, in respect of "ownership" or title. The PNG Govt claims the aeroplane belongs to them, but if our MoD here are to be believed then US aircraft wrecks still belong to the US Govt and, in respect of US aircraft in the UK, for example, they, the MoD, act as agents for the US Govt. Have the US Govt formally abandoned title of Swamp Ghost to the PNG Govt, I wonder, or are our own MoD here telling us porky-pies about legal title to these wrecks? Andy Saunders

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    111
    Whether or not the remains of American aircraft which crashed in the UK are still US property is something of a mute point as the Protection of Military Remains Act covers all military aircraft crash sites,irrespective of nationality or who actually owns the crash site or the wreckage.

    If the USAF have indeed abandoned ownership of aircraft which crashed during WW2 legally ownership would then go to the owner of the land on which the crash occured as he is in possession of the wreckage,however the site would still be protected under the PoMRA and if anyone(including the landowner) "tampered with,damaged,moved,removed or unearthed" any part of the aircraft he would be guilty of an offence under the act.

    In regard to "Swamp Ghost" I am not familiar with the legal system on PNG but it would appear that their "War Surplus Materials Act" is similiar to the PoMRA here.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Angels one-five over North Bucks.
    Posts
    10,421
    Will it be home for Christmas?

    Mark

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Grantown on Spey
    Posts
    2,263
    What a load of red tape drivel. There is no way that PNG gave a toss about its wartime wrecks when they were stuck in the jungle. And I reckon that they have zero chance of getting any money for already recovered items.
    As for the UK POMRA its an often ignored piece of legislation, landowners have gone by the old adage that its finders keepers when items are on their land especially farmers.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Southend-on-Sea, Essex
    Posts
    1,001
    This is a bit like the saga of the Richard Montgonery, its a US Flaged ship that sunk in UK teritorial waters still laiden with munitions,

    should she blow who do the people of Sheppy, North Kent, and Southend turn to,

    The UK will not have to pay Non-UK flagged ship

    The US can claim Sovereign Rights and will not have to pay.
    Pass the remote

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    556
    So surprise that PNG is pulling this crap, was always on the cards really

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    East Anglia, U.K.
    Posts
    329

    God Bless the 'Richard Montgomery'

    Quote Originally Posted by Old Fart
    This is a bit like the saga of the Richard Montgonery, its a US Flaged ship that sunk in UK teritorial waters still laiden with munitions,

    should she blow who do the people of Sheppy, North Kent, and Southend turn to,
    The UK will not have to pay Non-UK flagged ship

    The US can claim Sovereign Rights and will not have to pay.
    I was thinking (hoping !) that, North Kent aside, folks on the above wouldn't need to worry themselves too much about "who to turn to ?" - they'll be too busy being 'Kebabed or Atomised'

    Just think, no more Isle of ****ty, Shoeburyness back in business as usual (the M.o.D Range) hopefully unearthing as yet, unfound T.S.R.2 components.

    But best of all, no more Sarfend & resident/Indiginous Chav's & their Vauxhall Nova's - they'll all be mere fragments, Hallelujah.

    Then I can go back & visit the Kursaal Dome, a year later in eerie silence, reminding me of that Dome shaped 'thingy' that's always featured on the Hiroshima aftermath footage....... NICE :diablo: .

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    418
    hows this going to effect aircraft that are allready out of the country? as the way i read this the png government has identified a large amount of aircraft(82 i think) that have been recoverd by their words illegely ,could this meen that they intend to try and recover these relics which could include some planes that are allready flying ?
    the one's that come to mind include the p40 little jeanie and the tfc p39.
    paul
    Last edited by oz rb fan; 15th September 2006 at 00:30.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Where you wish you were.
    Posts
    8,936
    No huge surprise.
    I wonder if they really want to keep it or if it's a ploy to get some extra money out of the deal.

    If they are sincere, hopefully they'll take care of her. At least she's out of the swamp.
    There are two sides to every story. The truth is usually somewhere between the two.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    On the beach
    Posts
    2,318
    Will it be home for Christmas?
    Realy it should be asked.."Will it be at legends"...As far as I understand it.Swamp Ghost will "go back" to PNG after it has been restored.Same as another warbird which is languishing in a quiet corner in a hangar at Amberly collecting dust ..waiting till the PNG officials get off their fat heinies and build a proper museum for it.Where do they get off ..They say it crashes there, it is theirs now.Fer christs sake do something about recovering the wrecks and protect them!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!If they don,t ,then why stop someone else from doing the right thing by them,restore them,give them back to you for future generations to enjoy and get the tourists to pay to see them.Talk about being blind to the future....."shakes head,kicking loose stones,muttering to the stupidity of it all".........
    "If the C.O. ask's you to be Tail End Charlie...just shoot him!!!....A Piece of Cake.
    http://spitfirea58-27.blogspot.com.au/

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Stamford Lincs
    Posts
    9,598
    Ofcourse the scrap merchants from Australia and other countries who almost
    stripped PNG bare of wrecks in the 1950's and 60's are the exception to your rule! I find it amazing that the PNG people are slated for doing nothing with these aircraft because of their location but the U.S and other countries including Britain melted anything they could get their hands on!

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Blenheim , New Zealand
    Posts
    709
    I think the difference is, they don't do it today!..comparing scrap drives of the 50s and 60s when such aircraft were still 'relatively common', is totally out of context.

    Dave

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Stamford Lincs
    Posts
    9,598
    Why is it out of context??? The American's scrapped large numbers of P-61's -indeed a Reporter crashed in the late 1960's on a firebombing flight in the U.S. However the example in Irian Java had been left alone on Mt Cyclops so it was fair to have it ? So because the people of PNG have left their wrecks alone they are fair game? I don't think it's a matter of when the aircraft were 'common' - I think it's a matter of that they are now worth more now as warbirds than the effort to recover them and scrap them in the 50's and 60's.
    Last edited by David Burke; 15th September 2006 at 11:14.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Southend-on-Sea, Essex
    Posts
    1,001
    Quote Originally Posted by Hornchurch
    I was thinking (hoping !) that, North Kent aside, folks on the above wouldn't need to worry themselves too much about "who to turn to ?" - they'll be too busy being 'Kebabed or Atomised'

    Just think, no more Isle of ****ty, Shoeburyness back in business as usual (the M.o.D Range) hopefully unearthing as yet, unfound T.S.R.2 components.

    But best of all, no more Sarfend & resident/Indiginous Chav's & their Vauxhall Nova's - they'll all be mere fragments, Hallelujah.

    Then I can go back & visit the Kursaal Dome, a year later in eerie silence, reminding me of that Dome shaped 'thingy' that's always featured on the Hiroshima aftermath footage....... NICE :diablo: .
    Southend WOULD survive thank god, no windows would the sea front would be flooded but the water level would drop, Thames Forts would probably be lost along with the pier (at least any fire would be put out) but best of all

    No more Canvey


    PS: Chav Capital is Basildon, Colchester or Chumpsford...
    Pass the remote

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Blenheim , New Zealand
    Posts
    709
    [QUOTE=David Burke] So because the people of PNG have left their wrecks alone they are fair game? I don't think it's a matter of when the aircraft were 'common' QUOTE]

    Because they aren't leaving them alone ,wrecks are currently being cut up for scrap, with the knowledge of the Govt. who have little motivation to stop it. ironically, a lot of the scrap metal is ending up being shipped to Oz for smelting.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    1,442

    crashed US machines in UK

    As far as I remember crashed US wrecks in the UK are still legally owned by the US but our UK MOD act as agents on behalf of the US as they would on our own wrecks.

    This is why whether it is US or UK owned if a dig takes place you have to provide details of what was excavated and removed, just in case the RAF or USAF want to retrieve the parts for themselves as a historical artifact or as spares should they be in good enough condition to renovate for use.

    Obiviously they need to consult the recovery team but they retain the right to the parts until the are written off the air forces books.

    this is what I read the rules as but if anyone knows better.
    Regards Merlin

    www.acia.co.uk

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    On your six
    Posts
    1,924
    There does seem to be a contradiction in terms here, where the people of PNG and their govt don't actually want these wrecks, and when they do its just for the scrap; but when someone from outside the country expresses an interest, they think to themselves "he wants it more than us ,so its worth more to him , therefore we need to see just how much we can get out of the interested party, for something that we place such a low value on".

    A bit like a farmer in this country, with an old Fordson major laying in a hedge, totally derelict; it isn't even worth the effort of pulling it out the hedge to scrap it, and yet when a tractor boy turns up with badges in his cloth cap, the farmer thinks "how much is this worth now?" and invariably asks way to much for it ,so it stays where it is.

    In my view its greed, on the part of the farmer, and the PNG govt.
    Why be your own worse critic, that's what the forum is for.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Stamford Lincs
    Posts
    9,598
    Difficult to quatify greed - The RAFM Beaufort for example wouldn't be here if it weren't effectively for the PNG people leaving it alone! It could be argued if the aircraft are being scrapped to satisfy Australian smelters maybe the Australian government should ban imports from PNG of aluminium if they feel strongly about it.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    In the Lucky Country
    Posts
    8,442
    I don't think any of the governments in consideration are exactly working to the agenda of either the preservationists, purchasers or locals - I know the Australian government's attitude to aviation in Australia's pretty ropey, and we've all noted the remarks on here about the UK government's variable attitude to vintage aviation in the UK - Likewise I'm sure in PNG, plus even less interest in acting for the locals whose land the aircraft was on. I can't see the American's getting much support from their government either. No votes any which way outside PNG; and in PNG it's all about the politicians and the smart guys. I'm sure there are some who are crusading for a good reason, but the locals won't get anything out of it.

    Sadly now it's purely political, so a (sadly safe) prediction is that there's going to be some rich lawyers, a LOT of money that could have been spent on the Swamp Ghost's locals won't be, and another large chunk of cash won't go towards vintage aviation (either Swamp Ghost itself, other a/c or a PNG museum or a US or Australian etc. display) but to people after the main chance.

    Another waste. And I'm afraid the aircraft was either better off out and off to the USA, or where it was. I believe it's on the dock, which is the worst place.

    Rotten show.
    James K

    Looking and thinking...
    Vintage Aero Writer: Blog & Details

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    South Coast UK
    Posts
    345
    Reading these comments we yet again sadly see the multi headed watsit of commercial greed at work, while it was a wreck known only to those interested enough to look as a grid reference it had no other value than historical, the thing was and currently is scrap value only but in the hands of those willing to invest considerable time and money could become something the world can enjoy for many years to come, as it stands all that will outcome this legal bun fight will be richer laywers and poorer history.
    Perfection is a lot of little things done well.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    canada
    Posts
    12,409
    Sad news hopefully something will come out of this that will benefit such a historical airplane. Makes one wonder if she would have been better left in the swamp!
    Cheers,Peter
    "Merlins always drip oil, when they don't....worry!"

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    On the beach
    Posts
    2,318
    Yes a lot of stuff has been bought in as scrap.But a sh!tload has been saved by far thinking individuals like Langdon Badger and many other Aussies.Thing is there is still stuff being brought into the country for the express use of being used in restorations.Thing is the scrapping is done from the PNG side.No one here AFAIK is going to PNG looking for scrappable material.This stuff is found by the local villagers,bought by the scrappy over there and shipped here.By the time we hear anything of it it is too late.After all the guys involved with recovery of Swampy did for the PNG people and for their government to pull a fasty makes you cringe with disgust.
    "If the C.O. ask's you to be Tail End Charlie...just shoot him!!!....A Piece of Cake.
    http://spitfirea58-27.blogspot.com.au/

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Stamford Lincs
    Posts
    9,598
    Problem is that things like the valuation of her were slightly off track for example from WRG :The agent acting for Aero Archeology Robert Grienert, a collector of war relics with a museum in Sydney, Australia, was also summoned before the inquiry yesterday.

    Grienert said he was first hired by the museum to value the Swamp Ghost.
    He found that the plane had suffered heavy corrosion and “you can peel skins of the aircraft”, leaving it with a value of about K12,000.

    He said the company spent K20,000 on motor hire and local labour during the salvage operation.



    Putting that into context in July they valued her at K12,000 = £2,259 British Pounds! You cannot buy a good Lightning cockpit for that amount!

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Stamford Lincs
    Posts
    9,598
    Connection is relative terms - how many B-17's have you seen for sale at £2,259 recently? Undoubtedly it would be better off restored but it doesn't seem like the legal side was fully in order. The value of the aircraft is the documentary of her recovery - that is where the real money is.

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Angels one-five over North Bucks.
    Posts
    10,421
    Value.

    It depends who you are, where you are and what your aspirations for the B-17 are.

    To a scrap dealer it will be 'X', to a local PNG museum it will be 'Y'. What you can guarantee is that to a US party that wants to get it back in the air, their accountant will, if experienced in these fields, value it as a minus number, '-Z', because after all the money has been totted up and spent, the selling price of the aircraft when initially flying again is unlikely to exceed the factored spend over say five years at commercial labour rates.

    A dealer however could put a different value on it. Establish what the market selling price is for the recovered 'as is' airframe sitting on the docks at Galveston, Texas, clear of customs and all charges. Factor in a profit, factor in a risk element, add to these two figures all the spend to get it to Galveston and compare with the landed selling price...and there is the value.

    In this latter case I would estimate it at about £2,500 on the right side.

    Mark

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Stamford Lincs
    Posts
    9,598
    The aircraft is two documentaries . One of the recovery and subsequently one a couple of years down the road . Budget at something like an hour per programme .
    Send this round the various history channels and the rebuild cost starts to becomes an incidental !

    I would be interested to see what the reception would be to some PNG people turning up in the U.S to save the B-17 on top of the gas station that has been rotting for years!

  28. #28
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Victoria Australia
    Posts
    1,764
    http://pidp.eastwestcenter.org/pirep...r/09-14-19.htm

    RECOVERY OF U.S. WWII AIRCRAFT IN PNG QUESTIONED

    By Isaac Nicholas


    PORT MORESBY, Papua New Guinea (The National, Sept. 13) - An aircraft war wreck was salvaged and shipped out of the country, allegedly using forged documents engineered by the acting director of the National Museum and Art Gallery, Simon Poraituk.

    The wreck was believed to have been removed around July despite the National Museum Board of Trustee’s "black ban" on any dealings with salvaging company 75th Squadron Museum.

    [PIR editor’s note: According to PIR archives, The World War II bomber aircraft nicknamed the "Swamp Ghost" was to be sent to the United States to be reconstructed and restored to its original form. Under an agreement reached in June, the aircraft was to be returned "when Papua New Guinea finally has the capacity to house and care for all its war materials."]

    Board member Andrew Abel made the allegations during the Public Accounts Committee inquiry into the National Museum and Art Gallery yesterday.

    Mr. Abel said the board meeting on July 6 had banned all dealings with salvaging companies, including the 75th Squadron.

    He also alleged that a lot of board documents, including memorandum of agreements, have been going out without the board’s approval or knowledge.

    "Poraituk engineered a MOA and, after this was rectified by the board chairman, he concocted to fraudulent MOA," Abel claimed.

    He said with the fraud document in hand, the 75th Squadron Museum went to Wewak and salvaged an aircraft at St. John in Siring.

    He said this angered local landowners who signed a letter and sent it through to the National Museum Board of Trustees. He claimed that Poraituk and his management team had worked in isolation with the Board of Trustees.

    Abel said the management had sidelined himself, and two other board members Peter Loko and Maria Kopkop.

    The accusations brought the ire of Poraituk, who accused Mr. Abal and certain board members of collaborating to discredit him and his management.

    "Andrew Abel is working against my management."

    Poraituk also attacked the creation of sub-committees within the board, claiming it was illegal and should get a full 13-member board approval.

    Another museum officer Mark Katakum, curator of modern history, claimed that he was threatened and forced to sign documents.

    Mr. Katakum alleged that a consultant and agent of Aero Archeology Museum, Robert Greinert, had accused him of receiving bribes and forging an export permit for the 75th Squadron.

    Acting PAC chairman Dr. Bob Danaya said there was a "web of influence wielded by the 75th Squadron, Greinert and Fred Hagan.

    "War surplus is clearly a big business, and how these people were ever allowed to plunder State property is beyond comprehension. It’s a disgrace," Danaya said.

    It also emerged that the salvaging companies involved were operating illegally, and were not registered with the Investment Promotion Authority (IPA).

    IPA chief executive officer Ivan Pomaleu also gave evidence and confirmed that none of the companies involved in salvaging wartime wreckage have registered with the authority.

    September 14, 2006

    The National: www.thenational.com.pg/

    Copyright © 2004 The National Online. All Rights Reserved

    http://pidp.eastwestcenter.org/pirep...r/09-15-12.htm

    PNG STOPS SALE OF WWII ‘SWAMP GHOST’

    PORT MORESBY, Papua New Guinea (PNG Post Courier, September 14) – The Papua New Guinea Public Accounts Committee has disallowed the contract for the sale, salvage or export of the controversial Swamp Ghost aircraft.

    The Committee yesterday, in its interim findings, emphasized the Swamp Ghost is still the property of the State of Papua New Guinea and the National Museum and Arts Gallery is not an agent or a representative of the state to sell, salvage, remove or export state-owned property as the museum has no power to sell the Swamp Ghost or War Surplus material. The committee found the actions of the museum in selling the Swamp ghost as unlawful and identified about 82 other aircraft or aircraft parts that have been exported from PNG.

    A large number of aircraft have been traced to private hands, museums and collectors and the committee found there has been an ongoing international trade in war surplus material illegally obtained and exported from PNG. The committee intends to refer transactions and salvagers and their agents or vendors who sell materials on the open market to the Royal Papua New Guinea Police Force, Foreign Police Forces and International Law Enforcement Agencies.

    Some of those materials have been sold on the open market by salvagers The committee also found there were four major salvages that had been operating in the country with the assistance of the National Museum, although the museum had no power at all to action or permit salvage, removal or export of war surplus materials pursuant to the War Surplus Materials Act.

    The committee added that there were two and possibly three salvors operating in the country that have engaged in unlawful conduct while dealing with state property or selling it for their own profit.

    September 15, 2006

    PNG Post Courier Online: www.postcourier.com.pg/

    Copyright © 2006 The PNG Post Courier. All Rights Reserved
    "Never has a Country so Big!, owed so Much!, to those who Flew!"

  29. #29
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    On the beach
    Posts
    2,318
    Makes me sick in the stomach....All I got to say.
    "If the C.O. ask's you to be Tail End Charlie...just shoot him!!!....A Piece of Cake.
    http://spitfirea58-27.blogspot.com.au/

  30. #30
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    In the Lucky Country
    Posts
    8,442
    Quote Originally Posted by David Burke
    The aircraft is two documentaries . One of the recovery and subsequently one a couple of years down the road . Budget at something like an hour per programme .
    Send this round the various history channels and the rebuild cost starts to becomes an incidental !
    Go on! Has anyone, ever, covered the costs of a recovery or rebuild by a film of the same?

    Quote Originally Posted by David Burke
    I would be interested to see what the reception would be to some PNG people turning up in the U.S to save the B-17 on top of the gas station that has been rotting for years!
    It would be amusing.

    Ask the Canadians about American so-called 'Free Trade'.
    Last edited by JDK; 17th September 2006 at 12:28.
    James K

    Looking and thinking...
    Vintage Aero Writer: Blog & Details

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

- Part of the    Network -

KEY AERO AVIATION NEWS

MAGAZINES

AVIATION FORUM

SHOP

 

WEBSITES