Many enthusiasts like to change the sound files that come with ProSim-TS 737 aircraft. In my simulator I use an assortment of sounds including those from ProSim, PMDG, the immersion CFM engine sound pack, and audio recordings that have been made from the real aircraft.
Read More
The Main Instrument Panel (MIP), unless a special order is made, usually will not include a chronograph. Depending upon the MIP manufacturer, the MIP may have a cut out for the chronograph, a facsimile of a chronograph or just a bezel.
LEFT: OEM chronograph used by America Airlines. Although nothing beats an OEM item, in this case conversion is difficult; therefore; a reproduction chronograph was more cost effective. Image courtesy of Micks737.
The Next Generation aircraft mostly use digital chronographs. The classic series airframes usually use (unless retrofitted) mechanical chronographs.
After Market Chronograph
There are several after-market chronographs that can be purchased. SISMO Solicones produce a mechanical type that replicates the real world counterpart quite well, despite the awful orange-coloured backlighting. Flight Illusion produces a quality instrument as does Flight Deck Solutions (FDS). FDS replicate the digital chronograph.
Chronographs are manufactured by several companies and not every chronograph looks identical, although their functionality is. There are a few different styles available to an airline. The main difference is in the number and shape of the buttons; round or rectangular.
No matter which type you decide, be prepared to shell out 250 plus Euro per chronograph; for an item rarely used it's quite a financial outlay.
Converting OEM Chronograph
Converting an OEM B737 mechanical chronometer is a valid option and the process of conversion is relatively straightforward. However, finding a mechanical chronograph in operational order is difficult, as airlines frequently keep chronographs in service for as long as possible. Converting a digital chronograph is also an option, however, the initial price of the item and then conversion make this an expensive exercise. Add to this the fact that converting the chronograph, due to its internal digital electronics is very difficult (even if you use ARINC 429 protocol).
Another option is to use the virtual chronometer (Sim Avionics and ProSim737) and fabricate a reproduction bezel that overlays a small LCD screen.
ProSim737 Virtual Chronograph
Screen capture of ProSim737 chronograph. ProSim737 have a Chronograph that can be used for the Captain and First Officer side of the MIP. There are seevral version of the display that can be used
ProSim737 as part of their avionics suite have available a virtual chronometer.
The display used by ProSim737 is very crisp, the size is accurate (1:1 ratio), and the software allows complete functionality of the chronograph.
To use the virtual version a small computer screen is needed on which is displayed the virtual chronograph.
Chronograph
A friend of mine indicated that he wanted to make a chronograph for the simulator and use the virtual ProSim737 display. He also wanted to incorporate the four setting buttons and have them fully functional.
The components needed to complete the project are:
A small TFT LCD screen (purchased from e-bay);
A standard Pokey interface card;
Several LEDS; and,
Four small tactile switches and electrical wire.
I currently use an Main Instrument Panel (MIP) fabricated by Flight deck Solutions (FDS). Therefore, the chronograph bezel used in this project was that supplied by FDS.
The screen used was 5.0" TFT LCD Module with a Dual AV / VGA Board 800x480 with a 40 Pin LED Backlight.
The screen was small enough that it just covered the circular hole of the cut out in the FDS MIP. The TFT LCD screen uses a standard VGA connector cable, 12 Volt power supply and a USB cable to connect the POKEY card to the computer.
The holes in the box provide ventilation for the Pokeys card. The only portion of the box that is visible from the front of the MIP is the bezel and four buttons
Two-part Fabrication
FDS supply with their MIP a bezel with four solid plastic but non-functional buttons. The bezel does not support direct backlighting, nor does it have enough space for tactile switches or wiring.
Therefore, the FDS bezel must be modified to accommodate the wiring for the switches and LED illuminated backlighting. The easiest way to approach this modification is to use a Dremel rotary tool with a 9902 Tungsten Carbide Cutter.
Place the bezel on a hard surface using a towel to avoid scratching and damaging the bezel. Then, with 'surgical' accuracy and steady hands carve out several channels (groves) at the rear of the bezel. The channels enable placement of the miniature tactile switches, small LEDS and wiring.
Space is at a premium, and to gain addition real estate, the LEDS were shaved to remove excess material. This enabled the LEDS to fit into the excavated groove on the bezel. Be very careful when using the carbide cutter to not punch out onto the other side of the bezel.
The four solid plastic front buttons on the bezel are carefully removed and small tactile switches attached (glued) to the rear of each of the buttons. 26/28 AWG wire is used to connect the tactile switches (using common ground leads) to a PoKeys interface card.
The box is not seen as it's attached to the rear of the MIP. My friend's humour - several warning signs suggesting that I not tamper with his creation :)
Box Fabrication
A small box needs to be fabricated to house the Pokey card. The size of the box is controlled by the size of interface card used and the length and width of the LCD screen.
A box is not required, however, it's a good idea as it illuminates the need to seal the LCD screen to illuminate dust ingress between the screen and overlying glass in the bezel.
The material used to fabricate the box is plastic signage card (corflute); real estate agencies often use this type of sign. The main advantage of this material is that it’s not difficult to find, is light in weight, and it's easy to cut, bend, and glue together with a glue gun.
After the Pokey card is installed to the inside of the box, and the LCD screen attached to the front edge, the bezel needs to be secured to the front of the LCD screen. The best method to attach the screen and bezel is to use either glue or tape.
A hole will need to be made in the rear of the box to enable the fitment of the USB and VGA connectors. Small holes punched into the side of the container ensure the LCD screen and PoKeys card do not overheat. If you're concerned about heat buildup, a small computer style fan can easily be added to the box, but this does add complexity and is not necessary. To conform to standard colours, the box is painted in Boeing grey.
LED Backlighting
Careful examination of the backlighting will show that the light coverage is not quite 100%. There are two reasons as for this.
(i) There is limited space behind the bezel to accommodate the wiring and the LEDS; and,
(ii) The material that FDS has used to construct the bezel is opaque. The only way to alleviate this is to replace the stock bezel with another made from a transparent material.
Important Point:
If you want to try and replicate the digital OEM chronograph as closely as possible, that the OEM version does not use backlighting. Illumination of the front of the chronograph is by the MIP lighting.
Potential Problem
Depending on the MIP being used, there maybe space constraints that do not allow a 5 inch screen to be easily positioned. If you're forced to use a smaller screen, the outcome will be that you may see the screen edges within the bezel. For the most part this is not an issue, if you ensure the desktop display is set to black. Remember, you are looking at the chronograph from a set distance (from the pilot seat) and not close up.
ProSim737 Virtual Chronograph (position and set-up)
This task is straightforward and follows the same method used to install and position the PFD, ND and EICAS displays.
Open ProSim737’s avionics suite and select the virtual chronograph from the static gauges: resize and position the display to ensure the chronograph conforms to the size of the bezel. To configure the buttons on the bezel, so that ProSim737 recognizes them with the correct function, open the ProSim737 configuration screen and configure the appropriate buttons from the switches menu (config/switches).
The four functions the buttons are responsible for are:
(i) Chronograph start;
(ii) Set time and date;
(iii) Expired Time (ET) and Reset; and,
(iv) +- selection
NOTE: The above functions differ slightly between the panel and the virtual chronograph in use.
Chronograph Operation and Additional Configuration
Captain-side CLOCK start button. Connection between the clock button and the CHR button is made in the assignments page in ProSim737 (FDS MIP)
The chronograph can be initiated (started) by either depressing the CHR button on the top left of the clock, or by depressing the CLOCK button located on the glarewing of the MIP.
Configuration
Connecting the CLOCK button to the chronograph start (CHR) function is straightforward.
Connect the two wires from the Captain-side clock button to the appropriate interface card and configure in the switches tab of ProSim737 (config/switches/CAPT CHR).
The same should be done with the First Officer side CLOCK button and chronograph, however, ensure you select the FO CHR function in switches to be done for the First Officer side chronometer if fitted.
If configured correctly, one press of the CLOCK button will start the chronograph, a second press will stop the chronograph, and a third press will reset the chronometer to zero.
After Market Chronograph
For those wanting to use an after market chronograph, SimWorld in Poland and Flight deck Solutions (FDS) in Canada produce high quality chronographs that can be dropped into the MIP with minimal required fabrication.
Video
A short video (filmed at night) showing the new chronograph running the virtual ProSim737 software. Note that the chronograph displas is slightly smaller in the video to what it should be. Adjusting the size of the display is done within the ProSim737 software.
Update
on 2020-06-18 03:27 by FLAPS 2 APPROACH
Another flight deck builder has also constructed a chronograph using similar methods. His chronograph uses a different design that does not use a box.
Update
on 2020-05-23 01:00 by FLAPS 2 APPROACH
In August 2019 this chronometer will be replaced. The replacement will use a similar design, however, will not be encapsulated in a box that fits behind the MIP. The new design will incorporate a å larger 5" TFT LCD screen that will enable more screen real estate for the chronograph. The screen will be mounted directly to the rear of the MIP and the interface card will be adhered to the rear of the screen.
The reason for changing the design is two-fold:
The box is quite large, and the weight (although light weight) is heavy enough to cause the bezel to pull away from the MIP; and,
Accessing the interface card is difficult (as it's inside the box).
An article explaining the process will form a new article. The new chronograph very closely follows the design used by FlightDeck737.BE
After flight testing several aircraft models, I decided to use the B738 (FS9 version) produced by Precision Manuals Development Group (PMDG). This flight model, once the PMDG flight logic is removed, functioned exceptionally well and is very stable.
One of the potential problems when using a flight model produced by another company is compatibility and functionality with your chosen avionics software suite. Minor problems are often solved by tweaking the aircraft.cfg file; however, tweaks are just that, and often issues will occur which cannot be identified and rectified. In my experience, tweaking the .cfg file may solve your initial problem, but may cause additional errors elsewhere.
Different Aircraft Models – Different Solutions
To ensure various aircraft models operate with their software, Sim Avionics provide users with specific aircraft.cfg files that correspond to the particular flight model they are using. These files are optimally tweaked to the Sim Avionics software.
ProSim737 has handled the problem of aircraft model variances slightly differently. Rather than provide a tweaked aircraft.cfg file to allow you to use whatever flight model you wished, they took a holistic approach and produced a complete aircraft dedicated ONLY to their avionics software suite.
Creating an aircraft model that is designed to only operate with their software has many advantages. First and foremost is trouble-shooting. Everyone is using the same software, meaning that if a problem does present itself, finding a solution is usually easier. Chasing ghosts rarely occurs as the same company that produced the avionics suite produced the aircraft flight model.
At this stage, you may think that ProSim737 only works with their dedicated aircraft. This is incorrect; ProSim737’s avionics suite will work with numerous aircraft models including the default FSX 737 and the PMDG FS9 737, however, if you want to achieve harmonious inter-connectivity with the avionics software, then using the dedicated flight model is highly recommended.
Hello JetStream 738
The JetStream aircraft is more a flight model than an actual virtual aircraft. Don’t expect to see “wow” factor visuals with this model. Instead, expect to experience “wow” factor flight dynamics that work in perfect unison with the flight avionics software.
Virtual pilots using a fully developed simulator often do not need what is offered in many aircraft models: virtual flight decks, pop-up gauges and GPS consoles are not necessary. As such, the JetStream doesn’t provide these additives. You will, however, see the default FSX panel layout of the B737. This can easily be permanently removed by either editing the panel.cfg file or removing the panel images.
Installation
The JetStream software comes with an .exe installer. Installing is as easy as following the prompts. When installed, a JetStream 738 folder will be found in the simobjects/aircraft folder.
JetStream Textures
The Jetstream uses the default texture pack belonging to the B737-800 FSX aircraft; therefore, the outside views mimic the same texture details seen on the default FSX model.
I think the outside textures (especially with a repainted airline livery) are just as good as many payware add-on aircraft textures. Certainly, PMDG NGX textures surpass the JetStream textures, but you must remember that the aircraft has NOT been designed as a pretty aircraft to look at, but a flight model to replicate defined flight dynamics. Think of it as flying ones and zeros.
Video Makers & Virtual Airlines
Video-makers or those who wish to mimic a particular airline can easily re-texture the aircraft skin to reflect a specific colour scheme or airline livery. Search through the ProSim737 forum and you will find several dozen repaints. Installing additional textures is identical to the method used in FSX.
If you search this website you will find mention of the 164 liveries pack. This pack provides many liveries and re-textures.
Outside Views & Animation
Many individuals concern themselves with the outside view of an aircraft. Whilst it’s enjoyable to inspect the aircraft from the outside, the quality of the external visuals has absolutely nothing to do with the way the flight model behaves.
This said, the movement of essential equipment can be observed: the rudder, flaps, ailerons, spoilers and landing gear. Landing and other outside lights are also replicated including a functional taxi light which is bright enough to “read by”. The outside view is far from sterile.
Taxi Light – Too Bright & Intense
One downside to the external view is the actual positioning the taxi light.
Historically, Micro$oft have never animated the taxi light correctly. ProSim737 have created their version of a taxi light, which is more a ball of light than a taxi light.
The taxi light is bright – very bright. On lift off, the fall of the light beam covers the lower portion of the front screen view. This obviously does not occur in a real aircraft. Although I have not altered the files, I have been informed that this cosmetic issue can be rectified with a small tweak to the aircraft.cfg file.
I would have liked ProSim737 to have developed the external lights from scratch with a dedicated taxi light with no fall off on the lower portion of the computer monitor. Good external lights are essential if you fly predominately at night.
Flight Dynamics – flying Ones & Zeros
This is why the JetStream was developed – as a platform to replicate complicated flight dynamics to realistically mimic the movement and handling of a real jet aircraft. This is where the wow factor begins and is where the JetStream leaves it’s contemporaries behind.
I am very impressed with the flight dynamics. During several hours flight testing, the model was exceptionally stable, handled as you would expect, and interfaced with the ProSim737 logic flawlessly.
Fine-Tuning & Stability Testing
ProSim737 has been designed to be operate with MCPs (Main Control Panel) manufactured by several companies. I have been informed that, depending on the MCP type, problems can be experienced with the sensitivity of the auto pilot. To alleviate this, ProSim737 allows the sensitivity of the MCP to be adjusted.
The JetStream manual suggests that a good method to determine possible over-control (i.e. oscillations) is to increase the simulation speed to 4x and observe if oscillations occur, and if the autopilot is able to hold either heading or altitude”.
I performed this stability test at x4 acceleration and noted very mild pivoting of the wings as the aircraft slewed along it defined navigation track. When I morphed back to normal speed, the aircraft was in the same direction, attitude and altitude that it was when I entered acceleration mode. Only at faster acceleration speeds (x16) did the aircraft loose position (which is to be expected).
Hardware Calibration
The JetStream requires careful and fastidious calibration of your yoke and rudder pedals to ensure solid performance.
Calibration isn’t as important if you use the auto pilot to do most of your flying, however, if you prefer to hand fly to and from FL10, correct calibration of your yoke and rudder is paramount.
It’s essential to take the time to calibrate your hardware correctly using the Windows and FSX calibration tool, using FSUIPC to fine tune the results.
Your hardware control settings play a huge role in how the plane behaves, so before blaming the flight model, please test it with different controls and settings.
The following is an excerpt from the JetStream read me file:
Most 738 models available represent a truly overpowered engine/dynamics ratio, The flight model tries to follow the real curve, don't expect it to reach high speed/AOA values as other flight models do, especially immediately after rotation.
As in FSX, nose-steering is nothing else but rudder, without FSUIPC's given steering routine and a hardware wheel, do not expect acceptable results on the ground.
The VC was deliberately removed from the model.
Trim related values do depend on hardware behaviour. This relates to whether hardware has been calibrated with or without FSUIPC.
Idle N1 value is OAT dependent. You will get 20.7 at 15C.
Set General Realism Slider to Maximum! It is vital for the model!
PMDG (FS9) and Default 738 Verses JetStream
I outlined in the opening paragraph that ProSim737 can be used with several other add on aircraft, including the default FSX 738. My limited testing proved that these aircraft fly well with ProSim737, however, nuisances do occur and tweaking of the aircraft .cfg file is needed to solve niggling problems with often undesirable outcomes..
The JetStream was designed from the bottom up to be the flight model for ProSim737. Therefore, many of the nuisances observed when using other flight models do not exist.
As an example, the FS9 version of the PMDG aircraft at Vr, with the yoke pulled to aft position, exhibits a slight delay of a second or two before actually lifting off the runway. A positive rate is rarely achieved before V2 is called. This is completely different with the JetStream which is far more responsive. Pull back slightly on the yoke at Vr and the aircraft is airborne before reaching V2.
No matter what I did with the PMDG flight model, the only way to achieve rotation at Vr was to pull back on the yoke a few seconds before actually hearing the Vr call out.
This is but one example, illustrating why it’s solid sense to link a dedicated flight model to a specific avionics software suite to achieve harmonious integration.
FS Add Ons - Top Cat Compliant
Many virtual pilots use a popular add on flight tool called Top Cat.
Top Cat is used, amongst other things, to calculate weight, takeoff and landing performance. The JetStream is compatible with Top Cat and the JetStream manual explains how to incorporate this advanced FS add on.
JetStream User Manual
A detailed user manual is included which is well written and informative. It’s important to read this manual to ensure you get the most from the JetStream flight model.
Updates & Improvements
ProSim737 currently produces one aircraft and one avionics software suite. While some may find this lacking, I find it reassuring. Rather than become tired down to developing other aircraft and software, ProSim737 focus their attention on one aircraft – the B738. This translates to regular updates and improvements which can only benefit the end user.
Support
Support is provided either by a dedicated forum or via personal e-mail communication.
To date, all requests have been answered quickly and efficiently. If you need help, support is available. You are not left to feel as if you’re withering on a vine, waiting for assistance.
I try to be impartial and accurate when I make a review, however, if I have missed something or have made a mistake, feel free to make a comment.
This review is based solely on my experience with the JetStream and ProSim737. I have no affiliation with the company.
My Rating is 9/10
lot 737-600 (RHL Images from England, LOT B737, SP-LKF (3833448252), CC BY-SA 2.0)
Flight Testing - Hardware & Flight Models
Now comes the fun and not so fun part - field testing. Everything has been configured (throttle, MIP, yoke, etc) and requires flight testing to ensure correct operation. Reliability is related to repeatability; therefore, to ensure reliability you must replicate the outcome several times before you can state something is working correctly. This takes time and many takeoffs and landings.
As you can imagine, there are many systems that inter-finger to achieve the desired outcome, and all the systems, hardware, software and components must be correctly communicating between themselves to replicate flight. Often a small problem can develop from something as insignificant as a loose wire or a incompatible computer part. I've already had a few spanners thrown into the mix with faulty power packs, problematic USB cables and USB ports and a few user problems.
It's during this test period that I hope to iron out any niggle problems to ensure a robust and trouble-free system for the future.
Flight testing occurs whenever a new component is added, changed, or the avionics software is updated.
Word of Advice - Go Slow & Be Methodical
To determine the solution to any problem that may arise, it's important to know which hardware or software is causing the problem. When in the test phase, it's best to only have the basic software installed. When your happy with the result, add another piece of software and test. This is the best way to build a robust system. The temptation is to install everything and then field test, only to find an issue and not be able to work out what is causing the problem. Develop and build in stages, try to take your time, be methodical, take notes and replicate the results before moving on. It's a slow and often tedious process.
One benefit of going slow is that you will have the opportunity to learn your software and know what it can do and more importantly what it can't do.
Bugs
Often individuals will state a piece of software has bugs as it doesn't do what they believe it should be doing. Certainly some software is bug prone and should be avoided, however, for the most part high-end software and hardware more than often operates correctly and is trouble free.
A piece of software or hardware can only function within the specifications of the, motherboard and other software you have installed. It is not uncommon for one individual to state a bug whilst another has no issues what-so-ever. Before crying BUG, it's best to check, double check and then check again. Often the fault will be your computer set-up or your lack of knowledge to what the software can or cannot do with regard to the computer and computer components you are using.
Examining The Flight Models
Testing also includes evaluating the two flight models that interest me: the PMDG FS9 and default FSX 737. At the moment I prefer the former; probably because this is the aircraft model I've used since it was release. Each model has its differences and nuances.
I'll post a separate entry in the Journal outlining my thoughts on the two models in due course, although this is a personal preference.
Unfortunately, the CP Flight MCP PRO I purchased appears to be faulty and have been returned to Italy. Using the virtual Sim Avionics MCP achieves the same outcome, but it's a bit ungainly using a mouse and separate MCP screen. Hopefully a replacement MCP will arrive in a few weeks time which will flying easier and more enjoyable.
Testing Duration
To test anything properly requires at least a few weeks; as mentioned above repeatability must occur.
Eye Candy
The outside model, what the Americans call eye candy is not of great importance to me. Most of the time I like to fly IFR in inclement weather, so looking out the front or at the exterior is not that important; I spend most of my time reading instruments, manuals and looking at charts (yes I like paper charts although I do also have an electronic flight bag).
External Visuals
At the moment, during the initial flight testing stage I am using a rather small computer display; functional when building and testing, but not that exciting to fly with. Following construction, more suitable external visuals will be looked at.
Update
on 2013-06-17 23:00 by FLAPS 2 APPROACH
Time has been limited, however, I have completed several flights using the two flight models that interested me - the default B737 FSX and the PMDG (FS9 version) B737. Although both flight models depict the same aircraft, there is considerable variation in how each model behaves. Many of the differences are small and probably would not be noticed by a casual flier who has only experienced one flight model.
Easy to Nit Pick
It's easy to fall into the trap comparing flight models for entirety and nit-pick each to death without coming to a conclusion. Put simply, it's about compromise. Each model has its benefits and failings. After considerable time and effort, I've decided that the PMDG FS9 model is suitable to my style of flying (at the present time).
Main Differences - PMDG FS9 Model & Default FSX 737 Model Using ProSim737
The main differences that I have noted is that the default B737 model, in many respects, is VERY EASY to fly. Its responsive to flight inputs and generally speaking is not challenging when flying - even in a cross wing. Some of the methods in which instrumentation interact with the model is also slightly different. For instance, when flying in command mode (auto pilot on), the default B737 will not allow you any roll CWS using the yoke. You must depress the CWS button on the MCP to allow the aircraft to be rolled whilst the auto pilot is controlling the aircraft.
In contrast, the PMDG FS9 flight model is generally more difficult to fly and control. Landing in a cross wing requires far more concentration as does a normal take off and climb to altitude. Interestingly, the CWS issue mentioned above is not a problem with the PMDG model. If the aircraft is in autopilot mode with command activated and you wish to alter course, all you need do id move the yoke and CWS roll or pitch is activated whilst the auto pilot is maintained. This has obvious benefits.
A few other variables that I was not happy with when using the default model are;
Instability in pitch during a VNAV descent
Instability in pitch when using the speed brake
Overpowering of engines during take off and climb
Flaps extension and retraction appears to be very fast
CWS roll/pitch requires engagement of CWS button & disengagement of auto pilot
Poor outside visuals (aircraft in spot mode)
Many of the above issues can be easily rectified by editing the constraints in the Air File.
One of the benefits of the default model is it allows connection and configuration to any of the standard FSX controls (aircraft lighting, various buttons, etc). It's unfortunate that the same level of interaction is not possible when using the PMDG model (without further configuration & work around). As an example, the navigation and strobe lights cannot easily be connected to an outside switch using PMDG. This is because PMDG has configured their model outside the standard defaults of FSX.
I have no doubt that there are other nuisances that I've yet to discover.
Which Flight Model - PMDG FS9...
Personally I prefer the PMDG FS9 model as it delivers greater flight accuracy than the default model. For this reason I will most likely use the PMDG as a standard model. This said, once some tweaks are made to the default model's Air File to counter the above mentioned dot points, the model flies quite well with full button capability. However the CWS roll & pitch discrepancy, for me, places the PMDG FS9 model ahead of the default model.
Update
on 2012-06-20 03:30 by FLAPS 2 APPROACH
After spending the last few months on and off flight testing, I thought I'd share my final decision to which flight model the simulator will be using.
ProSim 737 and JetStream B738
I spent May and June field tested ProSim 737 as an alternative to Sim Avionics. ProSim737 can be used with a number of add on aircraft, however, they also produce a dedicated flight model to the their own software called the JetStream Advanced Flight Model B738.
I'm impressed with the JetStream and believe it to be the par of the PMDG FS9 model. Certainly, the external visuals do not match PMDG, but this is not the concept behind the JetStream. The concept ProSim wanted to deliver was an aircraft model that provided a top shelf flight model compatible with ProSim's flight avionics suite. As such, external visuals are as per the default FSX 737.
I'll be compiling and posting to the journal section an evaluation of the JetStream shortly.
The avionics suite chosen is ProSim737 and the flight model is the JetStream 738 (as at June 2012).
Flaps 2 Approach documents the construction of a Boeing 737-880 flight simulator using OEM aircraft parts.
Hosting and paying server costs is expensive. Please consider helping to pay these costs if you find the website helpful to you. This site does not have advertising. Thank you
© Copyright 2011 - 2024. Flaps 2 Approach. All Rights Reserved
