So first I am going to tell some situations about secret aircraft
And then I am going to tell some stuff about some secret aircraft
1.STEALTH BLACK HAWK
Shortly after midnight on May 1, 2011 two unusual helicopters 25 U.S. Navy Seal'sdescended on Osam bin Laden's compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan.
The havily modified Sikorsky UH-60 Black Hawk helicopters were able to fly 200 km undetected from the afganistan border. And there were some nighborns reporting that they didn't hear the helicopters until they were directly overhead.
Their existence might have remained secret had one of the helicopters not crash landed on the wall of the compound U.S. forces destroyed the crashed BLACK HAWK with explosives but a portion of the tail section survived. Revealing top secret stealth modifications stemming form program that had supposedly beed discontuinued in 2005
2.Aurora
The name "Aurora" first appeared when it was inadvertently included in the 1985 U.S budget
as a $455 million allocation for "black aircraft production" in 1987.
Claims of its existence are based on observations that the U.S. has te technology needed to bould such a hypersonic craft and by sightings of black triangular aircraft accompanied by the donuts=on=a=rope contrail indicative of the pulse detonation engine it is thought to utilize.
Aurora is also linked to unusual sonic booms that were recorded at regular intervals by U.S geological survey sensors across Southern California wich were later analyzed by nasa experts and showed "something at 90,000 ft (27.4 km)" moving at "Mach 4 to Mach 5.2" .
With sightings starting in the 1980s and continuing today, the Aurora rumors may encompass multiple top secret aircraft including many that are yet to be revealed.
Those what you just read was only peoples theories based on what they've seen hear and read.
Now lets start with some real stuff.
TR-3 Black Manta
The TR-3A Black Manta is the name of a surveillance aircraft of the United States Air Force speculated to be developed under a so-called "black project." The only evidence for such an aircraft is based on speculations about several reported sightings of mysterious flying wing aircraft over Antelope Valley, an area of desert in southern California. This stretch of desert draws people interested in potential "black project"-related aircraft, because it is close to several known military research and testing areas, such as Edwards Air Force Base in California, and United States Air Force Plant 42.
Rumors
The TR-3A is claimed to be a subsonic stealth spy plane with a flying wing design. It was alleged to have been used in the Gulf War to provide laser designation for Lockheed F-117 Nighthawk bombers, for targeting to use with laser-guided bombs. The TR-3A is supposedly manufactured by Northrop Grumman.How the TR-3 designation came up in publications is unclear. It is clearly not a continuation of the R-for-Reconnaissance series, since ER-2 (NASA designation for U-2 aircraft modified for Earth science studies) stood for "Earth Resources", not "Electronic Reconnaissance". It is, therefore possible that TR-3 is merely a corruption of Tier III, a name given to a cancelled large reconnaissance unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) flying wing designed around the time of alleged sightings of the Black Manta, circa 1988–1990. The Tier III Minus program that resulted in the unsuccessful Lockheed Martin RQ-3 DarkStar was a scaled-down derivative of the original Tier III.
Potential candidates for TR-3
Because there is no evidence to support TR-3's existence, only sightings and "experience" stories by real people and also the web discussions on it, it is possible that the mysterious flying wing sightings associated with Black Manta could be a technology demonstrator for a potential new-generation tactical reconnaissance aircraft.[3] This contention is supported by United States Air Force (USAF) sources in the late 1980s confirming that the United States had no short-term plans to develop a low-observable U-2 successor.[4]Another candidate for the alleged spy plane is a design from Teledyne Ryan, patented in the United States on April 26, 1977, under number 4,019,699.[5] This aircraft of low observability, as it is called, was invented by Robert W. Wintersdorff and George R. Cota, employees at Teledyne Ryan, a firm specialized in building unmanned reconnaissance aircraft. On May 10, 1977, a design of an aircraft was patented by Teledyne Ryan under number Des. 244,265,[6] and closely resembles the earlier mentioned example. This design was made by Waldo Virgil Opfer. The first design is unmanned, the second one manned. Whether one of these designs is related to the above-mentioned TR-3A is not positively identified, but it is a coincidence that TR also stands for Teledyne Ryan. Teledyne Ryan was acquired by Northrop Grumman in 1999. The Teledyne Ryan designs also strongly resemble the unidentified flying objects photographed in Belgium in 1989–1990,[original research?] which were chased by the Belgian Air Force and seen by hundreds of people in what is called the Belgian UFO wave.
Lockheed Martin SR-72
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| SR-72 | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Lockheed Martin SR-72 rendering | |
| Role | Hypersonic strategic reconnaissance UAV |
| Manufacturer | Lockheed Martin |
| Status | Design proposal |
| Primary user | United States Air Force (intended) |
Design and development[edit]
The SR-72, the proposed successor to the SR-71 Blackbird retired in 1998,[2] is expected to fill what is considered a coverage gap between surveillance satellites, manned aircraft, and unmanned aerial vehicles for intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) and strike missions. With the growth of anti-satellite weapons, anti-access/area denial tactics, and counter-stealth technologies, a high-speed aircraft could penetrate protected airspace and observe or strike a target before enemies could detect or intercept it. The proposed reliance on extremely high speed to penetrate defended airspace is considered a significant conceptual departure from the emphasis on stealth in fifth-generation jet fighter programs and projected drone developments.[3] There were unconfirmed reports about the SR-72 dating back to 2007, when various sources disclosed that Lockheed Martin was developing a Mach 6 (4,567 mph; 7,350 km/h; 1 mi/s) plane for the United States Air Force.[4][5] Skunk Works' development work on the SR-72 was first published by Aviation Week & Space Technology on 1 November 2013.[1][2] Public attention to the news was large enough to overwhelm the Aviation Week servers.[6]To attain such speeds, Lockheed Martin has been collaborating with Aerojet Rocketdyne since 2006 on an appropriate engine. The company is developing the system from the scramjet-powered HTV-3X, which was canceled in 2008. The SR-72 is envisioned with an air-breathing hypersonic propulsion system that has the ability to accelerate from standstill to Mach 6.0 using the same engine, making it about twice as fast as the SR-71.[1] The challenge is to design an engine to encompass the flight regimes of subsonic, supersonic and hypersonic speeds. Using turbine compression, turbojet engines can work at zero speed and usually perform best up to Mach 2.2.[7] Ramjets, using aerodynamic compression with subsonic combustion, perform poorly under Mach 0.5 and are most efficient around Mach 3, being able to go up to around Mach 6. The SR-71's specially designed engines converted to low-speed ramjets by redirecting the airflow around the core and into the afterburner for speeds greater than Mach 2.5. Finally, scramjets with supersonic combustion cover the range of high supersonic to hypersonic speeds. The SR-72 is to use a turbine-based combined cycle (TBCC) system to use a turbine engine at low speeds and a scramjet engine at high speeds.[2] The turbine and ramjet engines share common inlet and nozzle, with different airflow paths in between.[8]
When flying at and above Mach 5, aerodynamic friction becomes hot enough to melt conventional metallic airframes, so engineers are looking at composites to make it out of including high-performance carbon, ceramic, and metal mixes, such as the types used for the noses of intercontinental ballistic missiles and space shuttles. Although the SR-72 is envisioned as an ISR and strike platform, no payloads have been specified, likely because current payloads will be insufficient on an aircraft flying at Mach 6 up to 80,000 ft (24,000 m) high requiring hundreds of miles to turn. New sensors and weapons will likely have to be created specifically to operate at such speeds.[9]
Construction of an optionally-piloted scaled demonstrator is planned to start in 2018. The demonstrator will be about 60 ft (18 m) long, about the size of an Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor, and powered by one full-scale engine to fly for several minutes at Mach 6.[1][2] Flights of the demonstrator are to be conducted starting in 2023. The SR-72 flight testing follows the planned timeline for the hypersonic High Speed Strike Weapon. The SR-72 is to be similar in size to the SR-71 at over 100 ft (30 m) long and have the same range, with entry into service by 2030. The SR-72 follows the US Air Force's hypersonic road map for developing a hypersonic strike weapon by 2020, and a penetrating ISR aircraft by 2030. At the time of the concept's unveiling, Lockheed Martin had engaged in talks with government officials, but has not secured funding for the demonstrator or engine.[1][2]
On 13 November 2013, Air Force Chief of Staff General Mark Welsh revealed that the service was interested in the SR-72's hypersonic capabilities, but had not spoken with Lockheed about the aircraft. Its high speed appeals to the service to reduce the time an adversary would have to react to an operation. They are pursuing hypersonic technology, but don't yet have the material ability to construct a full-size plane like the unmanned SR-72. The SR-72 was unveiled in the midst of sequestration budget cuts that have forced the Air Force to prioritize acquisition projects and sacrifice mission readiness. By the mid-2020s, it is believed that foreign countries will produce and export advanced aerial technologies that could end up in battlespaces against the United States. This drives the Air Force to further develop new systems, including hypersonic, to replace legacy systems that would be outclassed in those situations.[10]
The SR-72 may face significant challenges to being accepted by the Air Force, as they are opting to develop the Northrop Grumman RQ-180 stealth UAV to perform the task of conducting ISR missions in contested airspace. Compared to the SR-72, the RQ-180 is less complex to design and manufacture, less prone to problems with acquisition, and can enter service as soon as 2015.[11]
In December 2014 NASA awarded Lockheed Martin a contract to study the feasibility of building the SR-72's propulsion system using existing turbine engine technologies. The $892,292 contract funds a design study to determine the viability of a TBCC propulsion system by combining one of several current turbine engines, with a very low Mach ignition Dual Mode Ramjet (DMRJ). NASA previously funded a Lockheed Martin study that found speeds up to Mach 7 could be achieved with a dual-mode engine combining turbine and ramjet technologies. The problem with hypersonic propulsion has always been the gap between the highest speed capabilities of a turbojet, from around Mach 2.2 to the lowest speed of a ramjet at Mach 4. Typical turbine engines cannot achieve high enough speeds for a ramjet to take over and continue accelerating. The NASA-Lockheed study is looking at the possibility of a higher-speed turbine engine or a ramjet that can function in a turbine engine's slower flight envelope; the DARPA HTV-3X had demonstrated a low-speed ramjet that could operate below Mach 3. Existing turbofan engines powering jet fighters and other experimental designs are being considered for modification. If the study is successful, NASA will fund a demonstrator to test the DMRJ in a flight research vehicle.
Ayaks
The Ayaks (Russian: АЯКС, meaning also 'Ajax') is a hypersonic aircraft program started in the Soviet Union and currently under development in Russia[1] by the Saint Petersburg Institute for the Hypersonic Systems of Leninets Holding Company. The concept of the aircraft was developed by Vladimir Freishtadt (Владимир Львович Фрайштадт) in the late 1980s as a response to the American Aurora aircraft program.[2] The Ayaks was initially supposed to be produced in three variants:[2]
- As a platform for launching satellites into space;
- As a multi-purpose hypersonic military aircraft; and
- As a hypersonic transport aircraft.
History[edit]
In the early 1980s, Soviet scientists began to explore a new type of aircraft. The Ayaks was to be a new Soviet spaceplane capable of flying and conducting a wide range of missions in the mesosphere, for both military and civilian purposes. The original concept was inspired by Lockheed's Aurora hypersonic reconnaissance aircraft project, but later was expanded into the wider concept of hypersonic multi-purpose military and civilian jets, as well as a platform for launching satellites.The mesosphere is the layer of the Earth's atmosphere from 50 kilometres (160,000 ft) to 85 kilometres (279,000 ft) high, above the stratosphere and below the thermosphere. It is very difficult to fly in the mesosphere — the air is too rarefied for aircraft wings to generate lift, but sufficiently dense to cause aerodynamic drag on satellites. In addition, parts of the mesosphere fall inside the ionosphere, meaning the air is ionized due to solar radiation.
The ability to conduct military activities in the mesosphere gives a country some significant military potential. The aircraft might be planned to be used as a form of an asymmetrical response to SDI (U.S. President Ronald Reagan's Strategic Defense Initiative), since most of the planned anti-aircraft and anti-missile systems would not be effective in the mesosphere.[citation needed]
Novel "magneto-plasmo-chemical engine"
The Ayaks was projected to employ a novel engine that uses some form of MHD generator to collect and slow down highly ionized and rarefied air. The air is mixed with fuel into the mixture that burns in the combustor, while the electricity produced by the inlet's MHD generator is used in the magnetoplasmadynamic thruster to provide additional thrust[dubious ]. The plasma funnel developed over the air inlet from the magnetohydrodynamics forces greatly increases the ability of the engine to collect air, increasing the effective diameter of the air inlet up to hundreds of meters. Thus, it is theorized that the Ayaks' engine can use atmospheric oxygen, even at heights above 35 kilometres (115,000 ft).[2][dubious ]
The fuel feed system of the Ayaks engine is also novel. When the aircraft reaches hypersonic speed, it uses the heating energy from air friction to increase the heat capacity of the fuel ("reform" the fuel). The aircraft has double shielding between which water and ordinary, cheap kerosene circulates. The energy of surface heating is used to break up water into hydrogen and oxygen[dubious ]. Thus, the heating capacity of the fuel increases, and the surface of the aircraft cools down.[2]
The whole concept is named "Magneto-plasmo-chemical engine" (Магнитоплазмохимический двигатель).[2]
According to Paul A. Czysz,[1] there are six novel ideas in the concept of the Ayaks's engine:
- Energy bypass via coupled MHD generator/accelerator: a portion of the free kinetic energy of air bypasses the combustion chamber, thus reducing entropy rise in the combustion chamber;
- Reforming of the hydrocarbon fuel, increasing its energy concentration;
- Ionization of the air in the nose of the aircraft and the airflow entering the engine;
- Powering the fuel reforming process by the MHD generator in the nose of the engine;
- Increase of the combustion effectiveness of the engine by injecting plasma and/or hydrogen upstream of the main fuel injectors; and
- Diverting some electrical energy produced by the MHD generator to peaceful or military directed-energy devices.
For further reference there are some AIAA papers on this cycle under Transposed Turbojet and Inverted Turbojet.[citation needed]
Specifications
According to the data presented at the 2001 MAKS Airshow, the specifications of the Ayaks are:| Parameter | Hypersonic Satellite Launcher | Multi-purpose Hypersonic Craft | Transport Hypersonic Craft |
|---|---|---|---|
| Maximum takeoff weight, tonne | 267 | 200 | 390 |
| Loaded Weight, tonne | 113 | 85 | 130 |
| Empty weight, tonne | 76 | ||
| Mass of the second stage, tonne | 36 | ||
| Payload, tonne | 10 | 10 | |
| Satellite mass, tonne | 6 | ||
| Turbojet engines | 4 | 4 | 4 |
| Magneto-plasmo-chemical engines | 4 | 6 | 4 |
| Thrust, turbojet engines, tonne | 4×25 | 4×25 | 4×40 |
| Thrust, magneto-plasmo-chemical engines | 4×25 | 6×14 | 4×40 |
| Maximal speed, m/s | 4000 | 4000 | 4600 |
| Service ceiling, km | 36 | 36 | 36 |
| Practical range at M = 8 ... 10 and height of 30 km, km | 14200 | 10000 | 12000 |
Aurora (aircraft)
For the Canadian maritime patrol aircraft, see Lockheed CP-140 Aurora.
Aurora was a rumored mid-1980s American reconnaissance aircraft. There is no substantial evidence that it was ever built or flown and it has been termed a myth.[1][2]
The U.S. government has consistently denied such an aircraft was ever built. Aviation and space reference site Aerospaceweb.org concluded "The evidence supporting the Aurora is circumstantial or pure conjecture, there is little reason to contradict the government's position."[1]
Others come to different conclusions.[3] In 2006, veteran black project watcher and aviation writer Bill Sweetman said, "Does Aurora exist? Years of pursuit have led me to believe that, yes, Aurora is most likely in active development, spurred on by recent advances that have allowed technology to catch up with the ambition that launched the program a generation ago."[4]
Background
The Aurora legend started in March 1990, when Aviation Week & Space Technology magazine broke the news that the term "Aurora" had been inadvertently included in the 1985 U.S. budget, as an allocation of $455 million for "black aircraft production" in FY 1987.[5] According to Aviation Week, Project Aurora referred to a group of exotic aircraft, and not to one particular airframe. Funding of the project allegedly reached $2.3 billion in fiscal 1987, according to a 1986 procurement document obtained by Aviation Week. In the 1994 book Skunk Works, Ben Rich, the former head of Lockheed's Skunk Works division, wrote that the Aurora was the budgetary code name for the stealth bomber fly-off that resulted in the B-2 Spirit.[6]Evidence
By the late 1980s, many aerospace industry observers believed that the U.S. had the technological capability to build a Mach-5 replacement for the aging Lockheed SR-71 Blackbird. Detailed examinations of the U.S. defense budget claimed to have found money missing or channeled into black projects.[7] By the mid-1990s, reports surfaced of sightings of unidentified aircraft flying over California and the United Kingdom involving odd-shaped contrails, sonic booms and related phenomena that suggested the US had developed such an aircraft. Nothing ever linked any of these observations to any program or aircraft type, but the name Aurora was often tagged on these as a way of explaining the observations.[1]British sighting claims
In late August 1989, while working as an engineer on the jack-up barge GSF Galveston Key in the North Sea, Chris Gibson and another witness saw an unfamiliar isosceles triangle-shaped delta aircraft, apparently refueling from a Boeing KC-135 Stratotanker and accompanied by a pair of F-111 fighter-bombers. Gibson and his friend watched the aircraft for several minutes, until they went out of sight. He subsequently drew a sketch of the formation.Gibson, who had been in the Royal Observer Corps' trophy-winning international aircraft recognition team since 1980, was unable to identify the aircraft. He dismissed suggestions that the aircraft was an F-117, Mirage IV or fully swept wing F-111.[8] When the sighting was made public in 1992, the British Defence Secretary Tom King was told, "There is no knowledge in the MoD of a 'black' programme of this nature, although it would not surprise the relevant desk officers in the Air Staff and Defence Intelligence Staff if it did exist."[9]
A crash at RAF Boscombe Down in Wiltshire on 26 September 1994 appeared closely linked to "black" missions, according to a report in AirForces Monthly. Further investigation was hampered by aircraft from the USAF flooding into the base. The crash site was protected from view by firetrucks and tarpaulins and the base was closed to all flights soon after.[10]
American sighting claims
A series of unusual sonic booms was detected in Southern California, beginning in mid- to late-1991 and recorded by United States Geological Survey sensors across Southern California used to pinpoint earthquake epicenters. The sonic booms were characteristic of a smaller vehicle, rather than the 37-meter long Space Shuttle orbiter. Furthermore, neither the Shuttle nor NASA's single SR-71B was operating on the days the booms had been registered.[11] In the article, "In Plane Sight?" which appeared in the Washington City Paper on 3 July 1992 (pp. 12–13), one of the seismologists, Jim Mori, noted: "We can't tell anything about the vehicle. They seem stronger than other sonic booms that we record once in a while. They've all come on Thursday mornings about the same time, between 4 and 7."[5] Former NASA sonic boom expert Dom Maglieri studied the 15-year-old sonic boom data from the California Institute of Technology and has deemed that the data showed "something at 90,000 ft (c. 27.4 km), Mach 4 to Mach 5.2". He also said the booms did not look like those from aircraft that had traveled through the atmosphere many miles away at Los Angeles International Airport, rather, they appeared to be booms from a high-altitude aircraft directly above the ground moving at high speeds.[12] The boom signatures of the two different aircraft patterns are wildly different.[4] There was nothing particular to tie these events to any aircraft, but they served to grow the Aurora legend.On 23 March 1992, near Amarillo, Texas, Steven Douglass photographed the "donuts on a rope" contrail and linked this sighting to distinctive sounds. He described the engine noise as: "strange, loud pulsating roar... unique... a deep pulsating rumble that vibrated the house and made the windows shake... similar to rocket engine noise, but deeper, with evenly timed pulses." In addition to providing the first photographs of the distinctive contrail previously reported by many, the significance of this sighting was enhanced by Douglass' reports of intercepts of radio transmissions: "Air-to-air communications... were between an AWACS aircraft with the call sign "Dragnet 51" from Tinker AFB, Oklahoma, and two unknown aircraft using the call signs "Darkstar November" and "Darkstar Mike". Messages consisted of phonetically transmitted alphanumerics. It is not known whether this radio traffic had any association with the "pulser" that had just flown over Amarillo." ("Darkstar" is also a call sign of AWACS aircraft from a different squadron at Tinker AFB)[13] A month later, radio enthusiasts in California monitoring Edwards AFB Radar (callsign "Joshua Control") heard early morning radio transmissions between Joshua and a high flying aircraft using the callsign "Gaspipe". "You're at 67,000 feet, 81 miles out" was heard, followed by "70 miles out now, 36,000 ft, above glideslope." As in the past, nothing linked these observations to any particular aircraft or program, but the attribution to the Aurora helped expand the legend.
In February 1994 former resident of Rachel, Nevada, and Area 51 enthusiast, Chuck Clark claimed to have filmed the Aurora taking off from the Groom Lake facility. In the David Darlington book Area 51: The Dreamland Chronicles, he said:
I even saw the Aurora take off one night - or an aircraft that matched the Aurora's reputed configuration, a sharp delta with twin tails about a hundred and thirty feet long. It taxied out of a lighted hangar at two-thirty A.M. and used a lot of runway to take off. It had one red light on top, but the minute the wheels left the runway, the light went off and that was the last I saw of it. I didn't hear it because the wind was blowing from behind me toward the base." I asked when this had taken place. "February 1994. Obviously they didn't think anybody was out there. It was thirty below zero - probably ninety below with the wind chill factor. I had hiked into White Sides from a different, harder way than usual, and stayed there two or three days among the rocks, under a camouflage tarp with six layers of clothes on. I had an insulated face mask and two sleeping bags, so I didn't present a heat signature. I videotaped the aircraft through a telescope with a five-hundred-millimeter f4 lens coupled via a C-ring to a high-eight digital video camera with five hundred and twenty scan lines of resolution, which is better than TV." The author then asked "Where's the tape?" Locked away. That's a legitimate spyplane; my purpose is not to give away legitimate national defense. When they get ready to unveil it, I'll probably release the tape.[14]
Additional claims
Although his claims have been controversial, Bob Lazar has stated that, during his employment at the mysterious S-4 facility in Nevada, he briefly witnessed an Aurora flight while aboard a bus near Groom Lake. He claimed that there was a "tremendous roar" which sounded almost as though "the sky was tearing". Although Lazar only saw the aircraft for a moment through the front of the bus, he described it as being "very large" and having "two huge, square exhausts with vanes in them". Lazar claims that his supervisor confirmed to him that the aircraft was indeed an "Aurora", a "high altitude research plane". He was also told that the aircraft was powered by "liquid methane".[15]By 1996, reports associated with the Aurora name dropped off in frequency, suggesting to people who believed that the aircraft existed that it had only ever been a prototype or that it had had a short service life.[1]
In 2000, Aberdeen Press and Journal writer Nic Outterside wrote a piece on US stealth technology in Scotland. Citing confidential 'sources', he alleged RAF/USAF Machrihanish in Kintyre, Argyll to be a base for Aurora aircraft. Machrihanish's almost 2-mile (3.2 km)-long long runway makes it suitable for high-altitude and experimental aircraft with the fenced-off coastal approach making it ideal for takeoffs and landings to be made well away from eyes or cameras of press and public. 'Oceanic Air Traffic Control at Prestwick' Outterside says, 'also tracked fast-moving radar blips. It was claimed by staff that a "hypersonic jet was the only rational conclusion" for the readings.'[16]
In 2006, aviation writer Bill Sweetman put together 20 years of examining budget "holes", unexplained sonic booms, as well as the Gibson sighting and concluded:
"This evidence helps establish the program's initial existence. My investigations continue to turn up evidence that suggests current activity. For example, having spent years sifting through military budgets, tracking untraceable dollars and code names, I learned how to sort out where money was going. This year, when I looked at the Air Force operations budget in detail, I found a $9-billion black hole that seems a perfect fit for a project like Aurora."[4]On 1 December 2014, loud repetitive bangs were heard in Bedfordshire, Glasgow, North Devon, Leicestershire, and West Sussex in the UK. The repetitive banging sound lasted for 20 to 30 minutes and was recorded by one resident on a cell phone. At around the same time, a loud boom was reported by a number of people in the upstate New York areas of Buffalo, Cheektowaga, and Clarence. Dr Bhupendra Khandelwa (University of Sheffield, UK) stated that he believed the loud, repetitive bangs sounded like an experimental jet engine called a pulse detonation engine (PDE). Sonic booms caused by meteors and military planes were ruled out, as were the sounds of fireworks and thunderstorms. Media speculation concluded that the noise recorded by locals in the UK could have been caused by the PDE engine of an Aurora aircraft.[17]
Thank you for reading this blog comment down below what should I blog next
No comments:
Post a Comment