F-35 Cancelled, then what ?
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As JSFfan has chosen to bring up the 6:1 claim again, I shall refresh the flaws in this claim once more. JSFfan, you admitted to no knowledge of the technicalities involved in these evaluations, but stated that you are happy to accept the views of (I paraphrase) those that know. You claimed that you are smart enough to know which sources are reliable and which are not. However, as soon as I challenged you (repeatedly, if you recall) to explain why the simulation used was able to produce the 6:1 figure, you eventually had to agree that that you could not even state what scenarios, modification states, weapons or adversaries had been used in the simulation. How, therefore, could you make a personal, informed judgement about the trial and it's conclusions? I suspect it's more likely that you chose to cling onto and repeatedly quote that figure because it suits your optimistic view of the project and your blinkered and entrenched stance of its successes AND FAILURES.
I listen to the dozen air forces and LM who are doing these evaluations
they claim a simmed 6:1 with 4 vs 8 red and better than 6:1 when they are piloted.
I certainly give the above more credibility than a blogger
I don't consider this main group blinkered
Joint Strike Fighter Program - C-SPAN Video Library
Defense Department officials testified on the cost, schedule, and performance of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program.
Last edited by JSFfan; 19th Sep 2013 at 07:22.
Just waiting for all the JSF cheer squad to start praising Bogdan's success in "saving" the program, even though none of them would have acknowledged two years ago that it needed saving in the first place.
What Bogdan did, in fact, was to walk into the cockpit of AF447 and yell STICK FORWARD YOU STUPID
S, and for this he deserves credit for doing his job.
What Bogdan did, in fact, was to walk into the cockpit of AF447 and yell STICK FORWARD YOU STUPID
S, and for this he deserves credit for doing his job.
Join Date: May 2013
Location: US
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just waiting for all the JSF cheer squad to start praising Bogdan's success in "saving" the program, even though none of them would have acknowledged two years ago that it needed saving in the first place.
People who are realistic about the JSF will quickly concede the procurement has been harsh nasty brutish and long. The problem I have is when people equate that to combat capability. That issue gets confused on both sides, as the JSF fans feel they must defend a horrific procurement system in order to defend the JSF's future combat virtues. I see nothing wrong with claiming the program was in dire straights and in a lot of ways still has issues ahead, but will produce a good aircraft in the end. I say this because procurement has been so messed up for so long, yet still produces capable machines despite the issues.
Thats the problem here. procurement, cost, capability, politics, etc just gets lumped into one giant messy furball and no one bothers to separate one from the other, so in a single paragraph you will get hit with a procurement issue, massive costs/delays, future fleet sustainment ("1 trillion dollars!") and then Wheeler talking about battle damage. Claiming that Wheeler doesn't know his sphincter from a hole the ground doesn't suddenly mean you think the program is a peach, and a trillion dollars to sustain a fleet of 3,000 aircraft over 50 years is excessive.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: in the magical land of beer and chocolates
Age: 52
Posts: 506
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The political leader for the Dutch Socialists party (one of the two ruling parties) just stated on TV that they cannot approve the F35 because the accounting office determined that one of the key parameters can not be met with the low amount of aircraft on order (37).
Minimally the Dutch must be able to operate all missions on a continuing base abroad with at least 4 Aircraft, something that is deemed impossible with only 37 Aircraft in the fleet.
A top up order to compensate for this shortfall is out of the question, failing to deliver on this key-parameter is an automatic no-go.
Also if this order goes ahead , the official order will only be set in the course of 2015, all price changes or substantial €/$ exchange-rate changes that lead to a price-increase and therefore a further reduction in numbers will automatically lead to a cancellation of the whole order.
It looks like the Dutch are putting all their eggs in a further partnership with Belgium and as such regaining the benefits of a combined Air Force of sufficient scale.
Whatever happens between now and 2015, it is going to be interesting one way or the other.
One possible and interesting solution could be that a combined split buy to reduce overall costs could mean that the total amount of F35's might be upped to 48 (11 extra for Belgium) and a fleet of 36-48 NG Gripens with limited specialised tasks like Air support, QRA, recce, .... .
One thing is certain, like our NAVIES before, we will melt together as one combined Air Force with one Airspace.
A330,Vip fleet, A400M's(3 or 4 extra) , NH90's, A109, ALPHAJET'S and the new fighters (F35+JAS39 ?) from Belgium combined with NH90, Chinook, Apache, F35 and KC10-DC10 from Holland with 5 airbases (Florennes, Kleine Brogel, Volkel, Gilze Rijen, Leeuwarden) and 1-2 extra station(Melsbroek or/and Eindhoven).
Minimally the Dutch must be able to operate all missions on a continuing base abroad with at least 4 Aircraft, something that is deemed impossible with only 37 Aircraft in the fleet.
A top up order to compensate for this shortfall is out of the question, failing to deliver on this key-parameter is an automatic no-go.
Also if this order goes ahead , the official order will only be set in the course of 2015, all price changes or substantial €/$ exchange-rate changes that lead to a price-increase and therefore a further reduction in numbers will automatically lead to a cancellation of the whole order.
It looks like the Dutch are putting all their eggs in a further partnership with Belgium and as such regaining the benefits of a combined Air Force of sufficient scale.
Whatever happens between now and 2015, it is going to be interesting one way or the other.
One possible and interesting solution could be that a combined split buy to reduce overall costs could mean that the total amount of F35's might be upped to 48 (11 extra for Belgium) and a fleet of 36-48 NG Gripens with limited specialised tasks like Air support, QRA, recce, .... .
One thing is certain, like our NAVIES before, we will melt together as one combined Air Force with one Airspace.
A330,Vip fleet, A400M's(3 or 4 extra) , NH90's, A109, ALPHAJET'S and the new fighters (F35+JAS39 ?) from Belgium combined with NH90, Chinook, Apache, F35 and KC10-DC10 from Holland with 5 airbases (Florennes, Kleine Brogel, Volkel, Gilze Rijen, Leeuwarden) and 1-2 extra station(Melsbroek or/and Eindhoven).
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,577
Likes: 0
Received 52 Likes
on
45 Posts
Netherlands Government Statement re F-35 Buy Sep 2013
Politics is a wonderful thing...
Dutch to buy the F-35 jet fighter 17 Sep 2013 Andrea Ahles
Sky Talk: Dutch to buy the F-35 jet fighter
Dutch to buy the F-35 jet fighter 17 Sep 2013 Andrea Ahles
"...Netherlands Government Statement:
...After comparing the candidates in 2001 and 2008, and updating the relevant information in 2013, the government has decided, on operational, financial and economic grounds, to select the F 35 as the new fighter aircraft for the Netherlands armed forces.
The F-35 is a well-considered choice for a high-tech, future-oriented air force. From a military operational perspective, the F-35 offers the greatest number of options. It is also the most future-proof option. The aircraft is best able to deal with the proliferation of mobile air defence systems and offers vastly improved observation capabilities, which are of great value in any type of mission. In addition, the aircraft offers great potential for follow-on development, particularly in the area of network-enabled operations. Also important are the possibilities for international cooperation in areas such as training, sustainment and deployment. NATO’s analyses underpin the Netherlands’ decision.
With this decision, which concludes a process of almost fifteen years, the Netherlands is responding to the Alliance's call for investment in quality and, consequently, in the collective security of the Alliance....
...International cooperation is the ideal way to further optimise operational effectiveness. An important step in this respect is the intention of Belgium and the Netherlands to patrol the Benelux airspace together. These Quick Reaction Alert (QRA) and Renegade tasks currently place heavy demands on the pilots and aircraft of the two separate countries. Cooperation will therefore significantly benefit both countries. A treaty will be required in order to be able to carry out these tasks in each other’s airspace....
...Compared with the current fleet of F-16s, the air force will in future be able to deploy fewer F-35s for longer periods of time. In addition to the permanent deployment for the protection of Dutch and Allied airspace, with 37 F-35s the Netherlands will continue to be able to deploy four fighter aircraft, simultaneously and continuously, to support Dutch ground troops as was done in Uruzgan and is still being done in Kunduz...."
...After comparing the candidates in 2001 and 2008, and updating the relevant information in 2013, the government has decided, on operational, financial and economic grounds, to select the F 35 as the new fighter aircraft for the Netherlands armed forces.
The F-35 is a well-considered choice for a high-tech, future-oriented air force. From a military operational perspective, the F-35 offers the greatest number of options. It is also the most future-proof option. The aircraft is best able to deal with the proliferation of mobile air defence systems and offers vastly improved observation capabilities, which are of great value in any type of mission. In addition, the aircraft offers great potential for follow-on development, particularly in the area of network-enabled operations. Also important are the possibilities for international cooperation in areas such as training, sustainment and deployment. NATO’s analyses underpin the Netherlands’ decision.
With this decision, which concludes a process of almost fifteen years, the Netherlands is responding to the Alliance's call for investment in quality and, consequently, in the collective security of the Alliance....
...International cooperation is the ideal way to further optimise operational effectiveness. An important step in this respect is the intention of Belgium and the Netherlands to patrol the Benelux airspace together. These Quick Reaction Alert (QRA) and Renegade tasks currently place heavy demands on the pilots and aircraft of the two separate countries. Cooperation will therefore significantly benefit both countries. A treaty will be required in order to be able to carry out these tasks in each other’s airspace....
...Compared with the current fleet of F-16s, the air force will in future be able to deploy fewer F-35s for longer periods of time. In addition to the permanent deployment for the protection of Dutch and Allied airspace, with 37 F-35s the Netherlands will continue to be able to deploy four fighter aircraft, simultaneously and continuously, to support Dutch ground troops as was done in Uruzgan and is still being done in Kunduz...."
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: in the magical land of beer and chocolates
Age: 52
Posts: 506
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Spaszinbad,
Politics being what it is, your news is already old news, Mr Samson just categorically stated on TV that his fraction is going to vote against because the arbitrary advice given by the national accounting office stated that the 4 aircraft per mission on a continuing base is apparently impossible.
Pauw & Witteman: do 19 sep 2013, 23:00 - Uitzending Gemist.
Politics being what it is, your news is already old news, Mr Samson just categorically stated on TV that his fraction is going to vote against because the arbitrary advice given by the national accounting office stated that the 4 aircraft per mission on a continuing base is apparently impossible.
Pauw & Witteman: do 19 sep 2013, 23:00 - Uitzending Gemist.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,577
Likes: 0
Received 52 Likes
on
45 Posts
Bogdan: $857 -22% less - real estimate lifecycle costs accurate
Good for them and good for you... we will see eh. But I'll not watch the Dutch TV news - English web news reports will do fine. Meanwhile 'the SHERIFF' says this:
Twenty-Two Percent is Real 19 Sep 2013 John A. Tirpak
Twenty-Two Percent is Real
________________________________
Turning the Corner 19 Sep 2013 John A. Tirpak
Turning the Corner
Twenty-Two Percent is Real 19 Sep 2013 John A. Tirpak
"Press reports about F-35 lifecycle costs—indicating that the new estimate is $857 billion versus the previous estimate of $1.1 trillion, or 22 percent less—were accurate, said F-35 Program Executive Officer Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan. "We're working well" with the Pentagon's independent cost-assessment shop to get to figures both teams can agree on, he said during a Sept. 17 interview. One difference of opinion: the cost-assessment office's estimates assume seasoned maintainers will be doing the repair work, since senior people have been tapped for the program so far. But eventually those jobs will be done by two-stripers, said Bogdan. Such assumptions make a "huge difference" in cost over the 53 years for which the cost estimators are required to forecast. Bogdan asserted that opponents of the F-35 have "too many opinions, not enough facts." He considers himself an honest broker and is not afraid to tell bad news about the F-35, or in this case, good news."
________________________________
Turning the Corner 19 Sep 2013 John A. Tirpak
"The F-35 program is "really, really close" to turning the corner and becoming a truly healthy program, Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan, F-35 program executive officer, told the Daily Report. He said he'll be satisfied the program has really turned around when production "really starts to ramp up" and after the next year or so of software and weapons testing—all the "really hard stuff" of operational testing. Once past that point, Bogdan said he thinks the program will not only be on track, but will cost less than fourth generation fighters. Progress has been good and costs are consistently coming down, he noted in the Sept. 17 interview. In his speech that same day at AFA's 2013 Air and Space Conference in National Harbor, Md., Bogdan said the services "are committed not to breaking this program" and will do what's necessary to keep it moving forward. In 10 years, Bogdan predicted, "people will look back and say, 'What was all the fuss about?'" The F-35, he said, will by then be seen as the obvious solution to "what we need" and will still have "great growth potential.""
Last edited by SpazSinbad; 19th Sep 2013 at 23:05. Reason: 2nd QUOTE
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: in the magical land of beer and chocolates
Age: 52
Posts: 506
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If anything, General Bogdan might be the best advocate for the F35, he (and his colleagues) seems genuinely concerned with what is best for the USAF iso being an extension for the interests of LM and partners.
I fully agree that the F35 is a reality for most of us but I think vigilance is now more than ever necessary and I can only hope we'll never again do big purchases in this manner any more.
As far as the B-NL cooperation goes, it might solve most of both of our biggest problems, having a large enough potent but sustainable Air Force
with enough F35's or IMHO a split fleet of F35's and JAS39's
I fully agree that the F35 is a reality for most of us but I think vigilance is now more than ever necessary and I can only hope we'll never again do big purchases in this manner any more.
As far as the B-NL cooperation goes, it might solve most of both of our biggest problems, having a large enough potent but sustainable Air Force
with enough F35's or IMHO a split fleet of F35's and JAS39's
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Oz
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Courtney Mil
FoxtrotAlpha,
Yes, I see your point. Four groups, then. I had hoed to sweep them up in group 1, but in hindsight the definition doesn't quite fit. Not intentional.
Yes, I see your point. Four groups, then. I had hoed to sweep them up in group 1, but in hindsight the definition doesn't quite fit. Not intentional.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,577
Likes: 0
Received 52 Likes
on
45 Posts
Pass the Dutchie on the left hand side....
Labour members rebel on JSF, audit office says figures don't add up 19 Sep 2013
DutchNews.nl - Labour members rebel on JSF, audit office says figures don't add up
Labour members rebel on JSF, audit office says figures don't add up 19 Sep 2013
"The cabinet may have agreed to spend €4.5bn on 37 JSF fighter jets, but criticism of the decision is mounting both inside and outside parliament.
The government's audit office said on Thursday it had doubts about the defence ministry's spending plans and that there are gaps in the calculations about use of the JSF.
'The audit office does not support the statement that the defence ministry's vision will lead to a financially and operationally sustainable armed forces,' the statement said.
Missions
The ministry says four JSFs will always be available for international missions but there are doubts about whether this is possible, audit office chief Saskia Stuiveling said.
Savings which the ministry assumes will be made by working together with the Belgian airforce are unproven and questions remain about the ministry's chronic problems with aircraft maintenance, she is quoted as saying by the Financieele Dagblad.
In addition, the assumption that maintenance will cost €270m a year is 'unlikely' to be the case, Stuiveling said.
Labour MPs
Defence minister Jeanine Hennis outlined her vision for the armed forces on Tuesday, during the presentation of the annual budget. The plans include the loss of a further 2,400 jobs and the closure of four barracks.
Although the cabinet's decision is supported by Labour ministers, Labour MPs are not so happy with the greenlight for the JSF. [Must be the DutchTeePartay]
According to RTL news, party members are planning to submit a motion against the JSF to Saturday's party conference. The motion calls on the party to 'take all necessary steps to leave the JSF project, as agreed in last year's motion'.
And a number of Labour MPs told the Volkskrant on Thursday they feel they are being forced to accept the decision by the party leadership."
The government's audit office said on Thursday it had doubts about the defence ministry's spending plans and that there are gaps in the calculations about use of the JSF.
'The audit office does not support the statement that the defence ministry's vision will lead to a financially and operationally sustainable armed forces,' the statement said.
Missions
The ministry says four JSFs will always be available for international missions but there are doubts about whether this is possible, audit office chief Saskia Stuiveling said.
Savings which the ministry assumes will be made by working together with the Belgian airforce are unproven and questions remain about the ministry's chronic problems with aircraft maintenance, she is quoted as saying by the Financieele Dagblad.
In addition, the assumption that maintenance will cost €270m a year is 'unlikely' to be the case, Stuiveling said.
Labour MPs
Defence minister Jeanine Hennis outlined her vision for the armed forces on Tuesday, during the presentation of the annual budget. The plans include the loss of a further 2,400 jobs and the closure of four barracks.
Although the cabinet's decision is supported by Labour ministers, Labour MPs are not so happy with the greenlight for the JSF. [Must be the DutchTeePartay]
According to RTL news, party members are planning to submit a motion against the JSF to Saturday's party conference. The motion calls on the party to 'take all necessary steps to leave the JSF project, as agreed in last year's motion'.
And a number of Labour MPs told the Volkskrant on Thursday they feel they are being forced to accept the decision by the party leadership."
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: A lot closer to the sea
Posts: 665
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It looks like Dutch politics are going to cause the biggest problems for the Dutch AF. There are currently 2 Dutch F-35A flying and yet they still can't decide if they actually want them! Meanwhile are there any Dutch pilots or maintainers going through the Eglin training pipeline? It makes the UK procurement and political coalition look positively streamlined!
I love it when bold unsubstantiated claims are countered with bold unsubstantiated claims. "no one" who thinks the JSF might actually be good could acknowledge the program had troubles?
People who are realistic about the JSF will quickly concede the procurement has been harsh nasty brutish and long. The problem I have is when people equate that to combat capability. That issue gets confused on both sides, as the JSF fans feel they must defend a horrific procurement system in order to defend the JSF's future combat virtues. I see nothing wrong with claiming the program was in dire straights and in a lot of ways still has issues ahead, but will produce a good aircraft in the end. I say this because procurement has been so messed up for so long, yet still produces capable machines despite the issues.
Thats the problem here. procurement, cost, capability, politics, etc just gets lumped into one giant messy furball and no one bothers to separate one from the other, so in a single paragraph you will get hit with a procurement issue, massive costs/delays, future fleet sustainment ("1 trillion dollars!") and then Wheeler talking about battle damage. Claiming that Wheeler doesn't know his sphincter from a hole the ground doesn't suddenly mean you think the program is a peach, and a trillion dollars to sustain a fleet of 3,000 aircraft over 50 years is excessive.
People who are realistic about the JSF will quickly concede the procurement has been harsh nasty brutish and long. The problem I have is when people equate that to combat capability. That issue gets confused on both sides, as the JSF fans feel they must defend a horrific procurement system in order to defend the JSF's future combat virtues. I see nothing wrong with claiming the program was in dire straights and in a lot of ways still has issues ahead, but will produce a good aircraft in the end. I say this because procurement has been so messed up for so long, yet still produces capable machines despite the issues.
Thats the problem here. procurement, cost, capability, politics, etc just gets lumped into one giant messy furball and no one bothers to separate one from the other, so in a single paragraph you will get hit with a procurement issue, massive costs/delays, future fleet sustainment ("1 trillion dollars!") and then Wheeler talking about battle damage. Claiming that Wheeler doesn't know his sphincter from a hole the ground doesn't suddenly mean you think the program is a peach, and a trillion dollars to sustain a fleet of 3,000 aircraft over 50 years is excessive.
The JSF may be a compromised design due to trying to fulfil too many roles with one airframe, but it seems to be the best compromise available. Suck it up, it will succeed because too many countries cannot afford for it not to.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,577
Likes: 0
Received 52 Likes
on
45 Posts
VIDEO: F-35B Ship Trial Crew Interviews
Dutch maintainers are being trained to help look after the aircraft in storage to be able to supervise ongoing storage maintenance but that is going to change since recent decision I'll wager. Meanwhile - back at the ranch....
Crew Interviews from F-35B Ship Trials
__________________
Ship Trials Bring F-35B Capability, Operational Utility Into Focus
Lockheed Martin · Ship Trials Bring F-35B Capability, Operational Utility Into Focus
Crew Interviews from F-35B Ship Trials
"Published on Sep 19, 2013
Hear from the Marine and Navy aviators and maintainers that were aboard the USS Wasp for F-35B ship trials in August 2013."
Hear from the Marine and Navy aviators and maintainers that were aboard the USS Wasp for F-35B ship trials in August 2013."
Ship Trials Bring F-35B Capability, Operational Utility Into Focus
"FORT WORTH, Texas, September 19, 2013 - Recent ship trials for the Lockheed Martin [LMT] F-35B onboard the USS Wasp [LHD-1] underscored the fifth-generation fighter's unique capabilities and operational utility according to Marines and sailors alike.
In a video released today, U.S. Navy Capt. Erik Etz stated, "A fifth-generation aircraft, such as the F-35, will open up threat areas where previous legacy fighters that operate off L-class ships weren't even invited to play. So, an F-35B operating from this type of ship really gives a joint war-fighting commander different options to affect change in the world wherever it is necessary."
Marine Corps Capt. Mike Kingen, an F-35 test pilot, added, "Ship-borne capabilities are important for the F-35B because they are important for the Marine Corps. Having F-35B, having a stealth platform that's organic to that unit will allow us to support the Marines…. The F-35 is going to allow future pilots to worry less about stick and rudder skills and more about executing the mission."
"The fact that the Harrier was not fly by wire at all, there was nothing in between me and the flight controls," said Marine Corps Maj. Michael Rountree, an F-35 test pilot. "So, I could do things in the Harrier that would very specifically get me killed if I did them incorrectly. Whereas in this airplane there is a level of protection between me and those flight control surfaces. So in a mission - you know up and away from the ship - that's going to allow me more time to think about the tactical picture, thinking about how I'm going to support the Marines on the ground."
During the 18-day long ship trials, two F-35Bs conducted a series of tests to determine the aircraft's suitability for sea-based operations. The aircraft completed 95 vertical landings, 19 of which were conducted at night, and 94 short takeoffs. The ship trials, known as Developmental Test-II, were a key milestone on the Marine Corps' path to Initial Operating Capability which is scheduled for 2015...."
In a video released today, U.S. Navy Capt. Erik Etz stated, "A fifth-generation aircraft, such as the F-35, will open up threat areas where previous legacy fighters that operate off L-class ships weren't even invited to play. So, an F-35B operating from this type of ship really gives a joint war-fighting commander different options to affect change in the world wherever it is necessary."
Marine Corps Capt. Mike Kingen, an F-35 test pilot, added, "Ship-borne capabilities are important for the F-35B because they are important for the Marine Corps. Having F-35B, having a stealth platform that's organic to that unit will allow us to support the Marines…. The F-35 is going to allow future pilots to worry less about stick and rudder skills and more about executing the mission."
"The fact that the Harrier was not fly by wire at all, there was nothing in between me and the flight controls," said Marine Corps Maj. Michael Rountree, an F-35 test pilot. "So, I could do things in the Harrier that would very specifically get me killed if I did them incorrectly. Whereas in this airplane there is a level of protection between me and those flight control surfaces. So in a mission - you know up and away from the ship - that's going to allow me more time to think about the tactical picture, thinking about how I'm going to support the Marines on the ground."
During the 18-day long ship trials, two F-35Bs conducted a series of tests to determine the aircraft's suitability for sea-based operations. The aircraft completed 95 vertical landings, 19 of which were conducted at night, and 94 short takeoffs. The ship trials, known as Developmental Test-II, were a key milestone on the Marine Corps' path to Initial Operating Capability which is scheduled for 2015...."
Last edited by SpazSinbad; 20th Sep 2013 at 05:56.
I could be putting my foot in it but all those launches and recoveries seemed to be under ideal conditions, flat calm and no headway. Has it been done with the deck rising and falling etc.?
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,577
Likes: 0
Received 52 Likes
on
45 Posts
F-35B Jumpin' Jack Flash Video
Video for 'The Oberon'....
(I was raised by a toothless bearded CAG)
The Rolling Stones - Jumpin' Jack Flash (Lyrical)
(I was raised by a toothless bearded CAG)The Rolling Stones - Jumpin' Jack Flash (Lyrical)
"I was flown in a cross-fire hurricane
And I howled at CAG in the driving rain,
But it's all right now, in fact, it's a gas!
But it's all right. Im jumpin jack flash,
F-35B - Lightning II..."
And I howled at CAG in the driving rain,
But it's all right now, in fact, it's a gas!
But it's all right. Im jumpin jack flash,
F-35B - Lightning II..."
Last edited by SpazSinbad; 20th Sep 2013 at 08:20. Reason: hag to CAG