Jump to content

Boomer (Not So) Sooner (more on the pilot shortage) - rebuttal


r22butters

Recommended Posts

I only know 2 pilots with civilian only backgrounds who skipped the conventional CFI/CFII instructional route. One got commercial certs and started a helicopter business, had languages and worked international as well as domestic. The other could instruct when required, but was into many other things that parleyed into fliying as the situation arose. These were unusually capable and adaptable people who were happier doing the same Palooka-pilot gig that I was on than the adventure of the time past.

If you can step out of the box, like those two, then you could concievably skip the cfi route.

Me, I had to do the CFI thing to get a couple hundred hours and into civilian networking. My first civilian job negotiation as a 1400 hour Vietnam pilot started with an offer of sleep space in the hangar loft and lots of broom and gofer duties. Incidentally, that would have been the perfect opportunity for the 2 pilots I started this post with. I wasn't smart enough to develop that one, and moved on to 2 other very long term 'employee' positions.

 

I agree with the position that not everybody can be a great teacher/cfi. It's a 'performance art' that takes talent to max. That said, it's not entirely foriegn to the skill sets a professional pilot should have- self control and a disciplined approach to the work, understanding of the fundamentals of flight, communication, teamwork, ability to diagnose and explain an issue and resolution- that a mature adult could do for a year or two.

Edited by Wally
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah something told me I shouldn't have brought up the "I'll never be a CFI thing",...just opens up a huge, messy can of worms. :rolleyes:

 

The thing is I've had 4 face-to-face interviews, so if someone is willing to check me out in person (let alone spend the gas to see how well I fly) then not being a CFI isn't what's really keeping me from getting hired. It may extend the periods in between interviews (by several years), but if they're willing to interview a non-CFI then they're willing to hire a non-CFI. So it must be something else,...perhaps my age?, my personality?,...my hair cut?, my lack of actual work experience?,...yeah its probably that one! :D

 

Truth is if I never find a job flying, its not that big a deal. I'm still a pilot, I still fly from time to time. That's all that really matters! B)

 

Besides, if I reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeally wanted it as bad as so many others say they do, and was willing to do ANYTHING to get my flying career started, I would have taken that job I mentioned in the thread, "What's the risk of not finding employment after training", post #25 I believe?

 

The fact that I didn't take it speaks volumes about my true desire to be an employed pilot!,...in that sometimes I think that I really don't?

;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah something told me I shouldn't have brought up the "I'll never be a CFI thing",...just opens up a huge, messy can of worms. :rolleyes:

 

The thing is I've had 4 face-to-face interviews, so if someone is willing to check me out in person (let alone spend the gas to see how well I fly) then not being a CFI isn't what's really keeping me from getting hired. It may extend the periods in between interviews (by several years), but if they're willing to interview a non-CFI then they're willing to hire a non-CFI. So it must be something else,...perhaps my age?, my personality?,...my hair cut?, my lack of actual work experience?,...yeah its probably that one! :D

 

Truth is if I never find a job flying, its not that big a deal. I'm still a pilot, I still fly from time to time. That's all that really matters! B)

 

Besides, if I reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeally wanted it as bad as so many others say they do, and was willing to do ANYTHING to get my flying career started, I would have taken that job I mentioned in the thread, "What's the risk of not finding employment after training", post #25 I believe?

 

The fact that I didn't take it speaks volumes about my true desire to be an employed pilot!,...in that sometimes I think that I really don't?

;)

 

Wow. Four whole interviews. You should write a book, with that kind of aviation job seeking experience.

 

You're right. Four interviews (in how many years?) goes to show you couldn't give a stuff about a career, but that's been quite evident from your comments in the first place. Don't let the notion that someone granted an interview to you swell your head too much. Four interviews isn't exactly something one could put on a resume to show that you've got something to sell.

 

Whether it's your age or your haircut or something more esoteric, the bottom line is that you're not really qualified to do anything at this stage, and you're unwilling to qualify yourself. For that, the industry bears no burden nor blame.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not angry in the least. You began a thread about the need for more entry level jobs. The jobs are there. What's not there are your qualifications, or your willingness to do what's necessary to get the jobs.

 

Rather than begin a post about non-existent jobs, or an insufficient supply of entry level jobs, perhaps if the matter is of concern to you, you'll do what's necessary to be employable. Until then, you've not a leg upon which to stand.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now granted the interviews I've had, haven't been for aviation related jobs but I do have something I'd like to add. During some of my interviews and process leading up to it I've been able to gather info by talking to different people and basically find out I got the interview basically because they needed to interview X amount of people and only so many people applied. I know on one occasion they had 10 interviews planned and only 10 people applied. Why they still interviewed 10 people, I don't know, maybe it was HR requirements or that is what they had budgeted so they thought might as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The thing is I've had 4 face-to-face interviews, so if someone is willing to check me out in person (let alone spend the gas to see how well I fly) then not being a CFI isn't what's really keeping me from getting hired. It may extend the periods in between interviews (by several years), but if they're willing to interview a non-CFI then they're willing to hire a non-CFI. So it must be something else,...perhaps my age?, my personality?,...my hair cut?, my lack of actual work experience?,...yeah its probably that one! :D

 

 

So...you refer us to post 25 in the thread http://helicopterforum.verticalreference.com/topic/18216-whats-the-risk-of-not-finding-employment-after-training/page-2?do=findComment&comment=157451.

 

You tell us that four interviews says someone must be interested in you, but in the interview you describe to us, you paid 1,500 to get there and interview, knowing it was a five hundred dollar a month job, to say nothing of the 3,500 you would have had to pay to buy your way into the seat. This is evidence that something isn't holding you back? You don't think your refusal to instruct might have some part of it?

 

Let's not even discuss that you got disoriented during the interview, when you flew with the employer. Perhaps a little more instrument experience and training (say, to the level of an instructor who teaches it to others) might have helped.

 

What I find particularly intriguing is that you state in your epistle that you've regretted your decision not to take the job, ever since you turned it down. Most interesting. For a guy that doesn't care if he moves forward or back in his career, that's a lot of regret.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Then go get more than 0 given. What's the rush to instruct in the R44 when you haven't instructed in the R22? You're busy renting airplanes at a ridiculous expense to yourself, when it will do little or no good. This isn't a problem on the part of the employer. You simply haven't done what you need to do in the first place, which is to get busy doing basic instruction.

 

 

By the time you get done renting your R44, you'll still have zero hours of instruction given.

 

The 19 year old kid who rocks up to your front door wanting instruction may not know enough or be bold enough when using daddy's money or a loan to ask for the most experienced instructor, but most adults will be, and won't be satisfied with a zero time wet behind the ears kid...especially for R44 instruction when the cost of rental is already so high. If you've got a few hours of R44 time that you bought, it doesn't really make up for lack of experience, and you'll need to get that before you can be considered any kind of commodity or asset to an employer (or client).

 

 

 

How far are you willing to move to get that job instructing, and how qualified are you to do it? Are you a CFII? If not, why not? How far are you willing to go to look for work? How many resumes have you sent out, and how many employers have you contacted? Why aren't you working for the school where you did your training? If you have additional training to do, why don't you do it at a school where you can be hired? Schools prefer to hire their own students; it makes the school look good and the students are already inculcated in school procedures and practices.

 

 

I don't care which one I instruct in, but every job I have found which I have enough hours for wants an instructor who is SFAR qualified in the 44. I have interviewed and flown with owners who say, "You'd be great, give me a call when you get 25 hours in a 44!"

I am a CFII, and I'm willing to go just about anywhere. I've talked to employers from California to Minnesota to Colorado to Virginia to New Hampshire and everywhere in between. I really wish I was working for my flight school, but they ran into issues with the VA right as I finished my training and they lost over 80% of their student base overnight. It seems they are the only school around that isn't using 44's now as well. There will probably be a position that I could take in the spring, but I don't want to wait that long. I'm eager to become an instructor, I wouldn't be forking out thousands of my own dollars if I wasn't. You have a good point about doing additional training where I can be hired, that is exactly what I am doing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I don't care which one I instruct in, but every job I have found which I have enough hours for wants an instructor who is SFAR qualified in the 44. I have interviewed and flown with owners who say, "You'd be great, give me a call when you get 25 hours in a 44!"

I am a CFII, and I'm willing to go just about anywhere. I've talked to employers from California to Minnesota to Colorado to Virginia to New Hampshire and everywhere in between. I really wish I was working for my flight school, but they ran into issues with the VA right as I finished my training and they lost over 80% of their student base overnight. It seems they are the only school around that isn't using 44's now as well. There will probably be a position that I could take in the spring, but I don't want to wait that long. I'm eager to become an instructor, I wouldn't be forking out thousands of my own dollars if I wasn't. You have a good point about doing additional training where I can be hired, that is exactly what I am doing.

 

 

It’s been said over-and-over again, if you’re not qualified, potential employers will pass. AND, they will pass every time. That is, in today’s entry level marketplace, to be considered, you must meet the Robinson SFAR for both machines and if possible, some 300 time. Anything short of this and you’re at a disadvantage. Why you ask? Simply because the competition you are up against will have that experience and sometimes more. With that, you can choose to wait until something comes along, which could be way beyond next spring, or go pay for R44 time. If you decide to go that route, it would be wise to train at the school that said they’d hire IF you had the R44 time…………

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have always had a solution for those that want to build cheap helicopter time in either the R22 or the R44 at below solo rates (on our photo contract time building with a CFI). And if you build a minimum of 100 we will hire you as a cfi or teach you the cfi after you have 50 hours right seat and 50 hours left seat with us. I suggest you do it in the R22 as it's cheaper. Ours is a mathematical formula so you don't have to interview well because if you fly 50 tanks of fuel with one of my cfi you'd better know how to do the job. Everyone comes a little rusty but in six weeks you'll be a paid pilot with us.

 

I'll be at Heli-Success in Las Vegas which is next weekend and I will be there in the front row as I have been at every one since inception. Usually, at least three speakers have personally flown with me doing boat photo and "funnest job ever" comes to mind when I've asked from the floor. If you are a cfi working for me you've already got the email that if you pay for Heli-Success I'll pay for the hotel room. If you wish to contact me I'm at 561-346-2816 and I will treat you to lunch or dinner. If you are a car guy the SEMA show is a couple of days before this year.

 

I've advertised on these forums since 2001 and nothing has really ever changed in that you need hours and ratings and an opportunity usually will happen in the Spring. It also helps if you can find some financial aid which we've got (and remember since there is a job at the end your relatives can see the financial light).

 

If someone is concerned with teaching understand some instructors don't do primary flight instruction but just boat photo with already rated pilots so if you've been turned off by Instructors negativity towards the newbie this is a cake way to build hours without the hard stuff. After a couple of hundred hours of dual photo you get the itch to teach a newbie We are good at accommodating all situations including a 300 pound candidate in our Raven II. Yes, I had to create a job for him and you'll soon see him flying HELIRIDES.COM which will cater to the more physically strongly built guys and beach tours and rides.

 

Timing is important, too, as we have a guy who just left for a turbine job on 10/17/2014 and he came to us with 200 hours and a CFI on 5/10/2015. He did 100 hours in a month and then averaged 100 hours a month and did a lot of groundschool as well. He met me on this very forum talking about ten guys getting a experimental helicopter to build helicopter time and I showed him our plan. He said he had never heard of us and was like 1 mile from our Part 141 office in Hollywood North Perry Airport. We fly R22's on floats and he's now flying a Hughes 500 on floats.

 

If the heli thing hasn't worked out you should call me and I might be able to get it back on track for you like I have for hundreds of pilots.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I enjoyed flying your CFI around while he took pictures of boats, but when I held the camera I got so misserably nauseated after just about ten minutes that we had to call it a day. :wacko: So I don't think your program would work for me.

 

...ain't got the dough anyway, and I'm already burried under one flight school loan! :ph34r:

B)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have always had a solution for those that want to build cheap helicopter time in either the R22 or the R44 at below solo rates (on our photo contract time building with a CFI). And if you build a minimum of 100 we will hire you as a cfi or teach you the cfi after you have 50 hours right seat and 50 hours left seat with us. I suggest you do it in the R22 as it's cheaper. Ours is a mathematical formula so you don't have to interview well because if you fly 50 tanks of fuel with one of my cfi you'd better know how to do the job. Everyone comes a little rusty but in six weeks you'll be a paid pilot with us.

 

 

Of course one need not interview. They just paid for their job. And you sold it to them, under the guise of "time building," all the while getting someone to pay you to "work" for you while engaged in a commercial operation to make money for you. Quite the gambit.

 

You have a big vested interest, and you get paid twice; once form the customer, and once from the "employee." Making money off your "employees" is reprehensible, only a little more than the low character of those who would defecate in their own bed by buying their job. Usually it's those who do so, who pay for their job and thus lower the bar for everyone, that scream the loudest later about the low wages in the business. They've only themselves to thank.

 

And you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Take Fort Rucker for instance. We have a lot of civilian instructors in the primary division (B206/TH67) that are getting old. Not trying to be mean, but some of them can't stand up straight and walk with a limp. We have hoards of them. At the same time we are transitioning from the TH-67 to the LUH-72 for primary training. If you think that those old timers will be eager to transition into a glass cockpit twin engine aircraft to maybe fly 1 or 2 more years you are wrong. Some will, many will not. Many, including some I have talked to here, see that as a retirement notice. Despite a downturn in the total number of new aviators being trained, there will be a number of openings for transitioning military aviators (and some civilian CFIs) that have instructor ratings.

 

 

The word I've gotten on this, back in August was "Layoffs possible in October. A few instructors may not go through the 72 transition but I believe they will be covered by folds on layoff."

 

As it was, at the time of getting this, the only hiring URS was doing in this regard was returns from layoffs. Just checked, and it's the same story (though I don't know if they did any layoffs this month).

 

 

If I could get back to Rucker to teach, I would in a heartbeat, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Charyoutree,

 

That may very well be true. I honestly don't know. In the time I have been here I have seen layoffs, hirings, contractor changes, etc. You of course know that. With every increase or decrease in students that staffing level changes.

 

But right now everything is still being done in the TH-67. That transition to the Lakota hasn't really started. I've seen a few more come in, I know they are taking them from even Flat Iron, etc., but so far no huge changes and I do know that it takes time and will be gradual. At the same time I can't help but see when I'm doing a low approach over Cairns the endless rows of orange and white 206s. Then I sit at Florala or Andalusia and look around at the IPs during breaks. No offense, everyone ages, but I wonder how some of these guys are still around. When I put the two together I just see a significant percentage of guys who probably won't be making the switch. A good friend of mine teaches primary right now. He's been telling me the same things about the back office talk concerning the transition.

 

We are a shrinking force, that is for sure. But we will always be training pilots, a lot of pilots really. I think there is going to be quite a bit of movement going on in the primary division, and I think there will be a number of positions filled with new blood when that Lakota transition actually does take place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It blows me away that the military is sending experienced pilots out the door who aren't even at the 1/2 way mark..... But still filling entry level seats as the experienced pilots are being pushed out the back door. Is be a little irate finishing up a 6 yr commitment and being told to move on as I'm watching new students being ushered in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It blows me away that the military is sending experienced pilots out the door who aren't even at the 1/2 way mark..... But still filling entry level seats as the experienced pilots are being pushed out the back door. Is be a little irate finishing up a 6 yr commitment and being told to move on as I'm watching new students being ushered in.

 

Military manpower...in a nutshell. Basically retarded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...about pushing "older" guys out while bringing newer guys in.

 

The Army could staff and make decisions in general so much better. They simply don't. While I don't agree with the concept of the way they do it, I understand why.

 

The Army does not value experience in the same way that profitable civilian organizations do. A civilian company would rather that every one of their employees be experienced, dedicated, and knowledgeable. The Army wants to have a certain number of people at every rung on the ladder. They don't want all Sergeants and no Privates. In the long run they would say if everyone is senior right now, then in the future everyone will be junior and we won't have experience. So they push certain people out to filter new ones in to allow for the constant mentorship, never too many Chiefs and never too many Indians - at least that is the theory.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mr. Butters . . .

Hello. My name is Lyn and I am the Owner / Editor In Chief of Rotorcraft Pro. I read with great interest your rebuttal to the story I ran in our magazine, as well as the follow on discussion. I thought the discussion was very good with lots of unique perspectives. I think much of what has been said in response to your rebuttal is accurate. I want to make a few points:

1. That article was written from a global perspective. You might note that the two sources quoted were from two of the largest helicopters operators on the planet. . . Air Methods Corp and Bristow Group. One has a U.S. imprint, and the other has a global imprint. Some of the references you saw regarding 60 year olds and two pilot crews are how it’s done in areas like the North Sea and Europe. I think both operators are far more qualified than you (or I for that matter) to look out on the horizon and see where their challenges will come from with respect to personnel shortages. You might know that in recent years, these big operators have made bold investments in areas that are not within their normal business purview. For example, remember when Bristow Group purchased one of the largest flight schools in the nation? Bristow Academy used to be Helicopter Adventures. And more recently, Air Methods, the largest EMS operator in the world (in fact the largest Part 135 operator in the world) purchased tour operator Sundance Helicopters. Both are trying to invest in areas that will not only be profit centers for their portfolios, but a personnel pipeline for their most profitable ops, which are EMS and Oil & Gas.

2. Your viewpoint is definitely not macro-economic; nor is it micro-economic. Frankly, it is myopic. There is a much bigger industry out there than the tee-tiny space in which you occupy where you only have experience in an R22, some experience in a R44, do not hold a CFI, nor have ever held a job in the industry. I do not say that in a mean spirited way, or as a personal attack, but this is the truth . . . . our industry is driven by supply and demand. This is true of helicopters themselves as well as the pilots who fly them.

The concept is simple, when there are more entry-level pilots than entry-level positions — as there has been for the last 7 years — then you better be competitive. 95% of the people who enter this U.S. market with the desire to become a career helicopter pilot better do two things: 1) Fly Robinsons and, 2) go all the way to CFII.

If you do not do those two things, you will have drastically reduced your chances for opportunity and being successful. Sure, there is a chance to be successful, but a VERY small one. Why would an operator hire an entry level person with the lowest ratings, when there are 9 CFII’s standing in the same line who will work for the same pay?

Our industry is kind of unique in that there are many different sectors that all have different experience requirements. But because there is essentially only one main entry level job source (flight training), it creates a supply log-jam as pilots funnel through. Take a look at the graphic I created about 7 years ago. It can flux a little left and right, but for the most part is an accurate reflection of reality.

HeliPilot_Lifecycle.jpg

Whereas the log-jam occurs at the entry level jobs (Flight Training), there is more equilibrium in the area of tours and GOM . . .for now. The projected experience gap lies in the area of EMS, GOM/IFR and other missions that demand more experience like firefighting, corporate, utility and so on where they want 2500+ + night + nvg + IFR or some other specialized experiences. The other problem we have is the absorption rate that occurs between the three largest sectors that make up the career tracks, i.e., flight training >>> GOM/Tours >>> EMS. They all have their own economies and are rarely in sync.

It is a known fact that the largest pilot demographic was created by the Vietnam war (which also is made up of baby boomers). It was always speculated a decade ago that they would be leaving when they hit around 60. As it turned out, with declining 401K’s from 2008 - 2010, and the fact that they are healthier . . .they are staying on board as long as they can keep a medical.

In the end that large population will leave, but not in a vacuum. It will not be like "poof" and they are all gone, but a steady attrition over just a few years. In the meantime though, global demand for helicopters will increase. Latin america has exploded, while emerging markets such as India and China are the next great frontier. Why do you suppose the OEM’s are all running east. Sure, more helicopters will be sold in the US in years to come, but the real fleet growth will be globally. Below is a chart to give you some perspective on projections. The slide was created about 3.5 years ago (not by me) and the data came from Helicas International.

HeliPilotDemand.jpg

3. You closed your post with, “You need more pilots with fat logbooks, we need more entry-level jobs!,...but no one ever writes an article about that?”

What’s to write?? It’s not like someone can snap a finger and create more flight schools, thereby creating more entry level jobs. Nor can the operators who foresee the need for increased supply snap their fingers and create more pilots . . . hence their long term investments. Again, supply and demand is the rule of the day.

Here is the cold hard reality that people entering in this industry need to understand. Your options are simple. A) Join the military —— or B) Go the traditional civilian track.

  1. If you go the civilian track, AS A MINIMUM — you better plan on flying a Robinson, becoming a CFII, having some other valuable skill besides just flying, and be willing to pay your dues in order to be competitive.
  2. You better plan on positioning yourself for flying tours or GOM as your next job.
  3. You better get your ATP the instant you have the hours to take the tests so that you are competitive for the next level jobs.

There is no amount of bitching or griping that will change these facts. Sure, some get lucky and fall into the rare opportunity because of being in the right place and right time, but that is the exception and not the rule. If people are spending their time and money banking on the exception . . .then they are fools. One needs to invest in a plan that’s rooted in the real world first, and if you get a lucky break, then be thankful.

Ps. Gonna get even harder here pretty soon. The Army just killed the Kiowa Warrior (basically a Bell 407), potentially putting 500 pilots out of a job. Many will take up new MOS’s, and some will transition to another airframe if positions are available. But many will be pushed out of the Army, and that will equal an influx of experienced light-turbine helicopter pilots, many of which will be competing for those same Tour and GOM jobs.

Think global. Think macro-economics. Think supply demand. Jobs don’t get created because you think they should be. They are what the industry demands and you must compete with the supply.

 

Thanks again for starting this thread, it has been most interesting.

  • Like 14
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

The Army just killed the Kiowa Warrior (basically a Bell 407), potentially putting 500 pilots out of a job. Many will take up new MOS’s, and some will transition to another airframe if positions are available. But many will be pushed out of the Army, and that will equal an influx of experienced light-turbine helicopter pilots, many of which will be competing for those same Tour and GOM jobs.

 

Do you have any empirical data that would indicate that? other than logic or deduction? Just curious. I'm ways out before even considering jumping from Mil-Civ, just wanted to know what the feel was around the market. I say that because I hear about pilots getting out all of the time, but lots (I would say the majority) on the DoN side typically don't go into flying post military employment. Unless it involves flying at a major airline. Obviously educational background plays here a bit, as I'm not sure how many warrants get out with a STEM degree and can employ themselves rapidly in another career field. Although I could be completely mistaken.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Do you have any empirical data that would indicate that? other than logic or deduction?

 

Not sure which piece of information you are asking me to support with data? That the Army is shutting down the Kiowa program? Or how many pilots will be impacted? Or what the options will be for those pilots who are impacted?

 

Regarding the Kiowa program . . .that is not new news:

http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/ain-defense-perspective/2014-03-05/presidents-fy2015-defense-budget-retires-oh-58-kiowas

 

Regarding the other points . . . at first it was my own logical deduction, but I then had the opportunity to speak with an active kiowa pilot who was very familiar with that community . . .she confirmed my deductions about a month ago when we spoke.

 

I was also recently embedded with two Army helicopter squadrons who are feeling the squeeze and I spoke to many of them about the issue. I even wrote an article and produced a video about them. The article speaks to the potential Apache cuts . . the video was really more about the training exercises. I spent about 8 days with a couple different units and this was a common topic of discussion.

 

If the Apaches stay with the Guard (and it looks like they might), but the Kiowa gets the axe, then those pilots will have no choice but to change jobs or get out if there is not a position available on another airframe. I guess another option I never considered is that the Army procures a new replacement scout platform, but what would that be and plus . . . the Army does nothing fast.

 

Article on page 24: http://content.yudu.com/A35eyh/October2014

 

Video is here: http://www.justhelicopters.com/Multi-Media/Videos/VideoPlayer/TabId/574/VideoId/443/Army-National-Guard-Helicopter-Air-Assault-Exercise.aspx

 

Here is another story by the Army Times about the issue

"The Army will evaluate about 800 pilots for potential retraining as the service prepares to eliminate the OH-58 Kiowa Warrior helicopter from its inventory."

http://www.armytimes.com/article/20140607/CAREERS/306070009/Panel-screen-hundreds-Kiowa-pilots

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...