Wattflyer RC Network: RC Universe :: RCU Magazine :: RCU Forums :: RCU Classifieds :: RCU User Reviews :: RCU YouTube
Home Who's Online Calendar Today's Posts RealTime Post Spy Mark Forums Read
Go Back   WattFlyer RC Electric Flight Forums - Discuss radio control eflight > Electric R/C Airplanes > Beginners
Register Members List Wattflyer Extras Articles Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Social Groups

Beginners New to e-power flying? Get the low down in here from experienced e-power RC pilots!

Thank you for your support (hide ads)
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-08-2012, 08:03 PM   #1
old flyer 84
New Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Arizona and Vermont
Posts: 11
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Club: Quiet Birdmen
iTrader: (0)
Friends: (0)
Default Define binding when applied to the TRX and RX

Being new to Rc airplanes after a 14 year layoff, can someone tell me what is meant by binding the TRX to the airplane RX. I have the Hubsan Spyhawk FPV ARF with the TV camera in the nose and the receiver screen on the TRX. However the Chinease manuals leave much to be desired.

Edit old flyer 83 to old flyer 84.
old flyer 84 is offline  
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2012, 08:22 PM   #2
JetPlaneFlyer
Super Contributor
 
JetPlaneFlyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland
Posts: 4,264
Thanked 471 Times in 439 Posts
Awards Showcase

5kW  Outstanding Contributor Award  1kW 
iTrader: (0)
Friends: (8)
Default

Binding is the process of connecting the receiver and transmitter together. During binding the receiver 'listens to' and 'remembers' the unique coding within the signal sent by your transmitter.

Once the receiver has memorised the transmitters unique code then it will respond only to that transmitter and ignore all others even if the frequencies coincide. This is why you don't need peg boards or any other frequency control when flying 2.4GHz.

The actual procedure to bind a receiver to a transmitter varies depending on brand.
JetPlaneFlyer is offline  
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2012, 10:48 PM   #3
old flyer 84
New Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Arizona and Vermont
Posts: 11
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Club: Quiet Birdmen
iTrader: (0)
Friends: (0)
Default Binding

Thanks for the explanation. Very helpful

Edit old flyer 83 to old flyer 84.
old flyer 84 is offline  
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 01:21 AM   #4
Beemerider
Member
 
Beemerider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Shenandoah Valley Of Virginia
Posts: 386
Thanked 9 Times in 9 Posts
Club: Augusta County RC Club
iTrader: (0)
Friends: (1)
Default

Kinda like pairing a bluetooth earpiece to a cellphone.
Beemerider is offline  
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2012, 01:45 AM   #5
Rockin Robbins
Super Contributor
 
Rockin Robbins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: DeLand, FL
Posts: 1,604
Thanked 134 Times in 132 Posts
iTrader: (0)
Friends: (8)
Default

And that's what a five star thread looks like! I want to give it six stars for the best explanation and analogy possible.
Rockin Robbins is offline  
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2012, 04:59 AM   #6
solentlife
Super Contributor
 
solentlife's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Ex UK Brit now in Latvia west coast - Ventspils
Posts: 5,861
View solentlife's Gallery47
Thanked 225 Times in 222 Posts
Club: Founder Member Ventspils RC Club. Ex Waltham Chase and Meon Valley Soaring.
Awards Showcase

Scratchbuilders Award  Scratchbuilders Award  Outstanding Contributor Award  125mph Speed Demon 
iTrader: (0)
Friends: (15)
Default

Originally Posted by JetPlaneFlyer View Post
......
Once the receiver has memorised the transmitters unique code then it will respond only to that transmitter and ignore all others even if the frequencies coincide.
Actually not as I understand it strictly true ... if two Tx's co-incide on freq - the signal will be unintelligible to both Tx's ... but because the Tx's hop about the freq band - the Rx will follow the Tx when hopping and hear clear code / signal to follow. This is well illustrated by the Vers 1 9x and also DSM2 Spektrum that only used 2 spots ... later Vers 2 9x uses 16 spots I believe ...

This is why you don't need peg boards or any other frequency control when flying 2.4GHz.
True - but based on hopping system again. The principle being that so many variations of hopping, so many slots etc. etc. - the chance of a Rx getting a clear code and signal is near guaranteed. So far no-one has really come up with definitive number of Tx's on at one time to swamp the 2.4Ghz band and produce similar to old Mhz days ...


No disrespect - just fine-tuning reply ...

Nigel

222kph PKJ,EDF Concorde, Mini4,Mig3,T45,PKJ twin,ME109,Edge540,Cessna182,Skymaster Biplane,F15,F16,Badius,Ultimate,SE5,Qbee10,450 Heli,V911,J3 Cub Founder 9x forum: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Flysky_RC_radio/
- Subscribe my Youtube: "solentlifeuk"
solentlife is offline  
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2012, 05:34 AM   #7
kyleservicetech
Dennis V
 
kyleservicetech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Posts: 7,867
Thanked 670 Times in 653 Posts
Club: www.racinercclub.com (I'm the newsletter editor)
Awards Showcase

Outstanding Contributor Award  3kW  2kW  100mph Speed Demon 
iTrader: (1)
Friends: (20)
Default

Originally Posted by solentlife View Post
Actually not as I understand it strictly true ... if two Tx's co-incide on freq - the signal will be unintelligible to both Tx's ... but because the Tx's hop about the freq band - the Rx will follow the Tx when hopping and hear clear code / signal to follow. This is well illustrated by the Vers 1 9x and also DSM2 Spektrum that only used 2 spots ... later Vers 2 9x uses 16 spots I believe ...



True - but based on hopping system again. The principle being that so many variations of hopping, so many slots etc. etc. - the chance of a Rx getting a clear code and signal is near guaranteed. So far no-one has really come up with definitive number of Tx's on at one time to swamp the 2.4Ghz band and produce similar to old Mhz days ...


No disrespect - just fine-tuning reply ...

Nigel
In theory, two 2.4 Ghz transmitters should never be transmitting on two identical frequencies. Those transmitters first look for clear frequencies, and use them, per FCC guidelines.

If you google Direct Sequence Spread Spectrum, there is a lot of information on just how all this stuff works. Spektrum/JR's DSSS system uses a very high level mathematics system for modulating the transmitted 2.4 Ghz frequencies. It might be that you could have good reception even if two transmitters are transmitting on the same frequency.
http://rfdesign.com/images/archive/0900McCune90.pdf

The now defunct RC Report magazine did some tests years ago where they turned on some 40 Spektrum, Futaba and one other brand transmitters at the same time, then flew a 2.4 Ghz model directly over those transmitters. Spektrum receivers had no problems, Futaba got hit a little, another brand (no I won't say which one) completely went out of control. RC Report also found that these 2.4 Ghz radios had a line of sight range of some three MILES.

If you wonder how this can all work, just take a look at your cellphone. Similar type of operation.

Nowdays, Spektrum went to the DSMX system which is both spread spectrum and frequency hopping. Spektrum did tests where 100 transmitters were all turned on at the same time. That might be approaching the upper limit with the DSMX systems.

I picked up a "Spectrum Analyzer" awhile ago that allows examination of the 2.4 Ghz frequencies. It was interesting, the Futaba frequency hopping system transmitted right on on top of both of the frequencies selected by my Spektrum DX7 transmitter. Had no effect on its receiver. Note that the Spektrum system uses a "wide band" signal, where the Futaba transmits on a "Narrow Band" signal.

Take a look:
http://www.wattflyer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=63497

DennyV
Retired and the days are just too short, busier than ever!
kyleservicetech is online now  
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2012, 08:35 AM   #8
JetPlaneFlyer
Super Contributor
 
JetPlaneFlyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland
Posts: 4,264
Thanked 471 Times in 439 Posts
Awards Showcase

5kW  Outstanding Contributor Award  1kW 
iTrader: (0)
Friends: (8)
Default

Originally Posted by solentlife View Post
Actually not as I understand it strictly true ... if two Tx's co-incide on freq - the signal will be unintelligible to both Tx's ... but because the Tx's hop about the freq band - the Rx will follow the Tx when hopping and hear clear code / signal to follow. This is well illustrated by the Vers 1 9x and also DSM2 Spektrum that only used 2 spots ... later Vers 2 9x uses 16 spots I believe ...
It's a complex area and it's hard to give a concise answer and be precisely correct in every detail for every system. However my understanding is that some systems (Spektrum DSM2 for instance) do have a high degree of on channel interference resistance.
It's discussed in this Spektrum advertising blurb: http://www.horizonhobby.co.uk/aeroon...smx_about.html
JetPlaneFlyer is offline  
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2012, 05:51 PM   #9
kyleservicetech
Dennis V
 
kyleservicetech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Posts: 7,867
Thanked 670 Times in 653 Posts
Club: www.racinercclub.com (I'm the newsletter editor)
Awards Showcase

Outstanding Contributor Award  3kW  2kW  100mph Speed Demon 
iTrader: (1)
Friends: (20)
Default

Originally Posted by JetPlaneFlyer View Post
It's a complex area and it's hard to give a concise answer and be precisely correct in every detail for every system. However my understanding is that some systems (Spektrum DSM2 for instance) do have a high degree of on channel interference resistance.
It's discussed in this Spektrum advertising blurb: http://www.horizonhobby.co.uk/aeroon...smx_about.html
I've picked up a Spektrum DX8 with DSMX technology this past summer, and am quite happy with it.

There is a lot of information on the internet about Spektrums DSMX system and what it is. However, I can't find anything about Futaba's FASST system outside of the fact that it has error checking capabilities. That's something easily done with the capabilities of the computer chips used in our radios. There is also some suggestion that FASST technology is not compatible with the Futaba FHSS systems, at least in the lower cost transmitters.

Do any wattflyer readers have any technical info on this FASST system and just how it operates?

DennyV
Retired and the days are just too short, busier than ever!
kyleservicetech is online now  
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2012, 05:01 AM   #10
solentlife
Super Contributor
 
solentlife's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Ex UK Brit now in Latvia west coast - Ventspils
Posts: 5,861
View solentlife's Gallery47
Thanked 225 Times in 222 Posts
Club: Founder Member Ventspils RC Club. Ex Waltham Chase and Meon Valley Soaring.
Awards Showcase

Scratchbuilders Award  Scratchbuilders Award  Outstanding Contributor Award  125mph Speed Demon 
iTrader: (0)
Friends: (15)
Default

Surely all 2.4 systems must have error checking to ID the code and also the transmitted info. As I underestand from all the blurb on web ... such as RCModelreviews etc. - when error checking indicates faulty info - it retains previous until receives next error free info ... or goes to failsafe / no control if no good info received after set time... all in tiny time frame of course.

And lets also be honest that PCM has been around longer in RC than 2.4Ghz and was using code ID in its signal info ... look at the old JR Propo of the 1980's .......

I think all manufacturers like to claim things that at end of day others have ... bit like Volvo with crumple zones and airbags !!

Nigel

222kph PKJ,EDF Concorde, Mini4,Mig3,T45,PKJ twin,ME109,Edge540,Cessna182,Skymaster Biplane,F15,F16,Badius,Ultimate,SE5,Qbee10,450 Heli,V911,J3 Cub Founder 9x forum: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Flysky_RC_radio/
- Subscribe my Youtube: "solentlifeuk"
solentlife is offline  
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2012, 06:36 AM   #11
kyleservicetech
Dennis V
 
kyleservicetech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Posts: 7,867
Thanked 670 Times in 653 Posts
Club: www.racinercclub.com (I'm the newsletter editor)
Awards Showcase

Outstanding Contributor Award  3kW  2kW  100mph Speed Demon 
iTrader: (1)
Friends: (20)
Default

Originally Posted by solentlife View Post
Surely all 2.4 systems must have error checking to ID the code and also the transmitted info. As I underestand from all the blurb on web ... such as RCModelreviews etc. - when error checking indicates faulty info - it retains previous until receives next error free info ... or goes to failsafe / no control if no good info received after set time... all in tiny time frame of course.

And lets also be honest that PCM has been around longer in RC than 2.4Ghz and was using code ID in its signal info ... look at the old JR Propo of the 1980's .......

I think all manufacturers like to claim things that at end of day others have ... bit like Volvo with crumple zones and airbags !!

Nigel
Yeah, that's the confusing part of Futabas FASST system. Their ads show "error checking". (http://www.futaba-rc.com/technology/fasst.html)

Error checking is nothing new. I designed several different computer chip controlled brush type ESC in the mid 1980's and 1990's that had error checking. And I'm by no means a real expert in this sort of stuff. Those brushless ESC's are several orders of magnitude more complex than those brush type ESC's I built.

DennyV
Retired and the days are just too short, busier than ever!
kyleservicetech is online now  
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 01:04 PM   #12
AEAJR
Community Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: NY, USA
Posts: 5,301
Thanked 346 Times in 308 Posts
Club: Long Island Silent Flyers
Awards Showcase

WAA-08 Pilot  Outstanding Contributor Award 
iTrader: (0)
Friends: (8)
Default

Whether two 2.4 GHz transmitters on the same frequency will interfere or not is irrelevent to the pilot as it is not something he will see or have any way to control. The RF systems in the radios take care of this so that we don't have to worry about it. How it works may be interesting but not useful in the context of flying model airplanes.

Long Island Silent Flyers
www.lisf.org
Eastern Soaring League
www.flyesl.org
AEAJR is offline  
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 02:59 PM   #13
FlyWheel
Ochroma Lagopus Tekton
 
FlyWheel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Blackstock, South Carolina
Posts: 2,531
View FlyWheel's Gallery5
Thanked 70 Times in 68 Posts
Club: Lancaster County Fliers
iTrader: (0)
Friends: (3)
Default

Actually, I think binding began before 2.4 came out. My HiTec Flash5 - a 72MHz reciever that came out (I believe) before the release of 2.4 had a primitive form of binding; each TX had a coded signal that the RX would Learn when it was turned on, and would from then on only respond to the TX that transmited it's comand via/with that code. It wouldn't shift frequencies, obviously. I don't even know if that's possible (legal?) with 72Megs; I don't see why not, but then I'm not a radio engineer. do know I've never had a problem with TX "cross commands", even when 72 was in common use.

Posted via Mobile Device
FlyWheel is offline  
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 04:58 PM   #14
AEAJR
Community Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: NY, USA
Posts: 5,301
Thanked 346 Times in 308 Posts
Club: Long Island Silent Flyers
Awards Showcase

WAA-08 Pilot  Outstanding Contributor Award 
iTrader: (0)
Friends: (8)
Default

Could you fly your Flash 5 on the same 72 mhz as another pilot? No.

There were berg receivers that claimed they could learn the specific character of the individual radio. This would protect the berg pilot with the Berg but not the other pilot. There was no binding or concept of binding.

Long Island Silent Flyers
www.lisf.org
Eastern Soaring League
www.flyesl.org
AEAJR is offline  
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2012, 11:39 PM   #15
kyleservicetech
Dennis V
 
kyleservicetech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Posts: 7,867
Thanked 670 Times in 653 Posts
Club: www.racinercclub.com (I'm the newsletter editor)
Awards Showcase

Outstanding Contributor Award  3kW  2kW  100mph Speed Demon 
iTrader: (1)
Friends: (20)
Default

Originally Posted by AEAJR View Post
Whether two 2.4 GHz transmitters on the same frequency will interfere or not is irrelevent to the pilot as it is not something he will see or have any way to control. The RF systems in the radios take care of this so that we don't have to worry about it. How it works may be interesting but not useful in the context of flying model airplanes.
Yup, for 99% of the RC'rs, the important part is these 2.4 Ghz radios work, not how they work.

Reminds me back in college, where on the first day, one of the students asked the teacher "How does a superhetrodyne receiver work?" Teachers response, "Very Well!"

We did cover that subject completely later on in the course.

DennyV
Retired and the days are just too short, busier than ever!
kyleservicetech is online now  
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2012, 12:16 AM   #16
rcers
Community Moderator
 
rcers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Trophy Club TX
Posts: 6,148
View rcers's Gallery57
Thanked 498 Times in 488 Posts
Awards Showcase

WAA-08 Pilot 
iTrader: (4)
Friends: (9)
Default

Originally Posted by FlyWheel View Post
Actually, I think binding began before 2.4 came out. My HiTec Flash5 - a 72MHz reciever that came out (I believe) before the release of 2.4 had a primitive form of binding; each TX had a coded signal that the RX would Learn when it was turned on, and would from then on only respond to the TX that transmited it's comand via/with that code.
Actually there was nothing like that on Hitec or any other system.

Ed is right Berg claimed very high levels of rejection on the same channel but both were still likely to lose all control.

Originally Posted by FlyWheel View Post
It wouldn't shift frequencies, obviously. I don't even know if that's possible (legal?) with 72Megs; I don't see why not, but then I'm not a radio engineer. do know I've never had a problem with TX "cross commands", even when 72 was in common use.

Posted via Mobile Device
Correct it would not, and legally could not, change channels. The crystal in your RX was only on that channel.

Some advanced systems would allow the transmitter to dial another channel (all on the ground) and they did eventually get synthesised receivers that didn't rely on a single channel but could also select any frequency. This was all on the ground changes however. We affectionatly called them "dial a crash".

The spread spectrum 2.4 GHz air system Spektrum brought to the industry was simply remarkable. We were well entrenched in single channel operation and frequency control. The spread spectrum changed that for the better.

The large events had a very sophisticated system in place to attempt to control the few fixed channels we were allowed to use. It really was the dark ages. Now we know that.

I don't miss those days even one tiny little bit.

rcers is offline  
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2012, 10:02 PM   #17
FlyWheel
Ochroma Lagopus Tekton
 
FlyWheel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Blackstock, South Carolina
Posts: 2,531
View FlyWheel's Gallery5
Thanked 70 Times in 68 Posts
Club: Lancaster County Fliers
iTrader: (0)
Friends: (3)
Default

Originally Posted by AEAJR View Post
Could you fly your Flash 5 on the same 72 mhz as another pilot? No.

There were berg receivers that claimed they could learn the specific character of the individual radio. This would protect the berg pilot with the Berg but not the other pilot. There was no binding or concept of binding.
You're right - my bad - it was the RX that learned the particular signals from TX, and even then a stronger signal will override it.

And as you pointed out it wouldn't prevent another brand of RX on the same Freq from being hijacked by my transmitter's signal.

Hey, I did say it was primitive.

I wonder why they couldn't do the same binding channel hopping thing with 72 though? I mean now that they have the technology?

Couldn't they make them better than they were before?

Better? Stronger? Fast... Oh wait, wrong technology.

Posted via Mobile Device
FlyWheel is offline  
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2012, 10:36 PM   #18
JetPlaneFlyer
Super Contributor
 
JetPlaneFlyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland
Posts: 4,264
Thanked 471 Times in 439 Posts
Awards Showcase

5kW  Outstanding Contributor Award  1kW 
iTrader: (0)
Friends: (8)
Default

Originally Posted by FlyWheel View Post
I wonder why they couldn't do the same binding channel hopping thing with 72 though? I mean now that they have the technology?
I think that fundamental problem would be that the much lower frequency carrier wave wouldn't be able to carry all the data required anywhere near fast enough.
JetPlaneFlyer is offline  
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2012, 12:14 AM   #19
kyleservicetech
Dennis V
 
kyleservicetech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Posts: 7,867
Thanked 670 Times in 653 Posts
Club: www.racinercclub.com (I'm the newsletter editor)
Awards Showcase

Outstanding Contributor Award  3kW  2kW  100mph Speed Demon 
iTrader: (1)
Friends: (20)
Default

Originally Posted by JetPlaneFlyer View Post
I think that fundamental problem would be that the much lower frequency carrier wave wouldn't be able to carry all the data required anywhere near fast enough.
Exactly.
One thing of note with radio frequencies, and the modulation of those frequencies. Basically, the more stuff you cram into the radio frequency, the wider the bandwidth of that frequency becomes.

Since by definition, the 72 Mhz frequencies were considered "narrow band", it would not be possible to carry all the data required, and keep the transmitted frequency narrow band.

DennyV
Retired and the days are just too short, busier than ever!
kyleservicetech is online now  
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2012, 11:11 PM   #20
old flyer 84
New Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Arizona and Vermont
Posts: 11
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Club: Quiet Birdmen
iTrader: (0)
Friends: (0)
Default Nuclear melt down

I' m so sorry I asked the simple question. Ididn't know The respose was going to be like a nuclear chain reaction. When I was flying the big iron we had this guy who was a stickler for detail. If you asked him what time it was he would tell you how to build a watch.

Edit old flyer 83 to old flyer 84.
old flyer 84 is offline  
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2012, 12:56 AM   #21
kyleservicetech
Dennis V
 
kyleservicetech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Posts: 7,867
Thanked 670 Times in 653 Posts
Club: www.racinercclub.com (I'm the newsletter editor)
Awards Showcase

Outstanding Contributor Award  3kW  2kW  100mph Speed Demon 
iTrader: (1)
Friends: (20)
Default

Originally Posted by old flyer 84 View Post
I' m so sorry I asked the simple question. Ididn't know The respose was going to be like a nuclear chain reaction. When I was flying the big iron we had this guy who was a stickler for detail. If you asked him what time it was he would tell you how to build a watch.
Nope

My guess is that more than a few wattflyer readers have some interest in this type of question.

As a result, we all learn a bit of stuff we didn't know before.

DennyV
Retired and the days are just too short, busier than ever!
kyleservicetech is online now  
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2012, 10:32 AM   #22
AEAJR
Community Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: NY, USA
Posts: 5,301
Thanked 346 Times in 308 Posts
Club: Long Island Silent Flyers
Awards Showcase

WAA-08 Pilot  Outstanding Contributor Award 
iTrader: (0)
Friends: (8)
Default

Originally Posted by old flyer 84 View Post
I' m so sorry I asked the simple question. Ididn't know The respose was going to be like a nuclear chain reaction. When I was flying the big iron we had this guy who was a stickler for detail. If you asked him what time it was he would tell you how to build a watch.
But, do you now have what you need? If not, ask it again.

Long Island Silent Flyers
www.lisf.org
Eastern Soaring League
www.flyesl.org
AEAJR is offline  
  Reply With Quote
Reply

  WattFlyer RC Electric Flight Forums - Discuss radio control eflight > Electric R/C Airplanes > Beginners

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:34 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2005 WattfFlyer.com
RCU Eflight HQ

Charities we support Select: Yorkie Rescue  ::  Crohn's & Colitis Foundation



Page generated in 0.34443 seconds with 62 queries