banner
banner

28 Mar 2024, 21:30 [ UTC - 5; DST ]


Concorde Battery (banner)



Reply to topic  [ 104 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
Username Protected Message
 Post subject: Re: AF new CAS aircraft
PostPosted: 01 Oct 2018, 12:20 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 08/26/15
Posts: 9514
Post Likes: +8745
Company: airlines (*CRJ,A320)
Location: Florida panhandle
Aircraft: Travel Air,T-6B,etc*
Username Protected wrote:
Isn't a gun being fitted on some F-35s or did I read that wrong? If strafing doesn't work anymore, why would that be?

It's for when you're too close for missiles and you have to switch to... something else.

Image


Top

 Post subject: Re: AF new CAS aircraft
PostPosted: 01 Oct 2018, 12:22 
Offline



User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 08/23/11
Posts: 2106
Post Likes: +1977
Company: Delta/ check o'the month club
Location: Meridian , ID (KEUL)
Aircraft: 1968 Bonanza 36
Only the USAF version has an internal gun. (3 barrel 25mm) The USN/USMC versions will have to carry a gun pod if they want to strafe. (bye-bye stealth)


Top

 Post subject: Re: AF new CAS aircraft
PostPosted: 01 Oct 2018, 12:36 
Online


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 12/16/07
Posts: 17513
Post Likes: +21031
Company: Real Estate development
Location: Addison -North Dallas(ADS), Texas
Aircraft: In between
Thanks Ben.

_________________
Dave Siciliano, ATP


Top

 Post subject: Re: AF new CAS aircraft
PostPosted: 01 Oct 2018, 14:45 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 07/02/13
Posts: 3127
Post Likes: +2979
Location: Stamping Ground, Ky
Aircraft: twin bonanza
Username Protected wrote:
Isn't a gun being fitted on some F-35s or did I read that wrong? If strafing doesn't work anymore, why would that be?

Strafing works, but slant ranges put you smack in the middle of small arms and manpads during a strafe pass, and locked in on the sight. Occasions where it is the best option are not as common as you would think. Even with the new stabilization systems, 6000 slant range is probably max tactical effective against soft targets, and even with 30 mm, 2-3000 foot slant range for hard targets.

Strafe has some use, but I wouldn’t field an entire weapon system around it, if that system doesn’t do anything else.


Top

 Post subject: Re: AF new CAS aircraft
PostPosted: 01 Oct 2018, 20:18 
Online


 Profile




Joined: 11/07/09
Posts: 1346
Post Likes: +772
Location: North Florida
Username Protected wrote:
Yes, and there is talk of the F-35 performing this mission. How many rounds in the gun when it arrives? How many bombs (I know the answer). What kind of loiter, and are you really going to bring that aircraft down to a level where it would be vulnerable to small arms?


...probably a rhetorical question Dave, but I'll answer it...what the hell...every Infantryman and Marine, active and retired, knows instinctively the F-35 will never get down in the weeds with them in the fight...our friends in Blue know the same...JTACs know it better than everyone else...

...loiter time--poor...ammo--not nearly as lethal or plentiful as the Hog...

...and our friends in Blue's position on the F-35 and CAS has been a moving target, so to speak...first the F-35 was going to be an adequate replacement for the Hog in the CAS mission, until it wasn't...and, then it was...hard to keep track...it's all B.S.

...interesting, against my better judgment because of the Anthem protests I went to the Jaguars game yesterday against the Jets as I had been gifted some tickets for the game so I wanted to be a good scout and appreciative and all...two F-35s performed the flyover...awesome of course...but my immediate thoughts were that they were too fast and thin skinned for the CAS mission--just like all fast movers really ...as an aside, the Anthem was handled well actually...


Top

 Post subject: Re: AF new CAS aircraft
PostPosted: 01 Oct 2018, 21:47 
Online


 Profile




Joined: 11/07/09
Posts: 1346
Post Likes: +772
Location: North Florida
"Strafing works, but slant ranges put you smack in the middle of small arms and manpads during a strafe pass"

...well, gee...let's just give up then...heaven forbid if our friends in Blue are put "smack in the middle of small arms fire"...


Top

 Post subject: Re: AF new CAS aircraft
PostPosted: 01 Oct 2018, 22:36 
Online


 Profile




Joined: 11/07/09
Posts: 1346
Post Likes: +772
Location: North Florida
" Another load of mistruths"

...nice...but actually these are pretty revealing comments...demonstrates what the Army has been facing as far as the AF not living up to their CAS promises in exchange for taking the DOD fixed winged dollars......and goes to my point of the Infantry/Armor mentality versus the AF mentality

" If you want a lot of loiter time and a huge load of precision ordinance, a B1 loaded with JDAMs is tough to beat. There are a number of scenarios where an AC130 or F18 are a better choice for CAS than a Hog"

...we could all dream up several CAS scenarios where the Bone or Spectre might be more useful than the Hog...so what?

...yea, and JDAMs are tough to beat, until they are not...like when the enemy is danger close and trying to kill you...you bring JDAMs into that scenario and a lot of friendlies will die

"Giving CAS assets to a Division Commander isn’t a great way to use CAS. Never saw one who really understood how to use it. One of the constants in dealing with the Army was trying to keep them from calling for CAS when their own arty could range the threat."

... sure, so now our Army Division Commanders don't understand CAS...B.S., but again pretty telling coming from our friends in blue...our Division Commanders are among the most gifted individuals, not to mention among the most proficient Combat Arms Officers, on the planet...they damn sure understand CAS, and if they were in charge of the CAS assets, you'd have a lot more Hogs in Theater than Bones...and, the JTACs would support their moves all the way...

...good lord, our friends in blue don't even understand the distinction between CAS and Artillery and when our troops on the ground would prefer one over the other...

...and to borrow the phrase from the former Senate Armed Forces Chairman, "ranging the threat" is quite a remarkable statement in this contextt...."ranging" the threat has little to do with the decision making process between selecting CAS and arty...hell, you could "range" the threat with Naval Gunfire, but that doesn't mean you would want to call it in on top of you with the bad guys in the next trench over

...another remarkable statement:

"Not sure how often I’ve said it, but the idea that A10s can operate from a Forward location with the Army is a fantasy. They don’t do that any better than any other jet. 7-8000feet of runway, fuel munitions and maintenance sounds like an airfield."


...so, Sprey is wrong also, sure....your argument is wearing pretty thin...the Army would make it work deployed well forward...

:popcorn:

Sprey on the A-10

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rEdy84YGf1k

" Because of low speed, Hogs are more susceptible to small arms than fast movers. Witness Desert Storm and the altitude restrictions imposed there because of high losses. 10k iirc, with an allowance down to 5k when delivering ordinance."

…another remarkable statement...no kidding, aircraft performing the CAS mission will be more susceptible to small arms fire...that is why the Hog has a better chance of surviving against small arms fire than the fast movers

..the fact that the AF imposed altitude restrictions on the Hog has nothing really to do with the current debate, other than to reinforce the AF's high risk intolerance...

"It is a good low threat airplane, but high threat, you end up wasting assets with no real results, except having to train a bunch of replacements".

…POGO says differently...course they are wrong too I guess according to our friends in blue...

"Classic CAS isn’t anymore. Anyone with a rover pod can deliver insanely accurate munitions."

...don't know if the argument is over yet...according to the AF just a few years ago they said the Hog "isn't" anymore, until Congress told them otherwise...

...and that we have capabilities to deliver accurate munitions from other aircraft is another strawman argument...

...and as the JTACs have told Congress, the so called "insanely" accurate munitions don't do the trick in many CAS scenarios...that they are not as nearly accurate as claimed and can be impacted by environmental factors

...this argument of course totally ignores the benefit of the Hog in performing CAS in the traditional sense by assisting the troops on the ground to shape the battlefield...


Top

 Post subject: Re: AF new CAS aircraft
PostPosted: 01 Oct 2018, 22:57 
Online


 Profile




Joined: 11/07/09
Posts: 1346
Post Likes: +772
Location: North Florida
"FWIW, the number one tank killer in Desert Storm was the F111..."

...not sure that is accurate...but, even if true--your confusing Air Interdiction Missions with CAS

"Strafing attacks are neat, but only useful and practical in very limited situations. In those situations, an AC130 is nice to have around."

...yea, and in those so called "very limited" situations our troops on the ground deserve an Aircraft that can deliver...and a pilot that takes on the mission with enthusiasm

...the notion that the AC130 can perform in danger close environments like the HOG can is yet another remarkable statement...talk about mistruths

"The supposed “advantage” of the slow speed of the A10 is a rationalization, not a realistic assessment of the aircraft’s capabilities. F16s actually turn just as tight a turn circle. The difference is, they can operate at corner speed, whereas as the Hog is immediately way below corner as soon as the turn is commenced."

... :scratch: ...no way a fast mover can operate in limited terrain and low ceilings all the while keeping the enemy and battlefield in sight as the Hog can

"High threat CAS the way the army rank and file imagine it would require hundreds of expendable aircraft and pilots. We can’t afford either one. That reality is why the AF would like to get rid of the A10. Other platforms do CAS as well, and in some cases better, than the Hog."

...POGO says differently...that, if the Hog is operating in an Combined Arms concept and the Army is directly taking on the enemies AD assets and keeping their heads down then it could work

...of course History tells us the AF has been attempting to get rid of the A10 for decades...the "high threat CAS" argument is just the latest ploy...

...History also tells us that the AF has been goldbricking on the CAS mission for decades...but yet, they still keep backing up to the teller to take the DOD CAS monies...talk about Treason...


Top

 Post subject: Re: AF new CAS aircraft
PostPosted: 02 Oct 2018, 00:21 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 07/02/13
Posts: 3127
Post Likes: +2979
Location: Stamping Ground, Ky
Aircraft: twin bonanza
Donald, you just don’t have a clue what CAS flight ops are like. Most if not all of your talking points are woefully misguided. Not much point I trying to educate someone whose mind is so slammed shut. My opinions were formed after a couple of Hog tours, in three theaters, and an ALO assignment with a squadron of JTACs. Yours appear to come from pr fluff pieces.
What Sprey designed and what the Hog is actually capable of are not completely congruent. Not the first time that has happened to jet fighters.

FWIW, an F35 is in all probability every bit as tough as the Hog. I recall an Eagle rtbing with a 12 inch stub for a wing. THAT is tough.

You have absolutely no idea about how a Hog or F16 might or might not operate under low ceilings or from FOLs, or what CAS is like from the cockpit. I’ve tried to explain things a bit, as have others. You seem unwilling or incapable of learning anything from the discussion.

You just seem to need a platform to belittle the Air Force. Carry on.


Top

 Post subject: Re: AF new CAS aircraft
PostPosted: 14 Oct 2018, 12:21 
Online


 Profile




Joined: 11/07/09
Posts: 1346
Post Likes: +772
Location: North Florida
"FWIW, an F35 is in all probability every bit as tough as the Hog. "

...of all the remarkable statements in this thread, this one is the most remarkable...pretty much speaks for itself...and you received eight "likes", equally remarkable

"You have absolutely no idea about how a Hog or F16 might or might not operate under low ceilings"

...I know that a Hog can operate in low ceilings where a F16 might not be able to...FACT...and I know the AF has lied about the capabilities of their Fast Mover's ability to replace the HOG CAS Capabilities...another FACT

...many examples in our current War On Terror where the HOG has flown in low ceiling conditions and supported our troops when the fast movers couldn't have completed or even attempted the mission...FACT...that's undisputable

______

...but stepping back a second from all the rancor....interesting thread, and I'd bet a case of beer that if you sat down a dozen active and recently retired JTACs and had them read this thread that they would support my views over the views of the AF fast mover and Hog drivers that have derided my comments...and that's interesting to contemplate, indeed

...you gotta wonder to of the comments of our resident Hog driver and other Fast Mover pilots that have chimed in basically concluding that I "don't know anything about CAS"...of course not, how could an Army Infantry Officer whose service included a tour as a Rifle Company Commander in the 101ST possible know anything about CAS? ...but setting myself aside for an el' momento...of course POGO doesn't know anything about CAS either, nor the former Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman, or the JTACs, or the majority of Congress, or Marine Corps Officers that have recently been in the fight, or the other Hog pilots who counter what has been set forth on this thread...of course not, they "don't know anything about CAS" either...right

...and, if what is being said by the Hog pilots and fast mover pilots on this thread is to be taken as "Gospel", then why the necessity of the AF's deception on grounding the Hog in all their testimony before Congress? … and why did AF leadership threaten its own JTACs with "Treason" if they spoke to Congress about the Hog's capabilities? .

...was thinking though also as well as it pertains to the Hog's capability to operate forward with our ground maneuver elements...our resident Hog driver says this is a far fetched idea, and implies that it requires the runway requirements suitable for our Space Shuttles and Hilton lodging for its crew ...I'd say not so fast, for many reasons...

...despite Sprey's comments being derided on this thread--yea, what does he know?--Sprey rightfully points out that the Hog could operate well forward based on a variety of factors, all relevant

...as far as the 7000 foot take off minimum for the HOG? ...hell, 7K can be carved out of a stretch of the blown up section of the Autobahn...7K is easy to find for a makeshift air strip...and that was pretty much the plan back in the day...if the WP attacked in a Third World Scenario then the AF bases would have been the first targeted, and in actuality the AF planned on moving many of their aircraft--and esp. the Hog--out of their resident bases before the balloon went up

...and once the balloon went up, there would be few original air bases to return to after the WP unleashed its special operators, air attacks, and long range missles on them...the Hog would actually have a higher survival rate being deployed up forward than in one of the massive air bases that were far too vulnerable to attack.....and your kidding yourself if you don't think the 7K minimum take off requirements wouldn't be busted in a WP Attack scenario

.


Top

 Post subject: Re: AF new CAS aircraft
PostPosted: 14 Oct 2018, 13:19 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 01/21/14
Posts: 5098
Post Likes: +3641
Company: FAA Flight Check
Location: Oklahoma City, OK (KOKC)
Aircraft: King Air 300F/C90GTx
First - I'll update my previous comment from this thread:


:bang: :bang:

Second.

I've sent parts of this thread to two other former A-10 pilot and one of them also flew F-16s.
There comments were they your comments were (and I'll paraphrase) HOGwash :lol:

We really have no proof of how hearty a F-35 might be.
Not enough time.

You don't KNOW anything about a A-10, or other aircraft might operate under certain weather conditions, because you have no experience. Your thoughts on this matter are irrelevant. People who have operated in such conditions contradict your opinions.

You can not come up with one instance where ONLY A-10s could support our TIC, yet I provided one example (with video proof available if you are interested enough to see your contention proved wrong) where one of the "fast movers" conducted CAS under the weather when A-10 refused the mission.

I'll take that case of beer as I have been there and had those same conversation and have heard other opinions than yours. I don't know how an Army Infantryman who had a tour as a Rifle Company Commander could know more about CAS than "our resident Hog driver and other Fast Mover pilots" who have trained for and flown CAS missions for years and years. Seems to me that in most circles - your claims of more knowledge of how aircraft conduct CAS mission and the capabilities of such would be viewed with great suspicison (if not right out humor).

Operating out of a FOB for some type of capability written up in some 'white paper' is one thing, yet when it came down to even forward basing HARRIERS (VTOL/STOL for goodness sakes) forward to the fight, it wasn't done by the big bosses. Could it had been done? Do they train for it? Is the capability there? YES to all. Was it done? NO.

Once again Donald - you have proven that you are far out of your element in this particular discussion and your reciting talk-points is paper-thin. I've had FAR more infantry training in all aspects than you have had aviation training and I would never think of trying to discuss/argue the finer points of infantry maneuvering with you, though I figure that the TTPs of which you are familiar with are probably as old school and unacceptable as some of your thoughts about how "REAL" CAS is accomplished.

I'll end with the fact that TYPE I CAS is the LEAST desirable, hardest to conduct, and more prone to failure than any other type of CAS TTPs - ESPECIALLY in the current theater(s) of operation(s).


Top

 Post subject: Re: AF new CAS aircraft
PostPosted: 14 Oct 2018, 13:43 
Online


 Profile




Joined: 11/07/09
Posts: 1346
Post Likes: +772
Location: North Florida
"you can not come up with one instance where ONLY A-10s could support our TIC"

...well, my friend there is this one as referenced below...and there are many more...I pasted excerpts, but please do review the entire article and offer your opinions...inquiring minds and all...and when you do, please check your hyperbole at the door

...my favorite part of the article, and if I may dare say, somewhat relevant to this thread is posted immediately below...maybe I should draw it in Crayon for you fast movers:

:popcorn:

The Hornets had been unable to penetrate the weather deck that encompassed the valley and mountains around the area where the Marines were fighting for their lives.

The Hog pilots checked in with the Hornets who provided a quick handover, checked off station and turned toward their carrier which was operating in the Arabian Sea. It was now an A-10 only mission.

...we were not going to orbit overhead and listen to them die.
:popcorn:

https://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/how-t ... 1806510162

How Two A-10 Pilots Saved a Group of Marines

"In late October 2008 in northwestern Afghanistan, six members of a Marine Special Operations Team were minutes away from being overrun by Taliban fighters. Surrounded by a larger enemy force, the Marines had called for air support, but dense cloud cover over the valley the Marines were trapped in was making it impossible for Navy F/A-18s to reach them. For a minute, it looked like all would be lost, until two A-10s arrived, flown by pilots who risked their own lives to save the Marines’, just as night began to fall. The narrative below is based on official statements from Marines in addition to an extensive interview with one of the Hog pilots, all of whom might not have lived to tell the tale."

...

"Heavy small arms fire and a swarm of rocket-propelled grenades quickly descended on MSOT-5. Cut-off from the other Marines who were just several miles away, MSOT-5 was heavily outnumbered by a force determined to kill them. Moving quickly under intense fire, the small group of Marines and Afghans quickly cleared a compound, seeking shelter inside a single building and immediately setting up a defensive perimeter. The team’s JTAC, or Joint Terminal Attack Controller (call sign HALO One-One), got on the radio to initiate higher prioritization for close air support. Four U.S. Navy F/A-18 Hornets would soon arrived above the valley, at that point covered in a blanket of clouds thousands of feet thick."




…"Around 325 miles away, two A-10Cs had just completed a three-hour mission and were setting up to return home to Bagram Air Base, the sprawling facility north of Kabul, the Afghanistan capital. But a refueling plane quickly met up with the A-10s as they redirected towards the firefight, piloted by Capt. Jeremiah Parvin and First Lt. Aaron Cavazos, of the 75th Expeditionary Fighter Squadron. Once the A-10s got to within 50 miles of the Marines location, they began to hear communications from the orbiting Navy Hornets. The Hornets had been unable to penetrate the weather deck that encompassed the valley and mountains around the area where the Marines were fighting for their lives. The Hog pilots checked in with the Hornets who provided a quick handover, checked off station and turned toward their carrier which was operating in the Arabian Sea. It was now an A-10 only mission."

" For the Hog pilots, the decision was easy: They were going to find a way to help these Marines fight their way out of their situation, even if it cost the pilots their lives. “Capt. Parvin and I decided,” Cavazos recalled, “that we were not going to orbit overhead and listen to them die.”

"A plan was made to penetrate the cloud layer into the valley, as the JTAC had estimated that the cloud layer dropped to 3,000 feet above the ground. But the A-10 had no radar to guide them, no local maps, and no real way of safely penetrating the weather and avoiding the mountains surrounding the valley. The JTAC, though, told the pilots that the valley ran north-to-south and their location was right in the middle of it; the decision was made to fly into the valley heading north, descending slowly toward the coordinates of the firefight, hoping the description of the valley was accurate enough...."


...

.“Once under the clouds and in the valley, it was easy to see where the Taliban fighting positions were and where their fire was directed. Four larger areas showed me immediately where the heavy machine guns were placed as they hammered the Marines. It was just bright enough where I could see outside still, but not dark enough where I needed my night vision goggles. Trying to [not collide] with my Parvin was tough as the valley was so much tighter than I expected. The smoke ... from the firefight did not help either, and colliding with the other A-10 was a real concern as we could not execute our normal procedural deconfliction of each other. At this point, I made the call, ‘Hawg flight, go Christmas tree’, and he did that immediately.”


Top

 Post subject: Re: AF new CAS aircraft
PostPosted: 14 Oct 2018, 14:16 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 01/21/14
Posts: 5098
Post Likes: +3641
Company: FAA Flight Check
Location: Oklahoma City, OK (KOKC)
Aircraft: King Air 300F/C90GTx
Duplicate post


Last edited on 14 Oct 2018, 18:54, edited 1 time in total.

Top

 Post subject: Re: AF new CAS aircraft
PostPosted: 14 Oct 2018, 14:17 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 01/21/14
Posts: 5098
Post Likes: +3641
Company: FAA Flight Check
Location: Oklahoma City, OK (KOKC)
Aircraft: King Air 300F/C90GTx
Duplicate post


Last edited on 14 Oct 2018, 18:54, edited 1 time in total.

Top

 Post subject: Re: AF new CAS aircraft
PostPosted: 14 Oct 2018, 14:17 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 01/21/14
Posts: 5098
Post Likes: +3641
Company: FAA Flight Check
Location: Oklahoma City, OK (KOKC)
Aircraft: King Air 300F/C90GTx
That is a good story.
I wonder if I can trust the NEWS media - especially with the need to support a certain view.

Since I personally know those involved in my scenario - I'm more likely to believe the factual nature of that event. I wonder what relevant facts were left out of that story?
Yes...I'm bias in this fact.

3.000' AGL? :coffee:
Not a reason that ANY aircraft couldn't get below a 3,000' AGL cloud layer.


Last edited on 15 Oct 2018, 11:34, edited 1 time in total.

Top

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic  [ 104 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next




You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  

Terms of Service | Forum FAQ | Contact Us

BeechTalk, LLC is the quintessential Beechcraft Owners & Pilots Group providing a forum for the discussion of technical, practical, and entertaining issues relating to all Beech aircraft. These include the Bonanza (both V-tail and straight-tail models), Baron, Debonair, Duke, Twin Bonanza, King Air, Sierra, Skipper, Sport, Sundowner, Musketeer, Travel Air, Starship, Queen Air, BeechJet, and Premier lines of airplanes, turboprops, and turbojets.

BeechTalk, LLC is not affiliated or endorsed by the Beechcraft Corporation, its subsidiaries, or affiliates. Beechcraft™, King Air™, and Travel Air™ are the registered trademarks of the Beechcraft Corporation.

Copyright© BeechTalk, LLC 2007-2024

.stanmusikame-85x50.jpg.
.Wingman 85x50.png.
.tempest.jpg.
.kadex-85x50.jpg.
.planelogix-85x100-2015-04-15.jpg.
.saint-85x50.jpg.
.headsetsetc_Small_85x50.jpg.
.Genesys_85x50.jpg.
.concorde.jpg.
.Foreflight_85x50_color.png.
.MountainAirframe.jpg.
.shortnnumbers-85x100.png.
.chairmanaviation-85x50.jpg.
.Wentworth_85x100.JPG.
.aircraftferry-85x50.jpg.
.Rocky-Mountain-Turbine-85x100.jpg.
.bpt-85x50-2019-07-27.jpg.
.ssv-85x50-2023-12-17.jpg.
.jetacq-85x50.jpg.
.Latitude.jpg.
.Marsh.jpg.
.avfab-85x50-2018-12-04.png.
.temple-85x100-2015-02-23.jpg.
.ei-85x150.jpg.
.midwest2.jpg.
.camguard.jpg.
.wat-85x50.jpg.
.boomerang-85x50-2023-12-17.png.
.wilco-85x100.png.
.sierratrax-85x50.png.
.aviationdesigndouble.jpg.
.pdi-85x50.jpg.
.SCA.jpg.
.traceaviation-85x150.png.
.geebee-85x50.jpg.
.airmart-85x150.png.
.blackwell-85x50.png.
.cav-85x50.jpg.
.one-mile-up-85x100.png.
.CiESVer2.jpg.
.gallagher_85x50.jpg.
.AAI.jpg.
.dbm.jpg.
.blackhawk-85x100-2019-09-25.jpg.
.daytona.jpg.
.aircraftassociates-85x50.png.
.kingairacademy-85x100.png.
.bullardaviation-85x50-2.jpg.
.tat-85x100.png.
.kingairnation-85x50.png.
.pure-medical-85x150.png.
.jandsaviation-85x50.jpg.
.avionwealth-85x50.png.
.ABS-85x100.jpg.
.centex-85x50.jpg.
.aeroled-85x50-2022-12-06.jpg.
.lucysaviation-85x50.png.