Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Battle of Savo Island

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: Battle of Savo Island Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 4 [5]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Battle of Savo Island - 4/3/2019 9:06:25 PM   
Joe D.


Posts: 3989
Joined: 8/31/2005
From: Stratford, Connecticut
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: spence

quote:

So after the London blitz from '40-41, the only thing left that ever really frightened Churchill were fully operational U-boats.


Actually I don't think the London Blitz frightened Churchill much because it was pretty much an expression of Hitlerian bluster....


Or another of Goering's failed "Dunkirk" operations. But if he were allowed to continue striking the British airfields instead of blitzing London, it would have been another historical "What if," as in what if Nagumo went after the fuel tanks at Pearl, what if Mikawa also sank the supply transports at Savo, etc.


_____________________________

Stratford, Connecticut, U.S.A.

"The Angel of Okinawa"

Home of the Chance-Vought Corsair, F4U
The best fighter-bomber of World War II

(in reply to spence)
Post #: 121
RE: Battle of Savo Island - 4/4/2019 5:52:28 AM   
Buckrock

 

Posts: 471
Joined: 3/16/2012
From: not all there
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Fishbed
There were near to no subs operating from PH in December. Submarines use diesel in relatively small quantities that is easily replaced. Unreliable torpedoes are the main cause explaining the US subs lack of efficiency in the first half of 1942, which means that the few patrols that *might* not have taken place in case of a highly hypothetical complete shortage of Diesel fuel aboard ships at PH and ashore wouldn't have impacted the conflict in any meaningful way.

If based on the figures of the Joint Army-Navy Assessment Committee (JANAC) and making the assumption that the historical subs can't operate from PH for 6 months (Dec '41 - May '42) and instead move back to the West Coast and take no effective part in Pacific operations until PH is again ready for submarines, then this hypothetical impact on the overall wartime submarine effort against Japanese shipping can be quantified with a bit of quick and dirty analysis.

a) Total Japanese sinkings by US submarines 1941-45:- naval vessels sunk = 540,192 tons, merchant vessels sunk = 4,779,902 tons.

b) Total Japanese sinkings by US submarines based out of PH for 6 month period Dec '41 - May '42:- naval vessels sunk = 15,597 tons, merchant vessels sunk = 113,487 tons.

c) % of historical wartime Japanese sinkings by US submarines forgone by this 6 month scenario:- naval vessels = 2.9%, merchant vessels = 2.4%


_____________________________

This was the only sig line I could think of.

(in reply to Fishbed)
Post #: 122
RE: Battle of Savo Island - 4/4/2019 7:04:19 AM   
Barb


Posts: 2463
Joined: 2/27/2007
From: Bratislava, Slovakia
Status: offline
Destroying fuel tanks at Pearl would not affect PacFleet Submarine operations much.
Single oiler of the Patoka class (e.g. USS Ramapo AO-12) had a capacity of 70,000 barrels, Cimarron class fleet oiler (e.g. USS Neosho AO-23) had 146,000 barrels.

Typical Fleet submarine available in 1942 (Tambor, Sargo, Seadragon, Salmon, Perch, Shark, Porpoise classes) had total bunkerage of about 90,000-109,000 galons. Averaged, rounded up it is some 2400 barrels of diesel oil. Later classes like Gato, Balao and Tench had up to 116,000 galons bunkerage so up to 2800 barrels of diesel oil.

Doing some math here, a single Patoka class oiler would be able to support 25-29 submarines topped up, while Cimarron class ship would support 52-60 submarines topped up.

Of course Fleet oilers would be used elsewhere, but commercial tankers were available. Just one tanker doing WC-PH route once a month would be able to bring enough fuel to support number of submarines operating out of Pearl. Couple of Submarine tenders (AS) would be able to keep subs in operation in case a submarine repair facilities were hit badly. Of course they would have to be taken out from somewhere else, but I presume this would not cause such degradation of submarine patrols in number on efficiency as to make a big difference in the end.

_____________________________

[img]https://drive.google.com/open?id=0BzOZPXg_qJ22TG43UmJ5UjRsb3c[/img]

(in reply to Buckrock)
Post #: 123
RE: Battle of Savo Island - 4/4/2019 8:57:30 AM   
Fishbed

 

Posts: 1821
Joined: 11/21/2005
From: Beijing, China - Paris, France
Status: offline
@Buckrock
Thank you for the extra research, much appreciated and very interesting.

@Barb
There again, nice data, big thanks! Although such knowledge regarding US submarines might be expected from someone who decided to call himself Barb. I suppose it wasn't because of the fish

_____________________________


(in reply to Barb)
Post #: 124
RE: Battle of Savo Island - 4/4/2019 11:41:16 AM   
Joe D.


Posts: 3989
Joined: 8/31/2005
From: Stratford, Connecticut
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Buckrock

If based on the figures of the Joint Army-Navy Assessment Committee (JANAC) and making the assumption that the historical subs can't operate from PH for 6 months....


Why would you make that assumption as neither the subs or their fuel received any significant damage during the IJN attack?

_____________________________

Stratford, Connecticut, U.S.A.

"The Angel of Okinawa"

Home of the Chance-Vought Corsair, F4U
The best fighter-bomber of World War II

(in reply to Buckrock)
Post #: 125
RE: Battle of Savo Island - 4/4/2019 11:49:23 AM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 13612
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline
If the Japanese really wanted to hurt the USN, all they had to do was bomb out the bars on Oahu. USN morale would plummet and half the sailors would be down with DTs!




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to Joe D.)
Post #: 126
RE: Battle of Savo Island - 4/4/2019 12:34:28 PM   
Fishbed

 

Posts: 1821
Joined: 11/21/2005
From: Beijing, China - Paris, France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

If the Japanese really wanted to hurt the USN, all they had to do was bomb out the bars on Oahu. USN morale would plummet and half the sailors would be down with DTs!





You, Sir, know all too well how history is born








Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Fishbed -- 4/4/2019 12:55:09 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 127
RE: Battle of Savo Island - 4/4/2019 12:41:16 PM   
Buckrock

 

Posts: 471
Joined: 3/16/2012
From: not all there
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joe D.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Buckrock

If based on the figures of the Joint Army-Navy Assessment Committee (JANAC) and making the assumption that the historical subs can't operate from PH for 6 months....


Why would you make that assumption as neither the subs or their fuel received any significant damage during the IJN attack?

Just in case someone brings up the possible impact of such a worst-case scenario within the context of a hypothetical Japanese 3rd strike. Such topics have been known to occur on the AE forum.

_____________________________

This was the only sig line I could think of.

(in reply to Joe D.)
Post #: 128
RE: Battle of Savo Island - 4/4/2019 1:11:17 PM   
Joe D.


Posts: 3989
Joined: 8/31/2005
From: Stratford, Connecticut
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Buckrock


quote:

ORIGINAL: Joe D.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Buckrock

If based on the figures of the Joint Army-Navy Assessment Committee (JANAC) and making the assumption that the historical subs can't operate from PH for 6 months....


Why would you make that assumption as neither the subs or their fuel received any significant damage during the IJN attack?

Just in case someone brings up the possible impact of such a worst-case scenario within the context of a hypothetical Japanese 3rd strike. Such topics have been known to occur on the AE forum.


So all your calculations were based on a hypothetical that didn't occur.
Thank you for that clarification.

_____________________________

Stratford, Connecticut, U.S.A.

"The Angel of Okinawa"

Home of the Chance-Vought Corsair, F4U
The best fighter-bomber of World War II

(in reply to Buckrock)
Post #: 129
RE: Battle of Savo Island - 4/4/2019 1:11:58 PM   
Joe D.


Posts: 3989
Joined: 8/31/2005
From: Stratford, Connecticut
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

If the Japanese really wanted to hurt the USN, all they had to do was bomb out the bars on Oahu. USN morale would plummet and half the sailors would be down with DTs!





1+

_____________________________

Stratford, Connecticut, U.S.A.

"The Angel of Okinawa"

Home of the Chance-Vought Corsair, F4U
The best fighter-bomber of World War II

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 130
RE: Battle of Savo Island - 4/4/2019 1:37:03 PM   
Fishbed

 

Posts: 1821
Joined: 11/21/2005
From: Beijing, China - Paris, France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Joe D.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Buckrock


quote:

ORIGINAL: Joe D.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Buckrock

If based on the figures of the Joint Army-Navy Assessment Committee (JANAC) and making the assumption that the historical subs can't operate from PH for 6 months....


Why would you make that assumption as neither the subs or their fuel received any significant damage during the IJN attack?

Just in case someone brings up the possible impact of such a worst-case scenario within the context of a hypothetical Japanese 3rd strike. Such topics have been known to occur on the AE forum.


So all your calculations were based on a hypothetical that didn't occur.
Thank you for that clarification.


I beg you to forgive my silly colleague here for having the weakness to work his ar*e needlessly over a whole lot of data, for the sake of some fantasy born from the mind of a troubled man.

Oh, wait...




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Fishbed -- 4/4/2019 1:38:08 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to Joe D.)
Post #: 131
RE: Battle of Savo Island - 4/4/2019 1:55:52 PM   
Buckrock

 

Posts: 471
Joined: 3/16/2012
From: not all there
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Joe D.
So all your calculations were based on a hypothetical that didn't occur.
Thank you for that clarification.

The totals and % are all historical, the hypothetical conditions of the scenario are not.


_____________________________

This was the only sig line I could think of.

(in reply to Joe D.)
Post #: 132
RE: Battle of Savo Island - 4/4/2019 2:15:16 PM   
Buckrock

 

Posts: 471
Joined: 3/16/2012
From: not all there
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Fishbed
I beg you to forgive my silly colleague here for having the weakness to work his ar*e needlessly over a whole lot of data...

Thankfully no ar*e was overworked during the making of that data, just about 30 minutes revisiting some old JANAC notes I made a few years ago. After they'd originally failed as conversation starters at parties, I'd lost hope of ever finding a use for them....till now.


_____________________________

This was the only sig line I could think of.

(in reply to Fishbed)
Post #: 133
RE: Battle of Savo Island - 4/5/2019 1:55:23 AM   
spence

 

Posts: 5055
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: Vancouver, Washington
Status: offline
quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

If the Japanese really wanted to hurt the USN, all they had to do was bomb out the bars on Oahu. USN morale would plummet and half the sailors would be down with DTs!





Oh come now, the Kido Butai definitely did not have enough ordnance for that.

(in reply to Buckrock)
Post #: 134
RE: Battle of Savo Island - 4/5/2019 1:54:40 PM   
fcooke

 

Posts: 362
Joined: 6/18/2002
From: Boston, London, Hoboken, now Warwick, NY
Status: offline
Not the IJN should have known, but the US didn't have many Mark 14s (made even more severe by the loss of a couple hundred at Cavite). So bomb the torpedo storage facility. As it was many boats went on patrol with partial torp loads, often augmented by mines - which crews really did not like laying. In addition captains were urged to use small spreads, which led to many ships being missed altogether, before you even get to the issues with running deep, magnetic exploders, and firing pin jamming (the firing pin problem was a special insult as perfect shots often jammed the pins, but more oblique shots would more often explode).

Regards,Frank

(in reply to spence)
Post #: 135
RE: Battle of Savo Island - 4/5/2019 8:06:32 PM   
anarchyintheuk

 

Posts: 3954
Joined: 5/5/2004
From: Dallas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: spence

quote:

The Germans "did it" to save their torpedoes, most of which worked


Actually the Germans had severe problems with their torpedoes at first related to their magnetic exploder. IIRC the closer they got to magnetic North the worse their problems became...in the Norwegian Campaign it became so severe that their equivalent of BuOrd actually paid attention and corrected the problem.

Found a link on the web that describes the problems pretty well. Interesting that there were a lot of the same problems with the same systems on US torpedoes.

http://www.uboataces.com/articles-wooden-torpedoes.shtml


Love the quote by Donitz: “I do not believe that ever in the history of war, men have been sent against the enemy with such a useless weapon”.



(in reply to spence)
Post #: 136
RE: Battle of Savo Island - 4/5/2019 8:18:38 PM   
GetAssista

 

Posts: 1944
Joined: 9/19/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: anarchyintheuk
quote:

ORIGINAL: spence
quote:

The Germans "did it" to save their torpedoes, most of which worked

Actually the Germans had severe problems with their torpedoes at first related to their magnetic exploder. IIRC the closer they got to magnetic North the worse their problems became...in the Norwegian Campaign it became so severe that their equivalent of BuOrd actually paid attention and corrected the problem.

Found a link on the web that describes the problems pretty well. Interesting that there were a lot of the same problems with the same systems on US torpedoes.

http://www.uboataces.com/articles-wooden-torpedoes.shtml

Love the quote by Donitz: “I do not believe that ever in the history of war, men have been sent against the enemy with such a useless weapon”.

From the linked article
"As 1939 drew to a close, at least 25 percent of all shots fired had been torpedo failures."
Ahhaha, 25% failure rate and Donitz is complaining... You knew nothing, Karl Donitz! Try mk14 80%

< Message edited by GetAssista -- 4/5/2019 8:20:15 PM >

(in reply to anarchyintheuk)
Post #: 137
RE: Battle of Savo Island - 4/5/2019 8:19:29 PM   
anarchyintheuk

 

Posts: 3954
Joined: 5/5/2004
From: Dallas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: GetAssista

quote:

ORIGINAL: anarchyintheuk
quote:

ORIGINAL: spence
quote:

The Germans "did it" to save their torpedoes, most of which worked

Actually the Germans had severe problems with their torpedoes at first related to their magnetic exploder. IIRC the closer they got to magnetic North the worse their problems became...in the Norwegian Campaign it became so severe that their equivalent of BuOrd actually paid attention and corrected the problem.

Found a link on the web that describes the problems pretty well. Interesting that there were a lot of the same problems with the same systems on US torpedoes.

http://www.uboataces.com/articles-wooden-torpedoes.shtml

Love the quote by Donitz: “I do not believe that ever in the history of war, men have been sent against the enemy with such a useless weapon”.

From the linked article
"As 1939 drew to a close, at least 25 percent of all shots fired had been torpedo failures."
Ahhaha, 25% failure rate and Donitz is complaining... Try mk14 80%


What a wuss

(in reply to GetAssista)
Post #: 138
RE: Battle of Savo Island - 4/5/2019 8:37:01 PM   
Joe D.


Posts: 3989
Joined: 8/31/2005
From: Stratford, Connecticut
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: anarchyintheuk


quote:

ORIGINAL: spence

quote:

The Germans "did it" to save their torpedoes, most of which worked


Actually the Germans had severe problems with their torpedoes at first related to their magnetic exploder. IIRC the closer they got to magnetic North the worse their problems became...in the Norwegian Campaign it became so severe that their equivalent of BuOrd actually paid attention and corrected the problem.

Found a link on the web that describes the problems pretty well. Interesting that there were a lot of the same problems with the same systems on US torpedoes.

http://www.uboataces.com/articles-wooden-torpedoes.shtml


Love the quote by Donitz: “I do not believe that ever in the history of war, men have been sent against the enemy with such a useless weapon”.



That weapon didn't stay useless for long.

"During the war the U-boats sank about 2,779 ships for a total of 14.1 million tons GRT. This figure is roughly 70% of all allied shipping losses in all theatres of the war and to all hostile action. The most successful year was 1942 when over 6 million tons of shipping were sunk in the Atlantic."

https://uboat.net/special/faq.htm?question=4


_____________________________

Stratford, Connecticut, U.S.A.

"The Angel of Okinawa"

Home of the Chance-Vought Corsair, F4U
The best fighter-bomber of World War II

(in reply to anarchyintheuk)
Post #: 139
RE: Battle of Savo Island - 4/5/2019 8:57:57 PM   
anarchyintheuk

 

Posts: 3954
Joined: 5/5/2004
From: Dallas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joe D.


quote:

ORIGINAL: anarchyintheuk


quote:

ORIGINAL: spence

quote:

The Germans "did it" to save their torpedoes, most of which worked


Actually the Germans had severe problems with their torpedoes at first related to their magnetic exploder. IIRC the closer they got to magnetic North the worse their problems became...in the Norwegian Campaign it became so severe that their equivalent of BuOrd actually paid attention and corrected the problem.

Found a link on the web that describes the problems pretty well. Interesting that there were a lot of the same problems with the same systems on US torpedoes.

http://www.uboataces.com/articles-wooden-torpedoes.shtml


Love the quote by Donitz: “I do not believe that ever in the history of war, men have been sent against the enemy with such a useless weapon”.



That weapon didn't stay useless for long.

"During the war the U-boats sank about 2,779 ships for a total of 14.1 million tons GRT. This figure is roughly 70% of all allied shipping losses in all theatres of the war and to all hostile action. The most successful year was 1942 when over 6 million tons of shipping were sunk in the Atlantic."

https://uboat.net/special/faq.htm?question=4



My dad was born in Stratford, my mom was born in Fairfield. I always liked the Stratford Point lighthouse. Hope it's still around.

(in reply to Joe D.)
Post #: 140
RE: Battle of Savo Island - 4/5/2019 9:35:43 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 40188
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: anarchyintheuk


quote:

ORIGINAL: spence

quote:

The Germans "did it" to save their torpedoes, most of which worked


Actually the Germans had severe problems with their torpedoes at first related to their magnetic exploder. IIRC the closer they got to magnetic North the worse their problems became...in the Norwegian Campaign it became so severe that their equivalent of BuOrd actually paid attention and corrected the problem.

Found a link on the web that describes the problems pretty well. Interesting that there were a lot of the same problems with the same systems on US torpedoes.

http://www.uboataces.com/articles-wooden-torpedoes.shtml


Love the quote by Donitz: “I do not believe that ever in the history of war, men have been sent against the enemy with such a useless weapon”.

warspite1

Well Donitz obviously never heard of the Fairey Battle then......


_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to anarchyintheuk)
Post #: 141
RE: Battle of Savo Island - 4/5/2019 9:46:15 PM   
Orm


Posts: 18238
Joined: 5/3/2008
From: Sweden
Status: offline
Not many have heard of the Battle Fairy, fewer still have seen it. And of those who have seen it, not many survive to tell the story.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Intend attacking at dawn high water.

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 142
RE: Battle of Savo Island - 4/5/2019 10:37:15 PM   
Joe D.


Posts: 3989
Joined: 8/31/2005
From: Stratford, Connecticut
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: anarchyintheuk


quote:

ORIGINAL: Joe D.


quote:

ORIGINAL: anarchyintheuk


quote:

ORIGINAL: spence

quote:

The Germans "did it" to save their torpedoes, most of which worked


Actually the Germans had severe problems with their torpedoes at first related to their magnetic exploder. IIRC the closer they got to magnetic North the worse their problems became...in the Norwegian Campaign it became so severe that their equivalent of BuOrd actually paid attention and corrected the problem.

Found a link on the web that describes the problems pretty well. Interesting that there were a lot of the same problems with the same systems on US torpedoes.

http://www.uboataces.com/articles-wooden-torpedoes.shtml


Love the quote by Donitz: “I do not believe that ever in the history of war, men have been sent against the enemy with such a useless weapon”.



That weapon didn't stay useless for long.

"During the war the U-boats sank about 2,779 ships for a total of 14.1 million tons GRT. This figure is roughly 70% of all allied shipping losses in all theatres of the war and to all hostile action. The most successful year was 1942 when over 6 million tons of shipping were sunk in the Atlantic."

https://uboat.net/special/faq.htm?question=4



My dad was born in Stratford, my mom was born in Fairfield. I always liked the Stratford Point lighthouse. Hope it's still around.


It's now a private residence and is never open to the public, but here's some info and a picture.

http://www.townofstratford.com/content/39836/42857/42867/43080.aspx

_____________________________

Stratford, Connecticut, U.S.A.

"The Angel of Okinawa"

Home of the Chance-Vought Corsair, F4U
The best fighter-bomber of World War II

(in reply to anarchyintheuk)
Post #: 143
RE: Battle of Savo Island - 4/6/2019 9:02:20 AM   
warspite1


Posts: 40188
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Orm

Not many have heard of the Battle Fairy, fewer still have seen it. And of those who have seen it, not many survive to tell the story.


warspite1

So a bit like the poor b*****s sent into action in the Fairey Battle....





Attachment (1)

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to Orm)
Post #: 144
RE: Battle of Savo Island - 4/6/2019 9:02:58 AM   
Buckrock

 

Posts: 471
Joined: 3/16/2012
From: not all there
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: fcooke

Not the IJN should have known, but the US didn't have many Mark 14s (made even more severe by the loss of a couple hundred at Cavite). So bomb the torpedo storage facility. As it was many boats went on patrol with partial torp loads, often augmented by mines - which crews really did not like laying. In addition captains were urged to use small spreads, which led to many ships being missed altogether, before you even get to the issues with running deep, magnetic exploders, and firing pin jamming (the firing pin problem was a special insult as perfect shots often jammed the pins, but more oblique shots would more often explode).

Regards,Frank

The submarine torpedo storage and repair facility was at the PH submarine base, as was Kimmel's CINCPAC HQ (located in the large "U" shaped adminsitration building close to the camouflaged fuel tank in the photo of Spence's post 94). IIRC, these torpedo facilities ashore and the sub tender USS Pelias (docked at the base on Dec 7th) contained the entire reserve stocks of around 100 torpedoes for the Pacific Fleet submarines.

So IF the Japanese had gone after the submarine base, they might well have caused further headaches for US early-war operations.

_____________________________

This was the only sig line I could think of.

(in reply to fcooke)
Post #: 145
RE: Battle of Savo Island - 4/6/2019 9:09:28 AM   
warspite1


Posts: 40188
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: Orm

Not many have heard of the Battle Fairy, fewer still have seen it. And of those who have seen it, not many survive to tell the story.



warspite1

Mmmmm a female archer.... reminds me of a poll we had back in the day from about page 223 when someone happened to mention Rose Leslie....

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3083586&mpage=223&key=Katniss


< Message edited by warspite1 -- 4/6/2019 9:10:13 AM >


_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to Orm)
Post #: 146
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 3 4 [5]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: Battle of Savo Island Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 4 [5]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.148