KAI KF-21 Boramae (KFX Korean Indigenous Fighter program)

Deino

Moderator
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2006
Messages
3,038
Reaction score
1,307
Any news from the prototype itself?
 

Frogfigther

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Aug 30, 2020
Messages
41
Reaction score
153
war-20200831-221416-001.jpg
Central fuselage for KF-X Prototype.
war-20200831-221358-000.jpg
Internal fuel tank model.
war-20200831-221548-005.png
Film style RAM(similar to RAM applied to F-35).
war-20200831-222443-000.jpg
1:1 scale cockpit model.

Source
https://m.blog.naver.com/jhst3103/222027193901
https://m.blog.naver.com/jhst3103/222058914795
 
Last edited:

helmutkohl

ACCESS: Top Secret
Staff member
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 29, 2010
Messages
944
Reaction score
1,638
great, thanks for all the pics and update even if they are in the Korean language.

the KFX really excites me. Not so much because its cutting edge..
but because its a new entry into a mid-weight fighter market that has been traditionally dominated by the US, Western Europe, Russia, and the PRC.
especially because its a stealth jet (well semi-stealth for now until they get the funding for the full stealth version)
 

stealthflanker

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2010
Messages
1,011
Reaction score
927
All that remains now is hope that Indonesia does not reduce the amount of purchase as it would considerably affect the price of each aircraft.

I did a little lookup on possible KFX cost. I'm using modified DAPCA84 (Gonna update it to whatever latest version i could get soon)
Production run of 200 aircrafts + 6 prototypes would amount to about 16.2 B USD (FY2020, RDTE+ Flyaway cost) Which make each plane cost about 97 M USD. Additional 50 aircrafts however would allow 64 M USD Price.

If Indonesia ever cancel or reduce the amount of purchase, the plane would end up having about 109 M USD of cost. Which might not be the best interest for Korea.
 

stealthflanker

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2010
Messages
1,011
Reaction score
927
Ok. Guess this is it. Not as finished as i think it would be. But as seen, the shape is clear, the AESA is installed.

Oh and Video of assembling process too.

 

Attachments

  • fx3.jpg
    fx3.jpg
    94.6 KB · Views: 128
  • fx2.jpg
    fx2.jpg
    104.2 KB · Views: 125
  • fx1.jpg
    fx1.jpg
    100.8 KB · Views: 115
  • fx4.jpg
    fx4.jpg
    90.6 KB · Views: 120
Last edited:

Frogfigther

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Aug 30, 2020
Messages
41
Reaction score
153
 

Attachments

  • war-20200903-101531-016.jpg
    war-20200903-101531-016.jpg
    1 MB · Views: 109
  • war-20200903-101529-015.jpg
    war-20200903-101529-015.jpg
    1,000.4 KB · Views: 105
  • war-20200903-101528-014.jpg
    war-20200903-101528-014.jpg
    1 MB · Views: 101
  • war-20200903-101526-013.jpg
    war-20200903-101526-013.jpg
    962.9 KB · Views: 99
  • war-20200903-101525-012.jpg
    war-20200903-101525-012.jpg
    839.1 KB · Views: 103
  • war-20200903-101506-011.jpg
    war-20200903-101506-011.jpg
    940.7 KB · Views: 109
  • war-20200903-101505-010.jpg
    war-20200903-101505-010.jpg
    1 MB · Views: 108
  • war-20200903-101503-009.jpg
    war-20200903-101503-009.jpg
    1 MB · Views: 111
  • war-20200903-101502-008.jpg
    war-20200903-101502-008.jpg
    962.4 KB · Views: 101
  • war-20200903-101500-007.jpg
    war-20200903-101500-007.jpg
    754.9 KB · Views: 104
  • war-20200903-101456-005.jpg
    war-20200903-101456-005.jpg
    951.4 KB · Views: 106
  • war-20200903-101453-004.jpg
    war-20200903-101453-004.jpg
    1.2 MB · Views: 99
  • fx4.jpg
    fx4.jpg
    90.6 KB · Views: 103
  • fx1.jpg
    fx1.jpg
    100.8 KB · Views: 105
  • fx2.jpg
    fx2.jpg
    104.2 KB · Views: 141

helmutkohl

ACCESS: Top Secret
Staff member
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 29, 2010
Messages
944
Reaction score
1,638
Screen Shot 2020-09-04 at 12.35.21.png
modified froggy's pic to better explain
my question is.. in the future, can the semi-recessed bay version be modified to use the full bay in the future?
 

stealthflanker

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2010
Messages
1,011
Reaction score
927
View attachment 640573
modified froggy's pic to better explain
my question is.. in the future, can the semi-recessed bay version be modified to use the full bay in the future?

The answer is yes... it's just something far ahead in the future. Once the first batch operational KFX enters service and operational experience gained
 

Bhurki

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Jul 16, 2020
Messages
308
Reaction score
294
View attachment 640573
modified froggy's pic to better explain
my question is.. in the future, can the semi-recessed bay version be modified to use the full bay in the future?
That rectangular block that covers the volume for the supposed weapons bay might be an additional fuel tank.
So in the future there might be 2 versions -
One long legged version with shown configuration of semi recessed A-A points, and another shorter legged version with internal bay used for A-G/A munition.
 

Maro.Kyo

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
May 8, 2017
Messages
169
Reaction score
317
View attachment 640573
modified froggy's pic to better explain
my question is.. in the future, can the semi-recessed bay version be modified to use the full bay in the future?
That rectangular block that covers the volume for the supposed weapons bay might be an additional fuel tank.
So in the future there might be 2 versions -
One long legged version with shownconfiguration of semi recessed A-A points, and another shorter legged version with internal bay used for A-G/A munition.

It's known as the ammunition storage for the 20mm vulcan. Currently more than 300 rounds could be loaded so even when the IWB is installed, I guess around healthy 150 or so rounds could be loaded.
 

tyrin

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Nov 29, 2019
Messages
12
Reaction score
30
All that remains now is hope that Indonesia does not reduce the amount of purchase as it would considerably affect the price of each aircraft.

I did a little lookup on possible KFX cost. I'm using modified DAPCA84 (Gonna update it to whatever latest version i could get soon)
Production run of 200 aircrafts + 6 prototypes would amount to about 16.2 B USD (FY2020, RDTE+ Flyaway cost) Which make each plane cost about 97 M USD. Additional 50 aircrafts however would allow 64 M USD Price.

If Indonesia ever cancel or reduce the amount of purchase, the plane would end up having 109 M USD of cost. Which might not be the best interest for Korea.
My friend, I think it will be sold well in the middle east to countries like the UAE which have very good relations with South Korea to replace Mirage 2000 and Block 60 in 10-15 years possibly and complement F-35.
 
Last edited:

helmutkohl

ACCESS: Top Secret
Staff member
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 29, 2010
Messages
944
Reaction score
1,638
My friend, I think it will be sold well in the middle east to countries like the UAE which have very good relations with South Korea to replace Mirage 2000 and Block 60 in 10-15 years possibly and complement F-35.

do you think it will be superior to the late block F-16s and Eurofighter/Rafales?
 

tyrin

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Nov 29, 2019
Messages
12
Reaction score
30
My friend, I think it will be sold well in the middle east to countries like the UAE which have very good relations with South Korea to replace Mirage 2000 and Block 60 in 10-15 years possibly and complement F-35.

do you think it will be superior to the late block F-16s and Eurofighter/Rafales?
Block 2 and 3 are undoubtedly superior in my opinion supposedly their stealth features will become close to F-117 and F-22 later. Also avionics are crucial and i believe the Koreans can pull off a good package.
 

Ejajjs

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Aug 4, 2020
Messages
50
Reaction score
232
original pixels (7101x4406 32mb,Please start a private conversation with me if you want)
 

Attachments

  • 176183-371434b5760de30c2837caf69285aacd.jpg
    176183-371434b5760de30c2837caf69285aacd.jpg
    48.1 KB · Views: 92
  • 176181-d583f1271071d497f812e40861d82e06.jpg
    176181-d583f1271071d497f812e40861d82e06.jpg
    47 KB · Views: 80
  • 176182-7ba6b3c355fd162099322ccade6b0036.jpg
    176182-7ba6b3c355fd162099322ccade6b0036.jpg
    50.1 KB · Views: 81
  • kf-x_coejongjorib-baepoyong1-1.jpg
    kf-x_coejongjorib-baepoyong1-1.jpg
    75 KB · Views: 84

Lascaris

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Nov 15, 2008
Messages
141
Reaction score
132
All that remains now is hope that Indonesia does not reduce the amount of purchase as it would considerably affect the price of each aircraft.

I did a little lookup on possible KFX cost. I'm using modified DAPCA84 (Gonna update it to whatever latest version i could get soon)
Production run of 200 aircrafts + 6 prototypes would amount to about 16.2 B USD (FY2020, RDTE+ Flyaway cost) Which make each plane cost about 97 M USD. Additional 50 aircrafts however would allow 64 M USD Price.

If Indonesia ever cancel or reduce the amount of purchase, the plane would end up having about 109 M USD of cost. Which might not be the best interest for Korea.

Silly question but can the model/calculator be found online?
 

stealthflanker

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2010
Messages
1,011
Reaction score
927
Silly question but can the model/calculator be found online?

No, but the equations are as follows :

To implement.png

You can easily implement them into Excel or any spreadsheet program, then divide the RD/TE with the amount of aircrafts being produced plus prototype. That's how you got the "initial" batch cost. Later however you may want to introduce "production cost curve" This would be simpler, where the required variable is the learning curve constant (0.95 maybe for aircraft made using imported components) Then you could estimate the cost of future batch.

Word of caution however is to implement correction as the equations are for FY-86 USD. You have to correct the estimate with present day USD.
 

helmutkohl

ACCESS: Top Secret
Staff member
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 29, 2010
Messages
944
Reaction score
1,638

TLDR: Koreans sending delegation to Indonesia to demand answers on the status of their contribution
Indonesians want to reduce amount of contribution, and also want an option to pay via CN-235 planes rather than cash
also want more tech transfers
 

stealthflanker

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2010
Messages
1,011
Reaction score
927

TLDR: Koreans sending delegation to Indonesia to demand answers on the status of their contribution
Indonesians want to reduce amount of contribution, and also want an option to pay via CN-235 planes rather than cash
also want more tech transfers

This is embarrassing but true. The butthurt back from 2013 hasnt healed.

We actually budgeted for KFX devs and plan to pay on time since 2012. The problem was that when the budget really got approved, there was that 2013 political matters in Korea (election and stuff) which slowed down the project and the budget ended up not being properly absorbed. This is what our treasury and bean counters doesnt like to see. As a result they slashed down the budget next year, worst that there begin voices deep down in our govs on KFX. There also apparently a loop holes in the MOU where delay in payments actually goes unpunished.

My biggest issue is why our govt rate themselves way too highly. Or maybe it's an ethiquette in diplomacy where one cant really talk straight about their real condition.
 

TomcatViP

Hellcat
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
4,794
Reaction score
4,310
Not directly related but somewhat relevant:
Korea Aerospace Industries executive Martin Chun delivered the bad news in an Oct. 28 letter to the Argentine ambassador to South Korea. “The export of six major components produced by U.K. suppliers for FA-50 is subject to approval of U.K. government.”

The United Kingdom placed an arms embargo on Argentine following the ‘82 war. That embargo remains in effect. “It is our regret to inform you that the U.K. export license issue is not resolved to date,” Chun wrote.

And with that, the FA-50—just like the Gripen, F-16, Mirage F.1 and FC-1—is off the table for Argentina. It’s unclear where Buenos Aires might look next for its fighter needs, which grow more dire by the year.

It would however seems obvious today that they go after a handful of Rafale at 400M€ the dozen... :rolleyes:

Greek and Argentinan color being similar, it's even possible that Frenchs won't even notice...
 
Last edited:

helmutkohl

ACCESS: Top Secret
Staff member
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 29, 2010
Messages
944
Reaction score
1,638
according to that link, the FC-1 is off the table? does it have UK sourced components?
 

TomS

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
4,975
Reaction score
2,555
according to that link, the FC-1 is off the table? does it have UK sourced components?

Probably different reasons. The FC-1 proposal was from a 2015 deal with then-President Kirchner. When she lost the election, that deal may have been tabled. Then FA-50 was selected. Now Kirchner is (sort of) back and the FA-50 is off, so it's conceivable they might revisit that. But the geopolitics of buying Chinese have shifted a lot in the last few years...
 

helmutkohl

ACCESS: Top Secret
Staff member
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 29, 2010
Messages
944
Reaction score
1,638

translation: Indonesia owes 600 billion won for KFX fees

about 550 million USD?
 

Maro.Kyo

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
May 8, 2017
Messages
169
Reaction score
317
How much fuel does it carry internally?
12000 Ibs. Ain't much as KF-X is intended to be assigned mostly on DCA missions alongside limited OCA duties and standoff IA/maritime surface attack in and around the Korean peninsula.

My friend, I think it will be sold well in the middle east to countries like the UAE which have very good relations with South Korea to replace Mirage 2000 and Block 60 in 10-15 years possibly and complement F-35.

do you think it will be superior to the late block F-16s and Eurofighter/Rafales?
According to the studies conducted by KISTEP (Korea Institue of Science and Technology Evaluation and Planning, an institute that basically does almost all the feasibility study and interim reports for defense R&D programs in Korea) in 2019, EF-2000 has the data fusion ability of JDL level 0. Considering that Rafale has been developed around the same period and French military electronics and software tech ain't far off of that of UK and Italy, I would also suggest that the Rafale has the same JDL level 0 data fusion ability.

KF-X is aimed for JDL level 1. Keep in mind that Rafale Stadard F4 and Eurofighter Trance 4 is in development and thus Tranche 5 is being offered, I would say that the eurocanards after these upgrades would not be far off of KF-X.

MCs and avionics structure are based on integrated modular architecture just like every new 5th and 4.5th gen aircrafts but I'm not sure if it's comparable to the of Pave Pillar structure on F-22 or Pave Pace on F-35 (ie integration with compromise or fully integrated avionics).

On HW level the radar and EW suite are top notch as well. Throughput of the radar is more than decent (I've once read the calculation which claims that the AESA on KF-X has the similar output compared to that of F-35 but have forgotten the source. Take this claim with a grain of salt but individual TRM on the Korean AESA has more output power than that of F-35 iirc so it might be true) and KAI and ADD have claimed that KF-X's EW antenna arrays are designed to be bigger than that of legacy 4.5th gen fighters in order to achieve greater jamming output power. Even so, SW is probably more important for these specic avionics and this is what the Koreans would relatively lack on compared to the Europeans. Given that unlike the HW there ain't much infos given on the side of SWs I would hold my exact judgement.

Another thing to consider is Elta is helping out with testing and evaluation of the radar and SAAB is providing assistance. So I would guess that the SW at least wouldn't be jackshit :p

Almost all of the avionics have been on development since mid 2000s, like the MC since 2007 and AESA since 2006 or sth like that afaik so the effort to catch up has been going on for a while it seems.
 
Last edited:

stealthflanker

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2010
Messages
1,011
Reaction score
927
How much fuel does it carry internally?
12000 Ibs. Ain't much as KF-X is intended to be assigned mostly on DCA missions alongside limited OCA duties and standoff IA/maritime surface attack in and around the Korean peninsula.

My friend, I think it will be sold well in the middle east to countries like the UAE which have very good relations with South Korea to replace Mirage 2000 and Block 60 in 10-15 years possibly and complement F-35.

do you think it will be superior to the late block F-16s and Eurofighter/Rafales?


On HW level the radar and EW suite are top notch as well. Throughput of the radar is more than decent (I've once read the calculation which claims that the AESA on KF-X has the similar output compared to that of F-35 but have forgotten the source. Take this claim with a grain of salt but individual TRM on the Korean AESA has more output power than that of F-35 iirc so it might be true) and KAI and ADD have claimed that KF-X's EW antenna arrays are designed to be bigger than that of legacy 4.5th gen fighters in order to achieve greater jamming output power. Even so, SW is probably more important for these specic avionics and this is what the Koreans would relatively lack on compared to the Europeans. Given that unlike the HW there ain't much infos given on the side of SWs I would hold my exact judgement.

That brings question on duty cycle. Like one can make 100 Watt peak power TRM.. But what determines range and power aperture performance of a Radar is the Average power (Emitted power in function of time) or peak power multiplied by duty cycle.

Like 12000 Lbs of fuel may correspond to cooling capacity of 13.9 KW available for Radar (Total cooling capacity is approximately 35 KW) This, at frequency of 10 GHz and PAE of 33% (Typical of Class A Amplifier) Would constrain the average emitted power for 1088 TRM to 3.3 KW maximum.

The module may have 30 Watt of peak power, but it might only operates at 10% duty cycle. It wont put as many pulses or power compared to anything having greater duty cycle. Might not even match AN/APG-79 or AN/APG-82. Seeing that the fighters bearing them have greater cooling capacity.
 

Maro.Kyo

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
May 8, 2017
Messages
169
Reaction score
317
How much fuel does it carry internally?
12000 Ibs. Ain't much as KF-X is intended to be assigned mostly on DCA missions alongside limited OCA duties and standoff IA/maritime surface attack in and around the Korean peninsula.

My friend, I think it will be sold well in the middle east to countries like the UAE which have very good relations with South Korea to replace Mirage 2000 and Block 60 in 10-15 years possibly and complement F-35.

do you think it will be superior to the late block F-16s and Eurofighter/Rafales?


On HW level the radar and EW suite are top notch as well. Throughput of the radar is more than decent (I've once read the calculation which claims that the AESA on KF-X has the similar output compared to that of F-35 but have forgotten the source. Take this claim with a grain of salt but individual TRM on the Korean AESA has more output power than that of F-35 iirc so it might be true) and KAI and ADD have claimed that KF-X's EW antenna arrays are designed to be bigger than that of legacy 4.5th gen fighters in order to achieve greater jamming output power. Even so, SW is probably more important for these specic avionics and this is what the Koreans would relatively lack on compared to the Europeans. Given that unlike the HW there ain't much infos given on the side of SWs I would hold my exact judgement.

That brings question on duty cycle. Like one can make 100 Watt peak power TRM.. But what determines range and power aperture performance of a Radar is the Average power (Emitted power in function of time) or peak power multiplied by duty cycle.

Like 12000 Lbs of fuel may correspond to cooling capacity of 13.9 KW available for Radar (Total cooling capacity is approximately 35 KW) This, at frequency of 10 GHz and PAE of 33% (Typical of Class A Amplifier) Would constrain the average emitted power for 1088 TRM to 3.3 KW maximum.

The module may have 30 Watt of peak power, but it might only operates at 10% duty cycle. It wont put as many pulses or power compared to anything having greater duty cycle. Might not even match AN/APG-79 or AN/APG-82. Seeing that the fighters bearing them have greater cooling capacity.
Great point right there but KF-X doesn't use it's fuel but a separate cooling liquid (PAO) and is designed with adequate cooling capacity in mind. Might be the reason they are using 20W TRM instead of the 30W model they already have.
 
Last edited:

stealthflanker

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2010
Messages
1,011
Reaction score
927
How much fuel does it carry internally?
12000 Ibs. Ain't much as KF-X is intended to be assigned mostly on DCA missions alongside limited OCA duties and standoff IA/maritime surface attack in and around the Korean peninsula.

My friend, I think it will be sold well in the middle east to countries like the UAE which have very good relations with South Korea to replace Mirage 2000 and Block 60 in 10-15 years possibly and complement F-35.

do you think it will be superior to the late block F-16s and Eurofighter/Rafales?


On HW level the radar and EW suite are top notch as well. Throughput of the radar is more than decent (I've once read the calculation which claims that the AESA on KF-X has the similar output compared to that of F-35 but have forgotten the source. Take this claim with a grain of salt but individual TRM on the Korean AESA has more output power than that of F-35 iirc so it might be true) and KAI and ADD have claimed that KF-X's EW antenna arrays are designed to be bigger than that of legacy 4.5th gen fighters in order to achieve greater jamming output power. Even so, SW is probably more important for these specic avionics and this is what the Koreans would relatively lack on compared to the Europeans. Given that unlike the HW there ain't much infos given on the side of SWs I would hold my exact judgement.

That brings question on duty cycle. Like one can make 100 Watt peak power TRM.. But what determines range and power aperture performance of a Radar is the Average power (Emitted power in function of time) or peak power multiplied by duty cycle.

Like 12000 Lbs of fuel may correspond to cooling capacity of 13.9 KW available for Radar (Total cooling capacity is approximately 35 KW) This, at frequency of 10 GHz and PAE of 33% (Typical of Class A Amplifier) Would constrain the average emitted power for 1088 TRM to 3.3 KW maximum.

The module may have 30 Watt of peak power, but it might only operates at 10% duty cycle. It wont put as many pulses or power compared to anything having greater duty cycle. Might not even match AN/APG-79 or AN/APG-82. Seeing that the fighters bearing them have greater cooling capacity.
Great point right there but KF-X doesn't use it's fuel but a separate cooling liquid (PAO) and is designed with adequate cooling capacity in mind. Might be the reason they are using 20W TRM instead of the 30W model they already have.
PAO is the intermediate medium which will dump the heat to somewhere (as clearly you cant just pump fuel into the array) Even APG-79 use PAO and it dumps the heat to fuel.
 

Maro.Kyo

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
May 8, 2017
Messages
169
Reaction score
317
PAO is the intermediate medium which will dump the heat to somewhere (as clearly you cant just pump fuel into the array) Even APG-79 use PAO and it dumps the heat to fuel.
Oh I've mistaken what you mean(pumping the fuel into array thing) and thought you were suggesting such. Well that besides, KF-X doesn't dump the heat into the fuel but uses radiators connected to the ECS to dump heat into the air that came in via ram air intake. The radiator itself's not a flat panel but looks rather like a cooling box (don't really know how to put it) to be able to air-cool all that heat.
 

Deino

Moderator
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2006
Messages
3,038
Reaction score
1,307

Mach42

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Feb 10, 2013
Messages
86
Reaction score
63
At least I haven't seen this:

Separate photograph (of infuriating small size) realised via an online "article". https://www.sedaily.com/NewsVIew/22H43GZJR8

22H43GZJR8_1.jpg


I spy further sub-assemblies on the left in the background on the left and what seems to be the flag of Indonesia on the wall at the right on the image too.;)
 

TomcatViP

Hellcat
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
4,794
Reaction score
4,310
Notice also what seems to be the same set of IFF antenna on the noze as found in the Falcon/Viper.
 

Frogfigther

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Aug 30, 2020
Messages
41
Reaction score
153
mission_computer.PNG
Mission Computer
  1. Interface Video and Data, and Display HUD & MFD
  2. Support Fire Control, Arm Management, and System Conrtol Interlocking
  3. ARINC653 based interface
  4. ARICK-818 Video Signal Processing for LAD; Resolution 2560x1024
  5. Open Architecture
  6. Generate Videos for LAD and MFDs
eotgp.PNG
EOTGP
  1. SXGA(1280x1024) Resolution IR Sensor
  2. High Power Laser for LGB
  3. Common Optical System
irst.PNG
IRST
  1. Leonardo Skyward based
  2. Detect/Track Aircrafts and Missiles
  3. Generate IR image, Angle information for the aircraft
lad.PNG
LAD
  1. 20'' X 8'' Resistive Touchscreen
  2. ARINC-818 Interface
HUD.PNG FLCC.PNG Radio.PNG
BAE LiteHUD & LIG Nex1 FLCC & BAE ARC-232A SDR

Source
 

Attachments

  • accs.PNG
    accs.PNG
    126.5 KB · Views: 24
Last edited:
Top