Russia Defence Forum

Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


+51
Big_Gazza
thegopnik
Tsavo Lion
Arrow
kvs
George1
Hole
LMFS
dino00
Benya
hoom
HM1199
Enera
Rmf
Tolstoy
RTN
Book.
Isos
franco
x_54_u43
Kimppis
GJ Flanker
Vann7
jhelb
Austin
sepheronx
2SPOOKY4U
whir
GunshipDemocracy
victor1985
max steel
AlfaT8
Walther von Oldenburg
Morpheus Eberhardt
MarshallJukov
NickM
Stealthflanker
ahmedfire
magnumcromagnon
flamming_python
Viktor
Mike E
Werewolf
Mindstorm
GarryB
CaptainPakistan
calripson
Cyberspec
Rpg type 7v
Flanky
medo
55 posters

    Russian Electronic Warfare Systems

    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 29973
    Points : 30499
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russian Electronic Warfare Systems - Page 12 Empty Re: Russian Electronic Warfare Systems

    Post  GarryB Tue 02 Mar 2021, 01:31

    I see but look at what they choosed for the title .Turks are spreading such claims east and west to get more deals for their drones .

    But don't you see that is a good thing.

    Idiots wanting to read about Turkish drones trashing Russian EW and air defence systems will read about how the opposite actually happened and that teh Russian systems when used correctly slaughtered the drones... some of which are tiny and have little or no radar or heat signature rendering them invisible for most western systems... so that is a real achievement.

    The more of Russias enemies who buy Turkish drones the better... imagine if instead they found the truth and tried to develop better and more capable drones that they could not defeat... that is not a better situation for Russia or users of Russian gear.

    The point is that the war between making air defences and defeating air defences will continue... but at the moment the Russians seem to hold a serious advantage and Ironically for all their spewing venom HATO isn't really even in the race... right now most HATO countries would be wide open to drone attack... how long before the drones they provided terrorists in Syria and Azerbeijan and Libya turn up in Europe being used by terrorists trained to use them... just flying them around an international airport will cost billions in delays as the aircraft are grounded... imagine a suicide drone hitting the cockpit of an airliner as it takes off with a 10kg HE package... many international airports in Europe are surrounded by buildings... an Airliner full of fuel crashing into high rise buildings.... 11/9 again?

    I believe the saying... yea shall reap what yea sows....

    magnumcromagnon likes this post

    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 7666
    Points : 7650
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Russian Electronic Warfare Systems - Page 12 Empty Re: Russian Electronic Warfare Systems

    Post  Isos Tue 02 Mar 2021, 02:52

    It worked for 3 days untill they changed configuration of the drone or flights paths according to armenian generals.

    The thing is that defensive weapons can always be bypassed.

    Against a real military during those 3 days azeri airports operating the drones would have been bombed.

    Relying on defensive weapons only means loosing the war.

    GarryB and Yugo90 like this post

    Hole
    Hole

    Posts : 4313
    Points : 4305
    Join date : 2018-03-24
    Age : 45
    Location : Merkelland

    Russian Electronic Warfare Systems - Page 12 Empty Re: Russian Electronic Warfare Systems

    Post  Hole Tue 02 Mar 2021, 03:45

    The drones were avoiding the area where the EW systems were positioned. That means the EW system worked as it should, it created a no-go (fly) area.

    GarryB and kvs like this post

    magnumcromagnon
    magnumcromagnon

    Posts : 7326
    Points : 7475
    Join date : 2013-12-04
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Russian Electronic Warfare Systems - Page 12 Empty Re: Russian Electronic Warfare Systems

    Post  magnumcromagnon Tue 02 Mar 2021, 08:27

    Someone should tell these Turkish cockroach cocksuckers to stop polishing each others knobs, and remove the kabob's from the back of their throats.
    Russian Electronic Warfare Systems - Page 12 Eq4hZcNXAAAT9Hs?format=jpg&name=large
    Russian Electronic Warfare Systems - Page 12 Eq4hZcRWMAIYB_C?format=jpg&name=4096x4096
    magnumcromagnon
    magnumcromagnon

    Posts : 7326
    Points : 7475
    Join date : 2013-12-04
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Russian Electronic Warfare Systems - Page 12 Empty Re: Russian Electronic Warfare Systems

    Post  magnumcromagnon Mon 12 Apr 2021, 06:11

    "In conditions close to combat": the Ministry of Defense worked out the suppression of enemy communications at a long distance
    Russian Electronic Warfare Systems - Page 12 1618214813_snimok

    The Russian Ministry of Defense conducted exercises on the use of long-range electronic warfare systems.

    As reported "News" with reference to the military department, the Baltic and Northern fleets of the Russian Federation took part in the testing.

    Exercises on the use of long-range electronic suppression systems were conducted back in March 2021, but only now it became known about them. Electronic warfare systems from the Baltic and Northern fleets took part in testing, which ones, the Ministry of Defense, did not disclose.

    As the newspaper writes, during the exercises, the electronic warfare systems of the fleets alternately found the stations of the imaginary enemy and suppressed them, despite the range of several thousand kilometers. The "enemy", in turn, inflicted a retaliatory electronic strike.

    It is emphasized that the calculations of the electronic warfare stations worked in conditions close to combat. The exercises were recognized as successful, the stations confirmed the inherent characteristics and the ability to jam long-range communications.

    For our part, we note that in the exercises, with a high probability, the Murmansk-BN electronic warfare (EW) complexes were used, capable of suppressing communication and control channels at a distance of up to 5 thousand kilometers. This complex was previously deployed in the Kaliningrad and Murmansk regions.

    "Murmansk-BN" is an automated radio interference complex for communication lines in the short-wave (HF) range, capable of suppressing radio communications at a distance of 3 to 5 thousand kilometers, and with good signal transmission - up to 8 thousand kilometers. The equipment automatically collects data on signal emitters in the HF range, classifies and determines what and what power of interference can suppress them. In addition to communications, the complex also disrupts the operation of ships' weapons systems.

    https://en.topwar.ru/181891-v-uslovijah-priblizhennyh-k-boevym-minoborony-otrabotalo-podavlenie-svjazi-protivnika-na-bolshoj-dalnosti.html

    dino00, LMFS, Hole and Yugo90 like this post

    magnumcromagnon
    magnumcromagnon

    Posts : 7326
    Points : 7475
    Join date : 2013-12-04
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Russian Electronic Warfare Systems - Page 12 Empty Re: Russian Electronic Warfare Systems

    Post  magnumcromagnon Thu 15 Apr 2021, 10:54

    The professional holiday is celebrated by the servicemen of the Russian Electronic Warfare Troops.

    George1, LMFS and Hole like this post

    magnumcromagnon
    magnumcromagnon

    Posts : 7326
    Points : 7475
    Join date : 2013-12-04
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Russian Electronic Warfare Systems - Page 12 Empty Re: Russian Electronic Warfare Systems

    Post  magnumcromagnon Thu 15 Apr 2021, 11:04

    magnumcromagnon wrote:
    "In conditions close to combat": the Ministry of Defense worked out the suppression of enemy communications at a long distance
    Russian Electronic Warfare Systems - Page 12 1618214813_snimok

    The Russian Ministry of Defense conducted exercises on the use of long-range electronic warfare systems.

    As reported "News" with reference to the military department, the Baltic and Northern fleets of the Russian Federation took part in the testing.

    Exercises on the use of long-range electronic suppression systems were conducted back in March 2021, but only now it became known about them. Electronic warfare systems from the Baltic and Northern fleets took part in testing, which ones, the Ministry of Defense, did not disclose.

    As the newspaper writes, during the exercises, the electronic warfare systems of the fleets alternately found the stations of the imaginary enemy and suppressed them, despite the range of several thousand kilometers. The "enemy", in turn, inflicted a retaliatory electronic strike.

    It is emphasized that the calculations of the electronic warfare stations worked in conditions close to combat. The exercises were recognized as successful, the stations confirmed the inherent characteristics and the ability to jam long-range communications.

    For our part, we note that in the exercises, with a high probability, the Murmansk-BN electronic warfare (EW) complexes were used, capable of suppressing communication and control channels at a distance of up to 5 thousand kilometers. This complex was previously deployed in the Kaliningrad and Murmansk regions.

    "Murmansk-BN" is an automated radio interference complex for communication lines in the short-wave (HF) range, capable of suppressing radio communications at a distance of 3 to 5 thousand kilometers, and with good signal transmission - up to 8 thousand kilometers. The equipment automatically collects data on signal emitters in the HF range, classifies and determines what and what power of interference can suppress them. In addition to communications, the complex also disrupts the operation of ships' weapons systems.

    https://en.topwar.ru/181891-v-uslovijah-priblizhennyh-k-boevym-minoborony-otrabotalo-podavlenie-svjazi-protivnika-na-bolshoj-dalnosti.html

    George1 and kvs like this post

    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 29973
    Points : 30499
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russian Electronic Warfare Systems - Page 12 Empty Re: Russian Electronic Warfare Systems

    Post  GarryB Thu 15 Apr 2021, 21:13

    the electronic warfare systems of the fleets alternately found the stations of the imaginary enemy and suppressed them, despite the range of several thousand kilometers.

    So the Russian EW system was able to locate the stations that were controlling the drones from thousands of kms away... so when the Ukraine launches drones to attack certain other Ukrainians living in the east of the country, Russia would be able to determine where those drones were being controlled from and with satellite imagery should be able to locate vehicles or buildings that would be worth sending special packages to... perhaps via something labelled Kh-101 or something similar, while S-400 batteries in the area enforce a complete no fly zone and other EW assets deal with any radar source that could detect low flying cruise missiles.

    magnumcromagnon and kvs like this post

    avatar
    limb

    Posts : 276
    Points : 286
    Join date : 2020-09-17

    Russian Electronic Warfare Systems - Page 12 Empty Re: Russian Electronic Warfare Systems

    Post  limb Thu 29 Apr 2021, 13:32

    The threat of Russian ground based EW systems disrupting the much vaunted GPS and AWACS datalinked guided munitions of the US air force has made the national interest publish a propaganda piece of how the US nearly has the technnology to make Russian EW inneffective.

    https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/how-air-force%E2%80%99s-%E2%80%9Cgolden-horde%E2%80%9D-helps-bombs-defeat-gps-jamming-183969

    he Air Force is taking new steps to fast-track a promising new in-flight weapons-networking technology to war. This system is described as a computer-enabled autonomous, collaborative data sharing capability between weapons on route to target.

    The service’s Golden Horde technology, as it is called, engineers high-tech seekers into weapons such as Small Diameter Bombs to enable them to thwart enemy attempts to jam GPS targeting and share flight-trajectory and battlespace data between weapons on route to a target. An Air Force essay describes the technology as a “software defined radio for communication between weapons and a processor preloaded with collaborative algorithms.”

    In flight “collaborative targeting” enables one weapon to use its advanced seeker to identify an enemy jammer and transmit that tactical detail to another weapon allowing it to adjust course as needed. A recent test of Golden Horde using collaborative Small Diameter Bombs exchanging data in flight showed great promise, as well as areas of needed improvement. The Air Force tested the ability of air-dropped bombs able to share target-sensitive data with each other in flight to adjust attack specifics, find GPS-jammers and optimize the speed and precision with which attack operations can be conducted.

    Now, the Air Force Research Lab is aligning its development efforts with the service’s acquisition entity to build upon its progress developing the innovations needed to operationalize the weapon.

    “As we go forward with our acquisition partner, who is PEO weapons, they know how to better structure the future acquisition of those weapons. We’re in partnership with acquisition. This is an S&T (science & technology) effort for sure, but partnering with PEO Weapons will enhance the subsequent acquisition initiatives it is furthering,” Air Force Brig. Gen. Heather Pringle, Commander, Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL), told a group of reporters.

    Pringle’s discussion of an AFRL S&T efforts alliance with Air Force acquisition aligns with current service-wide efforts to better synergize successful innovations from S&T with accelerated acquisition initiatives aimed at fast-tracking promising new technologies to war. The concept, as articulated in a recently published AFRL strategy document, is described by Pringle as an Air Force effort to closely align its research and laboratory community with rapid acquisition experts to leverage the near term promise of new technical breakthroughs.

    “It’s a natural evolution of the progress that Golden Horde has made to date. Of course, you’re familiar with the small diameter bomb flights that occurred in February, those were successful in looking at multiple SBDs and having them converge on a particular target on time and on target. And so this is just a natural progression, but it’s also a step in the right direction, because it just gets us closer to that digital environment.” Pringle said.

    The technical and tactical concepts of the SBD in-flight weapons collaboration, Air Force assessments explain, are designed to enable sensors integrated into the weapons themselves to discern new information, assess it in relation to front-loaded mission specifics and perform the analytics needed to make course corrections as needed. While fully bringing this to fruition may require even more advanced AI-enabled autonomy, it represents the cusp of very significant breakthrough technology.

    Im seriously taking this with a grain of salt however, since I know that in disrupting GPS and AWACS datalinks, output power is important, and detecting an EW source is nothing new too. However US air force advocates sometimes claim that in order to jam something like a datalinked AMRAAM being guided by an AWACS, or a JDAM, you need to know exactly at what angle the datalink radar wave is, since its "narrow beam" and apparently wide beam jammers are uselss against narrow beam datalinks. Im very low IQ in RF electrical engineering, so I have no idea if this is true. Another claim is that an EW emitter like the krasukha is useless without knowing the exact frequency NATO datalinks are at, and that this requires humans spying databases to get them, and even themn, NATO can almost immediately change the compromised frequency. Is this true?
    Atmosphere
    Atmosphere

    Posts : 135
    Points : 137
    Join date : 2021-01-31

    Russian Electronic Warfare Systems - Page 12 Empty Re: Russian Electronic Warfare Systems

    Post  Atmosphere Thu 29 Apr 2021, 15:06

    Hmm i find it hard to believe.
    If jammers are useless unless they have exact data on the operating frequencies , which are all usually closely guarded, then why are the russians actively using them to defend themselves in syria? Is it that those hundreds of engineers and academians involved all stupid and incompetent to not realise such a "glaring" flaw?

    Its a bit similar to the claim tha "LPI" radars are immune/almost immune to electronic intelligence and jammi'g
    avatar
    Mindstorm

    Posts : 1094
    Points : 1261
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Russian Electronic Warfare Systems - Page 12 Empty Re: Russian Electronic Warfare Systems

    Post  Mindstorm Fri 30 Apr 2021, 01:48

    limb wrote:The threat of Russian ground based EW systems disrupting the much vaunted GPS and AWACS datalinked guided munitions of the US air force has made the national interest publish a propaganda piece of how the US nearly has the technnology to make Russian EW inneffective.

    https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/how-air-force%E2%80%99s-%E2%80%9Cgolden-horde%E2%80%9D-helps-bombs-defeat-gps-jamming-183969

    he Air Force is taking new steps to fast-track a promising new in-flight weapons-networking technology to war. This system is described as a computer-enabled autonomous, collaborative data sharing capability between weapons on route to target.

    The service’s Golden Horde technology, as it is called, engineers high-tech seekers into weapons such as Small Diameter Bombs to enable them to thwart enemy attempts to jam GPS targeting and share flight-trajectory and battlespace data between weapons on route to a target. An Air Force essay describes the technology as a “software defined radio for communication between weapons and a processor preloaded with collaborative algorithms.”

    In flight “collaborative targeting” enables one weapon to use its advanced seeker to identify an enemy jammer and transmit that tactical detail to another weapon allowing it to adjust course as needed. A recent test of Golden Horde using collaborative Small Diameter Bombs exchanging data in flight showed great promise, as well as areas of needed improvement. The Air Force tested the ability of air-dropped bombs able to share target-sensitive data with each other in flight to adjust attack specifics, find GPS-jammers and optimize the speed and precision with which attack operations can be conducted.

    Now, the Air Force Research Lab is aligning its development efforts with the service’s acquisition entity to build upon its progress developing the innovations needed to operationalize the weapon.

    “As we go forward with our acquisition partner, who is PEO weapons, they know how to better structure the future acquisition of those weapons. We’re in partnership with acquisition. This is an S&T (science & technology) effort for sure, but partnering with PEO Weapons will enhance the subsequent acquisition initiatives it is furthering,” Air Force Brig. Gen. Heather Pringle, Commander, Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL), told a group of reporters.

    Pringle’s discussion of an AFRL S&T efforts alliance with Air Force acquisition aligns with current service-wide efforts to better synergize successful innovations from S&T with accelerated acquisition initiatives aimed at fast-tracking promising new technologies to war. The concept, as articulated in a recently published AFRL strategy document, is described by Pringle as an Air Force effort to closely align its research and laboratory community with rapid acquisition experts to leverage the near term promise of new technical breakthroughs.

    “It’s a natural evolution of the progress that Golden Horde has made to date. Of course, you’re familiar with the small diameter bomb flights that occurred in February, those were successful in looking at multiple SBDs and having them converge on a particular target on time and on target. And so this is just a natural progression, but it’s also a step in the right direction, because it just gets us closer to that digital environment.” Pringle said.

    The technical and tactical concepts of the SBD in-flight weapons collaboration, Air Force assessments explain, are designed to enable sensors integrated into the weapons themselves to discern new information, assess it in relation to front-loaded mission specifics and perform the analytics needed to make course corrections as needed. While fully bringing this to fruition may require even more advanced AI-enabled autonomy, it represents the cusp of very significant breakthrough technology.

    Im seriously taking this with a  grain of salt however, since I know that in disrupting GPS and AWACS datalinks, output power is important, and detecting an EW source is nothing new too. However  US air force advocates sometimes claim that in order to jam something like a datalinked AMRAAM being guided by an AWACS, or a JDAM, you need to know exactly at what angle the datalink radar wave is, since its "narrow beam" and apparently wide beam jammers are uselss against narrow beam datalinks. Im very low IQ in RF electrical engineering, so I have no idea if this is true. Another claim is that an EW emitter like the krasukha is useless without knowing the exact frequency NATO datalinks are at, and that this requires humans spying databases to get them, and even themn, NATO can almost immediately change the compromised frequency. Is this true?

    This has nothing to do with capability to neutralize EW systems , very far from that.

    The concept instead ,that in domestic military institutions was implemented in the construction of long range antiship missiles more than 35, turn around the chance that in a group of PGMs, released from relatively close range, (such as SDB of second generation of the GBU-53B with operational gliding range when delivered at relatively high altitude and low supersonic speed of around 45-50 km) and where each element of is equipped with terminal optronic homing , some ammunition in the salvo will find anyway, in spite of GPS suppression, within terminal optronic homing range from the intended target so to provide correction positional data for the other elements of the salvo still in the possibility to maneuver to engage it.

    Practically, when delivered within relatively close range (because at long range the cumulative positional error in absence of GPS navigation signal become too great), some missile/bomb of the salvo will statistically find itself within detection and recognition range of its optronic terminal sensor from the intended target and ,if possible, share the data with other bombs and missiles that have not diverted theirs trajectories too much from that point.

    Practically this methodology work only against some of the older GPS jamming techniques (that now are penetrating in the arsenals of the weaker players in the international theatre against which the offensive "expeditionary" military doctrine of the US is aimed) simply drowning the GPS signal under heavy jamming barring signals.

    Even without taking into account the other dozen of variables involved, related both to a myriad of other EW systems and IAD elements capable to easily distrupt this unsophisticated approach, against a very advanced enemy the GPS signal is not shut down but provide instead very small navigational corrections, perfectly compatible with the normal working parameters of the NAVSTAR but toward a completely wrong area, inter missile-bomb communication at close range from target become very difficult if not impossible (and this is an immense problem for slow subsonic ammunitions) and most important targets are provided with mutispectral obscurants completely opaque from mid infrared to visible spectrum.

    dino00, magnumcromagnon and LMFS like this post

    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 29973
    Points : 30499
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russian Electronic Warfare Systems - Page 12 Empty Re: Russian Electronic Warfare Systems

    Post  GarryB Fri 30 Apr 2021, 02:09

    Another claim is that an EW emitter like the krasukha is useless without knowing the exact frequency NATO datalinks are at, and that this requires humans spying databases to get them, and even themn, NATO can almost immediately change the compromised frequency. Is this true?

    Sounds like they are pretending to have more knowledge on the subject than they actually do.

    I am no expert but if you have something that is used to jam a range of frequencies then in addition to broadcasting on those frequencies that jamming signal they must also be able to listen too... so they could listen to the frequencies being used on a broad band antenna listening across the bandwidth.... do it from multiple positions and record locations at the same time of course, and then broadcast noise in those frequencies directed at the sources... if they change bands your antenna will detect that and the jamming signal can change to match easily enough.

    By The Way... Golden Horde technology to stop GPS jammers on SDBs... shouldn't they be more worried about S-350 missiles shooting down the platforms carrying SDBs in the first place because they don't seem to have gotten their stealth planes stealthy yet...

    And GH... sounds like it is directed at China, or maybe all the engineers working on it are Chinese... in which case it might actually work, but what exactly are they expecting it to achieve...

    It seems to allow groups to work together to destroy jammers, but disposable jammers then render your attack force useless because all of your munitions will be expended destroying disposable jammers instead of real targets that are things like SAMs shooting down your aircraft delivery platforms and other munitions and drones.

    EDIT: Don't you hate it when you read a post and compose a reply and just as you post it you notice the last person to post after the one you read is Mindstorm, and he clearly and succinctly outlines the problems and reasons why with the post you are responding to that makes your post redundant.


    Last edited by GarryB on Fri 30 Apr 2021, 02:11; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : Mindstorm)
    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 7666
    Points : 7650
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Russian Electronic Warfare Systems - Page 12 Empty Re: Russian Electronic Warfare Systems

    Post  Isos Fri 30 Apr 2021, 02:24

    As long as you use signals you can jamm it. No matter what tech you use, be it 1945 radar or 2020 radio or 2035 quantic radars, you will be avle to jamm it just by using the same technology on your jammer.

    For exemple main stream media talk about how quantic computers will break safety codes in banks in matter of seconds and take all the money but that's true only if the banks use older technology. If they use quantic computers the situation will be the same as today and hacking them will be very hard.

    Now if you use 1960 jammers on 2020 communication stuff it won't work. But if you use a 2020 jammer designed to jamm 2020 communications then it will work.

    It's all about r&d. There is no magic stuff.

    Singular_Transform likes this post

    George1
    George1

    Posts : 16369
    Points : 16870
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Russian Electronic Warfare Systems - Page 12 Empty Re: Russian Electronic Warfare Systems

    Post  George1 Tue 03 Aug 2021, 14:11

    Russia to feature latest Lesochek small-size portable jammer at Army-2021 arms show

    According to the press office of Russia’s Western Military District, Lesochek jamming stations have entered service with the motor rifle formations stationed in the Leningrad Region

    MOSCOW, August 3. /TASS/. Lesochek portable small-size jamming stations will be on display at the Army-2021 arms show, the press office of Russia’s Western Military District reported on Tuesday.

    "In late August, this station will be on static display at the Army-2021 military-technical forum," the press office said in a statement.

    The Lesochek small-size electronic warfare system considerably outshines foreign rivals by its efficiency through the expanded operating frequency band and new jamming techniques, the statement says.

    "The unique capabilities of the Lesochek station make it possible to boost the protection of motor and armored vehicles and the personnel from remote controlled explosives while on the march and at camps. The station is highly mobile and can be carried in an armored or motor vehicle or in a backpack," the press office explained.

    The jamming station is highly resistant to enemy electronic warfare systems and anti-radiation weapons, which boosts its combat sustainability, the statement says.

    Lesochek jamming stations have entered service with the Western Military District’s motor rifle formations stationed in the Leningrad Region, the statement says.

    "Currently, the personnel are learning to operate these jammers in the course of field exercises," the press office said.

    https://tass.com/defense/1322243

    Hole likes this post


    Sponsored content

    Russian Electronic Warfare Systems - Page 12 Empty Re: Russian Electronic Warfare Systems

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Thu 05 Aug 2021, 01:56