The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Skunkworks > Handloading, Reloading, and Bullet Casting

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old June 29, 2013, 11:42 AM   #26
Jimro
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 18, 2006
Posts: 7,097
Quote:
I think most of the burning/unburnt powder remains in the case/chamber until after the bullet exits the muzzle, at which point the rapid decompression pulls it forward.

There's really no reason why the powder would go flying down the bore during the initial burn. Some of it might, but it's not going to be pushed the same way the bullet is, pressure can get past a piece of powder, it can't get past the bullet. The building pressures would be more or less equal from all directions on a single powder grain. It started stationary, the only source of movement was the primer blast and the bullet is essentially still stationary when that event ends so the powder has no where to go.
Except that a deflagration event has a wave front. You are starting a pressure wave with the primer. I don't disagree that unburnt powder in the chamber will move forward as pressure equalizes. However given the temperature difference between front and rear ignition cases that there is significant amounts of powder not burned in the case.

Jimro
__________________
Machine guns are awesome until you have to carry one.
Jimro is offline  
Old June 29, 2013, 01:09 PM   #27
SL1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 8, 2007
Posts: 2,001
When a kernal of powder is burning, it is giving-off gases in all directions. That means that it will push itself away from other kernals of powder and case walls and bore surfaces. So, there will be a tendency for the particles of powder to act more or less the same as the molecules of gas that surround them, and they will try to uniformly fill-up the space they have available. BUT, powder kernals are heavier than gas molecules, so they do not accelerate as rapidly when pushed on by the gas molecules. That means that there will be a tendency for the gas molecules to blow past the kernals and go down the bore after the bullet to a greater extent than the kernals. So, some of the burning powder will go down the bore before the bullet exits the muzzle.

AFTER the bore exits the muzzle, the gases behind the bullet are able to expand rapidly to atmospheric pressure by exiting the muzzle at an even higher speed than they were able to impart to the bullet. When the gases at the muzzle see atmospheric pressure, they rapidly accelerate away from the muzzle, allowing the gases a little ways farther into the bore to see the atmospheric pressure, which accelerates them, too. And, thus an "expansion wave" travels the bore from the muzzle all the way back to the case head. It travels at the speed of sound IN THE HOT GASES in the bore. Because the speed of sound in gas is a function of the temperature of the gase, the expansion wave in the bore will travel much faster than the speed of sound we all think about in air.

As the expansion wave passes unburned particles of powder, for a brief moment, there will be a different gas pressure on the muzzle side and the case side of the particle, which will accelerate the particle toward the muzzle. However, they will not get accelerated to the speed of the gases as they exit the bore.

Now, here is a part that will seem a little strange to people who have not studied gas dynamics. When that expansion wave hits the closed end of the case, it "reflects" and goes back to the muzzle. To understand why this happens, think about the fact that the gases that are on the muzzle side of the initial expansion wave are moving away from the case head. When the initial expansion wave hits the case head, ALL of the gases are moving away from the solid surface. If they kept doing that, then there would quickly be a complete vacuum in the bore as all of the gases exited the muzzle. What the reflected expansion wave does is make the gases come to rest in the bore as it travels back to the muzzle. In doing so, it again puts a differential pressure across any unburned powder particles that are still in the bore. But, the gases are thinner this time, so the force on the particles is not so great as to stop them as completely as the gas is stopped. But, they are then pushing through the gas, instead of travelling with it. So, some particles stop and get left in the bore and case.

(There is even more to the story about the waves travelling through the gases in the bore, which I am leaving out so as not to unnecessarily confuse the issue. On aspect is that the reflected expansion wave will get reflected again as a compression wave when it reaches the muzzle, because it will have reduced the pressure in the bore to less than atmospheric pressure. And, that wave will also reflect from the case head. Thus, the gas in the bore "rings" like the air in a musical instrument. But, that is not something that we need to think about in order to understand why the unburned powder particles end-up where we find them.)

SL1
SL1 is offline  
Old June 30, 2013, 01:24 AM   #28
Jimro
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 18, 2006
Posts: 7,097
SL1,

Thank you for that explanation, it fits with what I understand of a deflagration of gas mixture but put into a much more understandable post than I could gin up.

The traveling wave traveling between the case and the bullet made me think of the "Secondary Pressure Spike" that happens with some bullet/powder combinations. If a pressure wave hit a burning bit of powder and caused either a minor detonation or rapid increase in deflagration that would explain the secondary pressure spike. Anyways, I think that the traveling wave explanation makes more sense than the water vapor theory.

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/201...in-ammunition/

http://www.shootingsoftware.com/barrel.htm

Jimro
__________________
Machine guns are awesome until you have to carry one.
Jimro is offline  
Old June 30, 2013, 07:26 AM   #29
WESHOOT2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 20, 1999
Location: home on the range; Vermont (Caspian country)
Posts: 14,324
wish I had the pics

High-speed photography shows gases, powder, and flame exiting pistol-length barrels before the bullet.
__________________
.
"all my ammo is mostly retired factory ammo"
WESHOOT2 is offline  
Old June 30, 2013, 02:51 PM   #30
SL1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 8, 2007
Posts: 2,001
Weshoot2,

I have seen the photography of GASES escaping the muzzle ahead of the bullet, but not powder particles. Some gases almost always get by the bullet before it is bumped-up in diameter (by the pressure on its base) to fully seal the bore.

I do often see jacketed bullets in a backstop that don't show any engraving on the part of the bullet that was in the grooves, indicating that there was never a complete seal. I guess that powder particles might make it through that gap, considering the high pressures that are pushing them that way.

Jimro,

With respect to the "secondary pressure spike/explosion" phenomenon: the gas dynamics in the chamber and bore BEFORE the bullet exits are SUPPOSED to be "subsonic" in the sense that the speed of sound in the very hot gases is higher than the speed of the things moving around in it. Being subsonic tends to let pressure differences from place-to-place even out without building-up shock waves. There is SPECULATION by some that the secondary explosion effect is created when supersonic compression waves ("shock waves") somehow build-up in the gases in the bore before the bullet exits.

In gase mixtures, such as air/propane, the transition from deflagration to detonation (i.e., wave front going from sub-sonic to super-sonic) can be calculated and demonstrated. For other mixtures, such as air/methane, that is calculated to NOT occur and has not been demonstrated to occur at normal atmospheric pressures (last I heard, anyway). What causes the transition from deflagration to detonation IN GAS MIXTURES is the ability of the mixture to burn quickly enough and release enough energy to keep accelerating the flame front. The more pressure-dependent the burning process rate is, the more capable the mixture is of transitioning to detonation.

Trying to think about that phenomenon where particles of powder are what is burning in a gun barrel full of hot gases is much more complicated. We know that the particle burn rate is dependent on the pressure of the gases. But, folks who do the calculations of the particle burn rates (NOT me) don't seem to think that a shock wave can be created IN THE SOLID PARTICLES so that the particles themselves would detonate. However, it is not clear to me that is necessary to create a "secondary explosion effect". PERHAPS a shock wave can be created IN THE GAS that will cause the powder particles to burn fast enough to create a pressure spike that can burst a barrel?

The observations that secondary explosion effect occurs with light loads of slow powders in long barrels tends to make me wonder if part of the cause is that the powders are "slow" partly because of surface coatings of "deterent" chemicals which make the powder burn slowly to START but then let it burn faster later, presumably after the pressure peak has occurred. If slowly burning particles are distributed along the barrel behind a bullet and a shock wave can be generated travelling from the chamber towards the bullet's base, that wave will reflect from the bullet's base back into the gases with the burning particles as another shock wave, headed back toward the chamber, and it will raise the pressure in the gases right behind the bullet a second time. IF there is a lot of burning powder near the bullet's base, it should get quite a boost in its rate of burning, and create a LOCAL pressure pulse. That seems likely to me considering that it is often near the muzzle where the barrel bursts from "secondary explosion effect."

But, I am definitely NOT an expert on that phenomenon, so take this as just more speculation by someone who knows some pertinent things, but not enough to get it right.

SL1

Last edited by SL1; June 30, 2013 at 03:16 PM.
SL1 is offline  
Old July 1, 2013, 01:18 AM   #31
Jimro
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 18, 2006
Posts: 7,097
Quote:
But, I am definitely NOT an expert on that phenomenon, so take this as just more speculation by someone who knows some pertinent things, but not enough to get it right.
You and me both, there aren't a whole lot of experts on the physics/chemistry of what we are talking about. I do know that you can detonate smokeless powder under the correct conditions, even in an uncontained pile. The key is starting a shockwave that travels through the powder causing a relatively "instantaneous" transition from solid to gas, without going through the "burning/deflagration" process.

My personal pet theory is that the powder behaves much like burning C4, all it does is burn until you apply extra pressure then it explodes. At some point enough burning powder gets compressed enough to make the transition from deflagration to detonation, and the evidence of a gunsmith blowing off 5 inches of barrel seems to support this. I think that burning powder in the bore (behind the bullet) gets squished by a pressure wave which causes the secondary pressure spike in the barrel. I think that when the wave travels back to the cartridge can causes a detonation you get the secondary explosive effect.

I can't prove it, but the logic seems to fit the facts available.

Jimro
__________________
Machine guns are awesome until you have to carry one.
Jimro is offline  
Old July 1, 2013, 07:29 AM   #32
SL1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 8, 2007
Posts: 2,001
The problem with explaining secondary explosion effect has been that nobody can calculate what happens. And, it was rare enough that people were not reproducing it on-demand, so there was a tendency to think that it was just an excuse for some reloading mistake by the people who reported it. But, now that there is credible evidence that it really happens (sometimes), we still can't calculate it with what we currently understand.

Which reminds me that, when I was in college, nobody could calculate how bumblebees could fly. But, as one of my professors observed, no bumblebees dropped out of the air when he calculated why they could not fly.

Today, we have learned enough to not only show how bumblebees fly, but to be able to make mechanical devices that fly the same way.

So, maybe in our lifetimes, somebody will figure-out secondary explosion effect.

SL1
SL1 is offline  
Old July 1, 2013, 10:18 AM   #33
Jimro
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 18, 2006
Posts: 7,097
Maybe, but probably not. Tornadoes are just like SEE, we know the conditions that can cause it to happen, but not when or where. It's one of those things were we see the danger signs before they happen, but they don't always happen.

Jimro
__________________
Machine guns are awesome until you have to carry one.
Jimro is offline  
Old July 1, 2013, 10:33 AM   #34
F. Guffey
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 18, 2008
Posts: 7,249
There was knock and anti-knock, then cam climate control by TEXACO with their seasonal blend, THEN! somewhere before that Diesel discovered/invented compression, instead of a spark of two different choices he used compression, compression concentrated the head from a large area to a small area, that worked until winter arrived, winter reduced the amount of heat, some called latent, latent because it was hidden, anyhow, there was not enough latent head in cold air when concentrated to ignite diesel because of the low flash point, SO? they lowered the flash point of the fuel, or built engines that started on gas then after warming up they switched to diesel.

And then? They used either, after either they used air pre-heat systems, after all that effort there was the problem with oil getting thick in the winter, finally going to work became too much work.

Then there was the two flame front and the collision, back to knock and anti knock, and always with us is the ’the hot spot’.

None of the above relates to gun powder except the know factor if we consider some fuels have an ability to resist knock based on the speed of burn.

Variables, always the variable, an excuse for reloaders to claim “IT CAN NOT BE DONE BECAUSE of ‘VARIABLES”. Big factor, time, time is a big factor, to render your rifle scrap load the case with pistol powder, with pistol powder in a rifle the bullet can not get out out the way fast enough, and no, it is not a good ideal to burn all the powder at once, Me? I do not like the ‘BG!!!! effect, I am a fan of the BAAAAAAANNNNNGGGGGG, I am the fan of getting the bullet moving with a running/jump start, I want the a pressure increase when gets things moving, and enough to left to keep everything moving until the bullets leaves the barrel.

Then there was smokeless powder, reduced smoke, not much help at night, because? there was no effort to reduce the flash, until attachments were added to reduce the flash to a degree.

F. Guffey

Last edited by F. Guffey; July 1, 2013 at 10:41 AM. Reason: change of to or
F. Guffey is offline  
Old July 1, 2013, 02:06 PM   #35
Unclenick
Staff
 
Join Date: March 4, 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 21,017
I'm a bit late to this, having started composing two days ago, so please forgive any redundancy.

I’ve read reflected waves are a serious consideration in artillery and cannon because the size of the guns offers opportunity for many reflection cycles of large gas masses, but that in small arms they are largely ignored. But I’ve also read Doppler radar bounced off an angled sacrificial reflector into a rifle muzzle shows the bullet’s initial acceleration is full of hesitations, rather than smooth, which might well be accounted for by such waves (though I don’t spot obvious echoes of that in pressure measurements). Seems alike a good topic for exploration.

If you recover exposed base bullets fired with stick powder from a backstop, you pretty clearly see the impression of the stick grains in the core. Gas takes time to move through powder grains, like blowing through a granular filter. There is enough surface area for fluid resistance to be significant. In this sense, the powder behaves like a leaky wad, and a good portion is blown forward fairly hard.

I’ve seen the high speed Kurzzeit videos showing gas and powder preceding a bullet, but I suspect the powder to be unburned grains left in the barrel from previous firings and swept out by bypass gas.

Just to be sure folks are on the same page: Combustion is a reaction in which molecules with high potential energy are injected with enough kinetic energy to start to disassemble. That disassembly gives the atoms an opportunity to rearrange themselves into lower potential energy molecules called combustion products, as entropy demands. The quantity of heat released by this is the difference between the potential energies of the two molecular arrangements. Successful ignition means at least enough energy is being released to continue disassembly of fuel molecules adjacent to the ignition site.

Deflagration and detonation are subcategories of combustion. The difference is in how the ongoing conversion of potential energy to kinetic energy sustains combustion after ignition. In deflagration (common burning) it is kinetic energy arriving by heat conduction, which is subsonic, from a flame front comprised of currently recombining atoms that maintains combustion. In detonation it is kinetic energy in the form of a detonation wave. This is a pressure wave that disassembles combustible molecules, while their recombination into combustion products behind the wave front releases energy at high enough pressure to sustain the wave’s intensity while it spread throughout the combustible. The wave compresses the combustible material, increasing its density and temperature because it moves faster than the material can be pushed out of its way without compressing. That’s means it is faster than the speed of sound in the material. Simply put, in a combustible material or mixture, deflagration always occurs at a rate that is below the speed of sound in it, while detonation always occurs above the speed of sound in it.

Because detonation depends on kinetic transfer of the wave front, it works best in a contiguous medium, having a solid or fluid fuel mix to propagate through. Any discontinuity in the material, such as granulation of solid explosives makes that harder to achieve. This is why absorbing nitroglycerine into particulate matter (Dynamite) makes it harder to set off than the pure nitro. However, if you get a large enough mass of granulated material in one place, it takes on fluid properties and can carry a detonating wave well enough to sustain a detonation. Black gunpowder, for example, can be detonated if the quantity is large enough, but I’ve read that requires several tons in one place. The above is why I’ve always assumed detonation of small charges in a rifle chamber probably requires the powder mass to fuse first, as poor ignition can be observed to have done when some loads squib out. But I digress into speculation.


Steve,

At the Shooter’s Forum, Humpy (Hummer90 on this board), a former Aberdeen Proving Grounds test director, disagreed with Rocky, pointing out you can sweep the dust in front of the firing line at an indoor range into a pile, light it with a match and watch it flare and burn because of all the unburned powder in it. I think most of us have found unburned grains scattered down a dirty bore as well.

Rocky got his information from a commercial munitions industry person. It disagrees with Hartmut Broemel, who authored QuickLOAD. But Herr Broemel is not to be taken lightly. He trained in government labs (the predecessor code to QuickLOAD was based on 20 mm gun data), which typically have military test equipment budgets far in excess of commercial facilities. He writes software for the CIP, and is a respected ballistics authority on that side of the pond. Ken Oehler said, in an exchange at the 24 Hour Campfire, that Broemel had probably seen more real interior ballistics data than himself and others combined. This is partly due to the way Europe collected data historically through individual proofing of firearms and still collects through clubs that test handloads. Lots more data than we get here.

Barsness is correct about muzzle flash. Smokeless powder self-combustion is an oxygen deficient reaction, which is why you see carbon left behind in your bore. There isn’t enough oxygen in nitrocellulose molecules to turn all the carbon into CO or all the hydrogen into H2O, nor to oxidize all the ionized nitrogen, let alone stabilizers and deterrents that don’t supply their own. So when hot, unoxidized fuel atoms find oxygen in the air, if there hasn’t been enough expansion in the barrel to drop their temperatures below their ignition points, they burn.

As to how quickly powder burns out in a bore, Rocky and Barsness got some bad information. Several things in addition to unburned powder in the bore and on the floor, suggest powder is not completely consumed at the pressure peak. Start with a highly "overbore" cartridge with a small expansion ratio and figure out how much Bullseye is required to reach its SAAMI maximum average pressure. Then figure out how much of a really slow powder is required to reach the same pressure peak. In a .25-06 with a typical 100 grain cup and core construction bullet, it takes around three times as much Reloader 25 as it does Bullseye to reach the same peak pressure.¹ Well, if takes three times more Reloader 25 (or H1000, for that matter) to reach a certain peak pressure, and you assume all the powder mass is converted to gas, then why isn't the peak pressure three times higher with the slow powder, and not merely equal to the Bullseye pressure?

To be fair, the Bullseye pressure will peak when the bullet base has moved about five eighths of an inch forward, while the Reloader 25 won’t peak until the bullet base has moved about two and a half inches. So Reloader 25 will peak in a larger volume. But even with that bullet position difference, in this overbore cartridge you only have about 28% increased volume from that. With three times the gas you should still have pressure that's more than double for the heavier powder charge, and not merely equal. Indeed, for expansion to account for the difference, the Reloader 25 would have to peak about 14” down the barrel.

In a uniform bore in good condition, you can verify peak pressure bullet location with a borescope by seeing where copper fouling is heaviest. Peak pressure causes peak bullet radial upset force which causes peak friction between the bullet jacket and the bore, rubbing the most gilding metal off. Peaking 14” down the tube would make muzzle pressure and muzzle blast so high it could distort bullets clearing the muzzle. (This happened in experiments Dr. Lloyd Brownell did in the mid '60's in which a .30-06 barrel was cut way down, resulting in bullets bumped up at the muzzle to have a wide flared skirt.) But 14” isn’t where the heavy copper deposits are; 2.5 inches is. So between that and the bullets coming out in good shape, we know the 14” peak location is not happening.

Another way to tell powder burn doesn’t stop at the peak is pressure curve shapes are wrong for this. Below is a measured pressure curve reproduced with permission from Jim Ristow at RSI. I stretched it to get the proportions similar to the curve generated by QuickLOAD in the plot below it so you can see the shape similarity. Below those is what the curve should look like if the powder burn just stopped dead at the pressure peak. Without new gas being made, as the bullet coasts forward the volume containing the gas expands and gas temperature drops. The combination causes pressure to fall off roughly as the inverse of the square of the increase in volume. With a powder like Bullseye, which really does finish burning before the bullet has travelled far, you see the corner at the top a little less sharp than in my fictional plot, but from about a quarter of an inch of bullet travel past the peak and on, it drops just like that.





Bottom line: Hartmut Broemel is right. Powder does not complete combustion by the pressure peak. What is complete by the pressure peak is the net progressive phase of the burn, but the net digressive phase continues after that.

¹ I used QuickLOAD to calculate this. If you feel this smacks of a circular argument, you can find pressures for published data for other slow powders and relatively fast ones, like Trail Boss, that will verify it takes a lot less quick powder to reach a particular peak pressure than it does slow powder.
__________________
Gunsite Orange Hat Family Member
CMP Certified GSM Master Instructor
NRA Certified Rifle Instructor
NRA Benefactor Member and Golden Eagle
Unclenick is offline  
Old July 2, 2013, 09:02 AM   #36
F. Guffey
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 18, 2008
Posts: 7,249
http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=341348

Unclenick, thank you, I was trying to transition from “I do not like the ‘BG!!!!' effect, I am a fan of the BAAAAAAANNNNNGGGGGG” to the link above, an example of using BG!!!! powder in a rifles that was designed for “BAAAAAAANNNNNGGGGGG” powder.

I went to the range with a white poster board, I laid the board on the bench then began shooting pistols, after ever shot I lowered the barrel, dirty? Unburned? There have been claims improvements have been made, I am the fan of improvements, I will not purchase the improved version at the sake of dumping what is left of the 8 pound keg.

F. Guffey

Last edited by F. Guffey; July 2, 2013 at 10:05 AM. Reason: add '
F. Guffey is offline  
Old July 2, 2013, 09:34 AM   #37
F. Guffey
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 18, 2008
Posts: 7,249
“High-speed photography shows gases, powder, and flame exiting pistol-length barrels before the bullet”

Long after they had it figured out, a photographer took a picture of a blast the moment the projectile left the barrel, it took months to determine what happened, there was nothing military about the picture, the picture won awards as art, and that is where the military found the picture. First, out front and ahead of everything was a cloud of visible moisture, never seen before by the trained and or untrained eye because it happened ‘too fast to see’, then the smoke ring caused by gas that passed the projectile then the projectile, behind the projectile was the blast leaving the barrel at a 90 degree angle with perfect rifling definition.

I am sure cleaning rods cause taper at the muzzle, as convinced as I am that ‘can’ happen, I am equally convinced the t hot, high pressure metal cutting gas escaping at a 90 degree of the muzzle can not be good on the end of the barrel, again, the hot high metal cutting was not a go-high-low flame (arrow looking, or anything that resembled a snake after it swallowed something)

The sequence of events (“High-speed photography”) was before high speed file, or put another way, it was before they were aware of high speed film, plates, negatives. Imagine the excitement caused by the discovery, again, the photographer entered the picture in a contest and won.

F. Guffey
F. Guffey is offline  
Old July 2, 2013, 10:03 AM   #38
F. Guffey
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 18, 2008
Posts: 7,249
“With respect to the "secondary pressure spike/explosion" phenomenon”: No bullet, no spike, jam the bullet into the lands with ‘BG’ powder and the spike can render the firearm scrap. Then there is the ‘too big-a bullet’ meaning the phenomenon of firing a 8mm57 round in a 30/06 chamber, CAUSE AND EFFECT": The case will shorten, 2 causes, one the 8mm57 has a lot of chamber to fill, then there is the spoke caused by the reluctant billet, reluctant because it has a lot of trouble getting into the lands, and then finally ‘TIME’ the delay in building up enough pressure to clean the chamber causes high pressure, no ‘ary’ as in primary, secondary or thirdary. Back to 2 causes, the case will shorten between the case body and case head because of compression/hammering, back to time, and hammering, the case head can increase .040” in diameter because of the hammering, and if that will not pull your case head off the case body add powder or seat the bullet into the lands etc., etc..

Then, there is more, the primer, I have little interest in determining how fast the primer gas expands, in every other event I discuss it seems the primers part in all of this is more than most reloaders want to keep up with, but, the primer will dislodge a bullet from the case into the forcing cone, with powder the sequence of events become compounded (as in more than one).

Powder in the case between the bullet base and case cup, if the primer drives the case into the forcing cone before the powder ignites we (correction) I have two explosions, the first explosion drives the bullet into the forcing cone, and the bullet stops, after the bullet stops, the powder burns and gets busy building pressure, WITH A BULLET JAMMED INTO FORCING CONE AND WILL NOT MOVE UNTIL PRESSURE IS SUFFICIENT TO MOVE IT, while trying to remember the powder is ‘BG’ powder. and thatis the reason I say I an the fan of the running start, I want my bullets to have ‘the jump’.

F. Guffey

Last edited by F. Guffey; July 2, 2013 at 10:03 AM. Reason: remove bullets
F. Guffey is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

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

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

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:40 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2021 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Page generated in 0.07256 seconds with 9 queries