Youtube comments of Retrosicotte (@Retrosicotte).

  1. 2000
  2. 587
  3. 532
  4. A good video, but a few mistakes in regards to the QE. Normally I wouldn't be the "ACHTHUALLY" sort, but the QE has so many misconceptions about it around the net and especially here in the UK from the public. The speed is far above the one listed in video. She's already gone faster than 29 knots in British waters (look at her route on AIS when she passed the Isle of Wight), and the Assembly Director has stated she can go up to 32 knots, is the highest (publically released) figure. They turn off their AIS whenever they go faster, so he was certainly correct. In addition, "more than" 36 is underselling it, the hangar alone can fit 24 (plus 2 Merlins) and the deck can easily take another 24, plus helos. You state the F-35B cannot carry anti-ship missiles inside its bays, this is incorrect. It can fit 4x Spear Cap 3 missiles inside each bay, for a total of 8. The Spear 3 from MBDA is a multipurpose missile, one of those being "anti ship", capable of targeting specific critical systems like bridge, turrets, radars and VLS clusters. No mention made of its superior radar (SMART-L and Artisan) over the Chinese one, that would give it much greater detection in this strange scenario where there's no escorts available. In addition, no mention made of sortie rate, in which the QE is generations ahead thanks to automated munitions handling and the F-35's inherently faster rearmament speed. Sortie rate over time matters ten times more than "who can launch more in ten seconds". Finally, no mention made of the QE's damage control, it's basically two ships in one, dual separated propulsion, dual separated bridges and air control, dual separated avionics, dual separated exhaust and electronics lines. That is not an insignificant aspect.
    369
  5. 221
  6. 166
  7. 133
  8. 93
  9. 82
  10. 78
  11. 68
  12. 59
  13. 58
  14. 58
  15. 55
  16. 47
  17. 46
  18. 42
  19. 39
  20. 37
  21. 36
  22. 36
  23. 35
  24. 35
  25. 35
  26. 30
  27. 29
  28. 29
  29. 28
  30. 28
  31. 28
  32. 27
  33. 26
  34. 26
  35. 26
  36. 25
  37. 25
  38. 25
  39. 23
  40. 23
  41. 22
  42. 22
  43. Great talk on the Typhoon, but if I may there were a few notable inaccurate statements, which I offer with respect to the fun show you guys put on, great to play AW while listening to: "Typhoon is not stealth, it is loud and proud" - This is quite incorrect. There is no such thing as "stealth" and "not stealth". Every plane has some degree of stealth associated with it, even as far bad as the Mosquito or Vulcan. The Typhoon is the most stealthy 4.5th gen on the market right now, with only 15% non-composite external materials, 90% frontal arc RAM coverage, a tilted radar mount, S-ducts, recessed weapon hardpoints and a canard management system for RCS reduction, to name but a few features. From the front it has been speculated to have the RCS of a B-2 bomber, and when you look at the known specs of the T-50/PAK-FA, it's actually LESS stealthy than the Typhoon from some angles due to the exposed non-RAM metal materals on the T-50. It won't ever be AS stealthy as an F-22 or F-35, but to not mention that it is the best stealth out there that isn't a 5th gen fighter is a bit inaccurate. Stealth isn't an "on or off" switch, as Damien says. The greater (or lower, I suppose) the RCS, the close you can get before detection. The Typhoon absolutely has an RCS advantage over 95% of the planes out there. "We'll be getting the Tranche 4 soon" - There's no such thing as a Tranche 4. Tranche 3 is the "final" Tranche, however after that it is the Phase Enhancement process. Currently the 2nd phase (P2E) has been implemented to the Tranche 2 and 3 fighters. P3E is due this or next year to bring (most notably among other things) the Storm Shadow cruise missile and the world beating Brimstone II missile.. What I believe you mean is the P4E upgrade that will be given to existing Tranche 3 aircraft. "It is getting a bit outdated" - Not at all! They are still making new ones, and with its Tranche 3 and P4E upgrades it's amongst some of the best aircraft out there. Modern Typhoon models are amongst the most advanced in the world. When there are only 2 planes in service in existence that can outdo you in technology, that doesn't make you old! It's got an enormous future ahead of it in technological upgrades, and is only of only three planes in existence to have a two-way datalink for its A2A missiles. (Not even the F-22 has one of them yet.) It says a lot that many countries with Typhoons have chosen to retain them for upgrades and operate them beside F-35's, rather than universally replace them. In recent Red Air exercises from 2013, F-22's and Typhoons working in tandem achieved a 30-1 kill ratio against gen 4 and gen 4.5 aircraft. If the Typhoon was "outdated", then they wouldn't have been so mutually capable. "The Advanced Super Hornet and its external weapons pod" - Stands a 90% chance of never being made, let alone being ordered, the base Super Hornet has enough trouble finding buyers in a world that's turning to already existing and in service models like F-35, Typhoon, Rafale and Gripen. External weapons pods might reduce RCS a bit, but there are other methods to do that such as the Typhoons recessed weapons hardpoints (notice how the BVRAAM stations are 'dipped' into the fuselage to lower their visual impact). In addition, the one thing that Boeing hasn't commented on is that such an enormous pod will create lots of drag and add extra weight on top of the munitions themselves, this would significantly affect aircraft range on a plane that is already not exactly one of the longer ranged ones around. "The F-35 is meant more for air to ground" - The F-35 is meant for multi-mission. It is superior to the F-16 and Super Hornet for air to air, and no-one would dare say either of them are not meant for air to air. When it comes to beyond visual range, the F-35 is one of the best. Even up close, while it doesn't have the truly obscene turning of the Typhoon or the energy retention, it has numerous tricks that only it can do, like an absolutely outrageous angle of attack of 50+ degrees. (They can fly almost seemingly sideways when in a hard angle.) Typhoon has a "high and fast" approach which is better for some forms of air to air, but the F-35 has its own advantages. For air to air, the Typhoon and F-35 are COMPLIMENTARY, not rivals. They each bring a unique trait to the table and create an incredible joint capability. "The Typhoon is more for air to air" - This is accurate, originally. It is before anything else an interceptor/air superiority hybrid. However it's a swingrole, and it will have several munitions for air to ground the F-35 won't have. The Brimstone II missile for example, is unique to the Typhoon until the Spear CAP 3 program arrives for F-35. Storm Shadow is also something that (in the RAF) only Typhoon will have. Although the F-35 does have comparitives such as the JASS-ER. Loved the show, I look forward to future ones!
    21
  44. 21
  45. 20
  46. 20
  47. 19
  48. 19
  49. 19
  50. 19
  51. 18
  52. 17
  53. 17
  54. 17
  55. 16
  56. 16
  57. 16
  58. 16
  59. 16
  60. 16
  61. 16
  62. 15
  63. 15
  64. 15
  65. 15
  66. 15
  67. 14
  68. 14
  69. 14
  70. 14
  71. 13
  72. 13
  73. 13
  74. 13
  75. 13
  76. 13
  77. 13
  78. 12
  79. 12
  80. 12
  81. 12
  82. 12
  83. 12
  84. 12
  85. 11
  86. 11
  87. 11
  88. 11
  89. 11
  90. 11
  91. 11
  92. 11
  93. 11
  94. 11
  95. 10
  96. 10
  97. 10
  98. 10
  99. 10
  100. 10
  101. 10
  102. 10
  103. 10
  104. 10
  105. 10
  106. 9
  107. 9
  108. 9
  109. 9
  110. 9
  111. 9
  112. 9
  113. 9
  114. 9
  115. 9
  116. 9
  117. 9
  118. 9
  119. 9
  120. 9
  121. 9
  122. 8
  123. 8
  124. 8
  125. 8
  126. 8
  127. 8
  128. 8
  129. 8
  130. 8
  131. 8
  132. 8
  133. 8
  134. 8
  135. 8
  136. 8
  137. 8
  138. 8
  139. 8
  140. 8
  141. 8
  142. 8
  143. 8
  144. 8
  145. 8
  146. 8
  147. 8
  148. 8
  149. 8
  150. 7
  151. 7
  152. 7
  153. 7
  154. 7
  155. 7
  156. 7
  157. 7
  158. 7
  159. 7
  160. 7
  161. 7
  162. 7
  163. 7
  164. 7
  165. 7
  166. 7
  167. 7
  168. 7
  169. 7
  170. 6
  171. 6
  172. 6
  173. 6
  174. 6
  175. 6
  176. 6
  177. 6
  178. 6
  179. 6
  180. 6
  181. 6
  182. 6
  183. 6
  184. 6
  185. 6
  186. 6
  187. 6
  188. 6
  189. 6
  190. 6
  191. 6
  192. 6
  193. 6
  194. 6
  195. 6
  196.  @bowez9  "in CAS air superiority is almost always already achieved" So your belief rests in a plane that requires everything else to protect it protecting things, instead of one that just does the job first time...right. "Also let's see how F35 does after taking a AIM-9 to right wing. A10 flew back to base with only..." Again, this belief in "it took a hit and survived means its more survivable" is nonsense. A-10 is cripplingly vulnerable because anything anti-air swats it and drives them off, making their use unsuitable and dangerous for the pilots. They have ONLY been used in controlled air. F-35 meanwhile has no such worries and can oeprate in denied or contested airspace. A-10 relies on a chance it might survive. F-35 is happy just not getting into trouble at all while accomplishing the same mission. "Plus the A10 sound is enough to change a battle--without even firing a shot. " So is dropping an SDB from no-where and entirely removing what is causing the issue at all. The "sound" means little when your opponent is already dead. "In a era were we are fighting against Guerrillas why use a million dollar missile to do a job a hundred dollar round can do--and the survivors know what hit them." Because the A-10 is becoming outrageously expensive to maintain, and its presence bringing a whole new logistics line and need to upgrade a different aircraft for every weapon costs far more than it saves to do an inferior job. (Note most CAS isn't done by A-10 any more) "A Mutlitool is much less adapt at doing the job than a purpose built tool. Ask any tradesman." Except the F-35 both does more roles, and does it objectively better than the A-10. It's like trying to argue running into battle with only a knife is better than going in with an assault rifle.
    6
  197. 5
  198. 5
  199. 5
  200. 5
  201. 5
  202. 5
  203. 5
  204. 5
  205. 5
  206. 5
  207. 5
  208. 5
  209. 5
  210. 5
  211. 5
  212. 5
  213. 5
  214. Here's the usual "Things Binkov missed about Britain/France by not bothering to research them properly": - It should be 12 nuclear submarines for the UK, as HMS Audacious is actually out and on sea trials at the moment, there's no way she wouldn't be called into it. - Talks about the AESA count between the nations, but completely neglects to add in the 21 F-35s which all have better AESAs than the Rafale - Mentions France have more carrier aircraft yes, but CdG cabn only fit 30 of them on board, and 21 F-35s will wipe the floor with 30 previous generation fighters. - Why does Binkov keep mentioning the "3 F-35 are in the US for training"? This is the same for EVERY AIRCRAFT FLEET EVER. They ALL have some dedicated to training otherwise there wouldn't be any pilots! Why not count out the Rafales France uses for this too? - "It lacks Aerial Early Warning Helicopters" - They entered service last week dude. Please. Research. - And how, pray tell, would a Rafale even get by F-35s to launch a short range 70km Exocet at the carrier when each Rafale M can only carry a single one? - "The Meteor has a greater reach" Maybe compared to AIM-120C, but the British F-35s use AIM-120D, which is about the same. - The Rafale missile loadout is incorrect. They can carry 6 A2A missiles max. They have 4x A2A hardpoints on the wings (two can only fit MICA), and two on the belly for Meteor. - "The British may not even carry (ASRAAM) to preserve stealth" The F-35 will outstealth the Rafales even with them, jesus christ...stealth is not an "on/off switch" - "France operates 3 E-2" It operates 2 at most from the carrier as the third is always in deep maintainance. This leaves it with a deadzone where they have no AEW each day as two aircraft cannot run 24/7 ops. Why never mention this? - "The Rafales could fire their Exocets near the edge of reach of the (T45)" Er, no. Rafale's Exocet is 70km maximum. The T45s Aster-30 missile goes out to over 120km... - Why not mention that the Dauphion also relies on 3rd party sonar? Why only put it as a negative for the Wildcat? - "The French Navy would eventually break out into the Atlantic" And you ever going to explain HOW? No navy is going to get through that chokepoint with SSNs sinking everything coming. Why just say this happens and not justify it? - "Poseidon don't have anti-ship missiles" Er, yes they do. The UK has an agreement with the US to use ALL their munitions on the plane. They can fit anything from the US inventory on there ad hoc as required via contract. - Also, there's 5 Poseidons, not 3. This is literally a five minute Google check, man. - Why would the British need to sacrifice submarines? You are forgetting the British literally build the French Navy's main sonar for them. The UK knows every single detail of how the CAPTAS4 detects things. You think they won't abuse the hell out of that? - Total Army Regulars ignores the 2,000 odd from the RAF Regiment. They may be maed fun of but they're still trained ground troops. - "700+ Warrior 2" Er, no. The UK only has about 12 Warrior 2s. The rest are still Warrior 1s. - Also why not count the 6-12 Ajax that entered service? - Why not count the Griffins that entered service for the French Army? They already have a bunch of them. - Why didn't you count the Army's Wildcats for scout helicopters? That is literally their primary role... - "Though the rest of their fleet might fare a bit better than the British fleet overall" Again, how? When most of it would be sunk coming out of Gibraltar, and anything on the north coast docks will get Storm Shadowed to hell and back given the UK has eight times the number. Ultimately, it would still be a stalemate, but there are a lot of errors in this...
    5
  215. 5
  216. 5
  217. 5
  218. 5
  219. 5
  220. 5
  221. 5
  222. 5
  223. 5
  224. 5
  225. 5
  226. 5
  227. 5
  228. 5
  229. 5
  230. 5
  231. 5
  232. 5
  233. 5
  234. 5
  235. 5
  236. 5
  237. 5
  238. 5
  239. 5
  240. 4
  241. 4
  242. 4
  243. 4
  244. 4
  245. 4
  246. 4
  247. 4
  248. 4
  249. 4
  250. 4
  251. 4
  252. 4
  253. 4
  254. 4
  255. 4
  256. 4
  257. 4
  258. 4
  259. 4
  260. 4
  261. 4
  262. 4
  263. 4
  264. 4
  265. 4
  266. 4
  267. 4
  268. 4
  269. 4
  270. 4
  271. 4
  272. 4
  273. 4
  274. 4
  275. 4
  276. 4
  277. 4
  278. 4
  279. 4
  280. 4
  281. 4
  282. 4
  283. 4
  284. 4
  285. 4
  286. 4
  287. 4
  288. 4
  289. 4
  290. 4
  291. 4
  292. 4
  293. 4
  294. 4
  295. 4
  296. 4
  297. 4
  298. 4
  299. 3
  300. 3
  301. 3
  302. 3
  303. 3
  304. 3
  305. 3
  306. 3
  307. 3
  308. 3
  309. 3
  310. 3
  311. 3
  312. 3
  313. 3
  314. 3
  315. 3
  316. 3
  317. 3
  318. 3
  319. 3
  320. 3
  321. 3
  322. 3
  323. 3
  324. 3
  325. 3
  326. 3
  327. 3
  328. 3
  329. 3
  330. 3
  331. 3
  332. 3
  333. 3
  334. 3
  335. 3
  336. 3
  337. 3
  338. 3
  339. 3
  340. 3
  341. 3
  342. 3
  343. 3
  344. 3
  345. 3
  346. 3
  347. 3
  348. 3
  349. 3
  350. 3
  351. 3
  352. 3
  353. 3
  354. 3
  355. 3
  356. 3
  357. 3
  358. 3
  359. 3
  360. 3
  361. 3
  362. 3
  363. 3
  364. 3
  365. 3
  366. 3
  367. 3
  368. 3
  369. 3
  370. 3
  371. 3
  372. 3
  373. 3
  374. 3
  375. 3
  376. 3
  377. 3
  378. 3
  379. 3
  380. 3
  381. 3
  382. 3
  383. 3
  384. 3
  385. 3
  386. 3
  387. 3
  388. 3
  389. 2
  390. 2
  391. 2
  392. 2
  393. 2
  394. 2
  395. 2
  396. 2
  397. 2
  398. 2
  399. 2
  400. 2
  401. 2
  402. 2
  403. 2
  404. 2
  405. 2
  406. 2
  407. 2
  408. 2
  409. 2
  410. 2
  411. 2
  412. 2
  413. 2
  414. 2
  415. 2
  416. 2
  417. 2
  418. 2
  419. 2
  420. 2
  421. 2
  422. 2
  423. 2
  424. 2
  425. 2
  426. 2
  427. 2
  428. 2
  429. 2
  430. 2
  431. 2
  432. 2
  433. 2
  434. 2
  435. 2
  436. 2
  437. 2
  438. 2
  439. 2
  440. 2
  441. 2
  442. 2
  443. 2
  444. 2
  445. 2
  446. 2
  447. 2
  448. 2
  449. 2
  450. 2
  451. 2
  452. 2
  453. 2
  454. 2
  455. 2
  456. 2
  457. 2
  458. 2
  459. 2
  460. 2
  461. 2
  462. 2
  463. 2
  464. 2
  465. 2
  466. 2
  467. 2
  468. 2
  469. 2
  470. 2
  471. As usual every time the UK comes up, several big research fails on the British Armed Forces by Binkov: - "But 3 F-35s are still in the US for training" This is the same for EVERY fleet of aircraft in EVERY country. Being in the US or not is irrelevant, every single fleet in the entire world has some earmarked purely for training or experimental purposes. Why single the UK only out and not India's for this? - "Would have to come from the UK mainland" So we're ignoring that the UK has 2 large naval bases in Bahrain and Oman just next door that can support carriers? - "Can only house X fighter in this place alone" Also ignoring RAF Al Udeid is in Qatar that could run interception and additional ISTAR. - "No Crowsnest" Except Crowsnest is already prepped for IOC in CSG2021, so they should be included here and are FAR superior to the ancient Indian helo AEW. - "3x P-8s" The RAF has 5 of them, not 3 - "Detecting Indian submarines would be almost impossible" Why? The UK is one of the best ASW nations on the planet, and regularly engages in ASW shenanigans with the much more capable Russian subs. India's are ancient or lower end for the most part, why would they be any trouble? - Absolutely no mention of Storm Shadow on Typhoons to hit Indian ships while still in port, the UK already did this to Libya and it worked perfectly. - MASSIVELY underestimates the potency of Astute class submarines, by implying they would shoot once then just die. - "Most units lack good sensors" While showing Sampson equipped units, which are some of the best radars out there, and another whole fleet of Artisans, and then Sky Sabre using modern Giraffe... - "The UK would lose several subs" Why? There is no reason to assume this. Modern SSNs are the most feared vessels in the world for good reason. - "And half a dozen ships" Again, why? This is completely without explanation. How does India even locate the ships to fire at when their AWACS cannot survive in the air to locate for them? - "Even if the RAF shoots down 2 planes for the loss of one of their own" It amuses me that you think old Russian Su's can go 1:2 odds against F-35s. Try 1:20 as proven in Red Flag, which was against MUCH more potent counter-air than India has. - "The British don't have as much room for quick improvement" Why? They would have a second supercarrier by then, another SSN, would be building Typhoons much faster than India can its own planes, would have another 12 F-35s, and would have Sea Venom and the Interim-OTHM by then. - Why is the Indian carrier still shown at the end? In what reality do you think an Astute wouldn't sink that thing within a month? The UK knows Russian design carrier acoustics better than any country in the world given how often they pass us by. Why not count in the loss of its entire air wing?
    2
  472. 2
  473. 2
  474. 2
  475. 2
  476. 2
  477. 2
  478. 2
  479. 2
  480. 2
  481. 2
  482. 2
  483. 2
  484. 2
  485. 2
  486. 2
  487. 2
  488. 2
  489. 2
  490. 2
  491. 2
  492. 2
  493. 2
  494. 2
  495. 2
  496. 2
  497. 2
  498. 2
  499. 2
  500. 2
  501. 2
  502. 2
  503. 2
  504. 2
  505. 2
  506. 2
  507. 2
  508. 2
  509. 2
  510. 2
  511. 2
  512. 2
  513. 2
  514. 2
  515. 2
  516. 2
  517. 2
  518. 2
  519. 2
  520. 2
  521. 2
  522. 2
  523. 2
  524. 2
  525. 2
  526. 2
  527. 2
  528. 2
  529. 2
  530. 2
  531. 2
  532. 2
  533. 2
  534. 2
  535. 2
  536. 2
  537. 2
  538. 2
  539. 2
  540. 2
  541. 2
  542. 2
  543. 2
  544. 2
  545. 2
  546. 2
  547. 2
  548. 2
  549. 2
  550. 2
  551. 2
  552. 2
  553. 2
  554. 2
  555. 2
  556. 2
  557. 2
  558. 2
  559. 2
  560. 2
  561. 1
  562. 1
  563. 1
  564. 1
  565. 1
  566. 1
  567. 1
  568. 1
  569. 1
  570. 1
  571. 1
  572. 1
  573. 1
  574. 1
  575. 1
  576. 1
  577. 1
  578. 1
  579. 1
  580. 1
  581. 1
  582. 1
  583. 1
  584. 1
  585. 1
  586. 1
  587. 1
  588. 1
  589. 1
  590. 1
  591. 1
  592. 1
  593. 1
  594. 1
  595. 1
  596. 1
  597. 1
  598. 1
  599. 1
  600. 1
  601. 1
  602. 1
  603. 1
  604. 1
  605. 1
  606. 1
  607. 1
  608. 1
  609. 1
  610. 1
  611. 1
  612. 1
  613. 1
  614. 1
  615. 1
  616. 1
  617. 1
  618. 1
  619. 1
  620. 1
  621. 1
  622. 1
  623. 1
  624. 1
  625. 1
  626. 1
  627. 1
  628. 1
  629. 1
  630. 1
  631. 1
  632. 1
  633. 1
  634. 1
  635. 1
  636. 1
  637. 1
  638. 1
  639. 1
  640. 1
  641. 1
  642.  @reyvan3806  Incorrect. Iraq was both A) A very rare example and B) Conducted by scout vehicles (M3s), not IFVs carrying infantry. Again this idea of you wanting to attack armour with infantry would get you laughed out the brief faster than you even would believe. In reality, people know their job and they perform that job. If someone's coming at you with tanks, then you will be disembarked, and will have Javelins and NLAWs. The ONLY time you are embarked with infantry in a combat zone is in moving to engage (in which case why did you begin your MTT without an armour screen?) or at engaged in an advance to engage (in which case you will be following the tanks and your job is not to start playing call of duty). The main reason most countries use it is most countries don't have the force capability to have attack helos, ATGM equipped drones, fast jets with Brimstones, coordinated DBF, mass ATGM infantry equipment, TES RWS with ATGMs if required. ATGMs on IFVs as your reliant method is the refuge of one of two people. 1) Those who don't have the ability to coordinate like we do, or 2) Those who have more money than sense and can just do whatever they want with their budget. The money is MUCH better spent on things whos job it is to hunt armour. Not tacking something to a vehicle that shouldn't be doing that anyway. You want us to fit them to artillery pieces next "just in case"? Or make every infantryman carry a sniper rifle "just in case there's no snipers around to help you?"
    1
  643. 1
  644. 1
  645. 1
  646. 1
  647. 1
  648. 1
  649. 1
  650. 1
  651. 1
  652. 1
  653. 1
  654. 1
  655. 1
  656. 1
  657. 1
  658. 1
  659. 1
  660. 1
  661. 1
  662. 1
  663. 1
  664. 1
  665. 1
  666. 1
  667. 1
  668. 1
  669. 1
  670. 1
  671. 1
  672. 1
  673. 1
  674. 1
  675. 1
  676. 1
  677. 1
  678. 1
  679. 1
  680. 1
  681. 1
  682. 1
  683. 1
  684. 1
  685. 1
  686. 1
  687. 1
  688. 1
  689. 1
  690. 1
  691. 1
  692. 1
  693. 1
  694. 1
  695. 1
  696. 1
  697. 1
  698. 1
  699. 1
  700. 1
  701. 1
  702. 1
  703. 1
  704. 1
  705. 1
  706. 1
  707. 1
  708. 1
  709. 1
  710. 1
  711. 1
  712. 1
  713. 1
  714. 1
  715. 1
  716. 1
  717. 1
  718. 1
  719. 1
  720. 1
  721. 1
  722. 1
  723. 1
  724. 1
  725. 1
  726. 1
  727. 1
  728. 1
  729. 1
  730. 1
  731. 1
  732. 1
  733. 1
  734. 1
  735. 1
  736. 1
  737. 1
  738. 1
  739. 1
  740. 1
  741. 1
  742. 1
  743. 1
  744. 1
  745. 1
  746. 1
  747. 1
  748. 1
  749. 1
  750. 1
  751. 1
  752. 1
  753. 1
  754. 1
  755. 1
  756. 1
  757. 1
  758. 1
  759. 1
  760. 1
  761. 1
  762. 1
  763. 1
  764. 1
  765. 1
  766. 1
  767. 1
  768. 1
  769. 1
  770. 1
  771. 1
  772. 1
  773. 1
  774. 1
  775. 1
  776. 1
  777. 1
  778. 1
  779. 1
  780. 1
  781. 1
  782. 1
  783. 1
  784. 1
  785. 1
  786. 1
  787. 1
  788. 1
  789. 1
  790. 1
  791. 1
  792. 1
  793. 1
  794. 1
  795. 1
  796. 1
  797. 1
  798. 1
  799. 1
  800. 1
  801. 1
  802. 1
  803. 1
  804. 1
  805. 1
  806. 1
  807. 1
  808. 1
  809. 1
  810. 1
  811. 1
  812. 1
  813. 1
  814. 1
  815. 1
  816. 1
  817. 1
  818. 1
  819. 1
  820. 1
  821. 1
  822. 1
  823. 1
  824. 1
  825. 1
  826. 1
  827. 1
  828. 1
  829. 1
  830. 1
  831. 1
  832. 1
  833. 1
  834. 1
  835. 1
  836. 1
  837. 1
  838. 1
  839. 1
  840. 1
  841. 1
  842. 1
  843. 1
  844. 1
  845. 1
  846. 1
  847. 1
  848. 1
  849. 1
  850. 1
  851. 1
  852. 1
  853. 1
  854. 1
  855. 1
  856. 1
  857. 1
  858. 1
  859. 1
  860. 1
  861. 1
  862. 1
  863. 1
  864. 1
  865. 1
  866. 1
  867. 1
  868. 1
  869. 1
  870. 1
  871. 1
  872. 1
  873. 1
  874. 1
  875. 1
  876. 1
  877. 1
  878. 1
  879. 1
  880. 1
  881. 1
  882. 1
  883. 1
  884. 1
  885. 1
  886. 1
  887. 1
  888. 1