Thread Closed

Shame or Fame for McCormack.

The Hooded Canary's ATSB to face Senate Inquiry -  Rolleyes

(08-20-2019, 05:47 PM)Peetwo Wrote:  #BellingCat: Angel Flight embuggerance cont/-

Via AOPA Oz:
 

Angel Flight Press Release responding to concerns with the ATSB final report issued 13th August 2019.

[Image: angelflight.jpg]


ANGEL FLIGHT IS AUSTRALIA’S LARGEST AND LONGEST-SERVING CHARITY FACILITATING COMMUNITY BENEFIT FLYING

Angel Flight has co-ordinated free flights for more than 100,000 disadvantaged rural Australians, whose only other option to attend city hospitals for specialist treatment is ground transport – often taking days each way, at times with the driver/ patients being very elderly or accompanying very young children, on dangerous outback roads. These people cannot afford commercial air travel, which is more often than not, unavailable from their hometowns. Angel Flight recognises, publicly and privately with the affected people, the consequences of tragic fatal accidents, wherever and in whatever circumstances they occur, and is (and has always been) committed to safety and welfare as its priority.

THE ATSB REPORT INTO THE ACCIDENT AT MT GAMBIER ON 20 JUNE 2017

Click to download a copy of the ATSB Final Report

RECOMMENDATIONS

The ATSB offered no safety recommendations to pilots flying light aircraft in bad weather.

The safety recommendation made was  for the charity to book people on airlines for travel: this does not adequately factor in cost (particularly where two or more people are travelling, which is often the case); nor does it properly factor in the infrequent scheduling or non-existence of airline flights into country regions across Australia; the inconvenience and difficulties faced by the elderly and families with young children at major city airports, and the associated ground travel; and appears to work on the assumption that city specialists and hospitals will gear their appointment times around airline timetables.  Angel Flight does use airline flights where practicable and necessary, and will continue to utilise these services.

The rules implemented  by CASA were not directed to the cause of the 2017 accident,  or any other accident in the community benefit sector, and the ATSB has not given any support for those rules, save and except for that requiring pilots to write community benefit flights up in their log books, and note that fact on flight plans: the only flow-on from those rules is one of policing data –  the very same data has been given by the charity to the ATSB.

It is regrettable, that the Bureau made no relevant safety recommendations, nor gave any guidance whatsoever, to pilots flying in poor weather conditions – the  cause of the accident: it would have been of benefit to the flying community had the ATSB focussed on these aspects of the accident.

The safety message raised  – induction training and safety management systems, together with a pilot mentoring programme, had already been implemented by the charity prior to the ATSB report and recommendations.  Angel Flight takes, and has taken, a very serious and proactive approach to improving safety, and will continue to do so.  Angel Flight will continue to urge CASA to improve its Human Factors training in the pre-licencing stage of training, in addition to the refresher courses now offered.

THE DATA

The charity engaged two senior expert statisticians and an analyst, all of whom concluded that the accident rate was not significantly different from the rate for other private flying across Australia. The ATSB also chose to compare only the passenger-carrying sectors of flights coordinated by the charity –it disregarded the flights, also coordinated by the charity, where the aircraft flew from home base to the city collection points, the return trips back to base, and the positioning flights to collect passengers from their own home towns:  it did, however, include those flights when reporting ‘occurrences’ against the charity flights.  There was, and is, no reason for this failure. To remove up to two-thirds of the coordinated flights in order to make statistical conclusions  is unjustifiable.  Moreover, when comparing the data with private flights generally, it did not exclude the non-passenger flights for that group  – all flights were counted in the general private sector, but not in the charity sector.

Angel Flight has coordinated more than 46,000 flights for the purpose of travelling to, returning from and carrying rural Australians to the city for non-emergency medical appointments. The ATSB has excluded more than half of these flights when assessing accident rates, with the result being to substantially increase the alleged statistical accident rates.

THE EXACERBATION OF THE DATA ERRORS

The ATSB has not adopted its own protocols (and those followed in the US) of counting flight hours for general aviation accidents – instead it counted only flight numbers. An example of that  methodology,  further invalidating the findings, is (a common route), where the pilot departs home base in Tyabb, flies to Essendon to collect passengers, flies from Essendon to Hay, then returns to Tyabb (three sectors) – this is counted as one flight by the ATSB for its statistical purposes. The flight time for this route in a Cessna 182 would be at least 3.5 hours yet the ATSB gives it is given the same status as a 6-minute touch-and-go circuit at Essendon. To disregard both the actual flight numbers, and the flight hours, compounds the errors (and unreliability) of the findings to an extraordinary degree.

OCCURRENCES

The ATSB also looked at  ‘Occurrences’  in controlled airspace  (in comparison with private flights  generally, most of which occur in uncontrolled space, and therefore  are not reported).  The ATSB acknowledged that they have no data from flights OCTA, so they did not take that fact into account. The investigators also included in the occurrence data (adverse to the charity), instances where the admitted and conclusive report findings included ATC errors;  errors of other aircraft causing safety breaches (not the fault of the charity flight);  the proper reporting  by the charity-organised flights where others had caused danger (including, for example, a pilot reporting a model aircraft illegally on a flight path, causing the authorised charity aircraft to take evasive action:  this was included as a ‘negative’ occurrence against the charity; and diversions to other airports in the interests of safety.

This cannot be regarded as valid in the collection of statistical data, and nor was it found to be so by the experts.

OTHER FINDINGS

The ATSB, amongst its findings, noted that Angel Flight was planning a mentoring program: this is incorrect, and known to the ATSB – the charity implemented its pilot mentoring programme more than a year ago. It was required  to stop because CASA introduced rules which imposed restrictions on who could accompany a pilot, as was made very clear by the written advice of  a senior CASA executive that “another pilot can accompany a pilot on a CSF as operating crew, so long as the other pilot qualifies to be a co-pilot of the aircraft and has such duties in relation to the CSF”:  this clearly  precludes pilots from being on board for mentoring, familiarisation, and observation of  Angel Flight’s processes and safety culture.

FURTHER OVERLOOKED FACTS

It has not been acknowledged that all volunteers operating their own (CASA-approved and maintained)  aircraft for the purpose of these community benefit flights, are CASA-licensed, CASA-trained, and CASA-tested on a one or two-yearly basis. Angel Flight has ensured that the volunteer pilot qualifications are  not less than as permitted by the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations, and for the entire period leading to the investigation (14 years), these pilots have had substantially more than the required experience for passenger-carrying private flights in Australia. The new Rules decreed by CASA would have had no bearing on the accident under investigation, and this has been acknowledged by CASA. The pilot under investigation had greater experience than that required by either the former or the current Rules.

Angel Flight has been urging CASA for a substantial time, to re-visit and strengthen the training of its pilots in the human factors area prior to issuing licences.  With the additional safety, risk-management and induction training that Angel Flight has already implemented, the addition of CASA training would be beneficial for all pilots in this and other general aviation environments.

This message has been authorised by Angel Flight Australia.



And from the ABC News:

Quote:Angel Flight hits back at 'grossly wrong' ATSB report into fatal Mount Gambier plane crash
By Rhett Burnie
Posted Fri at 3:20pm
[Image: 8724242-3x2-700x467.jpg]
PHOTO: The Angel Flight crash that killed Tracy and Emily Redding and pilot Grant Gilbert. (ABC: Stuart Stansfield)



The head of Angel Flight Australia is calling for a Senate review into an Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) report that found the charity was seven times more likely to be involved in a fatal crash than other private flight operators.

Key points:
  • Three people were killed in an Angel Flight crash in Mount Gambier in 2017

  • ATSB investigators found the charity was seven times more likely to crash

  • Angel Flight's CEO has hit back at the findings, labelling them "grossly wrong"

Marjorie Pagani slammed the ATSB investigation into a fatal Angel Flight crash in regional South Australia in June 2017, labelling it "demonstrably wrong".

Tracy Redding, 43, her daughter Emily, 16, and Angel Flight volunteer pilot Grant Gilbert, 78, were killed when the light aircraft they were in crashed into a paddock, 70 seconds after take-off at Mount Gambier on June 28.

A two-year investigation into the triple fatality found Mr Gilbert had taken off in low cloud, despite not being licenced to do so, and had likely become "spatially disorientated" before the plane flipped midair and nosedived into the ground.

The accident was the second triple fatal Angel Flight crash in Australia.

ATSB investigators calculated the number of flights Angel Flight had made since it started in Australia in 2004 and the two fatal crashes to conclude the charity was seven times more likely to be involved in a deadly plane crash than other private pilots.

However, Ms Pagani said the ATSB had not included the flights in which its volunteer pilots flew solo to and from passenger transfers.

"We've had three experts look at this — two of Australia's top statisticians and an analyst — all of who conclude that it is grossly, demonstrably wrong," she said.

"They have counted less than half our flights in order to arrive at this statistical conclusion.

Quote:"They're not [comparing] apples with apples … it's wrong, it's grossly in error.

"If they counted all of our flights there is a conclusion from them that our safety data would be not significantly different from any other private flight."

Better training needed for pilots

Ms Pagani said Angel Flight was only able to engage with qualified pilots from the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) and the issue of training was squarely on the regulator.

[Image: 8723790-3x2-340x227.jpg]
PHOTO: The scene of a fatal Angel Flight crash near Horsham in Victoria. (ABC News)


"This accident was caused by a pilot making a poor decision to fly into cloud and lost control," she said.

She said CASA needed to "strengthen their awareness" and "their training prior to the licensing stage".

"If there is an issue in this area — provide better training prior to the licensing stage," she said.

Quote:"We have safety programs in place, but it is not the role of a charity to do the job of the ATSB or CASA.

"They are the ones who are responsible for training the pilots — we rely on it — we use their pilots.

"We do everything we can to prevent this sort of thing and our hearts are with those people."

Calls for Senate review of ATSB report

Ms Pagani said Angel Flight would appeal the investigation's findings if it could and would call on the Senate to review the report.

"Basically, without Parliamentary intervention, the ATSB can do and say whatever it likes because none of us can legally challenge it," she said.


[Image: 11160834-3x2-340x227.jpg]
PHOTO: Centre Alliance senators Rex Patrick said a review could take place in Senate Estimates. (ABC News: Nick Haggarty)




South Australian Senator Rex Patrick said he believed the data in the ATSB's report "did not include the pre-positioning flight".


"So, for example the flight from an airport to the place where the patient needed to be picked up and indeed from where the patient was dropped off back to where the pilot originally started off from," he said.


"That has the effect of — in effect of — halving the number of flights for the same amount of instances.


"In that way it distorts the figures … I would have to talk to my colleagues in the Senate."


Senator Patrick said a review could be made during Senate Estimates or "it might end up being a Senate inquiry".


More concerns raised with charity


However, the ATSB's Dr Stuart Godley told The World Today the calculation was correct.


"That's the way we always do it when the data is available and its pretty consistent around the world," he said.

"Generally, when you're looking at operational risk, most of the risk is connected with the landing and the take-off in the flight, so really the most appropriate way to look at risk is to look at [it] per flight."


Dr Godley also said more people had come forward to raise their concerns over Angel Flight since the ATSB report was published.


"Generally, a lot of people are supporting our report and actually coming in with a lot of stories that we hadn't heard before that actually support the conclusions of our report," he said.


Ms Pagani countered that by claiming many people had contacted Angel Flight to express their support for the organisation.


On Friday, Angel Flight published two full-page advertisements in News Corp newspapers, refuting much of the ATSB's findings.

Ms Pagani said supporters of the charity paid for the advertisements, which cost $30,000.

[Image: 11420850-16x9-large.jpg?v=2]

And via the UP, some commentary etc..etc beginning and ending with Sunfish  Rolleyes :


Quote:Sunfish

But wait, there’s more.......

In using the safety system “occurrence” database for what is clearly a partisan political purpose - helping CASA destroy Angel Flight, the ATSB has not only utterly compromised its alleged independence but has destroyed any faith in the alleged anonymity of ALL reporting schemes, both mandatory and voluntary.

As for the analysis, I fail to understand why the ATSB has not discussed or commented on its startling finding that Angel Flight operations are seven times more dangerous than ordinary GA operations. The only reason I can think why is that at least someone is ashamed of this hatchet job.

It appears ATSB is now part of the problem, along with CASA.

To put that another way, I am aware, I think, of safety occurrence reports that are, to put it mildly, less than frank about what happened. The current ATSB behaviour seems to provide a strong disincentive to report anything at all if it can be avoided.



Lead Balloon

Quote:Angel Flight offers an invaluable service to families in regional and remote areas burdened with an ill or disabled family member. Only two nights ago I spoke with Senator Hollie Hughes’ who had used Angel Flight for her own autistic son, Fred, to access city services from remote areas of NSW. She described it as a Godsend.

The findings in respect of community service flights are intensely bureaucratic in nature and clearly written by people sitting at a desk in Canberra without reference to any of the thousands of families that have been helped by organisations such as Angel Flight.

Indeed, it's hard to take the report’s analysis of Angel Flight seriously. It asserts that many flights can be replaced by commercial services almost blind to the costs of regional flights, their limited routes, and their limited schedules. Indeed, the data the ATSB uses to support its claim are based on the very narrowest of data sets.

The ATSB uses ‘lies, damned lies, and statistics’, coupled with predominantly subjective analysis, to portray community service flights as unsafe. Angel Flights use experienced pilots and safe aircraft. There is no difference in the safety case associated with a CASA certified pilot flying a mate to the footy in Melbourne and a CASA certified pilot flying someone to chemo therapy in Melbourne, except the ill patient is more aware of the qualifications of the pilots and the risks associated with a flight.

Its Pel-Air (Norfolk Island ditching) all over again - for that particular report the ATSB were found to be grossly incompetent and were ultimately required to redo the report.

If CASA and the ATSB were in charge of road transport, no one would be allowed to use the roads.

Hear! Hear! Senator Patrick.

Here is the crux of the problem: “invaluable service”. CASA does not put a value on community service flights and, even if it wanted to, it wouldn’t know how to balance that value against the cost of the risks. And once you resort to the rhetorical question: “what price a life?”, any mitigation at all is justifiable.



Sunfish

Originally Posted by Lead Balloon  

Quote:Hear! Hear! Senator Patrick.

Here is the crux of the problem: “invaluable service”. CASA does not put a value on community service flights and, even if it wanted to, it wouldn’t know how to balance that value against the cost of the risks. And once you resort to the rhetorical question: “what price a life?”, any mitigation at all is justifiable.

‘’But that matter is dealt with every day by actuaries and risk management professionals.

The ICAO understands it.

https://www.icao.int/safety/SafetyMa...alltext.en.pdf




IFEZ

Good to see Angel Flight defending themselves. That report is a joke. If that was a school assignment it would have been handed back with a big “F” stamped on it and an instruction to resubmit. Come on ATSB, that’s just embarrassing. What the hell is going on..? You’re trashing the legacy of what was once a world leading investigation agency. I just don’t understand how they can sign off on this tripe and think it’s acceptable or that no one will question its veracity.



Stickshift3000

Originally Posted by IFEZ  View Post

Quote:I just don’t understand how they can sign off on this tripe and think it’s acceptable or that no one will question its veracity.

It's pretty clear to me that CASA has 'influenced' the content of this report.



Lead Balloon


Irrespective of what ATSB continues to do to ensure its trashed reputation remains trashed, there should be:

1. More effective safety education, including more effective human factors education, not mere words parroting lessons already learned and not mere seminars and videos the equivalent of “drugs are bad”. They don’t count as “comprehensive safety education and training programs” in terms of CASA’s functions.

2. Less complicated (and therefore less expensive) paths to highly experienced private pilots to become instructors of key airmanship issues. Private VFR pilots with thousands of hours in their logbooks have a better insight into the practicalities and risks of VFR flight and human factors risks and, more importantly, more experience in how to mitigate them in the real world, than a freshly minted CPL Grade 3 instructor or an ATPL with 20,000 hours at 35,000’. Any idiot can say: “just don’t fly VFR when the weather’s IMC”. That’s not how to effectively mitigate the risks of ‘getthereitis’.

3. Less complicated (and therefore less expensive) paths to IFR ratings. PIFR has been stuffed by the complicators. (Yes I know that some theorise that the conditions at Mount Gambier in this case were not conducive even to IFR flight. That merely reinforces the other points.)




Old Akro

The problem with this ATSB report is that it has been used to pursue a political agenda against community service flights.

The accident itself was tragic and the cause pretty much black & white without any real extenuating circumstances. They pilot had trouble landing visually. What bigger sign do you need to not immediately turn around and take off??

All pilots like me who have cancelled Angel Flights due to weather know that the Angel Flight organisation is extremely understanding and supportive in such circumstances.

The ATSB maliciously misrepresents the Angel Flight accident rate. It does not count the full hours of Angel flights.

And the life’s of the poor passengers are no more (or less) special because its an Angel Flight. This accident should be examined as an accident regardless of who is on board.

The CASA argue meant that community service flights should be charter flights is completely flawed. A
private pilot should be safe to carry passengers. Period. The CPL training and study is about working in a commercial environment that runs to time, has last minute changes, carries minimum fuel and is done day in day out so that duty times are an issue.

The ATSB / CASA should be really use these accidents as cause for reflection on a) whether the PPL flight training requires improvement, b) if the CASA safety education mechanisms are working and c) whether CASA’s bureaucracy around IFR ratings is discouraging pilots from becoming IFR rated and how many lives would be saved if Australia had the same level of IFR ratings as the US.

There is a real argument that CASA’s over regulation of IFR is costing lives.



Sunfish

I know I am overreacting having spent the day introducing a Five year old to the joys of skiing. I also should add that I am NOT an Angel Flight pilot nor associated with them in any way.

I am simply pissed off at first of all CASA, who senses that Angel Flight is an organisation with credentials that make it a threat to CASA domination, so they have, like many others, to be destroyed, then with CASA's lapdog, the ATSB who have produced a turd of an analysis in an attempt to justify its masters position. Then along come players and axe grinders who want to stroke their own ego by sinking the slipper into Angel Flight.

Of course it was "getthereitis"! I can't think of any other reason either. However two incidents of it in 10,000 odd Angel Flight over ten years are statistically insignificant. By that I mean rigorous statistical testing of the hypothesis "Angelflight pilots flights are more likely than the rest of the pilot population to suffer from gethereitis" will draw a big ******* blank at the 99.999% confidence level or ATSB would have shouted it from the roof tops by now.

So since that fails, ATSB then invents a convoluted pseudo scientific analysis claiming Angel Flights are seven times more dangerous than ordinary private flying! I looked in vain for the causal link in that steaming pile of shit for the link between runway incursions and gethereitis but haven't found it.

So CASA and ATSB would have the general public believe that Angel Flight is populated by weak minded emotionally unstable pilots with sub human flying skills to boot - the very dregs of the private pilot population! That is the exact conclusion and the obvious corollary is that Angel Flight should be destroyed as a danger to the man in the street, just like a dangerous dog. Nice one CASA, protecting us all the time. At least Angel Flight was able to kick CASA in the balls over that one -you licenced those pilots CASA, didn't you?

And the ATSB, now in full Marie Antionette mode, ruffles its corsets and tells Angel Flight customers not to use Angel Flight but instead to use Regular Public Transport to hospital - Rex, Qantas, Virgin or Jetstar! What are they smoking in Canberra?????

....And then people, come here to PPRuNe and solemnly nit pick and criticize Angel Flight - for trying to help people??? CASA and ATSB make the pre revolutionary French aristocracy look grounded and in touch with the common man by comparison, they are the problem.

There is a cure to this madness and it doesn't involve ******* over Angel Flight. Maybe we need our own form of French revolution in Canberra.

*The asterisked word involved is a synonym for intercourse with the suffix -ing.

Finally comments in reply to last week's LMH: http://www.australianflying.com.au/the-l...ugust-2019

Quote:Mike Borgelt • 4 days ago

"shouldn't they be recommending that private operations be disallowed because they are dangerous?"

Careful Steve, that is already clearly CASA and ATSB's game plan. Of course they are less than honest about this goal and instead of an outright ban they will just load up our activities with so much pointless and unproductive bureaucracy and expense that everyone gives up



Sandy Reith • 4 days ago

Hitch is quite correct when he says that the regulator has given up looking for answers to one of aviation’s oldest and most common forms of accident. Visual flight into non visual conditions which can cause disorientation and loss of control. Such accidents commonly result in fatalities. Loss of visual reference can be largely overcome with low cost technology for pilots that normally only fly, and are only qualified for visual flight by regulation, in visual conditions. Around twenty years ago operators in Alaska set about developing and using hand held tablet computers capable of synthetic vision. Speaking with a leader of this program, called Operation Capstone, I was informed that their weather related accident rate was reduced by half.

Why not here? CASA is dysfunctional, absolutely hidebound and will not countenance any innovation. The other obvious route is to gain the Instrument Rating which has never been more expensive and difficult due to CASA’s extreme measures preventing new flying schools and caused hundreds of schools to close. CASA’s inappropriate mandating of the Cessna additional Inspection Documents, has caused huge financial losses on private pilots and again going against training for the Instrument Rating.



Ian • 4 days ago

There are a couple of semi-related issues. For which I have questions but no answers.

1) How do you measure pilot competence. The traditional measure is hours, and there seems to be a weak correlation between raw hours flown and pilot competence.

2) Who is responsible for a pilot's competence.The Pilot seems the obvious answer but that isn't bringing the results we desire. Angle Flight is the worst placed because they have no control over pilots or flights.

I would hesitate disparaging CASA investing in education because education is far more effective in achieving quality results that rules compliance. (rules compliance is the worst method of effective risk mitigation)

If people are going to quote Statistics it would be desirable that they made their raw data available. Extra marks for showing your working.



Sandy Reith in reply to Ian • 3 days ago

Ian, quite right, having CASA investing more in education is not the answer because CASA’s raison d’être is is to stiffen the straight jacket not to try a new cut or taylor it fit for purpose. Having persuaded a thoughtless Parliament into migrating the rules into the criminal code, with strict liability as the criterion for ease of convictions, there’s nothing to suggest the slightest willingness of CASA to alter it’s trajectory. On the contrary the practical implications of such wrong policy clearly demonstrate CASA’s mindset of supremacy and strict control. Its nearly thirty two years since it was divorced from Ministerial and Departmental control and tasked with rewriting the rules. It still hasn’t finished because it is incapable and has no incentive to change.

The independent Commonwealth corporate as means of undertaking this function of government has failed with disastrous effects for General Aviation and the thousands of jobs, businesses and services that have been lost.
Two factors stand out from the embedded CASA modus operandi; unwillingness on the part of aviation personnel to admit to, or share lessons from their errors, mistakes or even totally innocent misadventures, for fear of criminal prosecution leading to heavy fines and problems with criminal history such as gaining visas for international travel.
That is bad enough, arguably worse is the excessive fear factor that flows through the whole of one’s flight training, this factor has been evident in my experience as an instructor and flying school operator over very many years. This excessive fear factor stems directly from the fear of Big Brother CASA armed with it’s frightening legal weapons.
In the last few years risk aversion has increased and is more unhealthy than ever before. The fear factor means that the pilot has lost much of his or her adrenaline before takeoff. I have witnessed this phenomenon, and experienced it personally as have most pilots.

This comes to Ian’s question about the value of experience in flying hours. There’s much reduced value if judgement is impaired by psychological stress that leads to a loss of adrenaline and subsequent heavy and debilitating physical and mental weariness. This is precisely the point; l when inevitably circumstances will come together and an accident like this occurs.

There’s nothing odd or new about weather problems, but advances will require serious reforms by Parliament and new thinking in GA.



Ian in reply to Sandy Reith • 3 days ago

I'll try to be clearer

1a) Education: a good way to achieve desirable outcome.
1b) Rule Compliance: the worst way way to achieve desirable outcome.

2) We need a better method of measuring competence than raw hours flown.



Finally Hitch in reply to all:

SteveHitchen Mod • 2 days ago

Guys. Isn't better training a form of education? We need to continue to educate, but more seminars and bigger, shinier posters doesn't cut it. There is always the thinking that "a little bit of knowledge is dangerous" and that training VFR pilots to save themselves in IMC might encourage them to enter IMC deliberately, but considering that it's happening anyway, maybe we need to revisit that thinking.

Finally, without top cover from Barry O'obfuscation, the Hooded Canary and crew have been referred to a Senate Inquiry... Wink

Quote:Performance of the Australian Transport Safety Bureau

The Senate Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee is conducting an inquiry into the performance of the Australian Transport Safety Bureau under Standing Order 25 (2) (a).

Committee Secretariat contact:

Committee Secretary
Senate Standing Committees on Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport
PO Box 6100
Parliament House
Canberra ACT 2600 

Phone: +61 2 6277 3511
Fax: +61 2 6277 5811
rrat.sen@aph.gov.au

Hmm...now where do I start with a submission... Big Grin

How about here: #SBG 18 August 2019: Belling the Cat?? & Time to ‘Bell the Cat!’ or maybe here: https://auntypru.com/forum/showthread.ph...0#pid10520 etc..etc..  Shy 


MTF? Definitely!...P2  Tongue   
Thread Closed


Messages In This Thread
Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 07-23-2018, 07:54 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Gobbledock - 07-23-2018, 10:28 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 07-23-2018, 02:54 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Gobbledock - 07-23-2018, 04:28 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by P7_TOM - 07-23-2018, 08:16 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by thorn bird - 07-23-2018, 08:34 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 07-24-2018, 08:20 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Gobbledock - 07-24-2018, 01:10 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 07-24-2018, 07:41 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by P7_TOM - 07-24-2018, 07:54 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 07-26-2018, 08:44 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Gobbledock - 07-26-2018, 03:31 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 07-27-2018, 08:49 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 07-27-2018, 09:58 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 07-28-2018, 11:10 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 08-17-2018, 09:32 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Gobbledock - 07-27-2018, 11:25 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by thorn bird - 07-28-2018, 06:42 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Gobbledock - 07-28-2018, 02:40 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by P7_TOM - 07-29-2018, 07:18 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 07-30-2018, 08:22 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 08-01-2018, 10:53 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Gobbledock - 08-01-2018, 01:30 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by P7_TOM - 08-01-2018, 07:12 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 08-04-2018, 09:17 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Gobbledock - 08-06-2018, 06:55 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by thorn bird - 08-08-2018, 06:35 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Gobbledock - 08-08-2018, 08:56 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Gobbledock - 08-10-2018, 12:54 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 08-11-2018, 09:47 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Gobbledock - 08-17-2018, 11:06 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 08-20-2018, 08:55 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 08-22-2018, 10:55 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 08-23-2018, 10:09 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Gobbledock - 08-23-2018, 11:53 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 08-24-2018, 08:59 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 08-25-2018, 11:24 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 08-27-2018, 07:18 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 08-27-2018, 10:03 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 08-28-2018, 07:31 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Gobbledock - 08-28-2018, 03:15 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 09-05-2018, 09:40 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 09-07-2018, 04:08 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 09-06-2018, 06:09 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 09-10-2018, 08:18 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 09-11-2018, 08:14 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Gobbledock - 09-11-2018, 09:43 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 09-11-2018, 09:51 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 09-12-2018, 10:24 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Gobbledock - 09-12-2018, 06:04 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 09-14-2018, 08:14 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 09-14-2018, 12:34 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 09-15-2018, 11:35 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Gobbledock - 09-14-2018, 10:01 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 09-22-2018, 09:57 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Gobbledock - 09-22-2018, 02:26 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by P7_TOM - 09-22-2018, 08:08 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Sandy Reith - 09-23-2018, 03:58 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 09-24-2018, 07:48 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 10-05-2018, 10:39 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Gobbledock - 10-05-2018, 07:30 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Gobbledock - 10-11-2018, 11:14 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by P7_TOM - 10-11-2018, 07:59 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 10-17-2018, 09:01 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by P7_TOM - 10-17-2018, 09:27 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Gobbledock - 10-17-2018, 11:20 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 10-20-2018, 07:26 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Gobbledock - 10-20-2018, 01:13 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 10-31-2018, 09:59 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by thorn bird - 11-01-2018, 06:08 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 11-01-2018, 09:40 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 11-05-2018, 07:06 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 11-30-2018, 09:02 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 12-04-2018, 10:30 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by P7_TOM - 12-04-2018, 07:35 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 12-14-2018, 12:39 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Gobbledock - 12-14-2018, 01:37 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by BRhoades - 12-14-2018, 05:49 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 01-01-2019, 11:35 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Gobbledock - 12-15-2018, 06:04 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Gobbledock - 12-17-2018, 09:59 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 12-18-2018, 05:32 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 12-18-2018, 09:05 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Gobbledock - 12-18-2018, 11:25 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 12-18-2018, 01:57 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Gobbledock - 12-18-2018, 07:52 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 12-19-2018, 09:56 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 12-19-2018, 05:48 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Gobbledock - 01-01-2019, 11:06 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 01-04-2019, 07:50 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 01-04-2019, 01:16 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 01-07-2019, 10:36 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 01-08-2019, 03:36 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 01-11-2019, 01:33 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 01-25-2019, 01:26 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 01-26-2019, 02:22 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Gobbledock - 01-11-2019, 06:28 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 01-26-2019, 08:00 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Gobbledock - 01-26-2019, 07:02 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 01-30-2019, 05:46 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 01-31-2019, 08:04 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 01-31-2019, 09:25 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 02-01-2019, 07:38 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by thorn bird - 02-01-2019, 12:27 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Gobbledock - 02-01-2019, 02:43 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 02-02-2019, 08:18 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Gobbledock - 02-02-2019, 05:03 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 02-03-2019, 07:56 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Gobbledock - 02-03-2019, 01:46 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by thorn bird - 02-03-2019, 02:49 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 02-04-2019, 07:38 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 02-07-2019, 10:55 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Gobbledock - 02-07-2019, 04:38 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 02-08-2019, 08:33 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 02-09-2019, 07:34 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Gobbledock - 02-08-2019, 10:14 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Gobbledock - 02-09-2019, 10:05 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by P7_TOM - 02-11-2019, 08:22 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Gobbledock - 02-11-2019, 09:32 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Cap'n Wannabe - 02-12-2019, 11:28 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 02-12-2019, 05:51 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 02-12-2019, 05:55 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Gobbledock - 02-12-2019, 06:23 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by P7_TOM - 02-12-2019, 08:19 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Gobbledock - 02-12-2019, 09:11 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 02-13-2019, 08:43 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 02-13-2019, 10:05 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 02-17-2019, 08:49 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 02-19-2019, 07:35 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 02-21-2019, 11:01 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 02-21-2019, 10:45 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Sandy Reith - 02-22-2019, 03:50 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 02-23-2019, 08:23 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 02-23-2019, 12:27 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 02-25-2019, 08:32 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by thorn bird - 02-25-2019, 09:46 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 02-25-2019, 09:49 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 02-26-2019, 06:29 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Gobbledock - 02-25-2019, 10:48 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 03-04-2019, 07:40 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 03-08-2019, 09:25 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 03-08-2019, 11:31 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 03-14-2019, 11:22 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Gobbledock - 03-24-2019, 01:12 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 03-25-2019, 08:37 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 03-26-2019, 05:16 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 03-27-2019, 08:13 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 04-01-2019, 08:35 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 04-02-2019, 08:15 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 04-06-2019, 07:44 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 04-09-2019, 08:54 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 04-10-2019, 08:00 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 04-10-2019, 10:00 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 04-12-2019, 12:29 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 04-13-2019, 07:36 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 04-13-2019, 10:09 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 04-13-2019, 11:34 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 05-14-2019, 08:33 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 05-29-2019, 08:38 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 06-13-2019, 10:54 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 06-17-2019, 07:58 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by P7_TOM - 06-17-2019, 08:07 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 06-24-2019, 07:26 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 06-24-2019, 11:09 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 06-25-2019, 08:33 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 06-30-2019, 11:34 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by P7_TOM - 06-30-2019, 08:19 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 07-04-2019, 09:46 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 07-05-2019, 02:10 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 07-10-2019, 11:04 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Cap'n Wannabe - 07-12-2019, 05:02 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 07-12-2019, 12:06 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 07-12-2019, 11:00 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 07-15-2019, 08:14 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 07-19-2019, 02:37 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 07-22-2019, 08:16 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 07-27-2019, 10:25 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 07-30-2019, 05:50 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 07-31-2019, 10:34 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 07-31-2019, 11:07 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 08-01-2019, 02:36 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 08-05-2019, 08:16 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 08-06-2019, 09:18 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 08-07-2019, 08:42 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 08-07-2019, 08:59 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 08-08-2019, 06:36 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by P7_TOM - 08-08-2019, 07:18 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 08-09-2019, 05:35 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by thorn bird - 08-11-2019, 09:42 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 08-12-2019, 09:17 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by thorn bird - 08-13-2019, 07:50 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 08-13-2019, 10:09 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 08-14-2019, 09:11 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 08-16-2019, 12:21 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 08-18-2019, 10:37 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 08-20-2019, 10:28 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 08-20-2019, 11:21 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Sandy Reith - 08-20-2019, 11:16 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 08-21-2019, 08:37 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 08-22-2019, 06:45 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 08-27-2019, 08:04 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 08-27-2019, 05:09 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by P7_TOM - 08-27-2019, 05:55 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by P7_TOM - 09-05-2019, 08:31 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 09-06-2019, 10:53 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 09-07-2019, 10:22 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by thorn bird - 09-07-2019, 09:09 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 09-19-2019, 09:03 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by P7_TOM - 09-19-2019, 08:45 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 09-21-2019, 08:52 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by thorn bird - 09-23-2019, 06:10 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 09-23-2019, 09:46 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by thorn bird - 09-23-2019, 03:42 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 09-24-2019, 08:52 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by thorn bird - 09-24-2019, 02:38 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by P7_TOM - 09-25-2019, 09:43 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 10-14-2019, 08:00 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 10-15-2019, 07:58 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 10-15-2019, 09:24 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 10-16-2019, 07:21 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 10-23-2019, 08:11 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by P7_TOM - 10-23-2019, 07:37 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by P7_TOM - 10-25-2019, 07:54 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 10-26-2019, 10:29 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by P7_TOM - 10-29-2019, 06:56 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 10-30-2019, 12:19 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by P7_TOM - 10-30-2019, 07:43 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 11-06-2019, 09:12 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 11-21-2019, 01:26 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by P7_TOM - 11-22-2019, 05:58 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 11-27-2019, 11:16 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 12-06-2019, 10:49 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 11-28-2019, 06:05 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 11-28-2019, 09:31 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by P7_TOM - 11-28-2019, 08:04 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 11-29-2019, 01:43 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by P7_TOM - 11-29-2019, 08:13 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 12-04-2019, 07:30 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by P7_TOM - 12-05-2019, 07:18 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by thorn bird - 12-06-2019, 11:40 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 12-09-2019, 05:42 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 12-10-2019, 07:35 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by thorn bird - 12-10-2019, 01:37 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by P7_TOM - 12-10-2019, 06:26 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by P7_TOM - 12-17-2019, 06:56 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 12-20-2019, 08:27 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by P7_TOM - 12-23-2019, 08:24 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by thorn bird - 12-25-2019, 06:50 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 12-27-2019, 01:40 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 12-26-2019, 06:58 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by P7_TOM - 12-26-2019, 06:31 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by P7_TOM - 12-31-2019, 08:28 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 01-03-2020, 10:10 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by P7_TOM - 01-13-2020, 09:25 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by P7_TOM - 01-14-2020, 07:05 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 01-15-2020, 11:55 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 01-16-2020, 07:32 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Sandy Reith - 01-16-2020, 09:19 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 01-16-2020, 09:46 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 01-16-2020, 07:30 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 01-17-2020, 07:07 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by P7_TOM - 01-19-2020, 10:13 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 01-24-2020, 08:00 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 01-24-2020, 10:43 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by thorn bird - 01-24-2020, 02:55 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by P7_TOM - 01-24-2020, 07:52 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 01-26-2020, 08:43 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 01-27-2020, 10:36 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 01-28-2020, 05:56 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by P7_TOM - 01-29-2020, 07:40 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 02-06-2020, 11:40 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 02-07-2020, 08:29 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 02-07-2020, 11:36 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by thorn bird - 02-08-2020, 01:40 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 02-13-2020, 10:38 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 02-15-2020, 08:21 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 02-23-2020, 11:22 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 02-28-2020, 09:49 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 03-03-2020, 10:25 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 03-05-2020, 11:46 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Sandy Reith - 03-05-2020, 03:19 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by thorn bird - 03-05-2020, 03:46 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Sandy Reith - 03-05-2020, 11:19 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 03-06-2020, 08:28 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by P7_TOM - 03-07-2020, 06:49 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 03-07-2020, 09:50 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by P7_TOM - 03-11-2020, 08:59 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 03-17-2020, 10:32 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 03-18-2020, 12:19 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 03-19-2020, 11:11 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 03-20-2020, 08:36 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 04-01-2020, 10:24 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 04-03-2020, 11:47 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by P7_TOM - 04-05-2020, 06:49 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 04-08-2020, 11:32 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by P7_TOM - 04-10-2020, 08:09 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by thorn bird - 04-11-2020, 04:53 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 04-17-2020, 08:59 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by thorn bird - 04-23-2020, 04:21 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 04-24-2020, 11:25 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by thorn bird - 04-25-2020, 07:01 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 04-25-2020, 10:42 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by P7_TOM - 04-26-2020, 08:59 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 05-06-2020, 10:47 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by P7_TOM - 05-12-2020, 07:45 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 05-13-2020, 09:59 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 05-13-2020, 12:44 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 05-23-2020, 10:37 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 05-25-2020, 08:19 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 05-31-2020, 08:32 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 06-01-2020, 08:22 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by P7_TOM - 06-03-2020, 06:11 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 06-05-2020, 10:41 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 06-06-2020, 03:45 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 06-12-2020, 10:06 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 06-25-2020, 08:17 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 07-01-2020, 10:54 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 07-08-2020, 10:35 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 07-09-2020, 08:17 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 07-16-2020, 12:14 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 07-16-2020, 07:49 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 07-16-2020, 11:31 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 07-28-2020, 10:04 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 07-31-2020, 01:25 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 08-08-2020, 10:10 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by thorn bird - 08-11-2020, 08:23 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 08-19-2020, 07:25 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 08-25-2020, 08:00 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Sandy Reith - 08-26-2020, 11:15 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by P7_TOM - 08-26-2020, 09:48 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 09-04-2020, 10:24 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by thorn bird - 09-04-2020, 01:26 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Sandy Reith - 09-04-2020, 02:33 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by thorn bird - 09-04-2020, 03:21 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by P7_TOM - 09-04-2020, 07:40 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 09-04-2020, 08:07 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 09-05-2020, 11:08 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by P7_TOM - 09-15-2020, 07:49 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 09-18-2020, 10:54 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 09-30-2020, 10:22 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Sandy Reith - 09-30-2020, 04:37 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by thorn bird - 09-30-2020, 08:59 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 10-01-2020, 07:55 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by P7_TOM - 10-11-2020, 07:52 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 10-15-2020, 07:19 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by P7_TOM - 10-15-2020, 09:29 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 10-16-2020, 08:55 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 10-20-2020, 02:44 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 10-24-2020, 08:08 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 10-22-2020, 09:42 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by P7_TOM - 10-25-2020, 06:23 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 10-29-2020, 10:58 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 11-10-2020, 08:26 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 11-11-2020, 05:44 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 11-14-2020, 09:28 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 11-17-2020, 09:55 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 11-17-2020, 06:37 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by thorn bird - 11-18-2020, 02:25 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 11-27-2020, 02:24 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 12-08-2020, 07:00 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by thorn bird - 12-08-2020, 07:23 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 01-01-2021, 08:47 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 01-02-2021, 06:54 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 01-02-2021, 06:30 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by thorn bird - 01-02-2021, 07:09 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 01-04-2021, 06:11 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 01-19-2021, 10:13 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 01-07-2021, 09:11 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 01-07-2021, 07:19 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 01-12-2021, 06:25 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 01-13-2021, 08:13 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 01-14-2021, 10:55 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 01-16-2021, 06:32 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 01-27-2021, 07:37 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 02-03-2021, 09:53 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 02-12-2021, 10:17 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 02-17-2021, 12:58 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 02-23-2021, 05:55 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 02-27-2021, 09:46 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 02-28-2021, 09:27 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 03-02-2021, 03:48 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 03-09-2021, 07:32 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 03-18-2021, 09:00 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by P7_TOM - 03-21-2021, 05:58 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by P7_TOM - 03-22-2021, 07:47 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 03-23-2021, 06:48 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 03-24-2021, 07:15 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 04-08-2021, 10:36 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Sandy Reith - 04-09-2021, 03:40 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 04-09-2021, 07:43 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 04-29-2021, 10:11 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 05-27-2021, 09:19 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by thorn bird - 05-28-2021, 11:32 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 05-31-2021, 08:18 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by thorn bird - 06-01-2021, 06:44 PM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Sandy Reith - 06-02-2021, 10:03 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 06-02-2021, 11:20 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 06-09-2021, 11:59 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 06-10-2021, 05:16 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Kharon - 06-17-2021, 08:15 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 06-22-2021, 10:29 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by Peetwo - 11-26-2021, 10:44 AM
RE: Shame or Fame for McCormack. - by thorn bird - 12-02-2021, 12:15 PM



Users browsing this thread: 13 Guest(s)