F14 Vs. F15 - AR15.COM

General » General Discussion

Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - F14 Vs. F15 (Page 1 of 5)

Posted: 2/23/2007 4:43:30 PM EDT

F14 Vs. F15

Which one is better?

How long will the F-15 be in service?

Posted: 2/23/2007 4:46:03 PM EDT

[#1]

They don't fly the same mission. So they aren't comparable.

The F15 would die before it could get in range.

Posted: 2/23/2007 4:48:58 PM EDT

[#2]

Quoted:
They don't fly the same mission. So they aren't comparable.

The F15 would die before it could get in range.

The AIM-54 Phoenix would have a hard time connecting on an F-15, other than that the F-15 is the superior bird.

Posted: 2/23/2007 4:49:01 PM EDT

[#3]

like previous poster said - different missions, no direct comparison possible

no way the F-15 would die automatically in a BVR engagement... the phoenix wasn't as good as advertised.

Bottom line: which one is still in service now? That should answer which was the better overall platform.

Posted: 2/23/2007 4:49:06 PM EDT

[#4]

did this a couple of months ago

i think eagles was the consensus

Posted: 2/23/2007 4:51:33 PM EDT

[#5]

I wouldn't say one is 'better' than the other. They both provide similar performance and speed, and have roughly the same power to weight ratio.

I would give te advantage to the F-14 because of Naval Top Gun school pilot training(over Red Flag), the variable geometry (swing wing) wings, and four eyes are better than two. Assuming this is against a one-seater F-15 model.

Both of these planes are late 60's early 1970's designs with the F-14 being slightly older.

ETA - the Phoenix missle system isn't for fighter vs fighter confrontations!! It is for fleet defense. The AIM-54 was designed for blowing-up formations of enemy bombers with a nuke

F-14>F-15

Posted: 2/23/2007 4:54:56 PM EDT

[#6]

Quoted:
They don't fly the same mission. So they aren't comparable.

The F15 would die before it could get in range.

Nope... the Phoenix was not designed to shoot down fighters it would be of little use against F-15s.

The F-15 is the better fighter.

Posted: 2/23/2007 4:56:45 PM EDT

[#7]

Quoted:
I wouldn't say one is 'better' than the other. They both provide similar performance and speed, and have roughly the same power to weight ratio.

I would give te advantage to the F-14 because of Naval Top Gun school pilot training(over Red Flag), the variable geometry (swing wing) wings, and four eyes are better than two. Assuming this is against a one-seater F-15 model.

Both of these planes are late 60's early 1970's designs with the F-14 being slightly older.

F-14>F-15

We don't fly the F-15 of the 70s anymore. We didn't fly the F-14 of the 70s either, the D model had much better engines and other enhancements. The F-15 of today (and the future) has AESA radar, JHMCS, AIM-9X, AMRAAM, etc. It is a much more lethal ATA platform than the F-14 ever was, and the F-15E is a much better ATG aircraft than the "bomb-cat" two bomb wonder ever was. There is a reason all the F-14s are at the boneyard and eagles will be flying for decades to come. Of course since most arfcommers learned everything they ever needed to know about F-14s from "Top Gun", they will always win the emotional vote here.

Posted: 2/23/2007 4:59:54 PM EDT

[#8]

Quoted:
They don't fly the same mission. So they aren't comparable.

The F15 would die before it could get in range.

BS.

One of them is THE "Air Superiority" fighter, designed to take on enemy fighters.
The other is a "Fleet Defender", whose primary weapon (Phoenix) was designed to take out missile-carrying bombers.

One of them always makes the #1 on any top jet fighter list, while the other never even makes the list.

The F-14 was great for what it did, but head-to-head, I'd give the F-15 the nod every time.

Posted: 2/23/2007 5:01:06 PM EDT

[#9]

Quoted:

We don't fly the F-15 of the 70s anymore. We didn't fly the F-14 of the 70s either, the D model had much better engines and other enhancements. The F-15 of today (and the future) has AESA radar, JHMCS, AIM-9X, AMRAAM, etc. It is a much more lethal ATA platform than the F-14 ever was, and the F-15E is a much better ATG aircraft than the "bomb-cat" two bomb wonder ever was. There is a reason all the F-14s are at the boneyard and eagles will be flying for decades to come. Of course since most arfcommers learned everything they ever needed to know about F-14s from "Top Gun", they will always win the emotional vote here.

After observing what happened to Goose, I'd say the F-14 has an inferior ejection system.

Posted: 2/23/2007 5:03:05 PM EDT

[#10]

I thought they were both called air superiority fighters. Which i took to mean they primarily blow other planes out of the sky.

What are the different roles for each fighter then?

I guess the F-14 is completely replaced byby the F-18 and the F-18 super hornets right?

They aren't oredering enough F-22 to replace the F-15s yet are they?

Posted: 2/23/2007 5:04:26 PM EDT

[#11]

Quoted:
I wouldn't say one is 'better' than the other. They both provide similar performance and speed, and have roughly the same power to weight ratio.

I would give te advantage to the F-14 because of Naval Top Gun school pilot training(over Red Flag), the variable geometry (swing wing) wings, and four eyes are better than two. Assuming this is against a one-seater F-15 model.

Both of these planes are late 60's early 1970's designs with the F-14 being slightly older.

ETA - the Phoenix missle system isn't for fighter vs fighter confrontations!! It is for fleet defense. The AIM-54 was designed for blowing-up formations of enemy bombers with a nuke

F-14>F-15

I have zero time spent in the military, but I highly doubt bombers armed with nuclear weapons are "flying in formation."

Posted: 2/23/2007 5:06:48 PM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:

Quoted:
I wouldn't say one is 'better' than the other. They both provide similar performance and speed, and have roughly the same power to weight ratio.

I would give te advantage to the F-14 because of Naval Top Gun school pilot training(over Red Flag), the variable geometry (swing wing) wings, and four eyes are better than two. Assuming this is against a one-seater F-15 model.

Both of these planes are late 60's early 1970's designs with the F-14 being slightly older.

ETA - the Phoenix missle system isn't for fighter vs fighter confrontations!! It is for fleet defense. The AIM-54 was designed for blowing-up formations of enemy bombers with a nuke

F-14>F-15

I have zero time spent in the military, but I highly doubt bombers armed with nuclear weapons are "flying in formation."

Doubt it all you want, but Soviet military doctrine called for swarming attacks on carriers. Hard to do when your formation is separated.

Posted: 2/23/2007 5:07:34 PM EDT

[#13]

They're both very good at their intended missions.

A "Little" off-topic but, who here remembers the term "Look-down-shoot-down" radar?

Posted: 2/23/2007 5:08:07 PM EDT

[#14]

I'd like to see what would happen if the F-14 salvoed off two or more AIM-54s against the F-15. It might not connect, but it might get him defensive enough for the -14 to close for an AIM-7 shot.

Posted: 2/23/2007 5:11:01 PM EDT

[#15]

Different fighters, different missions

The F-14 was designed to accomodate the AIM-54, an ultra long-range AA missile that was adequate, at the time.

The F-15 was designed to counter the MIG-25, at the time the USSR's fastest, highest flying 'fighter' of the time

Both are superior at what they do, but not similar in mission

Posted: 2/23/2007 5:12:06 PM EDT

[#16]

"Look-down-shoot-down radar"

You mean helmet mounted target desgination, like the balls-out AWESOME Schlem helmet-mounted sight in the Su-27 and Mig-29?

The system that, to my knowledge, still isn't incorporated in a US fixed-wing aircraft?

Posted: 2/23/2007 5:14:08 PM EDT

[#17]

Quoted:
I'd like to see what would happen if the F-14 salvoed off two or more AIM-54s against the F-15. It might not connect, but it might get him defensive enough for the -14 to close for an AIM-7 shot.

After the F-15 avoids the AIM-54s the pilot then launches an AIM-120 at the F-14 who then has to take evasive action and loses radar lock on the F-15 and the AIM-7 misses. The the F-15's AIM-120 takes out the F-14.

Posted: 2/23/2007 5:14:22 PM EDT

[#18]

Quoted:
"Look-down-shoot-down radar"

You mean helmet mounted target desgination, like the balls-out AWESOME Schlem helmet-mounted sight in the Su-27 and Mig-29?

The system that, to my knowledge, still isn't incorporated in a US fixed-wing aircraft?

No.
The radar is able to look for aircraft against ground clutter, as opposed to above the horizon (open air).

Posted: 2/23/2007 5:14:35 PM EDT

[#19]

Quoted:
I wouldn't say one is 'better' than the other. They both provide similar performance and speed, and have roughly the same power to weight ratio.

I would give te advantage to the F-14 because of Naval Top Gun school pilot training(over Red Flag), the variable geometry (swing wing) wings, and four eyes are better than two. Assuming this is against a one-seater F-15 model.

Both of these planes are late 60's early 1970's designs with the F-14 being slightly older.

ETA - the Phoenix missle system isn't for fighter vs fighter confrontations!! It is for fleet defense. The AIM-54 was designed for blowing-up formations of enemy bombers with a nuke

F-14>F-15

The Phoenix was not armed with a nuclear warhead.

Posted: 2/23/2007 5:16:57 PM EDT

[#20]

Quoted:

Quoted:
"Look-down-shoot-down radar"

You mean helmet mounted target desgination, like the balls-out AWESOME Schlem helmet-mounted sight in the Su-27 and Mig-29?

The system that, to my knowledge, still isn't incorporated in a US fixed-wing aircraft?

No.
The radar is able to look for aircraft against ground clutter, as opposed to above the horizon (open air).

Yep. It ("Look-Down-Shoot-Down") was a BIG thing when it came out in the late 70's and early '80's.

Posted: 2/23/2007 5:17:32 PM EDT

[#21]

Quoted:

Quoted:
I wouldn't say one is 'better' than the other. They both provide similar performance and speed, and have roughly the same power to weight ratio.

I would give te advantage to the F-14 because of Naval Top Gun school pilot training(over Red Flag), the variable geometry (swing wing) wings, and four eyes are better than two. Assuming this is against a one-seater F-15 model.

Both of these planes are late 60's early 1970's designs with the F-14 being slightly older.

ETA - the Phoenix missle system isn't for fighter vs fighter confrontations!! It is for fleet defense. The AIM-54 was designed for blowing-up formations of enemy bombers with a nuke

F-14>F-15

The Phoenix was not armed with a nuclear warhead.

I was gonna post that, but then I realized he was talking about the bombers.

Posted: 2/23/2007 5:17:51 PM EDT

[#22]

I thought that other than missions/armament, the only difference was that the F14's wings were retractable for carrier storage. No?

Posted: 2/23/2007 5:19:36 PM EDT

[#23]

"I thought that other than missions/armament, the only difference was that the F14's wings were retractable for carrier storage. No? "

no

Posted: 2/23/2007 5:19:43 PM EDT

[#24]

Quoted:

Quoted:
I'd like to see what would happen if the F-14 salvoed off two or more AIM-54s against the F-15. It might not connect, but it might get him defensive enough for the -14 to close for an AIM-7 shot.

After the F-15 avoids the AIM-54s the pilot then launches an AIM-120 at the F-14 who then has to take evasive action and loses radar lock on the F-15 and the AIM-7 misses. The the F-15's AIM-120 takes out the F-14.

The F-15 avoids the first -54. Then finds himself engaged by a second -54. While he's avoiding the two missiles the F-14 closes to AIM-7 range and the fight is on. Of course, if it's a 15C and a 14D then it's an AIM-120 the Eagle Driver has to worry about.

Anyway, someone said there is a reason the Eagle is still flying and the Tomcat isn't. That's true. The -15 is still flying because the -22 didn't enter service at the time nor in the quantity the USAF originally envisioned.

Posted: 2/23/2007 5:20:14 PM EDT

[#25]

Quoted:

Quoted:
I wouldn't say one is 'better' than the other. They both provide similar performance and speed, and have roughly the same power to weight ratio.

I would give te advantage to the F-14 because of Naval Top Gun school pilot training(over Red Flag), the variable geometry (swing wing) wings, and four eyes are better than two. Assuming this is against a one-seater F-15 model.

Both of these planes are late 60's early 1970's designs with the F-14 being slightly older.

ETA - the Phoenix missle system isn't for fighter vs fighter confrontations!! It is for fleet defense. The AIM-54 was designed for blowing-up formations of enemy bombers with a nuke

F-14>F-15

The Phoenix was not armed with a nuclear warhead.

that was my 1st thought

Posted: 2/23/2007 5:20:48 PM EDT

[#26]

F-14 no bullshit answers or reason. f-14 hands down.

Posted: 2/23/2007 5:29:43 PM EDT

[#27]

Quoted:

Quoted:
I wouldn't say one is 'better' than the other. They both provide similar performance and speed, and have roughly the same power to weight ratio.

I would give te advantage to the F-14 because of Naval Top Gun school pilot training(over Red Flag), the variable geometry (swing wing) wings, and four eyes are better than two. Assuming this is against a one-seater F-15 model.

Both of these planes are late 60's early 1970's designs with the F-14 being slightly older.

ETA - the Phoenix missle system isn't for fighter vs fighter confrontations!! It is for fleet defense. The AIM-54 was designed for blowing-up formations of enemy bombers with a nuke

F-14>F-15

The Phoenix was not armed with a nuclear warhead.

I was gonna post that, but then I realized he was talking about the bombers.

I stand corrected... Just about everything i thought i knew about the F-14/AIM-54 defense system was wrong!

WIKIPEDIA has a good write-up on the AIM-54

Primary function: Long-range air-launched air intercept missile
Contractor: Hughes Aircraft Company and Raytheon Corporation
Unit cost: US$477,131
Power Plant: Solid propellant rocket motor built by Hercules
Length: 3.9 m (13 ft)
Weight: 460 kg (1,014 lb)
Diameter: 380 mm (15 in)
Wing span: 900 mm (3 ft)
Range: 48.3 to 80nm depending on variant used
Speed: >1300 m/s (3,000 mph)
Guidance system: Semi-active and active radar homing
Warheads: Proximity fuze, high explosive
Warhead weight: 60 kg (130 lb)
Users: USA (US Navy), Iran
Date deployed: 1974
Date retired (US): September 30, 2004

Posted: 2/23/2007 5:32:58 PM EDT

[#28]

Enlighten me.

height=8

Quoted:
"I thought that other than missions/armament, the only difference was that the F14's wings were retractable for carrier storage. No? "

no

Posted: 2/23/2007 5:34:44 PM EDT

[#29]

google is your friend james

Posted: 2/23/2007 5:38:21 PM EDT

[#30]

I was getting the AIM-54 confused with the AIR-2 Genie nuke

Specifications (AIR-2A)
Length: 2.95 m (9 ft 8 in)
Diameter: 0.44 m (17.5 in)
Wingspan: 1.02 m (3 ft 4 in)
Launch weight: 373 kg (822 lb)
Speed: Mach 3.3
Range: 9.6 km (6 m)
Guidance: Inertial (None)
Warhead: W25 nuclear fission, 1.5 kiloton yield
Date deployed: 1957
Date retired: 1985

The F-106 and F-14 are my favorite jets

Posted: 2/23/2007 5:39:54 PM EDT

[#31]

Quoted:

Quoted:
I wouldn't say one is 'better' than the other. They both provide similar performance and speed, and have roughly the same power to weight ratio.

I would give te advantage to the F-14 because of Naval Top Gun school pilot training(over Red Flag), the variable geometry (swing wing) wings, and four eyes are better than two. Assuming this is against a one-seater F-15 model.

Both of these planes are late 60's early 1970's designs with the F-14 being slightly older.

ETA - the Phoenix missle system isn't for fighter vs fighter confrontations!! It is for fleet defense. The AIM-54 was designed for blowing-up formations of enemy bombers with a nuke

F-14>F-15

I have zero time spent in the military, but I highly doubt bombers armed with nuclear weapons are "flying in formation."

Doubt it all you want, but Soviet military doctrine called for swarming attacks on carriers. Hard to do when your formation is separated.

Didn’t Soviet military doctrine also call for swarming attacks to come simultaneous from as many points of the compass as possible? I was taught the ideal Soviet attack would spread the bombers in an arc and not bunched along one axis of attack.

Posted: 2/23/2007 5:40:39 PM EDT

[#32]

Quoted:
F-14 no bullshit answers or reason. f-14 hands down.

real reasons then ?

Posted: 2/23/2007 5:44:22 PM EDT

[#33]

Quoted:

Quoted:
I wouldn't say one is 'better' than the other. They both provide similar performance and speed, and have roughly the same power to weight ratio.

I would give te advantage to the F-14 because of Naval Top Gun school pilot training(over Red Flag), the variable geometry (swing wing) wings, and four eyes are better than two. Assuming this is against a one-seater F-15 model.

Both of these planes are late 60's early 1970's designs with the F-14 being slightly older.

ETA - the Phoenix missle system isn't for fighter vs fighter confrontations!! It is for fleet defense. The AIM-54 was designed for blowing-up formations of enemy bombers with a nuke

F-14>F-15

I have zero time spent in the military, but I highly doubt bombers armed with nuclear weapons are "flying in formation."

Doubt it all you want, but Soviet military doctrine called for swarming attacks on carriers. Hard to do when your formation is separated.

Didn’t Soviet military doctrine also call for swarming attack to come from as many points of the compass as possible? I was taught the ideal Soviet attack would spread the bombers in an arc and not bunched along one axis of attack.

They aren't mutually exclusive. You could have an entire regiment of Backfire bombers with each of its squadrons attacking from a different direction.

ETA: Remember that the bombers of the day carried one or two missiles. So if they had 24 bombers in a squadron they had at most 48 missiles. That's impressive, but the missiles they carried weren't that hard to shoot down.

The reason from approaching from different points is it increases your chances of catching the CAP out of position and increases the chances that maybe one group won't be detected.

Posted: 2/23/2007 5:45:42 PM EDT

[#34]

I choose the Brewster Buffalo

Posted: 2/23/2007 5:47:55 PM EDT

[#35]

Quoted:
I was getting the AIM-54 confused with the AIR-2 Genie nuke

Specifications (AIR-2A)
Length: 2.95 m (9 ft 8 in)
Diameter: 0.44 m (17.5 in)
Wingspan: 1.02 m (3 ft 4 in)
Launch weight: 373 kg (822 lb)
Speed: Mach 3.3
Range: 9.6 km (6 m)
Guidance: Inertial (None)
Warhead: W25 nuclear fission, 1.5 kiloton yield
Date deployed: 1957
Date retired: 1985

The F-106 and F-14 are my favorite jets
img341.imageshack.us/img341/8567/f1061jf5.jpg

Dude, you would'a loved the AGM-28

Posted: 2/23/2007 5:48:03 PM EDT

[#36]

Quoted:
google is your friend james

Judging by your screen name, I thought you would know off the top of your head.

Posted: 2/23/2007 5:48:09 PM EDT

[#37]

You F14 lovers are kidding right? An F15C OR E would smoke an F14D. The F14s radar works like shit over land. <-- That comes straight out of a Navy RIOs mouth I know.

The F15C is the dominant ASF our inventory besides the few F22s we have.

The AESA radar kicks ass.

Posted: 2/23/2007 5:48:29 PM EDT

[#38]

Quoted:
They aren't mutually exclusive. You could have an entire regiment of Backfire bombers with each of its squadrons attacking from a different direction.

That's why one of the requirements of the F-14/AIM-54 system was to be able to shoot down 6 planes with 6 missles. Even if the F-14 was shot down, the missles would still keep coming at you

Posted: 2/23/2007 5:50:01 PM EDT

[#39]

Quoted:

Dude, you would'a loved the AGM-28

upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/ad/Agm-28_1.jpg

That Hound dog has got bite!

Posted: 2/23/2007 5:52:47 PM EDT

[#40]

I thought the F-15 came in many different variations that some would be comparable to the F-14.

Posted: 2/23/2007 5:55:18 PM EDT

[#41]

Quoted:

Quoted:
They aren't mutually exclusive. You could have an entire regiment of Backfire bombers with each of its squadrons attacking from a different direction.

That's why one of the requirements of the F-14/AIM-54 system was to be able to shoot down 6 planes with 6 missles. Even if the F-14 was shot down, the missles would still keep coming at you

http://www.ausairpower.net/TE-Sov-ASuW.html
Good reading here.

Posted: 2/23/2007 5:57:17 PM EDT

[#42]

Quoted:
You F14 lovers are kidding right? An F15C OR E would smoke an F14D. The F14s radar works like shit over land. <-- That comes straight out of a Navy RIOs mouth I know.

The F15C is the dominant ASF our inventory besides the few F22s we have.

The AESA radar kicks ass.

Who said the fight was over land? The APG-71 wasn't the same radar as the AWG-9, btw.

And who said the F-15 was one equipped with AESA?

Posted: 2/23/2007 5:57:34 PM EDT

[#43]

Quoted:

Quoted:
google is your friend james

Judging by your screen name, I thought you would know off the top of your head.

Maybe I do James and maybe I don't - Do you really want to trust what you read here to the exclusion of outside sources? If so, I apologize - but I won't feed that kind of ignorance.

Your original question is covered in literally hundreds of internet pages. Some accurate, some not. If you have specific questions I'd be happy to answer them to the best of my ability, but then again, those answers would be just one more wave on the sea of knowledge.

Posted: 2/23/2007 6:01:56 PM EDT

[#44]

So far the only reason presented for the F14 taking out an F15 is the Phoenix missile. Unfortunately, the Phoenix was at best unproven.

The flying "tennis court" would be v ery hard for any plane (including the F22) to "smoke".

Bomber

Posted: 2/23/2007 6:03:30 PM EDT

[#45]

Ok, heres a specific question. Other than f-14's being designed for carrier based ops, and the f-15's designed for long range land based ops. What's the difference (airframe, engines, etc.) ?

Quoted:

Quoted:
google is your friend james

Judging by your screen name, I thought you would know off the top of your head.

Maybe I do James and maybe I don't - Do you really want to trust what you read here to the exclusion of outside sources? If so, I apologize - but I won't feed that kind of ignorance.

Your original question is covered in literally hundreds of internet pages. Some accurate, some not. If you have specific questions I'd be happy to answer them to the best of my ability, but then again, those answers would be just one more wave on the sea of knowledge.

Posted: 2/23/2007 6:08:22 PM EDT

[#46]

Quoted:
So far the only reason presented for the F14 taking out an F15 is the Phoenix missile. Unfortunately, the Phoenix was at best unproven.

The flying "tennis court" would be v ery hard for any plane (including the F22) to "smoke".

Bomber

I think it would come down to the pilot. Who can get the most out of their machine. Who can employ the superior tactics. The Phoenix wouldn't kill a F-15 in all probability, but it would get him shucking and jiving. The question is, in my mind, could the F-14 pilot make the most of it.

Or alternatively, the F-14 could establish radar contact. Send the information to a silent shooter via Link 4A. Turn and run. The F-15 gives chase, not looking for the Aegis ship, which isn't radiating. The Aegis ship tracks the F-15 thanks to his radar emissions as his superior speed is closing on the F-14. Then the Aegis ship goes active, acquires a track, fires an SM-2 and the first indication the Eagle Driver gets of being targeted is mere seconds before the proximity fuse in the SM-2 activates.

That's not fighting fair, but war isn't fair.

Posted: 2/23/2007 6:10:06 PM EDT

[#47]

James - that's just a restatement of your original question LIKE I SAID A FEW TIMES NOW GOOGLE IT - you might learn a lot.

One was originally designed to defend a fleet. The other was originally designed to win air superiority. Believe it or not these are distinct tasks. Both were originally designed with air to ground capabilities. Neither one had air to ground capabilities when originally fielded. Both have since dropped bombs in anger (i.e. air to ground)....

if it sounds a little like a riddle to you, it's only because you haven't done your background reading yet.

Posted: 2/23/2007 6:11:03 PM EDT

[#48]

The much vaunted AIM-54 was only good against non manouvering targets, It was relatively innefective against fighters, if they saw it they could outmanouevere it. It was designed to shoot down subsonic cruise missiles and bombers at very long range

ANdy

Posted: 2/23/2007 6:19:02 PM EDT

[#49]

Quoted:
So far the only reason presented for the F14 taking out an F15 is the Phoenix missile. Unfortunately, the Phoenix was at best unproven.

The flying "tennis court" would be v ery hard for any plane (including the F22) to "smoke".

Bomber

The F22s from Langley went through Red Flag and smoked everything they came up against including swam attacks and F-15s.

Posted: 2/23/2007 6:32:45 PM EDT

[#50]

Quoted:
After observing what happened to Goose, I'd say the F-14 has an inferior ejection system.

Quoted:
Mav, we're caught in the jet-wash, we got a flame out!

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - F14 Vs. F15 (Page 1 of 5)

General » General Discussion

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us