"Human damage" is my new favorite euphemism for injury.

@ClaptonFan91

3 жыл бұрын

Gotta watch out for damaged humans

@blessingchizema9154

2 жыл бұрын

I HEARD HIM SAY THAT AND I WAS LIKE WHAAATTTT????? HE IS NOT A NATIVE ENGLISH SPEAKER...LETS FORGIVE HIM ON THAT ONE 🤣🤣🤣🙌🏾🙏🏾

@michaelscott356

2 жыл бұрын

Damage=Death in My mind.

@BeigeAlertHamburg

2 жыл бұрын

Personenschaden

@C.Fecteau-AU-MJ13

Жыл бұрын

It would be a killer name for a band

I loved the discussion about how the engines are designed to detach in a ground collision while maintaining as much structural integrity as possible. These steps all help to make an accident more survivable and the industry is right to pride itself on its record. One should never forget the terrible price paid by those that lost their lives in previous accidents, leading to the improvements and better safety we now enjoy. The industry must never ease up on its rigorous controls and we, the travelling public, should always pay attention to all advice and instructions from the cockpit and cabin crew.

That 'positive attitude' T-shirt is epic!

@LightTransformerGuy

4 жыл бұрын

Was that the video or the shirt or both?

I saw one of these engines being tested at GE. It hung with two bolts on the engine and one (1) on the gantry (wing surrogate). I said what is the fitting on the plane. The engineer said "that's it." I said I would have expected more. He smiled and said "If your taking off and your engine hits a tree what would you rather rip off, your engine or your wings!!!" Good point.

Back in the late 80's, an AA 727 flying to San Diego experienced an engine problem. The aircraft was over the Southwestern desert and the crew felt a thump, then got an indicator that the starboard engine had failed. They shut off the engine, started an early decent and simply flew the rest of the way to San Diego on the two remaining engines. When the plane landed in San Diego (without incident), it took the tower controllers to tell the astonished crew that they were missing an engine. It had apparently seized up and simply snapped off...exactly what it was supposed to do. They found the engine in the desert a couple of days later. There was a front-page photo in the local paper the next day of the plane sitting in the PSA hangar missing an engine. Good design worked that time!

Before watching this video: I m comfortable driving my car After watching this video : why is the engine inside the car?

@y68on42

4 жыл бұрын

So it doesn't crush you

@HelloKittyFanMan.

4 жыл бұрын

@@y68on42: He said "is."

@HelloKittyFanMan.

4 жыл бұрын

Boss, I'm trying to get your joke, but need your help. How, even in joking, did the engine get into the car (car's cab, I guess you meant)?

@thomasm1964

3 жыл бұрын

Hello Kitty Lover Man! No. He meant “Why is the engine not outside the car instead of being inside the bonnet (hood)?”

Very well explained along with the case study. Always love to hear such kind of exciting information from you. Keep it up Mentour.

Mentour is an example of someone who started presenting videos in a reasonable way, as most folk do, and has now become so good at it, he is easily as good as a professional TV presenter! The transformation over the last four years or so has been extremely interesting to watch!

Hi Mentour, thanks for the awesome videos. Lot of clarity and details in your explanation. Respect! Could you please make some videos on the following topics? I would like to hear the answers from you. 1. Aircraft leasing 2. Lifespan of an aircraft and what happens after they retire a certain fleet 3. Some interesting details on technical rivalries between Boeing and Airbus (can be made as a series if possible). 4. History or evolution of airline companies as well as aircraft manufacturers in terms of technology, design, thought process etc (like a playlist / series). If anyone is interested in similar topics please like this. Thanks 😊

It’s amazing how well designed modern aircraft are. This is so obscure, they must have thought of everything. And it’s crazy that every single modern passenger aircraft has these features, all though they will probably never be used 99% of the time.

That dog is absolutely adorable 🐕

Just ordered one of you Positive Attitude T-shirt’s! Particularly suitable during these difficult times! Love your channel! Keep up the great work and stay positive! 👍👍

Beautiful animations. Love your technical topics.

I've been a mechanical engineer for 40 years with an emphasis in aerospace engineering and machining . Can't wait to see more comments . Cool video and Thanks . Everyone stay healthy and Happy .

@czhaok

Жыл бұрын

What does an 'emphasis' mean in this context? You either engineered aeroplane components, or you didn't..

@QuantumMechanic_88

Жыл бұрын

@@czhaok Attend a university. Many courses have an emphasis to a particular area of expertise.

“….and this might be interesting…” Sir. Every piece of content you produce has consisted entirely of intriguing substance. Much love

To add a little to what @Mentour Pilot said. Since the two disasters he detailed, engine mounts are designed so that the front mount shears off first, and the aft shear pins break away last. This prevents the engine from coming over the wing and causing other structural damage to the aircraft such as damaged electrical or hydraulic lines.

Mentour: I could spend hours talking to you about the technical bits of this. Everybody: Please do! Much appreciated!

@michaela3274

4 жыл бұрын

Me... (Notepad ready) - i'm listening

Mentour pilot, you are an inspiration to me as a great aviator! I always look up to you as an example and will want to be a pilot as I have loved planes since the age of 4 and still do love them.

One other reason for the nacelles (pods) to be mounted so far forward of the wings rather than inside them is for aerodynamics. While the Comet _looked_ quite sleek, a modern airliner is actually quite a lot more aerodynamically efficient, and the placement of the engines is a big part of that. Why? Wave drag. Specifically trans-sonic wave drag. Even today in the age of efficiency over speed, airliners go fast enough that airflow over certain parts of them nears supersonic speeds. Without going into _too_ much detail (watch me now go into way too much detail, lol), right around Mach 1 (around 0.8 to 1.2 or so) is the most drag an aircraft will ever see. You have the normal drag, which is a combination of friction from the boundary layer between the airframe's skin and the air flowing over it, along with pressure drag caused by compression at the leading edges and evacuation at trailing edges, and induced drag caused as a consequence of extracting lift. At subsonic speeds less than Mach 0.8, these types of drag totally dominate the drag the aircraft experiences. At supersonic speeds, this changes. Sonic shockwaves form boundary layers of air that 'sticks' to the skin of the plane, taking up much of the skin drag. Those shockwaves also take on more and more aerodynamically ideal shapes, reducing pressure drag. And, the faster the plane goes, the less angle of attack is needed for level flight, and so the less induced drag there is. Instead, the formation of those shockwaves becomes the primary source of drag, as the supersonic flow (relative to the airframe) around the plane has to very rapidly accelerate to match speeds with the subsonic boundary layer of air "stuck" to the plane's skin. It does this at faster than the speed of sound, which is normally the speed any pressure wave moves in a fluid. In physics terms, what happens then is that the pressure in the trough of the shockwave just behind the wavefront becomes a vacuum, which takes enormous amounts of energy; energy that has to come from somewhere, and in fact comes out of the plane's kinetic energy. Just as an aside, at hypersonic speeds, more of the energy starts to go into thermal effects and phase change of the air from a gas to a plasma, and becomes the dominant form of drag at those speeds (which is what defines the difference between supersonic and hypersonic). In any case, short of hypersonic speeds (at which drag can theoretically tend toward infinity), the most drag a vehicle will ever experience is in the _transsonic_ regime, when both wave drag and traditional drag are in full effect simultaneously. This fact, combined with a lack of understanding of how to modify control surfaces for supersonic flight created what was known as the "sound barrier" in the early 20th century. Traditional streamlining, like what you see in the de Havilland Comet helps reduce traditional drag. To reduce _wave drag_ on the other hand, you use what's called the Area Rule. The minimum wave drag for a given overall flight volume is caused by the smoothest possible rate of change of the cross-sectional area of the airframe in the direction of travel. A big increase in cross-sectional area in a short distance along the length of the plane creates tons of wave drag, because it forms new shock fronts. In a traditional-configuration airplane, the biggest sudden increases in area (aside from at the nose) happen at the start of the wings, and the start of the engines. So for efficient flight in the trans-sonic or high-subsonic regime, you _do not want_ engines and wings to both start at the same point along the length of the airframe; that actually maximizes wave drag and greatly decreases fuel efficiency. Modern airliners are "waisted" subtly but (if you know what you're looking for) noticeably right around where the wings start to take shape, to reduce the rate of change of cross-sectional area. Having the engine nacelles well out in front of the leading edges of the wings helps further reduce the suddenness of that transition. The "hump" of the Boeing 747 where the upper deck is is also, in fact, entirely about reducing wave drag. The 747 has that hump for aerodynamic efficiency, and they got to put a second deck there, rather than the other way around like you might assume. It was a somewhat crude but _very_ effective design from an era in which the kind of waisting of the main fuselage we use today wasn't as feasible for structural integrity reasons. That hump, and the nacelles well forward of the leading edges, both revolutionary at the time, made the 747 the most efficient heavy aircraft for _decades._ As a neat little bit of trivia, wave drag is important for ships as well. The big, bulbous nose that extends out under the water in front of the bow of big ships designed for fuel efficiency (bulk freighters, tankers, cruise ships) actually deliberately induces waves that interfere destructively with the waves produced by the motion of the main hull through the water, greatly reducing the wake, the energy that goes into it, and the drag induced by it.

Structural engineer here, I love the topic of this video. The tensile strength of 180 MPa is actually quite low for bolts, typical yield strength for steel bolts is 600-800 MPa. I am both amused and bothered by one specific incident related to the engine connection to the wing, that is the Hudson river landing. The amount of drag the engines produced must have been very high, I think one of the engines came off. Will increasing engine size on modern planes give less margin on keeping the plane level during accidental landings?

@mytech6779

4 жыл бұрын

Iconel 718 yield is about 160,000 psi, [1100MPa] I think he mixed units. Although he may have been quoting a high temperature strength as Iconel718 is often selected for high temperature uses.

@mullity1952

4 жыл бұрын

@Elvind Kvinge What is the shear strength of the bolt?

@eivindkvinge6564

4 жыл бұрын

@@mullity1952 yield strength x area / Square root (3)

@sac3528

4 жыл бұрын

"Accidental landings" This is my new euphemism for crashes.

@Mike-oz4cv

4 жыл бұрын

Yeah, his assumption of real world load was very optimistic (only 100kN in each direction (141kN combined)) and even then he was already at 1/5 of his assumed yield strength. Which would be very bad for metal fatigue (also considering that there is probably lots of vibrations and direction changes, it’s not just one nice, permanent static force). Your numbers make much more sense.

@mentour You including the case studies in the last few technical videos is a very good idea. It helps a lot in understanding the topic better. Very good idea indeed.

I was towing gliders the day after AA191 for an AA co-pilot who had invited his captain along to our small airport. I remember all of us pilots gathered around the desk looking at a grainy newspaper picture of AA191 on it's back. We were looking at the control surfaces and we could see the elevator pushed forward trying to unload but most important the rudder full right. We could see that the pilot knew he was spinning, more accurately snap rolling. To the end, their fellow AA pilot was flying the aircraft with proper control inputs to correct for a stalling left wing. What he didn't know was that no control inputs could overcome the loss of high lift leading edge slats resulting from the hydraulic failure. It was a sobering moment for all of us.

As we’re on the subject of shear, I notice that both Paxti and Petter have been to the shearers recently. Looking good.

Boeing PSD (Propulsion Systems Division) in the house!!! Thanks MP for all you do for the KZread community!

Thanks 😊 for explaining in such a good manner. This content has answered many doubts in myself Thanks again 😊

10:35 nice animations! It explains very well! Tack, Petter!

Recognized the Mustard clip immediately. Easily one of the best channels on KZread

I have been a follower of this channel for several years and in my opinion this video is one of the most interesting that you have published. Thank you very much.

Thanks for putting efforts in making these videos.

I appreciate your permanent positive standing, not trying to impress us as of how clever you are, but discussing THE SUBJECT and the positive consequences of these mishaps. (Francisco from Mexico)

Compliments on the visuals and the content. They were key. I’m an aviation enthusiast so the visuals helped a lot. Keep paying attention to the small details, it makes the experience a whole lot better and it does set you apart👌🏾

Your puppy moving at 3:15... adorable asf

I worked on rotating machinery in the petrochemical industry for 40 years. Large part of my activity was RCA (root cause analysis). One of the steps in an investigation was metallurgical investigation. The results of the metallurgical investigation would determine among other details whether the material of the damaged part was correctly selected, and had been correctly heat treated for its purpose (had correct hardness, tensile strength, etc.). Most important would be the determination of the fracture cause. Fatigue fractures do seldom occur suddenly, and have very characteristic surface appearance. The designers of the component that failed (your second case) have certainly been thoroughly calculated by the designers and dimensioned for fatigue safety. There must have been another reason (the root cause) why the component was exposed to additional forces or exposed to additional vibration which made it to fatigue faster than expected.

Great video! I love details like you have. I come from an aviation family; my dad was a RENI/Maintenance Crew Chief, I am a gate supervisor-lead agent and my son is an aviation mechanic, all with American Airlines. My son said you were spot on from his experience (his actual comment was "Holy cow, a pilot that actually knows what he's talking about! Not a bad compliment for him.) You may have a new fan. Anyway, I loved the video. You made it easy to understand. Keep 'me coming!

@MentourPilot

4 жыл бұрын

Ahhh, that’s like honey to my ears! Send him my regards and glad you liked it!

Yet again, I’d never thought of this. Perfect.

Petter, I have a question: I am always impressed by how much deep technical knowledge you have of the aircraft you fly. Is this actually a formal part of your training and job or is it a personal interest?

@hafidz182

4 жыл бұрын

I was about going to ask the same question.. do these kind of engineering and manufacturing details also being taught in flight school or certification?

@MrFlyingPanda

4 жыл бұрын

Both

@mytech6779

4 жыл бұрын

@@hafidz182 Much of this is taught in flight school. Not for all planes, only for the plane type that the pilot will be certified to fly. Not every engineering detail, the pilot would not be tested on specific alloy like "Iconel 718", but the pilot would be tested on the general electrical, hydraulic, and fuel systems design and operation. ie a 737-400 pilot would need to know that hydraulic system A is powered by two pumps one mechanical on engine#1 and the other electrical and powered from engine#2 alternator, and exactly which items are attached to hydraulic system A. They would also need to know the electrical layout(and power capacity) so faults can be isolated or power transferred from one subsystem to another in an emergency.

Great presentation Peter. Thank you! On AA#191, I think it is important to discuss the improper de-mounting/mounting procedure the mechanics were using for the DC-10 engine, which was using a fork lift. I believe there was discussion that some vertical movement weakened fasteners leading to the catastrophic loss of AA#191. Other issues were the pilots did not get a stick-shaker nor stall warning due to losses in the electrical systems (generator) that the F/E had not been able to restore buses on. The pilots also received no slat-disagreement warning lights/gauge indicator, which also misled them, as they did not know they had an asymmetric slat/stall trend developing. The DC-10--Murphy's Law's favorite airplane: What can go wrong, will. The pilots of that ill fated flight did everything by the book, and in simulator presentations using the AA#191 profile, with pilots that did not know what caused #191 to lose control, I believe the great majority of those pilots in the SIM also lost control. As you said, one wing stalled, at a premature speed due to an uncommanded and unexpected leading edge devices (slats) retraction due to loss of hydraulic fluid/pressure.

Thanks Petter, that was a terrific program, but I need to watch it again.

As always great informative video!

Well explained in a concise manner.

I've been loving your videos mate! Do you think you could do a video of like a side by side comparision of some of the more popular engines and why they're so efficient?

Thanks for the great video Petter 👍

Joe Sutter explains this really, really well in his book “747.” Great vid Mentour! Hope you get back to flying soon!

After the El Al 747 crash, the attach lugs for the pylon were completely redesigned and made much more robust. Also the pins that attach the pylon to the wing are called "fuse pins". They are hollow bolts which are very carefully designed to break at an exact load. Good video

Best videos of flying. Congratulations

I always love your explanation and the puppies :-)

Thanks for this video, I’ve been searching for an answer to this question for years!

Amazing, I just asked about the dc-10 crash in Chicago. You really have a great channel.

Well done, sir. I have a personal connection to flight 191 out of Chicago and have done extensive research on that terrible event. It was a perfect storm of engineering failure, maintenance failure and training failure. It is almost never one thing that brings down an airliner. Your understanding and explanation of these events (explained in a straightforward yet caring way) brings confidence to those of us who are by nature or experience, nervous flyers. Thank you.

@gracelandone

4 жыл бұрын

Wow. I express just a bit of surprise at the number of cavalier responses regarding accidents related to engine separation from air craft conveying many passengers to their destination. In many cases, the destination turns out to be a horrid communal death. Y’all might apply just a modicum of empathy towards the victims and victims’ families of flights doomed by these accidents. You can be sure it hurts all around. I hope you never experience it.

Quite informative..Thank you

Very informative indeed Thanks

Thank you Mentour! Great explanation! Always wondered how strong those mounts were. They look so flimsy as the engines wobble and gyrate during mild turbulence.

Great detailing

I love the rolling dog 🐶😍😅

Brilliant video Mentour

Excellent. Do more like this. Thanks.

All videos are so nice!

The overall technique is called a ‘mechanical fuse’, analogous to an electrical fuse - a deliberate weak point to protect the rest of the system.

@QuantumMechanic_88

4 жыл бұрын

Not quite ... but humorous .

@ewilloch

4 жыл бұрын

"predetermined breaking point" is the general phrase. In German, it's "Sollbruchstelle", which is actually a quite clever word which can loosely be translated to "The area of a part where the breakage is supposed to happen in the case of an overload of the part".

@disorganizedorg

4 жыл бұрын

A more every-day example would be snow-blower shear pins, which I consume at an alarming rate.

@ewilloch

4 жыл бұрын

Rich Marceau Sorry, but I had to laugh when reading that! 🤗😂

@allangibson8494

4 жыл бұрын

It was inherited from the earlier piston engined transports - literally losing an engine on the over water runs was very common, particularly due to a failed propeller or engine fire.

A nother great video thanks petter :)👍

Så du får sitta i soffan igen👍🏻👍🏻😃 gött att du fortsätter mata ut intressanta videos👍🏻😃

I built some of the tooling platforms that hold the pylons for the 747-8 as it works its way down the assembly line.

That was the answer to the question I had the most often while flying in the last years and looking at the planes while boarding or flying. Very nice to know now.

Great show to educate us

It is easy to forget that for the first twenty-some years of jet airliners, cargo aircraft, and bombers, only the Americans placed engines on pylons on the wing. They're harder to design than is apparent. An aeronautical engineer once told me that pylon design was actually considered a secret for a while.

7:26 5g for F16 be like: cmon pull some more 5g for 737 be like: holy smokes engines are GONE! 5g for conspirationists: covid is a coverup

@flybywire5866

4 жыл бұрын

Hahaha, amazing!!

@andreaspoppe3124

4 жыл бұрын

I have been tolled about an Eurofighter where limited to 6g for a safe flight home after an accident...

@southjerseysound7340

4 жыл бұрын

@@andreaspoppe3124 I don't know about the Euro fighter,but my cousin flew the F16's and the g limits on the F16 is the limit of the pilot not the planes.

@23rickl26

4 жыл бұрын

I would like, but you have 69 likes

@giovannimonchietto1863

4 жыл бұрын

@@southjerseysound7340 indeed the airframe is capable of pulling up to something like 15 g but pilots' brain would start to squish out of the skull at that load

EXCELLENT CONTENT!

Back in A&P school c. 70's, they told us another reason for the forward slung under wing mountings was for additional wing 'flutter' mitigation. They also said some mounts were engineered to fail & let the engine fall free if subjected to excessive torque loads; as if an engines rotating element/s were to suddenly become 'locked up'... they said it would be preferable over possibly having catastrophic wing damage. Cool videos, Thanks!

@mytech6779

4 жыл бұрын

Flutter control would be extremely specific to each plane design. Engine placement would certainly have an effect but I feel that instructor was maybe over-extrapolating his information about one plane to all others.

@get2dachoppa249

4 жыл бұрын

I was also taught that when I was in A&P school in the late 80s.

so good to see a video about different topic than crisis again 😁👍

Thank you! Very interesting. I didn’t know it!

Has the airline industry ever looked at a system to deliberately eject an engine in circumstances such as uncontrolled fire on an engine? Great work..love the channel and your content...and the Doggo! 👍🏻

That was an excellent video. My question is - when a plane takes off and its wheels retract, is a brake applied to the wheels or are they left spinning? What are brakes made from, and how are they used during taxiing. More about taxiing - what are the procedures for applying thrust while taxiing, e.g., to advance the aircraft in a line to take off, to start from a stationary position, or when moving at a constant speed?

The EL AL incident was also when the public discovered that Depleted Uranium parts were used in the early Jumbo Jets.

@ryanvandoren1519

3 жыл бұрын

What?! I've never heard of this. Which parts of the plane was it used in?

The best channel in youtube

I like this one. Neat topic

Great chapter, aircraft structures strength and design are a pretty cool subject.

Nice topic! I thought to make the same video. Well, maybe later 😂

Thank you petter, super interesting topic

Cute dog noticing rolling hand movement at 10:50! :-D

The many many commerce and questions through the chart I've never been liked by anybody or by you.. no correspondence. Expected with a large audience. This was good content and I enjoyed it. Thanks

Congratulations peter 🎉 about to smash 600k. I can't thank you enough for how much you have inspired me, And got me through theses hard times we are all currently facing. I hope you are well and soon to be back up where we belong. 👊💪

Thanks for the video 🤙🏻👌🏻

It really is ingenious. Thank you,

I'm gonna call it. Bolts, plenty of Bolts, that can shear when forces are put into them the wrong way.

@speedbird9313

4 жыл бұрын

Eight..four fwd and four aft🤭

@koen2062

4 жыл бұрын

A330-200/300 with a GE CF6-80 has 9 bolts. Four on the AFT attach point and Five on the FWD attach point.😉

@speedbird9313

4 жыл бұрын

Je Moeder The MD-80 had three if I remember correctly🤭

@QuantumMechanic_88

4 жыл бұрын

Amusing .

@mytech6779

4 жыл бұрын

One of my cultivators has one shear bolt and one pivot bolt per shank, in the even it hits a large stone or stump. The other cultivator has one pivot bolt and two big springs per shank that automatically reset after the obstacle.

I slept during This explanation watching your house your red and green pillows and your beautiful dog !! 😀

Great video. Mentour Puppy was as good as usual. Let's see a video on aircraft wing attachment. This is one area where videos of the process are hard to find.

Still remember AA191 very well, I was 18 and lived 5 miles south of the crash area. Very sad for the victim's and family's.

@rwbishop

4 жыл бұрын

A friend of my Mom lost her husband on that flight... didn't really know him but had been once introduced. Even then it hit a little close to home... shocking.

What a great question!

Excellent review of aircraft construction requirements. Maybe one day we’ll get to fly again!

Thank you for another video! I was a bit worried there when you said the engines weren't attached as firmly as the rest of the components; but it seems like they are fitted to deal with great forces. I find it interesting that the engines are also expected to shear off if they hit the ground to give the aircraft and passengers the best chance of survival. Are the bolts and shear pins now a part of regular maintenance checks between flights? How many bolts hold each wing on? how regularly are they checked?

As always: very well explained ! 👍 My question is: what are the 2 little fins on the top left and right side of the engine casing ?

@rwbishop

4 жыл бұрын

They're 'Nacelle strakes'. Take a look at the Wikipedia 'Strake (aeronautics)' entry for an overview.

@3:15 NOTE: Adorable puppy doing calisthenics...

When I was young ( in the 60s ) my next door neighbor would point out jets and planes flying overhead. One, which seemed to be his favorite was the "Whisper Jet". It had a small "wing" on top of it's tail . I was wondering if you could talk about that, like if it move or controlled something or if in fact it was called a whisper jet. P.S. I love your channel.

Petter/Mentour, Great video and expert explanation - thank you! God bless Paul (in MA USA)

Maybe a video about reciprocal torque differences in piston, turbo prop and high bypass engines. Great videos!!

I am a Dutchman, and I remember the El Al-cargoplane crashing into the apartmentbuilding in Amsterdam vividly. I was a student back then (1992) and I was visiting my parents on a Sundaynight when suddenly breaking news came about the crashing plane. I never heard the official results from the investigation, but I do know that our parliament conducted a legal inquiry that led a maintenance-engineer to plead the fifth, because he was made a bit of a scapegoat. So this is the first time since I hear what the issue was. Thank you!

Holy crap, you just keep producing and producing 😱

@elimalinsky7069

4 жыл бұрын

Covid-19 Not a lot of pilots are flying right now.

@charlesjay8818

4 жыл бұрын

desparate content, 17mins to tell people that the engine is attached by nuts and bolts, he must need the YT money lol

@psisteak4122

4 жыл бұрын

@@charlesjay8818 And you must be a desperate person to have to write comments like this over and over again ... Maybe you should spent some time learning English instead, your spelling is really horrible.

@lucas_k23

4 жыл бұрын

@@elimalinsky7069 Dude. I know. Obviously.

@charlesjay8818

4 жыл бұрын

@@psisteak4122 whats wrong with my spelling, i love trolls who comment on someones spelling rather than dealing with the content of the comment, Psi steak???? hahaha your as stupid as your name

By the way, Peter, I enjoy your videos! I find them to be very informative. R.K.

My first time comment is to say good job and interesting themes 👍

omg thank ou for using mustard in your channel, his editing is so gooood

You answered my question I asked on you're IG post lol