daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Infrastructure and Mobility Forums > Subways and Urban Transport

Subways and Urban Transport Metros, subways, light rail, trams, buses and other local transport systems



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old January 24th, 2008, 04:07 AM   #201
greg_christine
Registered User
 
greg_christine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Smithfield, VA
Posts: 1,008
Likes (Received): 142

There was a previous thread on monorails in which I posted information on the various monorail trains. This is a repeat of that post with a few updates. Please note that some of the numbers vary depending on the source. This is especially true of the train capacity numbers as there is no internationally accepted standard for the maximum number of people who can occupy a given area of floor space:

STRADDLE BEAM MONORAILS

Von Roll/Adtranz/Bombardier Type III-a - Sydney Harbor & Newark Airport

Length: 32.12m (105.3") (7 Car Train)
Width: 2.06m (6.8')
Maximum Speed: 26 mph (42 km/h)
Bogie Arrangement: 8 Bogies (7 Car Train) Bogies are located between passenger compartments. End bogies are not powered. There are two load bearing and four guiding wheels per bogie. There is no passageway between passenger compartments.
Tires: (16) 29.5" Load Bearing Wheels (7 Car Train)
Motors: (6) 37kW DC (7 Car Train)
Power Supply: 500V AC
Passenger Capacity: 130 Normal, 170 Crush (7 Car Train)
Beam Configuration: Steel Box Beam 832mm high x 700 mm wide (32.8" x 27.6") with 940mm Top Flange (37")
Maximum Grade: 4.6% Up and 6.6% Down
Minimum Curve Radius: 20m (65.6')

Due to its low speed, the Von Roll/Adtranz/Bombardier Type III-a is usually not considered to be a transit grade system but rather a circulator system suitable for an airport or park. Similar systems are marketed by Intamin and Severn Lamb.


Alweg - 1962 Seattle World's Fair

Length: 122' (37.2m) (4-Car Train)
Width: 10'-3" (3.1m)
Height: 14' (4.3m)
Maximum Speed: 70 mph (112 km/h)
Operating Speed: 50 mph (80 km/h)
Bogie Arrangement: 8 Bogies (4 Car Train) Bogies are recessed into wheel wheels that form the base of centerline seats. There are two load bearing and six guiding wheels per bogie.
Tires: (16) 39.5" Load Bearing & (48) 25" Guiding
Motors: (8) 100 HP
Power Supply: 600 VDC
Passengers: 450 (124 Seated)
Beam Configuration: Concrete Box Beam 1.5m High x 0.9m Wide (59.0" x 35.4")
Maximum Grade: 12% (Limited to 7% for passenger comfort.)

The ALWEG train architecture features a body that is low to the guideway with the bearing wheel bogies recessed in wheel wells that form the bases of banks of seats that are on the centerline. This configuration is shared with the Hitachi trains on the Tokyo Haneda Airport line and the Monorail Malaysia trains in Kuala Lumpur.


Scomi/MTrans - Kuala Lumpur (1st Generation Train)



Length: 69'-7" (21.2m) (2-Car Train)
Width: 9'-10" (3.0m)
Height: 14'-2" (4.3m)
Maximum Speed: 56 mph (90 km/h)
Operating Speed: 50 mph (80 km/h)
Power Supply: 750 VDC or 1500 VDC
Passengers: 316 Regular/536 Crush (4-Car Train)
Beam Configuration: Concrete Box Beam 1.4m-1.6m High x 0.8m Wide (55.1"-63.0" x 31.5")
Maximum Grade: 6%
Minimum Curve Radius: 70m (230')


Scomi Sutra (2nd Generation Train)


Length: 76'-9" (23.4m) (2-Car Train)
Length: 217'-6" (66.3m) (6-Car Train)
Width: 10'-1" (3.08m)
Overall Height: 14'-2" (4.33m)
Floor Height above Beam: 2'-4" (0.70 m)
Top of Beam to Top of Car: 10'-6" (3.2 m)
Maximum Speed: 56 mph (90 km/h)
Operating Speed: 50 mph (80 km/h)
Power Supply: 750 VDC or 1500 VDC
Passengers: 24 per car seated / 79 per car @ 4 pax per sq. meter / 106 per car @ 6 pax per sq. meter
Beam Configuration: Concrete Box Beam 1.4m-1.6m High x 0.8m Wide (55.1"-63.0" x 31.5")
Maximum Grade: 6%
Minimum Curve Radius: 50m (164')


Bombardier M-VI - Las Vegas


Length: 138' (42m) (4-Car Train)
Width: 9' (2.7m)
Height: 11' (3.4m)
Motors: Disneyworld Mark VI features (8) 100 Hp motors. Las Vegas M-VI may differ.
Power Supply: 750 VDC Inverted for AC Motors
Passengers: 196 (64 Seated) - Numbers are from a study by Lea & Elliott.
Maximum Speed: 53 mph (85 km/h)
Operating Speed: 45 mph (72 km/h)
Bogie Arrangement: 8 Bogies (4 Car Train) There are one load bearing and four guiding wheels per bogie. The bogies are located between passenger compartments. There are also a set of guide wheels at either end of the train. There is no passageway between passenger compartments.
Tires: (8) 45" Load Bearing & (32) 18" Guiding & (4) 16" Nose Steering
Beam Configuration: Concrete Box Beam 1.22m High x 0.66m Wide (48" x 26")
Minimum Curve Radius: 175' (53.3m)
Maximum Grade: 6%


Hitachi Large - Chongqing, Osaka, Tama, & Kita-Kyushu


Hitachi Standard - Naha (Okinawa) & Tokyo Disneyland (Tokyo-Haneda uses a low floor variant.)


Hitachi Small - Sentosa (Singapore)


Monorail trains built by Hitachi since the 1980's feature a flat floor design with bogies under the floor.




SUSPENDED MONORAILS

Wuppertal

Length: 24.06m (78.9')
Width: 2.2m (7.2')
Height of Car to Roof: 2.7m (8.9')
Passenger Capacity: 204 (48 Seated)
Bogie Arrangement: 4 Bogies per two section articulated train. Two double flanged steel wheels per bogie.
Motors: (4) 50kW DC
Power Supply: 600 VDC
Maximum Speed: 60 km/h (37 mph)
Pendulum Swing Angle: 15 degrees (Trains automatically bank in turns.)
Minimum Radius of Curvature: 75m (246')
Maximum Grade: 4%
Beam Configuration: Steel truss work supporting a single steel rail.


Mitsubishi - Shonan & Chiba

Length: 15.4m (50.5') (2-Car Train)
Width: 2.65m (8.7')
Bogie Arrangement: 4 Bogies (2-Car Train) Four rubber load bearing and four rubber guiding wheels per bogie.
Maximum Speed: 65 km/h (40 mph)
Pendulum Swing Angle: "several degrees" (Trains automatically bank in turns.)
Power Supply: 1500 VDC
Beam Configuration: Steel Box Beam 1.86m x 1.89m (6.09' x 6.18')


Further information is available at the following links:

Monorail Society Technical Pages
www.monorails.org/tMspages/TPindex.html

Monorail Society Beam Size Chart
www.monorails.org/tMspages/TPBeams.html

Scomi
http://www.scomigroup.com.my/core/energy_monorail.asp

Bombardier
http://www.bombardier.com/

Hitachi
http://www.hitachi-rail.com/products...iew/index.html

Mitsubishi
www.mhi.co.jp/machine/e/product/trans/tra_02.htm

Metrail
www.metrail.com/
greg_christine no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old January 24th, 2008, 04:21 AM   #202
greg_christine
Registered User
 
greg_christine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Smithfield, VA
Posts: 1,008
Likes (Received): 142

Quote:
Originally Posted by UrbanBen View Post
Sure, I agree with you there. It's flexibility - in Seattle, we have some tunnel, some elevated, and some at-grade (partial separation, in its own lane but crosses some signaled intersections with signal priority) - all on the same light rail line. We could never have built in the same corridor with monorail, especially because of our downtown transit tunnel - buses need to be able to interline with rails while we're ramping up light rail service.
The Seattle Central Link light rail line should have been built as a heavy rail metro. Most of the initial segment is grade-separated and all of the proposed extensions are grade-separated. The only sections that wouldn't be appropriate for heavy rail are the downtown transit tunnel and the Rainier Valley segment. The interlining with buses in the downtown transit tunnel is just a temporary measure. The buses will be evicted from the tunnel when the line is extended to the University of Washington. Many people including myself consider the decision to build the line at grade through the Rainier Valley to be a mistake. Seattle should have been able to have a better system for the amount of money that is being spent.
greg_christine no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 24th, 2008, 06:19 AM   #203
Electrify
Registered User
 
Electrify's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Markham (Thornhill), Ontario
Posts: 1,684
Likes (Received): 5

Thanks for the monorail info a few posts up.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by OEincorparated View Post
You are genius too Electrify, never would have thought of this if not for your thread.
Electrify no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 24th, 2008, 06:48 AM   #204
UrbanBen
the transit nazi
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Seattle
Posts: 966
Likes (Received): 12

Quote:
Originally Posted by greg_christine View Post
The Seattle Central Link light rail line should have been built as a heavy rail metro. Most of the initial segment is grade-separated and all of the proposed extensions are grade-separated. The only sections that wouldn't be appropriate for heavy rail are the downtown transit tunnel and the Rainier Valley segment. The interlining with buses in the downtown transit tunnel is just a temporary measure. The buses will be evicted from the tunnel when the line is extended to the University of Washington. Many people including myself consider the decision to build the line at grade through the Rainier Valley to be a mistake. Seattle should have been able to have a better system for the amount of money that is being spent.
We voted down central link as a heavy rail metro - in 1968, 1970, and 1995. I agree with you that we should have it, but we said no. The next year, we said yes to light rail. And if you think we could have gotten it oh so much cheaper, why don't you talk to the lowest bidder about why their bid was so high? That's competitive capitalism. The state auditor's office also agrees we're not wasting any significant money.
UrbanBen no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 24th, 2008, 04:17 PM   #205
TRZ
Welcome to the Rail World
 
TRZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Toronto
Posts: 4,671
Likes (Received): 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by UrbanBen View Post
The state auditor's office also agrees we're not wasting any significant money.
Depends if you are thinking long term or short term. Short term, no, you are not wasting any significant money. Long term, well, maybe you'll never know, but based on the information provided, it sounds like they didn't weigh long-term planning into the equation appropriately.
__________________
Pssst... your balls are showing...

EXTREEEEEEEEEEEME transit geek
TRZ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 24th, 2008, 05:16 PM   #206
UrbanBen
the transit nazi
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Seattle
Posts: 966
Likes (Received): 12

Quote:
Originally Posted by TRZ View Post
Depends if you are thinking long term or short term. Short term, no, you are not wasting any significant money. Long term, well, maybe you'll never know, but based on the information provided, it sounds like they didn't weigh long-term planning into the equation appropriately.
Who didn't?
UrbanBen no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 24th, 2008, 07:21 PM   #207
TRZ
Welcome to the Rail World
 
TRZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Toronto
Posts: 4,671
Likes (Received): 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by UrbanBen View Post
Who didn't?
Seattle
__________________
Pssst... your balls are showing...

EXTREEEEEEEEEEEME transit geek
TRZ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 24th, 2008, 07:25 PM   #208
UrbanBen
the transit nazi
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Seattle
Posts: 966
Likes (Received): 12

Quote:
Originally Posted by TRZ View Post
Seattle
Look, by the time I got here, the choice was wider highways or a light rail system with about double the max capacity of Portland. You do realize they're planning long-term for 2.4 minute headways with 4-car trains, right?
UrbanBen no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 25th, 2008, 01:41 PM   #209
greg_christine
Registered User
 
greg_christine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Smithfield, VA
Posts: 1,008
Likes (Received): 142

The planners in Seattle produced unrealistic cost estimates based on the assumption that light rail would be relatively cheap. The voters approved the plan based on those unrealistic estimates. They did not understand that the costs would be similar to heavy rail given that much of the line would be in tunnels and on elevated viaducts. They will be struggling to make light rail function as a heavy rail metro with some of the longest light rail trains in the country operating at the closest headways for light rail anywhere.

The benchmark for comparison in Seattle seems to be the Portland light rail system, so most of the people in Seattle will probably think that they have a pretty good system. It won't occur to them that they might have been able to have a system like BART or the Metro in Washington, D.C.

Regarding rail transit service for other areas of Seattle, there doesn't seem to be any plan other than a few streetcar routes in the downtown area. For service to Ballard and West Seattle, there are presently no serious proposals for light rail even though it was implied that light rail would be the alternative when the Green Line monorail project was terminated. The Green Line monorail plan will provide a benchmark for comparison when any future proposals are made and I believe this will show that monorail would provide the best service at the lowest cost for that corridor.
greg_christine no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 25th, 2008, 06:33 PM   #210
UrbanBen
the transit nazi
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Seattle
Posts: 966
Likes (Received): 12

Quote:
Originally Posted by greg_christine View Post
The planners in Seattle produced unrealistic cost estimates based on the assumption that light rail would be relatively cheap. The voters approved the plan based on those unrealistic estimates. They did not understand that the costs would be similar to heavy rail given that much of the line would be in tunnels and on elevated viaducts. They will be struggling to make light rail function as a heavy rail metro with some of the longest light rail trains in the country operating at the closest headways for light rail anywhere.

The benchmark for comparison in Seattle seems to be the Portland light rail system, so most of the people in Seattle will probably think that they have a pretty good system. It won't occur to them that they might have been able to have a system like BART or the Metro in Washington, D.C.

Regarding rail transit service for other areas of Seattle, there doesn't seem to be any plan other than a few streetcar routes in the downtown area. For service to Ballard and West Seattle, there are presently no serious proposals for light rail even though it was implied that light rail would be the alternative when the Green Line monorail project was terminated. The Green Line monorail plan will provide a benchmark for comparison when any future proposals are made and I believe this will show that monorail would provide the best service at the lowest cost for that corridor.
Green Line proposals will show that the monorail project had their rose-colored glasses on to the end, or potentially that it's easy to manipulate numbers by not including correct inflation adjustments.

There won't be Ballard - West Seattle service until we get Northgate and Bellevue built. There's just no comparison in need.
UrbanBen no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 26th, 2008, 05:22 AM   #211
greg_christine
Registered User
 
greg_christine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Smithfield, VA
Posts: 1,008
Likes (Received): 142

Ballard and West Seattle both voted against the recent Roads & Transit ballot measure. I believe they feel short-changed.
greg_christine no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 26th, 2008, 09:00 AM   #212
UrbanBen
the transit nazi
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Seattle
Posts: 966
Likes (Received): 12

Quote:
Originally Posted by greg_christine View Post
Ballard and West Seattle both voted against the recent Roads & Transit ballot measure. I believe they feel short-changed.
Believe what you like, polling says it's a lot more about the overall size of the package.
UrbanBen no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 28th, 2008, 07:46 PM   #213
Electrify
Registered User
 
Electrify's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Markham (Thornhill), Ontario
Posts: 1,684
Likes (Received): 5

1st Middle East monorail on schedule (01/25/08)
Dubai, United Arab Emirates. This is the year that the Middle East joins the world of monorails. Later this year, the Palm Jumeirah Monorail System will open. Over 90 percent of work has been completed on the 5.4 km dual-lane guideway that runs from the shore and along the trunk of the amazing man-made series of islands. The system will have four stations; Gateway Towers, Trump Tower, a retail center and Atlantis Hotel. Track installation is set to be complete this summer. After that, a six-month test period will verify that the monorail is ready for the public. The monorail will connect with Dubai Metro, a conventional rail line that is also under construction. Aaron Richardson, a senior spokesperson for Palm Jumeirah developer Nakheel, says "The idea is to ensure complete connectivity so that tourists can leave Dubai International Airport on the Metro and continue through to The Palm, where they change over to the monorail system and move onwards to their hotel.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by OEincorparated View Post
You are genius too Electrify, never would have thought of this if not for your thread.
Electrify no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 30th, 2008, 09:33 AM   #214
nazrey
Registered User
 
nazrey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 91,227
Likes (Received): 11224

Scomi involved in bid for RM5b project
Wednesday January 30, 2008
By DAVID TAN

PENANG: Scomi Engineering Bhd is among seven international consortia that submitted pre-qualification bids, which closed on Jan 25, for the RM5bil Mumbai monorail project.

Scomi is in the consortium led by India-based Larsen & Toubro Ltd.

The other consortia are Reliance Energy and Hitachi; Reliance Engineering and Siemens; Kalpataru Power Transmission Ltd, JMC and Intimin; Gammon India and Metrail Swiss; Videocon and Aerospace; and Bombardier Transportation India.

Sources said the Melewar Group, which is bidding for the Penang monorail project, was not among the consortia bidding for the India project.

Scomi is also in the race for at least three more monorail projects in India.

StarBiz learnt that the Mumbai Transportation Redevelopment Authority (MTRA), which called for the tender, imposed very stringent qualification standards.
nazrey no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 1st, 2008, 08:04 PM   #215
Electrify
Registered User
 
Electrify's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Markham (Thornhill), Ontario
Posts: 1,684
Likes (Received): 5

Hitachi bids monorail for Honolulu (01/30/08)
Honolulu, Hawaii. The City of Honolulu has received a dozen bids from transit suppliers hoping to provide the city with a fixed guideway system. The sole monorail bid is being placed by Hitachi America. Though bruised from the painful monorail experience in Seattle, Hitachi is not giving up on getting monorail work for North America. Other suppliers are proposing various forms of light rail, elevated steel rail, rubber-tired peoplemovers, bus rapid transit and maglev (Mitsubishi-Itochu). A five member "independent" panel will recommend the technology to pursue after evaluation of the proposals.

Here's hoping that Honolulu goes with the monorail. At best it could create a monorail renaissance in North America (especially with the new focus on transit), and at the very least have them be taken seriously by urban planners
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by OEincorparated View Post
You are genius too Electrify, never would have thought of this if not for your thread.
Electrify no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 2nd, 2008, 12:06 AM   #216
mistermonorail
Registered User
 
mistermonorail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Fremont, CA
Posts: 150
Likes (Received): 123

please credit what you copy/paste

[QUOTE=Electrify;18125028]Hitachi bids monorail for Honolulu (01/30/08)
Honolulu, Hawaii. The City of Honolulu has received a dozen bids from transit suppliers hoping to provide the city with a fixed guideway system. The sole monorail bid is being placed by Hitachi America. Though bruised from the painful monorail experience in Seattle, Hitachi is not giving up on getting monorail work for North America. Other suppliers are proposing various forms of light rail, elevated steel rail, rubber-tired peoplemovers, bus rapid transit and maglev (Mitsubishi-Itochu). A five member "independent" panel will recommend the technology to pursue after evaluation of the proposals.

Copied, pasted and not given proper credit. Nothing new I guess. For my own satisfaction: this News Brief is taken from The Monorail Society website: http://www.monorails.org
mistermonorail no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 2nd, 2008, 08:26 AM   #217
Electrify
Registered User
 
Electrify's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Markham (Thornhill), Ontario
Posts: 1,684
Likes (Received): 5

[QUOTE=mistermonorail;18129820]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Electrify View Post
Hitachi bids monorail for Honolulu (01/30/08)
Honolulu, Hawaii. The City of Honolulu has received a dozen bids from transit suppliers hoping to provide the city with a fixed guideway system. The sole monorail bid is being placed by Hitachi America. Though bruised from the painful monorail experience in Seattle, Hitachi is not giving up on getting monorail work for North America. Other suppliers are proposing various forms of light rail, elevated steel rail, rubber-tired peoplemovers, bus rapid transit and maglev (Mitsubishi-Itochu). A five member "independent" panel will recommend the technology to pursue after evaluation of the proposals.

Copied, pasted and not given proper credit. Nothing new I guess. For my own satisfaction: this News Brief is taken from The Monorail Society website: http://www.monorails.org
Sorry about that. Was in a bit of a rush, and really want to turn the focus from this silly debate over which transit mode is better (something I am part guilty for), to actual discussion on monorails.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by OEincorparated View Post
You are genius too Electrify, never would have thought of this if not for your thread.
Electrify no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 4th, 2008, 10:10 AM   #218
allurban
All Urban
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Toronto, Kuala Lumpur
Posts: 4,348
Likes (Received): 6

Has there been any example of a SAFEGE monorail guideway being built into the deck supports of an elevated highway?

Id love to propose that over here in Malaysia as a wild, out there idea...see how many people would be interested...

(there are 4 major elevated highways built over major transportation routes in and around KL, and it would be interesting if they had a safege monorail underneath)

Cheers, m
allurban no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 4th, 2008, 08:55 PM   #219
Electrify
Registered User
 
Electrify's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Markham (Thornhill), Ontario
Posts: 1,684
Likes (Received): 5

Quote:
Originally Posted by allurban View Post
Has there been any example of a SAFEGE monorail guideway being built into the deck supports of an elevated highway?

Id love to propose that over here in Malaysia as a wild, out there idea...see how many people would be interested...

(there are 4 major elevated highways built over major transportation routes in and around KL, and it would be interesting if they had a safege monorail underneath)

Cheers, m
Don't know of any SAFEGE ones that do that (though it is possible), but here is an ALWEG in Kitakyushu doing just that:

__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by OEincorparated View Post
You are genius too Electrify, never would have thought of this if not for your thread.
Electrify no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 5th, 2008, 04:19 PM   #220
TRZ
Welcome to the Rail World
 
TRZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Toronto
Posts: 4,671
Likes (Received): 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by allurban View Post
Has there been any example of a SAFEGE monorail guideway being built into the deck supports of an elevated highway?

Id love to propose that over here in Malaysia as a wild, out there idea...see how many people would be interested...

(there are 4 major elevated highways built over major transportation routes in and around KL, and it would be interesting if they had a safege monorail underneath)

Cheers, m
For urban planning practices in general, highways and train lines generally should not share the same ROW, unless the train line in question is some kind of express service perhaps. I think this would explain why there are not really any examples of such a design, even though, as Electrify already noted, it would be possible to do that - it'd actually be the most appropriate technology for use along an elevated highway, I'd have to admit (that or an inverted urban maglev, which would achieve the same result just with cheaper upkeep).
__________________
Pssst... your balls are showing...

EXTREEEEEEEEEEEME transit geek
TRZ no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Thread Tools

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

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

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 08:31 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

tech management by Sysprosium