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 > Railways

Railways (Inter)national commuter and freight trains



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 October 12th, 2010, 10:34 AM   #561
LMB
Once BMW, always Honda
 
LMB's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: München
Posts: 664
Likes (Received): 44

Quote:
Originally Posted by IcyUrmel View Post

The alternative - upgrading the old station - is explained on www.kopfbahnhof-21.de. The site has no international section, s I just want to give the link to one short movie showing the idea of an integrated timetable, providing shorter connection times for almost every rail passanger. A concept that is not possible in a reduced, 8-track station.
Thanks for the in-depth analysis. Now I know what's going on.

There is one more aspect: aesthetics. The old station is ugly, but quite unusual, so it's easily remembered. It's the thing of Stuttgart (possibly one of many, sorry never been there yet). The new station is downright horrible. It looks like a bad dream of a coke-sniffing architect, who's stuck in 1970's. I'm not at all an architect, not even a humanist, but I hate it. How is it possible that a bunch of specialists saw it and accepted it? It looks suspicious.
LMB no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old October 12th, 2010, 10:34 AM   #562
Coccodrillo
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 7,200
Likes (Received): 768

Nothing. There is a moderator who can split the thread?
__________________
1.6.2016: Basistunnel!

für Güter die Bahn ~ pour vos marchandises le rail ~ chi dice merci dice ferrovia
Coccodrillo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 12th, 2010, 11:04 AM   #563
LMB
Once BMW, always Honda
 
LMB's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: München
Posts: 664
Likes (Received): 44

Quote:
Originally Posted by IcyUrmel View Post
I just want to give the link to one short movie showing the idea of an integrated timetable, providing shorter connection times for almost every rail passanger.
Sorry, but I completely disagree with the logic behind the film. It argues that what is good for Switzerland, will be good for Stuttgart.

I beg to differ. My arguments:
* Swiss arguments supporting the ITF may be manipulated. The Swiss failed to invest in HST (more properly High Speed Lines), and will be naturally prone to produce lies about how useful their solution is. Lies are far cheaper than investments. I heard somewhere (read: unconfirmed) that Swiss trains have the lowest average trade speed in Central and Eastern Europe, because in order to prevent delays, average speed of trains is lowered. Surely that will work in Switzerland due to mountainous terrain and short distances, but this technique will fail for a TGV to Paris, or an ICE to Hamburg. A TGV to Paris will spend ca 1/3 of its time in "bad" mountainous are, and then the terrain is flat like a table, and speeds exceed 320km/h.

* Regional trains are rarely profitable. While some trains are surely packed to the maximum, some other trains are very often filled 15%, and they run not because there's need, but there's the "Stundentakt". That will probably change (hopefully! -> energy efficiency*), and there will be more room at the station.

* I'd rather take a HST from point 1 to point 2, than take an RE and have to transfer twice, even if option A means that there are fewer trains per day. Just a personal opinion.

That, of course, does not mean that the new station does make sense. If I remember correctly, there's an S-Bahn station underneath the old station - if there's congestion, 6 billion euro (read: original 4b plan + 50% overrun) could buy Stuttgart a very, very nice second underground station in whatever depth and/or direction, or a widening of the existing tunnel.
LMB no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 12th, 2010, 12:00 PM   #564
Coccodrillo
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 7,200
Likes (Received): 768

Just two notes.

1) Symmetry in a timetable is like grammar for a language, a way to structure the thing. You can have both fast trains and a symmetric timetable, if the infrastructure allow it.

2) An hourly frequency is the minimum to make a service attractive on short distances, and usually if trains are full in peak hours then an hourly frequency off peak is usually justified.
__________________
1.6.2016: Basistunnel!

für Güter die Bahn ~ pour vos marchandises le rail ~ chi dice merci dice ferrovia
Coccodrillo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 12th, 2010, 12:00 PM   #565
K_
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,744
Likes (Received): 243

Quote:
Originally Posted by LMB View Post
Sorry, but I completely disagree with the logic behind the film. It argues that what is good for Switzerland, will be good for Stuttgart.

I beg to differ. My arguments:
* Swiss arguments supporting the ITF may be manipulated. The Swiss failed to invest in HST (more properly High Speed Lines), and will be naturally prone to produce lies about how useful their solution is. Lies are far cheaper than investments.
Firstly the Swiss currently have about 80km of high speed railways in operation (and about 70km under construction), so they invested far from nothing...
Secondly the argument is not manipulated, as anyone with access to a Swiss timetable can easily verify.

Quote:
I heard somewhere (read: unconfirmed) that Swiss trains have the lowest average trade speed in Central and Eastern Europe, because in order to prevent delays, average speed of trains is lowered. Surely that will work in Switzerland due to mountainous terrain and short distances, but this technique will fail for a TGV to Paris, or an ICE to Hamburg. A TGV to Paris will spend ca 1/3 of its time in "bad" mountainous are, and then the terrain is flat like a table, and speeds exceed 320km/h.
Commercial speeds on intercity connections are quite good. Average speed on Geneva - Zürich for example is about 105 km/h, which compares quite favorable to for example comparable countries like the Netherlands or Belgium (especially since these don't have the difficult geography)
Switzerland still has a lot of regional railways that are not that fast, and that do lower the average, but these are trains that in countries like France have been largely replaced by buses, which are even slower. As a result when one compares the system speed of public transportation between Switzerland and other European countries Switzerland compares very well.

Quote:
* Regional trains are rarely profitable. While some trains are surely packed to the maximum, some other trains are very often filled 15%, and they run not because there's need, but there's the "Stundentakt". That will probably change (hopefully! -> energy efficiency*), and there will be more room at the station.
Regional trains are rarely profitable europe wide. But fare recovery for regional trains is fairly high in Switzerland compared to the rest of europe. The marginal cost of the extra trains that fill the gaps in the timetable to make it regular is rather low, and they do result in more customers.

Quote:
* I'd rather take a HST from point 1 to point 2, than take an RE and have to transfer twice, even if option A means that there are fewer trains per day. Just a personal opinion.
That is indeed personal. My personal perference is exactly the oposite. I want flexibility when I travel. So a service ever hour with changes is of more use to me than a direct service once or twice a day.
It seems that most railway travellers are like me. The story of the direct Bern - Paris TGV here is quite telling: There used to be two direct trains from Bern to Paris. Now there is only one.
The reason is that it lost passengers, since the introduction of the Basel - Paris TGVs. People from Bern willing to go to Paris seem to prefer the services that involve a change in Basel, because they are nicely integrated in the Swiss interval schedule, over the direct train. Mostly because it gives you more travel options.
K_ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 12th, 2010, 01:04 PM   #566
LMB
Once BMW, always Honda
 
LMB's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: München
Posts: 664
Likes (Received): 44

Quote:
Originally Posted by K_ View Post
Firstly the Swiss currently have about 80km of high speed railways in operation (and about 70km under construction), so they invested far from nothing...
Secondly the argument is not manipulated, as anyone with access to a Swiss timetable can easily verify.
You're missing the point - what does the "access to timetable" have to do with the accuracy of the Swiss example in Stuttgart? And where do you prove me wrong? 70km is indeed proving me right. Czech Republic offers more than that, being half poorer.

But please, no elaboration on the topic of HSL in Switzerland, the accusation was about the Swiss model not fitting Stuttgart.

Quote:
Originally Posted by K_ View Post
That is indeed personal. My personal perference is exactly the oposite. I want flexibility when I travel. So a service ever hour with changes is of more use to me than a direct service once or twice a day.
Flexibility does not exist in Germany due to lack of competition, and thus extreme prices. One simply has to buy the ticket in advance, otherwise train is no competitor to car/plane. I hope SBB can offer more affodable connections.
LMB no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 12th, 2010, 03:06 PM   #567
K_
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,744
Likes (Received): 243

Quote:
Originally Posted by LMB View Post
But please, no elaboration on the topic of HSL in Switzerland, the accusation was about the Swiss model not fitting Stuttgart.
Now, that was not your argument. Wat you wrote was:

Quote:
Swiss arguments supporting the ITF may be manipulated. The Swiss failed to invest in HST (more properly High Speed Lines), and will be naturally prone to produce lies about how useful their solution is. Lies are far cheaper than investments.
You basically claimed that SBB lied about the advantages of the ITF. I tell you that you can verify for yourself that when SBB makes claims like "the new timetable gives an reduction in travel times due to better connections at the hubs" that this is a claim that is verifiable by anyone. Calling in a suspicien that this might be a lie is completely unfounded.


Quote:
Flexibility does not exist in Germany due to lack of competition, and thus extreme prices. One simply has to buy the ticket in advance, otherwise train is no competitor to car/plane. I hope SBB can offer more affodable connections.
You again misunderstand what I am talking about. If I want to go from Bern to Köln (or any other major city in Germany) I have to choice to leave at 6:04, 7:04, 8:04, 9:04, 10:04 and so on. That thanks to an integrated timetable. When I want to go from Bern to some major city in France however I usually have only one or two convenient departure times.
An integrated interval timetable is easier to integrate in your other activities. That means you get to use your time more efficiently. A train every hour that takes four hours saves more time than a train that takes three hours but only runs twice a day.

In Switzerland btw a train ticket always costs the same, weather you buy it a year or a second before departure.
K_ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 12th, 2010, 03:22 PM   #568
aab7772003
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 773
Likes (Received): 7

Quote:
Originally Posted by K_ View Post

...

You again misunderstand what I am talking about. If I want to go from Bern to Köln (or any other major city in Germany) I have to choice to leave at 6:04, 7:04, 8:04, 9:04, 10:04 and so on. That thanks to an integrated timetable. When I want to go from Bern to some major city in France however I usually have only one or two convenient departure times.
An integrated interval timetable is easier to integrate in your other activities. That means you get to use your time more efficiently. A train every hour that takes four hours saves more time than a train that takes three hours but only runs twice a day.

...
Stuttgart 21 is NOT designed to annihilate the system timetable concept. Baden Württemberg is not an independent country like the the compact Switzerland. Stuttgart 21 is designed to better connect the city and the state with the rest of Germany and the rest of Europe. If the terminus concept were as efficient as these anti Stuttgart 21 experts claim, there would be many more newly termini around the world.

Last edited by aab7772003; October 12th, 2010 at 05:19 PM.
aab7772003 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 12th, 2010, 03:35 PM   #569
K_
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,744
Likes (Received): 243

[QUOTE=aab7772003;65210577]Stuttgart 21 is NOT designed to annihilate the system timetable concept.
[quote]

I know that. But one of the arguments of the opponents of S21 is that an ITF with the old station would work better than the new one. I'm not entirely convinced of that argument (I think you could get a good, well coordinated timetable with the new station too). However someone needed to argue that that an ITF was even a bad idea.

Quote:
Baden Württemberg is not an independent country like the the compact Switzerland. Stuttgart is designed to better connect the city and state with Germany and the rest of Europe. If the terminus concept were as efficient as these anti Stuttgart 21 experts claim, there would be many more newly termini around the world.
According to a recent poll the majority of the inhabitants of Baden Württemberg wouldn't mind become part of Switzerland :-) But we digress.

Stuttgart 21 is an impressive project. I'm not entirely sure however if it is indeed an optimal way to spend a huge amount of tax payer money. However, I do notice that SBB is also pouring a huge amount of money in a project to get more through platforms in Zürich...
K_ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 12th, 2010, 04:42 PM   #570
flierfy
Registered User
 
flierfy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,886
Likes (Received): 296

Quote:
Originally Posted by K_ View Post
Modal share for PT is high for two classes of trafic: Inner city trafic, and medium distance city to city traffic. That is not without a reason. It proves that on medium distance trail _can_ compete with road traffic.
No, it only proves that rail achieves a favourable modal split on medium distances between areas very well served by PT. These very well served areas make up just a fraction of the settled area of Switzerland.

Quote:
Originally Posted by K_ View Post
Geneve - Zürich: 2h42 minutes by train (every half hour). Distance 280km. That's an average of just above 100kph. And that is about as fast as you can get from Geneva to Zürich by car.
That the SBB is not even faster than road traffic on this high-profile route actually highlights the slowness of intercity connections in Switzerland. I know that you can't admit it. But for any unbiased observer it is clear to see. Swiss railways lack speed on the longer distances.

Quote:
Originally Posted by K_ View Post
The new services will actually have a commercial speed that will substantially exceed 100km/h.
I was talking about average commercial speed. And this won't exceeding 100 km/h substantially. The SBB intents to cut travel time from Zürich to Lugano to 2 h. 2 h for 200 km.
__________________
Rippachtal.de
flierfy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 12th, 2010, 05:17 PM   #571
flierfy
Registered User
 
flierfy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,886
Likes (Received): 296

Quote:
Originally Posted by thun View Post
You didn't show proper reading skills there. You need the bus to get to Milano Centrale, if you want to (which a lot of people want to do...). I posted two comparisions, one to Centrale, one to Duomo. The times aren't exact travel times (which I never said to be), but quite realistic assumptions, so it has to be good enough.
Before you question my reading skill you better review your own phrases. You did not mention for where you intended to take the bus.

Beside that the trip from Malpensa to Milano Centrale doesn't require a bus anyway.

Quote:
Originally Posted by thun View Post
If you want to proove that the plane is fast enough to be the better choice, feel free to post your travel schedule here.
I leave it to you to make obscure calculations with biased assumptions. I stick to the hard facts. And these are the economical viability of air services on such short distance. Which is only possible when the competing rail service is simply not fast enough.

Quote:
Originally Posted by thun View Post
That's the whole point. The plane is less than half an hour faster, but you have to change the mode of transport two (to Centrale) or three (to Duomo) times, which means carrying all your baggage, search for the right direction, etc.
I don't know how you made your research. I for one get different routes. From Malpensa to Duomo I have to change just once, at Milano Cadorna. And it takes only 40 min by train and metro.

Quote:
Originally Posted by thun View Post
Well, travel time will be one hour less, Zurich - Milan in 2:41. That means that the train arrives in Milan when you might still be at Malpensa.
Of course it won't outplace air travel completely as people might catch an connecting flight at either Zurich or Malpensa. But it will certainly mean that for those travelling from city to city it will. So yes, I'm 100% sure that in the future it will be the fastest mode of transport.
We'll find out the actual modal shift in 6 or 7 years time.
__________________
Rippachtal.de
flierfy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 12th, 2010, 05:20 PM   #572
flierfy
Registered User
 
flierfy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,886
Likes (Received): 296

Quote:
Originally Posted by LMB View Post
What does all that have to do with " Stuttgart 21 - 4.5 bn Eur for new rail hub", which is the subject matter?
We discuss the Swiss rail strategy to find out whether it is favourable for Stuttgart or not.
__________________
Rippachtal.de
flierfy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 12th, 2010, 08:00 PM   #573
thun
Registered User
 
thun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,829

Quote:
Originally Posted by flierfy View Post
Before you question my reading skill you better review your own phrases. You did not mention for where you intended to take the bus.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thun
Let's compare Zurch HB to Milano Centrale (...) get to the bus, buy the bus ticket, wait for the bus to leave(...)
Hm. All in one paragraph. It's not too hard to understand, is it?

Quote:
Beside that the trip from Malpensa to Milano Centrale doesn't require a bus anyway.
Of course you could take the train to Cadorna and the metro from there. Which takes about the same time, is more expensive and you have to change the mode of transport once more. There are only some few Frecciarossi to Centrale (the only direct trains and 5 euros more expensive). Oh: Bus every 20min, Malpensa Express every 30min, Frecciarossa every now and then. The bus is the most obvious choice to Centrale.


Quote:
I leave it to you to make obscure calculations with biased assumptions. I stick to the hard facts.
"Hard fact" = biased personal preference?

Quote:
And these are the economical viability of air services on such short distance.
Which no-one questioned.
Quote:
Which is only possible when the competing rail service is simply not fast enough.
Wrong. Of course both at the same time can be viable and in most cases are, simply due to the fact that people don't exclusively travel from city centre to city centre and/or have individual preferences.

Quote:
From Malpensa to Duomo I have to change just once, at Milano Cadorna. And it takes only 40 min by train and metro.
Which is exactly the result I calculated for the Malpensa - Duomo route on a rough guess (Malpensa-Centrale 1 hour by bus, Malpensa-Duomo is 20 min faster due to the Malpensa Express).


Still, is a mode of transport that is something between 20 and 45min (depending on the location you're heading to) worth 60€ more or double the price of an alternative? Probably yes if your company pays for it, probably not if you have to do so yourself. There you have it, both can be viable at the same time.
__________________
Folglich mein TagesTipp => Es genau so hinzunehmen wie ich es sagte. Notorisches Widersprechen wird nichts bringen. Ehrlich! Vertraut mir da voellig!
__________ __________ __________

Last edited by thun; October 12th, 2010 at 08:10 PM.
thun no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 12th, 2010, 08:41 PM   #574
aab7772003
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 773
Likes (Received): 7

Quote:
Originally Posted by flierfy View Post
We discuss the Swiss rail strategy to find out whether it is favourable for Stuttgart or not.
... which is really not by any stretch of the imagination.

The whole debacle is all caused by the people who have no international perspective and insist on saving every brick and tree branch.

They are all used to their RE/IRE/verkehrsverbund services, and probably have not even tried the high speed rail between Cologne and Frankfurt! Meanwhile, those young protesters are too busy with the Mitfahrzentrale and do not know that they have lost much money because they do not subscribe to Bahncard.

If the Swiss system were this universally good, you would think that there would be quite a few rail systems around the world emulating the Swiss system now.

Last edited by aab7772003; October 13th, 2010 at 03:34 PM.
aab7772003 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 13th, 2010, 07:40 AM   #575
K_
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,744
Likes (Received): 243

Quote:
Originally Posted by aab7772003 View Post
If the Swiss system were this universally good, you would think that there would be quite a few rail systems around the world emulating the Swiss system now.
Since quite a few rail systems are actually emulating it you could be indeed tempted in to thinking it was a good idea. That and the fact that it is hugely successful wherever it is implemented.
K_ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 13th, 2010, 07:49 AM   #576
K_
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,744
Likes (Received): 243

Quote:
Originally Posted by flierfy View Post
No, it only proves that rail achieves a favourable modal split on medium distances between areas very well served by PT. These very well served areas make up just a fraction of the settled area of Switzerland.
Actually the "very well served areas" is where the majority of the Swiss live, but go on, ignore facts as you want.

Quote:
That the SBB is not even faster than road traffic on this high-profile route actually highlights the slowness of intercity connections in Switzerland. I know that you can't admit it. But for any unbiased observer it is clear to see. Swiss railways lack speed on the longer distances.
Sigh...

I'll repeat: The biggest, most pressing problem the SBB has right now, that what occupies its management, that what it's CEO is now losing his sleep over is the following:
The SBB has to many customers. It's services are too popular. The demand for it's trains is outgrowing it's capacity to put more trains on the rails.
In other words: The SBB is actually doing _too_ well.
How can you claim that a company that is suffering from being to successful is somehow not doing those things that it ought to do in order to become successful.

Quote:
I was talking about average commercial speed. And this won't exceeding 100 km/h substantially. The SBB intents to cut travel time from Zürich to Lugano to 2 h. 2 h for 200 km.
And for a route that has a huge mountain range in the middle of it that is mightely impressive. Can you give me an example of anywhere in the world where a similar route operates faster?
K_ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 13th, 2010, 03:31 PM   #577
aab7772003
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 773
Likes (Received): 7

Quote:
Originally Posted by K_ View Post
Since quite a few rail systems are actually emulating it you could be indeed tempted in to thinking it was a good idea. That and the fact that it is hugely successful wherever it is implemented.
Which ones specifically?

Just remember that real HIGH SPEED on major city center to major city center routes is an essential part of the formula for success.

There is a hierarchy in any system timetable; not all stations are created equal. Those tiny stations at the end of those one-track lines with hourly services during day-light hours coordinate with the major rail hubs, not the other way around.

Last edited by aab7772003; October 13th, 2010 at 04:43 PM.
aab7772003 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 13th, 2010, 05:25 PM   #578
czm3
Automobile lover
 
czm3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: NYC/Miami
Posts: 381
Likes (Received): 147

Quote:
Originally Posted by LMB View Post
What does all that have to do with " Stuttgart 21 - 4.5 bn Eur for new rail hub", which is the subject matter?
x2
czm3 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 13th, 2010, 07:26 PM   #579
thun
Registered User
 
thun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,829

Quote:
Just remember that real HIGH SPEED on major city center to major city center routes is an essential part of the formula for success.
Except that it isn't. If it would be the case, only small parts of France, Spain, Italy, Germany would have economical successful rail operations in Europe. Obviously, that isn't the case.
The "formula to success" (if you want to formulat a universal one) is to prvide good service at reasonable prices for your customers. But that doesn't necessarily have to mean "real" high speed services.

It would be like saying that a large intercontinental network is an essential element for the success of an airline, ignoring that there are lots of regional and national airlines on the market as well.

Quote:
There is a hierarchy in any system timetable; not all stations are created equal. Those tiny stations at the end of those one-track lines with hourly services during day-light hours coordinate with the major rail hubs, not the other way around.
Which of course isn't done in Switzerland as well. Your point is what exactly?
__________________
Folglich mein TagesTipp => Es genau so hinzunehmen wie ich es sagte. Notorisches Widersprechen wird nichts bringen. Ehrlich! Vertraut mir da voellig!
__________ __________ __________
thun no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 13th, 2010, 08:18 PM   #580
K_
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,744
Likes (Received): 243

Quote:
Originally Posted by aab7772003 View Post
Which ones specifically?
The "Integrales Taktfahrplan", or ITF isn't really a Swiss invention. The Dutch fist implemented it, including a system of nodes, with a clear hierarchy of trains. The next ones to implement it were the German railways, for their nationwide Intercity Network. Then came the Swiss, and the Belgian. Since then the ITF has also been implemented for regional traffic in Germany, and France is also gradually introducing interval schedules. Many regions in France already operate on interval schedules.
So it seems that railways operators in the Netherlands, Belgium, Germany, Switzerland and now even France and to a certain extent Italy all seem to think it is a good idea.
Don't let these facts keep you from acting as if the whole idee is just a silly Swiss idea...

Now, what has this to do with Stuttgart 21. Not a lot really. Only that the opponents of S21 claim that an ITF isn't possible with the new station. Some proponents of S21 seem to think that defending the ITF means opposing S21, which is how the pros and cons of an ITF got dragged in to this discussion.
For the record. I'm not against S21 per se, but lack sufficient data to really have a definite opinion (yet). However that a few trees have to be cut for the project is not an argument against it. Also the argument that an ITF would be impossible with the new station is not convincing me, so I think I can at the same time defend the ITF, without having to be subjected to the suspicion that I might be radically opposed to S21.
K_ 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 10:50 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