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 December 1st, 2008, 11:29 AM   #3201
city_thing
Put it in your mouth
 
city_thing's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Melbourne.
Posts: 7,128
Likes (Received): 883

Can one of you nice Canadian guys please explain something to me...

I read on a thread on here that the Canada Line is being called a 'mini-metro'

It looks a lot like a metro to me - so why is it a mini-metro?
I really don't know enough about metros to understand the finer points.
__________________
Calling occupants of interplanetary craft...
city_thing no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old December 1st, 2008, 11:39 AM   #3202
deasine
=)
 
deasine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 2,452
Likes (Received): 57

Quote:
Originally Posted by spongeg View Post
look how long it took the expo line to dense up

and in vancouver it has barely densified up - perhaps joyce station but the rest of the vancouver stations haven't densified up in over 20 years

I don't forsee the RAV line being any quicker to densify than the expo line - oakridge has the most potential to do so

and marine drive could do it

the rest of the stations probably not in the near future
The plan for the Vancouver proper is to densify Oakridge as you mentioned, as well as King Edward area.

Quote:
Originally Posted by city_thing View Post
Can one of you nice Canadian guys please explain something to me...

I read on a thread on here that the Canada Line is being called a 'mini-metro'

It looks a lot like a metro to me - so why is it a mini-metro?
I really don't know enough about metros to understand the finer points.
Well we are using technology of heavy-rail, which is just the standard metro technology of the world. Mini, because our system is only designed to handle the a 150000 pphd capacity, short 40 metre platforms [expandable to 50 metre ], and 41 metre trains [with a theoretical passenger capacity of 400]. Once we expand all the platforms, we can lengthen the trains to 63 metres with a theoretical passenger capacity of 600. That's still incredibly low compared to most other metros in the world, but for Vancouver's case, it is adequate [AHEM *clears throat*].

That should answer your question?
deasine no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 1st, 2008, 11:39 AM   #3203
mr.x
Ex-mod
 
mr.x's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: █♣█ Vancouver
Posts: 7,931
Likes (Received): 486

Quote:
Originally Posted by city_thing View Post
Can one of you nice Canadian guys please explain something to me...

I read on a thread on here that the Canada Line is being called a 'mini-metro'

It looks a lot like a metro to me - so why is it a mini-metro?
I really don't know enough about metros to understand the finer points.
The Canada Line is a separate part of SkyTrain, and it only has 50-metre platforms with an ultimate capacity of 15,000 passengers per hour per direction. So some are aligning it with a high capacity LRT rather than a full fledge heavy rail metro system.
__________________
"My Homer is not a communist. He may be a liar, a pig, an idiot, a communist, but he is NOT a porn star." - Abe Simpson

"Preparations for the Vancouver 2010 Olympics are progressing so well, it's boring. We'd like there to be some challenges, so we [the IOC] could shout at them." - IOC (Sept. 2007)


"In medieval Europe if you didn't like somebody's argument and couldn't think of a real response you called them a witch and demanded they be burned at the stake. In the US you call them unpatriotic, and in Canada you call them racist."
mr.x no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 1st, 2008, 11:40 AM   #3204
deasine
=)
 
deasine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 2,452
Likes (Received): 57

LMAO I answered first this time mr. x XD
deasine no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 1st, 2008, 11:44 AM   #3205
mr.x
Ex-mod
 
mr.x's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: █♣█ Vancouver
Posts: 7,931
Likes (Received): 486

Quote:
Originally Posted by deasine View Post
LMAO I answered first this time mr. x XD
A marathon to the finish line, beaten by one-hundredths of a second.



King Edward Station
image hosted on flickr


image hosted on flickr





Broadway-City Hall Station:
image hosted on flickr


image hosted on flickr


image hosted on flickr


image hosted on flickr


image hosted on flickr


image hosted on flickr


image hosted on flickr


image hosted on flickr


image hosted on flickr


image hosted on flickr


image hosted on flickr


image hosted on flickr


image hosted on flickr


image hosted on flickr


image hosted on flickr
__________________
"My Homer is not a communist. He may be a liar, a pig, an idiot, a communist, but he is NOT a porn star." - Abe Simpson

"Preparations for the Vancouver 2010 Olympics are progressing so well, it's boring. We'd like there to be some challenges, so we [the IOC] could shout at them." - IOC (Sept. 2007)


"In medieval Europe if you didn't like somebody's argument and couldn't think of a real response you called them a witch and demanded they be burned at the stake. In the US you call them unpatriotic, and in Canada you call them racist."
mr.x no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 2nd, 2008, 08:38 PM   #3206
trainrover
:-x
 
trainrover's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,787
Likes (Received): 738

Quote:
Originally Posted by city_thing View Post
nice Canadian
...
why is it a mini-metro?
...
the finer points.
West coasters over/up here nicely take to fine platform lengths...

Many cities the world over have had to lengthen their platforms (thus trains) over the decades due to increasing usage. Retrofitting's very expensive plus it messes with service. It might yet be baffling to many folks why Vancouver's bothering to construct a brand new metro line that shan't accommodate trains longer than two cars, an airport-serving one no less!

Thankfully, Montréal thought otherwise when they opened (1986) the continent's second metro line that does not serve a city centre. The city devised 9-car platform lengths into this 11-station crosstown Blue Line, just like the city's first three lines. Until several years ago, 3-car trains served the Blue Line, and usage was sparse. Then the service was marginally bumped up to 6-car trains appearing peak hours (3-car ones off-peak hours). One or two years ago, all services were bumped up to 6-car trains. Then they increased the frequency of daytime weekday service (to every 5 minutes off-peak hours). But the trains are still often crowded (waiting for the next train's too frequently a necessity peak hours), such that I wouldn't be surprised if they meet their maximum lengths once the city's new fleet's delivered in a few years' time.
__________________
.
hee hee
.

Last edited by trainrover; December 2nd, 2008 at 09:12 PM.
trainrover no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 3rd, 2008, 03:36 AM   #3207
deasine
=)
 
deasine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 2,452
Likes (Received): 57

Quote:
Originally Posted by trainrover View Post
West coasters over/up here nicely take to fine platform lengths...

Many cities the world over have had to lengthen their platforms (thus trains) over the decades due to increasing usage. Retrofitting's very expensive plus it messes with service. It might yet be baffling to many folks why Vancouver's bothering to construct a brand new metro line that shan't accommodate trains longer than two cars, an airport-serving one no less!
Thanks for speaking in English finally.

The Canada Line is designed for EASY platform extension to 50m that will not disrupt service. All underground stations have been designed with provisions for future expansion. The major downtown stations, including Waterfront, Vancouver City Center, and Yaletown are already built to the maximum 50m.

BTW, the Canada Line can have a maximum of 3 Cars including future platform extensions: giving a total of 600 passengers per train. We can easily double track the Richmond corridor (as it was intended and designed) and build a loop around YVR so that we can have a shorter maximum frequency for trains: 1 minute per train sounds pretty good doesn't it?

Like Mr.X pointed out earlier, the 98 B-Line (the BRT form of Canada Line) handles about 2000 pphd vs the Canada Line, which will open initially 8000 pphd. Even if you factor the amount of people traveling through the Granville and Cambie Corridors, the Canada Line will have more than enough capacity to handle the initial load. We will be lengthening platforms, extending trains, and adding more trains in the future.
deasine no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 3rd, 2008, 03:42 AM   #3208
Der Alte
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 25
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by deasine View Post
Once we expand all the platforms, we can lengthen the trains to 63 metres with a theoretical passenger capacity of 600.
And where did you get this number of 63 metres from?
Der Alte no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 3rd, 2008, 05:21 AM   #3209
Plumber73
I need coffee.
 
Plumber73's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,442
Likes (Received): 57

Quote:
Originally Posted by Der Alte View Post
And where did you get this number of 63 metres from?
He's probably refering to train length. The train would be longer than the platform with the third car added, yet the doors would still be accessible. I can't confirm if it's 63, but it would have to be longer than 50 metres with a full sized middle car.
__________________
"If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe." - Carl Sagan.
Plumber73 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 3rd, 2008, 06:18 AM   #3210
mr.x
Ex-mod
 
mr.x's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: █♣█ Vancouver
Posts: 7,931
Likes (Received): 486

^I highly doubt it'll be 63-metres, that's a bit much since you would highly prefer to have all doors fit into the platform....it'll be more like somewhere in between 55-60 metres.

If more capacity is needed, we could re-arrange the seating into the most efficient usage. The rowed seating arrangement is terrible efficiency. You could probably easily double the capacity by having MTR/NYC transverse style arrangements.
__________________
"My Homer is not a communist. He may be a liar, a pig, an idiot, a communist, but he is NOT a porn star." - Abe Simpson

"Preparations for the Vancouver 2010 Olympics are progressing so well, it's boring. We'd like there to be some challenges, so we [the IOC] could shout at them." - IOC (Sept. 2007)


"In medieval Europe if you didn't like somebody's argument and couldn't think of a real response you called them a witch and demanded they be burned at the stake. In the US you call them unpatriotic, and in Canada you call them racist."
mr.x no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 3rd, 2008, 07:54 AM   #3211
Der Alte
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 25
Likes (Received): 0

Its just that 63 metres is a rather precise number. Did somebody from the Canada Line provide this number? Anybody can pull a number out of the air and claim it as fact. If there is indeed a credible source to this number, it should be shared. Blindly believing otherwise would not be prudent.

Quote:
Originally Posted by deasine View Post
We can easily double track the Richmond corridor (as it was intended and designed) and build a loop around YVR so that we can have a shorter maximum frequency for trains: 1 minute per train sounds pretty good doesn't it?
This would seem to be a very abstract definition of "easy". If "easily double track the Richmond corridor" means terminating the line at Lansdowne Stn for a year, ripping down the guideway from there to Richmond Brighouse Stn and rebuilding the whole thing....then I guess easy it is. That would not fit my definition of an "easy" extension however.

Same goes for any looping arrangement around the Airport. You'd have to rip the Domestic terminal and new Link building up pretty good to start looping the guideway around and you'd have to join it back up with the guideway at some point which would necessitate of closure of that part of the guideway. Again, my definition of easy and your definition of easy do not seem to correlate.

I would also suggest 1 minute headways as impractical. IF you are getting your information from a credible source, you will find that the 1 minute headways are not feasible. SelTrac is good, but its not that good. Sustained headways of less than 90 seconds is just not that practical unless you are going around in a circle all day long.

One final shot at the 1 minute headways with 63 metre cars....have you seen how big the yard is? The yard can expand some...but not THAT much without buying adjacent properties and re-railing the who thing. Short of that, a good portion of the fleet would have to be parked somewhere on the mainline after hours.

If someone from the Canada Line is trying to suggest different, I would encourage one to take a step back and look at things a bit more rationally. Really maxing out the capacity on this system will cost a lot of money and inconvenience. Either way the taxpayer will be on the hook for it. From what I gather, SNC-Lavalin builds the initial system and operates it. Any additions to capacity come on TransLink's tab....and as we know, that tab is mighty close to being "maxed out".

Overall the Canada Line is a good thing. It does have its shortcomings however. I think when the whole thing opens everyone will be pretty happy with it....but there will always be that nagging notion of how much BETTER it could be if only a bit more money was spent on it to give a real eye to the future.
Der Alte no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 3rd, 2008, 11:17 AM   #3212
deasine
=)
 
deasine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 2,452
Likes (Received): 57

Quote:
Originally Posted by Der Alte View Post
Its just that 63 metres is a rather precise number. Did somebody from the Canada Line provide this number? Anybody can pull a number out of the air and claim it as fact. If there is indeed a credible source to this number, it should be shared. Blindly believing otherwise would not be prudent.
Actually I did say the wrong number. I thought the Canada Line trains are 42m but actually they are 41m according to the Vehicle Train Summary... SO:

41m (total train)/2 cars = 20.5m per car
20.5m per car x 3 cars = 61.5m total 3-car train length.

Apparently, I was told (and Global actually said this too) that they can include a full size Canada Line car in the future.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Der Alte View Post
This would seem to be a very abstract definition of "easy". If "easily double track the Richmond corridor" means terminating the line at Lansdowne Stn for a year, ripping down the guideway from there to Richmond Brighouse Stn and rebuilding the whole thing....then I guess easy it is. That would not fit my definition of an "easy" extension however.
That's information given to me by a Canada Line representative. Apparently, they designed the single tracked portion to be double tracked in the future. We actually had a discussion on SSP how that is possible - but again we aren't the designers/engineers right?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Der Alte View Post
Same goes for any looping arrangement around the Airport. You'd have to rip the Domestic terminal and new Link building up pretty good to start looping the guideway around and you'd have to join it back up with the guideway at some point which would necessitate of closure of that part of the guideway. Again, my definition of easy and your definition of easy do not seem to correlate.
Scratch the loop. Upon looking closer in detail, it's not enough space =P If they moved it East back 20m, we would just have enough room to make one entire U-Turn around the parking lot. But they could still double track up till the station itself... though that means either ripping the guideway apart or building a separate guideway... which will look odd. Anyways, so,a train outbound train can wait until the inbound train leaves the platform. SkyTrain @ Waterfront Station has this happen a lot, especially during rush hours.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Der Alte View Post
I would also suggest 1 minute headways as impractical. IF you are getting your information from a credible source, you will find that the 1 minute headways are not feasible. SelTrac is good, but its not that good. Sustained headways of less than 90 seconds is just not that practical unless you are going around in a circle all day long.
No, that's just off the top of my head... But you know what I mean... SkyTrain currently operates every 90 seconds and that's the main advantage for automated systems over manual systems.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Der Alte View Post
One final shot at the 1 minute headways with 63 metre cars....have you seen how big the yard is? The yard can expand some...but not THAT much without buying adjacent properties and re-railing the who thing. Short of that, a good portion of the fleet would have to be parked somewhere on the mainline after hours.
Good point, didn't think about that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Der Alte View Post
If someone from the Canada Line is trying to suggest different, I would encourage one to take a step back and look at things a bit more rationally. Really maxing out the capacity on this system will cost a lot of money and inconvenience. Either way the taxpayer will be on the hook for it. From what I gather, SNC-Lavalin builds the initial system and operates it. Any additions to capacity come on TransLink's tab....and as we know, that tab is mighty close to being "maxed out".
Agreed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Der Alte View Post
Overall the Canada Line is a good thing. It does have its shortcomings however. I think when the whole thing opens everyone will be pretty happy with it....but there will always be that nagging notion of how much BETTER it could be if only a bit more money was spent on it to give a real eye to the future.
My point is that we don't need to just look at platform lengths. That's just one piece of the big puzzle.

Officedweller mentioned countless times that we don't even have to start doubletracking, we could just run shorter frequencies between Waterfront and Bridgeport Station.
deasine no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 3rd, 2008, 12:02 PM   #3213
mr.x
Ex-mod
 
mr.x's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: █♣█ Vancouver
Posts: 7,931
Likes (Received): 486

Quote:
Originally Posted by deasine View Post
Actually I did say the wrong number. I thought the Canada Line trains are 42m but actually they are 41m according to the Vehicle Train Summary... SO:

41m (total train)/2 cars = 20.5m per car
20.5m per car x 3 cars = 61.5m total 3-car train length.

Apparently, I was told (and Global actually said this too) that they can include a full size Canada Line car in the future.
That's incorrect. The third car wouldn't be a full-length size car....it would be about 15-metres in length but would have the same capacity as the other cars as a result of a safe in space from no equipment and better space usage efficiency.

Besides, even if it were another full-length size car you wouldn't be able to fit all the doors in the platform.



Quote:
No, that's just off the top of my head... But you know what I mean... SkyTrain currently operates every 90 seconds and that's the main advantage for automated systems over manual systems.
If it were entirely double-tracked, it would have the same ultimate frequency as SkyTrain obviously. With the single-tracking, it'll have something like a max. frequency of 90 secs from Vancouver to Bridgeport (assuming all trains end at the terminus) and 180 secs in the two Richmond branches.

It's only a 640-metre single-track length. That's nearly the same distance as from Cordova Street to Robson/Smithe Street in Downtown. Including the roundtrip, the trains will make 1280-metres in those sections without any other train present. Not to mention that the train will only be stopping for about 20 secs at the most at the terminus stations with such high frequencies.



For some reason, the number 60 is always associated with the OMC in my head. I believe it's the capacity they have built for the OMC, in terms of the number of cars it can accommodate, or the number of cars it can accommodate with future expansion....not too sure.
__________________
"My Homer is not a communist. He may be a liar, a pig, an idiot, a communist, but he is NOT a porn star." - Abe Simpson

"Preparations for the Vancouver 2010 Olympics are progressing so well, it's boring. We'd like there to be some challenges, so we [the IOC] could shout at them." - IOC (Sept. 2007)


"In medieval Europe if you didn't like somebody's argument and couldn't think of a real response you called them a witch and demanded they be burned at the stake. In the US you call them unpatriotic, and in Canada you call them racist."
mr.x no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 3rd, 2008, 12:05 PM   #3214
mr.x
Ex-mod
 
mr.x's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: █♣█ Vancouver
Posts: 7,931
Likes (Received): 486





Seems like an awful waste of space with it empty on the lower left corner.
__________________
"My Homer is not a communist. He may be a liar, a pig, an idiot, a communist, but he is NOT a porn star." - Abe Simpson

"Preparations for the Vancouver 2010 Olympics are progressing so well, it's boring. We'd like there to be some challenges, so we [the IOC] could shout at them." - IOC (Sept. 2007)


"In medieval Europe if you didn't like somebody's argument and couldn't think of a real response you called them a witch and demanded they be burned at the stake. In the US you call them unpatriotic, and in Canada you call them racist."
mr.x no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 3rd, 2008, 11:23 PM   #3215
trainrover
:-x
 
trainrover's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,787
Likes (Received): 738

Quote:
Originally Posted by deasine View Post
The Canada Line is designed for EASY platform extension to 50m that will not disrupt service.
Rubbish. Just try convincing any BC union with that abominable claim o' yers.....ditch that bee.she drawl while yer at it, you're embarassing me.

Two, three cars: I'd bet the city's gonna need far longer trains sooner than expected. Much like the Expo Line, this Canada one's yet another flimsy showcase for some Season's visitors, although just a measly fortnight's worth this time around...
__________________
.
hee hee
.

Last edited by trainrover; December 3rd, 2008 at 11:32 PM.
trainrover no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 4th, 2008, 02:59 AM   #3216
deasine
=)
 
deasine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 2,452
Likes (Received): 57

Quote:
Originally Posted by mr.x View Post
That's incorrect. The third car wouldn't be a full-length size car....it would be about 15-metres in length but would have the same capacity as the other cars as a result of a safe in space from no equipment and better space usage efficiency.

Besides, even if it were another full-length size car you wouldn't be able to fit all the doors in the platform.
That's what I thought at first... and I was later corrected by someone either here or at SSP. I asked a Canada Line representative this and I was told "yes", though now come to think about it, maybe I wasn't clear enough when asking whether it's a full train car or a shorter train car... Argh... stupid...

Quote:
Originally Posted by mr.x View Post
For some reason, the number 60 is always associated with the OMC in my head. I believe it's the capacity they have built for the OMC, in terms of the number of cars it can accommodate, or the number of cars it can accommodate with future expansion....not too sure.
That number sounds familiar.

Quote:
Originally Posted by trainrover View Post
Rubbish. Just try convincing any BC union with that abominable claim o' yers.....ditch that bee.she drawl while yer at it, you're embarassing me.
As I said earlier, the Canada Line stations have already dug out space for the total 50m, so they really need to do is just tile the space, add lighting, and you have your full 50m for the underground stations. As with above-ground stations or at-grade stations, obviously you can easily extend platforms...

Broadway Station is doing a renovation right now and it hasn't affected SkyTrain service at all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by trainrover View Post
Two, three cars: I'd bet the city's gonna need far longer trains sooner than expected. Much like the Expo Line, this Canada one's yet another flimsy showcase for some Season's visitors, although just a measly fortnight's worth this time around...
We need more cars more than we need longer ones. I can see a problem with overcrowding after eighty years, by then we would probably have a much better rapid transit network.
deasine no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 4th, 2008, 04:02 AM   #3217
Plumber73
I need coffee.
 
Plumber73's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,442
Likes (Received): 57

Quote:
Originally Posted by trainrover View Post
Two, three cars: I'd bet the city's gonna need far longer trains sooner than expected.
Two, three cars is not a typical train length that you see in the mega cities of the world, but is that reason to think it's not sufficient here? I think the thing people need to realize is that Richmond, and the corridor along Cambie is not really dense. Sure, if we all bred like rabbits for a number of years we'll need something sooner than expected. Do you know when we are expecting to need longer trains???
__________________
"If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe." - Carl Sagan.
Plumber73 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 4th, 2008, 05:15 AM   #3218
officedweller
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,379
Likes (Received): 98

That OMC map has a lot of "future storage" tracks. i.e. not yet built.
You can see a lot of empty corridors for the future tracks in Tafryn's pics:

http://canadalinephotos.blogspot.com/search/label/OMC

WRT length or trains and frequeny - that one of the advantages of an automated sytem - you can run shorter trains at higher frequency without increasing staffing costs (i.e. higher level of service (shorter waiting times)).

http://mic-ro.com/metro/driverless.html
__________________
officedweller
officedweller no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 4th, 2008, 08:15 AM   #3219
spongeg
Registered User
 
spongeg's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Coquitlam/Rainbow Lake
Posts: 8,039
Likes (Received): 1742

train test as seen at oakridge

spongeg no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 4th, 2008, 10:12 PM   #3220
trainrover
:-x
 
trainrover's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,787
Likes (Received): 738

Quote:
Originally Posted by deasine View Post
obviously
Hmmph.....our senses of obviousness must differ.....this project's now especially more flawed because of the following.

In the midst of the special news broadcast this morning on national radio due to the fledgling political crisis, the broadcaster finally broke for an especial World Report. Their second news item reported the BC Human Rights Tribunal faulting of your metro line's construction management company (SNC Lavalin?) for paying tunnel constructors hailing from Latin America half the salary paid to their local peers (for just as much labour).

Just what part of fact must you find too repulsive?




Quote:
Originally Posted by Plumber73 View Post
Do you know when we are expecting to need longer trains?
No, I don't know when, coz that'd playing god, wouldn't it? With climate change all about us, I bet our cities are probably going to have to absorb millions of refugees from over-populated communities. 50, 60, 63m: still far too short.
__________________
.
hee hee
.

Last edited by trainrover; December 4th, 2008 at 10:19 PM.
trainrover no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
british columbia, canada, vancouver

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 12:17 PM.


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