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 > Highways & Autobahns

Highways & Autobahns All about automobility



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 September 27th, 2010, 11:15 PM   #1181
54°26′S 3°24′E
Registered User
 
54°26′S 3°24′E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 811
Likes (Received): 155

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maxx☢Power View Post
I think it makes more sense that traffic entering a road should always yield to traffic already on it. The entire point of a motorway is to remove the need for drivers to have to react to traffic on intersecting roads (which an on ramp is). You can be nice and move over or slow down if that doesn't affect the traffic flow to let others join, but if you're on the motorway you should always have priority. Also if two regular driving lanes merge into one it should be clear which lane "disappears" so drivers in that lane can move to the other well ahead of the actual merge point.
The point of the motorway is to get rid of intersecting traffic, yes, but on motorways you still have to keep an eye on traffic traveling in the same direction as you, which merging traffic in fact is.

Actually I think the zipper rule (as we call it in Norway) is one of the few things the road authorities here got right. Nothing jams the flow of traffic as much a car stranded at the end of an entrance ramp in dense traffic. Not only the traffic coming from the ramp is blocked, eventually some nice blokes will brake and let the poor stranded guy, or the stranded guy/women gives up and heads into. But, since the stranded person enters the motorway (actuallyt this rule is also used for other roads in Norway) at zero speed, the traffic in the right lane almost have to stop as well.

Another point is that when two lanes of the same road are merging, the capacity of both lanes can be used until the merging zone when using the zipper rule. When one lane has the priority, the other lane will typically be empty some distance ahead of the end of that lane. In heavy traffic, this distance could be quite long, limiting the capacity of the road, for instance the queing traffic in the surviving lane could block other entry / exit lanes.

In practice, the zipper rule only formalizes good driving practice. God knows that Norway, a land where people tend to meticulously follow the law (and pursue their rights) need such a rule. As far as I know, there are rarely accidents on places where the zipper rule applies. The reason is that traffic on both the main road and ramp know that they will be at fault if something happens (as it is difficult to prove who was first at the start of the merging zone...), and as such are forced to adapt to each other. This is much safer, IMO, than having unexperienced drivers stranded at the end of an entry lane.

On places where the entry ramp is short or the line of sight is short, the zipper rule is usually not used in Norway. The system in for instance Minnesota was quite similar, as far as I remember: Usually entry ramps merged into the freeway, but on short ramps or ramps with for instance bad curvature there was always a yield sign.

Regardless if the zipper rule applies or not, there will of course be a jam if too many cars try to enter the highway / motorway. A short term / cheap fix to assure better flow would be to set up a ramp meter, used with some success a couple of places in the US (and Norway).
__________________
Norway needs a new transport infrastructure network, let's start now!

Last edited by 54°26′S 3°24′E; September 27th, 2010 at 11:26 PM.
54°26′S 3°24′E no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old September 27th, 2010, 11:36 PM   #1182
Spikespiegel
Used Registrant
 
Spikespiegel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Copenhagen
Posts: 411
Likes (Received): 27

Quote:
Originally Posted by 54°26′S 3°24′E View Post
In practice, the zipper rule only formalizes good driving practice. God knows that Norway, a land where people tend to meticulously follow the law (and pursue their rights) need such a rule. As far as I know, there are rarely accidents on places where the zipper rule applies. The reason is that traffic on both the main road and ramp know that they will be at fault if something happens (as it is difficult to prove who was first at the start of the merging zone...), and as such are forced to adapt to each other. This is much safer, IMO, than having unexperienced drivers stranded at the end of an entry lane.
I agree that the "Scandinavian merging rule" would not work many places outside Scandinavia. Especially not in a country like Italy or France. But here it just works. I've NEVER heard of any accidents that has happened in the merging lanes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 54°26′S 3°24′E View Post
On places where the entry ramp is short or the line of sight is short, the zipper rule is usually not used in Norway. The system in for instance Minnesota was quite similar, as far as I remember: Usually entry ramps merged into the freeway, but on short ramps or ramps with for instance bad curvature there was always a yield sign.
In Denmark, ramps are usually long enough that even a piss-pot can reach the motorway speed (110/130kph) before they hit the merging zones. There are a few exceptions, but with the new refurbishment, Vejdirektoratet will fix them. One example is the Fløng eastbound ramp. There are still a few places where the ramp is too short to use the merge rule, and in thiese instances, Yield signs have been put up (I can think of one just north of Lyngby, southbound).
Spikespiegel no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 27th, 2010, 11:43 PM   #1183
Ingenioren
Registered User
 
Ingenioren's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Oslo
Posts: 5,605
Likes (Received): 584

There were supposed to add some of these lights on ramps to E39 in Stavanger, i don't know if it has been done yet. There used to be one on E6 near Halden when it was still a normal highway.
__________________
I want to see some construction!
Ingenioren no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 28th, 2010, 12:00 AM   #1184
54°26′S 3°24′E
Registered User
 
54°26′S 3°24′E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 811
Likes (Received): 155

There are ramp meters on E6 / Sandmoen in Trondheim.
__________________
Norway needs a new transport infrastructure network, let's start now!
54°26′S 3°24′E no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 28th, 2010, 12:28 AM   #1185
diosandri
Registered User
 
diosandri's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Caxias do Sul
Posts: 2,085
Likes (Received): 134



The tourist project of national highways is wonderful. Amazing!
Must be declared World Heritage by UNESCO. Congratulations.
diosandri no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 28th, 2010, 05:01 AM   #1186
Fargo Wolf
Resident Smartass.
 
Fargo Wolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Port Kepler, Galilei Continent, Chakona
Posts: 685
Likes (Received): 17

Quote:
Originally Posted by IceCheese View Post
For the first NO ONE HAS PRIORITY. Not the ones entering, not the ones already on the motorway.

The whole point with an access lane is that you have a long stretch to match your speed with the current speed of the motorway. Then you and traffic on the motorway merge as best can on the motorway. If you give a little or the cars on the motorway give a little, that really doesn't matter. Eitherway no one will have to break in such high speeds. The merging stretch is LONG..
So, essentially, it's "driver co-operation" then. Everyone works together, to ensure a safe merge.
Fargo Wolf no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 29th, 2010, 12:07 PM   #1187
KiwiRob
BANNED
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,366
Likes (Received): 5

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maxx☢Power View Post
I think it makes more sense that traffic entering a road should always yield to traffic already on it.
I wish that were the case on all roads in Norway, all this yielding to cars entering roads only causes stop start traffic and confusion.
KiwiRob no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 29th, 2010, 02:25 PM   #1188
Maxx☢Power
BANNED
 
Maxx☢Power's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 387
Likes (Received): 3

Quote:
Originally Posted by KiwiRob View Post
I wish that were the case on all roads in Norway, all this yielding to cars entering roads only causes stop start traffic and confusion.
Well, isn't it the case for most roads? Except the very few motorways, that is.. Maybe not inside city suburbs built on a square grid where most of the time the yield to traffic coming from the right rule applies, but city traffic tends to be a lot of stop and go anyway..
Maxx☢Power no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 1st, 2010, 12:28 AM   #1189
Ingenioren
Registered User
 
Ingenioren's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Oslo
Posts: 5,605
Likes (Received): 584

No not at all, the priority to the right is very common on roads with considerable importance aswell. And we don't know how to work it out, some drivers are comming from the right in 50km/h with one hand already on the horn while others will stop for all cars cause they are so unsure...
__________________
I want to see some construction!
Ingenioren no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 1st, 2010, 01:16 AM   #1190
IceCheese
Scandi-friendly
 
IceCheese's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Canada is my city
Posts: 7,227
Likes (Received): 920

In Oslo's innercity, it surely is hard to keep track of (Maridalsveien comes to mind), but in most of Norway it's almost always given by the road you drive on whether it's a yield or no-yield road. Yellow midstripe usually mean non-yield.
__________________
Oslo/Copenhagen - The True Capital of Scandinavia.


Take a look at my Photo Mess!
IceCheese no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 1st, 2010, 03:57 PM   #1191
Ingenioren
Registered User
 
Ingenioren's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Oslo
Posts: 5,605
Likes (Received): 584

One other example, Professor Birkelandsvei, Grorud. A north-south crossing of the industrial valley (with stripes.):
http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=5...=12,31.74,,0,5
__________________
I want to see some construction!
Ingenioren no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 26th, 2010, 11:16 PM   #1192
54°26′S 3°24′E
Registered User
 
54°26′S 3°24′E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 811
Likes (Received): 155

Trondheim Sluppen Update (Rv 706 / E6)

A lot of the discussion regarding Norwegian highways now unfortunately seems to have moved to the national forum:
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showth...7#post65854857

Here is a short update from Trondheim / Sluppen. First a recap of the current situation and alternatives during planning:
Quote:
Originally Posted by 54°26′S 3°24′E View Post
From Bergen to Trondheim:

The by far most important - and problematic - area in the Trondheim traffic is Sluppen:
Quote:
Originally Posted by 54°26′S 3°24′E View Post
The picture in the previous post was shot facing south. The main arteria is the E6 coming from the southern suburbs and beyond, in Sluppen sluppen the E6 split in one arm going towards the city center (i.e. towards north / the phographer) and one arm going around the city (towards north/east at the bottom left. In addition, this is were rv 715, comes across the river on the infamous Sluppen bridge to connect to E6. Rv 715 is the main road for traffic coming the other side of the fjord (Fosen), but most of the traffic comes from the western suburbs of Trondheim (Byåsen). There is no other option for cars going east / west between this bridge and downtown several kms to the north. In addition to E6 and Rv 715, there are quite a few other roads coming to this area.

The two main problems of the area is quite evident in the picture shown above:[list][*]The Sluppen bridge (small bridge across river to the right) and sourrounding infrastructure is insufficient[*]For traffic coming from the bypass E6 the single lane ramp for traffic going towards the south is under capacity.

Below is sketch of the current situation with traffic numbers from 2007 and with circles around the problematic areas. Since 2007 the population of Trondheim has increased by almost 6 %. For some reason north is to the left on this map:

The Sluppen bridge was built as a temporary bridge substutiting another temporary bridge (?) as far back as 1954, and is only 6 m wide. At the east bank there is a bend so sharp that trucks and buses needs both lanes in order to enter the bridge. At the other end there is a traffic light, and add a lot of bicycles to this mix and you have serious traffic problem:

The road system on the west bank (Byåsen) side is not ideal either, and the result is many people make huge detours today in order to avoid the worst areas and times.

Hopefully, this will change to the better in a few years, at least there are now some plans on the table for new solutions and their financing (100 % toll, of course...)

The overall planned and U/C main road system of Trondheim is shown below:

The existing bypass E6 is shown in blue. Yellow and red roads are existing or U/C. The white road is the new planned Sluppen bridge and a refurbished road at the west bank. In addition, a four lane tunnel up to the Byåsen suburbs are planned (not shown). A more detailed / bigger map can be found here:
http://www.vegvesen.no/binary?id=171301

The alternatives currently considered will be given below. Yellow is new / modified road, green colors are for bikes / pedestrians.
Alternative 0+

This alternative just means that there will only be built a slightly widened and realigned Sluppen bridge and building a new roundabout. No solution for connecting the new Byåsen tunnel to the system.
Alternative 1

Here the new sluppen bridge is widened to four lanes, and the bridge is moved down the river a bit and a roundabout at the west bank connects the new bridge to the tunnel and the north-south road (Oslovegen) on the west bank. No lanes added to the single lane E6 ramp, but traffic from Sluppen going towards downtown are realigned.
Alternative 2a

Here also Oslo-vegen on the west bank will be four lanes, and through traffic on that road will be grade separated from the Sluppen bridge traffic. In addition all ramps on the E6 have at least two lanes. This is IMO the first solution that will fix most of the current problems. Notice also that the new bike route system is far better.
Alternative 2b

More or less the same as alternative 2a, except the through way of E6 is changed from the branch going into the city to the bypass branch.
Alternative 3

This alternative is fairly similar to 2a, except that the E6 goes down through a tunnel. As drawn here the E6-E6 interchange will have three levels. The alternative was suggested by the city in order to increase the area available for commercial development. In addition, this alternative keep the south/west road on the western bank (Oslovegen) as a two lane road, but keep the grade separation. In addition some ramps on the existing interestion on the bypass E6 in the NE corner of the map will be closed.

It will be exciting to see what the end result of this will be. Hopefully they will not be so short-sighted this time that they end up with alternative 0+ or 1, that wont solve anything in the long run. Also, I think there should be four lanes on the west bank road, as there is more than enough room since the houses close to that road anyway will be / has been demolished. Also other aspects of alternative 3 is suboptimal IMO. More area may be open for development, but that will also make future amendments to the system more difficult.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kjello0 View Post
I wouldn't at all be surprised if they choose alternative 1. I would actually be by far more surprised if they actually choose alternative 2a which is by far the best solution of these. However, if Osloveien had four lanes on alternative 3 I would go for that instead.
Unfortunately, you will probably not be surprised, Kjello0, as it seems like Vegvesenet is now going for alternative 1, meaning essentially no improvement for this Gordic knot of Trondheim traffic. (Norwegian speakers can check here). True, the cost of alternative 1, which is expanded somwhat by adding an extra lane towards the round-about on the west side of the bridge, is estimated to be 383 M NOK (36 %) less than alternative 2A, but with alternative 1, it is estimated that the traffic (AADT) on that hardly 2+1 road west of the river will be 28 000 already in 2015! So much for keeping to the Norwegian standards calling for four lanes when traffic surpasses 12 000 AADT in 30 years time!

I.e., they predict that the tolls people are paying now are funding more traffic jams, not less. I am not sure if that even can be called short sighted. I mean, they actually know what is going to happen, but simply don't seem to think it is important that both people and the environment loses due to traffic jams.

Also for other trafficant groups (bicycles, pedestrians, PT), alt 2A is superior. Finally, the consequence of the four lane tunnel coming out of the hill directly west of the new bridge is currently not considered. They say they it should be considered only when the tunnel is planned in detail, which probably happen after construction start of the rest of the roads at Sluppen in a few years time. Needless to say, this is actually really short sighted....

The main excuse for choosing alternative 1 is that a four lane road (as in 2A) will be 3 m wider than the 2+1 alternative. It is claimed that this is disasterous for the forest right to the west from the road. To me this sounds like crap. That forest on the clay hillside most likely was not even there 60 years ago, and already has traffic/ railways on all sides, and anyway 3 m won't make a difference. In fact, whatever "protected" wildlife is in there probably will suffer more by suffocation due to the disasterously underdimensioned alt. 1 than alt. 2A. To me this is one of the least attractive areas of the city, but I guess the Vegvesenet figured that some at least half-way long-term solution would be impossible to swallow for the socialist national and local government currently in charge....


(Sorry for the long quote, I will remove it if anyone protests)
__________________
Norway needs a new transport infrastructure network, let's start now!

Last edited by 54°26′S 3°24′E; October 26th, 2010 at 11:58 PM.
54°26′S 3°24′E no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 27th, 2010, 03:26 AM   #1193
RV
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Porvoo
Posts: 726
Likes (Received): 275

Wow, I thought in Finland things go bad with ecologists etc crap. 28000 cars in 2015 on a 1+1/2+1 road with 1-laned roundabout with another 1+1-laned road? That means hours of jams!
RV no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 27th, 2010, 05:57 AM   #1194
IceCheese
Scandi-friendly
 
IceCheese's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Canada is my city
Posts: 7,227
Likes (Received): 920

Quote:
Originally Posted by 54°26′S 3°24′E View Post
A lot of the discussion regarding Norwegian highways now unfortunately seems to have moved to the national forum:
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showth...7#post65854857

Here is a short update from Trondheim / Sluppen. First a recap of the current situation and alternatives during planning:





Unfortunately, you will probably not be surprised, Kjello0, as it seems like Vegvesenet is now going for alternative 1, meaning essentially no improvement for this Gordic knot of Trondheim traffic. (Norwegian speakers can check here). True, the cost of alternative 1, which is expanded somwhat by adding an extra lane towards the round-about on the west side of the bridge, is estimated to be 383 M NOK (36 %) less than alternative 2A, but with alternative 1, it is estimated that the traffic (AADT) on that hardly 2+1 road west of the river will be 28 000 already in 2015! So much for keeping to the Norwegian standards calling for four lanes when traffic surpasses 12 000 AADT in 30 years time!

I.e., they predict that the tolls people are paying now are funding more traffic jams, not less. I am not sure if that even can be called short sighted. I mean, they actually know what is going to happen, but simply don't seem to think it is important that both people and the environment loses due to traffic jams.

Also for other trafficant groups (bicycles, pedestrians, PT), alt 2A is superior. Finally, the consequence of the four lane tunnel coming out of the hill directly west of the new bridge is currently not considered. They say they it should be considered only when the tunnel is planned in detail, which probably happen after construction start of the rest of the roads at Sluppen in a few years time. Needless to say, this is actually really short sighted....

The main excuse for choosing alternative 1 is that a four lane road (as in 2A) will be 3 m wider than the 2+1 alternative. It is claimed that this is disasterous for the forest right to the west from the road. To me this sounds like crap. That forest on the clay hillside most likely was not even there 60 years ago, and already has traffic/ railways on all sides, and anyway 3 m won't make a difference. In fact, whatever "protected" wildlife is in there probably will suffer more by suffocation due to the disasterously underdimensioned alt. 1 than alt. 2A. To me this is one of the least attractive areas of the city, but I guess the Vegvesenet figured that some at least half-way long-term solution would be impossible to swallow for the socialist national and local government currently in charge....


(Sorry for the long quote, I will remove it if anyone protests)
Statens Vegvesen Region Midt seems even more incompetent than theire collegues out here (only barely though).. But if the plan is out on hearing now, shouldn't you try to make yourself heard? Democracy and all that?
__________________
Oslo/Copenhagen - The True Capital of Scandinavia.


Take a look at my Photo Mess!
IceCheese no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 27th, 2010, 09:55 AM   #1195
metasmurf
Registered User
 
metasmurf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Umeå, Sweden
Posts: 374
Likes (Received): 555

This is just pure madness. To put this in contrast, in my hometown they're widening an existing road to 2+2 (16,5m) and the AADT will be 12-15K 2015.
metasmurf no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 27th, 2010, 07:49 PM   #1196
54°26′S 3°24′E
Registered User
 
54°26′S 3°24′E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 811
Likes (Received): 155

Quote:
Originally Posted by IceCheese View Post
Statens Vegvesen Region Midt seems even more incompetent than theire collegues out here (only barely though).. But if the plan is out on hearing now, shouldn't you try to make yourself heard? Democracy and all that?
Perhaps, but I live an extremely busy life, with many commitments. But I have noted the due date in the beginning of December...
__________________
Norway needs a new transport infrastructure network, let's start now!
54°26′S 3°24′E no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 27th, 2010, 09:51 PM   #1197
ElviS77
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 564
Likes (Received): 54

Quote:
Originally Posted by 54°26′S 3°24′E View Post
Unfortunately, you will probably not be surprised, Kjello0, as it seems like Vegvesenet is now going for alternative 1, meaning essentially no improvement for this Gordic knot of Trondheim traffic. (Norwegian speakers can check here). True, the cost of alternative 1, which is expanded somwhat by adding an extra lane towards the round-about on the west side of the bridge, is estimated to be 383 M NOK (36 %) less than alternative 2A, but with alternative 1, it is estimated that the traffic (AADT) on that hardly 2+1 road west of the river will be 28 000 already in 2015! So much for keeping to the Norwegian standards calling for four lanes when traffic surpasses 12 000 AADT in 30 years time!
And Osloveien is only part of the problem with the chosen alternative. The E6 link between Kroppanbrua and Omkjøringsveien also leaves a lot to be desired, particularly when it's pretty obvious that the Vegvesen and Trondheim kommune want to reduce traffic on Klæbuveien (right? It's been a while since I called Trondheim home...) towards Trondheim city centre. 2 direct inbound and outbound lanes do not really support such a concept. In short, the entire "ring road Trondheim" is going to be overcrowded from day one.

Sure, I do understand budgetary constrains. But when one eventually receives the get-go for a massive project, it makes sense to build it efficient enough to resolve at least a few of the problems it faces on the opening day, at least.
ElviS77 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 27th, 2010, 10:12 PM   #1198
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,573
Likes (Received): 19366

It looks like they are better in building bridges and tunnels across and under fjords than to improve the situation on busy urban roads.
ChrisZwolle está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old November 5th, 2010, 12:33 AM   #1199
54°26′S 3°24′E
Registered User
 
54°26′S 3°24′E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 811
Likes (Received): 155

You can say that again.....
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElviS77 View Post
And Osloveien is only part of the problem with the chosen alternative. The E6 link between Kroppanbrua and Omkjøringsveien also leaves a lot to be desired, particularly when it's pretty obvious that the Vegvesen and Trondheim kommune want to reduce traffic on Klæbuveien (right? It's been a while since I called Trondheim home...) towards Trondheim city centre. 2 direct inbound and outbound lanes do not really support such a concept. In short, the entire "ring road Trondheim" is going to be overcrowded from day one.

Sure, I do understand budgetary constrains. But when one eventually receives the get-go for a massive project, it makes sense to build it efficient enough to resolve at least a few of the problems it faces on the opening day, at least.
There has not been access from Omkjøringsvegen (E6) to Klæbuveien for a number of years, and Klæbuveien itself is closed to traffic at several places. Perhaps you mean Bratsbergveien, Elgeseter gate or Sluppenveien? The latter will at least be closed to through traffic in most alternatives, whereas the traffic level on Elgeseter effectively is clamped as long as the half the lanes are closed to private cars. In any case, the connection between Kroppanbrua and Omkjøringsveien on E6 is a major difference between the alternative 1 and alternative 2a/2b/3. The former is basically no improvement from today's situation where the single lane creates jams that get worse every year, whereas the latter alternatives add a lane in each direction.
__________________
Norway needs a new transport infrastructure network, let's start now!
54°26′S 3°24′E no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 25th, 2010, 02:35 PM   #1200
54°26′S 3°24′E
Registered User
 
54°26′S 3°24′E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 811
Likes (Received): 155

I just stumbled over this figure, showing the formal phaces involved in Norwegian road construction:

In short, planning of a new road in Norway takes AT LEAST 9 years, before even construction can start....
__________________
Norway needs a new transport infrastructure network, let's start now!
54°26′S 3°24′E no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
norway

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 11:56 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