COPENHAGEN | Public Transport - Page 63 - SkyscraperCity
 

forums map | 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 19th, 2020, 10:12 PM   #1241
sbondorf
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 26
Likes (Received): 24

Quote:
Originally Posted by dysharmonica View Post
This would be far from the first long water crossing on a metro / urban transit. From systems I know, NYC's MTA crosses from Coney Islands, BART in SF Bay crosses under the bay, and Sound Transit in Seattle crosses Lake Washington (soon). I am sure there are better examples.

The upcoming Bosporus crossing in Istanbul is another good example. But generally I believe these examples deal with either a shorter distance between shores, or larger populations, or both. In any case one must choose which mode of transport to integrate the crossing with, and in the Cph-Malmö case I tend to believe that choice would be mainline rail, not metro.

In the Istanbul example, on the contrary, metro is the logical answer: the tunnel constitutes a missing link between two existing metro systems, the distance is much shorter (6 km) and millions of people live on either side of the Bosporus.
sbondorf no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old January 19th, 2020, 10:41 PM   #1242
Wilhem275
The Transporter
 
Wilhem275's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Genoa & Venice [I]
Posts: 3,135
Likes (Received): 1122

A metro on a 30 km span makes no sense.

And in any case, you can always run metros in railway gauged tunnels, but doesn't work the other way round...
__________________
I've sold monorails to Brockway, Ogdenville, and North Haverbrooke, and by gum, it put them on the map!
Well, sir, there's nothing on earth like a genuine, bona fide, electrified, six-car monorail!

Marchionne means never having to say you're sorry.

Swede, sbondorf liked this post
Wilhem275 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 20th, 2020, 10:31 PM   #1243
dysharmonica
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: København / Bratislava / Austin, TX / Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 1,438
Likes (Received): 2184

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wilhem275 View Post
A metro on a 30 km span makes no sense.

And in any case, you can always run metros in railway gauged tunnels, but doesn't work the other way round...
The problem is that CPH does not and will not have a raiload-gauge tunnel ready for any more capacity and nowhere near the sound.

Further ... Malmo is already connected to the KBH H, Nørreport, Østerport direction. Connecting to the metro connects to a larger urban network of frequent all day transit.

I understand 30km seems long .. but that is the water gap we have ...
And I understand that
Banedanmark / the state has no interest in building and operating a tunnel to Malmo.

But, the city does and the city will soon-ish have a tunnel conveniently close to the sea that can make a branch across the water.

And so .. like often, the city is pursuing this for its own benefits with the system it owns, not with the system controlled by the state.

Last edited by dysharmonica; January 21st, 2020 at 11:33 AM.
dysharmonica no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 20th, 2020, 11:04 PM   #1244
Wilhem275
The Transporter
 
Wilhem275's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Genoa & Venice [I]
Posts: 3,135
Likes (Received): 1122

Well, it's not mandatory to connect specifically Malmo, if the aim is just urban expansion. With the money needed to draft an underwater 30 km metro line, you can connect a lot more areas geographically closer to Cph and bring so many connections to a lot more people.

If the wish is to make a stronger connection with that particular area, then ok, but then it's never a good idea to choose a technical concept over non-technical criteria (and God forbid if the reasons are political).

There are things a metro is simply not fit to do well, and there's nothing we can do about it.
If 30 km is the water gap you have, then... push Zealand closer to Sweden, or go for another solution (or, live with a substandard solution).
__________________
I've sold monorails to Brockway, Ogdenville, and North Haverbrooke, and by gum, it put them on the map!
Well, sir, there's nothing on earth like a genuine, bona fide, electrified, six-car monorail!

Marchionne means never having to say you're sorry.

sbondorf liked this post
Wilhem275 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 21st, 2020, 11:31 AM   #1245
dysharmonica
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: København / Bratislava / Austin, TX / Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 1,438
Likes (Received): 2184

Quote:
Originally Posted by sbondorf View Post
Well, Vejdirektoratet is actually analysing both road and road/passenger rail combinations (see http://api.vejdirektoratet-stage.ffw...rbindelsen.pdf) - not exactly “active opposition” but you’re right about freight trains not being part of the analysis.
I may be wrong about this, but if I remember correctly, the Danes are only investigating the rail link because of instistance from the Swedes. The Danish position (again, please correct me if I am remembering wrong) was that the rail tunnel does not make financial sense. But the Swedes threw a strong opposition to that.
dysharmonica no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 21st, 2020, 11:42 AM   #1246
dysharmonica
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: København / Bratislava / Austin, TX / Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 1,438
Likes (Received): 2184

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wilhem275 View Post
Well, it's not mandatory to connect specifically Malmo, if the aim is just urban expansion. With the money needed to draft an underwater 30 km metro line, you can connect a lot more areas geographically closer to Cph and bring so many connections to a lot more people.

If the wish is to make a stronger connection with that particular area, then ok, but then it's never a good idea to choose a technical concept over non-technical criteria (and God forbid if the reasons are political).

There are things a metro is simply not fit to do well, and there's nothing we can do about it.
If 30 km is the water gap you have, then... push Zealand closer to Sweden, or go for another solution (or, live with a substandard solution).
I still do not understand how a 120km/h toilet-less metro is worse off than a 120 km/h toilet-less S-train. Sure people are proposing a 200km/h tunnel, but what will ride there?

The difference on the cca. 20km straight shot across the water is 10 minutes for the metro (at 120 km/h) and 6 minutes for a 200km/h train (and that is assuming the train can accelerate as fas at as the metro)

The connection to Malmø is key because allowing Malmø's 250k inhabitants to have sub 30 minute commute to much of the city will further connect the labor markets. Part of the reason the commute is so short is that they do not have to transfer too many times to get outside othe KBH H - Østerport corridor which while a central part of Copenhagen, does not cover most of the office space in the city. And Copenhagen, which along with Frederiksberg is the only one besides that state with the finances to build any local transit. And thus, while many Danish suburbs would like a metro they cannot aford it, and the state refuses to build it for them. Malmo is working hard to get the money to contribute to this. Should Hvdove, or Rødøvre or whoever get the money to extend the metro, Copenhagen has plenty left to pay for their part - the Malmo metro is not a factor here.


I strongly believe his is really a non-issue. The Metro is perfectly capable of serving this corridor, it is owned by a willing owner, it will better connect people to where they want to go (daily commute, city to city) and importantly to new stops than the current Øresundtåg, and the connection to Malmo fits neatly into its infrastucture plans.

By contrast a direct train connection would
1) add more traffic to the busy Mlamø C and overloaded KBH H
2) Require near prohibitive tunneling costs for a line that will barely break even even for the cheaper metro
3) Would require Bane DK / DSB / Danish state / and the Airport to allow for a train connection that bypasses the CPH Airport and finally
4) Does not fit into any long term plans the state has for the rail hub in Copenhagen.
__________________

Suburbanist liked this post

Last edited by dysharmonica; January 21st, 2020 at 02:46 PM.
dysharmonica no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 21st, 2020, 01:56 PM   #1247
dysharmonica
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: København / Bratislava / Austin, TX / Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 1,438
Likes (Received): 2184

EDIT: Updated infor says March 28th. 2020.

New M4 metro line in Copenhagen will open on 1. April 2020, with 2 new stops to Nordhavn and 6 stations shared with Cityringen M3 line. As with the other stations on Cityringen, "the stations are ready for use, but not finished" Details below. Links in Danish

Quote:
Originally Posted by dysharmonica View Post
M4 opens 1. April, 2020


Both stations will open to traffic.
Station surroundings of Orientkaj will be finished in the summer
Station surroundings of Nordhavn are according to the city not part of Cityringen, but part of Nordhavn development and will not be fully realized until 2025.
The transfer tunnel at Nordhavn will not open with the station, but will be finished enough to serve as an escape route. No date was given for opening of the tunnel

https://ing.dk/artikel/nordhavn-metr...rfladen-231617
https://www.ft.dk/samling/20191/almd...52/2134455.pdf

The Cityringen line (M3) is currently in a second week of planned closure as it shares tacks with M4 and the merging and splitting of trains needed to be tested. Given that the date was announced in the middle of this closure indicates the tests are going well.

The northern extention includes one underground and one above ground station and will establish the initial operation of the M4 line from these two new stations, and 6 stations shared with M3 Cityringen to KBH H. The southern extension with 5 underground stations is scheduled to open in 2024.

__________________

Last edited by dysharmonica; January 27th, 2020 at 10:44 AM.
dysharmonica no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 21st, 2020, 02:06 PM   #1248
korbendallas
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 241
Likes (Received): 283

When designing trains, you make a tradeoff between acceleration and top speed. You also make tradeoffs between number of standing vs. seated passengers.

Having one stretch between two stations will shift these tradeoffs towards a faster top speed and more seating. This will reduce capacity and average speed on the rest of the line, even if it's only the trains going to Malmø having a different acceleration/top speed profile.

So the discussion is very much worth taking. And for the reasons above, I would prefer if a Copenhagen-Malmø metro line isn't branching off from a ring.
__________________

dysharmonica, Swede, sbondorf, TER200 liked this post
korbendallas no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 21st, 2020, 02:20 PM   #1249
dysharmonica
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: København / Bratislava / Austin, TX / Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 1,438
Likes (Received): 2184

Quote:
Originally Posted by korbendallas View Post
When designing trains, you make a tradeoff between acceleration and top speed. You also make tradeoffs between number of standing vs. seated passengers.

Having one stretch between two stations will shift these tradeoffs towards a faster top speed and more seating. This will reduce capacity and average speed on the rest of the line, even if it's only the trains going to Malmø having a different acceleration/top speed profile.

So the discussion is very much worth taking. And for the reasons above, I would prefer if a Copenhagen-Malmø metro line isn't branching off from a ring.
I can understand the tradeoff. I do land on a different answer than you on the right solution. But well .. neither of us is in railroad planning, so I guess others will decise this anyways.
dysharmonica no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 21st, 2020, 03:12 PM   #1250
Swede
forumer #29
 
Swede's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: sol.III.eu.se.08
Posts: 4,491
Likes (Received): 2076

I see the debate on the best type of train/service for the Malmö Matro stays alive. I think most participants are making good points. i.e. doing it with a regular CPH metro train will make for a too long non-stop trip on that type of train and wouldn't work well as a branch from an existing line in CPH. And running a regional train from the existing Malmö Central to the existing CPH Hovedbangård wouldn't be a good line because of capacity constraints at existing stations and it'd add transfers to all trips.

I'd say the best option would be somewhere inbetween doing it as a regular CPH Metro and doing it as part of the current regional train system using existing stations.
If the CPH S-train system was unbalanced you could grab one of the lines and put it in a new tunnel under central CPH with new stations (with transfers to other rail lines along the way), the new cross-Sound tunnel, and then a line going for like 5-6 stations through Malmö that has transfers to other rail lines at at least 2 stations.
But the S-train system seems to be well balanced, no lines needing to find a new place to go on the other side on the city.

So...
Use vehicles very similar to either the Metro, the S-trains or the Pågatåg (adding another completely new type usually isn't a smart idea unless it'll be used on more than one line).
Have the line go across Malmö with stations at like Västra Hamnen, Malmö C, Sorgenfri, Nobeltorget, Persborg, Jägersro, Oxie? Or 1 to 2 fewer stations?
Have it go across CPH with transfers at either Österport or Nörreport as well as at least another station on M3 and ending at like Flintholm?
A line that would also do local transit work within each city, but aiming at the Sound instead of trying to have both ends of the line in the same city.
Am I making any sense?
__________________
Forumers met so far:
Huopa, Nightsky, Jo, wolkenkrabber, ThisSideofSteinway, jacksom, New Jack City, LeCom, Ellatur, Jan, Dennis, Ace, Bardamu, AtlanticaC5, Ringil, Dysfunctional, stacey, karakhal, ch1le, Hviid, staff, kjetilab, Þróndeimr, queetz, FREKI, sander, Blue Viking, nomels, Mantas, ristov, Rafal_T, khaan, Chilenofuturista, Jonte Myra, safta20, AW, Pas, Jarmo K, IceCheese, Sideshow_Bob, sk, Ingenioren, Ayreonaut, Silver Creations, Hasse78, Svartmetall, OzFrog
Swede no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 21st, 2020, 03:23 PM   #1251
dysharmonica
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: København / Bratislava / Austin, TX / Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 1,438
Likes (Received): 2184

One note:
Västra Hamnen is included in the Oresundsmetro proposal.
https://www.kk.dk/sites/default/file...lsk_04_web.pdf

I can understand that the metro to Malmo may needs to ve different, but we can plan on the Havneringen to be built expecting this difference. The ring is expected to have only one, perhaps 2 relatively short stubs in Copenhagen besides the line to Malmo. Thus we could design the whole ring with the Malmo trains in minds (acceleration profile, train type, etc). There is no prescription that the M5/M6 system has to have exactly the same specs as M1/M2 and M3/M4 .. after all these three systems will not interchange trains .. they just have to use the same control systems. For example, the same system as in Copenhagen is being built in Honolul with decidedly longer distances between stops on a line with much more suburban and regional character. Oresundsmetro can easily adapt some of the designs from that system, for example.





I am advocating for the metro because it seems the most feasable at the moment. I can understand that perhaps better options exist in an ideal world, but unlikely. Heck Oresundsmetro seems unlikely as well, as especially Malmo would require state help and the state seems unwilling to pay for this at the moment. Copenhagen would require state loans and likely a permission to borrow above whatever limits there are on the city's borrowing, and it is defnitely not clear if the state would be interested in that.

We will see. if I remember correctly the next study is coming out in May or thereabout.
__________________

Swede liked this post

Last edited by dysharmonica; January 21st, 2020 at 03:31 PM.
dysharmonica no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 21st, 2020, 05:37 PM   #1252
sbondorf
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 26
Likes (Received): 24

Quote:
Originally Posted by Swede View Post
So...
Use vehicles very similar to either the Metro, the S-trains or the Pågatåg (adding another completely new type usually isn't a smart idea unless it'll be used on more than one line).
Have the line go across Malmö with stations at like Västra Hamnen, Malmö C, Sorgenfri, Nobeltorget, Persborg, Jägersro, Oxie? Or 1 to 2 fewer stations?
Have it go across CPH with transfers at either Østerport or Nørreport as well as at least another station on M3 and ending at like Flintholm?
A line that would also do local transit work within each city, but aiming at the Sound instead of trying to have both ends of the line in the same city.
Am I making any sense?
You make very much sense, yes :-) It is generally a very interesting thought to envision a new city-to-city-crossing as some kind of S-tog / Pågatåg integration, since these two systems cover quite similar transport needs on the two sides of the Sound.

But the two systems are technically very different, so real integration requires some compromise or new trains capable of running on dual voltage (15kV / 1.5kV) or even triple voltage (15kV / 1.5kV / 25 kV) are needed. Metro would also require a new train type, as dysharmonica describes.

An alternative would be the existing Öresundstog regional trains which are 15kV / 25kV dual voltage - but they don't integrate with the S-train system.

As for the existing S-train system: yes the system is balanced but also filled to the brink in the central tunnel and at the Central Station. The proposed Roskilde extension might add to this congestion. So: possible extensions are being discussed regularly. One solution could be to connect your suggested east-west-tunnel is to the Roskilde branch and/or the Frederikssund branch. Add to this a northbound interchange connection at Nørreport and ... voilÃ* ... all capacity issues gone. On the Swedish side we may build your proposed Oxie line or simply connect the underwater tunnel to the existing Pågatåg lines at Malmö C.

Thus, with dual voltage trains with toilets in them, we could have have S-Påga-connections ("RER") every 10m-15m between Roskilde and Lund (or between Ballerup and Oxie) going through consistently populated areas all the way except the 20km ocean gap. Such a line would IMO be vastly more useful than metro if the greater regional/urban integration is considered rather than just the pure center-to-center connection on which the city mayors tend to focus.
__________________
sbondorf no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 22nd, 2020, 02:38 PM   #1253
Swede
forumer #29
 
Swede's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: sol.III.eu.se.08
Posts: 4,491
Likes (Received): 2076

Good points from both of you.

I think I end up mostly in favour of this idea though:
Quote:
Originally Posted by sbondorf View Post
Thus, with dual voltage trains with toilets in them, we could have have S-Påga-connections ("RER") every 10m-15m between Roskilde and Lund (or between Ballerup and Oxie) going through consistently populated areas all the way except the 20km ocean gap. Such a line would IMO be vastly more useful than metro if the greater regional/urban integration is considered rather than just the pure center-to-center connection on which the city mayors tend to focus.
Roskilde-Lund via CPH and Malmö, using a train that can run on both the S-train and Pågatåg lines. The Malmö-Lund line is currently being finally expanded to four tracks, so increased capacity there is coming.

I 100% agree that the line needs to be more than just center-to-center. For it to make any sense it has to keep going on both sides. In different ways depending on if it is a Metro or a RER, but 100% has to keep going.
__________________
Forumers met so far:
Huopa, Nightsky, Jo, wolkenkrabber, ThisSideofSteinway, jacksom, New Jack City, LeCom, Ellatur, Jan, Dennis, Ace, Bardamu, AtlanticaC5, Ringil, Dysfunctional, stacey, karakhal, ch1le, Hviid, staff, kjetilab, Þróndeimr, queetz, FREKI, sander, Blue Viking, nomels, Mantas, ristov, Rafal_T, khaan, Chilenofuturista, Jonte Myra, safta20, AW, Pas, Jarmo K, IceCheese, Sideshow_Bob, sk, Ingenioren, Ayreonaut, Silver Creations, Hasse78, Svartmetall, OzFrog

Wilhem275 liked this post
Swede no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 23rd, 2020, 01:50 PM   #1254
hkskyline
Hong Kong
 
hkskyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 100,869
Likes (Received): 25332

Kongens Nytorv by Daniel Tam, on Flickr
__________________
World Photo Gallery recent updates - | Chicago | Los Angeles | Toronto | London | Buffalo | Yellowknife | Silk Road
More galleries - | Hong Kong | Pyongyang | Istanbul | Dubai | Shanghai | Mumbai | Queenstown, NZ | Bagan | Angkor Wat

Wilhem275 liked this post
hkskyline no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 24th, 2020, 03:45 PM   #1255
Nikolaj
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 333
Likes (Received): 107

According to a press release today, the M4 will be inaugurated 28 March.

https://m.dk/nyheder/nordhavn-kobles...-den-28-marts/
__________________

Da18be, bongo-anders, dysharmonica liked this post
Nikolaj no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 10th, 2020, 02:21 PM   #1256
dysharmonica
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: København / Bratislava / Austin, TX / Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 1,438
Likes (Received): 2184

The Metro system announced that more than 12 million passengers took the new M3 line in 2019 since openinig in late September.

The system ridership rose from a little under 65 million in 2018 to a little under 79 million in 2019.

Finally, as expected the new line relieaved the overcrowded Nørreport transfer point (the busiest train station in Denmark) redistributing transferring traffic among multiple stations.

The EIA for hte M3-M4 lines estimated that the M1-M2-M3-M4 system, when completed, should reach 120 million annual passengers (roughly in 2034). Extrapolating this data it seems we may see these numbers either rhis year or next. (The system has had about 10M monthly passengers in October, Novermber, and December 2019)

Quote:
Originally Posted by dysharmonica View Post
https://ing.dk/artikel/12-millioner-...en-2019-232071


Quote:
Over 12 million traveled with Cityringen in 2019

...

The new metro line exceeds expectations in the first few months.

...

12.2 million passengers have traveled with Cityringen in the first three months of the project's lifetime, new figures from the Metro company show. That's more than expected. The metro company has previously announced that it expected 9 million passengers in 2019 from its opening at the end of September.

...

The opening of the Cityringen can also be seen in the total number of travelers. In total, 78.8 million have traveled by lines M1, M2 and M3 in 2019 against 64.7 million at M1 and M2 in 2018.

The opening of the city ring can also be measured at Nørreport Station, which is the busiest station on the metro network and which was to be relieved by M3. Here, the number of passengers has decreased by approximately 6,000. per day, corresponding to a total decrease of 15 percent since the opening of the new line.

On the other hand, there has been a large increase of almost 40 percent at the switching stations Kongens Nytorv and Frederiksberg.

__________________

Last edited by dysharmonica; February 10th, 2020 at 02:32 PM.
dysharmonica no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 20th, 2020, 04:37 PM   #1257
dysharmonica
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: København / Bratislava / Austin, TX / Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 1,438
Likes (Received): 2184

The authority building the light rail line in suburban Copenhagen - Hovesstadens Letbane - announced that the interior design process has concluded, altering the standard Siemens Avenio layout to accommodate more bikes, prams, and wheelchairs. With that, the authority also released photos of the interior design and some mockups of the vehicles. As I state in the original post, the color choices are rather drab, so I hope this stage of the design process focused on layout, and material choices are still forthocming.

As reported before, the exterior color of the vehicles will be rather bright green, and I must admit that color looks rather dashing on the mockup.

The light rail line is to open in 2025 (one year behind schedule due to troubles purchasing needed land and property to make way. The suburban municipalities and Copenhagen itself are already discussing expansion plans, some of which will no doubt be approved before this line even opens.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dysharmonica View Post
Exterior and INTERIOR mockups

Letbanen's FB:
https://www.facebook.com/dinletbane/...95638081145428

And their blog
https://www.dinletbane.dk/da/laes-ny...elig-for-alle/

and prss photos:
https://www.dinletbane.dk/da/presse/pressefotos/









I am not terribly keen on the beige seats - how drab and boring. Hopefully the work was focused only on layout, and the materials choice can still change.
__________________

aenigma, Shenkey, BHT liked this post

Last edited by dysharmonica; February 20th, 2020 at 04:47 PM.
dysharmonica no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 


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


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Expo Metro Line Joey313 Transportation-Infrastructure 23 July 9th, 2006 05:46 PM
Best LA Metro Rail Line GetOnDaTrain Transportation-Infrastructure 65 December 17th, 2005 10:41 AM
INFRASTRUCTURE | Decision on Metro Cityring in Copenhagen moves closer cphdude Copenhagen 47 December 3rd, 2005 07:59 PM


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 10:24 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us