• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

DOO now coming to Sweden

Status
Not open for further replies.

SthlmDriver

Member
Joined
7 Mar 2023
Messages
6
Location
Stockholm, Sweden
I've been driving the commuter trains in Stockholm for over a decade. We've always had a guard on board. The service is operated by Chinese MTR and now they are removing the guard from the trains, leaving me alone on board with 600ft of train and over 1.500 passengers.

I'd be happy to hear about your experiences with working like this and how stuff like evacuations, fire, torn powerline and people with disabilities have been solved, or, realistically, tried to be solved.

Our union is fighting hard against this, but MTR has been controlling the narrative by saying that the system works great in the UK.

Any input would be much appreciated.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

LNW-GW Joint

Veteran Member
Joined
22 Feb 2011
Messages
21,937
Location
Mold, Clwyd
Most London commuter trains (and London Underground/Overground services) are DOO.
The first DOO line was in 1983 (St Pancras-Bedford), and spread to almost all commuter lines radiating from London terminals (not Euston or Waterloo), extending to 100km or so from London and with some journeys over 200km across London.
The latest DOO example is our new Elizabeth Line (which happens to be operated by MTR) which links lines east and west of London through a busy core section.
Recent partial-DOO schemes have been of a hybrid nature where there is another member of staff on board to assist passengers with their journeys, but not operating the train which is left to the driver.
There is great union resistance to more DOO in the UK, from both drivers and conductors, and it is one of the key issues in the current industrial disputes on the railway.
The safety authorities have approved DOO operation, as long as the trains and infrastructure support it (which most do these days).
There has been at least one high-profile incident with DOO trains, involving a train losing power in a tunnel and some passengers forcing an exit onto the track.
From what I recall the train operator (not MTR) was to blame for not rescuing the train quicker.

I'm sure the professionals on here will have more information on how well or otherwise DOO operates in the UK.
Welcome to the forum by the way.
SL seemed to me to have a great network and trains when I used them over the years.
 

Craig1122

Member
Joined
14 May 2021
Messages
373
Location
UK
Access for people with disabilities certainly hasn't been solved and a user group is pushing court action as the operators appear to be in breach of the law. "Our data reveals that DOO has created ‘no go areas’ for accessible rail travel at a total of 292 stations across Greater London and the south-east of England, representing over 11% of Britain’s stations."


With regards to evacuations it tends to take a very long time. In this incident task overload for the driver was identified as a contributing factor when passengers were evacuated to a live track. In essence the overload was having to deal with the passengers on board as well as trying to rectify a technical fault.

"Dozens of passengers could have died after they were told to evacuate a London Overground train close to a live railway line, a report has found.

The Rail Accident Investigation Branch (RAIB) blamed miscommunication between the driver and control room staff.

A delay in reaching a clear understanding about what should be done "contributed to stress and task overload of the driver, which affected his decision making", the RAIB said."


Here's another example. This may of course have still happened even with a second member of staff given that it went on for so long. But having someone else to reassure and manage passengers certainly seems to help

"A catalogue of errors led to passengers walking alongside live electrified rails as they evacuated a Southeastern train stranded by snow last year, a report by investigators has revealed.

The train was a busy commuter service and the onboard toilet was out of service.

No plans had been put in place for evacuating the passengers, and customers took matters in their own hands by forcing their way off the train."


This subject has been debated many times on here and I'm sure you'll find strong opinions on both sides of the debate.
 
Last edited:

Wyrleybart

Established Member
Joined
29 Mar 2020
Messages
2,633
Location
South Staffordshire
My advice is to read up on the Lac Megantic disaster in Canada and how Ed Burkhardt took DOO (NP) from EWS in the UK and thought it would be a good idea in Canada. That is what can happen if you operate clapped out locos with very poor timekeeping in a "down to the bone" company.

You really need to read it to understand what actually happened but it was shocking.

Obviously, they are proposing DOOP for you guys which is not quite the same.

Here is the Wiki link
 
Last edited:

Carlisle

Established Member
Joined
26 Aug 2012
Messages
4,515
My advice is to read up on the La Majantic disaster in Canada and how Ed Burkhardt took DOO (NP) from EWS in the UK and thought it would be a good idea in Canada. That is what can happen if you operate clapped out locos with very poor timekeeping in a "down to the bone" company.

You really need to read it to understand what actually happened but it was shocking.

Obviously, they are proposing DOOP for you guys which is not quite the same.
Agreed the clapped out hardware was a significant factor however the official enquiry couldn’t conclude whether a second person would’ve prevented that tragedy or not & a few similar runaways have occurred since on guarded trains.
 
Last edited:

zwk500

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Jan 2020
Messages
18,629
Location
Northampton
My advice is to read up on the La Majantic disaster in Canada and how Ed Burkhardt took DOO (NP) from EWS in the UK and thought it would be a good idea in Canada. That is what can happen if you operate clapped out locos with very poor timekeeping in a "down to the bone" company.
The key point here is that DOO is only one part of the system. It's perfectly possible to have absolutely safe DOO if it's used appropriately and in concert with other operating practices to ensure the safety. The problems come when you start propping windows open up cutting your own holes in the cheese to make it easier (to brutalise 2 popular analogies for systematic failures).

DOO for freight operation is also very common in the UK, and incidents on freight operation are very rare, and a vanishingly small proportion of them would have been prevented or mitigated by the presence of a 2nd person on the train.
 

ScotGG

Established Member
Joined
3 Apr 2013
Messages
1,587
In parts of London it's very easy to not pay for journeys on some DOO routes after on-board staff removed if there's no widespread staffing at stations to barrier them and/or roving ticket checks.

Often seems a false economy.
 

66701GBRF

Member
Joined
3 Jun 2017
Messages
913
My advice is to read up on the La Majantic disaster in Canada and how Ed Burkhardt took DOO (NP) from EWS in the UK and thought it would be a good idea in Canada. That is what can happen if you operate clapped out locos with very poor timekeeping in a "down to the bone" company.

You really need to read it to understand what actually happened but it was shocking.

Obviously, they are proposing DOOP for you guys which is not quite the same.

What would the second person have done that would have stopped that incident? Commercial airline also operate with two pilots yet accidents still happen.
 

Wyrleybart

Established Member
Joined
29 Mar 2020
Messages
2,633
Location
South Staffordshire
What would the second person have done that would have stopped that incident? Commercial airline also operate with two pilots yet accidents still happen.
Erm. Secured the train properly at the top of the hill.

When the fire department shut the remaining engine down because it was smoking it ceased creating air to keep the brakes on. Brakes eventually came off and the train rolled down the hill and killed 39 people in a horrendous fire, but had the train had all it's parking brakes applied, and had the train not run late causing the driver / engineer to run out of hours blah blah blah.

I am assuming that DB Cargo have the last maroon and gold locos in the world since the Australian, New Zealand and Estonian operations ceased.
 

AlterEgo

Verified Rep - Wingin' It! Paul Lucas
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
29,563
Location
LBK
What would the second person have done that would have stopped that incident? Commercial airline also operate with two pilots yet accidents still happen.
I do fear we are going to go back over old ground but two person operation is certainly not a panacea. This was done to death years ago on here to the point I cannot really be bothered to talk about it any more, but there was little data to convince me that two person operation, and a division of safety duties, was safer in a properly controlled environment.
 

Tetchytyke

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Sep 2013
Messages
17,627
Location
Isle of Man
Done properly there’s no reason why DOO is unsafe in itself. The issue is whether it’s done properly- whether the driver can see the full platform properly, whether there is suitable control staff immediately available when something goes wrong, etc.

I’m not generally in favour of DOO because it normally comes from a money-saving perspective, meaning the investment in equipment and control staff is also approached from a cost perspective. But the problem there is the operator’s ethos and not DOO.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==

As for Lac-Megantic, that- like Ohio- is more about US operators stripping everything back to the barest of bare minimums than anything else. I’m not sure how it’s relevant to DOO in an urban passenger setting.
 

185

On Moderation
Joined
29 Aug 2010
Messages
5,709
Apparently it's perfectly safe and our dodgy safety body the RSSB will just gloss over the fact that most trap-and-drag incidents are on driver only trains but they are the minority of services in the UK.

Det är en dum idé :lol:
 

SthlmDriver

Member
Joined
7 Mar 2023
Messages
6
Location
Stockholm, Sweden
Most London commuter trains (and London Underground/Overground services) are DOO.
The first DOO line was in 1983 (St Pancras-Bedford), and spread to almost all commuter lines radiating from London terminals (not Euston or Waterloo), extending to 100km or so from London and with some journeys over 200km across London.
The latest DOO example is our new Elizabeth Line (which happens to be operated by MTR) which links lines east and west of London through a busy core section.
Recent partial-DOO schemes have been of a hybrid nature where there is another member of staff on board to assist passengers with their journeys, but not operating the train which is left to the driver.
There is great union resistance to more DOO in the UK, from both drivers and conductors, and it is one of the key issues in the current industrial disputes on the railway.
The safety authorities have approved DOO operation, as long as the trains and infrastructure support it (which most do these days).
There has been at least one high-profile incident with DOO trains, involving a train losing power in a tunnel and some passengers forcing an exit onto the track.
From what I recall the train operator (not MTR) was to blame for not rescuing the train quicker.

I'm sure the professionals on here will have more information on how well or otherwise DOO operates in the UK.
Welcome to the forum by the way.
SL seemed to me to have a great network and trains when I used them over the years.
In Sweden, we have separate rules for closed - circuit systems, like metro and local rail. The commuter traffic, that I drive, is under heavier rules and regulations we are sharing tracks with freight and other trains at speeds up to 200km/h. There's also a rule that an evacuation MUST be done within one hour.

What we, as drivers, mostly object to is being alone when we have a jumper in front of the train, or have a technical breakdown forcing us to run around and troubleshoot, whilst trying to keep the passengers from opening an emergency exit to walk to a bus stop or something. Also emptying trains at night at end of service. Trying to wake a unconscious person is not fun when alone.

The DOO here will be "pure". No other staff of any kind will be on board the train. Some lines takes us through areas with no roads nearby. Any assistance would take ages to arrive.

Before, the attendant (guard) had video feeds from all over the passenger spaces. We have none.
 

matt_world2004

Established Member
Joined
5 Nov 2014
Messages
4,581
In Sweden, we have separate rules for closed - circuit systems, like metro and local rail. The commuter traffic, that I drive, is under heavier rules and regulations we are sharing tracks with freight and other trains at speeds up to 200km/h. There's also a rule that an evacuation MUST be done within one hour.

What we, as drivers, mostly object to is being alone when we have a jumper in front of the train, or have a technical breakdown forcing us to run around and troubleshoot, whilst trying to keep the passengers from opening an emergency exit to walk to a bus stop or something. Also emptying trains at night at end of service. Trying to wake a unconscious person is not fun when alone.

The DOO here will be "pure". No other staff of any kind will be on board the train. Some lines takes us through areas with no roads nearby. Any assistance would take ages to arrive.

Before, the attendant (guard) had video feeds from all over the passenger spaces. We have none.
Are stations staffed? On DOO services in the UK many stations are staffed to accommodate for the lack of second staff member on board the train, some station staff are required to dispatch the train when the platform is crowded by holding up a baton or other method of communicating with the driver.
 

SthlmDriver

Member
Joined
7 Mar 2023
Messages
6
Location
Stockholm, Sweden
Are stations staffed? On DOO services in the UK many stations are staffed to accommodate for the lack of second staff member on board the train, some station staff are required to dispatch the train when the platform is crowded by holding up a baton or other method of communicating with the driver.
Most stations are staffed, but that is just the person selling tickets in the booth. There's none on the platforms. Trains run every 5 minutes at peak, and every 7-15 minutes for the rest of the time. Much is 4 tracks with our trains usually on the two center tracks, making spontaneous evacs a horrible thought.
 

Balcombe

New Member
Joined
7 Mar 2023
Messages
1
Location
Balcombe
I've been driving the commuter trains in Stockholm for over a decade. We've always had a guard on board. The service is operated by Chinese MTR and now they are removing the guard from the trains, leaving me alone on board with 600ft of train and over 1.500 passengers.

I'd be happy to hear about your experiences with working like this and how stuff like evacuations, fire, torn powerline and people with disabilities have been solved, or, realistically, tried to be solved.

Our union is fighting hard against this, but MTR has been controlling the narrative by saying that the system works great in the UK.

Any input would be much appreciated.
Just out of interest is the role of the Guard on your MTR Stockholm commuter trains the same as in the UK? So is the Guard on your trains responsible for opening the doors and closing the doors and despatching the train like in the UK? Do they check tickets and sell tickets as well like in the UK? I would be curious to know how similar it is as i know the role of the Guard can vary quite a lot depending on the country?
 

the sniper

Established Member
Joined
4 Sep 2007
Messages
3,498
In Sweden, we have separate rules for closed - circuit systems, like metro and local rail. The commuter traffic, that I drive, is under heavier rules and regulations we are sharing tracks with freight and other trains at speeds up to 200km/h. There's also a rule that an evacuation MUST be done within one hour.

That's certainly not a standard that DOO has had to contend with here.

What we, as drivers, mostly object to is being alone when we have a jumper in front of the train, or have a technical breakdown forcing us to run around and troubleshoot, whilst trying to keep the passengers from opening an emergency exit to walk to a bus stop or something. Also emptying trains at night at end of service. Trying to wake a unconscious person is not fun when alone.

The "DOO is safe" crowd don't really account for such factors, which makes most discussion on the matter rather awkward. Where I am you feel the need for two people in case one of us gets battered, but that's hard to quantify to people who haven't been in the situation, who's problem it isn't... A big thing over here also is the additional liability when doing the doors.
 
Last edited:

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
78,463
Location
Yorkshire
... the system works great in the UK.
Put simply, it works absolutely fine.


Recent partial-DOO schemes have been of a hybrid nature where there is another member of staff on board to assist passengers with their journeys, but not operating the train which is left to the driver.
Driver Only Operation refers to the operation of the train; services that have an on board ticket inspector, on board supervisor etc are DOO
There is great union resistance to more DOO in the UK, from both drivers and conductors, and it is one of the key issues in the current industrial disputes on the railway.
Yes it's obvious Unions don't like it; swapping a Guard for a TTI/OBS etc reduces the Union's ability to obliterate the service.
Access for people with disabilities certainly hasn't been solved and a user group is pushing court action as the operators appear to be in breach of the law, details here:


With regards to evacuations it tends to take a very long time. In this incident task overload for the driver was identified as a contributing factor when passengers were evacuated to a live track. In essence the overload was having to deal with the passengers on board as well as trying to rectify a technical fault:


Here's another example. This may of course have still happened even with a second member of staff given that it went on for so long. But having someone else to reassure and manage passengers certainly seems to help:

Plenty of examples exist for trains with Guards.
This subject has been debated many times on here and I'm sure you'll find strong opinions on both sides of the debate.
Indeed.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==

My advice is to read up on the La Majantic disaster in Canada and how Ed Burkhardt took DOO (NP) from EWS in the UK and thought it would be a good idea in Canada. That is what can happen if you operate clapped out locos with very poor timekeeping in a "down to the bone" company.

You really need to read it to understand what actually happened but it was shocking.

Obviously, they are proposing DOOP for you guys which is not quite the same.
What's that got to do with the matter in hand?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==

I do fear we are going to go back over old ground but two person operation is certainly not a panacea. This was done to death years ago on here to the point I cannot really be bothered to talk about it any more, but there was little data to convince me that two person operation, and a division of safety duties, was safer in a properly controlled environment.
Indeed, very true.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==

Apparently it's perfectly safe and our dodgy safety body the RSSB will just gloss over the fact that most trap-and-drag incidents are on driver only trains but they are the minority of services in the UK.

Det är en dum idé :lol:
Plenty of incidents have occurred with Guards.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==

Most stations are staffed, but that is just the person selling tickets in the booth. There's none on the platforms. Trains run every 5 minutes at peak, and every 7-15 minutes for the rest of the time. Much is 4 tracks with our trains usually on the two center tracks, making spontaneous evacs a horrible thought.
That's a really outdated method of working that is not going to last long, with the move towards e-tickets.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==

Just out of interest is the role of the Guard on your MTR Stockholm commuter trains the same as in the UK? So is the Guard on your trains responsible for opening the doors and closing the doors and despatching the train like in the UK? Do they check tickets and sell tickets as well like in the UK? I would be curious to know how similar it is as i know the role of the Guard can vary quite a lot depending on the country?
The UK sees a range of operations; Guards don't always open and close doors and TOCs such as SWR have non-commercial Guards who can't check/issue tickets.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==

The "DOO is safe" crowd ...
Given the huge numbers of people carried on the likes of LU, LO, GTR etc, the majority of GB passenger journeys are surely done on DOO services; are you seriously suggesting these aren't safe? Rail is a very safe mode of transport and it's disappointing to see someone in the industry undermine that.
 

the sniper

Established Member
Joined
4 Sep 2007
Messages
3,498
Given the huge numbers of people carried on the likes of LU, LO, GTR etc, the majority of GB passenger journeys are surely done on DOO services; are you seriously suggesting these aren't safe? Rail is a very safe mode of transport and it's disappointing to see someone in the industry undermine that.

I'm not sure why you omitted the rest of the post very selectively quoted, but in doing so it does essentially confirm the point I made in that paragraph... :rolleyes:
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
78,463
Location
Yorkshire
I'm not sure why you omitted the rest of the post very selectively quoted, but in doing so it does essentially confirm the point I made in that paragraph... :rolleyes:
I was responding specifically to this point; there is no point quoting the entirety of all the posts I am responding to. Links are provided so anyone can see the full post if they wish.

Do you have anything constructive to say? If you disagree with what I wrote, can you say what part you are disagreeing with is, and what is your alternative view? I am all for a constructive debate, but your posts appear to be anything but.

(Note: you also didn't quote the entirety of the post that you are replying to; not that there is any requirement to! A key point of the quote system is that you can indicate exactly which part of a post you are referring to; there is no need to re-quote the entirety of posts which are there for all to see)
 

the sniper

Established Member
Joined
4 Sep 2007
Messages
3,498
I was responding specifically to this point; there is no point quoting the entirety of all the posts I am responding to. Links are provided so anyone can see the full post if they wish.

It completely ignored the point made, which was in response to what the OP said, which I quoted. There was no point made in the five words you quoted, which you took out of context to try and make your own point. I'm glad we're doing this in public for once though.

Do you have anything constructive to say? If you disagree with what I wrote, can you say what part you are disagreeing with is, and what is your alternative view? I am all for a constructive debate, but your posts appear to be anything but.

Which weren't relevant to the issues raised by the OP, which I quoted, which is what I addressed.

(Note: you also didn't quote the entirety of the post that you are replying to; not that there is any requirement to! A key point of the quote system is that you can indicate exactly which part of a post you are referring to; there is no need to re-quote the entirety of posts which are there for all to see)

Are you joking? I quoted the part that was addressed to me, no context was omitted.
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
78,463
Location
Yorkshire
It completely ignored the point made, which was in response to what the OP said, which I quoted. There was no point made in the five words you quoted, which you took out of context to try and make your own point. I'm glad we're doing this in public for once though.
OK so can you please explain what you meant by what you said?

If your point was not to insinuate that DOO is in any way not safe, why did you say what you did?
Which weren't relevant to the issues raised by the OP, which I quoted, which is what I addressed.
Can you elaborate; what wasn't relevant?

I've asked you a question, but you're not answering it.
Are you joking? I quoted the part that was addressed to me, no context was omitted.
I don't understand your objection to the concept that people can quote a particular part of the post that they are addressing. If it assists you in some way, here is the full quote (this time, instead of just quoting the part I am questioning you on, I will quote the whole thing, with the relevant part in bold):
The "DOO is safe" crowd don't really account for such factors, which makes most discussion on the matter rather awkward. Where I am you feel the need for two people in case one of us gets battered, but that's hard to quantify to people who haven't been in the situation, who's problem it isn't... A big thing over here also is the additional liability when doing the doors.
Can you please explain what you mean by this phrase, and are you in any way suggesting that DOO is unsafe?

If you are not saying DOO is unsafe, then simply say so.

If you are, then can you justify your claims?
 

the sniper

Established Member
Joined
4 Sep 2007
Messages
3,498
Can you please explain what you mean by this phrase, and are you in any way suggesting that DOO is unsafe?

That those who argue "DOO is safe" have little interest in what the OP was discussing, which is what it meant for them as a Driver. It doesn't need to be explained if you read the whole post. You've subsequently provided great supporting evidence though.
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
78,463
Location
Yorkshire
That those who argue "DOO is safe" have little interest in what the OP was discussing, which is what it meant for them as a Driver. It doesn't need to be explained if you read the whole post. You've subsequently provided great supporting evidence though.
So you are you suggesting DOO is unsafe. Or not?

If you are, please provide your supporting evidence.

If you are not, why did you use those words?

You are the one who appears to be making a claim that a safe method of operation is unsafe; the onus is on you to present your evidence, if that is what you are claiming.

If it is not what you are claiming, then don't beat about the bush and make your position clear.
 

the sniper

Established Member
Joined
4 Sep 2007
Messages
3,498
So you are you suggesting DOO is unsafe. Or not?

If you are, please provide your supporting evidence.

If you are not, why did you use those words?

I think the point is clear for everyone to see.

If you want to have yet another generic debate about the general safety of DOO, maybe start another thread?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==

Edit: In response to what was added subsequently:

You are the one who appears to be making a claim that a safe method of operation is unsafe; the onus is on you to present your evidence, if that is what you are claiming.

If it is not what you are claiming, then don't beat about the bush and make your position clear.

I think for Drivers working under DOO is less safe, but that it isn't most peoples problem.
 
Last edited:

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
78,463
Location
Yorkshire
I think the point is clear for everyone to see.

If you want to have yet another generic debate about the general safety of DOO, maybe start another thread?
You are the one who appeared to be suggesting that DOO is not safe; I've asked you to clarify if this is what you are saying and you're just beating about the bush.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==

Edit: In response to what was added subsequently:



I think for Drivers working under DOO is less safe, but that it isn't most people's problem.
Can you clarify what you mean by this? I'm all for constructive debate but you are not clarifying your position.

Also you did say earlier:
The "DOO is safe" crowd don't really account for such factors, which makes most discussion on the matter rather awkward. Where I am you feel the need for two people in case one of us gets battered, but that's hard to quantify to people who haven't been in the situation, who's problem it isn't... A big thing over here also is the additional liability when doing the doors.
Are you actually suggesting DOO is not safe? Or was this not intended to be taken as a serious comment? Do you withdraw the comment? I don't understand why you've still not provided clarification; this could have been dealt with very swiftly if you had clarified your position.
 

Parjon

Member
Joined
27 Oct 2022
Messages
518
Location
St Helens
Our union is fighting hard against this, but MTR has been controlling the narrative by saying that the system works great in the UK.

Any input would be much appreciated.
Funny. Normally the Chinese government (of which MTR and any other Chinese state and many "private" companies are an inseparable part) are scathing of anything done here in the UK.

The safety aspect of DOO is used heavily in the UK to defend against its expansion. In reality it's only the strength of the union that prevents it.

Given the Chinese government's despicable and deliberate alignment with an inhuman genocidal dictatorship (and it's vicious war of aggression against civilians), perhaps MTR aren't as in control of the narrative as you think. Should they really have any say in how Swedish society should be run? Are their profits really a priority?

Perhaps this aspect of the narrative needs to be pointed out to public and politicians alike...
 

the sniper

Established Member
Joined
4 Sep 2007
Messages
3,498
by less safe do you mean increased liability for the driver?

Both in terms of liability and circumstances that you could find yourself in, such as dealing with disorderly passengers alone, potentially on trains that are otherwise empty, like described by the OP.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top