±Recent Visitors

Recent Visitors to Com-Central!

±User Info-big


Welcome Anonymous

Nickname
Password

Membership:
Latest: HighestAce
New Today: 0
New Yesterday: 0
Overall: 6648

People Online:
Members: 0
Visitors: 476
Total: 476
Who Is Where:
 Visitors:
01: Home
02: Home
03: Community Forums
04: Community Forums
05: Community Forums
06: Community Forums
07: Downloads
08: Downloads
09: Member Screenshots
10: Home
11: Home
12: Member Screenshots
13: Photo Gallery
14: Photo Gallery
15: Home
16: Home
17: News
18: Your Account
19: Home
20: Home
21: Downloads
22: News
23: Member Screenshots
24: Photo Gallery
25: Member Screenshots
26: Photo Gallery
27: Photo Gallery
28: Home
29: Photo Gallery
30: News Archive
31: News
32: Community Forums
33: Photo Gallery
34: Community Forums
35: Community Forums
36: Home
37: Community Forums
38: Member Screenshots
39: News Archive
40: Member Screenshots
41: Downloads
42: Member Screenshots
43: Community Forums
44: Community Forums
45: Statistics
46: Member Screenshots
47: Your Account
48: Community Forums
49: Community Forums
50: Photo Gallery
51: Community Forums
52: Downloads
53: Home
54: Community Forums
55: Home
56: Community Forums
57: Photo Gallery
58: Community Forums
59: Member Screenshots
60: Community Forums
61: Home
62: Home
63: Home
64: Community Forums
65: Downloads
66: Community Forums
67: Community Forums
68: Photo Gallery
69: Community Forums
70: Home
71: Community Forums
72: Home
73: Member Screenshots
74: Photo Gallery
75: Community Forums
76: Community Forums
77: Home
78: Photo Gallery
79: Home
80: Community Forums
81: Community Forums
82: Home
83: Community Forums
84: Community Forums
85: Member Screenshots
86: Home
87: Photo Gallery
88: Photo Gallery
89: Community Forums
90: Community Forums
91: Member Screenshots
92: Community Forums
93: Member Screenshots
94: Downloads
95: Photo Gallery
96: Downloads
97: Community Forums
98: Member Screenshots
99: Home
100: Photo Gallery
101: Community Forums
102: Community Forums
103: Home
104: Home
105: Home
106: Community Forums
107: Home
108: Home
109: Member Screenshots
110: Member Screenshots
111: Community Forums
112: Downloads
113: LinkToUs
114: Community Forums
115: Home
116: Member Screenshots
117: Home
118: Home
119: Member Screenshots
120: Community Forums
121: Member Screenshots
122: Home
123: Community Forums
124: Home
125: Photo Gallery
126: Community Forums
127: Home
128: Member Screenshots
129: Downloads
130: Community Forums
131: Home
132: Community Forums
133: Member Screenshots
134: Home
135: News
136: Community Forums
137: Photo Gallery
138: Community Forums
139: Community Forums
140: Community Forums
141: Community Forums
142: Home
143: News Archive
144: Community Forums
145: Community Forums
146: Member Screenshots
147: Community Forums
148: Home
149: Community Forums
150: Community Forums
151: Community Forums
152: Home
153: Downloads
154: Community Forums
155: Community Forums
156: Home
157: Community Forums
158: Photo Gallery
159: Community Forums
160: Home
161: Community Forums
162: Community Forums
163: Community Forums
164: Community Forums
165: Community Forums
166: News Archive
167: Community Forums
168: Downloads
169: Community Forums
170: Community Forums
171: Community Forums
172: Community Forums
173: Community Forums
174: Photo Gallery
175: Photo Gallery
176: Community Forums
177: Community Forums
178: Community Forums
179: Community Forums
180: Downloads
181: Community Forums
182: Community Forums
183: Community Forums
184: Community Forums
185: Home
186: Community Forums
187: Member Screenshots
188: Photo Gallery
189: Community Forums
190: Community Forums
191: Community Forums
192: Photo Gallery
193: Downloads
194: Community Forums
195: Photo Gallery
196: Member Screenshots
197: Community Forums
198: Community Forums
199: Downloads
200: Downloads
201: Home
202: Community Forums
203: Community Forums
204: Member Screenshots
205: Member Screenshots
206: Community Forums
207: Home
208: News Archive
209: Statistics
210: Home
211: Community Forums
212: Community Forums
213: Community Forums
214: Home
215: Member Screenshots
216: Community Forums
217: Home
218: Photo Gallery
219: Community Forums
220: Community Forums
221: Home
222: Community Forums
223: Photo Gallery
224: Community Forums
225: Home
226: Community Forums
227: Community Forums
228: Community Forums
229: Community Forums
230: Community Forums
231: Community Forums
232: Downloads
233: Community Forums
234: Community Forums
235: Community Forums
236: Community Forums
237: Community Forums
238: Community Forums
239: Community Forums
240: Community Forums
241: Community Forums
242: Community Forums
243: Community Forums
244: Community Forums
245: Community Forums
246: Community Forums
247: Member Screenshots
248: Community Forums
249: Community Forums
250: Photo Gallery
251: Photo Gallery
252: Community Forums
253: Community Forums
254: Community Forums
255: Community Forums
256: Community Forums
257: Member Screenshots
258: Statistics
259: Downloads
260: Community Forums
261: Downloads
262: Community Forums
263: Home
264: Photo Gallery
265: Community Forums
266: Member Screenshots
267: Home
268: Community Forums
269: Home
270: Community Forums
271: Home
272: Community Forums
273: Community Forums
274: Community Forums
275: Downloads
276: Community Forums
277: Member Screenshots
278: Downloads
279: Community Forums
280: Home
281: Community Forums
282: Community Forums
283: Member Screenshots
284: Photo Gallery
285: Home
286: Statistics
287: Community Forums
288: Statistics
289: Community Forums
290: News
291: Statistics
292: Community Forums
293: News
294: Downloads
295: Downloads
296: Community Forums
297: Home
298: Community Forums
299: Home
300: Community Forums
301: Community Forums
302: Home
303: Home
304: Community Forums
305: Home
306: Member Screenshots
307: Member Screenshots
308: Member Screenshots
309: Home
310: Member Screenshots
311: Home
312: Photo Gallery
313: Downloads
314: Home
315: Home
316: Photo Gallery
317: Home
318: Downloads
319: Community Forums
320: Member Screenshots
321: Downloads
322: Home
323: Home
324: Community Forums
325: Statistics
326: Downloads
327: Photo Gallery
328: Community Forums
329: Community Forums
330: Home
331: Home
332: Community Forums
333: Home
334: Home
335: Photo Gallery
336: Home
337: Home
338: Home
339: Photo Gallery
340: Community Forums
341: Community Forums
342: Community Forums
343: Community Forums
344: Community Forums
345: Photo Gallery
346: Home
347: Member Screenshots
348: Home
349: Community Forums
350: Community Forums
351: Member Screenshots
352: Community Forums
353: Community Forums
354: Home
355: Community Forums
356: Community Forums
357: Community Forums
358: Community Forums
359: Community Forums
360: Community Forums
361: Home
362: Member Screenshots
363: Photo Gallery
364: Home
365: Community Forums
366: Home
367: Photo Gallery
368: Community Forums
369: News
370: Community Forums
371: Community Forums
372: Community Forums
373: Community Forums
374: Photo Gallery
375: Community Forums
376: Photo Gallery
377: Downloads
378: Home
379: Statistics
380: Photo Gallery
381: Community Forums
382: Community Forums
383: Community Forums
384: Community Forums
385: Home
386: Home
387: Photo Gallery
388: Home
389: Photo Gallery
390: Community Forums
391: Statistics
392: Photo Gallery
393: Photo Gallery
394: Home
395: Downloads
396: Home
397: Home
398: Photo Gallery
399: Community Forums
400: Community Forums
401: Community Forums
402: Community Forums
403: Community Forums
404: Home
405: News Archive
406: Community Forums
407: Community Forums
408: Community Forums
409: Photo Gallery
410: Community Forums
411: Member Screenshots
412: Downloads
413: Community Forums
414: Home
415: News Archive
416: Community Forums
417: Downloads
418: Community Forums
419: Community Forums
420: Community Forums
421: Community Forums
422: News
423: Community Forums
424: Downloads
425: Downloads
426: Home
427: Community Forums
428: Photo Gallery
429: Community Forums
430: Community Forums
431: Downloads
432: Community Forums
433: Downloads
434: Community Forums
435: Photo Gallery
436: Home
437: Home
438: Home
439: Community Forums
440: Community Forums
441: Home
442: Home
443: Downloads
444: Community Forums
445: Photo Gallery
446: Community Forums
447: Community Forums
448: Photo Gallery
449: Home
450: Community Forums
451: Community Forums
452: Community Forums
453: Member Screenshots
454: Downloads
455: Community Forums
456: Photo Gallery
457: Your Account
458: Community Forums
459: Statistics
460: Home
461: Community Forums
462: Community Forums
463: Community Forums
464: Community Forums
465: Community Forums
466: Community Forums
467: Member Screenshots
468: Member Screenshots
469: Member Screenshots
470: Member Screenshots
471: Member Screenshots
472: Community Forums
473: Community Forums
474: Home
475: Home
476: Downloads

Staff Online:

No staff members are online!
Marine Corps looking for EFV alternatives...
The AFV ASSOCIATION was formed in 1964 to support the thoughts and research of all those interested in Armored Fighting Vehicles and related topics, such as AFV drawings. The emphasis has always been on sharing information and communicating with other members of similar interests; e.g. German armor, Japanese AFVs, or whatever.
Post new topic    Reply to topic    Printer Friendly Page     Forum Index ›  AFV News Discussion Board

View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Neil_Baumgardner
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 3942
Location: Arlington, VA
PostPosted: Mon Feb 26, 2007 4:07 am
Post subject: Marine Corps looking for EFV alternatives...

money.cnn.com/news/new...RTUNE5.htm

Marines Not Recommending End Of General Dynamics Amphib Pact

February 22, 2007: 06:54 PM EST

WASHINGTON -(Dow Jones)- The U.S. Marines aren't recommending that a big General Dynamics Corp. (GD) amphibious vehicle contract be canceled, even though a new competition is on the table, a Marine Corps spokesman said Thursday.

The Marines are trying to get their multibillion dollar Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle program back on track, after it failed initial testing last year. Last month, program officials said it faced up to three years in redesign work.

Now the Pentagon has asked industry about possible alternate designs for the program. Replies to the "sources sought" notice are due Friday, and could include anything from minor modifications to an entire new vehicle design.

This raises questions about whether General Dynamics will keep the program. Defense Department officials have turned up the heat on General Dynamics in recent weeks - for example, on Feb. 13, Navy Secretary Donald Winter told a House Appropriations Committee panel that the Navy was considering "funding of a second source."

But the Marines say it's too early to throw in the towel on the General Dynamics design.

"We have not made any recommendation to terminate our contracts with General Dynamics," said David Branham, a spokesman for the Marine Corps program office, in a Thursday telephone interview.

The Marine Corps plan calls for buying seven new vehicles over the next two years to build and test improvements to the original design. Industry responses could complement that effort.

"The only thing that we're doing, is we're trying to hear from who's out there that has the requisite expertise to weigh in with capabilities that may be applied to these problems," Branham said.

BAE Systems PLC (BAESY) is the only other major manufacturer of tracked vehicles. Industry observers said BAE might contribute to the redesign effort, but it's unlikely the military would want a completely new alternate design.

"It is not realistic at this point in the history of the EFV program to talk about a new design or a second source," said Lexington Institute defense analyst Loren Thompson. "If the existing amphibious vehicles are not replaced expeditiously, people are going to die."

Defense Department weapons buyers are scheduled to discuss the program next week at a Defense Acquisition Board meeting. That panel will weigh alternatives and possibly settle on a way forward.

General Dynamics spokesman Rob Doolittle said the current EFV design has met most of its performance parameters. The company will continue to work on improvements.

"We are working closely with the marines to achieve the reliability that they desire," Doolittle said.

BAE Systems declined to comment.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

www.dodtechmatch.com/D...7854070032

This announcement constitutes a Sources Sought Synopsis for market research. This is NOT a Request for Proposal. The following information is requested to assist the United States Marine Corps Direct Reporting Program Manager, Advanced Amphibious Assault (DRPM AAA) in conducting market research of industry. The DRPM AAA is seeking source information from industry leaders who develop and produce track combat vehicles that can provide an alternate design concept of the Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle (EFV) that will include concept drawings, architecture, design analysis for selected alternate subsystems (Preliminary Design Review level of design completion). A follow-on effort may be requested for a possible detailed alternate design to include design analysis, test results (where applicable) for selected alternate subsystems (Critical Design Review level of design completion). This request is for information only and is intended to identify companies that can devel! op and produce a reliable amphibious capability that is a self-deploying, high-water-speed, amphibious, armored tracked vehicle and is capable of seamlessly transporting Marines from ships located beyond the horizon (approximately 25 nautical miles) to inland objectives. It must provide essential command, control, communications, and intelligence (C4I) functions for embarked personnel and EFV units. The mission of the EFV Program is to field an EFV that will provide the principle means of tactical surface mobility for the Marine Air Ground Task Force (MAGTF) during both ship-to-objective maneuver and sustained combat operations ashore as part of the Navy and Marine Corps concepts within the Expeditionary Maneuver Warfare (EMW) capstone. The EFV will provide the MAGTF with increased operational tempo, survivability, and lethality throughout the battle space and across all quadrants of conflict. Companies or teams interested in responding to this request should mail the fol! lowing: a statement of the company's professional, technical and other capabilities, facilities and history with this type of development or similar development, the name and telephone number of a company representative that can be contacted, and the company's address. Contractors should submit responses electronically to Robin Kuschel at Kuschelrj @ efv.usmc.mil, no later than 5:00 PM EST on February 23, 2007. Information submitted to DRPM AAA in response to this notice will be treated as subject to the Trade Secrets Act and not generally releasable to the public unless otherwise indicated. It is emphasized this information is for planning and information purposes only and is NOT to be construed as a commitment by the Government to enter into a contractual agreement, nor will the Government pay for information solicited. No solicitation exists; therefore, do not request a copy of the solicitation. It is a potential offeror's responsibility to monitor these sites for the release of any solicitation or synopsis.
Back to top
View user's profile
Roy_A_Lingle
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 1997
Location: El Paso & Ft Bliss, Texas
PostPosted: Mon Feb 26, 2007 8:37 am
Post subject: Re: Marine Corps looking for EFV alternatives...

Hi Folks!

I think within the last two months or so, I have seen the Gunny do a report on the EFV on Mail Call and last week, or maybe the week before that ex-Navy Seal did a report on Future Weapons.

One of the things that was done on Future Weapons that impressed me was one of the test vehicles was lifted up in the air and the driver retracted the track system. At the front and rear, panels slide out to cover the opening left by the tracks. For the long bottom run, panels mounted flat along the hull bottom folded outward to cover the bottom run. After all the different panels did their thing, the track system was up and out of sight and not dragging in the water.

Both shows gave it glowing reports. I wonder what the problem or problems are?
Sgt, Scouts Out!

_________________
"You can never have too much reconnaissance."
General G.S. Patton Jr.
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail
bsmart
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 23, 2006
Posts: 2523
Location: Central Maryland
PostPosted: Mon Feb 26, 2007 10:24 am
Post subject: Re: Marine Corps looking for EFV alternatives...

I think the main problem is finding money to pay for anything that won't be used in Iraq.

Ever since Desert Storm I've been wondering how much sense it made to use AAVs for long cross country runs. in ODS I figured 'well it's a one time thing' but then we saw them used on the long run up to Bahgdad in the latest adventure and I kept seeing them used as regular cross country transportation. I wonder what shape they will be in for amphibious use after they have been driven around the desert so much?

I saw part of the Future Weapons segment and found myself wondering how practical a beach landing weapons system is these days. Even with the high speed and longer range I just wonder if the capability would ever be used.

_________________
Bob Smart ([email protected])
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail
mike_Duplessis
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 236

PostPosted: Mon Feb 26, 2007 4:18 pm
Post subject: Re: Marine Corps looking for EFV alternatives...

Did anybody see a mention of which design goals weren't met? That's a rather diffuse phrase. It could either refer to seat cover material cracking or the thing refusing to float for more than fifteen minutes. Both of those would be considered a 'failed test'. The U.S. has a longtime history of its reach exceeding its grasp on light vehicle design. Remember aaaaaall those light tank designs to replace Sheridan over the past 25-ish years?
Back to top
View user's profile
Doug_Kibbey
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 23, 2006
Posts: 4678
Location: The Great Satan
PostPosted: Mon Feb 26, 2007 4:24 pm
Post subject: Re: Marine Corps looking for EFV alternatives...

- mike_Duplessis
Did anybody see a mention of which design goals weren't met? That's a rather diffuse phrase. It could either refer to seat cover material cracking or the thing refusing to float for more than fifteen minutes. Both of those would be considered a 'failed test'. The U.S. has a longtime history of its reach exceeding its grasp on light vehicle design. Remember aaaaaall those light tank designs to replace Sheridan over the past 25-ish years?


I don't recall the Army (in particular) really seeming to want one very badly....and certainly not enough to divert any funds from anything it wanted more...like Bradley or Abrams. I had the impression that lighter "tanks" (as we understand them) had been pretty much dismissed as irrelevant. Not that I agree with that.
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website Photo Gallery
Cloudy
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Mar 06, 2006
Posts: 75

PostPosted: Wed Feb 28, 2007 4:23 am
Post subject: Re: Marine Corps looking for EFV alternatives...

Here's the Gov't Accounting Office's report on the EFV:

www.gao.gov/new.items/d06349.pdf

Do you realize that they currently cost 12 million dollars+ each? Yikes!
After watching the complicated track retraction sequence on "Future Weapons" (first time I ever saw a good view of it), small wonder that they are having hydraulic problems...

Alan
Back to top
View user's profile
JimWeb
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 1439
Location: The back of beyond
PostPosted: Wed Feb 28, 2007 8:31 am
Post subject: Re: Marine Corps looking for EFV alternatives...

I'm sure I read an article where Vickers engineers took a look at the EFV and when they had finished laughing suggested that the whole hydraulic folding nonsense be abandoned in favor of a bolt on box on the front of the vehicle that held an inflatable bottom section. The idea being that once the vehicle entered the water the bottom section was inflated it formed a bow and covered the tracks etc. Then the vehicle commenced its high-speed run into the beach. When it was close enough to the beach the bottom section was then deflated and jettisoned and the EFV finished the run in its normal amphibious mode.

It sounded a more practical idea as the EFV doesn't have to make the high-speed approach everytime its used but I suspect the idea fell foul of the NIH syndrome and, probably the manufacturers profit margin as it could have slashed the cost of the vehicle apparently despite having to fit a new inflatable section each time.

Cool

_________________
TTFN
Jim

If your not a member of JED then your
not serious about anything military..

***********************
www.jedsite.info
JED Military Equipment
***********************
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website ICQ Number
Cloudy
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Mar 06, 2006
Posts: 75

PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 1:03 am
Post subject: Re: Marine Corps looking for EFV alternatives...

I sort of expected mechanical arms & legs to be deployed and that the pilot would stand the thing up and stride down the beach into the sea and walk along undetected on the sea bottom Wink
Back to top
View user's profile
JimWeb
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 1439
Location: The back of beyond
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 1:05 am
Post subject: Re: Marine Corps looking for EFV alternatives...

- Cloudy
I sort of expected mechanical arms & legs to be deployed and that the pilot would stand the thing up and stride down the beach into the sea and walk along undetected on the sea bottom Wink


I think that was the backup irish solution... Laughing

Cool

_________________
TTFN
Jim

If your not a member of JED then your
not serious about anything military..

***********************
www.jedsite.info
JED Military Equipment
***********************
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website ICQ Number
johnestauffer
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 5

PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 10:22 pm
Post subject: Re: Marine Corps looking for EFV alternatives...

I saw some pictures of a 'EFV" like vehicle on that was in development by the PRC that looked much like a clone of the USMC's vehicle (except for the turret)

It does seem that the EFV concept is stretching things a bit.
Why go to the trouble of creating a single service, expensive vehicle?
It would seem more cost effective to focus on more LCAC's or similiar platforms that had more versitility.
Back to top
View user's profile
Doug_Kibbey
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 23, 2006
Posts: 4678
Location: The Great Satan
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 10:47 pm
Post subject: Re: Marine Corps looking for EFV alternatives...

- johnestauffer
It does seem that the EFV concept is stretching things a bit.
Why go to the trouble of creating a single service, expensive vehicle?
It would seem more cost effective to focus on more LCAC's or similiar platforms that had more versitility.


I get to watch those from time to time out here where I live and while they kick up a mess o' mist, I see your point.

I saw that "Futureweapons" episode and the one point I thought strange was the emphasis on "over the horizon" approach. I think he kept referencing distances like 20 miles out or so...maybe more, like 25-30. That seems like a long way to be cruising in for the sake of stealth. OK, it's probably less detectable than a low flying CH-46, but a lot slower. I just wonder how sneaky that kind of op really is and how often you'd get to use it in a forced entry kind of scenario? (if you'd even defined that as "forced") Then again, I'm not used to thinking like a Marine. Seems like a lot of water to cross, to me.
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website Photo Gallery
Neil_Baumgardner
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 3942
Location: Arlington, VA
PostPosted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 3:38 am
Post subject: Re: Marine Corps looking for EFV alternatives...

I theory thats the advantage, keeps ships out of visual & artillery distance from shore - that way enemy may know the Marines are somewhere over the horizon, but dont know exactly what beach they will hit...

My biggest question about Marine Corps amtracs is the need to carry 2 squads in each. It raises/stresses a lot of the requirements when you have to stuff 20+ guys in the back. Of course just carrying a squad like other APCs / IFVs means a lot more vehicles you have to buy... But you know, there is a reason why armies dont go around in vehicles like M59s and M75s...

Way back in the 80s United Defense offered an amphib version of the Bradley...

Neil
Back to top
View user's profile
Doug_Kibbey
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 23, 2006
Posts: 4678
Location: The Great Satan
PostPosted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 3:53 am
Post subject: Re: Marine Corps looking for EFV alternatives...

- Neil_Baumgardner
I theory thats the advantage, keeps ships out of visual & artillery distance from shore - that way enemy may know the Marines are somewhere over the horizon, but dont know exactly what beach they will hit...
Neil


Yeah, I recognized the advantage of keeping 'em guessing, though there are now missiles that'll reach out that far. Still, 30-45 minutes or so to reach the beach?
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website Photo Gallery
Cloudy
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Mar 06, 2006
Posts: 75

PostPosted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 4:40 am
Post subject: Re: Marine Corps looking for EFV alternatives...

Marine squads are larger than Army squads - as I recall around 13 men. Transporting more men per vehicle is probably more efficient when it comes to storing the vehicles aboard ship. I wonder how they would be used? Suppress the defenses with Marine air assets and advertise that the Marines will soon be landing , send in the EFV's with no softening up from over the horizon in a "stealth" attack with CAS timed to arrive as they hit the beach or no CAS until called to avoid radar detection of the assault force?
Back to top
View user's profile
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    Reply to topic    Printer Friendly Page    Forum Index ›  AFV News Discussion Board
Page 1 of 1
All times are GMT - 6 Hours



Jump to:  


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum