Class 745 Stadler FLIRTs

AM9 · 10 Jan 2020

trebor79 said:
I don't think much of that is actually true.
Acceleration does not involve braking. And a lot of braking is regenerative on modern stock anyway.
I highly doubt that acceleration has any impact at all on track or wheel wear, unless the wheels are slipping, which again modern electronics takes care of.
Accelerating away quickly rather than dawdling means junctions and sections will be cleared more quickly, helping to keep other traffic flowing smoothly.
Ultimately, it takes the same amount of energy to accelerate several hundred tonnes of train from rest to 100mph, regardless of whether you do that quickly or slowly.
If there was no good reason to have such acceleration rates available, they wouldn't have installed 5.2MW of traction equipment and could have saved lots of money by chopping half of it out.
In short, quick acceleration does not "waste energy" in the slightest.

Hard acceleration does affect track and wheel wear even if there is little or no loss of traction. The 755s have just 22% of the wheels driven which is less than most of the BR MKIII trains (mostly 25%), so even with modern wheelsip control electronics, drivers would need to moderate their driving to reduce the chance of slippage, which certainly does cause excessive wear. Also, applying full power generates more heat, therefore the motors are (slightly) less efficient, plus there would be additional power wasted as cooling systems are needed to work nearer their maxima.
As far as braking goes, regenerative systems do not return all the power expended in the kinetic energy carried by the train's speed, typical figures can be as high as 60-70%, but that is generally under ideal conditions. The losses include the transformer loss when accelerating as well as decelerating, and the electronic traction control system is not without losses.

RailUK Forums

Railperf · 10 Jan 2020

AM9 said:
Hard acceleration does affect track and wheel wear even if there is little or no loss of traction. The 755s have just 22% of the wheels driven which is less than most of the BR MKIII trains (mostly 25%), so even with modern wheelsip control electronics, drivers would need to moderate their driving to reduce the chance of slippage, which certainly does cause excessive wear. Also, applying full power generates more heat, therefore the motors are (slightly) less efficient, plus there would be additional power wasted as cooling systems are needed to work nearer their maxima.
As far as braking goes, regenerative systems do not return all the power expended in the kinetic energy carried by the train's speed, typical figures can be as high as 60-70%, but that is generally under ideal conditions. The losses include the transformer loss when accelerating as well as decelerating, and the electronic traction control system is not without losses.

The 745s have 8 driven axles compared to only 4 for a Class 90 hauled rake.
We see drivers easing off power in slippery conditions for sure. But on a dry rail full power is used..though some drivers delay applying full power to around 10 to 15mph.
Must remember here that full power in the controller does not mean full load on the motors. The load on the motors in controlled by computers to prevent electronic overload.
In the case of GWR Class 800..full power would only deliver enough electrical current to meet a specified acceleration rate. That is why the mechanically identical 802s without the same acceleration specification were faster. Obviously now the 800s have had the software tweaked to deliver the same power as the 802s.

samuelmorris · 10 Jan 2020

AM9 said:
Hard acceleration does affect track and wheel wear even if there is little or no loss of traction. The 755s have just 22% of the wheels driven which is less than most of the BR MKIII trains (mostly 25%), so even with modern wheelsip control electronics, drivers would need to moderate their driving to reduce the chance of slippage, which certainly does cause excessive wear. Also, applying full power generates more heat, therefore the motors are (slightly) less efficient, plus there would be additional power wasted as cooling systems are needed to work nearer their maxima.
As far as braking goes, regenerative systems do not return all the power expended in the kinetic energy carried by the train's speed, typical figures can be as high as 60-70%, but that is generally under ideal conditions. The losses include the transformer loss when accelerating as well as decelerating, and the electronic traction control system is not without losses.

For 745s yes but 33% for a 755/4, 40% for a 755/3. 22% is still a lot more than the 10% (or less) a loco-hauled rake has to deal with.

trebor79 · 10 Jan 2020

AM9 said:
Also, applying full power generates more heat, therefore the motors are (slightly) less efficient,

I don't think you really understand any of these issues. Let's take this as an example.
Yes, a motor working harder will generate more waste heat. But the train's accelerating more quickly, so the motor will shut off more quickly than at a lower power setting.
If you accelerate more slowly, the motor will generate less wattage of waste heat, but for a longer period of time.
Lightly loaded induction motors are actually *less* efficient than one running at full power, due to power factor effects you generate more waste heat elsewhere in the system.
So you'd have the trains trundling around, making both the rail network and their own power consumption less efficient than @dk1 and his cohorts doing what they do and smashing the power controller to full.

AM9 · 10 Jan 2020

Railperf said:
The 745s have 8 driven axles compared to only 4 for a Class 90 hauled rake.
We see drivers easing off power in slippery conditions for sure. But on a dry rail dull power is used..though some drivers delay applying full power to around 10 to 15mph.

OK, but the 745s have an unusually low number of driven axles for a modern multiple unit, especially as there is more power available to each of those wheels (650kW) than any other unit that I can think of. If there is a need to work the trains on what is more a 100mph outer-suburban style route than a true inter-city one, then the trains will need a traction system like an outer suburban train does. For example, a class700 has 5000kW per 12-car train weighing 410 tonnes with 50% powered axles, and that is a 100mph train designed to nip in and out between 125mph class222s and HSTs. The 10-car class 720/1 replacements for the 360s and 321s will also have a similar traction configuration, which will probably run like 100mph class 345s. High power isn't much use if it's ditribution concentrates it on too few axles.
I haven't seen the weights for the class745s yet but I would guess that it is something between 350 and 400 tonnes. The train has 6 Jacobs bogies that saves the weight of 5 conventional types but not that much and the concentration of weight at the ends of each 6-car sub-unit would not mitigate the load of the remaining 4 + two-half cars.

samuelmorris · 10 Jan 2020

trebor79 said:
I don't think you really understand any of these issues. Let's take this as an example.
Yes, a motor working harder will generate more waste heat. But the train's accelerating more quickly, so the motor will shut off more quickly than at a lower power setting.
If you accelerate more slowly, the motor will generate less wattage of waste heat, but for a longer period of time.
Lightly loaded induction motors are actually *less* efficient than one running at full power, due to power factor effects you generate more waste heat elsewhere in the system.
So you'd have the trains trundling around, making both the rail network and their own power consumption less efficient than @dk1 and his cohorts doing what they do and smashing the power controller to full.

Modern control software would negate either of those issues automatically I suspect, but considering older technology, I would disagree about the thermal issue since there will be a fixed rate of cooling (or linear from passive airflow at higher speed) versus an exponential increase in heat generated - there will be a point at which that suddenly exceeds available cooling.

I do agree, however, with the inefficiencies of running at lower speeds, you can effectively hear that in action from the loud noise most IGBT and GTO systems produce at lower speed when 'gearing' the power output.

Railperf · 10 Jan 2020

AM9 said:
OK, but the 745s have an unusually low number of driven axles for a modern multiple unit, especially as there is more power available to each of those wheels (650kW) than any other unit that I can think of. If there is a need to work the trains on what is more a 100mph outer-suburban style route than a true inter-city one, then the trains will need a traction system like an outer suburban train does. For example, a class700 has 5000kW per 12-car train weighing 410 tonnes with 50% powered axles, and that is a 100mph train designed to nip in and out between 125mph class222s and HSTs. The 10-car class 720/1 replacements for the 360s and 321s will also have a similar traction configuration, which will probably run like 100mph class 345s. High power isn't much use if it's ditribution concentrates it on too few axles.
I haven't seen the weights for the class745s yet but I would guess that it is something between 350 and 400 tonnes. The train has 6 Jacobs bogies that saves the weight of 5 conventional types but not that much and the concentration of weight at the ends of each 6-car sub-unit would not mitigate the load of the remaining 4 + two-half cars.

Plated weight of 375t for the 745.
The 700s and 720s are designed for services with much denser station stop patterns. So that explains their greater axle to power ratio.
Stadler obviously have been running this power to axle ratio successfully in Europe..so unless railhead conditions here prove to much worse than expected..it may well be a configuration that works well.
But yes you do get the impression on a greasy railhead that a few extra bags of cement would be useful over the powered bogies to aid traction. as 1980s Ford Capri drivers can sympathise with.

Possibly Eurostar Class 373 sets have a greater power to axle ratio.

Railperf · 10 Jan 2020

Is there an optimum power to axle ratio?
Class 90s for example can deliver 7650hp for a short burst (iirc)so 1900 hp per axle!!

bahnause · 10 Jan 2020

Railperf said:
Is there an optimum power to axle ratio?
Class 90s for example can deliver 7650hp for a short burst (iirc)so 1900 hp per axle!!

There is an optimum tractive effort. You don‘t need more tractive effort then you can use under optimum conditions (dry rail, good track and wheel condition). Normal friction coefficient for dry rails is around 0.35. The other variable is the weight on wheels.

Maximum tractive effort=coefficient of friction × Weight on wheel.

Power becomes a limiting factor at higher speeds, it defines for how long (which speed) the maximum traction effort is available.

Railperf · 10 Jan 2020

bahnause said:
There is an optimum tractive effort. You don‘t need more tractive effort then you can use under optimum conditions (dry rail, good track and wheel condition). Normal friction coefficient for dry rails is around 0.35. The other variable is the weight on wheels.

Maximum tractive effort=coefficient of friction × Weight on wheel.

Power becomes a limiting factor at higher speeds, it defines for how long (which speed) the maximum traction effort is available.

That is probably why the 200km/h versions such as Norwegian Railways Type 74 get an extra powered bogie per 5-car set.

absolutelymilk · 10 Jan 2020

I think we're getting a bit off topic here, maybe time for a new thread "Does accelerating quickly use more energy for EMUs?"

MisterT · 10 Jan 2020

It is off topic, but we did some pretty extensive testing in the Netherlands on the subject of driving style and energy consumption, and in all situations, accelerating with full power to the maximum speed, and coasting the longest distance possible was the most efficient way to drive.
We have developed an app on a tablet for the drivers (see the attached picture) that calculates the maximum coasting distance based on the actual (GPS) position of the train and gives the driver the difference between the scheduled time of arrival and the actual arrival time if the driver coasts from that point (and other information like our timetable, distance to the next station, current position, train formation, and a real-time feed from the signaller post, so we can see in real-time if our path has been set, other trains in front of us, etc.).
For example the attached image shows that I'm coasting and that I'm 16 seconds early (so I could have started coasting a bit earlier).

Carlgoss · 10 Jan 2020

Oh dear. On my first 745(007) and initial impression.. I don’t like it. Wobbling side to side with rumbling rails below the carriage. Every point or crossing creating quite a shake and din. All the problems mentioned elsewhere on this thread including breaking up Public address system, dopey information screens, seat strut, bright lighting, hard seats, etc but the worst bit for someone who likes to sit in the window seat.. the boiling hot heating tubes up against your leg. I am currently sitting at a table and to avoid burning my shin I’m sitting with legs pointing to the aisle seats. And this train actually feels claustrophobic first off.. the sea of big thick tall headrests. Oh hell .. I wanted so much to love these. I’m rattling side to side so much typing this commment is a challenge. Thank goodness for spelchick. I need time I think and perhaps try some different seats. Acceleration etc is superb. Overall 007 leaves me shaken.. not particularly stirred.. well someone had to do it.

captainbigun · 10 Jan 2020

MisterT said:
It is off topic, but we did some pretty extensive testing in the Netherlands on the subject of driving style and energy consumption, and in all situations, accelerating with full power to the maximum speed, and coasting the longest distance possible was the most efficient way to drive.
We have developed an app on a tablet for the drivers (see the attached picture) that calculates the maximum coasting distance based on the actual (GPS) position of the train and gives the driver the difference between the scheduled time of arrival and the actual arrival time if the driver coasts from that point (and other information like our timetable, distance to the next station, current position, train formation, and a real-time feed from the signaller post, so we can see in real-time if our path has been set, other trains in front of us, etc.).
For example the attached image shows that I'm coasting and that I'm 16 seconds early (so I could have started coasting a bit earlier).

Where timetabling and margins allow a train to accelerate to line speed this makes sense. The route the 745s are operating over largely doesn't allow this. It is constrained by the sheer quantity of mixed stopping pattern passengers trains and off peak you add freight to the mix. Line speed is often not attained on the busier parts of the route.

dk1 · 10 Jan 2020

captainbigun said:
Where timetabling and margins allow a train to accelerate to line speed this makes sense. The route the 745s are operating over largely doesn't allow this. It is constrained by the sheer quantity of mixed stopping pattern passengers trains and off peak you add freight to the mix. Line speed is often not attained on the busier parts of the route.

100mph is attainable most of the way from Norwich to Chelmsford & vice versa & that's with 90/DVTs.

captainbigun · 10 Jan 2020

Yes.....and then the punter and path count reaches its max. And as the need for more capacity increases and the Chelmsford starters move East saturation will reach further out.

MisterT · 10 Jan 2020

captainbigun said:
Where timetabling and margins allow a train to accelerate to line speed this makes sense. The route the 745s are operating over largely doesn't allow this. It is constrained by the sheer quantity of mixed stopping pattern passengers trains and off peak you add freight to the mix. Line speed is often not attained on the busier parts of the route.

It doesn't have to be line speed. We have an "advised speed", which is mostly used when there are conflicts with other trains. Using that information and the real-time status displayed on the tablet ,we are still able to drive trains as optimised as possible.

dk1 · 10 Jan 2020

We started using a tablet based Driver Advisory System (DAS) a couple of years back but I know no driving colleagues who even bother with this irritating addition anymore. There have been murmurs that it may return & appear on the TMS screens on the newer stock but we live on hope that it doesn't.

MisterT · 10 Jan 2020

Well, if it's a bit like here in the Netherlands, I wouldn't get your hopes up. It is already integrated here in the newest trains. The tablet is only for the older train types that doesn't have it integrated.

The system works actually pretty well. There was some aversion in the past, but now only some very stubborn drivers still don't want to use it. About 80-90% of the drivers use it now, if only for the real-time feed from the signalling post. I have been using it for about 5 years now, since it first became available, and I love it. As a driver, I can anticipate much better on all upcoming things. The signallers are very happy too: they have lot less phone calls to answer as every driver can see in real-time what's happening.

Railperf · 10 Jan 2020

captainbigun said:
Where timetabling and margins allow a train to accelerate to line speed this makes sense. The route the 745s are operating over largely doesn't allow this. It is constrained by the sheer quantity of mixed stopping pattern passengers trains and off peak you add freight to the mix. Line speed is often not attained on the busier parts of the route.

Absolutely North of Chelmsford, 100mph is very attainable for long distances. I would argue that accelerating to line speed quickly and maintaining it gives a better margin of safety later on because they can approach the station more gently. And to be honest, any extra dwell time is always welcome especially on busy services. But no point running so early that you end up at signals waiting for the train ahead to clear. That's why to my mind a good DAS system should give drivers a better view of what is going on ahead. If drivers know what the next two or three signal aspects are, they are better advised as to the state of the road ahead - unless it is a straight road where you can visually see the signals ahead.

South of Chelmsford it is mainly 85/90 mph.

As an example, despite shaving off 40 seconds off a Class 90 run leaving Colchester towards London, the 745 was two minutes down passing Ilford, where the 90 had a clear run to the capital, in fact as clear a run as I have ever experienced. So almost three minutes lost due to other trains timetabled very closely ahead.
The weekday/Saturday timetable south of Chelmsford is very intense indeed.

Railperf · 10 Jan 2020

dk1 said:
We started using a tablet based Driver Advisory System (DAS) a couple of years back but I know no driving colleagues who even bother with this irritating addition anymore. There have been murmurs that it may return & appear on the TMS screens on the newer stock but we live on hope that it doesn't.

Did you not find DAS even slightly helpful? What was the main issue?
Personally i don't see the obsession in arriving on the second for a precise arrival time - when i see how many station dwell times are far longer than booked. I would rather arrive as early as poss - within the limits. Gives you a chance for a PNB if you ned one rather than having to bring a 'bottle'. lol.

Railperf · 10 Jan 2020

MisterT said:
It doesn't have to be line speed. We have an "advised speed", which is mostly used when there are conflicts with other trains. Using that information and the real-time status displayed on the tablet ,we are still able to drive trains as optimised as possible.

Probably the system works well when you are on a low density traffic route with reasonably reliable infrastructure and not many other trains to worry about.
But on the congested Liverpool Street to Colchester route, i personally think DAS in its current state is an unnecessary distraction that good drivers do not need!

dk1 · 10 Jan 2020

Railperf said:
Did you not find DAS even slightly helpful? What was the main issue?
Personally i don't see the obsession in arriving on the second for a precise arrival time - when i see how many station dwell times are far longer than booked. I would rather arrive as early as poss - within the limits. Gives you a chance for a PNB if you ned one rather than having to bring a 'bottle'. lol.

Couldn't bear it telling me to slow down when I knew there was an ESR further on so I'd end up being late. Irritated me so much I got the greatest pleasure out of it telling me I was ignoring its advice :lol:

Originally we had to use it, then all power cables where removed from DMUs due to fire risk so most lost interest in using them on the main line too. We still use the cables on the locos but purely for charging the tablets whilst driving.

dk1 · 10 Jan 2020

Railperf said:
Probably the system works well when you are on a low density traffic route with reasonably reliable infrastructure and not many other trains to worry about.
But on the congested Liverpool Street to Colchester route, i personally think DAS in its current state is an unnecessary distraction that good drivers do not need!

Exactly, it's nothing but an annoying distraction.

MisterT · 10 Jan 2020

Railperf said:
Probably the system works well when you are on a low density traffic route with reasonably reliable infrastructure and not many other trains to worry about.
But on the congested Liverpool Street to Colchester route, i personally think DAS in its current state is an unnecessary distraction that good drivers do not need!

What do you call "low density"? We use it on all lines, including lines where trains drive within 90-120 seconds from each other at line speed and it works perfectly fine.
As soon as the train is near a station (scheduled stop), it will switch off the advise and only show the scheduled time to arrival (or count your delay when delayed). Studies have shown that drivers aren't distracted by the system. Only for the first day when everything is new, but it soon becomes a second nature, just like checking the speedometer, all the gauges, warning lights, etc.

But of course that is the Dutch system. I guess that the system used in the UK is completely different, and there are obviously also many differences between the rail networks, also in timetabling requirements, which might make a lot of difference in the usability.

Railperf · 10 Jan 2020

MisterT said:
What do you call "low density"? We use it on all lines, including lines where trains drive within 90-120 seconds from each other at line speed and it works perfectly fine.
As soon as the train is near a station (scheduled stop), it will switch off the advise and only show the scheduled time to arrival (or count your delay when delayed). Studies have shown that drivers aren't distracted by the system. Only for the first day when everything is new, but it soon becomes a second nature, just like checking the speedometer, all the gauges, warning lights, etc.

Maybe it works well there. I do not dispute that even if you are running at 2 minute headways. But something diesn't work here.
Anyway getting back OT, I thought the drivers used the additional performance well. This talk of 'excess' acceleration is bonkers! They were able to coast and approach stations gently. There was loads of dwell time for passengers to embark / disembark. And those that arrived typically 1 to 2 mins earlier than usual were happy. It was a win win all round from.a performance point of view.

trebor79 · 10 Jan 2020

Carlgoss said:
Oh dear. On my first 745(007) and initial impression.. I don’t like it. Wobbling side to side with rumbling rails below the carriage. Every point or crossing creating quite a shake and din. All the problems mentioned elsewhere on this thread including breaking up Public address system, dopey information screens, seat strut, bright lighting, hard seats, etc but the worst bit for someone who likes to sit in the window seat.. the boiling hot heating tubes up against your leg. I am currently sitting at a table and to avoid burning my shin I’m sitting with legs pointing to the aisle seats. And this train actually feels claustrophobic first off.. the sea of big thick tall headrests. Oh hell .. I wanted so much to love these. I’m rattling side to side so much typing this commment is a challenge. Thank goodness for spelchick. I need time I think and perhaps try some different seats. Acceleration etc is superb. Overall 007 leaves me shaken.. not particularly stirred.. well someone had to do it.

Rail noise and the numb backside were my main disappointments. The seats aren't too hard, the base is just a bit small so there isn't enough thigh support. Might be better once they've softened up a bit.
A lot more of the seats are raised than the 755 and it does make it quite cosy, bit I think there are enough table seats scattered about to make it ok.
I thought the ride was no worse than the hauled stock.
I think they are pretty near perfect for the route, and I'm sure the extra 150 seats or so will go down with people who regularly stand from Ipswich, Colchester and Chelmsford.

Carlgoss · 10 Jan 2020

Trebor 79 I agree and see exactly what you mean. I know I'm expecting too much, but humour me here! I reckon it's the Swiss connection. An hour after getting off 007, and reflection time.. I was thinking about the 'similar' trains I've spent years with in Switzerland and Germany. The same style heating ducts just don't get in the way out there.. so why here? The trains there seem far more airy, and the ride quality seems far better (is this a track/gauge thing?) 007 really felt like a regional stopping train would in Switzerland.. not intercity. I spoke to a couple of other folk who were very happy with 007 and I have to admit it's great to get something new and i'm really happy for that. Maybe it's because I've had 35 years of a daily commute on MK2's and 3's, and yes people did occasionally momentarily lose their balance walking down the aisle on those, but they were doing it tonight. OK I don't know what I was expecting, but I think we're going to be missing those yellow MK3 aluminium knobs. It took the person in front of me to push the exit button several times before the various whirring sounds began. I even thought 'OK I'll try those toilets everyone's talking about.. and yes I had all the same problems (why did the flush button lights go out when you move away from the pan) And the pathetically feeble sink which spills over the floor. The door that opens onto the worlds eyes, and leaves you standing there while it decides to slowly revolve shut. Initial impression for me.. Why are these not the same as similar trains in Switzerland? I just don't get it. Maybe it's like Swiss wine.. they keep all the good stuff for themselves. But wait till the end of next week and i'll no doubt be singing their praises.. as well as mourning the loss of some old friends. Anyroad up, well done GA this bit of the rollout is going well so far!

Bletchleyite · 10 Jan 2020

Carlgoss said:
So an hour after getting off 007, and reflection time.. I was thinking about the 'similar' trains I've spent years with in Switzerland and Germany. The same style heating ducts just don't get in the way out there.. so why here?

Because the UIC profile allows for a square body, whereas the UK profile requires it to taper in towards platform level, which is even more pronounced with a low floor. Stadler's "we can build whatever you want in the quantities you want" thing uses modular components, so the UK units will use the same heating ducts as the Swiss units, as a result of which they will get in the way somewhat.

CAF also seem to have the heating duct issue. Indeed, so does much other UK stock, though at least with Desiros it's square so you can put your foot on it. I'm not sure why underfloor heating is not more common to avoid the issue.

The Swiss ones seem more spacious because of the straight sides and lower floor, by the way. The Polish all-high-floor IC units have a much more similar feel to the UK ones.

trebor79 · 10 Jan 2020

Carlgoss said:
Trebor 79 I agree and see exactly what you mean. I know I'm expecting too much, but humour me here! I reckon it's the Swiss connection. An hour after getting off 007, and reflection time.. I was thinking about the 'similar' trains I've spent years with in Switzerland and Germany. The same style heating ducts just don't get in the way out there.. so why here? The trains there seem far more airy, and the ride quality seems far better (is this a track/gauge thing?) 007 really felt like a regional stopping train would in Switzerland.. not intercity. I spoke to a couple of other folk who were very happy with 007 and I have to admit it's great to get something new and i'm really happy for that. Maybe it's because I've had 35 years of a daily commute on MK2's and 3's, and yes people did occasionally momentarily lose their balance walking down the aisle on those, but they were doing it tonight. OK I don't know what I was expecting, but I think we're going to be missing those yellow MK3 aluminium knobs. It took the person in front of me to push the exit button several times before the various whirring sounds began. I even thought 'OK I'll try those toilets everyone's talking about.. and yes I had all the same problems (why did the flush button lights go out when you move away from the pan) And the pathetically feeble sink which spills over the floor. The door that opens onto the worlds eyes, and leaves you standing there while it decides to slowly revolve shut. Initial impression for me.. Why are these not the same as similar trains in Switzerland? I just don't get it. Maybe it's like Swiss wine.. they keep all the good stuff for themselves. But wait till the end of next week and i'll no doubt be singing their praises.. as well as mourning the loss of some old friends. Anyroad up, well done GA this bit of the rollout is going well so far!

As stated continental trains are larger and more spacious due to the larger loading guage.
The guy in front of me was mashing the door button trying to get it to open. The step extends first and then the door opens. People will get used to that, saw the same button mashing in the first few weeks of 755.

I think at the moment with a choice between Mk3 and 755 I'd take the Mk3, but it's a close run race. There are pros and cons to each. But the 755 is very nice as far as new stock goes. I don't think we could have hoped much better.

Class 745 Stadler FLIRTs

Veteran Member

RailUK Forums

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Attachments

Member

Member

Veteran Member

Member

Member

Veteran Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Veteran Member

Established Member