Bottom Gun BBSSubmarineSailor.com
Find a Shipmate
Reunion Info
Books/Video
Binnacle List (offsite)
History
Boat Websites
Links
Bottom Gun BBS
Search | Statistics | User listing Forums | Calendars | Quotes |
You are logged in as a guest. ( logon | register )


At random: Habitability is heavily stressed in the construction of modern submarines. Specially designed color schemes, mechanical conveniences, air conditioning, and the best chow in the Navy are supplied to make the vessels more livable. A full time staff is maintained by Electric Boat Division to work out 'human engineering' problems.
Uss Fitzgerald
Moderators:

Jump to page : 1
Now viewing page 1 [25 messages per page]
   Forums-> Submarine DiscussionMessage format
 
Runner485
Posted 2017-06-21 11:46 AM (#84268)


COMSUBBBS

Posts: 2667

Location: New Jersey
Subject: Uss Fitzgerald

I copied this article from CNN. It gives a description of what goes on, on the bridge when a ship is at sea.


How do Navy ships operate?

The guided-missile destroyer USS Fitzgerald collided with the ACX Crystal merchant vessel Saturday morning off Japan.

(CNN)Whether it's an aircraft carrier or any other warship, a United States Navy vessel never sleeps on the open sea thanks to a complex orchestra of people and systems tracking its course.

A deadly collision Saturday between the USS Fitzgerald and a container ship off Japan's coast raises questions about how military vessels operate. Here are the basics:

How does a Navy ship navigate?

Service members rely on a constant flow of information from satellite technology, radar, the Global Positioning System and visual cues to track their course and monitor other vessels. Ships receive normal weather updates and imagery from satellites but no real-time imagery of ocean traffic is available.
How much attention they pay to each signal depends on the situation, said CNN national security analyst John Kirby, a retired rear admiral in the US Navy.
Vessels approaching shore or heavy traffic use more feedback to adjust position minute to minute, he said. As a vessel gets farther out into lighter traffic the crew uses less feedback to modulate its position.
"It's a multifaceted, multilayered application of a series of sensors in real time that are providing feedback not only about where your ship is but where other ships are," he said.
On a destroyer, the information flows into the Electronic Chart Display and Information System, which interfaces with the ship's GPS receivers and navigation sensors, such as speed and wind indicators, to give watchstanders a computerized real-time view of position and movement.

Who's actually operating the ship?

Unlike merchant vessels, which may not necessarily be manned at the same level at all times, the bridge is staffed 24 hours. In a normal rotation, a typical bridge watch team consists of six to 10 members responsible for safe navigation and operation under the officer of the deck, who reports to the commanding officer.
The helmsman is a sailor who controls the direction of the ship based on orders from the conning officer. The quartermaster is the direct representative of the ship's navigator who monitors the surface search radar system and other charts to provide a continuous navigational watch on the bridge. The boatswain's mate of the watch is a petty officer who assists the OOD and ensures all bridge watch stations.
Below the bridge is the combat information center, a watch team of six to 10 officers and enlisted specialists responsible for the weapons system. The CIC includes a radar operator who monitors ships within range and a navigation chart plotter who also monitors the electronic chart display and navigation system.
Outside the ship, lookouts are typically stationed at the back and near the front on or close to the bridge. Part of the bridge watch team, their job is to constantly scan the horizon with binoculars as a backup to radar in case it misses a small fishing boat or picks up big waves in a heavy sea.
"Many times the radar picture may be convincing you of one thing and what you see doesn't match up," Kirby said. "You need an extra layer of context and you can only get that from what you can see."
Everyone is in constant contact over different types of radio communications, some classified, some not, he said. To communicate with other vessels they use bridge to bridge radio, the maritime version of a CB radio, in which they pick up a microphone and find the common frequency to talk in real time.

What assistance does a ship have from any dispatch or central authority?

Higher headquarters maintain a regional picture of activity, tracking a ship's progress and location. But once a vessel receives orders, it tends to be self-directed under the aegis of the commanding officer. He has "singular authority" over the vessel, making him a constant presence in the bridge, especially in busy environments involving high levels of feedback, Kirby said.
"Every commanding officer has full authority to defend his or her ship with weapons if he or she deems another vessel poses a hostile, direct threat to the safety and security of his ship and crew," he said.
The commanding officer of the USS Fitzgerald was in his cabin when the collision happened, suggesting the immediate environment did not warrant his presence in the bridge, Kirby said.
"The captain would be on bridge if coming into port or leaving port or in a highly trafficked area, because it's more dangerous," he said.
"The fact that he was down in his cabin tells you this wasn't that kind of environment."

What sort of training is involved?

A lot. It starts at the US Naval Academy or Officer Candidate School and continues through an officer's career, taking different paths depending on the person: classroom time, tests, simulations, on-the-job training on different warships.
Navy ship bridge teams in particular complete a management course that includes team-building and communications training, from situational awareness, analysis of error chains, voyage planning, stress and fatigue, among other skill sets.
"By the time an individual is standing watch on the bridge of a warship they have gone through an extensive amount of training and education and on-the-job experience to get to that point," Kirby said.

Why don't destroyers hit cargo ships (or vice versa) more often?

Because of all the precautions noted above, collisions involving Naval ships are uncommon, Kirby said.
"There is nothing the Navy takes more seriously than the safety and security of its ships and its sailors. Period. And, that's why collisions at sea are so rare," he said. "Do they happen? Yes. But it is exceedingly rare because the Navy takes safety and security so incredibly seriously because the stakes are so incredibly high."
The commanding officer has several options if a cargo ship deliberately targets a destroyer -- a rare scenario that Kirby suspects is not the case with the USS Fitzgerald. A vessel can change course or speed or fire a warning shot if the captain perceives a threat. It has happened as recently as January; the USS Mahan fired warning shots at Iranian boats as the vessels came within 900 yards.

What could have prevented the USS Fitzgerald tragedy?

It's too soon to tell, Kirby said. Because the radio room was hit hard, the degree to which radio communications were used before and after the collision will likely come under scrutiny, he said.
Otherwise, he said one thing is certain. "The Navy will investigate completely and thoroughly and they will use what they learn in schools so it will never happen again."
 
Ralph Luther
Posted 2017-06-21 2:55 PM (#84271 - in reply to #84268)
COMSUBBBS

Posts: 6180

Location: Summerville, SC
Subject: RE: Uss Fitzgerald

CNN such a reliable source.
whalen
Posted 2017-06-21 6:48 PM (#84272 - in reply to #84268)


Great Sage of the Sea

Posts: 606

Location: Citrus County FL
Subject: RE: Uss Fitzgerald

 "The Navy will investigate completely and thoroughly and they will use what they learn in schools so it will never happen again."

Back in August 2013 a sistership of the FITZGERALD, the PORTER (DDG 78),  seems to have had the same problem.

Listen to this cluster ****:

http://gcaptain.com/intense-bridge-conversation-porter/
rover177
Posted 2017-06-22 1:57 PM (#84276 - in reply to #84268)
Master and Commander

Posts: 1576

Location: Wollongong, NSW
Subject: RE: Uss Fitzgerald

Considering the time interval in the Porter collision, I'm astounded that any vessel's relative movement would be a surprise. Rule of Thumb, when sighting another vessel, look at aspect and bearing rate. That audio recording was more like kids playing in pre-school.
Pedro
Posted 2017-06-22 7:23 PM (#84284 - in reply to #84276)


COMSUBBBS

Posts: 2974

Location: Liverpool, England
Subject: RE: Uss Fitzgerald

An interesting viewpoint on this incident. Makes you wonder what truly happened here,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DuwhMk3x0Og

Pedro
GaryKC
Posted 2017-06-22 9:43 PM (#84285 - in reply to #84268)


COMSUBBBS

Posts: 3660

Location: Kansas City Missouri
Subject: RE: Uss Fitzgerald

Before we go through the terrorist Keyser Soze wormhole, waiting for the investigations findings to be released is prudent. When hearing of the collision, my immediate thought was, why didn't the E-3's with binoculars standing watch inform anyone that a huge ship was bearing down on them? Are those newfangled billion dollar vessels only relying on sailors watching LCD screens for input on what's happening outside? 
Runner485
Posted 2017-06-23 4:12 AM (#84286 - in reply to #84285)


COMSUBBBS

Posts: 2667

Location: New Jersey
Subject: RE: Uss Fitzgerald

GaryKC - 2017-06-23 12:43 AMBefore we go through the terrorist Keyser Soze wormhole, waiting for the investigations findings to be released is prudent. When hearing of the collision, my immediate thought was, why didn't the E-3's with binoculars standing watch inform anyone that a huge ship was bearing down on them? Are those newfangled billion dollar vessels only relying on sailors watching LCD screens for input on what's happening outside? 


Agree completely Gary! I thought of that when I first heard of the collision...Though, maybe because of all the electronics that they have now, outside help is not used anymore. But i can't imagine that....
610ET
Posted 2017-06-23 11:33 AM (#84290 - in reply to #84268)


Old Salt

Posts: 438

Location: Fort Lauderdale, FL
Subject: RE: Uss Fitzgerald

The internet keyboard captains are on it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yrrmNpGYH28
GaryKC
Posted 2017-06-24 6:18 AM (#84293 - in reply to #84268)


COMSUBBBS

Posts: 3660

Location: Kansas City Missouri
Subject: RE: Uss Fitzgerald

Destroyer Failed to Dodge a Cargo Ship

Runner485
Posted 2017-06-24 9:42 AM (#84294 - in reply to #84268)


COMSUBBBS

Posts: 2667

Location: New Jersey
Subject: RE: Uss Fitzgerald Latest article

I excerpted this from today's NY Times. It is a partial story.
================================================================================

There should have been lookouts on watch on the port, starboard and stern of the destroyer Fitzgerald — sailors scanning the horizon with binoculars and reporting by headsets to the destroyer’s bridge. At 1:30 a.m. last Saturday, off the coast of Japan south of Tokyo, they could hardly have failed to see the 730-foot freighter ACX Crystal, stacked with more than 1,000 containers, as it closed in.

Radar officers working both on the bridge and in the combat information center below it should have spotted the freighter’s image on their screens, drawing steadily closer. And under standard protocol, the Fitzgerald’s captain, Cmdr. Bryce Benson, should have been awakened and summoned to the bridge to assure a safe passage long before the ships could come near each other.

But none of that happened. The Fitzgerald’s routine cruise in good weather through familiar, if crowded, seas ended in the most lethal Navy accident in years. Seven sailors lost their lives.

As investigators try to figure out what many veteran seamen describe as an incomprehensible collision, they have plenty of mysteries to unravel. In addition to the questions for the destroyer’s crew, there is the peculiar course of the Crystal after the accident, recorded by ship-tracking websites. It raises the possibility that no one was awake, or at least aware of their surroundings, when the two ships hit.

Continue reading the main story

Rather than cut engines, assess the damage and look for ways to assist, the Crystal quickly resumed its former course, steaming toward Tokyo harbor for a half-hour before suddenly executing a U-turn and returning to the crash site — as if the ship’s crew had belatedly realized what had happened.

Investigators have spent the past week surveying the damage, reviewing logs, recovering electronic records — a “black box” aboard the Crystal and stored radar data from the Fitzgerald — and interviewing crew members. There should also be an audio recording from the bridge of the destroyer, like the harrowing tape of a 2012 collision between a different destroyer, the Porter, and an oil tanker, in which no one was injured.

Under strict orders not to talk about what they saw that night, the crew of the Fitzgerald is mostly keeping its counsel while grieving the loss of its shipmates. But one sailor, contacted via social media, offered what may endure as an epitaph for the accident.

“All I can say is,” the sailor wrote to The New York Times, “somebody wasn’t paying attention.”

Graphic

The Path of the Container Ship That Struck a U.S. Navy Destroyer

An animation of the route of the cargo ship that struck a U.S. Navy vessel.

OPEN Graphic

On Friday, Rear Adm. Brian Fort, a veteran warship commander, was ordered to lead the Navy’s main investigation of the collision. The multiple investigations now underway — two by the Navy, one by the United States Coast Guard, others by the Japanese Coast Guard and the Crystal’s insurers — will probably provide answers. But even if the Crystal crew was asleep, Navy veterans say the far more maneuverable Fitzgerald will likely bear much of the blame.

“This is the kind of thing the Navy is brutally honest about,” said Bryan McGrath, who commanded a destroyer in the Atlantic from 2004 to 2006. “To the extent that the Fitzgerald did anything wrong, we’ll find out all about it, and there will be consequences.”

The two ships now sit in ports a short drive apart on the coast south of Tokyo, the 9,000-ton, $1.5 billion Fitzgerald at Yokosuka naval base, its home port, and the 29,000-ton Crystal at Yokohama.

The Fitzgerald has a section of its starboard side caved in, where the Crystal smashed directly into Commander Benson’s stateroom, tearing it open and leaving him injured. Sailors had to bend back the door of his cabin to free him and get him inside the ship, the United States Naval Institute News reported. Beneath the water line, the container ship’s flared bow also tore a large gash in the destroyer’s hull, officials said.

As seawater poured in, some 116 crew members were asleep in two flooded berthing rooms. The ship’s radio room was damaged and much of its communications gear ruined or left without power. Sailors fought the flooding for an hour before sending out distress calls, the institute said.

The bodies of the seven men who died were recovered by divers from flooded spaces sealed off to keep the ship from foundering, a wrenching decision by officers in the chaotic aftermath of the crash.

There are many signs that the Fitzgerald had almost no warning of the approaching collision: the fact that the captain was in his cabin and that no shipwide alarm had rousted sailors from their bunks. “As to how much warning they had, I don’t know,” said Vice Adm. Joseph Aucoin, commander of the Seventh Fleet, at a news conference on Sunday. “That’s going to have to be found out during the investigation.”

Less is known about what happened aboard the Crystal, which had been chartered by a Japanese company to bring cargo from Nagoya, on Japan’s central coast, to Tokyo. Manned by a Filipino crew, it was far less damaged than the Fitzgerald. On Wednesday afternoon, a large blue tarp hung from a gash in the front of the ship, large scratches were visible on the port side and a section of the bow was crumpled.

Darrell Wilson, a spokesman for Dainichi-Invest Corporation, the Crystal’s owner, said the company “wishes to offer sincere condolences to the family and friends of those who so tragically lost their lives on the U.S.S. Fitzgerald.” He declined to comment on whether anyone was awake in the pilot house of the container ship at the time of the collision.

Steffan Watkins, an information technology security consultant who writes for Janes Intelligence on ship tracking, said the path of the Crystal, as posted from its Automatic Identification System, “looks like an automated course.” Instead of stopping so the crew could investigate what had just happened, the ship corrected its course and “kept accelerating” toward Tokyo, he said.

“It looks very much like the computer was driving,” he said.

But the fact that after more than 30 minutes the Crystal reversed course and returned to the accident scene suggests the captain or crew took control of the ship from the autopilot, Mr. Watkins said. “It took them 55 minutes to get back to the spot of the collision, and that’s when they called the Japanese Coast Guard,” he said.

Whether the investigations will confirm the informed speculation of Mr. Watkins remains to be seen. But a number of Navy veterans who joined a lively online debate said that even the most distracted performance by the Crystal’s crew could not justify or explain the Fitzgerald’s failure to get out its way.

“It looks horrible,” said Gary E. Meyer, owner of a tech company in New Jersey, who served on the Navy ship San Diego and posted a YouTube commentary on the accident that got much attention. “You have three lookouts and you’re running radar,” Mr. Meyer said. “That ship can really accelerate and maneuver. It doesn’t mean they caused the collision, but they’re at fault for not avoiding it.”

Steven M. Morawiec, of Sparta, Wis., who spent 22 years in the Navy and many times took charge of his ship at night as the officer of the deck, said the failure to summon the captain was incomprehensible.

“On my ship, if another ship was expected to get within 4,000 yards, you had to have the captain there beside you,” he said. “If you didn’t wake the captain when you were supposed to, you were toast.”

 
Runner485
Posted 2017-06-24 9:53 AM (#84295 - in reply to #84272)


COMSUBBBS

Posts: 2667

Location: New Jersey
Subject: RE: Uss Fitzgerald

whalen - 2017-06-21 9:48 PM "The Navy will investigate completely and thoroughly and they will use what they learn in schools so it will never happen again."

Back in August 2013 a sistership of the FITZGERALD, the PORTER (DDG 78),  seems to have had the same problem.

Listen to this cluster ****:



Holy Shyte! They had almost 4 minutes to get out of the way of this tanker and couldn't...Geez I can't believe this is the US Navy.
Holland Club
Posted 2017-06-24 12:42 PM (#84297 - in reply to #84295)


Master and Commander

Posts: 2490

Location: East Coast of Wisconsin
Subject: RE: Uss Fitzgerald

Having survived a collision at sea with nothing but an account (NTIN) to tell.
Hanging around in the Caribbean back about 1953 or 4. The plan was to execute a towing maneuver though we weren't disabled. It was 'just a drill' thingy.
We were dead in the water and the plan was to have this other ship (USS Rollette (AKA- 99) to take us in tow. They approached off the starboard beam and the plan was for them to execute an abrupt turn to starboard bringing them ahead of us with their stern at our bow. Supposedly during the approach, someone would get a line over and then lead over the towing cable/line over to us.

Anyway, someone miscalculated the wind and the other ship never responded to the helm and on she came right for our midsection. Our bridge people saw the problem and ordered 'Emergency Back' so with lots of black smoke and screw wash, we managed to back up enough so that the Rollette's bow hit us about 8 feet back from the extreme front end. They also backed all they could. Had we not observed the problem in time to back enough to prevent the hit being right about amidships.
As it was, only a dented bulwark for us and a somewhat dented bow for the other ship. The hit rolled us a few degrees to port.
Strangely enough, the blasts on ships horns sent the Rollette sailors hauling it for the fantail and my ships's people were running forward I guess to see what was going on.

In the pic, we were hit just above the anchor about where the shadow cuts upward. I see they did straighten out tre minor dent before the pic was taken but we did wear it for a couple years.

Edited by Holland Club 2017-06-24 12:50 PM




(USS Thuban (AKA-19).jpg)



Attachments
----------------
Attachments USS Thuban (AKA-19).jpg (74KB - 684 downloads)
Pedro
Posted 2017-06-24 4:29 PM (#84298 - in reply to #84285)


COMSUBBBS

Posts: 2974

Location: Liverpool, England
Subject: RE: Uss Fitzgerald

Gary,

The terrorism aspect was raised by an American blog as a possible explanation, but you're quite justified in awaiting the results of an official enquiry. Your point about physical lookouts as opposed to operators watching LCD monitors does however re-ignite concerns I held when hi-tech, computers and robotics started to replace the human input of sailors. All the aforementioned systems rely upon an electrical power source in order to function. What happens in the event when that supply is compromised by being temporarily disabled or partially/completely obliterated during a naval action? Have the boffins in their infinite wisdom provided back-up/redundancy systems and the training to enable the crew to revert back to any form of manual control? I note the new JFK carrier will now use electrically-powered lifts as a cost cutting factor rather than the standard and reliable hydraulics currently used on other carriers. Once upon a time bean counters were a dime a dozen, but now alas they are firmly in the driving seat and dictating everything whilst seamanship skills take the back seat.

Pedro
rover177
Posted 2017-06-24 7:07 PM (#84299 - in reply to #84268)
Master and Commander

Posts: 1576

Location: Wollongong, NSW
Subject: RE: Uss Fitzgerald

Pedro - your comment about beancounters immediately brought to the fore a problem we had when the naval engagement phase of the Falklands War was on. The RAN was in the process of renewing the contract for coveralls - overalls; had been cotton for general duties and wool for firefighting suits for generations. Nylon type manmade fibre was cheaper; uniforms were having a losing battle against the accountants.

In came the pictures of the burns etc and overalls that had melted into the skin of the Sheffield and Coventry sailors. The beancounters very quickly retired from the scene.
Later when I was in PNG, the engineering sailors preferred to draw manmade fibre overalls from slops. We showed them the result of a flame on cotton and a flame on the manmade. One burned and then went out when the flame was withdrawn, the other kept on supporting combustion. All the young turks who had cut sleeves off etc., all turned up the next day in the uniform as it should be worn.

I really can't understand how a warship can fail to keep a good lookout. Captain's night orders, I presume the USN has them, normally states when to call the captain. My bosses and my standard night orders stated I was to be called when a vessel was at a specific distance and if it was to pass within a certain range. Plenty of time to decide what to do. The statement to me was " I have a ship bearing red/green ...; I am .. degrees on its port/starboard bow, the bearing is steady or drawing right/left and it will pass within ... yards of our port/starboard bow. Of course, a constant steady bearing vessel will go bang into our ship; obviously action is needed. Our encounter with the Polish freighter when I was in Odin was that situation.

Not uncommon for merchant vessels to have no one on the bridge when out of a busy shipping lane; especially if it a 'cheap charter' carrier.
Gil
Posted 2017-06-25 3:11 AM (#84300 - in reply to #84268)
Master and Commander

Posts: 1597

Subject: RE: Uss Fitzgerald

I remember entering Tokyo Bay in January of 1968.  If my memory is correct we entered it north of Yokosuka, but south of Yokohama.  I was surprised it extended so far south of Yokosuka.

This was my first Westpac, and I was besides myself with anticipation of getting ashore and experiencing Japan.  We had a rough two week trip from Pearl and we were really beat up.  We were going to replace at least four clam shells we lost to storms on the transit.  Had we been undamaged we'd have immediately joined the whole fleet for the Pueblo.

I was lookout, and I couldn't believe I was in Tokyo Bay seeing the Japanese coast.  As we were approaching Yokosuka it started snowing,  being from SoCal it was the first time I ever experienced snowfall.  Seeing Japan, experiencing snowfall, remembering thirty seconds over Tokyo, and the peace treaty I was a basket case.  The entrance was very busy and I was relieved when the maneuvering watch was set.  I wanted to strike for quartermaster and I remember discussions about our arrival -  we would not enter Tokyo Bay in the dark, we'd wait until morning as it was very busy.

Five months later I was double mesmerized as lookout entering Hong Kong.   It was a beautiful morning and the skyscrapers, Victoria Peak, and Kowloon were overwhelming and beautiful.  So much so the bridge officer asked me when I was going to tell him about the contact crossing our stern.  That should of and did snap me out of my s**ts.  Again I was so glad when the maneuvering watch was set, and thankful the bridge officer didn't reprimand me again.  When we left Hong Kong I relieved one of the maneuvering watch lookouts, by this time I was okay, and never had that problem again.

My experiences happened in daylight with reasonably good visibility.  I was overwhelmed by being in these places I never thought I'd see.  Had it been dark I don't think I'd have been as distracted as I was.  I was thankful my officer was aware of this.  The ship crossed our stern maybe 2000 yds behind us, but still I should have acknowledged it.
Ric
Posted 2017-06-25 7:44 AM (#84302 - in reply to #84300)


Plankowner

Posts: 9153

Location: Upper lefthand corner of the map.
Subject: RE: Uss Fitzgerald

We entered Tokyo in March/April of 1968 and I remember the huge amount of vessel traffic. Even on busy Puget Sound between Seattle, Tacoma and Bremerton, Everett areas I can't say I've ever seen so much traffic. I can't remember why I was on the bridge for the life of me but it was only a short time. Maybe taking coffee to the bridge.
Sewer Pipe Snipe
Posted 2017-06-26 2:32 PM (#84305 - in reply to #84268)
Master and Commander

Posts: 1795

Location: Albany, GA.
Subject: RE: Uss Fitzgerald

The container ship Captain says the Destroyer ignored visual and audible warning signs prior to collision. Navy has no comment.
rover177
Posted 2017-06-26 2:32 PM (#84306 - in reply to #84268)
Master and Commander

Posts: 1576

Location: Wollongong, NSW
Subject: RE: Uss Fitzgerald

Constant heavy traffic is relatively easy because there are no 'cowboys.' Occasional heavy traffic with ships that can't pass safely with one two miles away is a worry. Approaches to Singapore and Malacca Straits can be fun when a big one is coming through. Some of those big guys only had a little over a metre (four foot) under them - they had to pick the tides correctly. Six or more submarines all told to come into the Pearl Harbor channel at the same time is fun. Throw in the odd destroyer and cruiser and it become chaotic.

The Mark I eyeball when used correctly, is a pretty good input for the computer - the brain; the brain is not used correctly on too many occasions.
steamboat
Posted 2017-06-26 3:04 PM (#84307 - in reply to #84268)
Master and Commander

Posts: 1812

Location: Boydton, Virginia
Subject: RE: Uss Fitzgerald

It still begs the question: WHY DID THE CONTAINER SHIP SUDDENLY TURN AROUND IN A BUSY CHANNEL?

Steamboat sends
Jump to page : 1
Now viewing page 1 [25 messages per page]
Printer friendly version
E-mail a link to this thread
Jump to forum :


(Delete all cookies set by this site)
Running MegaBBS ASP Forum Software v2.0
© 2003 PD9 Software