[1.12.X] Tantares - Stockalike Soyuz and MIR [16.1][28.05.2024][Mars Expedition WIP]

passinglurker · December 21, 2014

Interesting there.
I don't want to steal the numbers, but I think OrionKermin is right here in these stats.
I'll have to see if the basic TLV (With only small Vostok upper stage) is still capable of
delivering Vostok to orbit with increased weight.

Mk1 lander can: 0.6 tons dry, 3kN torque, 8ms crash tolerance

"Chinese Spud clone" almach: 0.7 tons dry, 4kN torque, 10ms crash tolerance

Mk1 pod: 0.8 tons dry, 5kN torque, 14ms crash tolerance

"Pottentially ballanced" TST: 0.85-0.9 tons dry, 3-4kN torque, 15-20ms crash tolerance

Orionkermins "corvus" gemini: 1 ton dry, 5kN torque, 21ms crash tolerance

makes a nice flow does it not?

Niemand303 · December 21, 2014

Beale, I think you may remove the RO patch from your next updates, I've communicated with RO author, my patches are going there.

Beale · December 21, 2014

Hmm, maybe he hasn't got modulemanager installed?
Anyway, that game surely looks interesting. How's Progress* with the Energia?
*if you get what I mean with that big P ^^

That seems likely, actually!

Energia: Sadly, no recent news. I think I can say, when it is around for more information, it will be worth the wait

Hmmm...
Beale, I have heard that real chute has a docking port/parachute combo.
Might want to look into it.

Yes, I've had a look, thankyou.

That is quite close to what I want to achieve

Mk1 lander can: 0.6 tons dry, 3kN torque, 8ms crash tolerance
"Chinese Spud clone" almach: 0.7 tons dry, 4kN torque, 10ms crash tolerance
Mk1 pod: 0.8 tons dry, 5kN torque, 14ms crash tolerance
"Pottentially ballanced" TST: 0.85-0.9 tons dry, 3-4kN torque, 15-20ms crash tolerance
Orionkermins "corvus" gemini: 1 ton dry, 5kN torque, 21ms crash tolerance
makes a nice flow does it not?

Done! :cool:

Beale, I think you may remove the RO patch from your next updates, I've communicated with RO author, my patches are going there.

Okay!

That's awesome! Thanks for sorting that out

Resheph · December 21, 2014

I don't know if it's just me, but along with using FAR, it's way harder for me to launch rockets with "cannonball" crew module than with the stock one. It makes it nearly impossible to make a gravity turn, the top behaves like it was way heavier. After turning the rocket at ~50-90 m/s there's no way to tweak the angle, it just goes down and stalls. Changing module to stock fixes the issue, although it's heavier than the first one introduced with the mod.

Niemand303 · December 21, 2014

Hmmm...
Beale, I have heard that real chute has a docking port/parachute combo.
Might want to look into it.

I think it was already made in SDHI with RealChutes and in K-P011O with stock parachute module. So, I guess, nothing new there.

dimovski · December 21, 2014

Well it could be that your craft isn't covered by fairings. Or that you aren't using RCS. Or you didn't place wing strakes at the bottom.

I'll be honest, I had a lot of problems with my N-III Vostok craft aswell. And with FAR. But these were mostly caused by my engine choice anyway.

DGatsby · December 21, 2014

Could you please please make gemini capsule? (with opening wings @ reentery if can!)

Orionkermin, the person behind HGR, actually has a really nice little Gemini part over here: Small Part Pack if you want a different part than the Radish in HGR. It's a very pretty little part that looks more like the actual Gemini.

AppleDavidJeans · December 21, 2014

Here's a suggested decimal value: 0.16666 (It could be 1666666666, but I don't know for sure but this is what did the trick.)

Edited December 21, 2014 by AppleDavidJeans

Beale · December 21, 2014

I don't know if it's just me, but along with using FAR, it's way harder for me to launch rockets with "cannonball" crew module than with the stock one. It makes it nearly impossible to make a gravity turn, the top behaves like it was way heavier. After turning the rocket at ~50-90 m/s there's no way to tweak the angle, it just goes down and stalls. Changing module to stock fixes the issue, although it's heavier than the first one introduced with the mod.

Hmmm...

I am not sure, I will be honest.

The Vostok has near zero torque at the moment, possibly this?

There shouldn't be any special aerodynamic properties applied to this capsule in particular.

I'll install FAR and try it myself

Well it could be that your craft isn't covered by fairings. Or that you aren't using RCS. Or you didn't place wing strakes at the bottom.
I'll be honest, I had a lot of problems with my N-III Vostok craft aswell. And with FAR. But these were mostly caused by my engine choice anyway.

Well, it is more evidence for something being odd with the Vostok, thanks

http://i.imgur.com/G4AiSyw.png
Allow me to suggest a decimal value: 0.16666 (It could be 1666666666, but I don't know for sure but this is what did the trick.)

Aha, well, I had put it "manual" to give people an opportunity to play around and get to grips with the mouse control a little better.

But if you have found an exact value, that's awesome! (I guess I'll put it in there.)

dimovski · December 21, 2014

I don't know if it would help in the ascent, but during reentry it tends to flip towards its parachute. It isn't just really ugly to look at (I mean, the real Vostok couldn't control how it would descend, but yours has those black tiles on the lower half for a reason!), it is potentially deadly with... deadly reentry. So I would suggest moving the center of mass to the back, so that the forces FAR creates automatically orient the craft so that it's rear is facing the retrograde marker during reentry.

Oh, and the energy drain is somewhat ludicrous, as we don't have any way of building up energy during flight, after the LV and its alternators are decoupled. I mean, there should be enough juice for 2-5 orbits, right? No point in running out of charge during the coasting towards apoapsis.

Niemand303 · December 21, 2014

Oh, and another thing: Beale, can you put TantaresLV on CKAN too? It would be nice, I think, to have them both available for install via GUI.

AppleDavidJeans · December 21, 2014

Beale, I screwed up the nozzle's interior on the UV mapping:

How do I fix this?

passinglurker · December 21, 2014

"sorry I didn't want to make it heavier" TST orbital: 0.45 tons dry, 2kN torque, 6-7ms crash tolerance
"beware of evil A.I." Mianbao Orbital: 0.5 tons dry, 2kN torque, 6-7ms crash tolerance, No SAS
"because you said you were gonna nerf the thrust" Libra: 0.5 tons dry, 2.5kN torque, 6-7ms crash tolerance, remove the built in RTG
Mk1 lander can: 0.6 tons dry, 3kN torque, 8ms crash tolerance
"Chinese Spud clone" almach: 0.7 tons dry, 4kN torque, 10ms crash tolerance
Mk1 pod: 0.8 tons dry, 5kN torque, 14ms crash tolerance
"Pottentially ballanced" TST: 0.85-0.9 tons dry, 3-4kN torque, 15-20ms crash tolerance
Orionkermins "corvus" gemini: 1 ton dry, 5kN torque, 21ms crash tolerance

Since its a can its gonna tend to touch down on legs so the libra can stand to have less crash tolerance and find a niche in lightweight tasks. Also it'd finally be lighter than the almach which would give you even more of a reason to choose it over landing blind in the spherepod

the orbital modules are a bit tougher to balance following this pattern when you consider that all you have to do is add an octo and they wind up out performing most other pods in terms of tons per crew carried and in trying to nerf them they wind up looking like very slight variants of the libra proposal. I'm afraid this is one of those arbitrary kerbal moments where there is no right answer in terms of balance. Another thing that's gonna need to be thought about is what level of sas to give the various probes, and automated modules.

Edited December 21, 2014 by passinglurker

Beale · December 21, 2014

I don't know if it would help in the ascent, but during reentry it tends to flip towards its parachute. It isn't just really ugly to look at (I mean, the real Vostok couldn't control how it would descend, but yours has those black tiles on the lower half for a reason!), it is potentially deadly with... deadly reentry. So I would suggest moving the center of mass to the back, so that the forces FAR creates automatically orient the craft so that it's rear is facing the retrograde marker during reentry.
Oh, and the energy drain is somewhat ludicrous, as we don't have any way of building up energy during flight, after the LV and its alternators are decoupled. I mean, there should be enough juice for 2-5 orbits, right? No point in running out of charge during the coasting towards apoapsis.

Okay, a comm offset, maybe good

The power: a power slug maybe? (like the Libra has)

Supply just enough juice to keep the spacecraft functional forever, but not much more.

Oh, and another thing: Beale, can you put TantaresLV on CKAN too? It would be nice, I think, to have them both available for install via GUI.

Ah,

I have no idea how! :sealed:

Eagleshift made the current one.

Got a link on how to do it, by any chance?

Beale, I screwed up the nozzle's interior on the UV mapping:
http://i.imgur.com/Jks6S8R.png
How do I fix this?

It's looking to be going well apart from this little mistake!

Anyway: select all the faces on the underside of the nozzle, right click and select UV mapping.

Now in the UV window, right click and choose ReMap UV.

Let me know if this helps!

P.S. I would send modding requests like these to PM, though I check Tantares often, it maybe can get buried sometimes

"sorry I didn't want to make it heavier" TST orbital: 0.45 tons dry, 2kN torque, 6-7ms crash tolerance
"beware of evil A.I." Mianbao Orbital: 0.5 tons dry, 2kN torque, 6-7ms crash tolerance, No SAS
"because you said you were gonna nerf the thrust" Libra: 0.5 tons dry, 2.5kN torque, 6-7ms crash tolerance, remove the built in RTG
Mk1 lander can: 0.6 tons dry, 3kN torque, 8ms crash tolerance
"Chinese Spud clone" almach: 0.7 tons dry, 4kN torque, 10ms crash tolerance
Mk1 pod: 0.8 tons dry, 5kN torque, 14ms crash tolerance
"Pottentially ballanced" TST: 0.85-0.9 tons dry, 3-4kN torque, 15-20ms crash tolerance
Orionkermins "corvus" gemini: 1 ton dry, 5kN torque, 21ms crash tolerance
Since its a can its gonna tend to touch down on legs so the libra can stand to have less crash tolerance and find a niche in lightweight tasks. Also it'd finally be lighter than the almach which would give you even more of a reason to choose it over landing blind in the spherepod
the orbital modules are a bit tougher to balance following this pattern when you consider that all you have to do is add an octo and they wind up out performing most other pods in terms of tons per crew carried and in trying to nerf them they wind up looking like very slight variants of the libra proposal. I'm afraid this is one of those arbitrary kerbal moments where there is no right answer in terms of balance. Another thing that's gonna need to be thought about is what level of sas to give the various probes, and automated modules.

Thanks for looking through these!

The OM balance, I think 60% OM mass and cost might be okay. That is just an arbitrary guess though.

The Libra's RTG, it really is needed, for me (Doesn't provide a huge amount of power, anyway).

Only other option, give it mad battery capacity.

Edited December 21, 2014 by Beale

Niemand303 · December 21, 2014

Ah,
I have no idea how!
Eagleshift made the current one.
Got a link on how to do it, by any chance?

Yep, here it is!

https://github.com/KSP-CKAN/CKAN/wiki/Adding-a-mod-to-the-CKAN

I like the idea of that tool, though lots of cool stuff haven't yet appeared in the database.

passinglurker · December 21, 2014

Thanks for looking through these!
The OM balance, I think 60% OM mass and cost might be okay. That is just an arbitrary guess though.
The Libra's RTG, it really is needed, for me (Doesn't provide a huge amount of power, anyway).
Only other option, give it mad battery capacity.

I'm not sure what you mean by 60% OM cost and mass?

As for the libra RTG part of the reason it needs one is because all your reactions wheels are mad power hungry(seriously any balance I propose just tag "fix pow hungry reaction wheel" on the end) have you considered giving the landing engine an alternator?

AppleDavidJeans · December 21, 2014

It's looking to be going well apart from this little mistake!
Anyway: select all the faces on the underside of the nozzle, right click and select UV mapping.
Now in the UV window, right click and choose ReMap UV.
Let me know if this helps!
P.S. I would send modding requests like these to PM, though I check Tantares often, it maybe can get buried sometimes

Thanks for the tip! I was able to complete Part 2. When will Part 3 come out?

HuntsmanThe8 · December 22, 2014

Dang Beale, Good Job on your Mod, It has seriously grown a lot from the last time I saw it. Btw, How about some real life Tantares Merchandise? ~HuntsmanThe7

Businfu · December 22, 2014

Just to throw it out there, can anyone (or does anyone want to) figure out how to make Tantares work with AntennaRange? It's a really great little mod that adds basic antenna range and relay. Personally I like it because it's sort of a simplified stockalike version of RemoteTech.

As promised, I present my compatibility files for AntennaRange!

Each antenna works now, and I've assigned values for range/cost/tech nodes in an attempt to make game more balanced and interesting. Basically, I found that AntennaRange with stock parts led to the rather silly situation of being stranded in the Kerbin system until one gets all the way up to electronics and then the 88-88 trumps everything hands down. The Tantares antenna parts nicely fill the progression, so that probe missions to Duna and the inner planets can play out in a more interesting fashion. The idea is as follows:

Vos-19-61 Hoop Antenna: Super cheap, only good in LKO, slightly reduced EC use for early game

TST CD-01: A spacecraft equipped with the TST CD-01 should be able to maintain communications throughout the inner planets. Atleast thats what the engineers tell us...

V-ODA Backup Antenna: A cheap & sturdy Communotron 16

"Priority" Dish Mk5: Designed to maintain communications with spacecraft in a Dunar orbit, and maybe beyond!

The TST comes with the Electrics node, allowing somewhat risky exploration of distant bodies even without upgrading the R&D facility. The "Priority" comes at the Advanced Electrics node, which allows mid-range probes without the cost of going all the way to the 88-88. This config also changes the price of the stock 88-88 to better balance progression. It was grossly under priced, probably because it has no advantage in a vanilla KSP game.

Anyways, due to lack of time and inexperience posting files for download, here is all the code needed for the cfgs. Just copy in paste into a new cfg file and drop it into the Tantares folder in GameData.


@PART[Almach_Antenna_A]:NEEDS[AntennaRange]
{



	@MODULE[ModuleDataTransmitter]
	{
		@name = ModuleLimitedDataTransmitter
		@packetResourceCost = 8.0
		nominalRange = 700000
		maxPowerFactor = 8
		maxDataFactor = 4

	}


}



@PART[Vega_Antenna_A]:NEEDS[AntennaRange]
{




	@MODULE[ModuleDataTransmitter]
	{
		@name = ModuleLimitedDataTransmitter
		@packetResourceCost = 10.0
		nominalRange = 1800000
		maxPowerFactor = 8
		maxDataFactor = 4

	}


}


@PART[Tantares_Antenna_A]:NEEDS[AntennaRange]
{


	@MODULE[ModuleDataTransmitter]
	{
		@name = ModuleLimitedDataTransmitter
		@packetResourceCost = 15.0
		nominalRange = 8000000000
		maxPowerFactor = 8
		maxDataFactor = 4

	}


}	




@PART[Vega_Antenna_B]:NEEDS[AntennaRange]
{


	@MODULE[ModuleDataTransmitter]
	{
		@name = ModuleLimitedDataTransmitter
		@packetResourceCost = 15.0
		nominalRange = 17000000000
		maxPowerFactor = 8
		maxDataFactor = 4

	}


}

Also, I couldn't get the cost tweaks and the AntennaRange to work as a single file. So the following must also be made into a separate cfg and put in the Tantares Folder. Note to Beale: I didn't change any antenna costs with my earlier overhaul cause I wanted to see how I would balance them first. If you want, these changes could be added to standard Tantares dl during the next update


@PART[Almach_Antenna_A]


	{


	@mass= .001
	}	







@PART[Vega_Antenna_A]


	{
	@crashTolerance = 20
	@entryCost = 800
	@cost = 200
	}	







@PART[Tantares_Antenna_A]


	{
	@mass = .03
	@TechRequired = electrics
	@entryCost = 3000
	@cost = 800
	@description = A communication dish mounted on a folding arm. A spacecraft equipped with the TST CD-01 should be able to maintain 


communications throughout the inner planets. Atleast thats what the engineers tell us...
	}	






@PART[Vega_Antenna_B]


	{
	@mass = .15
	@TechRequired = advElectrics
	@entryCost = 4100
	@cost = 1100
	@description = A largely flat, high-gain, fixed dish. Popular in the second hand market to be re-used as a sled.  Designed to maintain 


communications with spacecraft in a Dunar orbit, and maybe beyond!  
	}	






@PART[commDish]


	{
	@entryCost = 10200
	@cost = 2000
	}

DGatsby · December 22, 2014

As promised, I present my compatibility files for AntennaRange!
Each antenna works now, and I've assigned values for range/cost/tech nodes in an attempt to make game more balanced and interesting. Basically, I found that AntennaRange with stock parts led to the rather silly situation of being stranded in the Kerbin system until one gets all the way up to electronics and then the 88-88 trumps everything hands down. The Tantares antenna parts nicely fill the progression, so that probe missions to Duna and the inner planets can play out in a more interesting fashion. The idea is as follows:
Vos-19-61 Hoop Antenna: Super cheap, only good in LKO, slightly reduced EC use for early game
TST CD-01: A spacecraft equipped with the TST CD-01 should be able to maintain communications throughout the inner planets. Atleast thats what the engineers tell us...
V-ODA Backup Antenna: A cheap & sturdy Communotron 16
"Priority" Dish Mk5: Designed to maintain communications with spacecraft in a Dunar orbit, and maybe beyond!
The TST comes with the Electrics node, allowing somewhat risky exploration of distant bodies even without upgrading the R&D facility. The "Priority" comes at the Advanced Electrics node, which allows mid-range probes without the cost of going all the way to the 88-88. This config also changes the price of the stock 88-88 to better balance progression. It was grossly under priced, probably because it has no advantage in a vanilla KSP game.
Anyways, due to lack of time and inexperience posting files for download, here is all the code needed for the cfgs. Just copy in paste into a new cfg file and drop it into the Tantares folder in GameData.

Wow that was pretty quick! Thanks man! I'll download it and play around.

Businfu · December 22, 2014

Wow that was pretty quick! Thanks man! I'll download it and play around.

Well I gotta play it too!

But actually, let me know how it feels. Balance seems to be the greatest opportunity in KSP.

Beale · December 22, 2014

Yep, here it is!
https://github.com/KSP-CKAN/CKAN/wiki/Adding-a-mod-to-the-CKAN
I like the idea of that tool, though lots of cool stuff haven't yet appeared in the database.

Nice!

I'll get around to it.

I'm not sure what you mean by 60% OM cost and mass?
As for the libra RTG part of the reason it needs one is because all your reactions wheels are mad power hungry(seriously any balance I propose just tag "fix pow hungry reaction wheel" on the end) have you considered giving the landing engine an alternator?

60%, I mean the OMs should be 60% mass and cost of the comparable command module. So Tantares OM would be 60% of Tantares CM.

Never even though about reaction wheels :sealed:

Yes, the drain is the same on all of them, I think. Which is a bit ridiculous.

Thanks for the tip! I was able to complete Part 2. When will Part 3 come out?

Cool!

Part 3, tomorrow? If I have some free time.

You can have a crack at painting the texture a bit now, just make sure to back up the basic "Outline" version you made in the tutorial.

Dang Beale, Good Job on your Mod, It has seriously grown a lot from the last time I saw it.

Thanks!

As promised, I present my compatibility files for AntennaRange!
Each antenna works now, and I've assigned values for range/cost/tech nodes in an attempt to make game more balanced and interesting. Basically, I found that AntennaRange with stock parts led to the rather silly situation of being stranded in the Kerbin system until one gets all the way up to electronics and then the 88-88 trumps everything hands down. The Tantares antenna parts nicely fill the progression, so that probe missions to Duna and the inner planets can play out in a more interesting fashion. The idea is as follows:
Vos-19-61 Hoop Antenna: Super cheap, only good in LKO, slightly reduced EC use for early game
TST CD-01: A spacecraft equipped with the TST CD-01 should be able to maintain communications throughout the inner planets. Atleast thats what the engineers tell us...
V-ODA Backup Antenna: A cheap & sturdy Communotron 16
"Priority" Dish Mk5: Designed to maintain communications with spacecraft in a Dunar orbit, and maybe beyond!
The TST comes with the Electrics node, allowing somewhat risky exploration of distant bodies even without upgrading the R&D facility. The "Priority" comes at the Advanced Electrics node, which allows mid-range probes without the cost of going all the way to the 88-88. This config also changes the price of the stock 88-88 to better balance progression. It was grossly under priced, probably because it has no advantage in a vanilla KSP game.
Anyways, due to lack of time and inexperience posting files for download, here is all the code needed for the cfgs. Just copy in paste into a new cfg file and drop it into the Tantares folder in GameData.
@PART[Almach_Antenna_A]:NEEDS[AntennaRange]
{



	@MODULE[ModuleDataTransmitter]
	{
		@name = ModuleLimitedDataTransmitter
		@packetResourceCost = 8.0
		nominalRange = 700000
		maxPowerFactor = 8
		maxDataFactor = 4

	}


}



@PART[Vega_Antenna_A]:NEEDS[AntennaRange]
{




	@MODULE[ModuleDataTransmitter]
	{
		@name = ModuleLimitedDataTransmitter
		@packetResourceCost = 10.0
		nominalRange = 1800000
		maxPowerFactor = 8
		maxDataFactor = 4

	}


}


@PART[Tantares_Antenna_A]:NEEDS[AntennaRange]
{


	@MODULE[ModuleDataTransmitter]
	{
		@name = ModuleLimitedDataTransmitter
		@packetResourceCost = 15.0
		nominalRange = 8000000000
		maxPowerFactor = 8
		maxDataFactor = 4

	}


}	




@PART[Vega_Antenna_B]:NEEDS[AntennaRange]
{


	@MODULE[ModuleDataTransmitter]
	{
		@name = ModuleLimitedDataTransmitter
		@packetResourceCost = 15.0
		nominalRange = 17000000000
		maxPowerFactor = 8
		maxDataFactor = 4

	}


}
Also, I couldn't get the cost tweaks and the AntennaRange to work as a single file. So the following must also be made into a separate cfg and put in the Tantares Folder. Note to Beale: I didn't change any antenna costs with my earlier overhaul cause I wanted to see how I would balance them first. If you want, these changes could be added to standard Tantares dl during the next update
@PART[Almach_Antenna_A]


	{


	@mass= .001
	}	







@PART[Vega_Antenna_A]


	{
	@crashTolerance = 20
	@entryCost = 800
	@cost = 200
	}	







@PART[Tantares_Antenna_A]


	{
	@mass = .03
	@TechRequired = electrics
	@entryCost = 3000
	@cost = 800
	@description = A communication dish mounted on a folding arm. A spacecraft equipped with the TST CD-01 should be able to maintain 


communications throughout the inner planets. Atleast thats what the engineers tell us...
	}	






@PART[Vega_Antenna_B]


	{
	@mass = .15
	@TechRequired = advElectrics
	@entryCost = 4100
	@cost = 1100
	@description = A largely flat, high-gain, fixed dish. Popular in the second hand market to be re-used as a sled.  Designed to maintain 


communications with spacecraft in a Dunar orbit, and maybe beyond!  
	}	






@PART[commDish]


	{
	@entryCost = 10200
	@cost = 2000
	}

Looks cool!

I have turned off remote tech for a short while now, as it was preventing me going beyond the Mun, ever.

I'll give these a shot.

But, of course, those mass and cost changes, I will change in vanilla distribution.

Edited December 22, 2014 by Beale

mike9606 · December 22, 2014

Can we get a proper RemoteTech config? Businfu's config is for AntennaRange, and while the antenna work with RT, they are not properly balanced (hoop dish and TST antenna both having range of 500 km).

Niemand303 · December 22, 2014

Can we get a proper RemoteTech config? Businfu's config is for AntennaRange, and while the antenna work with RT, they are not properly balanced (hoop dish and TST antenna both having range of 500 km).

I think it's quite fair, as the hoop is from 1961 and was used for LEO comms and TST is just a docking system antenna.

Beale · December 22, 2014

Can we get a proper RemoteTech config? Businfu's config is for AntennaRange, and while the antenna work with RT, they are not properly balanced (hoop dish and TST antenna both having range of 500 km).

I think it's quite fair, as the hoop is from 1961 and was used for LEO comms and TST is just a docking system antenna.

It's a somewhat fairpoint to make when the ec/s drain is considered - The hoop antenna got about 0.1ec/s, the TST antenna is around 0.7ec/s.

I've changed it a little, the power draw remains the same, but now the hoop antenna can only reach 220km up, limiting you to really low orbit operations only.

Some of the probe power draws have been re-kajiggered, also.

[1.12.X] Tantares - Stockalike Soyuz and MIR [16.1][28.05.2024][Mars Expedition WIP]

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Join the conversation