THE magazine of railroading

SEARCH TRAINSMAG.COM

Enter keywords or a search phrase below:

Actual GG-1 top speed

6703 views
83 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    June, 2002
  • 12,624 posts
Actual GG-1 top speed
Posted by daveklepper on Sunday, November 13, 2016 9:05 AM

There have been instances where GG-1s ran at 100 mph on th e NEC.  They seemed to do this pretty regularly both int heir prime and in substitution when MU Metroliners had problems.  Has anybody had experience of their operating at  higher speed?

Tags: GG-1 speed
  • Member since
    August, 2010
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 6,801 posts
Posted by Firelock76 on Sunday, November 13, 2016 9:20 AM

I've never heard or read of the GG1's going any faster than 100MPH, from what I've been told the gearing wouldn't have allowed it, but then I may have been told wrong.

I've also been told no one ever knew how really fast they would go, the trackage available made going over 100 unadviseable.  This one's a puzzler.

  • Member since
    September, 2013
  • 1,480 posts
Posted by caldreamer on Sunday, November 13, 2016 10:28 AM

Link attached to the actual PRR equipment diagram shows the top speed of 100 MPH.

http://prr.railfan.net/diagrams/PRRdiagrams.html?diag=gg1_dc_2.gif&sel=ele&sz=sm&fr=

  • Member since
    May, 2012
  • 2,974 posts
Posted by rcdrye on Sunday, November 13, 2016 11:25 AM

I don't know how often they actually got over 100 MPH, but the Metroliner-equipped GG1s used in the mid-1970s were allowed 105.  The main modification was to the bearings on the non-motorized trucks.

  • Member since
    February, 2005
  • 1,645 posts
Posted by timz on Sunday, November 13, 2016 4:34 PM

rcdrye
Metroliner-equipped GG1s used in the mid-1970s were allowed 105.

Anyone got a spec instr showing 105 for GG1s?

  • Member since
    May, 2003
  • From: US
  • 11,944 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Sunday, November 13, 2016 4:39 PM

timz
rcdrye

Anyone got a spec instr showing 105 for GG1s?

In times past, Maximums were rarely if ever a written instruction.  Wink, wink, nod, nod.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

  • Member since
    August, 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 8,319 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Sunday, November 13, 2016 10:17 PM

BaltACD

 

 
timz
rcdrye

Anyone got a spec instr showing 105 for GG1s?

 

In times past, Maximums were rarely if ever a written instruction.  Wink, wink, nod, nod.

 

Perhaps it was understood that the speed limits indicated in the ETT would be observed--so there was no need to state how fast a particular class could be run? ----More smiles and winks.

Johnny

  • Member since
    May, 2003
  • From: US
  • 11,944 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Sunday, November 13, 2016 11:32 PM

Deggesty
BaltACD
timz
rcdrye

Anyone got a spec instr showing 105 for GG1s?

In times past, Maximums were rarely if ever a written instruction.  Wink, wink, nod, nod.

Perhaps it was understood that the speed limits indicated in the ETT would be observed--so there was no need to state how fast a particular class could be run? ----More smiles and winks.

A senior Division Official I knew well 'back in the day' stated that on Main Tracks the ETT maximum of 79 MPH was there for the benefit of the government.  His engineers were instructed to move their trains as fast as possible when necessary to 'make up time'.  Curve and Train Order speed restrictions were to be observed.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

  • Member since
    November, 2013
  • 1,056 posts
Posted by Buslist on Monday, November 14, 2016 12:15 AM

BaltACD

 

 
Deggesty
BaltACD
timz
rcdrye

Anyone got a spec instr showing 105 for GG1s?

In times past, Maximums were rarely if ever a written instruction.  Wink, wink, nod, nod.

Perhaps it was understood that the speed limits indicated in the ETT would be observed--so there was no need to state how fast a particular class could be run? ----More smiles and winks.

 

A senior Division Official I knew well 'back in the day' stated that on Main Tracks the ETT maximum of 79 MPH was there for the benefit of the government.  His engineers were instructed to move their trains as fast as possible when necessary to 'make up time'.  Curve and Train Order speed restrictions were to be observed.

 

 Not related to GG1s but the situation was similar on the Chicago District of the Illinois Division of the IC (Champaign to Stunel Rd.) during the 60s. 79 on the books but whatever it takes to get/keep on schedule. Did a lot of 33sec miles along there!

RME
  • Member since
    March, 2016
  • 2,009 posts
Posted by RME on Monday, November 14, 2016 8:13 PM

[quote user="daveklepper"]There have been instances where GG-1s ran at 100 mph on the NEC.  They seemed to do this pretty regularly both in their prime and in substitution when MU Metroliners had problems.  Has anybody had experience of their operating at higher speed?

Reported speed of between 125-128mph during the Claymont tests, although I have not seen the actual paperwork.  Dial speedometers registered only 100mph (same as the T1s) and I do not recall what, if anything different, was used on the engines modified for Metroliner service.

It was my understanding that the Metroliner permission was 110mph, not 105mph; they certainly ran at that speed on occasion, and were technically capable of reaching higher speed but were badly underdamped.  There were some discussions of 120mph peak operation, but this would have required fairly extensive rebuilding and, of course, the problem with underbraking from the required Amfleet consists nipped the higher-speed GG1 experiment in the bud long before any of that testing was done.  I suspect a considerable amount of the "Metroliner" road mileage was run at higher speed as I don't recall any tire problem with the 100mph maximum. 

The "156mph" is a particularly egregious wives' tale, which I doubt anyone with even the least familiarity with a physical GG1 would swallow.  But it makes an even better story than 6100 on the Trail Blazer.

  • Member since
    June, 2002
  • 12,624 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Tuesday, November 15, 2016 7:14 AM

The T1 Spedometers topped at 120mph, and there was a good website story of reaching that speed.  "A good read for steamheads, Last Chance for a Pennsylvania Class T!," by John L. Crosby.

My own top apwwsa on rhw NEC were nly 136 on a Metrolinier MU and 110 on the Turbotrain.  Acela is faster than that.

  • Member since
    February, 2005
  • 1,645 posts
Posted by timz on Tuesday, November 15, 2016 3:30 PM

RME
It was my understanding that the Metroliner permission was 110mph, not 105mph

GG1s, you mean?

Sometime after March 1978 the timetable increased GG1 speed to 100 mph. That's the limit in the 10/78 timetable, then in 4/79 they're back to 90. Has anyone found anything in print allowing GG1s 105 or more?

RME
  • Member since
    March, 2016
  • 2,009 posts
Posted by RME on Tuesday, November 15, 2016 6:08 PM

timz
GG1s, you mean?

GG1s operating "Metroliner" service with Amfleet consists.

If I remember this correctly, "10 over" the highest employee timetable speed was required mechanically, and this is where the 110mph limit comes in.

Mr. Klepper, trust me when I say the original T1 speedometers only read to 100mph.  I have copies of the drawings and have been researching how to duplicate the mechanism.

  • Member since
    August, 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 8,319 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Tuesday, November 15, 2016 9:18 PM

[quote user="RME"]

daveklepper
There have been instances where GG-1s ran at 100 mph on the NEC.  They seemed to do this pretty regularly both in their prime and in substitution when MU Metroliners had problems.  Has anybody had experience of their operating at higher speed?

Reported speed of between 125-128mph during the Claymont tests, although I have not seen the actual paperwork.  Dial speedometers registered only 100mph (same as the T1s) and I do not recall what, if anything different, was used on the engines modified for Metroliner service.

It was my understanding that the Metroliner permission was 110mph, not 105mph; they certainly ran at that speed on occasion, and were technically capable of reaching higher speed but were badly underdamped.  There were some discussions of 120mph peak operation, but this would have required fairly extensive rebuilding and, of course, the problem with underbraking from the required Amfleet consists nipped the higher-speed GG1 experiment in the bud long before any of that testing was done.  I suspect a considerable amount of the "Metroliner" road mileage was run at higher speed as I don't recall any tire problem with the 100mph maximum. 

The "156mph" is a particularly egregious wives' tale, which I doubt anyone with even the least familiarity with a physical GG1 would swallow.  But it makes an even better story than 6100 on the Trail Blazer.

 

In the spring of 1970 I rode the Metroliner from Washington to New York, and spent much of the time in the vestibule at the front of the train. I did not keep my eye on the speedometer all the time, but I do not recall noting any speed over 100 mph. There may have been times that we exceeded 100 mph. The engineer said nothing to me, though I am sure he was aware of my presence.

Johnny

  • Member since
    December, 2005
  • From: Cardiff, CA
  • 2,619 posts
Posted by erikem on Tuesday, November 15, 2016 10:45 PM

RME

The "156mph" is a particularly egregious wives' tale, which I doubt anyone with even the least familiarity with a physical GG1 would swallow.  But it makes an even better story than 6100 on the Trail Blazer.

Wasn't that the speed reached by the modified Silverliners that were doing a proof of concpet test for the Mteroliner MU's?.

My recollection was that the GE equipped Metroliners were good for 160 MPH and he Westinghouse equipped were good for 165 MPH. "Good for" meaning that the Metroliners being able to attain that speed in testing as opposed to being to operate at that speed in revenue service.

  • Member since
    June, 2002
  • 12,624 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Wednesday, November 16, 2016 7:02 AM

RME:   This is from the article downloaded from this website, which I gave as a reference:

Our last scheduled stop was in Van Wert, Ohio.  Again, Harry drove into the station, making a precise spot so that the various mail and express carts did not have to move far to find an open door.  He called me over to his side of the cab and said, "Johnny, this may be our last chance at one of these beasts.  What do you say about seeing just what she'll do between here and Fort Wayne?"  As he spoke, I noted that his face was completely covered with dirt, except for the two white circles behind his glasses. 
My deferential reply was, "You're the boss.  My side of the cab is still attached to yours."  He nodded in reply to my answer, and issued a warning.  "You'd better get your fire ready, 'cause we're going to move out of here."
With this bit of information, I began to work on my fire.  I grabbed the No. 5 scoop shovel and filled the back corners of the firebox.  I shut off the stoker jets and ran a big ward of coal into the firebox, right in front of the firebox doors.  When finished, I felt satisfied that I was ready for what was to come.  
With the first peep of the communicating whistle, Harry turned on the bell and sanders.  A second later came the second peep.  He cautiously opened the throttle.  The first six or so exhausts were relatively gentle "chuffs" as we began to move.  One of the exhausts blew a perfect smoke ring.  When Harry was satisfied that we had a good supply of sand under the drivers, he pulled open the throttle a little farther.  Until then, the sounds of the exhaust had been drowned out by the sound of the whistle, but no more.  The exhaust began to snap and crack out of the twin stacks.  The presence of nearby warehouses and lumber yards created a pronounced echo effect so that each exhaust was multiplied as it bounced back and forth from building to building.  This was the ultimate in stereo.  With the heavy throttle, the engine began to rock slightly from side to side.
We rounded the curve at Estry Tower, and now between us and Fort Wayne lay 31 miles of perfectly straight track.  As soon as we cleared the Cincinnati Northern diamond, Harry pulled the throttle wide open.  The engine began to quiver, and it was easy to note the acceleration.  With a good supply of sand, there was not a hint of a slip, although I did note that Harry kept his hand on the throttle in anticipation of such an event.  As the speed built up, he began to move the reverse lever from the corner up towards center, in effect shifting from low to high gear.
The busy U.S. 30 crossing slipped by with the speedometer showing 78 mph.  Soon the needle showed 86.  In spite of the large demand for steam, I had no problem maintaining 300 pounds of steam pressure.  This was not necessarily due to my prowess as a fireman, but rather to the fact that the engine was a free steamer.  I cracked open the firedoors to check the fire.  I was satisfied to note that its color was bright yellow-white.  The coal that I had put into the back corners and in front of the fire door was long gone.
Dixon is the location of a cast-iron post indicating Ohio on one side and Indiana on the other.  We did not have much time for reading as we were now running at 96 mph.  Harry had now moved the reverse lever to within just a few points of being vertical.  He was kept busy blowing for road crossings.  At our speed, there was not too much time from the passing of a whistle post until the crossing showed up. 
We bounced straight through the Monroeville crossovers at 108 mph, with the needle still unwinding.  West of town we hit 110.  The "T" still had reserve left.  The only problem we had was with dirt and soot.  This was compounded by coal dust from the tender. 
At Maples the speedometer needle quit moving.  We were now covering a mile in 30 seconds - 120 mph!
We blazed by Adams Tower with the engine and tender each trying to go their separate ways as they passed over the crossovers and siding switches.  The tower operator beat a hasty retreat as the breeze we created tried to blow him over.  Clearing the interlocking, Harry applied the brakes and pulled our speed down to a more respectable 80.  We slipped into town, stopping at the coal dock for a load of coal.  With the tender full, we made our final dash of a mile to the Fort Wayne station. 
Arriving there, we got off and headed downstairs to the crew room.  The passenger crew dispatcher, Chet Glant, met Harry as he turned in his timeslip.  "Harry, the dispatcher wants to talk to you upstairs."  So without cleaning ourselves, we both went up to the dispatcher's office.
The dispatcher eyeballed us, shaking his head in wonder.  Somewhat sarcastically he asked, "Which one of you two clowns has a pilot's license?"  He paused for dramatic effect and continued, "You guys were certainly flying low today.  According to your timing by Estry and Adams, it took you only 17 minutes to cover 27miles.  Now my math is nothing to brag about, but that averages out to something like 95 miles per hour, and that from a station stop."
Neither of us offered any comment.  He looked at us for a few moments and closed with the admonition, "Don't do this again."  As we walked out he grinned and added, Good job, guys."

 

 
Tags: 120 mph T1
  • Member since
    June, 2002
  • 12,624 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Wednesday, November 16, 2016 7:10 AM

I should add that my all-time favorate locomotive is still the N&W J.  But there is no question that the Pennsy T-1 WAS North America's fastest steam locomotive.

Some T-1s may have gotten 100mph speedometers, but there certainly were some with 120mph ones.

The speedometers on Metroliner MUs were digitial.   I am sure they could register 199 mph if that were obtained.  I often rode behind the engineer and frequently saw 120mph.   But only once 136 mph top.

RME
  • Member since
    March, 2016
  • 2,009 posts
Posted by RME on Wednesday, November 16, 2016 7:13 AM

Deggesty
In the spring of 1970 I rode the Metroliner from Washington to New York, and spent much of the time in the vestibule at the front of the train. I did not keep my eye on the speedometer all the time, but I do not recall noting any speed over 100 mph.

If there was a T1 speedometer that read over 100mph, produce a picture, or a reference that shows one.  I have done extensive research that appears to establish the contrary, but of course you can't prove a negative, and I for one would be delighted to find legitimate evidence of a speedometer reading that high.  (Of course, the same argument that was made in the Firestone 721 case -- that having a speedometer reading that high meant the engine was good to operate that fast -- might have applied...)

And there is no "N&W J-1".  Unless you mean the temporary wartime expedient with plain rods and little streamlining, which was mercifully corrected ASAP when materials restrictions were relaxed.  The engine is simply "class J" just as its 2-6-6-4 sisters are 'class A'.

I rode the Metroliner to Washington as a child (in 1969?) and the train frequently reached 100mph at that time - in fact, the engineer (he was NOT called a 'motorman' on PC) picked up the PA mike at one point to tell the passengers 'we're now doing a hundred' when I mentioned it.  I do not remember markedly exceeding that speed, though.

I was amused to ride a commuter train in from Landover a few years ago and having it regularly get up to 112mph, without much effort (or interest from the engineer).  Call me old-fashioned, but I still find locals that go that fast to be interesting.

  • Member since
    June, 2002
  • 12,624 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Wednesday, November 16, 2016 9:02 AM

If I remember correctly, the first Metroliner service was introduced in December 1969. My 136 mph experience was in January 1970, on a southbound run from NY to Washington.  I do not remember whether it was between New Brunzwick and Princeton Junction or between Newark and Perryville, where were the usual spots to see 120mph.  It was tbe only time I recall 120 mph exceeded.  

The article that I copied on to my hard-drive is the only source I have for a 120mph speedometer on T1s.  Is it possible that they were applied retroactively, replacing originally-installed 100mph speedometers?  Is the story fictional?  At this point I do not remember whether it was a Classic Trains or Trains offering, but it was definitely from this website.

Possibly your computer skills are greater than mine and can pull up the original article on this website.

  • Member since
    June, 2002
  • 12,624 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Wednesday, November 16, 2016 12:57 PM

I visited the cab of a GG-1  once, and rode opposite in the Fireman's seat from New Haven to Penn, NY.  I don't remember the speedometerv and take your work that it read only to 100.  In any case, I doubt we exceededs 79 anywhere on that run.

Haa any reader been in a T-1 cab and can report on the speedometer that he or she observed?

When did numerical display speedometers come into use?  Is it possible that some replaced regular circular speedometers in some T-1s at some point in time?   But then again he said "the needle stopped..."

RME
  • Member since
    March, 2016
  • 2,009 posts
Posted by RME on Wednesday, November 16, 2016 3:20 PM

daveklepper
The article that I copied on to my hard-drive is the only source I have for a 120mph speedometer on T1s. Is it possible that they were applied retroactively, replacing originally-installed 100mph speedometers?

See if you can find it, and supply the author and date.

I only have reference drawings for a 100mph calibration for the Jones-Motrola speedometer used.  (Note the spelling; the 'Motrola' was a power attachment for spring-wound Victrolas back in the day, and Jones Instrument adopted it as a trade name for the speedos and tachs.)  Jones Instrument is still in business and I believe they are advising (and perhaps bidding on) the unit for replica 5550; I will ask if they have any records of special calibration.

Somewhere in one of the four episodes of this there is a picture of a GG1 speedometer (with the needle at 90mph)...

  • Member since
    August, 2010
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 6,801 posts
Posted by Firelock76 on Wednesday, November 16, 2016 5:33 PM

Those boys in the T1 wouldn't have needed a speedometer to tell them they were doing 120, all they had to do was use a watch and count the mileposts, the old-time-y way. 

A mile in 30 seconds?  That's 120 mph any way you look at it.

By the way, I remember reading that article David quoted. Wish I'd kept the mag!

  • Member since
    January, 2001
  • From: Atlanta
  • 10,278 posts
Posted by oltmannd on Wednesday, November 16, 2016 8:40 PM

The gussied up Silverliners that were the Metroliner test bed struggle to hit their 155 mph target.  It took many runs and lots of mods.  The Metroliners were a lot more powerful and hit 164 in test runs.

The first scheduled Metroliner was 1/16/69.  

The Metroliners by Goldberg and Warner is a pretty good book on their history.  The authors were involved in the developent and marketing of the Metroliners.

-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/

  • Member since
    June, 2002
  • 12,624 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Thursday, November 17, 2016 12:29 AM

I had the necessary computer equipment at the time, so I  can post the entire article.  But would that not violate the copyrite agreement we all agreed to  for use of this website?  Perhaps the moderator can give me permission, and I will then post the entire article ona a new thread.

RME
  • Member since
    March, 2016
  • 2,009 posts
Posted by RME on Thursday, November 17, 2016 7:26 AM

All we would need is covered by fair use:  the author, issue and date, and the paragraph or two of text that covers the issue in question.

 

  • Member since
    June, 2002
  • 12,624 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Thursday, November 17, 2016 9:09 AM

T havw given you the author and the title and more than a paragraph from the body of the text.  I just don't know whether it was Classsic Trains or Trains, and the date and issue and page.  I neglected to keep that information.  I do have the completw story without any pictures.   Apologies.

  • Member since
    October, 2012
  • 38 posts
Posted by JL Chicago on Thursday, November 17, 2016 4:44 PM
Every PC employee timetable I have (and I have all but a couple) clearly showed a 90 mph limit for GG1s hauling Metroliners. Maybe they ran faster but that was not authorized. Check out multimodalways.com for PC and other ETTs in PDFs. Appreciate if anyone could find an exception to this rule as I am missing a couple issues.
  • Member since
    October, 2012
  • 38 posts
Posted by JL Chicago on Thursday, November 17, 2016 5:05 PM
Claims that the T1s were the fastest steam locomotives were not made by the people who rode the trains and wrote books and articles about their experiences. All of those writers claimed the Milwaukee Hiawathas as the fastest steam trains. Specifically Gerard Vulliet, EL Thompson and Cecil Allen all timed (or compiled timings) in their books and articles and all 3 claimed the Hiawathas as fastest. If the T1s were faster then no one recorded it and published it at the time.
  • Member since
    July, 2004
  • 2,219 posts
Posted by Paul Milenkovic on Thursday, November 17, 2016 6:56 PM

oltmannd

The gussied up Silverliners that were the Metroliner test bed struggle to hit their 155 mph target.  It took many runs and lots of mods.  The Metroliners were a lot more powerful and hit 164 in test runs.

The first scheduled Metroliner was 1/16/69.  

The Metroliners by Goldberg and Warner is a pretty good book on their history.  The authors were involved in the developent and marketing of the Metroliners.

 

The story I heard is that those Silverliners hit 150 MPH over a short stretch by operating in the short-term rating of their traction motors.  It was a test -- much like the NYC putting jet engines on an RDC -- to see if they could operate at such speeds without shaking to pieces or jumping the track and also to prove the concept of EMUs in high(er) speed passenger service.

The Metroliners, to my understanding, were designed to operate at 150 MPH in their continuous rating.  That made them a good deal heavier than the Silverliners as the state-of-the-art was that the transformers and other gear would make them weigh that much.  That they were not particularly streamlined probably contributed to the requirements for high power levels at 150 MPH.

The 150 MPH was also a "government spec", and I was told back-in-the-day that there was some national chauvinism involved.  If the Japanese could run 150 MPH, by jingo!, we were going to have the capability of running 160.  They were never operated that fast in service.

The picture to emerge is that the Silverliners (I am picking what I call rough-round numbers) were continous rated at 500 HP and short-time rated at 1000 HP, which allowed the famous Silverliner high-speed run.  The Metroliners were continuous rated at least twice that -- 1000 HP, and the 2500 HP figure, which was regarded as making them electric boxcabs for freight service if the Northeast Corridor and later Amtrak fell through.  But the 2500 HP I gather was a short-term and not a continuous rating.

If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?
  • Member since
    December, 2007
  • From: Georgia USA SW of Atlanta
  • 8,119 posts
Posted by blue streak 1 on Thursday, November 17, 2016 8:56 PM

Suspect later limitations of GG-1 speeds were because of power supply problems.

The following conclusions are all speculation but the few listed facts are not. These items are not in exactly calendar order.

1.  PRR handled WW-2 fairly well with their motors that were supplemented by steam.  PRR seemed to keep NEC speeds fairly constant to maintain fluidity except for a few varnish trains. We did have the overspeed wreck at the same curve as the 188 wreck last year.  

2.  After WW-2 PRR seemed to have power supply problems which may have been their increase the nominal CAT voltage from 11Kv to 11.5Kv. The reduction of freight allowed it to continue operating. 

3.  Then we have PC and Conrail dropping electric freight service reducing electrical demand.

4.  Then the Metroliners came on board .  There are reports that the Metroliners drew so much power that they were tested on the RDG lines at a location that had excess power.

5.  Then SEPTA, MARC. and NJ Transit increased their trains and lengths upping demand significantly.   

6.   In short order Amtrak had many low voltage problems.  They had to rebuilt the Atglen transmission lines.  Added and repaired several frequency converters, Upped the CAT voltage from 11.5 to 12 Kv.  Amtrak Is building a very large solid state frequency converter near Newark.  Converting Hell gate route to 12.5 Kv 60 Hz. 

7.  All these power upgrades are first for the additional commuter trains and higher HP ACS-64s and Acela-1s  and the future more Acela-2s. Would not be surprized if Amtrak ups its CAT voltage to 12.5 Kv.

Not knowing the power efficiency of GG-1s with its unique traction motor setup can only speculate that is one reason GG-1s were limited to the listed timetable speeds.

 

 

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Trains free email newsletter
NEWS » PHOTOS » VIDEOS » HOT TOPICS & MORE
GET OUR WEEKLY NEWSLETTER DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Connect with us
ON FACEBOOK AND TWITTER

Search the Community