UK Vintage Radio Repair and Restoration Powered By Google Custom Search Vintage Radio and TV Service Data

Go Back   UK Vintage Radio Repair and Restoration Discussion Forum > Specific Vintage Equipment > Vintage Amateur and Military Radio

Notices

Vintage Amateur and Military Radio Amateur/military receivers and transmitters, morse, and any other related vintage comms equipment.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old 17th Apr 2019, 8:30 pm   #21
trh01uk
Octode
 
trh01uk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Ross-on-Wye, Herefordshire, UK.
Posts: 1,648
Default Re: Merits of The Wireless Set No. 19?

Quote:
Originally Posted by G6Tanuki View Post
I struggled with a WS19 on the Army Cadet 60-Metre nets in the 70s; I was rather glad when COD Donnington released some C12s, even though it did involve some interesting 'negotiations' with the chemistry-master to get a couple of gallons of H2SO4 for the pair of metal-cased 110AH batteries needed to power it (C12 was 24V).

The C12 was great! Proper high-level modulation and a nice ATU. I worked all over the UK during lunch-breaks, that being the only time when AF breakthrough into the intercom between the headmaster's study and his secretary's office was not going to be a problem.

I also operated on the cadet nets on 5330KHz, often using a WS19. I found them perfectly adequate in those days, but I suspect the arrival of wall-to-wall QRM in all built-up areas was yet to come in the early 1970s! When I have susbequently operated a WS19 in the field in more recent decades, I have again found it perfectly adequate on the 80m band - though again quite radio conditions are essential with only about 2 watts output.

I had, for instance, a contact from Herefordshire to southern Ireland without any difficulty using a WS19 on AM, on the 80m band. And using a dipole cut to frequency at about 25' agl.

The C12 I also used in both situations. As a cadet operator it worked extremely well, with its very nice high level modulation. Apparently equivalent to a WS19HP, without all the extra bulk and extra batteries.

But the C12 also had a fatal flaw in some situations compared to the WS19. If its used with a wire aerial in an area of strong broadcast stations at the top end of the MW band, it can be easily swamped - while the WS19 will operate just fine. And that is due to the very much simplified PA series L, parallel C aerial matching system, and with no tuned circuit on the receive RF amplifier whatsoever. The WS19 has a full tuned circuit in this position, while the C12 effectively has no more than a low pass filter. And you can then find the C12 receives nothing but the local MW signal, wherever tune it!

Obviously a decent ATU would restore the C12 to usability in this situation, but I have been caught on the hop while out in the field, and had to resort to the good ol' WS19 to rescue the day!

Richard
trh01uk is offline  
Old 17th Apr 2019, 9:54 pm   #22
Herald1360
Dekatron
 
Herald1360's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Leominster, Herefordshire, UK.
Posts: 16,526
Default Re: Merits of The Wireless Set No. 19?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bazz4CQJ View Post
..........
They were all sold at a standard price of 39/6 (that format looks wrong......

B
Perhaps 39/6d would look better? 39s/6d doesn't "work" either.
__________________
....__________
....|____||__|__\_____
.=.| _---\__|__|_---_|.
.........O..Chris....O
Herald1360 is offline  
Old 17th Apr 2019, 11:59 pm   #23
Argus25
No Longer a Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Maroochydore, Queensland, Australia.
Posts: 2,679
Default Re: Merits of The Wireless Set No. 19?

One thing I noticed about the ZC1 and it possibly applies to the WS19. The theoretical peak envelope power cannot be achieved due to the modulator being a little inept. For example with a 3.2 watt carrier wave, if the modulation could get close to 95%, it could be an impressive 9 watts. But with the carbon mic and the circuit it (in the ZC1) it barely gets to 50% modulation on peaks, they could have pushed that harder I think. I wonder if the 19 is like that too?

But, one good bit of news with these styles of radios, normally they have a very sensitive receiver with an RF stage and good tuning of the antenna wire on receive, so perhaps that mitigates to some extent the deficiencies on the transmitting side of things.
Argus25 is offline  
Old 18th Apr 2019, 7:07 am   #24
Radio Wrangler
Moderator
 
Radio Wrangler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Fife, Scotland, UK.
Posts: 22,799
Default Re: Merits of The Wireless Set No. 19?

The 19 set's merits were all in the 1960s:

1) There was an awful lot of them about
2) They were dirt-cheap

In the 1940s they didn't acquire a fan club. The VHF 'B' set was essentially useless and got jokes, I was told, about 'Press button B and get your money back'. Any free-tuning of a receiver was going to be difficult in a moving tank. Construction was at least robust enough to survive the shock and vibration fairly well.

People wanting a receiver in the 1960s saw the 19 set as very affordable and it wasn't a bad receiver, but the tuning range was frustrating in a wonderful sunspot maximum. The 19 set sold to people who'd rather have an 1155, CR100, HRO, AR88 in ascending preference order, but were financially constrained. Transmitting-type people might have a 19 set as a starter setup, but soon moved on to homebrew and heathkits. The LG300 was aspired to. KW entered the fray. There didn't seem to be that many 1154s around. Anything with Collins written on it was very desirable.

Through it all, the 19 set remained plentiful and cheap. A lot of people got started with them because of this.

The bit of the 19set I most liked.... The variometer!

David
__________________
Can't afford the volcanic island yet, but the plans for my monorail and the goons' uniforms are done
Radio Wrangler is online now  
Old 18th Apr 2019, 8:42 am   #25
trh01uk
Octode
 
trh01uk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Ross-on-Wye, Herefordshire, UK.
Posts: 1,648
Default Re: Merits of The Wireless Set No. 19?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Argus25 View Post
One thing I noticed about the ZC1 and it possibly applies to the WS19. The theoretical peak envelope power cannot be achieved due to the modulator being a little inept. For example with a 3.2 watt carrier wave, if the modulation could get close to 95%, it could be an impressive 9 watts. But with the carbon mic and the circuit it (in the ZC1) it barely gets to 50% modulation on peaks, they could have pushed that harder I think. I wonder if the 19 is like that too?

But, one good bit of news with these styles of radios, normally they have a very sensitive receiver with an RF stage and good tuning of the antenna wire on receive, so perhaps that mitigates to some extent the deficiencies on the transmitting side of things.
The theory of the AM modulation system is that the carrier power needs to be no more than a quarter of the peak power available. The peak power is established by what the set can push out on CW. If that's 5W, then the AM carrier should be no more than 1.25W.

But the reality of these sets is that the rather crude modulation circuit, and lack of proper adjustment, means that the carrier power is often much higher than a quarter of the peak power. The rules cannot be broken though. If you push out 2.5W carrier power, and your peak power is 5W, then your modulation percentage is going to be less (I make it roughly 41.4% - but someone else can check my maths!).

If you go through the setup procedure of a WS19 in the EMER, you will find the adjustment of drive levels is particularly critical - even more so when it comes to getting it the same across the whole of both bands. I doubt many users ever get near to using the EMER procedure - the typical amateur is just going to twiddle everything for maximum output (i.e. carrier power).......then wonder why the results aren't great!

Richard
trh01uk is offline  
Old 18th Apr 2019, 8:45 am   #26
trh01uk
Octode
 
trh01uk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Ross-on-Wye, Herefordshire, UK.
Posts: 1,648
Default Re: Merits of The Wireless Set No. 19?

It might be worth adding to my post above that the low level modulation scheme used in the WS19 was widely used in WWII era sets. I could name the WS18, WS52, WS38, WS22, WS62, T1154, WS12 for starters.

I have been working on a T1154 recently. I can't get the mod depth anything over about 60%, and there are no more adjustments to play with. That set uses suppressor grid modulation of the PT15 PA valves (like the WS12). It is what it is. I think the designers took the attitude that CW was the mode to use when things got difficult. Voice was just a "nice-to-have" and it if worked on the day then that was a bonus.

Richard
trh01uk is offline  
Old 18th Apr 2019, 8:50 am   #27
trh01uk
Octode
 
trh01uk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Ross-on-Wye, Herefordshire, UK.
Posts: 1,648
Default Re: Merits of The Wireless Set No. 19?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Radio Wrangler View Post
In the 1940s they didn't acquire a fan club. The VHF 'B' set was essentially useless and got jokes, I was told, about 'Press button B and get your money back'. Any free-tuning of a receiver was going to be difficult in a moving tank. Construction was at least robust enough to survive the shock and vibration fairly well.
The B-set apparently acquired jokes by real users long before amateurs got their hands on them. The joke I was told was that it was easier to shout to the guy in the next tank than use the B-set!

The actual problem the army users had was they found it impossible to net the sets. When two B-sets are close, they swamp each other, and the transmitting set pulls the receiving set off frequency - by the well known phenomenon of oscillators locking together, I guess. That meant they could apparently be netted, but as soon as they moved away the signal was lost, as the receivers moved back to their natural frequency.

All this could have been avoided if an RF amplifier had been included in the receive system, just to buffer off the super-regen detector from the aerial. After all super-regens can work very well.


Richard
trh01uk is offline  
Old 18th Apr 2019, 11:43 am   #28
Keith
Heptode
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Tewkesbury, Gloucestershire, UK.
Posts: 690
Default Re: Merits of The Wireless Set No. 19?

A few years ago I was lucky enough to have a conversation with 92 year-old Bill Betts, a D-Day veteran and Sherman tank wireless operator.

He remembered the WS19 as being effective and reliable. It was kept running continuously, batteries being charged using a “Chore-horse” generator when the tanks were “in harbour” (i.e. gathered together for the night). At that time the priorities were re-fuelling, taking on ammunition, getting tomorrow’s new location code and finally eating! He recalled that the “B-set” was used successfully – especially to “listen-in” in an attempt to find out what was actually going on! On the “A-set” he recalled occasionally hearing American voices. One Christmas he was able to find some jazz on his 19 set for a little light relief.

He distinctly remembered sending the codes “Victor Target” and “Uncle Target” to report the location of enemy positions and call in artillery attacks. He recalled that a massive bombardment would then ensue. These were priority signals and all other stations on net would shut down to avoid interference. His worst moment was getting out of range and having to resort to CW, RT being generally used.

Sadly, Bill has now passed away.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Bill and WS19_cropped_c.JPG
Views:	184
Size:	23.4 KB
ID:	181480  
__________________
Keith Yates - G3XGW
VMARS & BVWS member http://www.tibblestone.com/oldradios/Old_Radios.htm
Keith is offline  
Old 18th Apr 2019, 3:18 pm   #29
Argus25
No Longer a Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Maroochydore, Queensland, Australia.
Posts: 2,679
Default Re: Merits of The Wireless Set No. 19?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Radio Wrangler View Post
The VHF 'B' set was essentially useless and got jokes, I was told, about 'Press button B and get your money back'.

David
Ha ha, that reminds me of a movie, I don't know if it was popular in the UK.
Space Cowboys. A vintage satellite is coming back to Earth in an uncontrolled manner, so NASA get the aging original designer (played by Clint Eastwood) to help them with the electronics. He gets into an argument with the young NASA engineer about the way parts of the satellite's control system work. Eastwood suggests that the young engineer doesn't understand it, so the young engineer tries to defend himself: "But I have a double degree in Engineering from MIT" Eastwood replies: Then perhaps you should ask for a refund.

User pays education, who knew?
Argus25 is offline  
Old 18th Apr 2019, 4:57 pm   #30
John KC0G
Hexode
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.
Posts: 275
Default Re: Merits of The Wireless Set No. 19?

There are many issues wrapped up in this thread. W.A.S. (William) Butement discussed some of them in his article "Army Radio Communications since 1914", Electronics Australia, November 1969, pp 10-13, 15, 17 and 18. You can find the issue at www.americanradiohistory.com

Butement was at the Signals Experimental Establishment (SEE) and worked on the design of the No. 11 set, in conjunction with the E.K. Cole company. That was a departure from the established procedures. Butement comments that it was known that the No. 19 set did not comply with all of the military specifications, and that this had a disastrous effect with capacitor failures in North Africa. See also:
I. M. Ross, "Component Development for War-Time Service Applications", Journai IEE, Vol. 94 Pt IIIA, 1947, pp 231-243.
On p. 232 Ross discusses the effects of poor component reliability and its potential effect on the outcomes of battle, including the problems with the WS. 19 sets in the African Desert campaign. .The discussion drives home the point that reliable equipment is not a luxury, but an essential. BTW the Ross paper was read at the IEE Radiocommunication Convention in 1947.

I only became aware of Butement and his work from an article in Electric Radio (published here in the USA) by Ray Robinson, VK2N0 in the Nov. 2017 issue. I understand that he also contributed a similar article to the VMARS "Signal", issue no. 34, Feb. 2015. Butement's work in radio (No. 11 set, No. 10 set and others), radar (600 Mhz experiments in 1930, and his work on coastal defence or CHL radar) and the radio proximity fuze was extraordinary. The proximity fuze was included in the Tizard Mission. Later, after the Americans had worked out how to make it in large numbers, it was instrumental, along with gun-laying radar and the M9 predictor, in the defence of London against the V-1 flying bombs.

The development of German technology (posts #2 and #5) in the 1930's has been very well covered by Arthur Bauer. His history of technology web site is at http://www.cdvandt.org/ Clicking on "Synopsis" gives a very very brief overview.
German radio sets were extensively analyzed, See:
"German Army Wireless Equipment - A critical survey of the mechanical and electrical features", W. Farrar, The Royal Signals Quarterly Journal (New Series), Volume 1, Nr. 2 & 3, April 1947, p. 62-66. You can find it here: https://www.nonstopsystems.com/radio...y-wireless.pdf

Selectivity in super-regenerative receivers (post #27) is a tricky subject. It depends upon the shape of the quench waveform, and whether the receiver is operating in linear or logarithmic mode. In the latter the selectivity is dependent upon the signal level. See:
J.R. Whitehead, "Super-Regenerative Receivers", Cambridge University Press, 1950 for the details.

John
John KC0G is offline  
Old 18th Apr 2019, 6:30 pm   #31
John KC0G
Hexode
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.
Posts: 275
Default Re: Merits of The Wireless Set No. 19?

Two papers by Arthur Bauer (see above):

"Receiver and Transmitter Development in Germany 1920-1945", Arthur Bauer, PAØAOB, IEE Int'l Conf. on 100 Years of Radio, London, September 1994
https://www.nonstopsystems.com/radio...arthur-trx.pdf

"The significance of German electronic engineering in the 1930s" Arthur Bauer, PAØAOB, presented at the 2004 IEEE Conference on the History of Electronics (CHE2004), Bletchley Park, UK, June 2004.
https://www.nonstopsystems.com/radio...ngineering.pdf

John
John KC0G is offline  
Old 18th Apr 2019, 8:13 pm   #32
trh01uk
Octode
 
trh01uk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Ross-on-Wye, Herefordshire, UK.
Posts: 1,648
Default Re: Merits of The Wireless Set No. 19?

Quote:
Originally Posted by John KC0G View Post
German radio sets were extensively analyzed, See:
"German Army Wireless Equipment - A critical survey of the mechanical and electrical features", W. Farrar, The Royal Signals Quarterly Journal (New Series), Volume 1, Nr. 2 & 3, April 1947, p. 62-66. You can find it here: https://www.nonstopsystems.com/radio...y-wireless.pdf

John
John,

I am quite familiar with this Farrar paper, and thank you for pointing an online copy of it. I met Walter Farrar in person about 15 years ago, not long before he died, and discussed quite a few of his wartime activities at SRDE.

One of his jobs at SRDE was to evaluate German equipment as it arrived after capture. He wrote a catalogue of this equipment, and copies can sometimes still be found. No doubt he was asked to write this paper as a conclusion of this work before he left to take up teaching physics after the war.

The problem with this paper is that its conclusion looks to me to be entirely political, and not in the least bit a valid engineering evaluation of the equipment. He concludes that "Electrically the equipment was good and efficient, but not at all modern when judged by British war time standards, although it was in many cases quite ingenious".

That statement is laughable, given that firstly he cites feature after feature of German equipment in the bulk of the paper, and would appear to be quite in awe of the engineering prowess the Germans exhibited in their radio equipment. So that concluding statement simply does not fit with the rest of the paper. I suspect it was a political statement, and designed to be read by his superiors who would like skip most of the text and look for an "appropriate conclusion." Who - in post war Britain, having defeated someone regarded as the ultimate in evil, and at huge cost in lives and equipment - could possibly then make any realistic statement about the overwhelming superiority of the enemy equipment? Quite impossible I would say.

Its even more laughable when, with hindsight, we can see that British equipment (in the form of the Larkspur military radio series) eventually evolved to get somewhere near what the Germans achieved during the war!


Richard
trh01uk is offline  
Old 18th Apr 2019, 9:00 pm   #33
trh01uk
Octode
 
trh01uk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Ross-on-Wye, Herefordshire, UK.
Posts: 1,648
Default Re: Merits of The Wireless Set No. 19?

Quote:
Originally Posted by John KC0G View Post
There are many issues wrapped up in this thread. W.A.S. (William) Butement discussed some of them in his article "Army Radio Communications since 1914", Electronics Australia, November 1969, pp 10-13, 15, 17 and 18. You can find the issue at www.americanradiohistory.com

John
Yes, thank you for pointing out this paper - its a new one to me. I eventually found it and have attached a copy of the file after a bit of tidying, in case anyone would like to consider its contents.

Richard
Attached Files
File Type: pdf Army Radio Communications - Butement.pdf (783.7 KB, 146 views)
trh01uk is offline  
Old 18th Apr 2019, 10:43 pm   #34
trh01uk
Octode
 
trh01uk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Ross-on-Wye, Herefordshire, UK.
Posts: 1,648
Default Re: Merits of The Wireless Set No. 19?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith View Post
He recalled that the “B-set” was used successfully – especially to “listen-in” in an attempt to find out what was actually going on!

Yes, this comment from a user suggests that the B-set was heavily dependent on the skill of the user. Obviously, the specifiers, designers and evaluators would never have released a set which was as bad as many wartime users made out.

However, to balance that, a set that can only be successfully used by those with enough skill (rather than the usual squaddie) is never going to survive. And those B-sets were ripped out en masse in the late 50s. And the replacement sets - the C12 and then the C13 - had no VHF short range secondary set built into them. Rather they concentrated on making the HF set work as well as possible. And I can't recall any other attempt to combine HF and VHF sets into one box ever again.

What did also happen - from the middle of WWII onwards - was to add a secondary set into tanks and other vehicles, typically adapting manpack sets for vehicle use. The was one was the WS38 HF manpack, which became the "WS38AFV" (AFV = armoured fighting vehicle). That was followed quickly by the WS88AFV and the WS31AFV. What I have never been able to establish is exactly what the purpose was for these secondary sets - nominally they were talking from the tank crew to infantry on the ground. I suspect again that they were equally used for tank to tank comms when the crew couldn't get the WS19 B-set to work.


Richard
trh01uk is offline  
Old 19th Apr 2019, 12:06 am   #35
Skywave
Rest in Peace
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Chard, South Somerset, UK.
Posts: 7,457
Default Re: Merits of The Wireless Set No. 19?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Radio Wrangler View Post
The 19 set sold to people who'd rather have an 1155, CR100, HRO, AR88 in ascending preference order, but were financially constrained.
. . . the 19 set remained plentiful and cheap. A lot of people got started with them because of this.
Yes: I did! And I similarly 'graduated' to the R1155, CR100 and the HRO. Never got to the AR88 in the mid-1960s, since they were too expensive for me . (Although I did get one a few years ago - mainly out of curiosity). After a brief interlude with a few Japanese sets, I eventually acquired an Eddystone 888A: a superb RX for AmRad use. I sold it last year: it became redundant, the RA-17 being my main RX for S.W. - and still is.
Nevertheless, I still have fond memories of the 19 set: I learnt a lot about S.W. radios, electronics, etc. with mine. Halcyon days that were.

Al.
Skywave is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2019, 6:07 pm   #36
G6Tanuki
Dekatron
 
G6Tanuki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Wiltshire, UK.
Posts: 13,951
Default Re: Merits of The Wireless Set No. 19?

I always wonder about the people behind the B-set: surely any competent designer would have measured the spectacular level of on-channel radiation from the thing on 'receive' and realised that when you had a group of such receivers in close proximity the result would invariably be a mess?

It's not hard to handle: various similar-era RAF VHF/UHF RADAR-gear used the "Superhet-superregen" approach, downconverting to something around 30MHz before using a superregen detector.

I guess the perils of flying something-that-radiates-massively [so providing a good homing target for enemy fighters] was rather higher in the minds of avionics-radio designers.
G6Tanuki is offline  
Old 23rd Apr 2019, 6:03 pm   #37
trh01uk
Octode
 
trh01uk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Ross-on-Wye, Herefordshire, UK.
Posts: 1,648
Default Re: Merits of The Wireless Set No. 19?

Quote:
Originally Posted by G6Tanuki View Post
I always wonder about the people behind the B-set: surely any competent designer would have measured the spectacular level of on-channel radiation from the thing on 'receive' and realised that when you had a group of such receivers in close proximity the result would invariably be a mess?

It's not hard to handle: various similar-era RAF VHF/UHF RADAR-gear used the "Superhet-superregen" approach, downconverting to something around 30MHz before using a superregen detector.

I guess the perils of flying something-that-radiates-massively [so providing a good homing target for enemy fighters] was rather higher in the minds of avionics-radio designers.

I don't know about the avionics designers - but certainly the naval ones had radiation from receivers in mind. Local oscillator signals propagate brilliantly across a highly conductive near flat surface (aka "the sea"). So they designed TRF after TRF. So did the Germans.

I think the trouble was that the boffin class simply didn't think in terms of super-regens very much. One set that was successful - the WS17 in its wooden box (no screening there then!) - was designed by a radio amateur based on common practice amongst amateurs from about 1935 onwards. The boffin class probably didn't actually try and use their designs very much either - engineering was at a pretty basic level in those days, and highly hierarchical which does not help when you need to take a systems view of a problem. These are all things that have come into engineering practice in recent decades - probably entirely unknown back in 1940.

Also..... although its easy enough to suppress radiation from a super-regen by using a buffer-amplifier in front of it (or a mixer) - its not so easy to then reconfigure the stage to become a transmitter, as is done on the WS19. The Aux Units set - the TRD - reportedly had a grounded-grid buffer amplifier added in front of its super-regen stage to suppress such radiation. But it also had a completely separate transmitter oscillator using a double triode.

Richard
trh01uk is offline  
Old 23rd Apr 2019, 6:55 pm   #38
John KC0G
Hexode
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.
Posts: 275
Default Re: Merits of The Wireless Set No. 19?

Quote:
Originally Posted by trh01uk View Post
I think the trouble was that the boffin class simply didn't think in terms of super-regens very much.
Super-regens might not have been used very much for radio (voice and CW) receivers, but they were the basis of the IFF (Identify Friend or Foe) MkIII sets, which included automatic gain stabilisation. Many many tens of thousands of these units were built. See "Super-Regenerative Receivers", by J.R. Whitehead, Cambridge University Press, 1950 and chapters 3 and 4 of his memoirs "Memoirs of a Boffin" at http://www.whitehead-family.ca/drrennie/radar.html

Louis Brown, in his book "A Radar History of World War II, technical and military imperatives", pp 403-408 discusses the post WW2 post mortem on the German radar systems. He also comments upon the fact that when the Battle of Berlin was ended early in 1944, many problems had been caused by excessive radiation from radio comms., jammers, tail warning radars, IFF and H2S.

73 John
John KC0G is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 3:12 pm.


All information and advice on this forum is subject to the WARNING AND DISCLAIMER located at https://www.vintage-radio.net/rules.html.
Failure to heed this warning may result in death or serious injury to yourself and/or others.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright ©2002 - 2023, Paul Stenning.