Settlement design

Noah · 2021-04-27 00:00:23

RobertDyck wrote:

This is an area that NASA management has traditionally been obsessed. American culture is obsessed with sex, but upper class elites like to pretend they have Puritan values. NASA wanted to prohibit any sexual activity what so ever for the reasons you state. When the International Space Station was built, there were other countries involved. The European Space Agency brings European values. They are quite adamant about this: what adults do on their own time is their business. Management has no business telling adults what they can or cannot do with sex. So policy for ISS was established (at least as released to members of the public like me) that space agencies cannot dictate sexual activity or lack thereof to astronauts. They can insist that astronauts be discrete, and the emphasis is that individuals must be professionals at all times, they must be able to continue to work together. European representatives treated NASA's attitude toward sex as adolescent, not mature. As if Americans have never learned how to grow up.
One Space Shuttle mission did have a married couple on the same mission. They went into space together. Many people have speculated what happened up there. However, the crew cabin of Shuttle is actually quite small. If anything did happen, absolutely everyone on the Shuttle would have heard everything.

That a good side note, I will also include it.

-

Sources from post #318 (Books:)

Mars Prospect Energy and Material Resources
Mars - Wie wir den roten Planeten besiedeln
Use of extraterrestrial resources for human space missions to moon or Mars

-

Oldfart1939 wrote:

I'm certainly willing to set up and **own** such a topic. I looked at what Noah has written and his thoughts are in a way, similar to mine, but from a different approach in reaching his conclusions.

I also think that would be a good idea. Then we would have two approaches, which makes things more interesting.

louis · 2021-04-27 05:12:43

Regarding labour time allocation, I would say anything from 2005 or before is way out of date.

If you google on "farm robots" or "mining robots" you will see there are now a huge range of robotic machines that can take over from human labour. There was an assumption in the past that, as on the moon, there would be a lot of EVA activity on the surface with crew in spacesuits (and it used to take 180 minutes to get in and out of a space suit). That's no longer going to be necessary. The pioneers can largely stay in their pressurised vehicles and supervise various robot vehicles undertaking tasks like digging for water ice, drilling into and colecting the ice and then transporting it back to the propellant plant. We also have functional "fetch and carry robots" from Boston Dynamics that Space X are already using. The likelihood is they could be made to perform well on Mars as well.

In addition there have been huge advances in 3D printers and the capabilities of industrial robots are well established.

Put it all together and I think the amount of labour time required for survival on Mars has been greatly reduced. However, on the debit side, Space X's plan to relaunch a Starship to return to Earth is likely to consume a huge amount of labour time. Every centimetre of the rocket is going to have to be checked out and all systems will need to be tested pre launch, as far as they can be.

Noah wrote:

CREW SIZE
From a moral point of view, the number of crew members should be kept small. But what is actually even more important than keeping the crew small is keeping the crew safe! So in order to achieve the mission objective, do science, and bring the crew back safely, there are several requirements for the crew. There are four critical factors that affect crew size:
First, there are personnel requirements, which primarily include scientific and technical skills. Second, there is the workload, which should be an interplay of productive work as well as rest breaks. Third is psychological factor. A mission that lasts over 2.5 years will bring some problems, mainly due to confinement and isolation. Fourth is the composition of the crew, should it be more homogeneous or heterogeneous (in terms of nationality, gender, age and experience).
Personnel requirements
A minimum crew for operations, maintenance, and overhead is needed, about 2 to 3 people. The mission critical person would definitely be a mechanic for the electrical systems or life support systems. The lives of the crew would depend on his/her skills. Therefore, this person should be an experienced mechanic with hands-on skills to troubleshoot most problems. A person or rather persons with medical skills are also irreplaceable. All crew members need basic medical knowledge and are trained in first aid.
Further, a field scientist/geologist would also be needed to explore the Martian landscape to find resources for the ISRU and to understand the history of Mars. Further, a geologist would be needed to find new evidence to answer the question of past or present life.
A partial list for mission jobs might include:
Technological Skills:
Commander
Spacecraft Engineer
Manufacturing Engineer
Navigation
Communication
Software Engineering
Scientific skills:
Geology
Biology
Medicine
Atmosphere
Meteorology
Astronomy
It is not necessary to bring an expert for each field. It is not necessary to bring a "pilot" or commander. Yes, we need them, but a commander could be mainly a mechanic who has the skills to lead the crew. Redundancy is needed to make the mission as safe as possible. The mission critical people should definitely be at least dual. So the crew maximum would be all 12 skills plus redundancy in the mission critical people, which would be around 20 people.
Workload
In the 1970s, there was a "Skylab mission" where the astronauts had a tough schedule. For this reason, the crew went on strike for one day. Therefore, a good time segment is very important.
To determine the workload, it is useful to note what work needs to be done and what should be done. All issues related to safety and life support have the highest priority, followed by exploration and science.
There have been several studies on the workload and psychological effects in a Mars-like environment such as in the Arctic/Antarctica, in low Earth orbit, in isolation chambers, and in underwater submarines.
After landing on Mars, the first month will likely be the hardest. There are three options for the building: 1. bring the whole building, 2. print the building in advance, or 3. build it on site, after landing. Regardless of which case occurs, the team will have a heavy workload. They will need to install power supplies and life support systems. If they are a larger team, they can divide the work more efficiently, but they will also have to do more work. In such a case, with a shortage of people, a larger crew at the top end (about ~ 16) is better. However, this should not happen so often, so such a large team would probably be superfluous. The team then moves into the maintenance phase, which is more repetitive but also more demanding. This would mainly involve cleaning and repairs. Coinciding with the start of science and exploration. Lamamy et al. (2005) noted that for a four-person crew, probably 80% of the crew time would be devoted to self-maintenance and about 20% of the crew time would be devoted to science and exploration. With a crew of six, this ratio would possibly change to 60-40. It should be noted that these numbers are quite subjective at this early stage. However, with a larger crew, the ratio would allow more room for science and exploration. So with a crew of 8 or more, the crew would have plenty of time for science and would not be constantly engaged in self-maintenance.
What also needs to be considered is the schedule of how and when the crew operates. For example, the ISS crew gets a schedule from the Earth crew, and that works well. But on Mars, a response from the Earth crew would take about 40 minutes because of the long distance. Accordingly, the crew has to operate largely autonomously. This also has an impact on various other psychological factors.
Psychological factors
The aforementioned studies also collected useful data on psychological factors. They are listed in total in Table 3. I will only go through the most important points. The results were all similar: most crew members had a pleasant and harmonious time. Nevertheless, they all missed their family/friends, or unfamiliar faces and other things. One of the biggest hurdles was isolation and confinement. Constantly next to others and almost no space of their own. They also found that larger crews have a higher rate of deviance and conflict than smaller crews. Therefore, crew size should be kept small in terms of psychological aspects. But still many psychological aspects are not well researched. For example, the earth-out-of-sight phenomenon. It is not clear how much the crew is affected by this phenomenon.
Composition
Composition is in terms of nationality, gender, age, and experience. In general, deviance and conflict increased with mission duration, with the deviance peak in the tired quarter. Dudley - Rowley investigation of teams respond in a heterogeneity or homogeneity group. Heterogeneity differentiates people from each other, this makes thinking about a long duration more interesting. However, they start with higher levels of deviance, conflict, and dysfunction - but they decrease. Perhaps this is how some innovative solutions emerge, because of the different skills and experiences. In homogeneous teams, the start was quite comfortable. After the middle to the end of the third quarter, conflicts increase sharply. Especially gender plays a role in the composition. To date, there has been no systematic research on the behavior and performance of mixed- and same-sex groups that arise under confinement and isolation. Nevertheless, there are several risks associated with sexual activity:
formation of couples
interpersonal tensions due to jealousy
sexual deprivation can be harder to bear in the presence of people perceived as sexually attractive
sexual harassment
unwanted pregnancy
Only the last risk cannot be associated with homosexuality, but the other one can. So this does not make a same-sex group more favorable. There are also some proposals to send married couples on a Mars mission, but this does not seem realistic, as high technical skills are required.
So how many should go and in what constellation?
Based on the facts, an eight-person crew consisting of a mixed & heterogeneous team seems most likely. A crew of eight allows for a dedicated crewmember for the most critical function, while still allowing for some redundancy in capability coverage and still keeping the mission feasible and affordable.
With a smaller crew, there would likely not be enough time for science and would lead the mission primarily to a survival camp. A crew with more people, say 11 or 12, would also seem reasonable. But there are two main reasons for a smaller crew: the first is to keep the payload as small as possible to allow for a realistic price. In the past, most attempts failed not because of technical problems but because of lack of funds. Second is a moral consideration: regardless of any safety precautions, this mission will be extremely risky. Therefore, the number of crew should be kept to a minimum for the first mission.

tahanson43206 · 2021-04-27 05:15:42

For Noah re #318

Thank you for providing references for the material you posted in #318

Please go back and edit that information into Post #318

I will recommend for SpaceNut and kbd512 as a policy for the forum: "Plagarism cannot and will not be tolerated"

For SpaceNut and kbd512 ... Noah has potential to become successful in an academic career and later in professional activities.

However, he is an undergraduate, with little (apparent) appreciation for how seriously PhD level persons take plagarism.

I have spent decades in support of PhD level people, and have learned how seriously they can (and do) take this violation of the norms of academic activity.

I would greatly appreciate your commenting upon the recommendation for a forum policy on the subject. It has never come up before (that I am aware of).

Most members of the forum are careful to cite the source of the material they present from other sources, and to use the BBCODE format [ q u o t e ] and [ / q u o t e ] as needed to set out text in a post.

(th)

louis · 2021-04-27 05:37:50

I agree. I think it makes sense for at least the first 4 Misssions to take your habs with you, ready made.

Then over the next few missions, you might start trials with ISRU construction. The most promising I have seen have been the robotic laying down of cement structures. Cut and cover using Mars brick might be used for artificially lit farm habs.

Air locks will be a crucial design element. It may be necessary to import those for a while longer until Mars has a well developed steel industry. On the other hand, we might be able to address that issue with industrial scale 3D printers.

SpaceNut wrote:

The trouble with building and especially remotely from support trains is the issue of time, quantities of what types of payloads can be moved. It will always come back to the planned steps to achive the final goal and must start with the first step, to the next and so forth fully itemized as to what happens when.

RobertDyck · 2021-04-27 16:28:16

Noah,
I corrected second quote in post #326. I'm not OldFart1939. I'm not that old; my mother was born in 1938.

louis · 2021-04-27 18:20:37

I've been thinking for a while, as the reality of settling Mars approaches, we need a thread on some "difficult" subjects: sex, drugs (alcohol, cannabis, hallucinogenics etc), religion (particularly religious observance in the early colony), pregnancy/abortion, free speech,
vaccination, screening for disabilities etc

I think I'll do that now.

Noah wrote:

RobertDyck wrote:
This is an area that NASA management has traditionally been obsessed. American culture is obsessed with sex, but upper class elites like to pretend they have Puritan values. NASA wanted to prohibit any sexual activity what so ever for the reasons you state. When the International Space Station was built, there were other countries involved. The European Space Agency brings European values. They are quite adamant about this: what adults do on their own time is their business. Management has no business telling adults what they can or cannot do with sex. So policy for ISS was established (at least as released to members of the public like me) that space agencies cannot dictate sexual activity or lack thereof to astronauts. They can insist that astronauts be discrete, and the emphasis is that individuals must be professionals at all times, they must be able to continue to work together. European representatives treated NASA's attitude toward sex as adolescent, not mature. As if Americans have never learned how to grow up.
One Space Shuttle mission did have a married couple on the same mission. They went into space together. Many people have speculated what happened up there. However, the crew cabin of Shuttle is actually quite small. If anything did happen, absolutely everyone on the Shuttle would have heard everything.
That a good side note, I will also include it.
-
Sources from post #318 (Books:)
Mars Prospect Energy and Material Resources
Mars - Wie wir den roten Planeten besiedeln
Use of extraterrestrial resources for human space missions to moon or Mars
-
Oldfart1939 wrote:
I'm certainly willing to set up and **own** such a topic. I looked at what Noah has written and his thoughts are in a way, similar to mine, but from a different approach in reaching his conclusions.
I also think that would be a good idea. Then we would have two approaches, which makes things more interesting.

Noah · 2021-04-28 11:14:39

@Thomas
I absolutely agree that I need to add references.
I have added the sources to the post.

@RobertDyck
Thanks for the correction!

@louis
Good point about the workload. I will include the use of robotics. And I will also add the "difficult topics".

SpaceNut · 2021-04-28 18:14:54

Robotics that can not keep its self powered up or maintained is adding work to the crew to make use of them...plus this increases that mass as to the variety of machines we would want to add in when the budget to get to mars and back is already tight....

tahanson43206 · 2021-05-03 13:42:04

The Mars Society <info@marssociety.org>
Mon, May 3 at 12:57 PM
MARS SOCIETY ANNOUNCEMENT
View this email in your browser
Mars City State Designs Book Published!
The Mars Society is proud to announce that its book, “Mars City States: New Societies for a New World”, has now been published. Edited by Frank Crossman, the new publication contains the twenty top designs for a one million person Mars city state and is now on sale in both paperback and kindle formats.
People will soon be able to go to the Red Planet. But that very possibility opens a still more interesting – indeed truly grand – question: What will we create on Mars?
It was to answer this question that the Mars Society sponsored its Mars City State Design Competition in early 2020. The challenge: Design a city state for 1 million people on Mars. The prizes: $10,000 and a grand trophy for the best design, with lesser prizes and trophies on down to Fifth. The designs had to take into account all aspects of the city: its technical basis, its economic foundation, its social and political system, and its architectural aesthetics. If a city is to succeed and grow, it will need to be a place that people will want to move to. How can we create such cities on Mars?
The response to the challenge was fantastic, with 176 teams from all over the world entering the fray. All twenty of the semi-finalist, finalist, and top five winning designs are presented in this volume.
The range of creative ideas is extraordinary, collectively representing an intellectual banquet, a feast for thought, that will be of enduring value for all those who will help initiate human civilization on Mars, and innumerable new worlds beyond.
Get your copy today!
The Mars Society
11111 West 8th Avenue, unit A
Lakewood, CO 80215 U.S.A.
www.marssociety.org
https://www.facebook.com/TheMarsSociety
@TheMarsSociety
Copyright (c) 2021 The Mars Society
All rights reserved.

(th)

louis · 2021-05-03 17:44:10

Is it tight? A minimum of 500 tonnes.

Energy system (nuclear or solar) - c 150 tons.

Habs - 10 tons

Food and LSS Supplies - 50 tons

Propellant plant facility - 20 tons?

Spare parts/feedstocks - 50 tons?

Medical supplies and equiipment - 20 tons?

Industrial 3D printers - 30 tons.

You've got plenty of spare tonnage for Rovers, robots etc. For Mission One, I'd like to see

x2 Human rated rovers (for exploration and mining activity) (6 tons?)

x4 Robot drillers (4 tons)

x2 Robot diggers (2 tons)

x4 Robot transporters (8 tons)

x2 Boston Dynamics Robodogs adapted for Mars (0.5 tons?)

x2 Inspection Robots - for inspecting exterior of Starships. (0.1 tons)

We also need some method for getting humans into position if they need to repair a Starship e.g. repair heat shield tiles. Those crane platforms with hydraulic platforms that can reach up are pretty heavy duty. Fortunately winds on Mars are light. A better option might be to take bespoke scaffolding, that could be built over several weeks if necessary. One hopes it won't be necessary but we know heat shield tiles did become detached on the Space Shuttles, so we need some capability. Scaffolding might come in at under 5 tons at a guess.

Robots could be designed to go and recharge their batteries as and when necessary. The alternative to using robots for mining say is pioneers changing into EVA suits and working out in the open. That will take up a lot more time.

SpaceNut wrote:

Robotics that can not keep its self powered up or maintained is adding work to the crew to make use of them...plus this increases that mass as to the variety of machines we would want to add in when the budget to get to mars and back is already tight....

Last edited by louis (2021-05-04 14:28:53)

Calliban · 2021-05-06 15:33:12

Interesting video on Mars settlement design. I would imagine that the presenters read this forum, as many of the issues they discuss are the same ones that have been discussed here.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=T49DyKETfDk

tahanson43206 · 2021-05-18 07:08:35

An observation by RobertDyck at post #161 of this topic stayed with me. It was a caution that trees need wind to stress them.

http://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.php … 45#p178745

SearchTerm:trees need wind
Searchterm:wind needed by trees to develop strength

Failures of Biosphere II

(th)

SpaceNut · 2021-05-18 18:48:40

Trees require deep root systems, as well as the large canopy area that that wind is blowing....
Thats not happening underground....

Noah · 2021-05-21 05:01:31

Calliban, #336
Thanks for the link to the video, looks interesting.

louis wrote:

Is it tight? A minimum of 500 tonnes.
Energy system (nuclear or solar) - c 150 tons.
Habs - 10 tons
Food and LSS Supplies - 50 tons
Propellant plant facility - 20 tons?
Spare parts/feedstocks - 50 tons?
Medical supplies and equiipment - 20 tons?
Industrial 3D printers - 30 tons.
You've got plenty of spare tonnage for Rovers, robots etc. For Mission One, I'd like to see
x2 Human rated rovers (for exploration and mining activity) (6 tons?)
x4 Robot drillers (4 tons)
x2 Robot diggers (2 tons)
x4 Robot transporters (8 tons)
x2 Boston Dynamics Robodogs adapted for Mars (0.5 tons?)
x2 Inspection Robots - for inspecting exterior of Starships. (0.1 tons)

Is this your assumption or do you have a source?

louis · 2021-05-21 16:08:33

These are very rough estimates based on my knowledge of the various subject areas (which have included a lot of independent research). For instance re habs, I will have previously researched Bigelow habs and that's likely why I think that is a reasonable estimate for maybe the 3-5 habs required for Mission One. My estimates do tend to be worst case upper limits.

Having rediscovered this persuasive presentation by Blake on Reddit, I think I would probably revise down the energy system allowance or treat it as a very conservative worst case scenario for PV power.

https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/comment … r_park_on/

Noah wrote:

Calliban, #336
Thanks for the link to the video, looks interesting.
louis wrote:
Is it tight? A minimum of 500 tonnes.
Energy system (nuclear or solar) - c 150 tons.
Habs - 10 tons
Food and LSS Supplies - 50 tons
Propellant plant facility - 20 tons?
Spare parts/feedstocks - 50 tons?
Medical supplies and equiipment - 20 tons?
Industrial 3D printers - 30 tons.
You've got plenty of spare tonnage for Rovers, robots etc. For Mission One, I'd like to see
x2 Human rated rovers (for exploration and mining activity) (6 tons?)
x4 Robot drillers (4 tons)
x2 Robot diggers (2 tons)
x4 Robot transporters (8 tons)
x2 Boston Dynamics Robodogs adapted for Mars (0.5 tons?)
x2 Inspection Robots - for inspecting exterior of Starships. (0.1 tons)
Is this your assumption or do you have a source?

Last edited by louis (2021-05-21 16:10:37)

SpaceNut · 2021-06-19 16:12:38

we can practice

louis · 2021-06-19 17:52:31

What's it made out of? Marshmallow?

SpaceNut wrote:

we can practice https://img-s-msn-com.akamaized.net/tenant/amp/entityid/AAL9UhL.img?h=416&w=799&m=6&q=60&u=t&o=f&l=f

SpaceNut · 2021-06-19 19:06:41

Live in this

squash

SpaceNut · 2021-06-20 18:39:55

https://www.growveg.com/guides/growing- … -a-family/

Research in the 1970s by John Jeavons and the Ecology Action Organization found that 4000 square feet (about 370 square metres) of growing space was enough land to sustain one person on a vegetarian diet for a year, with about another 4000 square feet (370 square meters) for access paths and storage – so that’s a plot around 80 feet x 100 feet (24m x 30m).
How much you can grow in this space will depend on your climate, weather and soil and, crucially, how much time you have. Tending to 4000 square feet, particularly at the height of the growing season, will take many hours a week.

So approximate 400 square meters per person required...needing water, warmth and simulated sun light....

What you want to eat versus time to growth gives planting area required for each food that you would want in the menu. Of course staggered crops so that timing gets different foods for the menu.

each person at a min needs 400 m^2 of food growing area for on earth is 1kwm^2 x 400 = 400 kw x 9 plus hrs a day 3,600 kwhrs per crew member

tahanson43206 · 2021-07-17 20:08:50

Noah sent me a copy of a paper he had written, along with the references that support it. I've been booked until now, and began to work on the project this evening. Rather than start with the paper, I spent this evening following the links he provided. To my delight, the pdf version of the references was able to connect directly to the Internet. A few books ended up showing as teasers on Amazon, but I assume they are available by interlibrary loan in the US and probably elsewhere.

With the flood of (mostly new) background material to settle overnight, I'll study the actual paper tomorrow.

A paper on Biosphere II was particularly interesting. it was written in German, but Google did an amazing job of translation. While some parts of the writing were critical, and the participation of Steve Bannon does not come off well, I came away with a favorable impression of the value of the experiment so bravely undertaken.

I'll be interested to see how Noah synthesized and integrated all this background material.

(th)

SpaceNut · 2021-07-17 20:16:08

If one looks at the ISS we are onto biosphere 3 with still lots of things to refine for the future of living off from the moon or mars surface...

tahanson43206 · 2021-08-07 11:24:38

It has been a while since we heard from Noah....

I hope all is well with his studies.

Noah prepared a paper to describe his vision of an 8 person Expedition to Mars. I am prepared to review the paper in detail but presently await his renewed contact.

In the mean time, the Mars Society published a collection of papers under the title "Mars City States"

The original announcement is here: http://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.php … 65#p179665

I opened the book at random today, and landed on page 357

It seems possible that other members of the forum ordered their own copies of this book. Noah's topic here seems (to me at least) a good place to discuss tiny parts of this massive book.

Today, in the absence of Noah (a) and (b) in the absence of any other forum member who owns a copy of the book, I'll take a moment to think about the paragraph in the middle of Page 357, entitled: Vision of a Mature Martian Economy

This paragraph contemplates a community of 1 million or so people, organized into what the authors seem to be calling cooperatives.

In the vision described, there would be 1,500 of these, of varying sizes and complexity.

The authors seem to feel that a community of this size could supply itself with the "vast majority" of goods and services they need.

***
Elsewhere in the forum, (I think it was Calliban) a member proposed that manufacture of goods on Mars would actually be cheaper than the corresponding activity on Earth, due to the greater gravity well. Since the cost of lifting goods from Earth will soon be achieved by fuel and oxidizer produced by renewable energy systems, ultimately powered by the Sun, I would expect the cost of shipping from Earth to fall toward zero.

However, there may be a period of time during which the cost of fuel and oxidizer produced on Earth is NOT zero, or even close to it, so Mars may have a small competitive advantage.

(th)

SpaceNut · 2021-08-07 11:54:27

Mars energy for use is the difference as a business is not paying for its cost or use to make the goods.

Calliban · 2021-08-07 15:34:44

Lifting anything to Low Mars Orbit from Mars surface, requires only about 1/10th as much energy as lifting from Earth surface to LEO. The comparison is skewed even further in Mars favour, when you take into account the fact that atmospheric drag is much less, engines are more efficient in the thin atmosphere, gravity losses are lower and launch assist techniques (like rocket sled, linear electric motor, steam cannon) would provide a much larger percentage of dV to orbit on Mars.

None of that changes the fact that you need to send to Mars all of the industrial hardware to make stuff in the first place. But once that is done, Mars has a very large advantage over Earth in building anything that is intended to be used in space. I don't think there are many export opportunities to Earth surface. But Earth orbit is a much better prospect.

Even after development of manufacturing capabilities in high Earth orbit, supplied with lunar materials, Mars will has stores of volatile elements that lunar has no hope of matching. The market for propellant, food, water, plastics and chemicals, would still be dominated by Mars. We can therefore foresee a growing triangle trade between Earth, Mars and Lunar. Earth will provide people, design services and high tech gear. Lunar will provide bulk metal ores and refractory ceramics. Mars will provide anything made of carbon, hydrogen and nitrogen.

Last edited by Calliban (2021-08-07 15:42:13)

tahanson43206 · 2021-08-26 08:51:59

Focus: http://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.php … 31#p179531

The preview on Amazon is generous!

Search for: Mars City States: New Societies for a New World

The table of contents and the preface are available in full.

Editor's notes are available in full. The notes include a brief summary of each chapter.

The entirety of Chapter 1 is included in the free sample.

Investigation to be continued ...

(th)

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#326 2021-04-27 00:00:23

Re: Settlement design

#327 2021-04-27 05:12:43

Re: Settlement design

#328 2021-04-27 05:15:42

Re: Settlement design

#329 2021-04-27 05:37:50

Re: Settlement design

#330 2021-04-27 16:28:16

Re: Settlement design

#331 2021-04-27 18:20:37

Re: Settlement design

#332 2021-04-28 11:14:39

Re: Settlement design

#333 2021-04-28 18:14:54

Re: Settlement design

#334 2021-05-03 13:42:04

Re: Settlement design

#335 2021-05-03 17:44:10

Re: Settlement design

#336 2021-05-06 15:33:12

Re: Settlement design

#337 2021-05-18 07:08:35

Re: Settlement design

#338 2021-05-18 18:48:40

Re: Settlement design

#339 2021-05-21 05:01:31

Re: Settlement design

#340 2021-05-21 16:08:33

Re: Settlement design

#341 2021-06-19 16:12:38

Re: Settlement design

#342 2021-06-19 17:52:31

Re: Settlement design

#343 2021-06-19 19:06:41

Re: Settlement design

#344 2021-06-20 18:39:55

Re: Settlement design

#345 2021-07-17 20:08:50

Re: Settlement design

#346 2021-07-17 20:16:08

Re: Settlement design

#347 2021-08-07 11:24:38

Re: Settlement design

#348 2021-08-07 11:54:27

Re: Settlement design

#349 2021-08-07 15:34:44

Re: Settlement design

#350 2021-08-26 08:51:59

Re: Settlement design

Board footer