Infrastructure

louis · 2021-11-16 18:50:35

There are some 600,000 bridges in the USA (at least - the figure relates primarily to road and rail bridges but there must be many more footbridges). We won’t need a single one on Mars. That underlines the difference in infrastructure needs will be different from those on Earth.

On Earth a lot of infrastructure expenditure goes into dealing with the fact we are a watery planet. Not only do we build bridges across rivers and sea inlets, we also build massive ports that can take the huge container ships that transport goods around the planet. We construct huge breakwaters to stop the sea eroding our coasts.

On Earth we also construct vast international airports and because we are such a watery world we are obliged to build very robust metalled roads that won’t get washed away in a rainstorm.

Until terraformation is successfully concluded, Mars won’t require big bridges or ports or airports or even roads. Perhaps there will be a few viaducts, but no bodies of water need to be bridged. Even after terraformation, the single ocean on Mars - the Northern Ocean - would occupy a small proportion of the globe (compared with 70% on Earth - think Mars's ocean would be more like maybe 15%).

So what sort of infrastructure will Mars require?

As on Earth, human civilisation will be heavily dependent on energy production. It is indeed one of the marks of our modern civilisation on Earth that it can access huge quantities of energy above and beyond that produced by human or animal bodies. So Mars will require large energy facilities. These are highly likely to be based on photovoltaic energy to begin with. But other forms of power generation could be developed such as nuclear power and heat difference engines (the latter might prove hugely effective on Mars owing to the very large daily swings in temperature).

We will need the equivalent of roads of course. Most of the northern hemisphere of Mars seems well suited to robust vehicular traffic with no need to create tarmac surfaces (metalled roads). So rather than roads as on Earth, these would be on Mars what I call roadways - cleared paths for vehicular traffic. Robots would clear all boulders and stones from the roadway and roller robot rovers would render them as flat as possible. Because of the cratered surface, roadways may take rather circuitous routes. That won't be very important for the robot eletric vehicles that travel these roads. It makes more sense to have focus on connecting places rather than building bridges.
Robots are tireless. They can work 24/7. Circuitous routes are not a major issue.

The roadways will be used primarily in the early period to transport water ice and a variety of ores from mining areas to the main city. As more settlements are established away from the main city (at tourist sites, science sites and mining areas) we will see more food, clothes and a host of other items being transported to the settlements. People will travel along these routes but probably not for hundreds of miles (unless they are heading off on an exploratory mission in a large pressurised rover). For very long journeys human will probably travel in rocket hoppers or in Starships.

Roadways will be a wonderful cheap mode of transportation. No need for any expensive infrastructure like tarmac, bridges or signage (any warnings can be communicated directly to robot vehicles or via audio instructions to human passengers). They will have regular solar power battery stations for recharging of batteries and life support posts offering food, water and air. There will be a Roadway Support Unit maintaining these stations and ensuring they are always kept supplied. The Unit will also be responsible for keeping roadways clear of any obstructions inculding sand build-up. Transponders along the roadways will help keep vehicles on path (though the Mars equivalent GPS system will also serve the same purpose).

Earth-based infrastructure requirements for hurricane and earthquake warning/response/design will not be necessary on Mars.

I don't think we would build vast electricity grids on Mars with huge pylons and transmission wires. It won't be necessary. From the get-go, the energy generating facility (primarily PV) will be located close to usage points. PV facilities can be far less robust than on Earth owing to the clement weather conditions. Another big saving.

Water management on Mars will be very different to on Earth. Whether it requires more or less of a resource input is not clear. It may be more resource-intensive than on Earth. Earth's advantage when it comes to water is that there is a lot of free flowing fresh water. On Mars we will be able to get water easily enough from very pure water ice glaciers. It will require some processing (but probably not as much as water drawn from rivers on Earth). Rather than water being used and disposed of via a sewer system I think on Mars there will be an emphasis on water recycling. This may extend even to sewage with any solid residue simply being dumped in a convenient crater some miles from the city. It will be naturally frozen. It's final disposal can be left to future generations if necessary. On Earth water eventually runs into the sea and essentially that's how we deal with sewage...we now spend a lot of money to clean it up and then let the water flow into rivers and thence to the sea. On Mars that's not an option.

The overall modest infrastructure requirement of Mars will mean that living on Mars is significantly less expensive than on Earth in terms of infrastructure. Simple roadways, pure water ice, no bridges, no ports...it's all pretty good news really.

SpaceNut · 2021-11-16 19:07:47

I would say future mars will be as such.

Robotic road use is as you say not a problem but humans using the same road to travel from site to site is since you must account for the travel time and consumed items that humans need to make repairs or to make changes to a site that robots can not do.

Surely we can make use of the underground tunnels for that fast transport to over come the human use issues as in Musk hyper travel or as in a subway car.

These under ground tunnels can also be used for storage of excess air, water, power ect as well as a means to move these goods from a site to another site.

louis · 2021-11-16 20:19:34

Yes I do think something like the Hyperloop system could be useful on Mars. You're right to point out its potential. My oversight!

We don't hear much about hyperloop on Earth now but for Mars it makes much sense as a near equivalent of jet travel. But you would probably need a big build up in population - hundreds of millions of people on the planet before it made economic sense.

I don't think there's much to be gained from road tunnels on Mars. As I say if humans wanted to cut journey time they can get in a rocket hopper - their luggage that went off five sols before them will be there when they arrive! If they are travelling thousands of miles then a Starship journey will make sense.

SpaceNut wrote:

I would say future mars will be as such.
Robotic road use is as you say not a problem but humans using the same road to travel from site to site is since you must account for the travel time and consumed items that humans need to make repairs or to make changes to a site that robots can not do.
Surely we can make use of the underground tunnels for that fast transport to over come the human use issues as in Musk hyper travel or as in a subway car.
These under ground tunnels can also be used for storage of excess air, water, power ect as well as a means to move these goods from a site to another site.

SpaceNut · 2021-11-16 21:04:16

Just how many of those rocket hops will there be for a substitute airline?
Whats the refurbishing time frame for each trip to be able to use the same rocket again?
Has it got to be full before we can get to where we are wanting to go?

Since at 60mph you can travel a couple hundred miles with no problem in a straight line but if you make that same point a to b several thousand miles we have a problem since its only a couple hundred by straight line.

I do not think there is any reason to travel point a to b being a thousand miles either since population will need each other to be near by to ensure fast response.

louis · 2021-11-17 08:08:36

Points taken. If the Erebus Mountain region is chosen for the first base (which will likely also become the first city on Mars) , then I expect there will be some destinations that emerge as settlements fairly soon. One would be Mount Olympus. The other would be Valles Marineris (probably more than one vantage point).

SpaceNut wrote:

Just how many of those rocket hops will there be for a substitute airline?
Whats the refurbishing time frame for each trip to be able to use the same rocket again?
Has it got to be full before we can get to where we are wanting to go?
Since at 60mph you can travel a couple hundred miles with no problem in a straight line but if you make that same point a to b several thousand miles we have a problem since its only a couple hundred by straight line.
I do not think there is any reason to travel point a to b being a thousand miles either since population will need each other to be near by to ensure fast response.

Last edited by louis (2021-11-17 17:48:18)

Calliban · 2021-11-17 09:22:59

Louis, this is an excellent topic! Whilst I think some individual points are debatable, I would agree that the fact that Mars is effectively a global continent, does simplify transportation. Though it won't necessarily make it easier. For railways and hyperloop, there will still be a requirement for some bridges, as these modes benefit from keeping the track as straight as possible. But doubtless, there will be fewer such bridges than on Earth as there are no water courses to traverse.

Paved roads, whilst not essential, would offer the advantage of allowing higher speed by reducing rolling resistance and would keep abrasive dust away from wheel bearings and other moving parts. To begin with roads will be dirt tracks and transportation will involve large multi-trailer trucks. It will be a lot like Ice Road Truckers, but without the ice.

The absence of oceans is not really an advantage for transportation. On Earth, seas and oceans are low friction media that allow large volumes of goods to be moved over long distances with very little energy involved. On Mars, we could do the same thing with railways or maybe even floating goods in capsules in pipelines. But both options involve continuous infrastructure between one end of the journey and the other.

Airports are unlikely. The thin atmosphere makes aerodynamic lift more challenging, but sub-orbital trajectories are much easier to achieve. We could launch vehicles using something like a rocket sled. There is even the potential for most of the energy required to be provided by direct electric power. Vehicles would only need to engage their own engines to achieve fine course correction and landing at the end of a flight.

Energy supply on Mars will be provided by a mixture of sources. We have discussed problems with large scale photovoltaic power at length before. This seems to be a topic on which you are utterly impervious to facts. The facts are on record none the less. On Mars, there is potential to make use of rammed soil berms to support PV panels in place of steel frames. Wind loadings are lower, although still significant in dust storms. Dust accumulation is a problem that would require constant attention. The potential for solar dynamic power, exploiting temperature differences between night and day, is largely unexplored in a Martian context. The inherent simplicity and low embodied energy of the requisite components, may make this a favourable option in situations where modest amounts of power are needed. I say modest, because there are scale limitations imposed by the need for fluid transportation.

I would agree that recycling of water is more sensible than discarding it on Mars. Water is an energy intensive product when it must be mined from solid ice. The Martian environment is harsh. Most habitable areas will be underground. This will be done partially for radiation protection and conservation of heat, but more significantly because it is cheaper to build pressurised volume by excavating than it is to build a pressure vessel above ground. Food production is another case. We either build pressurised, heated greenhouses above ground, or use artificial lighting beneath ground. Which one will prove more cost effective I do not know. I do know that both approaches necessitate a much higher investment of energy per calorie than comparable food production on Earth.

Long-distance electric power transmission is in some ways easier on Mars. With high voltage DC, we could in fact build a truly global grid. Martian nighttime temperatures can reach -90°C even at the equator and regolith under near vacuum conditions is an excellent insulator. High temperature super conductors are a more promising option for long distance power transmission on Mars compared to Earth. Ultimately, it may turn out that a heavily populated Mars will choose to exploit the economies of scale offered by a global grid and construct multi-GW fusion powerplants Close to the poles, using ice as a heat sink. Likewise, eventually a global pipeline system may allow air and water to be transported globally, such that individual colonies are not so critically dependant on the functionality of their own life support systems. Time will tell.

Last edited by Calliban (2021-11-17 09:40:05)

Void · 2021-11-17 11:46:29

I will jump in for a bit as I think that the posts in this topic seem for the most part sensible to me.

If we estimate just how much atmospheric pressure can be increased, say in the first 100 years, we know for sure that Mars will be at best a glacial planet.

Three things that might be done to alter the environment may be:
1) Greenhouse effects increased.
2) Atmospheric pressure increased, which will impact greenhouse effects and the stability of ice and liquid water.
3) Orbital assets for Mars including Elon Musk flash bombs, Microwave power to the surface, and mirrors redirecting light to the surface.

However, even with all that, it seems most likely that the maximum achievement per atmospheric altering the atmosphere might be 333 mBar of pressure, mostly Oxygen. Unless some method of Nitrogen and/or Argon increase can be obtained.

So, at best a Green Mars, with still a lot of red, and also a lot of ice covered water.

I actually think that that is a maximum win. What good is open water anyway for such a planet, as you may have Underground transportation, rockets and surface transport?

For any water reservoir of significance you may have domes or domes over enclosures, and may have warm water so long as you can keep your dome from leaking.

If you have 333 mBar pressure, then you may have aircraft such as jets and aeroplanes.

1 Billion years ago, is is said by some that it would be possible to have gushing rivers. I don't think we want to warm Mars enough for that.

We have the possibility of:
1) Greenhouse Gasses.
2) Atmospheric volume increase.
3) Cloud Diode. (Ask me if you are interested).
4) Orbital assets.

And excellent planet for humans if managed as temperate to glacial, more towards glacial.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2021-11-17 11:55:51)

louis · 2021-11-17 18:29:16

Calliban wrote:

Louis, this is an excellent topic! Whilst I think some individual points are debatable, I would agree that the fact that Mars is effectively a global continent, does simplify transportation. Though it won't necessarily make it easier. For railways and hyperloop, there will still be a requirement for some bridges, as these modes benefit from keeping the track as straight as possible. But doubtless, there will be fewer such bridges than on Earth as there are no water courses to traverse.

Yes "global continent" is a good phrase. I might use it myself!

For Mars (happy with them on Earth!) I am not a fan of railways. Way too labour intensive for an early colony. And way too slow for a later colony. I would agree that a Hyperloop system might incorporate some bridges. But if Musk's "Boring" technology comes good, we may find it's a lot simpler to build longer tunneled sections. I don't think energy will be a problem on Mars so I am not so sure gradient will be as a big an issue as you imply.

Paved roads, whilst not essential, would offer the advantage of allowing higher speed by reducing rolling resistance and would keep abrasive dust away from wheel bearings and other moving parts. To begin with roads will be dirt tracks and transportation will involve large multi-trailer trucks. It will be a lot like Ice Road Truckers, but without the ice.

Yes - Ice Road Truckers makes me think of Mars as well. For me though, most freight transport on Mars will be robotic (we clearly have the tech for that already, good to go). Robots aren't paid by the hour. As long as your supply chain is there, the speed of the robot rovers is not that big a deal I think (the faster they go, remember, the faster they wear out). I think as long as we can get an average speed above 20 MPH that should be OK.

The absence of oceans is not really an advantage for transportation. On Earth, seas and oceans are low friction media that allow large volumes of goods to be moved over long distances with very little energy involved. On Mars, we could do the same thing with railways or maybe even floating goods in capsules in pipelines. But both options involve continuous infrastructure between one end of the journey and the other.

Yes I do appreciate that sea transport is very cheap (China would be effed if it wasn't!).

However, I was referencing the sea transport infrastructure which does require a huge upfront capital investment.

Am I right in thinking that the reason sea transport is very cheap is because of the buoyancy force that counteracts gravity? I think that's right.

Of course on Mars the weather is very clement, so you don't have to worry about building huge port installations.

I wonder whether on Mars it might be possible to build canals (yes canals on Mars, finally!)...these could be water courses that were 95% covered in black floating plastic balls (to increase insolation effect) and maybe also heated by solar reflectors and PV panels on the banks. You might even have some sort of heat retentive covering over the canal that is activated after sunset.

Anyway. clearly the question here is whether the energy gain for transport is greater than the energy cost of building and maintaining the canal. I am a bit doubtful about that.

It's partly a question of how we see Mars developing. If it's mainly very cheap PV powered robotic transportation, if the need for transportation is hugely reduced by local 3D printing technology then the ocean going Earth model probably doesn't make much sense.

Airports are unlikely. The thin atmosphere makes aerodynamic lift more challenging, but sub-orbital trajectories are much easier to achieve. We could launch vehicles using something like a rocket sled. There is even the potential for most of the energy required to be provided by direct electric power. Vehicles would only need to engage their own engines to achieve fine course correction and landing at the end of a flight.

We can agree that the current Earth airport model is not relevant!

Energy supply on Mars will be provided by a mixture of sources. We have discussed problems with large scale photovoltaic power at length before. This seems to be a topic on which you are utterly impervious to facts. The facts are on record none the less. On Mars, there is potential to make use of rammed soil berms to support PV panels in place of steel frames. Wind loadings are lower, although still significant in dust storms. Dust accumulation is a problem that would require constant attention. The potential for solar dynamic power, exploiting temperature differences between night and day, is largely unexplored in a Martian context. The inherent simplicity and low embodied energy of the requisite components, may make this a favourable option in situations where modest amounts of power are needed. I say modest, because there are scale limitations imposed by the need for fluid transportation.

I think then we can agree that the hundreds of miles of power transmission lines will not be required on Mars.

I would agree that recycling of water is more sensible than discarding it on Mars. Water is an energy intensive product when it must be mined from solid ice. The Martian environment is harsh. Most habitable areas will be underground. This will be done partially for radiation protection and conservation of heat, but more significantly because it is cheaper to build pressurised volume by excavating than it is to build a pressure vessel above ground. Food production is another case. We either build pressurised, heated greenhouses above ground, or use artificial lighting beneath ground. Which one will prove more cost effective I do not know. I do know that both approaches necessitate a much higher investment of energy per calorie than comparable food production on Earth.

It's really not that difficult to mine water ice and, I would suggest, if you are also recycling the water the overall cost may not be so different because you don't have to pay for all that expensive post-usage treatment.

I'm not saying I know the answer but in terms of how much resource input is required to produce one litre of potable water on Mars v one litre on Earth in an advanced economy, I think it's still an open question. The water on Mars will be very pure at the outset which makes everything a lot easier.

Long-distance electric power transmission is in some ways easier on Mars. With high voltage DC, we could in fact build a truly global grid. Martian nighttime temperatures can reach -90°C even at the equator and regolith under near vacuum conditions is an excellent insulator. High temperature super conductors are a more promising option for long distance power transmission on Mars compared to Earth. Ultimately, it may turn out that a heavily populated Mars will choose to exploit the economies of scale offered by a global grid and construct multi-GW fusion powerplants Close to the poles, using ice as a heat sink. Likewise, eventually a global pipeline system may allow air and water to be transported globally, such that individual colonies are not so critically dependant on the functionality of their own life support systems. Time will tell.

I just don't see the need for transmission lines and grids really. PV power and methane or hydrogen storage plus batteries for smoothing out power output in response to demand will meet all local needs. PV facilities will be built where the power is required.

I could see a global air pipeline being useful if it means small settlements dotted around the planet don't have to go to the trouble of producing their own air mix. That could be useful. Water? Not so much I think. There are good deposits of water ice in many Northern Hemisphere locations - robot mining of water ice (coupled with water recycling) will meet the needs of these smaller communities.

Calliban · 2021-11-17 19:21:43

The problem with gradient and bends is wear on the track and velocity change, which requires reaction forces to be exerted on the wheels by the track. This results in horrible amounts of wear as speed increases. Not so much energy consumption, though that could increase as well. A bendy track consigns trains to low speeds. Bends or bumps in hyperloop tracks would result in the vehicle hitting the sides. There can be no bends at 500mph. The track or guideway must be near as possible a straight line in both vertical and horizontal axes. The radius of curvature of any deviation from straight must be measured in tens of miles. If there is a hill or depression, you either remove it, go through it or over it, with minimal change in trajectory. That means tunnels or bridges.

Last edited by Calliban (2021-11-17 19:23:35)

louis · 2021-11-18 11:37:53

Personally I don't envisage rail being a big part of the transport scene on Mars. I wouldn't personally pursue the rail option. Hyperloop is a definiite possibility. I could see that maybe connecting the big cities of Mars once you have a few tens of millions of people living on the planet.

I was just reading that the curve of radius on a hyperloop bend would have to be less than 80 kms if you were travelling at 1000 Kph. So some big curves might be allowed. I guess it will depend on where the big cities are located as to how practical hyperloop will be. A quicker journey by Starship might be a preferable option in terms of infrastructure. Noise is far less of an issue on Mars.

Calliban wrote:

The problem with gradient and bends is wear on the track and velocity change, which requires reaction forces to be exerted on the wheels by the track. This results in horrible amounts of wear as speed increases. Not so much energy consumption, though that could increase as well. A bendy track consigns trains to low speeds. Bends or bumps in hyperloop tracks would result in the vehicle hitting the sides. There can be no bends at 500mph. The track or guideway must be near as possible a straight line in both vertical and horizontal axes. The radius of curvature of any deviation from straight must be measured in tens of miles. If there is a hill or depression, you either remove it, go through it or over it, with minimal change in trajectory. That means tunnels or bridges.

tahanson43206 · 2021-11-18 11:46:00

For Calliban (with a nod to Louis for keeping the topic going)...

Maglev trains are (presumably) not subject to physical wear in the same way as physical contact rail systems.

While it seems to me to make sense to try to plot a straight path between destinations in any case, a maglev system should be able to perform curves by adjusting the bank angle of the track so that a vehicle traveling at a velocity of 1000 kph would be centered on the track, and therefore centered on the magnetic support structure.

I have no idea what amount of curve might be possible, but would be most interested if there is a reference to study along these lines.

(th)

louis · 2021-11-19 08:16:30

Just occurred to me, that a suitably sized crater might be the perfect location for a Starship launch facility, as it would naturally baffle the sound waves. Maybe about 3 miles across? Then you could have a tunnel connecting to the spaceport facility which could be closer to the launch site than would otheriwise be the case. You would have the spaceport connected to the city the spaceport served by a road or hyperloop tunnel or tube. Pressurised, if road, unpressurised if hyperloop.

tahanson43206 · 2023-01-26 07:41:09

For kbd512 .... this old topic by Louis (and specifically post #12) seemed a possible good fit for part of your recent post:

http://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.php … 61#p205461

If we think about where the real tonnage is, for purposes of building a Mars colony from scratch, it's metals, petrochemicals, heavy machine tools (tunnel boring machines, lathes, hydraulic presses for metal stamping), tracked motorized vehicles, solar panels, batteries, nuclear fuels (Uranium and Thorium), concrete and steel to build landing pads / launch pads / transport cranes for Starships, cryogenic propellant storage tanks, and eventually a runway with arresting gear and catapults so that "normal" (for Mars) space planes can conduct regular flights without the dangers associated with vertical takeoff and landing.

While Louis appears to have been thinking about sound waves, I'm picking up on the natural slope of a crater wall, to support your catapult concept.

(th)

Mars_B4_Moon · 2023-02-11 11:39:35

We had a 'Trains on Mars' thread somewhere. When Spain updated its Trains it was almost the envy of the world for doing such a good job but now exposed for bad planning?

‘Unspeakable botch’: Spain spends €258 million on trains that are too big for its tunnels
https://www.euronews.com/travel/2023/02 … ts-tunnels

tahanson43206 · 2023-02-11 13:18:10

For Mars_B4_Moon re #14

Thank you for the report on (what appears to be) Groupthink.

Another example that comes to mind is the inability of the high level officials in the United States government to think like a terrorist prior to 911.

There were plenty of folks at lower levels warning about suspicious activity before the event, but as nearly as I can tell, there was no one at the highest levels of the US government able to break out of Groupthink that was pervasive at the time.

Thanks again for the link to the report!

(th)

Mars_B4_Moon · 2023-08-15 10:12:04

Cross any part of Mars, that feat will be a huge project, you could add up the areas of Russia, Antarctica, Canada, China, United States, France, Ukraine, Brazil, Australia, India, Argentina, Kazakhstan, Mexico, Afghanistan, South Africa, Mongolia, Sweden, Kenya, Yemen and still not compare to the journeys you would need to make on Mars.

in news on infrastructure on Earth

Washington state Democrats ask Buttigieg for $200M to plan Canada-Seattle-Portland bullet train
https://www.adn.com/nation-world/2023/0 … let-train/

Second Auckland harbour crossing: Tunnels backed by Government as ambitious plan revealed
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politics/ … XXKWWZNMI/

How China is fast-tracking high-speed rail with AI-powered builders
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/science … d-builders

Goodyear Blimp offers birds eye view of Tupelo for passengers
https://www.yahoo.com/news/goodyear-bli … 00476.html

Plane lands on A40! Miracle as light aircraft makes emergency landing on dual carriageway without injuries or damage as shocked onlookers hail 'top' pilot
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl … geway.html

Light plane makes belly landing at Japan airport, nobody injured
https://english.kyodonews.net/news/2023 … jured.html

Mars will be a very new experience for any new civilization, I think one of the only places we can compare it to are past times or unexplored lands, crossing a desert for the first time or climbing a mountain or maybe compare it to travel in Antarctica an untamed land now a scientific nature reserve and the fifth-largest continent. Like many have commented I do not believe there is one solution, some have come up with the idea of Airships or Balloons or Aircraft, some want to access the Canyons and Valley, Deep Craters others want to go to where the minerals are and others want to stay near the Equator where the Sun is for farming. Some others commented maybe Mars could be nomadic with seasonal work changes between the North and South. We had others ideas discussed like 'Nuclear Powered Crawler-Transporter' , some want to use existing Lava Tubes and Tunnels others want Bikes and Cars. The size of Mars is vast, a surface 28% of Earth but because Earth is something like 70% water then Mars is nearly equivalent to all of the dry land on Earth. The robotic Rover and Humanoid machine might first set the infrastructure and roads, robot missions with A.I. Diggers seem to have possibility for such long lead in times building villages and colony and starting farms without risk to human life. As we see when wars break out on Earth, minerals, fuel, chemicals and food can be politically weaponized, perhaps with a nasty government or corporation there is a risk in a future Mars that life support could be used as leverage or control?

Last edited by Mars_B4_Moon (2023-08-15 10:17:38)

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2021-11-16 18:50:35

Infrastructure

#2 2021-11-16 19:07:47

Re: Infrastructure

#3 2021-11-16 20:19:34

Re: Infrastructure

#4 2021-11-16 21:04:16

Re: Infrastructure

#5 2021-11-17 08:08:36

Re: Infrastructure

#6 2021-11-17 09:22:59

Re: Infrastructure

#7 2021-11-17 11:46:29

Re: Infrastructure

#8 2021-11-17 18:29:16

Re: Infrastructure

#9 2021-11-17 19:21:43

Re: Infrastructure

#10 2021-11-18 11:37:53

Re: Infrastructure

#11 2021-11-18 11:46:00

Re: Infrastructure

#12 2021-11-19 08:16:30

Re: Infrastructure

#13 2023-01-26 07:41:09

Re: Infrastructure

#14 2023-02-11 11:39:35

Re: Infrastructure

#15 2023-02-11 13:18:10

Re: Infrastructure

#16 2023-08-15 10:12:04

Re: Infrastructure

Board footer