Forums :: Resources :: Features :: Photo Gallery :: Vintage Radio Shows :: Archives :: Books
Support This Site: Contributors :: Advertise


It is currently Jun Thu 22, 2017 11:24 pm


All times are UTC [ DST ]





Post New Topic Post Reply  [ 157 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: New Line Cinema drama on the Farnsworth/RCA dispute
PostPosted: Jan Mon 24, 2005 5:43 pm 
New Member

Joined: Jan Thu 01, 1970 1:00 am
Posts: 23
"......websites all copy from each other and are not the last word in accurate research. I'll take books with verifiable footnotes and authors who have spent years digging in real archives any day."<P>I fully agree with you regarding the potential inaccuracy of websites regarding proper and verifiable research. After all, it is this very issue that has inaccurately promoted Farnsworth as the inventor of television. However, I would not like to dismiss research on the internet as worthless, it just requires proper sifting through many sites before drawing a preliminary conclusion through comparison, subject to verification by other means. I do believe that it is possible to get at the grains of truth in this way. However, I believe that there is no substitute for all forms of research, especially reading well founded literature on the subject as you rightly say.<P>Jason<P>------------------<BR>


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: New Line Cinema drama on the Farnsworth/RCA dispute
PostPosted: Jan Tue 25, 2005 3:01 am 
Member

Joined: Jan Thu 01, 1970 1:00 am
Posts: 30698
Location: Pocasset, Cape Cod, MA
True, there are some outstanding websites, for instance Thomas White's:<BR> <A HREF="http://earlyradiohistory.us/index.html" TARGET=_blank>http://earlyradiohistory.us/index.html</A> <P>but most people who do this much research and writing prefer to publish a book. Of course books vary a lot too. However a book is a finished, unchanging work and you can find reviews by (one hopes) knowledgeable people. Most historical technology books get reviewed by specialist members of SHOT, the Society for the History of Technology.<P>------------------<BR>


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: New Line Cinema drama on the Farnsworth/RCA dispute
PostPosted: Jan Wed 26, 2005 10:39 pm 
Member

Joined: Jan Thu 01, 1970 1:00 am
Posts: 4890
Location: La Porte, IN, USA
So, when is this thing going to be on TV, anyway?<P>------------------<BR>OZ


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: New Line Cinema drama on the Farnsworth/RCA dispute
PostPosted: Jan Thu 27, 2005 9:54 pm 
Member

Joined: Jan Thu 01, 1970 1:00 am
Posts: 159
Location: New Jersey, USA
Scott Marshall wrote:
<font>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by OZ132HOME:<BR><B>So, when is this thing going to be on TV, anyway?<P></B><HR>
<P>The movie "The Farnsworth Invention" is, I believe, planned to be a theatrical motion picture. Written by the writer of "A Few Good Men" it promises to have gripping courtroom drama. Almost nothing is known about the project publicly and there is now published release date. Since it doesn't appear to have even been cast yet, and apparently not having a big special effects budget, my guess is that it will be in theaters next fall.<P>I've been sneaking peeks at the production news at the Internet Movie Database and the Aaron Sorkin Yahoo fan club discussion group.<BR> <A HREF="http://imdb.com/title/tt0408773/combined" TARGET=_blank>http://imdb.com/title/tt0408773/combined</A> <BR> <A HREF="http://movies.groups.yahoo.com/group/AaronSorkin/" TARGET=_blank>http://movies.groups.yahoo.com/group/AaronSorkin/</A> <P>Scott<P><BR><P>------------------<BR>


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: New Line Cinema drama on the Farnsworth/RCA dispute
PostPosted: Feb Fri 18, 2005 4:53 am 
New Member

Joined: Jan Thu 01, 1970 1:00 am
Posts: 23
Quote - "No matter what may be the future of television technology, or what early forms were being tested and tried out by very, very, smart men like Baird, the issue is who invented ELECTRONIC television" <P>Hmm, so let's exclude what came before and what's going to come after, and focus on the bit in the middle? I'm afraid that doesn't work when establishing the inventor of a technology. <P>Quote - "...the issue is who invented ELECTRONIC television" <P>I quite agree if Electronic television is defined as "the capture and formation of an image using electrons". However, unless "The Farnsworth Invention" makes absolutely certain that the qualifier 'Electronic' is placed in every line of dialogue that mentions the invention of television, I fear that the cinema-going public will be mislead as to who invented the first working television system which, incidentally, was not simply a lab bench curiosity, but was put into mass production and sold to the public for watching scheduled BBC broadcasts (made by the Baird television studio) before Farnsworth reached first base. <P>Quote - "There isn't a TV on the market (notice I said TV, I don't know enough about HDTV to make quite so blanket a claim) that doesn't depend on his patents to function" <P>Hmm. The formation of images using electrons wasn't the first and won't be the last, and it certainly isn't the only technology on the market today. Digital cinema theatres, DLP televisions and projectors all make use of technology that links directly back to J. L. Baird, as does the technology to transfer 'The Farnsworth Invention' for broadcast on television if you want to add to the irony. <P>Quote - "And why should the fact that the invention was later improved by others be an issue? Who improved the Light Bulb? Who improved the telephone? I don't know--but I know who invented them." <P>You're right about this. Farnsworth did contribute to the improvement of the technology behind television, but I know who invented television. <P>Quote - "Farnsworth, on the other hand, was making demonstrations that satisfied his financial backers by 1927" <P>This is the part that always makes me chuckle. Baird started work on television in 1922 but he recognised that his attainment of the worlds first true television image occurred in 1925, despite having many successful transmissions before this time. You see, he had certain criteria as to what television was as an entity, and this was the transmission of moving, recognisable human faces in true half tones using reflected light. In 1927, Farnsworth achieved the formation of a static straight line using projected backlighting. The televising of recognisable human faces was not possible in this demonstration. As a result, Farnsworth's 1927 demonstration does not even come close to being a true manifestation of television and is only noteable for being as crude as Baird's first dabbles in 1922/23. <P>Quote - "I spent my formative years telling people my grandmother's brother invented TV" <P>...and there-in lies the problem. And it's this problem I don't want to see perpetrated by this film. <P>Jason. <BR> <BR> <BR>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR> <BR> <BR> <P><BR><P>------------------<BR>


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: New Line Cinema drama on the Farnsworth/RCA dispute
PostPosted: Feb Fri 18, 2005 4:59 am 
New Member

Joined: Jan Thu 01, 1970 1:00 am
Posts: 23
FarnGuy,<P>You probably had the best of intentions, but we could all post large swathes of text by cutting and pasting en-masse from existing websites. However, it would make for a very boring forum.....<P>Jason.<P>------------------<BR>


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: New Line Cinema drama on the Farnsworth/RCA dispute
PostPosted: Feb Fri 18, 2005 5:18 am 
New Member

Joined: Jan Thu 01, 1970 1:00 am
Posts: 23
However, FarnGuy, as you brought it up...<P>Quote - "Before that date, television was the province of Newtonian electro-mechanical engineers who<BR>employed spinning disks and mirrors in their crude attempts to scan, transmit, and reassemble a<BR>moving image. The inventions of Jenkins, Ives, Alexanderson, Baird, and others are all similar in<BR>their reliance on the spiral-perforated, spinning disk first proposed in the 1880s by the German<BR>Paul Nipkow. These contraptions were engineering marvels in their own quaint way, but they<BR>were not the sort of breakthrough that Farnsworth introduced, nor is anything left of their<BR>technology in the system of television that is in use around the world today" - Unquote<P>Here's something that appeared in the New York Times on April 8th 1927....(if you want to put a US slant on things - obviously this must have been the first US practical demonstration....)<P><BR>Text of New York Times article<BR>April 8, 1927<P>"Washington, April 7. The first practical demonstration of television, which in the opinion of Federal authorities presages the early introduction of visual radio, was staged between Washington and New York today by the American Telephone and Telegraph Company and the Bell Laboratories."<P><BR>This New York Times article describes a demonstration of television the previous day. This demonstration was comprised of a television transmission being conducted from Washington to New York, the demonstrators being AT&T (Herbert Ives) and the subject being televised being Herbert Hoover, then Secretary of Commerce.<P><BR>Let’s set up a scenario that may have taken place in the editor’s office of the New York Times prior to running the story;<P><BR>Reporter: Well, we’ve got the story. It’s reading as “Washington, April 7. The first practical demonstration of television was staged between Washington and New York today by AT&T Company and Bell Laboratories”. <P>Editor: Whoa!!! You can’t run that story!!<P>Reporter (Shouting out of the door): Hold the presses, we have a situation here……<P>(Sound of printing presses ceases from outside as they are stopped).<P>Reporter: Why can’t we run the story?<P>Editor: Because Philo T. Farnsworth isn’t scheduled to invent television until September 7th 1927. He’s got it in his diary. You’ll have to alter the story. By the way, who’s being televised?<P>Reporter: Secretary Hoover. (Panicing) What can we say? How can we alter the story? (Pauses for thought, then says) <P>Reporter: I know! Let’s call television ‘Quaint Victorian era contraption using Newtonian physics applied to spinning disks and mirrors’. That should do it.<P>Editor: So, the story will say something like;<P>“Secretary Hoover attended the AT&T demonstration today, and he was ‘Quaint- Victorian-era-contraption-using-Newtonian-Physics-applied-to-spinning-disks-and mirrors-ised’. Hmm. Doesn’t exactly trip off the tongue, does it?<P>Reporter: Well, what else can we do (starting to panic again).<P>Editor: Got it! Call it ‘pretend’ television. Then, when Philo T. Farnsworth gets around to inventing real television on September 7th everything will be OK.<P>Reporter: No, can’t do that!<P>Editor: Why not?<P>Reporter: It’s not credible for the paper, or for Secretary Hoover. Did a pretend demonstration take place? Did Secretary Hoover just make a telephone call and everyone had to visualise him in their minds? Did everyone pretend to see a live moving image of Secretary Hoover from hundreds of miles away, and see his lips moving as he talked? Or was everyone on some serious hallucinogenic trips that day?<P>Editor: Yes, I see what you mean. (Thinks) Got it!!!<P>Reporter: What?<P>Editor: Run the story as you have it now. Call it television!<P>Reporter: Why? What about Philo T. Farnsworth in September this year when he invents real television????<P>Editor: Well, from the same sources as I got the Farnsworth tip-off, I’ve got some more information<P>Reporter: What?<P>Editor: Well, from my trusty crystal ball, I know that a great medium will be in great use around the 1990’s early 2000’s. It’ll be called the Internet!<P>Reporter: And how does that help us?<P>Editor: Well there’ll be this person, S….Sa,….Sha….Schatzkin, that’s it! He’ll put a website on the internet that’ll try to convince people that Philo T. Farnsworth invented television. Everyone will believe him and forget about all this stuff with Secretary Hoover. We’ll be home and dry!!!!<P>Reporter (smiles – and calls out of the door): Start the presses, run the story!!!!<P>(Sound of printing presses being restarted).<P>END<P>------------------<BR>


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: New Line Cinema drama on the Farnsworth/RCA dispute
PostPosted: Feb Fri 18, 2005 2:21 pm 
New Member

Joined: Jan Thu 01, 1970 1:00 am
Posts: 23
I'm sorry, but you can't go around making gross generalisations. People were already hooked into watching television when the BBC was broadcasting on Baird's system. You see, because of Baird the world knew what a television was and what it could deliver. Do you think in a million years that the excessive amount of money that was sunk into the development of electronic television would have been authorised if people didn't know what they would be getting? The simple fact is that the early electro-mechanical experiments in the invention of television made possible the investment in electronic television that was the next stage of development (note the word development, not invention). Coupled with this was the fact that people knew what they were getting in terms of an industry. When did Farnsworth have the vision to create the entire television industry? Let me make it clear again, the Baird television studios were the first in the world! That shows some serious vision. Also, you seem to think that Baird is being treated as a God but no, I'm simply giving him his rightful place in the creation of a global industry, one that shapes the world as we know it today.<P>Did Farnsworth invent the first working television? - No.<BR>Did Farnsworth invent colour television? - No<BR>By extension, did Farnsworth invent the first colour electronic television tube? - No<BR>Did Farnsworth create the concept and reality of a full television studio and all that entailed? - No<BR>Did Farnsworth make possible the worlds first regular television broadcast service? - No<BR>Did Farnsworth design, develop and manufacture the worlds first mass produced television set and make it available to the public? - No<BR>Did Farnsworth take the design of said television set and improve it to make it even easier to mass produce in order to make television cheaper and more attainable to the public? - No<BR>Did Farnsworth see the need to develop technology to transfer film content for television broadcast? - No<BR>Did Farnsworth see the need for cameras that could be used 'On Location' or in low light conditions? - No<BR>Did Farnsworth see the future of recorded video and achieve it? - No<P>Baird did all of the above and more. Unfortunately for people like yourself the invention of television cannot be addressed in terms of who developed the 'electronic' approach. It's much wider than that! Should Baird be regarded as a God to television? People need to decide that for themselves.<P>However I do find it refreshing that you recognise the previous developments, both in terms of the electro-mechanical (or light based) approach and the early descriptions and articles of electronic television produced by A.A. Campbell Swinton. Please now make the reasonable step in recognising that Farnsworth did not invent television, but was a pioneer in a certain era. Articles in publications that tell us how much of a genius Farnsworth was because he was ploughing a field do not match the reality of the situation, both in terms of prior knowledge of what television was as a concept (brought to public attention via the electro-mechanical system) and previous knowledge of what would define an electronic television courtesy of Mr. Swinton.<P>Jason.<P>------------------<BR>


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: New Line Cinema drama on the Farnsworth/RCA dispute
PostPosted: Feb Fri 18, 2005 9:38 pm 
Member

Joined: Jan Thu 01, 1970 1:00 am
Posts: 518
Location: Holland, MI
Baird rose to his own level of incompetence during the 1936 "system trials" by refusing to envision a television system that didn't somehow incorporate a motor. Fascinating and factual perspective here: <A HREF="http://my.integritynet.com.au/barkertv/" TARGET=_blank>http://my.integritynet.com.au/barkertv/</A> <BR><P>------------------<BR> <A HREF="http://tvontheporch.com" TARGET=_blank>http://tvontheporch.com</A>


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: New Line Cinema drama on the Farnsworth/RCA dispute
PostPosted: Feb Fri 18, 2005 11:21 pm 
New Member

Joined: Jan Thu 01, 1970 1:00 am
Posts: 23
<Yawn> Let's take a pop at events that have been deemed to have happened 11 years after the invention of television by J. L. Baird. Can you come up with a website that compares the technical merits of two systems in October 1925? Nope, didn't think so!<P>To quote<P>"Victor G.Barker A.M.I.R.E.E. Aust J.P. Takes you through the early years of television broadcasting in the United Kingdom.<P>You are about to turn back the calendar to 1936 on a cold winters day at Alexandra Palace, London."<P>Not very good is it? You can't seriously look at the history of television broadcasting in the United Kingdom and start in 1936!! Laughable!<P>Perhaps the creator of that website might try to envision a design that doesn't make use of garish primary colours!!! I was almost blinded!!!<P>Jason.<P><BR>------------------<BR>


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: New Line Cinema drama on the Farnsworth/RCA dispute
PostPosted: Feb Sat 19, 2005 2:10 am 
Member

Joined: Jan Thu 01, 1970 1:00 am
Posts: 159
Location: New Jersey, USA
FarnGuy's post has Paul Schatzkin's fingerprints all over it. In fact, it's copied and pasted from his silly rant "There was no Iconoscope in 1923." I've met Paul and had a "kitchen debate" with him a few feet from Zworykin's pre-Farnsworth camera tubes. I've also debated this subject with him on other message boards and by email. When I told him what I suspected his alterior motive was for his Farnsworth crusade, he threatened to sue me if I publicized it.<P>I can hold in one hand a copy of Farnsworth's 1927 patent application, which has a mechanical receiver and does not resemble television as we know it. In the other I can hold Swinton's 1908 diagram of television and Zworykin's 1925 patent application, which DO look like television as we know it. After that, the reams of unscholarly verbiage backing Farnsworth and attacking Baird, Zworykin, and Sarnoff become like snow on a CRT screen and white noise in a loudspeaker.<P>Scott<P><BR>------------------<BR>


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: New Line Cinema drama on the Farnsworth/RCA dispute
PostPosted: Feb Sat 19, 2005 4:26 am 
Member

Joined: Jan Thu 01, 1970 1:00 am
Posts: 518
Location: Holland, MI
It was shortsighted at the <I>very</I> least to place those 30 line televisors on the market. Instead of an effort toward continued improvement that would make his system truly viable (what was up w/ that 7:1 vertical aspect ratio anyway?) Baird had tailored his technology to the limits of contemporary radio bandwidth. That's why 1936 <I>does</I> matter. You may choose to believe that others simply improved on an invention of Baird, but that's just what Baird himself was unable to do. The story of J.L. Baird was essentially told in "A Very Brady Movie." Just substitute a spinning disc for that split level house that Gary Cole as architect "Mike Brady" would recycle in all his subsequent designs.<P>------------------<BR> <A HREF="http://tvontheporch.com" TARGET=_blank>http://tvontheporch.com</A>


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: New Line Cinema drama on the Farnsworth/RCA dispute
PostPosted: Feb Sun 20, 2005 12:25 am 
New Member

Joined: Jan Thu 01, 1970 1:00 am
Posts: 23
Quote - "It was shortsighted at the very least to place those 30 line televisors on the market."<P>What? The man had just invented the technology everyone thought was impossible and you thought it was shortsighted to market it? Are you for real?<P>30 lines was better then 0 lines!! Remember, people hadn't seen this kind of technology before. It caused a sensation back then. Perhaps the people who bought and enjoyed them should be shown a little more respect.<P>Quote - "Instead of an effort toward continued improvement that would make his system truly viable (what was up w/ that 7:1 vertical aspect ratio anyway?) Baird had tailored his technology to the limits of contemporary radio bandwidth."<P>Correct use of the word 'tailored' there. It was all that the BBC would allow him. Remember that this was an unproven technology. To even get that granted was a major achievement. His system was designed within the limitations he had imposed on him. Also, your use of the word 'improved' is telling. Perhaps invention comes before improvement? As to the aspect ratio, it's easy to condemn a design when you're sitting in 2005. I could just as easily ridicule any aspect ratio before widescreen.<P>Quote - "That's why 1936 does matter."<P>Not in the context of who invented the worlds first working television system, and certainly not in the context of claiming it to be the beginning of television broadcasting in the UK.<P>Quote - "You may choose to believe that others simply improved on an invention of Baird, but that's just what Baird himself was unable to do."<P>Well, if you read the website that you yourself posted, you will see that Baird achieved 240 lines. Correct me if I'm wrong, but that looks like an improvement!<P>"The story of J.L. Baird was essentially told in "A Very Brady Movie." Just substitute a spinning disc for that split level house that Gary Cole as architect "Mike Brady" would recycle in all his subsequent designs."<P>Haven't seen the film, can't comment.<P>Jason.<P>------------------<BR>


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: New Line Cinema drama on the Farnsworth/RCA dispute
PostPosted: Feb Sun 20, 2005 7:00 pm 
New Member

Joined: Jan Thu 01, 1970 1:00 am
Posts: 7
Location: Metzad, Israel
Time to keep score:<P>About 100,000,000 people will see the upcoming film by the best writer in the history of TV and films.<P>About 20 intelligent and well-informed people read and/or contribute to this list-- some contributors debate objectively and respectfully, and some lose the debate by invoking sarcasm and personal attacks.<P><P>------------------<BR>Yerucham Teitelbaum


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: New Line Cinema drama on the Farnsworth/RCA dispute
PostPosted: Feb Sun 20, 2005 8:10 pm 
Member
User avatar

Joined: Jan Thu 01, 1970 1:00 am
Posts: 659
Location: Columbus, OH
It seems to me that the crucial issue in determining whether Philo was the first to demonstrate a working all-electronic TV system is whether Zworykin demonstrated a working system in 1924 or 25. <P>I'd like to hear the evidence for that demonstration (Scott Marshall - can you help?)<P><P>------------------<BR>


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: New Line Cinema drama on the Farnsworth/RCA dispute
PostPosted: Feb Mon 21, 2005 3:26 am 
Member

Joined: Jan Thu 01, 1970 1:00 am
Posts: 626
Location: MI
I think this is a critical question, but hard to answer 75 years later.<P>It has been suggested here and elsewhere that Zworykin gave a demonstration to Westinghouse officials in 1923 or 1924 that was so disappointing, his superiors told him to work on something useful. The extrapolation is then made by some that this proves his system did not work, however this is a baseless conclusion.<BR>Case in point, Xerox PARC in the 1970's. Their think tank came up with the Graphical User Interface (GUI), the mouse, and networking of computers only to have their superiors tell them to work on something more productive. A friend of Steve Jobs brought him through the labs since Xerox had no interest in the work that had been done, and he recognized what they had. The rest is computer history.<BR>I have managed many design groups, and can honestly say that upper management at most companies can not see past the immediate ability of work in progress to generate revenue. These are business people, good at what they do, but short sighted when it comes to technology and it's applications. It is rare to find a visionary technical person at this level in a corporate structure. <P>It also seems quite possible that all Zworykin was able to show was a blurry horizontal line being transmitted. It is easy to see how Westinghouse officials may have thought this was useless, while Farnsworth was able to envision what he had accomplished. Farnsworth, being both the visionary and the upper management at his company gave him an advantage over Zworykin.<P>I have great personal admiration for all the people that contributed to televisions early years, and do not find a need to elevate one above the other. It seems clear that Baird can be credited with the first practical television system of any type, although extrapolating this to say that modern LCOS, DMM, LCD, Plasma, and all other display technologies are based on his work is pointless. None of these technologies except DMM is remotely mechanical in nature, and improvements to existing art that was not previously know is defined as invention.<P>Will we ever be able to fully determine the exact timeline of who invented what, and when? Probably not. We will hopefully continue to have healthy and productive discussion, bringing new facts to light, while avoiding drawing baseless conclusions to support ones person views.<P>I hope I have not offended anyone here. Just my 2 cents.<P>Darryl<P>------------------<BR>


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: New Line Cinema drama on the Farnsworth/RCA dispute
PostPosted: Feb Mon 21, 2005 1:44 pm 
New Member

Joined: Jan Thu 01, 1970 1:00 am
Posts: 23
Tubesrule,<P>I fully agree with everything you have said here, and it serves to sum up the situation as I see it. My issue is with the term 'The Farnsworth Invention' in that I don't think the inventor of television was Philo T. Farnsworth, but rather the person who first transmitted live moving pictures through the air in real time. That person was J. L. Baird, so by definition he invented television. However, I fully agree that much work has been done in camera and display technology that was not based on his work, but I feel that to use this to dismiss his contributions to both the art and science of television as irrelevant and also somehow for him to be seen as a figure of fun and ridicule, is disingenuous. I also think that it is unfair to say that nothing of his work is used in today's television industry purely because some technologies were not based on his work. Many principles and techniques used in the television industry are based on his work and I hope I've gone some way to informing people's views on this. I also think it's fair to say that CRT television would not have had the accelerated start it had without the work of Baird in relation to preparing the BBC to think of television as a viable concept. In this regard 1936 is important as it would have taken a lot longer if the CRT approach was the first technology demonstrated to the BBC. The investment in transmitting infrastructure just wouldn't have been made. Those early Baird transmissions using contemporary radio transmitting infrastructure were crucial to the development of television as we know it today, as was the marketing of those early televisors to the public to fire their imagination.<P>My issue is that for the debate to be accurate, it has to centre around who invented CRT television. I know that this has been mentioned before but there does appear to be a tendency to drop the qualifier and by extension to give credit for the invention of television as an entity to those that the title does not apply to. However, in common with yourself, I have great admiration for the early pioneers, including Farnsworth, Zworykin, Jenkins, Ives and all of the others. I'm glad they did what they did!<P>Jason.<P>P.S. My points above are in the general sense. I'm not saying that you are putting these views across :-)<BR>------------------<BR>


Top
 Profile  
 
Post New Topic Post Reply  [ 157 posts ]  Moderators: 7jp4-guy, Mr. Detrola Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests



Search for:
Jump to:  




















Privacy Policy :: Powered by phpBB