HS2 under review

[Covkid]

I agree with most of what you said, but your last sentence requires clarification?

 

The Phase 1 trains (up to 60 sets being procured actively), must be classic compatible (i.e. current UK loading gauge, UK1), otherwise there can be no direct services north of Birmingham, and it would be a false economy and a severe operational constraint to procure a few taller and wider units just for Curzon Street- Euston services only.

 

But trains procured for Phase 2b will be "captive" and to the "continental" loading gauge (see attached). I have seen no firm numbers of sets quoted (which is sensible given their need is at least 15 years away), but the 2b service pattern suggests a similar number would be needed, perhaps fewer overall if classic compatible set numbers are increased. But classic compatible will not be the "huge" majority you claim, only between Phases 1 and 2b.

 

http://assets.hs2.org.uk/sites/default/files/consulation_library/pdf/P2C40_HS2%20operation%20and%20train%20types.pdf

 

 

The original concept was/is for two fleets (CC & captive).

 

At the present time, there is only one detailed technical train specification and that is for the CC fleet.

The procurement is for "a minimum of 54 trains".

 

The later phase two fleet, is to be the subject of a future procurement process.

There's a vague mention of up to 100 trains.

No specification has been drawn up or released and currently there now appears to be no reference that I can see to that fleet being "captive".

Quite worrying if anything can be read into that.

 

 

If anyone is interested, the detailed technical train specification is available to read.

The detail almost goes down to the colour of the laces in the Train Captain's shoes.

 

The HS2 fleet livery is also detailed in the spec.

White and "HS2 Blue".

 

 

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/730116/HS2-HS2-RR-SPE-000-000007_P07_Train_Technical_Specification.pdf

 

 

 

.

 

Thanks for your information.

From what i can make out, the only pure HS2 route mileage providing a useable service will be HS2 phase 1, and phase 2 once the Manchester link has been built. Then the eastern arm of the "Y" to maybe Sheffield. I believe all other services will use existing NR track north of Sheffield and north of Manchester / Warrington.

 

Please correct me if I am wrong but will the company procure "euro" size captive units in addition to the CCs ? I am sceptical.    

[Edwin_m]

Thanks for your information.

From what i can make out, the only pure HS2 route mileage providing a useable service will be HS2 phase 1, and phase 2 once the Manchester link has been built. Then the eastern arm of the "Y" to maybe Sheffield. I believe all other services will use existing NR track north of Sheffield and north of Manchester / Warrington.

 

Please correct me if I am wrong but will the company procure "euro" size captive units in addition to the CCs ? I am sceptical.    

Certainly the initial fleet for phase 1 will be all classic compatible, as it's not worth procuring captive units just for the Birmingham service.  I don't think there is any extra procurement for phase 2A.  At phase 2B the phase 1 units serving Birmingham and Manchester could be replaced by new captive units and cascaded onto the new routes such as Sheffield, Newcastle and Birmingham-Scotland.  Quite how the numbers stack up depends on service decisoins yet to be finalised, and whether it is considered worthwhile to have a fleet split between captive and compatible units even then.  As the Phase 2B fleet doesn't have to be ordered for around a decade there is plenty of time to answer these questions. 

[Mike Storey]

Thanks for your information.

From what i can make out, the only pure HS2 route mileage providing a useable service will be HS2 phase 1, and phase 2 once the Manchester link has been built. Then the eastern arm of the "Y" to maybe Sheffield. I believe all other services will use existing NR track north of Sheffield and north of Manchester / Warrington.

 

Please correct me if I am wrong but will the company procure "euro" size captive units in addition to the CCs ? I am sceptical.    

 

The info document I provided as an attachment was published in 2013. If Ron has reason to believe that the "captive" version is no longer mentioned in current documents, it does not surprise me. Procurement decisions for that are at least ten years away.

 

Given that time gap and the probability that train technology will have evolved considerably further by then (given what we are now seeing coming out of Siemens, Hitachi, Alstom and to some extent, the Chinese for forward HS fleet designs) it would be less than prudent to firm up a policy just yet.

 

Notwithstanding the greater operational flexibility of a fully classic compatible fleet, if a fleet of HS2 captive sets are available "off the shelf", being the size supplied to most other European countries, there should be a significant price advantage per set in going for "captive". Of course, that may be negated if more sets are needed than for a fully compatible fleet, and that will depend on the service specification extant in around 2028.

[jamie92208]

Thanks for your information.

From what i can make out, the only pure HS2 route mileage providing a useable service will be HS2 phase 1, and phase 2 once the Manchester link has been built. Then the eastern arm of the "Y" to maybe Sheffield. I believe all other services will use existing NR track north of Sheffield and north of Manchester / Warrington.

 

Please correct me if I am wrong but will the company procure "euro" size captive units in addition to the CCs ? I am sceptical.

Certainly London to Leeds will be able to use Captive sets but they wouldn't be able to call at Sheffield. I believe they could also do Leeds Birmingham diagrams. The HS2 station at Leeds will be at right angles to but connected to the existing Leeds station under current plans.

 

Jamie

[Mike Storey]

I wonder how much of the work carried out to build the French network of LGVs and the TGVs that run on them went to non-French companies. They were operating under exactly the same rules and EEC/EU treaty obligations as our governments but somehow seem less bound by them.

 

The catch with the TGVs seems to be that they became what SNCF's management thought they were for. Running the world's fastest trains was far more exciting than developing traffic on boring old cross-country lines or making a success of wagonload freight instead of sending customers away if they couldn't generate a hundred wagons a week (or whatever the figure was) The "classic" network, or a great deal of it, wasn't invested in and in many places has deteriorated to the point of having to be closed and "temporarily" replaced by buses. 

 

I don't think that will ever be a problem with HS2 as Britain is far more dependent on its entire rail network which in general is groaning from undercapacity rather than deteriorating from lack of use.

 

Some interesting statements given the history of Alstom, the sole builder of SNCF TGV's. I would remind you that for a period of that building, it was an Anglo-French company: GEC-Alstom, following merger, but the GEC part of the name was dropped some years later. French TGV's require components from Germany, Switzerland and the UK!  Alstom has changed dramatically in the last 15 years, having had to sell most of its power generation and signalling subsidiaries (to US giant GE) in order to be bailed out of near bankruptcy. It was recently going to close at least one of its French plants (it has plants in many countries), but the previous French govt and the EU enabled that to be postponed. It is now actively progressing a merger with the German firm Siemens, a move now approved by a vast majority of its shareholders, in order to defend European train manufacture from the Chinese threat. This should be complete by December.

 

You should also note that Eurostar, a wholly French owned company now, chose Siemens for its latest HS sets.

 

There is no existing UK capability to build such trains, and never has been since the demise of BREL. The Italians (FIAT) had it for a while, but their part in it was bought out by Alstom. Only Spain (Talgo) has capability away from France and Germany, but their success has been limited to date. The eccentricity of patriotic enthusiasm for domestic engineering and manufacturing (shared by many French people) is quaint, but belongs to a world long gone, given growing and huge, Asian competition.

 

As for infrastructure, the French use companies certified for such construction in France, as do Network Rail for UK work equivalents. Competitive tendering now includes a requirement for a form of PFI funding (the TGV Ocean extension allows the builders to charge a fee per train run for the next 40 years, to allow them to recover their capital and make a profit, which required funding from the international markets, including London). But, in all cases in the past 10 years, the lead company is supported by truly international partners, and obtains supplies across Europe. Since the acquisition of Tata Steel long products division, and conversion to the new British Steel, much FB rail production for SNCF has been transferred from France to Scunthorpe.

 

So whilst accusations of protectionism have some validity in the past, those days are largely over. Quite how a certain event in 2019 will affect that remains open.

 

As for the prioritisation of SNCF senior management on TGV operation, I completely agree about their ineptitude (as do around 75% of the French population now, unheard of even 5 years ago). But the investment in the LGV routes was a political one, not a SNCF one, and politically funded. SNCF were expected to maintain their existing, classic routes (along with regional government funding where appropriate) regardless with existing, and inflation assisted budgets. But they did not, and costs rose to a degree that makes GWIP look amateurish in terms of rank incompetence. The Macron reforms, regardless of the dwindling union resistance, will re-constitute SNCF and get it ready for truly open competition, mandatory from 2020.

 

In parallel, the recently enlarged French Regions, who have powers and budgets for Transport that English and Welsh councils can only dream of, have declared open warfare on SNCF, and will bring forward their ability to manage local and regional routes on competitive tendering to 2019. Interesting times ahead.

 

Your conclusion that HS2 will not cause the same problems in the UK, is completely correct. HS2 Ltd is an entity entirely separate from Network Rail, as is its funding. The situation is completely different. 

[jjb1970]

Alstom seem to have blown their market position in high speed trains. At one point they were very strong and exported their technology, now they seem to be very far behind Siemens and Asian competition is a real threat to the European train builders hence their merger with Siemens. Alstom were always a weird company, some of their business units were complete basket cases and other units world class.

[Mike Storey]

Alstom seem to have blown their market position in high speed trains. At one point they were very strong and exported their technology, now they seem to be very far behind Siemens and Asian competition is a real threat to the European train builders hence their merger with Siemens. Alstom were always a weird company, some of their business units were complete basket cases and other units world class.

 

I fully understand why you have said that. But their EuroDuplex is being actively considered beyond France (especially Italy and Oz) and their new Avelia Horizon next generation TGV is streets ahead of Siemens offerings (100 have just been ordered by SNCF). They seem to have re-discovered their mojo. Those alone may explain why Siemens was pretty keen to merge.

 

Talgo have had a lot of publicity over their US, Canadian, Russian and other prospects. But few (none?) have turned into orders so far. Siemens have had little non-German success since ICE4. Only Hitachi seem to able to keep up, and the new EU-Japan Free Trade Agreement should help them, but the emerging costs of the IEP (not really their fault of course) may raise eyebrows elsewhere, and their products range from eccentric to stodgy. Their advantage lies in financing.

 

Given the forward prospects for High Speed train replacement and new fleets, across Europe and in North America, I am amazed there has not been more active investment in such R&D and production capabilities. I would have thought the ever present Stadler would have gone there, but they prefer to keep to the mundane, done well. Bombardier and CAF don't have the capital. Whither GE (GM are out of the running for now)?

 

Alstom have been clever at the long game, but at the expense of some short term losses. They need the combined strengths and money of Siemens, and Siemens need their brains. Good fit.

[jjb1970]

I find that Siemens trains are very sensitive to track quality. I thought it was just the class 350's but as a fairly frequent traveller to Brussels I'm not at all impressed with the ride quality of the new 374 trains, on either HS1, the French bit or the Belgian high speed line. They seem to have the same fidgety ride and harsh lateral movement. The Thalys units seem to ride noticeably better, as do the 373's. On the other hand I will say I've always been impressed by the solidity and general feel of constructional quality of Siemens trains. That said, I still think the various Shinkansen trains are the best high speed trains I've ever used.

[JeffP]

 

 

They were operating under exactly the same rules and EEC/EU treaty obligations as our governments but somehow seem less bound by them.

 

As all EU states with the exception of the UK seem to be........

 

 

 

It was recently going to close at least one of its French plants (it has plants in many countries), but the previous French govt and the EU enabled that to be postponed.

 

From what I understood, the french government bailed out a private company, (against EU rules), and the EU looked the other way...'cos it's France and they do as they please?

[runs as required]

Talgo have had a lot of publicity over their US, Canadian, Russian and other prospects. But few (none?) have turned into orders so far.

1

It was a Talgo that fell off a bridge onto the Freeway in the US Pacific NW last Fall. Though due to human rather than mech eng design errors, it survived pretty well in the circumstances. For fun in RMweb's Imaginary Locomotives thread I had a go at tweaking a DD Talgo to comply with UK CC dynamics. (I've always enjoyed being 'upstairs' on trains from the days of Bulleid from LB to Blackheath on into travel on European trains).

2

I am really not surprised that HS2 is yet again coming under scrutiny. Having briefly had to deal with Infrastructure Planning at National scale late in my planning career, I was always most impressed at the Italian recognition of strategic pathways around Italy from Roman times right down to the present.

For example the Bologna/Florence/Rome corridor has been overlaid from original road with early railway, Mussolini base rail tunnel, post war autostrada, and most recently supplementary High Speed rail alignments.

It seemed to me blindingly obvious that the London/MK/Rugby/Brum/Crewe/Derby/Sheffield/York pathways should have been progressively consolidated since WWII rather than trying to thread new (often competing) routes through our land with never ending adversarial confrontations.

I think this every time we visit my daughter in Rugby from Tyneside and thread through DIRFT. in our old Mondeo .

dh

Edited July 29, 2018 by runs as required

[62613]

As all EU states with the exception of the UK seem to be........

 

 

 

 

From what I understood, the french government bailed out a private company, (against EU rules), and the EU looked the other way...'cos it's France and they do as they please?

It's hardly the fault of the EU if one of its governments plays strictly by the rules, or indeed gold plates them, is it? I'm talking all that country's governments over the length of our stay in that organisation

[Ron Ron Ron]

You should also note that Eurostar, a wholly French owned company now, chose Siemens for its latest HS sets.

 

Probably a more than slightly pedantic note Mike.....

 

While the 2015 shareholder agreement gave SNCF Mobilities full managerial and strategic control of EIL (effective from mid-2015), unless matters have changed I don't think it's technically a wholly French "owned" company as there is still a substantial 45% shareholding by other non-French parties.

 

From what I can tell, information found online suggests that....

SNCF's shareholding is still 55% of the post 2010, private Eurostar company.

Canadian investment fund Caisse de depot et placement du Quebec hold 30%

British based, international investment group, Hermes IM, hold 10% and Belgian NMBS/SNCB the remaining 5%

 

Do you have any more up-to-date info on that?

 

 

Ron

 

 

.

[Mike Storey]

Probably a more than slightly pedantic note Mike.....

 

While the 2015 shareholder agreement gave SNCF Mobilities full managerial and strategic control of EIL (effective from mid-2015), unless matters have changed I don't think it's technically a wholly French "owned" company as there is still a substantial 45% shareholding by other non-French parties.

 

From what I can tell, information found online suggests that....

SNCF's shareholding is still 55% of the post 2010, private Eurostar company.

Canadian investment fund Caisse de depot et placement du Quebec hold 30%

British based, international investment group, Hermes IM, hold 10% and Belgian NMBS/SNCB the remaining 5%

 

Do you have any more up-to-date info on that?

 

 

Ron

 

 

.

 

The key procurement decisions are not made by the stockholders (although they approve any change in strategy perhaps) but by the French management. ergo, a French-run company bought German, and even SNCF have bought serious numbers of German, and now Swiss/Spanish locos.

[Mike Storey]

As all EU states with the exception of the UK seem to be........

 

 

 

 

From what I understood, the french government bailed out a private company, (against EU rules), and the EU looked the other way...'cos it's France and they do as they please?

 

Great myth peddling again I am afraid. The EU did NOT look the other way, and forced Alstom to sell off its non-rail divisions as a consequence, to allow it to re-capitalise. Look it up please, instead of re=posting stuff from Vote Leave/Daily Mail etc. It was fully covered in Railway Gazette and Modern Railways at the time (2004).

 

You may like to contrast your understanding with the huge state bailouts of some UK retail banks in 2008 (also against EU rules, theoretically), an action not widely repeated (some minor exceptions) anywhere else in the EU, bar Greece and to some extent Spain and Portugal. They tended to use economic stimulus (supply side) measures instead, which the UK later adopted.

 

The UK is highly adept at using or abusing the rules as much as any other country, as in most cases of competition regulation, it wrote most of the script. The main reason for the ultimate ascendance of French and German manufacturing, compared to the UK, was due to long termism by their shareholders, not government subsidy, but it is true that there continued to be a culture of buy French/German or whatever, something actively discouraged in the UK with its own industries. It is true that in certain industries, the state or local government, continued to hold some of the shares, but that is also allowed under EU rules, if they are regarded as strategic. These are exactly the same kind of rules Trump is now trying to use to impose tariffs without Congressional approval. But successive UK governments have chosen not to use these possibilities, seeing the free market as King. Why oh why do people keep saying everyone else cheated, as the reason for the current state of our economy? The answers are much closer to home.

 

In any event, HS2 is being encouraged to seek the maximum possible percentage of UK suppliers, whomsoever wins each if the contracts. One of their first attempts gave Carillion a lead role on a major part of Phase 1. That has worked out well.

[JeffP]

It's hardly the fault of the EU if one of its governments plays strictly by the rules, or indeed gold plates them, is it? I'm talking all that country's governments over the length of our stay in that organisation

Never said it was. But it's a cast iron certainty that successive UK government's insistence on enforcing all EU regulations, then blaming them when people complained, was one of the factors leading to Brexit. What did they expect, that somehow we'd overlook all the cr@p and love the EU anyway?

[JeffP]

Mike, your allusion to 2004:

The latest bail out was only a year or so ago.

Perhaps you need to "look it up instead of reposting stuff from remain or whatever paper you read".

 

The French govt bought TGVs for a line not even given permission to be built, plus over 100 new locos, despite there being hundreds standing idle, some less than twenty years old, at Rouen Quatre Mars works.

[62613]

Never said it was. But it's a cast iron certainty that successive UK government's insistence on enforcing all EU regulations, then blaming them when people complained, was one of the factors leading to Brexit. What did they expect, that somehow we'd overlook all the cr@p and love the EU anyway?

I always thought that the EU issued its directives and national governments implemented them; as long as the spirit of the directive was adhered to then the Council of Ministers/ Parliament/whoever was happy.

[phil-b259]

Thanks for your information.

From what i can make out, the only pure HS2 route mileage providing a useable service will be HS2 phase 1, and phase 2 once the Manchester link has been built. Then the eastern arm of the "Y" to maybe Sheffield. I believe all other services will use existing NR track north of Sheffield and north of Manchester / Warrington.

 

Please correct me if I am wrong but will the company procure "euro" size captive units in addition to the CCs ? I am sceptical.    

 

Why does a train builder have make a bespoke 'captive' train just for HS2?

 

If HS2 was to open now then nobody would go round making a brand new design of train - they would simply purchase an off the shelf Siemens Velaro / Alstom TGV product to use as Eurostar did.

 

Come 2030 the HS2 operator can simply buy whatever is on offer for the rest of Europe and make substantial savings over the 'Classic Compatible' variant by not having to worry about big design changes to shrink it.

 

Thats the point about building the core of HS2 to Continental high speed standards, no need to go bespoke - its the need to build something that will also fit the UK classic network that makes train procurement an issue as that 'classic compatible' train will have very little overseas sales potential for whoever makes it. There simply isn't the sales volumes there to drive down procurement costs.

 

In fact its no different to what TfL are facing with building new Underground stock - namely if the only other place you can run your trains is the Isle of Wight then they will be expensive to design and lease. The Crossrail trains TfL have ordered by contrast can be used throughout the rest of the UK rail network and the numbers of Aventra that can be sold to UK operators means the purchase price paid by TfL is much less. Hence why TfL are going to be selling their Crossrail stock to a bank (they own that outright at present) and lease it back to generate funds for a new fleet of Piccadilly trains that they will own outright rather than lease.

[Ron Ron Ron]

....they would simply purchase an off the shelf Siemens Velaro / Alstom TGV product to use as Eurostar did.

I agree with the rest of your post Phil, but I don't think the Eurostar Class 374's are straight off-the-shelf Velaro's.

My understanding is that they're a unique version, specified for that operator's and the Channel Tunnel's particular special requirements and differ quite radically in several respects, compared to the standard Velaro product on which they are based.

 

i.e. a customised one off design.

 

 

 

.

Edited July 31, 2018 by Ron Ron Ron

[Mike Storey]

I agree with the rest of your post Phil, but I don't think the Eurostar Class 374's are straight off-the-shelf Velaro's.

My understanding is that they're a unique version, specified for that operator's and the Channel Tunnel's particular special requirements and differ quite radically in several respects, compared to the standard Velaro product on which they are based.

 

i.e. a customised one off design.

 

 

 

.

 

True Ron, but that won't necessarily apply to HS2, so the example is reasonable.

[Mike Storey]

Mike, your allusion to 2004:

The latest bail out was only a year or so ago.

Perhaps you need to "look it up instead of reposting stuff from remain or whatever paper you read".

 

The French govt bought TGVs for a line not even given permission to be built, plus over 100 new locos, despite there being hundreds standing idle, some less than twenty years old, at Rouen Quatre Mars works.

 

No need, thanks. Because it was a purchase, not a bail out, and the TGV's are for the new OuiGo services, which are very much active, replacing very old, and low capacity first gen TGV's.. I agree that SNCF's loco policy is harder to follow.

 

But how was that any different to TfL's continuing purchases of trains (not just Tubes) from Bombardier, when everyone else was avoiding them like the plague at the time, to keep Derby open?

 

And how was it any different to the tax incentives provided to Hitachi to secure UK manufacture?

 

Bash the French as much as you want. Go for it! It is very popular right now.

[Mike Storey]

I must amend my comments about Talgo. I forgot they have won the very prestigious (i.e. highly profitable) contract to build and maintain the trains for the new Saudi "Medina" high speed 350kph railway. The technical consensus appears to be that the low axle weight and reduced track forces won them the contest. Politically, it was a huge surprise.

 

But I guess it puts them in real contention for HS2, but they have no product that could easily fulfill "classic compatible" without huge re-design. Nonetheless, they appear to be actively seeking a UK assembly plant location, just in case.

 

But the shortlisting of Bombardier is perhaps the most interesting. They do not appear to have built any of their range of HS trains without partnership in design and build (in Italy, with a company now taken over by a competitor, and in China, with a company not bidding with them) and in others they have really played the role of supplier for the main bid winner, for key parts. I wonder whether their absence as lead contractor on anything in this field so far, and whether they could adapt Derby both for the design and in capacity terms (given their forward order book for the very successful Aventura, replacing their equally successful Electrostar), places them in real contention? I hope it does, as it probably represents the only option whereby HS knowledge and R&D would be developed in the UK. All the others, who may represent less risky options, would keep their IP in the safe back home, albeit UK jobs would be generated by any of them, but future potential would be lost.

 

I wonder whether the HMG directive to HS2 Ltd, to procure the maximum potential for British companies and jobs, extends that far (given that Bombardier is strictly speaking, Canadian, and truly international across Europe)?

[Ron Ron Ron]

.....But the shortlisting of Bombardier is perhaps the most interesting.

They do not appear to have built any of their range of HS trains without partnership .....

.....I wonder whether their absence as lead contractor on anything in this field so far, and whether they could adapt Derby both for the design and in capacity terms (given their forward order book for the very successful Aventura, replacing their equally successful Electrostar), places them in real contention?

 

I hope it does, as it probably represents the only option whereby HS knowledge and R&D would be developed in the UK.

I wonder whether the HMG directive to HS2 Ltd, to procure the maximum potential for British companies and jobs, extends that far (given that Bombardier is strictly speaking, Canadian, and truly international across Europe)?

 

 

Bombardier are involved in a joint bid with Hitachi Europe, who are proposing a derivative of their proposed AT400 high speed train.

 

I assume the AT400 borrows heavily from Hitachi's latest Shinkansen technology.

 

I get the impression that Bombardier are providing the risk sharing and that assembly is likely to be at Hitachi's Newton Aycliffe plant, rather than Derby.

 

 

.

[Mike Storey]

Bombardier are involved in a joint bid with Hitachi Europe, who are proposing a derivative of their proposed AT400 high speed train.

 

I assume the AT400 borrows heavily from Hitachi's latest Shinkansen technology.

 

I get the impression that Bombardier are providing the risk sharing and that assembly is likely to be at Hitachi's Newton Aycliffe plant, rather than Derby.

 

 

.

 

Thanks Ron. I had read the list as the two bidding separately. Perhaps it was the way it was printed in the HS2 article. No, I have checked, and this was not listed as a combined bid. But subsequently, both companies have now publicised a combined bid, and both draw on "their" partnership to win the Italian HS ETR 1000 contract, despite the fact that the bid was won by Bombardier in conjunction with the Italian company Ansaldo-Breda, since taken over by Hitachi.

 

That makes a lot of sense but Hitachi's blurb make much of Bombardier's experience of dealing with UK conditions, as though Hitachi had not already had to deal with them, big time, via IEP. It suggests the AT400 borrows much more from the ETR1000 than Shinkansen. But who knows what their own blurb actually means.

 

A pity otherwise, although it would help to keep Newton Aycliffe open longer term, because it precludes any possibility of HS IP being developed much further in the UK (other than Bombardier's bogie design and certain on-board systems).

Edited August 1, 2018 by Mike Storey

[Ron Ron Ron]

http://railcolornews.com/2016/01/31/uk-hitachi-rail-at400-the-uk-bullet-train/

 

https://www.railwaygazette.com/news/single-view/view/joint-venture-to-bid-for-hs2-rolling-stock-contract.html

 

 

 

.