FN SCAR? - Page 2

Armory » FN Herstal

Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - FN SCAR? (Page 2 of 3)

Posted: 11/5/2007 5:12:53 PM EDT

[#1]

Quoted:
Defenselink.mil posted the following today in its contract announcements:

FN Herstal of Herstal, Belgium, was awarded a 10-year indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity contract for the development and production of the Special Combat Assault Rifle in support of U.S. Special Operations Command procurement division in November 2004. There have been eleven delivery orders awarded to date for the procurement of Initial Operational Test and Evaluation and Low Rate Initial Production requirements totaling $11,134,096. The production phase of this contract is anticipated to begin in March 2008. The work will be performed primarily in Herstal, and is expected to be completed by 2014. The contract number is H92222-05-D-0001.

Has there been any confirmation on when civilian-legal variants of the SCAR will be made available?

With a contract like that, it doesn't seem like we'll see many IMO, But I'm no expert. It does say the FN is producing them "primarily in Herstal" so maybe FNH USA may play a roll in the civie version I dunno. We can only hope we'll see one late 2008 before its too late

Posted: 11/5/2007 5:22:15 PM EDT

[#2]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Defenselink.mil posted the following today in its contract announcements:

FN Herstal of Herstal, Belgium, was awarded a 10-year indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity contract for the development and production of the Special Combat Assault Rifle in support of U.S. Special Operations Command procurement division in November 2004. There have been eleven delivery orders awarded to date for the procurement of Initial Operational Test and Evaluation and Low Rate Initial Production requirements totaling $11,134,096. The production phase of this contract is anticipated to begin in March 2008. The work will be performed primarily in Herstal, and is expected to be completed by 2014. The contract number is H92222-05-D-0001.

Has there been any confirmation on when civilian-legal variants of the SCAR will be made available?

With a contract like that, it doesn't seem like we'll see many IMO, But I'm no expert. It does say the FN is producing them "primarily in Herstal" so maybe FNH USA may play a roll in the civie version I dunno. We can only hope we'll see one late 2008 before its too late

Relax folks. They'll probably just ship in most the parts from Herstal and then assemble them here with the required parts. I'm sure they want a BIG Army contract or a DOD contract as the next service rifle and they'll need production to be here for that. They're smart guys over there and they will make it happen rest assured. You're talking about the varsity team of the firearms industry after all, which has shown more support for the Second Amendment than any other large company. I have faith in them, because they've earned it.

Has anyone heard anything about the trigger on the SCAR? Any idea how nice the trigger is compared to an AR national match? Anyone at least know the pull on it?

Oh and according to MAGPUL the SCAR doesn't have capture pins is that true?

Thanks.

Posted: 11/5/2007 8:36:22 PM EDT

[#3]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Defenselink.mil posted the following today in its contract announcements:

FN Herstal of Herstal, Belgium, was awarded a 10-year indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity contract for the development and production of the Special Combat Assault Rifle in support of U.S. Special Operations Command procurement division in November 2004. There have been eleven delivery orders awarded to date for the procurement of Initial Operational Test and Evaluation and Low Rate Initial Production requirements totaling $11,134,096. The production phase of this contract is anticipated to begin in March 2008. The work will be performed primarily in Herstal, and is expected to be completed by 2014. The contract number is H92222-05-D-0001.

Has there been any confirmation on when civilian-legal variants of the SCAR will be made available?

With a contract like that, it doesn't seem like we'll see many IMO, But I'm no expert. It does say the FN is producing them "primarily in Herstal" so maybe FNH USA may play a roll in the civie version I dunno. We can only hope we'll see one late 2008 before its too late

Relax folks. They'll probably just ship in most the parts from Herstal and then assemble them here with the required parts. I'm sure they want a BIG Army contract or a DOD contract as the next service rifle and they'll need production to be here for that. They're smart guys over there and they will make it happen rest assured. You're talking about the varsity team of the firearms industry after all, which has shown more support for the Second Amendment than any other large company. I have faith in them, because they've earned it.

Has anyone heard anything about the trigger on the SCAR? Any idea how nice the trigger is compared to an AR national match? Anyone at least know the pull on it?

Oh and according to MAGPUL the SCAR doesn't have capture pins is that true?

Thanks.

Ship what parts from Herstal? None of the SCAR is made over seas.

Posted: 11/5/2007 9:26:09 PM EDT

[#4]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Defenselink.mil posted the following today in its contract announcements:

FN Herstal of Herstal, Belgium, was awarded a 10-year indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity contract for the development and production of the Special Combat Assault Rifle in support of U.S. Special Operations Command procurement division in November 2004. There have been eleven delivery orders awarded to date for the procurement of Initial Operational Test and Evaluation and Low Rate Initial Production requirements totaling $11,134,096. The production phase of this contract is anticipated to begin in March 2008. The work will be performed primarily in Herstal, and is expected to be completed by 2014. The contract number is H92222-05-D-0001.

Has there been any confirmation on when civilian-legal variants of the SCAR will be made available?

With a contract like that, it doesn't seem like we'll see many IMO, But I'm no expert. It does say the FN is producing them "primarily in Herstal" so maybe FNH USA may play a roll in the civie version I dunno. We can only hope we'll see one late 2008 before its too late

Relax folks. They'll probably just ship in most the parts from Herstal and then assemble them here with the required parts. I'm sure they want a BIG Army contract or a DOD contract as the next service rifle and they'll need production to be here for that. They're smart guys over there and they will make it happen rest assured. You're talking about the varsity team of the firearms industry after all, which has shown more support for the Second Amendment than any other large company. I have faith in them, because they've earned it.

Has anyone heard anything about the trigger on the SCAR? Any idea how nice the trigger is compared to an AR national match? Anyone at least know the pull on it?

Oh and according to MAGPUL the SCAR doesn't have capture pins is that true?

Thanks.

According to the 1st "SAR" report, the original prototype that won the SCAR competition had capture-everything - pins, bbl. torx screws, etc. I fail to see why the latest iteration wouldn't.

Posted: 11/6/2007 4:22:44 AM EDT

[#5]

This is the company that brought us the PS90 and FS2000. I have faith they will bring us the SCAR. I want one L and one H please.

Posted: 11/8/2007 2:01:13 PM EDT

[#6]

www.fnhusa.com/downloads/FNH_SCAR_Brochure.pdf

looks like soon :) they are advertised on the website for agencies....should only be a matter of time.

www.fnhusa.com/products/firearms/group.asp?gid=FNG007&cid=FNC01

Posted: 11/8/2007 2:45:33 PM EDT

[#7]

Quoted:
www.fnhusa.com/downloads/FNH_SCAR_Brochure.pdf

looks like soon :) they are advertised on the website for agencies....should only be a matter of time.

www.fnhusa.com/products/firearms/group.asp?gid=FNG007&cid=FNC01

Thanks for the links

I thought they were changing the selector to 90/135/180

Posted: 11/8/2007 3:20:27 PM EDT

[#8]

Quoted:

Quoted:
www.fnhusa.com/downloads/FNH_SCAR_Brochure.pdf

looks like soon :) they are advertised on the website for agencies....should only be a matter of time.

www.fnhusa.com/products/firearms/group.asp?gid=FNG007&cid=FNC01

Thanks for the links

I thought they were changing the selector to 90/135/180

+1

I still can't get a taste for the loong AAC FH on the -H, but that's easily remedied.

Posted: 11/8/2007 3:28:37 PM EDT

[#9]

Quoted:
I thought they were changing the selector to 90/135/180

It has been (since approx. Jan 2007) - the pics are of older gen. guns... Not sure why, however (most likely had those from prior marketing clip-art).

Hope this helps,
Clint

Posted: 11/8/2007 3:30:12 PM EDT

[#10]

Quoted:
I still can't get a taste for the loong AAC FH on the -H, but that's easily remedied.

A good bit of the length of the 'H' flash hider extends back over the barrel.

Take care,
Clint

Posted: 11/8/2007 4:35:31 PM EDT

[#11]

clint.....let me ask you because I know you know :) are the rifles still modular? I know the SCAR H was supposed to also be able to shoot 7.62x39...is that still the case? or are these rifles 223 and 308 only? any info greatly appreciated

Posted: 11/8/2007 10:59:57 PM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:

Quoted:
I thought they were changing the selector to 90/135/180

It has been (since approx. Jan 2007) - the pics are of older gen. guns... Not sure why, however (most likely had those from prior marketing clip-art).

Hope this helps,
Clint

Now, about that long handguard version...

Posted: 11/9/2007 4:30:25 AM EDT

[#13]

Quoted:
clint.....let me ask you because I know you know :) are the rifles still modular? I know the SCAR H was supposed to also be able to shoot 7.62x39...is that still the case? or are these rifles 223 and 308 only? any info greatly appreciated

Right now only in 5.56 and 7.62... We have a prototype coversion kit (barrel, bolt, and magazine) for the Mk16 (SCAR-L) that converts it to 6.8 SPC, but that is on permanent loan to one of our customers. Once things settle down with the current crop of work I'm sure we'll see more development into other caliber conversions (which will all be based on the Mk17 / SCAR-H receiver).

Hope this helps,
Clint

Posted: 11/9/2007 1:43:55 PM EDT

[#14]

thanks Clint......so the 6.8 conversion is on loan? mind if I ask....who is going the 6.8 route? many thanks

Posted: 11/9/2007 1:59:26 PM EDT

[#15]

Cool.

The calibers that count most to me are the 5.56x45mm (.223) and 7.62x51 (.308). The other modular rifles that use 6.8 SPC and 7.62x39mm are nice options, but aren't as important to me as being able to step-up to a 7.62x51 from a 5.56x45.

What I wonder is whether they will release on the civilian market both versions at once? If the answer is yes would it be more cost efficient (ie. less parts for conversion) to purchase the SCAR-H and then the conversion kit for the SCAR-L? Heck, will we even be able to purchase the conversion kits for the shared parts or will we have to purchase each version in full?

For instance, the youtube video presentation I found says that the SCAR-H stock will work for the SCAR-L, but it did not say whether the reverse was true.

Posted: 11/9/2007 2:30:42 PM EDT

[#16]

Quoted:
Cool.

The calibers that count most to me are the 5.56x45mm (.223) and 7.62x51 (.308). The other modular rifles that use 6.8 SPC and 7.62x39mm are nice options, but aren't as important to me as being able to step-up to a 7.62x51 from a 5.56x45.

What I wonder is whether they will release on the civilian market both versions at once? If the answer is yes would it be more cost efficient (ie. less parts for conversion) to purchase the SCAR-H and then the conversion kit for the SCAR-L? Heck, will we even be able to purchase the conversion kits for the shared parts or will we have to purchase each version in full?

For instance, the youtube video presentation I found says that the SCAR-H stock will work for the SCAR-L, but it did not say whether the reverse was true.

Clint noted that the common receiver is in dev-stage, but that -L &-H upper'ed-versions will be marketed (w/ their respectively unique lowers). This probably means that the -L receiver will accomomdate 5.56 & 6.8 bolts, carriers, & bbls.; -H receiver will take bolts, carries, & bbls for Red & NATO 7.62 cal. All other parts (stocks, grips, etc.) should be common.

Posted: 11/9/2007 5:52:22 PM EDT

[#17]

Quoted:

Quoted:
I still can't get a taste for the loong AAC FH on the -H, but that's easily remedied.

A good bit of the length of the 'H' flash hider extends back over the barrel.

Take care,
Clint

The bbbl. length is fine w/ me. It's just the look - it's purely an aesthetic preference on my part. I like a more minimalist FS - like the Mod07 ratchet-mount on AAC's M42K-Mod07. They'll probably have a ratchet mount for the 7.62 SD at some point, & so I'd go that route.

Posted: 11/10/2007 7:19:42 AM EDT

[#18]

Quoted:

Quoted:
I still can't get a taste for the loong AAC FH on the -H, but that's easily remedied.

A good bit of the length of the 'H' flash hider extends back over the barrel.

The bbbl. length is fine w/ me. It's just the look - it's purely an aesthetic preference on my part. I like a more minimalist FS - like the Mod07 ratchet-mount on AAC's M42K-Mod07. They'll probably have a ratchet mount for the 7.62 SD at some point, & so I'd go that route.

I suspect that the reason for the long flash suppressor on the SCAR-H is to prevent some doofii from trying to attach the 5.56mm suppressor to a 7.62mm barrel.

Posted: 11/14/2007 9:02:19 PM EDT

[#19]

Quoted:
Clint noted that the common receiver is in dev-stage, but that -L &-H upper'ed-versions will be marketed (w/ their respectively unique lowers). This probably means that the -L receiver will accomomdate 5.56 & 6.8 bolts, carriers, & bbls.; -H receiver will take bolts, carries, & bbls for Red & NATO 7.62 cal. All other parts (stocks, grips, etc.) should be common.

Really want that common receiver. That would greatly lower the cost for conversion and make conversion easier for me.

Posted: 11/15/2007 2:58:50 AM EDT

[#20]

Just to make sure....is this thing still tracking for a 2008 release? Just asking.

Posted: 11/15/2007 8:00:35 AM EDT

[#21]

i know time lines are allways iffy, but is there any guess on how long after LEO guns are availible will we see them on the civy market,? months/year?

at this point are they going to be agency purchase only or can officers purcashe them?

Posted: 11/15/2007 10:40:24 AM EDT

[#22]

Does the SCAR L accept standard nato 5.56 magazines?

I understand there will be a standard, cqc, and designated marksman barrel, but what their respective lengths?

I know the requirement for the SCAR was that the "L" should weight not more than 6.97 lbs. unloaded, but does anyone know what the total weight of the current "L" configuration is unloaded?

From what I understand the IOT&E testing is either being conducted now or has been conducted correct? Does anyone know whether they are done with the SOCOM LRIP testing?

I know they have $25 Million budgeted for 2008 for this rifle. I have heard that delivery of the initial rifles to SOCOM for operational use were scheduled for January 2008. Has that delivery date been pushed back? I'm curious to know, because the sooner SOCOM gets their rifles the sooner the civilian market will be able to get their MK16 or MK17 SCARs.

Posted: 11/15/2007 10:45:56 AM EDT

[#23]

Quoted:
i know time lines are allways iffy, but is there any guess on how long after LEO guns are availible will we see them on the civy market,? months/year?

at this point are they going to be agency purchase only or can officers purcashe them?

I read one article that said Fall 2008 is the roughly projected time for LEO/Civilian purchase.

Semi-Automatic sporting versions should be available to the general public.

SOCOM has $25,000,000 budgeted for FY 08' to purchase these rifles and then that drops to a little over $6,000,000 for FY 09' as of right now.

From what I have read they are building these rifles in Columbia, South Carolina so there will not be any import restriction crap to deal with.

Posted: 11/15/2007 10:52:23 AM EDT

[#24]

Quoted:
Does the SCAR L accept standard nato 5.56 magazines?

Yes, it's supposed to, and some of the testing photos showed standard mags. FN does make a (steel, IIRC) magazine which is what is usually pictured.

I understand there will be a standard, cqc, and designated marksman barrel, but what their respective lengths?

The website info says 10", 14", and 18" barrels for the .mil/LE 5.56 (SCAR-L) versions, 13", 16" and 20" for the 7.62x51 (SCAR-H). Pretty safe bet they'll have a 16" 5.56 barrel for the civ market rifles when the time comes.

I know the requirement for the SCAR was that the "L" should weight not more than 6.97 lbs. unloaded, but does anyone know what the total weight of the current "L" configuration is unloaded?

Website says 7lbs 4oz for the 14" barrel L. IIRC they had a lighter profile barrel that got the weight under the desired spec but then was changed to a heavier profile for the same reasons as the M4A1 "socom" barrel... high volume of fire use.

Posted: 11/15/2007 2:57:46 PM EDT

[#25]

Thanks Gamma762.

So is the heavier profile barrel they are going with still rated at around a 35,000 round life span?

Posted: 11/15/2007 5:46:21 PM EDT

[#26]

Man this makes me want one even more!

Posted: 11/15/2007 8:08:46 PM EDT

[#27]

Quoted:
Man this makes me want one even more!

I hear ya.

There is always a bit of a confidence problem for me with brand new weapon systems. I really do embrace and encourage development of new rifles, but there is always that little devil on my shoulder telling me "you don't know if you can count on this firearm."

With the extensive testing of the SCAR L & H through SOCOM and the fact that it is produced by the world's leading company in the firearms industry today really gives me high confidence in this new rifle.

The more I learn the more impressed I am by this rifle.

Posted: 11/27/2007 1:21:41 PM EDT

[#28]

Quoted:
For me it's the Masada then the SCAR and that's unless Sig puts out the 550 (yeah right).

If teh companies dont get them out before elections 08, we might not be able to get any of them

Posted: 11/27/2007 3:59:31 PM EDT

[#29]

Quoted:

Quoted:
For me it's the Masada then the SCAR and that's unless Sig puts out the 550 (yeah right).

If teh companies dont get them out before elections 08, we might not be able to get any of them

We've got until at least early 2009. The Congress will not be back until then to swear in new members and it will take them some time even at break neck speed to get an AWB to a floor vote, passed through both the house and senate, and then signed by the President.

We'll have this rifle.

Oh yes, it will be mine.

Posted: 11/28/2007 12:07:21 PM EDT

[#30]

Posted: 11/28/2007 1:15:07 PM EDT

[#31]

Awesome.

Posted: 11/28/2007 2:49:07 PM EDT

[#32]

Quoted:
img89.imageshack.us/img89/779/mk17og2.jpg

nice.

BTW, anyone else notice the L-plate/ranger plate looking magazine bases on the Mk17 mags? I noticed them in that video that was posted also.

Posted: 11/28/2007 4:58:02 PM EDT

[#33]

Quoted:
img89.imageshack.us/img89/779/mk17og2.jpg

I LOVE it. Good Texas Poster.

Posted: 11/28/2007 9:34:11 PM EDT

[#34]

Posted: 11/29/2007 8:57:22 PM EDT

[#35]

Quoted:

Quoted:
img89.imageshack.us/img89/779/mk17og2.jpg

nice.

BTW, anyone else notice the L-plate/ranger plate looking magazine bases on the Mk17 mags? I noticed them in that video that was posted also.

Yes, I wonder if they will all be like that or just an option. I like it.

Posted: 12/1/2007 2:04:10 PM EDT

[#36]

Quoted:

Quoted:
img89.imageshack.us/img89/779/mk17og2.jpg

nice.

BTW, anyone else notice the L-plate/ranger plate looking magazine bases on the Mk17 mags? I noticed them in that video that was posted also.

Yes, I wonder if they will all be like that or just an option. I like it.

This is kind of a sore spot with us.

We sent modified Rangers to FNH USA in 2006 that worked with their magazines (at their request) and even offered to build them a 7.62 version. These items were sent to Belgium and they built their own, patents not withstanding.

Posted: 12/1/2007 2:40:53 PM EDT

[#37]

Quoted:
This is kind of a sore spot with us.

We sent modified Rangers to FNH USA in 2006 that worked with their magazines (at their request) and even offered to build them a 7.62 version. These items were sent to Belgium and they built their own, patents not withstanding.

Send SOCOM a bill for patent royalties maybe?

Posted: 12/1/2007 4:28:26 PM EDT

[#38]

FN stole a concept from Magpul?
Bastards.

Posted: 12/1/2007 5:55:40 PM EDT

[#39]

Quoted:
FN stole a concept from Magpul?
Bastards.

That is an issue for the U.S. Patent and Trade Office and not folks on the internet.

Keep in mind also that those magazines may have not yet been reviewed by a U.S. Patent Examiner at that time and the patent application could have still been pending. Of course, if you file first you have certain protections that are extended to you, but this issue is FAR too complicated to make decisions based on one side of the story with little to no facts known.

So, please if you are going to accuse FN of violating US patent laws file a complaint.

Posted: 12/1/2007 7:05:56 PM EDT

[#40]

Quoted:

Quoted:
FN stole a concept from Magpul?
Bastards.

That is an issue for the U.S. Patent and Trade Office and not folks on the internet.

Keep in mind also that those magazines may have not yet been reviewed by a U.S. Patent Examiner at that time and the patent application could have still been pending. Of course, if you file first you have certain protections that are extended to you, but this issue is FAR too complicated to make decisions based on one side of the story with little to no facts known.

So, please if you are going to accuse FN of violating US patent laws file a complaint.

I would have to agree with Silent type here. "Stole" is a very strong word. It maybe their design is outside of the Ranger Patent 7,174,666 and 6,481,136 (we haven't gotten a written opinion on this yet). I just thought I would mention why it is a sore spot with us.

Posted: 12/2/2007 12:42:48 PM EDT

[#41]

I don't mean to fly off the handle here, that whole Knoxx thing really perturbed me. I talked a great deal to some Knoxx factory reps and they seemed like good guys.

Everyone occasionally tastes their own foot.

I figure that the Knoxx thing, general ARF.com silliness and other undisclosed issues are why you folks stopped the tech updates and pictures.

Honestly, the Magpul updates were the highlight of my internet gun browsing and now they are defunct.

Pisses me off when someone urinates in the cheerios.

Posted: 12/2/2007 9:04:29 PM EDT

[#42]

Quoted:

Quoted:
img89.imageshack.us/img89/779/mk17og2.jpg

nice.

BTW, anyone else notice the L-plate/ranger plate looking magazine bases on the Mk17 mags? I noticed them in that video that was posted also.

Yes, I wonder if they will all be like that or just an option. I like it.

This is kind of a sore spot with us.

We sent modified Rangers to FNH USA in 2006 that worked with their magazines (at their request) and even offered to build them a 7.62 version. These items were sent to Belgium and they built their own, patents not withstanding.

No wonder your mag's don't work in the FS200.

Posted: 12/4/2007 1:24:11 AM EDT

[#43]

Guys, don't get your panties in a bunch. They're not ranger plates, its's a device so you can display the weapon standing on it's grip and mag without additional support.

Posted: 12/4/2007 5:36:48 AM EDT

[#44]

Quoted:
Guys, don't get your panties in a bunch. They're not ranger plates, its's a device so you can display the weapon standing on it's grip and mag without additional support.

Incorrect, it is required for the 7.62 mag to be grabbed when the grenade launcher is installed on the SCAR.

Posted: 12/4/2007 6:28:43 AM EDT

[#45]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Guys, don't get your panties in a bunch. They're not ranger plates, its's a device so you can display the weapon standing on it's grip and mag without additional support.

Incorrect, it is required for the 7.62 mag to be grabbed when the grenade launcher is installed on the SCAR.

Seriously? That's just silly. Make a bigger mag instead.

Posted: 12/4/2007 7:16:26 AM EDT

[#46]

Quoted:
Seriously? That's just silly. Make a bigger mag instead.

Not as silly as "its's a device so you can display the weapon standing on it's grip and mag without additional support". But hey, whatever floats your boat.

Posted: 12/4/2007 9:06:07 AM EDT

[#47]

Quoted:

While you're here, I have a question. Are the side and/or lower rails removable? I see that the lower rail comes off with the barrel but didn't know if it was required for proper function.

Posted: 12/4/2007 9:21:22 AM EDT

[#48]

Quoted:
Are the side and/or lower rails removable? I see that the lower rail comes off with the barrel but didn't know if it was required for proper function.

You could, theoretically, remove the rails and not affect function of the weapon - However, removing the bottom section would leave the barrel exposed, as the rail is integral to the part (it is a one-piece aluminum part). Removing the side rails would leave the front left and right barrel retention screws exposed (assuming you still had the lower rail intact), but I guess its doable.

Just curious: why would you want to do this?

Posted: 12/4/2007 10:46:11 AM EDT

[#49]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Are the side and/or lower rails removable? I see that the lower rail comes off with the barrel but didn't know if it was required for proper function.

You could, theoretically, remove the rails and not affect function of the weapon - However, removing the bottom section would leave the barrel exposed, as the rail is integral to the part (it is a one-piece aluminum part). Removing the side rails would leave the front left and right barrel retention screws exposed (assuming you still had the lower rail intact), but I guess its doable.

Just curious: why would you want to do this?

I would rather have a narrower grip... and hypothetically if/when I get one/two/etc of these, I may well try to fab up an extended handguard out of kydex or something. I'm tall and like more handguard room.

Posted: 12/5/2007 12:28:33 AM EDT

[#50]

Havoc could you spare me a moment?

Did F.N. keep the same height over rail for the iron sights as the m4/m16 series? Could a Troy industries rear folding sight been used on the SCAR and will it work with the SCAR front sight.

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - FN SCAR? (Page 2 of 3)

Armory » FN Herstal

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us