View allAll Photos Tagged PASSIVE
Best Viewed Large!
Model: Dana
The work contained in my gallery is copyrighted ©2006-2009 Alice Marie Photography. All rights reserved. My work may not be reproduced, copied, edited, published, transmitted or uploaded in any way without my written permission. My work does not belong to the public domain.
+++ DISCLAIMER +++
Nothing you see here is real, even though the conversion or the presented background story might be based on historical facts. BEWARE!
Some Background:
During the 1950s, Hindustan Aircraft Limited (HAL) had developed and produced several types of trainer aircraft, such as the HAL HT-2. However, elements within the firm were eager to expand into the then-new realm of supersonic fighter aircraft. Around the same time, the Indian government was in the process of formulating a new Air Staff Requirement for a Mach 2-capable combat aircraft to equip the Indian Air Force (IAF). However, as HAL lacked the necessary experience in both developing and manufacturing frontline combat fighters, it was clear that external guidance would be invaluable; this assistance was embodied by Kurt Tank.
In 1956, HAL formally began design work on the supersonic fighter project. The Indian government, led by Jawaharlal Nehru, authorized the development of the aircraft, stating that it would aid in the development of a modern aircraft industry in India. The first phase of the project sought to develop an airframe suitable for travelling at supersonic speeds, and able to effectively perform combat missions as a fighter aircraft, while the second phase sought to domestically design and produce an engine capable of propelling the aircraft. Early on, there was an explicit adherence to satisfying the IAF's requirements for a capable fighter bomber; attributes such as a twin-engine configuration and a speed of Mach 1.4 to 1.5 were quickly emphasized, and this led to the HF-24 Marut.
On 24 June 1961, the first prototype Marut conducted its maiden flight. It was powered by the same Bristol Siddeley Orpheus 703 turbojets that had powered the Folland Gnat, also being manufactured by HAL at that time. On 1 April 1967, the first production Marut was delivered to the IAF. While originally intended only as an interim measure during testing, HAL decided to power production Maruts with a pair of unreheated Orpheus 703s, meaning the aircraft could not attain supersonic speed. Although originally conceived to operate around Mach 2 the Marut in fact was barely capable of reaching Mach 1 due to the lack of suitably powerful engines.
The IAF were reluctant to procure a fighter aircraft only marginally superior to its existing fleet of British-built Hawker Hunters. However, in 1961, the Indian Government decided to procure the Marut, nevertheless, but only 147 aircraft, including 18 two-seat trainers, were completed out of a planned 214. Just after the decision to build the lukewarm Marut, the development of a more advanced aircraft with the desired supersonic performance was initiated.
This enterprise started star-crossed, though: after the Indian Government conducted its first nuclear tests at Pokhran, international pressure prevented the import of better engines of Western origin, or at times, even spares for the Orpheus engines, so that the Marut never realized its full potential due to insufficient power, and it was relatively obsolescent by the time it reached production.
Due to these restrictions India looked for other sources for supersonic aircraft and eventually settled upon the MiG-21 F-13 from the Soviet Union, which entered service in 1964. While fast and agile, the Fishbed was only a short-range daylight interceptor. It lacked proper range for escort missions and air space patrols, and it had no radar that enabled it to conduct all-weather interceptions. To fill this operational gap, the new indigenous HF-26 project was launched around the same time.
For the nascent Indian aircraft industry, HF-26 had a demanding requirements specification: the aircraft was to achieve Mach 2 top speed at high altitude and carry a radar with a guided missile armament that allowed interceptions in any weather, day and night. The powerplant question was left open, but it was clear from the start that a Soviet engine would be needed, since an indigenous development of a suitable powerplant would take much too long and block vital resources, and western alternatives were out of reach. The mission profile and the performance requirements quickly defined the planned aircraft’s layout: To fit a radar, the air intakes with movable ramps to feed the engines were placed on the fuselage flanks. To make sure the aircraft would fulfill its high-performance demands, it was right from the outset powered by two engines, and it was decided to give it delta wings, a popular design among high-speed aircraft of the time – exemplified by the highly successful Dassault Mirage III (which was to be delivered to Pakistan in 1967). With two engines, the HF-26 would be a heavier aircraft than the Mirage III, though, and it was planned to operate the aircraft from semi-prepared airfields, so that it would receive a robust landing gear with low-pressure tires and a brake parachute.
In 1962 India was able to negotiate the delivery of Tumansky RD-9 turbojet engines from the Soviet Union, even though no afterburner was part of the deal – this had to be indigenously developed by Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL). However, this meant that the afterburner could be tailored to the HF-26, and this task would provide HAL with valuable engineering experience, too.
Now knowing the powerplant, HAL created a single-seater airframe around it, a rather robust design that superficially reminded of the French Mirage III, but there were fundamental differences. The HF-26 had boxy air intakes with movable ramps to control the airflow to the two engines and a relatively wide fuselage to hold them and most of the fuel in tanks between the air ducts behind the cockpit. The aircraft had a single swept fin and a rather small mid-positioned delta-wing with a 60° sweep. The pilot sat under a tight canopy that offered - similar to the Mirage III - only limited all-round vision.
The HF-26's conical nose radome covered an antenna for a ‘Garud’ interception radar – which was in fact a downgraded Soviet ‘Oryol' (Eagle; NATO reporting name 'Skip Spin') system that guided the HF-26’s main armament, a pair of semi-active radar homing (SARH) ‚Saanp’ missiles.
The Saanp missile was developed specifically for the HF-26 in India but used many components of Soviet origin, too, so that they were compatible with the radar. In performance, the Saanp was comparable with the French Matra R.530 air-to-air missile, even though the aerodynamic layout was reversed, with steering fins at the front end, right behind the SARH seaker head - overall the missile reminded of an enlarged AIM-4 Falcon. The missile weighed 180 kg and had a length of 3.5 m. Power came from a two-stage solid rocket that offered a maximum thrust of 80 kN for 2.7 s during the launch phase plus 6.5 s cruise. Maximum speed was Mach 2.7 and operational range was 1.5 to 20 km (0.9 to 12.5 miles). Two of these missiles could be carried on the main wing hardpoints in front of the landing gear wells. Alternatively, infrared-guided R-3 (AA-2 ‘Atoll’) short-range AAMs could be carried by the HF-26, too, and typically two of these were carried on the outer underwing hardpoints, which were plumbed to accept drop tanks (typically supersonic PTB-490s that were carried by the IAF's MiG-21s, too) . Initially, no internal gun was envisioned, as the HF-26 was supposed to be a pure high-speed/high-altitude interceptor that would not engage in dogfights. Two more hardpoints under the fuselage were plumbed, too, for a total of six external stations.
Due to its wing planform, the HF-26 was soon aptly called “Teer” (= Arrow), and with Soviet help the first prototype was rolled out in early 1964 and presented to the public. The first flight, however, would take place almost a year later in January 1965, due to many technical problems, and these were soon complemented by aerodynamic problems. The original delta-winged HF-26 had poor take-off and landing characteristics, and directional stability was weak, too. While a second prototype was under construction in April 1965 the first aircraft was lost after it had entered a spin from which the pilot could not escape – the aircraft crashed and its pilot was killed during the attempt to eject.
After this loss HAL investigated an enlarged fin and a modified wing design with deeper wingtips with lower sweep, which increased wing area and improved low speed handling, too. Furthermore, the fuselage shape had to be modified, too, to reduce supersonic drag, and a more pronounced area ruling was introduced. The indigenous afterburner for the RD-9 engines was unstable and troublesome, too.
It took until 1968 and three more flying prototypes (plus two static airframes) to refine the Teer for serial production service introduction. In this highly modified form, the aircraft was re-designated HF-26M and the first machines were delivered to IAF No. 3 Squadron in late 1969. However, it would take several months until a fully operational status could be achieved. By that time, it was already clear that the Teer, much like the HF-24 Marut before, could not live up to its expectations and was at the brink of becoming obsolete as it entered service. The RD-9 was not a modern engine anymore, and despite its indigenous afterburner – which turned out not only to be chronically unreliable but also to be very thirsty when engaged – the Teer had a disappointing performance: The fighter only achieved a top speed of Mach 1.6 at full power, and with full external load it hardly broke the wall of sound in level flight. Its main armament, the Saanp AAM, also turned out to be unreliable even under ideal conditions.
However, the HF-26M came just in time to take part in the Indo-Pakistani War of 1971 and was, despite its weaknesses, extensively used – even though not necessarily in its intended role. High-flying slow bombers were not fielded during the conflict, and the Teer remained, despite its on-board radar, heavily dependent on ground control interception (GCI) to vector its pilot onto targets coming in at medium and even low altitude. The HF-26M had no capability against low-flying aircraft either, so that pilots had to engage incoming, low-flying enemy aircraft after visual identification – a task the IAF’s nimble MiG-21s were much better suited for. Escorts and air cover missions for fighter-bombers were flown, too, but the HF-26M’s limited range only made it a suitable companion for the equally short-legged Su-7s. The IAF Canberras were frequently deployed on longer range missions, but the HF-26Ms simply could not follow them all the time; for a sufficient range the Teer had to carry four drop tanks, what increased drag and only left the outer pair of underwing hardpoints (which were not plumbed) free for a pair of AA-2 missiles. With the imminent danger of aerial close range combat, though, During the conflict with Pakistan, most HF-26M's were retrofitted with rear-view mirrors in their canopies to improve the pilot's field of view, and a passive IR sensor was added in a small fairing under the nose to improve the aircraft's all-weather capabilities and avoid active radar emissions that would warn potential prey too early.
The lack of an internal gun turned out to be another great weakness of the Teer, and this was only lightly mended through the use of external gun pods. Two of these cigar-shaped pods that resembled the Soviet UPK-23 pod could be carried on the two ventral pylons, and each contained a 23 mm Gryazev-Shipunov GSh-23L autocannon of Soviet origin with 200 rounds. Technically these pods were very similar to the conformal GP-9 pods carried by the IAF MiG-21FLs. While the gun pods considerably improved the HF-26M’s firepower and versatility, the pods were draggy, blocked valuable hardpoints (from extra fuel) and their recoil tended to damage the pylons as well as the underlying aircraft structure, so that they were only commissioned to be used in an emergency.
However, beyond air-to-air weapons, the HF-26M could also carry ordnance of up to 1.000 kg (2.207 lb) on the ventral and inner wing hardpoints and up to 500 kg (1.100 lb) on the other pair of wing hardpoints, including iron bombs and/or unguided missile pods. However, the limited field of view from the cockpit over the radome as well as the relatively high wing loading did not recommend the aircraft for ground attack missions – even though these frequently happened during the conflict with Pakistan. For these tactical missions, many HF-26Ms lost their original overall natural metal finish and instead received camouflage paint schemes on squadron level, resulting in individual and sometimes even spectacular liveries. Most notable examples were the Teer fighters of No. 1 Squadron (The Tigers), which sported various camouflage adaptations of the unit’s eponym.
Despite its many deficiencies, the HF-26M became heavily involved in the Indo-Pakistan conflict. As the Indian Army tightened its grip in East Pakistan, the Indian Air Force continued with its attacks against Pakistan as the campaign developed into a series of daylight anti-airfield, anti-radar, and close-support attacks by fighter jets, with night attacks against airfields and strategic targets by Canberras and An-12s, while Pakistan responded with similar night attacks with its B-57s and C-130s.
The PAF deployed its F-6s mainly on defensive combat air patrol missions over their own bases, leaving the PAF unable to conduct effective offensive operations. Sporadic raids by the IAF continued against PAF forward air bases in Pakistan until the end of the war, and interdiction and close-support operations were maintained. One of the most successful air raids by India into West Pakistan happened on 8 December 1971, when Indian Hunter aircraft from the Pathankot-based 20 Squadron, attacked the Pakistani base in Murid and destroyed 5 F-86 aircraft on the ground.
The PAF played a more limited role in the operations, even though they were reinforced by Mirages from an unidentified Middle Eastern ally (whose identity remains unknown). The IAF was able to conduct a wide range of missions – troop support; air combat; deep penetration strikes; para-dropping behind enemy lines; feints to draw enemy fighters away from the actual target; bombing and reconnaissance. India flew 1,978 sorties in the East and about 4,000 in Pakistan, while the PAF flew about 30 and 2,840 at the respective fronts. More than 80 percent of IAF sorties were close-support and interdiction and about 45 IAF aircraft were lost, including three HF-26Ms. Pakistan lost 60 to 75 aircraft, not including any F-86s, Mirage IIIs, or the six Jordanian F-104s which failed to return to their donors. The imbalance in air losses was explained by the IAF's considerably higher sortie rate and its emphasis on ground-attack missions. The PAF, which was solely focused on air combat, was reluctant to oppose these massive attacks and rather took refuge at Iranian air bases or in concrete bunkers, refusing to offer fights and respective losses.
After the war, the HF-26M was officially regarded as outdated, and as license production of the improved MiG-21FL (designated HAL Type 77 and nicknamed “Trishul” = Trident) and later of the MiG-21M (HAL Type 88) was organized in India, the aircraft were quickly retired from frontline units. They kept on serving into the Eighties, though, but now restricted to their original interceptor role. Beyond the upgrades from the Indo-Pakistani War, only a few upgrades were made. For instance, the new R-60 AAM was introduced to the HF-26M and around 1978 small (but fixed) canards were retrofitted to the air intakes behind the cockpit that improved the Teer’s poor slow speed control and high landing speed as well as the aircraft’s overall maneuverability.
A radar upgrade, together with the introduction of better air-to-ai missiles with a higher range and look down/shoot down capability was considered but never carried out. Furthermore, the idea of a true HF-26 2nd generation variant, powered by a pair of Tumansky R-11F-300 afterburner jet engines (from the license-built MiG-21FLs), was dropped, too – even though this powerplant eventually promised to fulfill the Teer’s design promise of Mach 2 top speed. A total of only 82 HF-26s (including thirteen two-seat trainers with a lengthened fuselage and reduced fuel capacity, plus eight prototypes) were built. The last aircraft were retired from IAF service in 1988 and replaced with Mirage 2000 fighters procured from France that were armed with the Matra Super 530 AAM.
General characteristics:
Crew: 1
Length: 14.97 m (49 ft ½ in)
Wingspan: 9.43 m (30 ft 11 in)
Height: 4.03 m (13 ft 2½ in)
Wing area: 30.6 m² (285 sq ft)
Empty weight: 7,000 kg (15,432 lb)
Gross weight: 10,954 kg (24,149 lb) with full internal fuel
Max takeoff weight: 15,700 kg (34,613 lb) with external stores
Powerplant:
2× Tumansky RD-9 afterburning turbojet engines; 29 kN (6,600 lbf) dry thrust each
and 36.78 kN (8,270 lbf) with afterburner
Performance:
Maximum speed: 1,700 km/h (1,056 mph; 917 kn; Mach 1.6) at 11,000 m (36,000 ft)
1,350 km/h (840 mph, 730 kn; Mach 1.1) at sea level
Combat range: 725 km (450 mi, 391 nmi) with internal fuel only
Ferry range: 1,700 km (1,100 mi, 920 nmi) with four drop tanks
Service ceiling: 18,100 m (59,400 ft)
g limits: +6.5
Time to altitude: 9,145 m (30,003 ft) in 1 minute 30 seconds
Wing loading: 555 kg/m² (114 lb/sq ft)
Armament
6× hardpoints (four underwing and two under the fuselage) for a total of 2.500 kg (5.500 lb);
Typical interceptor payload:
- two IR-guided R-3 or R-60 air-to-air-missiles or
two PTB-490 drop tanks on the outer underwing stations
- two semi-active radar-guided ‚Saanp’ air-to-air missiles or two more R-3 or R-60 AAMs
on inner underwing stations
- two 500 l drop tanks or two gun pods with a 23 mm GSh-23L autocannon and 200 RPG
each under the fuselage
The kit and its assembly:
This whiffy delta-wing fighter was inspired when I recently sliced up a PM Model Su-15 kit for my side-by-side-engine BAC Lightning build. At an early stage of the conversion, I held the Su-15 fuselage with its molded delta wings in my hand and wondered if a shortened tail section (as well as a shorter overall fuselage to keep proportions balanced) could make a delta-wing jet fighter from the Flagon base? Only a hardware experiment could yield an answer, and since the Su-15’s overall outlines look a bit retro I settled at an early stage on India as potential designer and operator, as “the thing the HF-24 Marut never was”.
True to the initial idea, work started on the tail, and I chopped off the fuselage behind the wings’ trailing edge. Some PSR was necessary to blend the separate exhaust section into the fuselage, which had to be reduced in depth through wedges that I cut out under the wings trailing edge, plus some good amount of glue and sheer force the bend the section a bit upwards. The PM Model's jet exhausts were drilled open, and I added afterburner dummies inside - anything would look better than the bleak vertical walls inside after only 2-3 mm! The original fin was omitted, because it was a bit too large for the new, smaller aircraft and its shape reminded a lot of the Suchoj heavy fighter family. It was replaced with a Mirage III/V fin, left over from a (crappy!) Pioneer 2 IAI Nesher kit.
Once the rear section was complete, I had to adjust the front end - and here the kitbashing started. First, I chopped off the cockpit section in front of the molded air intake - the Su-15’s long radome and the cockpit on top of the fuselage did not work anymore. As a remedy I remembered another Su-15 conversion I did a (long) while ago: I created a model of a planned ground attack derivative, the T-58Sh, and, as a part of the extensive body work, I transplanted the slanted nose from an academy MiG-27 between the air intakes – a stunt that was relatively easy and which appreciably lowered the cockpit position. For the HF-26M I did something similar, I just transplanted a cockpit from a Hasegawa/Academy MiG-23 with its ogival radome that size-wise better matched with the rest of the leftover Su-15 airframe.
The MiG-23 cockpit matched perfectly with the Su-15's front end, just the spinal area behind the cockpit had to be raised/re-sculpted to blend the parts smoothly together. For a different look from the Su-15 ancestry I also transplanted the front sections of the MiG-23 air intakes with their shorter ramps. Some mods had to be made to the Su-15 intake stubs, but the MiG-23 intakes were an almost perfect fit in size and shape and easy to integrate into the modified front hill. The result looks very natural!
However, when the fuselage was complete, I found that the nose appeared to be a bit too long, leaving the whole new hull with the wings somewhat off balance. As a remedy I decided at a rather late stage to shorten the nose and took out a 6 mm section in front of the cockpit - a stunt I had not planned, but sometimes you can judge things only after certain work stages. Some serious PSR was necessary to re-adjust the conical nose shape, which now looked more Mirage III-ish than planned!
The cockpit was taken mostly OOB, I just replaced the ejection seat and gave it a trigger handle made from thin wire. With the basic airframe complete it was time for details. The PM Model Su-15s massive and rather crude main landing gear was replaced with something more delicate from the scrap box, even though I retained the main wheels. The front landing gear was taken wholesale from the MiG-23, but had to be shortened for a proper stance.
A display holder adapter was integrated into the belly for the flight scenes, hidden well between the ventral ordnance.
The hardpoints, including missile launch rails, came from the MiG-23; the pylons had to be adjusted to match the Su-15's wing profile shape, the Anab missiles lost their tail sections to create the fictional Indian 'Saanp' AAMs. The R-3s on the outer stations were left over from a MP MiG-21. The ventral pylons belong to Academy MiG-23/27s, one came from the donor kit, the other was found in the spares box. The PTB-490 drop tanks also came from a KP MiG-21 (or one of its many reincarnations, not certain).
Painting and markings:
The paint scheme for this fictional aircraft was largely inspired by a picture of a whiffy and very attractive Saab 37 Viggen (an 1:72 Airfix kit) in IAF colors, apparently a model from a contest. BTW, India actually considered buying the Viggen for its Air Force!
IAF aircraft were and are known for their exotic and sometimes gawdy paint schemes, and with IAF MiG-21 “C 992” there’s even a very popular (yet obscure) aircraft that sported literal tiger stripes. The IAF Viggen model was surely inspired by this real aircraft, and I adopted something similar for my HF-26M.
IAF 1 Squadron was therefore settled, and for the paint scheme I opted for a "stripish" scheme, but not as "tigeresque" as "C 992". I found a suitable benchmark in a recent Libyian MiG-21, which carried a very disruptive two-tone grey scheme. I adapted this pattern to the HA-26M airframe and replaced its colors, similar to the IAF Viggen model, which became a greenish sand tone (a mix of Humbrol 121 with some 159; I later found out that I could have used Humbrol 83 from the beginning, though...) and a very dark olive drab (Humbrol 66, which looks like a dull dark brown in contrast with the sand tone), with bluish grey (Humbrol 247) undersides. With the large delta wings, this turned out to look very good and even effective!
For that special "Indian touch" I gave the aircraft a high-contrast fin in a design that I had seen on a real camouflaged IAF MiG-21bis: an overall dark green base with a broad, red vertical stripe which was also the shield for the fin flash and the aircraft's tactical code (on the original bare metal). The fin was first painted in green (Humbrol 2), the red stripe was created with orange-red decal sheet material. Similar material was also used to create the bare metal field for the tactical code, the yellow bars on the splitter plates and for the thin white canopy sealing.
After basic painting was done the model received an overall black ink washing, post-panel shading and extensive dry-brushing with aluminum and iron for a rather worn look.
The missiles became classic white, while the drop tanks, as a contrast to the camouflaged belly, were left in bare metal.
Decals/markings came primarily from a Begemot MiG-25 kit, the tactical codes on the fin and under the wings originally belong to an RAF post-WWII Spitfire, just the first serial letter was omitted. Stencils are few and they came from various sources. A compromise is the unit badge on the fin: I needed a tiger motif, and the only suitable option I found was the tiger head emblem on a white disc from RAF No. 74 Squadron, from the Matchbox BAC Lightning F.6&F.2A kit. It fits stylistically well, though. ;-)
Finally, the model was sealed with matt acrylic varnish (except for the black radome, which became a bit glossy) and finally assembled.
A spontaneous build, and the last one that I completed in 2022. However, despite a vague design plan the model evolved as it grew. Bashing the primitive PM Model Su-15 with the Academy MiG-23 parts was easier than expected, though, and the resulting fictional aircraft looks sturdy but quite believable - even though it appears to me like the unexpected child of a Mirage III/F-4 Phantom II intercourse, or like a juvenile CF-105 Arrow, just with mid-wings? Nevertheless, the disruptive paint scheme suits the delta wing fighter well, and the green/red fin is a striking contrast - it's a colorful model, but not garish.
©GERES
Titre : Maison solaire passive
Results of this project (2010):
- 7,000 direct beneficiaires and 300,000 indirect beneficiaires
- 2.49 tonnes CO2 equivalent saved per household and per year
---
Résultats du projet (2010) :
- 7 000 bénéficiaires directs et 300 000 bénéficiaires indirects
- 2,49 tonnes équivalent CO2 économisées par foyer et par an
A focus on the individual optics making up a Gen II Sun Simba concentrating solar PV panel.
You can see the staggered row design - vertical spaces between the strings of optics - that allows wind to pass between optical strings (i.e. the rows making up a panel). This allows for less wind loading and passive cooling.
U.S. Air Force Fact Sheet
E-3 SENTRY (AWACS)
E-3 Sentry celebrates 30 years in Air Force's fleet
Mission
The E-3 Sentry is an airborne warning and control system, or AWACS, aircraft with an integrated command and control battle management, or C2BM, surveillance, target detection, and tracking platform. The aircraft provides an accurate, real-time picture of the battlespace to the Joint Air Operations Center. AWACS provides situational awareness of friendly, neutral and hostile activity, command and control of an area of responsibility, battle management of theater forces, all-altitude and all-weather surveillance of the battle space, and early warning of enemy actions during joint, allied, and coalition operations.
Features
The E-3 Sentry is a modified Boeing 707/320 commercial airframe with a rotating radar dome. The dome is 30 feet (9.1 meters) in diameter, six feet (1.8 meters) thick, and is held 11 feet (3.33 meters) above the fuselage by two struts. It contains a radar subsystem that permits surveillance from the Earth's surface up into the stratosphere, over land or water. The radar has a range of more than 250 miles (375.5 kilometers). The radar combined with an identification friend or foe, or IFF, subsystem can look down to detect, identify and track enemy and friendly low-flying aircraft by eliminating ground clutter returns that confuse other radar systems.
Major subsystems in the E-3 are avionics, navigation, communications, sensors (radar and passive detection) and identification tools (IFF/SIF). The mission suite includes consoles that display computer-processed data in graphic and tabular format on video screens. Mission crew members perform surveillance, identification, weapons control, battle management and communications functions.
The radar and computer subsystems on the E-3 Sentry can gather and present broad and detailed battlefield information. This includes position and tracking information on enemy aircraft and ships, and location and status of friendly aircraft and naval vessels. The information can be sent to major command and control centers in rear areas or aboard ships. In time of crisis, this data can also be forwarded to the president and secretary of defense.
In support of air-to-ground operations, the Sentry can provide direct information needed for interdiction, reconnaissance, airlift and close-air support for friendly ground forces. It can also provide information for commanders of air operations to gain and maintain control of the air battle.
As an air defense system, E-3s can detect, identify and track airborne enemy forces far from the boundaries of the United States or NATO countries. It can direct fighter-interceptor aircraft to these enemy targets. Experience has proven that the E-3 Sentry can respond quickly and effectively to a crisis and support worldwide military deployment operations.
AWACS may be employed alone or horizontally integrated in combination with other C2BM and intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance elements of the Theater Air Control System. It supports decentralized execution of the air tasking order/air combat order. The system provides the ability to find, fix, track and target airborne or maritime threats and to detect, locate and ID emitters. It has the ability to detect threats and control assets below and beyond the coverage of ground-based command and control or C2, and can exchange data with other C2 systems and shooters via datalinks.
With its mobility as an airborne warning and control system, the Sentry has a greater chance of surviving in warfare than a fixed, ground-based radar system. Among other things, the Sentry's flight path can quickly be changed according to mission and survival requirements. The E-3 can fly a mission profile approximately 8 hours without refueling. Its range and on-station time can be increased through in-flight refueling and the use of an on-board crew rest area.
Background
Engineering, test and evaluation began on the first E-3 Sentry in October 1975. In March 1977 the 552nd Airborne Warning and Control Wing (now 552nd Air Control Wing, Tinker Air Force Base, Okla.), received the first E-3s.
There are 32 aircraft in the U.S. inventory. Air Combat Command has 27 E-3s at Tinker. Pacific Air Forces has four E-3 Sentries at Kadena AB, Japan and Elmendorf AFB, Alaska. There is also one test aircraft at the Boeing Aircraft Company in Seattle.
NATO has 17 E-3A's and support equipment. The first E-3 was delivered to NATO in January 1982. The United Kingdom has seven E-3s, France has four, and Saudi Arabia has five. Japan has four AWACS built on the Boeing 767 airframe.
As proven in operations Desert Storm, Allied Force, Enduring Freedom, Iraqi Freedom, and Odyssey Dawn/Unified Protector the E-3 Sentry is the world's premier C2BM aircraft. AWACS aircraft and crews were instrumental to the successful completion of operations Northern and Southern Watch, and are still engaged in operations Noble Eagle and Enduring Freedom. They provide radar surveillance and control in addition to providing senior leadership with time-critical information on the actions of enemy forces. The E-3 has also deployed to support humanitarian relief operations in the U.S. following Hurricanes Rita and Katrina, coordinating rescue efforts between military and civilian authorities.
The data collection capability of the E-3 radar and computer subsystems allowed an entire air war to be recorded for the first time in the history of aerial warfare.
In March 1996, the Air Force activated the 513th Air Control Group, an AWACS Reserve Associate Program unit which performs duties on active-duty aircraft.
During the spring of 1999, the first AWACS aircraft went through the Radar System Improvement Program. RSIP is a joint U.S./NATO development program that involved a major hardware and software intensive modification to the existing radar system. Installation of RSIP enhanced the operational capability of the E-3 radar electronic counter-measures and has improved the system's reliability, maintainability and availability.
The AWACS modernization program, Block 40/45, is currently underway. Bock 40/45 represents a revolutionary change for AWACS and worldwide Joint Command and Control, Battle Management, and Wide Area Surveillance. It is the most significant counter-air battle management improvement in Combat Air Forces tactical Command and Control history. The Block 40/45 Mission Computer and Display upgrade replaces current 1970 vintage mission computing and displays with a true open system and commercial off-the-shelf hardware and software, giving AWACS crews the modern computing tools needed to perform, and vastly improve mission capability. Estimated fleet upgrades completion in ~2020.
General Characteristics
Primary Function: Airborne battle management, command and control
Contractor: Boeing Aerospace Co.
Power Plant: Four Pratt and Whitney TF33-PW-100A turbofan engines
Thrust: 20,500 pounds each engine at sea level
Rotodome: 30 feet in diameter (9.1 meters), 6 feet thick (1.8 meters), mounted 11 feet (3.33 meters) above fuselage
Wingspan: 145 feet, 9 inches (44.4 meters)
Length: 152 feet, 11 inches (46.6 meters)
Height: 41 feet, 9 inches (13 meters)
Weight: 205,000 pounds (zero fuel) (92,986 kilograms)
Maximum Takeoff Weight: 325,000 pounds (147,418 kilograms)
Fuel Capacity: 21,000 gallons (79,494 liters)
Speed: optimum cruise 360 mph (Mach 0.48)
Range: more than 5,000 nautical miles (9,250 kilometers)
Ceiling: Above 29,000 feet (8,788 meters)
Crew: Flight crew of four plus mission crew of 13-19 specialists (mission crew size varies according to mission)
Unit Cost: $270 million (fiscal 98 constant dollars)
Initial operating capability: April 1978
Inventory: Active force, 32 (1 test); Reserve, 0; Guard, 0
Point of Contact
Air Combat Command, Public Affairs Office; 130 Andrews St., Suite 202; Langley AFB, VA 23665-1987; DSN 574-5007 or 757-764-5007; e-mail: accpa.operations@langley.af.mil
Liberty, equality, Power? Words that hold no meaning in life.
Freedom only be a state of mind, equality non-existent while power so fleeting and false.
A fire burns deep inside, quelled to fit societies hold.
I get so discouraged suffocated by all this shit I have to do,
when all I want is those three simple little words,
all bullshit never to be true.
Home Telephone Company, Inc employees perform directional drilling to insert underground fiberoptic cables, part of the U.S. Department of Agriculture USDA Rural Development RD ReConnect 50/50 grant of $8,184,531 to extend broadband services to several areas of Berkeley County and Charleston County in South Carolina on August 8, 2022.
Home Telephone Company, Inc, provided matching funds for the $16,369,062 project. The internet and video services will be provided over fiber optic cable and Gigabit Passive Optical Network (GPON) Fiber-to-the-Home (FTTH) technology. The Network design includes 219 miles of fiber and drop fibers to 3,585 premises. These rural communities do not have access to broadband services for today's needs. For more information, please go to usda.gov/reconnect. USDA media by Lance Cheung.
Mi radio
xat.com/Error_Postmort
Nota: para escuchar la radio (21hs) al lado de la bola negra ay un icono apretar en ese icono para activar la radio
I finally did it. I made my first hydroponic system. I did the easiest thing I could do which is just a wick system. I found hydroponic nutrients and perlite at Home Depot
The Mercedes-Benz W111 was a chassis code given to its top-range vehicles, including 4-door sedans, produced from 1959 to 1968, and 2-door coupes and cabriolets from 1961 to 1971.
Mercedes-Benz emerged from World War II as an automaker in the early 1950s with the expensive 300 Adenauers and the 300SL roadsters that gained it fame, but it was the simple unibody Pontons that were the volume models. However, in both their construction and design, the Pontons were archaic, based on 1940s models of U.S. sedans.
Work on replacing these cars began in 1956, and the design focused on passenger comfort and safety. The basic Ponton cabin was widened and squared off, with larger glass area improving driver visibility. A milestone in car design were front and rear crumple zones that would absorb kinetic energy from impact. The automaker also patented retractable seatbelts. (The death toll in the new generation cars would be less than half that of the pontons.)
The exterior was designed for the European and North American markets. The body was modern and featured a characteristic tailfins that gave gave the models their nickname — the fintail (German: Heckflosse).
Series production of the 4-door sedan began in August 1959, and the car was premiered at the Frankfurt Auto Show in autumn. Initially the series consisted of three models the 220b, 220Sb, and the 220SEb. These replaced the 219 W105, the 220S W180 and the 220SE W128 Ponton sedans respectively.
Design of a replacement for the two-door Pontons began in 1957, as most of the chassis and drivetrain were to be unified with the sedan, the scope was focused on the exterior styling. Some of the mock-ups and prototypes show that Mercedes-Benz attempted to give the two-door car a front styling almost identical to what would be realised in the Pagoda roadster, but ultimately favoured the work of engineer Paul Bracq. The rear bodywork however, persisted, and thus, though officially still called a fintail the rear end design had no chrome fin highlights. Production began in late 1960, and in February of the next year the coupe was premiered in Stuttgart for the 75th anniversary of the opening of Mercedes-Benz Museum.
(Wikipedia)
- - -
Der Mercedes-Benz W 111 war das erste Oberklassen-Modell der Heckflossen-Serie von Mercedes-Benz, gelegentlich „Große Flosse“ genannt.3
Der W 111 folgte der bis 1959 gebauten großen „Ponton“-Serie W 105 und W 180 nach. Seine geradlinig elegante Karosserieform stammte vom damaligen MB-Chefdesigner Karl Wilfert und seinem Team. Die Karosserie zeichnete sich durch eine bis dahin nicht gekannte passive Sicherheit aus: Sie besaß als erste eine stabile Fahrgastzelle und wirksame Knautschzonen. Mercedes führte umfangreiche Crashtests durch, z. B. brachte man ein Fahrzeug mit 80 km/h über eine Rampe zum Überschlagen.
n die Baureihen W 111 und W 112 eingeordnet wurden neben den viertürigen Fahrzeugen („Heckflossen“-Limousinen) auch die Coupés und Cabrios in flacheren Karosserien mit runderen, nur noch im Ansatz erkennbaren Finnen. Im Rahmen der Eröffnung des Daimler-Benz-Museums in Untertürkheim am 24. Februar 1961 wurde der neue Mercedes-Benz 220 SE(b) Coupé präsentiert.
Im US-Thriller Marathon Man von Regisseur John Schlesinger aus dem Jahr 1976 wird ein W 111 von einer der Hauptfiguren, Klaus Szell bewegt. Dieser kommt in einer Verfolgungsjagd um Leben, nachdem er einen Tanklaster rammt.
Im Film Der Richter und sein Henker von 1975 ist eine schwarze Limousine der Baureihe W 111 zu sehen. Diese wurde von Robert Schmied bzw. Walter Tschanz gefahren.
Im Film The Hangover wird ein silbernes W-111-Cabrio gezeigt.
Im Film Im Geheimdienst Ihrer Majestät fahren die Gegner von Geheimagent James Bond in der Schweiz eine schwarze Limousine, Typ 220 S. Während einer Verfolgungsjagd wird der Wagen spektakulär zerstört.
(Wikipedia)
New to Last Passive, Dublin, Republic of Ireland, this B7RLE was meant to originally start life at First Manchester, registered as MX06VOO, but actually started work in Dublin doing Airport Shuttle services registered as 06-D-52161(IRL). When it came to First Manchester it received it's registration plate it wears in this view. Notice the illegal spacing, in UK eyes, of the letters and numbers of the plate. Several stablemates were also the same. It is seen here on Haymarket Street, Bury, on 23/10/2011, having just departed from the Transport Interchange, when operating to Rochdale on Service 471. © Peter Steel 2011.
I just deleted this album then re-loaded it to un tag a dealer i have problems with and to blow off steam about his companies' problem. it won't take the wind out of my sales for the love of life on the road. I just spent the last two hours deleting tags to dealers I’ve made large purchases from. The next step is to take their name off of my Truck and Fifth Wheel! That will teach them! I’ve even deleted two entire albums of photos with tags leading friends to the dealerships. My small protest but to have to spend more money in civil court. There should be a court for dealing with consumer products after large purchases and problems exist. Who can afford to do that and or spend the time teaching the bad dealer a lesson! It’s hard when you live on fantasy island and want to believe there are people out there that are true pros and true craftsmen. I know there are a few people out there because I met them and refused to do business with other dealers because I met them too. I’ve seen a guy weld a Holiday Rambler that broke in half over night at the frame and get me back on the road. There is even an RV dealer five minutes from my house that did such a poor job on a 30 foot trailer I want to restore that they lost a ten-grand restoration job! I went elsewhere for a purchase. Where is Brett Michaels when you need him! Now to find the proper venues to vent. Do you think the dealer’s sites post bad reviews? I’m the perfect sucker for a Salesman that cares nothing but for the commission or if they aren’t paid on commission for the BS they lay on you to kill time to eventually close the sale. I shopped for years at many different places within the State and even some Florida dealers for the right RV for me. I have twenty years’ road experience with travel trailers in and out of campgrounds and dealers. The hard part is when you find a good mechanic you are often down the road on the next adventure. The dealer can’t take away my enthusiasm for the joy of my new trailer. They are so useful when built properly and so versatile for travel or events or full time Road Warriors! Who wouldn’t be frustrated when there are 18 jobs that need attention! I was told by the salesman I’d get a good education from top to bottom and the demo guy was going to send me out of the dealership with the fifth wheel receiver or jaws ungreased with no Teflon pad for the fifth wheel! I really needed a fifth wheel hooking and unhooking lesson along with good Hydraulic jack lesson. I was good for most other things except how the solar panel works. But they try hard to push you off on the useless manuals or Destruction books because they are over worked and under staffed in the service area. I get that. Except learning the hard way almost cost me my hand with a bed and the fifth wheel. Luckily I’m quick. Sometimes I don’t know if I should have been a great mechanic a teacher or a great lawyer. I walked HIM through greasing the B&W hitch and greasing the receiver and made him put the Teflon pad he was going to make me leave without that I bought two years ago in anticipation of having a fifth wheel from Mark (the good guy) at the RV show in Greensboro. No kidding, I put a lot of thought into this. Needless to say, he has mechanical skills beyond my capability and they used the excuse it was market time or the RV show to be short with me. Now that I have tested things on the trailer before a trip and found at least 18 jobs that need to be done after waiting for a call for parts that had already been delivered and a call never received then accused of not paying for screens that didn’t fit and that a $125.00 per hour fee was going to be charged, who wouldn’t be upset? Did I mention this? It will always be something! They can just put the nail in the coffin for the common belief that it is over after the Sale is done. Getting passed off from one department to the other is unforgiveable! The excuse is familiar. I just do Sales; you have to talk to Service. Service says we just do Service, you have to go to parts. Even with lifetime warranty printed and tagged all over the trailer with a promise to teach you about how everything works I’ve found out the hard way from a popular dealer in Rural Hall, NC that it is not the case! It’s too bad I didn’t buy my Truck or RV and drive all the way to Atlanta to deal with @Scott Trail or find a similar friend that would make sure everything is right. Dream on Consumer! So, if any name bashing starts remember we always have one friend in the car, RV, insurance or Sales business. When we overall call all Salesman assholes or all insurance companies thieves or all dealings with service mechanics complete disasters we have to remember we have people on our friend’s lists that have those jobs. You know what, right now after a huge purchase and being shuffled it’s amazing I can work up any mercy for any of them. I’ve tried to be a Salesman. Service over profit was my downfall. I’ve tried to be a Customer Service Rep. It was difficult talking to people that needed parts after a large purchase when you just learned there aren’t any parts! We are all selling something whether we know it or not. If you aren’t taking pride in your job to be the best you can be and just killing time you are a part of this problem! Not everyone has a dream job. But it is just my turn to take a punch, but I’m swinging back! It is just unfortunate for them I know a little about RVs. I must have too high a standard to believe that there are really people that give a damn about products or follow through after the sale. I hate that we just don’t care attitude that leaves you searching for a better place. I had a place in Mooresville that I will find again for service. Hopefully the same family runs the place. It is near the Lake in Terrell. I need to return to and find another mobile mechanic once that moved on to a dealer in the mountains and I can’t dig his name up. There are good people out there. They are so hard to find. Maybe it is just me. I expect too much after laying down a hard-earned wage or a life savings for a house, new car, recreation vehicle or piece of equipment that is supposed to work. When I get a new toy, I want to take a photo of every nut bolt and screw on it, one because I am proud, the other reason is for future reference when things fall apart. Buyer’s remorse sucks even if you know the term all too well, Buyer Beware! I saw one guy at the current dealership I am dealing with now running, literally running to get from customer to customer after my purchase. In between him and the good mechanics are problems! The good guy’s name is Mark. He is extremely smart and knows RV’s and fifth wheels up and down. He was literally running with a ladder and carrying three heavy hitches with him to try to wait on at least two customers at the same time. I’m always leaving a window or looking for the good and hoping I’m not back on fantasy island. There were excellent qualified educated trailer technicians in the service in a good building with the right tools to build trailers from scratch, including paint. Getting to them is a full-time job on the customer’s end. They even had parts delivered that they owed me on what they call a we owe and hadn’t bothered to call in a three-week period. They wanted to double charge for some bug screens around 50 bucks until I produced a paid receipt. Even after the Salesmen told (I know his name) the parts manager he personally sat with the mechanic for a half hour trying patiently to put on the wrong screen. Even with lifetime warranty written all over my trailer they wanted to charge me for service $125.00 per hour for labor. That must be some sort of trick. For $125.00 an hour most any parts should be free! I waited three hours even with a scheduled appointment to even get told they were ready to take her in. Two days later I had to force the call to get an eta on when she would be ready. Imagine if I were a full timer living full time in my RV or still doing three shows a day in three different cities a day. Fortunately, I am gifted with a little time. The service manager mentioned to do the 18 jobs I needed to be done he still had to order parts. Imagine I was sold a unit that I (The Customer) found at least 18 things to do after leaving the lot and running the unit. So, I am going to rescue my unit tomorrow and hope what they did fix after two days waiting can get me through my first trip until parts come for the rest of the job. Do you think I am a fool to take it back? It is a hard call! I’ll know tomorrow if I receive a bill or the trailer is in good shape. The tough part is, after you have been tough with service now your unit is at their mercy. I was told by a good agent I don’t take any crap from anyone. But sometimes it costs me. But those of you that are passive and just let them walk all over you take a bigger beating. With full time jobs or people that depend on their unit as a full-time vehicle you can imagine the pressure to change up vacation times or deal with time off from your job to take care of problems.
THE ANKH, also known as key of life, the key of the Nile or crux ansata, was the ancient Egyptian hieroglyphic character that read "eternal life", a triliteral sign for the consonants ʻ-n-ḫ. Egyptian gods are often portrayed carrying it by its loop, or bearing one in each hand, arms crossed over their chest.
The ankh appears frequently in Egyptian tomb paintings and other art, often at the fingertips of a god or goddess in images that represent the deities of the afterlife conferring the gift of life on the dead person's mummy; this is thought to symbolize the act of conception. Additionally, an ankh was often carried by Egyptians as an amulet, either alone, or in connection with two other hieroglyphs that mean "strength" and "health" Mirrors of beaten metal were also often made in the shape of an ankh, either for decorative reasons or to symbolize a perceived view into another world.
The ankh was almost never drawn in silver; as a sun-symbol, the Egyptians almost invariably crafted important examples of it (for tombs or other purposes) from the metal they most associated with the sun, gold. A similar metal such as copper, burnished to a high sheen, was also sometimes used.
A symbol similar to the ankh appears frequently in Minoan and Mycenaean sites. This is a combination of the sacral knot (symbol of holiness) with the double-edged axe (symbol of matriarchy) but it can be better compared with the Egyptian tyet which is similar. This symbol can be recognized on the two famous figurines of the chthonian snake goddess discovered in the palace of Knossos. Both snake goddesses have a knot with a projecting loop cord between their breasts. In the Linear B (Mycenean Greek) script, ankh is the phonetic sign za.
The ankh also appeared frequently in coins from ancient Cyprus and Asia Minor (particularly the city of Mallus in Cilicia). In some cases, especially with the early coinage of King Euelthon of Salamis, the letter ku, from the Cypriot syllabary, appeared within the circle ankh, representing Ku(prion) (Cypriots). To this day, the ankh is also used to represent the planet Venus (the namesake of which, the goddess Venus or Aphrodite, was chiefly worshipped on the island) and the metal Copper (the heavy mining of which gave Cyprus its name).
David P. Silverman notes the striking example of how the depiction of the Ancient Egyptian Ankh was preserved by the Copts in their representation of the Christian cross.
THE EYE OF HORUS
The Eye of Horus is an ancient Egyptian symbol of protection, royal power and good health. The eye is personified in the goddess Wadjet (also written as Wedjat, Uadjet, Wedjoyet, Edjo or Uto and as The Eye of Ra or "Udjat"). The name Wadjet is derived from 'wadj' meaning 'green' hence 'the green one' and was known to the Greeks and Romans as 'uraeus' from the Egyptian 'iaret' meaning 'risen one' from the image of a cobra rising up in protection.
Wadjet was one of the earliest of Egyptian deities who later became associated with other goddesses such as Bast, Mut, and Hathor. She was the tutelary deity of Lower Egypt and the major Delta shrine the 'per-nu' was under her protection. Hathor is also depicted with this eye. Funerary amulets were often made in the shape of the Eye of Horus. The Wedjat or Eye of Horus is "the central element" of seven "gold, faience, carnelian and lapis lazuli" bracelets found on the mummy of Shoshenq II. The Wedjat "was intended to protect the king [here] in the afterlife" and to ward off evil. Ancient Egyptian and Near Eastern sailors would frequently paint the symbol on the bow of their vessel to ensure safe sea travel.
Horus
Horus was the ancient Egyptian sky god who was usually depicted as a falcon. His right eye was associated with the sun Ra. The eye symbol represents the marking around a Peregrine Falcon's eye that includes the "teardrop" marking sometimes found below the eye. The mirror image, or left eye, sometimes represented the moon and the god Djehuti (Thoth).
The eye as a hieroglyph and symbol
There are seven different hieroglyphs used to represent the eye, most commonly 'ir.t' in Egyptian, which also has the meaning 'to make or do' or 'one who does.' In Egyptian myth the eye was not the passive organ of sight but more an agent of action, protection or wrath.
WIKIPEDIA
Pokemon are still caught in the passive tense. I actively caught this Pikachu using Google Map on an iPhone
Panels constructed with an aluminum frame and sustainably harvested Mageris hard wood slats. Panels roll across the facade on track welded to the I-beam that supports the trellis and second story addition.
Project Name: Red Box
Project Type: 2 story addition to one story home
Location: Eagle Rock, CA
Status: Completed 2008
Designer: Jeremy levine design
...in taking pictures of my puppy. Gregg the girl dog with a boy name is the puppy in question. I took a photo of her laying on my "boob-shelf" and put it on Facebook. One of the mothers on the fundraising committee disapproved of the visible cleavage. And being the passive-aggressive bitch that I am, I made this my submission to the group.
[sarcasm]
I hope nobody is offended!
[/sarcasm]
The irony is... I show more boobage than this at a ren faire.
I met with Amra, a genuine Sarajevan, who, much to my delight, offered to show me around. In return, I promised nice pictures of her, and she wasn't particularly happy with a single one. But I'm not bitter. Maybe a little passive aggressive, but it's fine.
Full gallery: www.m1key.me/photography/sarajevo/
Click here for more Images from Alaska.
The Trans-Alaska Pipeline System, usually called the Alyeska Pipeline in Alaska or the Alaska Pipeline elsewhere, is a major U.S. oil pipeline connecting oil fields in Alaska's North Slope to a North Pacific seaport where the oil can be shipped to the Lower 48 states for refining.
The main Trans-Alaska Pipeline runs north to south, almost 800 miles (1,300 km), from the Arctic Ocean at Prudhoe Bay, Alaska to the Gulf of Alaska at Valdez, Alaska, passing near several Alaskan villages and towns, including Wiseman (pop. 21), Bettles (pop.39), Livengood (pop.29), Fox (pop.300), Fairbanks (pop. 34,540), and Glennallen (pop.554)
Oil emerges from the ground at up to 180 °F (80 °C), and travels through the pipeline at temperatures above 120 °F (50 °C). In some elevated portions, heat conduction from the oil through the Vertical Support Members (VSMs) would melt the permafrost in which the VSMs are embedded. This would cause the pipeline to sink and possibly sustain damage. To prevent this, these portions of the pipeline include heat exchangers atop each VSM, passively cooled by convection to the air. Each heat exchanger is thermally coupled by a heat pipe to the base of the VSM. Running through the VSM, the heat pipe transports heat from the base to the heat exchanger. Since ammonia, the working fluid in the heat pipes, has a freezing point lower than the permafrost, the heat pipe works throughout the year, even during the coldest winter nights. This convection cooling system is thought by TAPS engineers to be the greatest innovation associated with the pipeline.
Another innovation associated with the pipline is the zig-zag configuration aboveground. Since pipe shifts around far more easily aboveground than when buried, the zig-zag path of the pipeline allows the pipe to move from side to side and lengthwise. This movement may be caused by earthquakes or by thermal expansion and contraction. The VSMs also include "shoes" to allow for horizontal or lateral movement, and crushable blocks to absorb shocks from earthquakes, avalanches, or vehicles.
DSC_2173 - 69601 - 231-D-25943 - Volvo B8RLE/MCV eVoRa - Aircoach (Dublin Airport Car Parks) - Dublin Airport, Terminal 2 28/10/23
The day is done and the weather is about to tell us so. Sarah stands defiant photographing for Flickr til the end!!!
Lake Rotoma, Near Rotorua, New Zealand.
Original Shot..cropped. Polarising Filter.
Trumpeter swan (Cygnus buccinator), a species of swan found in North America / Massapequa Preserve, also known as the Peter J. Schmitt Preserve, is 423 acres of land located in the center of Massapequa, an unincorporated Hamlet within the Town of Oyster Bay, beginning at the intersection of Ocean Ave. and Merrick Road. These undeveloped acres of land feature woodlands, lakes, and freshwater wetlands that border Massapequa Creek and stretch for about 4 miles. Massapequa Preserve is the largest passive use park in Nassau County; its beauty is maintained by several volunteer groups and organizations that work to maintain the natural ecosystems in the area. Massapequa Preserve was originally part of the New York City water supply property and was acquired by Nassau County in 1981. Currently, it is being managed by the Nassau County Department of Recreation and Parks. Massapequa Preserve offers multiple small bodies of water to explore, including a reservoir. The Massapequa Reservoir is known to be a popular fishing spot and may be the most heavily fished pond on Long Island. This is due to the routine stocking of trout that happens twice a year. Massapequa Reservoir is stocked with brown and rainbow trout in the spring and fall which draw crowds of people around these times. Other common fish to catch in the Massapequa Reservoir include Largemouth Bass, Trout, Sunnies, Carp, Catfish, and Pickerel. Local fishers enjoy the easily accessible bodies of water.
Fonzie (left) prefers to have the big chair all to himself. Here, Fonzie's trying to convince his friend Guinness that he would be more comfortable somewhere else. Anywhere else.
A surreal moment in the star's original dance routine, complete with a giant hair-do directly in front of me!
From the Jubal Arts & Music Studio annual dance recital in Lansing, Michigan, May 2009. www.jubalarts.com
My awesome niece started this several years ago, realizing her dream in impressive fashion. Her student base doubled twice, then stabilized.
These recitals completely pack a high school auditorium consistently! And they run just a tad over ONE hour, with lightning fast transitions which are practiced extensively to ensure a fast-paced show.
by ZIOPTIS FOUNDATION
Detroit, Michigan USA
founded 1986
AWARDED RUNNER UP IN THE ENERGY CATEGORY OF THE 2009 USGBC HOME TOUR
FEATURED IN THE BOOK: TOWARD A ZERO ENERGY HOME, BY DAVID JOHNSTON & SCOTT GIBSON
VANDENBERG AIR FORCE BASE, Calif. – Preparations are underway to weigh NASA's Soil Moisture Active Passive, or SMAP, spacecraft in the clean room of the Astrotech payload processing facility on Vandenberg Air Force Base in California. The weighing of a spacecraft is standard procedure during prelaunch processing. SMAP will launch on a Delta II 7320 configuration vehicle featuring a United Launch Alliance first stage booster powered by an Aerojet Rocketdyne RS-27A main engine and three Alliant Techsystems, or ATK, strap-on solid rocket motors. Once on station in Earth orbit, SMAP will provide global measurements of soil moisture and its freeze/thaw state. NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory that built the observatory and its radar instrument also is responsible for SMAP project management and mission operations. Launch from Space Launch Complex 2 is targeted for Jan. 29, 2015. To learn more about SMAP, visit smap.jpl.nasa.gov. Photo credit: NASA/Randy Beaudoin