View allAll Photos Tagged equal
54 Canal Street, Chinatown, Manhattan
Called “the first strictly high-class tall bank and office building” on the Lower East Side, with a design “equal in every respect [to] the highest grade banking buildings throughout the city,” the S. Jarmulowsky Bank Building was completed in 1912 as the architectural showpiece of one of the neighborhood’s most prominent bankers. Born in 1841 in what was then the Russian province of Lomza, its owner, Sender Jarmulowsky, established his business on the Lower East Side in 1873 and was operating at this location by 1878. Known for his honesty and conservative financial approach, Jarmulowsky grew wealthy over the following three decades providing steamship tickets and banking services to the immigrants of the surrounding neighborhood, which was unrivaled as the world’s largest Jewish community. He was also one of the Lower East Side’s leading philanthropists, playing an instrumental role in the construction of the Eldridge Street Synagogue, and serving as its first president.
In 1911, the firm of Rouse & Goldstone filed plans for this twelve-story building, which towered over the tenements of the Lower East Side when it was completed the following year. A pioneer in introducing the prevailing skyscraper aesthetic of New York’s major office districts to the neighborhood, the S. Jarmulowsky Bank Building was executed in the “modern Renaissance style” and the tripartite configuration that was standard for tall buildings of the time.
Accessed through a classical corner entrance, Jarmulowsky’s banking hall and offices were housed in the building’s rusticated stone base; manufacturing lofts occupied the rest of the building, including its ornate terra-cotta crown. Sender Jarmulowsky died shortly after the building’s opening, and his bank failed in 1917. The building was then sold by his sons, and continued to house a variety of industrial tenants into the twentyfirst century. Today, the richly decorated S. Jarmulowsky Bank Building remains one of the area’s tallest and most distinctive buildings, and one of a handful of structures that “encapsulate the Jewish immigrant experience” on the Lower East Side.
The S. Jarmulowsky Bank Building is a twelve-story building executed in the tripartite configuration that was standard for tall buildings of its time. It is a notable example of a skyscraper in which the three major portions of its main facades are executed in different materials. A neo-Renaissance-style building, it is ornamented with a wealth of classically derived detailing; located on a prominent corner site on the Lower East Side, it features a rounded corner—slightly recessed above the second floor—which extends the building’s full height.
Extending for 65 feet along Canal Street and 73 feet along Orchard Street, the building is generally symmetrical, except that it extends a bay further on Orchard Street than it does on Canal. Originally and into the early 1990s, its corner was crowned by a two-story-high, circular pavilion that was probably based upon the ancient Choragic Monument of Lysicrates in Athens.
Although the building remains largely intact today, the most important losses to its historic fabric have been the replacement, with solid panels, of the balustrades in front of its eleventh-floor windows; the removal of its rooftop cornice; the removal of the balustrades and large urns from its rooftop parapet; and the removal of its circular rooftop pavilion. In addition to its two main facades, the S. Jarmulowsky Building has two sparely ornamented brick secondary facades, which are visible from Allen and Division Streets as well as other surrounding public thoroughfares, including the Manhattan Bridge.
At the time this description was written, in 2009, a sidewalk bridge spanned the entire length of the building’s main facades. Photographs taken in August of 2007 were used to describe features of the building’s base that were concealed by the sidewalk bridge.
The three-story-high base of the S. Jarmulowsky Bank Building is executed in rusticated Indiana limestone, although the lowest portion of the building’s ground floor may be marble or granite. (The ground floor has been painted many times, making identification of its materials difficult.54) The entrance to the building’s original banking hall is located at the base’s corner.
This entrance is accessed by a single curved granite step; a non-historic metal roll-down security gate with gate box has been installed at the entrance opening, which may originally have contained “fancy grilled doors.”55 A non-historic fluorescent light fixture is attached to the front of the gate box. The entrance opening appears originally to have had a wide transom bar, and it contains a multi-pane transom window, which may be historic. The corner entrance opening was entirely surrounded, originally, by a thick enframement, probably of terra cotta, containing foliate ornament, cartouches, and a bead-and-reel molding. The portion of this enframement below the transom has been removed and replaced with non-historic tile; a lock box for the security gate has been attached to the tile surface adjacent to the entrance opening on the west. A non-historic curved canvas awning is present just below the transom.
The corner entrance sits within a classical surround, featuring paired pilasters with Ionic capitals on high bases supporting an entablature. A non-historic metal bracket, formerly holding a sign, is attached to the westernmost pilaster. The entablature, which is curved to follow the round profile of the building’s corner, has a stepped architrave crowned by an acanthus-leaf molding, a projecting cornice with denticulated and egg-and-dart moldings, and a frieze containing incised lettering reading “S ▪ JARMVLOWSKY’S ▪ BANK ▪ EST ▪ 1873 ▪”; the entablature supports a balustraded third-story balconet. Between the transom and the entablature is a carved stone panel containing a clock at its center. A finely detailed surround containing rosettes and a helmeted figure—possibly Hermes, the Greek god of commerce—frames the clock, which is flanked by two seated figures, as well as carved foliate ornament. Other carved ornament within the panel includes a gear, a barrel, a chain, and a coiled rope.
The Orchard Street portion of the base has three, two-story-high round-arch-headed openings, each of which is crowned by a cartouche. Beneath the central opening of the three is a stone sill and blind stone balustrade, which is supported by the base of the ground floor. A nonhistoric metal security gate with gate box covers the northernmost opening, which may have been extended to the ground, resulting in the possible loss of its historic sill, balustrade, and base, which were identical to those of the central opening; an electrical box for the gate has been mounted to the façade just north of this opening. The southernmost of the three round-archheaded openings has always extended to the ground and contains a historic recessed, paneled metal fascia and return below its windowsill. This opening, and the central opening of the three, retain their historic tripartite window frames decorated with scrolls, cartouches, and bead-and-reel and egg-and-dart moldings, although the frames contain replacement sashes. All three of these openings retain their historic transom bars with vertically projecting anthemia. Non-historic canvas awnings have been installed at the two northernmost openings.
One square-headed door opening is located to the south of the three round-arch-headed openings on the Orchard Street façade. This opening retains its original molded surround crowned by a frieze, which is plain except for small carved panels containing urns and foliate ornament at its ends. Non-historic metal doors fill the door opening below a non-historic transom panel containing applied Chinese characters. A non-historic electrical box with conduit has been installed at the center of the frieze. Above the frieze is a heavy projecting cornice with egg-anddart molding; this, in turn, is crowned by an original square-headed window opening within a molded enframement flanked by scrolls. This window opening is covered by a metal grille, which is likely non-historic, and contains a non-historic window sash and infill.
The Orchard Street sidewalk is of plain concrete; two siamese pipes are present in front of the building.
The Canal Street façade of the building’s base contains one, two-story-high round-archheaded opening and one large storefront opening crowned by a baskethandle arch. Like the round-arch-headed openings on the Orchard Street façade, the one on the Canal Street façade is crowned by a cartouche; whether or not this opening retains its historic sill and balustrade, similar to those of the central round-arch-headed opening on the Orchard Street façade, is unclear, as the opening is covered by a non-historic metal security gate with gate box, which is partially concealed by a non-historic canvas awning. Like the round-arched openings on the Orchard Street façade, it retains historic framing elements decorated with cartouches and a bead-and-reel molding, but its transom sashes may have been replaced. Several non-historic signs have been attached to the ground-floor portion of the façade between this opening and the storefront opening.
Although two roll-down metal security gates have been installed at the storefront opening, it retains much of its historic infill, including its continuous, wide metal transom bar sandwiched between a projecting cornice with egg-and-dart molding below, and a denticulated cornice with acanthus-leaf molding above. The transom bar itself is decorated with cherubs, cartouches, and foliate ornament. The transom window mullions within the storefront opening may be historic. Possibly historic glazing and wood window-framing elements are present over the storefront’s eastern gate. A non-historic metal door with metal side and transom panels has been installed in the portion of the opening between the two gates.
The eastern portion of the storefront opening contains a historic metal entrance surround with paneled reveal. The surround is decorated with rope and acanthus-leaf moldings and foliate ornament; an entablature above the surround is filled with winged cherubs’ heads and cartouches joined by festoons. This entrance is crowned by an angular pediment with denticulated, egg-anddart, and acanthus-leaf moldings. Non-historic elements attached to the surround include an alarm box, electrical boxes with conduit, and a large light fixture. The entrance opening is filled with a non-historic metal roll-down security gate behind a pair of non-historic metal security doors with a non-historic transom panel filled with applied Chinese characters. Three non-historic awnings have been installed at the storefront opening.
The Canal Street sidewalk is of plain concrete and contains two metal hatches and one siamese pipe. A high vertical flue projects through, and for about fifteen feet above, the eastern hatch.
Much of the ground-floor portion of the building’s base is defaced with graffiti. The base’s top story has square-headed window openings with plain masonry sills, containing nonhistoric double-hung sashes, although at least some of the openings appear to retain their historic wood brickmolds. The lower portions of all of these openings, except for the southernmost opening on the Orchard Street façade, which is shorter than the others, are filled with non-historic brick. A non-historic metal box, possibly a camera, is attached to the brick infill of the northernmost Orchard Street opening. The entire base of the S. Jarmulowsky Bank Building is crowned by a heavy projecting cornice with denticulated and egg-and-dart moldings.
The shaft portion of the S. Jarmulowsky Bank Building, comprising the fourth through ninth stories of the Canal and Orchard Street facades, is faced with buff-colored Roman brick laid in Flemish bond. The building’s corner has three window openings per floor; the other window openings are paired, except for a single window opening in each southernmost bay of the Orchard Street façade. These openings feature soldier-brick lintels and plain masonry sills, as well as nonhistoric double-hung sashes, although many openings appear to retain their historic wood brickmolds. A non-historic metal grille projects from the southernmost portion of the Orchard Street façade at the fourth floor. This portion of the building is crowned by a continuous terracotta cornice.
The three-story terra-cotta crown, or “capital,” of the S. Jarmulowsky Bank Building, extending from the tenth through twelfth stories, is divided into a single-story lower portion, and a two-story upper portion. It appears to have been painted. As on the shaft portion below, each floor contains three window openings at its corner. The other tenth-floor window openings are paired, except for the single window opening in the southernmost bay of the Orchard Street façade, with each window within each pair separated by a pilaster containing a rectangular, recessed panel. Large scrolled brackets are located between the corner window openings; identical brackets, but paired, frame each pair of windows and the single window opening at the southern end of the Orchard Street façade. A continuous egg-and-dart molding runs along the top of the tenth floor.
A paneled parapet, much of which is non-historic, extends the length of both main facades, including the building’s corner, at the eleventh floor. Balustrades are located in front of the windows at the building’s corner; balustrades were also originally located in front of the other eleventh-floor windows, but were removed and replaced with solid walls at sometime in the 1980s or afterward. Two-story-high engaged columns with Corinthian capitals spring upward from the parapet at the corner; the corner window openings at the eleventh and twelfth floors are vertically separated from each other by paneled spandrels.
12 Wide, two-story-high plain pilasters with molded capitals resting on the parapet frame the corner and the southernmost, single window openings at the eleventh and twelfth floors of the Orchard Street façade. An identical pilaster is present at the western end of the Canal Street façade. Paired, plain pilasters with Corinthian capitals projecting forward from a ribbed background and resting upon the eleventh-floor parapet separate the other window openings, each of which has a tripartite configuration. Each two-story group of tripartite windows features spiralcolumn mullions with Corinthian capitals, and spandrel panels decorated with cartouches and egg-and-dart moldings, and is surrounded by denticulation. All of the tenth-through-twelfth-floor window openings appear to contain replacement sashes, although many appear to retain their historic wood brickmolds. A bead-and-reel molding runs continuously above the twelfth-floor windows. Above this, a continuous paneled band decorated with roundels and foliate ornament is framed by a rope molding below, and by denticulated and bead-and-reel moldings above, and runs the length of the main facades, including the corner. The building’s original projecting cornice above this band has been removed, and the parapet appears to have been coated with a cementitious material.
A large stepped and rounded pediment containing a cartouche is present on the building’s roof, at the southern end of the Orchard Street façade. Three paneled rooftop pedestals overlooking Orchard Street, and four paneled rooftop pedestals overlooking Canal Street, are also present. These originally supported large urns and were joined by balustrades; both the balustrades and the urns have been removed. The building’s corner retains the base of its original circular rooftop pavilion, which has also been removed. The base is paneled and features four large scrolled buttresses; the pavilion, as shown in a photograph taken shortly after the building’s opening, originally featured tapered columns with ornate, probably Corinthian, capitals. The round dome of the pavilion was ringed by eagles on paneled pedestals and was crowned by a pinnacle.56 A rooftop bulkhead is visible over the building’s Canal Street façade.
The south façade of the S. Jarmulowsky Bank Building is two bays wide at the third and fourth floors, and five bays wide at the fifth through twelfth floors. It is of brick laid in common bond, and has window openings above the second floor of varying heights, with plain masonry sills. Portions of the eastern end of this façade have been painted or coated with a cementitious material; the entire façade at the fourth floor and below has been coated with cementitious material. Non-historic grilles are present at the third-through-sixth-floor window openings. These openings contain a mixture of one-over-one and two-over-two double-hung sashes, all of which are likely replacements, although many appear to retain their historic wood brickmolds. This façade is crowned by a high, stepped brick parapet, which may or may not be original.
The seven-bay west façade of the building is of brick laid in common bond. Its window openings have plain stone sills and contain paired one-over-one, double-hung sashes, which likely are replacements. At the northern end of this façade, the brick is keyed into the building’s Canal Street façade; below the tenth floor, the northern portion of this façade is of the same lightcolored brick as the shaft portion of the building’s main facades, and from the tenth through the twelfth floors, it is of terra cotta. The upper portion of the northern end of this façade is decorated with panels and a variety of moldings. A large metal structure supporting two water tanks is visible over this façade.
The building has a notched southwestern corner containing a metal fire escape and square-headed openings. These openings contain metal doors, metal gates, and two-over-two double-hung sashes, which appear not to be original.
- From the 2009 NYCLPC Landmark Designation Report
Blackpool Borough Council Transport 706 PRINCESS ALICE, a The English Electric Company Limited ‘Balloon’ tram with The English Electric Company Limited 4’ 9” wheelbase equal wheel bogies, two The English Electric Company Limited 305 57 horsepower motors and The English Electric Company Limited DB1 Z6 controllers with a The English Electric Company Limited O52/40CD body built 1934 runs along Bold Street in Fleetwood approaching the Ferry tram terminus during the Blackpool and Fleetwood Transport Festival. Sunday 14th July 1985
Note, 706 was new to Blackpool Corporation as an open top tram with O54/40CD seating, entering service on 25th September 1934 as number 243. It was rebuilt with a roof in 1942 with the seating being altered to H44/40CD. It was renumbered 706 in early 1968 and the seating was further altered to H54/40CD at some time. Blackpool Corporation became Blackpool Borough Council on 1st April 1974 due to local government reorganisation. 706 was damaged on 22nd July 1980 in a collision at the Pleasure Beach with tram number 705. 705 was scrapped in October 1982 as a result but 706 was stored until 1984 when work began to rebuild it as an open top tram. It returned to service in May 1985 and was named PRINCESS ALICE by HRH Princess Alice on 6th June 1985
Ref no HL/06126
‘Equal Temperance’ is a schizophonic composition for twenty-nine pianos. The composition provides the audience with an insight into the imagined sonification of the instruments regarding the environment they have been placed within. The project explores the differing tunings and acoustic environments of the pianos whilst additionally providing a creative documentation of the London soundscape.
The pianos used in this composition were part of the ‘Play me, I’m yours’ live art piece installed in London by Luke Jerram in July 2009. The material for the composition was recorded at each piano site over a ten-day period in collaboration with pianist, Keir Vine. Every location features in the composition and no external material was used.
‘Equal Temperance’ was diffused live over 8 speakers with Keir Vine performing on piano in the Queen Elizabeth Hall foyer, Southbank. This performance was part of the ‘Trouble Tune Tonic’ festival on July 31st 2009.
For more information about the piece and details of each piano please see this link - equaltemperance.blogspot.com
2008 Exemplary Public Service Award for a Student winner
Caroline Hsu (center) with Suzanne Endrizzi (right) and Fordham University Law School staff members Andrew Chapin, Hillary Exter and Thomas Schoenherr
every lao buddhist male is expected to become a monk for a short period in his life.
luang prabang, laos
‘Equal Temperance’ is a schizophonic composition for twenty-nine pianos. The composition provides the audience with an insight into the imagined sonification of the instruments regarding the environment they have been placed within. The project explores the differing tunings and acoustic environments of the pianos whilst additionally providing a creative documentation of the London soundscape.
The pianos used in this composition were part of the ‘Play me, I’m yours’ live art piece installed in London by Luke Jerram in July 2009. The material for the composition was recorded at each piano site over a ten-day period in collaboration with pianist, Keir Vine. Every location features in the composition and no external material was used.
‘Equal Temperance’ was diffused live over 8 speakers with Keir Vine performing on piano in the Queen Elizabeth Hall foyer, Southbank. This performance was part of the ‘Trouble Tune Tonic’ festival on July 31st 2009.
For more information about the piece and details of each piano please see this link - equaltemperance.blogspot.com
One of seven installations during the event Lights in Alingsås 2016 – the theme of the year is Enlightenment. It is based on the 17 Global Goals for Sustainable Development agreed to by 193 world leaders. This installation is inspired by the goal "5 Gender equality".
Workshop head: Sabine De Schutter, Germany: "When I was a child, everything seemed equal. I thought I could do anything and everything. I´ve realized our world isn´t equal at all! I understand why they said not to play football or to go out after dark. My voice isn´t heard equally, I don´t have the same opportunities. I am a woman.
One day I wish to see equal chances and respect for all girls and women. That we feel safe whenever and wherever we go. I wish for a better world!"
Every year in september/october leading international lighting designers come to Alingsås to hold a week´s workshop with participants from all over the world. Together they light a number of buildings and locations around the town centre. Around 80 000 people come every year to see the designs during the month-long event.
www.lightsinalingsas.se/en (website about this year´s event in English and Swedish)
Wie jedes Jahr habe ich an der Demonstration anlässlich des Equal Pay Days teilgenommen. Frauen verdienen im Durchschnitt 22 Prozent weniger als Männer bei gleicher und gleichwertiger Arbeit. Das muss sich ändern!
Lesen Sie weiter unter: www.mechthild-rawert.de/inhalt/2015-03-23/equal_pay_day_2...
The Yakovlev Yak-3 (Russian: Яковлев Як-3) was a single-engine, single-seat World War II Soviet fighter. Robust and easy to maintain, it was much liked by both pilots and ground crew. One of the smallest and lightest combat fighters fielded by any combatant during the war, its high power-to-weight ratio gave it excellent performance and it proved to be a formidable dogfighter.
The origins of the Yak-3 went back to 1941 when the I-30 prototype was offered along with the I-26 (Yak-1) as an alternative design. The I-30, powered by a Klimov M-105P engine, was of all-metal construction, using a wing with dihedral on the outer panels. Like the early Yak-1, it had a 20 mm (0.79 in) ShVAK cannon firing through the hollow-driveshaft nose spinner as a motornaya pushka (моторная пушка - Literally: 'Motor Cannon'), twin 7.62 mm (0.300 in) synchronized ShKAS machine guns in cowling mounts and a ShVAK cannon in each wing.
During the Battle of Stalingrad, Luftwaffe fighters exhibited significant speed, climb rate, and armament advantages over those of the VVS. The Yak-1 then in service was understood to be in urgent need of a modernization were it to fight on equal footing against the latest models of German fighters, as well as better energy retention and higher firepower.
Then, in 1943, a group of designers headed by Alexander Sergeyevich Yakovlev designed the Yak-3, a further development of the proven Yak-1 aimed at improving survivability, flight characteristics and firepower, which required a lower weight, a higher-power engine and therefore, faster speed.
The first of two prototypes had a slatted wing to improve handling and short-field performance while the second prototype had a wooden wing without slats in order to simplify production and save aluminium. The second prototype crashed during flight tests and was written off. Although there were plans to put the Yak-3 into production, the scarcity of aviation aluminium and the pressure of the Nazi invasion led to work on the first Yak-3 being abandoned in late 1941.
In between 1942 and 1943, Yakovlev built the Yak-1M, a prototype that would ultimately lead to the Yak-3, coupled with the VK-105PF2, the latest iteration of the VK-105 engine family, where "P" indicated support for a motornaya pushka - an autocannon that fires between the engine banks, through the hollow propeller shaft - mounting. It incorporated a wing of similar design but with smaller surface area (17.15 to 14.85 m2 (184.6 to 159.8 sq ft)), and had further aerodynamic refinements, like the new placement of the oil radiator, from the chin to the wing roots (one of the visual differences with the Yak-1, -7, -9). A second Yak-1M (originally meant as a "backup") prototype was constructed later that year, differing from the first aircraft in that it had plywood instead of fabric covering of the rear fuselage, mastless radio antenna, reflector gunsight and improved armour and engine cooling.
After the VK-105PF2 engine received a boost from a manifold pressure of 1050 mmHg to 1100 mmHg, additional tests were needed to determine how it impacted the flight characteristics of the Yak-3. State trials revealed that this boost reduced the time needed to reach 5,000 m (16,000 ft) by 0.1 seconds, the takeoff run by 15 m (49 ft), altitude gain in a combat loop by 50 m (160 ft), and speed below 2,400 m (7,900 ft) by 5–6 km/h (3–4 mph).
The chief test pilot for the project Petr Mikhailovich Stefanovskiy was so impressed with the new aircraft that he recommended that it should completely replace the Yak-1 and Yak-7 with only the Yak-9 retained in production for further work with the Klimov VK-107 engine. The new fighter, designated the Yak-3, entered service in 1944, later than the Yak-9 despite the lower designation number, and by mid-1946 4,848 had been built.
The designation Yak-3 was also used for other Yakovlev projects – a proposed but never built, heavy twin-engine fighter and the Yakovlev Yak-7A.
The first 197 Yak-3 were lightly armed with a single motornaya pushka-mount 20 mm (0.79 in) ShVAK cannon and one 12.7 mm (0.50 in) UBS synchronized machine gun, with subsequent aircraft receiving a second UBS for a weight of fire of 2.72 kg (6.0 lb) per second using high-explosive ammunition. All armament was installed close to the axis of the aircraft with a cannon mounted in the engine "vee" firing through the propeller boss, synchronised machine guns in the fuselage, helping accuracy and leaving wings unloaded.
Lighter and smaller than the Yak-9 but powered by the same engine, the Yak-3 was a forgiving, easy-to-handle aircraft loved by both novice and experienced pilots. It was robust, easy to maintain and a highly successful dog-fighter. It was used mostly as a tactical fighter, flying low over battlefields and engaging in dogfights below 4,000 m (13,000 ft).
The new aircraft began to reach frontline units during summer 1944. Yak-3 service tests were conducted by 91st IAP of the 2nd Air Army, commanded by Lt Colonel Kovalyov, in June–July 1944. The regiment had the task of gaining air superiority. During 431 sorties, 20 Luftwaffe fighters and three Junkers Ju 87s were shot down while Soviet losses amounted to two Yak-3s shot down. A large dogfight developed on 16 June 1944, when 18 Yak-3s clashed with 24 German aircraft. Soviet Yak-3 fighters shot down 15 German aircraft for the loss of one Yak destroyed and one damaged. The following day, Luftwaffe activity over that section of the front had virtually ceased. On 17 July 1944, eight Yaks attacked a formation of 60 German aircraft, including escorting fighters. In the ensuing dogfight, the Luftwaffe lost three Ju 87s and four Bf 109Gs, for no loss. The Luftwaffe issued an order to "avoid combat below five thousand metres with Yakovlev fighters lacking an oil cooler intake beneath the nose!" Luftwaffe fighters in combat with the Yak-3 tried to use surprise tactics, attacking from above.
Unresolved wartime problems with the Yak-3 included plywood surfaces delaminating when the aircraft pulled out of a high-speed dive, short-range and poor engine reliability. The pneumatic system for actuating landing gear, flaps and brakes, typical for all Yakovlev fighters of the time, was troublesome. Though less reliable than hydraulic or electrical alternatives, the pneumatic system was preferred owing to the weight saving.
In 1944, the Normandie-Niemen Group re-equipped with the Yak-3, scoring the last 99 of their 273 air victories against the Luftwaffe.
Total Yak-3 losses in combat were 210, 60 in 1944 and 150 in 1945.
Yak-3
main production version
Yak-3 (VK-107A)
Klimov VK-107A engine with 1,230 kW (1,649 hp) and 2 × 20 mm (0.79 in) Berezin B-20 cannons with 120 rpg. After several mixed-construction prototypes, 48 all-metal production aircraft were built in 1945–1946 during and after WW2. Despite excellent performance (720 km/h (450 mph) at 5,750 m (18,860 ft)), it saw only limited squadron service with the 897th IAP. Though the problems with the VK-107 overheating were eventually mitigated, it was decided to leave the engine for the better-suited Yak-9.
Yak-3 (VK-108)
Yak-3 (VK-107A) modified with VK-108 engine with 1,380 kW (1,851 hp), and armed a single 23 mm (0.91 in) Nudelman-Suranov NS-23 cannon with 60 rounds of ammunition. The aircraft reached 745 km/h (463 mph) at 6,290 m (20,636 ft) in testing but suffered from significant engine overheating. Another Yak-3 with 2 × 20 mm (0.79 in) Berezin B-20 cannons was also fitted with the engine with similar results.
Yak-3K
Armed with a 45 mm (1.8 in) Nudelman-Suranov NS-45 cannon, only a few built because Yak-9K was a better match for the weapon
Yak-3P
Production started after war[11] armed with 3 × 20 mm (0.79 in) Berezin B-20 cannon with 120 rounds for the middle cannon and 130 rpg for the side weapons. A total of 596 being built, none of them took part in combat.[12] The three-cannon armament with full ammunition load was actually 11 kg (24 lb) lighter than that of a standard Yak-3, and the one-second burst mass of 3.52 kg (7.8 lb) was greater than that of most contemporary fighters.
Yak-3PD
high-altitude interceptor with Klimov VK-105PD engine and a single 23 mm (0.91 in) Nudelman-Suranov NS-23 cannon with 60 rounds of ammunition, reached 13,300 m (43,635 ft) in testing but did not enter production due to unreliability of the engine.
Yak-3RD (Yak-3D)
experimental aircraft with an auxiliary Glushko RD-1 liquid-fuel rocket engine with 2.9 kN (650 lbf) of thrust in the modified tail, armed with a single 23 mm (0.91 in) Nudelman-Suranov NS-23 cannon with 60 rounds of ammunition. On 11 May 1945, the aircraft reached 782 km/h (486 mph) at 7,800 m (25,600 ft). During the 16 August test flight, the aircraft crashed for unknown reasons, killing the test pilot V.L. Rastorguev. Like all mixed powerplant aircraft of the time, the project was abandoned in favor of turbojet engines.
Yak-3T
tank destroyer version armed with 1 × 37 mm (1.5 in) Nudelman N-37 cannon with 25 rounds and 2 × 20 mm (0.79 in) Berezin B-20S cannons with 100 rpg. Cockpit was moved 0.4 m (16 in) back to compensate for the heavier nose. Engine modifications required to accept the weapons resulted in serious overheating problems which were never fixed and the aircraft did not advance beyond the prototype stage.
Yak-3T-57
single Yak-3T with a 57 mm (2.2 in) OKB-16-57 cannon
Yak-3TK
powered by a VK-107A engine, and fitted with an exhaust turbocharger.
Yak-3U
Yak-3 fitted with Shvetsov ASh-82FN radial engine with 1,380 kW (1,851 hp) in an attempt to increase performance while avoiding the overheating problems of VK-107 and VK-108. Wingspan increased by 20 cm (7.9 in), wings moved 22 cm (8.7 in) forward, cockpit raised by 8 cm (3.1 in). Armament of 2 × 20 mm (0.79 in) Berezin B-20 cannons with 120 rpg. The prototype reached 682 km/h (424 mph) at 6,000 m (20,000 ft) and while successful did not enter production because it was completed after the war.
Yak-3UTI
two-seat conversion trainer based on Yak-3U powered by Shvetsov ASh-21 radial piston engine. The aircraft became the prototype for the Yak-11.
From 1991 to 2002 there were 21 Yakovlev Yak-3, Yak-7 and Yak-9 aircraft produced in the former Soviet Union using the original plans and dies. These aircraft are powered by the American Allison V-1710 or the Pratt & Whitney R-1830 Twin Wasp engine in place of the Klimov V-12s used during the war. Several of these aircraft are airworthy, mostly based in the United States with others in Germany, Australia and New Zealand. Others have been converted to "Yak-3U" status from original Yak-11 trainers for private owners and museums.
Flying a modified modern production Yak-3UPW powered by a Pratt & Whitney R-2000 engine, William Whiteside set an official international speed record for piston-engined aircraft in the under-3,000 kg (6,600 lb) category on 10 October 2011, reaching 655 km/h (407 mph) over a 3 km (1.864 mi) course at the Bonneville Salt Flats in Utah in the United States, greatly exceeding the previous record of 491 km/h (305 mph) set in 2002 by Jim Wright. The following day, Whiteside used the same aircraft to set an unofficial speed record for aircraft in the category of 670 km/h (416 mph) over the same 3-km (1.863-mile) course.
Specifications (Yak-3)
General characteristics
Crew: 1
Length: 8.5 m (27 ft 11 in)
Wingspan: 9.2 m (30 ft 2 in)
Wing area: 14.85 m2 (159.8 sq ft)
Airfoil: root: Clark YH (14%); tip: Clark YH (10%)[16]
Empty weight: 2,105 kg (4,641 lb)
Max takeoff weight: 2,697 kg (5,946 lb)
Powerplant: 1 × Klimov VK-105PF2 V-12 liquid-cooled piston engine, 960 kW (1,290 hp)
Propellers: 3-bladed constant-speed propeller
Performance
Maximum speed: 646 km/h (401 mph, 349 kn) at 4,100 m (13,500 ft)
Combat range: 550 km (340 mi, 300 nmi)
Service ceiling: 10,400 m (34,100 ft)
Time to altitude: 5,000 m (16,000 ft) in 4 minutes 30 seconds
Wing loading: 162 kg/m2 (33 lb/sq ft)
Power/mass: 0.35 kW/kg (0.21 hp/lb)
Take-off run: 345 m (1,132 ft)
Landing run: 580 m (1,900 ft)
360° turn: 17 seconds
Armament
Guns: ** 1 × 20 mm ShVAK cannon, with 150 rounds
2 × 12.7 mm Berezin UBS machine guns with 170 rpg
‘Equal Temperance’ is a schizophonic composition for twenty-nine pianos. The composition provides the audience with an insight into the imagined sonification of the instruments regarding the environment they have been placed within. The project explores the differing tunings and acoustic environments of the pianos whilst additionally providing a creative documentation of the London soundscape.
The pianos used in this composition were part of the ‘Play me, I’m yours’ live art piece installed in London by Luke Jerram in July 2009. The material for the composition was recorded at each piano site over a ten-day period in collaboration with pianist, Keir Vine. Every location features in the composition and no external material was used.
‘Equal Temperance’ was diffused live over 8 speakers with Keir Vine performing on piano in the Queen Elizabeth Hall foyer, Southbank. This performance was part of the ‘Trouble Tune Tonic’ festival on July 31st 2009.
For more information about the piece and details of each piano please see this link - equaltemperance.blogspot.com
Longridge won the league title by beating league rivals Wren Rovers 1-0 in the last game of the season.
Both teams were equal on points going into this game that was decided by a Leon Mcloughlin 75th minute goal.
Don't let anyone tell you dog's can't count.
Mine can absolutely count at least to Two (as in, they know in a particular situation I should have thrown two cookies and they only found one) AND they know if the other dog gets MORE of something.
(Riley on the left and Toby on the right)
Daily Dog Challenge - 4853. 3/19 "Equal"
Our Daily Challenge - EQUAL is the topic for Wed March 20th 2024
And no - I didn't grow an extra hand. The iPhone was on a mini-tripod with a 10 second timer (10 photo burst).
Looking north west from Cape Spencer on the southern tip of Yorke Peninsula towards Reef Head (small island near shore) and to Wedge Island in the background. Some wonderful fishing spots along this coastline, that is if you survive the climb down the cliffs.
Archival image scanned from my colour slide collection. Taken on a much cooler day than today by the look of things... Adelaide has just had a record equalling heat wave... 6 days in a row with temperatures 40°C or above. A little cooler today, only 38.6 :-)
Cape Spencer, Reef Head, Wedge Island, Yorke Peninsula, South Australia
Huffington Post
California Adopts Strong Equal Pay Protections
Gov. Jerry Brown signed the California Fair Pay Act into law Tuesday.
California will soon have what advocates say are the strongest equal pay protections in the country after Gov. Jerry Brown (D) signed the California Fair Pay Act into law Tuesday.
SB 358, introduced by state Sen. Hannah-Beth Jackson (D) earlier this year, requires employers to prove that any pay gap between workers is due to factors like skill level or seniority and not gender. Additionally, the legislation protects workers from retribution for sharing salary information or asking about their colleagues' compensation.
Brown signed the bill into law during a ceremony at Rosie the Riveter Park in Richmond, California.
"Sixty-six years after passage of the California Equal Pay Act, many women still earn less money than men doing the same or similar work," Brown said. "This bill is another step toward closing the persistent wage gap between men and women."
The bill unanimously passed in the state Senate in May, and cleared the Assembly 66-2 last week.
Jackson attended Tuesday's ceremony, posting a celebratory photo on Twitter:
"This is a momentous day for California, and it is long overdue. I want to thank the Governor for his support and for signing this bill into law. Equal pay isn’t just the right thing for women, it’s the right thing for our economy and for California," Jackson said in a statement. "Today, California leads the nation in showing how it can be done."
The legislation goes a step further than existing fair pay regulations by establishing the standard of equal pay for "substantially similar work" rather than "equal work." The bill's backers say this language closes a loophole employers could use to justify gender-rooted differences in compensation.
While federal attempts at closing the gender gap, such as the U.S. Senate's Paycheck Fairness Act, have divided congressional Democrats and Republicans, the California bill had strong support from both parties as well as business groups like the California Chamber of Commerce.
"As working moms and women who have competed in male-dominated industries, Assembly Republican women stand behind the importance of paying women and men equally for equal work," Assembly Minority Leader Kristin Olsen (R) said in a statement in August.
On average, women are paid 78 cents for every dollar a man earns. The gender pay gap is even worse for women of color. As the Center for American Progress reported last year, Hispanic women on average made just 54 percent of what white men made in 2013, while black women made 64 cents on the dollar compared to white men.
Equal pay regulations have been on the books in California since 1959, but pay disparity still persists. A 2013 study by the National Partnership for Women & Families found California women earned an average of 85 cents on the dollar compared to men, costing female full-time workers approximately $33.6 billion annually.
Advocates hope California's new law is a beacon of progress to come.
"The win here is undeniable. We think of 2015 as the year of fair pay," Equal Rights Advocates executive director Noreen Farrell said in a statement. "With the strong support for fair pay bills in the California legislature, a business community willing to prioritize pay equity for women, and calls for fair pay from the Oscars stage to the United Nations, it seems the tides are shifting toward closing the gender wage gap."
The law also won praise from actress Patricia Arquette, who put a spotlight on pay equality during her acceptance speech at the 2015 Academy Awards.
"The California Fair Pay Act received bipartisan support because women support families and drive our economy. They also have tremendous political power," Arquette said in a statement. "It is a critical step toward ensuring that women in California are seen and valued as equals."
The California Fair Pay Act goes into effect Jan. 1.
The Award Ceremony of The European Social Fund at The Skills Show 2014. Winners of the ESF Equal Opportunities Mainstreaming Leader (Policy and Plan) 2014 were the Michaeljohn Training School. Pictured from the left are Lesley McCormack, Simon Stuart and Gabriella McCormack
Credit: Professional Images/@ProfImages'