Not a great composition, objects are too near the border of the image .... but I like the color here and the idea !!!

Inspired by Sylvain Latouche, a great photographer ..I greatly encourage you to visit his stream

 

Setup:

Camera Canon 5DIII | Exposure 1/160 sec | Aperture f/5.6| Focal Length 85 mm | ISO Speed 100

One bottle of '' PINK CHAMPAGNE"

One flash 430 EXII with a home-made snoot for the background

One flash 580 EXII with a softbox @8h00

and another flash (but i don't remember where is it ).

Dated Southampton, December 7, 1930.

 

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

History

United Kingdom

NameRMS Aquitania

NamesakeAquitania (Roman province in France)[3]

Owner

 

1914–1934: Cunard Line[1]

1934–1949: Cunard White Star Line

1949–1950: Cunard Line

 

OperatorCunard Line

Port of registryUnited Kingdom Liverpool, United Kingdom

RouteSouthampton-New York (1914) (1920–1939) (1945–1948) (1945–1950) Southampton-Halifax (1948–1950)

Ordered8 December 1910[1]

BuilderJohn Brown & Company, Clydebank, Scotland[1]

Yard number409[2]

Laid downDecember 1910

Launched21 April 1913[1]

Christened21 April 1913 by the Countess of Derby

Acquired24 May 1914

Maiden voyage30 May 1914[1]

In service30 May 1914

Out of service1950

FateScrapped in 1950 at Faslane, Scotland.[1]

General characteristics

TypeOcean liner

Tonnage45,647 GRT[4]

Length901 ft (274.6 m)[4]

Beam97 ft (29.6 m)[4]

Draught36 ft (11.0 m)[1]

Decks10

Installed power

 

Direct drive Parsons steam turbines;[4]

59,000 shp (44,000 kW)

 

PropulsionFour shafts[4]

Speed

 

24 knots (44 km/h; 28 mph) (service)

25 knots (46 km/h; 29 mph) (max)[4]

 

Capacity

 

1914: 3,230[1]

618 1st class passengers

614 2nd class passengers

2,004 3rd class passengers

1926: 2,200[1]

610 1st class passengers

950 2nd class passengers

640 tourist class passengers

 

Crew972[1]

 

RMS Aquitania was a British ocean liner of the Cunard Line in service from 1914 to 1950. She was designed by Leonard Peskett and built by John Brown & Company in Clydebank, Scotland. She was launched on 21 April 1913[5] and sailed on her maiden voyage from Liverpool to New York on 30 May 1914. Aquitania was the third in Cunard Line's grand trio of express liners, preceded by RMS Mauretania and RMS Lusitania, and was the last surviving four-funnelled ocean liner.[6] Shortly after Aquitania entered service, World War I broke out, during which she was first converted into an auxiliary cruiser before being used as a troop transport and a hospital ship, notably as part of the Dardanelles Campaign.

 

Returned to transatlantic passenger service in 1920, she served alongside the Mauretania and the Berengaria. Considered during this period of time as one of the most attractive ships, Aquitania earned the nickname "the Ship Beautiful" from her passengers.[4] She continued in service after the merger of Cunard Line with White Star Line in 1934. The company planned to retire her and replace her with RMS Queen Elizabeth in 1940.

 

However, the outbreak of World War II allowed the ship to remain in service for ten more years. During the war and until 1947, she served as a troop transport. She was used in particular to take home Canadian soldiers from Europe. After the war, she transported migrants to Canada before the Board of Trade found her unfit for further commercial service. Aquitania was retired from service in 1949 and was sold for scrapping the following year. Having served as a passenger ship for 36 years, Aquitania ended her career as the longest-serving Cunard vessel, a record which stood for six years until overtaken by RMS Scythia's service record of 37 years. In 2004 Aquitania's service record was pushed into third place when Queen Elizabeth 2 became the longest-serving Cunard vessel.

 

Conception

 

The origins of Aquitania lay in the rivalry between the White Star Line and Cunard Line, Britain's two leading shipping companies. The White Star Line's Olympic, Titanic and the upcoming Britannic were larger than the latest Cunard ships, Mauretania and Lusitania, by 15,000 gross register tons. The Cunard duo were significantly faster than the White Star ships, while White Star's ships were seen as more luxurious. Cunard needed another liner for its weekly transatlantic express service, and elected to copy the White Star Line's Olympic-class model with a slower but larger and more luxurious ship.[4][7][8] The plan for the building of that liner began in 1910. Several draft plans were conceived in order to determine the main axes of what should be the ship for which an average speed of 23 knots was planned. In July of that year, the company launched the construction offers to several shipyards before choosing John Brown and Company, the builder of the Lusitania. The company chose Aquitania as the name for its new ship in continuity with those of its two previous duo. The three ships were named respectively after the Ancient Roman provinces Lusitania, Mauretania, and Gallia Aquitania.[9]

 

Aquitania was designed by Cunard naval architect Leonard Peskett.[4] Peskett drew up plans for a larger and wider vessel than Lusitania and Mauretania (about 130 feet (40 m) longer). With four large funnels the ship would resemble the famous speed duo, but Peskett also designed the superstructure with "glassed in" touches from the smaller Carmania, a ship he also designed. Another design feature from Carmania was the addition of two tall forward deck ventilator cowlings. Although the ship's outward dimensions were greater than that of Olympic, her displacement and tonnage were lower.[10] With Aquitania's keel being laid at the end of 1910, the experienced Peskett took a voyage on Olympic in 1911 so as to experience the feel of a ship reaching nearly 50,000 tonnes as well as to copy pointers for his company's new vessel.[10] Though Aquitania was built solely with Cunard funds, Peskett designed her according to strict British Admiralty specifications.[citation needed] Aquitania was built in the John Brown and Company yards in Clydebank, Scotland, where the majority of the Cunard ships were built.[5] The keel was laid in the same plot where Lusitania had been built, and would later be used to construct Queen Mary, Queen Elizabeth, and Queen Elizabeth 2.[11] Just like with Mauretania, for the launch the hull was painted in a light grey colour for photographic purposes; a common practice of the day for the first ship in a new class, as it made the lines of the ship clearer in the black-and-white photographs. Her hull was repainted to black in dry dock.[12]

 

In the wake of the Titanic sinking, Aquitania was one of the first new ships to carry enough lifeboats for all passengers and crew.[4] Eighty lifeboats, including two motorised launches with Marconi wireless equipment, were carried in both swan-neck and newer Welin type davits.[13] There was also a double hull and watertight compartments that were designed to allow the ship to float with five compartments flooded.[14] As required by the British Admiralty, she was designed to be converted into an armed merchant cruiser, and was reinforced to mount guns for service in that role. The ship displaced approximately 49,430 tons, of which the hull accounted for 29,150 tons, machinery 9,000 and bunkers 6,000 tons.[15]

 

Aquitania was launched on 21 April 1913 after being christened by Alice Stanley, the Countess of Derby, and fitted out over the next thirteen months. Notable installations were electrical wiring and decorations. The fitting out was led by Arthur Joseph Davis and his associate Charles Mewès.[10] On 10 May 1914, she was tested in her sea trials and steamed at one full knot over the expected speed. On 14 May, she reached Mersey and stayed at a port there for fifteen days, during which she underwent a final major cleaning and finishing in preparation for her maiden voyage.[16]

Technical aspects

 

Aquitania was the first Cunard liner to have a length in excess of 900 feet.[10] Unlike some four-funneled ships, such as White Star Line's Olympic-class ocean liners, Aquitania did not have a dummy funnel; each funnel was utilised in venting smoke from the ship's boilers.[17][18]

 

Steam was provided by twenty-one forced-draft, double-ended Scotch boilers, having eight furnaces each, that were 22 feet (6.7 m) long with diameter of 17 feet 8 inches (5.4 m) arranged in four boiler rooms.[19] Each boiler room had seven ash expellers with pump capacity of approximately 4,500 tons per hour that could also be used as emergency bilge pumps.[19]

 

Steam drove Parsons turbines in three separate engine rooms in a triple expansion system for four shafts.[19] The port engine room contained the high pressure ahead (240 tons, 40 feet 2 inches (12.2 m) long with four stage expansion) and astern turbine (120 tons, 22 feet 11 inches (7.0 m) long) for the port shaft, the centre room contained two low pressure turbines with ahead and astern capability within single casings (54 feet 3 inches (16.5 m) long, nine expansion stages in ahead turbine, four in astern turbine) for the two centre shafts and the starboard room contained the intermediate pressure ahead turbine (41 feet 6.5 inches (12.7 m) long) and a high pressure astern turbine (twin of the port high pressure turbine) for the starboard shaft.[19][20]

 

The electrical plant, located on G deck below the waterline, consisted of four 400 kW British Westinghouse generator sets generating 225 volt direct current, with emergency power provided by a diesel driven 30 kW generator up on the promenade deck.[21] Power was provided for about 10,000 lamps and about 180 electric motors.[21] She also had brass triple chambered 3 chime steam whistles on the 1st funnel and 2nd funnel.

 

In 1914, Aquitania had the capacity to carry 3,220 passengers (618 First Class, 614 Second Class, 2,004 Third Class). After a refit in 1926, the figure was reduced to 610 in first class, 950 in second class, and 640 in tourist class. Although the original specification mentioned a capacity of 972 crew members, the ship sometimes carried around 1,100.[9]

 

Although Aquitania lacked the lean, yacht-like appearance of running mates Mauretania and Lusitania, the greater length and wider beam allowed for grander and more spacious public rooms. Her public spaces were designed by the British architect Arthur Joseph Davis of the interior decorating firm Mewès and Davis. This firm had overseen the construction and decoration of the Ritz Hotel in London and Davis himself had designed several banks in that city. His partner in the firm, Charles Mewès, had designed the interiors of the Paris Ritz, and had been commissioned by Albert Ballin, head of Germany's Hamburg America Line (HAPAG), to decorate the interiors of the company's new liner Amerika in 1905.[10]

 

In the years prior to the First World War, Mewès was charged with the decoration of HAPAG's trio of giant new ships, Imperator, Vaterland, and Bismarck, while Davis was awarded the contract for Aquitania.[10] In a curious arrangement between the rival Cunard and Hamburg-Amerika Lines, Mewès and Davis worked apart—in Germany and England respectively and exclusively—with neither partner being able to disclose details of his work to the other. Although this arrangement was almost certainly violated, Aquitania's first-class interiors were largely the work of Davis. The Louis XVI dining saloon owed much to Mewès' work on the HAPAG liners, but it is likely that having worked so closely together for many years the two designers' work had become almost interchangeable. Indeed, Davis must be given credit for the Carolean smoking room and the Palladian lounge; a faithful interpretation of the style of architect John Webb.[22]

 

The second class had a dining room, several lounges, a smoking room, a veranda café, and a gymnasium; many being unique facilities for this class on British liners. The third class had several common areas, a promenade, and three shared bathrooms.[22] The cabins offered great comfort. The first class included eight luxury suites, named after famous painters. A large number of first-class cabins had bathrooms, although not all did. The second-class cabins were larger than average, most being capable of accommodating three people as opposed to the standard four. Her Third Class accommodations were a great expansion in facilities compared to her running mates. While most Cunard liners had their Third Class areas confined forward, aboard Aquitania such spaces spanned the full length of the ship, and included several large open areas, three large dining rooms and both open and enclosed promenades.[23]

 

Over her thirty-five years career, her facilities changed. Examples of this were the addition of a cinema during her refit from 1932 to 1933[24] and the reorganisation of the tourist class during the 1920s for giving greater comfort to poor passengers.[25]

Early career and World War I

 

Aquitania's maiden voyage was under the command of Captain William Turner on 30 May 1914 with arrival in New York on 5 June.[1][15] The voyage and arrival in New York received great attention.[26] Fifteen days later, the German liner SS Vaterland, being the largest ship in the world at the time, was put into service. In the eye of the press, this maiden voyage was a matter of national prestige.[27] However, this event was overshadowed by the sinking of RMS Empress of Ireland in Quebec the previous day with over a thousand drowned.[28] However, no passenger cancelled their voyage aboard the Aquitania, despite the strong emotion aroused by this sinking.[16] During her maiden voyage, the ship carried around 1,055 passengers, which was about a third of her total capacity. This was because a superstition pushed some people away from travelling on a ship's maiden voyage.[citation needed] The crossing fully satisfied the crew and the company. Average speed for the voyage, a distance of 3,181 nautical miles (5,891 km; 3,661 mi) measured from Liverpool to the Ambrose Channel lightship, was 23.1 knots (42.8 km/h; 26.6 mph),[15] taking into account a five-hour stop due to fog and the proximity of icebergs. The ship briefly managed to exceed 25 knots. Also, her coal consumption was significantly lower than that of Lusitania and Mauretania. Many passengers enjoyed the voyage. On the return trip, the success was renewed; she carried a total of 2,649 passengers, which was a record for a British liner leaving New York.[29]

 

Upon arrival at her home port, she underwent minor modifications, which took into account observations made during the two first crossings (this was typical for a liner after its first round trip).[29] Two more round trips took place in the second half of June and the whole of July of that year. Her architect Leonard Peskett was on board during those trips to note any defect and room for improvement. In total, 11,208 passengers travelled on the ship during her first six crossings. Her career was abruptly interrupted by the outbreak of World War I, which removed her from passenger service for six years.[30]

 

The following month Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria was assassinated, and the world was plunged into World War I. Aquitania was converted into an armed merchant cruiser on 5 August 1914, for which provision had been made in her design. On 8 August, having been rid of decorative elements and armed with guns, she was sent on patrol. On 22 August, she collided with a liner named Canadian. Shortly after, the Admiralty found that large liners were too expensive to operate as cruisers. On 30 September, she was repaired, disarmed, and returned to Cunard Line.[31][4]

 

After being idle for a time, in the spring of 1915 she was recalled by the Admiralty and converted into a troopship, and made voyages to the Dardanelles, sometimes running alongside Britannic or Mauretania. Around 30,000 men were transported on the ship to the battlefield between May and August of that year.[31] Aquitania then was converted into a hospital ship, and acted in that role during the Dardanelles campaign.[1][32] In 1916, the year that White Star's flagship, and one of Aquitania's main rivals, Britannic, was sunk, Aquitania was returned to the trooping front, and then in 1917 was laid up in the Solent.[1][33] In 1918, now under the command of James Charles, the ship was back on the high seas in troopship service, conveying North American troops to Britain. Many of these departures were from the port of Halifax, Nova Scotia where the ship's dazzle paint scheme was captured by artists and photographers, including Antonio Jacobsen. On one occasion Aquitania transported over 8,000 men. During her nine voyages, she transported approximately a total of 60,000 men. During this period, she collided with USS Shaw and tore apart its bow. The accident killed a dozen members of the American ship's crew.[34]

 

After the end of the war, in December 1918, Aquitania was dismissed from military service. She collided with the British cargo ship Lord Dufferin at New York in the United States on 28 February 1919. Lord Dufferin sank and Aquitania rescued her crew.[35] Lord Dufferin was later refloated and beached.[36]

Interwar career

 

In June 1919, Aquitania ran a Cunard "austerity service" between Southampton and New York. In December of that year Aquitania was docked at the Armstrong Whitworth yards in Newcastle to be refitted for post-war service. The ship was converted from coal burner to oil-fired, which greatly reduced the number of engine room crew required.[1][37] The original fittings and art pieces, removed when refitted for military use, were brought out of storage and re-installed. At some point during this time, a new wheelhouse was constructed above the original one as the officers had complained about the visibility over the ship's bow. The second wheelhouse can be seen in later pictures of the era and the original wheelhouse area below had the windows plated in.[38]

1920s

 

Aquitania resumed her commercial service on 17 July 1920, leaving from Liverpool with 2,433 passengers on board. The crossing was a success; the ship maintained good speed while showing that now being oil-fuelled was much cheaper than coal-fuelled propulsion.[39] The ship's arrival in New York Harbor was filmed as part of the pioneering 1921 documentary Manhatta, in which she is seen being pushed to her destination by tugboats. The months that followed were just as promising, despite a stewards' strike in May 1921.[40] At the beginning of the decade, Aquitania was the only large liner in the service of Cunard Line as the Mauretania was undergoing repair after a fire. The year 1921 was thus an exceptional year for her; she broke a record by transporting around 60,000 passengers that year.[41] In the following year, the Mauretania rejoined her in Cunard service. Aquitania operated in service with the Mauretania and Berengaria (formerly the German liner Imperator) in a trio known as "The Big Three."[4][42]

 

In 1924, a new restriction on immigration was passed in the United States, causing the number of third-class passengers to decline significantly. From about 26,000 third-class passengers transported by Aquitania in 1921, the figure fell to about 8,200 third-class passengers in 1925. The number of crew was thus reduced to around 850 people from the original 1,200.[42] The third class was no longer the key to the profitability of the liner, and so the company had to adapt. The third-class gradually became a tourist class, which offered decent service at a low price. In 1926, the ship underwent a major overhaul, which reduced the passenger capacity from around 3,300 to around 2,200.[43]

 

Still, the Cunard Line benefited from prohibition in the United States, which started in 1919. American liners were legally part of the territory of the United States, and thus alcoholic beverages could not be served on them. Passengers who wanted to drink therefore travelled on British liners in order to do so.[44] Aquitania enjoyed great success, making much profit for her company. In 1929, she underwent a major refit. A bathroom was added to many first-class cabins, and the tourist class was renovated. While new competitors, such as the German liner SS Bremen, entered service, Aquitania remained particularly popular after fifteen years of service.[45]

Crisis of 1929 and its consequences

 

Following the stock market crash of 1929, many ships were affected by the economic downturn and reduced traffic. Aquitania found herself in a tough position. Only a few could afford expensive passage on her now, so Cunard sent Aquitania on cheap cruises to the Mediterranean. These were successful, especially for Americans who went on "booze cruises," tired of their country's prohibition.[46] Another problem also arose: the two liners of the Norddeutscher Lloyd, SS Bremen and SS Europa, successfully captured the Blue Riband and many customers.[47] In 1934, the number of passengers Aquitania carried declined to around 13,000 from 30,000 in 1929.[48] The ship, however, remained popular and she was the third busiest in the early 1930s behind those two German liners.[46]

 

To keep the ship up to date, she underwent a refit, which added a cinema, between 1932 and 1933. At the same time, in order to modernise its fleet, the company ordered the Queen Mary. The Great Depression, however, prevented the company from being able to fully finance the construction, and the company merged with its rival, the White Star Line, in 1934 in order to do so. The Queen Mary entered service in 1936.[49] Author C. R. Bonsor writing in 1963 states, from 1936 on it became necessary to squeeze the maximum speed out of Aquitania in order to make her a suitable running mate for Queen Mary thus 24 knot passages became regular.[50] Aquitania ran aground in the Solent on 24 January 1934 but was refloated later the same day.[51] The merger of the two companies into Cunard-White Star Line resulted in a large surplus of liners being owned by a single company. Thus, very old ships, such as the Mauretania and the Olympic, were removed from service immediately and sent to the scrapyard. However, the Aquitania was not, despite her age.[52] On 10 April 1935, Aquitania went hard aground on Thorne Knoll in the Solent near Southampton, England, but with the aid of ten tugboats, on the next high tide the ship was freed.[1] When the new liner RMS Queen Elizabeth was due to enter service in 1940, newspapers speculated that Aquitania would be scrapped that year. However, during that period, her performance continued to satisfy her company. The year 1939 saw an increase in the number of wealthy passengers on board. The ship was then already 26 years old.[53]

World War II service

 

Aquitania, with a normal troop capacity of 7,400, was among the select group of large, fast former passenger ships capable of sailing independently without escort transporting large numbers of troops that were assigned worldwide as needed.[54] These ships, often termed "Monsters" until London requested the term be dropped, were Aquitania, Queen Mary, Queen Elizabeth, Mauretania (II), Île de France and Nieuw Amsterdam with "lesser monsters" being other large ex-liners capable of independent sailing with large troop capacity that accounted for much of the troop capacity and deployment, particularly in the early days of the war.[55][56]

 

Plans to replace Aquitania with the newer Queen Elizabeth in 1940 had been forestalled by outbreak of World War II in 1939.[4] On 16 September 1939 Aquitania, awaiting initial refit as a troop ship, was at pier 90 in New York along with Queen Mary while nearby, at pier 88, were the French ships Île de France and Normandie.[1][4] She returned to Southampton and was requisitioned on 18 November.[57]

 

Aquitania's initial troop transport operation was taking Canadian troops to Scotland, Convoy TC1 in company with Empress of Britain, Empress of Australia, Duchess of Bedford, Monarch of Bermuda, HMS Hood, HMS Warspite, HMS Barham, HMS Resolution, HMS Repulse, HMS Furious, December 1939.[1] Meanwhile, a massive transport of Australian and New Zealand troops to Suez and North Africa, with possible diversion to the United Kingdom if events required, was in planning with the numbered convoys to be designated as "US" with the large Atlantic liners assigned a role.[58] The fast convoy designated as US.3 was composed of Aquitania and the liners Queen Mary, Mauretania, Empress of Britain, Empress of Canada, Empress of Japan and Andes.[59] Aquitania, Empress of Britain and Empress of Japan, after embarking New Zealand troops at Wellington in May, sailed escorted by HMAS Canberra, HMAS Australia, and HMNZS Leander to join the Australian component off Sydney on 5 May 1940.[60] Joined off Sydney by Queen Mary and Mauretania the convoy sailed the same day to be joined the next by Empress of Canada from Melbourne for a stop at Fremantle 10–12 May before the voyage intended to be for Colombo.[60] About midway to Colombo, on 15 May, the convoy was rerouted due to the rapid German penetrations into France with the ultimate destination of Gourock, Scotland via Cape Town, South Africa and Freetown, Sierra Leone where the escort strengthened by various ships including the aircraft carriers HMS Hermes and HMS Argus and the battlecruiser HMS Hood.[61] The convoy arrived in the Clyde and anchored off Gourock on 16 June 1940.[62]

 

Now repainted battleship grey, in November 1941 Aquitania was in the British colony of Singapore, from which she sailed to take part indirectly in the loss of the Australian cruiser HMAS Sydney. Sydney had engaged in battle with the German auxiliary cruiser Kormoran. There has been much unsubstantiated speculation that Kormoran was expecting Aquitania, after spies in Singapore had notified Kormoran's crew of the liner's sailing, and planned to ambush her in the Indian Ocean west of Perth but instead encountered Sydney on 19 November. Both ships were lost after a fierce battle. On the morning of 24 November Aquitania en route to Sydney from Singapore spotted and picked up twenty-six survivors of the German ship but maintained radio silence and did not pass word until in visual range of Wilson's Promontory on 27 November.[63] The captain had gone against orders not to stop for survivors of sinkings.[1] There were no survivors from Sydney.

 

December saw the outbreak of war in the Pacific, then Japanese advances throughout Southeast Asia and toward Australia, necessitating the redeployment of defensive forces.[64] On 28 December Aquitania and two smaller transports departed Sydney with 4,150 Australian troops and 10,000 tons of equipment for Port Moresby, New Guinea. (On the same date, USS Houston and other U.S. ships evacuating from the north reached Darwin, with USS Pensacola, and elements of her diverted Philippine convoy some 300 miles (480 km) ahead.) Aquitania was back in Sydney on 8 January 1942.[65] The next effort was reinforcement of Singapore and the Netherlands East Indies with Aquitania transporting Australian troops (whose equipment was in Convoy MS.1) as the single ship MS.2 convoy, under escort of HMAS Canberra.[66] The ship had been the only suitable transport for such a large movement. Originally, transport directly to Singapore was considered, but the danger from aircraft to such a valuable asset and so many troops caused a change of plans. Instead, Aquitania departed Sydney on 10 January, reaching Ratai Bay at the Sunda Strait on 20 January, where 3,456 personnel (including some Navy, Air Force and civilians) were transhipped[66] under a covering naval force to seven smaller vessels (six of them Dutch KPM ships) that would continue to Singapore as convoy MS.2A.[66] Aquitania was returned to Sydney on 31 January.[66]

 

With the United States in the war, Aquitania (then with a troop capacity of 4,500) had been scheduled for transport duties from the United States to Australia in February, but necessary repairs delayed that. Because her deep draft was hazardous in Australian and intermediate ports in the Pacific Islands,[67] she spent March and April 1942 transporting troops from the west coast of the U.S. to Hawaii.[55][68] Then Aquitania was temporarily transferred from Pacific duties to support the movement of troops from the United States to Britain, sailing 30 April from New York in a large convoy that transported some 19,000 troops.[69] On 12 May 1942 Aquitania loaded troops at Gourock destined for the war in the Middle East, departing in convoy WS19P on 1 June with destroyers and heavy weather, she broke off independently on 7 June due to her greater speed with designation WS19Q.[70] The first port of call was 48 hours at Freetown (West Africa) on 11 June, then 3 days at Simonstown, South Africa 20 June 48 hours at Diego Suarez, Madagascar from 30 June 24 hours at Steamer Point, Aden on 3 July, and then disembarkation at Port Tewfik, Egypt from 8 July 1942.[71] The return journey was via Diego Suarez, Capetown, Freetown and then to Boston. By September Aquitania was engaged in a triangular troop deployment of United States-United Kingdom-Indian Ocean voyages.[72]

 

Pamphlet

 

As part of the major redeployment of Australian troops from North Africa to the defence of Australia and start of offensive operations in the Southwest Pacific Aquitania, Queen Mary, Île de France, Nieuw Amsterdam, and the armed merchant cruiser HMS Queen of Bermuda transported the Australian 9th Division to Sydney in Operation Pamphlet during January and February 1943.[73]

 

By the buildup for the invasion of Europe in 1944 troop deployments to Britain depended heavily on Aquitania and the other "Monsters" and no allowance could be made for interruption of their service for other transport requirements.[74]

 

Wartime embarkation at New York is described in some detail in the description of the departure of the Special Navy Advance Group 56 (SNAG 56) that was to become Navy Base Hospital Number 12 at the Royal Victoria Hospital, Netley, England, to receive casualties from Normandy. The unit was sent by "devious routes" by train to Jersey City where under cover of darkness they boarded a ferry crossing to the covered pier 86 in New York where a band played and the Red Cross served their last coffee and doughnuts as they boarded "N.Y. 40", the New York Port of Embarkation code designation for Aquitania, which got underway the morning of 29 January 1944 with some 1,000 Navy and 7,000 Army personnel for arrival at Gourock, Scotland 5 February.[75]

 

In eight years of military work, Aquitania sailed more than 500,000 miles, and carried nearly 400,000 soldiers,[1][76] to and from places as far afield as New Zealand, Australia, the South Pacific, Greece and the Indian Ocean.[77]

Postwar service and retirement

 

After completing troopship service, the vessel was handed back to Cunard-White Star in 1948. She underwent a refit for passenger service. She was then used to transport war brides and their children to Canada under charter from the Canadian government. This final service created a special fondness for Aquitania in Halifax, Nova Scotia, the port of disembarkation for these immigration voyages.[78][4]

 

On completion of that task in December 1949, Aquitania was taken out of service when the ship's Board of Trade certificate was not renewed as the condition of the ship had deteriorated, and it would have been cost-prohibitive to be brought up to new safety standards, namely fire code regulations. The decks leaked in foul weather, the bulkheads and funnels were corroded to a point that one could stick their finger through them. A piano had fallen through the roof of one of the dining rooms from the deck above during a corporate luncheon held on the ship. This signalled the end of Aquitania's operational life.[4][79]

 

The vessel was retired and sold to British Iron and Steel Corporation for scrap for £125,000 in 1950 at Faslane in Scotland.[1] Dismantling took almost a year to complete.[79] This ended a career which included steaming 3 million miles over 450 round voyages. Aquitania carried 1.2 million passengers through an active sea career that spanned nearly 36 years, making her the longest-serving Express Liner of the 20th century. Aquitania was the only major liner, and the largest commercial vessel, to serve in both World Wars. She was also the last four-funnelled passenger ship to be scrapped.[76] The ship's wheel and a detailed scale model of Aquitania may be seen in the Cunard exhibit at the Maritime Museum of the Atlantic in Halifax.

 

Maritime author N. R. P. Bonsor wrote of Aquitania in 1963: "Cunard had recovered possession of their veteran in 1948 but she was not worth reconditioning. In 35 years of service Aquitania had sailed more than 3 million miles and apart from one or two early Allan Line steamers no other ship served for as long in a single ownership."[80][81][82]

Member contribution. Large women can find happiness in partners of different sizes. I'm sure their child is going to be gorgeous.

Hi. Not having a Pro account is the worst feeling. I wasn't expecting to get one, but I just thought someone would purchase me one 'cause I've done it for other's in the past. I'm not saying that I bought them for Olivia and Juliana just so other people would buy me one, but ugh, I just want one :(

 

-This is old, I don't love it, but I don't hate it(: School and cross country is great!(: I wish I could see all six-hundred of my pictures here again...My first meet is this Saturday!! :D I cannot wait to wear my flats againnnn(: I hope who ever reads this is doing great!!<3

 

-You know what I'm really sick and tired of though? When girls take pictures that I took the same exact things of, the same idea, the same, UGH everything! And they take a picture, edit it just like one of mine, and then post it without saying anything that it was inspired. I mean, OHMYGOSH. I just can't even take it sometimes. Its the exact same picture!!!!!!

  

My youth group leader-I've mentioned him here before- Mike is leaving...He won't be my leader any more. I can't explain what I feel other than happy and sad at the same time, but isn't that pretty obvious?

When Jaimie and I went to Youth Week rather than going to Young Life summer camp, it was sad we wouldn't be with our friends, but we grew in God more. Mike hasn't had his own leader so to speak, no one has been filling him up with Jesus, you could say. He hasn't had a church for a long time. So, even though it is terribly sad that he won't be my leader anymore, I'm happy that he'll be going on mission trips to do bigger and better things and be more of a solider for our Lord.

I mean, yes its awesome that he's Asian, but he's so much more than that. I find it so much easier to follow his lesson's at bible study rather than anyone else's, honestly. He can explain things like Jaimie can, in a way that you would have never thought of but when you hear it, you're blown away and become excited because you would have never thought of to look at a verse like that before, or something. When Mike found out that I had a "thing" with this boy named James, he told Lisa, my other leader to make sure I didn't date him because Mike new he wasn't a Christian. He thought of me instantly when Shannon was coming to Long Island and needed a photographer's assistant and helped me out so much. He's just...He rock's so much. Two of my Young Life leaders have now left while I've been in Young Life, my two favorites.

Maybe you think its weird that I'm talking about my youth group leader, especially since he's a guy, but I don't really care because countless times, he's amazed me, surprised me, said incredible things. He's going to save more unsaved people, and I cannot wait to hear about it; he's changed me life and I'm just so grateful and blessed to having known him.

 

Let God and God only define you.

 

Join my Facebook!

Do not steal my pictures or blog my pictures without my permission.

 

You might expect a room full of steam pumps to be an asbestos-swaddled nightmare, but there’s just a few pipes wrapped up with the stuff.

 

The sign is probably just something the Buffalo Water Department has to post by law or by regulation.

 

We walked through what used to be the boiler house on the way in here. Now that was a place to see asbestos! But the asbestos as been cleaned out of there, too.

 

(I thought I would do all of my steam pump photos in black and white, but this one is color to show how much or how little rust there is on this century-old machinery.)

  

Life is still busy and nervous.Wanna have a cup of coffee at a quiet coffee shop.

  

Expect our next trip.

 

I miss those days we walked together in Tokyo, shared everything, books, music, every great view, and happy moment with each other!

  

I bought an amazing biography of a female artist, will share with you later.

 

♥ Thank 蜜茶不加蜜 for the lovely testimonial, you made my day!

Ante las pobres expectativas de poder realizar fotos de algún mercante digno (como duele ver por ahí ese tren de cenizas), fijé mi atención, durante los escasos días de vacaciones, en inmortalizar algunos de los servicios extra de este verano.

 

Así, pues, el jueves a mediodía hice el Talgo Mare Nostrum con su refuerzo de tres coches y hoy viernes, última oportunidad de cerrar el círculo, he ido a por el Talgo Barcelona - Alcázar de San Juan (10697) al puente de Alfafar - Massanassa. Por la tarde iría a por el que cerraba la lista, el Intercity 33104 Madrid - Gandía (lo que viene a ser un 449 mas feo que Picio)

 

¿Y por qué hacer esta foto aquí de un tren que ya tenía fotografiado? Pues por una razón muy sencilla: Desde este punto, en la que hay luz buena por la mañana, un Talgo es difícil de cazar porque el resto del año no hay.

 

La suerte (relativa) ha estado de mi lado, puesto que me ha venido con la 252-070 que parece últimamente abonada al corredor Mediterráneo ya que en apenas una semana la he visto hasta tres veces.

 

Lo dicho. En la imagen el Talgo Barcelona - Alcázar de San Juan pasando por el famoso campo de coles alfafareño.

Captain now expects that he gets to go everywhere, he packs himself and is quite pleased that he is so in the know and in the go with me.

Wasn't expecting to see this in Hadlow near Tunbridge today!, and this was the best I could do of this vehicle as the Arriva Route 7 Bus I was ridding back to Maidstone was moving, and this vehicle is now used by Hugh Lowes Farms to transport farm workers around Mereworth near Maidstone in Kent, and is is one 13! vehicles in use at Mereworth, and they are not the only ex Stagecoach Vehicles in Farms use in the Maidstone Area, and acording to Google Maps Satalite Imagery several others can be found around Five Wents, Langley, Sutton Valence and Coxheath.

 

And be sure to check by my other acount: www.flickr.com/photos_user.gne?path=&nsid=77145939%40..., to see what else I saw Very Recently!!

For those who don't know, i'm expecting a baby in a few weeks! (which is why i've been absent from flickr for so long) i'm busy getting prepared at the moment ♥

 

♥ new facebook page ♥

♥ Pinterest ♥

♥ Instagram♥

♥ Society6♥

♥ Blog♥

With all that fresh grass to eat, she doesn't seem concerned at all.

Europe Europa

Belgique België Belgium Belgien Belgica

Bruxelles Brussel Brussels Brüssel Bruxelas

Grand-Place Grote Markt

 

October 16th, 2012

 

It is an honor for Belgium to receive the most fantastic World Supporters: The Scots!

Hope to see you soon!

M1 Brockhall 13/06/2018

Rain stopped play today, so here is a shot from the end of April taken @ home on a similar sort of day :-)

 

BTW - my macro lens does not have IS, which explains why I sometimes use q high ISO numbers when shooting handheld :-) The lower, more expected ones = tripod used.

 

Sincere thanks to all who view, comment upon or make a favourite of any of my shots, for they are a help and pleasure in equal measure. Phil

At last, summer comes to Edinburgh! On one of the sunniest and most pleasant days of the year so far an unbroken blue sky provided perfect conditions to capture photographs of Lothian's twelve new Airlink 100 buses in blue.

 

Taken from the Royal Bank of Scotland's Gogar Bridge Volvo B5TL / Wright Eclipse Gemini 3 number 430 (SA15 VTJ) raced along the A8 at a speed that should open up the engine nicely. The new vehicles have been described by a few drivers as "a bit sluggish", but of course the smaller engine size will make a difference so this was perhaps to be expected.

 

The view to the rear is of Corstorphine Hill and 430 is having a race with a cute little thingy from another bus company somewhere else - looks quite smart actually!

  

Young Timmy was in absolute heaven!

 

Although he didn't expect to be.

 

Earlier in the day, when his parents said they'd be taking him to Times Square to see the Fleet Week activities, he wasn't exactly thrilled. Wasn't that the Navy? Didn't they just sail around in boats and stuff? His cousin Fred, whom he idolized, had joined the Army -- now THAT was cool! The video game he played at home -- the one where he got to blow up stuff and kill people -- that was the Army. That's what he wanted to be a part of.

 

Bobby from down the block also told him that the Navy was filled with "a bunch of homos." Timmy didn't know what that meant, but he knew whatever it was, it must be bad...right? He didn't want to be around homos. He wasn't looking forward to this Fleet Week thing at all.

 

But when he and his parent got to Times Square, it was filled with not just regular sailors, but Navy guys and Marines in cool camouflage outfits. They were doing self-defense demonstrations, and he watched as guys wrestled each other on the mat. Now that was awesome! And even cooler was the amount of weapons being shown. Rifles, bazookas...you name it!

 

When one of the soldier guys asked Timmy if he wanted to hold his big gun, he was thrilled! He didn't know if his mom would let him, so he looked up at her for her approval. But she just smiled, and nodded her head "ok"...

 

This was the best day ever!!!

    

Times Square, NYC

Taken with a 1st gen. iPhone

Heath Fritillary - Really didn't expect them to be about. So glad I made the effort with that late evening sunshine!

A1(M) Bramham 02/06/2016

Expecting to fly

While I laughed, I wondered whether

I could wave goodbye

Knowin' that you'd gone

 

Bella strikes a strong pose. She is amazing in all ways, both physically and personally.

 

Lyrics: Expecting to Fly by Buffalo Springfield

www.instagram.com/bellapengfit/

Two days to go...

A47 Hockering

Flagstaff, Arizona

Polaroid SX-70 Sonar

Impossible Project PX 680 Beta

ND Filter

 

Fluidr

Took the Banff Gondola to the top of Sulphur Mountain. Some spectacular views and falling snow ( not what we were expecting in August!). The native residents of this mountain peak are these cute little ground squirrels. And after three landscapes in a row it must be time for some wildlife...

  

I DIDN'T EXPECT THIS !

The only water in front of my hide was from the heavy rain we've had recently.

I was photographing Jays when this Kingfisher suddenly arrived.

Even more surprising was when it dived into the water and returned to the perch with what looked like a dragonfly larvae.

After bashing it on the perch, it swallowed it and flew off.

Ukrainian troops work on a wrap up of the invasion of Romania but due to un foreseen resistance is expected to last at most one more day of fighting.

 

The 25th Air Borne Battalion over the last couple days has moved into Cluj-Napoca. After defeating the Romanian force at Dej the 25th mobilized and moved for Cluj-Napoca. On the way to Cluj-Napoca no resistance was met until they reached the outskirts of the city. The was a large defensive force here which has taken the last several days for the 25th to overcome. Taking 28 casualties in the taking of the city the 25th then stayed there for the rest of the invasion to to lack of troop numbers from the 43 losses they had taken as well as 13 wounded.

 

The 26th Air Borne Battalion also pushed to the city of Cluj-Napoca. The Romanian forces fighting the 26th at Huedin was of a larger scale then expected. The fight raged on for two and a half days till the Romanians pulled out do to a large KIA count. The 26th was not hit any lighter with at this point now bringing their KIA count to 21. After the Romanian forces pulled out the 26th pushed to Cluj-Napoca meeting the same resistance as the 25th. Working together in the siege they fully occupied the town this morning. The 26th will also be staying in Cluj-Napoca for the rest of the invasion do to their KIA count of 43 with 7 wounded.

 

The 27th Air Borne Battalion pushed in to the Romanian capital of Bucharest. On the 2nd day of the invasion the Romanian forces that were skirmishing with the 27th pulled out. On the way to Bucharest the 27th met these forces agin which turned out to be a unit of Romanian SF. The 27th used this to their advantage eliminating the Romanian check point on the way to the capital. Once reaching the capital the 27th was discovered and was met with heavy resistance by the defensive forces. The 27th fought in an all out siege of the capital for the last 6 days and this morning reported to have taken the capital. The 27th has a final KIA count including those who died in the air craft crash at 38 and 17 wounded.

 

The 28th Air Borne Battalion also pushed to the Romanian capital of Bucharest. At Urziceni on the 2nd day a medium sized Romanian force made contact with the 28th. Fighting till the 4th day the 28th over came the enemy and started the push for the capital. Slowly working their way through the enemy check point the 28th joined the siege on the 5th day giving the forces needed to make a drastic push in the city. The 28th now has a reported KIA count of 33 men and 8 wounded.

 

The 1st Вовки task force finished the taking of Braila the morning of the second day opening up the bottom of Romania to Ukrainian forces. The 6th Army Corps pushed through here into Romania and has been working its way across the country ever since. Now holding the line at Brasov they wait to push into the last Romanian stronghold at the city of Sibiu. The 1st Вовки broke off from the 6th and went to help finish taking the capital with the 27th and 28th.

 

THe 4th and 5th Ukrainian SF opened the northern Romania-Ukraine bored and on the second day the 8th Army Corps pushed pushed through at this point (withdrawn from Belarus). The joint force has been pushing through the country to their current position at Targu Mures. They wait to push into Sibiu with the 8th.

 

Ukrainian Air support was in a medium use during this invasion having high effectiveness on the Romanian forces.

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Sorry I have been short on my Romanian invasion post. I would have officially taken the country today but I need one more build so I'm pushing it to tomorrow.

Different forms of fluctuations of the terrestrial gravity field are observed by gravity experiments. For example, atmospheric pressure fluctuations generate a gravity-noise foreground in measurements with super-conducting gravimeters. Gravity changes caused by high-magnitude earthquakes have been detected with the satellite gravity experiment GRACE, and we expect high-frequency terrestrial gravity fluctuations produced by ambient seismic fields to limit the sensitivity of ground-based gravitational-wave (GW) detectors. Accordingly, terrestrial gravity fluctuations are considered noise and signal depending on the experiment. Here, we will focus on ground-based gravimetry. This field is rapidly progressing through the development of GW detectors. The technology is pushed to its current limits in the advanced generation of the LIGO and Virgo detectors, targeting gravity strain sensitivities better than 10−23 Hz−1/2 above a few tens of a Hz. Alternative designs for GW detectors evolving from traditional gravity gradiometers such as torsion bars, atom interferometers, and superconducting gradiometers are currently being developed to extend the detection band to frequencies below 1 Hz. The goal of this article is to provide the analytical framework to describe terrestrial gravity perturbations in these experiments. Models of terrestrial gravity perturbations related to seismic fields, atmospheric disturbances, and vibrating, rotating or moving objects, are derived and analyzed. The models are then used to evaluate passive and active gravity noise mitigation strategies in GW detectors, or alternatively, to describe their potential use in geophysics. The article reviews the current state of the field, and also presents new analyses especially with respect to the impact of seismic scattering on gravity perturbations, active gravity noise cancellation, and time-domain models of gravity perturbations from atmospheric and seismic point sources. Our understanding of terrestrial gravity fluctuations will have great impact on the future development of GW detectors and high-precision gravimetry in general, and many open questions need to be answered still as emphasized in this article.

 

Keywords: Terrestrial gravity, Newtonian noise, Wiener filter, Mitigation

Go to:

Introduction

In the coming years, we will see a transition in the field of high-precision gravimetry from observations of slow lasting changes of the gravity field to the experimental study of fast gravity fluctuations. The latter will be realized by the advanced generation of the US-based LIGO [1] and Europe-based Virgo [7] gravitational-wave (GW) detectors. Their goal is to directly observe for the first time GWs that are produced by astrophysical sources such as inspiraling and merging neutron-star or black-hole binaries. Feasibility of the laser-interferometric detector concept has been demonstrated successfully with the first generation of detectors, which, in addition to the initial LIGO and Virgo detectors, also includes the GEO600 [119] and TAMA300 [161] detectors, and several prototypes around the world. The impact of these projects onto the field is two-fold. First of all, the direct detection of GWs will be a milestone in science opening a new window to our universe, and marking the beginning of a new era in observational astronomy. Second, several groups around the world have already started to adapt the technology to novel interferometer concepts [60, 155], with potential applications not only in GW science, but also geophysics. The basic measurement scheme is always the same: the relative displacement of test masses is monitored by using ultra-stable lasers. Progress in this field is strongly dependent on how well the motion of the test masses can be shielded from the environment. Test masses are placed in vacuum and are either freely falling (e.g., atom clouds [137]), or suspended and seismically isolated (e.g., high-quality glass or crystal mirrors as used in all of the detectors listed above). The best seismic isolations realized so far are effective above a few Hz, which limits the frequency range of detectable gravity fluctuations. Nonetheless, low-frequency concepts are continuously improving, and it is conceivable that future detectors will be sufficiently sensitive to detect GWs well below a Hz [88].

 

Terrestrial gravity perturbations were identified as a potential noise source already in the first concept laid out for a laser-interferometric GW detector [171]. Today, this form of noise is known as “terrestrial gravitational noise”, “Newtonian noise”, or “gravity-gradient noise”. It has never been observed in GW detectors, but it is predicted to limit the sensitivity of the advanced GW detectors at low frequencies. The most important source of gravity noise comes from fluctuating seismic fields [151]. Gravity perturbations from atmospheric disturbances such as pressure and temperature fluctuations can become significant at lower frequencies [51]. Anthropogenic sources of gravity perturbations are easier to avoid, but could also be relevant at lower frequencies [163]. Today, we only have one example of a direct observation of gravity fluctuations, i.e., from pressure fluctuations of the atmosphere in high-precision gravimeters [128]. Therefore, almost our entire understanding of gravity fluctuations is based on models. Nonetheless, potential sensitivity limits of future large-scale GW detectors need to be identified and characterized well in advance, and so there is a need to continuously improve our understanding of terrestrial gravity noise. Based on our current understanding, the preferred option is to construct future GW detectors underground to avoid the most dominant Newtonian-noise contributions. This choice was made for the next-generation Japanese GW detector KAGRA, which is currently being constructed underground at the Kamioka site [17], and also as part of a design study for the Einstein Telescope in Europe [140, 139]. While the benefit from underground construction with respect to gravity noise is expected to be substantial in GW detectors sensitive above a few Hz [27], it can be argued that it is less effective at lower frequencies [88].

 

Alternative mitigation strategies includes coherent noise cancellation [42]. The idea is to monitor the sources of gravity perturbations using auxiliary sensors such as microphones and seismometers, and to use their data to generate a coherent prediction of gravity noise. This technique is successfully applied in gravimeters to reduce the foreground of atmospheric gravity noise using collocated pressure sensors [128]. It is also noteworthy that the models of the atmospheric gravity noise are consistent with observations. This should give us some confidence at least that coherent Newtonian-noise cancellation can also be achieved in GW detectors. It is evident though that a model-based prediction of the performance of coherent noise cancellation schemes is prone to systematic errors as long as the properties of the sources are not fully understood. Ongoing experiments at the Sanford Underground Research Facility with the goal to characterize seismic fields in three dimensions are expected to deliver first data from an underground seismometer array in 2015 (see [89] for results from an initial stage of the experiment). While most people would argue that constructing GW detectors underground is always advantageous, it is still necessary to estimate how much is gained and whether the science case strongly profits from it. This is a complicated problem that needs to be answered as part of a site selection process.

 

More recently, high-precision gravity strainmeters have been considered as monitors of geophysical signals [83]. Analytical models have been calculated, which allow us to predict gravity transients from seismic sources such as earthquakes. It was suggested to implement gravity strainmeters in existing earthquake-early warning systems to increase warning times. It is also conceivable that an alternative method to estimate source parameters using gravity signals will improve our understanding of seismic sources. Potential applications must still be investigated in greater detail, but the study already demonstrates that the idea to use GW technology to realize new geophysical sensors seems feasible. As explained in [49], gravitational forces start to dominate the dynamics of seismic phenomena below about 1 mHz (which coincides approximately with a similar transition in atmospheric dynamics where gravity waves start to dominate over other forms of oscillations [164]). Seismic isolation would be ineffective below 1 mHz since the gravitational acceleration of a test mass produced by seismic displacement becomes comparable to the seismic acceleration itself. Therefore, we claim that 10 mHz is about the lowest frequency at which ground-based gravity strainmeters will ever be able to detect GWs, and consequently, modelling terrestrial gravity perturbations in these detectors can focus on frequencies above 10 mHz.

 

This article is divided into six main sections. Section 2 serves as an introduction to gravity measurements focussing on the response mechanisms and basic properties of gravity sensors. Section 3 describes models of gravity perturbations from ambient seismic fields. The results can be used to estimate noise spectra at the surface and underground. A subsection is devoted to the problem of noise estimation in low-frequency GW detectors, which differs from high-frequency estimates mostly in that gravity perturbations are strongly correlated between different test masses. In the low-frequency regime, the gravity noise is best described as gravity-gradient noise. Section 4 is devoted to time domain models of transient gravity perturbations from seismic point sources. The formalism is applied to point forces and shear dislocations. The latter allows us to estimate gravity perturbations from earthquakes. Atmospheric models of gravity perturbations are presented in Section 5. This includes gravity perturbations from atmospheric temperature fields, infrasound fields, shock waves, and acoustic noise from turbulence. The solution for shock waves is calculated in time domain using the methods of Section 4. A theoretical framework to calculate gravity perturbations from objects is given in Section 6. Since many different types of objects can be potential sources of gravity perturbations, the discussion focusses on the development of a general method instead of summarizing all of the calculations that have been done in the past. Finally, Section 7 discusses possible passive and active noise mitigation strategies. Due to the complexity of the problem, most of the section is devoted to active noise cancellation providing the required analysis tools and showing limitations of this technique. Site selection is the main topic under passive mitigation, and is discussed in the context of reducing environmental noise and criteria relevant to active noise cancellation. Each of these sections ends with a summary and a discussion of open problems. While this article is meant to be a review of the current state of the field, it also presents new analyses especially with respect to the impact of seismic scattering on gravity perturbations (Sections 3.3.2 and 3.3.3), active gravity noise cancellation (Section 7.1.3), and timedomain models of gravity perturbations from atmospheric and seismic point sources (Sections 4.1, 4.5, and 5.3).

 

Even though evident to experts, it is worth emphasizing that all calculations carried out in this article have a common starting point, namely Newton’s universal law of gravitation. It states that the attractive gravitational force equation M1 between two point masses m1, m2 is given by

 

equation M21

where G = 6.672 × 10−11 N m2/kg2 is the gravitational constant. Eq. (1) gives rise to many complex phenomena on Earth such as inner-core oscillations [156], atmospheric gravity waves [157], ocean waves [94, 177], and co-seismic gravity changes [122]. Due to its importance, we will honor the eponym by referring to gravity noise as Newtonian noise in the following. It is thereby clarified that the gravity noise models considered in this article are non-relativistic, and propagation effects of gravity changes are neglected. While there could be interesting scenarios where this approximation is not fully justified (e.g., whenever a gravity perturbation can be sensed by several sensors and differences in arrival times can be resolved), it certainly holds in any of the problems discussed in this article. We now invite the reader to enjoy the rest of the article, and hope that it proves to be useful.

 

Go to:

Gravity Measurements

In this section, we describe the relevant mechanisms by which a gravity sensor can couple to gravity perturbations, and give an overview of the most widely used measurement schemes: the (relative) gravimeter [53, 181], the gravity gradiometer [125], and the gravity strainmeter. The last category includes the large-scale GW detectors Virgo [6], LIGO [91], GEO600 [119], KAGRA [17], and a new generation of torsion-bar antennas currently under development [13]. Also atom interferometers can potentially be used as gravity strainmeters in the future [62]. Strictly speaking, none of the sensors only responds to a single field quantity (such as changes in gravity acceleration or gravity strain), but there is always a dominant response mechanism in each case, which justifies to give the sensor a specific name. A clear distinction between gravity gradiometers and gravity strainmeters has never been made to our knowledge. Therefore the sections on these two measurement principles will introduce a definition, and it is by no means the only possible one. Later on in this article, we almost exclusively discuss gravity models relevant to gravity strainmeters since the focus lies on gravity fluctuations above 10 mHz. Today, the sensitivity near 10 mHz of gravimeters towards gravity fluctuations is still competitive to or exceeds the sensitivity of gravity strainmeters, but this is likely going to change in the future so that we can expect strainmeters to become the technology of choice for gravity observations above 10 mHz [88]. The following sections provide further details on this statement. Space-borne gravity experiments such as GRACE [167] will not be included in this overview. The measurement principle of GRACE is similar to that of gravity strainmeters, but only very slow changes of Earth gravity field can be observed, and for this reason it is beyond the scope of this article.

 

The different response mechanisms to terrestrial gravity perturbations are summarized in Section 2.1. While we will identify the tidal forces acting on the test masses as dominant coupling mechanism, other couplings may well be relevant depending on the experiment. The Shapiro time delay will be discussed as the only relativistic effect. Higher-order relativistic effects are neglected. All other coupling mechanisms can be calculated using Newtonian theory including tidal forces, coupling in static non-uniform gravity fields, and coupling through ground displacement induced by gravity fluctuations. In Sections 2.2 to 2.4, the different measurement schemes are explained including a brief summary of the sensitivity limitations (choosing one of a few possible experimental realizations in each case). As mentioned before, we will mostly develop gravity models relevant to gravity strainmeters in the remainder of the article. Therefore, the detailed discussion of alternative gravimetry concepts mostly serves to highlight important differences between these concepts, and to develop a deeper understanding of the instruments and their role in gravity measurements.

 

Gravity response mechanisms

 

Gravity acceleration and tidal forces We will start with the simplest mechanism of all, the acceleration of a test mass in the gravity field. Instruments that measure the acceleration are called gravimeters. A test mass inside a gravimeter can be freely falling such as atom clouds [181] or, as suggested as possible future development, even macroscopic objects [72]. Typically though, test masses are supported mechanically or magnetically constraining motion in some of its degrees of freedom. A test mass suspended from strings responds to changes in the horizontal gravity acceleration. A test mass attached at the end of a cantilever with horizontal equilibrium position responds to changes in vertical gravity acceleration. The support fulfills two purposes. First, it counteracts the static gravitational force in a way that the test mass can respond to changes in the gravity field along a chosen degree of freedom. Second, it isolates the test mass from vibrations. Response to signals and isolation performance depend on frequency. If the support is modelled as a linear, harmonic oscillator, then the test mass response to gravity changes extends over all frequencies, but the response is strongly suppressed below the oscillators resonance frequency. The response function between the gravity perturbation δg(ω) and induced test mass acceleration δa(ω) assumes the form

equation M32

where we have introduced a viscous damping parameter γ, and ω0 is the resonance frequency. Well below resonance, the response is proportional to ω2, while it is constant well above resonance. Above resonance, the supported test mass responds like a freely falling mass, at least with respect to “soft” directions of the support. The test-mass response to vibrations δα(ω) of the support is given by

 

equation M43

This applies for example to horizontal vibrations of the suspension points of strings that hold a test mass, or to vertical vibrations of the clamps of a horizontal cantilever with attached test mass. Well above resonance, vibrations are suppressed by ω−2, while no vibration isolation is provided below resonance. The situation is somewhat more complicated in realistic models of the support especially due to internal modes of the mechanical system (see for example [76]), or due to coupling of degrees of freedom [121]. Large mechanical support structures can feature internal resonances at relatively low frequencies, which can interfere to some extent with the desired performance of the mechanical support [173]. While Eqs. (2) and (3) summarize the properties of isolation and response relevant for this paper, details of the readout method can fundamentally impact an instrument’s response to gravity fluctuations and its susceptibility to seismic noise, as explained in Sections 2.2 to 2.4.

 

Next, we discuss the response to tidal forces. In Newtonian theory, tidal forces cause a relative acceleration δg12(ω) between two freely falling test masses according to

 

equation M54

where equation M6 is the Fourier amplitude of the gravity potential. The last equation holds if the distance r12 between the test masses is sufficiently small, which also depends on the frequency. The term equation M7 is called gravity-gradient tensor. In Newtonian approximation, the second time integral of this tensor corresponds to gravity strain equation M8, which is discussed in more detail in Section 2.4. Its trace needs to vanish in empty space since the gravity potential fulfills the Poisson equation. Tidal forces produce the dominant signals in gravity gradiometers and gravity strainmeters, which measure the differential acceleration or associated relative displacement between two test masses (see Sections 2.3 and 2.4). If the test masses used for a tidal measurement are supported, then typically the supports are designed to be as similar as possible, so that the response in Eq. (2) holds for both test masses approximately with the same parameter values for the resonance frequencies (and to a lesser extent also for the damping). For the purpose of response calibration, it is less important to know the parameter values exactly if the signal is meant to be observed well above the resonance frequency where the response is approximately equal to 1 independent of the resonance frequency and damping (here, “well above” resonance also depends on the damping parameter, and in realistic models, the signal frequency also needs to be “well below” internal resonances of the mechanical support).

 

Shapiro time delay Another possible gravity response is through the Shapiro time delay [19]. This effect is not universally present in all gravity sensors, and depends on the readout mechanism. Today, the best sensitivities are achieved by reflecting laser beams from test masses in interferometric configurations. If the test mass is displaced by gravity fluctuations, then it imprints a phase shift onto the reflected laser, which can be observed in laser interferometers, or using phasemeters. We will give further details on this in Section 2.4. In Newtonian gravity, the acceleration of test masses is the only predicted response to gravity fluctuations. However, from general relativity we know that gravity also affects the propagation of light. The leading-order term is the Shapiro time delay, which produces a phase shift of the laser beam with respect to a laser propagating in flat space. It can be calculated from the weak-field spacetime metric (see chapter 18 in [124]):

equation M95

Here, c is the speed of light, ds is the so-called line element of a path in spacetime, and equation M10. Additionally, for this metric to hold, motion of particles in the source of the gravity potential responsible for changes of the gravity potential need to be much slower than the speed of light, and also stresses inside the source must be much smaller than its mass energy density. All conditions are fulfilled in the case of Earth gravity field. Light follows null geodesics with ds2 = 0. For the spacetime metric in Eq. (5), we can immediately write

 

equation M116

As we will find out, this equation can directly be used to calculate the time delay as an integral along a straight line in terms of the coordinates equation M12, but this is not immediately clear since light bends in a gravity field. So one may wonder if integration along the proper light path instead of a straight line yields additional significant corrections. The so-called geodesic equation must be used to calculate the path. It is a set of four differential equations, one for each coordinate t, equation M13 in terms of a parameter λ. The weak-field geodesic equation is obtained from the metric in Eq. (5):

 

equation M147

where we have made use of Eq. (6) and the slow-motion condition equation M15. The coordinates equation M16 are to be understood as functions of λ. Since the deviation of a straight path is due to a weak gravity potential, we can solve these equations by perturbation theory introducing expansions equation M17 and t = t(0) +t(1) + …. The superscript indicates the order in ψ/c2. The unperturbed path has the simple parametrization

 

equation M188

We have chosen integration constants such that unperturbed time t(0) and parameter λ can be used interchangeably (apart from a shift by t0). Inserting these expressions into the right-hand side of Eq. (7), we obtain

 

equation M199

As we can see, up to linear order in equation M20, the deviation equation M21 is in orthogonal direction to the unperturbed path equation M22, which means that the deviation can be neglected in the calculation of the time delay. After some transformations, it is possible to derive Eq. (6) from Eq. (9), and this time we find explicitly that the right-hand-side of the equation only depends on the unperturbed coordinates1. In other words, we can integrate the time delay along a straight line as defined in Eq. (8), and so the total phase integrated over a travel distance L is given by

 

equation M2310

In static gravity fields, the phase shift doubles if the light is sent back since not only the direction of integration changes, but also the sign of the expression substituted for dt/dλ.

 

Gravity induced ground motion As we will learn in Section 3, seismic fields produce gravity perturbations either through density fluctuations of the ground, or by displacing interfaces between two materials of different density. It is also well-known in seismology that seismic fields can be affected significantly by self-gravity. Self-gravity means that the gravity perturbation produced by a seismic field acts back on the seismic field. The effect is most significant at low frequency where gravity induced acceleration competes against acceleration from elastic forces. In seismology, low-frequency seismic fields are best described in terms of Earth’s normal modes [55]. Normal modes exist as toroidal modes and spheroidal modes. Spheroidal modes are influenced by self-gravity, toroidal modes are not. For example, predictions of frequencies and shapes of spheroidal modes based on Earth models such as PREM (Preliminary Reference Earth Model) [68] are inaccurate if self-gravity effects are excluded. What this practically means is that in addition to displacement amplitudes, gravity becomes a dynamical variable in the elastodynamic equations that determine the normal-mode properties. Therefore, seismic displacement and gravity perturbation cannot be separated in normal-mode formalism (although self-gravity can be neglected in calculations of spheroidal modes at sufficiently high frequency).

In certain situations, it is necessary or at least more intuitive to separate gravity from seismic fields. An exotic example is Earth’s response to GWs [67, 49, 47, 30, 48]. Another example is the seismic response to gravity perturbations produced by strong seismic events at large distance to the source as described in Section 4. It is more challenging to analyze this scenario using normal-mode formalism. The sum over all normal modes excited by the seismic event (each of which describing a global displacement field) must lead to destructive interference of seismic displacement at large distances (where seismic waves have not yet arrived), but not of the gravity amplitudes since gravity is immediately perturbed everywhere. It can be easier to first calculate the gravity perturbation from the seismic perturbation, and then to calculate the response of the seismic field to the gravity perturbation at larger distance. This method will be adopted in this section. Gravity fields will be represented as arbitrary force or tidal fields (detailed models are presented in later sections), and we simply calculate the response of the seismic field. Normal-mode formalism can be avoided only at sufficiently high frequencies where the curvature of Earth does not significantly influence the response (i.e., well above 10 mHz). In this section, we will model the ground as homogeneous half space, but also more complex geologies can in principle be assumed.

 

Gravity can be introduced in two ways into the elastodynamic equations, as a conservative force −∇ψ [146, 169], or as tidal strain The latter method was described first by Dyson to calculate Earth’s response to GWs [67]. The approach also works for Newtonian gravity, with the difference that the tidal field produced by a GW is necessarily a quadrupole field with only two degrees of freedom (polarizations), while tidal fields produced by terrestrial sources are less constrained. Certainly, GWs can only be fully described in the framework of general relativity, which means that their representation as a Newtonian tidal field cannot be used to explain all possible observations [124]. Nonetheless, important here is that Dyson’s method can be extended to Newtonian tidal fields. Without gravity, the elastodynamic equations for small seismic displacement can be written as

 

equation M2411

where equation M25 is the seismic displacement field, and equation M26 is the stress tensor [9]. In the absence of other forces, the stress is determined by the seismic field. In the case of a homogeneous and isotropic medium, the stress tensor for small seismic displacement can be written as

 

equation M2712

The quantity equation M28 is known as seismic strain tensor, and λ, μ are the Lamé constants (see Section 3.1). Its trace is equal to the divergence of the displacement field. Dyson introduced the tidal field from first principles using Lagrangian mechanics, but we can follow a simpler approach. Eq. (12) means that a stress field builds up in response to a seismic strain field, and the divergence of the stress field acts as a force producing seismic displacement. The same happens in response to a tidal field, which we represent as gravity strain equation M29. A strain field changes the distance between two freely falling test masses separated by equation M30 by equation M312. For sufficiently small distances L, the strain field can be substituted by the second time integral of the gravity-gradient tensor equation M32. If the masses are not freely falling, then the strain field acts as an additional force. The corresponding contribution to the material’s stress tensor can be written

 

equation M3313

Since we assume that the gravity field is produced by a distant source, the local contribution to gravity perturbations is neglected, which means that the gravity potential obeys the Laplace equation, equation M34. Calculating the divergence of the stress tensor according to Eq. (11), we find that the gravity term vanishes! This means that a homogeneous and isotropic medium does not respond to gravity strain fields. However, we have to be more careful here. Our goal is to calculate the response of a half-space to gravity strain. Even if the half-space is homogeneous, the Lamé constants change discontinuously across the surface. Hence, at the surface, the divergence of the stress tensor reads

 

equation M3514

In other words, tidal fields produce a force onto an elastic medium via gradients in the shear modulus (second Lamé constant). The gradient of the shear modulus can be written in terms of a Dirac delta function, equation M36, for a flat surface at z = 0 with unit normal vector equation M37. The response to gravity strain fields is obtained applying the boundary condition of vanishing surface traction, equation M38:

 

equation M3915

Once the seismic strain field is calculated, it can be used to obtain the seismic stress, which determines the displacement field equation M40 according to Eq. (11). In this way, one can for example calculate that a seismometer or gravimeter can observe GWs by monitoring surface displacement as was first calculated by Dyson [67].

 

Coupling in non-uniform, static gravity fields If the gravity field is static, but non-uniform, then displacement equation M41 of the test mass in this field due to a non-gravitational fluctuating force is associated with a changing gravity acceleration according to

equation M4216

We introduce a characteristic length λ, over which gravity acceleration varies significantly. Hence, we can rewrite the last equation in terms of the associated test-mass displacement ζ

 

equation M4317

where we have neglected directional dependence and numerical factors. The acceleration change from motion in static, inhomogeneous fields is generally more significant at low frequencies. Let us consider the specific case of a suspended test mass. It responds to fluctuations in horizontal gravity acceleration. The test mass follows the motion of the suspension point in vertical direction (i.e., no seismic isolation), while seismic noise in horizontal direction is suppressed according to Eq. (3). Accordingly, it is possible that the unsuppressed vertical (z-axis) seismic noise ξz(t) coupling into the horizontal (x-axis) motion of the test mass through the term ∂xgz = ∂zgx dominates over the gravity response term in Eq. (2). Due to additional coupling mechanisms between vertical and horizontal motion in real seismic-isolation systems, test masses especially in GW detectors are also isolated in vertical direction, but without achieving the same noise suppression as in horizontal direction. For example, the requirements on vertical test-mass displacement for Advanced LIGO are a factor 1000 less stringent than on the horizontal displacement [22]. Requirements can be set on the vertical isolation by estimating the coupling of vertical motion into horizontal motion, which needs to take the gravity-gradient coupling of Eq. (16) into account. Although, because of the frequency dependence, gravity-gradient effects are more significant in low-frequency detectors, such as the space-borne GW detector LISA [154].

 

Next, we calculate an estimate of gravity gradients in the vicinity of test masses in large-scale GW detectors, and see if the gravity-gradient coupling matters compared to mechanical vertical-to-horizontal coupling.

 

One contribution to gravity gradients will come from the vacuum chamber surrounding the test mass. We approximate the shape of the chamber as a hollow cylinder with open ends (open ends just to simplify the calculation). In our calculation, the test mass can be offset from the cylinder axis and be located at any distance to the cylinder ends (we refer to this coordinate as height). The gravity field can be expressed in terms of elliptic integrals, but the explicit solution is not of concern here. Instead, let us take a look at the results in Figure ​Figure1.1. Gravity gradients ∂zgx vanish if the test mass is located on the symmetry axis or at height L/2. There are also two additional ∂zgx = 0 contour lines starting at the symmetry axis at heights ∼ 0.24 and ∼0.76. Let us assume that the test mass is at height 0.3L, a distance 0.05L from the cylinder axis, the total mass of the cylinder is M = 5000 kg, and the cylinder height is L = 4 m. In this case, the gravity-gradient induced vertical-to-horizontal coupling factor at 20 Hz is

 

equation M4418

This means that gravity-gradient induced coupling is extremely weak, and lies well below estimates of mechanical coupling (of order 0.001 in Advanced LIGO3). Even though the vacuum chamber was modelled with a very simple shape, and additional asymmetries in the mass distribution around the test mass may increase gravity gradients, it still seems very unlikely that the coupling would be significant. As mentioned before, one certainly needs to pay more attention when calculating the coupling at lower frequencies. The best procedure is of course to have a 3D model of the near test-mass infrastructure available and to use it for a precise calculation of the gravity-gradient field.

 

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.

Object name is 41114_2016_3_Fig1.jpg

Figure 1

Gravity gradients inside hollow cylinder. The total height of the cylinder is L, and M is its total mass. The radius of the cylinder is 0.3L. The axes correspond to the distance of the test mass from the symmetry axis of the cylinder, and its height above one of the cylinders ends. The plot on the right is simply a zoom of the left plot into the intermediate heights.

Gravimeters

 

Gravimeters are instruments that measure the displacement of a test mass with respect to a non-inertial reference rigidly connected to the ground. The test mass is typically supported mechanically or magnetically (atom-interferometric gravimeters are an exception), which means that the test-mass response to gravity is altered with respect to a freely falling test mass. We will use Eq. (2) as a simplified response model. There are various possibilities to measure the displacement of a test mass. The most widespread displacement sensors are based on capacitive readout, as for example used in superconducting gravimeters (see Figure ​Figure22 and [96]). Sensitive displacement measurements are in principle also possible with optical readout systems; a method that is (necessarily) implemented in atom-interferometric gravimeters [137], and prototype seismometers [34] (we will explain the distinction between seismometers and gravimeters below). As will become clear in Section 2.4, optical readout is better suited for displacement measurements over long baselines, as required for the most sensitive gravity strain measurements, while the capacitive readout should be designed with the smallest possible distance between the test mass and the non-inertial reference [104].

 

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.

Object name is 41114_2016_3_Fig2.jpg

Figure 2

Sketch of a levitated sphere serving as test mass in a superconducting gravimeter. Dashed lines indicate magnetic field lines. Coils are used for levitation and precise positioning of the sphere. Image reproduced with permission from [96]; copyright by Elsevier.

Let us take a closer look at the basic measurement scheme of a superconducting gravimeter shown in Figure ​Figure2.2. The central part is formed by a spherical superconducting shell that is levitated by superconducting coils. Superconductivity provides stability of the measurement, and also avoids some forms of noise (see [96] for details). In this gravimeter design, the lower coil is responsible mostly to balance the mean gravitational force acting on the sphere, while the upper coil modifies the magnetic gradient such that a certain “spring constant” of the magnetic levitation is realized. In other words, the current in the upper coil determines the resonance frequency in Eq. (2).

 

Capacitor plates are distributed around the sphere. Whenever a force acts on the sphere, the small signal produced in the capacitive readout is used to immediately cancel this force by a feedback coil. In this way, the sphere is kept at a constant location with respect to the external frame. This illustrates a common concept in all gravimeters. The displacement sensors can only respond to relative displacement between a test mass and a surrounding structure. If small gravity fluctuations are to be measured, then it is not sufficient to realize low-noise readout systems, but also vibrations of the surrounding structure forming the reference frame must be as small as possible. In general, as we will further explore in the coming sections, gravity fluctuations are increasingly dominant with decreasing frequency. At about 1 mHz, gravity acceleration associated with fluctuating seismic fields become comparable to seismic acceleration, and also atmospheric gravity noise starts to be significant [53]. At higher frequencies, seismic acceleration is much stronger than typical gravity fluctuations, which means that the gravimeter effectively operates as a seismometer. In summary, at sufficiently low frequencies, the gravimeter senses gravity accelerations of the test mass with respect to a relatively quiet reference, while at higher frequencies, the gravimeter senses seismic accelerations of the reference with respect to a test mass subject to relatively small gravity fluctuations. In superconducting gravimeters, the third important contribution to the response is caused by vertical motion ξ(t) of a levitated sphere against a static gravity gradient (see Section 2.1.4). As explained above, feedback control suppresses relative motion between sphere and gravimeter frame, which causes the sphere to move as if attached to the frame or ground. In the presence of a static gravity gradient ∂zgz, the motion of the sphere against this gradient leads to a change in gravity, which alters the feedback force (and therefore the recorded signal). The full contribution from gravitational, δa(t), and seismic, equation M45, accelerations can therefore be written

 

equation M4619

It is easy to verify, using Eqs. (2) and (3), that the relative amplitude of gravity and seismic fluctuations from the first two terms is independent of the test-mass support. Therefore, vertical seismic displacement of the reference frame must be considered fundamental noise of gravimeters and can only be avoided by choosing a quiet measurement site. Obviously, Eq. (19) is based on a simplified support model. One of the important design goals of the mechanical support is to minimize additional noise due to non-linearities and cross-coupling. As is explained further in Section 2.3, it is also not possible to suppress seismic noise in gravimeters by subtracting the disturbance using data from a collocated seismometer. Doing so inevitably turns the gravimeter into a gravity gradiometer.

 

Gravimeters target signals that typically lie well below 1 mHz. Mechanical or magnetic supports of test masses have resonance frequencies at best slightly below 10 mHz along horizontal directions, and typically above 0.1 Hz in the vertical direction [23, 174]4. Well below resonance frequency, the response function can be approximated as equation M47. At first, it may look as if the gravimeter should not be sensitive to very low-frequency fluctuations since the response becomes very weak. However, the strength of gravity fluctuations also strongly increases with decreasing frequency, which compensates the small response. It is clear though that if the resonance frequency was sufficiently high, then the response would become so weak that the gravity signal would not stand out above other instrumental noise anymore. The test-mass support would be too stiff. The sensitivity of the gravimeter depends on the resonance frequency of the support and the intrinsic instrumental noise. With respect to seismic noise, the stiffness of the support has no influence as explained before (the test mass can also fall freely as in atom interferometers).

 

For superconducting gravimeters of the Global Geodynamics Project (GGP) [52], the median spectra are shown in Figure ​Figure3.3. Between 0.1 mHz and 1 mHz, atmospheric gravity perturbations typically dominate, while instrumental noise is the largest contribution between 1 mHz and 5 mHz [96]. The smallest signal amplitudes that have been measured by integrating long-duration signals is about 10−12 m/s2. A detailed study of noise in superconducting gravimeters over a larger frequency range can be found in [145]. Note that in some cases, it is not fit to categorize seismic and gravity fluctuations as noise and signal. For example, Earth’s spherical normal modes coherently excite seismic and gravity fluctuations, and the individual contributions in Eq. (19) have to be understood only to accurately translate data into normal-mode amplitudes [55].

 

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.

Object name is 41114_2016_3_Fig3.jpg

Figure 3

Median spectra of superconducting gravimeters of the GGP. Image reproduced with permission from [48]; copyright by APS.

Gravity gradiometers

 

It is not the purpose of this section to give a complete overview of the different gradiometer designs. Gradiometers find many practical applications, for example in navigation and resource exploration, often with the goal to measure static or slowly changing gravity gradients, which do not concern us here. For example, we will not discuss rotating gradiometers, and instead focus on gradiometers consisting of stationary test masses. While the former are ideally suited to measure static or slowly changing gravity gradients with high precision especially under noisy conditions, the latter design has advantages when measuring weak tidal fluctuations. In the following, we only refer to the stationary design. A gravity gradiometer measures the relative acceleration between two test masses each responding to fluctuations of the gravity field [102, 125]. The test masses have to be located close to each other so that the approximation in Eq. (4) holds. The proximity of the test masses is used here as the defining property of gradiometers. They are therefore a special type of gravity strainmeter (see Section 2.4), which denotes any type of instrument that measures relative gravitational acceleration (including the even more general concept of measuring space-time strain).

 

Gravity gradiometers can be realized in two versions. First, one can read out the position of two test masses with respect to the same rigid, non-inertial reference. The two channels, each of which can be considered a gravimeter, are subsequently subtracted. This scheme is for example realized in dual-sphere designs of superconducting gravity gradiometers [90] or in atom-interferometric gravity gradiometers [159].

 

It is schematically shown in Figure ​Figure4.4. Let us first consider the dual-sphere design of a superconducting gradiometer. If the reference is perfectly stiff, and if we assume as before that there are no cross-couplings between degrees of freedom and the response is linear, then the subtraction of the two gravity channels cancels all of the seismic noise, leaving only the instrumental noise and the differential gravity signal given by the second line of Eq. (4). Even in real setups, the reduction of seismic noise can be many orders of magnitude since the two spheres are close to each other, and the two readouts pick up (almost) the same seismic noise [125]. This does not mean though that gradiometers are necessarily more sensitive instruments to monitor gravity fields. A large part of the gravity signal (the common-mode part) is subtracted together with the seismic noise, and the challenge is now passed from finding a seismically quiet site to developing an instrument with lowest possible intrinsic noise.

 

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.

Object name is 41114_2016_3_Fig4.jpg

Figure 4

Basic scheme of a gravity gradiometer for measurements along the vertical direction. Two test masses are supported by horizontal cantilevers (superconducting magnets, …). Acceleration of both test masses is measured against the same non-inertial reference frame, which is connected to the ground. Each measurement constitutes one gravimeter. Subtraction of the two channels yields a gravity gradiometer.

The atom-interferometric gradiometer differs in some important details from the superconducting gradiometer. The test masses are realized by ultracold atom clouds, which are (nearly) freely falling provided that magnetic shielding of the atoms is sufficient, and interaction between atoms can be neglected. Interactions of a pair of atom clouds with a laser beam constitute the basic gravity gradiometer scheme. Even though the test masses are freely falling, the readout is not generally immune to seismic noise [80, 18]. The laser beam interacting with the atom clouds originates from a source subject to seismic disturbances, and interacts with optics that require seismic isolation. Schemes have been proposed that could lead to a large reduction of seismic noise [178, 77], but their effectiveness has not been tested in experiments yet. Since the differential position (or tidal) measurement is performed using a laser beam, the natural application of atom-interferometer technology is as gravity strainmeter (as explained before, laser beams are favorable for differential position measurements over long baselines). Nonetheless, the technology is currently insufficiently developed to realize large-baseline experiments, and we can therefore focus on its application in gradiometry. Let us take a closer look at the response of atom-interferometric gradiometers to seismic noise. In atom-interferometric detectors (excluding the new schemes proposed in [178, 77]), one can show that seismic acceleration δα(ω) of the optics or laser source limits the sensitivity of a tidal measurement according to

 

equation M4820

where L is the separation of the two atom clouds, and is the speed of light. It should be emphasized that the seismic noise remains, even if all optics and the laser source are all linked to the same infinitely stiff frame. In addition to this noise term, other coupling mechanisms may play a role, which can however be suppressed by engineering efforts. The noise-reduction factor ωL/c needs to be compared with the common-mode suppression of seismic noise in superconducting gravity gradiometers, which depends on the stiffness of the instrument frame, and on contamination from cross coupling of degrees-of-freedom. While the seismic noise in Eq. (20) is a fundamental noise contribution in (conventional) atom-interferometric gradiometers, the noise suppression in superconducting gradiometers depends more strongly on the engineering effort (at least, we venture to claim that common-mode suppression achieved in current instrument designs is well below what is fundamentally possible).

 

To conclude this section, we discuss in more detail the connection between gravity gradiometers and seismically (actively or passively) isolated gravimeters. As we have explained in Section 2.2, the sensitivity limitation of gravimeters by seismic noise is independent of the mechanical support of the test mass (assuming an ideal, linear support). The main purpose of the mechanical support is to maximize the response of the test mass to gravity fluctuations, and thereby increase the signal with respect to instrumental noise other than seismic noise. Here we will explain that even a seismic isolation of the gravimeter cannot overcome this noise limitation, at least not without fundamentally changing its response to gravity fluctuations. Let us first consider the case of a passively seismically isolated gravimeter. For example, we can imagine that the gravimeter is suspended from the tip of a strong horizontal cantilever. The system can be modelled as two oscillators in a chain, with a light test mass m supported by a heavy mass M representing the gravimeter (reference) frame, which is itself supported from a point rigidly connected to Earth. The two supports are modelled as harmonic oscillators. As before, we neglect cross coupling between degrees of freedom. Linearizing the response of the gravimeter frame and test mass for small accelerations, and further neglecting terms proportional to m/M, one finds the gravimeter response to gravity fluctuations:

 

equation M4921

Here, ω1, γ1 are the resonance frequency and damping of the gravimeter support, while ω2, γ2 are the resonance frequency and damping of the test-mass support. The response and isolation functions R(·), S(·) are defined in Eqs. (2) and (3). Remember that Eq. (21) is obtained as a differential measurement of test-mass acceleration versus acceleration of the reference frame. Therefore, δg1(ω) denotes the gravity fluctuation at the center-of-mass of the gravimeter frame, and δg2(ω) at the test mass. An infinitely stiff gravimeter suspension, ω1 → ∞, yields R(ω; ω1, γ1) = 0, and the response turns into the form of the non-isolated gravimeter. The seismic isolation is determined by

 

equation M5022

We can summarize the last two equations as follows. At frequencies well above ω1, the seismically isolated gravimeter responds like a gravity gradiometer, and seismic noise is strongly suppressed. The deviation from the pure gradiometer response ∼ δg2(ω) − δg1(ω) is determined by the same function S(ω; ω1, γ1) that describes the seismic isolation. In other words, if the gravity gradient was negligible, then we ended up with the conventional gravimeter response, with signals suppressed by the seismic isolation function. Well below ω1, the seismically isolated gravimeter responds like a conventional gravimeter without seismic-noise reduction. If the centers of the masses m (test mass) and M (reference frame) coincide, and therefore δg1(ω) = δg2(ω), then the response is again like a conventional gravimeter, but this time suppressed by the isolation function S(ω; ω1, γ1).

 

Let us compare the passively isolated gravimeter with an actively isolated gravimeter. In active isolation, the idea is to place the gravimeter on a stiff platform whose orientation can be controlled by actuators. Without actuation, the platform simply follows local surface motion. There are two ways to realize an active isolation. One way is to place a seismometer next to the platform onto the ground, and use its data to subtract ground motion from the platform. The actuators cancel the seismic forces. This scheme is called feed-forward noise cancellation. Feed-forward cancellation of gravity noise is discussed at length in Section 7.1, which provides details on its implementation and limitations. The second possibility is to place the seismometer together with the gravimeter onto the platform, and to suppress seismic noise in a feedback configuration [4, 2]. In the following, we discuss the feed-forward technique as an example since it is easier to analyze (for example, feedback control can be unstable [4]). As before, we focus on gravity and seismic fluctuations. The seismometer’s intrinsic noise plays an important role in active isolation limiting its performance, but we are only interested in the modification of the gravimeter’s response. Since there is no fundamental difference in how a seismometer and a gravimeter respond to seismic and gravity fluctuations, we know from Section 2.2 that the seismometer output is proportional to δg1(ω) − δα(ω), i.e., using a single test mass for acceleration measurements, seismic and gravity perturbations contribute in the same way. A transfer function needs to be multiplied to the acceleration signals, which accounts for the mechanical support and possibly also electronic circuits involved in the seismometer readout. To cancel the seismic noise of the platform that carries the gravimeter, the effect of all transfer functions needs to be reversed by a matched feed-forward filter. The output of the filter is then equal to δg1(ω) − δα(ω) and is added to the motion of the platform using actuators cancelling the seismic noise and adding the seismometer’s gravity signal. In this case, the seismometer’s gravity signal takes the place of the seismic noise in Eq. (3). The complete gravity response of the actively isolated gravimeter then reads

 

equation M5123

The response is identical to a gravity gradiometer, where ω2, γ2 are the resonance frequency and damping of the gravimeter’s test-mass support. In reality, instrumental noise of the seismometer will limit the isolation performance and introduce additional noise into Eq. (23). Nonetheless, Eqs. (21) and (23) show that any form of seismic isolation turns a gravimeter into a gravity gradiometer at frequencies where seismic isolation is effective. For the passive seismic isolation, this means that the gravimeter responds like a gradiometer at frequencies well above the resonance frequency ω1 of the gravimeter support, while it behaves like a conventional gravimeter below ω1. From these results it is clear that the design of seismic isolations and the gravity response can in general not be treated independently. As we will see in Section 2.4 though, tidal measurements can profit strongly from seismic isolation especially when common-mode suppression of seismic noise like in gradiometers is insufficient or completely absent.

 

Gravity strainmeters

 

Gravity strain is an unusual concept in gravimetry that stems from our modern understanding of gravity in the framework of general relativity. From an observational point of view, it is not much different from elastic strain. Fluctuating gravity strain causes a change in distance between two freely falling test masses, while seismic or elastic strain causes a change in distance between two test masses bolted to an elastic medium. It should be emphasized though that we cannot always use this analogy to understand observations of gravity strain [106]. Fundamentally, gravity strain corresponds to a perturbation of the metric that determines the geometrical properties of spacetime [124]. We will briefly discuss GWs, before returning to a Newtonian description of gravity strain.

 

Gravitational waves are weak perturbations of spacetime propagating at the speed of light. Freely falling test masses change their distance in the field of a GW. When the length of the GW is much larger than the separation between the test masses, it is possible to interpret this change as if caused by a Newtonian force. We call this the long-wavelength regime. Since we are interested in the low-frequency response of gravity strainmeters throughout this article (i.e., frequencies well below 100 Hz), this condition is always fulfilled for Earth-bound experiments. The effect of a gravity-strain field equation M52 on a pair of test masses can then be represented as an equivalent Newtonian tidal field

 

equation M5324

Here, equation M54 is the relative acceleration between two freely falling test masses, L is the distance between them, and equation M55 is the unit vector pointing from one to the other test mass, and equation M56 its transpose. As can be seen, the gravity-strain field is represented by a 3 × 3 tensor. It contains the space-components of a 4-dimensional metric perturbation of spacetime, and determines all properties of GWs5. Note that the strain amplitude h in Eq. (24) needs to be multiplied by 2 to obtain the corresponding amplitude of the metric perturbation (e.g., the GW amplitude). Throughout this article, we define gravity strain as h = ΔL/L, while the effect of a GW with amplitude aGW on the separation of two test mass is determined by aGW = 2ΔL/L.

 

The strain field of a GW takes the form of a quadrupole oscillation with two possible polarizations commonly denoted × (cross)-polarization and +(plus)-polarization. The arrows in Figure ​Figure55 indicate the lines of the equivalent tidal field of Eq. (24).

 

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.

Object name is 41114_2016_3_Fig5.jpg

Figure 5

Polarizations of a gravitational wave.

Consequently, to (directly) observe GWs, one can follow two possible schemes: (1) the conventional method, which is a measurement of the relative displacement of suspended test masses typically carried out along two perpendicular baselines (arms); and (2) measurement of the relative rotation between two suspended bars. Figure ​Figure66 illustrates the two cases. In either case, the response of a gravity strainmeter is obtained by projecting the gravity strain tensor onto a combination of two unit vectors, equation M57 and equation M58, that characterize the orientation of the detector, such as the directions of two bars in a rotational gravity strain meter, or of two arms of a conventional gravity strain meter. This requires us to define two different gravity strain projections. The projection for the rotational strain measurement is given by

 

equation M5925

where the subscript × indicates that the detector responds to the ×-polarization assuming that the x, y-axes (see Figure ​Figure5)5) are oriented along two perpendicular bars. The vectors equation M60 and equation M61 are rotated counter-clockwise by 90° with respect to equation M62 and equation M63. In the case of perpendicular bars equation M64 and equation M65. The corresponding projection for the conventional gravity strain meter reads

 

equation M6626

The subscript + indicates that the detector responds to the +-polarization provided that the x, y-axes are oriented along two perpendicular baselines (arms) of the detector. The two schemes are shown in Figure ​Figure6.6. The most sensitive GW detectors are based on the conventional method, and distance between test masses is measured by means of laser interferometry. The LIGO and Virgo detectors have achieved strain sensitivities of better than 10−22 Hz−1/2 between about 50 Hz and 1000 Hz in past science runs and are currently being commissioned in their advanced configurations [91, 7]. The rotational scheme is realized in torsion-bar antennas, which are considered as possible technology for sub-Hz GW detection [155, 69]. However, with achieved strain sensitivity of about 10−8 Hz−1/2 near 0.1 Hz, the torsion-bar detectors are far from the sensitivity we expect to be necessary for GW detection [88].

 

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.

Object name is 41114_2016_3_Fig6.jpg

Figure 6

Sketches of the relative rotational and displacement measurement schemes.

Let us now return to the discussion of the previous sections on the role of seismic isolation and its impact on gravity response. Gravity strainmeters profit from seismic isolation more than gravimeters or gravity gradiometers. We have shown in Section 2.2 that seismically isolated gravimeters are effectively gravity gradiometers. So in this case, seismic isolation changes the response of the instrument in a fundamental way, and it does not make sense to talk of seismically isolated gravimeters. Seismic isolation could in principle be beneficial for gravity gradiometers (i.e., the acceleration of two test masses is measured with respect to a common rigid, seismically isolated reference frame), but the common-mode rejection of seismic noise (and gravity signals) due to the differential readout is typically so high that other instrumental noise becomes dominant. So it is possible that some gradiometers would profit from seismic isolation, but it is not generally true. Let us now consider the case of a gravity strainmeter. As explained in Section 2.3, we distinguish gradiometers and strainmeters by the distance of their test masses. For example, the distance of the LIGO or Virgo test masses is 4 km and 3 km respectively. Seismic noise and terrestrial gravity fluctuations are insignificantly correlated between the two test masses within the detectors’ most sensitive frequency band (above 10 Hz). Therefore, the approximation in Eq. (4) does not apply. Certainly, the distinction between gravity gradiometers and strainmeters remains somewhat arbitrary since at any frequency the approximation in Eq. (4) can hold for one type of gravity fluctuation, while it does not hold for another. Let us adopt a more practical definition at this point. Whenever the design of the instrument places the test masses as distant as possible from each other given current technology, then we call such an instrument strainmeter. In the following, we will discuss seismic isolation and gravity response for three strainmeter designs, the laser-interferometric, atom-interferometric, and superconducting strainmeters. It should be emphasized that the atom-interferometric and superconducting concepts are still in the beginning of their development and have not been realized yet with scientifically interesting sensitivities.

 

Laser-interferometric strainmeters The most sensitive gravity strainmeters, namely the large-scale GW detectors, use laser interferometry to read out the relative displacement between mirror pairs forming the test masses. Each test mass in these detectors is suspended from a seismically isolated platform, with the suspension itself providing additional seismic isolation. Section 2.1.1 introduced a simplified response and isolation model based on a harmonic oscillator characterized by a resonance frequency ω0 and viscous damping γ6. In a multi-stage isolation and suspension system as realized in GW detectors (see for example [37, 121]), coupling between multiple oscillators cannot be neglected, and is fundamental to the seismic isolation performance, but the basic features can still be explained with the simplified isolation and response model of Eqs. (2) and (3). The signal output of the interferometer is proportional to the relative displacement between test masses. Since seismic noise is approximately uncorrelated between two distant test masses, the differential measurement itself cannot reject seismic noise as in gravity gradiometers. Without seismic isolation, the dominant signal would be seismic strain, i.e., the distance change between test masses due to elastic deformation of the ground, with a value of about 10−15 Hz−1/2 at 50 Hz (assuming kilometer-scale arm lengths). At the same time, without seismically isolated test masses, the gravity signal can only come from the ground response to gravity fluctuations as described in Section 2.1.3, and from the Shapiro time delay as described in Section 2.1.2.

 

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5256008/

This is my biggest pumpkin so far in the 2020 growing season. It has really nice color and a long shape. I expect it will be one of my top 2 this year.

★5th Pre-order + Notice about delivery★

  

We apologize that the delivery is delayed than promised date as supplementation

and research about new joint take more time than expected.

 

Therefore, after this 5th Pre-order we, Bimong Doll, have decided to receive no more orders

and focus on completing the delivery first until it is finished.

  

Firstly, we would like to give credibility and relief to our customers

who are going to purchase and have purchased already.

 

Secondly, we would like to prepare the environment that we can concentrate on

making goods to provide more satisfying dolls to customers.

 

The future sales method is going to hold inventories beforehand as we did in the past.

We plan prompt delivery within 3-7days.

 

Also we are going to prepare the limited edition decided full option concept.

 

We do not sell the gift-parts of the limited edition separately to give them rareness and value.

 

All deliveries are going to be completed in sequence within 1~3months after finishing 5th pre-order.

  

Even though we aim to finish all deliveries in a month after order,

we do our best you to receive within 90 days at the latest.

There are going to be no new sales before completing all deliveries, please understand it.

 

Bimong Doll are going to open all line-up prepared perfectly after completing all deliveries.

  

--------Scheduled line-up of Bimong Doll----------

(1)*65Narin & 60Narae couple

(2)*40Narin & 40Narae New couple + Classic couple

(3)*Dandelion 51cm New body

(4)*Chuu&Chuubi New body 27cm couple

(5)*Shahti New body 16 inches Fashion Doll

(6) Other parts/ Animals/ Characters

  

Reopening of Bimong Doll is scheduled during April or May when all deliveries will be completed.

We are going to sell goods finished copy every month limitedly.

 

We promise seeing you again with higher quality dolls after finishing the research for the rest of the period.

  

And Finally, we highly appreciate customers giving good ideas about the part of body and joint working.

  

Every precious your opinion is always the biggest power for us.

 

With a deep sense of gratitude

감사의 마음을 담아.

 

Sincerely yours,

Bimong

비몽 드림

 

Note.

1) It is going to be delivered to the customers of 2nd and 4th pre-order in sequence in mid-February.

  

2) It is going to be delivered to the customers purchased the head in sequence in mid-February.

  

3) It is going to be delivered to the customers of 3rd and 5th pre-order in sequence in mid-March.

Adding on the morning of 19 May 2021: just had a quick look at our weather forecast and I see that snow flurries are expected tonight, with scattered flurries tomorrow and wet snow for Friday. All my windows and door are being removed and reinstalled on Friday! If the snow does arrive, I wonder if the repair work will still continue. Typical Calgary, our high just four days ago was 24C. This morning, our temperature is 6C (windchill 3C). Sunrise is at 5:40 am and sunset is at 9:25 pm.

 

Tuesday, 18 May 2021: our temperature was PLUS 15C (windchill PLUS 13C) at 3:00 pm. Sunrise is at 5:42 am, and sunset is at 9:23 pm. Very windy today.

 

On 15 May 2021, I finally did a long drive that I had wanted to do the last few years, but never really been brave enough to do it. So glad I made myself do this, and it was a great day.

 

Much of the driving was on backroads that had a thick layer of loose, chunky gravel, making driving very unpleasant. It tends to push the wheels towards the side of the road, so one has to concentrate on trying to drive in a straight line. My arms and wrists ached like crazy from gripping the steering wheel.,

 

It looked a good day to go for a long drive to take my mind off all the repair work that has to be done. The forecast looked good, though it made no mention of the haze which made scenic shots useless. It felt so good to see quite a few birds for a change. The highlight of my day was briefly seeing a Swainson's Hawk perched on a fence post. I took a couple of shots, which had to be through my windshield. The hawk put its head down and that is when I realized that it had a snake held in its talons. It took a couple of pecks at the snake while I was watching (and taking a few seconds of video), and then off it flew. I wonder if it had a nest with babies in it nearby.

 

Another highlight for me, was to come across a beautiful female Merlin, also perched on a fence post. It had been quite a while since I last saw a Merlin.

 

At the beginning of my drive, I would have liked to call in for breakfast at the Saskatoon Farm, but I knew it would be really busy on a Saturday. Likewise at the end of the day, I would have liked to call in at Frank Lake, but I always try and avoid busy places. Makes no sense when someone has the weekdays in which to visit places like city parks. Some people are still working, so I prefer to usually leave the parks for them at the weekends.

 

I did call in at one of my favourite sloughs on the way home and enjoyed watching quite a few White-faced Ibis feeding and preening. So peaceful in a place with no other cars or people.

 

Of course, no day would be complete without spotting an old barn or two. These included one of my absolute favourite barns, photographed and posted previously, too.

 

The next two days, I have to get all sorts of things done because I know the repairmen will be taking out all my windows and putting them back, along with new frames on Friday, 21 May. I will have to be home, as they will need to have access to inside my place. It has now been just over six weeks that they have been replacing all sorts of rotten, wooden beams outside and adding two (?) layers of whatever material they use, before they eventually install new siding.

[A few minutes after finishing the table the doorbell rings. As expected it's Pocahontas's father and Leila. Pocahontas can't help but feel a little annoyed at this mysterious woman. Vincent senses it and breaks the ice.]

 

V: Hey there, Chief! I haven't seen you in awhile! Welcome to our home.

 

C: Thank you. It's a lovely home, but not as lovely as my daughter.

 

P: Hi, Daddy. I've missed you.

 

C: I've missed you too. I want you to meet my fiance Leila.

 

[Leila walks from behind Chief and smiles at Pocahontas. She opens up her arms for a hug, but Pocahontas instead shakes her hand and backs away.]

 

P: Nice to meet you. I'm sure you're both starving. The restroom is to the left if you want to clean yourselves up.

 

[Pocahontas quickly walks into the kitchen to grab the food. She's serving steak and salad with a few different sides. When she finished putting the last dish on the table Vincent and the others entered the dining room.]

 

P: I hope you both like steak.

 

C: Oh...um...

 

P: What's wrong, dad?

 

C: Leila is a vegetarian...I'm sorry I should have called ahead and told you.

 

L: No, no, don't make a fuss over me! That salad looks wonderful I'll just eat that and the sides.

 

[Everyone sits down at the table and grace is said before anyone eats. The two couples chat and make conversation. Pocahontas is still feeling some kind of way and barley contributes to the table talk leaving Vincent to do the bulk of it. Soon the chatting dies down into an awkward silence until Leila speaks up.]

 

L: Pocahontas you seem a little quiet. Do you have any questions you want to ask me? Or how I met your father?

 

P: I didn't really think it mattered since today is the first time I found out about you.

 

L: Oh, well your father and I met in a grocery store. And wel--

 

P: When are you getting married?

 

L: Huh... oh...well...um

 

C: This weekend.

 

P: [she stands up fully enraged] WHAT!?

 

C: Calm down, please. Let me explain.

 

P: You're telling me you haven't see me in over five years, and the first time I see you not only do you have a finance, but your marrying her this weekend!? Why bother coming?

 

C: We were passing through the state and...

 

P: "Passing through"! I don't even get a personal visit? Just a passing through!?

 

L: We have a wedding and honeymoon paid for in Vegas.

 

P: Well isn't that fantastic!

 

V: 'Tas, try and relax...

 

P: I most certainly will not! My father didn't come to see us, the kids, the new house, not even to show us Leila, but just passing by on his way to get married! How would you feel if your mother treated you with that much lack of respect?

 

V:....

 

L: Honey, please just---

 

P: Don't "honey" me! Don't "sweetie", "darling", "dear", or anything me! I--

 

[She hears the twins crying. Her yelling must have woken them up.]

 

P: I want you both gone by the time I come back downstairs.

 

C: Pocahontas!

 

P: Thanks for the visit, dad.

 

[Pocahontas goes upstairs to tend to the babies. Vincent is struck with silence and feels as if he has been glued to his chair. Chief and Leila both look hurt. They quietly get up and leave. Vincent hears the door shut softly and deeply exhales. He slowly gets out of his chair and begins to clear the table.]

  

The son of Zeus and Danaë, works 5Q95, dragging 350247 from Long Marston to Northampton EMD.

 

I was assured that the trip up the Honeybourne branch is always done at a gentle pace, so I'd have plenty of time to get to Honeybourne proper and secure my shots, but unfortunately the walk back to my car wasn't factored in to the equation. By the time I'd dribbled in to the station car park, Perseus was slowly working up to the red signal. Despite not having time to change any settings on my camera, the shot turned out better than I'd have expected, and it just goes to show that I can still do unpanned work; well kind of.

 

Best viewed by putting your index finger on 'L'.

 

37601 & 350257. 5Q95. Honeybourne. 17-03-2017.

 

All rights reserved.

 

www.europhoenix.eu/index.php

 

www.railopsgroup.co.uk

++++ FROM WIKIPEDIA +++

 

Taiwan (/ˌtaɪˈwɑːn/ (About this sound listen)), officially the Republic of China (ROC), is a state in East Asia. Its neighbors include the People's Republic of China (PRC) to the west, Japan to the northeast, and the Philippines to the south. Taiwan is the most populous state and largest economy that is not a member of the United Nations.

 

The island of Taiwan, formerly known as Formosa, was inhabited by aborigines before the 17th century, when Dutch and Spanish colonies opened the island to mass Han immigration. After a brief rule by the Kingdom of Tungning, the island was annexed by the Qing dynasty, the last dynasty of China. The Qing ceded Taiwan to Japan in 1895 after the Sino-Japanese War. While Taiwan was under Japanese rule, the Republic of China (ROC) was established on the mainland in 1912 after the fall of the Qing dynasty. Following the Japanese surrender to the Allies in 1945, the ROC took control of Taiwan. However, the resumption of the Chinese Civil War led to the ROC's loss of the mainland to the Communists, and the flight of the ROC government to Taiwan in 1949. Although the ROC continued to claim to be the legitimate government of China, its effective jurisdiction has, since the loss of Hainan in 1950, been limited to Taiwan and its surrounding islands, with the main island making up 99% of its de facto territory. As a founding member of the United Nations, the ROC continued to represent China at the United Nations until 1971, when the PRC assumed China's seat, causing the ROC to lose its UN membership.

 

In the early 1960s, Taiwan entered a period of rapid economic growth and industrialization, creating a stable industrial economy. In the 1980s and early 1990s, it changed from a one-party military dictatorship dominated by the Kuomintang to a multi-party democracy with a semi-presidential system. Taiwan is the 22nd-largest economy in the world, and its high-tech industry plays a key role in the global economy. It is ranked highly in terms of freedom of the press, healthcare,[15] public education, economic freedom, and human development.[d][13][16] The country benefits from a highly skilled workforce and is among the most highly educated countries in the world with one of the highest percentages of its citizens holding a tertiary education degree.[17][18]

 

The PRC has consistently claimed sovereignty over Taiwan and asserted the ROC is no longer in legitimate existence. Under its One-China Policy the PRC refuses diplomatic relations with any country that recognizes the ROC. Today, 20 countries maintain official ties with the ROC but many other states maintain unofficial ties through representative offices and institutions that function as de facto embassies and consulates. Although Taiwan is fully self-governing, most international organizations in which the PRC participates either refuse to grant membership to Taiwan or allow it to participate only as a non-state actor. Internally, the major division in politics is between the aspirations of eventual Chinese unification or Taiwanese independence, though both sides have moderated their positions to broaden their appeal. The PRC has threatened the use of military force in response to any formal declaration of independence by Taiwan or if PRC leaders decide that peaceful unification is no longer possible.[19]

  

Etymology

See also: Chinese Taipei, Formosa, and Names of China

Taiwan

Taiwan (Chinese characters).svg

"Taiwan" in Traditional (top) and Simplified (bottom) Chinese characters

ROC (Chinese characters).svg

"Republic of China" in Traditional (top) and Simplified (bottom) Chinese characters

Chinese name

Traditional Chinese 臺灣 or 台灣

Simplified Chinese 台湾

[show]Transcriptions

China

Traditional Chinese 中國

Simplified Chinese 中国

Literal meaning Middle or Central State[20]

[show]Transcriptions

Republic of China

Traditional Chinese 中華民國

Simplified Chinese 中华民国

Postal Chunghwa Minkuo

[show]Transcriptions

Japanese name

Kanji 台湾

Kana たいわん

Kyūjitai 臺灣

[show]Transcriptions

 

There are various names for the island of Taiwan in use today, derived from explorers or rulers by each particular period. The former name Formosa (福爾摩沙) dates from 1542,[verification needed] when Portuguese sailors sighted the main island of Taiwan and named it Ilha Formosa, which means "beautiful island".[21] The name "Formosa" eventually "replaced all others in European literature"[22] and was in common use in English in the early 20th century.[23]

 

In the early 17th century, the Dutch East India Company established a commercial post at Fort Zeelandia (modern-day Anping, Tainan) on a coastal sandbar called "Tayouan",[24] after their ethnonym for a nearby Taiwanese aboriginal tribe, written by the Dutch and Portuguese variously as Taiouwang, Tayowan, Teijoan, etc.[25] This name was also adopted into the Chinese vernacular (in particular, Hokkien, as Pe̍h-ōe-jī: Tāi-oân/Tâi-oân) as the name of the sandbar and nearby area (Tainan). The modern word "Taiwan" is derived from this usage, which is seen in various forms (大員, 大圓, 大灣, 臺員, 臺圓 and 臺窩灣) in Chinese historical records. The area of modern-day Tainan was the first permanent settlement by Western colonists and Chinese immigrants, grew to be the most important trading centre, and served as the capital of the island until 1887. Use of the current Chinese name (臺灣) was formalized as early as 1684 with the establishment of Taiwan Prefecture. Through its rapid development, the entire Formosan mainland eventually became known as "Taiwan".[26][27][28][29]

 

In his Daoyi Zhilüe (1349), Wang Dayuan used "Liuqiu" as a name for the island of Taiwan, or the part of it near to Penghu.[30] Elsewhere, the name was used for the Ryukyu Islands in general or Okinawa, the largest of them; indeed the name Ryūkyū is the Japanese form of Liúqiú. The name also appears in the Book of Sui (636) and other early works, but scholars cannot agree on whether these references are to the Ryukyus, Taiwan or even Luzon.[31]

 

The official name of the state is the "Republic of China"; it has also been known under various names throughout its existence. Shortly after the ROC's establishment in 1912, while it was still located on the Chinese mainland, the government used the short form "China" Zhōngguó (中國), to refer to itself, which derives from zhōng ("central" or "middle") and guó ("state, nation-state"), [e] A term which also developed under the Zhou Dynasty in reference to its royal demesne[f] and the name was then applied to the area around Luoyi (present-day Luoyang) during the Eastern Zhou and then to China's Central Plain before being used as an occasional synonym for the state under the Qingera .[33] During the 1950s and 1960s, after the government had fled to Taiwan due to losing the Chinese Civil War, it was commonly referred to as "Nationalist China" (or "Free China") to differentiate it from "Communist China" (or "Red China").[35] It was a member of the United Nations representing "China" until 1971, when it lost its seat to the People's Republic of China. Over subsequent decades, the Republic of China has become commonly known as "Taiwan", after the island that comprises 99% of the territory under its control. In some contexts, especially official ones from the ROC government, the name is written as "Republic of China (Taiwan)", "Republic of China/Taiwan", or sometimes "Taiwan (ROC)."[36] The Republic of China participates in most international forums and organizations under the name "Chinese Taipei" due to diplomatic pressure from the People's Republic of China. For instance, it is the name under which it has competed at the Olympic Games since 1984, and its name as an observer at the World Health Organization.[37]

History

Main articles: History of Taiwan and History of the Republic of China

See the History of China article for historical information in the Chinese Mainland before 1949.

Prehistoric Taiwan

Main article: Prehistory of Taiwan

A young Tsou man

 

Taiwan was joined to the mainland in the Late Pleistocene, until sea levels rose about 10,000 years ago. Fragmentary human remains dated 20,000 to 30,000 years ago have been found on the island, as well as later artefacts of a Paleolithic culture.[38][39][40]

 

Around 6,000 years ago, Taiwan was settled by farmers, most likely from mainland China.[41] They are believed to be the ancestors of today's Taiwanese aborigines, whose languages belong to the Austronesian language family, but show much greater diversity than the rest of the family, which spans a huge area from Maritime Southeast Asia west to Madagascar and east as far as New Zealand, Hawaii and Easter Island. This has led linguists to propose Taiwan as the urheimat of the family, from which seafaring peoples dispersed across Southeast Asia and the Pacific and Indian Oceans.[42][43]

 

Han Chinese fishermen began settling in the Penghu islands in the 13th century.[44] Hostile tribes, and a lack of valuable trade products, meant that few outsiders visited the main island until the 16th century.[44] By the 1700's visits to the coast by fishermen from Fujian, as well as Chinese and Japanese pirates, became more frequent.[44]

Opening in the 17th century

Main articles: Dutch Formosa, Spanish Formosa, and Kingdom of Tungning

Fort Zeelandia, the Governor's residence in Dutch Formosa

 

The Dutch East India Company attempted to establish a trading outpost on the Penghu Islands (Pescadores) in 1622, but were militarily defeated and driven off by the Ming authorities.[45]

 

In 1624, the company established a stronghold called Fort Zeelandia on the coastal islet of Tayouan, which is now part of the main island at Anping, Tainan.[29] David Wright, a Scottish agent of the company who lived on the island in the 1650s, described the lowland areas of the island as being divided among 11 chiefdoms ranging in size from two settlements to 72. Some of these fell under Dutch control, while others remained independent.[29][46] The Company began to import labourers from Fujian and Penghu (Pescadores), many of whom settled.[45]

 

In 1626, the Spanish Empire landed on and occupied northern Taiwan, at the ports of Keelung and Tamsui, as a base to extend their trading. This colonial period lasted 16 years until 1642, when the last Spanish fortress fell to Dutch forces.

 

Following the fall of the Ming dynasty, Koxinga (Zheng Chenggong), a self-styled Ming loyalist, arrived on the island and captured Fort Zeelandia in 1662, expelling the Dutch Empire and military from the island. Koxinga established the Kingdom of Tungning (1662–1683), with his capital at Tainan. He and his heirs, Zheng Jing, who ruled from 1662 to 1682, and Zheng Keshuang, who ruled less than a year, continued to launch raids on the southeast coast of mainland China well into the Qing dynasty era.[45]

Qing rule

 

In 1683, following the defeat of Koxinga's grandson by an armada led by Admiral Shi Lang of southern Fujian, the Qing dynasty formally annexed Taiwan, placing it under the jurisdiction of Fujian province. The Qing imperial government tried to reduce piracy and vagrancy in the area, issuing a series of edicts to manage immigration and respect aboriginal land rights. Immigrants mostly from southern Fujian continued to enter Taiwan. The border between taxpaying lands and "savage" lands shifted eastward, with some aborigines becoming sinicized while others retreated into the mountains. During this time, there were a number of conflicts between groups of Han Chinese from different regions of southern Fujian, particularly between those from Quanzhou and Zhangzhou, and between southern Fujian Chinese and aborigines.

 

Northern Taiwan and the Penghu Islands were the scene of subsidiary campaigns in the Sino-French War (August 1884 to April 1885). The French occupied Keelung on 1 October 1884, but were repulsed from Tamsui a few days later. The French won some tactical victories but were unable to exploit them, and the Keelung Campaign ended in stalemate. The Pescadores Campaign, beginning on 31 March 1885, was a French victory, but had no long-term consequences. The French evacuated both Keelung and the Penghu archipelago after the end of the war.

 

In 1887, the Qing upgraded the island's administration from Taiwan Prefecture of Fujian to Fujian-Taiwan-Province (福建臺灣省), the twentieth in the empire, with its capital at Taipei. This was accompanied by a modernization drive that included building China's first railroad.[47]

Japanese rule

Main articles: Taiwan under Japanese rule and Republic of Formosa

Japanese colonial soldiers march Taiwanese captured after the Tapani Incident from the Tainan jail to court, 1915.

 

As the Qing dynasty was defeated in the First Sino-Japanese War (1894–1895), Taiwan, along with Penghu and Liaodong Peninsula, were ceded in full sovereignty to the Empire of Japan by the Treaty of Shimonoseki. Inhabitants on Taiwan and Penghu wishing to remain Qing subjects were given a two-year grace period to sell their property and move to mainland China. Very few Taiwanese saw this as feasible.[48] On 25 May 1895, a group of pro-Qing high officials proclaimed the Republic of Formosa to resist impending Japanese rule. Japanese forces entered the capital at Tainan and quelled this resistance on 21 October 1895.[49] Guerrilla fighting continued periodically until about 1902 and ultimately took the lives of 14,000 Taiwanese, or 0.5% of the population.[50] Several subsequent rebellions against the Japanese (the Beipu uprising of 1907, the Tapani incident of 1915, and the Musha incident of 1930) were all unsuccessful but demonstrated opposition to Japanese colonial rule.

 

Japanese colonial rule was instrumental in the industrialization of the island, extending the railroads and other transportation networks, building an extensive sanitation system, and establishing a formal education system.[51] Japanese rule ended the practice of headhunting.[52] During this period the human and natural resources of Taiwan were used to aid the development of Japan and the production of cash crops such as rice and sugar greatly increased. By 1939, Taiwan was the seventh greatest sugar producer in the world.[53] Still, the Taiwanese and aborigines were classified as second- and third-class citizens. After suppressing Chinese guerrillas in the first decade of their rule, Japanese authorities engaged in a series of bloody campaigns against the mountain aboriginals, culminating in the Musha Incident of 1930.[54] Intellectuals and laborers who participated in left-wing movements within Taiwan were also arrested and massacred (e.g. Chiang Wei-shui (蔣渭水) and Masanosuke Watanabe (渡辺政之輔)).[55]

 

Around 1935, the Japanese began an island-wide assimilation project to bind the island more firmly to the Japanese Empire and people were taught to see themselves as Japanese under the Kominka Movement, during which time Taiwanese culture and religion were outlawed and the citizens were encouraged to adopt Japanese surnames.[56] The "South Strike Group" was based at the Taihoku Imperial University in Taipei. During World War II, tens of thousands of Taiwanese served in the Japanese military.[57] For example, former ROC President Lee Teng-hui's elder brother served in the Japanese navy and was killed in action in the Philippines in February 1945. The Imperial Japanese Navy operated heavily out of Taiwanese ports. In October 1944, the Formosa Air Battle was fought between American carriers and Japanese forces based in Taiwan. Important Japanese military bases and industrial centres throughout Taiwan, like Kaohsiung, were targets of heavy American bombings.[58] Also during this time, over 2,000 women were forced into sexual slavery for Imperial

 

On 25 October 1945, the US Navy ferried ROC troops to Taiwan in order to accept the formal surrender of Japanese military forces in Taipei on behalf of the Allied Powers, as part of General Order No. 1 for temporary military occupation. General Rikichi Andō, governor-general of Taiwan and commander-in-chief of all Japanese forces on the island, signed the receipt and handed it over to General Chen Yi of the ROC military to complete the official turnover. Chen Yi proclaimed that day to be "Taiwan Retrocession Day", but the Allies considered Taiwan and the Penghu Islands to be under military occupation and still under Japanese sovereignty until 1952, when the Treaty of San Francisco took effect.[62][63] Although the 1943 Cairo Declaration had envisaged returning these territories to China, in the Treaty of San Francisco and Treaty of Taipei Japan has renounced all claim to them without specifying to what country they were to be surrendered. This introduced the problem of the legal status of Taiwan.

 

The ROC administration of Taiwan under Chen Yi was strained by increasing tensions between Taiwanese-born people and newly arrived mainlanders, which were compounded by economic woes, such as hyperinflation. Furthermore, cultural and linguistic conflicts between the two groups quickly led to the loss of popular support for the new government, while the mass movement led by the working committee of the Communist Party also aimed to bring down the Kuomintang government.[64][65] The shooting of a civilian on 28 February 1947 triggered island-wide unrest, which was suppressed with military force in what is now called the February 28 Incident. Mainstream estimates of the number killed range from 18,000 to 30,000. Those killed were mainly members of the Taiwanese elite.[66][67]

The Nationalists' retreat to Taipei: after the Nationalists lost Nanjing (Nanking) they next moved to Guangzhou (Canton), then to Chongqing (Chungking), Chengdu (Chengtu) and Xichang (Sichang) before arriving in Taipei.

 

After the end of World War II, the Chinese Civil War resumed between the Chinese Nationalists (Kuomintang), led by Chiang Kai-shek, and the Communist Party of China, led by Mao Zedong. Throughout the months of 1949, a series of Chinese Communist offensives led to the capture of its capital Nanjing on 23 April and the subsequent defeat of the Nationalist army on the mainland, and the Communists founded the People's Republic of China on 1 October.[68]

 

After losing most of the mainland, the Kuomintang held remaining control of Tibet, the portions of Qinghai, Xinjiang, and Yunnan provinces along with the Hainan Island until 1951 before the Communists subsequently captured both territories. From this point onwards, the Kuomintang's territory was reduced to Taiwan, Penghu, the portions of the Fujian province (Kinmen and Matsu Islands), and two major islands of Dongsha Islands and Nansha Islands. The Kuomintang continued to claim sovereignty over all "China", which it defined to include mainland China, Taiwan, Outer Mongolia and other areas. On mainland China, the victorious Communists claimed they ruled the sole and only China (which they claimed included Taiwan) and that the Republic of China no longer existed.[73]

A Chinese man in military uniform, smiling and looking towards the left. He holds a sword in his left hand and has a medal in shape of a sun on his chest.

Chiang Kai-shek, leader of the Kuomintang from 1925 until his death in 1975

Chinese Nationalist one-party rule

 

Martial law, declared on Taiwan in May 1949,[74] continued to be in effect after the central government relocated to Taiwan. It was not repealed until 1987,[74] and was used as a way to suppress the political opposition in the intervening years.[75] During the White Terror, as the period is known, 140,000 people were imprisoned or executed for being perceived as anti-KMT or pro-Communist.[76] Many citizens were arrested, tortured, imprisoned and executed for their real or perceived link to the Communists. Since these people were mainly from the intellectual and social elite, an entire generation of political and social leaders was decimated. In 1998 law was passed to create the "Compensation Foundation for Improper Verdicts" which oversaw compensation to White Terror victims and families. President Ma Ying-jeou made an official apology in 2008, expressing hope that there will never be a tragedy similar to White Terror.[77]

 

Initially, the United States abandoned the KMT and expected that Taiwan would fall to the Communists. However, in 1950 the conflict between North Korea and South Korea, which had been ongoing since the Japanese withdrawal in 1945, escalated into full-blown war, and in the context of the Cold War, US President Harry S. Truman intervened again and dispatched the US Navy's 7th Fleet into the Taiwan Strait to prevent hostilities between Taiwan and mainland China.[78] In the Treaty of San Francisco and the Treaty of Taipei, which came into force respectively on 28 April 1952 and 5 August 1952, Japan formally renounced all right, claim and title to Taiwan and Penghu, and renounced all treaties signed with China before 1942. Neither treaty specified to whom sovereignty over the islands should be transferred, because the United States and the United Kingdom disagreed on whether the ROC or the PRC was the legitimate government of China.[79] Continuing conflict of the Chinese Civil War through the 1950s, and intervention by the United States notably resulted in legislation such as the Sino-American Mutual Defense Treaty and the Formosa Resolution of 1955.

With President Chiang Kai-shek, the US President Dwight D. Eisenhower waved to crowds during his visit to Taipei in June 1960.

 

As the Chinese Civil War continued without truce, the government built up military fortifications throughout Taiwan. Within this effort, KMT veterans built the now famous Central Cross-Island Highway through the Taroko Gorge in the 1950s. The two sides would continue to engage in sporadic military clashes with seldom publicized details well into the 1960s on the China coastal islands with an unknown number of night raids. During the Second Taiwan Strait Crisis in September 1958, Taiwan's landscape saw Nike-Hercules missile batteries added, with the formation of the 1st Missile Battalion Chinese Army that would not be deactivated until 1997. Newer generations of missile batteries have since replaced the Nike Hercules systems throughout the island.

  

Up until the 1970s, the government was regarded by Western critics as undemocratic for upholding martial law, for severely repressing any political opposition and for controlling media. The KMT did not allow the creation of new parties and those that existed did not seriously compete with the KMT. Thus, competitive democratic elections did not exist.[83][84][85][86][87] From the late 1970s to the 1990s, however, Taiwan went through reforms and social changes that transformed it from an authoritarian state to a democracy. In 1979, a pro-democracy protest known as the Kaohsiung Incident took place in Kaohsiung to celebrate Human Rights Day. Although the protest was rapidly crushed by the authorities, it is today considered as the main event that united Taiwan's opposition.[88]

Democratization

Main articles: Democratic reforms of Taiwan and Elections in Taiwan

 

Chiang Ching-kuo, Chiang Kai-shek's son and successor as the president, began to liberalize the political system in the mid-1980s. In 1984, the younger Chiang selected Lee Teng-hui, a Taiwanese-born, US-educated technocrat, to be his vice-president. In 1986, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) was formed and inaugurated as the first opposition party in the ROC to counter the KMT. A year later, Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law on the main island of Taiwan (martial law was lifted on Penghu in 1979, Matsu island in 1992 and Kinmen island in 1993). With the advent of democratization, the issue of the political status of Taiwan gradually resurfaced as a controversial issue where, previously, the discussion of anything other than unification under the ROC was taboo.

 

After the death of Chiang Ching-kuo in January 1988, Lee Teng-hui succeeded him as president. Lee continued to democratize the government and decrease the concentration of government authority in the hands of mainland Chinese. Under Lee, Taiwan underwent a process of localization in which Taiwanese culture and history were promoted over a pan-China viewpoint in contrast to earlier KMT policies which had promoted a Chinese identity. Lee's reforms included printing banknotes from the Central Bank rather than the Provincial Bank of Taiwan, and streamlining the Taiwan Provincial Government with most of its functions transferred to the Executive Yuan. Under Lee, the original members of the Legislative Yuan and National Assembly(a former supreme legislative body defunct in 2005）,[89] elected in 1947 to represent mainland Chinese constituencies and having held the seats without re-election for more than four decades, were forced to resign in 1991. The previously nominal representation in the Legislative Yuan was brought to an end, reflecting the reality that the ROC had no jurisdiction over mainland China, and vice versa. Restrictions on the use of Taiwanese Hokkien in the broadcast media and in schools were also lifted.[citation needed]

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Taiwan's special envoy to the APEC summit, Lien Chan, November 2011

 

Democratic reforms continued in the 1990s, with Lee Teng-hui re-elected in 1996, in the first direct presidential election in the history of the ROC.[90] During the later years of Lee's administration, he was involved in corruption controversies relating to government release of land and weapons purchase, although no legal proceedings commenced. In 1997,"To meet the requisites of the nation prior to national unification",[91] the Additional Articles of the Constitution of the Republic of China was passed and then the former "constitution of five powers" turns to be more tripartite. In 2000, Chen Shui-bian of the Democratic Progressive Party was elected as the first non-Kuomintang (KMT) President and was re-elected to serve his second and last term since 2004. Polarized politics has emerged in Taiwan with the formation of the Pan-Blue Coalition of parties led by the KMT, favouring eventual Chinese reunification, and the Pan-Green Coalition of parties led by the DPP, favouring an eventual and official declaration of Taiwanese independence.[92][clarification needed] In early 2006, President Chen Shui-bian remarked: “The National Unification Council will cease to function. No budget will be ear-marked for it and its personnel must return to their original posts...The National Unification Guidelines will cease to apply."[93]

The ruling DPP has traditionally leaned in favour of Taiwan independence and rejects the "One-China policy".

 

On 30 September 2007, the ruling DPP approved a resolution asserting a separate identity from China and called for the enactment of a new constitution for a "normal country". It also called for general use of "Taiwan" as the country's name, without abolishing its formal name, the Republic of China.[94] The Chen administration also pushed for referendums on national defence and UN entry in the 2004 and 2008 elections, which failed due to voter turnout below the required legal threshold of 50% of all registered voters.[95] The Chen administration was dogged by public concerns over reduced economic growth, legislative gridlock due to a pan-blue, opposition-controlled Legislative Yuan and corruption involving the First Family as well as government officials.[96][97]

 

The KMT increased its majority in the Legislative Yuan in the January 2008 legislative elections, while its nominee Ma Ying-jeou went on to win the presidency in March of the same year, campaigning on a platform of increased economic growth and better ties with the PRC under a policy of "mutual nondenial".[95] Ma took office on 20 May 2008, the same day that President Chen Shui-bian stepped down and was notified by prosecutors of possible corruption charges. Part of the rationale for campaigning for closer economic ties with the PRC stems from the strong economic growth China attained since joining the World Trade Organization. However, some analysts say that despite the election of Ma Ying-jeou, the diplomatic and military tensions with the PRC have not been reduced.[98]

 

On 24 May 2017, the Constitutional Court ruled that current marriage laws are unconstitutional and that same-sex couples in the Taiwanese LGBT community should have the right to marry. The court has given the Legislative Yuan two years to adequately amend Taiwanese marriage laws. According to the court ruling, if amendments are not passed within two years, same-sex marriages will automatically become legal in Taiwan.[99]

Geography

Main article: Geography of Taiwan

Taiwan is mostly mountainous in the east, with gently sloping plains in the west. The Penghu Islands are west of the main island.

 

The total area of the current jurisdiction of the Republic of China is 36,193 km2 (13,974 sq mi),[8] making it the world's 137th-largest country/dependency, smaller than Switzerland and larger than Belgium.

 

The island of Taiwan has an area of 35,883 km2 (13,855 sq mi), and lies some 180 kilometres (110 mi) from the southeastern coast of mainland China across the Taiwan Strait.[8] The East China Sea lies to the north, the Philippine Sea to the east, the Bashi Channel of the Luzon Strait directly to the south, and the South China Sea to the southwest. Its shape is similar to a sweet potato, giving rise to the name sweet potato used by Taiwanese Hokkien speakers for people of Taiwanese descent.[100]

 

The island is characterized by the contrast between the eastern two-thirds, consisting mostly of rugged mountains running in five ranges from the northern to the southern tip of the island, and the flat to gently rolling Chianan Plains in the west that are also home to most of Taiwan's population. Taiwan's highest point is Yu Shan (Jade Mountain) at 3,952 metres (12,966 ft),[101] making Taiwan the world's fourth-highest island.

 

The Penghu Islands, 50 km (31.1 mi) west of the main island, have an area of 126.9 km2 (49.0 sq mi). More distant islands controlled by the Republic of China are the Kinmen, Wuchiu and Matsu Islands off the coast of Fujian, with a total area of 180.5 km2 (69.7 sq mi), and the Pratas Islands and Taiping Island in the South China Sea, with a total area of 2.9 km2 (1.1 sq mi) and no permanent inhabitants.[8] The ROC government also claims the Senkaku Islands to the northeast, which are controlled by Japan.

Climate

 

Taiwan lies on the Tropic of Cancer, and its general climate is marine tropical.[7] The northern and central regions are subtropical, whereas the south is tropical and the mountainous regions are temperate.[102] The average rainfall is 2,600 millimetres (100 inches) per year for the island proper; the rainy season is concurrent with the onset of the summer East Asian Monsoon in May and June.[103] The entire island experiences hot, humid weather from June through September. Typhoons are most common in July, August and September.[103] During the winter (November to March), the northeast experiences steady rain, while the central and southern parts of the island are mostly sunny.

Geology

Main article: Geology of Taiwan

Dabajian Mountain

 

The island of Taiwan lies in a complex tectonic area between the Yangtze Plate to the west and north, the Okinawa Plate on the north-east, and the Philippine Mobile Belt on the east and south. The upper part of the crust on the island is primarily made up of a series of terranes, mostly old island arcs which have been forced together by the collision of the forerunners of the Eurasian Plate and the Philippine Sea Plate. These have been further uplifted as a result of the detachment of a portion of the Eurasian Plate as it was subducted beneath remnants of the Philippine Sea Plate, a process which left the crust under Taiwan more buoyant.[104]

  

The major seismic faults in Taiwan correspond to the various suture zones between the various terranes. These have produced major quakes throughout the history of the island. On 21 September 1999, a 7.3 quake known as the "921 earthquake" killed more than 2,400 people. The seismic hazard map for Taiwan by the USGS shows 9/10 of the island as the highest rating (most hazardous).[106]

Political and legal status

Main article: Political status of Taiwan

See also: List of states with limited recognition and Foreign relations of China § International territorial disputes

  

The political and legal statuses of Taiwan are contentious issues. The People's Republic of China (PRC) claims that the Republic of China government is illegitimate, referring to it as the "Taiwan Authority" even though current ROC territories have never been controlled by the PRC.[107][108] The ROC has its own constitution, independently elected president and armed forces. It has not formally renounced its claim to the mainland, but ROC government publications have increasingly downplayed it.[109]

 

Internationally, there is controversy on whether the ROC still exists as a state or a defunct state per international law due to the lack of wide diplomatic recognition. In a poll of Taiwanese aged 20 and older taken by TVBS in March 2009, a majority of 64% opted for the "status quo", while 19% favoured "independence" and 5% favoured "unification".[110]

Relations with the PRC

 

After the KMT's retreat to Taiwan, most countries, notably the countries in the Western Bloc, continued to maintain relations with the ROC. Due to diplomatic pressure, recognition gradually eroded and many countries switched recognition to the PRC in the 1970s. UN Resolution 2758 (25 October 1971) recognized the People's Republic of China as China's sole representative in the United Nations.[122]

 

The PRC refuses to have diplomatic relations with any nation that recognizes the ROC, and requires all nations with which it has diplomatic relations to make a statement recognizing its claims to Taiwan.[123] As a result, only 19 UN member states and the Holy See maintain official diplomatic relations with the Republic of China. The ROC maintains unofficial relations with most countries via de facto embassies and consulates called Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Offices (TECRO), with branch offices called "Taipei Economic and Cultural Offices" (TECO). Both TECRO and TECO are "unofficial commercial entities" of the ROC in charge of maintaining diplomatic relations, providing consular services (i.e. visa applications), and serving the national interests of the ROC in other countries.[124]

 

On 16 December 2015, the Obama administration announced a deal to sell $1.83 billion worth of arms to the armed forces of the ROC.[128][129] China's foreign ministry had expressed its disapproval for the sales and issued the US a "stern warning", saying it would hurt China–US relations.[130]

Participation in international events and organizations

See also: Foreign relations of Taiwan § Relation with International organizations

 

The ROC was a founding member of the United Nations, and held the seat of China on the Security Council and other UN bodies until 1971, when it was expelled by Resolution 2758 and replaced in all UN organs with the PRC. Each year since 1992, the ROC has petitioned the UN for entry, but its applications have not made it past committee.[131]

A white symbol in shape of a five petal flower ringed by a blue and a red line. In its centre stands a circular symbol depicting a white sun on a blue background. The five Olympic circles (blue, yellow, black, green and red) stand below it.

The flag used by Taiwan at the Olympic Games, where it competes as "Chinese Taipei" (中華台北).

 

Due to its limited international recognition, the Republic of China is a member of the Unrepresented Nations and Peoples Organization, represented by a government-funded organization, the Taiwan Foundation for Democracy (TFD) under the name "Taiwan".[132][133]

 

Also due to its One China policy, the PRC only participates in international organizations where the ROC is not recognized as a sovereign country. Most member states, including the United States, do not wish to discuss the issue of the ROC's political status for fear of souring diplomatic ties with the PRC.[134] However, both the US and Japan publicly support the ROC's bid for membership in the World Health Organization as an observer.[135] However, though the ROC sought to participate in the WHO since 1997,[136][137] their efforts were blocked by the PRC until 2010, when they were invited as observers to attend the World Health Assembly, under the name "Chinese Taipei".[138]

 

Due to PRC pressure, the ROC is forced to use the name "Chinese Taipei" in international events, such as the Olympic Games, where the PRC is also a party.[139] The ROC is typically barred from using its national anthem and national flag in international events due to PRC pressure; ROC spectators attending events such as the Olympics are often barred from bringing ROC flags into venues.[140] Taiwan also participates in the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum (since 1991) and the World Trade Organization (since 2002) under the name "Chinese Taipei". The ROC is able to participate as "China" in organizations that the PRC does not participate in, such as the World Organization of the Scout Movement.

Opinions within Taiwan

See also: Taiwan independence and Chinese Unification

  

The Democratic Progressive Party, the largest Pan-Green party, officially seeks independence, but in practice also supports the status quo because its members and the public would not accept the risk of provoking the PRC.[143][144]

  

On 27 September 2017, Taiwanese premier William Lai said that he was a “political worker who advocates Taiwan independence”, but that as Taiwan was an independent country called the Republic of China, it had no need to declare independence.[146] The relationship with the PRC and the related issues of Taiwanese independence and Chinese unification continue to dominate politics.[147]

Government and politics

Main articles: Government of the Republic of China and Politics of the Republic of China

See also: Elections in Taiwan and Human rights in Taiwan

蔡英文官方元首肖像照.png 賴清德市長.jpg

Tsai Ing-wen

President William Lai Premier

  

The first line of defence against invasion by the PRC is the ROC's own armed forces. Current ROC military doctrine is to hold out against an invasion or blockade until the US military responds.[195] There is, however, no guarantee in the Taiwan Relations Act or any other treaty that the United States will defend Taiwan, even in the event of invasion.[196] The joint declaration on security between the US and Japan signed in 1996 may imply that Japan would be involved in any response. However, Japan has refused to stipulate whether the "area surrounding Japan" mentioned in the pact includes Taiwan, and the precise purpose of the pact is unclear.[197] The Australia, New Zealand, United States Security Treaty (ANZUS Treaty) may mean that other US allies, such as Australia, could theoretically be involved.[198] In practice, the risk of losing economic ties with China may prevent Australia from taking action.[199] The United States, United Kingdom, Japan, South Korea, Australia, Canada, Chile, and Peru conduct maritime exercises in the Pacific Ocean every two years called RIMPAC. They are conducted to promote stability and to be able to respond in case of an armed conflict in the region – that includes an invasion of Taiwan by China.[200]

Administrative divisions

  

Since 1949, the government has made some changes in the area under its control. Taipei became a special municipality in 1967 and Kaohsiung in 1979. The two provincial governments were "streamlined", with their functions transferred to the central government (Fujian in 1956 and Taiwan in 1998).[204] In 2010, New Taipei, Taichung and Tainan were upgraded to special municipalities. And in 2014, Taoyuan County was also upgraded to Taoyuan special municipality. This brought the top-level divisions to their current state:[205]

Level 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th

Division

type Special municipality

(直轄市 zhíxiáshì) (6) Mountain Indigenous District

(原住民區 yuánzhùmín qū) (6) Urban Village

(里 lǐ) Neighborhood

(鄰 lín)

District

(區 qū) (164)

Province

(省 shěng) (2)

(Streamlined) City

(市 shì) (3)

County

(縣 xiàn) (13) County-controlled city

(縣轄市 xiànxiáshì) (14)

Urban Township

(鎮 zhèn) (38)

Rural Township

(鄉 xiāng) (122) Rural Village

(村 cūn)

Mountain Indigenous Township

(山地鄉 shāndì xiāng) (24)

Total 22 368 7,851 147,785

I have decided to join Nina on her challenge to add a flower photo a day for 365 days.

 

www.flickr.com/photos/21560098@N06/

 

I have been out all day visiting Peter's Dad in hospital and now my daughters have invited me to see Les Miserables with them - catch you later.

 

Peter's Dad is coming along nicely and they are hoping to move him to a rehabilitation centre next week where it is expected he will further recover until they feel he is able to go home.

I never expected to see the day flying Chimney Sweeper moth in my garden as their larval foodplant is "PIgnut" which is only found a 1000mts away from my garden. But research reading says that larvae have been observed feeding on "Cow Parsley" of which there is plenty, only 50mts away from my garden. So maybe this species may become a regular visitor to my garden in Empingham in the future.

 

Unfortunately only two grab shots of this moth before it took off.

 

The Arbroath smokie is a type of smoked haddock – a speciality of the town of Arbroath in Angus, Scotland.

The Arbroath Smokie is said to have originated in the small fishing village of Auchmithie, three miles northeast of Arbroath. Local legend has it that a store caught fire one night, destroying barrels of haddock preserved in salt. The following morning, the people found some of the barrels had caught fire, cooking the haddock inside. Inspection revealed the haddock to be quite tasty. It is much more likely the villagers were of Scandinavian descent, as the 'Smokie making' process is similar to smoking methods which are still employed in areas of Scandinavia.

 

Towards the end of the 19th century, as Arbroath's fishing industry died, the Town Council offered the fisherfolk from Auchmithie land in an area of the town known as the fit o' the toon. It also offered them use of the modern harbour. Much of the Auchmithie population then relocated, bringing the Arbroath Smokie recipe with them. Today, some 15 local businesses produce Arbroath smokies, selling them in major supermarkets in the UK and online.

 

In 2004, the European Commission registered the designation "Arbroath smokies" as a Protected Geographical Indication under the EU's Protected Food Name Scheme, acknowledging its unique status.

 

Preparation

Arbroath smokies are prepared using traditional methods dating back to the late 1800s.

 

The fish are first salted overnight. They are then tied in pairs using hemp twine, and left overnight to dry. Once they have been salted, tied and dried, they are hung over a triangular length of wood to smoke. This "kiln stick" fits between the two tied smokies, one fish on either side. The sticks are then used to hang the dried fish in a special barrel containing a hardwood fire.

 

When the fish are hung over the fire, the top of the barrel is covered with a lid and sealed around the edges with wet jute sacks (the water prevents the jute sacks from catching fire). All of this serves to create a very hot, humid and smoky fire. The intense heat and thick smoke is essential if the fish are to be cooked, not burned, and to have the strong, smoky taste and smell people expect from Arbroath smokies. Typically in less than an hour of smoking, the fish are ready to eat. [Wikipedia]

Pentax 6x7, 105mm F2.4, 1/250 KODAK PORTRA 400NC

Wasn't expecting to see this vehicle in Dover today, and this vehicle had just dropped off a large student group for "Student Group Day" which is every Wednesday afternoon and can sometimes bring up to 15! vehicles from all Local Operators, and I saw at least 10 vehicles here today.

 

And be sure to check by my other acount: www.flickr.com/photos_user.gne?path=&nsid=77145939%40..., to see what else I saw Very Recently!!

 

Yes I'm back again.

However due to my main computer on which I edit my work being struck down with a big bad virus, this picture and all the others I am uploading, were Unedited but have now been replaced with Edited versions. So enjoy and Thanks for your patience and understanding.

 

I do still hate everything about this shit that is new Flickr and always will, but an inability to find another outlet for my work that is as easy for me to use as the Old BETTER Flickr was, has forced me back to Flickr, even though it goes against everything I believe in.

 

I don't generally have an opinion on my own work, I prefer to leave that to other people and so based on the positive responses to my work from the various friends I had made on Flickr prior to the changes I have decided to upload some more of my work as an experiment and to see what happens.

 

So make the most of me before they delete my acount: www.flickr.com/photos/69558134@N05/?details=1, to stop me complaining!!

For Canada Day 2016, the National Music Centre at Studio Bell opened its doors to the public for a one-day special event with free admission in order to give Calgarians a taste of what they can expect from the new venue when it opens fully in the Fall. Featuring four floors of exhibition space, there was a mix of traditional and interactive exhibits, plus special performances on each of the floors throughout the day.

"Rapunzel, Rapunzel let down your hair! Immediatly the hair fell down and the king's son tried climbing up but Rapunzel who didnt expected a man climbing up her hair couldn't carry his weight and fell down out of the tower"

 

This was my final idea, I really thought this challenge was difficult especially because I'm not familiar to every fairy tale, my favorite fairy tale is bluebeard but I couldn't think of anything I could do with that fairy tale. (I really love Ochiva's bluebeard picture btw)

 

I took this picture in the garden and I made a string to "Rapunzel's" dress so she wouldn't fall for real, sadly I could not Photoshop the string away because that's against the rules, I attached Damien's hands to Rapunzel's hair so he was really hanging on her hair, though you can't see it really great because it almost looks like his feet are on the ground in this picture but they aren't.

 

I was a bit suprised by the many Rapunzel entries so now I'm worried if I will make it to the next round and I regret not doing my other idea of Damien and Shiryo going undercover as Hansel and Gretel.