text:
Talk:Jet stream

Discovered by Thaddeus Lowe?
The article about Thaddeus Lowe says:
 * Thaddeus Sobieski Constantine (alt. Coulincourt) Lowe (1832–1913) was an American engineer. He was exactly 29 when he proposed the idea of observation balloons during the American Civil War. During the Civil War, he became the commander of the United States' First Balloon Corps division. He flew the Intrepid, one of six hot air balloons used during the Civil War in addition to the Enterprise. While doing so, he was captured as a spy in North Carolina. He later used his knowledge of balloons to discover the jet stream.

Actually I doubt that... - Alureiter 18:14, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Child, you cut me to the Quick!
''A quote from the Wizard of Oz just before he took off in a balloon.

I never realized this question about Lowe and the Jet stream existed. In the biographies of Lowe, he is spoken of as having recognized a high wind above winds that always blew to the East. In his Cincinnati to Unionville South Carolina balloon flight, he flew a high wind, in excess of 18,000 feet, to that spot. If that's not the Jet Stream, then I'll redact. Maybe somebody named it "Jet Stream" later on. The best of aviators of the day, 1857-1859, realized that a transatlantic flight could be made by this wind, even though it was never accomplished. Lowe's subsequent period of Civil War ballooning had nothing to do with Jet Stream flight. Add to that, the best scientists from the Smithsonian, including Lowe's mentor Prof. Joseph Henry, were sold on Lowe's meteorological calculations, some of the earliest ever documented. I remain yours truly, editor of the Thaddeus Lowe article--Magi Media (talk) 01:15, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Ooishi and Esperanto?
The article says that Ooishi's work on the Jet Stream "went largely unnoticed outside of Japan as he chose to write in the international language of Esperanto which was little read in scientific circles."

And Japanese *was* widely read in scientific circles in the 1920s??? The way the matter is phrased to me seems boardering on being non-neutral towards Esperanto...

 * I don't think so - it would be true if he wrote it in any other language than those commonly used in international science circles (French and German for that era, I think, although I am very much uncertain of that). It's not a comment on Esperanto, it's a comment on the language used not being a language commonly used in scientific papers of the era. 69.162.59.13 14:31, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

 * In my rewrite I've addressed this. Esperanto was preferred by scientists like Ooishi whose native languages were unlikely to be read by Europeans. Unfortunately, the Europeans didn't get the message. ;-) After WW2 English became the scientific language of choice. --Dhartung | Talk 22:24, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Fire balloons
The article says:

 * "It was however utilised during World War II by the Japanese military in the fire balloon attacks on the American mainland (see below)."

But there is nothing below on the fire bombs :( 129.241.11.199 14:26, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

 * This is now hyperlinked to the article fire balloon Ma.rkus.nl 16:01, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Factual error about Wiley Post
"During World War II the American aviator Wiley Post.."

Wiley Post died in 1935. WWII started in 1939 and the U.S. entered the war in 1941. Clearly either the timeframe is wrong or it was not done by Wiley Post. MichaelSH 04:27, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
 * It's incorrect to write this as a competition between Ooishi and Post. Not even Ooishi fully understood what he had discovered, and the paper that was already linked to as the source did not overstate this, but its description here did. I've used that source to write a fuller history of the process of discovery that gives due credit to others including the German who first coined the term. --Dhartung | Talk 22:22, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for clearing this up. The article now makes sense.  MichaelSH 23:48, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Fastest speed
According to Guinness World Records 2006, a jet stream speed of 656 km/h (408 mph) was measured above South Uist December 13, 1967. More on the subject here.
 * The link cited is broken. Is the Guinness book a reliable source? if so can the article be revised, please? Jet stream of 300 mph has been reported on BBC TV news as causing prolonged periods of stormy weather in the UK, Jan-Feb 2014. Vernon White . . . Talk 00:53, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Here's an another link on the subject with more details --Anshelm '77 (talk) 13:16, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Tailwind caused a stall
My comment refers to the Jet Stream article found at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jet_stream. The text in question is quoted here:

“A 1943 Royal Air Force raid on Gironde, France, encountered tailwinds that sped them to their target, but returning the same headwinds, estimated at 380 km/h, caused their aircraft to stall, and the crews were forced to parachute into occupied Vichy France, where they were captured.”

I’m having trouble with the suggestion that the same headwinds, on the return trip, caused the aircraft to stall. Airplanes fly within the air mass and as such have air speeds. It really doesn’t matter which direction the air mass is moving, the aircraft is transiting that air mass at an airspeed that will allow it to continue flying. If they somehow tried t slow the aircraft’s airspeed to provide a given ground speed, then it would be possible to slow the aircraft (airspeed) sufficiently to allow it to stall (a pretty dumb thing to do).

There is a phenomenon encountered by airplanes approaching airports for landing (low altitude, slow airspeed, & perhaps hanging numerous lift/drag devices such as flaps and landing gear) in which a headwind quickly changes to a tailwind effectively causing the airspeed to drop to critical levels (and possible the aircraft to crash). This “wind shear” effectively steals the lift from the wings and unless the pilot can return the airspeed to flying speed quickly, they will likely crash.

Even if the 1943 flight encountered such a wind shear at altitude, it should not have caused the aircraft to stall and the crew to abandon it. Altitude is your friend in these situations and the 1943 flight should have been able to trade altitude for airspeed sufficient to maintain controlled flight.

If I missed the point of the article, I apologize in advance. Please accept these thoughts in the spirit in which they were intended.

Thank you for an excellent article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.188.252.180 (talk)

 * Removed the text since no citation was added, and the statement does sound quite unlikely to me. Kumiankka 22:12, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

 * The statement comes from the article on Ooishi in the External links section:
 * Flohn (1992, p. 13) [Oral history memoir]
 * An English bomber squadron encountered NNE headwinds of 380 km h−1 (~106 m s−1) on return from a raid over Gironde (west coast of France) in 1943. Crews parachute from stalled aircraft and are captured by German Army.
 * The source cited is a German memoir Flohn, H., 1992: Meteorologie im Übergang Erfahrungen und Errinerungern (1931–1991). Ferd Dümmlers, 81 pp. It is only a report, but it was included in the overview used to rewrite this article, so I thought it significant. Flohn being a meteorologist and not an aerospace engineer I don't think we can determine whether it's realistic or not, but it is sourced. --Dhartung | Talk 01:42, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

 * Wow. I'm surprised to see this aviation myth has even made it into print. The only logical explanation I can think of is them having run out of fuel if the headwind slowed their return enough, however it's not our place to speculate on that since that would be original research. However I suggest leaving the statement out as exceptional claims require exceptional sources (WP:CITE) Thanks for clarifying the matter :) Kumiankka 22:16, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

 * Keep in mind this may just be a mistranslation. I think "stalled" just as well implies the simpler case, that they ran out of fuel. The relevant point is that they encountered the extreme headwinds found only at those altitudes. Anyway, this has to have been documented elsewhere, so maybe we can find a better source. --Dhartung | Talk 05:29, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

 * I posted a question at the military aviation task force. Maybe somebody there has a suggestion. --Dhartung | Talk 05:40, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

 * I remember a TV program that talked about B-29 crews discovering that they were flying in very strong winds. The bomb sight calculated the wind from aircraft airspeed and an optical fix (a fixed point) on the ground.  The reported wind speed was off the scale and the crew abandoned the mission.  Fortunately they had an intelligence office on-board to vouch for the crew.  The result was that the B-20 couldn't use this bomb sight for accurate bombing and was obliged to 'carpet' bomb. More on the subject here

The very first paragraph states, "Jet streams are fast flowing, relatively narrow air currents found in the atmosphere at around 11 kilometres (36,000 ft) above the surface of the Earth, just under the tropopause. They form at the boundaries of adjacent air masses with significant differences in temperature, such as of the polar region and the warmer air to the south. The jet stream is mainly found in the stratosphere."

Since the stratosphere is found above the tropopause and not just under it, where exactly is the jet stream found?!

 * This has been fixed. Thegreatdr (talk) 20:02, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

See also BOAC Flight 911

 * BOAC flight 911 crashed after hitting severe Lee Wave Clear-air turbulence near Mt Fuji. This was a very sad accident. Clear-air turbulence is also encountered around jet streams, but this was not the case for Flight 911 (at just 4,900M) and so I have removed this link.--JollyTom 09:04, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Like Birds?
"In the Northern Hemisphere the streams are most commonly found between latitudes 30°N and 70°N for the polar jet stream (pilots remember that like birds they go north in the summer and south in the winter),"

What are we talking about here, do pilots go north in the summer and south in the winter, or does the jet stream. In my experiance the jetstream drops further to the south during the winter and gets pushed higher to the north during the summer. I could be... and probobly am... wrong though.
 * I worded the passage more appropriately. It was stated opposite to reality.  Thegreatdr (talk) 20:01, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Is there a way to harness energy from the Jet Stream to ease the strain?
Harnessing energy from the constant currents of Jet Streams may be a solution to some of Human energy concerns. Perhaps there is a way to create nanotech instruments that can capture the currents power in the Tropopause. Sort of like Dams. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mahovictor (talk • contribs) 04:56, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I have added a section concerning this possibility. Thegreatdr (talk) 21:26, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Do any birds/insects/creatures use the jet stream besides us? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.164.65.21 (talk) 03:17, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

The only means of doing this will always involve a tether: strong enough to withstand many tonnes of drag-force, but light enough (over 10's of km of [oblique] length) not to bring the whole thing down. The tethers (thousands of them to be practical) also must not pose an aeronautical hazard. These pose obstacles that would be practicably insurmountable. Furthermore, the jet streams are neither stable in horizontal or vertical position, nor strength. All those aerial wind-farms' kites could come crashing down with no wind to keep them lofted. JohndanR (talk) 18:33, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Jetstream direction
This article says jet streams flow from east to west. Other web pages dealing with jet streams say the opposite, that the winds flow from west to east.
 * This should be fixed now. Thegreatdr (talk) 21:40, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Tropical or subtropical
The article says "Northern Hemisphere (stream is) between latitude 20°N and 50°N for the subtropical (sic)". Should that last word be subtropical or tropical without the prefix "sub"? Moriori 02:27, Apr 9, 2004 (UTC)
 * Subtropical. Sorry for the very long delay.  I'm surprised no one answered you sooner.  Thegreatdr (talk) 17:06, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Wiley Post
article states that jet streams were discovered during WW II by Wiley Post. He actually died in 1935, but did discover them.
 * A user has corrected the discoverer. It was not him.  Thegreatdr (talk) 17:10, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

ECMWF data
I'm a bit puzzled as to how the page text and piccies fit in with pix like http://www.ecmwf.int/research/era/ERA-40_Atlas/images/full/D25_XS_DJF.gif. Obviously thats a long-term mean and doesn't take account of meandering, but... there is really only one jet per hemisphere... they are clearly far more than a few km wide... and so on William M. Connolley (talk) 20:11, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
 * If you average it out like that over 3 months, yeah, only one wind maximum shows up, and it is broad. That doesn't mean there's only one jet per hemisphere though and that it is a thousand or so km/miles wide.  Of the sources I looked through (let alone personal experience) there are at least 2 main jet streams much of the time...the polar and subtropical...and usually the subtropical is only present in a couple pieces.  The polar is prone to splitting into 2 or more pieces from time to time, in unphased flow.  That graphic might be useful for the climate article though, if it were in the public domain (which it likely is not, being that the ECMWF is the source).  Thegreatdr (talk) 21:10, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

GA nomination on hold

 * GA review (see here for criteria)

 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:

Overall, the article is almost there. Here's the things I saw:
 * There is a mention of the tropopause twice in the first paragraph of the lede. It is a little bit redundant to say the same thing twice—can it be condensed somehow? ✅ Thegreatdr (talk) 12:46, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
 * In the Discovery section: what is a pilot balloon? A dirigible, or just a hot-air balloon? ✅ Thegreatdr (talk) 12:54, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
 * A bit more detail about Rossby waves (e.g. that they're created by the Coriolis effect) would be helpful in the Description section. An extra short sentence or two would suffice. ✅ Thegreatdr (talk) 13:08, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
 * "The CAT is strongest on the cold air side of the jet,[7] usually next to or just below the axis of the jet." - I'm confused by "below" here. Does that mean towards the equator? (I guess it makes sense for the Northern Hemisphere, but the directional analogy breaks down for the Southern Hemisphere.)
 * ✅ It was simpler than you thought.  The article merely meant underneath (vertically below), not a cardinal direction in the horizontal.  Thegreatdr (talk) 13:12, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
 * In the Cause section, the relationship between temperature and pressure is a bit diffuse for non-technical readers. However, I'm not sure whether that should be explained in depth in this article, or if that explanation belongs in another article. Maybe saying "If two air masses of different temperatures and densities meet, the resulting pressure difference (which causes wind) is highest within the transition zone." would be sufficient.
 * I made a couple changes to the wording, which should make the description clearer in that first paragraph. See if that works for you.  Thegreatdr (talk) 13:15, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
 * (Not for GA) - the atmospheric parcel description could be made more engaging by adding a picture of a control volume surrounding the atmospheric parcel.
 * What are the effects of El Niño / La Niña associated with the jet stream outside North America? (This is the primary reason I put the article on hold)
 * I found a reference mentioning that ENSO combined with PDO phase affects the jet stream over Europe. I also found a reference regarding El Nino and South America.  North America definitely seems to be influenced most from ENSO, since it lies immediately downstream of the warming/cooling signals seen in the tropical Pacific and since it impacts during the Northern Hemisphere cold season.  In searches for Australia, ENSO influences to not extend to the jet stream.  Thegreatdr (talk) 14:42, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
 * A few more links in the ENSO section would work (e.g. Gulf coast, Southeast, Rockies, Sierra Nevada, etc.) I didn't do these because I'm running a bit out of time to review the article.✅ Thegreatdr (talk) 13:20, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Ref #2 needs to be formatted similar to the rest of them (and needs an accessdate too).
 * Did you mean ref #1? Ref #2 looked ok.  ✅ Thegreatdr (talk) 13:23, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Fill out the work parameter for Ref #19, so people can know it comes from the AOML FAQ. ✅ Thegreatdr (talk) 13:24, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Again, it shouldn't require that much work to get the article to GA status. Tito xd (?!? - cool stuff) 23:51, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Looks good. The only thing that I see now is that since the Forecasting section was split off, it is now a little bit short. Would it be appropriate to mention troughs and ridges in this section, or not? Tito xd (?!? - cool stuff) 20:56, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I moved the short section to description. It looked out of place where it was initially anyhow.  See if that looks better.  Thegreatdr (talk) 21:03, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Added refs for CAT mishaps. Thegreatdr (talk) 21:31, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
 * You edit-conflicted me when I was doing that, heh. It looks really good now, so I'll promote it. Tito xd (?!? - cool stuff) 21:33, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Alternative JET STREAM theory
The jet stream is caused by the rotation of the earth moving faster then the static air above the lower atmosphere]

There is a intermediate layer of stationary air [fisenne zone?] with sufficient viscosity to interact with the lower atmosphere. Simple inertia of this layer  translates to an apparent high speed wind from the ground viewpoint. Theoretically, wind speed ranges from zero at the north and south poles to a thousand  miles/hr at the equator. In fact, the strong heat thermals at the lower latitudes eliminate the static air. It is at the higher latitudes that the constant dynamic interaction of the  lower atmosphere and the  static air. creates the configuration called the jet stream.

Note:The tremendous power of the jet stream in an easterly direction cannot be fully explained in any other way: yet the powerless static air relies upon the earth's lower atmosphere to provide the apparent power.

My belief differs from conventional meteorology: but I am willing to bet a buck or two that I am correct. Submitted by Charles Fisenne 516-223-8899      2732  Park Ave. Baldwin N.Y.  11510 Replies welcome cfisenne@verizon.net  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.89.100.3 (talk) 21:01, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * There are locations in the tropics that launch upper air balloons...which typically burst towards the 10 hPa level...or 100000 feet. Measured winds rarely reach 200 kn, let alone higher, and close to 40000 feet up that occurs offshore Japan and the eastern portion of North America (higher than jet level winds trail off.)  I think the measured wind record aloft is on the order of 250 kn.  If what you are saying were true, those kinds of winds would have been measured as long as 60 years ago (if below 100k feet) or been detected in the drift of rockets/shuttles that have been launched since the 1930s.  It's not a good idea to throw addresses or phone numbers on any of these pages, since there are copies of these pages kept (theoretically) forever.  Thegreatdr (talk) 22:00, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Left me scratching my head
The article states:

 * "They are thought to be caused by a combination of atmospheric heating (by solar radiation and/or internal heat) and a planet's rotation on its own axis."

But if the jet stream moves in this direction, it would be moving faster than the earth is rotating. The article could use more depth on the jet stream cause? Ann arbor street (talk) 15:09, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

 * It is a combination of overturning (caused by heating) leading to polewards motion in the upper levels which then accelerates the air (by coriolis forces). The jet streams are the fastest bit of this; past that, it breaks up into instability William M. Connolley (talk) 20:03, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

 * I've just re-written the important bit, though I left a lot of (probably rather dubious) stuff behind William M. Connolley (talk) 20:46, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

I disagree with Boris over this (we can leave the Coriolis aside for the moment). The fundamental *cause* is solar heating. Thunderstorms are just one mechanism - they might even be the most important, I don't know - but they aren't the cause William M. Connolley (talk) 08:16, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

 * The original wording was "Tropical air heated by solar radiation..." which is wrong; heating of the air by absorption of solar radiation is small, and tropical air is heated mainly by sensible and latent heat fluxes. Introducing the idea that the ultimate heat source is the sun would be fine. Short Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 14:24, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, I left out some of the connecting words of course... it is heated by solar radiation, but that radiation goes via the ground, mostly. Also, of course, there is the element of organisation: a lot of the ground is heated, but ascent only occurs in a limited zone William M. Connolley (talk) 18:19, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

polar night jet
A small number of articles talk about a "polar night jet". This seems to be an additional type of jet which seems to be higher (stratosphere?) than the normal jet stream and to occur only in winter months in the relevant hemisphere (hence "polar night"). Should information on this topic be a different article or in a subsection of this article? Feline Hymnic (talk) 23:24, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I've begun a section within this article. But I noticed that two sources, both cited in my new text, give very different values for the height: "80,000 feet" (BBC source) and "30 miles" (Alaska source). That seems to be a factor of two difference and clearly incompatible. Any experts out there able to resolve this? Feline Hymnic (talk) 17:52, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
 * You might find the pix at http://www.ecmwf.int/research/era/ERA-40/ERA-40_Atlas/docs/section_D25/parameter_zmzwsp.html help (in particular for NH winter and  for SH winter). Mind you, those are zonally averaged. The SH winter max appears to be at about 2 hPa, and the NH above 1 hPa. 80,000 feet ~ 30km ~ 10 hPa, and 30 miles ~ 50 km ~ 1 hPa. So thats one down to the beeb. But Ian James's "Introduction to circulating atmospheres" (conveniently available from google books  (fig 9.5) would put the core at 0.1 hPa it looks to me, ~60 km William M. Connolley (talk) 19:59, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Incidentally, I'm not really sure about the "polar jet" stuff in the article. Can you see the polar jet in, e.g., this ? William M. Connolley (talk) 20:23, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

 * Thanks. The ECMWF pictures are certainly colourful. But taking the perspective of a lay, non-meteorological, reader, what do they mean? I've tried to assemble the text from cited sources in a way that I (a non-met. person) could follow. But it could certainly do with revision, not least the apparent contradiction in altitudes. I get the feeling that the ordinary "polar jet" is reasonably tightly constrained in altitude to the tropopause (I think I now know roughly what that might be) which is itself reasonably tightly constrained in altitude (albeit varying with latitiude as per the picture in this article.) By contrast might the "polar night jet" appear at more or less any altitude (more or less unconstrained) in the stratosphere? Help, I'm struggling! Feline Hymnic (talk) 20:33, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

 * I don't think this is easy. The article sez Polar jet streams are typically located near the 250 hPa (7.38 inHg) pressure level, or 7 kilometres (4.3 mi) to 12 kilometres (7.5 mi) above sea level, while the weaker subtropical jet streams are much higher, between 10 kilometres (6.2 mi) and 16 kilometres (9.9 mi) above sea level. but the "much stronger" polar jets are very hard to reconcile with, e.g. which is at their supposed strongest height of 250 hPa. But since the article links the PJ to the mostly-mythical Ferrel cell this isn't too surprising. This  makes it clear that the polar night jet is quite deep and doesn't have an easily-identifiable single altitude. Though those are both 40-year averages; a single year or day might well look different William M. Connolley (talk) 21:06, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

A decade+ later, and the 2:1 height discrepancy is still unexplained, standing out like a sore thumb to this reader. Frankly, I find the first two references extremely weak (brief mentions in the popular press), and in the third it's a barely off-hand comment in an article on a different topic. Surely better references are available ... and if not, the section should be deleted. (Not me tonight.) Paleolith (talk) 23:20, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Planets
Lede sez "Jet streams, or just jets in context, are fast flowing, narrow air currents found in the atmosphere of planets at the tropopause, the transition between the troposphere (where temperature decreases with height) and the stratosphere (where temperature increases with height)." (emphasis added) Which planets other than Earth have a troposphere with a stratosphere above? Since the lapse rate reversal in the stratosphere is mainly caused by ozone absorption of UV, I'm curious as to whether this generalizes to other planets. Short Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 21:05, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

upper-level and lower-level
Having done a little recent editing in an attempt to improve the article, it still doesn't seem right to me (a non-met. person who is trying to gain an understanding of the topic). I think that one of the problems is that it still lacks some structure and, indeed, focus; and that one of the reasons for this is that it has (I think) ended up covering two different topics without realising it. The major topic seems to be "jet streams" (global weather systems? polar and subtropical? Ooishi (1920s)? WW2? commercial aircraft? etc.) The other seems to be more localised phenomena (barrier jet? African, Australian winds? etc.)  My guess is that these two topics are really largely different (perhaps a little overlap) but that happen to share a common name "jet".

Might it help it if we consider splitting this article into two separate ones? Presumably the global weather article (polar, subtropical etc.) would retain the title "jet stream". What might the other be called?

Just a thought. Feline Hymnic (talk) 20:22, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
 * A jet is just a maximum of wind. It could be low level or upper level.  Since both are considered jets, they both belong in the article, even if they're caused by different processes.  Thegreatdr (talk) 13:45, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

 * Indeed. And thanks for your reply. I think the distinction, now becoming clearer (to me as a non-met. lay-reader), is a terminological one, between 'jet stream' and 'jet'. It seems that the term 'jet stream' specifically refers to the polar and sub-tropical jets (maybe also other upper-level jets, perhaps?) whereas 'jet' is a more general term describing both the principle of all jets and as a over-arching term to accommodate the known instances (both upper-level 'jet streams' and the various lower-level phenomena).
 * Try skim-reading the article, without getting too immersed in detail, and at each paragraph ask the question: Is what is being described in this paragraph a 'jet-stream' (global polar/sub-tropical etc.) or one of the other 'jets'?. This distinction isn't always clear; it is for that reason I'm proposing a split of the article. (Of course, if we can make this single article clearer to the lay-reader, that would be fine.) Feline Hymnic (talk) 16:09, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

The term "Coastal Low-Level Jets" does not seem to be covered in the article. Here are some general scientific sources : Global Climatology of the Coastal Low-Level Wind Jets using different Reanalysis, Global View of Coastal Low-Level Wind Jets, Mesoscale modeling of coastal low-level jets. There are also several site-specific sources. TGCP (talk) 21:52, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Origin of the name "jet stream"
Jet streams may have been known for a long time, but I'd always understood that the term "jet stream" was only coined in the 1950s when jet passenger aircraft flying at altitudes of 30,000ft and higher started to encounter them regularly on the trans-Atlantic crossing. Can anyone shed some light on this? --Recoloniser (talk) 11:52, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

 * The answer is in the first numbered subsection "Discovery". (Jetstram translates litarally from "Strahlströmung"). Interestingly, German Wikipedia says the term Jetstream dates from 1944. Marc1966 (talk) 09:47, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

What is the 2nd reason for narrow jets
Jet stream says "There are two factors that contribute to this sharpness of the jets. One is the tendency for developing cyclonic disturbances in midlatitudes to form fronts — sharp localized gradients in temperature." but doesn't say what the 2nd factor is (or provide a source). Rod57 (talk) 18:58, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
 * The article was rearranged 2 years ago after GA passage. The second factor is still there, it was just not labeled as such.  I added in the wording to clarify the situation.  Thegreatdr (talk) 04:27, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

First discovery?
The article credits a Japanese scientist for first noticing the phenomenon, but this evening's PBS NewsHour has a piece that makes it earlier and links it to following the spectacular sunsets that followed the Krakatoa explosion in 1883. They interviewed a person who had written a book about this.

It is probably worthwhile looking into this. Bill Jefferys (talk) 22:57, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Looks like someone just added it. Thegreatdr (talk) 04:28, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Origin of the term
A number of pop and news articles say something to the effect that Seilkopf invented the term "jet stream", and this claim found its way into wikipedia. Notice that the cite given (on the left pane) says nothing like this. Early German books typically write about Seilkopf's term, like, " 'Strahlströmung', English term 'jet stream'". The modern German synonym is "Starhlstrom".

By the way, please do not remove red linking from articles: a red link is useful: it brings an attention to the fact that an article is missing.

P.S. This leaves the issue open: who actually was first to use the English term "jet stream": was it just a translation of the German term or was introduced independently?

P.P.S. I understand that this may look like nitpicking, but for me it looks rather weird that a German is credited with coining an English word. It could make sense if the word was "international", e.g., "Agoraphobia" or directly borrowed, like Blitzkrieg, but here we have that a German term was translated, not borrowed. Therefore I rephrased the text in a more cautious way.

Jet streak
Various articles refer to something called a "jet streak". This would appear to be some sort of component within a jet stream that moves even faster. Somewhere within Wikipedia we could do with a description of a "jet streak". Should it be a separate article or a section within this article? ANy volunteers? Feline Hymnic (talk) 23:02, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
 * A jet streak is an absolute wind maximum within the jet stream. If someone wished to start an article on it, I wouldn't mind.  If you'd like to, be bold and do so.  Thegreatdr (talk) 17:21, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

I came here to ask about what a jet streak is. NWS has an old, poorly maintained article that I cannot understand. It would great if this topic were even mentioned in this article, but I think it deserves its own section. JKeck (talk) 14:35, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Air needs to catch up?
The introduction includes "Thus there is a tendency for air at higher levels of the atmosphere to "slip" and fall behind the speed of the air below. This results in a pressure buildup behind the "slipped" air, and so some air will have to catch up by moving in the same general direction as the planet's rotation (west to east on Earth)"

This makes no sense to me - on the face of it there is no obvious reason why a band of air in the upper atmosphere should not travel more slowly than the air above it. Surely the reason that the jet streams travel faster than the air below them is much more to do with equatorial air moving polewards while maintaining its angular momentum? In any case the statement needs a citation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Majurawombat (talk • contribs) 04:45, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Is AIUr Relevant?
The first line of the article states: "Jet streams are fast flowing, narrow air currents found in the atmospheres of some planets, including Earth. "

Do planets other than Earth have air?

If not should the word air be either replaced to use some other generic term such as as "fluid"?

Or if air is a requirement for a jetstream, then perhaps the first like could become something like: "Jet streams are fast flowing, narrow air currents found in the atmospheres of Earth, and possibly some other planets."

I'm not a chemist, physicist or astronomer, but I was under the impression that air was pretty much taken to be the the stuff that surrouds us on Earth and that it was not known to be present elsewhere. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.2.35.175 (talk) 06:04, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Cause or effect
There is a tendency for the jet stream to be designated the cause or controller of surface weather. Should it be placed more as a consequence of the interaction between high pressure cells? In which case it is more of an indicator of surface weather. I am reminded of the ping-pong ball suspended on a vertical air stream. And also the air bubbles and debris gathered into a line on the surface between ebbing and flowing masses of water in a tidal estuary. 81.156.103.21 (talk) 10:52, 3 July 2012 (UTC)Jon Horridge

North American animation
It seems a shame that the main animation in the lead shows jet streams over North America only. Span (talk) 22:12, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Agreed. It would also be nice to have a bit more research/info on jet streams in the southern hemisphere. Latitude distribution, effects, map, and so on. FF FridayFields (talk) 03:32, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

a comment
"aerial superhighway" that's not a "highway" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Guesters (talk • contribs) 18:42, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Revisiting the "Alternative Jet Stream Theory" inquiry above
Starting with the "Alternative Jet Stream Theory" heading above, and several other comments since then, I would like to add my concern about the stated origins or causes of the 4 main upper air Jet Streams (two in the northern hemisphere and two in the south). In both the opening remarks of the article, and under the heading "Cause" (subheading: "Other planets"), jet streams are said to be caused on other planets by "internal heating" - presumably nuclear reactions. The problem with this statement is that internal heating would cause the poles of the other (gas giant) planets to be as hot as their equators (compare with the sun). Thus the other statement, in the first section of "Cause", that the jet streams are the simple consequence of the equator being hotter than the poles, cannot be correct. Or, at least, there is an unexplained contradiction here.

Furthermore Uranus is unique among the planets because its axis of rotation is tilted sideways, nearly into the plane of its revolution about the Sun. Its north and south poles therefore lie where most other planets have their equators. Yet the winds at the equator are retrograde, which means that they blow in the reverse direction to the planetary rotation. Wind speeds increase with the distance from the equator, reaching zero values near ±20° latitude, where the troposphere's temperature minimum is located. Closer to the poles, the winds shift to a prograde direction, flowing with Uranus's rotation. Wind speeds continue to increase reaching maxima at ±60° latitude before falling to zero at the poles. (Words copied and pasted from the Wikipedia article on Uranus) This could have been a reasonably close description of the earth’s upper air winds, which implies that it highly unlikely that it is primarily solar insolation, and the consequent differences in temperature between the equator and the poles that cause the major features of the airflow in a planet’s atmosphere. Internal heating will also not explain Uranian weather, as explained above.

I am not a meteorologist, but have been doing some reading on the subject, and coming up against the same problem in all the texts I have consulted. I am therefore going to stick my neck out, and join some of the other commentators on this Talk page, and suggest that it is simply the earth’s (or other planet’s) rotation on its axis that accounts for most of the atmospheric circulation. If air at the equator is centrifuged away from the surface it will start moving round a greater circumference than at the surface and therefore seem to move “retrogradely”, or in a westward direction. At the tropopause it will spread north and southwards, but as it does so it will start going round ever decreasing circles (lines of latitude) and therefore gain ground-speed in an eastward direction (compare with Uranus’ atmosphere). If traced on a map these high level winds follow tracks that curve clockwise in the northern hemisphere and counter-clockwise in the south. They are prevented from returning to the equator by the continuous outflow of high altitude air from the equatorial region. Thus there is a build up of high altitude air moving in an eastward direction at high velocity: i.e. the '’subtropical jet streams’’ at about 30° N and S, associated with the subtropical high pressure zones at ground level around the globe.

I think I have said enough for an amateur on this subject. (Continuing in the same vein it is possible to explain most of the main features of the earth's air circulation - e.g. the equator-ward polar easterlies, the mid-latitudinal westerlies, etc.) If what I have said above is physical nonsense then any further elaboration is going to be pure absurdity. I have only put it out there because I think the explanation for the jet streams, presented in the article, does not take into account the airflow patterns that have been discovered on the other planets, where the difference in solar heating of the equatorial regions exceeding that of the poles does not apply. Heating from within the planet is clearly not the driving force either. The only thing that all the planets have in common and could be responsible the similarities in weather patterns is their rotation on their axes. Whether or not this provides a complete and satisfactory explanation of the jet streams on earth and the other planets should be acknowledged as a possibility, or a reason given why it is an absurd idea, and that the cause of the jet streams is still enigmatic. Oggmus (talk) 14:19, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Jet stream over the UK
It's only in the summer months that it's been consistently displaced to the south since 2007, and only in the vicinity of the UK (Eastern Europe has seen abnormally warm summers since those in the UK deteriorated). The article says the English Channel, but at times it's been down over the Bay of Biscay or even Iberia when it "normally" (pre 2007) would be north of Scotland. I've seen claims that melting Arctic ice is behind this, but that doesn't explain why it suddenly started in 2007. There was a run of unusually poor UK summers in the mid-1980s as well, but that only lasted 3 or 4 years. It did seem to be righting itself in June and July 2014, before suddenly going back to the post-2007 position in August (and remaining there during summer 2015 so far). One or two years of this would be normal climate variability, but eight does not seem right.

In winter the North Atlantic Oscillation is the key, and perhaps should be mentioned in the article. Since the 2007 summer shift it's varied in winter, unusually negative in 2009-2011 and very positive since late 2013. Walshie79 (talk) 23:32, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Jet stream. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060829012128/http://www.bbc.co.uk:80/weather/features/basics_jetstreams.shtml to http://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/features/basics_jetstreams.shtml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers. —cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 12:20, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Jet stream. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20080118235955/http://www.bbc.co.uk:80/weather/features/understanding/jetstreams_uk.shtml to http://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/features/understanding/jetstreams_uk.shtml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 16:01, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Polar night jet
The section seems to contradict itself. For example, the first sentence says it only occurs in the winter; the second sentence says that it occurs at a higher altitude in the winter than in the summer. Is the polar night jet a separate phenomenon from the all-year polar jet, or a variation of it? ZFT (talk) 04:47, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Jet stream. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071022030057/http://www.ccb.ucar.edu/lanina/report/mantua.html to http://www.ccb.ucar.edu/lanina/report/mantua.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080304212445/http://www.agclimate.org/Development/apps/agClimate/controller/perl/agClimate.pl/agClimate.pl?function=climforecast%2Foutlook.html&location=local&type to http://www.agclimate.org/Development/apps/agClimate/controller/perl/agClimate.pl/agClimate.pl?function=climforecast%2Foutlook.html&location=local&type
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100621115326/http://www.stat.osu.edu/~sses/collab_ozone_split_background.php to http://www.stat.osu.edu/~sses/collab_ozone_split_background.php
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060718105909/http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/tcfaq/A4.html to http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/tcfaq/A4.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 03:41, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Jet stream. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121022072917/http://iprc.soest.hawaii.edu/users/kph/K.pdf to http://iprc.soest.hawaii.edu/users/kph/K.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070301135911/http://amsglossary.allenpress.com/glossary/search?id=jet-stream1 to http://amsglossary.allenpress.com/glossary/search?id=jet-stream1
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061026100253/http://amsglossary.allenpress.com/glossary/search?id=cyclone-wave1 to http://amsglossary.allenpress.com/glossary/search?id=cyclone-wave1
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090609104745/http://amsglossary.allenpress.com/glossary/search?p=1&query=short+wave&submit=Search to http://amsglossary.allenpress.com/glossary/search?p=1&query=short+wave&submit=Search
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080724112429/http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/solarsystem/jupiter_sidebar_000209.html to http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/solarsystem/jupiter_sidebar_000209.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070926220024/http://www.walker-institute.ac.uk/news/summer_2007.pdf to http://www.walker-institute.ac.uk/news/summer_2007.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080724112429/http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/solarsystem/jupiter_sidebar_000209.html to http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/solarsystem/jupiter_sidebar_000209.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110915075738/http://www.awec2010.com/public/img/media/archer_caldeira.pdf to http://www.awec2010.com/public/img/media/archer_caldeira.pdf
 * Added tag to http://weather.about.com/od/weatherfaqs/f/dustbowl.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 02:22, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

Description Section
In the article I read:

"Rossby waves are caused by changes in the Coriolis effect with latitude. Shortwave troughs, are smaller scale waves superimposed on the Rossby waves, with a scale of 1000 to(-) long, that move along through the flow pattern around large scale, or longwave, "ridges" and "troughs" within Rossby waves. "

This text raises questions with me as to what the author(s) mean(s) to say exactly, and I suggest it be rewritten.

"Rossby waves are caused by changes in the Coriolis effect with latitude."

 * Clear enough, in my view.

"Shortwave troughs, are smaller scale waves superimposed on the Rossby waves, with a scale of 1000 to(-) long, that move along through the flow pattern around large scale, or longwave, "ridges" and "troughs" within Rossby waves. "

 * Which waves have a scale of 1000 to 4000 km, the Rossby waves or the short waves?
 * Are the "large scale, or longwave, "ridges" and "troughs"" components / parts of the Rossby waves, or are they distinct from (and superimposed on) Rossby waves?
 * I.e. is a three-way division of 1) Rossby waves, 2) large scale, or long wave, "ridges" and "troughs", and 3) shortwave troughs, with successive or recursive superimposition, meant here?

If my understanding is right, I would suggest the following wording.

"Rossby waves are caused by changes in the Coriolis effect with latitude. Superimposed on the Rossby waves can be shortwave troughs, which are smaller waves with a scale of 1000 to(-) long, and which move along through the flow pattern around the large scale, or longwave, "ridges" and "troughs" that constitute the Rossby waves. "Redav (talk) 16:15, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

Subtropical Jet section has major issues
Unreadable typos and contradictory statements abound. I'll try to come back to fix it later when I'm more well versed on the subject, but if someone could get to it before then that would be excellent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Conkaeso (talk • contribs) 01:43, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

Why do the jet streams go east?
It's not clear from the article why the jet streams go eastward. The surface winds north of 60° go towards the west, and the high-altitude winds north of 35° also go towards the west, according to the article Atmospheric circulation. From the diagram I have put here, I suppose that the explanation is that the polar jet stream is basic'ly just westerly surface winds from the Ferrel cell which have risen to a high altitude, whereas in the case of the subtropical jet stream, it's westerly high-altitude winds from the Hadley cell. Is that the explanation? Why then are the jet streams so much faster than the winds they are derived from? Eric Kvaalen (talk) 12:32, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

why?...
Why this current always runs in the direction from west to east? And why in recent years it is from the USA where thanks to the jet stream they always have mild summers and very snowy winters (long duration of snow cover is beneficial for underground water levels), and in Europe "thanks to" it always has hot summers way above the norm (droughts) starting from practically rainless months like March and April and warm rainy winters? I sense some weather machinations on the part of the US, who then push such "clogged" weather ("clogged" omega-shaped jet stream) eastward across the Atlantic and into Europe. 188.164.151.106 (talk) 13:26, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Short lead
This article has too short a prefatory lead for its good article status. If someone can invest some time and effort into expanding it so it adumbrates more of the content occurring in body, that would be very instructive from a reader's perspective. Thank you, MBlaze Lightning (talk) 09:51, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

 * I agree. Some broad numbers very early on would be very useful to help the reader build a mental image of what jet streams are. For example, the thing that makes jet streams notable is the high wind speeds, but it isn't until near the end of the 4th section (Description) that we get told what the typical and highest jet stream speeds are. Similarly for the dimensions of jet streams. At the start of the overview we get told heights, but no speeds. I think that something like the following needs to be in the lead or the Overview section. I hesitate to do it myself because I don't know much about this subject and am not sure how to deal with referencing.
 * "On Earth, jet streams occur between 7 to 16 kilometres (23,000 to 52,000 ft) above sea level. The width of a jet stream is typically a few hundred kilometres or miles and its vertical thickness often less than five kilometres (16,000 feet). The wind speeds often exceed 92 km/h (50 kn; 57 mph), and speeds of 400 km/h (220 kn; 250 mph) have been measured."
 * Macboff (talk) 12:28, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Incorrect citation regarding Japanese biological warfare during ww2
I've no idea how to edit so I'll just drop this here. The citation for Japanese ww2 biological warfare and cowpox production leads to an irrelevant list-style article about samurai warrior clans. 2604:3D09:3E7B:A600:40F:E464:1996:4594 (talk) 08:55, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

 * Link? Might be a usurped domain. Easy to fix once we figure out which it is. – Novem Linguae (talk) 09:23, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Not usurped, but it's a website which seems to provide an infinite scroll of articles and the URL changes as one scrolls, so it's easy to grab an URL that doesn't work. One relevant article on that site is https://www.warhistoryonline.com/world-war-ii/operation-cherry-blossoms-at-night.html. However, that article mentions nothing about balloons -- it's about a potential (scrapped) biological attack using subs and gliders. Another article on the site, more likely the one intended as a reference, is https://www.warhistoryonline.com/world-war-ii/japan-set-us-west-coast-ablaze.html. There's a short paragraph about the possibility of using balloons to carry viruses, which was scrapped due to the danger of the balloons releasing their payload over Japan. The article seems sloppy -- that's where the mention of cowpox comes from, the author apparently not knowing the difference between smallpox and cowpox.
 * So I declare it an unreliable reference, and I will delete that part of the paragraph. The part about incendiary bombs is well known and much better documented, and is the main topic of the second link above, though surely there are much better refs. Including five sentences about the discarded idea of adding biological weapons to the balloons seems out of place in an article about jet streams.
 * The final two references are in Japanese and are not online, and appear to be linked to only the scrapping of the idea.
 * The remaining reference, about the incendiary balloon attacks, is OK, though its reference is an article by John McPhee in The New Yorker, which should probably be cited. I'll try to add it. Paleolith (talk) 00:13, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I added the reference, and added a sentence derived from it.Paleolith (talk) 02:56, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Jet stream


text:
Émile Loubet

Émile François Loubet (30 December 1838 – 20 December 1929) was the 45th Prime Minister of France from February to December 1892 and later President of France from 1899 to 1906.

Trained in law, he became mayor of Montélimar, where he was noted as a forceful orator. He was elected to the Chamber of Deputies in 1876 and the Senate in 1885. He was appointed as a Republican minister under Carnot and Ribot. He was briefly Prime Minister of France in 1892. As President, he saw the successful Paris Exhibition of 1900, and the forging of the Entente Cordiale with the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, resolving their sharp differences over the Boer War and the Dreyfus Affair.

Early life
Loubet was born on 30 December 1838, the son of a peasant proprietor and mayor of Marsanne (Drôme). Admitted to the Parisian bar in 1862, he took his doctorate in law the next year. He was still a student when he witnessed the sweeping triumph of the Republican party in Paris at the general election in 1863, during the Second French Empire. He settled down to the exercise of his profession in Montélimar, where in 1869 he married Marie-Louise Picard. He also inherited a small estate at Grignan.

Physical description
American politician William Jennings Bryan described Loubet as "below the medium height, even for Frenchmen. His shoulders are broad and his frame indicative of great physical strength. His hair is snow white, as are also his beard and mustache. He wears his beard square cut at the chin. . . . His voice is soft, and he speaks with great vivacity, emphasizing his words by expressive gestures."

Political career
At the crisis of 1870, which brought about the Empire's end, he became mayor of Montélimar, and thenceforward was a steady supporter of Léon Gambetta. Elected to the Chamber of Deputies in 1876 by Montélimar, he was one of the notable 363 parliamentarians who in the 16 May 1877 crisis passed a vote of no confidence in the ministry of Albert, the duke of Broglie.

In the general election of October he was re-elected, local enthusiasm for him being increased by the fact that the government had driven him from the mayoralty. In the Chamber he occupied himself especially with education, fighting the clerical system established by the Loi Falloux, and working for the establishment of free, obligatory and secular primary instruction. In 1880 he became president of the departmental council in Drôme. His support of the second Jules Ferry ministry and his zeal for the colonial expansion of France gave him considerable weight in the moderate Republican party.

He had entered the Senate in 1885, and he became minister of public works in the Tirard ministry (December 1887 to March 1888). In 1892 President Sadi Carnot, who was his personal friend, asked him to form a cabinet. Loubet held the portfolio of the interior with the premiership, and had to deal with the anarchist crimes of that year and with the great strike of Carmaux, in which he acted as arbitrator, giving a decision regarded in many quarters as too favourable to the strikers. He was defeated in November on the question of the Panama scandals, but he retained the ministry of the interior in the next cabinet under Alexandre Ribot, though he resigned on its reconstruction in January.

President of the French Republic (1899–1906)
His reputation as an orator of great force and lucidity of exposition and as a safe and honest statesman procured for him in 1896 the presidency of the Senate, and in February 1899 he was chosen president of the republic in succession to Félix Faure by 483 votes as against 279 recorded by Jules Méline, his only serious competitor.

He was marked out for fierce opposition and bitter insult, as the representative of that section of the Republican party which sought the revision of the Dreyfus affair. On the day of President Faure's funeral Paul Déroulède met the troops under General Roget on their return to barracks, and demanded that the general should march on the Elysée. Roget sensibly took his troops back to barracks. At the Auteuil steeplechase in June, the president was struck on the head with a cane by an anti-Dreyfusard. In that month President Loubet summoned Waldeck-Rousseau to form a cabinet, and at the same time entreated Republicans of all shades of opinion to rally to the defence of the state. By the efforts of Loubet and Waldeck-Rousseau the Dreyfus affair was settled, when Loubet, acting on the advice of General Galliffet, minister of war, remitted the ten years' imprisonment to which Dreyfus was condemned at Rennes.

Loubet's presidency saw an acute stage of the clerical question, which was attacked by Waldeck-Rousseau and in still more drastic fashion by the Combes ministry. The French ambassador was recalled from the Vatican in April 1905, and in July the separation of church and state was voted in the Chamber of Deputies. Feeling had run high between France and Britain over the mutual criticisms passed on the conduct of the South African War and the Dreyfus affair respectively. These differences were composed, by the Anglo-French entente, and in 1904 a convention between the two countries secured the recognition of French claims in Morocco in exchange for non-interference with the British occupation of Egypt. President Loubet belonged to the peasant-proprietor class, and had none of the aristocratic proclivities of President Faure. He inaugurated the Paris Exhibition of 1900, received the emperor Nicholas II of Russia at the French maneuvers of 1901 and paid a visit to Russia in 1902.

On 4 July 1902 President Loubet was elected an honorary member of the Rhode Island Society of the Cincinnati.

Loubet also exchanged visits with King Edward VII, with the king of Portugal, the king of Italy and the king of Spain. During the king of Spain's visit in 1905, an attempt was made on his life, a bomb being thrown under his carriage as he and with his guest left the Opéra Garnier. When his presidency came to an end in January 1906, he became the first President of the Third Republic to have served a full term and without resigning a second one. He retired into private life and died on 20 December 1929 at the age of 90.

Honours
He received the following orders and decorations: • Belgium: Grand Cordon of the Order of Leopold, 1900

• Principality of Bulgaria: Grand Cross of St. Alexander, in Diamonds, July 1902

• Denmark: Knight of the Elephant, 1 November 1900

• Ethiopian Empire: Grand Cross of the Star of Ethiopia

• German Empire: Knight of the Black Eagle

• Kingdom of Italy: Knight of the Annunciation, 10 April 1901

• Empire of Japan: Grand Cordon of the Order of the Chrysanthemum, 5 August 1899

• Luxembourg: Knight of the Gold Lion of Nassau, 1902

• Netherlands: Grand Cross of the Netherlands Lion, 1902

• Ottoman Empire: Order of Distinction

• Kingdom of Portugal: Grand Cross of the Tower and Sword, October 1902 – during the visit of King Carlos I to France

• Russian Empire:

• * Knight of St. Andrew

• * Knight of St. Alexander Nevsky

• * Knight of St. Anna, 1st Class

• * Knight of St. Stanislaus, 1st Class

• San Marino: Grand Cross of the Order of San Marino

• Kingdom of Serbia: Grand Cross of the White Eagle

• Spain: Knight of the Golden Fleece, 22 June 1902 – invested by the Duke of Sesto, special representative of the Spanish King, in a ceremony in Paris

• Siam: Knight of the Order of the Royal House of Chakri, 29 August 1902

• Sweden-Norway:

• * Knight of the Seraphim, 17 April 1899

• * Knight of the Norwegian Lion, 1 December 1904

• Monaco: Grand Cross of St. Charles, 15 March 1901

Loubet's Ministry, 27 February – 6 December 1892

 * Émile Loubet – President of the Council and Minister of the Interior
 * Alexandre Ribot – Minister of Foreign Affairs
 * Charles de Freycinet – Minister of War
 * Maurice Rouvier – Minister of Finance
 * Louis Ricard – Minister of Justice and Worship
 * Jules Roche – Minister of Commerce, Industry, and the Colonies
 * Godefroy Cavaignac – Minister of Marine
 * Léon Bourgeois – Minister of Public Instruction and Fine Arts
 * Jules Develle – Minister of Agriculture
 * Yves Guyot – Minister of Public Works

Changes
 * 8 March 1892 – Godefroy Cavaignac succeeds Roche as Minister for the Colonies. Roche remains Minister of Commerce and Industry.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Émile Loubet


text:
Darryl F. Zanuck

Darryl Francis Zanuck (September 5, 1902 – December 22, 1979) was an American film producer and studio executive; he earlier contributed stories for films starting in the silent era. He played a major part in the Hollywood studio system as one of its longest survivors (the length of his career was rivaled only by that of Adolph Zukor). He produced three films that won the Academy Award for Best Picture during his tenure at 20th Century Fox.

Early life
Zanuck was born in Wahoo, Nebraska, the son of Sarah Louise (née Torpin), who later married Charles Norton, and Frank Harvey Zanuck, who owned and operated a hotel in Wahoo. He had an older brother, Donald (1893–1903), who died in an accident when he was only 9 years old. Zanuck was of partial Swiss descent, and raised a Protestant. At age six, Zanuck and his mother moved to Los Angeles, where the better climate could improve her poor health. At age eight, he found his first movie job as an extra, but his disapproving father recalled him to Nebraska. In 1917, despite being 15, he deceived a recruiter, joined the U.S. Army and served in France with the Nebraska National Guard during World War I.

Upon returning to the US, he worked in many part-time jobs while seeking work as a writer. He found work producing movie plots, and sold his first story in 1922 to William Russell and his second to Irving Thalberg. Screenwriter Frederica Sagor Maas, story editor at Universal Pictures' New York office, stated that one of the stories Zanuck sent out to movie studios around this time was completely plagiarized from another author's work.

Zanuck then worked for Mack Sennett and FBO (where he wrote the serials The Telephone Girl and The Leather Pushers) and took that experience to Warner Bros., where he wrote stories for Rin Tin Tin and under a number of pseudonyms wrote over 40 scripts from 1924 to 1929, including Red Hot Tires (1925) and Old San Francisco (1927). He moved into management in 1929, and became head of production in 1931.

Studio head
In April 1933, Zanuck left Warner Bros. over an industry salary dispute when studio head Jack L. Warner refused to comply with the Academy of Motion Pictures Arts and Sciences' decision to restore salary cuts. A few days later, he partnered with Joseph Schenck to form 20th Century Pictures, Inc. with financial help from Joseph's brother Nicholas Schenck and Louis B. Mayer, president and studio head of Loew's, Inc and its subsidiary Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, along with William Goetz and Raymond Griffith. 20th Century released its material through United Artists.

During that short time (1933–1935), 20th Century became the most successful independent movie studio of its time, breaking box-office records with 18 of its 19 films, all profitable, including Clive of India, Les Miserables, and The House of Rothschild. After a dispute with United Artists over stock ownership, Schenck and Zanuck negotiated and used their studio to bring the bankrupt Fox studios in 1935 to create Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corporation.

Zanuck was Vice President of Production of this new studio and took a hands-on approach, closely involving himself in scripts, film editing, and producing.

World War II
When the U.S. entered World War II at the end of 1941, he was commissioned as a colonel in the U.S. Army Signal Corps, but was frustrated to find himself posted to the Astoria studios in Queens, New York, and even worse, serving alongside the spoiled son of Universal's founder, Carl Laemmle Jr., who was chauffeured by limousine to the facility each morning from a luxury Manhattan hotel.

Appalled by such privileged cosseting, Zanuck stormed down to Washington, DC, and into the War Department, demanding a riskier assignment from Chief of Staff, General George C. Marshall. Since American forces were not yet fighting anywhere, Marshall had Zanuck posted to London as chief U.S. liaison officer to the British Army film unit, where at least he would be studying army training films while under Nazi bombardment by Hitler's Luftwaffe.

He even persuaded Lord Mountbatten to allow him along on a secret coastal raid across the Channel to occupied France. The daring nighttime attack on a German radar site was a success. Zanuck, ever the showman, sent his wife in Santa Monica a package of "Nazi-occupied sand", writing her "I've just been swimming on an enemy beach" – not allowed, of course, to tell her where he had been, let alone that they had been under Nazi gunfire and helped the wounded back to the ship.

While Zanuck was on duty, 20th Century-Fox, like the other studios, contributed to the war effort by releasing a large number of their male stars for overseas service and many of their female stars for USO and war bond tours — while creating patriotic films under the often contentious supervision of a fledgling Office of War Information. Jack L. Warner, whose studio lot happened to be next door to a Lockheed factory, was made a colonel in the Army Air Corps without ever actually having to leave the studio, let alone put on a uniform. Not so Zanuck, who pleaded with the War Department, as soon as American troops were posted for action in North Africa, and was rewarded with the assignment of covering the invasion for the Signal Corps.

Director John Ford, a longtime adversary of Zanuck despite the latter's having shepherded Ford's The Grapes of Wrath (1940) past the censorious Hays office into production, had been making films as a commander in the U.S. Navy even before the U.S. entered the war, and he was horrified to discover himself drafted into Zanuck's Africa unit. "Can't I ever get away from you?" he growled. "I bet if I die and go to heaven, you'll be waiting for me under a sign reading 'Produced by Darryl F. Zanuck'."

Ford's chagrin turned to real outrage when Zanuck, after three months, took all their footage from battles in Tunisia, most of which Ford had shot, and hastily assembled it into a picture that went into American theaters without Ford's name appearing anywhere. The movie, released as At The Front with Zanuck credited as producer, was poorly received in the States, called amateurish, dull, and even lacking in realism, prompting the affronted Zanuck to counter in The New York Times that he had resisted the temptation to stage events for a more convincing film. Unfortunately, this controversy landed Zanuck into a Senate subcommittee headed by Senator Harry S. Truman, investigating "instant" colonels who were popping up and concentrating on famous Hollywood names.

Unlike Col. Warner, most colonels from the studio system — Col. Frank Capra, Col. Anatole Litvak, Col. Hal Roach—were actually doing their cinematic jobs, often, like Zanuck, under enemy fire. Nonetheless, when Col. Zanuck was named in this investigation in 1944, the usually combative mogul uncharacteristically and abruptly resigned his commission and left the Army. Biographer Leonard Mosley suggests this to be because of an inadvertent security leak when Zanuck had mentioned a top-secret, brand new, massively powerful bomb the size of a "golf ball" to a fellow officer from his Hollywood world. Whatever the reason, despite having published his own first-person account of his wartime adventures (The New York Times critic Bosley Crowther actually liked this book better than the film), he resigned.

Studio head (1944–1956)
Zanuck returned to 20th Century-Fox in 1944 a changed man. He avoided the studio and instead read books at home, surrounded by his growing family, and caught up on all the films he had missed while overseas in his private screening room. He did not return to take the reins until William Goetz, the man Zanuck had left in charge when he went off to war, left for a job at Universal.

Zanuck's tenure in the 1940s and '50s resonated with his astute choices. He first personally rescued a cumbersome cut of The Song of Bernadette (1943), recutting the completed film into a surprise hit that made a star of newcomer Jennifer Jones, who won the Oscar. He relented to actor Otto Preminger's fervent wish to direct a modest thriller called Laura (1944), casting Clifton Webb in his Oscar-nominated role as Gene Tierney's controlling mentor, with David Raksin's haunting score.

Leading theater director Elia Kazan was carefully nurtured through his first film, A Tree Grows in Brooklyn (1945), based on a popular novel. It did so well, he chose Kazan to direct the first studio film on antisemitism, Gentleman's Agreement (1947), with Gregory Peck playing a Gentile reporter whose life falls apart due to implacable antisemitism emerging from friends and family when he pretends to be Jewish for an exposé. After Kazan triumphed in Tennessee Williams' Broadway hit, A Streetcar Named Desire, he brought Kazan back to direct Pinky (1949), another film about prejudice, this time racial.

The scathing theater world of Bette Davis's aging actress in All About Eve (1950) went on to win six Oscars at the Academy Awards; the disturbing questions of a bomber squadron leader Gregory Peck in Twelve O'Clock High (1949) challenged wartime patriotism. Both showed Zanuck's ability to create box-office hits via brilliant films with unflinching examinations of demanding, hierarchical worlds. Zanuck continued to tackle social issues other studios would not touch, but he stumbled with idealistic projects. Wilson (1944), an expensive picture that was unsuccessful at the box office, and an attempt to make a film of One World, a memoir by politician Wendell Willkie of his tour of war-damaged Europe, a project that was aborted before shooting began.

CinemaScope
As television began to erode Hollywood's audiences in the early 1950s, widescreen presentation was thought to be a potential solution. The 1950 television set duplicated the near-square shape of the 35 mm format in which all movies were shot—and this was no accident. Standardization of film size meant all theaters everywhere could play all films. Even the projection of film formats—i.e. any attempt to break out of the 35 mm format were under the control of the Hays Office, which limited any wide-screen experiments to the 10 largest cities in America. This severely limited the future of any widescreen format.

Zanuck was an early advocate of widescreen projection. One of the first things Zanuck did when he returned to Fox in 1944 was to restart the research on a 50 mm film, shelved in the early 1930s as a cost-cutting measure (a larger-sized film print in the projector meant higher resolution). Impressed by a screening in Cinerama, a three-projector widescreen process, unveiled in 1952 that promised to envelop the viewer in a wrap-around image, Zanuck wrote an essay extolling widescreen's virtues, seeing the new formats as a "participatory" form of recreation, rather than mere passive entertainment, such as television. Cinerama was cumbersome, though, and used three (image) projectors simultaneously (plus a 4th projector for sound), potentially a hugely expensive investment. Fox, like every other studio, had rejected Cinerama when the innovative new process was pitched to them for investment. In retrospect, this looked like a mistake, but nothing could be done. Cinerama was no longer for sale.

Zanuck now urged the studio to keep the same principle, but find a more feasible approach. He approved a massive investment into a system that would be called CinemaScope—$10 million in its first year alone. The urgency was increased when an aggressive appliance tycoon and shareholder, Charles Green, began threatening a proxy takeover, claiming the current Fox administration was wasting stockholders' money. He attempted to conspire with Zanuck to oust the New York-based president of Fox since 1942, Greek-American Spyros Skouras. Zanuck refused; instead, Skouras and he decided to gamble on CinemaScope to save their jobs, and perhaps, their studio.

Skouras made a bold announcement in February; Fox not only had a new and vastly more economical and efficient wide-screen process, but all Fox films would be released in CinemaScope—a format which had yet to be perfected. The Robe (1953), a Biblical      epic, would be its first released feature film. Skouras now began to oversee Fox's somewhat startled research scientists, based on the East Coast and accustomed to Hollywood executives who thought R&D was a waste of money. Then Skouras flew to Paris to meet with a French inventor, Henri Chretien, who had created a new lens that just might be suitable.

Though Fox shares immediately went up, Green found this an even more damning indication of Zanuck and Skouras's leadership and began readying his proxy fight for the May shareholder meeting. This meant that a CinemaScope process had to be publicly demonstrated to the industry's studios, theater owners, manufacturers, to stockholders and the press—by mid-March, to give them enough time to impress their shareholders with their new product and thus win the proxy fight.

With Chretien's new lens, the Fox engineers pulled it together—a widescreen, Cinerama-like picture projected using merely one projector, not three. Zanuck carried out presentations of CinemaScope to the press in cities across the country throughout April, as Skouras and he gathered their forces for the proxy fight. "The enthusiastic response of those who attended these screenings and the laudatory reviews of CinemaScope in the trade press," writes John Belton in his book, Widescreen (1992), "undoubtedly played a major role in Green's defeat" at the May 5 meeting. CinemaScope's need for a wider screen was because of an anamorphic lens attached to the camera which squeezed the image while filming, and another lens on the projector which reverted the process, widening the image during screening.

Implementing this was no easy matter. Directors, cameramen, and production designers were baffled by what to do with all that space. Zanuck encouraged them to spread the action across the screen, to take full advantage of the new proportions. Committed to its all-widescreen slate, Fox had to drop several projects that were deemed unsuitable for CinemaScope—one of them being Elia Kazan's On the Waterfront (1954), which Zanuck could not visualize being in color and widescreen. (Kazan took the project to Columbia, which had thus far stayed on the sidelines of the widescreen debate.) The public demonstrations that spring had already included excerpts from The Robe and How to Marry a Millionaire (also 1953), a glossy star package with Marilyn Monroe and Lauren Bacall.

Of the other studios, MGM had immediately abandoned its own attempts and committed to CinemaScope and United Artists and Walt Disney Productions announced they would make films in the same widescreen process, but the other studios hesitated, and some announced their own rival systems: Paramount's VistaVision, which would prove a worthy rival, and Warner Bros.'s WarnerScope which vanished overnight. The November 3, 1953, premiere of The Robe brought Warner Bros. and Columbia around, though Warner's plan was a full slate of 3-D features for 1954, instead. Zanuck began to make compromises, and eventually capitulated. Smaller theaters rented conventional versions of the studio's films; stereo they could live without altogether. Todd-AO came out in 1955, and after its developer, Mike Todd, died in 1958, Zanuck invested in the process for Fox's most exclusive roadshows. Although pictures continued to be shot in CinemaScope until 1967, it ironically became relegated to Fox's conventional releases.

Nonetheless, the Battle of the Screens seemed to leave Zanuck emotionally exhausted. He began an affair with a young Polish woman, who was actually a guest of his wife, changing her name to Bella Darvi. When he cast Darvi in The Egyptian (1954), she was so mediocre and the script so unsatisfactory, that star Marlon Brando walked off the picture after the first read-through. He agreed to give Fox two other pictures rather than return. Her unintelligible accent helped sink not only the ponderous film, but also his long-enduring marriage, and indeed his life at the studio itself.

Going independent
In 1956, Zanuck withdrew from the studio and left his wife, Virginia Fox, to move to Europe and concentrate on independent producing with a generous contract from Fox that gave him directing and casting control on any projects Fox financed. Eventually, in his absence, Fox began to fall to pieces due to the ballooning budget of Cleopatra (1963), whose entire set constructed at Pinewood Studios had to be scrapped before shooting even started.

Meanwhile, Zanuck picked up a hefty book by Cornelius Ryan called The Longest Day, which promised to fulfill his dream of making the definitive film of D-Day. Flying back to the States, he had to convince a Fox board, staggering under the still-unfinished Cleopatra's $15 million cost, to finance what he was sure would be a box-office hit, as indeed it was, despite skeptics that included his son Richard. He seethed at the $8 million ceiling imposed on him, knowing he would have to dip into his own pocket to finish the film, as he soon did.

To the all-star all-male cast, he added an unknown French beauty, Irina Demick, as a Resistance fighter. She had become his mistress after her casting session for the film's only female speaking part. She would be followed by Geneviève Gilles and the French singer Juliette Gréco. Greco, who in fact had her own recording career, published a kiss-and-tell memoir in the French press which Zanuck managed to suppress.

Probably for reasons like this, though he stayed in Europe for some years, Zanuck would not divorce his wife Virginia, nor she him. She stayed patiently in Santa Monica, a neglected but effective "Maginot Line" against the claims of her rivals. This would later prove to have costly consequences.

Return to Fox
Fearing the studio's profligacy would sink his cherished The Longest Day (1962) as it readied for release, Zanuck returned to control Fox. He replaced Spyros Skouras as president, who had failed to control perilous cost overruns on the still-unfinished Cleopatra and had been forced to shelve Marilyn Monroe's last vehicle, Something's Got to Give after principal photography had started, at a loss of $2 million. Zanuck promptly made his son, Richard D. Zanuck, head of production.

Richard quickly displayed his own flair for picking fresh, new hits, helped by his trusted fellow producer, David Brown. He plucked Rodgers and Hammerstein's least successful Broadway show from obscurity and turned it into the highly successful The Sound of Music (1965), committed to the science-fiction hit Planet of the Apes (1968), unleashed maverick director Robert Altman to create his antiwar comedy MASH (1970) and hired the little-known Francis Coppola to write Patton (1970) into a project for George C. Scott.

However, Zanuck Sr's next all-star World War II film Tora! Tora! Tora! (1970) was plagued with production problems from the start. First, director David Lean pulled out of the Pearl Harbor retelling, and had to be hastily replaced by Richard Fleischer; storms destroyed expensive exteriors, closing down production while they were rebuilt; then the Japanese co-director Akira Kurosawa, miffed by criticism of his early rushes, either really had or merely faked a nervous breakdown before his cast and crew and had to be hospitalized, shutting down production again.

When finally finished, the relentlessly authentic film could not disguise its downbeat nature as a chronicle of American defeat, the last thing critics and audiences wanted to revisit at the height of the Vietnam War in Asia.

As the tumultuous decade wore on, Richard also began to falter with lavish costume musicals that expensively tanked: Rex Harrison as the man who could talk to the animals in Doctor Dolittle (1967), Julie Andrews in the period film Star! (1968), and Barbra Streisand in Hello Dolly (1969).

Decline
By the decade's end, Zanuck Sr. was spending millions on expensive vehicles in Europe for his new girlfriend, Genevieve Gilles. Barely 20 years old, she had her own contract to produce and star in Zanuck's films. Her first acting effort, Hello-Goodbye (1970), died on release. The studio lost $4 million.

From her Paris apartment, Gilles interviewed directors for her next script, which she had written herself. Zanuck was never at the studio, seldom even in America. He seemed to have nothing on but more projects for Gilles. Quietly, eyeing a debt level whose interest they could hardly afford to pay, the nervous board members moved Richard to president and promoted his father to chairman, or more accurately, kicked the older man upstairs, which is how Zanuck began to perceive it. When Gilles' contract came up for renewal, Richard, for the first time, had the power to cancel it and he did.

At the end of 1970, Zanuck hurriedly assembled the board the day before New Year's. Zanuck denounced his son's incompetence in front of the entire board and summarily fired him. Richard, stunned and humiliated, flew back to Los Angeles on New Year's Day; a studio guard stood watch at his office; it was left to his secretary to tell him he had until 6:00 pm to be off the lot.

Zanuck remained chairman and appointed underlings to replace his son as president; an outraged Virginia Zanuck rushed to her son's side with her 100,000 shares of stock. Guilty gifts of stock from her faithless husband had made her one of Fox's major shareholders. She signed them over to a group of disgusted shareholders who staged a rebellion at the annual spring meeting that May. Zanuck was ousted from the studio he had founded and commanded for so long. He was the last Hollywood tycoon to fall.

Richard went to work for Warner Brothers and forgave his father. They spoke on the phone. Virginia put her foot down and Gilles was gone. After so much blood on the floor, Darryl Zanuck was now back in the fold of his original family. When his health failed and he suffered a stroke, Zanuck returned to California and moved in with Virginia. They lived together again and celebrated their 50th wedding anniversary. Richard moved to Universal Pictures with his producing partner, David Brown. They gave 26-year-old Steven Spielberg his first feature; their second movie was The Sting. Darryl predicted it would win the Oscar, and it did.

Personal life
On January 12, 1924, at a time when he was a hopeful screenwriter, he married actress Virginia Fox, with whom he had three children, Darrylin, Susan Marie, and Richard Darryl. Fox retired from acting but became known as a behind-the-scenes influence on her husband's business decisions, as well as a prominent California hostess. The couple separated in 1956, after Zanuck had suddenly resigned from Twentieth Century-Fox to become an independent producer, over Zanuck's well-publicized affairs with other actresses, although they never legally divorced. In 1973, after Zanuck retired from filmmaking, the two reconciled and lived together in Palm Springs, and she cared for him at their home from the time he became mentally incapacitated in the early 1970s until his death in 1979.

Sexual abuse allegations
An October 2017 article by The Daily Beast, following the reporting of several sexual abuse cases committed by Harvey Weinstein reported that "For an origin to all this ugliness, one must turn to Darryl F. Zanuck, the titan who rose from working as the head of production at Warner Bros. to running Twentieth Century Fox. It was in the latter position that he supposedly begat the modern casting couch, holding conferences with a variety of starlets in his office every afternoon from 4-4:30 p.m." The article further adds that "As some have argued, he may have learned this malicious practice from fellow studio head Harry Cohn, chief of Columbia Pictures during the first half of the 20th century, as Cohn reportedly even had a private room next to his office where he conducted his unofficial 'business'", and went on to blame both Zanuck and Cohn for having "helped foster the industry's corrosive atmosphere of sexualized misconduct."

A New York Times article in February 2020 following Weinstein's conviction repeated similar claims about Zanuck, while reporting that he also "had a well-documented habit of flashing his penis at women."

Death
A long-time cigar smoker, he died of pneumonia in 1979, aged 77. He is interred at the Westwood Village Memorial Park Cemetery, near his wife, Virginia Fox in Westwood, Los Angeles, California.

Legacy
Zanuck began tackling serious issues, breaking new ground by producing some of Hollywood's most important and controversial films. Long before it was fashionable to do so, Zanuck addressed issues such as racism (Pinky), antisemitism (Gentleman's Agreement), poverty (The Grapes of Wrath, Tobacco Road), unfair labor exploitation and destruction of the environment (How Green Was My Valley), and institutionalized mistreatment of the mentally ill (The Snake Pit). After The Snake Pit (1948) was released, 13 states changed their laws. For his contributions to the motion picture industry, Zanuck earned three Irving G. Thalberg Awards from the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences (including the first ever awarded); after Zanuck's third win, the rules were changed to limit one Thalberg Award to one person. 20th Century Fox, the studio he co-founded and ran successfully for so many years, screens movies in its Darryl F. Zanuck Theater.

On February 8, 1960, Zanuck received a star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame, for his contribution to the motion picture industry, at 6336 Hollywood Blvd.

In the 2022 Netflix film Blonde, Zanuck was portrayed by David Warshofsky.

Produced by Zanuck

 * 1970 Tora! Tora! Tora! (executive producer)
 * 1964 The Visit
 * 1962 The Chapman Report
 * 1962 The Longest Day
 * 1961 The Big Gamble
 * 1961 Sanctuary
 * 1960 Crack in the Mirror
 * 1958 The Roots of Heaven
 * 1958 The Barbarian and the Geisha
 * 1957 The Sun Also Rises
 * 1957 Island in the Sun
 * 1956 The King and I (executive producer – uncredited)
 * 1956 The Man in the Gray Flannel Suit
 * 1956 Carousel (executive producer – uncredited)
 * 1954 The Egyptian
 * 1952 The Snows of Kilimanjaro
 * 1952 With a Song in My Heart
 * 1952 Viva Zapata!
 * 1951 People Will Talk
 * 1951 David and Bathsheba
 * 1950 All About Eve
 * 1950 No Way Out
 * 1949 Twelve O'Clock High
 * 1949 Pinky
 * 1948 The Snake Pit
 * 1947 Captain from Castile
 * 1947 Gentleman's Agreement
 * 1947 Nightmare Alley
 * 1947 Moss Rose
 * 1946 The Razor's Edge
 * 1946 Dragonwyck
 * 1945 Leave Her to Heaven (executive producer)
 * 1944 Wilson
 * 1944 Buffalo Bill (executive producer)
 * 1941 How Green Was My Valley
 * 1941 Swamp Water
 * 1941 A Yank in the R.A.F.
 * 1941 Moon Over Miami
 * 1941 Man Hunt (executive producer)
 * 1941 Blood and Sand
 * 1941 That Night in Rio
 * 1941 Tobacco Road
 * 1941 Western Union
 * 1941 Hudson's Bay
 * 1940 Chad Hanna
 * 1940 The Mark of Zorro
 * 1940 Down Argentine Way
 * 1940 Brigham Young
 * 1940 The Return of Frank James
 * 1940 The Man I Married
 * 1940 Lillian Russell
 * 1940 Little Old New York
 * 1940 The Grapes of Wrath
 * 1940 The Blue Bird
 * 1939 The Little Princess
 * 1939 Swanee River
 * 1939 Hollywood Cavalcade
 * 1939 Here I Am a Stranger
 * 1939 The Rains Came
 * 1939 The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes
 * 1939 Stanley and Livingstone
 * 1939 Second Fiddle
 * 1939 Susannah of the Mounties (executive producer)
 * 1939 Young Mr. Lincoln
 * 1939 Rose of Washington Square
 * 1939 The Story of Alexander Graham Bell
 * 1939 The Hound of the Baskervilles (executive producer)
 * 1939 Wife, Husband and Friend
 * 1939 Tail Spin
 * 1939 Jesse James
 * 1938 Kentucky (executive producer)
 * 1938 Submarine Patrol
 * 1938 My Lucky Star
 * 1938 Gateway
 * 1938 I'll Give a Million
 * 1938 Little Miss Broadway
 * 1938 Just Around the Corner
 * 1938 Rebecca of Sunnybrook Farm
 * 1938 Always Goodbye
 * 1938 Josette (executive producer)
 * 1938 Kentucky Moonshine
 * 1938 International Settlement
 * 1938 Happy Landing
 * 1938 In Old Chicago
 * 1937 Love and Hisses
 * 1937 Lancer Spy
 * 1937 Wife, Doctor and Nurse
 * 1937 Thin Ice
 * 1937 Wake Up and Live
 * 1937 Wee Willie Winkie
 * 1937 Slave Ship
 * 1937 Seventh Heaven
 * 1937 Nancy Steele Is Missing! (executive producer)
 * 1936 Banjo on My Knee (executive producer)
 * 1936 Reunion (executive producer)
 * 1936 Pigskin Parade
 * 1936 Ramona (executive producer)
 * 1936 Sing, Baby, Sing
 * 1936 To Mary – with Love
 * 1936 Poor Little Rich Girl
 * 1936 The Road to Glory
 * 1936 Half Angel
 * 1936 Under Two Flags
 * 1936 The Country Beyond
 * 1936 A Message to Garcia
 * 1936 It Had to Happen
 * 1936 The Prisoner of Shark Island
 * 1935 Professional Soldier
 * 1935 Show Them No Mercy!
 * 1935 The Man Who Broke the Bank at Monte Carlo
 * 1935 Thanks a Million
 * 1935 Metropolitan
 * 1935 The Call of the Wild
 * 1935 Cardinal Richelieu
 * 1935 Les Misérables
 * 1935 Folies Bergère de Paris
 * 1934 The Mighty Barnum
 * 1934 Bulldog Drummond Strikes Back
 * 1934 Born to Be Bad
 * 1934 The Last Gentleman
 * 1934 Looking for Trouble
 * 1934 Moulin Rouge
 * 1933 Gallant Lady
 * 1933 Advice to the Lovelorn
 * 1933 Blood Money
 * 1933 The Bowery
 * 1933 Ex-Lady
 * 1933 The Working Man
 * 1933 42nd Street
 * 1933 Parachute Jumper
 * 1932 20,000 Years in Sing Sing
 * 1932 Three on a Match
 * 1932 The Cabin in the Cotton
 * 1932 Life Begins
 * 1932 Doctor X
 * 1932 The Dark Horse
 * 1932 The Rich Are Always with Us
 * 1932 The Man Who Played God
 * 1931 The Public Enemy
 * 1931 Illicit
 * 1931 Little Caesar
 * 1930 The Doorway to Hell
 * 1930 Three Faces East
 * 1929 The Show of Shows
 * 1929 On with the Show!
 * 1928 Tenderloin
 * 1927 The Jazz Singer
 * 1927 The First Auto
 * 1926 So This Is Paris
 * 1925 Lady Windermere's Fan

Written by Zanuck

 * 1968 D-Day Revisited (Documentary)
 * 1960 Crack in the Mirror (as Mark Canfield)
 * 1944 The Purple Heart (story – as Melville Crossman)
 * 1942 China Girl (story – as Melville Crossman)
 * 1942 Thunder Birds (original story – as Melville Crossman)
 * 1942 Ten Gentlemen from West Point
 * 1941 A Yank in the R.A.F. (story – as Melville Crossman)
 * 1940 The Great Profile (story – uncredited)
 * 1938 Alexander's Ragtime Band (contributing writer – uncredited)
 * 1937 This Is My Affair (story – uncredited)
 * 1935 Thanks a Million (story – as Melville Crossman)
 * 1935 G Men (story)
 * 1935 Folies Bergère de Paris (contributing writer – uncredited)
 * 1933 Lady Killer (story – uncredited)
 * 1933 Baby Face (story – as Mark Canfield)
 * 1932 The Dark Horse (story)
 * 1931 Little Caesar (story – uncredited)
 * 1930 The Life of the Party
 * 1930 Maybe It's Love (as Mark Canfield)
 * 1929 Say It with Songs (story)
 * 1929 Madonna of Avenue A (story)
 * 1929 Hardboiled Rose (story)
 * 1928 My Man (story)
 * 1928 Noah's Ark (story)
 * 1928 The Midnight Taxi (story – as Gregory Rogers)
 * 1928 State Street Sadie (story – as Melville Crossman)
 * 1928 Pay as You Enter (story – as Gregory Rogers)
 * 1928 Tenderloin (story – as Melville Crossman)
 * 1927 Ham and Eggs at the Front (story)
 * 1927 Good Time Charley (story)
 * 1927 Jaws of Steel (Rin Tin Tin story as Gregory Rogers)
 * 1927 Slightly Used (story – as Melville Crossman)
 * 1927 The Desired Woman (story – as Mark Canfield)
 * 1927 The First Auto (story)
 * 1927 Old San Francisco
 * 1927 The Black Diamond Express (story)
 * 1927 Simple Sis (story – as Melville Crossman)
 * 1927 Irish Hearts (story – as Melville Crossman)
 * 1927 The Missing Link (as Gregory Rogers)
 * 1927 Tracked by the Police (Rin Tin Tin story)
 * 1927 Wolf's Clothing
 * 1926 The Better 'Ole (screenplay)
 * 1926 Across the Pacific (adaptation)
 * 1926 Footloose Widows
 * 1926 The Social Highwayman
 * 1926 Oh! What a Nurse! (adaptation)
 * 1926 The Little Irish Girl (adaptation)
 * 1926 The Caveman (scenario)
 * 1925 Three Weeks in Paris (story as Gregory Rogers, screenplay as Darryl Zanuck)
 * 1925 Hogan's Alley
 * 1925 Seven Sinners
 * 1925 Red Hot Tires
 * 1925 The Limited Mail
 * 1925 Eve's Lover
 * 1925 A Broadway Butterfly
 * 1925 On Thin Ice (as Gregory Rogers)
 * 1924 The Lighthouse by the Sea (Rin Tin Tin story – as Gregory Rogers)
 * 1924 The Millionaire Cowboy (story)
 * 1924 Find Your Man (Rin Tin Tin story – as Gregory Rogers)
 * 1924 For the Love of Mike (Short)
 * 1924 Sherlock's Home (Short)
 * 1924 William Tells (Short)
 * 1924 King Leary (Short)
 * 1924 Money to Burns (Short)
 * 1924 When Knighthood Was in Tower (Short)
 * 1924 Julius Sees Her (Short)
 * 1923 Judy Punch (Short)
 * 1923 When Gale and Hurricane Meet (Short)
 * 1923 The End of a Perfect Fray (Short)
 * 1923 Gall of the Wild (Short)
 * 1923 Some Punches and Judy (Short)
 * 1923 Two Stones with One Bird (Short)
 * 1923 Six Second Smith (Short)
 * 1923 The Knight That Failed (Short)
 * 1923 The Knight in Gale (Short)
 * 1923 Fighting Blood
 * 1922 The Storm
 * 1922 Round Two (Short)

Zanuck in documentaries; television appearances

 * 2013 Don't Say Yes Until I Finish Talking (Documentary)
 * 2013 Don't Say No Until I Finish Talking: The Story of Richard D. Zanuck (Documentary)
 * 2011 Hollywood Invasion (Documentary)
 * 2011 Making the Boys (Documentary)
 * 2010 Moguls & Movie Stars: A History of Hollywood (TV documentary)
 * Fade Out, Fade In (uncredited)
 * The Attack of the Small Screens: 1950–1960
 * 2009 Coming Attractions: The History of the Movie Trailer (Documentary)
 * 2009 1939: Hollywood's Greatest Year (TV documentary)
 * 2006 Darryl F. Zanuck: A Dream Fulfilled (TV documentary)
 * 2005 Filmmakers vs. Tycoons (Documentary)
 * 2003 American Masters (TV documentary)
 * None Without Sin
 * Backstory (TV documentary)
 * Gentleman's Agreement (2001)
 * The Longest Day (2000)
 * History vs. Hollywood (TV documentary)
 * The Longest Day: A Salute to Courage (2001)
 * 2001 Cleopatra: The Film That Changed Hollywood (TV documentary)
 * Great Books (TV documentary)
 * The Grapes of Wrath (1999)
 * Biography (TV documentary)
 * Anna and the King: The Real Story of Anna Leonowens (1999)
 * Sonja Henie: Fire on Ice (1997)
 * 1997 20th Century-Fox: The First 50 Years (TV documentary)
 * 1996 Rodgers & Hammerstein: The Sound of Movies (TV documentary)
 * 1995 The First 100 Years: A Celebration of American Movies (TV documentary)
 * 1995 Darryl F. Zanuck: 20th Century Filmmaker (TV documentary)
 * 1995 The Casting Couch (Video documentary)
 * 1975 20th Century Fox Presents...A Tribute to Darryl F. Zanuck (TV documentary)
 * The David Frost Show (TV)
 * Episode #3.211 (1971)
 * Episode #2.203 (1970)
 * 1968 D-Day Revisited (Documentary)
 * What's My Line? (TV )
 * Episode September 16, 1962 – Mystery Guest
 * Episode October 5, 1958 – Mystery Guest
 * Cinépanorama (TV documentary)
 * Episode 11 (June 1960)
 * Small World (TV Series)
 * Episode #1.22 (1959) ... Himself
 * The Ed Sullivan Show (TV Series)
 * Episode #11.39 (1958)
 * 1954 The CinemaScope Parade
 * 1953 Screen Snapshots: Hollywood's Great Entertainers (Short)
 * 1950 Screen Snapshots: The Great Showman (Short)
 * 1946 Hollywood Park (Short)
 * 1943 Show-Business at War (Documentary)
 * 1943 At the Front (Documentary)
 * 1943 At the Front in North Africa with the U.S. Army (Documentary)

title: Darryl F. Zanuck


text:
USS Pennsylvania

USS Pennsylvania may refer to:

 * USS Pennsylvania (1837) was a 130-gun ship of the line launched in 1837 and burned to prevent capture in 1861
 * A screw steamer, laid down as Keywaden in 1863 but never launched, was renamed Pennsylvania while she lay in the ways before being broken up in 1884
 * USS Pennsylvania (ACR-4) was the lead ship of the Pennsylvania-class cruiser launched in 1903; renamed Pittsburgh in 1912; scrapped in 1931
 * USS Pennsylvania (BB-38) was the lead ship of the Pennsylvania-class battleship launched in 1915 and sunk during atomic bomb testing in 1948
 * USS Pennsylvania (SSBN-735) is an Ohio-class submarine launched in 1988 and currently in service

See also
 * USS Pennsylvania R. R. No. 9 (SP-679)
 * USS Pennsylvanian
 * USS Keystone State

title: USS Pennsylvania