text:
Burton Richter

Burton Richter (March 22, 1931 – July 18, 2018) was an American physicist. He led the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center (SLAC) team which co-discovered the J/ψ meson in 1974, alongside the Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL) team led by Samuel Ting for which they won Nobel Prize for Physics in 1976. This discovery was part of the November Revolution of particle physics. He was the SLAC director from 1984 to 1999.

Life and work
A native of New York City, Richter was born into a Jewish family in Brooklyn, and was raised in the Queens neighborhood of Far Rockaway. His parents were Fanny (Pollack) and Abraham Richter, a textile worker. He graduated from Far Rockaway High School, a school that also produced fellow laureates Baruch Samuel Blumberg and Richard Feynman. He attended Mercersburg Academy in Pennsylvania, then continued on to study at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, where he received his bachelor's degree in 1952 and his PhD in 1956. He then joined the faculty of Stanford University, becoming a full professor in 1967. Richter was director of the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center (SLAC) from 1984 to 1999. He was a senior fellow of the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies and Paul Pigott Professor in the Physical Sciences Emeritus of Stanford University.

As a professor at Stanford, Richter designed the SPEAR (Stanford Positron-Electron Asymmetric Ring) particle accelerator with the help of another Stanford physics professor, David Ritson. When eventually resources were secured, Richter led the building of SPEAR, with the support of the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission. With it he led a team that discovered a new subatomic particle he called a ψ (psi). This discovery was also made by the team led by Samuel Ting at Brookhaven National Laboratory, but he called the particle J. The particle thus became known as the J/ψ meson. Richter and Ting were jointly awarded the 1976 Nobel Prize in Physics for their work.

During 1975 Richter spent a sabbatical year at CERN where he worked on the ISR experiment R702.

In 1987, Richter received the Golden Plate Award of the American Academy of Achievement.

Richter was a member of the JASON advisory group and served on the board of directors of Scientists and Engineers for America, an organization focused on promoting sound science in American government.

Richter was elected to the American Philosophical Society in 2003.

In May 2007, he visited Iran and Sharif University of Technology.

Richter is one of the 20 American recipients of the Nobel Prize in Physics to sign a letter addressed to President George W. Bush in May 2008, urging him to "reverse the damage done to basic science research in the Fiscal Year 2008 Omnibus Appropriations Bill" by requesting additional emergency funding for the Department of Energy’s Office of Science, the National Science Foundation, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology.

In 2012, President Barack Obama announced that Burton Richter was a co-recipient of the Enrico Fermi Award, along with Mildred Dresselhaus.

In 2014, President Obama also awarded Richter the 2012 National Medal of Science. His citation read, "For pioneering contributions to the development of electron accelerators, including circular and linear colliders, synchrotron light sources, and for discoveries in elementary particle physics and contributions to energy policy."

In 2013, Richter commented on an open letter from Tom Wigley, Kerry Emanuel, Ken Caldeira, and James Hansen, that Angela Merkel was "wrong to shut down nuclear".

In 2014, Richter was among the residents of a continuing care retirement center who filed an unsuccessful lawsuit against a continuing care retirement home's financial practices.

Richter died on July 18, 2018, in Stanford, California, at the age 87.

Publications

 * Barber, W. C.; Richter, B.; Panofsky, W. K. H.; O'Neill, G. K. & B. Gittelman. "An Experiment on the Limits of Quantum Electro-dynamics", High-Energy Physics Laboratory at Stanford University, Princeton University, United States Department of Energy (through predecessor agency the Atomic Energy Commission), Office of Naval Research, (June 1959).
 * Richter, B. "Design Considerations for High Energy Electron – Positron Storage Rings", Stanford Linear Accelerator Center, Stanford University, United States Department of Energy (through predecessor agency the Atomic Energy Commission), (November 1966).
 * Boyarski, A. M.; Coward, D.; Ecklund, S.; Richter, B.; Sherden, D.; Siemann, R. & C. Sinclair. "Inclusive Yields of pi{sup +}, pi{sup -}, K{sup +}, and K{sup -} from H{sub 2} Photoproduced at 18 GeV at Forward Angles", Stanford Linear Accelerator Center, Stanford University, United States Department of Energy (through predecessor agency the Atomic Energy Commission), (1971).
 * Richter, B. "Total Hadron Cross Section, New Particles, and Muon Electron Events in e{sup +}e{sup -} Annihilation at SPEAR", Stanford Linear Accelerator Center, Stanford University, United States Department of Energy (through predecessor agency the U.S. Energy Research and Development Administration (ERDA)), (January 1976).
 * Richter, B. "Forty-five Years of e{sup +}e{sup -} Annihilation Physics: 1956 to 2001", Stanford Linear Accelerator Center, United States Department of Energy, (August 1984).
 * Richter, B. "Charting the Course for Elementary Particle Physics", Stanford Linear Accelerator Center, United States Department of Energy, (February 16, 2007).
 * Richter, B. Beyond Smoke and Mirrors: Climate Changes and Energy in the 21st Century. Second Edition. Cambridge University Press, 2014. ISBN 978-1-107-67372-4

title: Burton Richter


text:
Hazel

Hazels are plants of the genus Corylus of deciduous trees and large shrubs native to the temperate Northern Hemisphere. The genus is usually placed in the birch family Betulaceae,  though some botanists split the hazels (with the hornbeams and allied genera) into a separate family Corylaceae. The fruit of the hazel is the hazelnut.

Hazels have simple, rounded leaves with double-serrate margins. The flowers are produced very early in spring before the leaves, and are monoecious, with single-sex catkins. The male catkins are pale yellow and 5–12 cm long, and the female ones are very small and largely concealed in the buds, with only the bright-red, 1-to-3 mm-long styles visible. The fruits are nuts 1–2.5 cm long and 1–2 cm diameter, surrounded by an involucre (husk) which partly to fully encloses the nut.

The shape and structure of the involucre, and also the growth habit (whether a tree or a suckering shrub), are important in the identification of the different species of hazel.

The pollen of hazel species, which are often the cause for allergies in late winter or early spring, can be identified under magnification (600×) by their characteristic granular exines bearing three conspicuous pores.

Species
Corylus has around 14–18 species. The circumscription of species in eastern Asia is disputed, with World Flora Online and the Flora of China differing in which taxa are accepted, within this region. WFO accepts 17 species while Flora of China accepts 20 species (including Corylus mandshurica). Only those taxa accepted by both sources are listed below.

The species are grouped as follows:
 * Nut surrounded by a soft, leafy involucre, multiple-stemmed, suckering shrubs to 12 m tall
 * Involucre short, about the same length as the nut
 * Corylus americana – American hazel, eastern North America
 * Corylus avellana – Common hazel, Europe and western Asia
 * Corylus heterophylla – Asian hazel, Asia
 * Corylus yunnanensis – Yunnan hazel, central and southern China
 * Involucre long, twice the length of the nut or more, forming a 'beak'
 * Corylus colchica – Colchican filbert, Caucasus
 * Corylus cornuta – Beaked hazel, North America
 * Corylus maxima – Filbert, southeastern Europe and southwest Asia
 * Corylus sieboldiana – Asian beaked hazel, northeastern Asia and Japan (syn. C. mandshurica)
 * Nut surrounded by a stiff, spiny involucre, single-stemmed trees to 20–35 m tall
 * Involucre moderately spiny and also with glandular hairs
 * Corylus chinensis – Chinese hazel, western China
 * Corylus colurna – Turkish hazel, southeastern Europe and Asia Minor
 * Corylus fargesii – Farges' hazel, western China
 * Corylus jacquemontii – Jacquemont's hazel, Himalaya
 * Corylus wangii – Wang's hazel, southwest China
 * Involucre densely spiny, resembling a chestnut burr
 * Corylus ferox – Himalayan hazel, Himalaya, Tibet and southwest China (syn. C. tibetica).

Several hybrids exist, and they can occur between species in different sections of the genus, e.g. Corylus × colurnoides (C. avellana × C. colurna). The oldest confirmed hazel species is Corylus johnsonii found as fossils in the Ypresian-age rocks of Ferry County, Washington.

Chilean hazel (Gevuina avellana), despite its name, is not related to this genus.

Ecology
At least 21 species of fungus have a mutualistic relationship with hazel. Lactarius pyrogalus grows almost exclusively on hazel, and hazel is one of two kinds of host for the rare Hypocreopsis rhododendri. Several rare species of Graphidion lichen depend on hazel trees. In the UK, five species of moth are specialised to feed on hazel including Parornix devoniella. Animals which eat hazelnuts include red deer, dormouse and red squirrel.

Uses
The nuts of all hazels are edible. The common hazel is the species most extensively grown for its nuts, followed in importance by the filbert. Nuts are also harvested from the other species, but apart from the filbert, none is of significant commercial importance.

A number of cultivars of the common hazel and filbert are grown as ornamental plants in gardens, including forms with contorted stems (C. avellana 'Contorta', popularly known as "Corkscrew hazel" or "Harry Lauder's walking stick" from its gnarled appearance); with weeping branches (C. avellana 'Pendula'); and with purple leaves (C. maxima 'Purpurea').

Hazel is a traditional material used for making wattle, withy fencing, baskets, and the frames of coracle boats. The tree can be coppiced, and regenerating shoots allow for harvests every few years. There is a 7 year cycle (cut and grow) for hurdle (fence) making.

Hazels are used as food plants by the larvae of various species of Lepidoptera. Including Eriocrania chrysolepidella.

Culture
The Celts believed hazelnuts gave one wisdom and inspiration. There are numerous variations on an ancient tale that nine hazel trees grew around a sacred pool, dropping into the water nuts that were eaten by salmon (a fish sacred to Druids), which absorbed the wisdom. A Druid teacher, in his bid to become omniscient, caught one of these special salmon and asked a student to cook the fish, but not to eat it. While he was cooking it, a blister formed and the pupil used his thumb to burst it, which he naturally sucked to cool, thereby absorbing the fish's wisdom. This boy was called Fionn Mac Cumhail (Fin McCool) and went on to become one of the most heroic leaders in Gaelic mythology.

"The Hazel Branch" from Grimms' Fairy Tales claims that hazel branches offer the greatest protection from snakes and other things that creep on the earth. In the Grimm tale "Cinderella", a hazel branch is planted by the protagonist at her mother's grave and grows into a tree that is the site where the girl's wishes are granted by birds.

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

title: Hazel


text:
Charles Goodnight

Charles Goodnight (March 5, 1836 – December 12, 1929), also known as Charlie Goodnight, was a rancher in the American West. In 1955, he was inducted into the Hall of Great Westerners of the National Cowboy & Western Heritage Museum.

Early years
Goodnight was born in Macoupin County, Illinois, northeast of St. Louis, the fourth child of Charles Goodnight and the former Charlotte Collier. Goodnight's father's grave is located in a pasture south of Bunker Hill, Illinois. Goodnight was descended from immigrant pioneer Hans Michael Gutknecht, from Mannheim, Germany, making him a distant relative of Harry S. Truman.

Goodnight moved to Texas in 1846 with his mother and stepfather, Hiram Daugherty. In 1856, he became a cowboy and served with the local militia, fighting against Comanche raiders. A year later, in 1857, Goodnight joined the Texas Rangers. Goodnight is also known for raising and leading a posse against the Comanche in 1860 that located the Indian camp where Cynthia Ann Parker was living with her husband, Peta Nocona, then guiding Texas Rangers to the camp, leading to Cynthia Ann's recapture. In 1864, after serving in the Frontier Regiment during the American Civil War, Goodnight returned to Palo Pinto County, Texas.

Goodnight described what it took to become a scout, "First, he must be born a natural woodsman and have the faculty of never needing a compass except in snow storms or darkness."

Cattle

In 1866, Oliver Loving and he drove their first herd of cattle from Fort Belknap (Texas) to Fort Sumner, along what would become known as the Goodnight-Loving Trail. The trail crossed ninety miles of the southern portion of the Llano Estacado, before crossing the Pecos River at Horsehead Crossing. Goodnight invented the chuckwagon, during this initial cattle drive. They extended the trail into Colorado, where they established a contract with John Wesley Iliff, eventually providing 30,000 head of longhorn by 1876. They also formed a partnership with John Chisum, supplying cattle to Fort Sumner. In 1868, Goodnight established Rock Canon Ranch, west of Pueblo, Colorado.

To take advantage of available grass, timber, water, and game, Goodnight founded in 1876 what was to become the first Texas Panhandle ranch, the JA Ranch, in the Palo Duro Canyon. By 1885, the ranch covered 1,325,000 acres and held 100,000 head of cattle.

Bison
In addition to raising cattle 1876, the Goodnights preserved a herd of native plains bison that year, which is said to survive to this day in Caprock Canyons State Park. The herd in Caprock Canyons was actually donated in name by JA Ranch, which Goodnight managed for years. Bison of this herd were introduced into the Yellowstone National Park in 1902 and into the larger zoos and ranches throughout the nation. He also crossbred the bison with domestic cattle, which he called cattalo.

Personal life
On July 26, 1870, Goodnight married Mary Ann "Molly" Dyer, a teacher from Weatherford, west of Fort Worth. He developed a practical sidesaddle for Molly.

One of his great-great-great nephews was professional bull rider Brent Thurman.

Goodnight Ranch House restoration
The Charles and Mary Ann (Molly) Goodnight Ranch House is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. The Goodnight home is located one-quarter mile (400 m) south of U.S. Highway 287 about 40 mi east of Amarillo. The home was renovated by the Armstrong County Museum from 2006 to 2012. The structure was painted to resemble its appearance in 1887. The interior was restored based on research into the original paint and wallpapers used. In 2005, Amarillo businessman Brent Caviness and a partner donated the home and 30 acres. Mary Ann Goodnight taught children in the bunkhouse. The cowboys slept there at night, and she moved their things aside for school during the day, Goodin said.

The house was scheduled to open in April 2013.

Reputation
Goodnight is presented as a good and decent man. J. Frank Dobie, who knew Goodnight, is quoted in Charles Goodnight: Father of the Texas Panhandle as having said: "I have met a lot of good men, several fine gentlemen, hordes of cunning climbers, plenty of loud-braying asses and plenty of dumb oxen, but I haven't lived long enough or traveled far enough to meet more than two or three men I'd call great. This is a word I will not bandy around. To me, Charles Goodnight was great-natured."

Other views have been expressed. In Time-Life's 1973 publication The Cowboys, the author states (p. 62): "Goodnight was no better than the rest. Once when his wife expressed shock at some vigilante hangings ('I understand', she exclaimed, 'they hanged them to a telegraph pole!') Charlie replied quietly, 'Well, I don't think it hurt the telegraph pole.' What she didn't know was that the victims had actually been strung up with Goodnight's full approval." The men hanged were caught in the act of murder and cattle rustling.

In literature
The western novelist Matt Braun's novel Texas Empire is based on the life of Goodnight and fictionalizes the founding of the JA Ranch. The Goodnight Trail is the name of a novel by Ralph Compton. Similarly, Mari Sandoz's Old Jules Country in the part "Some dedicated men" relates the difficulties of Goodnight's cattle drives to Colorado. In James A. Michener's novel, Centennial, the Skimmerhorn Trail is based on the actual Goodnight-Loving Trail. In addition, his name is mentioned in the novel; the character R. J. Poteet appears to have been based on Goodnight. T.L. Davis' Shadow Soldier features the Goodnight-Loving cattle drive of 1866 as a means for J.D. Wilkes to make it to Colorado with Oliver Loving and in the sequel Home to Texas, Goodnight is often referenced. All four of Larry McMurtry's Lonesome Dove series novels include brief appearances by Goodnight. His appearance in the prequel Dead Man's Walk is historically inaccurate. The story takes place during the Santa Fe Expedition of 1841, when Goodnight would have been only five years old. Further, Lonesome Dove is a fictionalized account of Goodnight and Loving's third cattle drive. Woodrow F. Call represents Goodnight, Augustus McCrae is Oliver Loving. Though the characters have personalities rather different from their real-life counterparts, the novel borrows heavily from actual events, in particular Loving's ambush by Indians and Goodnight's attentive care as Loving died from an arrow-induced infection. Call returns McCrae's body to Texas, just as Goodnight returned Loving for burial in Weatherford. The marker that Call carves for Deets is based on an epitaph Charles Goodnight created for Bose Ikard, an ex-slave who worked alongside Goodnight most of his life. He also plays his largest role in the final volume, Streets of Laredo. He is played in the miniseries Dead Man's Walk by Chris Penn, in Comanche Moon by Jeremy Ratchford, and in Streets of Laredo by James Gammon.

Namesakes
The following are named for Goodnight:

 * Charles Goodnight Memorial Trail
 * Former town of Goodnight (now a ghost town) in Armstrong County, site of the former Goodnight Baptist College, and birthplace in 1920 of scientist Cullen M. Crain
 * The highway to Palo Duro Canyon State Park east of Canyon, Texas
 * Goodnight Elementary School, Pueblo, Colorado
 * Goodnight Middle School, San Marcos, Texas
 * A street in Pueblo, Colorado
 * A cabin at YMCA Camp Carter in Fort Worth, Texas
 * A street in Mansfield, Texas, off of Debbie Lane
 * A street in Alto, New Mexico, outside Ruidoso, is named the Goodnight-Loving Trail.
 * A street in Justin, Texas, off F.M. 407 (Goodnight Trail), part of Fort Worth, is located near the Texas Motor Speedway. Part of the subdivision Reatta Ridge also has names such as Loving, Chinos, and Lone Star within the subdivision.

Goodnight Barn Pueblo, Colorado
https://www.goodnightbarnpueblo.org/

title: Charles Goodnight


text:
Charles Wyndham, 2nd Earl of Egremont

Charles Wyndham, 2nd Earl of Egremont, PC (19 August 1710 – 21 August 1763), of Orchard Wyndham in Somerset, Petworth House in Sussex, and of Egremont House in Mayfair, London, was a British statesman who served as Secretary of State for the Southern Department from 1761 to 1763.

Origins
He was the eldest son and heir of Sir William Wyndham, 3rd Baronet, of Orchard Wyndham, Secretary at War in 1712, Chancellor of the Exchequer in 1713 and Tory leader in the House of Commons during the reign of King George I (1714–1727) and during the early years of King George II (1727–1760).

His mother was Catherine Seymour, daughter of Charles Seymour, 6th Duke of Somerset, and sister of Algernon Seymour, 7th Duke of Somerset, created in 1749 Earl of Egremont and Baron Cockermouth, with special remainder to his nephew Charles Wyndham, the subject of this article.

Inheritance
He succeeded to the Orchard Wyndham estates and as 4th baronet on his father's death in 1740, and in 1750 succeeded by special remainder as 2nd Earl of Egremont, on the death of his maternal uncle Algernon Seymour, 7th Duke of Somerset, 1st Earl of Egremont, and received, as his share of the Seymour inheritance, the former Percy estates, including Egremont Castle in Cumbria, Leconfield Castle in Yorkshire and the palatial Petworth House in Sussex (rebuilt by the 6th Duke ). These were formerly owned by the Percy family, and had been inherited by the 7th Duke of Somerset from his mother, Lady Elizabeth Percy (died 1722), daughter and heiress of Joceline Percy, 11th Earl of Northumberland.

His younger brother was Percy Wyndham-O'Brien, 1st Earl of Thomond, created Earl of Thomond, having become the chosen heir of his mother's sister's childless husband Henry O'Brien, 8th Earl of Thomond (1688–1741).

Career
Wyndham served as member of parliament for Bridgwater (Somerset) in 1734–1741, Appleby (Cumberland) in 1741–1747, and for Taunton (Somerset) in 1747–1750.

Seven Years' War
In October 1761, Egremont was appointed Secretary of State for the Southern Department in succession to William Pitt, 1st Earl of Chatham. His term of office, during which he acted in concert with his brother-in-law George Grenville, was mainly occupied with the declaration of war on Spain and with the negotiations for peace with France and Spain, the terms of which Wyndham seems to have disliked. He was also involved with the proceedings against John Wilkes. He died in office 21 August 1763.

He was Lord Lieutenant of Cumberland 1751–1763 and Lord Lieutenant of Sussex 1762–1763.

Marriage and progeny
On 12 March 1750/51 Wyndham married Hon. Alicia Maria Carpenter, a daughter of George Carpenter, 2nd Baron Carpenter of Killaghy, by his wife Elizabeth Petty. He had progeny including:
 * George O'Brien Wyndham (18 December 1751 – 11 November 1837), succeeded as 3rd Earl of Egremont.
 * Elizabeth Alicia Maria Wyndham (1752 – 10 February 1826), who married Henry Herbert, 1st Earl of Carnarvon, and had children.
 * Frances Wyndham (9 July 1755 – 15 January 1795), who married Charles Marsham, later Earl of Romney, and had children.
 * Charlotte Catherine Wyndham (5 September 1756 – April 1757).
 * Percy Charles Wyndham (27 September 1757 – 5 August 1833).
 * Charles William Wyndham (8 October 1760 – 1 July 1828).
 * William Frederick Wyndham (6 April 1763 – 11 February 1828), who married Frances Mary Harford, daughter of Frederick Calvert, 6th Baron Baltimore, and had children; his second wife was Julia de Smorzewska, Countess de Spyterki, by whom he also had children.

Assessment
According to the Encyclopædia Britannica Eleventh Edition, Horace Walpole perhaps rated Egremont's talents too low when he said he had neither knowledge of business, nor the smallest share of parliamentary abilities.

title: Charles Wyndham, 2nd Earl of Egremont


text:
Talk:Ford Motor Company

Old Ford Motor financials?
I'm looking for old financial data since the company's founding until the present. Unit sales, revenue, costs, profits, etc. Are there wikidata or other trusted data sources that takes us beyond the recent 20 years? Phil Wolff (talk)

Aston Martin
Didn't Ford sell its remaining 8% stake in Aston Martin? 2601:2C6:5000:92F0:D9E9:6984:7D37:5EEE (talk) 23:00, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

 * I thought they sold it back in 2008 but article is locked so I can’t fix it 2601:19E:4300:83E0:1D0:CFDA:9F25:44AF (talk) 14:56, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

 * Do you have a reference?  Stepho  talk 21:13, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm sure that Ford sold Aston Martin in 2007. 90.231.234.93 (talk) 14:05, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

1999 sales
According to a report from 1999, Ford was excepted to produce or sell 7.77 million vehicles in 1999. This number included Mazda, which was owned to 1/3 by Ford 1996 to November 2008. However, OICA shows that Ford produced "only" around 6.5 million in 1999, and excludes Mazda, I wonder why.

According to this report, Ford (including Mazda, Volvo, Jaguar, Lincoln) was also expected to increase its vehicle production to 9.15 million a year in 2005, and surpass General Motors as the largest automaker. 90.231.234.93 (talk) 18:25, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

 * It's hard to comment on "this report" when we don't know what that report is. Links would be helpful.
 * It's always a difficult question for whether to combine brands or to list them separately. In this case, I agree with OICA to list Mazda separately. Ford has always been closely linked with Mercury and Lincoln for almost it's entire existence. The advertising of them was always Ford for the common many, Mercury for the more affluent man and Lincoln for the rich man, with buyers expected to change brands as their economic position improved. Mazda, Jaguar, Volvo Range Rover have joined and later split from Ford, were not intimately linked to Ford for extended periods of time and did not form part of that economic progression.
 * Also be aware that some reports are US only, N.America only, or world-wide. And whether or not they include pickups, light trucks, full size trucks (eg 20 ton), motorcycles, knockdown kits (common in export markets) and vehicles made but not sold. A real minefield.  Stepho  talk 23:58, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

 * My first point on that is Mazda never came to be a consolidated subsidiary of Ford, even if Ford had a sizeable, potentially controlling stake. And Japanese companies are strongly guaranteed by the government, so less than 50% there may be a theoretical controlling stake but not an actual one. That's the reason I think Ford/Mazda and other companies (VW/Suzuki, Renault/Nissan..) were always counted separately by OICA despite the shareholdings technically giving control to one side.

 * Second (and this is a confusion very common, especially among American editors) production and sales are not the same thing. Companies sell all the time things they didn't actually produce (some are trillion dollar ones, as Apple) and claim sales in minority-owned operations as their own (eg Ford neighbour GM). It looks good at AGMs.

 * Third, OICA had to decide to which manufacturer it gave the production numbers, as companies tend to count for themselves facilities in which they only have a minority or a  non-controlling stake. The press and shareholders may go with it, but OICA needed to avoid the double counts. --Urbanoc (talk) 12:20, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
 * 1999 report in which Mazda is included in Ford's total production (estimated to 7.77 million in 1999, including Mazda; OICA, which excludes Mazda, estimated around 6.5 million). Ford, including Mazda, was expected to surpass General Motors as the largest automaker in 2005, with an estimated production of 9.15 million vehicles, in comparison to G.M. which was estimated to produce 9.10 million. (However, Ford's production stagnated in the 2000s, so Ford even didn't keep its place as the second-largest automaker; Ford was the second-largest automaker, behind G.M. for the last year in 2004, with 7.91 million vehicles - including Mazda - as Toyota, with 7.87 million vehicles in 2004, increased its production to 8.4 million vehicles in 2005.) 212.100.101.104 (talk) 22:06, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

 * Before we proceed, what do you complain about on this article exactly? I didn't find your points of contention the first time I looked around, but I supposed the 1999 OICA rankings were mentioned in passing. I glanced the article again a couple of times, and still didn't find anyting on 1999 OICA rankings. Most of the general rankings I found through the artice were sales and revenue/profit rankings by American media companies (like Forbes) which aren't generally considered too biased and certainly not try to diminish Ford (sometimes Tesla, but that's another point). Other mentions come from Ford itself (certainly not a source aimed at diminish Ford in positive rankings). There's a lot of conflating sales with production (as I said, something common in articles edited by Americans). The only use of an OICA ranking I found was a 2015 one in the lede, but by that time Ford was already almost completely out of Mazda, so a 1999 Mazda share ownership is a moot point, and you are free to remove that info as isn't presented in-line with Wikipedia policies, it uses Wikipedia as a source instead of OICA and doesn't clarify the ranking is the OICA one (as you mentioned, there are other production rankings, all of them paywalled BTW). Your criticism seems to be directed at the OICA ranking as a whole, not to a thing mentioned here, so the discussion should be cut/pasted to Talk:List of manufacturers by motor vehicle production where it makes sense, if you agree. If not, there's nothing more to say as this is irrelevant here. My following statements are made as if the discussion was moved.

 * So, after clarifying that caveat, I can answer to your post. Thanks for the news article discussing the ranking. If LA Times is correct, at least is actually a production ranking instead of a sales ranking, which a lot of people tried to equate here (the study is lousy and laughably wrong, however, I'd look to read it too have a good time, but I don't want to spend the money...) I'd say the absolute statement "33.4% share is considered controlling interest" is just plain wrong, as that's not how things work in practice in the Japanese corporate world. You can have even less than that and actually control a company and more and the company can still operate independently if provisions are made. That only applies at  things like naming directors and certain legal proceedings (ie from a legal standpoint). I still think OICA took the sensible route here.

 * Having said that, there was never opposition to add alternative production rankings that use other criteria. And PricewaterhouseCoopers is widely used through Wikipedia, especially in US-focused articles, so I don't oppose its usage here. If, as part of the study, Autofacts created a 1999 ranking and not just focused on the two American companies and if you have access to such ranking, you can add it here alongside the OICA one. But we won't use that failed study to "fix" the OICA ranking as that is original research and is against Wikipedia policy. That wouldn't be an OICA ranking but a Wikipedia made up ranking combining things arbitrarly. Hope that clarifies things. --Urbanoc (talk) 12:23, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

 * According to OICA's 1999 report, Ford produced 6.638 million vehicles in 1999 (excluding Mazda), and Mazda (then 33,3 % owned by Ford) 967 000 vehicles. Combined, Ford-Mazda produced 7.605 million, almost 100 000 less than 7.7 million which was estimated in the report that Ford was expected to increase its production to 9.15 million in 2005, and then surpass General Motors (with estimated 9.10 million in 2005) as the largest automaker. 212.100.101.104 (talk) 20:17, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

 * Ah, so your real goal is to "prove" that Ford is bigger than GM. That OICA report separates Ford and Mazda. It also separates GM and Isuzu. With some creative accounting we can "prove" either one is bigger by choosing whether to include full subsidiaries, partial subsidiaries, cars only, cars+pickups, cars+pickups+heavy trucks, US only production, global production, knock-down kits, etc, etc.  Stepho  talk 23:15, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

 * I never said Ford is bigger than G.M., but that Ford was expected in 1999 to increase its production to 9.15 million vehicles a year by 2005, and then surpass General Motors as the largest automaker, as General Motors was expected to produce 9.10 million in 2005.
 * Please listen or read more carefully what I'm saying or writing! 212.100.101.104 (talk) 17:19, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

 * Please state clearly what changes you want made.  Stepho  talk 23:17, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

 * In 2004, most news reports claimed that Ford had been surpassed by Toyota as the second-largest automaker (behind General Motors) in 2003, but that was not the case if Mazda's sales/production would be included, alternatively if Toyota would be counted alone without Daihatsu and Hino.
 * According to OICA, Toyota (including Daihatsu and Hino) produced more than 7.1 million vehicles in 2003 (of which over 6.2 million by Toyota alone), and Ford around 6.5 million. However, Mazda made around 1 million in 2003 and Ford-Mazda would therefore be larger than Toyota both in 2003 and 2004; first in 2005 did Toyota surpass Ford. 90.231.234.93 (talk) 22:51, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

 * Much easier if you include links to the data so that we don't have to waste time searching for it.:
 * 2003: https://www.oica.net/wp-content/uploads/2007/06/Worldranking2003.pdf
 * 2004: https://www.oica.net/wp-content/uploads/2007/06/worldranking.pdf
 * In both cases OICA listed Toyota separately from Daihatsu and Hino (opposite of your claim). Ford is listed separately from Mazda (agreeing with you). If we combine them as per your wish (which is not a universally agreed thing) then you get the following totals:
 * {| class="wikitable"

!Year!!Total!!Company!!Company!!Company
 * 2003||7,220,764 ||Toyota (6,240,526) ||Daihatsu (897,116) ||Hino (83,122)
 * 2003||7,718,667 ||Ford+Jaguar+VolvoCars (6,566,089) ||Mazda (1,152,578
 * 2004||7,874,694 ||Toyota (6,814,554) ||Daihatsu (965,295) ||Hino (94,845)
 * 2004||7,919,104 ||Ford+Jaguar+VolvoCars (6,644,024) ||Mazda (1,275,080)
 * }
 * This does indeed put the combined Ford production ahead of the combined Toyota production by about 1%. However, you have to make your case about why OICA's choice of combining companies is wrong. Remember that according to WP:RS and WP:SYNTH, we should rely on 3rd party references and not try to synthesis our own results.  Stepho  talk 01:53, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
 * 2004||7,919,104 ||Ford+Jaguar+VolvoCars (6,644,024) ||Mazda (1,275,080)
 * }
 * This does indeed put the combined Ford production ahead of the combined Toyota production by about 1%. However, you have to make your case about why OICA's choice of combining companies is wrong. Remember that according to WP:RS and WP:SYNTH, we should rely on 3rd party references and not try to synthesis our own results.  Stepho  talk 01:53, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
 * This does indeed put the combined Ford production ahead of the combined Toyota production by about 1%. However, you have to make your case about why OICA's choice of combining companies is wrong. Remember that according to WP:RS and WP:SYNTH, we should rely on 3rd party references and not try to synthesis our own results.  Stepho  talk 01:53, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Tractors
why is there no mention of the Ford tractor line. It litterally revolutionized the industry twice. 2600:1008:B071:29E1:0:29:24EE:EE01 (talk) 22:07, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

 * In the article there is an entire section on them - Ford Motor Company. This links to Fordson and Ford N-series tractor.  Stepho  talk

@ 154.115.236.98 (talk) 23:21, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

"NYSE: F" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=NYSE:_F&redirect=no NYSE: F] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. mwwv  converse ∫ edits  17:02, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Ford Motor Company


text:
Aero Spacelines

Aero Spacelines Inc. was an American aircraft manufacturer from 1960 to 1968 that converted Boeing 377 Stratocruisers into the famous Guppy line of airplanes, re-engineered to transport oversized cargo such as space exploration vehicles.

History
Aero Spacelines was formed with only one customer in mind: the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. NASA needed to transport outsize cargo from manufacturing plants such as the Michoud Assembly Facility in New Orleans, Louisiana, to Cape Canaveral Air Force Station in Florida. These items were too large to be safely transported by rail or truck. Shipping by sea was time-consuming, expensive, and risky, with the danger of damaging the cargo on turbulent seas. But no aircraft of the day was large enough.

John M. "Jack" Conroy, a retired United States Air Force pilot, and Lee Mansdorf, an aircraft salesman and entrepreneur, formulated the Guppy concept one evening over dinner. They decided to create a company to manufacture outsized aircraft. Conroy hired Robert W. Lillibridge as vice president of manufacturing and engineering, and a team was assembled for the project. Financing was provided by venture capitalist William Ballon, a World War II combat veteran also from the Army Air Corps. In 1960, Aero Spacelines began working at Van Nuys Airport, California, to transform a Boeing 377 airliner into the Pregnant Guppy.

NASA's Project Gemini made early use of the Pregnant Guppy to transport the first and second stages of Titan II GLV from the Martin Co. in Baltimore, Maryland, to Cape Canaveral, Florida. Subsequent versions of the Guppy series hauled the S-IVB, the third stage of the Saturn booster from California to Florida.

In 1967, Aero Spacelines encountered financial difficulties and was acquired by Unexcelled Inc. That corporation was sold to Tracor Aviation. Conroy organized a new company, Conroy Aircraft, which built more airplanes for transporting oversized cargo. By November 1968, NASA had paid Aero Spacelines $11,591,633 in contracts. Conroy ceased operations in 1972.

As of March 2021, one Super Guppy was still in operation. NASA uses it to transport vehicles, and leases it to third parties when not in use.

In early 2016, NASA used that aircraft to transport the main structure of Orion crew capsule, from its Michoud Manufacturing Facility in New Orleans, Louisiana, to the Kennedy Space Center in Florida, where the capsule underwent its first uncrewed test flight aboard the Space Launch System rocket. In November 2019, NASA used the aircraft to transport the Orion capsule from the Kennedy Space Center to the Mansfield Lahm Airport in Ohio for thermal and vacuum tests.

List of aircraft
Aero Spacelines produced three Guppy aircraft models.
 * Pregnant Guppy (1962) - 1 built
 * Super Guppy (1965) - 5 built
 * Mini Guppy (1967) - 3 built

title: Aero Spacelines


text:
Chemical mortar battalion

Chemical mortar battalions were United States Army non-divisional units that were attached to infantry divisions during World War II. They were armed with 4.2-inch (107 mm) chemical mortars. For this reason they were also called the "Four-deucers".

In 1943, General Mark Clark's Fifth Army established a policy that no infantry division would be committed to combat without a chemical mortar battalion attached. As a result, when infantry units were rotated out of combat, the mortar battalions often stayed in the line and were attached to fresh units. Chemical mortars were in such high demand that often the companies of a battalion would be split up and assigned to different divisions. On the first day that General George S. Patton's Third Army became operational, in the summer of 1944, he issued a standing order to his staff that no infantry division would be committed to combat without a chemical mortar battalion attached, and no infantry regiment would be committed without a mortar company attached.

Development and capabilities of the chemical mortar
Mortars came to be acknowledged by U.S. Army commanders and personnel as being one of the most effective means of quickly striking at stationary targets, such as machine gun nests, prepared strongpoints, pillboxes and even artillery positions. Other advantages mortars offered compared to full-sized artillery pieces were their easier transportation, assembly, and disassembly. Thanks to their relatively small size, mortars were able to fire from concealed positions, such as natural escarpments on hillsides, or from woods.

The 4.2 in (107 mm) chemical mortar was developed from the British World War I-era 4 inch (101.6 mm) Stokes mortar. The Stokes mortar could fire twenty shells per minute and had a range of 1,100 yd and in this way was capable of overwhelming enemy trenches. The American-built M1 4.2 inch (107 mm) mortar, first introduced in 1924, had a rifled barrel and a range of 2,300 yd. By the 1930s, after modifying the bore, improving the two-legged support and the recoil mechanism, and producing barrels made of seamless nickel steel, the M1A1 model was capable of sending shells 2,400 yd

Chemical mortars were so named because of their original intent of firing poison gas, incendiary and smoke marker shells. Chemical shells were on standby during World War II, to be used in retaliation should the enemy employ chemical weapons first. By 1942, after authorization had been sought and granted to use high explosive shells, the new M2 model was produced with a stronger barrel. Its rate of fire was 40 rounds in the first two minutes, 100 rounds in the first 20 minutes and thereafter a sustained rate of 80 rounds per hour. These variations were caused by the stresses and strains on the barrels and the rest of firing mechanisms that were being imposed by different firing conditions.

Later, the mortar was developed to be capable of firing shells from a mere 565 yd at minimum propellant charge, to a range of 4,400 yd. The propellant charges were manufactured as square disks with a hole in the middle, strung together, fitted into cartridges, and sewn together into bundles of various thicknesses. The rifled barrel gave the mortar remarkable accuracy; fire was often called on targets within fifty yards of friendly positions. The low-velocity shells were totally silent in transit and gave no warning of their powerful explosions (the M2 mortar's M3 high explosive shell contained 3.64 kg of explosives, placing it midway between the 2.18 kg of the 105 mm howitzer M2A1's M1 shell and the 6.88 kg of the 155 mm howitzer M1's M102 shell), which tended to create panic among enemy forces who were unexpectedly subjected to their firepower. The mortar was called the "grass-cutter" by German troops because its high explosive shell exploded and fragmented just a few inches above ground level. The mortars often fired white phosphorus munitions (WP) shells to block enemy observation with smoke; white phosphorus also caused casualties and fires, being especially effective against dug-in troops because the burning particles arced upward and fell directly down into foxholes.

Battalion history and activation
Chemical mortar battalions had their origins in gas regiments, which were first organized in the interwar period. They were redesignated chemical regiments in 1929. The 1st and 2nd Gas Regiments were allotted to the Regular Army. The 1st Gas Regiment had seen service in World War I. It was inactivated on 15 April 1935 and concurrently reorganized entirely with Organized Reserve personnel as a Regular Army Inactive unit. It was inactivated on 9 October 1940 at Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, by transfer of personnel to the 902nd Chemical Regiment. The 2nd Chemical Regiment was constituted in the Regular Army 1 April 1931, assigned to the Zone of the Interior, and allotted to the Fourth Corps Area. Company C, the only active unit, was organized 1 April 1931 at Fort Benning, Georgia, from Company D, 1st Chemical Regiment. The remainder of the regiment was organized in June 1932 with Organized Reserve personnel as a Regular Army Inactive unit at Columbus, Georgia. It was inactivated on 25 August 1940 at Columbus by relief of personnel.

There were two separate Regular Army chemical battalions, one animal-drawn and one motorized. The animal-drawn 1st Chemical Battalion was located in Hawaii due to the mountainous terrain there. Company A, the only active unit, was organized 4 March 1931 at Schofield Barracks from the 2nd Separate Chemical Company. It was disbanded on 12 March 1942. The 2nd Chemical Battalion was organized on 16 April 1935, less Companies B and C, at Edgewood Arsenal, Maryland, and performed duties as the support unit for the Chemical Warfare School. Companies B and C were allotted to the Third Corps Area as inactive units and organized with Organized Reserve personnel.

Four chemical regiments (the 101st-104th) were allotted to the National Guard in 1931, but these were never organized and were withdrawn from the National Guard in 1934 and allotted to the Organized Reserve as the 307th-310th Chemical Regiments. The headquarters of the 307th, 308th, and 310th Chemical Regiments were initiated in 1937, but the 309th Chemical Regiment was never initiated. All the regiments were disbanded on 18 October 1943. The 301st and 302nd Gas Regiments were constituted and initiated in the Organized Reserve in 1923, while the 303rd-306th Chemical Regiments were initiated in 1931. All the regiments were disbanded on 18 October 1943. The 902nd and 904th Chemical Regiments were constituted in the Organized Reserve in 1940 and intended to be used as support units for the Chemical Warfare School, but they were both inactivated by relief of personnel on 7 August 1941.

Wartime
Upon U.S. entry into World War II, the 1st and 2nd Chemical Regiments had only one company between them on active duty, the two separate chemical battalions also each had one active company, and there were also two separate chemical companies, one of which would be lost on Bataan and the other inactivated. The headquarters of the 1st and 2nd Chemical Regiments and 1st Separate Chemical Battalion were disbanded on 12 March 1942. Four more chemical mortar battalions (the 81st-84th) were activated by mid-1942, but the number of battalions remained at six until May 1943. After the 2nd, 3rd, 83rd, and 84th Battalions were sent overseas to participate in the Allied invasion of Sicily, the War Department authorized the activation of four more battalions in May and June 1943 (the 85th-88th).

The 2nd, 3rd, and 83rd Chemical Mortar Battalions were withdrawn from Italy in July 1944 and assigned to the U.S. Seventh Army to participate in the invasion of southern France, leaving only the 84th Battalion to support the U.S. Fifth Army. In June 1944, the Fifth Army converted two antiaircraft artillery battalions into the 99th and 100th Chemical Mortar Battalions, but they were not ready for combat until October 1944.

In late 1943 in the European Theater, Colonel Hugh V. Rowan, the theater chemical officer, had recommended 24 chemical mortar battalions (two battalions per corps and two per army) be assigned to the theater. However, the troop ceiling and troop basis forwarded from the War Department for the European Theater provided for only seven battalions. General Omar Bradley, the theater commander, tried unsuccessfully to get a battalion from Italy. Colonel Rowan realized that if the battalions in the United States reorganized under the September 1943 table of organization which reduced battalion strength from 1,010 to 622 officers and men, that would produce enough surplus personnel for eleven battalions (taking into account the battalions already existing and those to be created) and the theater would only need to requisition one more battalion above the War Department troop list. The 92nd Chemical Mortar Battalion was activated in England using a number of men which had been freed by the reorganization of the 81st Chemical Mortar Battalion.

In February 1944, a disappointed Rowan learned that the battalions in the United States had already been reorganized under the September 1943 table of organization. Rowan had successfully convinced the War Department to give him twelve battalions in the troop basis, but only seven would be available in 1944, including the two battalions in England (the 81st and 92nd) and two more (the 86th and 87th) that would arrive around projected date of D-Day.

Until the American drive into western Germany, chemical mortars were in short supply in the Twelfth United States Army Group; in September 1944, there were only four battalions (the 81st, 86th, 87th, and 92nd) assigned, and the battalions suffered from shortages of qualified officer and enlisted replacements. In December 1944, the 91st Chemical Mortar Battalion arrived in Europe and a "steady influx" of new battalions began; the 89th, 90th, 93rd, 94th, 95th, 96th, and 97th, leaving the Twelfth Army Group with a total of twelve battalions by the end of the war. The Sixth Army Group had four battalions (the 2nd, 3rd, 83rd, and 99th).

25 battalions served overseas, five of which (the 92nd and 97th-100th) were formed overseas.

Seven additional battalions formed late in the war via conversion from field artillery battalions were activated too late to serve overseas.

After World War II, the U.S. War Department transferred the operations and development of chemical mortars to the Ordnance Department, in this way making the mortar an official infantry weapon. The 2nd Chemical Mortar Battalion was the last of the chemical mortar battalions, and the only one to see combat after World War II. It was reactivated in 1949 and saw 1,008 days of combat during the Korean War. In January 1953, its combat personnel were transferred to the 461st Infantry Battalion (Heavy Mortar.)

Battalion organization
Originally, chemical mortar battalions had 36 officers, one warrant officer, and 973 enlisted men, for a total of 1,010, distributed among a headquarters, headquarters company, medical detachment, and four mortar companies. Each mortar company had twelve mortars organized into two platoons, each with two sections, with each section having three squads of one mortar each. Sidearms for battalion members included 820 M1911 pistols. There were 88 2.5-ton trucks and 36 various smaller vehicles. In actual combat, the 2.5 ton truck assigned as a prime mover often proved too conspicuous, so mortar crews sometimes used jeeps or mules to transport the mortar parts.

In July 1944, the 84th Chemical Mortar Battalion in Italy reorganized under the "long ignored" table of organization of September 1943. Lieutenant Colonel Ronald LeV. Martin of the 92nd Chemical Mortar Battalion received permission to eliminate one company of his battalion, anticipating future developments. In mid-1944, the War Department again revised the table of organization based upon the recommendations of Chemical Warfare Service officers with combat experience. One mortar company was eliminated to better fit with the three infantry regiments of the "triangular" infantry division, and the mortar companies were reorganized to have three platoons of four mortars each instead of two platoons of six mortars each. The strength of the battalion rose from 622 to 672, mainly because of the redesignation of the headquarters detachment of 63 men as a headquarters company with 155 men. Per Table of Organization and Equipment 3-25 of 29 September 1944, a typical chemical mortar battalion had an establishment of 37 officers, 138 NCOs and 481 junior enlisted men not counting the attached medical detachment. It consisted of:

 * 1 chemical mortar battalion headquarters company, containing:
 * 1 company headquarters section (4 officers, 4 noncommissioned officers, and 14 junior enlisted men)
 * 1 battalion headquarters section (5 officers, 6 noncommissioned officers, and 20 junior enlisted men
 * 1 maintenance section (1 officer, 2 noncommissioned officers, and 6 junior enlisted men)
 * 3 ammunition sections (each of 2 noncommissioned officers and 29 junior enlisted men)
 * 3 chemical mortar companies
 * Attached medical detachment (1 officer, 1 noncommissioned officer, and 13 junior enlisted men)

A chemical mortar company usually had an establishment of 9 officers, 40 noncommissioned officers and 118 junior enlisted men. It consisted of:
 * 1 chemical mortar company headquarters section (three officers, seven noncommissioned officers, and 28 junior enlisted men)
 * 3 mortar platoons

A mortar platoon consisted of:
 * One platoon headquarters (two officers, three noncommissioned officers, and six junior enlisted men)
 * Four mortar squads, each of which had one squad leader, (noncommissioned officer) one gunner, (noncommissioned officer) one assistant gunner, (junior enlisted man) three ammunition bearers, (junior enlisted men) and two truck drivers (junior enlisted men)

In November 1944, the 84th and 100th Chemical Mortar Battalions stationed in Italy reorganized under the table of organization of September 1944. Beginning in December 1944 and continuing into spring 1945, battalions in Europe reorganized under the new table of organization.

title: Chemical mortar battalion


text:
Ardbraccan House

Ardbraccan House (known sometimes historically as Ardbraccan Palace) is a large Palladian country house in the town of Ardbraccan, County Meath, Ireland. The historic house served from the 1770s to 1885 as the residence of the Church of Ireland Lord Bishop of Meath.

Construction
Ardbraccan itself had been the location of the residence of a Catholic bishop for over one thousand years, first of the Bishop of Ardbraccan and, later, following the merger of many small dioceses into the Diocese of Meath, as the residence of the Bishop of Meath. By the Middle Ages a large Tudor house, containing its own church, known as St. Mary's, stood on the site. However, in 1734, Bishop Arthur Price (1678-1752) decided to replace the decaying mansion with a new Georgian residence. Initially the two wings of the house were built, before the main four-bay two-storey block of the house was completed in the 1770s by Bishop Maxwell. It was partly designed by the acclaimed 18th-century German architect Richard Castle (also known as Richard Cassels), who was the architect of many notable Irish buildings including Leinster House in Dublin.

Controversy/legend
Legend suggested that gravestones from a neighbouring Catholic cemetery at Markiestown, some miles away, were removed and used as the steps into the servants' quarters in the residence. Whether that was an urban myth based on the intense rivalry between the state-established Church of Ireland and the local, predominantly Catholic, population in Bohermeen (who were subject to the discriminatory Penal Laws and forced to pay tithes to the Church of Ireland) or had some basis in fact, is unclear. It is possible that the house utilised stone from the derelict pre-Reformation church at the cemetery, though it was notable that from the mid to late eighteenth century the cemetery was denuded of all gravestones.

Sale
The new bishop's palace became famous for its architecture. Funded by government grants and locally paid tithes, the Church of Ireland bishop held court from the mansion, which was the centre of a large agricultural demesne. However the disestablishment of the Church of Ireland in 1871, following the previous scrapping of Roman Catholic-paid tithes, fatally weakened the economic survival of the bishop's estate, which was left totally reliant on the small local Church of Ireland community, and in 1885 the bishop sold the estate and house, moving to a more suitable smaller mansion nearby named Bishopscourt. Ardbraccan House was bought by the eldest son of Hugh Law, a former Lord Chancellor of Ireland, and remained in the ownership of his descendants until sold by Colonel Owen Foster in 1985 to Tara Mines, who used it as a guest residence for visiting businessmen.

Today
In the late 1990s, the house was bought by David Maher who invested large sums to completely restore the mansion. In 2002 the restoration of Ardbraccan House won An Taisce's Best Restoration of a Private Building award, and it was opened to the public.

In the early 2000s, the (Meath) planning authority approved controversial plans to build a major new motorway linking Clonee and Kells through part of the house's historic demesne. The Irish Georgian Society and environmentalists criticised the proposal. The M3 motorway eventually opened in 2010.

In 2013 the property was sold to Charles Noell.

title: Ardbraccan House


text:
Philip W. Anderson

Philip Warren Anderson (December 13, 1923 – March 29, 2020) was an American theoretical physicist and Nobel laureate. Anderson made contributions to the theories of localization, antiferromagnetism, symmetry breaking (including a paper in 1962 discussing symmetry breaking in particle physics, leading to the development of the Standard Model around 10 years later), and high-temperature superconductivity, and to the philosophy of science through his writings on emergent phenomena. Anderson is also responsible for naming the field of physics that is now known as condensed matter physics.

Education and early life
Anderson was born in Indianapolis, Indiana, and grew up in Urbana, Illinois. His father, Harry Warren Anderson, was a professor of plant pathology at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign; his maternal grandfather was a mathematician at Wabash College, where Anderson's father studied; and his maternal uncle was a Rhodes Scholar who became a professor of English, also at Wabash College. He graduated from University Laboratory High School in Urbana in 1940. Under the encouragement of a math teacher by the name of Miles Hartley, Anderson enrolled at Harvard University to study under a fully-funded scholarship. He concentrated in "Electronic Physics" and completed his B.S. in 1943, after which he was drafted into the war effort and built antennas at the Naval Research Laboratory until the end of the Second World War in 1945. As an undergraduate, his close associates included particle-nuclear physicist H. Pierre Noyes, philosopher and historian of science Thomas Kuhn and molecular physicist Henry Silsbee. After the war, Anderson returned to Harvard to pursue graduate studies in physics under the mentorship of John Hasbrouck van Vleck; he received his Ph.D. in 1949 after completing a doctoral dissertation titled "The theory of pressure broadening of spectral lines in the microwave and infrared regions."

Career and research
From 1949 to 1984, Anderson was employed by Bell Laboratories in New Jersey, where he worked on a wide variety of problems in condensed matter physics. During this period he developed what is now called Anderson localization (the idea that extended states can be localized by the presence of disorder in a system) and Anderson's theorem (concerning impurity scattering in superconductors); invented the Anderson Hamiltonian, which describes the site-wise interaction of electrons in a transition metal; proposed symmetry breaking within particle physics (this played a role in the development of the Standard Model and the development of the theory behind the Higgs mechanism, which in turn generates mass in some elementary particles); created the pseudospin approach to the BCS theory of superconductivity; made seminal studies of non-s-wave pairing (both symmetry-breaking and microscopic mechanism) in the superfluidity of helium-3, and helped found the area of spin-glasses. He was elected a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 1963.

Anderson spent a year as lecturer at Cambridge University in 1961–1962, and recalled that having Brian Josephson in a class was "a disconcerting experience for a lecturer, I can assure you, because everything had to be right or he would come up and explain it to me after class."

From 1967 to 1975, Anderson was a professor of theoretical physics at Cambridge. In 1977 Anderson was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics for his investigations into the electronic structure of magnetic and disordered systems, which allowed for the development of electronic switching and memory devices in computers. Co-researchers Sir Nevill Francis Mott and John van Vleck shared the award with him. In 1982, he was awarded the National Medal of Science. He retired from Bell Labs in 1984 and was Joseph Henry Professor Emeritus of Physics at Princeton University.

Anderson's writings included Concepts in Solids, Basic Notions of Condensed Matter Physics and The Theory of Superconductivity in the High-Tc Cuprates. Anderson served on the board of advisors of Scientists and Engineers for America, an organization focused on promoting sound science in American government.

In response to the discovery of high-temperature superconductors in the 1980s, Anderson proposed Resonating valence bond (RVB) theory to explain the phenomenon. While many found the idea unconvincing, RVB theory proved instrumental in the study of spin liquids.

Anderson also made conceptual contributions to the philosophy of science through his explication of emergent phenomena, which became an inspiration for the science of complex systems. In 1972, he wrote an article called "More is Different" in which he emphasized the limitations of reductionism and the existence of hierarchical levels of science, each of which requires its own fundamental principles for advancement.

In 1984, he participated in the founding workshops of the Santa Fe Institute, a multidisciplinary research institute dedicated to the science of complex systems. Anderson also co-chaired the institute's 1987 conference on economics with Kenneth Arrow and W. Brian Arthur, and participated in its 2007 workshop on models of emergent behavior in complex systems.

In 1987, Anderson testified to the US Congress, "against the construction of the Superconducting Super Collider (SSC), a 40 TeV proton-proton collider in Texas that would have been the biggest experiment in particle physics. Anderson's opposition to the SSC did not directly lead to its cancellation in 1993—spiralling costs were the main factor—but he was perhaps its most high-profile opponent." He was, "skeptical of the supposed boost it would provide to science in the US and the claim that the spin-offs would provide great return on investment."

A 2006 statistical analysis of scientific research papers by José Soler, comparing the number of references in a paper to the number of citations, declared Anderson to be the "most creative" amongst ten most cited physicists in the world. In 2021, Oxford University Press published the biography A Mind over Matter: Philip Anderson and the Physics of the Very Many by Andrew Zangwill.

Awards and honors
He was awarded the Oliver E. Buckley Condensed Matter Prize in 1964, the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1977, the Golden Plate Award of the American Academy of Achievement in 1978, was elected a Foreign Member of the Royal Society (ForMemRS) in 1980, and was elected a member of the American Philosophical Society in 1991. He was awarded the National Medal of Science in 1982.

Personal life
Anderson was an atheist and was one of 22 Nobel Laureates who signed the Humanist Manifesto. Anderson was also interested in Japanese culture, living there for a time and becoming a 1st Dan master of the board game Go. The Nihon Ki-in awarded him a lifetime achievement award in 2007, and Anderson joked that there were only four people in Japan who could beat him.

Anderson married Joyce Gothwaite in 1947 and they had a daughter, Susan. He died in Princeton, New Jersey, on March 29, 2020, at the age of 96.

Journal articles

 * Pdf.
 * Pdf.
 * Pdf.
 * Pdf.
 * Pdf.
 * Pdf.
 * Pdf.
 * Pdf.
 * Pdf.
 * Pdf.

title: Philip W. Anderson


text:
DJ Premier

Christopher Edward Martin (born March 21, 1966), known professionally as DJ Premier (also known as Preemo), is an American record producer and DJ. He has been frequently lauded as one of hip hop's greatest producers by publications such as Vibe. He formed the hip hop duo Gang Starr—alongside American rapper Guru—in 1983, with whom he has released seven albums. He formed another hip hop duo, PRhyme–with American rapper Royce da 5'9"—in 2014, with whom he has released two albums.

Premier has produced each Gang Starr's releases, as well as many of those by the Gang Starr Foundation. Alongside this, he has been credited with production work on releases for ASAP Mob, AZ, Common, the Game, Griselda, Jeru the Damaja, J. Cole, Jay-Z, Joey Badass, Kanye West, Limp Bizkit, M.O.P., Mos Def, Nas, the Notorious B.I.G., O.C., Rakim, Run the Jewels, and Showbiz & A.G., among others. Despite mainly working in underground hip hop, he has produced Billboard Hot 100-charting singles including "Ain't No Other Man" (2006) by Christina Aguilera, "The Actual" (1998) by All City, "Mass Appeal" (1994) and "You Know My Steez" (1997) by Gang Starr, "MC's Act Like They Don't Know" (1995) by KRS-One, and "Nas Is Like" (1999) by Nas.

Martin founded the record label, Year Round Records in 2010. He has signed acts including New York group NYGz, New Jersey rapper Nick Javas, and Houston rapper Khalil. Tha Blaqprint by Blaq Poet, which features 13 Premier productions, was released by Year Round Records through Fat Beats Records in June 2009.

Early life
Christopher Edward Martin was born in the Fifth Ward of Houston, Texas on March 21, 1966. He was then raised in Prairie View, Texas, before moving to Brooklyn, New York, during his teenage years. He attended Prairie View A&M University, where he honed his musical skills as the campus DJ, and he also occasionally performed with the Marching Storm band.

Musical career

The early line-up of the Gang Starr Foundation in the mid-1990s included Jeru the Damaja, Group Home, Big Shug, and Gang Starr. Premier was fully responsible for the production of Jeru the Damaja's first two albums, The Sun Rises in the East and Wrath of the Math. Jeru released three subsequent albums that did not include Premier's involvement. In terms of his Group Home collaboration, Premier commented in a 2003 interview: "They [Group Home] don't respect what fed them." He further explained that he only agreed to produce the track "The Legacy" because of Guru's involvement.

Other artists closely tied to the Gang Starr Foundation who Premier collaborated with include: Afu-Ra, Bahamadia, Krumbsnatcha, Big Shug, Smiley the Ghetto Child, and NYGz.

Premier collaborated with MC Jeru the Damaja on the album The Sun Rises in the East, released in 1994, as well as the 1996 follow-up, Wrath of the Math. Premier produced and supervised Livin' Proof by Group Home, also from the Gang Starr Foundation; although overlooked at the time of its 1995 release, the album eventually received acclaim. He produced several tracks on fellow Gang Starr Foundation member Afu-Ra's debut album Body of the Life Force and KRS-One's debut solo album Return of the Boom Bap.

Besides the Gang Starr Foundation, Premier is closely affiliated with M.O.P., which he names as one of his all-time favorite groups. The relationship started with the remix of "Rugged, Neva Smoove" in 1994, a single from the group's first album, which also included the exclusive B-side "Downtown Swinga." From then, Premier produced about one-third of the songs on each subsequent album and overseeing and mixing the projects. On M.O.P.'s 2009 Foundation album, Premier provided only one track, which was called "What I Wanna B."

In 2006, pop/R&B singer Christina Aguilera recruited Premier to produce her album Back to Basics. Premier explained the reservations he heard from people regarding the collaboration:

When Christina [Aguilera] had me work with her, people were like, "Oh no. Please don't." Then, when they heard "Ain't No Other Man," "Back In The Day," and all the other records were still constructed like Premier tracks they were like, "Yo, I really love this album. I was really impressed. I was worried, but you totally sound like what we love about you." Until you hear it, don't say a word. I never want to be just attached to hip hop. I want to be attached to music—country, rap, soul, jazz, blues, it doesn't matter, gospel music—I come from all of that.

In 2008, Premier appeared in Grand Theft Auto IV as himself – the host for radio station The Classics 104.1.

Premier produced the majority of Blaq Poet's Tha Blaqprint, which was released in mid-2009. Premier contributed a song on Game's 2011 album, The R.E.D. Album. Also in 2011, Premier appeared on the song "Gangster", on Bushido's album Jenseits von Gut und Böse.

Premier was one of the artists followed in the 2012 documentary, Re:GENERATION. The film followed his production of the song "Regeneration," for which he used a live performance of his work by the Berklee Symphony Orchestra.

In September 2012, Immortal Technique said that a song called "Born in the Trap," on his upcoming album, titled The Middle Passage, would feature production by Premier.

In early 2014, Premier revealed that he was working with Aguilera again in an interview with New Zealand's Rip It Up magazine. Premier produced Y'all Ready Know by Slaughterhouse, from the Shady Records album, Shady XV, and the music video was published in November 2014.

In mid-2014, Premier collaborated with Korean hip-hop group Dynamic Duo on two singles "AEAO" and "Animal", which were both warmly received.

A mid-January 2015 announcement from Premier stated that the producer's studio, D&D, also known as "The HeadQcouterz," will cease to be operational and relocated to a recording space in Astoria, New York City, U.S.

DJ Premier served as one of the three curators for the soundtrack to the video game NBA 2K16, alongside DJ Khaled and DJ Mustard.

On May 16, 2019, DJ Premier released a collaboration with Buffalo (New York) rappers Conway The Machine, Westside Gunn, and Benny the Butcher, called "Headlines."

In June 2020, DJ Premier produced a track for Public Enemy called "State of the Union (STFU)".

DJ Premier hosted a weekly two-hour show, Live From HeadQCourterz, on Sirius Satellite Radio's Shade 45. The show ended in 2022.

In August 2023, DJ Premier's collaboration clothing collection with AMIRI was released, marked with "PREEMO" alongside the Amiri typography, with a record print.

Style and influences
DJ Premier's style of production epitomizes the New York sound of his earlier peers. He is known for sampling jazz, funk, and soul artists, as well as sampling an artist's past work when creating a new track for that same artist. For example, on Jay-Z's "So Ghetto", from the 1999 album Vol. 3... Life and Times of S. Carter, Premier samples an older Jay-Z song, 1997's "Who You Wit II". In addition, his encyclopedic memory of hip-hop lyrics allows him to distinctively speak with his hands by scratching in lyrics from several different songs to construct new phrases. Premier's beats are known for his oft-imitated combinations of short vocal samples, often from multiple artists, to create a chorus. Premier has also experimented with atonal samples that are not confined to soul, jazz, and funk. For example, he sampled and chopped up seminal electro-acoustic music from the 1960s on the track "Physical Stamina" by Jeru the Damaja.

In an interview with XXL Magazine, DJ Premier was asked how his sound evolved, to which he replied, "Marley Marl is my number-one inspiration. Jam Master Jay, Mix Master Ice, and UTFO. Grandmaster D, and Whodini. DJ Cheese, Grandmaster Flash, Kool Herc, Afrika Bambaataa. Jazzy Jay—even Cut Creator. Seeing them do what they do. It's black music, it's black culture, it comes from the ghetto. How can you not relate to ghetto people when that's the rawest form of blackness? Even though it's not a good place in regards to the economy and how bad people have it in the neighborhood, the realism's there, and that's what we were born out of. So I very much pay respect by doing the same type of music in return." DJ Premier attended Prairie View A&M University and may have been influenced by the musical atmosphere at the university while serving as the campus DJ and occasional performer with the world-famous Marching Storm band. He was a major progenitor of the boom-bap style of hip-hop production.

Legacy
For its 20th-anniversary issue in 2008, The Source selected DJ Premier for its list of the 20 greatest producers in the magazine's history. He also made the finals in Vibe magazine's 2010 search for the greatest hip hop producer of all time—he finished second after Dr. Dre received 62 percent of the votes.

Afu Ra explained Premier's influence in a September 2014 interview with the "Lyrically Fit" website:

Premier definitely coached me when I was in the booth. "harder..stronger..more this..more that"—I was an untamed artist and rapping next to recording your vocals are different. He gave me this knowledge through the work we did.

Discography

 * DJ Premier Presents Get Used To Us (2010)
 * Kolexxxion (with Bumpy Knuckles) (2012)
 * PRhyme (with Royce da 5'9") (2014)
 * PRhyme 2 (with Royce da 5'9") (2018)
 * Hip Hop 50: Vol. 1 (2022)
 * Untitled album (with Nas) (2024)

title: DJ Premier


text:
Nevill Francis Mott

Sir Nevill Francis Mott (30 September 1905 – 8 August 1996) was a British physicist who won the Nobel Prize for Physics in 1977 for his work on the electronic structure of magnetic and disordered systems, especially amorphous semiconductors. The award was shared with Philip W. Anderson and J. H. Van Vleck. The three had conducted loosely related research. Mott and Anderson clarified the reasons why magnetic or amorphous materials can sometimes be metallic and sometimes insulating.

Education and early life
Mott was born in Leeds to Charles Francis Mott and Lilian Mary Reynolds, a granddaughter of Sir John Richardson, and great granddaughter of Sir John Henry Pelly, 1st Baronet. Miss Reynolds was a Cambridge Mathematics Tripos graduate and at Cambridge was the best woman mathematician of her year. His parents met in the Cavendish Laboratory, when both were engaged in physics research under J.J. Thomson.

Nevill grew up first in the village of Giggleswick, in the West Riding of Yorkshire, where his father was Senior Science Master at Giggleswick School. His mother also taught Maths at the School. The family moved (due to his father's jobs) first to Staffordshire, then to Chester and finally Liverpool, where his father had been appointed Director of Education. Mott was at first educated at home by his mother. At age ten, he began formal education at Clifton College in Bristol, followed by study at St John's College, Cambridge, where he read the Mathematics Tripos, supervised by R.H. Fowler.

Career and research
Mott was appointed a Lecturer in the Physics Department at the University of Manchester in 1929. He returned to Cambridge in 1930 as a Fellow and lecturer of Gonville and Caius College, and in 1933 moved to the University of Bristol as Melville Wills Professor in Theoretical Physics.

In 1948 he became Henry Overton Wills Professor of Physics and Director of the Henry Herbert Wills Physical Laboratory at Bristol. In 1954 he was appointed Cavendish Professor of Physics at Cambridge, a post he held until 1971. He was instrumental in the painful cancellation of the planned particle accelerator because of its very high cost. He also served as Master of Gonville and Caius College, 1959–1966.

His early works were on the theoretical analysis of collisions in gases, notably the collision with spin flip of an electron against a hydrogen atom, which would stimulate subsequent works by André Blandin and Jun Kondo about similar effects between conduction electrons, as well as magnetic properties in metals. This sort of activity led Mott to writing two books. The first one, which was edited together with Ian Sneddon, gives a simple and clear description of quantum mechanics, with an emphasis on the Schrödinger equation in real space. The second describes atomic and electronic collisions in gases, using the rotational symmetry of electronic states in the Hartree–Fock method.

But already in the middle of the 1930s, Mott's interests had broadened to include solid states, leading to two more books that would have a great impact on the development of the field in the years prior and after World War II. In 1936, Theory of the Properties of Metals and Alloys (written together with H. Jones) describes a simplified framework which led to rapid progress.

The concept of nearly free valence electrons in metallic alloys explained the special stability of the Hume-Rothery phases if the Fermi sphere of the sp valence electron, treated as free, would be scattered by the Brillouin zone boundaries of the atomic structure. The description of the impurities in metals by the Thomas Fermi approximation would explain why such impurities would not interact at long range. Finally the delocalisation of the valence d electrons in transitional metals and alloys would explain the possibility for the magnetic moments of atoms to be expressed as fractions of Bohr magnetons, leading to ferro or antiferromagnetic coupling at short range. This last contribution, produced at the first international conference on magnetism, held in Strasbourg in May 1939, reinforced similar points of view defended at the time in France by the future Nobel laureate Louis Néel. In 1949, Mott suggested to Jacques Friedel to use the approach developed together with Marvey for a more accurate description of the electric-field screening of the impurity in a metal, leading to the characteristic long range charge oscillations. Friedel also used the concept developed in that book of virtual bound level to describe a situation when the atomic potential considered is not quite strong enough to create a (real) bound level of symmetry e ≠ o. The consequences of these remarks on the more exact approaches of cohesion in rp as well as d metals were mostly developed by his students in Orsay.

The second book, with Ronald Wilfred Gurney, On the Physical Chemistry of Solids was more wide-ranging. It treated notably of the oxidation of metals at low temperatures, where it described the growth of the oxide layer as due to the electric field developed between the metal and absorbed oxygen ions, which could force the way of metallic or oxygen ions through a disordered oxide layer. The book also analysed the photographic reactions in ionic silver compound in terms of precipitation of silver ions into metallic clusters.

This second field had a direct and long lasting consequence on the research activity of John (Jack) Mitchell. Mott's accomplishments include explaining theoretically the effect of light on a photographic emulsion (see latent image). His work on oxidation, besides fostering new research in the field (notably by J. Bénard and Nicolás Cabrera), was the root of the concept of the band gap produced in semiconductors by gradients in the distribution of donor and acceptor impurities.

During the war Mott worked on the role of plastic deformation in the progression of fracture cracks. When he returned to Bristol after the war, his having met and hired Frederick Charles Frank enabled the two of them to make considerable advances in the study of dislocations, with the help of others such as Frank Nabarro and Alan Cottrell. Bristol became an important centre of research in this topic, especially at the end of the 1940s. If Mott only produced early and somewhat minor contributions to that field, notably on alloy hardening with Nabarro and on the topology of a dislocation network lowering the apparent elastic constants of a crystal, there is no doubt that Mott's enthusiasm played its role in the three major steps forward in the field by F. C. Frank on crystal growth and plasticity and later, in Cambridge, by P. Hirsch on thin film electron microscopy.

At the same time, however, Mott gave a lot of thought to electronic correlations and their possible role in Verwey's compounds such as nickel oxides which could switch from metals to nonmetallic insulators under various physical conditions - this is known as the Mott transition. The term Mott insulator is also named for him, as well as the Mott polynomials, which he introduced.

Publications
N. F. Mott revived the old Philosophical Magazine and transformed it into a lively publication essentially centred on the then-new field of solid state physics, attracting writers, readers and general interest on a wide scale. After receiving a paper on point defects in crystals by Frederick Seitz that was obviously too long for the journal, Mott decided to create a new publication, Advances in Physics, for such review papers. Both publications are still active in 2017.

 * N. F. Mott, "The Wave Mechanics of α-Ray Tracks", Proceedings of the Royal Society (1929) A126, pp. 79–84, . (reprinted as Sec. I-6 of Quantum Theory and Measurement, J. A. Wheeler. and W. H. Zurek, (1983) Princeton).
 * N. F. Mott, Metal-Insulator Transitions, second edition (Taylor & Francis, London, 1990). ISBN 0-85066-783-6, ISBN 978-0-85066-783-7
 * N. F. Mott, A Life in Science (Taylor & Francis, London, 1986). ISBN 0-85066-333-4, ISBN 978-0-85066-333-4
 * N. F. Mott, H. Jones, The Theory of Properties of Metals and Alloys, (Dover Publications Inc., New York, 1958)
 * Brian Pippard, Nevill Francis Mott, Physics Today, March 1997, pp. 95 and 96: (pdf).

Awards and honours
In 1977, Nevill Mott was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics, together with Philip Warren Anderson and John Hasbrouck Van Vleck "for their fundamental theoretical investigations of the electronic structure of magnetic and disordered systems." The news of having won the Nobel Prize received Mott while having lunch at restaurant Die Sonne in Marburg, Germany, during a visit to fellow solid state scientist at Marburg University.

Mott was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society (FRS) in 1936. Mott served as president of the Physical Society in 1957. In the early 1960s he was chairman of the British Pugwash group. He was knighted in 1962.

Mott received an honorary Doctorate from Heriot-Watt University in 1972.

In 1981, Mott became a founding member of the World Cultural Council.

He continued to work until he was about ninety. He was made a Member of the Order of the Companions of Honour in 1995.

In 1995, Mott visited the Loughborough University Department of Physics and presented a lecture entitled "65 Years in Physics". The University continues to host the annual Sir Nevill Mott Lecture.

Personal life
Mott was married to Ruth Eleanor Horder, and had two daughters, Elizabeth and Alice. He died in Milton Keynes on 8 August 1996 at the age 90, Buckinghamshire. His autobiography, A Life in Science, was published in 1986 by Taylor & Francis. His great grandfather was Sir John Richardson, the arctic explorer.

title: Nevill Francis Mott


text:
Boeing–Sikorsky RAH-66 Comanche

The Boeing–Sikorsky RAH-66 Comanche is an American stealth armed reconnaissance and attack helicopter designed for the United States Army. Following decades of study and development, the RAH-66 program was cancelled in 2004 before mass production began, by which point nearly US$7 billion had been spent on the program.

During the early 1980s, the U.S. Army started to formulate requirements for the replacement of its helicopters then in service, which resulted in the launch of the Light Helicopter Experimental (LHX) program. Nearly a decade later, following the refinement of requirements, evaluation of submissions, and the rebranding of the program as the Light Helicopter (LH) program, during April 1991, the Army announced the selection of the Boeing–Sikorsky team's design as the contest winner, shortly after which a contract for construction of prototypes was awarded. The Comanche was to incorporate several advanced elements, such as stealth technologies, and a number of previously untried design features. Operationally, it was to employ advanced sensors in its reconnaissance role, in which it was intended to designate targets for the AH-64 Apache. It was also armed with one rotary cannon and could carry missiles and rockets in internal bays and optionally on stub wings for light attack duties.

Two RAH-66 prototypes were constructed and underwent flight testing between 1996 and 2004. On 1 June 2000, the program entered its $3.1 billion engineering and manufacturing development (EMD) phase. However, during 2002, the Comanche program underwent heavy restructuring; the number of Comanches that were to be purchased was cut to 650. At the time, the projected total cost for the full production of the Comanche in such numbers stood at $26.9 billion. As early as the late 1990s, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) had reported that it had "serious doubts" about the program, observing that the Comanche would "consume almost two thirds of the whole Aviation budget by Fiscal Year 2008". Multiple government agencies had acted to cut the number of Comanches on order, but, as a consequence of the heavy reductions to the numbers to be procured, the unit costs soared.

On 23 February 2004, the U.S. Army announced the termination of the Comanche program, stating they had determined that the RAH-66 would require numerous upgrades to be viable on the battlefield and that the service would instead direct the bulk of its rotary systems funds to renovating its existing attack, utility, and reconnaissance helicopters. The Army also announced new plans to accelerate the development of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), which could also perform the scouting role intended for the Comanche, but with less risk. Since program cancellation, both of the prototypes have been placed on public display.

Origins and LHX
During 1982, the U.S. Army initiated the Light Helicopter Experimental (LHX) program with the aim of producing a replacement for several existing rotorcraft, including the UH-1, AH-1, OH-6, and OH-58 helicopters. Then in 1988 a formal request for proposal (RFP) was issued to various manufacturers; the requirement had evolved into a battlefield reconnaissance helicopter by this time. In October 1988, the Army announced two teams, these being Boeing–Sikorsky and Bell–McDonnell Douglas, received contracts to further develop their concepts. During the 1990s, the program's name was changed from LHX to simply Light Helicopter (LH). In April 1991, the Army awarded the Boeing–Sikorsky team a $2.8 billion contract to complete six prototypes. Later that month the helicopter was officially named RAH-66 Comanche.

During November 1993, assembly of the first prototype commenced at Sikorsky's facility in Stratford, Connecticut and at Boeing's manufacturing plant in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Later all of the rotorcraft's sub-assemblies were transferred to the former location where final assembly occurred. In December 1994, the Department of Defense reduced the number of planned prototypes to two as the services shifted budgets to pay for increased troop salaries. On 25 May 1995, the first Comanche prototype was formally rolled out at Sikorsky's production facility, after which it was transferred to West Palm Beach, Florida to commence flight testing activities. On 4 January 1996, the prototype Comanche, flown by test pilots Bob Gradle and Rus Stiles, performed its 39-minute maiden flight. The first flight had been originally planned to take place during August 1995, but had been delayed by a number of structural and software problems that had been encountered. On 30 March 1999, the second prototype conducted its first flight, before joining the flight test program shortly thereafter.

Prototype testing

The flight test program was conducted using the pair of prototypes produced, which had been assigned the serial numbers 94-0327 and 95-0001. Following a demonstration of its ability to meet certain key criteria, on 1 June 2000, the RAH-66 entered the $3.1 billion engineering and manufacturing development (EMD) phase of the program. Through the early 2000s, the U.S. Army maintained its plans for the intended purchase of over 1,200 Comanches, which were to fill both the scout helicopter and light attack roles; as late as 2003, it was being anticipated that deliveries of operational RAH-66s would commence as scheduled during 2006.

During late 2000, it was revealed that an effort to reduce the Comanche's empty weight by approximately 200 lb or 2.1 percent in order to conform with its established target weight had been initiated. The first Comanche prototype, serial 94-0327, completed 318 flights over 387 hours before reaching the end of its testing career during January 2002. The second prototype, serial 95-0001, had accumulated 103.5 flight hours and 93 sorties by May 2001. During late 2001 and early 2002, testing with the second RAH-66 was halted while the aircraft underwent extensive modifications, received both mission equipment and more powerful T800-LHT-801 engines. On 23 May 2002, the second prototype re-commenced flight testing with the additional equipment fitted. Accordingly, the expanded test programme involved new aspects such as the testing of the armaments and night vision systems; these test flights continued into 2003. During testing, the Comanche was recorded as having attained a cruise speed of 162 kn, as well as having achieved a "dash speed" of 172 kn. It also demonstrated ability to perform a 180° turn in under five seconds.

During 2002, the Comanche program underwent heavy restructuring; consequently, the planned number of Comanches to be purchased was decreased to 650 rotorcraft. At the time, the projected total cost for the full production of the Comanche in such numbers stood at $26.9 billion. Originally, the EMD phase was to last for six years with five Comanches to be constructed for the testing regime. During 2003, production on the third RAH-66, which was to be the first EMD-conformant helicopter, was started. Subsequently, eight RAH-66s were to be constructed for operational testing purposes. The initial production RAH-66s were to be completed in a Block I configuration that included the majority of the rotorcraft's planned weapons and sensors. From the 16th Comanche onwards, deliveries would have been made to the Block II standard with all of the planned capabilities.

Cancellation
On 23 February 2004, the U.S. Army announced that they had decided to terminate all work on the Comanche program. At the time, it was stated that the Army had determined that a number of upgrades would be necessary in order for the RAH-66 to be capable of surviving on the battlefield in the face of current anti-aircraft threats; however, the Army had instead decided to re-direct the bulk of its funding for rotary development toward the renovation of its existing helicopter fleet of attack, utility, and reconnaissance aircraft. Specifically, the Army also had plans to reuse the funds allocated to the Comanche program to speed up development of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), which could also perform the scouting role intended for the vehicle. At the time of its termination, the Comanche program had reportedly spent US$6.9 billion. The contract termination fees involved were estimated to total US$450–680 million for the main program partners Sikorsky and Boeing.

Subsequently, the Army decided to pursue development of another battlefield scout helicopter under the Armed Reconnaissance Helicopter program; this resulted in another rotorcraft, designated as the Bell ARH-70, being selected and developed with the intention to replace the OH-58D in place of the Comanche. However, on 16 October 2008, the Department of Defense notified Congress and Bell that it was canceling the program, reportedly due to cost overruns on its development.

A multitude of reasons contributed to the ultimate cancellation of the RAH-66 program. According to aviation author James Williams, efforts to speed up the program via the elimination of risk-mitigation measures and the stream of continuous adjustments to account for annual budget cuts to the rotorcraft resulted in the formation of a negative cycle that functioned to greatly extend the rotorcraft's development schedule. Over the course of the Comanche's development, multiple government agencies had acted to cut the number of helicopters that were intended to be ordered; one particularly common basis for such curtailments was that the Cold War had ended and thus such quantities were unnecessary (a phenomenon known as the "peace dividend"). However, significant reductions in volume directly resulted in the rapid climbs in the projections of the Comanche's unit cost; in turn, this stimulated and gave validity to critics of the program, such as the Army Acquisition Executive James Ambrose, who had prominently declared that the Army would not receive any aircraft "costing a dollar over $7.5 million".

As early as 1995, it is claimed by Williams that the Comanche had been facing complete cancellation as a choice between which defense development programs were to be scrapped. During mid-1999, the Comanche was subject to substantial governmental scrutiny; the Government Accountability Office (GAO) reported that it had "serious doubts" about the program and noted that the Comanche would "consume almost two thirds of the whole Aviation budget by Fiscal Year 2008". In addition, wartime experiences, such as from the Kosovo War, had led to some senior figures within the Army to place a greater emphasis on the use of unmanned platforms for conducting many of the same roles for which the Comanche was being developed to perform. By 2000, Williams postulates that the primary reason for retaining the program was out of concern for the state of the helicopter industry—Sikorsky's production and employment figures were at their lowest for decades and the contract was considered critical.

Author Fred Brooks criticized the program's requirement for the Comanche to be capable of ferrying itself across the Atlantic as an example of excessive requirements being present in a project's design phase and of their costly repercussions. Williams observes that the Comanche's weight requirements were unachievable, and claimed that this was due to poor management, in which no party was allegedly aware of or in control of the rotorcraft's final weight; there were concerns that, when outfitted with actual equipment required for operations, the Comanche's engines would be incapable of lifting the total weight of the helicopter. Additionally, it has been claimed that it proved difficult to convince the Army that the program suffered from serious troubles while key individuals failed to realize the existence of insurmountable technical problems. Prized elements of the program, such as certain software capabilities and its integration, failed to foster confidence with Army overseers; several capabilities were viewed as having been unproven and risky, while the anticipated consumption of up to 40 percent of the aviation budget by the Comanche alone for a number of years was considered to be extreme. According to Williams, it was concluded that the Army's aviation budget would be better spent on the delivery of less risky and more critical needs.

In a report published during 2008, the GAO recorded that an Army spokesperson had stated that "the program's costs could no longer be justified". Author Cindy Williams stated of the Comanche: "The rationale for cutting Comanche... is twofold. First, the doctrinal niche that the Comanche occupies is unnecessary in the near term and probably not viable in the longer term. Secondly, as with all rotary-wing aircraft, the Comanche is a voracious consumer of strategic airlift."

The manufacturing team, Sikorsky and Boeing, have attributed factors that were outside of their control, such as budget cuts, "requirement creep", and a protracted development period, to have caused problems with the program, rather than dysfunctionality on their part. Under the Comanche program, each company was responsible for the construction of different elements of the rotorcraft. Since the termination, both companies have decided to team up again to produce a jointly-developed prototype, designated as the SB-1 Defiant, for the Army's Future Vertical Lift (FVL) program.

Design

The Comanche was intended to be an advanced armed reconnaissance and attack helicopter. The Comanche was specifically tailored to the role of armed scout to replace the U.S. Army's OH-58D Kiowa Warrior, which is an upgraded version of a Vietnam War-era observation helicopter. It was both smaller and lighter than the AH-64 Apache attack helicopter that it had been intended to accompany. The RAH-66 was powered by a pair of LHTEC T800 turboshaft engines, each capable of generating up to 1,563 hp (1,165 kW) of power. The RAH-66's fuselage was 43 ft long and composed of composite materials; it was designed to be capable of fitting more readily onto transport ships, enabling the Comanche to be more rapidly deployed to flash points and other rapidly-developing situations. However, in the event of strategic transport assets not being available, the helicopter's ferry range of 1200 nmi would have allowed it to fly itself to battlefields overseas on its own.

As intended, it would have functioned as a stealth helicopter, incorporating a number of different techniques and technologies in order to reduce its radar cross-section (RCS) along with other areas of visibility and detectability. The exterior surfaces of the RAH-66 were faceted and covered with both radar-absorbent material (RAM) coatings and infrared-suppressant paint; as a result of these combined measures, the Comanche's RCS was stated to be 360 times smaller than that of the AH-64 Apache. The acoustic signature of the helicopter was also reported to be noticeably lower than that of comparable helicopters; this reduction had been partially achieved through the adoption of an all-composite five-blade main rotor and pioneering canted tail rotor assembly.

As intended, the Comanche was to be equipped with sophisticated avionics, including navigation and detection systems, which would have enabled operations at night and in inclement weather. Its primary mission was scouting using its advanced sensors, in particular locating and designating targets for attack helicopters, such as the AH-64 Apache, to strike. The Comanche was furnished with a digital fly-by-wire flight control system. Each of the two crew members were to be provided with a pair of multi-functional LCDs in addition to the Helmet-Integrated Display and Sight System (HIDSS).

For the light attack role, the RAH-66 was to be furnished with various armaments. It was equipped with a single chin-mounted 20 mm three-barrel XM301 rotary cannon, which could be pointed rearwards and retracted under a fairing when not in use to decrease the helicopter's radar cross-section. In addition, the RAH-66 was capable of internally carrying a maximum of six AGM-114 Hellfire air-to-ground missiles or up to twelve AIM-92 Stinger air-to-air missiles, which would be evenly divided between a pair of retractable weapons pylons. Beyond storing munitions internally, the Comanche could also mount external stub wings to carry up to eight Hellfire missiles or sixteen Stinger missiles. However, operations performing with armaments mounted externally would reduce the effectiveness of the Comanche's stealth technologies.

In 2001, the Army sought to procure a "heavy attack" variant of the Comanche, which was intended to begin replacing Apaches in 2025.

Aircraft on display
Both prototype airframes 94-0327, 95-0001, are located at the United States Army Aviation Museum at Fort Novosel, Alabama.

title: Boeing–Sikorsky RAH-66 Comanche