text:
Lehigh Valley International Airport

Lehigh Valley International Airport, formerly Allentown–Bethlehem–Easton International Airport, is a domestic airport located in Hanover Township in Lehigh County, Pennsylvania. Lehigh Valley International Airport is located in the center of the Lehigh Valley, roughly 7 mi northeast of Allentown, 4 mi northwest of Bethlehem, and 11 mi southwest of Easton.

Lehigh Valley International Airport is the fourth-busiest passenger airport in Pennsylvania after Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, and Harrisburg international airports. In 2022, the airport was utilized by 912,000 passengers. With over 83,000 flights in 2022, Lehigh Valley International Airport is the third-busiest airport in Pennsylvania after Philadelphia and Pittsburgh in terms of total flight takeoffs and landings.

The airport is also heavily utilized for the transport of air cargo due to the growth of e-commerce and its proximity to major population centers on the East Coast. As of 2022, the airport ships more than 237 million pounds of cargo. Companies such as Amazon.com are using the airport, a major factor in its growth.

20th century
Lehigh Valley International Airport opened in 1929. Scheduled airline flights began on September 16, 1935, with flights by United Airlines' Boeing 247s. The airport hangar initially served as the passenger terminal. The first terminal building at the airport was built in 1938 as part of a Works Progress Administration project.

World War II
During World War II, the U.S. Navy's V-5 flight training program was conducted at the airport in conjunction with ground training held at nearby Muhlenberg College. The headquarters of Group 312 of the Civil Air Patrol was based at the airport. One of its activities was to provide a courier service for cargo defense plants. Allentown-based pilots patrolled the Atlantic coastline during World War II and were active in recruiting young men for the U.S. Air Force's air cadet program.

In January 1944, work on a new runway was completed, and a Class A U.S. Weather Bureau station also was installed. About 1,000 Naval Aviation Cadets were trained in 1943, and civil and military air traffic both increased.

In late July 1944, the War Production Board approved the construction of a second-story addition to the airport's administration building. The building housed the Lehigh Aircraft Company, the weather bureau station, the Civil Aeronautic communications station, and the office and waiting room of United Airlines. In August, the V-5 flight training program ended when the Navy decided to move all flight training to naval air bases under Navy pilots.

Expansion
In April 1946, the Lehigh Airport Authority was created to own and manage the airport. The October 1946 command and general staff diagram shows four runways forming an asterisk: runway 1 was 2680 feet long, runway 6 was 4000 feet, runway 9 was 3800 feet and runway 14 was 3100 feet.

Construction began on the present terminal in 1973. The project, designed by Wallace & Watson, was completed in 1976.

Construction on a new passenger terminal began in 1948 and was finished in 1950. Allentown–Bethlehem–Easton (ABE) Airport, as it was then called, had flights on United and TWA since 1947, and Colonial Airlines since 1949. Douglas DC-4s and DC-6s appeared after runway 6 was extended to 5,000 feet. TWA left in 1967, replaced by Allegheny Airlines; Colonial's successor Eastern Air Lines remained until 1991. Republic Airlines' McDonnell Douglas DC-9's offered nonstop flights to Detroit and were continued by Northwest Airlines after Northwest's acquisition of Republic. Northwest also offered one-stop flights to Detroit with a stop in Harrisburg.

21st century
Regional partners replaced the successor Northwest around 2003. Delta Air Lines started nonstop flights to Atlanta and Harrisburg in 1991 and later added flights to Cincinnati, initially operated by Delta until changing to Delta Connection carrier Comair.

In 2012, Frontier Airlines started twice-a-week nonstop Airbus A319 flights to Orlando International Airport; they ended in 2013. Allegiant Air now flies nonstop from Lehigh Valley to Orlando via Orlando Sanford International Airport (SFB) in nearby Sanford, Florida.

In 2009 and 2010, the most recent terminal renovations were completed in two phases:

 * Phase I (April 2009). Cost: $7,253,235; PENNDOT grant amount: $3 million; general contractor: Lobar, Inc. (Dillsburg, Pennsylvania); architect: Breslin, Ridyard, Fadero Architects (Allentown); square footage of the Phase I project: 24,000 sq.ft., 7,000 sq.ft. of which is new space.
 * Phase II (November 2010). Cost: about $7,225,000; PENNDOT grant amount: $3.5 million; general contractor: E.R. Stuebner Construction, Inc. (Reading); architect: Breslin, Ridyard, Fadero Architects (Allentown); square footage of renovated space: 33,600 sq.ft.

On May 26, 2016, Solar Impulse 2 (SI2), piloted by Bertrand Piccard, completed the 13th leg from Dayton, Ohio of the first around the world (43,041 km) fuel-less flight by this solar-powered plane with a landing at ABE. On June 11, 2016, André Borschberg began the 14th leg (ABE to JFK, which included a dramatic Statue of Liberty flyover). While at ABE, an open house was held for public viewing of the SI2 aircraft.

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems for 2023–2027 categorizes Lehigh Valley International Airport as a small hub primary commercial service facility. In 2019 to 2023, the FAA categorized the airport as a "non-hub primary" and previous years it was categorized as a "small hub."

After several years of falling passenger counts in the early 2000s, the airport has lately experienced a significant rebound in passenger totals due to it being an alternative to congested Philadelphia International and Newark Liberty International, its facility improvements, a rapidly growing regional population, carrier expansions, especially Allegiant Air, and multiple new routes being added for popular destinations and major hubs across the country.

In 2019, the airport was utilized by 911,970 passengers, which represented an increase of 15.01% over its use the previous year, in 2018. Much of this growth has been driven by Allegiant Airlines' expansion at the airport.

One of the shortest scheduled jet flights in the contiguous U.S. operated between Lehigh Valley Airport (ABE) and Philadelphia International Airport (PHL). Piedmont Airlines operating as American Eagle regularly flew an Embraer ERJ-145 regional jet on the 55-mile route on behalf of American Airlines via a code sharing agreement. The average time in the air was 20 minutes. It was the shortest flight in the contiguous United States until 2017, when it was surpassed by United Express's San Francisco to Santa Rosa route in 2017, which had an average time in the air of 16 minutes. The ABE-PHL flights ended in 2020.

Facilities
The airport covers 2278 acre at an elevation of 393 ft. It has two asphalt runways: 6/24 is 7599 ft by 150 ft. The second, 13/31, is 5800 ft by 150 ft.

The airport has nine gates to service the passengers and six holding spots for cargo aircraft, which largely include Boeing 757 cargo aircraft with FedEx and Boeing 767s with Amazon Air.

In 2022, the airport had 83,760 aircraft operations, the third-most among all Pennsylvania airports.

In May 2020, 137 aircraft were based at the airport: 73 single-engine, 11 multi-engine, 52 jet, and one helicopter.

In 2022, the airport handled 237,945,266 lbs of freight and mail.

The Lehigh-Northampton Airport Authority (LNAA) also operates two nearby general aviation airports, Allentown Queen City Municipal Airport on Lehigh Street in Allentown and Braden Airpark in Easton.

Fire department
Aircraft rescue and firefighting (ARFF) is provided by the LNAA ARFF Department, which consists of seven full-time and three part-time personnel, operating from a 13,000 sq.ft. facility commissioned in October 2003.

Cargo
Amazon.com used the Lehigh Valley International Airport (LVIA) as one of the first five locations in the United States for their Amazon Air shipping service. LVIA was selected for the pilot concept of the program due to its close proximity to large population centers, cost-effectiveness, and robust infrastructure.

For similar reasons as Amazon, FedEx Ground selected an area that was once owned by the Lehigh Northampton Airport Authority to construct its largest terminal in the country as of 2016.

ABE currently has six cargo parking spots for cargo operations.

Former carriers

 * Southeast Airlines (November 2002–August 2012)
 * AirTran Airways (April 2009–August 2012)
 * Air Canada, Air Toronto, Air Georgian (until 2012)
 * Trans World Airlines (November 1993-____)
 * Provincetown-Boston Airlines
 * Freedom Airlines
 * Eastern Airlines
 * Frontier Airlines
 * US Airways, USAir, Allegheny Airlines
 * Republic Airlines
 * Continental Airlines, Continental Express
 * Piedmont Airlines, Piedmont Connection
 * Presidential Airways
 * Colgan Airways
 * Suburban Airlines
 * Altair Airlines
 * Monmouth Airlines
 * Canadian Partners, Ontario Express
 * Holiday Airlines
 * Hooters Air (May 2005-April 2006)

Bus service
Trans-Bridge Lines runs several daily buses from ABE to Manhattan, stopping at both Newark (EWR) and New York (JFK) Airports. Travel time to EWR is about 75 minutes.

United Airlines also has a bus service to Newark Liberty International Airport (EWR). Continental Airlines, which later merged into United, previously operated flights from Allentown to Newark but switched to a bus service in 1995 due to constant delays from air traffic control. The distance is 79 mi., the service was eight times daily. Today, the service is offered three times daily. By February 2010, bus was the only form of service offered by Continental after it cancelled its Allentown to Cleveland Hopkins International Airport flights.

American Airlines operates a bus service to Philadelphia International Airport.

LANta provides local bus service to the airport with routes 215 (Bethlehem), 319 (Lehigh Valley Mall-Bethlehem Square), and 325 (Allentown).

20th century

 * On May 5, 1972, Eastern Air Lines Flight 175, a Boeing 727 en route to Washington National Airport was hijacked by Frederick Hahneman, a Honduran-American. The plane eventually landed in Honduras after Hahneman parachuted in mid-flight with $300,000 in ransom money. There were no fatalities or injuries.

21st century

 * On September 19, 2008, Mesa Airlines Flight 7138, a Bombardier CRJ700, was forced to make a high-speed aborted takeoff and swerve in order to avoid a collision with a Cessna 172 that had yet to exit the airport's runway after landing. There were no fatalities or injuries.
 * On November 16, 2008, US Airways Flight 4551, a US Airways Express De Havilland Canada Dash 8 turboprop operated by Piedmont Airlines, took off from Lehigh Valley International Airport at 8:20 am headed to Philadelphia International Airport when the flight was forced to make an emergency landing. The flight crew indicated that the front nose gear had not come down, and the plane had to make a flyover of the runway for confirmation. There were no injuries among the 35 passengers and three crew members.
 * On June 27, 2009, Allegiant Air Flight 746, a McDonnell Douglas MD-80 aircraft, made an emergency landing at the airport after flames were observed coming from the aircraft's left engine. The flight was bound for Orlando Sanford International Airport. During takeoff, one of the aircraft's tires shredded and part of it was sucked into the engine, causing engine failure and a momentary fire. The plane landed safely minutes later with no injuries reported.
 * On February 27, 2023, Mark Muffley, a passenger from Lansford, Pennsylvania, attempted to board an Allegiant Air flight from Lehigh Valley International Airport to Orlando International Airport after having allegedly checked luggage that included an explosive device. After being paged, the passenger fled the airport and was later arrested by federal agents and charged with "possessing an explosive in an airport and attempting to place an explosive on an aircraft", according to New York Post.

Air Force One
Since its opening, Air Force One has made three landings at Lehigh Valley International Airport:

 * 2020: U.S. President Donald Trump made two campaign stops at ABE in May and October 2020 during the 2020 presidential campaign.
 * 1992: U.S. President George H. W. Bush visited ABE in 1992 onboard Air Force One, a Boeing VC-25.

Other notable visits

 * 1960: U.S. Vice President Richard Nixon and U.S. Senator John F. Kennedy made campaign stops at ABE during the 1960 presidential campaign.

title: Lehigh Valley International Airport


text:
Talk:Multilateralism

Untitled
Shouldn't "politician UN" be "political UN"?

I was tempted to correct it but I was afraid maybe it is a UK usage? -rhk, 20040221

Utopian dream

 * The idea of mutilateralism is that with all the world's nations acting in concert wars can be avoided and trade and other issues can be better dealt with.

I think this is not the chief meaning -- rather, it's one POV. I'm not sure who it's prime supporters are, though.

Certain internationalists count on the U.N. as being some sort of idealized pure, unselfish body whose members all sincerely follow wonderful ideals (with the exception of America and its closest allies). By virtue of having a high-minded charter and organizations which espouse human rights, etc. supposedly the votes and actions of the UN should inevitably or automatically be good, noble and lead the world into peace and happiness. Is this a fair summary? --Uncle Ed 19:45, 17 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Shouldn't trilateralism and bilateralism be removed, as they are both forms of multilateralism and mean essentially the same thing?

Cleanup
I added the tag to this article after wading into the morass of dense, directionless paragraphs toward the end of the article. At the very least I plan to return to add some more headings. —Ryanaxp 21:58, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)
 * My preference would be to simply cut the last four paragraphs. They are are jumbled mess that add little to the article. - SimonP 22:54, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)
 * ...And, after a bit of delay, I've gone ahead and done this. --RobthTalk 16:09, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Rewrite/Severe Revision
I don't know who's still involved cleaning this page as it seems to be still under construction. I offer to research, revise and cut most of the last four paragraphs except for the section about difficulties in upholding multilateral organizations/pacts/treaties. I think the page needs section headers and a better division instead of just a few paragraphs here or there. Anyone who's watching the page please advise, I would hate to POV what could be a really touchy topic. Chenenko 22:35, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Challenges
The US in effect abandoned multilateralism in the 1980s under President Reagan. Washington walked away from the Law of the Sea Conference -- it was the first time a US Administration simply turned its back on a major global negotiation rather than stick it out to resolve disagreement one way or the other. Under Reagan, the US also withdrew from compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice (and has never returned). It quit UNESCO. Finally, it began withholding dues, not to just signal unhappiness over a particular UN action or policy as had happened in the past, but to unilaterally require changes in the system.

Am I missing something or do these events not constitute a rejection of the multilateralism that had characterized American foreign policy up to Reagan's Administration? (See the insightful recap of these developments in Rosemary Righter, Utopia Lost, Twentieth Century Fund Press, New York, 1995, Chapter 8 "The Challenge from Washington.")Mjameswilkinson 03:39, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

"All nations acting together, not regional groupings"
"Moreover, multilateralism involves all nations acting together as in the UN and does not involve regional or military alliances, pacts or groupings."

Why is it only multilateralism if all nations are involved, and not just multiple nations? 62.172.108.23 (talk) 13:39, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

 * It means "many nations", not "all nations" ["omnilateralism?:)] And there's often an inherent POV element. Eg, the failed MAI was engineered by representatives of the world's wealthy nations to 'liberalize' investment without consulting Third World populations which would inevitably be adversely affected by it. I'm also reminded of craftily misleading terms like "the international community" and "the coalition of the willing" through use of which blatantly sectional interests have been represented as matters of widespread accord, even implying ethical accord. Cheers Bjenks (talk) 07:04, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

New here; feedback welcome.
I just took a stab at copyediting the first couple of paragraphs. GGSloth (talk) 21:40, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:Multilateralism


text:
Liberal-Progressive

Liberal-Progressive was a label used by a number of candidates in Canadian elections between 1925 and 1953. In federal and Ontario politics there was no Liberal-Progressive Party, as such. The term generally referred to candidates endorsed by Liberal and Progressive constituency associations or to individual candidates who claimed the label, sometimes running against a straight Liberal or straight Progressive candidate. In Manitoba, a party existed with this name provincially, and Liberal-Progressives ran federally in Manitoba under the leadership of Robert Forke, with the support of the Liberal Party.

Federal politics
With the Progressive Party's 1921 electoral breakthrough, Canadian federal politics operated under a "three party system" for the first time. The Liberal Party under William Lyon Mackenzie King tried to deal with this situation by co-opting the Progressives, offering to form a coalition with them. The Progressive Party refused. But by 1926, the party had split and some Progressives decided to support the Liberals, running as Liberal-Progressive or Liberal-Labour-Progressives, or similar variations. This phenomenon occurred particularly in the 1925 election and the 1926 election. A number of Liberal-Progressive Members of Parliament (MPs) became full-fledged Liberals in the 1930s. There was one Independent Liberal-Progressive candidate in 1925.

In the 1925 election, only one candidate ran—unsuccessfully—under the Liberal Progressive banner. There was also one Independent Liberal-Progressive candidate that year.

In the 1926 election, twelve candidates ran as Liberal-Progressives and eight were elected, including seven in Manitoba and one in Saskatchewan.There were three unsuccessful candidates in Ontario. An eighth Manitoba Liberal-Progressive, Robert Forke, who was the group's leader, was acclaimed in a by-election later in the year and was appointed to the Cabinet. These candidates were not opposed by the Liberal Party in the election and ran with the understanding that they would sit with and support the Liberals in Parliament and attend Liberal caucus meetings. Mackenzie King's Liberals alone did not have a majority of seats in the House of Commons after the 1926 election, but were able to form a minority government with the support of the Liberal-Progressives in the house. This government lasted for four years. The Liberal-Progressives also had their own caucus meetings and developed their own politics on certain issues, particularly in relation to agriculture. For example, they were critical of the 1927 federal budget for not reducing tariffs, a long-time Progressive demand.

In the 1930 election, eight Liberal-Progressives ran in Manitoba, but only two were elected. One candidate was defeated by a Liberal candidate.

In the 1935 election, five Liberal-Progressives ran in Manitoba, four of whom were elected. One of these won over a Liberal candidate, while the defeated Liberal-Progressive was defeated by a Liberal. In Ontario, Hughes Cleaver won Halton on the Liberal-Progressive ticket, but afterwards allied himself with the Liberals.

In the 1940 election, two Liberal-Progressives ran in Manitoba, of whom one was elected. Two Liberal-Progressives ran in Ontario. Both were elected.

"National Liberal Progressive" was a political label used in the federal election of 1940, by W. Garfield Case, in Grey North electoral district in Ontario. Case listed 'Insurance manager' as his profession. He won 2,434 votes, 15.5% of the popular vote. The election was won by the Liberal Party candidate, William P. Telford. When Telford resigned on 9 December 1944, to provide a vacancy for A.G.L. McNaughton, Case ran and won the 5 February 1945 by-election as the candidate of the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada.

William Gilbert Weir was the longest-lasting Liberal-Progressive MP, winning his first election in the riding of Macdonald in Manitoba in 1930. He was re-elected as a Liberal-Progressive in 1935 and 1940. In 1945, 1949 and 1953, he was elected as a Liberal-Progressive for the riding of Portage-Neepawa, and was the sole candidate to run as under the Liberal-Progressive label in those elections. Weir served as Chief Government Whip from 1945 to 1953 and parliamentary assistant to Prime Minister Louis St. Laurent from 1953 to 1957. He was defeated in the 1957 election, the first in which he ran as a Liberal.

Five MPs in all sat as Liberal-Progressives: Edgar Douglas Richmond Bissett, Robert Forke, James Allison Glen, George William McDonald and William Gilbert Weir. Forke and Glen became ministers in Liberal cabinets (Glen also served as Speaker of the House of Commons of Canada) while Weir served as government whip for a number of years.

Forke was appointed to the Senate of Canada in 1929 and was the sole Liberal-Progressive to ever sit in that body.

Alberta
In Alberta, one candidate ran under the Liberal-Progressive banner during the 1926 Alberta election. Mr A.D. Campbell won 252 votes, in the Camrose district, and came in fourth place.

Ontario
In Ontario, an electoral coalition was formed in 1934 between the provincial Liberals under Mitchell Hepburn, and the Progressive bloc of Members of the Legislative Assembly (MLAs) under Harry Nixon. Nixon had been elected with the United Farmers of Ontario (UFO) and served in cabinet of E. C. Drury as Provincial Secretary and Registrar of Ontario when the party formed government in 1919. By the end of its term in 1923, the party had changed its name to the Progressives and after the 1926 election, Nixon was the sole former member of the Drury cabinet left in the Legislature.

In the coalition formed in 1934, the Progressive group ran as Liberal-Progressives. They were eventually absorbed into the Ontario Liberal Party. Even before 1934, several candidates ran and were elected under the Liberal-Progressive banner:

 * Thomas Blakelock of Halton was elected on that ticket in 1929, 1934 and 1937.
 * Frederick Sandy of Victoria South was elected as a UFO MLA in 1919, defeated in 1923 and returned to serve as a Liberal-Progressive from 1926-1929;
 * Merton Elvin Scott of Oxford South served as a Liberal-Progressive MLA from 1926 to 1929; and
 * UFO MLA David Munroe Ross of Oxford North was re-elected as a Liberal-Progressive in 1926 and 1929.

It was only in the 1934 election that a formal alliance between the Progressives and Liberals began, returning four Liberal-Progressive MLAs (Nixon, Douglas Campbell of Kent East, Roland Patterson of Grey North and James Francis Kelly of Muskoka).

Liberal-Progressive leader Harry Nixon was provincial secretary in Liberal Premier Mitchell Hepburn's cabinet from its inception in 1934. He and Kelly ran for re-election as Liberals in the 1937 provincial election and were returned to office. Nixon served as Leader of the Liberal Party from 1943 to 1944 and briefly as Premier on Ontario in 1943, until his government's defeat in the 1943 election,and would continue sitting as a Liberal until his death in 1961. Kelly would sit as a Liberal until leaving politics in 1945. Two remaining Liberal-Progressive MLAs were returned in that election, Campbell and Patterson. Campbell was not returned in the 1943 election while Patterson was re-elected as a straight Liberal.

While he never sat as a Liberal-Progressive, Farquhar Oliver was first elected as a UFO MLA in 1926 and sat informally with the Liberal caucus beginning in 1934, when Hepburn formed government, while remaining a UFO MLA until 1941 when he officially joined the Liberals and was appointed to cabinet as minister of public works. Oliver would serve as leader of the Ontario Liberal Party from 1945 to 1950 and again from 1954 to 1958 and would continue to sit in the legislature as a Liberal until 1967 when he retired from office.

Manitoba
In Manitoba, the Progressives and Liberals merged in 1932 under Premier John Bracken and ran as Liberal-Progressives. Bracken continued as Premier until 1943, when he was replaced by Stuart Garson. In 1948, Garson was replaced by Douglas Campbell.

Although the party was dominated by its "Progressive" wing, it had become popularly known as the Liberal Party by the 1940s. (The national Progressive Party had vanished by this time.) It changed its name to the Manitoba Liberal Party in 1961, against only scattered objections from diehard Progressives.

title: Liberal-Progressive


text:
Unus the Untouchable

Unus the Untouchable (also known as Gunther Bain, born Angelo Unuscione) is a supervillain appearing in American comic books published by Marvel Comics. Unus is a mutant, and is named for his ability to consciously project an invisible force field which protects him from harm.

Publication history
Unus first appeared in X-Men #8 (November 1964), and was created by Stan Lee and Jack Kirby.

Origin
Angelo Unuscione was born in Milan, Italy. After his arrival in the United States, he legally changed his name to Gunther Bain. He became a wrestler, and, when the Beast briefly left the X-Men, he was able to defeat him in a wrestling match. Once in America, he sought out the Brotherhood of Evil Mutants to join them. He turned criminal, and joined with the Brotherhood as they fought the X-Men. During the battle, his powers were enhanced by a shot fired from Beast's gun, increasing his power beyond his ability to control it, and making him unable to touch anything. He promised to reform, and his normal power level was restored by the Beast. He became a good friend of the Blob, and they teamed up together on various schemes, such as posing as the X-Men and framing them for robbery, before both mutants went their separate ways. It was revealed the alien invader Lucifer was behind this, and had made sure the Beast's weapon did not work on Unus anymore.

Factor Three/Brotherhood
Unus then joined the villainous organization Factor Three in a conspiracy to conquer Earth. They fought the X-Men, but turned against the Mutant Master when the latter was exposed as an extraterrestrial. Unus later visited Ogre at their Mt. Charteris base. However, shortly after he was captured by Sentinels alongside several others mutants, but was later released, after which he teamed with the Blob and Mastermind as agents of the second Secret Empire; they were defeated by the Beast, and then held prisoner by the Secret Empire. Unus then joined an incarnation of Magneto's Brotherhood of Evil Mutants. As a member of the Brotherhood, Unus joined in their battle against the X-Men and Kruger. Alongside the Brotherhood, Unus battled the Defenders, but Magneto and the Brotherhood were reduced to infancy by their team member Alpha the Ultimate Mutant. Unus and the others were kept at Muir Island. When the Brotherhood was reverted to adulthood and reorganized, Unus teamed with the Vanisher, Blob and Mastermind and fought alongside the group against the Champions. However, he left the team disheartened. He came in conflict with Doc Samson, and Power Man, and then embarked on a New York crime spree, but was defeated by Iron Fist and Power Man.

Not long after, Unus decided to retire from the life of the organized supervillain, deciding to use his talents in less "lofty" ways; he was making a living as a wrestler. At some point, he fathered the Canadian mutant Radius. It is also believed that the Acolyte Carmella Unuscione is either his daughter or sister, but no official confirmation of this has ever been given.

Coming out of retirement and teaming with his friend the Blob again, Unus discovered, during a fight against the Hulk, that his powers had become nearly uncontrollable, and his field was smashed by the Hulk. Unus lost complete control of his powers, and his force-field became so thick that it repulsed the very oxygen molecules in the air until he suffocated and passed out. He fell into the arms of the Blob who, believing Unus to be dead, went on an angry rampage through Brooklyn leading to a fight with both Spider-Man and Black Cat.

Genosha
Years later, Unus reappeared on the decimated island of Genosha, traumatized by the devastation and speaking of "ghosts." Usually arrogant and somewhat fearless, due in no small part to his invulnerable force field, he was shaken by apparent "ghosts" being able to pass through it. At some point, he stopped seeing them, and returned to his former hubris.

Unus later formed his own band of mutant rebels (which included Toad and Paralyzer), trying to survive on the harsh island that Genosha had become. They most commonly had arguments with Professor Charles Xavier and Magneto, and surprisingly never recognized Magneto out of costume. In their first confrontation, the mutant known as Freakshow ends up literally swallowing Unus in order to end the tensions. His powers protected him.

Unus leads Appraiser and Stripmine, two superhuman poachers, to Genosha which caused him to be at odds with all the remaining mutants on Genosha.

House of M and death
Unus stayed on the island until before the House of M, and was depowered after the events of Decimation.

Unus is later found by Quicksilver on Genosha. Quicksilver granted him his powers back, however in an altered form. The Office of National Emergency soon stepped in and took the mists from Quicksilver and his daughter. Lockjaw managed to teleport Luna and Pietro away before ONE could capture them, leaving a battle between the Inhumans and the repowered mutants of Genosha. During the battle Unus faced Karnak, who was amazed that he could not break Unus's shield. However, Unus's powers soon evolved beyond his control and a pink metallic shell began to form all over his body. Both the Inhumans and the repowered mutants tried to save Unus's life, but it was too late. As Unus's field began to dissolve, it was discovered that he had died from lack of oxygen.

Necrosha
Unus was among the many on the island of Genosha who have been resurrected by Eli Bard and his version of the techno-organic virus. He appeared repowered by the T.O. virus.

Spider-Man and the X-Men
Unus was confirmed to be alive and repowered again after the events of Necrosha when he attacked the Jean Grey School for Higher Learning before being defeated by the then-new Special Class Guidance Counselor Spider-Man.

X of Swords
Unus became one of the many former villains granted amnesty on the mutant nation of Krakoa. During the Dawn of X event X of Swords, Unus escorted Apocalypse's grandchild Summoner through Otherworld to Arakko along with Banshee. He was taken captive by Amenthi forces during an ambush that also gravely injured Banshee. He was rescued by a Krakoan team and safely transported back to Krakoa.

Powers and abilities
Unus the Untouchable is a mutant that possessed the power to generate a field of invisible psionic energy around his body. The field acts to deflect objects and even energy beams, and can withstand great concussive force. Normally, Unus can control the force field at will and certain types of radiant energy, such as sunlight, can pass through the field, as do air and sound waves (at least within certain unknown limits). Unus has deflected beams of energy, objects of high mass, objects traveling at high speed and telepathy, including that of Charles Xavier. Unus was at one point vulnerable to the Beast's ray gun that augmented his force field power beyond his control; in later years Unus's power again became uncontrollable due to unknown reasons, finally repelling air molecules.

Unus's force field was not impenetrable, and could be disrupted by a sufficiently powerful force. The Incredible Hulk did this on two occasions, the first time by simply shattering it with a punch enhanced by his anger. When they battled again in Australia during the House of M crossover, the Hulk created a sonic boom by clapping his hands, which resonated with Unus's force field and caused shockwaves that stunned the villain. Although it was temporarily disrupted, the force field would eventually regenerate itself.

Unus is also an athletic man and an expert wrestler. Unus sometimes carried a baseball bat, which, when encased in his force field, can deliver blows with superhuman force.

Age of Apocalypse
Unus in the Age of Apocalypse (also known as Earth-295) was a Prelate in Apocalypse's Infinites. Prelate Unus's appearance was cut short, however, as he was frozen by Iceman and shattered.

House of M
In the House of M, Unus was a lieutenant of Exodus and was eradicating the remaining human population in Australia. However, while tracking several runaway humans he stumbled upon and attempted to destroy a tribe of Aboriginal people who had adopted the Hulk into their midst. In the ensuing conflict, Unus was severely injured and put in a hospital.

Ultimate Marvel
Unus also appeared briefly within the Ultimate Marvel universe as a member of Magneto's Brotherhood. In this version, he had some sort of astral projection powers. In The Ultimates 3, Unus is charged with protecting Magneto's citadel from the Ultimates. His forcefield deflected blows from Thor, but, ultimately, Thor broke through and apparently killed Unus for defying a god.

X-Men Noir
In X-Men Noir, Angelo Unuscione is an unpowered human and a dangerous mob boss known as "Unus the Untouchable". Unus struggled with the Brotherhood for control of New York City. For his own security, he only let a few select people be near him, and hence his name, "untouchable." He eventually became a target for the Brotherhood after Unus refused to join in the Brotherhood's and Sebastian Shaw's illegal act in land profiting. He was to be kill by Peter Magnus when he was about to leave the city for Central City by airship. However, Unus avoided his assassination due to the X Men, and was taken to safety to Welfare Island, where he would be transferred to Washington, D.C., and under protection from the federal authorities. As Unus was about to leave with the X Men, he was killed by Eric Magnus and his men, who appeared out of nowhere.

title: Unus the Untouchable


text:
Absorbance

Absorbance is defined as "the logarithm of the ratio of incident to transmitted radiant power through a sample (excluding the effects on cell walls)". Alternatively, for samples which scatter light, absorbance may be defined as "the negative logarithm of one minus absorptance, as measured on a uniform sample". The term is used in many technical areas to quantify the results of an experimental measurement. While the term has its origin in quantifying the absorption of light, it is often entangled with quantification of light which is “lost” to a detector system through other mechanisms. What these uses of the term tend to have in common is that they refer to a logarithm of the ratio of a quantity of light incident on a sample or material to that which is detected after the light has interacted with the sample.

The term absorption refers to the physical process of absorbing light, while absorbance does not always measure only absorption; it may measure attenuation (of transmitted radiant power) caused by absorption, as well as reflection, scattering, and other physical processes. Sometimes the term "attenuance" or "experimental absorbance" is used to emphasize that radiation is lost from the beam by processes other than absorption, with the term "internal absorbance" used to emphasize that the necessary corrections have been made to eliminate the effects of phenomena other than absorption.

Beer-Lambert law
The roots of the term absorbance are in the Beer–Lambert law. As light moves through a medium, it will become dimmer as it is being "extinguished". Bouguer recognized that this extinction (now often called attenuation) was not linear with distance traveled through the medium, but related by what we now refer to as an exponential function.

If $$I_0$$ is the intensity of the light at the beginning of the travel and $$I_d$$ is the intensity of the light detected after travel of a distance $d$, the fraction transmitted, $T$, is given by

$$T=\frac {I_d}{I_0} = \exp(-\mu d)\,,$$

where $$\mu$$ is called an attenuation constant (a term used in various fields where a signal is transmitted though a medium) or coefficient. The amount of light transmitted is falling off exponentially with distance. Taking the natural logarithm in the above equation, we get

$$-\ln(T) = \ln \frac {I_0}{I_d} = \mu d\,.$$

For scattering media, the constant is often divided into two parts, $\mu = \mu_s + \mu_a $, separating it into a scattering coefficient $$\mu _s$$ and an absorption coefficient $\mu_a$, obtaining

$$-\ln(T) = \ln \frac {I_0}{I_s} = (\mu_s + \mu_a) d\,.$$

If a size of a detector is very small compared to the distance traveled by the light, any light that is scattered by a particle, either in the forward or backward direction, will not strike the detector. (Bouguer was studying astronomical phenomena, so this condition was met.) In such case, a plot of $$-\ln(T)$$ as a function of wavelength will yield a superposition of the effects of absorption and scatter. Because the absorption portion is more distinct and tends to ride on a background of the scatter portion, it is often used to identify and quantify the absorbing species. Consequently, this is often referred to as absorption spectroscopy, and the plotted quantity is called "absorbance", symbolized as $\Alpha$. Some disciplines by convention use decadic (base 10) absorbance rather than Napierian (natural) absorbance, resulting in: $$\Alpha_{10} = \mu_{10}d $$ (with the subscript 10 usually not shown).

Absorbance for non-scattering samples
Within a homogeneous medium such as a solution, there is no scattering. For this case, researched extensively by August Beer, the concentration of the absorbing species follows the same linear contribution to absorbance as the path-length. Additionally, the contributions of individual absorbing species are additive. This is a very favorable situation, and made absorbance an absorption metric far preferable to absorption fraction (absorptance). This is the case for which the term "absorbance" was first used.

A common expression of the Beer's law relates the attenuation of light in a material as: $\Alpha = \varepsilon\ell c $, where $$\Alpha $$ is the absorbance; $$\varepsilon $$ is the molar attenuation coefficient or absorptivity of the attenuating species; $$\ell $$ is the optical path length; and $$c $$ is the concentration of the attenuating species.

Absorbance for scattering samples
For samples which scatter light, absorbance is defined as "the negative logarithm of one minus absorptance (absorption fraction: $$\alpha$$) as measured on a uniform sample". For decadic absorbance, this may be symbolized as $\Alpha_{10}=-\log_{10}(1-\alpha)$. If a sample both transmits and remits light, and is not luminescent, the fraction of light absorbed ($\alpha$), remitted ($R$), and transmitted ($T$) add to 1: $\alpha + R + T =1$. Note that $1-\alpha = R+T $, and the formula may be written as $\Alpha _{10}=-\log_{10}(R+T)$. For a sample which does not scatter, $R=0 $, and $1-\alpha = T$, yielding the formula for absorbance of a material discussed below.

Even though this absorbance function is very useful with scattering samples, the function does not have the same desirable characteristics as it does for non-scattering samples. There is, however, a property called absorbing power which may be estimated for these samples. The absorbing power of a single unit thickness of material making up a scattering sample is the same as the absorbance of the same thickness of the material in the absence of scatter.

Optics
In optics, absorbance or decadic absorbance is the common logarithm of the ratio of incident to radiant power through a material, and spectral absorbance or spectral decadic absorbance is the common logarithm of the ratio of incident to  spectral radiant power through a material. Absorbance is dimensionless, and in particular is not a length, though it is a monotonically increasing function of path length, and approaches zero as the path length approaches zero.

Absorbance of a material
The absorbance of a material, denoted $A$, is given by

$$A = \log_{10} \frac{\Phi_\text{e}^\text{i}}{\Phi_\text{e}^\text{t}} = -\log_{10} T,$$

where

 * $\Phi_\text{e}^\text{t}$ is the radiant flux  by that material,
 * $\Phi_\text{e}^\text{i}$ is the radiant flux  by that material, and
 * $T = \Phi_\text{e}^\text{t}/\Phi_\text{e}^\text{i}$ is the transmittance of that material.

Absorbance is a dimensionless quantity. Nevertheless, the absorbance unit or AU is commonly used in ultraviolet–visible spectroscopy and its high-performance liquid chromatography applications, often in derived units such as the milli-absorbance unit (mAU) or milli-absorbance unit-minutes (mAU×min), a unit of absorbance integrated over time.

Absorbance is related to optical depth by

$$A = \frac{\tau}{\ln 10} = \tau \log_{10} e \,,$$

where $τ$ is the optical depth.

Spectral absorbance
Spectral absorbance in frequency and spectral absorbance in wavelength of a material, denoted $Aν$ and $Aλ$ respectively, are given by

$$\begin{align} A_\nu &= \log_{10} \frac{\Phi_{\text{e},\nu}^\text{i}}{\Phi_{\text{e},\nu}^\text{t}} = -\log_{10} T_\nu\,, \\ A_\lambda &= \log_{10} \frac{\Phi_{\text{e},\lambda}^\text{i}}{\Phi_{\text{e},\lambda}^\text{t}} = -\log_{10} T_\lambda\,, \end{align}$$

where

 * $\Phi_{\mathrm{e},\nu}^t$ is the spectral radiant flux in frequency  by that material;
 * $\Phi_{\mathrm{e},\nu}^i$ is the spectral radiant flux in frequency  by that material;
 * $T_\nu$ is the spectral transmittance in frequency of that material;
 * $\Phi_{\mathrm{e},\lambda}^t$ is the spectral radiant flux in wavelength  by that material;
 * $\Phi_{\mathrm{e},\lambda}^i$ is the spectral radiant flux in wavelength  by that material; and
 * $T_\lambda$ is the spectral transmittance in wavelength of that material.

Spectral absorbance is related to spectral optical depth by

$$\begin{align} A_\nu &= \frac{\tau_\nu}{\ln 10} = \tau_\nu \log_{10} e \,, \\ A_\lambda &= \frac{\tau_\lambda}{\ln 10} = \tau_\lambda \log_{10} e \,, \end{align}$$

where
 * $τν$ is the spectral optical depth in frequency, and
 * $τλ$ is the spectral optical depth in wavelength.

Although absorbance is properly unitless, it is sometimes reported in "absorbance units", or AU. Many people, including scientific researchers, wrongly state the results from absorbance measurement experiments in terms of these made-up units.

Attenuance
Absorbance is a number that measures the attenuation of the transmitted radiant power in a material. Attenuation can be caused by the physical process of "absorption", but also reflection, scattering, and other physical processes. Absorbance of a material is approximately equal to its attenuance when both the absorbance is much less than 1 and the emittance of that material (not to be confused with radiant exitance or emissivity) is much less than the absorbance. Indeed,

$$\Phi_\mathrm{e}^\mathrm{t} + \Phi_\mathrm{e}^\mathrm{att} = \Phi_\mathrm{e}^\mathrm{i} + \Phi_\mathrm{e}^\mathrm{e}\,,$$

where
 * $\Phi_\mathrm{e}^\mathrm{t}$ is the radiant power transmitted by that material,
 * $\Phi_\mathrm{e}^\mathrm{att}$ is the radiant power attenuated by that material,
 * $\Phi_\mathrm{e}^\mathrm{i}$ is the radiant power received by that material, and
 * $\Phi_\mathrm{e}^\mathrm{e}$ is the radiant power emitted by that material.

This is equivalent to

$$T + \mathrm{ATT} = 1 + E\,,$$

where
 * $T = \Phi_\mathrm{e}^\mathrm{t} / \Phi_\mathrm{e}^\mathrm{i}$ is the transmittance of that material,
 * $\mathrm{ATT} = \Phi_\mathrm{e}^\mathrm{att} / \Phi_\mathrm{e}^\mathrm{i}$ is the  of that material,
 * $E = \Phi_\mathrm{e}^\mathrm{e} / \Phi_\mathrm{e}^\mathrm{i}$ is the emittance of that material.

According to the Beer–Lambert law, $T = 10^{-A}$, so and finally
 * $$\mathrm{ATT} = 1 - 10^{-A} + E \approx A \ln 10 + E, \quad \text{if}\ A \ll 1,$$
 * $$\mathrm{ATT} \approx A \ln 10, \quad \text{if}\ E \ll A.$$

Attenuation coefficient
Absorbance of a material is also related to its decadic attenuation coefficient by

$$A = \int_0^l a(z)\, \mathrm{d}z\,,$$

where
 * $l$ is the thickness of that material through which the light travels, and
 * $a(z)$ is the decadic attenuation coefficient of that material at $z$.

If a(z) is uniform along the path, the attenuation is said to be a linear attenuation, and the relation becomes $$A = al.$$

Sometimes the relation is given using the molar attenuation coefficient of the material, that is its attenuation coefficient divided by its molar concentration:

$$A = \int_0^l \varepsilon c(z)\, \mathrm{d}z\,,$$

where
 * $ε$ is the molar attenuation coefficient of that material, and
 * $c(z)$ is the molar concentration of that material at $z$.

If $c(z)$ is uniform along the path, the relation becomes

$$A = \varepsilon cl\,.$$

The use of the term "molar absorptivity" for molar attenuation coefficient is discouraged.

Logarithmic vs. directly proportional measurements
The amount of light transmitted through a material diminishes exponentially as it travels through the material, according to the Beer–Lambert law ($A = (ε)(l)$). Since the absorbance of a sample is measured as a logarithm, it is directly proportional to the thickness of the sample and to the concentration of the absorbing material in the sample. Some other measures related to absorption, such as transmittance, are measured as a simple ratio so they vary exponentially with the thickness and concentration of the material.

Instrument measurement range
Any real measuring instrument has a limited range over which it can accurately measure absorbance. An instrument must be calibrated and checked against known standards if the readings are to be trusted. Many instruments will become non-linear (fail to follow the Beer–Lambert law) starting at approximately 2 AU (~1% transmission). It is also difficult to accurately measure very small absorbance values (below $$) with commercially available instruments for chemical analysis. In such cases, laser-based absorption techniques can be used, since they have demonstrated detection limits that supersede those obtained by conventional non-laser-based instruments by many orders of magnitude (detection has been demonstrated all the way down to $0$). The theoretical best accuracy for most commercially available non-laser-based instruments is attained in the range near 1 AU. The path length or concentration should then, when possible, be adjusted to achieve readings near this range.

Method of measurement
Typically, absorbance of a dissolved substance is measured using absorption spectroscopy. This involves shining a light through a solution and recording how much light and what wavelengths were transmitted onto a detector. Using this information, the wavelengths that were absorbed can be determined. First, measurements on a "blank" are taken using just the solvent for reference purposes. This is so that the absorbance of the solvent is known, and then any change in absorbance when measuring the whole solution is made by just the solute of interest. Then measurements of the solution are taken. The transmitted spectral radiant flux that makes it through the solution sample is measured and compared to the incident spectral radiant flux. As stated above, the spectral absorbance at a given wavelength is

$$A_\lambda = \log_{10}\!\left(\frac{\Phi_{\mathrm{e},\lambda}^\mathrm{i}}{\Phi_{\mathrm{e},\lambda}^\mathrm{t}}\right)\!.$$

The absorbance spectrum is plotted on a graph of absorbance vs. wavelength.

An Ultraviolet-visible spectroscopy will do all this automatically. To use this machine, solutions are placed in a small cuvette and inserted into the holder. The machine is controlled through a computer and, once it has been "blanked", automatically displays the absorbance plotted against wavelength. Getting the absorbance spectrum of a solution is useful for determining the concentration of that solution using the Beer–Lambert law and is used in HPLC.

Shade number
Some filters, notably welding glass, are rated by shade number (SN), which is 7/3 times the absorbance plus one:

$$\begin{align} \mathrm{SN} &= \frac{7}{3} A + 1 \\ &= \frac{7}{3}(-\log_{10} T) + 1\,. \end{align}$$

For example, if the filter has 0.1% transmittance (0.001 transmittance, which is 3 absorbance units), its shade number would be 8.

title: Absorbance


text:
Sega Meganet

Sega Meganet, also known as the Net Work System, was an online service for the Mega Drive in Japan and later Brazil. Utilizing dial-up Internet access, Meganet was Sega's first online multiplayer gaming service, and functioned on a pay to play basis. The system functioned through the use of a peripheral called the Mega Modem and offered several unique titles that could be downloaded, and a few could be played competitively with friends. In addition, it shared technology and equipment with more serious services such as the Mega Anser, used for banking purposes. Though the system was announced for North America under the rebranded name "Tele-Genesis", it was never released for that region. Ultimately, the Meganet service would be short-lived, lasting approximately a year before it was discontinued, but would serve as a precursor to the Sega Channel and XBAND services, as well as a predecessor to online gaming services for video game consoles. Retrospective feedback praises the attempt by Sega to introduce online gaming, but criticizes the service for its logistical issues and lack of titles.

History
Sega's 16-bit console, the Mega Drive was released in Japan on October 29, 1988, though the launch was overshadowed by Nintendo's release of Super Mario Bros. 3 a week earlier. Positive coverage from magazines Famitsu and Beep! helped to establish a following, but Sega only managed to ship 400,000 units in the first year. In order to draw a larger audience, Sega began work on an Internet service, similar to what Nintendo had attempted with the Famicom Modem for the NES.

Released in Japan on November 3, 1990, at a cost of JP¥12,800 (approximately US$100) for the equipment, as well as an additional ¥800 monthly, access began to the Meganet service by way of the Mega Modem, a peripheral which attaches to the rear EXT 9-pin port on the rear of the console. From the modem, a cable runs to a dual-port connector, which connects into a telephone line. The Mega Modem also came packaged with a cartridge which allowed for access to the Meganet game library, and approximately six titles were available at launch. It was capable of connection speeds of up to 1200bit/s. The service had also been announced in North America under the name "Tele-Genesis" at the Winter Consumer Electronics Show (Winter CES) in January 1990, and advertised in publications such as Electronic Gaming Monthly, but it was never released for the region.

As another way of attempting to expand the audience for the Mega Drive in Japan, Sega introduced the Mega Anser, a system designed for use with Nagoya Bank in Japan, in 1990. Packaged as an all-in-one system including a Mega Drive, Mega Modem, Mega Anser cartridge and keypad, the system allowed for transactions such as balance inquiries, transfers, and loan information. It initially retailed at a cost of JP¥34,000 including the home console, and a version with an additional printer retailed for ¥72,800.

Due to the system's low number of titles, prohibitively high price, and the Mega Drive's lack of success in Japan, the Meganet system proved to be a commercial failure. By 1992, the Mega Modem peripheral could be found in bargain bins at a reduced price, and a remodeled version of the Mega Drive released in 1993 removed the EXT 9-pin port altogether, preventing the newer model from being connected to the Meganet service.

In 1995, the Meganet internet service launched in Brazil. Its main focus in the region was e-mail, although by 1996 the service was capable of online multiplayer, along with chat features. Similar to the Mega Anser, a home banking product was also released for the region. Meganet hardware and services were provided through Sega's distributor in the region, Tectoy.

Game library
The Meganet service utilized its own library of titles, independent of the Genesis library. Most of these games never received a cartridge release; however, Columns, Flicky, Fatal Labyrinth, and Teddy Boy Blues each later saw cartridge versions. Several Meganet games would also later appear in the Game no Kanzume series, released for the Mega-CD exclusively in Japan. Most games for the service were small, at around 128kB per game, due to the limits of Internet connection speeds at the time. Downloads were estimated to take about five to eight minutes to complete.

All of the Meganet games were available through the Sega Game Library, accessed through the Meganet modem. Due to issues with long-distance charges through the use of telephone lines, as well as seconds of lag time between commands, only two games featured competitive play: Tel-Tel Stadium and Tel-Tel Mahjong, with the remainder of the games available for single players via download. Due to Sega's reluctance to commit to releasing the service in North America, third-party developers in that region were unwilling to invest in developing games specifically for Meganet. This resulted in a low number of titles created for the service.

Reception and legacy
Retrospective feedback on the Sega Meganet service is mixed, praising the early initiative to develop online gaming for video consoles, but criticizing its implementation via use of telephone lines and issues with Sega's lack of developers for the service. Adam Redsell of IGN commented on the basic features of the service, and despite noting that Meganet received only a few games, stated "[T]hat's pretty damn impressive for 1990". He also notes the influence of Sega in the development of online gaming, with the Meganet service as their first attempt, and credits the Meganet's successor, Sega Channel, with helping to spread broadband Internet.

The telephone line network which the Meganet ran on has been criticized for its logistical issues in online gaming. According to Electronic Gaming Monthly, "Even though the TeleGenesis modem has been announced, it has yet to appear and the real usefulness of a device that is used only to play games with friends over the phone lines remains questionable (both have to have the modem, the phone lines must be clear, the phone bills will be a problem if it’s a long-distance call, etc.)" The same issues that plagued the Meganet over the use of phone lines for Internet connectivity would later resurface when Catapult Entertainment launched the XBAND service in 1994.

Ken Horowitz of Sega-16 took note of Sega's reluctance to commit to releasing the service in North America as part of the reason for its lack of titles, noting, "Companies were most likely waiting for confirmation of the modem’s release before they began to commit themselves, and as time has attested, few were waiting to go ahead with development in light of Sega's 'wait and see' attitude." Horowitz went on to criticize this issue as a problem Sega would have again with the 32X in 1994, stating, "History would repeat itself in the harshest of manners only five years later. Sega's expectations of third party support for something it showed little enthusiasm for were entirely unrealistic and ultimately meant that no games would be in the pipeline." Former Sega console hardware research and development head Hideki Sato stated that Sega made very little money on sales of the Mega Modem, but that Sega learned from the experience to develop future network opportunities for the Sega Saturn.

title: Sega Meganet


text:
Talk:Jet engine

Caption of the photo of the first 747
The JT9D in the picture in the 'Uses' section is not undergoing maintenance. The airplane shown is the first 747, and it is on display in the Airpark section of the Seattle Museum of Flight. The engine nacelle has (most likely) been removed so that the inside is visible to visitors. I haven't made enough edits to be able to edit this caption, perhaps someone else can do it.

Merge proposal
I propose that Airbreathing jet engine be merged into Jet engine. The two topics are essentially the same. Although there are issues around the exact meaning of the term jet propulsion, that already has its own article and no reliable source (that I am aware of) has ever defined any actual kind of "jet engine" that differs from the airbreathing variety. Some definitions of jet propulsion include rocket propulsion but no definitions of a jet engine appear to include rocket engines, which also have their own article, while both are usually classified as types of reaction engine - another existing article. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 21:58, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
 * I Support a merge --Marc Lacoste (talk) 07:03, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Support Andy Dingley (talk) 10:23, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Support. I browsed a handful of sources covering aviation technology and thermodynamics (including Rolls-Royce’s The Jet Engine), and none use the term "jet engine" to mean something else than "airbreathing jet engine". I believe the distinction with non-airbreathing jet propulsion devices is already clearly made and well illustrated in the current article’s section "Other types of jet propulsion". Ariadacapo (talk) 11:54, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Support: I have checked several college aerospace propulsion texts and none refer to non-airbreathing engines (e.g. rockets) as "jet engines". I have a bachelor's degree in aero propulsion engineering and have worked in the industry for 42 years, and never heard such a reference; I have no reason to believe the industry regards it as such. That "definition" is WP:original research which must be removed. Airbreathing jet engine is less well cited than Jet engine; the page is redundant, and what little that is good in the other should be merged here. JustinTime55 (talk) 12:32, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Oppose On practical grounds. It's a silly idea. The two articles are too big to merge. They were originally merged but were separated due to size. Remerging will just make the resultant article too big again. GliderMaven (talk) 19:43, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
 * The split was made by, following a lone post six months earlier that had gained no consensus at the time of the split. That editor is now permanently blocked for being a Bad Bunny. If a split is still needed, then we could do one of two things:
 * Merge the two articles back together and then agree a scope and meaningfully different title for the new child article. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 20:48, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
 * First agree the new scope and title, then move Airbreathing jet engine across and update the content of both articles accordingly.
 * I have no real problem with either process, though I think that an initial merge and tidy-up should make it more obvious whether a split is really needed and, if so, where the cut should be made. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 20:48, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
 * We would do much better to merge jet propulsion and reaction engine to this one. They're both short articles, and are overlapping topics. Airbreathing jet engine is already a subarticle and isn't even the primary topic. GliderMaven (talk) 21:57, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Jet propulsion encompasses a whole bunch of things, including rockets and pump-jets. I don't see it as ever being a terribly useful article as a result, but it fills an obvious conceptual space. Andy Dingley (talk) 23:17, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
 * But this article is already on that topic, and seems to be terribly useful, and as you note, fills an obvious conceptual space. GliderMaven (talk) 16:59, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
 * "The two articles are too big to merge": excess material should be moved in the relevant subarticles (Turbojet, Turbofan, Turboprop, turboshaft, Propfan, Ramjet, Scramjet, and Thrust with its 5 subsections), not in a dubious "airbreathing" concept.--Marc Lacoste (talk) 10:43, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

As for the merge itself, I see no objections to merging this article with the one on airbreathing jet engines and using the name "jet engine" for the merged article, as it appears to be the more common use of the term term by far among aeronautical engineers. The stuff about rockets etc that doesn't fit in the merged article should then be moved to the "jet propulsion" article, which is currently rather short. However, the new article should give both definitions in the lede, state that the current article uses the narrower definition because it is the most common interpretation among engineers, and then link to the "jet propulsion" article for details about engines that do not fit the narrower definition. Martijn Meijering (talk) 16:17, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Neutral It has now been conclusively shown that the claim that "no definitions of a jet engine appear to include rocket engines" is false. Dictionaries show that two meanings of the terms "jet engine" and "jet propulsion" are in common use, a broader one that includes rockets and a narrower one that doesn't. It has also been demonstrated that the term "jet engine" simply means "engine that works by jet propulsion", just as you would expect from the everyday meanings of the words involved. Nevertheless it has also been more or less settled that the broader use of the term is very uncommon among aeronautical engineers, as we've heard several ones weigh in on that topic. That said, Sutton clearly belongs to a minority that does use the term that way. It would be nice if we could get an explicit citation of a RS that says the broader interpretation is uncommon among aeronautical engineers, but unless others object I'll be happy if we state so explicitly as it is.
 * Support – Too much fragmentation and duplication. Airbreathing jet engine seems to be mostly composed of chunks of the turbojet, turbofan, ramjet etc articles plus a summary of Components of jet engines. If you take that out, what's left (Engine cycle, Thrust lapse, safety aspects and Terminology) could fit, with a bit of trimming, into Jet engine without much trouble. It's irritating, especially to the uninitiated reader, having to jump back and forth between articles only to find a lot of stuff that you have just read about. --Deeday-UK (talk) 21:57, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Support. The jet engine is always an airbreathing jet engine, so this is a distinction without a difference. Non-airbreathing engines that use some form of jet propulsion are referred to by other names, such as rocket engine or thruster. Binksternet (talk) 22:03, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Discussion

 * GliderMaven, once again you have diverted attention from the main issue which is the tautology of "airbreathing jet engines" (not necessary to disambiguate jet engine) and the definition of rockets as jet engines. The size of the article is not an insurmountable reason not to merge, and does not justify WP:OR.
 * Also, Airbreathing jet engine (which is completely uncited) contradicts Jet engine by omitting all the other European and Japanese pioneers of the jet engine except the English Whittle and the German von Ohain; the top half of the former certainly can go in the dustbin. JustinTime55 (talk) 13:08, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

 * There's no OR tags on the article, nor could there credibly be so. On the contrary, size is a limit that you have no current plan to tackle, and is a critical issue. GliderMaven (talk) 16:59, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

 * I have a plan though. Turn this article into jet engine (jet propulsion) and airbreathing jet engine into jet engine (airbreathing), and then temporarily make 'jet engine' into a disambiguation. Then go through the internal links and move them across, manually. AFTER you've done that and sorted out all the links (there's over 500 of them), you could then point/move 'jet engine' over to jet engine (airbreathing).

 * In Jet engine (jet propulsion) you would then define thrust simply as Fn = Mf Ve (where Ve is the effective exhaust velocity, including any inlet drag and any pressure term), and in Jet engine (airbreathing) define it as Fn = (Mair + Mf) Vex - Mair, where Vex is the average exhaust velocity and move everything related to airducts, and I mean everything, sections on turbojets, turbofans, ramjets all moved over to jet engine (airbreathing). But stuff like propulsive efficiency that has nothing specifically to do with air ducts and is only to do with Ve, leave it in the jet propulsion article. GliderMaven (talk) 16:59, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

 * If you do that, in that order, then you've achieved everything you guys want, and have evened out the two articles as well. GliderMaven (talk) 16:59, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Can you find sources that treat the jet engine as both the "jet propulsion" kind and the "airbreathing" kind separately, or is that just your own preferred way of covering the topic? Ariadacapo (talk) 17:18, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

 * Certainly. Merriam Webster defines it as: "an engine that produces motion as a result of the rearward discharge of a jet of fluid" and then adds a more specific definition as: "an airplane engine that uses atmospheric oxygen to burn fuel and produces a rearward discharge of heated air and exhaust gases". So no, since dictionaries record usage, both definitions are in use, no I didn't invent it, nor did anyone else in Wikipedia. GliderMaven (talk) 17:47, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

 * OK thank you. Ariadacapo (talk) 18:26, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
 * The term "jet propulsion" is ambiguous. It can mean specifically jet engine propulsion, as distinct from say rocket propulsion, or it can treat jet propulsion more widely as using any jet of fluid, in which case rocket propulsion is a form of jet propulsion. See for example the Collins dictionary definition. What has invented is the idea that any engine that works by jet propulsion must necessarily be a jet engine, regardless of which meaning is being used. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 18:28, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

 * Now you're just being insulting. GliderMaven (talk) 19:42, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
 * No, just open. You are welcome to either cite that idea or refute it, but refusing to do either leaves you open to such remarks. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 19:54, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

 * ? As I already noted, Wikipedia just uses the Merriam Webster definition. GliderMaven (talk) 15:58, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Merriam Webster (or the OED) don't have any privileged position on WP, and layman dictionaries are rarely of great use for trying to define encyclopedic content. It goes with the territory that an encyclopedia will need a more technically detailed definition than dictionaries manage with. Andy Dingley (talk) 16:04, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
 * And you're just being disruptive with your edt-warring to keep re-adding rockets:
 * I would agree broadly with your presumed scope for "jet engine" and "airbreathing jet engine". However much better titles for these are, as everyone else seems to favour, jet propulsion and jet engine.
 * Jet engine is a large scope and will be a large article. We can manage that size by functional splits to well-defined sub articles such as history of the jet engine, turbojet, turboprop etc. That makes far more sense than a very unclear and largely overlapping break into "jet engine" and "airbreathing jet engine". Andy Dingley (talk) 16:02, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
 * I vehemently agree with here. In any case,, please stop changing the scope of the article (re-writing the lead…) before consensus is reached here. Ariadacapo (talk) 16:19, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Huh? Isn't the longstanding consensus version of many years the one that does include rocket engines in the definition? Aren't we supposed to go back to the last version before the dispute until we reach a new consensus? If so, I don't think GliderMaven is the one who's edit-warring here. We clearly haven't reached a consensus yet, though I hope we're getting close. Martijn Meijering (talk) 16:23, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
 * It was a disputed split back in 2010, by an editor who managed to get themselves indef blocked twice under two different accounts, even before their socking was recognised. It has never been an accepted split, but the WP model is that a single-issue editor who cares nothing for disruption can force one viewpoint, just by their persistence. Andy Dingley (talk) 17:17, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks, that changes things, I didn't know that. Martijn Meijering (talk) 17:20, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
 * In the first half of the 20th century, Jet propulsion and jet engine pretty much meant the same broad class of largely experimental machines. In mid-century, rockets and turbojets became highly important for different applications. This caused a nomenclatorial split, with "jet engine" usually meaning air breathing turbine machines without airscrews sticking out. Rockets remained part of "jet propulsion" especially in scientific contexts, but mostly used their own name in popular, commercial, and engineering contexts. Yes, as encyclopedists it behooves us to embrace lexicological conservatism, but not archaism, so I think it better to follow this division that became conventional just a few decades ago. A sentence in the intro to the jet engine article ought to say something like, "Rocket engines also work by Jet propulsion and let it go at that. Jim.henderson (talk) 12:58, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Actually, that's the main reason to not do this- we're not lexicographers, as encyclopedists we don't divide up articles on lexicographic lines- which is what this very ill conceived discussion is trying to do. If the article is on jet propulsion engines then rocket engines are a hundred percent on-topic. Or, if the article isn't on jet propulsion engines any longer and is only on airbreathing jet propulsion then you've changed what the article is about, and you have to go through thousands of internal links to work out whether they're still correct. GliderMaven (talk) 14:33, 29 July 2018 (UTC)

Split article?
We've just had an undiscussed and uncredited split of the thrust content. However this has moved it to Thrust, rather than a new article at Jet engine thrust. As thrust was a tiny article deserving vital article status as basic principle of physics, that's now a worse article than when the content was here. If we're going to split, we should split; not just move to an equally bad location. Andy Dingley (talk) 14:37, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I readily confess that my choice of target may be poor. In the longer view I'm trying to make the present large article, and related ones, fit better with the suggestions in Summary style. The material I moved is a detailed theoretical study of one important aspect of airbreathers, and I figured it should go into a theoretical article. Yes, moving a fraction of this large article will make a small article several times bigger. The main alternative target I was considering was the airbreather one, and perhaps that would be better, or maybe someone can suggest an even better one. I am entirely open to suggestions in that vein, though somewhat less open to any idea that none of the several large detail parts of this article properly belong in various more narrowly focused articles. Making a new article would be something of a last resort, as there are already many related articles that, to my eye at least, look undernourished. If an alternative is decided in a couple days, it will just be a case of undoing my two edits and doing the agreed move, followed by a bit of cleanup for redundancy or article layout or similar reasons. Jim.henderson (talk) 15:43, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Quicker than that. It is undone. I face an objection from an editor with an excellent track record, and for the thrust article an objection from a stranger with not quite the same concern. Those, together with a second reading of the moved material, were enough. Umm, wet thrust? Yes, I read that before moving it, but what was I thinking? This obscure detail doesn't belong in either of these broad articles. So, the choices narrow to finding a better existing home, or making a new article. Hmm, moving details to the particular kind of engine? Water injection, far as I know, is only for Fighter planes and not many of those. I shall look into that article, and Turbojet and maybe someone can make a better suggestion and save me from surrendering and accepting a new article. Jim.henderson (talk) 18:48, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Hee-hee. Should have checked Water injection (engine) before showing my ignorance. Wet is old, rarely used anymore and was even a feature in an airliner designed in the 1960s. Jim.henderson (talk) 18:53, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
 * No, it's not time for a compromise. It's time for me to surrender unconditionally, having failed to find an alternative existing home, or to be rescued by a smarter editor who agrees with me, and I am sorry for the delay. Incidentally I am surprised at how many decades have passed since I paid much attention to developments in aircraft engines. Anyway, you seem to have exactly the right idea, so I propose that you go ahead and do the honor of creating a new article from the section. Jim.henderson (talk) 01:29, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

ETOPS discussion in lede
Why does the lede say, "This, combined with greatly decreased fuel consumption, permitted routine transatlantic flight by twin-engined airliners by the turn of the century, where before a similar journey would have required multiple fuel stops?" This seems to be confusing two entirely different issues. Aircraft had sufficient endurance to fly trans-Atlantic non-stops many decades before twins were allowed to fly the routes in passenger service. Fuel consumption had nothing to do with why twins weren't flying trans-Atlantic passenger routes until the 1980s. Twins weren't allowed to fly those routes even with fuel stops. The requirement was that they remained within 60 minutes flying time of an airport to which they could divert in the event of an engine failure.

If there had been airports close enough to each other such that they could have legally flown across the Atlantic with stops at those airports, then they could have equally legally just flown over those airports without stopping. As jet engines became more reliable, ETOPS began gradually increasing the flying time radii within which twins were required to remain from a possible diversion airport until trans-Atlantic and then trans-Pacific legs became legal. Vbscript2 (talk) 06:21, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
 * That sentence should just go. For WP:UNDUE (EROPS / ETOPS doesn't fit into the lead of jet engine), because ETOPS isn't about fuel consumptions, and mostly (as you note) that non-stop transatlantic flying was commonplace decades before the turn of the century. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:32, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:52, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Albert Fono's ramjet-cannonball in 1915-hu.svg

title: Talk:Jet engine


text:
Adapidae

Adapidae is a family of extinct primates that primarily radiated during the Eocene epoch between about 55 and 34 million years ago.

Adapid systematics and evolutionary relationships are controversial, but there is fairly good evidence from the postcranial skeleton (everything but the skull, or cranium) that adapids were stem strepsirrhines (members of the group including the living lemurs, lorises, and bushbabies). In particular, the anatomy of the adapid wrist and ankle (e.g., position of the groove for the flexor fibularis tendon on the talus, the presence of a sloping talo-fibular facet) show derived similarities with those of living strepsirrhines. However, adapids lacked many of the anatomical specializations characteristic of living strepsirrhines, such as a toothcomb,   a toilet-claw on the second pedal digit, and a reduction in the size of the promontory branch of the internal carotid artery.

There are two major branches of adapids, subfamily Adapinae (adapines) and subfamily Caenopithecinae (caenopithecines). Caenopithecines are sometimes assigned to their own family, Caenopithecidae.

title: Adapidae


text:
Phantasy Star II

Phantasy Star II (ファンタシースターII 還らざる時の終わりに) is a science fantasy role-playing video game developed and published by Sega for the Sega Genesis. It was released in Japan in 1989, North America in 1990, and in Europe in 1990. It was later ported to a variety of different platforms. An updated remake, Phantasy Star Generation 2 (ファンタシースター generation:2), was released for the PlayStation 2 in 2005 in Japan.

Phantasy Star II is the second installment in Sega's acclaimed Phantasy Star series and serves as a sequel to the original Phantasy Star for the Master System. Phantasy Star II takes place 1,000 years after the events of its predecessor and follows the journey of a government agent named Rolf and his friends, who are on a mission to discover why the protector of the planet Mota, Mother Brain, has started malfunctioning.

Phantasy Star II was the first video game to use a 6 mega-bit cartridge, making it the biggest video game on a console at the time. Since its release Phantasy Star II has been the subject of critical acclaim.

Gameplay

Gameplay is similar to the original Phantasy Star, the first game in the series. Its battle system is turn-based as well as menu-based, allowing the player to choose commands for their party of up to four characters. Each of the eight characters has a different set of preferred weapons and armor, as well as techniques, suited to the character's job. The player must defeat enemies in the overworld and in dungeons to advance in the game.

The game abandoned the first-person view that the first game used for dungeons and battles. Phantasy Star II instead uses a top-down perspective for exploration and a third-person view in battles.

Plot
Somewhere deep within the Andromeda Galaxy lies the Algol Star System. The parent star, Algol (referred to as "Algo" by this point in the timeline), has three planets orbiting about it. First is Palm ("Palma"), the home of the government. Governors, treasurers, and great thinkers dwell here in great ivory towers, away from the hubbub of everyday life. Next is Mota ("Motavia"), the shining jewel. Once a dry desert planet infested with ant lions, Mota has been transformed into a blue and green tropical paradise. Domed farms grow crops, and the water is regulated into dammed rivers. Life on Mota is sweet, peaceful, and easy. The people have everything they want and do not need to work. Farthest out is Dezo ("Dezoris"), the ice planet. Little is known about this mysterious and dark planet.

One thousand years have passed since Alis and her friends liberated Algo from the evil Lassic in the previous game; Algo has since prospered under the care of a giant computer called the Mother Brain. The Mother Brain regulates the Climatrol tower which has terraformed Mota, the biosystems lab, and all other things that provide whatever the people in Mota need.

The game begins with the character Rolf recalling a strange recurring nightmare he has been having. In the dream, a young girl who Rolf does not recognize – but who resembles Alis – is battling a demon. Finally, just before the demon would kill her, Rolf awakens. From his home in Paseo, Mota's capital, Rolf goes to the central tower to meet with the head of government on Mota, in order to receive his newest mission.

The first threat is an increase in dangerous biomonsters (biologically altered animals). Rolf sets off with his companion Nei, a humanoid with catlike features, to investigate, accompanied by six others with each different, but same purpose. Along the way, the group discovers a human-biomonster hybrid named Neifirst, who reveals that Nei's origins are the same as her own. Being part biomonster, she is an outcast from society, causing her to loathe mankind and, because of this, sabotage both Mota's climate control system and the biosystems laboratory. Nei confronts Neifirst and battles her in a one-on-one fight, but is defeated and killed. Anguished, Rolf and the remaining party defeat Neifirst, causing the biosystems laboratory to self-destruct and bringing an end to Mota's Biomonster hazard.

However, this sets another incident in motion: the explosion of the lab damages the Climatrol equipment and causes the central lake, the residential reservoir of Mota, to overflow with water. To prevent a massive flood, Rolf and his friends decide to open up the surrounding four dams. After unlocking the last one, they are captured by Mother Brain's security robots, charged with causing the environmental disaster, and sentenced to death upon the Gaira satellite. However, the satellite malfunctions and collides with Palm, destroying both. Rolf and company are rescued in the nick of time by a space pirate, Tyler.

Now the system's most wanted criminals, blamed for Palm's destruction and the deaths of its people, the group boards Mota's last remaining spacecraft – legacy of a space program now falling into ruins – to the mysterious and dangerous Dezo. Located at a far corner of the planet is the Esper Mansion: upon reaching it, Rolf awakens the legendary Lutz from a long sleep. Lutz reveals the secrets of Rolf's past, as well as the dark secret of Mother Brain which relates to the fate and destruction Algo is now facing. In order to save the System, the heroes seek to recover the powerful Nei arsenal, found in four hidden dungeons, capable of defeating the enemies on the spaceship Noah, where Mother Brain resides.

It is eventually revealed that the demon from Rolf's original nightmare – Dark Force, Lassic's true corruptor and Alis' enemy a thousand years ago – has corrupted Noah and been behind every threat Rolf has faced, including Mother Brain itself. Rolf confronts the two evil entities and defeats them. After the final battle, Lutz alerts him that there are still people on the ship: they're the remaining survivors from Earth. They reveal they created Mother Brain to satisfy their greedy lifestyle at the expense of Algo's resources, and a fight between the heroes and the earthmen ensues. The game ends with the outcome unrevealed.

Localization changes

 * Lutz, a refugee Esper who lives in the Esper Mansion on Dezo, aids Rolf and friends in their mission. He is supposed to be the same Esper who accompanies Alis in Phantasy Star, but due to the English version of Phantasy Star naming said Esper "Noah," this point is lost.
 * In the Japanese version, Ustvestia, a musician who teaches the characters the Musik technique, is openly gay; when requested to teach a male character the Musik technique, he comments, "He looks cute", and charges less than he would for teaching female characters. Any obvious references to this were removed from the American release; he instead comments, "He looks smart" – and still charges less for teaching the male characters.
 * While the tracks in the soundtrack are the same for both versions, the snare drums are much louder in the Japanese version.
 * In the Japanese version the game is set 942 years after the events of Phantasy Star I.

Ports
Phantasy Star II was re-released as a port in two different forms for the Sega Saturn and Game Boy Advance as part of Phantasy Star Collection. It was also released on the Sega Smash Pack Volume 1 for the Dreamcast. It is also part of the Sega Genesis Collection for PlayStation 2 and PlayStation Portable. The game is available in Sonic's Ultimate Genesis Collection for Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3. The game is also included as part of Sega Genesis Classics for Xbox One, PlayStation 4, Nintendo Switch, Microsoft Windows, macOS, and Linux.

The game was made available through Nintendo's Virtual Console service in 2008. On June 10, 2009, it was released on Xbox Live Arcade under the Sega Vintage Collection banner. On August 26, 2010, an iPhone port of the game was released. The port later became available on the iPad and iPod touch as well. On June 22, 2017, Sega made the game available for free through both iTunes and Android.

In October 1993, Atari Corporation filed a lawsuit against Sega for an alleged infringement of a patent originally created by Atari Corp. in the 1980s, with the former seeking a preliminary injunction to stop manufacturing, usage and sales of hardware and software for both Sega Genesis and Game Gear. On September 28, 1994,   both parties reached a settlement in which it involved a cross-licensing agreement to publish up to five titles each year across their systems until 2001. Phantasy Star II was one of the first five titles approved from the deal by Sega in order to be converted for the Atari Jaguar, but it was never released.

Contemporary
Its demonstration at the Winter Consumer Electronics Show (Winter CES) in January 1990 received a positive reception. The original Phantasy Star game was a big game for its time, and because of the advancements in technology between the Master System and Genesis, Phantasy Star II featured a much larger cartridge than its predecessor, holding 6 megabits of data, making it the largest game on any game machine up until that time. RePlay magazine praised the game for providing a lengthy home video game experience not found in arcades, and reported it could take about 250 hours to complete.

The game was well received by critics upon release. In Dragon magazine, Phantasy Star II was described as "one of the best role-playing games yet to be released for any video game system." Wizardry designer Roe R. Adams wrote in Computer Gaming World that Phantasy Star II was a system seller for the Genesis, stating that its "16-bit graphics are gorgeous, but the real fun lies in the science fiction story plot." He concluded that it is a "challenging and enjoyable" game with "superb combat and animated graphics." Raze concluded that it is a "challenging quest packed with gameplay."

Retrospective
Phantasy Star II was a landmark game in its time, "a game of many firsts" according to Nintendo Power. It was the first RPG for the Mega Drive, and was released in the U.S. two months before the original Final Fantasy for the NES, another key game in the genre's popularization in North America.

Phantasy Star II is regarded by many as a forerunner for certain aspects of role-playing video games, such as an epic, dramatic, character-driven storyline dealing with serious themes and subject matter, a strategy-based battle system, and the demand for extensive strategy guides for such games (Phantasy Star II included one with the game itself). Phantasy Star II's predominantly science fiction setting was also a major departure for RPGs, which had previously been largely restricted to fantasy or science fantasy settings. The game's science fiction story was also unique, reversing the common alien invasion scenario by instead presenting Earthlings as the invading antagonists rather than the defending protagonists. The game's strong characterization, and use of self-discovery as a motivating factor for the characters and the player, was a major departure from previous RPGs and had a major influence on subsequent RPGs such as the Final Fantasy series. It also made an attempt at social commentary years before the Final Fantasy series started doing the same. Tor.com described the worldbuilding as "fantastic, probably the best in any 16-bit era game."

Phantasy Star II has made a number of "greatest games of all time" type lists, including being inducted into GameSpot's list of greatest games of all time in 2005. Mega placed the game at #29 in their "Top Mega Drive Games of All Time" in 1992. In 1997 Electronic Gaming Monthly ranked it the 30th best console video game of all time, saying it was the best RPG on the Genesis due to its characters, story, enemies, and massive length. In 2003, IGN ranked it as the 92nd top game, choosing Phantasy Star II for how it "surprised everyone with the death of a major player 1/3 the way" years before Final Fantasy VII, in addition to "a balanced experience point system, tough-as-nails bosses, and one of the biggest and most difficult RPG quests that we've ever seen." In 2009, Nintendo Power called Phantasy Star II, along with Phantasy Star IV, one of the greatest role-playing games of all time. In 2011, GamePro included it in its list of "20 Games That Defined Role-Playing Games".

Levi Buchanan of IGN reviewed the iPhone version in 2010. He praised it as an "awesome game" with a "real sense of discovery" and one of his "favorite final twists in videogames."

Remake
A remake, Phantasy Star Generation 2, was released in Japan for the PlayStation 2 as a part of Sega Ages in 2005. Much like Phantasy Star Generation 1, the remake mirrors the events of the original game while adding character development and fleshing out the story in more detail. It featured enhanced graphics, a revised combat system, and a rearranged soundtrack. Other new features included the ability to play the original Mega Drive version, and to load a system file from Phantasy Star Generation:1 to allow the ability to play as Nei throughout the entire game.

It was originally slated for North American and European release by Conspiracy Entertainment as a part of the Phantasy Star Trilogy, a compilation of the remakes of Phantasy Star, Phantasy Star II, and Phantasy Star IV. The compilation's future is uncertain, however, since Sega reclaimed the publishing rights for North America and Europe. This is evidenced by the fact that the trilogy no longer appears on Conspiracy Entertainment's list of products on their website. Sega has abandoned their plans for a Phantasy Star IV remake in favor of a compilation featuring the original iterations of Phantasy Star I–IV.

Game designer Yasushi Yamaguchi, who was responsible for the 'Mechanical Design' in the game, expressed interest for a 3D remake.

title: Phantasy Star II


text:
Glanders

Glanders is a contagious zoonotic infectious disease that occurs primarily in horses, mules, and donkeys. It can be contracted by other animals, such as dogs, cats, pigs, goats, and humans. It is caused by infection with the bacterium Burkholderia mallei.

Glanders is endemic in Africa, Asia, the Middle East, and Central and South America. It has been eradicated from North America, Australia, and most of Europe through surveillance and destruction of affected animals and import restrictions. It has not been reported in the United States since 1945, except in 2000, when an American lab researcher had an accidental exposure in the lab. It is a notifiable disease in the UK, although it has not been reported there since 1928.

The term is from Middle English glaundres or Old French glandres, both meaning glands. Other terms include malleus, muermo, Rotz and snive.

Presentation
Signs of glanders include the formation of nodular lesions in the lungs and ulceration of the mucous membranes in the upper respiratory tract. The acute form results in coughing, fever, and the release of an infectious nasal discharge, followed by septicaemia and death within days. In the chronic form, nasal and subcutaneous nodules develop, eventually ulcerating; death can occur within months, while survivors act as carriers.

Cause and transmission
Glanders is caused by infection with the Burkholderia mallei, usually by ingestion of contaminated feed or water. B. mallei is able to infect humans, so it is classed as a zoonotic agent. Transmission occurs by direct contact with infected animal's body fluid and tissues and entry is through skin abrasions, nasal and oral mucosal surfaces, or inhalation.

Diagnosis
The mallein test is a sensitive and specific clinical test for glanders. Mallein (ATCvet code: ), a protein fraction of the glanders organism (B. mallei), is injected intradermopalpebrally or given by eye drop. In infected animals, the eyelid swells markedly in 1 to 2 days.

Historical cases and potential use in war
Glanders has been known since antiquity, with a description by Hippocrates around 425 BCE.

From the Middle Ages to the 1900s, glanders was a significant threat to armies. Before the Battle of Blenheim in 1704, glanders may have afflicted and greatly diminished the horses of Marshal Tallard's cavalry, helping the Duke of Marlborough win the battle.

Glanders was a significant problem for civilian use of horses, as well. In the 18th-century veterinary hospital at the École Nationale Vétérinaire d'Alfort, glanders was the most common disease among their equine patients and the one most likely to cause death.

Due to the high mortality rate in humans and the small number of organisms required to establish infection, B. mallei is regarded as a potential biological warfare or bioterrorism agent, as is the closely related organism, B. pseudomallei, the causative agent of melioidosis. During World War I, glanders was believed to have been spread deliberately by German agents to infect large numbers of Russian horses and mules on the Eastern Front. Other agents attempted to introduce the disease in the United States and Argentina. This had an effect on troop and supply convoys, as well as on artillery movement, which were dependent on horses and mules. Human cases in Russia increased with the infections during and after WWI. The Japanese deliberately infected horses, civilians, and prisoners of war with B. mallei at the Unit 731 Pingfang (China) Institute and Unit 100 facilities during World War II. The U.S. studied this agent as a possible biological weapon in 1943–44, but did not weaponize it. U.S. interest in glanders (agent LA) continued through the 1950s, except it had an inexplicable tendency to lose virulence in the lab, making it difficult to weaponize. Between 1982 and 1984, the Soviet Union allegedly used weaponized B. mallei during the Soviet–Afghan War.

Vaccine research
No vaccine is licensed for use in the U.S. Infection with these bacteria results in nonspecific symptoms and can be either acute or chronic, impeding rapid diagnosis. The lack of a vaccine for either bacterium also makes them potential candidates for bioweaponization. Together, with their high rate of infectivity by aerosols and resistance to many common antibiotics, both bacteria have been classified as category B priority pathogens by the US NIH and US CDC, which has spurred a dramatic increase in interest in these microorganisms. Attempts have been made to develop vaccines for these infections, which would not only benefit military personnel, a group most likely to be targeted in an intentional release, but also individuals who may come in contact with glanders-infected animals or live in areas where melioidosis is endemic.

title: Glanders


text:
Talk:Adapidae

Ancient adapids?
The article says that "ancient adapids lacked many of the anatomical specializations characteristic of living strepsirrhines, such as a tooth comb, a grooming claw on the second pedal digit, and a reduction in the size of the promontory branch of the internal carotid artery"

I know of no other adapid fossils except Darwinius (Ida) which lack these characteristics. Given the fact that that specimen has been rejected as a reliable specimen for describing morphology based on her crushed dentition that she is a juvenile, should this sentence be included as it is stating as fact something that is still very much in debate (and likely is incorrect).

Reference: Convergent evolution of anthropoid-like adaptations in Eocene adapiform primates, Nature, 22 October 2009, pages 1118-1121

Cirripedius (talk) 00:04, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

 * Sorry you never got an answer. The toothcomb of extant strepsirrhines is only found within the lemur/lorisiform clade, of which adapids were not a part.  (The reference to the toothcomb with Ida demonstrated a common misconception among primatologists and, surprisingly, some paleoanthropologists.)  The evolutionary history of the grooming claw has recently been called into question, and many fossils will now need to be reevaluated.  I plan to cover all of this when I re-write both toothcomb and grooming claw articles very soon.  Unfortunately, I don't know much about the promontory branch of the internal carotid artery in living strepsirrhines vs. adapiforms.
 * In short, the statement is probably correct, except for the possible issue of the grooming claw. However, early primate evolution and primitive primate fossils are poorly understood by anyone outside of paleoanthropology.  Much of the contention over the evolution of simians and toothcombed strepsirrhines is starting to recede, but meanwhile, many related branches of science still hold antiquated views about early primate evolution due to a lack of interdisciplinary study and a underemphasis on paleontology.  Since toothcombed primates did not evolve from adapids, the statement can stand. –  Maky  « talk » 06:05, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved to Adapidae. Favonian (talk) 09:56, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Adapid → Adapidae – Fossil groups are not titled by names derived from their taxon name (e.g. adapiform -> Adapiformes, notharctid -> Notharctidae). – Maky  « talk » 05:39, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Rename per above. – Maky  « talk » 05:39, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
 * rename sounds good to me. Consistency is a fine rationale. - UtherSRG (talk) 09:19, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

title: Talk:Adapidae