text:
Talk:Formula One car

Ground effects
Is it true to say that ground effects specifically are banned in F1, or is it just contoured underbodies that are banned? I honestly don't know, but it seems to me that the downforce that cars currently get from their raised nose, flat bottom and diffuser set up constitutes ground effects. SamH 09:03, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * From what I saw on a doco once, both contoured underbodies (flat bottom must be used) and side skirts are banned. Sliding side skirts are just as important as the shaped undertray for creating the ground effect, as they prevent the fast travelling air from being 'sucked' out the side of the car, significantly reducing the ground effect. However, I do agree that using the ground effect as such is not specifically banned - but rules have been put in place to prevent its use. Similar to the banning of launch control...I believe the rule is actually banning electronic systems that control power to reduce wheel spin (or something ridiculous like that) below speeds of 100mph (not sure exactly) - an effective ban, but not specifically stated as such. AlbinoMonkey 12:25, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)

New Articles
I'd like to make new articles on each of the categories shown here, such as Formula One car aerodynamics. I am admittedly not an expert on any of the things, but have plenty of F1 magazines to take reference from, and am interested enough to do decent research. The information that is here could remain, but as I have seen on other pages, with a link just below the title that says something like Main article:Formula One car aerodynamics. Objections/comments? AlbinoMonkey 12:25, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * The aerodynamics section of this article (Formula One cars) is quite short, so why not incorporate it there? The fewer "sub-articles" the better, I think, because it's less confusing.  — Dan | Talk 13:00, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * I agree with Danny; usually, articles are only split up when they become so long that they are difficult to read. I think that with the amount of info on this page, splitting it would make the information more difficult to read. SamH 13:21, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Engine section discrepancy?
In the Engine section, it starts out by describing the current enginer requirements as 8-cylinder V8, but later, after describing next year's changes, says that cars will be allowed next year to stay in the current V-10 configuration with detuning. So what is it? 8 or 10? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.76.241.17 (talk) 06:10, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Cars are meant to use V8's in 2006, but there is an allowance to use a de-tuned V10 if they believe their V8 will not be reasonably competitive or available. I'm not sure of the exact ruling, but I'll have a look AlbinoMonkey (Talk) 00:22, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

=
The following as quoted from the main page, is totally untrue "Nonetheless a Formula One engine is over 20% more efficient at turning fuel into power than even the most economical small car." It is no surprise that this statement lacks a citation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.31.56.154 (talk) 00:47, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

The statement itself if somewhat true. Power (J/s or Energy per unit time) is the rate at which energy can be expelled as useful or mechanical work. A performance engine is therefore designed to convert the chemical energy of fuel into mechanical work as quickly as possible and almost always at the expense of fuel efficiency (useful energy out per amount of chemical energy in). The error in the article is therefore the language used to express this fact. Efficiency is often associated with that of the consumption of fuel per distance travelled, whereas in this case it is being used to describe the ability to convert fuel into available power. Essentially the comparison is a poor one as small cars have no bearing on the topic of the paragraph, which is engines and energy conversion. 137.82.115.193 (talk) 20:24, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

=
The engines produce over 100,000 BTU per minute (1,750kW)[citation needed] of heat that must be dumped, usually to the atmosphere via radiators and the exhaust, which can reach temperatures over 1,000 degrees Celsius[citation needed](1,800 to 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit). They consume around 650 liters (23 ft³) of air per second[citation needed]. Race fuel consumption rate is normally around 75 liters per 100 kilometers traveled (3.1 US mpg - 3.8 UK mpg - 1.3 km/l). Nonetheless a Formula One engine is over 20% more efficient at turning fuel into power than most small commuter cars, considering their craftsmanship.

Hmmm, several points of note here. A BTU is a unit of energy, so in order to quote a power it does indeed need to be compared to a unit of time (the rather unconventional minute). A kW is however a unit of power so needs to be converted to joules per second and a minute conversion added. However this section is just a long hand version of energy efficiency. If you know the amount of fuel consumed, its calorific value and the useful work produced then you can quote a fuel conversion efficiency (in addition to the km/l figure). Similarly, on average the formula one calendar consists of 17-19 races per season and takes in a variety of tracks; how is it then possible to give energy and air consumption figures given this variety of engine operation conditions. Monaco has different cooling and engine use characteristics to Spa Francochamps. Air and fuel consumption are therefore dependant on engine operating conditions and should be quoted as such.

Finally, there is no citation for the '20% more efficient at turning fuel into power'. Not only is this claim dubious, but the comparison adds nothing to the readers understanding. The sentence is then concluded with the meaningless reference to craftsmanship. A F1 engine is hand made, a city car's is mass produced. A F1 engine is designed for high rates of energy conversion, a city car's for combined cycle fuel efficiency. An F1 engine is not concerned by emission regulations, a city car is shackled by them. Give and engine tuner a city car engine, a new ECU and a machine shop and the rates of energy conversion will rapidly converge. 137.82.115.193 (talk) 20:02, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

I agree they'd converge but with F1 teams' BIG budgets and the best and brightest engineers i don't think they would actually meet. I'm comparing simply HP/liter, all things being equal (aspiration etc). Hondaracer (talk) 02:53, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

5valve?
article in wikipedia says no more than 5 valves. F1.com says 2inlet and 2 outlet. Mistake?

Actually Wikipedia says "The regulations specify that the cars must be powered by 2.4 litre naturally-aspirated engines in the V8 configuration that have no more than FOUR valves per cylinder."

engine horsepower ratings
I think we should add the fact that exact horsepower ratings are closely guarded team secrets, and all our numbers are estimations by experts. In fact, teams sometimes lie outright as a disinformation strategy against other teams. I am not sure where to put that though

performace sections
I originally added the entire performance sections (forward accel, deceleration, turning accel) without a username, so I have deleted and re-added these sections to get the credit (in a clumsy way). I spend a lot of time in F1 technical sites and forums, and for the figure for 0 to 300 quoted in the acceleration section I spent quite some time with a stopwatch in hand and wathcing onboard videos of F1 cars from several seasons. The distance markers on the side of the track leading to turns helped along with the stopwatch. Deletor 14:51, 27 April 2006 (UTC)Deletor
 * Unfortunately I think your work falls under No original research and can't be included unless you can find a verifiable source to back the figures up. AlbinoMonkey (Talk) 21:53, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Alright, thanks for the heads up; let me clarify that the figures I have quoted for the acceleration for the Renault R25 are from the times taken from onboard videos, so as such my 'research' for the exact figures are simply 'observations' of the actual, recorded phenomena, not research. (Anyone else can do the same). For the other figures, the acceleration figures for 0 - 100 kph are know to be 2 seconds for F1 cars, even in 2006. For instance, in the recent 2006 San Marino GP, explaining why he couldn't stop even when the lollipop slammed into his helmet, said: ". These things get from nought to sixty in two second so by the time you realise, you're gone and everybody is on the deck,". planet-f1 article linkThe other figures are from quotes during races, F1 TV shows, F1 racing mags, and F1 official team sites. Eg throughout the 2005 Turkish GP the g-force for the famous turn 8 was quoted in TV broadcasts, websites, official sites as 4.5 G (for 8 seconds which incidentally was causing the drivers pain in their rib-cages). Deletor 04:34, 28 April 2006 (UTC)Deletor

I'd be interested in seeing something included here about the turning radius of one of these cars. I read that the steering wheel is locked in the Monaco hairpin. Got me wondering... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.170.184.157 (talk) 16:48, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Article implies that use of carbon material is an important factor to achieve the "remarkable braking forces". This is not true. Cast iron has been tested and can achieve same performance. Indeed lots of materials would suffice if the goal was merely to brake hard enough to reach grip limit. Carbon is used mainly because of lighter weight. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.115.39.1 (talk) 14:23, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

safety section needs to be added
I don't have enough material to add the section on safety of modern F1 cars, for instance the detailed construction and crash testing (I know a bit from various Inside GP episodes), as well as the g-force sufferred and survived by Ralf Schumacher in the 2004 USA GP. Could someone start this with these facts? I'll try to look them up, or at least compile the known facts about safety and crash testing from the (Official FIA) Inside GP episodes. One thing related to safety that should be added is this: During an episode of the TV show Fifth Gear Jackie Stewart told Tiff Needell, "Michael Schumacher makes more mistakes every Grand Prix weekend than any Grand Prix multiple world champion I've ever known. I mean, the number of times I went off in a Grand Prix in my entire career I could count on one hand, because if you went off the road there was a very good chance you were gonna hit something hard, and you were gonna hurt yourself, nevermind the car." However the context of the show was safety in Grand Prix racing and Stewart's statement simply reflect the fact that safety standards in F1 today are vastly improved over those of thirty years ago. While every mistake could be potentially fatal in those days, modern-day top F1 drivers are expected to always drive on the limit, specially in practice sessions when they are trying to find the limits of the car. Technical director of Ferrari, Ross Brawn, has an explanation for this phenomenon. "The truth is that if, during practice sessions, Michael feels he's losing the car, he prefers to let the car go instead of trying to make huge corrections to stay on the track. It's part of his search for the limit. During a race however, he's the driver who makes the least mistakes." Deletor 22:47, 28 April 2006 (UTC)Deletor

Turning acceleration figures: it is 4.0g in Istanbul Turn 8
Somebody has changed the acceleration figure for Istanmbul Turn 8 from 4.0g to 3.0g. However there is no reason why the g-force can't be so high, and empirical evidence supports that the lateral acceleration force is 4.0g or more: 1. The turning ability in terms of centripetal acceleration is not fixed but goes up with speed - in low speed cornering at < 100 km/h it is almost all due to the mechanical grip of the tyres and is about 2.0g. As the speed rises the downforce increases, and depending on the cornering radius can be very high - in fast corners such as Blanchimont in Spa or 130R in Suzuka, although the corners pose no challenge in terms of being on the limit, the high speeds (>300km/h) mean that the g-force spikes at 5.0g for a few seconds. 2. The Turn 8 has 4 35° to 45° corners. They are taken at speeds between 190km/h and 240km/h (in 2005, as seen from the FIA official broadcast onboard telemetry). The same telemetry also shows the lateral g-forces, and on the scale which goes up to 5.0g, the g-force stays above 3.5g throughout the 8 second corner, and has several spikes > 4.5g (at the corner apexes). Deletor 23:19, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Twards the end of the article, it reads: "in which the cars maintain speeds between 255 km/h and 270 km/h (in 2006) and experience between 4.5g and 5.5g for 7 seconds - the longest sustained hard cornering in Formula 1 (and hence all motorsport)."

I believe Indy Cars see similar, if not higher, cornering g's. Mustang6172 04:22, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

You must be joking Mr., all Indy Cars do is circle around and around, they have no cornering G's. (216.99.61.34 01:22, 8 September 2006 (UTC))

"Circling around and around at high speed", that's where cornering G's come from! It's not magic you know. Mustang6172 06:50, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

 * The radii of the so-called circular tracks are big enough to reduce those G's to something like 1 or 2. There are no exceptional braking zones or any sharp corners.

 * I think an accelerometer would disagree with you. I'm not talking about breaking or sharp turns.  Sharp turns produce low lateral G's anyway.  If you're interested in pure acceleration and breaking G's, a Top Fuel car has an F1 car beat hands down.  Lateral G's come from wide fast turns, and banking makes them faster. Mustang6172 05:10, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

 * Banking does make greater g forces possible, but they aren't lateral any more. On an unbanked surface, an F1 car will turn much faster around any radius than an Indy car will. sword 12:43, 17 June 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.159.76.205 (talk)

 * Mustang, the equation for lateral acceleration is (V^2)/R. The sharper the corner (narrower radius) the more acceleration the car will experience. This makes sense if you consider an extremely wide turn is indistinguishable from a straight line which produces no lateral acceleration. The wide oval has a much higher radius than sharp corners do, thus cars experience higher lateral acceleration in sharp corners at equal speeds. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.14.34.169 (talk) 02:29, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

 * I have to agree with user 216.99.X.X. An F1 car is technologically way superior to that of an indy-car (fact). As a result, it would produce more G's under the same conditions/track/etc (head to head comparison). (130.113.226.6 19:16, 15 September 2006 (UTC))

 * I'm not talking about G's would be reached in a head-to-head comparison with identical (and controlled) parameters. I'm talking about what the cars actually do in real life. Like it or not, Indy cars are pulling 5 G's at Richmond Mustang6172 05:22, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

 * Mustang6172, as you can read in the article, F1 cars produce twice downforce of an Indycar can at 190 kph. 8th turn in IstanbuPark is taken over 275 kph speed, and its diameter is one tenth of any oval circuit. I watched 2005 Istanbul Grand Prix at the circuit, drived a Renault Clio RS (200bhp) on this circuit in 2006, driven at PS2 F1 2006 game hundreds laps and spend much time reading telemetry data. At third apex of Turn 8, F1 cars can reach over 6.2 G's with a right adjustment at the F1 2006 simulation. By the way, I'm totally sure an oval-racer car can't even get close to an F1 car on a non-oval track. Khutuck 18:39, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

 * Wow, you played a video game. You're certainly a force to be reckoned with (sarcasm intended).  While I’m sure you can reach 6.2g’s on your little game, in real life, 6.2g’s would cause brownouts.  Champ Car cancelled an oval race in 2001 because drivers were seeing more than 6g’s sustained through the turns.  The human body, regardless of physical condition, cannot operate in those conditions.  I fail to see how it matters if a car that’s been designed specifically to race on ovals can reach the same g-loads on a road course.  I fail to see what difference it makes if Xg’s are produced on a road course or an oval.Mustang6172 20:41, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

At the end of the first paragraph it says the cars achieve 6g at 130R in Suzuka and the author has quoted some spurious website as his/her source for the high figure. But on the F1 database website, Suzuka's 130R was taken at only 3.6g @ 272 kph in 2006. So 6g is a rediculous figure, and is clearly wrong. I can only assume the 6G figure was achieved by a ground effect car some time in the past, and is not anything like achievable by todays F1 cars. Also, according to the official F1 website, the max possible lateral G for this year's cars is given as 4g at high speeds, but will typically be around 3.5g. So it should say 3.6g at 130R @ 272kph and not 6g. In fact, to pull 6g on the same curve the car would have to be doing 350kph. Top speed at Suzuka was 312kph in 2006 (just before 130R), so absolute max through that turn would be 4.7g. So 6g is not possible, wherever the figure came from it's pure nonsense.

 * According to this BBC article, the current lateral g force is 5.2g at Silverstone/Copse: . This article says Suzuka/130R was 5g when using the BMW P84/5 engine (probably about 2005): . Re "to pull 6g on the same curve the car would have to be doing 350kph", how can you know that without original research? Joema 13:03, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Simple school physics:- lateral acceleration is only dependant on speed in one particular curve (it also applies to complex, non-circular curves). Calculation is G=v^2/R. Where R is a constant (same curve), then G is proprtional only to v^2. So to get from 3.6g @ 272kph you need to go at v(at 6g)=squrt(6/3.6)*272kph = 350kph. You don't need to know the downforce figure or tyre grip coefficient, whatever they are they have to keep the car on the track at the requisite speed which is 350kph. - So it can't be done. Not at 130R anyway..
 * I just checked on Google Earth, copse has a radius around 130meters, so 5g is the correct figure at 177mph, but 130R at 6g is still a nonsense.
 * The equation may actually corroborate the above-quoted Castrol article saying Suzuka/130R is 5 lateral gs. At from 285-290 km/hr, the equation gives about 5g for a 130 meter radius turn (Suzuka 130R). It would apparently indicate 6g isn't possible at current speeds. However there are two main problems with this:

 * (1) The equation is for a ideal mathematical curve. We don't know the exact racing line. You can easily pull more or less g's at the exact same speed on the exact same curve, just by adjusting the racing line.
 * (2) We can't post or change Wikipedia information based on original research, such as doing our own calculations -- no matter how straightforward these seem. That's discussed here: No original research.

 * Sanity checking the figures by equations are a good basis for a discussion on the talk page, but we can't make article contributions based on that, as it constitutes original research. Joema 16:47, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

September 2007 issue of F1 Racing Turkey has an article about 8th turn of IstanbulPark. It mentions the lateral acceleration of an F1 car is continuously over 4.5G for 7 seconds, and it pekas to 5.2G on some bumps in the turn. It also mentions that without a proper G-suit like a fighter aircraft pilot wears, it is not easy for a human to be xposed to G-forces around 6G. --Khutuck 02:16, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Naming
Shouldn't this article properly be called Formula One car, in accordance with Wikipedia naming conventions? --SFoskett 14:34, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah. I be bold now. Gzuckier 18:02, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Engine heat units discrepancy
Under the "Engine" section, the engine is described as producing "100 000 BTU per minute (1750kW) of heat". Shouldn't that read "100 000 BTU per minute (1750kJ) of heat"? As kW is kJ per second.

-- A BTU per minute would is a valid unit for power (Watts), as energy over time. I haven't done the conversion, but BTU/min would go to kW or kJ/min, not simply kJ.129.116.14.205 (talk) 22:29, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

--100,000 BTU/min = 1750 kW = 1750 kJ/sec (actually 1758...). It should, however, read "power" instead of "heat", as heat/work are interchangeable descriptions of energy (units of BTU, J, or kW-hr), and power is work/time (units of BTU/min, kW). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.74.163.102 (talk) 20:32, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

imperial measures
i was hoping that maybe imperial measures could be put in brackets next too the current metric ones. i was hoping this because many ppl in the US and UK would appreciate this and make it more understandable. i personally when reading the article had to convert the units in my haed so i could appreciate it Pratj 12:27, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Top speeds
Hi 64.76.91.29. My recent edits were intended to clarify that an F1 car, modified, but still F1 legal (I don't believe there's any rule which says you have to have a rear wing) had reached a speed of 413km/h at Mojave. I only mention the actual Bonneville flats speed (the same car, but not F1 legal because it used a 'moveable aerodynamic device') because it's the one most people have heard of.

I will edit your words in line with these points. If you disagree, please correct those points that you feel are wrong, it would be useful if you could describe your reasoning here with reference to my points above. Thanks. 4u1e 07:31, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * "Despite some so called Formula One car performance demonstrations being conducted by some constructors in recent years in the hope of media attraction." - In Wikipedia articles we need to keep a neutral tone (see WP:NPOV). 'So-called' and 'in the hope of' give a strong impression of the editor's views.
 * "the real performance of these cars can only be measured on a race track where the FIA restrictions and legislations are observed." - First off, although this kind of argument is useful for deciding what we put in the article, we can't actually put the argument in the article, unless we've got it referenced from somewhere else. I agree that 'real' performance can only be measured where FIA restrictions are in force. Honda claim that the car met FIA F1 regulations at Mojave - we have no particular reason to disbelieve them, but that is why I used that phrasing to make it clear to the reader that we only have their word for it. I don't agree that 'real' performance can only be measured on the race track. If you took a completely standard Honda and ran it at Mojave you'd still reach a higher top speed than they do at F1 tracks - given that you can trim downforce below the optimum for a racetrack and step up the gearing. We do need to be very clear that this is about the top speed that a car meeting F1 regulations can meet, not the top speed of the cars we see every other weekend on the track (Edit - sorry, clarifying my thoughts!).
 * "McLaren Mercedes and Red Bull Racing" - I didn't include this in my edit because I hadn't heard that they had done this and I didn't have a reference for it.
 * notoriously" - not a neutral word
 * "which is not an indicator of real open-wheeled F1 car performance but the indicator of what an open-wheel car could do during a qualifying session with the absence of a Formula." - I think I agree with the sentiment being expressed here, but I think it can be expressed more clearly. In particular, it's not about what can be achieved in a qualifying session, I would suggest it is more about what can be achieved with an F1 car if the only criteria is top straightline speed.
 * Done - although I have ended up modifying my version rather than yours. 4u1e 09:27, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Is still funny thing on Top Speeds section. The FIA recognized a 372.6 as fastest and then after it is said that Bottas his 372.54 is still not recognized as fastest by FIA. I do not know who put that in. Very very small change you. But wanted to posted here for discussion and not just adjust things without discussing it with others.
 * But 372.54 is slower then the by FIA recognized 372.6 and so maybe that is why it is never recognized by the FIA? 2001:1C03:4918:A100:998A:A358:4A3A:8F83 (talk) 07:51, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

good, thanks a lot 4u1e... user

As i can remember, in Monza track of Italy, F1 cars had reached over 380kph in the year 2003 or 2004. So i think it's quite possible for an F1 car to reach 450+ kph speeds on a long, long, long tarmac. The salt flats had required a car with a relatively high ground clearance, which is not very suitable for a F1 speed record trial. Note:This is totally my own view as a F1 fan :) --Khutuck 02:21, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Steering Wheel
I tought they cost over $100,000, not $40,000.. i saw that in a book —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.12.155.116 (talk) 14:50, 10 March 2007 (UTC).
 * They cost £30,000 as far as I'm aware (so I guess about 43,000US$?).123.255.23.11 (talk) 23:20, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Tyres
Im not sure where to mention this but here seems fine. In the article it is mentioned that FIA and F1 will return to "Slicks" in 2008. While there have been rumors of a return, nothing is final. I have also read the technical regs from the FIA website and they clearly state "grooved" tires in 2008. Im going to edit it and state it is a rumor, not fact. Here are the regs 12.1 starts Tyres http://www.fia.com/resources/documents/4042041__2008_F1_TECHNICAL_REGULATIONS.pdf

Power to weight ratio figures
In working out the power to weight ratio of the 2006 car the figures of

weight of 605kg (440kg before ballast)

and a bhp of 850bhp give or take

the power to weight ratio comes back as 0.7117

but yet the page states 0.9

"The 2006 F1 cars have a power-to-weight ratio of 1,250 hp/tonne (0.9 kw/kg). "

Is either not clear, I've missed something or wrong.

IanGUK 12:37, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

 * Nope, you've done them the wrong way around. Its horsepower (850bhp in this case) divided by the weight (605kg) -> ~1,400bhp/tonne ... what you have worked out is the weight to power ratio.Pubuman (talk) 04:19, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Probably that figure was calculated for 2005 when power was creeping up around 900 bhp. 4u1e 23:59, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

 * 850 bhp is equal to 637,5kW, 605/637,5 is 0,949. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Khutuck (talk • contribs) 21:17, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
 * No, it should be the other way around (power/weight, not weight/power)... the 0.9 value was using the 1250bhp/tonne, because 1250bhp = 919 kW. So if it has a power to weight ratio of 919kW/tonne then its 0.919 kW/kg.Pubuman (talk) 04:22, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Potential Plagiarism?
I am not sure who is copying whom here, but this article is, in places, almost word for word identical to an article on the F1 Complete website: http://www.f1complete.com/content/view/1381/389/

Its been slightly reworded, but that doesn't place it outside the realms of plagiarism, especially as there are no attributions. 82.152.52.97 22:05, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
 * The Wikipedia article originally said this, and then had some minor changes to it, and the other bits were added at completely seperate times:, , and have since had minor changes. I think it's pretty safe to say that, given these bits were added at different times, by different editors, in a different order, and with sometimes vastly different wording (although with the same concepts), that the link you provided copied it from a version here. – AlbinoMonkey (Talk) 23:30, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Curb weight comparison?
To help readers understand how incredibly lightweight F1 cars are, can we add verbiage stating the estimated dry curb weight? That is how road cars are normally specified, which readers are familiar with. On a road car there's not a huge difference between wet and dry weight. However due to the extremely light dry weight of F1 cars, the wet weight (inc'l driver, apparel, fluids and ballast) is much greater than the dry weight. Wet weight understates how light F1 cars actually are. How about adding something like this to the "Construction section":

"Road cars typically specify "dry curb weight" (minus driver/passengers and fluids). F1 fuel capacity is about 150 liters (40 U.S. gallons), which weighs about 110 kg (244 lbs). The equivalent dry weight for an F1 car (minus fluids, driver and ballast) can be below 350 kg (770 lbs), or lighter than some motorcycles." Joema 13:49, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

 * Referenced and with British spellings (kerb, litres) to match the rest of the article that would probably be a good addition.4u1e 22:35, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

 * As i remember, an F1 car's weight without fuel, but all lubricants must be over 600kg. FIA says:

4.1 Minimum weight :

The weight of the car must not be less than 605kg during the qualifying practice session and no less than 600kg at all other times during the Event.

1.9 Weight :

Is the weight of the car with the driver, wearing his complete racing apparel, at all times during the event.

So, the car cannot be below 600kg's at the end of the race, when all the fuel is consumed. Car's weight without fuel must be over 600kg. Khutuck 02:31, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
 * It has now (2011) increased from 620 to 640 kg to allow for the weight of the KERS 87.254.238.85 (talk) 14:43, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Forward Acceleration discrepancy
The article states:

"0 to 200 km/h (124 mph): 3.9 seconds" "The acceleration figure is usually 2.46 g (24.1 m/s²) up to 200 km/h (124 mph)"

Per google calculator, 0-124 mph in 3.9s works out to an average acceleration of 1.4 g. Protomech (talk) 15:38, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Engine Efficiency
There is no evidence to suggest that the brake thermal efficiency of a formula one engine is higher than that of the most efficient of production passenger car engines, as stated in the article.

Engine speeds of 19.000rpm with mean piston speeds in excess of 25 m/s result in large friction losses. In addition, attainment of maximum output for a given quantity of inducted air mass requires operation with an air-fuel ratio that is rich of stoichiometric, at which air-fuel ratio the brake specific fuel consumption is higher than stoichiometric, where passenger car engines equipped with three-way catalysts operate. Turbocharging is another efficiency enabling technology that is available on passenger car engines which is not present on formula one engines.

I suggest deleting the sentence which states that brake thermal efficiency of the formula one engine is 20% higher than the most efficient of passenger car engines.

Emporiko (talk) 08:58, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

 * Apologies, I am new to the talk pages here, though I've done some anonymous editing. Sorry if I've replied in the wrong form. A web search reveals that the authour may be correct. The rather ugly page at http://ffden-2.phys.uaf.edu/102spring2002_Web_projects/Z.Yates/Zach's%20Web%20Project%20Folder/EICE%20-%20Main.htm is probably also the basis behind the article at http://www.f1reviews.com/technical/The-anatomy-of-an-F1-engine-part-1 Both suggest that thermal efficiency of a "street engine" is around 26% while a race engine may be as high as 34%. At a guess the materials used and shorter working life mean that higher temperatures may be tolerated. Possibly also thinner cylinder walls might mean better heat flow. But I'm only guessing at all that. 193.34.186.161 (talk) 20:02, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

 * I would especially recommend removing the statement that this increase in efficiency is due to "higher craftsmanship". Formula 1 car engines run at extremely high temperatures and compression ratios, which would not be allowable on passenger cars due to emissions standards. The effect of craftsmanship on efficiency (versus the engine technologies themselves) is likely very small. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.84.137.204 (talk) 18:23, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Driving upside-down
Theoretically, a car definitely cannot drive upside-down at the speed where they double their own weight. At such a speed, the tires have no grip on whatever surface they are driving on because gravity cancels out the downforce, and with no normal force between tire and surface, the wheels would immediately start to spin with no friction, causing the speed to drop below the necessary threshold to develop enough aerodynamic downforce to counter gravity, which would result in the car falling to the ground.

It is not necessarily impossible for a Formula 1 car to drive upside-down at some level of speed. However, the downforce has to be great enough, the tire friction coefficient has to be great enough, and the drag coefficient must be small enough that the force of friction in the tires can overcome the aerodynamic drag and keep the car at the necessary speed. However, we have no proof that such conditions exist, and until we do we cannot say that a car can drive upside-down, even in theory.--Kickflipthecat (talk) 22:03, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

 * We're all sure F1 cars can accelerate under 1G gravity (start of the race, while the car is stationary, so there is no downforce), also it is generally stated that a Formula 1 car can generate downforce equal to its weight at 120km/h, and double of its weight at 190km/h. So, a Formula One car may theoretically go upside down at speeds over 190 km/h, as the downforce will be double of the weight of car. Khutuck Bot (talk) 20:33, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

 * F1 cars can accelerate with the normal force equal to its weight, but the only thing it has to overcome is its own inertia and the rolling resistance in the tires. Because of the wings and surfaces on an F1 car, at 190 km/h the grip in the tires must also overcome the air resistance.  While they may be able to do this without spinning the wheels, the F1 teams have not given us the necessary drag and grip coefficients to mathematically prove whether or not this is possible.  Also, you have to take into account the fact that the ceiling of a tunnel is most likely not made of asphalt, but tile, which is much less grippy.--Kickflipthecat (talk) 06:18, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Wheels
The article doesn't explain what the 'hubcap' things on the F1 car wheels are. They appear relatively new. I'd like to see some mention of them in the part on tyres and wheels. Mostlyharmless (talk) 02:22, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

they are only on cars with KERs systems to stop the fly wheels coming loose in the event of a crash. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.192.106.221 (talk) 23:09, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

^ WRONG. They are aerodynamic devices. They are to condition the air flow around the wheels. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.151.138.135 (talk) 18:38, 6 June 2010 (UTC) They WERE aerodynamic devices. Banned from the start of the 2010 season. Maybe some information covering them may be useful. Bjmullan (talk) 19:07, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Braking performance
(transferred from the article):

An F1 car can brake from 200 km/h (124 mph) to a complete stop in just 2.9 seconds, using only 65 metres* (213 ft).

*this doesnt add up, if you say it can stop in 65m that would mean it would only take 0.7s and an deceleration of that speed would probably deform the car due to the forces and probably kill the driver too

v = u + at, v2 = u2 + 2as

where v is final velocity u is initial velocity, t is time, a is acceleration, s = distance.

using the equation : v = u + ( v2 - (u2/(2 * 65)) )

0 = (200,000/3600) + (02) - ((200,000/3600)2)/130)t

t = 0.7 seconds

(converted 200kmph to meters per second)

*it does add up. The acceleration/deceleration isn't constant throughout braking. Furthermore, at speed, it would take more than one second to cover 213 feet. How could it possibly take less time while slowing down?**

 * thats what im saying, the numbers dont add up, it cant take less time hence the figures are wrong. for all intensive purposes the average deceleration of the car is equal to the change in deceleration throughout, because we are talking about a time from motion to motionless, not a time from motion to motion, at a fixed distance.

 * What the previous poster was saying is that it would take longer than 0.7s to travel 65m if the car did not decelerate at all (at a constant speed of 200km/h – or 55.6m/s – it would take 1.2s to cover that distance), therefore there must be an error in your calculations. Hopefully this will clear things up:
 * $$a = \frac{(v^2 - u^2)}{2s} = \frac{(0^2 - 55.6^2)}{2 \times 65} = -23.8$$

 * $$t = \frac{\Delta v}{a} = \frac{(0 -55.6)}{-23.8} = 2.33$$
 * So, assuming a constant rate of deceleration, it would take 2.33 seconds to stop in the required distance. Of course, the rate of deceleration would not be constant – braking force would decrease as the car slows – so the quoted figure of 2.9 seems reasonable to me.
 * In any case, I've not been able to find another reliable source giving contradictory information. Regards,  AJ Cham  00:35, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

 * You want a reliable source? What about a filmed video of an actual test at 200 km/h?

 * http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JMp7UR_YGsw

 * 2.12 seconds.

Ecology
Perhaps that a new section can be added "Ecology", where it is explained that eco-frinedly technologies are being tested on formula one cars, and introduction of (some of) them could happen soon.

Ie --> mixing ethanol with gasoline (E85) --> see Project Green, http://www.physorg.com/news197730744.html

--> biodegradable materials for the chassis --> see World First Racing --> http://www.worldfirstracing.co.uk/

91.182.40.154 (talk) 09:52, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Diagram needed
This article would really benefit from one or more large labelled diagrams naming the different parts of the car, especially parts of the bodywork. I came looking for the names of two parts of the car. I eventually found them: "skid block" and "nose" - I hope these are correct but it's difficult to be sure without a labelled diagram. I also found "nosecone" on the F1 official site and "planks" are also often referred to elsewhere. Basically the only way I can use them is to Google and see what others use. BBC Sport used to have a good illustration (flash I think) but I can't find it any more. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.254.238.85 (talk) 09:48, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

World Championship winning Formula One cars
I noticed an absence of a category for F1 cars that won the World Constructors Championship (Red Bull RB6 & RB7, McLaren MP/4-4, etc). I know there is a category for Drivers Champions. Any thoughts; ought there be such a category? 71.210.0.211 (talk) 08:19, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

 * One problem with a category for cars would be that constructors have often used more than one model during a season - sometimes with widely varying success. -- Ian Dalziel (talk) 12:01, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Engine, POV
Engine specs has listed a top speed of 362km/h. How can an engine have that when its the gearbox that dictates (including the downforce modifiers) the speed and acceleration figures of the whole vehicle with regards to a chassis. An engine doesn't do anything usefull without a gearbox of some sort. The whole article has got some sections of fan-boi-ism and flambouant expressive text. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.70.80.179 (talk) 19:05, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

F1 2014 and 2013 rules merging
I have noticed that F1 2012 2013 and 2014 rules have Merged into one mess. At one point it says this but then says that later. I would suggest a clean up and update — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.15.108.198 (talk) 15:15, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 one external links on Formula One car. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100115010921/http://www.formula1.com:80/inside_f1/rules_and_regulations/technical_regulations/8699/fia.html to http://www.formula1.com/inside_f1/rules_and_regulations/technical_regulations/8699/fia.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141006170808/http://www.formula1.com:80/news/features/2013/8/14875.html to http://www.formula1.com/news/features/2013/8/14875.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100722013311/http://www.formula1.com:80/inside_f1/rules_and_regulations/technical_regulations/8710/fia.html to http://www.formula1.com/inside_f1/rules_and_regulations/technical_regulations/8710/fia.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090420054834/http://www.formula1.com:80/news/features/2008/2/7380.html to http://www.formula1.com/news/features/2008/2/7380.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051102030216/http://www.bonneville400.com/flash/default.aspx to http://www.bonneville400.com/flash/default.aspx
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060901003154/http://www.fia.com/resources/documents/1603301296__2006_F1_TECHNICAL_REGULATIONS.pdf to http://www.fia.com/resources/documents/1603301296__2006_F1_TECHNICAL_REGULATIONS.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081012214615/http://www.racecar-engineering.com/articles/1/f1.html to http://www.racecar-engineering.com/articles/1/f1.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081106195349/http://www.racecar-engineering.com:80/articles/f1/273555/inside-an-f1-engine.html to http://www.racecar-engineering.com/articles/f1/273555/inside-an-f1-engine.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141109221052/http://www.formula1.com/news/features/2014/1/15408.html to http://www.formula1.com/news/features/2014/1/15408.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 17:15, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

Specifications section
I'm wondering whether the "Specifications" section is starting to get a bit too detailed for a general purpose encyclopedia like Wikipedia. Or whether the content should be split out into a separate article. Thoughts? DH85868993 (talk) 06:21, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

 * This is a very late response but it is still relevant today, I agree completely that the whole section is overkill. It's also almost entirely unsourced and quite poorly written (like the abolation of the beam wing 5 years in a row). I suspect that this is mostly the result of an editor initially called Theriusrooney or something of the like (most recent confirmed activity on this article is sockpuppet account Karymborny, though I suspect the IP I just reverted is the same individual due to editing habit and geolocation in comparison with previously used IP's used to block evade) who does this type of editing on numerous motorsports related articles. In my opinion, just remove the whole section. The rest of the article provides better general information more appropriate for an encyclopedia anyway. TylerBurden (talk) 11:50, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Courtesy ping for you as I'd like to hear your thoughts on this, I'll wait a bit and if there is no further input I'll go ahead and remove it. TylerBurden (talk) 10:55, 8 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I'd support removing the whole section; I think it's way too detailed for Wikipedia. DH85868993 (talk) 11:19, 8 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Alright we're on the same page then. I'll remove it now. TylerBurden (talk) 11:26, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

Aerodynamics
BBC sport just added an excellent article on the nose / capes / J vanes impact to downforce at https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/51739796 (archived at https://web.archive.org/web/20200706085005/https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/51739796). Might be some useful additions to the article. --donal.hunt (talk) 08:58, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Recentism
I understand that there is a lot of crossover here with the History of Formula One article, but I think this article treats the modern form of a Formula One car as more of an absolute than it should. I don't know how exactly one would go about changing this article, but I think it should be made clearer that early Formula One cars were typically front engined and lacked aerofoils. The fact that some early Formula One cars had enclosed wheels is less relevant but possibly should be bought up at some point to avoid potentially misleading readers. HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 05:57, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Formula One car


text:
David Willcocks

Sir David Valentine Willcocks, (30 December 1919 – 17 September 2015) was a British choral conductor, organist, composer and music administrator. He was particularly well known for his association with the Choir of King's College, Cambridge, which he directed from 1957 to 1974, making frequent broadcasts and recordings. Several of the descants and carol arrangements he wrote for the annual service of Nine Lessons and Carols were published in the series of books Carols for Choirs which he edited along with Reginald Jacques and John Rutter. He was also director of the Royal College of Music in London.

During the Second World War (1939–1945) he served as an officer in the British Army, and was decorated with the Military Cross for his actions on Hill 112 during the Battle of Normandy in July 1944. His elder son, Jonathan Willcocks, is also a composer.

Biography
Born in Newquay in Cornwall, Willcocks began his musical training as a chorister at Westminster Abbey from 1929 to 1934, following a recommendation by the then Master of the King's Music, Sir Henry Walford Davies, to Ernest Bullock. From 1934 to 1938, he was a music scholar at Clifton College, Bristol, where his teacher was Douglas Fox, his most important musical influence. He was appointed as organ scholar at King's College, Cambridge in 1939. There, he met David Briggs, a choral scholar (bass). Willcocks and Briggs would later be colleagues at King's, from 1959 to 1974, as Organist and Master of the Choristers and as Headmaster of King's College School, the school attended by the choirboys of King's College.

Military service
With the outbreak of the Second World War, he interrupted his studies in music to serve in the British Army. He was commissioned as a second lieutenant in the Duke of Cornwall's Light Infantry (DCLI) on 15 February 1941, and was awarded the Military Cross as a temporary captain for his actions during the Battle of Normandy on the night of 10/11 July 1944, when he was serving with the 5th Battalion, DCLI as battalion intelligence officer. The battalion, part of the 214th Infantry Brigade of the 43rd (Wessex) Infantry Division, was ordered to hold Hill 112 in Normandy, France, as part of Operation Epsom. He carried out his duties outstandingly overnight, helping inflict severe casualties on the German forces by calling in artillery support to break up counter-attacks. The battalion suffered over 250 casualties during the night, including the commanding officer and one of the company commanders. This left Willcocks in command of the battalion headquarters, which by then was the furthest forward part of the battalion. He rallied the men, enabling the battalion to stand firm and reorganise. The award was gazetted on 21 December 1944.

Musical career
Willcocks returned to Cambridge in 1945 to complete his studies, and in 1947 was elected a Fellow of King's College and appointed Conductor of the Cambridge Philharmonic Society. In the same year, he became the organist at Salisbury Cathedral and the conductor of the Salisbury Musical Society. He moved to Worcester Cathedral in 1950 and remained until 1957, during which time he was organist of the cathedral, principal conductor of the Three Choirs Festival in 1951, 1954, and 1957, and conductor of the City of Birmingham Choir. From 1956 to 1974 he was also conductor of the Bradford Festival Choral Society, whilst continuing as guest conductor for their carol concerts into the early 1990s. Composers with whom he collaborated included Vaughan Williams, Britten, Howells and Tippett.

From 1957 to 1974 he held the post for which he is probably best known, Director of Music at King's College, Cambridge. He made numerous recordings with the college choir. (Among the most notable recordings was one of Thomas Tallis's Spem in alium, made in 1965.) The choir toured extensively, giving concerts worldwide, as well as garnering further acclaim internationally through television and radio appearances. Under the baton of Willcocks, Cambridge University Musical Society performed Benjamin Britten's War Requiem in 1963 in (Perugia) Milan, La Scala, and in Venice. The choir subsequently performed the work in Japan, Hong Kong, Portugal, and the Netherlands. In 1960, he also became the musical director of the Bach Choir in London.

He held these positions at Cambridge until the 1970s when he accepted the post of Director of the Royal College of Music. In the 1971 Queen's Birthday Honours, he was appointed a Commander of the Order of the British Empire (CBE), and was created a Knight Bachelor in 1977 in the Queen's Silver Jubilee Honours. He held honorary degrees in England from the Universities of Bradford, Bristol, Exeter, Leicester, and Sussex, and from the Royal College of Music in London; in the US from Luther College (Iowa), St. Olaf College (Minnesota), Rowan University and Westminster Choir College (New Jersey); and in Canada from the Universities of Trinity College, Toronto, and Victoria B.C. All in all, his honorary degrees numbered over fifty. He was also President of the City of Bath Bach Choir and Exeter Festival Chorus. For the 1981 wedding of Prince Charles and Diana Spencer, Willcocks served as guest director of music and conducted the Bach Choir, who sang during the signing of the registers. The event was watched by an estimated global TV audience of 750 million.

After stepping down from the Royal College, Willcocks resumed conducting and editing scores as his primary activities. A 1990 profile in The New York Times noted that he had made nine visits to the United States in the previous year, including conducting Evensong at St. Thomas Church in Manhattan and conducting the Mormon Tabernacle Choir. In live performance, he regularly conducted Mozart's Requiem at the Mostly Mozart festival in New York.

On 15 May 2010, a celebration of his contribution to music took place at the Royal Albert Hall in London, where pieces selected by Willcocks were performed by singers who are part of the Really Big Chorus. Special guests included choristers from King's College Choir, Cambridge, who performed three pieces.

He died at home in Cambridge on the morning of 17 September 2015.

Recordings and broadcasts
Willcocks made recordings with the (London) Bach Choir, the English Chamber Orchestra, the Academy of St Martin in the Fields, the Jacques Orchestra, the Philharmonia Orchestra, and the London Symphony Orchestra as well as with the Choir of King's College, Cambridge, with whom he regularly conducted the Nine Lessons and Carols service on Christmas Eve, broadcast by the BBC every year since 1931. With The Bach Choir, in particular he recorded works by Johann Sebastian Bach, especially his motets and, sung in English, his St John Passion and a stately rendition of the St Matthew Passion, a piece he regularly conducted for broadcast Easter performances. He also served as general editor of the Church Music series of the Oxford University Press. During his years at King's, an early and frequently reissued recording of the Allegri Miserere was made in March 1963 by the choir, conducted by David Willcocks, and featuring a 12-year old Roy Goodman, later a distinguished conductor, as the treble soloist. In 1965, he made his famous recording, with the Choir of King's College, of Tallis's Spem in alium.

He is particularly known for his widely used choral arrangements of Christmas carols, many of which were originally written or arranged for the Service of Nine Lessons and Carols at King's and/or the Bach Choir's Christmas concerts. They are published in the five Carols for Choirs anthologies (1961–1987), edited by Willcocks with Reginald Jacques (first volume) or John Rutter. The descant arrangements in particular are among the most famous and well-loved musical components. He was Music Director Emeritus of King's College Choir, and an Honorary Fellow of King's College, Cambridge.

Outside the world of classical music, Willcocks conducted his London Bach Choir for the studio recording of "You Can't Always Get What You Want" by the Rolling Stones in 1968.

A notable broadcast took place on BBC Radio 4 on 21 September 2010 in a series called Soul Music, when Willcocks profiled Fauré's Requiem. The programme included his memories of the fighting at Hill 112. The profile also featured Christina, widow of Olaf Schmid. Willcocks questioned the morality of war.

Selected Compositions

 * Five Folksongs (1972)
 * Introduction (Fanfare), Variations and Fughetto on the Hymn Tune Jena (Breslau) (1986). Commissioned by the Detroit chapter of the American Guild of Organists, premiered by Marilyn Mason at the 1986 AGO national convention.
 * A Ceremony of Psalms (1989)
 * Tomorrow shall be my dancing day

Commonwealth honours

 * Commonwealth honours

 * Military decorations

Scholastic

 * Fellowships

 * Honorary degrees

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

title: David Willcocks


text:
Handsome Boy Modeling School

Handsome Boy Modeling School is an American collaborative project between hip hop producers Dan the Automator (Gorillaz, Dr. Octagon, Deltron 3030) and Prince Paul (Stetsasonic, De La Soul, Gravediggaz). The collaboration originally lasted from 1999 to 2006 and resulted in two albums, featuring a vast cast of guest rappers, singers, comedians and DJs. In February 2018, the duo played a concert in New York City.

History
Handsome Boy Modeling School was a conceptual hip hop duo that parodied and acted as a commentary on vain, consumerist, materialistic, and self-absorbed members of upper class society, such as supermodels and people from old money. The pair often satirized upper class snobbery and perceived beauty.

In 1999, they released the concept album So... How's Your Girl?, which was loosely based on "The Prettiest Week of My Life", an episode of the sitcom Get a Life which starred Chris Elliott. The episode also contains the origin of the name Handsome Boy Modeling School, where Chris Elliott's character enrolls to become a male model. In the album, Dan and Paul assume the characters of Nathaniel Merriweather and Chest Rockwell, respectively. The Rockwell name is in reference to a pseudonym used by a porn star in 1997 film Boogie Nights; the Merriweather name is likely an homage to the character Nathanial Mayweather, also played by Chris Elliott, in the 1994 comedic feature Cabin Boy. Dan the Automator continued to use the pseudonym Nathaniel Merriweather alongside Mike Patton and Jennifer Charles for the collaborative project Lovage.

A number of guest musicians appear, including Róisín Murphy (one half of the duo Moloko at the time of the album's release), DJ Shadow, Del the Funky Homosapien, J-Live, Sean Lennon, Miho Hatori (of Cibo Matto), Mike D (of the Beastie Boys) and Don Novello (as comic character Father Guido Sarducci).

Their 1999 single "The Projects" in collaboration with Dave of De La Soul and Del the Funky Homosapien was featured in the 2001 film Ocean's Eleven.

Their second album, White People, was released in November 2004. Some collaborators from the first album returned, and new collaborators included RZA, Cat Power, Casual, Alex Kapranos of Franz Ferdinand, Chester Bennington and Mike Shinoda of Linkin Park, Jack Johnson, Cedric Bixler-Zavala of The Mars Volta, Mike Patton, El-P, Pharrell, John Oates, Chino Moreno, Lord Finesse, Black Sheep, and comedy actor Tim Meadows.

In 2006, Prince Paul announced his retirement from Handsome Boy Modeling School due to business conflicts with Dan the Automator. However, the duo reunited to play a concert hosted by Saks Fifth Avenue, New York City, on 14 February 2018. According to HipHopDX, they announced plans to release a new album at the performance. On 9 April 2022, at a show in Portland, Oregon, Dan the Automator officially announced that a third album was in the works, predicting a fall 2022 release. In March 2023, they released Music To Drink Martinis To in partnership with Ford’s Gin.

title: Handsome Boy Modeling School


text:
Coping

Coping refers to conscious or unconscious strategies used to reduce unpleasant emotions. Coping strategies can be cognitions or behaviors and can be individual or social. To cope is to deal with and overcome struggles and difficulties in life. It is a way for people to maintain their mental and emotional well-being. Everybody has ways of handling difficult events that occur in life, and that is what it means to cope. Coping can be healthy and productive, or destructive and unhealthy. It is recommended that an individual cope in ways that will be beneficial and healthy. "Managing your stress well can help you feel better physically and psychologically and it can impact your ability to perform your best."

Theories of coping
Hundreds of coping strategies have been proposed in an attempt to understand how people cope. Classification of these strategies into a broader architecture has not been agreed upon. Researchers try to group coping responses rationally, empirically by factor analysis, or through a blend of both techniques. In the early days, Folkman and Lazarus split the coping strategies into four groups, namely problem-focused, emotion-focused, support-seeking, and meaning-making coping. Weiten has identified four types of coping strategies: appraisal-focused (adaptive cognitive), problem-focused (adaptive behavioral), emotion-focused, and occupation-focused coping. Billings and Moos added avoidance coping as one of the emotion-focused coping. Some scholars have questioned the psychometric validity of forced categorization as those strategies are not independent to each other. Besides, in reality, people can adopt multiple coping strategies simultaneously.

Typically, people use a mixture of several types of coping strategies, which may change over time. All these strategies can prove useful, but some claim that those using problem-focused coping strategies will adjust better to life. Problem-focused coping mechanisms may allow an individual greater perceived control over their problem, whereas emotion-focused coping may sometimes lead to a reduction in perceived control (maladaptive coping).

Lazarus "notes the connection between his idea of 'defensive reappraisals' or cognitive coping and Sigmund Freud's concept of 'ego-defenses, coping strategies thus overlapping with a person's defense mechanisms.

Appraisal-focused coping strategies
Appraisal-focused (adaptive cognitive) strategies occur when the person modifies the way they think, for example: employing denial, or distancing oneself from the problem. Individuals who use appraisal coping strategies purposely alter their perspective on their situation in order to have a more positive outlook on their situation. An example of appraisal coping strategies could be individuals purchasing tickets to a football game, knowing their medical condition would likely cause them to not be able to attend. People may alter the way they think about a problem by altering their goals and values, such as by seeing the humor in a situation: "Some have suggested that humor may play a greater role as a stress moderator among women than men".

Adaptive behavioral coping strategies
The psychological coping mechanisms are commonly termed coping strategies or coping skills. The term coping generally refers to adaptive (constructive) coping strategies, that is, strategies which reduce stress. In contrast, other coping strategies may be coined as maladaptive, if they increase stress. Maladaptive coping is therefore also described, based on its outcome, as non-coping. Furthermore, the term coping generally refers to reactive coping, i.e. the coping response which follows the stressor. This differs from proactive coping, in which a coping response aims to neutralize a future stressor. Subconscious or unconscious strategies (e.g. defense mechanisms) are generally excluded from the area of coping.

The effectiveness of the coping effort depends on the type of stress, the individual, and the circumstances. Coping responses are partly controlled by personality (habitual traits), but also partly by the social environment, particularly the nature of the stressful environment. People using problem-focused strategies try to deal with the cause of their problem. They do this by finding out information on the problem and learning new skills to manage the problem. Problem-focused coping is aimed at changing or eliminating the source of the stress. The three problem-focused coping strategies identified by Folkman and Lazarus are: taking control, information seeking, and evaluating the pros and cons. However, problem-focused coping may not be necessarily adaptive, but backfire, especially in the uncontrollable case that one cannot make the problem go away.

Emotion-focused coping strategies
Emotion-focused strategies involve: Emotion-focused coping "is oriented toward managing the emotions that accompany the perception of stress". The five emotion-focused coping strategies identified by Folkman and Lazarus are: Emotion-focused coping is a mechanism to alleviate distress by minimizing, reducing, or preventing, the emotional components of a stressor. This mechanism can be applied through a variety of ways, such as: The focus of this coping mechanism is to change the meaning of the stressor or transfer attention away from it. For example, reappraising tries to find a more positive meaning of the cause of the stress in order to reduce the emotional component of the stressor. Avoidance of the emotional distress will distract from the negative feelings associated with the stressor. Emotion-focused coping is well suited for stressors that seem uncontrollable (ex. a terminal illness diagnosis, or the loss of a loved one). Some mechanisms of emotion focused coping, such as distancing or avoidance, can have alleviating outcomes for a short period of time, however they can be detrimental when used over an extended period. Positive emotion-focused mechanisms, such as seeking social support, and positive re-appraisal, are associated with beneficial outcomes. Emotional approach coping is one form of emotion-focused coping in which emotional expression and processing is used to adaptively manage a response to a stressor. Other examples include relaxation training through deep breathing, meditation, yoga, music and art therapy, and aromatherapy.
 * releasing pent-up emotions
 * distracting oneself
 * managing hostile feelings
 * meditating
 * mindfulness practices
 * using systematic relaxation procedures.
 * situational exposure
 * disclaiming
 * escape-avoidance
 * accepting responsibility or blame
 * exercising self-control
 * and positive reappraisal.
 * seeking social support
 * reappraising the stressor in a positive light
 * accepting responsibility
 * using avoidance
 * exercising self-control
 * distancing

Health theory of coping
The health theory of coping overcame the limitations of previous theories of coping, describing coping strategies within categories that are conceptually clear, mutually exclusive, comprehensive, functionally homogenous, functionally distinct, generative and flexible, explains the continuum of coping strategies. The usefulness of all coping strategies to reduce acute distress is acknowledged, however, strategies are categorized as healthy or unhealthy depending on their likelihood of additional adverse consequences. Healthy categories are self-soothing, relaxation/distraction, social support and professional support. Unhealthy coping categories are negative self-talk, harmful activities (e.g., emotional eating, verbal or physical aggression, drugs such as alcohol, self-harm), social withdrawal, and suicidality. Unhealthy coping strategies are used when healthy coping strategies are overwhelmed, not in the absence of healthy coping strategies.

Research has shown that everyone has personal healthy coping strategies (self-soothing, relaxation/distraction), however, access to social and professional support varies. Increasing distress and inadequate support results in the additional use of unhealthy coping strategies. Overwhelming distress exceeds the capacity of healthy coping strategies and results in the use of unhealthy coping strategies. Overwhelming distress is caused by problems in one or more biopsychosocial domains of health and wellbeing. The continuum of coping strategies (healthy to unhealthy, independent to social, and low harm to high harm) have been explored in general populations, university students, and paramedics. New evidence propose a more comprehensive view of a continuum iterative transformative process of developing coping competence among palliative care professionals

Reactive and proactive coping
Most coping is reactive in that the coping response follows stressors. Anticipating and reacting to a future stressor is known as proactive coping or future-oriented coping. Anticipation is when one reduces the stress of some difficult challenge by anticipating what it will be like and preparing for how one is going to cope with it.

Social coping
Social coping recognises that individuals are bedded within a social environment, which can be stressful, but also is the source of coping resources, such as seeking social support from others. (see help-seeking)

Humor
Humor used as a positive coping method may have useful benefits to emotional and mental health well-being. However, maladaptive humor styles such as self-defeating humor can also have negative effects on psychological adjustment and might exacerbate negative effects of other stressors. By having a humorous outlook on life, stressful experiences can be and are often minimized. This coping method corresponds with positive emotional states and is known to be an indicator of mental health. Physiological processes are also influenced within the exercise of humor. For example, laughing may reduce muscle tension, increase the flow of oxygen to the blood, exercise the cardiovascular region, and produce endorphins in the body. Using humor in coping while processing through feelings can vary depending on life circumstance and individual humor styles. In regards to grief and loss in life occurrences, it has been found that genuine laughs/smiles when speaking about the loss predicted later adjustment and evoked more positive responses from other people. A person might also find comedic relief with others around irrational possible outcomes for the deceased funeral service. It is also possible that humor would be used by people to feel a sense of control over a more powerless situation and used as way to temporarily escape a feeling of helplessness. Exercised humor can be a sign of positive adjustment as well as drawing support and interaction from others around the loss.

Negative techniques (maladaptive coping or non-coping)
Whereas adaptive coping strategies improve functioning, a maladaptive coping technique (also termed non-coping) will just reduce symptoms while maintaining or strengthening the stressor. Maladaptive techniques are only effective as a short-term rather than long-term coping process.

Examples of maladaptive behavior strategies include anxious avoidance, dissociation, escape (including self-medication), use of maladaptive humor styles such as self-defeating humor, procrastination, rationalization, safety behaviors, and sensitization. These coping strategies interfere with the person's ability to unlearn, or break apart, the paired association between the situation and the associated anxiety symptoms. These are maladaptive strategies as they serve to maintain the disorder.

 * Anxious avoidance is when a person avoids anxiety provoking situations by all means. This is the most common method.
 * Dissociation is the ability of the mind to separate and compartmentalize thoughts, memories, and emotions. This is often associated with post traumatic stress syndrome.
 * Escape is closely related to avoidance. This technique is often demonstrated by people who experience panic attacks or have phobias. These people want to flee the situation at the first sign of anxiety.
 * The use of self-defeating humor means that a person disparages themselves in order to entertain others. This type of humor has been shown to lead to negative psychological adjustment and exacerbate the effect of existing stressors.
 * Procrastination is when a person willingly delays a task in order to receive a temporary relief from stress. While this may work for short-term relief, when used as a coping mechanism, procrastination causes more issues in the long run.
 * Rationalization is the practice of attempting to use reasoning to minimize the severity of an incident, or avoid approaching it in ways that could cause psychological trauma or stress. It most commonly manifests in the form of making excuses for the behavior of the person engaging in the rationalization, or others involved in the situation the person is attempting to rationalize.
 * Sensitization is when a person seeks to learn about, rehearse, and/or anticipate fearful events in a protective effort to prevent these events from occurring in the first place.
 * Safety behaviors are demonstrated when individuals with anxiety disorders come to rely on something, or someone, as a means of coping with their excessive anxiety.
 * Overthinking
 * Emotion suppression
 * Emotion-driven behavior

Further examples
Further examples of coping strategies include emotional or instrumental support, self-distraction, denial, substance use, self-blame, behavioral disengagement and the use of drugs or alcohol.

Many people think that meditation "not only calms our emotions, but...makes us feel more 'together, as too can "the kind of prayer in which you're trying to achieve an inner quietness and peace".

Low-effort syndrome or low-effort coping refers to the coping responses of a person refusing to work hard. For example, a student at school may learn to put in only minimal effort as they believe if they put in effort it could unveil their flaws.

Otto Fenichel
Otto Fenichel summarized early psychoanalytic studies of coping mechanisms in children as "a gradual substitution of actions for mere discharge reactions...[&] the development of the function of judgement" – noting however that "behind all active types of mastery of external and internal tasks, a readiness remains to fall back on passive-receptive types of mastery."

In adult cases of "acute and more or less 'traumatic' upsetting events in the life of normal persons", Fenichel stressed that in coping, "in carrying out a 'work of learning' or 'work of adjustment', [s]he must acknowledge the new and less comfortable reality and fight tendencies towards regression, towards the misinterpretation of reality", though such rational strategies "may be mixed with relative allowances for rest and for small regressions and compensatory wish fulfillment, which are recuperative in effect".

Karen Horney
In the 1940s, the German Freudian psychoanalyst Karen Horney "developed her mature theory in which individuals cope with the anxiety produced by feeling unsafe, unloved, and undervalued by disowning their spontaneous feelings and developing elaborate strategies of defence." Horney defined four so-called coping strategies to define interpersonal relations, one describing psychologically healthy individuals, the others describing neurotic states.

The healthy strategy she termed "Moving with" is that with which psychologically healthy people develop relationships. It involves compromise. In order to move with, there must be communication, agreement, disagreement, compromise, and decisions. The three other strategies she described – "Moving toward", "Moving against" and "Moving away" – represented neurotic, unhealthy strategies people utilize in order to protect themselves.

Horney investigated these patterns of neurotic needs (compulsive attachments). The neurotics might feel these attachments more strongly because of difficulties within their lives. If the neurotic does not experience these needs, they will experience anxiety. The ten needs are:

 * 1) Affection and approval, the need to please others and be liked.
 * 2) A partner who will take over one's life, based on the idea that love will solve all of one's problems.
 * 3) Restriction of one's life to narrow borders, to be undemanding, satisfied with little, inconspicuous; to simplify one's life.
 * 4) Power, for control over others, for a facade of omnipotence, caused by a desperate desire for strength and dominance.
 * 5) Exploitation of others; to get the better of them.
 * 6) Social recognition or prestige, caused by an abnormal concern for appearances and popularity.
 * 7) Personal admiration.
 * 8) Personal achievement.
 * 9) Self-sufficiency and independence.
 * 10) Perfection and unassailability, a desire to be perfect and a fear of being flawed.

In Compliance, also known as "Moving toward" or the "Self-effacing solution", the individual moves towards those perceived as a threat to avoid retribution and getting hurt, "making any sacrifice, no matter how detrimental." The argument is, "If I give in, I won't get hurt." This means that: if I give everyone I see as a potential threat whatever they want, I will not be injured (physically or emotionally). This strategy includes neurotic needs one, two, and three.

In Withdrawal, also known as "Moving away" or the "Resigning solution", individuals distance themselves from anyone perceived as a threat to avoid getting hurt – "the 'mouse-hole' attitude ... the security of unobtrusiveness." The argument is, "If I do not let anyone close to me, I won't get hurt." A neurotic, according to Horney desires to be distant because of being abused. If they can be the extreme introvert, no one will ever develop a relationship with them. If there is no one around, nobody can hurt them. These "moving away" people fight personality, so they often come across as cold or shallow. This is their strategy. They emotionally remove themselves from society. Included in this strategy are neurotic needs three, nine, and ten.

In Aggression, also known as the "Moving against" or the "Expansive solution", the individual threatens those perceived as a threat to avoid getting hurt. Children might react to parental in-differences by displaying anger or hostility. This strategy includes neurotic needs four, five, six, seven, and eight.

Related to the work of Karen Horney, public administration scholars developed a classification of coping by frontline workers when working with clients (see also the work of Michael Lipsky on street-level bureaucracy). This coping classification is focused on the behavior workers can display towards clients when confronted with stress. They show that during public service delivery there are three main families of coping:

 * Moving towards clients: Coping by helping clients in stressful situations. An example is a teacher working overtime to help students.
 * Moving away from clients: Coping by avoiding meaningful interactions with clients in stressful situations. An example is a public servant stating "the office is very busy today, please return tomorrow."
 * Moving against clients: Coping by confronting clients. For instance, teachers can cope with stress when working with students by imposing very rigid rules, such as no cellphone use in class and sending everyone to the office when they use a cellphone. Furthermore, aggression towards clients is also included here.

In their systematic review of 35 years of the literature, the scholars found that the most often used family is moving towards clients (43% of all coping fragments). Moving away from clients was found in 38% of all coping fragments and Moving against clients in 19%.

Heinz Hartmann
In 1937, the psychoanalyst (as well as a physician, psychologist, and psychiatrist) Heinz Hartmann marked it as the evolution of ego psychology by publishing his paper, "Me" (which was later translated into English in 1958, titled, "The Ego and the Problem of Adaptation"). Hartmann focused on the adaptive progression of the ego "through the mastery of new demands and tasks". In fact, according to his adaptive point of view, once infants were born they have the ability to be able to cope with the demands of their surroundings. In his wake, ego psychology further stressed "the development of the personality and of 'ego-strengths'...adaptation to social realities".

Object relations
Emotional intelligence has stressed the importance of "the capacity to soothe oneself, to shake off rampant anxiety, gloom, or irritability....People who are poor in this ability are constantly battling feelings of distress, while those who excel in it can bounce back far more quickly from life's setbacks and upsets". From this perspective, "the art of soothing ourselves is a fundamental life skill; some psychoanalytic thinkers, such as John Bowlby and D. W. Winnicott see this as the most essential of all psychic tools."

Object relations theory has examined the childhood development both of "independent coping...capacity for self-soothing", and of "aided coping. Emotion-focused coping in infancy is often accomplished through the assistance of an adult."

Gender differences
Gender differences in coping strategies are the ways in which men and women differ in managing psychological stress. There is evidence that males often develop stress due to their careers, whereas females often encounter stress due to issues in interpersonal relationships. Early studies indicated that "there were gender differences in the sources of stressors, but gender differences in coping were relatively small after controlling for the source of stressors"; and more recent work has similarly revealed "small differences between women's and men's coping strategies when studying individuals in similar situations."

In general, such differences as exist indicate that women tend to employ emotion-focused coping and the "tend-and-befriend" response to stress, whereas men tend to use problem-focused coping and the "fight-or-flight" response, perhaps because societal standards encourage men to be more individualistic, while women are often expected to be interpersonal. An alternative explanation for the aforementioned differences involves genetic factors. The degree to which genetic factors and social conditioning influence behavior, is the subject of ongoing debate.

Physiological basis
Hormones also play a part in stress management. Cortisol, a stress hormone, was found to be elevated in males during stressful situations. In females, however, cortisol levels were decreased in stressful situations, and instead, an increase in limbic activity was discovered. Many researchers believe that these results underlie the reasons why men administer a fight-or-flight reaction to stress; whereas, females have a tend-and-befriend reaction. The "fight-or-flight" response activates the sympathetic nervous system in the form of increased focus levels, adrenaline, and epinephrine. Conversely, the "tend-and-befriend" reaction refers to the tendency of women to protect their offspring and relatives. Although these two reactions support a genetic basis to differences in behavior, one should not assume that in general females cannot implement "fight-or-flight" behavior or that males cannot implement "tend-and-befriend" behavior. Additionally, this study implied differing health impacts for each gender as a result of the contrasting stress-processes.

title: Coping


text:
Monkey-man of Delhi

The Monkey-man of Delhi, also known as the Face Scratcher (मुंहनोचवा, ) or the Black Monkey (काला बन्दर, ) is an unknown anomaly which was reported to be roaming Delhi in mid-2001. The entire incident has been described as an example of mass hysteria in India.

History
In May 2001, reports circulated in New Delhi, India concerning a monkey-like creature that attacked people at night. Eyewitness accounts were often inconsistent, but usually described the creature as about four feet (120 cm) tall, covered in thick black hair, with a metal helmet, metal claws, glowing red eyes and three buttons on its chest. Some reports also claim that it wore roller-skates. Others, however, described the Monkey-man as having a more vulpine snout, and being up to eight feet tall, and muscular; it would leap from building to building.

Over 350 sightings of the Monkey-man were reported, as well as around 60 resulting in injuries. Police released artist's sketches of eyewitness accounts in an attempt to catch the creature. Two (by some reports, three) people reportedly died when they fell from the tops of buildings or down stairwells in a panic caused when they thought they were under attack.

Film
The appearance of Monkey-man in Old Delhi is the centre-point of the 2009 Bollywood Hindi film Delhi-6 directed by Rakeysh Omprakash Mehra. In the film, the creature is used as an allegory to represent the evil that resides inside every man alongside God (virtue).

Television
In 2012, the Hindi TV series Mrs. Kaushik Ki Paanch Bahuein featured a story track around the mystery of "Kala Bandar" (Black Monkey).

Music
The Monkey-man is referenced in "Mysterious Man-Monkey", the 12th track in American cello rock band Rasputina's 2011 album Great American Gingerbread: Rasputina Rarities & Neglected Items.

Print media
In the 2011 graphic novel Munkeeman by Tere Bin Laden director Abhishek Sharma, the creature is interpreted as a misunderstood superhero, who was the result of a science experiment gone wrong. The first edition, Munkeeman Vol 1 chronicled the creatures brief appearance in Delhi, and the second edition will feature the creature in Kanpur, based on the incidents reported in February 2002.

title: Monkey-man of Delhi


text:
Coping (architecture)

Coping (from cope, Latin capa) is the capping or covering of a wall. A splayed or wedge coping is one that slopes in a single direction; a saddle coping slopes to either side of a central high point.

Coping may be made of stone (capstone), brick, clay or terracotta, concrete or cast stone, tile, slate, wood, thatch, or various metals, including aluminum, copper, stainless steel, steel, and zinc. In all cases it should be weathered (have a slanted or curved top surface) to throw off the water.

In Romanesque work, copings appeared plain and flat, and projected over the wall with a throating to form a drip. In later work a steep slope was given to the weathering (mainly on the outer side), and began at the top with an astragal; in the Decorated Gothic style there were two or three sets off; and in the later Perpendicular Gothic these assumed a wavy section, and the coping mouldings continued round the sides, as well as at top and bottom, mitring at the angles, as in many of the colleges at the University of Oxford.

title: Coping (architecture)


text:
Superman Adventures

Superman Adventures is a DC Comics comic book series featuring Superman. It is set in the continuity (and style) of Superman: The Animated Series. It ran for 66 issues between 1996 and 2002. Writers on the series included Paul Dini, Mark Evanier, Devin Grayson, Scott McCloud, Mark Millar, and Ty Templeton. It is a sister title to The Batman Adventures (based on Batman: The Animated Series) and Justice League Adventures (based on Justice League).

Exclusive characters
While the comic relied mostly on the cast from the animated series, there were a few characters who only appeared in the comic, such as General Zod, Brad Wilson (from Superman III), Bizarro Lois Lane, Krypto, and Sandman (from "The Sandman Saga").

World's Finest
Batman and Superman Adventures: World's Finest (December 1997) is an adaptation of the 3-part episode of the same name. The adaptation is mostly faithful to the animated version. An additional scene shows Batman discussing with Alfred his problem with Superman (his tendency to rush in without thinking). The story was written by Paul Dini, with penciling by Joe Staton, and inks by Terry Beatty.

Superman vs Lobo
In Superman Adventures Special: Superman vs Lobo: Misery in Space (February 1998), Superman inhales a poison unleashed by some terrorists and leaves Earth to trace a radiation source that should cure him (though not lethal to Superman, the poison makes him a danger to the rest of Earth). Lobo is pointed to an artifact called the Nirvana Crystal, which emits the radiation source Superman requires. The two team up (not with the best of results) and head to the Maracot System.

The owner of the crystal, Squeed, is determined to launch it into the sun to cleanse the universe of evil (as his wife was killed in an accident, but he assumes it to be an evil act). Superman, much to Lobo's dismay, has to destroy the crystal to keep it from going into the sun. The energy from the destruction of the crystal results in Superman's ailment being cured. He leaves to go back to Earth before the council of Maracot can repay him and Lobo with their treasury. Lobo claims he will give Superman his share of the reward and the issue ends with him asking, "Would I lie?" The story was written by David Michelinie, with art by John Delaney and Mike Manley.

English/Spanish version by Berlitz Publishing
The Learn Spanish with Superman series includes relettered speech bubbles, with over 300 Spanish words and phrases in red replacing the original text. Outside the comic panels frame, the replaced Spanish and the correspoding English texts are printed at the page border, but the English texts do not necessarily matching the ones in original publications. The Aprende Ingles Con Superman versions are in English text.

title: Superman Adventures


text:
Glenbrook, New Zealand

Glenbrook is a rural and industrial area in the Auckland region of New Zealand. The industrial area, that of New Zealand's major steel mill, New Zealand Steel, is not located close to any towns - the surrounding countryside is occupied by farms. The nearest towns are Waiuku, five kilometres to the south, and Pukekohe, 15 kilometres to the east.

Glenbrook's other claim to fame is the Glenbrook Vintage Railway.

History
Construction of the Glenbrook Steel Mill began in 1967. Glenbrook was chosen as the site due to the area's proximity to the Waikato North Head ironsand mine and the Huntly Power Station.

Demographics
Glenbrook statistical area, which includes Glenbrook Beach, covers 53.16 km2 and had an estimated population of as of  with a population density of  people per km2.

Glenbrook had a population of 2,193 at the 2018 New Zealand census, an increase of 159 people (7.8%) since the 2013 census, and an increase of 219 people (11.1%) since the 2006 census. There were 741 households, comprising 1,110 males and 1,083 females, giving a sex ratio of 1.02 males per female. The median age was 44.4 years (compared with 37.4 years nationally), with 402 people (18.3%) aged under 15 years, 336 (15.3%) aged 15 to 29, 1,134 (51.7%) aged 30 to 64, and 324 (14.8%) aged 65 or older.

Ethnicities were 86.0% European/Pākehā, 10.8% Māori, 4.1% Pacific peoples, 8.5% Asian, and 1.8% other ethnicities. People may identify with more than one ethnicity.

The percentage of people born overseas was 19.7, compared with 27.1% nationally.

Although some people chose not to answer the census's question about religious affiliation, 59.0% had no religion, 28.2% were Christian, 0.7% had Māori religious beliefs, 0.5% were Hindu, 0.7% were Muslim, 0.5% were Buddhist and 1.9% had other religions.

Of those at least 15 years old, 285 (15.9%) people had a bachelor's or higher degree, and 303 (16.9%) people had no formal qualifications. The median income was $38,600, compared with $31,800 nationally. 420 people (23.5%) earned over $70,000 compared to 17.2% nationally. The employment status of those at least 15 was that 1,020 (57.0%) people were employed full-time, 261 (14.6%) were part-time, and 54 (3.0%) were unemployed.

Education
Glenbrook School is a coeducational full primary school (years 1–8) with a roll of as of  The school opened in 1878.

title: Glenbrook, New Zealand


text:
Robert Blair

Robert Blair may refer to:

Entertainment

 * Robert Blair (poet) (1699–1746), Scottish poet
 * Robert Noel Blair (1912–2003), American painter and sculptor
 * Robert Blair (musician) (1930–2001), American gospel musician

Law

 * Robert Blair, Lord Avontoun (1741–1811), Scottish lawyer, son of poet Robert Blair
 * Robert A. Blair, justice of the Court of Appeal for Ontario
 * Robert Blair (politician) (c. 1782–1861), English-born judge and politician in Nova Scotia

Sports

 * Robert Blair (cricketer) (1858–1912), New Zealand cricketer
 * Robert Blair (badminton) (born 1981), badminton player from Great Britain

Other

 * Robert Blair (moderator) (1593–1666), Scottish clergyman
 * Robert Blair (minister) (1837–1907), Scottish minister
 * Robert Blair (astronomer) (1748–1828), Scottish astronomer
 * Robert Blair (VC) (1834–1859), Victoria Cross winner
 * Robert M. Blair (1836–1899), American Civil War sailor and Medal of Honor recipient
 * S. Robert Blair (1929–2009), Canadian businessman
 * W. Robert Blair (1930–2014), American politician
 * Robert Blair (farmer) (born 1968), specializing in precision agriculture and Unmanned Air Vehicles
 * Robert Blair (political advisor) (born 1972), American official

title: Robert Blair


text:
Adam Smith University

Adam Smith University is a private distance learning university founded in 1991 by Donald Grunewald, who is still its president. Grunewald was president of Mercy College between 1972 and 1984.

Adam Smith university espouses the principle of independence from state control and promotes free-market business economics.

History
Adam Smith's current American mailing address is a private mailbox in Garapan on Saipan in the Northern Mariana Islands, a U.S. commonwealth. Adam Smith University asserts the establishment of a French unit called École Supérieure Universitaire Adam Smith, which offers academic degrees for work experience.

The institution makes no statement suggesting that it has a physical campus.

Accreditation
Adam Smith University was accredited by the Liberian Ministry of Education since 1995, well before the most recent conflicts, and was accredited as a result of an act of the Liberian legislature. The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board identifies the institution as operating from Liberia and Saipan, but states that it has "no degree-granting authority from Liberia or Saipan."

Criticism
Adam Smith University found early praise when it was listed in “College Degrees by Mail: 100 Good Schools that offer bachelor’s, master’s, doctorates, and law degrees by the home study” by John Bear (Berkeley, California, Ten Speed Press, 1995). Others, however, would criticize the institution. Steve Levicoff referred to Adam Smith University as a degree mill, and he noted that it operated in Louisiana due to the absence of laws regulating the granting of degrees. Adam Smith University and Columbia State University have the same address, which is "likely a mail forwarding address".

Other critics have described Adam Smith University as a "diploma mill". Alan Contreras from the Oregon State Office of Degree Authorization (ODA), an agency of that state's government, called Adam Smith "a diploma mill with a long and unattractive history" in an article written in a personal capacity. However, in 2005, he updated Adam Smith's listing on the ODA website to remove the term "diploma mill."

title: Adam Smith University


text:
Mountebank

Mountebank may refer to:
 * A charlatan who sells phony medicines from a platform
 * Monte Bank, a card game
 * The Mountebanks, a comic opera by Alfred Cellier and W. S. Gilbert

title: Mountebank


text:
Thomas Moult

Thomas Moult (1893–1974) was a versatile English journalist and writer, and one of the Georgian poets. He is known for his annual anthologies Best Poems of the Year, 1922 to 1943, which were popular verse selections taken from periodicals on both sides of the Atlantic. His poem 'Truly He Hath A Sweet Bed' from Down Here the Hawthorn was set to music for chorus and orchestra by Cyril Rootham (as Brown Earth, 1921–2).

Life
He was born in Derbyshire, to Jewish parents. He wrote much newspaper criticism, on music and drama and as a book reviewer; and on sport in the popular press.

He founded a magazine, Voices, for young writers, in 1919, publishing Sherwood Anderson, A. E. Coppard, Louis Golding, F. V. Branford, and Neville Cardus. It has been described as "eminently uncontroversial".

From 1952 to 1962 he was president of the Poetry Society and chairman of the editorial board of Poetry Review.

Family
Moult's daughter Joy was the first wife of psychologist Oliver Zangwill.

Works

 * Snow over Elden (1920) novel
 * Down Here the Hawthorn (1921) poems
 * Cenotaph: A Book of Remembrance in Poetry and Prose for November the Eleventh (1923) editor
 * The Comely Lass (1923) novel
 * Forty Years in My Bookshop by Walter T. Spencer (1927) editor
 * Barrie (1928) criticism
 * Derbyshire Prose and Verse (1929) editor
 * Saturday Night (1931) novel
 * Sally Go Round the Moon (1931)
 * Playing for England by Jack Hobbs (1931) editor
 * Mary Webb: Her Life and Work (1932)
 * W. H. Davies (1933)
 * Willow Pattern (1934) cricket poems
 * Bat and Ball (1935) cricket anthology

The Best Poems of 1931
Poets included were:

A. E. - Conrad Aiken - Margaret Emerson Bailey - T. O. Beachcroft - William Rose Benét - Anthony Bertram - Edmund Blunden - Kay Boyle - Nancy Campbell - Thomas Caldecott Chubb - Elizabeth Coatsworth - Robert P. Tristram Coffin - Jane Culver - W. H. Davies - John Gould Fletcher - John Galsworthy - Viola Gerard Garvin - Stella Gibbons - Wilfrid Gibson - G. Rostrevor Hamilton - Ernest Hartsock - F. R. Higgins - John Lee Higgins - Robert Hillyer - Thomas Hornsby Ferril - Helen Hoyt - Julian Huxley - Leslie Nelson Jennings - Geoffrey Johnson - Frank Kendon - Stanley Kimmel - Alfred Kreymborg - Ruth Lechlitner - Marie Luhrs - Sylvia Lynd - Alister Mackenzie - E. H. W. Meyerstein - Harold Monro - Virginia Moore - David Morton - Edwin Muir - Robert Nichols - Jessica Nelson North - Alfred Noyes - Doris Pailthorpe - Herbert E. Palmer - Dorothy Parker - Laurence Powys - Frederic Prokosch - Lizette Woodworth Reese - Sarah-Elizabeth Rodger - Robert L. Roe - James Rorty - A. Wolseley Russell - Lady Margaret Sackville - Anderson M. Scruggs - Leonora Speyer - J. C. Squire - L. Steni - L. A. G. Strong - Sara Teasdale - Katharine Tynan - A. R. Ubsdell - Marie de L. Welch - John Hall Wheelock - Mary Brent Whiteside - Humbert Wolfe - Barbara Young

title: Thomas Moult


text:
Gavin Heffernan

Gavin Heffernan (born April 2, 1980) is a Canadian filmmaker/screenwriter/photographer.

He co-wrote the psychological horror feature The Taking of Deborah Logan (2014) and Paramount's Paranormal Activity: The Ghost Dimension (2015) with writing partner Adam Robitel. Deadline reported in July 2021, that Heffernan and Robitel had partnered with Darren Aronofsky on a thriller series for Netflix titled The Craving. In July 2019, Deadline posted that Heffernan and Robitel had teamed up with Sam Raimi on an "Untitled Supernatural Thriller" for Sony Pictures.

Also known for directing experimental visual works, primarily timelapse, featured in the Rolling Stones' 2015 Zip Code Tour as well as their 2016 Desert Trip shows. Heffernan also contributed visuals to Pink Floyd's Roger Waters' 2016 concerts, Paul Simon's 2018 Homeward Bound Farewell Tour, and John Mayer's 2022 Sob Rock tour.

An alumnus of McGill University and the American Film Institute. While attending McGill in Montreal, Quebec, Gavin wrote, directed, and starred in the feature film Expiration (2003). Though budgeted at a meagre $10,000, Expiration was awarded the Grand Jury Prize in Toronto at the 2004 Canadian Filmmakers' Festival, received a 76% critic score on Rotten Tomatoes, and acclaim from publications Variety, and Ain't it Cool News.

His unconventional anti-war documentary Grand Wheel (2008) premiered at SXSW and played more than fifty film festivals in twenty countries. His 2010 collection of experimental shorts about the fall of man titled "Devolution" premiered at the Florida Film Festival and won an Audience Award at the 2010 HollyShorts Film Festival. The sci-fi follow-up "Devolution: Reckoning" premiered at the 2011 Festival du Nouveau Cinema in Montreal.

Variety announced in October 2011 that Heffernan was attached to co-write the screen adaptation of Ray Manzarek's The Poet in Exile, a novel exploring the notion that Jim Morrison of the Doors staged his death in 1971.

Heffernan's timelapse art has been featured in Leonardo DiCaprio's Ice on Fire global warming doc for HBO, Virgin America flights, BBC Earth, Bravo's first scripted show Girlfriends' Guide to Divorce, and many other press and TV outlets including The New York Times, CNN, Time, National Geographic, CBS News, and Wired. Borrego Springs, California, named their 2014 town festival after Heffernan's "Borrego Stardance" astro timelapse and October 25 was subsequently named "Gavin Heffernan Day" in San Diego County by Senator Joel Anderson.

In 2015, Heffernan and Harun Mehmedinovic co-founded SKYGLOW, a crowdfunded book and Blu Ray project to tackle the rising danger and damage of urban light pollution. The fundraising campaign generated significant publicity and ended on May 9, 2015, as the fourth most successful Kickstarter campaign ever in the Photobooks category. The SKYGLOW book released in April 2017 at SKYGLOWPROJECT.COM and was created in association with the International Dark Sky Association.

title: Gavin Heffernan


text:
Robert Blair (astronomer)

Robert Blair FRSE (1748 – 22 December 1828) was a Scottish astronomer.

Life
He was born in Garvald, East Lothian, the son of Rev Archibald Blair, the local minister.

In 1773 he was apprenticed to Dr Francis Balfour, a naval surgeon, and served in the Royal Navy in the West Indies. On return to Scotland he studied medicine at the University of Edinburgh and qualified as a doctor in 1785.

Robert Blair was the first Regius Professor of Astronomy at the University of Edinburgh (1785 until death). He invented the aplanatic lens and also coined this term. This was a significant step in reducing the aberration in optical systems. He also experimented with hollow lenses, holding different solutions.

He was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society of Edinburgh in 1786.

He died in Westloch, Berwickshire on 22 December 1828.

title: Robert Blair (astronomer)