text:
Autograph (disambiguation)

An autograph is a person's signature, but may also refer to:

Writing

 * Autograph collecting, the hobby of collecting autographs
 * Autograph (manuscript), a document written entirely in the handwriting of its author
 * Autograph letter (Holy See), a letter signed by the pope
 * Autograph (Assyriology), a hand-copy of a cuneiform clay-tablet

Film and TV

 * Autograph (2004 film), a Tamil film
 * Autograph (2010 film), a Bengali film

Music

 * Autograph (American band), an American glam metal band
 * Autograph (Russian band), a Soviet and Russian rock band
 * Autograph Records, an American jazz record label
 * Autograph (album), a 1980 album by John Denver, or the title track
 * Autografh, a 2007 album by the American rapper Grafh
 * Autograph, an album by Andraé Crouch
 * Auto-Graph EP by Le Car
 * "Autograph" (song), a 2016 song by Dallas Smith
 * "Autographs", a song by Reks from the 2012 album Straight, No Chaser

Other uses

 * Autograph, a web-based editing tool for digital signage, produced by the Beaver Group
 * Autograph ABP, previously known as the Association of Black Photographers, a British-based photographic arts agency
 * Autograph (brand), a Marks & Spencer brand
 * Autograph Collection, chain of hotels within the Marriott International brand
 * Autograph (company), an NFT startup by quarterback Tom Brady
 * Autograph (gallery), a gallery of contemporary art in Yekaterinburg

title: Autograph (disambiguation)


text:
Talk:Emulsion

Else
I understand that there is a need for Emulsion in asphalt road laying. I want to know why? How the emulsion is created? What are th ealternatives. What they did when one such emulsion was not present? How to avoid using the asphalt emulsion and use some environmental friendly emulsion....

"In butter and margarine, a continuous liquid phase surrounds droplets of water (water-in-oil emulsion)." Shouldn't this be "a continuous oil phase"? I came here to read what an emulsion is, so I'm not familiar with these terms, but that would make more sense.

~Oil is not a phase, so "continuous oil phase" would not make sense. Oil is a liquid and thus liquid is the "phase". I hope this makes sense.

- I agree. Oil is not a phase, so, "continuous oil phase" does not make sense. However, the same mistake is made later in the sentance with "continuous water phase". I recommend editing the sentance to the following:

"In butter and margarine, oil surrounds droplets of water (a water-in-oil emulsion). In milk and cream, water surrounds droplets of oil (an oil-in-water emulsion). "

This is simple and gets the point across. -TEDMONDS April 17, 2008

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

title: Talk:Emulsion


text: Category:Dutch boxers

title: Category:Dutch boxers


text:
Talk:Agunah

Untitled
I've NPOVed this a bit. I was wondering if there is a legal reference for Judge Menachem ha-Kohen's verdict of >400,000 NIS for withholding a get. JFW | T@lk  15:27, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

 * We need more modern-day sources as well. Could anyone reference a cause celebre agunah case here? JFW | T@lk  20:37, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

One example of the "lion's den" case is women whose husbands died in the Twin Towers. Even if their husbands's bodies were not identified, women have been alowed to remarry. Chani

 * Could you provide a source that we could WP:CITE for this? This is a very good modern-day example that would really inform the article, Chani. JFW | T@lk  22:46, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

But after all this todo the husband shows up, it seems to hit the fan anyway. This todo appears provisional at best - not a real divorce just a standin separation cum new marriage in hopes the old hubbie stays dead.

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 7 January 2019 and 23 April 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Springwinter19.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 13:39, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Aguna
changed the spelling to "aguna", which seems to be supported by a Google search. However, the page title is still AgunaH. Anyone object to a formal move? JFW | T@lk  16:15, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
 * This move has my strong support. --Redaktor 16:30, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

At first glance, it just didn't look right to me, so I looked up similar words, and this is what I found: We don't yet have an article on "Schinah".
 * Binah not Bina
 * Haganah not Hagana
 * Hannah not Hanna
 * Judah not Juda
 * Kinah not Kina
 * Kallah not Kalla
 * Mikvah not Mikva
 * Tumah not Tuma
 * Taharah not Tahara
 * Terumah not Teruma
 * Tzedakah not Tzedaka

On the other hand, I found:
 * Halakha not Halakhah
 * Shiva not Shivah
 * Tshuva not Tshuvah.

When I did a Google search; "aguna" had double the amount of hits then "agunah", but "agunah's" hits were more of substance. Also when doing the search on "aguna"; Google asked "Did you mean: laguna ?"; kind of not sure if this is what I meant.

Based on all this; in my humble opinion "agunah" is correct, with "aguna" redirected to it. Itzse 21:09, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

BTW, I always regretted not calling myself "Itzseh" or "Itzeh"! Itzse 21:11, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

 * I don't think we can ever decide what is 'correct'. We can try though to find a sensible and consistent spelling. There really is no good reason for the final 'h' in most of these words. Judah is clearly an exception since it has passed into the English language that way.--Redaktor 22:22, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

 * You have a point; but I think that most of these words written with an "h" are actually pronounced "ah" closer to a "mapik heh" then for example "tuna" where the "a" doesn't continue with a flourish. I think we can say that Tuna is pronounced Tu-na but agunah or aguna is pronounced agun-ah. Whatever you decide is fine with me, I was only trying to clarify the issue. Itzse 19:08, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

 * I hope no-one thinks it should be pronounced agun-ah, because that would indeed not be correct. The pronunciation is agu-na. Discussion here also tends to favour omission of final silent he. --Redaktor 12:42, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Being refused a get - not an agunah?
removed from the intro the paragraph that describes the plight of women whose husbands refuse to grant a get as means of extortion. I don't understand his point that "this is not the halachic definition of agunah". Well, Wikipedia does not use halacha as a content guideline - almost everybody refers to these women as agunot. That includes a long cover article in the Jewish Observer some years ago. Lishna de-alma nakat. JFW | T@lk  14:05, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

I think the article needs to seperate the modern usage, which is technically incorrect, from the classical usage. Wikipedia is not a halachic dictionary, but here it is defining a halachic term. To confuse it with a modern activist term is not informative.

The term in its classical sense refers to a woman who cannot remarry because her marital status is in doubt. That's the definition of the word. A woman who is not recieving a get because her husband doesn't want a divorce is halachicly an ishes ish. She's stam a married woman. She has a right to collect support from her husbands estate, he must still provide for her physical and medical needs, and if he dies her children inherit property and she walks away capable of marrying a cohen. A real aggunah is in a much harsher reality where she is under all the chumros of a married woman and all the chumros of a single woman.

Both definitons need to be mentioned, but the sections should be clearly seperated. It might even be helpful to seperate the articles into Agunah (Jewish Law) and Agunah (Social Problem), or something similar. Basejumper2 07:39, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

 * Wikipedia has a NPOV, religious definitions are required to always come second and be explicitly called outt as such. Secularism is the way to go. Sticking to 2200yo fiction is just stupid. 89.204.138.63 (talk) 16:32, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

Solutions proposed
For a lengthy discussion on the proposed solutions to agunot see Jewish Women in Jewish Law by Rabbi Moshe Meiselman.

Statistics and incidence
Does anyone have any figures to indicate how many couples are affected by aguna issues, and what proportion of the population it represents? That would a valuable addition to the article. --Redaktor 12:46, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

If we are speaking of Agunahs as women who's husbands are unaccounted for, then there are right now very few. After ww1, the holocaust, the refugee migration to the US, the war of independence and the subsequent sephardi migration, they were prevelant and unfortunately probably will be again if similar tragedies arise. As to agunahs as women who's husbands do not want to give them a get, there's no way to know, but the article has some interesting numbers in it already. Basejumper2 14:20, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

 * The incidence is very low. Recently published figures in Israel show that there are less than 400 couples affected in Israel - with slightly more men than women being refused a get.    — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.68.233.33 (talk • contribs)

According to the article it notes men and women about the same according to the Rabbinate yet in life I hear about only women who have issues, and I mean real issues, almost no men as they can easily write-off the wide at will.{Unsigned|84.229.24.35}}
 * Because of anti-religious considerations, some like to portrait the religious world as cruel and anti-women. That is, IMHP, the only reason. Debresser (talk) 18:39, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
 * please write 'god is dead' to prove you're accepting a Neutral Point Of View.
 * Otherwise, please revert all edits you made in Wikipedia and consider publishing your oppinion in a religious medium. Thank you! 89.204.138.63 (talk) 16:34, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

Fell into a lion's den
I corrected the citation from Masekhet Yevamot according to a well established correction in the Hebrew equivalent article. There is one detail which I don't know how to incorporate in the article. In Israel, where civil marriage is impossible, but there is a system of common law marriage, many secular men don't wait too long for their wife's acceptance of the get, and simply live with their new partners under the common law marriage terms. If their new partner is single or divorcee, it doesn't affect the status of their new children, but it does create a strange case of ad-hoc bigamy (if they die without leaving a will, bothe women are entitled to their share in his property, according to a supreme court ruling). Being stigmatized as mamzer is still a strong holdback which prevents "chanined women", even secular ones, from acting similarly. DrorK 05:28, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

This sentence seems very misleading.
(Before you read the following comment of mine. Know that, at present, my objection has been rendered moot by recent edits.) Veecort (talk) 23:26, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

This sentence has a very prominent location within the article.

While it is widely assumed that the problem lies primarily in men refusing to grant their wives a get, and that it is a widespread issue; in Israel, figures released from the chief rabbinate show that men are equally victimized and that the numbers are actually a couple of hundred on each side.

(I bolded the words that seem misleading. Though... The sentence, while well constructed, does address two separate and distinct misconceptions in one long sentence. Maybe it is too much info for one sentence.) I only just heard about the phenomenon of agunah. But, there are a few things I don't like about the sentence. According to the source being cited...

1) Being refused divorce(/annulment) is not such a big "problem" for a man. (Forgive me if that sounds crass.)

2) Saying "equally victimized" leads one to believe that being a male agunah is as bad as being a female agunah. (I know there is no such thing as a male agunah. I was kind of trying to prove a point and kind of being lazy.)

Following is an excerpt from the cited source that helps to demonstrate my point. (This is not a subject that I am interested in studying, so I would rather not devote too much time and effort to familiarizing myself with the issue. In other words, at present, I have no intention of ever being able to claim that I know what I am talking about.)

A woman suffers more in this situation, as she is Biblically forbidden to marry again, and children she might bear to another man would be considered bastards according to Halakhah [Jewish Law]. A man is similarly not permitted to marry before being divorced, but the ban is much less severe, and in any event his future children will not be considered illegitimate.

Veecort (talk) 17:02, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Nevermind.Veecort (talk) 23:26, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Recent additions
Please review WP:NPOV, and in particular WP:UNDUE. The recent additions are the thoughts of a very small minority שיטה יחידאה, are not necessarily reflective of the current majority Orthodox opinion, and are thus inappropriate for a general article in the encyclopedia, especially in the volume in which they were presented. The sourcing is not the issue, it is the WP:FRINGEness of it that is. -- Avi (talk) 17:35, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

 * I think that you should add your belief that this is the belief of a small minority, if that is what you think, rather than leaving it out of an encyclopedia article. I personally made sure that I indicated that even Mnachem Risikoff offered his opinions as issues to be discussed in an halkhic framework, not to be implemented -- and the fact that 4 recent books have cited his views, thinking that the fact that an ultra-orthodox rabbi had advanced those ideas so early on, seemed significant to them!!
 * I think it is NOT a small minority belief that such ideas be DISCUSSED, rather than implemented. In any event, for an article on agunah not to include the fact that such issues have been raised -- even if the article then notes that they were ultimately not accepted -- is not doing justice to the subject.  And, I should add, this was not some fringe idea by someone whose orthodoxy was "suspect" by others.
 * I absolutely believe this section should stay in the article, although I believe you have the right (and perhaps even the responsibility) of framing them with sentences that state the ideas never were put into action by recognized orthodox authorities.
 * By the way, did you look at the references? These authors are well respected!
 * Floridarabbi (talk) 17:44, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

The sources are not the point, the opinion is. I have asked for others to comment here at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Judaism; let us see what other participants have to say. -- Avi (talk) 17:49, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

 * Agree with FloridaRabbi that the fact that there are opinions in the orthodox world searching for solutions should be in this article. I agree also with Avi that the format at the moment is in violation of WP:UNDUE.  I suggest that a two line (max) mention should be made with a See main directing to R' Risikof's article.  The opinion and the explanation belongs there and not in this article.  This article should make brief mention of it and no more. Joe407 (talk) 05:47, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment Perhaps a sentence or two with a wikilink to Risikoff would be appropriate, but the volume of material there now added by someone intimately acquainted with the Risikoffs (see the contributions of the user) is a violation of WP:UNDUE. -- Avi (talk) 17:58, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment Sounds like it's getting personal here,and I want to avoid that. In fact, if in discussion I had been advised to cut down the note to a couple of sentences, instead of having everthing I had written deleted -- twice -- there would never have been an argument on my part. I admit I am relatively new to wikipedia. I have just now cut down the reference to Risikoff, and left multiple references to works that reference him (as well as other rabbis) in major ongoing studies of this issue. I have also added the fact that there are orthodox rabbis (including Emanuel Rackman z"l) who have taken it upon themselves to annul marriages, but these unilateral actions have so far been condemned. I think this section is very important to an encyclopedia article on the agunah, and has improved the article as a whole. If others think it should be changed even more, then, of course, it should be. And by the way, creating the page on Risikoff was what led me to add something about him to this page -- but a recent article by Gershon Greenberg, on another subject (the Holocaust) devoted 16 pages to his writings. He was a prolific writer, often quoted and cited -- including in many works (some cited here) about the agunah. Floridarabbi (talk) 21:21, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Floridarabbi - Thank you for your revisions. I feel that this is no longer in violation of WP:UNDUE.  Thank you also for your civility in this debate. Avi?  What say you?  Joe407 (talk) 04:36, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Much better. I think that the section is lacking in that there are many, many cases over the centuries of how Orthodox Judaism tried to deal with this horrible problem, and there must be thousands of t’shuvos on this, but, not being a baki in Even HaEzer, I don't know of enough to flesh out the section. -- Avi (talk) 05:05, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you both for your guidance and help! Avi, I do reference the Freimann book, and mention there is a chapter that gives a good history of many of the teshuvot you mention, over a period of 2000 years -- so someone who wants more can go there. So I hope that's a help, as well.  Again, thank you both for helping me as I get more involved with Wikipedia! Floridarabbi (talk) 13:06, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

The Agunah
I've created an article on the Chaim Grade novel, The Agunah, and I am mentioning it here in case anyone thinks it is worthy of inclusion in this article, perhaps in the hatnote. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Choor monster (talk • contribs)
 * Done. -M.Altenmann >t 23:43, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Agunah. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071014052041/http://www.icjw.org/showitem.asp?itemid=advocacy_Agunot&title=Religious%20Rights%20(Agunot) to http://www.icjw.org/showitem.asp?itemid=advocacy_Agunot&title=Religious%20Rights%20%28Agunot%29

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

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 13:56, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Checked and found that the information is not in the source, so I added a tag to it. Debresser (talk) 17:34, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
 * While blogspot itself is not a reliable source, perhaps someone has the time to listen to the interview as regards how R' Elyashiv felt about this issue, as well as R' Moshe, and yibadel machayim l'chayim R'Dovid feel about hafkaa and prenups: http://daattorah.blogspot.com/2015_10_01_archive.html. -- Avi (talk) 18:23, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

 * Regarding the two sources of R' Zalman Nechemia Goldberg, I was not able to find on-line versions. However, it is clear he has wrote against using Hafka'ah this way a number of times (see http://haemtza.blogspot.com/2015/01/the-road-paved-with-good-intentions.html where it quotes a translation of a letter of R' Goldberg specifically mentioning the Tehumin article(s)). -- Avi (talk) 19:16, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

 * The sources are examples of rabbis who say these measures are against halakha, or they say that "most Orthodox leaders" hold that they are against halakha? Because it is the latter we need, not the first. Debresser (talk) 06:25, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
 * The article from Weider and R' Cohen say that historically and modernly it is not used nor accepted for use. I couldn't find the two Goldberg sources to confirm, so perhaps we should delete those for now. -- Avi (talk) 21:23, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I think we should. Debresser (talk) 21:49, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Removed from the lead
I've removed the following content from the lead, because WP:NOTNEWS:

"A woman suffers more in this situation, as she is Biblically forbidden to marry again, and children she might bear to another man would be considered mamzerim (bastards) according to halakhah. A man is similarly not permitted to marry before being divorced, but the ban is much less severe (because monogamy was instituted by one single overreaching authority in Europe in around the year 1000CE, and was accepted in Europe (Ashkenazim), whereas Sefardic and Mizrahi (Eastern) Jewish communities did not until very recently.) This considered, his future children will not be considered illegitimate."
 * In a 2015 case a beth din (rabbinical court) published an advertisement naming a man who had refused his (ex-)wife a get for 15 years, refusing him entry into any synagogue and suggesting that people should avoid social and business contact with him. Ten years before an advert criticising a man who had denied his wife a get had been placed by the beth din, but without calling for action.
 * In 2007 the Chief Rabbinate found that in Israel men and women were refused divorce in equal numbers, 180 women and 185 men over a two-year period. The Director-General of the Rabbinical Courts said this showed that "the claims by women's organizations of thousands of women whose husbands refuse to give them divorces have no basis in reality". Nevertheless,

There is a need for this article to be less about events and initiatives and more about the big picture. JFW | T@lk  16:31, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

 * I have restored the statistical information. I agree about individual cases, but it is important to know how many cases there are, and how they are divided between the sexes. Perhaps you removed that part by mistake. In either case, it should definitely be in the article. Debresser (talk) 19:34, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 one external links on Agunah. 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/20070706112933/http://www.youngisraelrabbis.org.il/divorce.htm to http://www.youngisraelrabbis.org.il/divorce.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111001162535/http://www.youngisraelrabbis.org.il/prenup.htm to http://www.youngisraelrabbis.org.il/prenup.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070706113557/http://www.youngisraelrabbis.org.il/index.html to http://www.youngisraelrabbis.org.il/index.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) 20:40, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Agunah. 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/20070728055519/http://www.jofa.org/about.php/advocacy to http://www.jofa.org/about.php/advocacy
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120328104825/http://www.voices-magazine.com/index.php?page=inside_page&id=180 to http://www.voices-magazine.com/index.php?page=inside_page&id=180
 * Added tag to http://www.mucjs.org/ARUDraftFinal.pdf

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 06:23, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Edit war
and, can we discuss the proposed changes and objections against these over here? Generally speaking I would recommend making small changes with WP:BRD and ongoing discussion. JFW | T@lk  14:32, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Agree. Debresser (talk) 17:56, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I'd also ask Hopesings69 to refrain from personal attacks, and assume good faith. Debresser (talk) 17:57, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I'd suggest to exclude people who try to portrait a religious oppinion as fact. Neutral Point Of View means Secularism First. 89.204.138.63 (talk) 16:36, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

Anti-female bias and Orthodox apologetics
The current page is rife with Orthodox apologetics and editorial dismissiveness of women's real lives. I fixed that language in many places, and added about a dozen modern sources.

The agunah issue is fundamentally this: Jewish law has a deep-seated gender bias in divorce, unequal exit power. Several actually:
 * The system of getting divorced is one in which the man acts and the women receives
 * The only person whose volition matters according to the core halakha is the man's not the woman's
 * Rabeinu Gershom's takana is just that, a takana. It is taken as flexible. Whereas for women, there is zero flexibility Point of fact: Dozens of men get married each year in Israel while leaving their first wives agunot. I will find the exact number if it available.
 * This gets to the main imbalance, which is that a man always has an exit. Whether with heter 100 rabonim, or by just flouting halakha, he can do what he wants with zero ZERO consequences. No mamzerim. No forbidding him from marrying a lover. None of that. No consequences. (And also, no body clock). By contrast, a woman who wants to get on with her life has no heter available to her, has zero option for marrying a second man, is and start a new family risks creating a mamzer, and is forbidden from marrying her lover. This is inherent halakhic gender imbalance, which is at the root of the problem of agunot. It makes women vulnerable to extortion in exchange for their freedom.

What this means is women can become stuck in non-existent marriages to men who are free. The woman is paradoxically still married to a man who is no longer married to her. That, in a nutshell, should explain everything about this story. No amount of explaining away rabbinic thinking can change these underlying facts. The Jewish marriage is a threat to women, not to men. Men have free exit power, and women do not.

All this needs to be explained at the outset to the wikipedia audience otherwise it is simply orthodox apologetics, which is how it stands now.

And the Israeli rabbinical courts are fully aware of this. Hence the "Agunah Fund", in which the rabbinic court uses charity funds to literally bribe men who refuse to give a get. The Center for Women's Justice brought a lawsuit about this, which you can read about in the book, Marriage and Divorce in the Jewish State, by Susan Weiss and Netty Gross-Horowitz.

And the idea that men are "equally" anchored into marriage is an absolute lie. Men have outs, as I just explained. And most cases in which the beit din declares a man an "chained" are cases in which the man has agreed to give a get in exchange for extortion, and when the woman refuses to be extorted, the court declares her to be recalcitrant. Again, I refer you to the very important book, And the Israeli rabbinical courts are fully aware of this. Hence the "Agunah Fund", in which the rabbinic court uses charity funds to literally bribe men who refuse to give a get. The Center for Women's Justice brought a lawsuit about this, which you can read about in the book, Marriage and Divorce in the Jewish State, by Susan Weiss and Netty Gross-Horowitz. And many more important sources here

Finally, the page has a very distorted narrative that rabbis (meaning Orthodox rabbis) are doing "whatever they can" for agunot. The exact opposite is true. When rabbis try to do the right thing and work within halakha, such as using hafkaat kiddushin, they are vilified. Look what happened to Rabbi Rackman, to Rabbi Sperber, to others. As soon as a rabbi does the right thing, his colleagues isolate him. This, too, is part of the agunah shonda and needs to be explained if wikipedia is going to be truthful.

On a personal note, debresser, your profile implies that you literally see yourself as speaking as a messenger of God, or "Hashem". I believe that such a stance should completely disqualify you from writing on Wikipedia, because your obvious bias is in your name. Hopesings69 (talk) 10:14, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

 * I see you came here to WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS (see #3 there). Your last paragraphs comes over a bit paranoid. Most of your statements regarding Jewish law and actual rabbinical practice are either incorrect or have been overly simplified in order to promote a certain POV. Your language sounds like you are speaking at a feminist rally, not like a contribution to a serious Wikipedia article or talkpage discussion. Lastly, what is your personal involvement with this issue? Debresser (talk) 22:09, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Some problems I found after looking over your edits: An estimated 100,000 women in Israel, or one out of every seven married Jewish women, is at risk of being an agunah. See WP:CRYSTAL; The problem of agunot, women who are legally bound to an effectively non-existent marriage and vulnerable to emotional and financial blackmail in exchange for their freedom, is considered one of the greatest injustices within religious Jewish practice. As a result, agunah activists around the world have been pressuring Orthodox rabbis for generations to release agunot from their abusive situations. WP:WEASEL and WP:NOTADVOCACY; However, today, when the problem has more to do with domestic violence and abuse, rabbis are much more reluctant to engage in creative halakhic solutions. Unclear, and WP:NOR; The only real halakhic solution to free agunot is the annulment. WP:UNDUE; Although during certain periods in Jewish history, the rabbis encouraged recalcitrant husbands to do the right thing (Maimonides, for example, was a proponent of even violent pressure tactics in order to alleviate the suffering of an agunah), medieval rabbis dialed back on those practices and determined that if there is even a hint that the man was coerced, the divorce is invalid. Unencyclopedic language, no mention of Maimonides in source given; Moreover, other patriarchal practices of Jewish marriage and divorce place women in danger from becoming an agunah. WP:NOTADVOCACY; There are no consequences to a man for ignoring the law and taking a second wife. WP:OVERSIMPLIFY; There is a solution within the halakhic system to release an agunah, which is to nullifying the marriage based on the premise of a "fraudulent purchase" -- that is, had a woman known that this would be her fate with this man, she would have never married him. Misrepresents sources given which indicate that this route is almost universally recognized as invalid. Great care must be taken before attempting to insert this sort of material into the established version. StonyBrook (talk) 01:48, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
 * why do orthodox jews act violently against women? and continue doing so when told?
 * Please do not answer unless you're saying sorry 89.204.138.63 (talk) 16:39, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

Criteria for applying pressure
added a recent case reported in the popular press as an example of how pressure may be applied to a recalcitrant husband. I think that the popular press is not a good source for such information, as it is very prone to narrow focus on the specific case at hand. I think a better source would examine the criteria systematically. The theme throughout this entire subject is "how much pressure would be considered excessive", with in addition the parameters set within the jurisdiction where the case is being dealt with. JFW | T@lk  05:47, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I understand JFW's misgivings about the "popular press"; my citation is a placeholder until I am able to find more substantial and scholarly discussion of the issue. I think any reasonable person will agree that a discussion of this issue as it presents itself in real life (and as it is reported in the "popular press") is, while not totally sufficient or an exhaustive discussion of the issue, certainly preferable to having no citation at all. While I continue to do research in order to find more substantive discussion of the circumstances in question, I invite JFW to add their own citations at their leisure. --newmila (talk) 13:46, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Additional sources - which hopefully will meet with approval - have been added, and my text restored. --newmila (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:34, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * The text was true enough, and I wouldn't have removed it just because the source was less than ideal, but I am happy it has been restored with good sources now, thank to the good word of editors. Debresser (talk) 14:49, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * i'd contrast it with cases of US women hiring killers to resolve their agunah. religion sucks, thats why. Also, religion has no say in a lexicon. it is a study object only. 89.204.138.63 (talk) 16:40, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Agunah


text:
William H. Pitsenbarger

William Hart Pitsenbarger (July 8, 1944 – April 11, 1966) was a United States Air Force Pararescueman who flew on almost 300 rescue missions during the Vietnam War to aid downed soldiers and pilots.

On April 11, 1966, Pitsenbarger was killed aiding and defending a unit of soldiers pinned down by an enemy assault during the Vietnam War. Before his death, he helped save over 60 men in the battle. He was posthumously awarded the Air Force Cross, which was later upgraded to the Medal of Honor.

Early life and education
Pitsenbarger was born in 1944 to Irene and William Pitsenbarger. He grew up in Piqua, Ohio, a small town near Dayton. As a junior in high school, he tried to enlist in the U.S. Army as a Green Beret, but his parents refused to give their permission. After he graduated from high school, he decided to join the U.S. Air Force, and on New Year's Eve 1962, he was on a train bound for basic training in San Antonio.

During his basic training in early 1963, he volunteered for Pararescue. Training included the U.S. Army Airborne School, U.S Navy Dive School (SCUBA), survival school, and a rescue and survival medical course. More Air Force rescue training and jungle survival school followed. His final training was in air crash rescue and firefighting. He completed the requirements, and was one of the first group of airmen to qualify for Pararescue right out of basic training. After completing, he was assigned to the Rescue Squadron stationed at the Hamilton AFB, California.

Vietnam War
Pitsenbarger was later sent on Temporary Duty (TDY) to Vietnam. Upon completing his first TDY assignment, he volunteered to return and received orders in 1965 to report to Detachment 6, 38th Air Rescue and Recovery Squadron at Bien Hoa Air Base near Saigon. His unit was composed of five aircrews that flew three Kaman HH-43F Huskie helicopters. His commander, Major Maurice Kessler, called him "One of a special breed. Alert and always ready to go on any mission."

Pitsenbarger completed more than 250 missions, including one in which he hung from an HH-43's cable to rescue a wounded South Vietnamese soldier from a burning minefield. This action earned him the Airman's Medal and the Republic of Vietnam's Medal of Military Merit and Gallantry Cross with Bronze Palm.

On April 11, 1966, the Joint Rescue Center dispatched two Huskies from Detachment 6 to extract a half-dozen or more Army casualties pinned down in a battle near Cam My, 35 mi east of Saigon. Upon reaching the site of the ambush, he was lowered through the trees to the ground where he attended to the wounded before having them lifted to the helicopter by cable. After six wounded men had been flown to an aid station, the two U.S. Air Force helicopters returned for their second load.

As one of the helicopters lowered its litter basket to Pitsenbarger, who had remained on the ground with the 20 infantrymen still alive, it was hit by a burst of enemy small-arms fire. When its engine began to lose power, the pilot realized he had to get the helicopter away from the area as soon as possible. Instead of climbing into the litter basket so he could leave with the helicopter, Pitsenbarger elected to remain with the Army troops under enemy attack and he gave a "wave-off" to the helicopter which flew away to safety. With heavy mortar and small-arms fire, the helicopters could not return to rescue Pitsenbarger.

For the next hour and a half, Pitsenbarger tended to the wounded soldiers, hacking splints out of snarled vines and building improvised stretchers out of saplings. When the others began running low on ammunition, he gathered ammunition from the dead and distributed it to those still alive. Then, he joined the others with a rifle to hold off the Viet Cong. Pitsenbarger was killed by Viet Cong snipers later that night. When his body was recovered the next day, one hand still held a rifle and the other clutched a medical kit. Although Pitsenbarger did not escape alive, the other 60 men did.

He is buried in Miami Memorial Park Cemetery Covington, Ohio.

Medal of Honor award
Soon after Pitsenbarger was killed, his Air Force commanders nominated him for the Medal of Honor. An Army general recommended that the award be downgraded to the Air Force Cross, apparently because at the time there was not enough documentation of Pitsenbarger's actions. Pitsenbarger received the Air Force Cross on June 30, 1966. After review and nearly 35 years later, the original award was upgraded.

On December 8, 2000, at the National Museum of the United States Air Force, the airman's father, William F. Pitsenbarger, and his mother, Alice, accepted the Medal of Honor from Secretary of the Air Force Whit Peters. During the same ceremony he was also posthumously promoted to the rank of Staff sergeant. The audience included battle survivors, hundreds of pararescue airmen, a congressional representative and the Chief of Staff of the U.S. Air Force.

Pitsenbarger was the 59th Medal of Honor recipient, and sixth enlisted recipient, from the Air Force and its predecessor organizations.

Medal of Honor citation
The President of the United States of America, authorized by Act of Congress, on December 8, 2000, has awarded in the name of the Congress the Medal of Honor posthumously to: A1C WILLIAM H. PITSENBARGER

UNITED STATES AIR FORCE for conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity in action at the risk of his life above and beyond the call of duty near Cam My, April 11, 1966:

Rank and organization: Airman First Class, U.S. Air Force, Detachment 6, 38th Aerospace Rescue and Recovery Squadron, Bien Hoa Air Base, Republic of Vietnam.

Place and date: Near Cam My, April 11, 1966

Entered service at: Piqua, Ohio

Born: July 8, 1944, Piqua, Ohio

Citation:

"Airman First Class William Pitsenbarger distinguished himself by extreme valor on April 11, 1966 near Cam My, Republic of Vietnam, while assigned as a Pararescue Crew Member, Detachment 6, 38th Aerospace Rescue and Recovery Squadron. On that date, Airman Pitsenbarger was aboard a rescue helicopter responding to a call for evacuation of casualties incurred in an on-going firefight between elements of the United States Army's 1st Infantry Division and a sizable enemy force approximately 35 miles east of Saigon. With complete disregard for personal safety, Airman William Pitsenbarger volunteered to ride a hoist more than one hundred feet through the jungle, to the ground. On the ground, he organized and coordinated rescue efforts, cared for the wounded, prepared casualties for evacuation, and insured that the recovery operation continued in a smooth and orderly fashion. Through his personal efforts, the evacuation of the wounded was greatly expedited. As each of the nine casualties evacuated that day were recovered, William Pitsenbarger refused evacuation in order to get one more wounded soldier to safety. After several pick-ups, one of the two rescue helicopters involved in the evacuation was struck by heavy enemy ground fire and was forced to leave the scene for an emergency landing. Airman William Pitsenbarger stayed behind, on the ground, to perform medical duties. Shortly thereafter, the area came under sniper and mortar fire. During a subsequent attempt to evacuate the site, American forces came under heavy assault by a large Viet Cong force. When the enemy launched the assault, the evacuation was called off and Airman William Pitsenbarger took up arms with the besieged infantrymen. He courageously resisted the enemy, braving intense gunfire to gather and distribute vital ammunition to American defenders. As the battle raged on, he repeatedly exposed himself to enemy fire to care for the wounded, pull them out of the line of fire, and return fire whenever he could, during which time, he was wounded three times. Despite his wounds, he valiantly fought on, simultaneously treating as many wounded as possible. In the vicious fighting which followed, the American forces suffered 80 percent casualties as their perimeter was breached, and airman William Pitsenbarger was finally fatally wounded. Airman William Pitsenbarger exposed himself to almost certain death by staying on the ground, and perished while saving the lives of wounded infantrymen. His bravery and determination exemplify the highest professional standards and traditions of military service and reflect great credit upon himself, his unit, and the United States Air Force."

Commendations
Staff Sergeant Pitsenbarger has been awarded the following:

Honors and awards
Pitsenbarger was the first enlisted recipient of the Air Force Cross medal, receiving the award posthumously in 1966.

The United States Navy Container Ship MV A1C William H. Pitsenbarger (T-AK-4638) was christened in his honor, but was decommissioned and returned to its original owner in 2008 with the new name Black Eagle.

In addition several buildings have been named in his honor including William H. Pitsenbarger Dining Hall, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio; William H. Pitsenbarger Professional Military Education Center, Beale Air Force Base, California; William H. Pitsenbarger Airman Leadership School, Spangdahlem Air Base, Germany; Pitsenbarger Hall, Randolph Air Force Base, Texas and Pitsenbarger Fitness Center, Sheppard Air Force Base, Texas.

His name can be found on Panel 06E Line 102 of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial.

Civilian authorities have also honored his name. The city of Piqua, Ohio, renamed a recreational park (which includes the municipal swimming pool) the "Pitsenbarger Sports Complex." In 2005, the State of Ohio designated State Route 48 as the "U.S.A.F. Pararescue Memorial Parkway." The highway runs near the hometowns of four pararescuemen who died in service to their country. This includes Pitsenbarger; Sgt. Jim Locker of Sidney, Ohio; Master Sgt. William McDaniel II of Greenville, Ohio; and Airman 1st Class James Pleiman of Russia, Ohio. In addition to being designated Main Street through the city of Dayton—where the Wright Brothers designed their airplane—state route 48 also runs along Miami Memorial Park north of Covington, Ohio, where all four are buried.

Edison Community College in Piqua, Ohio, awards the Pitsenbarger Scholarship to two full-time students per year who can show financial need.

The drill team of the AFJROTC unit at Martinsburg High School, Martinsburg WV is known as the Pitsenbarger Rifles.

The Air Force Association awards a $750 Pitsenbarger scholarship to the top USAF enlisted personnel graduating from the Community College of the Air Force (CCAF) who plan to pursue a baccalaureate degree and submits a competitive award nomination package.

Airlift/Tanker Association Hall of Fame Award for 2012.

In popular culture
The 2019 film The Last Full Measure depicting Pitsenbarger's life stars Jeremy Irvine as Pitsenbarger.

title: William H. Pitsenbarger


text:
List of storms named Blas

The name Blas has been used for eight tropical cyclones in the eastern Pacific Ocean and one medicane in the Mediterranean Sea.

In the Eastern Pacific:
 * Tropical Storm Blas (1980), never threatened land
 * Tropical Storm Blas (1986), did not affect land
 * Tropical Storm Blas (1992), never affected land
 * Hurricane Blas (1998), Category 4 hurricane that paralleled southwestern Mexico before moving out to sea
 * Tropical Storm Blas (2004), never affected land
 * Tropical Storm Blas (2010), remained over the open sea
 * Hurricane Blas (2016), Category 4 hurricane that never threatened land
 * Hurricane Blas (2022), Category 1 hurricane that paralleled the southwestern Mexico coastline causing dangerous surf conditions

In the Mediterranean:
 * Storm Blas (2021), affected the Balearic Islands, Sardinia and Corsica.

title: List of storms named Blas


text:
Talk:Herschel (Mimantean crater)

"Disruption" of Mimas
Almost all info of the crater mentions that its formation "nearly destroyed" Mimas. However, impactor was on the order of 2-3 km across only. Are there any numerical studies which show that this impact was anywhere near destroying or disrupting Mimas? Because I doubt that that was the case.
 * Dear User:193.120.148.177, there is no need for a numerical study to justify a claim that a meteor nearly disrupted Mimas because it is not a numerical statement. If the Cassini probe crashes into Mimas it will come near to disrupting Mimas, just not as near as the body that caused Herschel crater. --Fartherred (talk) 19:14, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Article title
I'm just wondering why this article was moved from Herschel (crater on Mimas) to Herschel (Mimantean crater)? The former seems clear while the latter does not; I have never heard the term Mimantean, and it seems to be a neologism used only on Wikipedia and its mirrors:. Worldtraveller 15:27, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I see it's been moved back: I think this is the most sensible location! Worldtraveller 18:45, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I was trying to rationalise the crater references on the "(lunar crater)" model; thus "(crater on Mars)" became "(Martian crater)", and so on. The Mimas article clearly states the correct (although obscure) adjective is « Mimantean », so...
 * Urhixidur 23:02, 2005 July 20 (UTC)
 * The Wikipedia (and its mirrors) is the only place on the whole of the web (according to Google) that uses that adjective. I think that it's far too obscure to use in an "encyclopedia", hence I tried to remove all references to the word. If there's a reputable source that says otherwise, ie. a popular/reputable book, I'd probably support putting it back in. It's just weird to create a word like that, it would be like replacing lunar with moonian. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 00:22, July 21, 2005 (UTC)
 * Okay, now someone has added that there is no accepted adjective for it, but that one would expect Mimantean would be used. However, I still don't see it on any website out of the Wikipedia, so I still find it inappropriate to use. Mentioning it in the main article (as it is) is fine, but actually using it as such... -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 00:27, July 21, 2005 (UTC)
 * The Mimas article was wrong on the point of the adjectival form - it might be considered correct by some but it's not merely obscure, it's a neologism, unused anywhere except Wikipedia, and most importantly, unused by astronomers, or the arbiters of astronomical nomenclature, the IAU. I feel that it is inappropriate to promote the use of a neologism in an encyclopaedia, which is supposed to be descriptive rather than prescriptive, and so I have removed the reference to the word.  Worldtraveller 11:31, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
 * The term is now accepted by the Cassini Equinox Mission website at JPL. I'll restore the term, but won't object if people feel it's still too obscure. — kwami (talk) 00:04, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I contacted the science writer of the Mimas page at NASA's Solar System Exploration site, which the JPL Cassini site is copied from, and she said that she didn't get "Mimantean" from Wikipedia, but that "I actually heard the term specifically from a Cassini scientist as it has become an acceptable use of the adjective." So. — kwami (talk) 00:07, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Just because an adjective exists does not mean it must be used. Use of: "crater of Mimas" was clear.  I prefer it.  --Fartherred (talk) 01:33, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
 * "Herschel Crater on Mimas of Saturn" was the headline of an article at THE FUTURE OF THINGS. This shows that the adjectival form of Mimas is not required to refer to craters on that moon.
 * This is a quote from WP:Wikipedia is not a dictionary:

"In a few cases, there will be notable topics which are well-documented in reliable sources, but for which no accepted short-hand term exists. It can be tempting to employ a neologism in such a case. Instead, it is preferable to use a title that is a descriptive phrase in plain English if possible, even if this makes for a somewhat long or awkward title."
 * User:Kwamikagami has made over 110 edits in the article listing adjectival forms of the names of astronomical bodies since May 25th, so it is reasonable to suspect that Kwamikagami might not be completely impartial regarding the opportunity to use one of the adjectives that were listed with diligence. While I suppose that these adjectives are highly useful in some cases, I think the article about Herschel (crater on Mimas) is not one of these cases.  Kwamikagami has documented the existence of Mimantean from a primary source that has coined many astronomical names, that is not the issue. --Fartherred (talk) 04:50, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
 * In doing a web search for alternative forms I found 198 results for Mimantean, 44,900 results for on Mimas and 54,700 results for of Mimas. In many cases Mimantean could be substituted for on Mimas or of Mimas, such as "the natural Mimantean color" for "the natural color of Mimas" or "the Mimantean South Pole region" for "the South Pole region of Mimas." Mostly, this substitution has not been made.  Mimantean is still a rare word.  No matter much one knows about astronomy, that person can still understand Herschel (crater on Mimas) at least as well as Herschel (Mimantean crater).  The converse for those poorly informed about astronomy is not true.  So, for the added convenience of the less well informed while causing no harm to the more well informed, I suggest changing the title of the article back to Herschel (crater on Mimas).  I count it no benefit to impress readers with the large vocabulary of our editors and the benefit of instructing readers in the adjectival form of Mimas can best come from the article Mimas (moon). --Fartherred (talk) 23:16, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
 * It's only in the past couple of years that the adj. form has caught on. You're right, it continues to be rare, and work-arounds are frequent, though less so each year. However, people aren't likely to reach this article without passing through Mimas, or an article which discusses Mimas, so I don't think ignorance of the word should be too much of a hurdle. It's not so much a matter of showing off as of precision: using the right word at the right time. NASA and JPL have started using 'Mimantean' where appropriate. I don't think we need to use periphrastic constructions that people were forced to use because they lacked the proper word, now that we have that word. IMO we can certainly follow the example of NASA as they adopt new terminology.
 * There's also Herschel (crater on Mars), which is a redirect to Herschel (Martian crater). Likewise Herschel (crater on Moon) hasn't even been made a redirect to Herschel (lunar crater). — kwami (talk) 02:10, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, kwami, for responding. I got to the Herschel (Mimantean crater) article by way of the Phobos article. It only discussed Mimas to the extent that it identified Herschel as Mimas's crater. I guess that that is sufficient. --Fartherred (talk) 21:54, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

 * I was going to bring this up at Wikiproject astronomy, but if you no longer object, I won't bother. — kwami (talk) 23:12, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Age
Do we have any idea when it was formed? Drutt 11:34, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Dear User:Drutt, Herschel crater on Mimas was discovered by the Voyager space probe program, (http://burro.astr.cwru.edu/stu/advanced/20th_far_voyagers.html) which photographed the crater. The Voyager 2 probe was last at Saturn in August of 1981,(http://www.nasa.gov/worldbook/saturn_worldbook.html) so the Herschel crater must be older than 28 years.  That is probably not a significant fact to put in the article. --Fartherred (talk) 21:32, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Age can be estimated from amount of cratering on floor. Sure it's been done somewhere. — kwami (talk) 23:11, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I would not spend too much time looking for age estimates for Herschel crater on Mimas because I have seen no images with sufficient resolution to do a meaningful crater count. There is a limit to the improvement in resolution that Cassini can get because as the craft gets closer to the moon, the image gets more blurred from the speed of passage.  Cassini has limited fuel and may not be able to slow down enough to get images of the required resolution.  If you find a crater count age estimate, post it. --Fartherred (talk) 12:53, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Size
"It measures 139 km[1] across, almost 1/3 the diameter of the moon;"

According to other sources, the moon is 3,500KM in diameter. Something is wrong here.216.160.181.242 (talk) 16:47, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

title: Talk:Herschel (Mimantean crater)


text:
International Scout

The International Scout is an off-road vehicle produced by International Harvester from 1960 to 1980. A precursor of more sophisticated SUVs to come, it was created as a competitor to the Jeep, and it initially featured a fold-down windshield. The Scout and second-generation Scout II were produced in Fort Wayne, Indiana as two-door trucks with removable hard tops, with options of a full-length roof, half-cab pickup, and/or soft top.

History
International Harvester began building trucks and pickups in 1907. In 1953, International began selling a truck-based people carrier, the Travelall. During the late 1950s, International began to design a competitor for the two-door Jeep CJ 4x4. The 1961 model year Scout 80 debuted in late 1960.

Later, chief designer Ted Ornas recalled: ...the market potential for a four-wheel drive recreational vehicle was an unknown quantity in the early 1950s. The only such vehicle offered in the post-war period was the Willys Jeep, a version of the military jeep produced for World War II. It was a flat-sided bare-bones product, and American military personnel learned to appreciate its ability to maneuver over rough terrain. Sales volume was very low. In early 1958, we were directed to develop a concept proposal to enter this small market. So help me, Mr. Reese, the engineering manager, said 'design something to replace the horse.' There was no product definition to use as a guide. It was even proposed to use the defunct Henry J body tooling. Compound body surfaces were considered too far out for this type of vehicle. The military jeep was thought to have the correct appearance. Our design sketches with the flat-side, no-contour look never excited the executive committee. The program began to die. One night while sitting at our kitchen table (full of frustration and desperation), I dashed off this rough sketch on a scrap mat board. It had contoured sides and was designed for plastic tooling. The next morning it was shown to a committee member. He reviewed it with controlled enthusiasm, but revived interest in the program. We were off and running. Goodyear produced many plastic parts for WWII and formed a large plastic engineering group. We entered a program with them, a scale model was vacuum formed to simulate body assembly. This model received executive approval for appearance. By July 1959, Goodyear completed their costing, and because of the high costs, the plastic program was cancelled. By this time, the contoured design met with executive approval and a decision was made to convert the body design to steel. Starting in late July 1959, a full-sized clay model was completed, and in November 1959, it was approved. It was a remarkable program with fast-paced engineering and manufacturing developments. The total development time of 24 months was a heroic achievement considering the concept was unique and no in-house engine or manufacturing was available or even considered when the program started. The first Scout was introduced in 1960. A concept for its replacement was initiated in 1964 and approved for production in mid-1965. The Scout II was introduced in 1971. The basic sheet metal remained unchanged until production stopped on October 21, 1980. During the 20-year period (1960–1980), 532,674 Scouts were produced. The Scout, introduced as a commercial utility pickup in 1960, set the stage for future four-wheel drive recreational vehicles of the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s.

Print slogans and marketing jingles during the 1970s signaled its appeal in the words, "International Scout: Anything less is just a car."

Line tickets
When an order for an IH vehicle was sent to the factory, a factory plan or construction sheet was created with the new vehicle's VIN or ID number and all the codes for standard equipment and options used by the salesman that issued the order. This sheet was used to assemble the vehicle from beginning to finish. After the vehicle was assembled, shipped, and sold, the so-called line ticket identified the engine type, transmission type, drive line, paint codes, gear ratio, and standard and optional equipment specific to that vehicle. Different parts were used on the same model in the same year. A small copy of the line ticket was attached to each vehicle during the building process at the factory. The location of the ticket varied: 1971–1976 Scout IIs had their copies mounted under their hoods, attached to the cowl cover panels. The 1977–1980 Scout IIs had their copies on the inside of the glove box doors, and 1969–1975 pickups and Travelalls had them attached to the back of the glove boxes; depressing the keeper tabs on each side of the box lets the box swing down to reveal the ticket. If lost, line tickets can be ordered through several Scout parts specialists due to their diligence in maintaining these valuable resources.

Models and variants
Scout models include:
 * Scout 80 (1960–1965): Original standard model.
 * Scout 800 (1966–1971): Same overall design as 80, with upgrades (electric wipers, newer engines, etc).
 * Scout 810 (1971); some early Scout IIs contain Scout 810 badging on the glove box.
 * Scout II (1971–1980): Later standard model with a removable soft or hard top (100-inch wheelbase).
 * Scout II Terra (1976–1980): Light pickup truck model (118-inch wheelbase).
 * Scout II Traveler (1976–1980): Sold with removable fiberglass hardtop and optional third row of seats (118-inch wheelbase).
 * Super Scout II (1977–1979): Sold with removable fabric doors, roll bar, and soft top. The soft-top model was tagged the "SSII" by IH marketing. Eventually, the "SS" letters were assumed to stand for "Super Scout", the name this model is called presently.

80
Scout 80s were built between 1960 and 1965. These models were identifiable by removable sliding side windows in 1960–1961 and even some very early 1962 models, a fold-down windshield, vacuum windshield wipers mounted to the top of the windshield, and an IH logo in the center of the grille and tailgate. The Scout 80 had a gasoline-powered International 152 inline-four as its standard engine.

Red Carpet
The first special package was the "Red Carpet" series, celebrating the 100,000th Scout manufactured by International; only 3,000 were produced. It had a red interior with a white exterior, full-length headliner, full floor mats, and a special silver-plated medallion affixed to the door, which read "Custom". This Scout was a step up from regular models; it was marketed to attract more people and was often advertised with women in mind. Each International dealer in the United States received one Red Carpet Scout for use in parades, in the showroom, and for promotional purposes.

Campermobile

During the early 1960s, International experimented with a camper body permanently mounted to the Scout 80. The roof was raised to nearly double the original height (to allow standing upright inside), tented sleeping bunks folded out from the sides, and the rear of the body was extended significantly. The tailgate/liftgate system was replaced with one large ambulance-style swinging door. Plans included that the unit could be purchased as a stripped-down shell ($960 installed), or as a "deluxe" unit with a dinette set, stand-up galley, and a screened chemical toilet that retracted into the wall ($1850 installed). The May 1963 issue of Mechanix Illustrated contained a full-color advertisement for the Scout Camper on the inside cover, which features two artist's renderings of the unit and a form to fill out and send in for free literature. The camper appeared again in the May 1963 issue of Popular Science, this time in an actual photo as part of a two-page article about pickup campers. Production of these units was low due to limited orders, and they are now rare.

Early 800
It is known that Scout 80s were built in 1965 and the new 800 was developed during 1966. However, some Scouts built later in 1965 are considered Scout 800s, as indicated by their VIN and Line Setting Ticket (LST). An assumed 3000 of these 1965 1/2 Scouts exist. Existing parts were used in piecing together these new 800 models, such as the hood that retained the tie-down loop that would hold down the 80's folding windshield, a feature the 800 lacked. The front grill, also from the 80, featured a gold-plated IH emblem on a black backing piece secured to wire mesh.

A stronger Dana 44 axle was available in the 800 until 1968, though early 800 models only used the 80's weaker Dana 27 axle, which was more prone to axle shafts breaking during heavy off-road use. By 1968, Scout 800s came with 4-wheel drive as standard.

800
The Scout 800 replaced the Scout 80 in 1965 and was built from 1965 to 1968. These models had many improvements in comfort and design, including bucket seats, better instrumentation and heating systems, an updated dashboard, optional rear seats, and an optional International 196 cuin inline-four (from 1966) or International 232 cuin inline-six. Beginning in March 1967, a 266 cuin V8 engine was also offered. Externally, changes were limited to an anodized aluminum grille with a rectangular "International" logo placed on the grille (with the IH badge being moved to the hood), door handles with buttons, and a tailgate without hooks.

The base engine was a naturally aspirated International "Comanche 152" inline-four producing 93 hp, of which a turbocharged version producing 111 hp, the 152-T, was also offered. In August 1966, the 152-T was complemented by the larger 196-4, which used less fuel (being capable of 20 mpg ) with the same power output. The 152-T was discontinued during early 1968. A fold-down windshield was still available as an option, but few were ordered because it was not advertised. The vacuum-powered wipers were moved to the bottom of the windshield frame with the fixed windshield.

Beginning in early 1966, International also offered the Scout 800 Sportop, which had an upgraded interior and a unique fiberglass top (also available as a convertible) with a slanted rear roof and a Continental spare tire kit. The "Champagne Series" Scout was an upscale trim level offered in the Scout 80 and later Scout 800 models that featured a headliner, door panels, and carpet.

800A
The 800A replaced the 800 in November 1968. Improvements included more comfort options, slightly different front end styling, drivetrain upgrades (a heavier rear axle and quieter Dana 20 transfer case), and the engine options of a 196 cuin inline-four, 232 cuin inline-six, 266 cuin V8, or 304 cuin V8. The inline-six was only offered for a short period in early 1969. The 800A's grille was in three segments: the center grill and two matte-black headlight bezels. The Light Line of pickup trucks received bodywork similar to that of the Scout in late 1969.

The 800A could be ordered with the Sportop, and later in Aristocrat and SR-2 packages. The Aristocrat was the final version of the original-bodied Scout. These trucks had a blue vinyl interior, a blue and silver paint scheme, and a chrome roof rack; four-wheel drive was standard for most models.

800B
The last of the 800 series was the 800B, available for less than eight months from August 1970 until March 1971, before it was replaced by the Scout II. Other than minor cosmetic details (notably chrome instead of matte black headlight bezels), it was identical to the 800A. It was only produced until the Scout II entered production.

The 800B was available with the Comanche package. This package included special paint and decals, chrome trim, sliding Traveltop-style windows, and other options such as a roof rack, chrome wheels, and an upgraded interior. In late 1970, the Sno-Star package became available; only available with the six-cylinder engine, it was developed specifically for snowplow usage.

Scout II
Scout IIs were manufactured from April 1971 to 1980. The design was finalized much earlier, with a version nearly identical to the production model shown to management in December 1967.

The Scout II is most identifiable by its different front grilles. The 1971–1972 Scout IIs' grilles had three horizontal bars between the headlights and chrome rings around the headlights. The 1973 Scout IIs had 14 vertical bars between the headlights, a split in the middle, seven bars on each side surrounded by chrome trim pieces, and an "International" badge at the bottom left corner. 1974–75 Scout II grilles added a vertical bar trim overlay to the 1973 design. 1975 grilles had chrome and black square trim rings around the headlights; 1976 had the same headlight trim rings as 1975, and a chrome center grille of 15 horizontal bars split into three sections was used in this year only.

The maximum GVWR of all Scouts, no matter the engine or equipment, was increased to 6200 lb for 1976 so as to avoid having to fit catalytic converters. These did not appear on Scouts until the 1980 model year. 1977–79 Scout IIs used the same grille between the headlight bezels; the new chrome grille had two large horizontal bars and three vertical bars, and the "International" nameplate was moved up to the center of the grille on the left side.

Scout II's could be ordered with the full metal Traveltop, the half-cab Roadster top (now seldom seen), or a soft top.

In 1980, the final year of production for the Scout, the grille used a distinctive single-piece design made of ABS plastic and available in black or silver. Both grille color options had imprinted chrome trim around the headlights and an "International" badge on the left side. Starting with late 1974 Scout IIs, power disc brakes were standard; early 1974 models had disc brakes as a rarely selected option. Very few 1971–1979 Scout IIs were ordered in RWD-only configuration—most were 4WD.

Before International discontinued the Scout in 1980, International experimented with Scout-based minivans, station wagons, dune buggies, Hurst-built special editions (in similar fashion to the Oldsmobile Hurst/Olds and Hurst SC/Rambler), and even a small motorhome. These plans were scrapped due to the International Harvester strike of 1979-80 and a lack of funds for the company to continue production of the Scout, let alone expand the Scout product line. The last IH Scout was produced on October 21, 1980.

Terra and Traveler
The Terra and Traveler were produced from 1976 to 1980. Terras and Travelers had fiberglass tops, with a half-cab for the Terra and a full top with a hatchback-type liftgate on the Traveler. These models were extended by 18 in between the door and the front of the rear wheel well.

SSII
The SSII (Super Scout II) was a stripped-down, off-road version introduced in February 1977. It was intended to compete directly with the Jeep CJ and was built until 1979. It included a soft top with soft doors, windshield-mounted mirrors, plastic door inserts, a unique plastic grille, and a roll bar, among other options. Four sub-models were on offer, from the barebones four-cylinder Rancher Special (the passenger seat was a cost option, as was the soft top and rear bumper) and the slightly more comfortable Brush Buster, to the dressy Sport and Baja Cruiser models. Several SSIIs were champions on the off-road racing circuit during the late 1970s.

Shawnee Scout
The Shawnee Scout was to be a trim type and special-feature package model produced by Hurst Performance. This model was built by dressing up a black SSII with special tomahawk and feather decals, special seats, a black targa-style top, hard tonneau bed cover, and a Hurst shifter. Only three Shawnee Scouts were produced.

CVI models
CVI (Custom Vehicles Incorporated; also associated with Arlington-based Good Times, Inc.) was a company located beside the Fort Wayne Scout Assembly Plant that produced special models for IH dealers in 1979 and 1980. The special models were dressed-up Scouts with unique exterior decals and trim, center console coolers, and hood scoops. Some versions had plastic louvers over the rear side windows, fender flares, and two different plastic tailgate inserts. Model names included the Midnitestar, Terrastar, Travelstar, Shadow, Raven, Green Machine Sport), Gold Medallion Scout, Hot Stuff, Trailstar, Sportstar, 5.6-Liter, 3.2-Liter, and two Classic models.

Selective Edition
This was a special package available from the factory. The 1978–79 package order code on the line ticket was 10992. The package included special gold accent stripes, gold-spoke wheels with Goodyear Tracker A-Ts, SSII black grille insert, and Sport Steering wheel. Different powertrains, interiors, and seats were an option, as were radios, cruise control, tow packages, and air conditioning, all available in exterior colors 1032 Dark Brown, 6027 Dark Blue, 001 Black, or 5013 Green. This package was available on the Traveltop, Traveler, and Terra models.

Spirit of 76 and Patriot
For the US Bicentennial in 1976, IH produced the Spirit of 76 and the Patriot models.

The Spirit of 76 had a special blue soft top, blue/red side applique, blue interior, racing-type steering wheel, and 15x7-inch chrome rally wheels. It was only available for standard Scout IIs. IH data only shows 384 Spirit models ever being built. Line tickets codes included were: The Patriot had a hard top and the same blue/red side applique, but was available for the Scout II, Terra, or Traveler. Sales figures on the Patriot show only one Terra, seven Travelers, and 50+ Scout IIs manufactured with these options. However, another undetermined number of Patriots were built without line ticket code designations (where the applique was applied at the Truck Sales Processing Center), making how many were built difficult to determine. Nevertheless, both models can be considered extremely rare.
 * 10876 for the side applique
 * 18696 to omit the hard top
 * 16928 deluxe interior
 * 16872 blue interior color
 * 9219 winter white exterior paint
 * 885102 10–15 front tires
 * 925102 10–15 rear tires with spare
 * 29091 7-in chrome wheels

Midas Edition
From 1977 to 1980, IH contracted with Midas Van Conversion Co. of Elkhart, Indiana to build special luxury models to be offered through its dealers. These vehicles had swivel bucket seats, shag carpets, color-keyed interiors, door panels, headliners, grille guards, dual sunroofs, overhead clocks, third seats, reading lights, tinted windows, fender flares, and special side appliques and paint designs. Models included the Family Cruiser (or just "Cruiser"), Street Machine, and Off-Road Vehicle. Another company named Van American (based in Goshen, Indiana) offered similar versions to compete with Midas; however, their vehicles were only offered for a brief time, making them currently very rare.

Special Limited Edition
Probably one of the rarest models ever produced by IH was the 1980 Special Limited Edition RS Scout. This version was only available on the Traveler in Tahitian Red metallic paint. Its numerous special features included polycast wheels with Tahitian Red accents, a luxurious plush all-velour russet interior including headliner and visors, special pin striping, a wood-grain trim instrument panel and shift console, chrome bumpers, and tinted glass. Two other special versions offered in 1980 were the 844 and 434 Gold Star models. The 844 offered standard equipment plus a 345 cuin V8, heavy-duty clutch, T428 four-speed manual transmission, 2.72 rear axle ratio, AM radio, rear seat, hub caps, a special black side applique and paint on the lower body, and black carpeting, while the 434 offered standard equipment plus a 4–196 cuin engine, T332 three-speed transmission, a 3:73 rear axle ratio, black vinyl interior, AM radio, rear seat, hubcaps, a special black side applique and paint on lower body, and black carpeting.

Engines
International offered the Scout with a variety of engines over its years of production. The Scout 80 used the gasoline-powered "152" four-cylinder as its standard engine. The 800, 800A, and 800B used the gasoline-powered "196" four-cylinder, AMC "232", "266" six-cylinder, "266" V8, and "304"V8. With the exception of the four-cylinder engines, most of these engines were shared with the International Light Line pick-up trucks and the International Travelall station wagon. A turbocharged version of the "152" four-cylinder engine was offered from 1965 to 1967.

The Scout II had the following engine options: the 196 cuin 4-cylinder, 232 cuin 6-cylinder (early production), 258 cuin 6-cylinder (later production), 304 cuin V8, and 345 cuin V8. International never installed a 392 cuin V8 or an AMC V8 engine into a Scout. At the time, International did not manufacture a diesel engine small enough to be used in the Scout, and so starting in 1976 offered the naturally aspirated Nissan SD33 diesel engine as an option. This engine was replaced by the turbocharged SD33T engine in late 1979 for the 1980 model year.

List of engines

 * IH 4-152
 * IH 4-196
 * IH SV-266
 * IH SV-304 (not to be confused with the AMC 304 V8)
 * IH SV-345
 * IH SV-392

 * AMC 6–232
 * AMC 6–258

 * Nissan SD33
 * Nissan SD33T

Axles and gear ratios
Dana 27 axles were used for the front and rear wheels in the 80 and 800 models until around 1968. Both front and rear differentials were offset to the passenger side for the purpose of lining up the drive shafts with the Dana 18 transfer case. With the transition to the 800A model, the rear axle was upgraded to a Dana 44, with a centered differential mated to a Dana 20 transfer case. Some Scouts from this transitional period use a mix of old and new components, with the rear driveshaft running at an angle. The front axle was still a Dana 27, though a 3500 lb axle upgrade option used a hybrid unit built from a Dana 30 center section and 27 tubes. The V8 engine option included an upgrade to the heavier-duty Dana 30 axle. The rear axle shafts changed from two pieces to one piece around 1968 or 1969. A Power-Lock limited-slip differential was provided as an option for both front and rear axles. Common final drive gear ratios are 3.31, 3.73, or 4.27, though nearly any ratio was available by special order (in at least one instance, a Scout 800 was shipped with a 5.71 ratio).

In Scout IIs, Dana 30 front axles and Dana 44 rear axles were standard until 1974, with Dana 44 front axles as a special option. After 1974, Dana 44 front and rear axles became standard on all Scout IIs. Available gear ratios were 2.72, 3.07, 3.31, 3.54, 3.73, 4.09, 4.27, and 4.54. Track-Lock limited-slip differentials were optional.

Axles originally had a tag bolted to their differential cover stamped with their gear ratio, but this tag often rusted off over time or was removed intentionally. The line ticket can be checked to identify the axle model, gear ratio, and whether it is equipped with a traction device using an International parts code book.

Monteverdi Safari
The Monteverdi Safari was made by Swiss luxury automaker Monteverdi, who used Scout IIs as bases for well-equipped luxurious off-road station wagons. Two models were made during the late 1970s: the Safari, which had most of the bodywork changed, and the Sahara, which featured more limited changes, such as a new grille and a more luxurious interior. Both were available with IH's SV-345 engine or Chrysler's LA 318 (5.7 or 5.2 L). The Safari was also offered with Chrysler's 7.2 L "440 RB" engine, while the lower-priced Sahara retained the Scout's original bodywork and could be had with the Nissan SD33 diesel engine.

Scout III SSV concept
IH developed a concept prototype for the next version of the Scout in 1979 named the Scout III SSV, but due to the company's decision to discontinue the Scout product line, it was never put into production. The second prototype of the concept vehicle is displayed at the Auburn Cord Duesenberg Automobile Museum in Auburn, Indiana. It was a two-door model with a sloped back window, built on a 100 in chassis with a 162 hp V8. The SSV name, standing for Scout Supplemental Vehicle, referred to what would have been a limited-production supplement to the regular model to help promote it, much as the Corvette supplements the Chevrolet brand. While the SSV may have appeared in 1981 if it had reached production, designs already existed for a new model in 1981 to replace the Scout II. Clay models of these designs showed an evolution of the Scout II into a more rounded body resembling the Chevrolet S-10 Blazer.

Case IH Scout
In 2010, Case IH started production of a UTV named the Scout and Scout XL, also sold as the New Holland Rustler. These UTVs were built by Club Car.

Motorsports
Scout SSIIs were awarded honors for off-road racing during the late 1970s. In 1977, an SSII driven by Jerry Boone of Parker, Arizona finished first among 4x4 production vehicles in the Baja 1000. Boone completed the run in 19 hours and 58 minutes, crossing the finish line at Ensenada almost 2 hours ahead of his closest competitor, a Jeep CJ7, and at times ran even faster than Class IV modified 4x4 racers. Only 9 of 21 vehicles that started the race finished the 1000 km course. Boone later revealed that his team only had a month to prepare a stock SSII for the race and were not sponsored by IH until after the race. Boone also won in 1978 at Riverside, California.

Sherman Balch, among many other accomplishments in off-road racing, won the off-road "world championship" in 1977 (the SCORE event in Riverside, California). Three other finishers also drove Scouts. Balch also won the Baja 1000, the Mint 400, and three events in the fall of 1978 at Lake Geneva Raceway. Balch and co-driver James Acker later won virtually all major off-road races in 1982 offered on the West Coast/Mexico circuit in an SSII: the Baja 250, the Baja 500, the Baja 1000, the Mint 400, and the Parker (Arizona) 400.

Revival
In September 2021, a report by Motor Trend revealed that Volkswagen Group may look to revive the Scout nameplate as a potential competitor to the Jeep Wrangler, Toyota 4Runner, and the revived Ford Bronco. VW Group had acquired the Scout trademarks earlier in the year when its commercial truck business Traton acquired Navistar. As VW Group is unlikely to acquire the International Harvester trademarks from Case IH even for a licensing deal, a revived Scout would either be sold under the Volkswagen nameplate as a sub-brand similar to the aforementioned Bronco or as a standalone off-road themed brand similar to Jeep. These rumors were confirmed when in May 2022, Volkswagen announced their intention to produce electric pickups and SUVs - and therefore become a competitor to Rivian and other electric off-road oriented vehicles - built in the United States as Scout Motors under the Scout brand name. The first prototype is expected in 2024, with production models expected by 2026.

title: International Scout


text:
Rogožarski IK-3

The Rogožarski IK-3 was a 1930s Yugoslav monoplane single-seat fighter, designed by Ljubomir Ilić, Kosta Sivčev and Slobodan Zrnić as a successor to the Ikarus IK-2 fighter. Its armament consisted of a hub-firing 20 mm autocannon and two fuselage-mounted synchronised machine guns. It was considered comparable to foreign aircraft such as the Messerschmitt Bf 109E and came into service in 1940. The prototype crashed during testing; twelve production aircraft had been delivered by July 1940.

Six IK-3s were serviceable when the Axis invasion of Yugoslavia began on 6 April 1941. All six were in service with the 51st Independent Fighter Group at Zemun near Belgrade. Pilots flying the IK-3 claimed 11 Axis aircraft had been shot down during the 11-day war. According to one account, to prevent them from falling into German hands, the surviving aircraft and incomplete airframes were destroyed by their crews and factory staff. Another account suggests that one aircraft survived the invasion and was later destroyed by sabotage. The IK-3 design was the basis for the post-war Yugoslav-built Ikarus S-49 fighter.

Background
In the late 1920s, the Royal Yugoslav Air Force (Vazduhoplovstvo vojske Kraljevine Jugoslavije, VVKJ) and the Royal Aero Club of Yugoslavia helped send aspiring aeronautical engineers to France to gain knowledge. It was intended that after this advanced training, they would return to Yugoslavia and be offered specialist roles in the VVKJ or in the aeronautical industry. Ljubomir Ilić and Kosta Sivčev went through this program but, when they returned to Yugoslavia, both were employed in administrative work. Frustrated by this, they decided in 1931 to design a replacement for the Czechoslovakian-built Avia BH-33E biplane fighter in service with the VVKJ. Working in a basement in Belgrade, and later in Ilić's apartment in Novi Sad, they secretly devoted their spare time to work on their design. They originally planned a low-wing monoplane with retractable landing gear. Contemporary thinking within the VVKJ led them to evolve their initial ideas into a strut-braced gull-wing monoplane armed with a hub-firing autocannon and fuselage-mounted synchronised machine guns. The design concept for what became the Ikarus IK-2 was submitted to the VVKJ on 22 September 1933. With this work completed, Ilić and Sivčev had time to start preliminary development of a new low-wing monoplane that could better meet and defeat the high-performance bomber prototypes then in development by potential adversaries.

Design and development
Ilić and Sivčev's new streamlined low-wing monoplane design had a retractable undercarriage. Like the IK-2 it was initially developed privately by the two men. A scale model was tested in the Eiffel-built wind tunnel in Paris, but the pair soon realised that they needed a third engineer to help evaluate the design and determine the structural details. Slobodan Zrnić, the head of construction at the Yugoslav State Aircraft Factory in Kraljevo, was recruited, as he had worked as a specialist aircraft engineer in France. The project name for the IK-2 was changed from IK, standing for (Ljubomir) Ilić and Kosta (Sivčev), to IKZ, to include Zrnić. This name was changed, possibly due to the similarities between the Cyrillic "З" (Z) and the Arabic numeral "3", and the aircraft became known as the IK-3. The aircraft was to be powered by a Hispano-Suiza 12Y29 engine, generating 980 hp at an altitude of 5000 m. The designers favoured manoeuvrability over speed, trying to find a compromise between the German and British concepts of a modern monoplane fighter. The design had a smaller wing area than the Hawker Hurricane and the Supermarine Spitfire, to achieve a higher speed for the engine power. In comparison to the Messerschmitt Bf 109, the Yugoslav design had a shorter fuselage and smaller turning radius. It differed from British and German design concepts in that its proposed armament was concentrated in the fuselage. The designs were delivered to the VVKJ in time for approval by mid-1936, but a general reluctance to adopt new concepts delayed the IK-3, and a contract for the production of the prototype was not signed until March 1937. The company selected for construction was Rogožarski A.D. in Belgrade. The first flight of the prototype was carried out by the VVKJ Test Group towards the end of May 1938 and the aircraft was then flown by a group of VVKJ officers who were to determine the best employment for it within the VVKJ, along with tactics to be used in Yugoslav conditions. These pilots observed that the controls were highly sensitive; the only real criticisms related to the visual distortion caused by the curved panels of the canopy. Some pilots believed that the fuselage-mounted armament should be supplemented by two wing-mounted machine guns. The test pilots also had to compare the performance of the IK-3 with the Hawker Fury (a biplane), Heinkel He 112, Morane-Saulnier M.S. 405 and Hawker Hurricane. They concluded that the IK-3 most closely matched the Morane-Saulnier; the Yugoslav aircraft was 40 km/h faster. In November 1938, the VVKJ placed an order with Rogožarski for 12 aircraft.

On 19 January 1939, test pilot Kapetan Milan Pokorni put the prototype into a steep dive. When he reached 400 m, the windscreen detached from the aircraft; Pokorni pulled up hard and the strain broke off half of the starboard wing. The aircraft crashed, and Pokorni was killed. An inquiry determined that modifications to the windscreen had contributed to the accident. Engineers recalculated the stress factors on the airframe and they were found to be safe, and the main factor had been the pilot's handling of the highly sensitive controls.

The loss of the prototype and some changes in the construction of the production model delayed the fulfilment of the contract. Further tests were conducted on the wing and it was found to withstand a g-force of 14. Modifications were made for the production model, including the use of flat plexiglass panels in the windscreen and the canopy to provide better visibility. The instrument layout was improved and the upper rear fuselage behind the pilot's seat was re-shaped. The folding undercarriage leg covers were replaced by single plates. The main changes were the replacement of the engine with a modified version of the Hispano-Suiza 12Y engine made under licence by the Czechoslovak company Avia and the replacement of the Hispano-Suiza HS.404 cannon by a Swiss-made Oerlikon FF 20 mm cannon. The replacement engine was less powerful, generating 860 hp at 4000 m. German-made Telefunken radios were to be installed but delays meant that only the first aircraft was delivered with a radio. The production aircraft were numbered 2–13; the prototype was number 1. The aircraft were built at the Rogožarski factory in Belgrade and assembled at the company hangar at Zemun. The first six aircraft were delivered by late March 1940; delivery of the rest of the order was delayed until July due to delays by foreign suppliers. The first production aircraft was delivered to the VVKJ Test Group, where it was confirmed that the production aircraft were free of the faults in the prototype. The Test Group determined that the maximum speed, previously estimated at 540 km/h, was 527 km/h, at an altitude of 5400 m. By July 1940, a further series of 25 IK-3s had commenced construction at the Rogožarski factory.

Planned developments
A shortage of engines was a major obstacle to mass production and development of the IK-3, so tests were conducted with more powerful engines, including the Daimler-Benz DB 601, Rolls-Royce Merlin II and Hispano-Suiza 12Y51. The tests were incomplete at the time of the Axis invasion, and the only prototype to be fitted with a non-production engine was deliberately destroyed by factory personnel during the invasion, along with the incomplete production aircraft. Development of a dual-control two-seat trainer variant of the IK-3 had commenced but pressure on the design team had delayed the completion of the project when the invasion intervened.

The development of the IK-3 encouraged the three designers to pursue the idea of a twin-engined fighter, capable of long-range reconnaissance, photographic reconnaissance and operation as a "destroyer" or heavy fighter similar to the Messerschmitt Bf 110. The concept included both one-seater and two-seater versions. Development of this new aircraft, designated IK-5, was commenced on the back of the success of the IK-3. The VVKJ ordered a one-seater prototype in early July 1939, with its first flight scheduled for late 1941. At the time of the invasion, the production of the IK-5 prototype was well advanced, but it was not pursued either during or after the war. The advanced Yugoslav Ikarus S-49 fighter, produced after World War II, was based on the IK-3.

Operational history
When they entered service, the IK-3 suffered from minor equipment and instrument faults, largely caused by deficiencies in the Yugoslav aeronautical industry which had resulted in a mixture of foreign and Yugoslav-made instruments being fitted to the aircraft. The Yugoslav Minister of War approved the acquisition of a further 48 IK-3s to be delivered in 1941–1942. The operational aircraft were allocated to the 51st Independent Fighter Group at Zemun, six each to the 161st Fighter Squadron (Kapetan Savo Poljanec) and the 162nd Fighter Squadron (Kapetan Todor Gogić). The IK-3 was then tested against Yugoslav Messerschmitt Bf 109Es in mock dogfights. The evaluation concluded that the IK-3 had several advantages over the Bf 109E; in particular, the Yugoslav aircraft was more manoeuvrable in level flight, enabling it to quickly get behind a pursuing Bf 109E by making tight horizontal turns.

In its first year of service, an IK-3 was lost when one of the squadron commanders, Kapetan Anton Ercigoj, was making a mock attack on a Potez 25 over the confluence of the Sava and Danube rivers. After passing below the Potez, he went into a climb with the intention of performing a loop. His rate of climb was too steep and the aircraft fell into a spin at low altitude and hit the water. Before the Axis invasion of Yugoslavia in early April 1941, the 51st Fighter Group was placed under the 6th Fighter Regiment, which was responsible for the defence of Belgrade. The 51st Fighter Group was further reinforced the day before the invasion began, with the 102nd Fighter Squadron equipped with Bf 109Es. When the invasion began on 6 April, the two IK-3 squadrons had only three serviceable aircraft each.

The invasion commenced with a wave of 234 German dive bombers and medium bombers attacking Belgrade. Escorted by 120 fighters, the bombers reached Belgrade at 07:00; they were met by the 51st Fighter Group, minus an IK-3 from the 161st Fighter Squadron that had developed engine trouble after takeoff and was unable to engage. The other five IK-3s were the first to meet the initial bomber wave but they were almost immediately attacked by Bf 109Es of Jagdgeschwader 77. The pilots of the IK-3s claimed five German aircraft, and one aircraft from each Yugoslav squadron was lost. Poljanec had claimed a twin-engined bomber and a Bf 109E; when he returned to Zemun in his badly damaged aircraft, he was strafed by a Messerschmitt Bf 110, which further damaged his aircraft and wounded him. After this encounter, only three IK-3s were serviceable, including the one that had developed engine difficulties prior to the first German wave. A second wave of German aircraft arrived over Belgrade at 10:00 and the remaining IK-3s were scrambled with the rest of the 51st Fighter Group but the IK-3 pilots claimed no victories. A joint claim was made during the third German attack at 14:00, a twin-engined bomber by Gogić and another pilot from the 162nd Fighter Squadron. The following day, the IK-3 pilots made five or six sorties against German bomber formations and their fighter escorts, and claimed three bombers between them. At 17:00, Milislav Semiz attacked a tight formation of three bombers; his aircraft received 56 hits from return fire, 20 of which were in the engine and propeller, but he managed to land the aircraft. The return of another IK-3 from the workshops meant that the number of serviceable IK-3s remained at three.

It became difficult to continue activity from the 51st Fighter Group airfield at Zemun due to air attacks, so on 8 April the remaining IK-3s and Bf 109Es flew to an auxiliary airfield at Veliki Radinci, 50 km north-west of Belgrade, where the surviving aircraft of the 6th Fighter Regiment were concentrated. Poor weather made operations impossible until 11 April, when Semiz shot down a Bf 110 that had strafed the airfield. Later that day, Gogić and another IK-3 pilot claimed one Junkers Ju 87 'Stuka' dive bomber each during a patrol. That night, German troops approached within 15 km of the airfield at Veliki Radinci and the following day all remaining aircraft of the 6th Fighter Regiment, including the remaining IK-3s, were burned by their crews. According to aviation writers Dragan Savić and Boris Ciglić, one serviceable IK-3 was captured by the Germans in April 1941 and it was joined by another by the end of June. Both aircraft were located at Zemun, along with 23 other former VVKJ aircraft in working condition that were destined for service with the air force of the Axis puppet state, the Independent State of Croatia. The Germans had used a fence to separate the serviceable aircraft from other aircraft that had been earmarked for scrapping. In late June, while the German guards were distracted listening to news of the invasion of the Soviet Union, local communists, including former VVKJ mechanics, moved the fence. As a result, all the serviceable aircraft were scrapped, including the two IK-3s.

"The IK-3s put up a valiant resistance against the Luftwaffe," wrote William Green, "scoring a number of 'kills' before they were finally destroyed in combat." Aviation writers Šime Oštrić and Čedomir Janić credit the IK-3 pilots with 11 victories, Semiz being the most successful, with four victories.

Operators

 * Kingdom of Yugoslavia
 * Royal Yugoslav Air Force

title: Rogožarski IK-3


text:
List of storms named Boris

The name Boris has been used for seven tropical cyclones in the Eastern Pacific Ocean.
 * Hurricane Boris (1984) – a Category 1 hurricane with no impacts on land that lasted from May 28 to June 18, a total of 21 days, one of the longest lasting hurricanes on record, and one of the longest-lived storms on record for the East Pacific
 * Hurricane Boris (1990) – a Category 1 hurricane whose outer rainbands produced moderate rain in several Mexican states
 * Hurricane Boris (1996) – a Category 1 hurricane that made landfall in southern Mexico causing heavy flooding that resulted in ten fatalities
 * Tropical Storm Boris (2002) – a moderate tropical storm that dumped heavy rains on sections of the Mexican coast
 * Hurricane Boris (2008) – a Category 1 hurricane with no impacts on land
 * Tropical Storm Boris (2014) – a weak tropical storm that struck southern Mexico in early June
 * Tropical Storm Boris (2020) – a weak tropical storm that moved into the Central Pacific without affecting land

title: List of storms named Boris


text: Talk:London's Burning (TV series)

title: Talk:London's Burning (TV series)


text:
List of storms named Bud

The name Bud has been used for eight tropical cyclones in the Eastern Pacific Ocean.
 * Tropical Storm Bud (1978), did not affect land.
 * Tropical Storm Bud (1982), weak, short-lived tropical storm.
 * Tropical Storm Bud (1988), dissipated near the south Mexican coastline.
 * Tropical Storm Bud (1994), weak, short-lived tropical storm.
 * Tropical Storm Bud (2000), paralleled the southwest coast of Mexico.
 * Hurricane Bud (2006), a Category 3 hurricane that did not affect land.
 * Hurricane Bud (2012), a Category 3 hurricane that approached Western Mexico.
 * Hurricane Bud (2018), a Category 4 hurricane that brushed the Baja California Peninsula as a tropical storm.

title: List of storms named Bud


text: User talk:67.101.217.126

title: User talk:67.101.217.126