text:
Talk:Air Transat Flight 236

Fly-by-wire has nothing to do with it
I took the liberty to correct the sentence which stated that the Airbus aircraft was fully fly-by-wire, hence it could not be flown without the engines unless it could rely on the ram air turbine. This statement was misleading, as the most important effect of losing  both engines is not the loss of electrical power (there are backup power sources - batteries, or even the APU when there is some fuel left), but the loss of hydraulic power. All modern 100+ passenger aircraft have hydraulicaly powered flight controls, therefore cannot be flown manually when all hydraulic power is lost. Hence the need for a ram air turbine, to provide limited hydraulic pressure and ensure some (although reduced, and all the more reduced as the aircraft flies slowly) controllability.

Mandarine--81.56.83.86 19:20, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

 * I've taken the liberty of reverting your change, pending you supplying a source. The National Geographic program portrayed the issue in terms of the electrically-powered flight control systems and fly-by-wire was a significant differentiating factor when the first Airbus was built, and continues to be so to a lesser degree today. The way you worded it is to ignore the issue of fly-by-wire and its total dependence on electrical power completely. --Icd 00:06, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

22:59, 20 September 2006 (UTC) Mandarine's revised text is very accurate and preferable to the previous/current. Take care with terminology. "Fly-by-Wire" refers to the electrical command of systems and is low in power consumption, (being based on 28V DC for the A330). For the A330, it is coupled with hydraulics to provide the "muscle" or "power assistance". Large modern aircraft are too large for pilot input to be transferred direct to the control surfaces, hence the need for assistance.

Mechanical command,no assistance required. Mechanical command, hydraulic assist Electrical command, hydraulic assist Electrical command, electrical assist.

Since the electrical command system is a (relatively) low power consumer, in emergency it can be powered by dedicated batteries, thus no reliance on engines or fuel. Regarding the comment about "loss of landing gear brakes", I consider this mis-leading. An hydraulic accumulator dedicated to the brake system, is sized to perform a complete braking action (and is sized to consider the normal leakage of pressure during the period of flight) - this device also provides the pressure to maintain the "handbrake" function, when the aircraft is parked up and without generated power. In this particular incident, wheel brakes made no difference, upon landing. The landing energy was great enough to cause multiple tire burst. With the tire rubber loose on the wheel rim, braking was useless. The photographic evidence clearly show a Circular Segment ground off of one of the main wheels and the tire was utterly destroyed. (I have around a dozen high quality digital photos taken shortly after the landing). (The high landing energy was due to vertical descent velocity, which was also related to forward velocity. Remembering that the pilot had only limited control of the aircraft, the RAT powered only the primary flight controls, so no high-lift surfaces could be deployed. With a single opportunity to land, there was no option for a go-around. Higher forward speed was the pilot's only option for maintaining lift, i.e. controlling vertical descent rate. It can be concluded that the pilot achieved a satisfactory balance between horizontal and vertical speeds,given that the runway was a finite length!)

For the Air Transat aircraft, from the time when it ran out of fuel, the pilot faced the same challenges as for the Gimli Glider, namely no means of assisting the commands. Note: RATs can power either an hydraulic generator or electrical generator, depending on the needs of the aircraft. Whilst many of the current generation commercial aircraft have 3 different hydraulic circuits, new generation a/c have 2 plus an electrical circuit; thus when primary hydraulic power is lost, electrical power is used to control the primary and secondary flight surfaces.

A very early example of the use of current technologies can be found in the late 1940's Bristol Brabazon : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bristol_Brabazon

[User: Aero-Eng] Aero-Eng 22:59, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

From Wikipedia's own ram air turbine article: "A ram air turbine (RAT) is a small propeller and connected generator used as an emergency power source for aircraft. In case of the loss of both primary and auxiliary power sources the RAT will power vital systems (flight controls, linked hydraulics and also flight-critical instrumentation)." [emphasis mine] The issue as far as control goes is not loss of electrical power; it's loss of hydraulic pressure. Even on a fly by wire aircraft, the actual movements of the controls are caused by hydraulics; it's only the commands that are electrical (a notable exception is the A380, which has a backup electrical control system). Without the feeds from the engines, you need something to generate hydraulic pressure, and that's what the RAT does. -Scott Wilson 01:00, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

 * How does the situation the Air Transat flight found itself in compare to an older non fly-by-wire aircraft, e.g. a Boeng 707 which has hydraulic assistance but mechanically linked flight controls? In a no-engine situation, do the controls become completely inoperative, or just very difficult to move? --Icd 00:20, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

 * While this is a bit late, there is a very important fact missing from this discussion. Namely, that the engines themselves will continue to supply adequate hydraulic pressure to power the controls, so long as the airspeed is maintained above some minimum value that is found in the hydraulic systems section of the flight manual for each type/model of airliner.  That is because the engines "windmill" as the plane continues to fly while descending, and the hydraulic pumps connected to each engine will continue to create the necessary hydraulic pressure, above that stated minimum airspeed.  In other words, the engines become giant RATs, once they run out of fuel.  From reading the story of this accident, the pilot kept the airspeed much higher than it would normally be, as part of his calculation of arriving at the proper section of the runway.  If he had chosen to fly much slower, he would have had to try doing additional 360s, so as to dissipate excessive altitude, but that would have been extremely risky, so better to fly a lot faster and land at a very high airspeed, to ensure making it to the runway and still having enough runway left to get the plane stopped, once on the ground.  EditorASC (talk) 23:36, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Dirk Dejager v. Dick Dejager
I changed the First Officers name from "Dick Dejager" to "Dirk Dejager" but was reverted. I have seen (and enjoyed) the National Geographic documentary on this and the name was definitely "Dirk". For some written references which use "Dirk", I can mention Now, I did notice that Air Transat referred to him as "Dick" Very odd. Sjakkalle (Check!)  08:16, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * CTV news reprt
 * CBC news report
 * CNN transcript
 * St. Petersburg Times article
 * Air Transat media centre

Also, a Google Check turns up more on "Dirk Dejager" than "Dick Dejager", and remember that several of the "Dick Dejager" hits are Wikipedia mirrors. Sjakkalle (Check!)  08:18, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Ah, good. Glad to see some sources being brought to the table. A Google search for "Air Transat Flight 236" bring up Dick several times in the top levels, including a CBC news report, confusingly giving a different name to the link you posted. What I presume is happening is that Dejager uses Dick as a diminutive of Dirk (or possibly vice-versa). I think both should probably be noted in the article (i.e. 'First officer Dirk or Dick Dejager') to prevent this issue from coming up again unless someone has a definitive answer. --Scott Wilson 11:02, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I have done as you suggested and added both names to the article. Sjakkalle (Check!)  12:54, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Knots (or Nautical Miles) vs. Kilometers (per Hour)
Parts of the article have information in knots (or nautical miles, or even feet), while other parts have meters, kilometers, km/h, etc. Consistency here (such as giving equivalents) would seem to be in order. 169.199.130.146 17:23, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Perhaps air speeds are given in knots, whereas ground speeds are given in km/h ? Icd 00:39, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

 * When the term is applied to the AIRSPEED of the plane, the correct nomenclature is "knots." When the term is applied to some specified distance, "Nautical Miles, Statute Miles or Kilometers should be used.  Ground speed of the plane should still be stated in "knots."  That can, and should be further refined as to WHAT KIND of speed is being discussed:

 * KTAS is "knots true airspeed", the airspeed of an aircraft relative to undisturbed air
 * KIAS is "knots indicated airspeed", the speed shown on an aircraft's pitot-static airspeed indicator
 * KCAS is "knots calibrated airspeed", the indicated airspeed corrected for position error and instrument error
 * KEAS is "knots equivalent airspeed"

 * EditorASC (talk) 00:02, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Removed reference to "lukewarm response"
This has been tagged since May and no one has come up with a source, so I have removed it. Harry was a white dog with black spots 16:51, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Removing unfounded assertion related to context of accident
The assertion, “It was discovered that the technician who worked on the engine had reported to his supervisor/manager that there was a problem with the part and that it did not fit properly. The supervisor/manager insisted that the incorrect part be used rather than wait for a new proper part to arrive,” is false and should be removed from the entry. That assertion originates from hearsay reported as fact, without proper verification, by the Toronto Globe and Mail daily newspaper in its September 3, 2001, issue. It is based on declarations allegedly made by a union official employed by another airline, and possibly further distorted. The union official later confirmed he had been misquoted, as reported in the Montreal daily newspaper La Presse of September 6, 2001. On September 5, the Globe and Mail retracted its September 3 piece, in another article relating an entirely different version of the events—which, as it happened, was also largely erroneous. Following representations by Air Transat, a further article summarizing the entire case was published by the Globe and Mail on September 7 ignores the versions published earlier on the 3rd and 5th. It should be noted that in the same timeframe, the New York Times picked up the story that ran in the Globe and Mail on September 3 (with appropriate attribution), which contributed to disseminating an erroneous version of the events (the NYT is quoted as a reference in the Wikipedia entry). From the start, Air Transat has been on record as firmly denying the aforementioned allegation, as early as September 3, 2001, only hours after the initial Globe and Mail story appeared, through such means as a news release and public statements, which were abundantly reported by the media. Air Transat’s position was further vindicated when the investigation report was published in October 2004, providing confirmation that the allegations in the September 3 and 5, 2001, issues of the Globe and Mail were false and groundless. It should also be noted that the initial story relied heavily on assertions that the alleged conversation between the technician and the supervisor had been taped, whereas: 1) the reporter confirmed in conversations with Air Transat (on September 4) that he had had no access to the tape and had no information on its contents, and that the union official had confirmed he had not been in possession of the tape and had not listened to it (in other words, at the time of publication, the reporter was unable to confirm either the tape’s existence or its contents); 2) the union formally backed Air Transat’s version in a press release and in media statements on September 3, all of which were widely reported in the media; 3) the Globe and Mail stated in its September 5 piece that it had been “unable to confirm the existence of the tape claimed to exist by [the union official],” thus confirming that the initial reporting was essentially based on single-source, unverified hearsay. Given that the union official retracted his version of the facts and that the Globe and Mail disavowed its September 3 and 5 versions, and taking into account the results of the investigation, the version of events related in the above-quoted assertion is not only false, but, as of September 7, 2001, had no proponents.

--Michel lemay (talk) 20:59, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
 * The official report confirms your position (pages 48-50). The whole thing was much more complex than given here are in "Mayday", but no interference of superiors is reported. One would wish that stuff was color coded to make mixups more visible to independend inspections ... JB. --84.186.154.31 (talk) 02:03, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Mayday vs emergency
The following text appears in the article:

At 05:48 UTC, an emergency was declared with Santa Maria Oceanic air traffic control because of fuel shortage. At 06:13 UTC, 28 minutes after the emergency declaration and 135 miles (217 km) from Lajes[3], engine no. 2 on the right wing flamed out, exhausted of jet fuel. Captain Piché then ordered full thrust from engine no. 1 on the left wing, and the plane descended to 33,000 feet (10,000 m), unable to stay at its 39,000 feet (12,000 m) cruising altitude with only one engine operating. At 06:23 UTC, Mayday was declared with Santa Maria Oceanic air traffic control.

However, as fair as I know an emergency is pretty much the same as a mayday. Therefore can anyone confirm it went in this order, or was the first one an urgency (pan pan pan) instead of an emergency (mayday)? --80.101.66.150 (talk) 17:17, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

 * To answer that question ... reading the official findings ... @5:48 UTC the crew informed Santa Maria about the need to divert because of a fuel problem. No official emergency declaration was made at that time. Later, @6:23 UTC it went directly to Mayday ... 3 minutes later they lost the remaining engine and became a glider ... Don't want to think about all this happening an hour ealier and a nightly ditch into the drink. JB. --84.186.154.31 (talk) 01:42, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Why is this in British English?
Sorry if I've caused confusion with spelling changes, but shouldn't this if anything be in Canadian English? I'm not that fussed so do revert me if you like (but watch out for "beause") - but I don't quite get it, is all. Best wishes DBaK (talk) 15:05, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

 * I added a couple of corrections because the template at the top of this talk page specifies that the article is/was written in British English. Why it was added I don't know.

 * And AFAIK, the term 'aeroplane' is still the current Canadian aeronautical usage, although whether people outside the aviation field in Canada use 'airplane' or not, again I don't know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.4.57.101 (talk) 10:15, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

 * Yeah, sorry, I jumped in and messed up what you were doing before I realized what was going on. It's a touch baffling. And yes re "aeroplane" but apparently this is a massive can of worms here so I will not be starting on that any time soon! :) DBaK (talk) 20:26, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Subsequent ADs realted to A330s and A318/319/3202/221s
The aircraft in this incident was an A330 ("The aircraft was an Airbus A330 manufactured in 1999..."), so why is it relevant that "The incident also led to the Directorate General for Civil Aviation (DGAC) and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) issuing an Airworthiness Directive,[7] forcing all operators of Airbus model A318-100, A319-100, A320-200, A321-100, and A321-200 Series aeroplanes; and Model A320-111 aeroplanes to change the flight manual, stressing that crews should check that any fuel imbalance is not caused by a fuel leak before opening the cross-feed valve."? Shouldn't there be some reference to any ADs related to the A330? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.61.25.254 (talk) 20:54, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

 * This is also not clear to me (and was the main reason I came to the Talk page). However, there was an Airworthiness Directive directly related to the Air Transat 236 incident: "The French airworthiness authority DGAC issued Airworthiness Directive 2002-548(B) on November 13, 2002, Fuel Leak Procedure, which is applicable to AIRBUS A-330 aircraft. The AD amends the A-330 FUEL LEAK procedure. This AD became effective on November 23, 2002." Refer to https://lessonslearned.faa.gov/ll_main.cfm?TabID=2&LLID=73&LLTypeID=11. I shall try to somehow correct the relevant article section. Cangelis (talk) 15:58, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Confusing or unclear section
We still have a tag concerning a "confusing and unclear section". Me not being an aviation expert, the section following that tag is for the most part clear enough and not that confusing. Maybe the only thing that's not obvious for me as a layman is why "the increased fuel flow would cause both the drop in oil temperature, as well as the rise in oil pressure" (but it might be too much of a diversion to explain this in greater detail in the article). All other things, the cross valve procedure, the flame-outs, etc. are IMHO described in a way that anyone can see what is meant. If someone thinks that the section is still confusing to him, I think he or she should specify that. --Proofreader (talk) 11:22, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree. I think the tag can be removed. Julianhall (talk) 21:35, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Number of people on board...
The lede refers to:
 * "...all 306 people (293 passengers and 13 crew) on board".

However the article used as the source states that there were:
 * "...291 passengers and a crew of 13".

Clearly there is something wrong somewhere! I suspect that there were 306 people in total; made up of 291 passengers, 13 crew members (meaning flight attendants), and the two pilots (who are obviously crew too, but someone has become confused?). Can someone who is more knowledgeable about this incident please fix the Wiki article? Unless it is the reference article which is incorrect, in which case it probably should be replaced with a new one? Further down in the article it states that:
 * "...There were 293 passengers and thirteen crew members on board".

So that probably needs fixing too, as does the Infobox... FillsHerTease (talk) 23:24, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

 * The cited source is inaccurate on that detail. The official accident report gives the 306 figure, and I consider that much more reliable. News stories are sometimes slightly off on such matters, even if the broad picture is correct. Sjakkalle (Check!)  20:11, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

Sugarcoating ?
Where the article describes the development of the crisis it sounds as if the crew did everything right ("standard operating procedure"). This description might be based on the "Mayday" movie instead of the findings of the investigation. Now that we have the official findings I don't see how such a representation is sustainable. As can be read there the "standard operating procedure" would have called for the crew to regularily read the ECAM messages which they accessed only once at the beginning of the flight. In those messages they would have been able to read about automatic compensating fuel transfers from the trim tank (a merry 3.5 metric tons) which could have alerted them 20 minutes earlier to the problem, maybe even earlier then that. It is also interesting to read (page 57) that they left the crossfeed open after the right engine flamed out so that fuel from the good left side continued to drain out at the right at up to 10x the rate an engine would normally consumate. Nobody ever closed the crossfeed ... and so on. I'm not out to cruzify anybody, I have no horse in that race, but if Wikipedia is science and not fiction the reality needs to become clear to the reader. Yes, later on, somewhere down the page there is indeed a mention that the report found the crew at fault but at least I believe that this is a location which half the readers might miss and it is also brushed over right away as is mentioned in the same sentence that the crew came out as heros ... right - first you help creating a problem and then you are a hero when you help solving it ... sorry. I think we are in the area of normal human errors here. In my eyes these guys are not villains and not heros but entirely normal people on a not so good day at the office. Their decision to open the crossfeed was not the brightest as they didn't make sure that there's no leak. Their omission to close the crossfeed after having got glaring demonstration that there actually IS a leak ... sorry again. "Mayday" didn't have the facts, so their reproduction is not entirely in sync with the real facts (in this particular case). JB. --84.186.154.31 (talk) 01:24, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

 * The only real fault of the crew, who based their actions on what was known to them at the time, is that they failed to consider the possibility of a genuine fuel leak until it was too late to save the remaining fuel by closing the fuel cross-feed cocks. At the time of the accident the electronic flight management system was relatively new and the crew suspected a failure in the system or sensors, leading them to discount the diminishing fuel contents reading, suspecting it was erroneous. After following the correct procedure for a fuel imbalance, they then after discovering the fuel imbalance was not being corrected by the transfer of fuel from the other wing, neglected or forgot to re-close the cross-feed cocks, possibly because it was not until the second engine flamed out they realised they had actually been losing fuel. If their initial diagnosis of misleading data had been correct then leaving the cross-feed open would have had no ill-effects. So, while their actions were to lead to the emergency, there were seemingly good reasons for doing what they did.

 * The crew, despite their (perhaps understandable) error, successfully got the aeroplane safely back on the ground with all its passengers unharmed, and the aircraft undamaged except for a few burst tyres. And ultimately, that's all that ever counts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.149.172.235 (talk) 12:16, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

 * It appears, that the crew's omissions were not limited to not considering the possibility of a genuine fuel leak. I did not read the official report, but having no reason to doubt JB, there is clear mention of not following standard procedure to regularly check ECAM messages. Not checking for a leak and not shutting down the crossfeed after first engine flame out (whether part of standard procedure or not) are actions that may clearly be considered as crew errors. There is room for further looking into crew actions and article review. For this reason, I shall make a small addition in the article, to initiate a discussion and review.
 * What is more, the comment above (dated Nov 23rd 2018) distorts facts. There were not good reasons for what [the crew] did, there are good excuses. There is not only one real fault of the crew, but probably a series of mistakes. If their initial diagnosis had been correct.. but it was not. The aircraft was not undamaged (but instead sustained landing gear and fuselage structural damage). The crew's job is not only to successfully maneuver the aeroplane, which the pilot obviously did, but to be fully in control of its systems and the overall situation. Cangelis (talk) 15:44, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

"Marco Scocco" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Marco_Scocco&redirect=no Marco Scocco] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. Utopes (talk / cont) 03:53, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Air Transat Flight 236


text:
Former Shu

Great Shu, known in historiography as the Former Shu or occasionally Wang Shu (王蜀), was a dynastic state of China and one of the Ten Kingdoms during the Five Dynasties and Ten Kingdoms period. It existed from 907 to 925 CE.

The country's name changed from "Shu" to "Han" in 917–918, which is not to be confused with another contemporaneous kingdom during the same Five Dynasties and Ten Kingdoms period, the Southern Han, 917–971 CE.

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

title: Former Shu


text:
Category:Sorcerer Hunters

Articles relating to the manga and anime series, Sorcerer Hunters.

title: Category:Sorcerer Hunters


text:
Milky seas effect

Milky seas (Somali: Kaluunka iftiima; English: Milky seas), also called mareel, is a luminous phenomenon in the ocean in which large areas of seawater (up to 6000 mi2) appear to glow translucently (in varying shades of blue). Such occurrences glow brightly enough at night to be visible from satellites orbiting Earth.

Mariners and other seafarers have reported that the ocean often emits a visible glow which extends for miles at night. In 2005, scientists announced that for the first time, they had obtained photographic evidence of this glow. It is most likely caused by bioluminescence.

Effect
Between 1915 and 1993, 235 sightings of milky seas were documented, most of which are concentrated in the northwestern Indian Ocean near to Somalia. The luminescent glow is concentrated on the surface of the ocean and does not mix evenly throughout the water column.

In 1985, a research vessel in the Arabian Sea took water samples during milky seas. Their conclusions were that the effect was caused by the bacterium Vibrio harveyi. Mareel is typically caused by Noctiluca scintillans (popularly known as "sea sparkle"), a dinoflagellate that glows when disturbed and is found in oceans throughout much of the world. In July 2015, at Alleppey, Kerala, India, the phenomenon occurred and the National Institute of Oceanography and Kerala Fisheries Department researched it, finding that the glittering waves were the result of Noctiluca scintillans. In 2005, Steven Miller of the Naval Research Laboratory in Monterey, California, was able to match 1995 satellite images with a first-hand account of a merchant ship. U.S. Defense Meteorological Satellite Program showed the milky area to be approximately 15400 km2 (roughly the size of Connecticut). The luminescent field was observed to glow over three consecutive nights.

While monochromatic photos make this effect appear white, Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute scientist Steven Haddock (an author of a milky seas effect study) has commented, "the light produced by the bacteria is actually blue, not white. It is white in the graphic because of the monochromatic sensor we used, and it can appear white to the eye because the rods in our eye (used for night vision) don't discriminate color." In Shetland (where generally caused by Noctiluca scintillans), mareel has sometimes been described as being green, rather than the traditional blue or white milky seas effect seen by the rest of the world. It is not known whether this difference depends on the area, or simply a perception of a cyanic colour as being green.

Etymology
The phenomenon is known as mareel in Shetland. This term is derived from the Norn word *mareld, which is itself derived from the Old Norse word mǫrueldr, which is a compound of marr (mere, sea) and eldr (fire).

In the Somali language it is called “Kaluunka Iftiima”. The term translates to glowing sea creatures or glowing fish as the word Kaluun refers to any bio organism that lives in the sea. It is most commonly used to refer to fish.

title: Milky seas effect


text:
Talk:Coronation Street/Wrongdoers and criminals

Wrongdoers and criminals
Joe Donelli - This GI, who appeared from 1967-1970, threw fellow GI Steve Tanner down a flight of stairs, and on 12 December 1970, he shot himself dead.

Frank Riley - This man was an escaped prisoner who tried to sexually attack Valerie Barlow, and was later on arrested by the police.

Roy Johnson - Battered his wife to death in Len Fairclough's kitchen.

Alan Bradley - This nasty turned up after his wife was hit and killed by a car. He beat his partner, Rita Fairclough, stole the deeds to her house, and even tried to kill her at one point. On 8 December 1989, he was hit and killed by a Blackpool tram.

Greg Kelly - Wife beater who ended his time on the street by fleeing with Sally Webster's credit cards.

Jez Quigley - Murdered Tony Horrocks, then beat Steve McDonald after the man testified against him. He was murdered by Jim McDonald.

Richard Hillman - He let business partner Dougie die, killed his wife with a blow to the head with a spade, set Audrey Roberts's house on fire, killed Maxine Peacock and died after his car ran into a canal.

Maya Sharma- She first appered as a laywer that Roy and Haley Cropper consulted about the adoption of Tracey Barlow's child. She ended up fired from her job for "professional misconduct" (sleeping with one of her clients). As she was dating shopowner Dev Alahan, she moved in with him. While they were dating, Dev's ex, Sunita Parek was still working for him at his Weatherfield shop and living in the flat above it. This annoyed Maya as she felt that it wasn't good for Dev's ex girlfriends to be around. Maya also found out about Dev's other engagements and confronted him about it as he hadn't told her. When Tyrone's dog was irritating her, she gave him to Chesney Brown but led Dev on a pointless hunt to find him (she wanted to get intimate with Dev in his car). When Dev was ill, Sunita showed a lot of concern for him which angered Maya to the point of telling Sunita off for it. Dev would recover but Sunita would fall ill (to a brain tumor) and Dev would show a great amount of concern for her, during this time Sunita and Maya became friendly. However when Dev realized that he still loved Sunita he broke up with Maya and began seeing Sunita. Maya wasn't happy about this and proceeded to trash Dev's apartment. When Dev and Sunita got engaged, Maya actually snuck into Sunita's apartment and stole her birth certificate while Dev and Sunita were at their engagement party. When they got married, they were both arrested for running an illegal marriage scam for immigrants. Maya had married several men using Sunita's birth certificate and while Dev was released, Sunita was kept in jail for a period of time but Dev and Sunita's mother managed to prove that she was innocent and Sunita was freed and Maya went to jail. However, Maya was released on bail and proceded to top her previous efforts to hurt Dev and Sunita's relationship. She started by blowing up all seven of Dev's shops, one at a time. She chained Dev and Sunita to a gas cooker in the flat about Dev's Weatherfield shop and started a fire in the shop below. She also locked and barricaded the doors to the flat so they could not escape. However Dev and Sunita were rescued by Cieran McCarthey and Charlie Stubbs and managed to get out of the burning building in time. When Maya saw this, she tied to run them over with her car but crashed into the viaduct, a truck then crashed into her car and while she was alive at the time, it is not known whether she is deceased or not.


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hawk-mo

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 23:18, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

Hawk-mo
Imaginary Haircut. I was very close to speedying under nonsense or nn, but I wanted to see what you all think. Karmafist 19:22, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete at normal speed This in no way fits any CSD criterion . It is, however, a dicdef, which wiki is not WP:ISNOT --CastAStone 20:01, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
 * It is referred to in the mohawk hairstyle as a "reverse mohawk". "Hawk-mo" is just silly. Punkmorten 20:31, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
 * -Punkmorten: I didn't see it in there, but I didn't check the article history.
 * -CastAStone: I disagree with you there, Websters barely put in "Chick Flick". Hawk-Mo is a neologism at best, jibberish at worst. Karmafist 22:38, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Delete. Neologism, dicdef.  And not imaginary:  I shaved a strip front-to-back through my Afro when I was a hippie living in a house full of hardcore punks with traditional mohawks.  Barno 18:59, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
 * The haircut might have existed before, but did the phrase exist before? That's what I meant by imaginary -- i've heard it been called a "reverse mohawk" before. Karmafist 20:51, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Agreed, my friends used the terms "no-hawk" and "reverse mohawk", but never "hawk-mo". The term is imaginary, as is the need for this article, but the hairstyle itself is real (albeit non-notable).  Barno 19:27, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.

title: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hawk-mo


text: User talk:88.111.111.63

title: User talk:88.111.111.63


text: User talk:82.43.172.25

title: User talk:82.43.172.25


text:
Talk:Roxanne Wars

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 24 January 2019 and 17 May 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Colinrung.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 08:24, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Article originally created by Eric B
(Was not logged on when the post was originally made, though).

After seeing the Bridge Wars article (even fixed it up and added to it a bit), I felt the Roxanne Wars had to be included as well, because it was the biggest saga of all, and prefigured the Bridge war, and included some of its key players, such as Roxanne Shante. I have included the 12 "Roxanne" records I have personally heard (from the original "Roxanne, Roxanne" to "Roxanne, Roxanne, Pt. 2: Calling Her a Crab"). I remember much of the battle by memory, and have also researched some of the records online to find out as much as I could about them (like the exact artist names). I could not find any information on the "Little Ice" record (which I only heard a clip of once), or the name of the Doug E. Fresh produced performers of the "The Show" response "No Show" [Found: Symbolic Three-No Show b/w We're Treacherous 12" (reality); source: http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474976750507 Eric B 02:49, 11 September 2007 (UTC)] . I have never heard stuff like "Roxanne's Dog", or any of the other alleged dozens of records. If any one has any information on all that other stuff, please add! These are the sites where some of the records are sold or at least mentioned, and you can even see pictures of the labels on some of them:

http://www.zeiger.franken.de/Labels/12/12_Warlock.html

http://www.hiphop-network.com/articles/mcarticles/raplist.asp

http://www.hiphopsite.com/?p=%2Fsearch%2F%3Fartistid%3D3A208576-3482-4F86-A5C2-3685C02052F5

http://members.aol.com/ProfQuater/Fun.html -includes many other silly 'rappin' records

http://www.goodmoverecords.com/en-gb/dept_58.html,

http://www.formic.de/shop/product/SIN-2007.html

http://www.cheebadesign.com/personal/mp3_09-14-04.txt this site offers upon request mp3s of "Roxanne's Parents", "Rappin Roxy", the intrumental "doctor j.r. kool - rap your own roxanne" from "the Complete Roxanne" album, and UTFO's "Roxanne's Backside, scratch it"; and they also have another one called potato chips - roxanne's real fat.mp3, which I have never heard of.

http://kyleewyote.tripod.com/raplist.html This site has a bunch of the records, including two more I am not familiar with: The East Coast Crew - The Final Word-No More Roxanne and Zelee - No More Roxanne. I have also never heard of any other Roxanne impersonator beside the two who were famous, though there are frequent mentions of all these other "Roxannes".

Eric B

Great article, Eric B.!
Though this isn't directly related to the "Roxanne Wars", it might also be fitting to mention that Roxanne Shante was involved in a beef with MC Lyte ("Steady F---king" is a pretty direct assault on Shante, including some scathing comments on her looks & career.)

---Buddy-Rey

 * Thanks! I didn't even know about that beef. I know JJ Fad got into it with her, and then her final thing going after Latifah and Monie. She was dissing everyone, while IMO, her responses to the people who dissed her first for no cause-- Sparky D and KRS, were weak.Eric B 01:15, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

What about the songs 'I don't wanna know' by Mario Winans feat. P.Diddy answered with'You should really know' by The Pirates feat. Shola Ama? Does that count as a Roxanne War style of thing? If so does anyone who knows, wanna add it on? Cheers --Djjazzyjeff69 20:12, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Correction!!!!
Adeladia Martinez and JoAnne are the same lady...it was Elise Jacks who recorded Full Force's official response to "Roxanne,Roxanne" the song of course being titled as "The Real Roxanne" and being billed as Roxanne w/UTFO...however Elise did record the response she did not become the Official Real Roxanne, Elise soon left The Full Force camp and was replaced by a young Puerto Rican lady named Adeladia JoAnne Martinez who in turn would become the official and final Real Roxanne, JoAnne's first recorded release was actually "Romeo pt 1" & "Romeo pt 2" which was released in 1985 alongside her DJ Hitman Howie Tee.

 * Thanks for that info! I know it changed somewhere, and had heard about a replacement early on, but coundn't find any info on it. It seems to have been forgotten. I remember when the Romeo singles first came out, she just didn't sound the same. More of a "harder" edge to her voice, where the original was softer. And it did seem the first one sounded more black then hispanic. (Wonder why she changed her name to "JoAnne", then). Do you have any sources?Eric B 01:15, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

New entry needed?
Towards the end of the article there is a large bidy of information that is interesting and noteworthy, but not really related to the 'Roxanne War'. Perhaps a 'Answer Record' entry needs to be created? Es-won 13:38, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Original research tag
I tagged this article because it's thin on sourcing, particularly reliable sources. I think the goal should be something along the lines of the LL Cool J vs. Kool Moe Dee feud article, which is well sourced. Xymmax So let it be written   So let it be done  15:32, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Removed section from article - The Answer Record
I took this section out of the article because it really was off topic from the article. If it can be properly referenced perhaps it can be a stand alone article. In the alternative, perhaps the entire article could be about answer records, with Roxanne Roxanne being the most notable one. Again this would need to be sourced, for the time being I'm just throwing it out there for people to consider. Here's the removed section:

 * ''At the height of the Roxanne war the trend of answer records spread to other hip-hop hits; however, none produced nearly as many responses. The first three sagas (especially the second and third) bore a striking resemblance to the Roxanne war, as they involved women responding to men over supposed disrespect towards women:

 * '' Right toward the end of the Roxanne saga, Doug E. Fresh's "The Show" and its B-side "La Di Da Di" were big hits in the summer of 1985. They were answered by "The Showstoppers," which was the first record performed by Salt-N-Pepa, at the time using the name Super Nature. Just like with "The Real Roxanne," Doug. E. Fresh and/or his record company (Reality/Fantasy) followed with a self-answering record "No Show" performed by a group called Symbolic Three. Roxanne Shanté even got involved in this one, in what was probably an early live extended version of "Def Fresh Crew," where she and the debuting Biz Markie go into a spoof of "La Di Da Di" called "Wash Your Body." She ends this show telling Biz, "Let's dis Sparky D, now." The rhythm of "Def Fresh Crew" was itself made to resemble "La Di Da Di."

 * ''* The Boogie Boys' "Fly Girl," in which they outline what they like and don't like in girls, was answered by Pebblee Poo's "Fly Guy," in which she portrayed them as bummy and then outlines what she as a real fly girl is like, and what she likes in guys. The Boogie Boys' follow up, "You Ain't Fresh," may possibly have been an indirect counterresponse.

 * ''* LL Cool J's "Dear Yvette" criticized a girl whose reputation was apparently so bad "the reverend in the church said you was barred," was answered by "E-Vette's Revenge," which was performed by E-Vette Money and produced by Kydd Fresh, who had come from the group Dr. Rocx & Co. (see above). This was perhaps the first of a long string of records to dis LL Cool J.

 * ''* Kydd Fresh would then go on to offer his own answer to LL; "It's a Walkman," which poked fun at LL's "I Can't Live Without My Radio." Emcee Steady B also responded to this hit with "Take Your Radio," in which he claimed to rob LL of his prized possession because "you was a sucker."

 * ''* LL Cool J himself would soon afterward enter a long standing battle with emcee Kool Moe Dee.

 * ''* Hip-hop pioneer Kurtis Blow stepped in with a reference to both the Roxanne and Yvette battles in his 1986 track "I'm Chillin'," which addressed the increasing amount of disrespect towards women in hip-hop songs.

 * ''* Jazzy Jeff and the Fresh Prince answered their own "Girls Ain't Nothing But Trouble" with "Guys Ain't Nothing But Trouble," performed by a woman named Ice Cream Tee, who would be signed by Jazzy Jay]’s and [[Rocky Bucano’s Strong City Records.

 * ''*TLC's 1999 song "No Scrubs," which put down good-for-nothing men, was answered by the hip-hop group Sporty Theivz' single "No Pigeons," which similarly attacked women as being fake and leeching off of men. But unlike the other male-female battles, it was the women who insulted the men first, with them responding.

 * ''*Eamon's 2003 song "Fuck It (I Don't Want You Back)" was answered in "F.U.R.B. (Fuck You Right Back)" by Frankee, who claimed to be Eamon's ex.

 * ''* In 2007, U.T.F.O. appeared on Nas' "Where Are They Now? [80s Remix]," in which Kangol Kid raps that his girlfriend of 20 years cheated on him: "she tried to take the house, the kids, the pots and pans ... nigga fuck Roxanne!"

Xymmax So let it be written   So let it be done  15:44, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Peace to Eric B for his contributions!
This is Sparky D producer Spyder D. I was there, obviously for all of this. One inaccuracy I would like to point out, is, UTFO was down with us, as we were all with Rush Productions, so there is no way they were unhappy with Sparky's response to Shante. In fact, on my myspace page comments, Kangol Kid thanked me for being a positive influence in his career. Select Records president Fred Munao might not have been happy because he turned our production down, and didn't want our release out before the one they were working on with Elease! That is the real story! I was there. I was the one to ask Sparky and Shante to put on the boxing gloves, and it was way before they did the Round 1 album. That photo was used in the promotion of their first live battle at Dorton Arena in North Carolina, in May of 1985, and marked the first time two female rappers ever headlined an arena and sold it out!Just wanted to set the record straight! Peace out- Spyder D for Spydo Music.Spydomusic (talk) 14:08, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
 * This is amazing @Spydomusic. It's been nearly 20 years since you posted this. I'm a professor teaching hip-hop at UAlbany upstate. If you're still editing or reading your messages, thank you! sheridanford (talk) 21:29, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Add content from citations for WikiEdu HH50 Sp2024
Hey Bomb Squad of Gender, there are no citations from scholarly sources in this article. Here's a list of articles to access through our private databases at UA. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C33&q=%22Roxanne+Wars%22&btnG= Here's a playlist to edit to: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLwp9dFE8YP_LLtFmXUmPYAvKSfL8jZJJZ

sheridanford (talk) 21:26, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Roxanne Wars


text:
Talk:Halbach array

untitled section
There must be some misunderstanding or fineprint missing. The configuration is symmetrical and therefore there is no reason why the fields should cancel on one side but not on the other side. --Pjacobi 19:24, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Now I get it. The article is in need of a diagram showing the field lines, like . Also the simplest, because most symmetric configuration, would be a cyclinder magnet inside a toroidal magnet. I guess I have to make a picture to make me clear. --Pjacobi 19:39, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

Arg. I still don't get it. I see the illustrations which look believeable, but the diagram still appears symmetrical. If so, how can it produce an assymetrical field? How can I predict whether the top is canceled or the bottom? The article does not explain this and it is drivng me crazy. --Dan (sorry, no account) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.16.144.75 (talk) 01:01, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

is there any information on how much the field is increased on the augmented side?

 * It is not symmetric at all. Have a look at this:

NN NS SS SN NN NS SS SN NN NS SS NS NN SN SS NS NN SN SS NS

 * In the first line, the north and south poles are always 4 units wide. In the second line, they are one and two units wide, alternating. The lower part looks uniform, (that is unmagnetized,) from a much shorter distance than the upper part. Just as a lot of tiny black dots, seen from a distance, look grey.

 * Or, more formally : If the director of the magnetig field gets tilted in one direction by going along the long edge of the array, the poles (or density of field lines) are always further apart on one side(low field), and nearer to each other on the other side (high field). --Maxus96 (talk) 20:56, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Please provide legend for green/red images
Nice pictures that display info, but they need a legend or explanation. Green is polarity A, red B, and strong side emits polarity A. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.80.117.214 (talk) 19:15, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

more easy to understand
Can we make this easyer for somone with less technical know how to understand? Alan2here 20:55, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
 * knowhow
 * The magnetic field spins and drifts; in other words, it tumbels like a wheel or baton. The strength grows where these directions match, on one side, and shrinks where they thwart, on the other. -lysdexia 07:32, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
 * What I asked seems to have happened while I was not watching which is good Alan2here 20:22, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Am I allowed, or is it even possible to post a picture here? There is still much confusion about the array, I have an extremely simple diagram that came with my Halbach array. People seem to think there is a way you can simply line up magnets to make the Halbach array, this is not correct, nor even possible (think trying to push N "pole" to N "pole")the array is only complete once the last magnet is forced into it's "holder". By holder I mean an aluminum block milled out to hold the magnets, they are held in place by, in this case, grub screws. (Some other Halbach arrays are assembled using an adhesive.) If any of the magnets are not held securely they fly out of their "box" due to the magnetic force of the magnets next to them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.17.201.107 (talk) 04:18, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

something amiss
The field on the strong side of the array should not be twifold as strong because the magnets are discrete, and each has some greattest intensity already. They would onely be stronger if the magnets are squished to half their volume. -lysdexia 07:26, 31 March 2007 (UTC)This is incorrect, while you are correct the array is not stronger by two-fold, it is indeed stronger than if they were just lined up N to S.

The other type of Halbach Array
This is

NSNSNSNS

or

NSNS SNSN NSNS SNSN

Where a N represents a magnet with it's north pole facing up and a S represents a magnet with it's south pole facing up. These are often (possibly incorrectly) called hallbach arrays Alan2here 20:24, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

 * They don't cancel the field though, so I don't think they count.- (User) Wolfkeeper (Talk) 18:31, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Merge with Halbach cylinder?
I'm not sure if there's a formal definition of Halbach array. It seems to me though that the term 'Halbach array' could apply to three dimensional layouts of magnets as well, so it might be a good idea to combine Halbach array and Halbach cylinder together into one article with redirects. Comments?- (User) WolfKeeper (Talk) 16:02, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

 * I see what you mean but I think these should be re-split. The Halbach Cylinder and Halbach Array are related but distinct structures both used for very different engineering applications. (Also, the cylindrical structure is two dimensional, like the array; in three dimensions both suffer from magnetic end effects.) --Hiltonj (talk) 05:41, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

 * Well... I don't see that there's any good reason to split right now, and the article is not big. The section topics meet the definition we use for Halbach array, they're obviously intimately related and even the wiggler is 3D really.- (User) Wolfkeeper (Talk) 18:36, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

half-life of Halbach arrays?
Isn't it true that all Halbach arrays must eventually fail (demagnetize)? If so, how long do they last? beefman (talk) 21:03, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

 * umm. It depends what type of magnets you use and how much you bash them about and whether they get hot etc. Supermagnet based arrays are very robust and may not degrade appreciably (it's difficult to be sure, they haven't been around very long).- (User) Wolfkeeper (Talk) 00:01, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

 * Every macroscopic dipole must fail in the end, because their macroscopic orientation is just not stable above 0 K. The old trouble with entropy. But never mind, as long as you stay at room temperature, they will last practically forever, at least modern Nd - Materials.
 * Wether a halbach array should demagnetize either faster or slower than on ordinary dipole, i don´t know. Any ideas, you physicists? And, btw., is that old story about magnets staying alive longer if you stick them to a large piece of iron true? --Maxus96 (talk) 13:34, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Been thinking about this a bit longer: I guess that the demagnetization is due to the fact that magnetic field lines repel each other, and thus the field outside one end of the magnet is not parallel to the field inside (except for the center of the pole). If that´s true, then a halbach array should demagnetize much slower, as it is ideally constructed in a way that the field lines are not being bent at the metal/air border. Anybody knows a source for this? --Maxus96 (talk) 17:57, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

 * They won't demagnetise themselves otherwise they would be demagnetised as soon as you put them together. To degauss a hard magnetic material you need to apply the reverse field to make the magnetic material itself to give no field (see remanence). Because Halbach arrays have zero field net at the outside, so it does not reach this strength at any point; there would have to be negative net field on any particular magnet to do that.- (User) Wolfkeeper (Talk) 18:15, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

 * What you say is only true in the short term (years ;-)). As i said above, every macroscopic dipole must fail on a large timescale for thermodynamic reasons. I´m very mistaken if this slow decay isn´t sped up (a little) by pertubing external fields, however small. Of course, it will be hard to even measure that speed up, let alone noticing it in application. The problem is sort of "academic" ;-)). --Maxus96 (talk) 22:05, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

 * (Late to the party, but anyway:) Short answers: No, Halbach arrays usually are stable (if coercivity is high enough, usually the case in Neodymium magnets), and yes, iron can help some magnets live longer (in terms of their magnetization). Demagnetization occurs when (and in those portions where) the opposing H field inside of the magnet exceeds the magnet's coercivity Hcj. A full FEM simulation is required to accurately predict this. Significant opposing internal H field is always generated by the magnet itself (think of 2 elementary magnets side by side, same orientation, opposing each other), depending on it's geometry. Additional field can be introduced by external sources, such as coils or other magnets, as is the case in a Halbach or other arrays. The opposing internal field can also be weakened by suitable external sources, or by flux conducting pieces (e.g. steel or iron parts in a loudspeaker magnet system, conducting the flux towards the air gap). The latter case leads to a higher working point, which comes from a steeper load line (larger permeance coefficient Pc) in the 2nd quadrant of the B-H diagram; this is similar to an electric circuit with internal resistance and external low-resistance load, which leads to a large current (flux) and low voltage at the source terminals (weak internal field). Also, coercivity is temperature-dependent: Through heat it can drop below the present opposing field, leading to partial demagnetization until the self-generated opposing field matches the new coercivity again. Especially with older materials (ferrite, AlNiCo, early Neodymium), coercivity was rather low to begin with; even at room temperature or in arrangements such as Halbach, those magnets operated close to their coercivity limits; that's where the issues with instability arose and where iron helps "staying alive". Some advanced Neodymium magnet grades can withstand >200°C (at Pc=1), and at room temperature are pretty much "indestructible". Langenforth (talk) 07:03, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Halbach cylinders
... are actually idealised models, aren´t they? If you really want one, you have to build it out of wedges or other kinds of dicrete dipoles. --Maxus96 (talk) 20:37, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

 * So are the cube-style linear ones though. An ideal Halbach array of any description is made of infinitely thin slivers of magnetic material.- (User) Wolfkeeper (Talk) 23:57, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

 * There's no theoretical reason you can't build an ideal one, it's more of a practical issue. They're normally built out of wedges as it's very difficult to impose the correct variation in magnetisation when you fabricate the ferromagnetic material. The practical difference between an eight-wedge design and the ideal one is very small anyway, so there isn't much gain to be had. There are some clever designs, though, that form a perfect magnetic image of a Halbach cylinder in a soft magnetic material. These designs have a continuous magnetisation pattern. If you're interested (and can get access) see "Cylindrical permanent-magnet structures using images in an iron shield", IEEE Trans. Magn., 39, p1983 (2003).--Hiltonj (talk) 06:16, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Why mirrors?
The radiation in a wiggler is emitted in one direction only, and there is no medium to start lasing anyway, so why do you need a mirror? The page on FEL only states that there is no material to mirror x-rays (tough luck ;-), but no explanation why you should want one in the first case. --Maxus96 (talk) 21:10, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

ERRATA ON THE HALBACH WRIGGLER ARRAY DIAGRAM: Concerning the wriggler array diagram, you will note that the entrance of the electrons (e.g., from an electron gun) so that they cross perpendicular to the initial B-field before curving away due to the Lorentz force interaction is shown, followed by the reverse curving when striking the next perpendicular B-field that is going in the opposite direction, and so on down the line of the Halbach array. The direction of the curving of the charged particle on the diagram is correct for a POSITVE charge (i.e., proton or alpha particle) but not for an electron, where it would curve in the opposite direction. This is because of the right-hand rule that applies for a positve charge traveling with a velocity v perpendicular to a B-field, where it experiences a force F perpendicular to both v and B. The simple formula, which can be taken from any college freshman pysics textbook, is the formula (for the Lorentz force on a positive charge traveling at a velocity v across a B-field) F = qv X B, where q is the positive charge given in units of esu (electrostatic units), v is in meters/second and B is in units of Gauss. For the electron, though, you must put in a minus sign in the formula, so that the Lorentz force is given by F = -qv X B for a negative charge, and then it would meed to follow a left-hand rule. So to correct the wiggler diagram for the electrons moving down the path between the two parallel Halbach arrays in a sinusoidal fashion, you need to have the electrons enter the Halbach on the OPPOSITE side from what is shown on the diagram.

FOI: The right-hand rule is visualized as follows: hold your right hand straight out with the four finger straight out and together and the thunb is extended straight up at right angles to the four fingers. Then imagine an arrow stickng straight out of the right palm at right angles to both fingers and thumb. Now label them as follows: Arrow shows direction of Lorentz force F on the positive charge, the fingers shows the north pole direction of the B-field (fingers are the north pole arrows pointing outward from the knuckles of the right hand), and the thunb is the directon of the velocity of the positive charge that is sitting in the middle of your palm. That is why, if you use a negative chraged particle instead (e.g., an electron), you have to switch hands and use your left hand to show the oposite direction that the Lorentz force will take when using an electron, hence the left-hand rule application when considering the direction of an electron moving perpendicularly to a B-field. [Michael A. Varela, MS in Physics, can be reached at mivarela@sbcglobal.net] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.101.188.7 (talk) 23:26, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

 * Thanks guys. Good spot on the electron path. I spent a very short time copying this diagram out of some book as a Halbach array application for the introduction to my thesis. If I'd known it'd cause so much discussion I'd have checked it more thoroughly, especially the electron path! The figure in the book had mirrors so I left them in, I didn't consider the FEL physics. The mirrors have now been removed and the B field should be in the correct direction for the wiggles. --Hiltonj (talk) 05:40, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Typo in Halbach cylinder section?
The first bullet intem at the end of the "Halbach cylinder" section states that the flux is confined to the centre of the bore (such as k = 3 above, a six pole rotor) but it is obvious from the referred-to picture above to see that k should be 4.

Motivation: it is the number of inward and outward arrows in the picture, that define how many poles the magnetic field has. So K=1 has one that cancels out because it goes in all the directions simultaneously, resulting in no pole, k=2 has two, k=3 has four, and k=4 has six. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gwrede (talk • contribs) 08:06, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
 * In literature, k is often defined as γ = (1+k)β, γ being the tilt angle of the direction of magnetization at the azimuthal angle β. That makes an outside field for k<0, no field for k=0, uniform inside field for k=1, inside quadrupole for k=2, and so on. I suspect this got mixed up with the definition metioned in the article. --129.13.72.198 (talk) 23:06, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

field perpendicular to array
Does anybody know what the field of a halbach cylinder looks like, perpendicular to the center of the ring? I guess it´s not just like a long solenoid with the vector tilted by 90°? Uniform in the center, zero outside, but that´d be too easy. --Maxus96 (talk) 22:51, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

 * The ones described in the article have exactly the same field pattern all the way along the axial length if that's what you mean.- Wolfkeeper  23:07, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

 * But there are riffs on the theme where the field lines go axial and oscillate sinusoidally along the length, and you can make sort of spiral staircase field shapes and all kinds of others.- Wolfkeeper  23:07, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

 * OK, being a bit more clear ;-) : In a k=2 halbach cylinder, with uniform field inside, how fast does the field decay if i´m leaving the cylinder in the direction of its axis? Quite fast, of course, but is there an analytical equation for it? --Maxus96 (talk) 12:26, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

 * If it's a continuously varying halbach array, the field is zero. If it's got discrete magnets, then it depends on how many magnets you have. For example this shows you the field outside as well as in:

- Wolfkeeper  15:06, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry, my question really was misunderstandable. If you see the cylinder from above, as a circle, the field along the normal of that circle. Out of the plane of paper of that picture. ;-) In an infinitely long cylinder, its constant, and the value is that of the equation mentioned in the article. I wanted to know if there is an analytical equation for the field alog the axis for a finite cylinder, like there is for a helmholtz coil. --Maxus96 (talk) 20:43, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

 * Dunno, the article is largely about infinite arrays, it doesn't seem like it really needs to cover finite arrays right now.- Wolfkeeper  17:55, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

no heading
Please explain how in the world anyone can believe a "lowly refrigerator" magnet or a Brush-less AC motor is using the Halbach array? I have two of these magnets the "flat" and "Cylinder" comparing these to both the refrigerator magnets and the 6 AC Brush-less motors I have sittig on the bench, it is obvious there is no Halbach array in either. If need be I can provide pictures to prove my point. The "Magnetic field viewer" I received with my Halbach array magnets shows exactly the described magnetic field created by the Halbach array when used with my Halbach magnets, while every refrigerator magnet I could find (25 of them)shows a simple north south magnet is used. AC Brush-less motors (something I work on nearly every day)certainly is not your typical magnet set-up but in no way utilizes a Halbach array as I understand them. Again, I'm looking for someone to explain how either of these items is based on the Halbach array. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.17.201.107 (talk) 00:32, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Those "refridgerator magnets" (at least the ones on my fridge) only have one magnetic side that sticks to the fridge. I guess this must be some sort of halbach. Advantages are clear: Less magnetic material needed for the same "stickyness", plus credit cards in the back pocket of people leaning against the fridge are not in danger. --Maxus96 (talk) 01:32, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Indeed the similarity is from being one-sided multi-pole. The typical Halbach array is made from rectangular pieces, rotating in 90° steps, but this is only for practical reasons as such bar magnets are easy to make and readily available. It is entirely possible to make a Halbach array from shorter pieces rotating in smaller steps, and this can be decreased further until the rotation is continuous. This would require infinite tiny magnets to be assembled, but fortunately this configuration can also be achieved by continuous material such as the ferrite sheet from which refrigerator magnets are made (ideally isotropic = without homogeneous preferred axis, or with rotating preferred axis). Magnetization is then done by a one-sided coil with straight conductors, in order to generate the pole-stripes in the magnet. Such a continuous Halbach "array" is actually superior to a discrete one, since the flux/field concentration on one side (and away from the other) is now perfect to the microscopic level. Actually, I'm about to update the article to include this, which was actually invented even before Mallinson. Langenforth (talk) 07:20, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Copyright concern
Halbach array Description IS WORD FOR WORD Taken from other sites. I thought this was not allowed? And no the site I'm specifically speaking about did not take the Wiki description, it existed long before this Wiki was made. I'm only talking about the first section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.17.201.107 (talk) 00:03, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Sounds like a problem that needs to be solved (see WP:COPYVIO)! What specific section are you talking about (I don't see one titled "Description")? Do you mean the introductory paragraph, or all the material before the "Flat Halbach arrays" section begins, or some other paragraph somewhere else? Please let us know the specific source you suspect is the original (the exact URL where you're talking about). DMacks (talk) 05:14, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for moving this where it belongs! Including the addition of the title. You are correct I meant the introductory paragraph. I will replace this with the first incident on the web tomorrow. (put in a 18 hour stint at the hospital today gotta hit the rack..) Well an interesting developement in the main site I was referring to. I contacted the "webmaster" of the site in question and asked him/her what the date of orgin on the build of the webpage was and explained briefly why I was asking, without even mentioning any specific website. He/she responded with an apology, admitted to plagerism, not the correct term(?) but is the term he/she used and said their site would remove all offending material within 48 hours... Hmm some people's kids. Okay this brings up another issue, what is the policy on copying word for word a wikipedia article and placing it on one's own site. This is not what happened in this incident as the website did pre-date this wiki by several years, but, it is clear that many sites are using the same information - word-for-word. I give up on tracking who was first etc. in this case for obvious reasons, but I have seen many wiki's copied word for word and placed on other websites. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.17.203.222 (talk) 05:06, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
 * As long as they attribute the content to us (and a few other details), then it is completely allowed. That's part of making the world's knowledge freely available. See FAQ/Copyright for details and further links. -- Quiddity (talk) 05:56, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Intro - second paragraph clean-up
Can someone edit the presumably mischievous 'down under with a shrimp on the barbie' comment in the second paragraph and restore to make sense, thanks! Davey5505 (talk) 19:37, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

JPEG display problem
Noticed 1st three .jpg pictures have display problems. I'm using Ggl Chrome Version 55.0.2883.87 m as of this date, 2017-01-06,

I'm working on other things today. I'll try to return to this for the technical fix.

This article may need other improvements such as adding citations.

I'm turning on article alerts so to be notified of changes.

Cheers, johnswolter — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnswolter (talk • contribs) 18:13, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Halbach array. 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/20110604160523/http://www.uta.edu/physics/main/resources/ug_seminars/papers/HalbachArrays.doc to http://www.uta.edu/physics/main/resources/ug_seminars/papers/HalbachArrays.doc
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060328054612/http://www.tipmagazine.com/tip/INPHFA/vol-4/iss-3/p34.pdf to http://www.tipmagazine.com/tip/INPHFA/vol-4/iss-3/p34.pdf
 * Added tag to http://www.reeserail.com/

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) 18:05, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Multiscale Hallbach Expansion
Here is a thingie I made a figure for.

title: Talk:Halbach array


text: Category:English cyclists

title: Category:English cyclists


text: User talk:69.231.115.212

title: User talk:69.231.115.212


text:
Galaxian3: Project Dragoon

Galaxian3: Project Dragoon (ギャラクシアン3 プロジェクトドラグーン) is a 3D rail shooter video game developed and published by Namco. It was originally a theme park attraction designed for the International Garden and Greenery Exposition (Expo '90) in Japan, and was later released as an arcade game in 1992. The game involves players controlling a starship named the Dragoon in its mission to destroy Cannon Seed, a superweapon set to destroy what is left of the human race.

An entry in the Galaxian series, Galaxian3 was conceived following Namco's success with motion-based arcade games in the late-1980s, such as Final Lap and Metal Hawk. The attraction version, housed in a massive circular room and supporting 28 players, was designed by company engineer Shigeki Toyama. He was tasked with making the biggest video game possible to prevent other companies from copying it, in addition to creating a game that showed off Namco's 3D technology. The attraction was moved to Namco's Wonder Eggs theme park in 1992, where it remained until its closure in 2000. Namco developed other smaller versions for other theme parks and its own video arcades in Japan and Taiwan. The game saw a home release for the PlayStation in 1996 in Japan and PAL regions titled Galaxian^3.

Galaxian3's demonstration at Expo '90 was received favorably, with showgoers showing interest and enthusiasm in the game's 3D flat-shaded graphics and technology. The arcade release was also praised for its technological features and impressiveness, while the PlayStation version saw mixed responses for its outdated gameplay and the appeal of the original having been lost. Galaxian3 has since gained a dedicated following among arcade game collectors for its scarcity, and has also been the focus of video game preservation efforts.

Gameplay

Galaxian3: Project Dragoon is a rail shooter video game. It uses Laserdisc-based video footage with 3D polygonal graphics overlayed on top. Each version supports a varied number of players; for instance, the theme park attraction allows for 28, while the PlayStation version only supports four. In the game, players assume control of the Dragoon, a massive space vessel created by the United Galaxy Space Force (UGSF) to destroy a race of hostile aliens known as the Unknown Intellectual Mechanized Species (UIMS). Players do not control the Dragoon directly, as it moves along a pre-set path; instead, they control a colored cursor that can fire lasers at incoming enemies. The objective is to make it towards the end without getting hit. All players share one health bar, labeled as "ENERGY" and positioned at the bottom of the screen. The meter depletes when the Dragoon is hit by enemies, obstacles, or projectiles.

The story is set far into the future, where mankind is studying interstellar travel and exploring the outer regions of the Solar System. When a group of humans settle on the planet Alpha, they detect unusual crustal movements within its surface. In response, the UGSF is sent to investigate, only to discover the planet is being inhabited by the UIMS. The race is using Alpha to construct a powerful superweapon called Cannon Seed, capable of destroying any planet in its radius. To prevent Cannon Seed from destroying what is left of humanity, the UGSF deploys its largest and most-powerful starship, the Dragoon, to destroy the UIMS once and for all.

Development
During the late 1980s, Japanese video game company Namco began to experiment with making arcade games that felt like miniature theme park attractions, such as sit-down machines like Final Lap (1987), and motion-based games such as Metal Hawk (1988) and Winning Run (1989). Namco had also started opening up large amusement centers across Japan, which featured many of these "taikan" arcade games alongside standard video game cabinets. With the motion games being critically and commercially successful, and the amusement centers turning a high profit, the company started drafting plans for a potential Namco-themed amusement park, with attractions based on their games. Galaxian3 was the first of these attractions to be conceived. Namco planners decided on basic foundations for the game, such as how long a single-play would be and the level structure, before presenting and commissioning the game to engineer Shigeki Toyama, known for his work on Xevious and Point Blank.

Toyama's supervisor instructed him and rest of the development team to pour all of their energy into the project, even if it meant other projects had to be postponed — as such, Namco only produced a small number of games in 1990. The goal of the project was to create the "greatest game in the world", and to make an arcade game so massive that other companies couldn't imitate it, an idea believed to stem from Namco's bitter rivalry with Sega. Executives wanted the game finished in time for the 1990 International Garden and Greenery Exposition, also known as Expo '90, in Osaka, giving Toyama and the production staff a tight deadline.

The game was housed in a large, circular room, with massive curved fiberglass projector screens surrounding it. Players were seated in a large cylindrical device placed in the center of the room, powered by hydraulics and moving around as the game progressed. Dubbed the "Motion Unit", it proved difficult to design during the production phase, as Toyama and others had issues with the hydraulics. The hydraulics themselves were purchased from an outside company instead of being made in-house, however due to them being created by a new hire were full of programming errors. Staff wanted the Motion Unit to have the feeling of a rollercoaster, with swift dives and sharp turns. An emergency stop button was implemented in the event that the Motion Unit would keep moving even when the game ended. Numerous other issues were found as well, such as the wires being too short to let the Motion Unit move and the hardware inside being knocked and jostled around. The game could seat a maximum of 28 players due to the curvature of the fiberglass screens and the design of the room itself; Toyama thought this could help increase the game's appeal, as if they made something that massive other companies wouldn't be able to copy it. Due to its sheer scale, Toyama compared designing the machine to designing a building.

The 3D models were done by Toyama and several others, as was the game itself. Unlike Namco's other 3D video games at the time, such as Winning Run, the models in Galaxian3 were of a much higher quality and resolution, however hardware limitations prevented the models from being textured. The soundtrack was composed jointly by Shinji Hosoe and Ayako Saso, being among their first projects for Namco and both of whom also provided minor assistance on the game itself. Saso assisted in the design of the projector boards. The name Galaxian3 was chosen due to the game bearing similarities with Galaxian and Galaga. Staff thought this would help ensure recognition. The "3" in the title is the algebraic term cubed (³), a reference to the game's usage of 3D polygons.

Release

Galaxian3: Project Dragoon was exhibited at the International Garden and Greenery Exposition in Osaka, also known as Expo '90, on April 1, 1990, and remained in operation until the event's conclusion in September. It was shown off alongside an attraction based on another Namco game, The Tower of Druaga, being the only two video game-related machines presented. The game had minor technical difficulties during its exhibition, although were quickly fixed as the event progressed. Namco chose to show it at Expo '90 as a way to present the game to an international audience, billing it as an "active simulator" and "hyper entertainment machine" in various pieces of promotional material. Show-goers were impressed with the game's technological accomplishments and 3D graphics, seen as being very impressive for the time.

A year later in 1991, Namco produced a smaller, 16-player version of Galaxian3 for various amusement centers worldwide. Dubbed the "GM-16", it was produced in extremely scarce numbers, and was created specifically to target arcades that wouldn't have room for a normal 28-player machine. In early 1992, the original Galaxian3 shown at Expo '90 was moved to the Namco Wonder Eggs theme park, located in the Futakotamagawa Time Spark amusement spot in Setagaya, Tokyo. It remained a popular attraction until the park's closure in 2000, with much of its parts either being sold off or destroyed. A second 28-player Galaxian3 was created in 1993 for a Namco arcade center in Kanagawa Prefecture, being internally named the "GH-28" to distinguish it from the 16-player version. The arcade closed in 1997 and the machine was dismantled and auctioned off, with proceeds going to charities.

Namco designed another smaller variation of Galaxian3 for arcades, further decreasing the player count to six. It was released in December 1992 in Japan and in North America in March 1993. It marked the game's first appearance in English-speaking territories, being test-marketed in England and shown at various amusement expos in the United States. This version utilized a Namco System 21 arcade board with laserdisc players attached to it, titled the "Theater 6" system. This version of the game was renamed to Galaxian3: Theater-6 to avoid confusion with other models. Theater-6 had higher-resolution graphics compared to the GH-28, as well as using 120-inch projectors and updated projector systems. Like GM-16, the Theater-6 version of the game was produced in very limited numbers; due to the massive size of these cabinets, most arcade operators simply had them destroyed or torn down for spare parts when the game no longer became profitable. As such, only a small handful of Theater-6 machines exist in the world, almost all of which being in the hands of private collectors. The Video Game Museum in Japan houses the only publicly-available Galaxian3 machine in the country.

In June 1994, GameFan magazine teased a port of Galaxian3 for the 3DO Interactive Multiplayer, however such a port was never released. A Virtual Boy conversion was also in development by Locomotive Corporation, which also went unreleased. In 1996, Namco published a home conversion of Galaxian3 for the PlayStation in Japan and Europe, stripping the Project Dragoon subtitle. This version of the game allowed for four-person multiplayer and featured smoothed-out, higher-resolution visuals and a newer soundtrack. It also included a bonus game called The Rising of Gourb, which had a new storyline and levels, as well as support for the NeGcon controller. The PlayStation version was digitally-released for the PlayStation Network on February 12, 2014 under the Game Archives brand.

Reception
Galaxian3: Project Dragoon was a monumental success. It was one of the most popular exhibitions at Expo '90 up until its conclusion, and was seen by players as an immersive, alluring piece of technology and entertainment. According to Hajime Nakatani, a designer for the game and the creator of Starblade, Galaxian3 was also a media sensation, regularly appearing as a featured topic in newspapers and television.

Retrospectively in 1998, Allgame was impressed with the game's scenery, presentation and immersive experience, writing that it is "just the ticket" for fans of the genre. They also complimented the PlayStation version for its accurate portrayal of the arcade version, particularly in retaining the "dazzling" 3D graphics. Both Famitsu and Dengeki PlayStation felt that while the game was still fun to play, the lack of playing it in the Theater-6 arcade machine had caused much of its atmosphere and entertainment to be lost during the transition to console. They also were critical of the game's short length and lack of a remade graphics mode similar to Starblade Alpha.

Legacy
Galaxian3: Project Dragoon is considered influential and important for being an early instance of turning video games into amusement rides, and for its usage of 3D polygonal graphics. It has achieved a small but dedicated following in more recent times, with preservation efforts being made to salvage anything related from the game to prevent it from being lost. It also influenced other companies to produce similar machines as a way to cash in on its success, such as Sega's Cyber Dome and Yotto-Group's 6D Cinema.

In 1990, Namco began work on a single-player prototype for Galaxian3 for arcades. This was the basis for Starblade, which was published a year later. With its cinematic atmosphere and technological accomplishments, Starblade was well-received, and became inspiration for titles such as Star Fox and Panzer Dragoon. It has also been ported to several systems such as the PlayStation, 3DO, and mobile phones. Solvalou, a 3D Xevious spin-off from 1991, is also based on Galaxian3. Namco published a sequel to Galaxian3 called Attack of the Zolgear in 1994, where it was offered as a conversion kit for the Theater-6 arcade version. Zolgear has players taking on the monster of the same name, which awakens after a 1,000-year sleep to destroy a nearby space colony and soon the entire human race. It never received a home release.

Beginning around the early 2000s, Galaxian3 has gained a large cult following for its historical importance and for being an important game for Namco, likely driven by its popularity at the Wonder Eggs park. Fan conventions based on it have been set up in Japan, as well as clubs and dōjin goods. It has also spawned collection circles and restoration projects to fix and preserve older Theater 6 machines, with some appearing in video game museums and expositions worldwide.

title: Galaxian3: Project Dragoon


text:
Olecranon

The olecranon, is a large, thick, curved bony process on the proximal, posterior end of the ulna. It forms the protruding part of the elbow and is opposite to the cubital fossa or elbow pit (trochlear notch). The olecranon serves as a lever for the extensor muscles that straighten the elbow joint.

Structure
The olecranon is situated at the proximal end of the ulna, one of the two bones in the forearm. When the hand faces forward (supination) the olecranon faces towards the back (posteriorly).

It is bent forward at the summit so as to present a prominent lip which is received into the olecranon fossa of the humerus during extension of the forearm.

Its base is contracted where it joins the body and the narrowest part of the upper end of the ulna.

Its posterior surface, directed backward, is triangular, smooth, subcutaneous, and covered by a bursa.

Its superior surface is of quadrilateral form, marked behind by a rough impression for the insertion of the triceps brachii; and in front, near the margin, by a slight transverse groove for the attachment of part of the posterior ligament of the elbow-joint.

Its anterior surface is smooth, concave, and forms the upper part of the semilunar notch.

Its borders present continuations of the groove on the margin of the superior surface; they serve for the attachment of ligaments, viz., the back part of the ulnar collateral ligament medially, and the posterior ligament laterally.

From the medial border a part of the flexor carpi ulnaris arises; while to the lateral border the anconeus muscle is attached.

Clinical significance
Fractures of the olecranon are common injuries. An olecranon fracture with anterior displacement of the radial head is called a Hume fracture.

Etymology
The word "olecranon" comes from the Greek olene, meaning elbow, and kranon, meaning head.

title: Olecranon


text:
User:Bobstay

Matthew Stephenson

UK

title: User:Bobstay


text: User talk:69.198.142.78

title: User talk:69.198.142.78


text:
Talk:Ricochet (Tangerine Dream album)

Is Ricochet a "live" album?
There's some debate about whether or not Ricochet qualifies as a "live" album. Although assembled from live recordings made during the band's 1975 European Tour, Ricochet differs heavily from the original recordings due to editing, overdubbing, and additional effects. Thus some fans argue that Ricochet was really composed in the studio rather than on stage and should not be called "live". Most sources, however, still refer to it as a live album: So far I haven't been able to find a single source that doesn't refer to the album as "live". I'm afraid objecting to this classification would amount to original research, at least until other sites also change how they classify the album. Kaldari 22:03, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Official TD site: "Live"
 * All Music Guide: "Live", "recorded live in France and Britain"
 * Amazon.com: "Live"
 * Tower Records: "Studio/Live: Live"
 * Progography: "first live album"
 * Strawberry Bricks: "Live"
 * Hyperreal.org TD Discography: "Live Album"
 * The Tangerine Dream Database: "Live"
 * Voices in the Net: "Live", "first live album"

but all of those sites are just taking the 'live' at face-value from the various sleeves that album has been released in. it's OR, of course, but it's clear to any student of the band's output that side one is NOT live, except in the sense of it being performed in one or more 'live' passes in the studio (no bootlegs of that tour feature the drums, for example- that's pretty basic stuff, even for a non-student of the band), while side two uses a recording of the croydon set as its basis (the piano intro & other bits were recorded in the studio). even if we coaxed the truth out of CF, PB or mick glossop, would that be 'verifiable' enough for WP, in the face of the multiple references that ape the claims of the album sleeves? duncanrmi (talk) 11:44, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

but see update under 'bordeaux' below

duncanrmi (talk) 16:03, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Source material
From the liner notes to The Bootleg Box Set Vol 1: "The Fairfield Halls in Croydon played host to the band on October 23, 1975... The 1975 official live album Ricochet was partly recorded here and some of the themes from that album are easily discernable." Kaldari 21:16, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

I remember that, pre-release, this album was listed in Music Master as "Tangerine Dream, Live at Coventry Cathedral". So do we know that it was recorded in Croydon, or were Coventry and Croydon simply two dates on a tour where they played similar shows? Jimskea (talk) 02:01, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

 * We do know that parts of Ricochet were recorded at Croydon. But indeed, those were two different shows on the same tour from which Ricochet originated, and yes, the shows had similarities during that time (but much more so by 1977). Coventry Cathedral was October 4, while Fairfield Hall in Croydon was October 23. MXVN (talk) 11:55, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

bordeaux?
where's the citation for that location, given in the info-box? current thinking- the notes in the ISOH boxed set, for example- suggest that side one was conjured in the manor studio, whilst side two is easily recognisable as deriving for the most part from the croydon gig.

duncanrmi (talk) 05:22, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
 * According to the webpage TANGERINE DREAM: A RECORDING CHRONOLOGY 1969-1990, some of Ricochet part 1 comes from the Bordeaux performance: "1975 Sep 14-23, live in in Bordeaux, France - Ricochet (part one) (on live-LP RICOCHET 28 Nov 1975)". The French website Tangram: Chroniques d'un fan de Tangerine Dream supports this saying: "Ricochet est un album Live (une des 2 parties serait partiellement enregistrée à Bordeaux)...". Those are just fan sites though, so probably not citable. On the back of the original LP, however, it says: "recorded live autumn 1975 in france and britain", which would support the Bordeaux idea. Kaldari (talk) 23:15, 27 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Probably based on a mangling of the cover photo credits:
 * The photography on the front cover was taken by Monique Froese on the ocean shore near Bordeaux (Voices in the Net)
 * There is a known recording from TD's Bordeaux 1975 concert (Tangerine Leaves volume 66) but it has nothing that resembles Ricochet. -- Trɔpʏliʊm • blah 21:54, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

"leaves" 66 is 'triple orange juice', otherwise undetailed. how do you know that bordeaux is in this collection, or that the dates tally? again, OR, but the chatter around ISOH & my own conversations with ed buller, steve wilson & others, do not suggest any concert recording provenance for side one of 'ricochet'. side two is clearly based on the croydon recording, but many of us steeped in the bootleg recordings of this tour agree that by the time of the croydon gig, the band were running out of time to capture a good enough performance for a live album, & that the performance style changed dramatically from the earlier improvisational pieces to a more arranged structure. "we need to get something together that we can release", in other words. none of the bootlegs from the UK/european dates of the period feature live drums, for instance, while they are prominent on side one. not sure what my point is here, except to re-assert that side one is a studio creation, probably prepared & then performed in several 'live' passes, with mick glossop doing the assembly, while side two is an enhanced & repaired live recording from croydon.

duncanrmi (talk) 11:37, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

[update- more OR!] I've listened to the TT bordeaux recording, & from about 34' in, there are some resemblances to side one of the album. I didn't hear anything & immediately go "ah, yes, there's that bit", but there are some phrases on the rhodes & a sequencer line that match the album. the bootleg runs out, unfortunately, before anything conclusive is heard.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZeL904QvD0

duncanrmi (talk) 13:20, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Triple Orange Juice lacks official cover art but did have original release notes and tracklisting, which give track 1 as "Bordeaux 75" clearly enough.
 * That Ricochet has studio overdubbed drums has been established fan knowledge for ages, IIRC going back to some interviews in the late 70s or early 80s, but doesn't invalidate live status otherwise; comparing the Croydon tape with Part 2 easily reveals similar tampering. I concluded though already when I first got my hands on a decent variety of TT releases that Ricochet part 1 must be studio work: maybe the most damning argument is that, among the small number of repeated melody and sequencer motifs in their live '75 work, the main themes from Part 1 are completely absent (continue to be absent even going into '76 too). -- Trɔpʏliʊm • blah 01:20, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:Ricochet (Tangerine Dream album)


text: User talk:86.139.233.87

title: User talk:86.139.233.87


text:
User talk:Cgsolano

Mexico U-17

Selección Mexicana U-17

Mexico, World champion. The "Tricolores" lifted the Cup in Lima, Peru at the 2005 FIFA U-17 World Cup by defeating Brazil, defending champions and looking to attain their 4th U-17 World Cup. Mexico categorically beat the Amazonians 0-3 with goals scored by Carlos Vela (31'), Omar Esparza (33') and Ever Guzman (85') at the Estadio Nacional in the Peruvian capital.

Mexico has had a long football history throughout the years, but this is the first time the Aztecs obtains a FIFA World Cup title in any category (U-17, U-20, Men's). The best Mexico had ever performed was the quarter finals on both 1970 and 1986 FIFA World Cups held in Mexico. On both ocassions, Mexico clinched 6th place.

Years of glorious matches and defeats against bigger and better teams are now left behind. Mexico, the giant of CONCACAF, went from the "almost there!" team to the "we did it!" one. These 16 year-old kids became men the night of October 2nd, 2005.

Giovani Dos Santos was awarded the silver ball as 2nd best player of the tournament and Carlos Vela the golden boot as the top scorer of the competition.

The official Mexico squad, 2005 FIFA U-17 World champions (NUMBER, POSITION, NAME (Last, First)):

1	GK	ARIAS Sergio

2	DF	ARAUJO Patricio

3	DF	VALDEZ Efrain

4	DF	SANCHEZ Christian

5	DF	MORENO Hector

6	MF	ESPARZA Omar

7	MF	HERNANDEZ Jorge

8	FW	DOS SANTOS Giovani

9	FW	VELA Carlos

10	FW	GUZMAN Ever

11	MF	GALLEGOS Mario

12	GK	GALLARDO Alejandro

13	MF	ANDRADE Edgar

14	FW	BELTRAN Heriberto

15	MF	SILVA Carlos

16	MF	ALDRETE Adrian

17	DF	VALVERDE Pedro

18	MF	VILLALUZ Cesar

19	GK	FLORES Cristian

20	FW	ESQUEDA Alejandro

Coach          RAMIREZ Jesus

Viva México !!!

Cgsolano

Image copyright problem with Image:U17.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:U17.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images on Wikipedia is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this:.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. You can get help on image copyright tagging from Wikipedia talk:Image copyright tags. -- Carnildo 05:11, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

title: User talk:Cgsolano


text:
Clarence Griffin

Clarence James "Peck" Griffin (January 19, 1888 – March 28, 1973) was an American tennis player. His best major performance in singles was reaching the semi-finals of the 1916 U.S. National Championships (where he beat Wallace F. Johnson before losing to R. Norris Williams). He also reached the quarter-finals in 1914, 1915, 1917 and 1920.

Biography
He was born on January 19, 1888, in San Francisco, California.

Griffin ranked in singles in the U.S. Top Ten three times: he was No. 7 in 1915 and No. 6 in both 1916 and 1920. In addition to his singles success, Griffin also made a mark in doubles with fellow Californian Bill Johnston.

In 1913 he won the singles title at the Niagara International Tennis Tournament defeating Edward H. Whitney in four sets. He successfully defended his title in the challenge round in the following year, 1914, against George Church, also in four sets. He won the singles and doubles titles at the Cincinnati tournament in 1915 and was a doubles champion and singles finalist in Cincinnati in 1916. In 1915 he was victorious in the Tri-State Championship, disposing W.S. McElroy in the challenge round in three straight sets.

Griffin, and doubles partner Johnston, won the U.S. doubles title three times (1915, 1916, and 1920), and Griffin also reached the 1913 doubles final with John Strachan. He and Strachan won the U.S. Clay Court title that year, and in 1914 Griffin reached his singles final in a comeback beating of Elia Fottrell, 3–6, 6–8, 8–6, 6–0, 6–2, for the Clay Court singles crown (held that year in Cincinnati).

In 1929, he married Mildred Talbot De Camp, daughter of T. James Talbot of Los Angeles.

He died on March 28, 1973.

Legacy
He was a 5-foot-7 right-handed player and entered the International Tennis Hall of Fame in 1970. His nephew was entertainer Merv Griffin.

title: Clarence Griffin


text:
Diexim Expresso

Diexim Expresso Aviaçao (operating as Diexim Expresso) was an airline based in Luanda, Angola. It operated scheduled services linking the main towns and cities in Angola, as well as VIP flights and charter services within Angola and to Namibia. Its main base was Quatro de Fevereiro Airport, Luanda. The airline was on the list of air carriers banned in the EU.

History
The airline was established in 2003 and is wholly owned by Grupo BD-Bartolomeu Dias. On 14 November 2008, Diexim Expresso was added to the list of air carriers banned in the EU due to safety concerns. Meanwhile, the airline ceased operations.

Destinations
Diexim Expresso served the following destinations as of November 2009:

Fleet
The Diexim Expresso fleet included the following aircraft as of April 2012:

title: Diexim Expresso