One of the tragedies of life is how seemingly few people are interested in philosophy as an active pursuit, as a way of being in the everyday world as opposed to academia where sweatered undergrads and bearded professors gather to drink coffee and say grand things about a bunch of 18th and 19th century Germans…who themselves sat around drinking coffee and saying things like weltanschauung, and Wir müssen die richtige Art und Weise kennen zu denken!! But philosophy is a grand adventure and just as relevant in Walmart as it is in Symbolic Logic classes.
So I have decided to use my blog to encourage you all to be philosophical, to see yourself and the world anew– no matter what race, gender, sexual orientation, nationality, age, or religion. You can even be a philosopher if you are Toronto Maple Leafs fan…especially if you are a Leafs fan (trying to explain to the world why we Leafs Nation members love them so much considering their annual win-loss ratio). But first… a (very) general summary of what happened in Western philosophy up to now.
The Classical Mythologists(Hesiod and Homer) collected and wrote of the Greek myths.
The philosophers after them and before Socrates (the Pre-Socratics) tried to figure how the world could be understood apart from the myths. What if the myths are indeed myths, how can we then explain how things are made and work…without referring to the gods?
The Classical Philosophers(Plato, Socrates, Aristotle and others) wanted to know how we can define virtue, and become virtuous. What is the right way, or at least the bestway, to live?
The Roman, Jewish, and Christian thinkers influenced by Greek culture (Hellenism) tried to analyze theology in terms of the Logos– the creative principle(s) organizing the Universe. Was God behind it, or part of the Logos itself? Also, how could one define virtue and be virtuous when the Roman state was in a constant state of war and trivial disputes?
The Medieval philosophers in Europe and the Near East looked anew at the ideas of Plato in terms of the (possibly) mystical nature of the universe (NeoPLatonism). The rise of Catholic philosopher St. Augustine and Boethius, and Alcuin the Latinist brought scholarship to Europe through theological thinking and Latin study. Also, medieval Islamic philosophers (Al-Kindi, Al Farabi, Ibn Sina) contemplated Platonic thought and science in terms of their faith. The classic Greek works were saved from Christian and barbarian sacking though their translation into and transmission in Arabic and Persian by Islamic scholars – much of what we know of Plato would have been lost without it. When Petrarch (1304-1374) revived the study of the ancient Roman thinker Cicero, this is considered to be the start of the Renaissance.
After Descartes, philosophers entered a so-called "Age of Reason" (the Enlightenment), and thinkers such as Baruch Spinoza and others saw truth as rational and deductive. Also the modern concepts of identity, the Self, and morality became important subjects, as well as the idea that Reality exists fundamentally in the mind. Mankind now attacked and questioned the authority of the Church (and Christianity in general), many rejecting the theological rationales for the existence of God.
Late Enlightenment (and/or Pre-Modern) philosophers such as Immanuel Kant thought that truth had to be independent from experience, while Georg Hegel theorized that the properties we perceive in objects depend on how they appear, and are not inherent to the objects themselves – things have no properties independent of the mind. Hegel and others (after Kant) were considered to be part of a new German Idealism: a rejection of the aristocratic thinking and politics of the day. Later, Arthur Schopenhauer introduced a new sense of pessimism into philosophy, arguing in his essay On the Vanity of Existence that "Time is that by virtue of which everything becomes nothingness in our hands and loses all real value." The nineteenth century saw the arrival of Charles Darwin (Evolution), Søren Kierkegaard (Existentialism), and Karl Marx's writing on the economic status of the working class (Marxism). Kierkegaard's ideas on how the individual and his experiences are the starting point of philosophy – and how moral/scientific thinking alone cannot explain human existence – were and are a huge influence on modern philosophy.
Though it is hard to say exactly when one philosophical age ends and another begins, the late 19th and early 20th century marks what is generally known as the Modern Era, arguably beginning with Frederick Nietzsche and his view that Life is without intrinsic value. His book The Will to Power and other works argue that though Christianity is a backward, anti-human religion, science has no inherent moral value and meaning either. Modern philosophy saw the rise and ongoing development of psychoanalysis (Freud), the study of signs and symbols (Semiotics), sociology, psychology, anthropology, linguistics, and Logical Positivism – philosophy as the logical clarification of thought (there are no specifically philosophical truths).
The late 20th century saw the rise of what is known as PostModernism– a complicated set of ideas revolving around questions of authorship, and the idea that there is no such things as objective knowledge. Postmodern philosophy is also highly critical of the effects of mass media, capitalism, and commodity fetishism. The decade we are currently in (the 2010s) is considered by some to be part of a Post-Postmodern Era, also called Metamodernism or (µ-Modernism, and some consider it vacuous and narcissistic (the supposed vacuity of Internet users is creating the meaning of the content within it). Others call this new era PostConceptualism – a time marked by a "New Sincerity" defined by a rejection of Postmodern cynicism or irony, and the return to sincerity, enthusiasm, and sentiment in music, art, literature, etc.
So, now that we know where we are and what has happened…how do we actually become philosophers ourselves?
First of all, we can start by considering ourselves philosophers. How is it that we can say this without having read Plato, or maybe taking a Philosophy 101 class? This is because what philosophy is, and always was, was something that starts from life – your life. The search for questions and answers starts within your life – within the situation of living, right now, where you sit. No need for a toga, or a fancy suit – your life is a rich vein of living no matter what it is. You are "in" your Life 24/7, and thus you don't need to think thoughts irrelevant to your life and its relationship to other lives. But that raises the question of what are the relevant questions to your life?
In my case I looked into what I was passionate and curious about – jazz improvisation, Zen Buddhism, and so on and found the things that I really wanted to philosophize about: things that were really important to me, things that I really wanted to know. This is really important as it makes our life exciting and filled with passion. In fact, I was (and am) so passionate about it I travelled to monasteries in Western Japan and South Korea to study Zen meditation, as well as played freely improvised music in numerous clubs and halls throughout South Korea, Japan, China, and Vietnam, then wrote a book about free form jazz and Zen Buddhism (my doctoral dissertation).
So why don't we take him at his word and begin our philosophical journey? First we find somewhere to live, food, money, a good night's sleep, love and so on. These questions of daily living may not be very philosophical, but we still must then carry on with logic and/or common sense – although sometimes what we think is common sense actually turns out to be illogical. So to begin we must know a few things about philosophical or analytical thinking.
CLARITY: What we say is clear and completely understandable. It always amazes me how undergrad philosophy students of all people fail on this first point so often. But most are young – victims of their own (commendable) enthusiasm – and are so excited about their first real analysis of the philosopher Frederick Nietzsche, for example, that they can't wait to tell all their friends about what they know and spout it out for everyone to hear at parties. But complete clarity is the top priority and any philosopher worth the name can make a subject clear to anyone at any level through the use of the appropriate language level. Clarity means you could explain Immanuel Kant's view(s) on morality to your 7-year-old niece and turn around and defend your understanding of it to a tenured philosopher professor at Harvard. This is the golden rule, but it is not that hard to live up to. Be clear and you will always be on the right track, even if you don't use fancy words.
ACCURACY: What you say should be correct. Thus make sure you know what you are saying, know it to be true. What you think and say should be free from error, and be changed the instant you discover an error. Philosophy means leaving your ego at the door and be ready to argue, contemplate and grow. Philosophy is NOT finding the right answer to something or everything, Philosophy is a set of tools to help you think and understand the world. NO philosopher has ever found the one right answer that solves morality for all people at all times for every situation. This enters the realm of the religious, so make sure you are clear if you are speaking philosophically or theologically. Nothing wrong with either but there is often a fine line between stating what is good, and what your God says is good. Just be clear which is which, and why.
PRECISION:What you say must be exact to the appropriate level of detail. You don't have to solve the great questions of life every time you consider the nature of what is good behaviour in your life. Make the level of your argument clear and you won't get sidetracked into defending a universal position on morality when you are just trying to get your kids to be quiet in the car!
RELEVANCE:This too is another major problem in many philosophical discussions – the topic gets sidetracked into something else. This is usually how fights get started. Discussions about the legacy of the Montreal Canadiens vs. the Maple Leafs often de-evolve quickly in Toronto bars on a Saturday night and soon someone is questioning the marital fidelity of the other's mother, and fists start flying. Thankfully this happens very rarely in philosophy, although I once attended a composer's conference where one of the attendees was so incensed that my work was included in the proceedings that she vigorously insisted I was a "charlatan" whose graphic scoreswere a mockery to "serious" music and then proceeded to leave the room in a fuming rage! Strangely enough, word got out around Athens (Greece) about the happening and it almost tripled the expected attendance of my concert the following evening! No such thing as bad press…I was performing in Paris three days later and even had a couple of curious audience members ask me Êtes-vous le charlatan?!
DEPTH:Your precise, accurate statements and ideas should also contain the appropriate amount of depth. Those big fancy words have their right place in philosophical discussions, so make sure you know exactly what they mean and use them to add the appropriate nuance and subtle meaning to your thinking. These big words are nuanced because they have interrelationships with other big words and knowing one means you will have considered the others that play into its overall meaning. Once again you don't have to be fancy, just know what you are saying and know the exact meaning of what you say. Make sure you are clear if you are using a word like Communism, because what Karl Marx meant by 'Communism' and what Soviet Communismbecame were two very different things.
BREADTH:This ties in with Depth, as you need to know what others before you thought about the things you are thinking about. You don't have to memorize a long list of philosophers and read every single book on philosophy. But if you think about morality a lot, look up moral philosophy and find out who thought about it most often. You will find much to think about in the present, and in the past – including Aristotle's ideas about ethics, medieval philosopher St. Anselm's thoughts about how 'just by thinking about God we can know he exists,' and why Thomas Aquinas thought that "all that is good is God." You don't have to agree or disagree with any of it, but knowing as much as you can about other thinkers will always help you towards finding your own (unique) thoughts.
FAIRNESS:This is one aspect of thinking that many media outlets and public "intellectuals" completely fail at. What we think must never be self-serving, or contain a vested interest in thinking a certain thought for our own gain. IF we are wrong about something, and it can be proven we are wrong we mustadmit it, and re-think our position. It is the ONLY way we can have a true discussion about anything. Trying to be right about everything all the time is arrogant, narcissistic, and not philosophical. Having a philosophical position does not make "us" right, it makes what we hold to to be correct, no matter who we are. Facts are facts, so we must make sure we are humble in this regard. Also, it is not philosophical (or nice) to take a "I told you so" approach to philosophy. We are not philosophers to be better than others or to be "right." We are philosophers to be philosophers. This ties in to how we use logic.
So that means we must know (what I call) the Big Eleven: the eleven most common fallacies (mistaken beliefs based on faulty arguments) people use. We are all guilty at one point or another of accidentally allowing one or two to slip in to our everyday thinking, especially when we are passionate about an opinion. But an opinion is not an argument, thus we must keep fallacies out of our best thinking. We must be dedicated to the avoidance of fallacies, especially the following eleven.
The first is the Hasty Generalization. We all use this occasionally. A young heavy metal drummer might say: "Jazz is stupid!" Clearly, it is not a universal truth that jazz is (or is not) stupid, or based on stupidity. It is a difficult art to perform properly and takes years of intensive study to improvise in a profound manner. Clearly our young drummer is making a hasty generalization based on his love of what he thinks is not stupid: heavy metal. Jazz, by comparison, is stupid to him. The Hasty Generalization is often preceded or followed by a Weak Analogy: for example, both saxophones and fully automatic assault rifles are made of metal so we should ban both! So does this mean my AK-47 and my vintage Selmer Mark VI tenor saxophone should go in the garbage? Very weak analogy! Clearly I am using a very silly example, but often Weak Analogies are at least a little silly.
Both fallacies are often part of an Argument Ad Ignorantium, arguing from 'ignorance' of what is actually true. Theists will often argue that since God has not been proven to not exist, their beliefs are justified. Alternately one might argue that since it has yet to be proven true, God doesn't exist. No matter which "side" you are on though, both arguments are fallacies. This is why true atheism is actually not "a-theism" at all. True atheism is a rejection of the evidence presented by theists as proof of their god(s) existence. Thus everyone is an atheist when it comes to not believing another's supposed evidence. Christians for example accept Christ, and reject Hinduism, as it is a "false" religion with what they consider to be imaginary gods. They reject the Bhagavad Gita, the Brahma Sutra, and other books as sources of truth. To use a rather awkward term, they are "Hindu a-theists." Thus, there are no true atheists who reject the idea that there could be a god or gods of some sort in some form in this Reality, or Universe, or in another. There is no proof to the contrary, so it remains a possibility. But this also is not "agnosticism" either, as science has proved so many facts about physical reality that negate a significant number of the claims of various religious texts (a kind of literary atheism). Either way, to claim theism or atheism on the basis of this fallacy is an error in thought.
I will continue this subject in Part Two of this series.
You made me wait e-bloody-nough time for your return you charlatan haha. True Daniel Schnee entrance back into blogging, with cogent poignancy.
As a largely autodidactic person from a working class background, I think it is more than reasonable to make the case for people to philosophize more & take pains to think better & though this takes effort, small steps over extended periods of time yield distance, perhaps even immense distances.
I hope so but as a poet I think it is my duty through intensity to bend the truth, sorry.
Well, thank you very much. It is always a good day when you show up!
I just want people to see that one does not have to put on some kind of fake and grandiose air to play with ideas and expand their own (and maybe others') minds. Objective, analytical thinking saves one from being duped in all aspects of life.
I am looking forward to Part Two.
I think you will like it. A lot of it deals with faulty reasoning, which is an important topic in this era of purported fake news and what is the actual truth.


text:
Mother and daughter indicted for racketeering
A Covington mother and daughter have been indicted by a Newton County grand jury on racketeering charges. Georgia Att...
Updated: Jul 27, 2018 5:41 PM
A Covington mother and daughter have been indicted by a Newton County grand jury on racketeering charges. Georgia Attorney General Chris Carr announced the indictments Wednesday.
"Our office is committed to stopping criminals who perpetrate identity theft and financial fraud and will continue to hold them accountable for their actions," said Carr. "I applaud our Consumer Protection Unit and Special Prosecutions Unit for their joint efforts in investigating and prosecuting these cases."
Tiara Dameron and her mother, Tieresa Mitchell, both of Covington, were indicted for their alleged roles in a fraud scheme involving hundreds of fraudulent Discover bank accounts. Both were indicted on one count of racketeering (R.I.C.O.), with theft and identity fraud as the predicate acts under the R.I.C.O. statute.
The investigation by criminal investigators from the Attorney General's Consumer Protection Unit revealed that between November 2014 and June 2015 the suspects applied online for hundreds of fraudulent Discover bank accounts using variations of their names and other names. The Social Security numbers used in support of the Discover accounts did not belong to the suspects, according to the Attorney General's Office.
The Attorney General's Office alleges that at least 65 of the Discover accounts were linked with accounts from other banks (Bancorp Bank, MetaBank and Wells Fargo, among others) belonging to Dameron and Mitchell. This allowed the suspects to deposit counterfeit checks into the Discover accounts and transfer the money to the linked bank accounts before the checks were returned for non-sufficient funds.
Assistant Attorney General Taylor Johnston from the Office of the Attorney General's Special Prosecutions Unit presented the case to the Newton County grand jury on July 6. The case was investigated by Calvin Thomas, a criminal investigator with the Attorney General's Consumer Protection Unit, and will be prosecuted by Sandra J. Bailey, assistant attorney general with the Special Prosecutions Unit.
An indictment merely alleges that crimes have been committed. All defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
Members of Tennessee motorcycle club accused of racketeering
Mother searching for daughter's guardian angel
Mother, daughter missing for 16 months
Mother and daughter reunited after 61 days
Mother, daughter trapped in convertible compartment rescued
Watch mother and daughter's emotional reunion
Migrant mother, daughter await asylum decision
Mother indicted after baby found in trunk of car
Mother demands answers in death of 7-year-old daughter

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


The author`s passion for music runs deep. Before turning his hand to writing, he ran a jazz club in Tokyo, and the aesthetic and emotional power of music permeates every one of his much-loved books. In this boo, he fulfills a personal dream, sitting down with his friend, acclaimed conductor Seiji Ozawa, to talk about their shared interest.


text:
Michelle Obama Calls on Facebook to Permanently Ban Trump After the Capitol Riots
"The day was a fulfillment of the wishes of an infantile and unpatriotic president."
By Starr Bowenbank
Michelle Obama has spoken out about yesterday's attack on the U.S. Capitol building by Donald Trump's supporters.
Michelle called the day a "fulfillment of the wishes of an infantile president" and called on Facebook to ban Trump from its website permanently.
America is still struggling with the aftermath of Trump's supporters breaching the U.S. Capitol building yesterday. In the attack—labeled as an attempt to "stop the steal" and prevent President-Elect Joe Biden from getting his electoral college votes confirmed—people were injured and killed. Senators' lives were at stake. Democracy was threatened. And now, Americans incensed by this blatant disregard for the U.S. government are processing the event.
Former First Lady Michelle Obama is one of those Americans hurt by this senseless riot. In a personal essay posted to her Twitter account, she shared her thoughts about the "thugs" who stormed the Capitol building and called on Silicon Valley companies (like Facebook) to put an end to Trump's reign of terror.
Like all of you, I've been feeling so many emotions since yesterday. I tried to put my thoughts down here: pic.twitter.com/9xzRvrpk7y
— Michelle Obama (@MichelleObama) January 7, 2021
pic.twitter.com/2xhMyVMpDF
"I woke up yesterday elated by the news of Reverend Raphael Warnock's election victory. He'll be Georgia's first Black senator, and I was heartened by the idea that the senior pastor of Ebenezer Baptist Church—the home parish of Dr. King and a spiritual and organizational hub during the Civil Rights Movement—would be representing his state in the United States Senate.
"In just a few hours, though, my heart had fallen harder and faster than I can remember. Like all of you, I watched as a gang—organized, violent, and mad they'd lost an election—laid siege to the United States Capitol. They set up gallows. They proudly waved the traitorous flag of the Confederacy through the halls. They desecrated the center of American government. And once authorities finally gained control of the situation, these rioters and gang members were led out of the building not in handcuffs but free to carry on with their days. The day was a fulfillment of the wishes of an infantile and unpatriotic president who can't handle the truth of his own failures. And the wreckage lays at the feet of a party and media apparatus that gleefully cheered him on, knowing full well the possibility of consequences like these.
"It all left me with so many questions—questions about the future, questions about security, extremism, propaganda, and more. But there's one question I just can't shake: What if these rioters had looked like the folks who go to Ebenezer Baptist Church every Sunday? What would have been different?
"I think we all know the answer. This summer's Black Lives Matter protests were an overwhelmingly peaceful movement—our nation's largest demonstrations ever, bringing together people of every race and class and encouraging millions to reexamine their own assumptions and behavior. And yet, in city after city, day after day, we saw peaceful protestors met with brute force. We saw cracked skulls and mass arrests, law enforcement pepper-spraying its way through a peaceful demonstration for a presidential photo op.
"And for those who call others unpatriotic for simply taking a knee in silent protest, for those who wonder why we need to be reminded that Black Lives Matter at all, yesterday made it painfully clear that certain Americans are, in fact, allowed to denigrate the flag and symbols of our nation. They've just got to look the right way.
"What do all those folks have to say now?
"Seeing the gulf between the responses to yesterday's riot and this summer's peaceful protests and the larger movement for racial justice is so painful. It hurts. And I cannot think about moving on or turning the page until we reckon with the reality of what we saw yesterday. True progress will be possible only once we acknowledge that this disconnect exists and take steps to repair it. And that also means coming to grips with the reality that millions voted for a man so obviously willing to burn our democracy down for his own ego.
"I hurt for our country. And I wish I had all the solutions to make things better. I wish I had the confidence that people who know better will act like it for more than a news cycle or two. All I know is that now is a time for true patriotism. Now is the time for those who voted for this president to see the reality of what they've supported—and publicly and forcefully rebuke him and the actions of that mob. Now is the time for Silicon Valley companies to stop enabling this monstrous behavior—and go even further than they have already by permanently banning this man from their platforms and putting in place policies to prevent their technology from being used by the nation's leaders to fuel insurrection. And if we have any hope of improving this nation, now is the time for swift and serious consequences for the failure of leadership that led to yesterday's shame.
"Thankfully, even in the darkness, there are glimmers of hope. It's something I imagine Reverend Warnock has preached about before—and I'm still heartened beyond belief that he's headed to Washington. I'm glad his fellow Georgian Jon Ossoff is, too, and that together they'll help give control of Congress back to the only party that's shown that it can put our democracy above its own short-term political fortunes. I pray that every American, especially those who disagree with them, will give our new Congress, President-Elect Biden, and Vice President-Elect Harris the chance to lead us in a better direction.
"But make no mistake: The work of putting America back together, of truly repairing what is broken, isn't the work of any individual politician or political party. It's up to each of us to do our part. To reach out. To listen. And to hold tight to the truth and values that have always led this country forward. It will be an uncomfortable, sometimes painful process. But if we enter into it with an honest and unwavering love of our country, then maybe we can finally start to heal."
Startling Images Show Trump Mob Breaching Capitol
Dear Former Trump Staffers Who Just Resigned: STFU
How to Channel Your Rage Over the Capitol Riot
Starr Bowenbank Assistant News Editor Starr Bowenbank is the assistant news editor who writes about all things pertaining to news, pop culture, and entertainment—you can follow her here.
The FDA Has Approved Abortion Pills by Mail
How You Can Help the Kentucky Tornado Survivors
What to Know About the Mississippi Abortion Case
Fact Check: The Anti-Choice Agenda Is About Racism
An Abortion Care Provider on Life After SB 8
Women Are Tired of Being America's Fallback Plan
Cecile Richards: "Ruth Would Want Us to Organize"
Texas Passes Most Restrictive U.S. Abortion Law
A Young Afghan Woman on Her Future
How to Help Haiti Earthquake Victims
Michelle Obama Is Ready to Move On
Michelle Obama Will Be on Sabado Gigante This Saturday!
Prince Harry Speaks Out About the Capitol Riot
Woman Who Called FLOTUS "Ape" Gets Job Back
West Virginia Official Fired for Racist Comment
Melania Trump Brings a Tiffany & Co. Box


Regal african figures adorn these sculptural pen holders (ball point cartridge not included). Although designed to be functional these pieces work just as well if used as decorative accents on your desk. Detail work on each pen varies, as shown in the photo.


'Zaoheibao' (a red tetraploid hybrid) and 'Wuhecuibao' (a white triploid hybrid) grapes have been obtained from Guibao? (diploid, Vitis vinifera) × Zaomeigui? (diploid, V. vinifera) and Guibao? (diploid, V. vinifera) × Wuhebaijixin? (triploid, V. vinifera) respectively. Aroma characterisation of the two new table grape cultivars was firstly done by the investigation of volatile compounds. The influence of greenhouse cultivation and vintage on berry aroma was studied as well. The results showed that linalool, decanal, β-damascenone, hexanal and (E)-2-hexenal were the main volatile compounds of the two cultivars, which meant that the floral, fruity and sweet odour were prominent, followed by the herbaceous aroma. Greenhouse cultivation enhanced herbaceous odour in both 'Wuhecuibao' and 'Zaoheibao' berries, and reduced the floral aroma, contributed mainly by β-damascenone, in 'Wuhecuibao', and the sweet aroma, represented mainly by linalool, in 'Zaoheibao'. The concentrations of the main aroma compounds were greatly affected by vintage and the intensity of sensorial perception was correspondingly changed, but varietal odour attributes were not significantly altered. These results will not only help promote the cultivation and popularisation of these cultivars, but also will provide valuable data for the use of these cultivars in future breeding.


Duffy the Disney Bear's newest friend, Cookie, has arrived at Hong Kong Disneyland.
According to Disney, Duffy and Cookie met on Main Street U.S.A. and when they bumped into each other Duffy's cotton candy and Cookie's waffles went flying … but Cookie came up with a new recipe: a cotton candy waffle sandwich.
A new show starring Moana has opened at Hong Kong Disneyland.
The show, Moana: A Homecoming Celebration, features storytelling, dancing, puppetry, and music to tell the story of Moana after she returns to her village.
This is the first show at the Disney Parks to star Moana, and guests are invited to interact with the characters during the outdoor show.
The show features custom-made props including costumes that took more than a year to create.
Guests at Hong Kong Disneyland can also now meet Moana in Adventureland.


Rouge Salon & Spa takes care of your beauty from finger to toe and everything in between.
If you would like to be satisfied with a brand new hairstyle, you need to come visit Rouge Salon & Spa. Let us trim away your troubles and shape a whole new you.
Visit us soon, so we can help you get back to your best self.
For the best facial treatments in the Dearborn, MI area, give Rouge Salon & Spa a call today!
When you need to treat yourself, look no further than Rouge Salon & Spa.
Rouge Salon & Spa is the premier salon and spa in Dearborn, Michigan. Our experienced beauty technicians never fail to please. Whether you need some help easing away the stress and toil of your busy day, or you want to primp yourself for a big event, only Rouge Salon & Spa can give you the top-quality service you deserve.
You want to look your best wherever you go. Proper salon work is your sword and shield at professional and social events. With the help of Rouge Salon & Spa, you can take on the world.
You will be amazed at the skill, the speed, and the pleasure of having one of our hairstylists revitalize your lovely locks. Your friends will gasp when they see you sporting a custom nail design found only at our salon.
We do eyelash extensions and facial peels. We thread, cut, and wax any hair. You can even get an essential oil treatment that removes excess earwax. We can provide all of the care and attention that you have been neglecting. The simple fact is,Rouge Salon & Spa will fine-tune your beauty to its maximum potential.


text:
Group raises $20K to bail moms out of North Carolina jail for Mother's Day
by: WNCN
Just ahead of Mother's Day, several moms are being bailed out of jail in Cumberland County, North Carolina.
Police Accountability and Community Task Force, or P.A.C.T, in Fayetteville is paying for it. The group raised more than $20,000 to bail out moms.
They're only bailing out mothers who have not been convicted, but are in jail waiting on a court date. A single mother of two was one of them.
"It was painful, I basically sat in a cell and cried the whole time because I missed my kids, I've never been away from them like that," said the mom who wanted to remain anonymous, "It's nice being with my child and not being in there and staying in there another day because I've never, never ever been to jail, it's a scary situation."
The group plans to bail out at least four mothers in Cumberland County and surrounding counties.
Organizers say they will continue to do it until the funds run out.
"We have a lot that have failure to appear that we could get out, it depends on the circumstances, what crime was committed, if it's a non-violent offense, if it's a recurring individual," said Fayetteville P.A.C.T Vice President Kathy Greggs.
The group says the goal is to put an end to cash bonds that keep people locked up who can't afford bail.
The group says they're planning a homecoming for the mother's just out this week, and a similar event for Father's Day.


text:
New Top Menu
Country Music Pride Stick 'em up!
Band Interviews
Songwriters Interviews
Alt Country Corner
Amateur Country Covers
Classic Country Corner
I Love This Country
State of Country
Eric Church and wife Katherine Share Picture of Baby Boone
By CMP on December 20, 2011 in Artists, News
"It will be interesting to see how this new chapter in our life manifests itself musically. I've always made music that was representative of real life. Life doesn't get more real than. . .
Eric Church is well known for his singing, his songwriting and most recently his GRAMMY nominated third album "Chief". He's picked and penned many a solo tune and many a collaboration. Many of which many are familiar with.
But in 2011 amidst his rising success, his release of "Chief" and his relentless touring, Eric collaborated with a beautiful young woman and created a masterpiece whose story's just begun.
Eric Church and his beautiful wife Katherine share their collaboration with the public for the first time. Boone McCoy Church, born on Oct. 3, 2011 at 7 lbs / 11 oz meets the world for the first time at 10-weeks old. A very healthy and happy boy indeed looking up from the casing of his daddy's 6-string guitar. And according to Eric, the most amazing gift he's ever received.
"Everybody always tells you what an awesome and unique experience being a parent is," says Eric. "But words can never do the feeling justice. The way our life changed in that 24-hour period alone after he was born – just by putting a little boy in the house – was awesome."
Mom and dad will be celebrating their son's first Christmas at home with family.
Country Music Pride would like to extend a big WELCOME to Boone and a big thank you to Eric and Katherine for sharing your most precious and personal gift with us. May you have a wonderful "First Christmas as parents" with many more to follow.
And fans can follow Eric's headlining tour, The Blood, Sweat & Beers Tour, beginning in 2012 on January 19th in Fort Smith, AR.
About CMP
Country Music Pride: best little country music hotspot
View all posts by CMP →
awesome mom, Baby, Boone, christmas at home, collaboration, Eric Church, fort smith ar, Gift, mccoy church, picture
Stocking Stuffer Alert-Zac Brown Band's Coy Bowles Writes Childrens Book
Jimmy Wayne's "Paper Angels" is More Than a Story about a Seasonal Program
Contrary to the name, Country Music Pride is not just about country—we're also about bluegrass, folk, alt-country and a fair amount of classic rock—but most of all, we're about love. We built this site because we love the music and wanted to provide an online music source for a genre that didn't quite have its Pitchfork Media or Nah Right equivalent. We seek to provide engaging, fresh content daily, ranging from news and features to album reviews to in-depth interviews with some of the top performers today, from Dan Tyminski to Dolly Parton.
This is a site for the fans. We believe an online music source is nothing if the fans can't participate, so we're always trying to find new avenues for our readers to get involved. We have crowd-participation open threads on hot country topics, plenty of fun promotional contests and we encourage written contributions by dedicated country fans.
So go Country Music Pride...because if you say you like "everything, but country," we'll know you're lying.
© 2019 Country Music Pride. All Rights Reserved.


text:
Home \ AP \ Supreme Court Upholds Indiana Abortion Law on Fetal Remains
Supreme Court Upholds Indiana Abortion Law on Fetal Remains
FILE – In this Oct. 10, 2017, file photo, the Supreme Court in Washington, at sunset. The Supreme Court is upholding an Indiana law that requires abortion providers to dispose of aborted fetuses in the same way as human remains. But the justices are staying out of the debate over a broader provision that would prevent a woman in Indiana from having an abortion based on gender, race or disability. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite, File)
By MARK SHERMAN Associated Press
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld an Indiana law that requires abortion providers to dispose of aborted fetuses in the same way as human remains, a sign that the conservative court is more open to abortion restrictions.
But the justices rejected the state's appeal of a lower court ruling blocking a separate provision that would prevent a woman in Indiana from having an abortion based on gender, race or disability.
The high court, with two liberal justices dissenting, thus found a way perhaps to signal a greater receptivity to state restrictions in the area of abortion without yet welcoming a more direct challenge to abortion rights.
The court split 7-2 in allowing Indiana to enforce the requirement that clinics either bury or cremate fetal remains, reversing a ruling by a federal appeals court that had blocked it. The justices said in an unsigned opinion that the case does not involve limits on abortion rights.
Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor dissented. Ginsburg said in a short solo opinion that she believes that the issue does implicate a woman's right to have an abortion "without undue interference from the state."
The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago had blocked both provisions of a law signed by Vice President Mike Pence in 2016 when he was Indiana's governor.
The Supreme Court's action Tuesday keeps it out of an election-year review of the Indiana law amid a flurry of new state laws that go the very heart of abortion rights. Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey this month signed a law that would ban virtually all abortions, even in cases of incest and rape, and subject doctors who perform them to criminal prosecution. That law has yet to take effect and is being challenged in court.
Other states have passed laws that would outlaw abortion once a fetal heartbeat has been detected, typically around six weeks of gestation.
Still, the high court is expected to hear at least one abortion-related case in its term that begins in October and ends in June 2020. In February, the justices blocked a Louisiana law that regulates abortion clinics, pending a full review.
The Indiana measure that would have prevented a woman from having an abortion for reasons related to race, gender or disability gets closer to the core abortion rights. While the justices declined to hear the state's appeal of that blocked provision Tuesday, they indicated that their decision "expresses no view on the merits."
Justice Clarence Thomas, who supports overturning the Roe v. Wade decision that first declared abortion rights, wrote a 20-page opinion in which he said the Indiana provision promotes "a state's compelling interest in preventing abortion from becoming a tool of modern-day eugenics." No other justice joined the opinion.
Thomas and Ginsburg also engaged in a brief battle of dueling footnotes in which Thomas said Ginsburg's dissent "makes little sense." Ginsburg wrote that Thomas' footnote "displays more heat than light," including Thomas' calling a woman who has an abortion a mother. "A woman who exercises her constitutionally protected right to terminate a pregnancy is a not a 'mother,'" she wrote.
One other noteworthy aspect of the court's action Tuesday was the silence of liberal Justices Stephen Breyer and Elena Kagan, who vote regularly to uphold abortion rights. By not joining their liberal colleagues in dissent, Breyer and Kagan helped Roberts in his desire to avoid, where possible, controversial outcomes that split the five conservatives and four liberals. The two also may have preserved their ability to negotiate with, if not influence, Roberts in other cases.
The court upheld the fetal remains provision under the least stringent standard of review courts employ. The legislation only needed to be rationally related to the state's interest in the proper disposal of the remains, the court said. Indiana met that burden, it said.
The court said it is leaving open court challenges to similar laws under a higher legal standard.
AP, Children & Families, News
AP, Children & Families, News | May 28, 2019 10:35 am


text:
<?php

namespace Drupal\views\Plugin\views\argument_validator;

use Drupal\Core\Form\FormStateInterface;
use Drupal\views\Plugin\views\argument\ArgumentPluginBase;
use Drupal\views\Plugin\views\PluginBase;

/**
 * @defgroup views_argument_validate_plugins Views argument validate plugins
 * @{
 * Plugins for validating views contextual filters.
 *
 * Views argument validator plugins validate arguments (contextual filters) on
 * views. They can ensure arguments are valid, and even do transformations on
 * the arguments. They can also provide replacement patterns for the view title.
 * For example, the 'content' validator verifies verifies that the argument
 * value corresponds to a node, loads that node, and provides the node title
 * as a replacement pattern for the view title.
 *
 * Argument validator plugins extend
 * \Drupal\views\Plugin\views\argument_validator\ArgumentValidatorPluginBase.
 * They must be annotated with
 * \Drupal\views\Annotation\ViewsArgumentValidator annotation, and they
 * must be in namespace directory Plugin\views\argument_validator.
 *
 * @ingroup views_plugins
 * @see plugin_api
 */

/**
 * Base argument validator plugin to provide basic functionality.
 */
abstract class ArgumentValidatorPluginBase extends PluginBase {

  /**
   * The argument handler instance associated with this plugin.
   *
   * @var \Drupal\views\Plugin\views\argument\ArgumentPluginBase
   */
  protected $argument;

  /**
   * Sets the parent argument this plugin is associated with.
   *
   * @param \Drupal\views\Plugin\views\argument\ArgumentPluginBase $argument
   *   The parent argument to set.
   */
  public function setArgument(ArgumentPluginBase $argument) {
    $this->argument = $argument;
  }

  /**
   * Retrieves the options when this is a new access control plugin.
   */
  protected function defineOptions() {
    return [];
  }

  /**
   * Provides the default form for setting options.
   */
  public function buildOptionsForm(&$form, FormStateInterface $form_state) {}

  /**
   * Provides the default form for validating options.
   */
  public function validateOptionsForm(&$form, FormStateInterface $form_state) {}

  /**
   * Provides the default form for submitting options.
   */
  public function submitOptionsForm(&$form, FormStateInterface $form_state, &$options = []) {}

  /**
   * Determines if the administrator has the privileges to use this plugin.
   */
  public function access() {
    return TRUE;
  }

  /**
   * Blocks user input when the form is shown but we don´t have access.
   *
   * This is only called by child objects if specified in the buildOptionsForm(),
   * so it will not always be used.
   */
  protected function checkAccess(&$form, $option_name) {
    if (!$this->access()) {
      $form[$option_name]['#disabled'] = TRUE;
      $form[$option_name]['#value'] = $form[$this->option_name]['#default_value'];
      $form[$option_name]['#description'] .= ' <strong>' . $this->t('Note: you do not have permission to modify this. If you change the default filter type, this setting will be lost and you will NOT be able to get it back.') . '</strong>';
    }
  }

  /**
   * Performs validation for a given argument.
   */
  public function validateArgument($arg) {
    return TRUE;
  }

  /**
   * Processes the summary arguments for displaying.
   *
   * Some plugins alter the argument so it uses something else internally.
   * For example the user validation set's the argument to the uid,
   * for a faster query. But there are use cases where you want to use
   * the old value again, for example the summary.
   */
  public function processSummaryArguments(&$args) {}

  /**
   * Returns a context definition for this argument.
   *
   * @return \Drupal\Core\Plugin\Context\ContextDefinitionInterface|null
   *   A context definition that represents the argument or NULL if that is
   *   not possible.
   */
  public function getContextDefinition() {}

}

/**
 * @}
 */

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


Our expert service technicans perform all maintenance and repair work for you.
We offer a comprehensive repair service from minor repairs to major overhauls. All repair work is completed to the highest of OEM specifications and guaranteed. There is a full support service on offer for the Detroit Diesel, Steyr Motors, Kubota and Deutz products.
We also maintain, repair and overhaul other brands such as Caterpillar, Perkins and MAN on all power ranges.


Retail sentiment is shifting in a big way. Many analysts point to the decline of nearly 10% in brick-and-mortar retail since last year as a signal that retail sentiment is down. However, the numbers say consumers are spending and optimistic, while industrial took the place of core assets as the second highest producing markets over the last year. Retail sentiment is shifting; here are 3 things you need to know.
That is, as brick-and-mortar stores are closing, new tenants, investors, and developers are looking at those same properties to play a big part in e-commerce's booming omnichannel operations. In order to provide same day delivery, retail needs warehouses, distribution centers, and fulfillment centers that are closer to urban centers. The big shift is that brick-and-mortar retail closures are being converted into major offline assets for online retailers.
Consumer spending is up. People are buying retail, just not in physical stores like they used to. According to a report issued by the Census Bureau, overall retail sales ticked up 4.5% this past spring. Brick-and-mortar retail declined by more than 5% while online retail posted an increase of close to 11% over the same period.
That has caused lessees and investors to rethink the space now occupied by former anchor stores in shopping centers across the country. Instead of trying to find the same old cookie cutter stores, retailers are shrinking their store space thereby reducing the rent that they pay. They are then using that smaller space to toy with experiential retail and new multi-purpose storefronts that act as a link in their local delivery chain.
Kroger is experimenting with online ordering and pick-up, just like Wal-Mart and Amazon. The new shift is encouraging smaller actors and mid-sized retail chains to do the same thing. Some retailers have been choosing to close their physical stores and redirect traffic to their online stores.
Yet Forrester Research predicts a close to 15% increase in overall retail sales this year and online retail makes up less than 13% of those sales. Choosing to revamp traditional retail is proving to be a big shift in the way that it is being used to attract new foot traffic offline.
Retailers have feared that a shift over the all-important Black Friday weekend would lead to more sales online than at their physical stores. Based on consumer sentiment, it appears that those fears have been overblown. Consumers are feeling very optimistic and forecasts all predict increasing retail sales over the coming holidays.
Instead of competing for space online, some are shifting to a comprehensive strategy where their online stores are used to compliment their brick-and-mortar assets and vice versa. By improving the in-person shopping experience and utilizing coupon apps to promote sales events online and offline, retailers are able to increase sales at their physical stores while also improving their position in the online retail space. 2017 looks to see some of the biggest shifts in holiday retail that we've seen to date.


text:
CSAR-X… "Canceled for Convenience"
Jun 03, 2009 14:32 UTC by Defense Industry Daily staff
HH-47 Concept
The $10-15 billion CSAR-X competition aimed at replacing the USAF's HH-60G Pave Hawk combat search-and-rescue helicopters has seen many twists and turns. From profiles of the original options, to transfers of program responsibility between AFSOC and the USAF and the withdrawal of the PRV-22 Osprey from competition, to Sikorsky's decision to offer the H-92 Superhawk, to Boeing HH-47 Chinook's contract win in November 2006, the CSAR-X/PRV program has been eventful indeed.
February 26, 2007 added one more big event: the US Government Accountability Office, a non-partisan agency of Congress, upheld Sikorsky and Lockheed Martin's protests over Boeing's win. Would the GAO ruling be interpreted narrowly, triggering a double-checking exercise, or more broadly, triggering a renewed evaluation process? Worse, could the GAO's follow-up defining the award's problem areas create so many issues that further protests from whomever loses bring the program to a halt? The USAF released its RFP v2.0, but Sikorsky and Lockheed Martin filed renewed protests even before the new RFP's due date. The USAF kept trying to push forward with an accelerated process, but barriers have mounted as it has lost – repeatedly. Meanwhile, the Pave Hawks aren't getting any younger, or more capable.
DID looks at the 3 competing helicopters' key advantages and disadvantages, and chronicles the events surrounding the GAO protest and subsequent developments. After their second loss before the GAO, the USAF has now decided to re-compete the contract – in full, with RFP Amendment 5. Which came out at about the same time as a report alleging that CSAR-X's criteria were changed to allow Boeing's HH-47 to compete. Meanwhile, almost $100 million is required to update the old HH-60 helicopters, as a result of all the delays.
The latest item is formal cancellation of the CSAR-X contract, per SecDef Gates' FY 2010 budget recommendations:
The GAO's February 2007 Decision
The USAF's Choices, and its Quandary
The CSAR-X Controversy: Updates & Subsequent Events
H-92's 2nd chance?
A Feb 26/07 GAO decision set this entire sequence in motion. It was quickly published in redacted form; Rotorhub had excerpts:
"By decision of today, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) sustained the bid protests of Sikorsky Aircraft Company and Lockheed Martin Systems Integration-Oswego (LMSI) against the Department of the Air Force's award of a contract to The Boeing Company, under request for proposals No. FA8629-06-R-2350, for the Combat Search and Rescue Replacement Vehicle (CSAR-X).
The solicitation provided that for purposes of the source selection, cost/price would be calculated on the basis of the Most Probable Life Cycle Cost (MPLCC), including both contract and operations and support costs. GAO sustained the protest on the basis that the Air Force's actual evaluation of MPLCC was inconsistent with the required approach as set forth in the solicitation.
GAO recommended that the Air Force amend the solicitation to reflect its intent with respect to the evaluation of MPLCC, reopen discussions with offerors, and then request revised proposals. GAO further recommended that if the evaluation of revised proposals results in a determination that Boeing's proposal no longer represents the best value to the government, the agency should terminate its contract. GAO also recommended that Sikorsky and LMSI be reimbursed the costs of filing and pursuing their protests, including reasonable attorneys' fees."
A decision that kicked off all of the events to follow.
In truth, each helicopter has strengths and weaknesses:
Boeing's H-47 Chinook is in demand in Afghanistan because its extra power gives it the muscle to fly with a useful cargo load in "hot and high" conditions that can cripple smaller helicopters. Its twin-rotor design also allows for more precise positioning, and gives it some close-in hovering maneuvers that other helicopters will find hard to duplicate. Compatibility with the US and global helicopter fleets is excellent, and the CH-47's service as the MH-47G Special Ops variant gives Boeing an edge with respect to early delivery and minimal R&D costs. On the negative side, it's a larger and noisier target, with more rotor downwash, the worst fuel economy, higher maintenance requirements, slower assembly after being flown over in a C-17 or C-5, and dimensions that make stowage and maintenance within Navy ships difficult to impossible.
Lockheed Martin's US101 is based on the European EH101. The EH101 is the only platform in the competition offering 3 engines, which ensures power to spare even if one is shot out. Compatibility with NATO allies is good, it boasts long range if an extra tank used, and it can be based aboard Navy ships to expand deployment options. On the negative side, it carries that extra fuel tank in its belly – not ideal for a helicopter that will be shot at a lot. The design also has other issues. Some operators (vid. Canada) have experienced mechanical problems and/or maintenance cost issues with their EH101 fleets, the British EH101 Mk3s continue to suffer from low readiness, and the US101-based VH-71 Presidential helicopter staggered through a poor initial program rating and ballooning costs, into outright cancellation.
Sikorsky's H-92 Superhawk offers a lot of compatibility with the H-60 helicopter family, which comprises the majority of US military helicopters on land and sea – including the HH-60 Pave Hawks CSAR-X aims to replace. It can easily be based aboard ship, and claims both excellent operating costs and extensive survivability features. On the negative side, its 2 engines raise questions re: whether it's comparatively underpowered for the role, especially if one engine is shot out while the helicopter is operating in the hot, high-altitude conditions often found in the current war. It's also the smallest of the 3 entries, which is both a potential plus and a minus.
Other choices, such as the CH-53K, might exist if delivery could take place in a few years. Given this roster of contenders, however, it's really a question of which disadvantages the USAF finds easiest to live with in a combat search-and-rescue role.
If the government's word is indeed final.
Industry consolidation over the last few decades has given the government less power over individual contractors. The buyer's decision isn't always final any more, and contractors are in a better position to use options like protests in order to dispute selection processes or even selection criteria. The USAF still sees CSAR-X as an urgent priority – but many observers, including DID, questioned their ability to make it one in this environment.
Those doubts turned out the justified.
CH-149 SAR (EH101)
August 2011: the Air Force issues a Sources Sought solicitation for a HH-60 Recap Program.
This later morphed into the Combat Rescue Helicopter competition. Further coverage will be located at that article.
June 2/09: The Pentagon's DefenseLINK:
"The Air Force is terminating for convenience the System Development and Demonstration Contract for the HH-47 Combat Search and Rescue Recovery Vehicle Program with the Boeing Co., of Ridley Park, Pennsylvania for $712,156,535. This contract termination is a result of the CSAR-X program cancellation directed by the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics (FA8629-07-C-2350)."
April 6/09: After clearing the move with President Obama, US Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates takes the unusual step of making his FY 2010 budget recommendations public, in advance of their formal submission to the President. He recommends termination of the CSAR-X contract, and its possible move away from the USAF – a blow that would strike at the USAF's own belief in its moral duty to its airmen:
"This program has a troubled acquisition history and raises the fundamental question of whether this important mission can only be accomplished by yet another single-service solution… We will take a fresh look at the requirement behind this program and develop a more sustainable approach."
March 23/09: Sikorsky announces that it had furnished replacement studs and tools to all S-92 operators, and that 50 of 91 aircraft had been reworked already.
March 20/09: Canada's Transportation Safety Board identifies a broken titanium stud as part of the downed S-92 helicopter's gearbox oil filter assembly. Sikorsky had previously recommended be replaced with a steel stud within one year or 1,250 flight hours. CBC News.
March 11/09: An S-92 operated by Cougar Helicopters goes down in the sea with 18 people aboard, while ferrying workers to one of the offshore oil rigs off of Newfoundland, Canada. In the end, only 1 of the 18 passengers survived. Standard procedures give all passengers immersion suits, but winds were running between 25-35 knots, with a 3m/ 9-10 foot swell, and water temperatures near freezing. The Globe and Mail | See also CBC and Flight International report & photos. re: later Canadian TSB findings.
Jan 29/09: Aviation Week in "Pentagon Wanted Sole-source Search, Rescue":
"A Defense Department study guidance and the supporting e-mail trail show that the department was pushing for sole-source procurement for the mixed CSAR-X replacement fleet as late as the fall of 2005 and well into 2006 — even though Air Force CSAR-X requirements ruled out MH-60s, and concerns over costs, downwash and sufficient weaponry dropped the CV-22 out of the running. This meant only one aircraft in the analysis would likely meet the Air Force requirements — the MH-47 Chinook."
Jan 13/09: Aviation Week's "U.S. Air Force Battles To Keep CSAR Mission" reports that the USAF has been pushed back so far on CSAR-X that it is re-fighting the battle to have the program at all, or to own CSAR capabilities.
Part of the USAF's response is the same moral imperative other services have about leaving no-one behind. The service estimates 2,800 lives saved by its CSAR forces on the front lines since 2001, most of which were not USAF personnel.
In terms of why it should retain overall CSAR responsibility, the service argues that the distances and conditions under which it must operate don't always fit the "off the shelf" resources available to other services, such as normal combat helicopters. A dedicated USAF fleet avoids having to over-design general purpose equipment for potential use recovering downed USAF pilots, with all of the cost penalties that would create. Instead, the USAF argues, a smaller fleet of dedicated aircraft and helicopters can be designed for its needs to include key capabilities like air-to-air refueling, advanced sensors, etc., and perform the combat search-and-rescue mission for all branches of the US military.
Dec 23/08: Aviation Week reports that availability of Canada's CH-149 Cormorant (EH101) fleet is improving, but has yet to reach the expected 75% availability standard. A 2008 report had placed the helicopters' availability at around 50%, and concluded that minimum operational requirements could only be met by buying more aircraft, or reducing maintenance inspections.
An operational availability improvement program involving faster spares supply; faster return of repaired, of repaired and overhauled items; lengthened inspection intervals; and other measures has begun. Even so, Canada's DND is reportedly waiting before it concludes that the program is a success. A recent report noted that 9/14 helicopters (64%) were available, but that number continues to fluctuate.
Dec 16/08: The Project On Government Oversight claims that the US Department of Defense Inspector General's report upholds USAF procurement criteria choices for CSAR-X:
"Specifically, POGO raised concerns that the Air Force Special Operations Command watered down the deployability requirement, even though a key performance parameter of the helicopter is the amount of time it can be deployed and ready to go in theater. We worried that the change in requirements may have resulted in the Air Force procuring the wrong helicopter for the mission.
The Department of Defense Inspector General found that this requirement was not changed improperly, and that the changes would not "adversely affect special operations capabilities in the Global War on Terror." Neither the report nor the results have been made publicly available – but we have the results in brief."
Copies of DoD IG Report #D-2009-027 (Project No. D2008-D000AB-0133.000) must be obtained through Freedom of Information requests. Meanwhile, POGO's abridged results can be found via this POGO link [PDF].
Oct 23/08: USAF assistant secretary for acquisition Sue Payton directs CSAR-X program staff to issue a minor amendment to the RFP. The offererors have been notified, and the amendment aims to clarify how USAF officials will make the source selection decision. The USAF release adds that:
"This amendment and resulting minor delay to the award of contract is not associated with the DOD inspector general's ongoing audit of the CSAR-X requirements development process. Air Force officials expect a final report will be released from the DOD IG later this year."
April 22/08: USAF officials release Amendment 6 to the CSAR-X RFP, on the grounds that new information and schedules in vendors' January 7/08 Amendment 5 proposals will require more time for review. According to the USAF release:
"Amendment 6 extends the planned contract award date and updates development timelines, schedules and realign funding. The exact award date has not been established… This amendment also incorporates the latest changes to specialty metals legislation, adjusts the award fee plan to increase the objective measurable criteria in accordance with the latest OSD guidance, and shifts the date for the Initial Operational Capability. Despite the shift, the Air Force's sense of urgency in delivering this capability to the warfighter remains the same."
March 26/08: USAF officials had hoped to declare an RFP winner by summer 2008, but Aviation Week reports that the service will be release a v6 RFP in the spring, and making a selection around October. The USAF said it needed more time to evaluate the very detailed proposals, and a Defense Acquisition Board (DAB) meeting on the program is likely to take place a month or so before the selection is made.
Meanwhile, the Pentagon's Inspector General investigation, and political fallout from EADS Airbus' win of the KC-45 aerial tanker program, remain wild cards in play.
Feb 22/08: The Pentagon's Inspector General will begin an audit in March 2008, to examine whether changes to "key performance parameters" for the helicopter were properly disclosed and vetted through the Pentagon's Joint Requirements Oversight Council. See Nov 15-16/07 items for more background. POGO report.
Feb 13/08: Lockheed Martin and AgustaWestland decide to improve their odds by completing their aerial refueling tests before the CSAR-X contract decision is made. This will pull them more even with the HH-47 Chinook, which already has significant experience via the MH-47G special forces model.
A British RAF Merlin Mk3 helicopter became the first British rotorcraft to demonstrate air-to-air refueling capability, plugging into the wing drogue pods of an Italian Air Force KC-130J tanker at 4,000 feet altitude, with both aircraft traveling at 127 knots. All trial objectives were completed with multiple in-flight refueling events successfully achieved up to the maximum Merlin Mk3 flying weight of 34,400 lbs. Both Britain and Italy stand to gain EH101-related contracts if the "HH-71" wins. AgustaWestland release.
Jan 28/08: The British Conservative Party issues a release and subsequent media background that give information re: the percentage of various fleet helicopter that are not in depth maintenance, and deemed "fit for service" (US nomenclature = mission capable, able to carry out their planned missions on a given date). The information does not appear positive for the EH101:
EH101 Merlin Mk1 (naval): 44%
EH101 Merlin Mk3 (trans): 53%
Lynx Mk7/9 (Army): 58%
CH-47 Chinook Mk3: 65%
AS330 Puma Mk1: 67%
Jan 7/08: Boeing announces that it has re-submitted its HH-47 for the v2.0 CSAR-X RFP. Boeing makes a number of specific claims in its release, which seems to be a growing trend for them:
"With the largest cabin size, highest operating altitude, lowest downwash velocity and most lift capacity of all competitors, the HH-47 provides CSAR crews with enhanced flexibility for demanding missions… With an unrefueled range of more than 775 nautical miles, the HH-47 also is the only entry with U.S.-certified aerial refueling and terrain-following/terrain-avoidance radar, further extending the HH-47's operational reach. Medical treatment, one of the most critical components of the CSAR mission, is maximized with the HH-47's environmentally controlled patient treatment area, real-time patient monitoring system and the ability to carry more survivors and treat more patients than any other entry."
Nov 16/07: Aviation Week alleges that at least one of the CSAR-X competitors ("almost certainly Boeing") asked for the key performance parameter (KPP) requirement change from "mission ready" within 3 hours of being transported into theater to the more lenient category of "flight ready"; Boeing's HH-47 subsequently passed that requirement by a narrow margin. Boeing company spokesperson Jenna McMullin denied this in a Nov 15/07 statement:
"To be clear, Boeing had absolutely no input toward the KPP changes… We agree that deployability is integral to saving lives, and the HH-47 will meet both mission and flight-ready requirements as a reliable, combat-proven platform."
Nov 15/07: Air Force officials release Amendment 5 to CSAR-X RFP, after a series of face-to-face meetings with all CSAR-X offerors. The 3 bidders now have 53 days to respond to RFP Amendment 5, and they may to update any portion of their proposals. However: "The performance-based requirements have not changed…"
The USAF release adds that Army and Navy specialists are being added to the team "in order to leverage their unique rotorcraft expertise," and a representative from the Office of the Secretary of Defense has also has been added to the team "to provide additional management experience."
Nov 15/07: The non-governmental Project On Government Oversight (POGO) releases a report concerning the CSAR-X acquisition process. "Rescue at Risk: Crucial Helicopter Requirement Weakened" appears to confuse strategic (getting the elements of a full operation in place, weeks/days) and tactical (this helicopter, hours/minutes) deployment speeds when discussing the importance of this performance parameter – and they are not the same thing. Nonetheless, it does offer a very complete chronology of the events involved.
POGO claims that in April 2005, USAF Special Operations command (AFSOC) requested a meeting with Boeing at the behest of the Office of the Secretary of Defense's (OSD) acquisition office. Special Operations Command's (US SOCOM, the umbrella command for US special forces) MH-47G was discussed, and Boeing told AFSOC that the Chinook could not be put back together in time to meet the 3-hour "mission ready" criterion after being airlifted to the mission site. According to POGO, Army Special Operations Command is quite fond of its MH-47Gs, which are currently used in CSAR missions, and AFSOC subsequently lobbied to have the requirements changed to allow a similar Chinook variant to compete. A full JROC (Joint Requirements Oversight Council) revision to the Key Performance Parameters (KPP) would have delayed the program by months, but it was possible to change "mission ready" to "flight ready" as an "administrative" rather than a "substantive" or "critical" change, without going through that process. POGO disputes this characterization of the change, and also alleges that proper testing procedures would have disqualified Boeing's HH-47 even with the revised parameter. Still…
"POGO would like to emphasize that none of these findings allege corruption or illegal action on the part of Air Force officials or the CSAR-X competitors. POGO's findings primarily point to failures in the acquisition process itself and possible violations of defense doctrine."
The organization recommends a DoD Inspector General investigation of the process that changed the KPP, and asks that the US DoD's Operational Test and Evaluation Directorate (DOT&E) be brought in as a 3rd party evaluator and tester.
Nov 13/07: Gannett's Air Force Times reports that the 2008 defense appropriations bill passed by Congress provides $99 million to keep the aging HH-60 Pave Hawk CSAR helicopter fleet operational until CSAR-X arrives. The report said that the HH-60 fleet will have to perform the search-and-rescue mission for "many years" longer than planned; Inside Defense suggests that even CSAR-X's Initial Operational Capability may not take place until Q3 2014 now.
Oct 24/07: U.S. Air Force Secretary Michael W. Wynne, speaking at a House Armed Services Committee hearing, said the final amendment to the CSAR-X request for proposals will be released in mid-November 2007; a draft was release on Oct 23/07. The 3 finalist bidders (Boeing, Lockheed Martin and Sikorsky Aircraft) will then be given 60 days to submit their proposals. The Air Force will then will take 30 days to make a selection, placing the v3.0 winner announcement in mid-February. Defense News.
S-92, UKMCA
Oct 14/07: The UK Maritime and Coastguard Agency announces that the first of 4 brand-new Sikorsky S-92 helicopters (a civilian version of the H-92), configured entirely for search and rescue (SAR), completed its maiden mission today for Stornoway Coastguard. The new helicopter is being operated on behalf of the Agency by CHC Scotia, who won an interim contract that provides for commercial search and rescue helicopter services from 4 civilian-operated bases – Sumburgh, Stornoway, Lee-on-Solent and Portland – for a five-year period from July 1/07 – July 1/12. The service provides a 24 hour coverage at Stornoway, where the S-92 is based.
This kind of deployment is critical for the H-92's ability to prove low risk for its platform, as it lacks the other contenders' operational experience. CHC Scotia's helicopters are fitted with 2 internal auxiliary fuel tanks of 210 gallons each, improved AFCS with auto-hover capability, Forward looking infra red (FLIR), dual rescue hoist, bubble window, cargo hook, search-light and loud hailer. The cabin can be arranged for installing triple medical litter kits, 1-2 extra fuel tanks, folding utility seats, and/or storage. The designated operator console provides search data including FLIR. UK MCA release.
Sept 26/07: The U.S. Air Force confirms that it will re-bid CSAR-X. The bid will be restricted to the existing 3 competitors, but allows them to include updates on pricing, cost and other program-related information in new proposal. The Air Force decision means the three competitors can essentially re-do their bids, in response to a new RFP.
Reports say that the common understanding among senior USAF officials is that information gathering for the issuance of a new RFP will be completed by year's end, but a new award will not take place until late summer or fall of 2008. This will create further pressure for fast fielding, and may help Boeing keep the contract, but other changes seem to improve Sikorsky's odds. Time will tell.
Aviation Week: "Air Force To Widen Scope Of CSAR-X Rebid" | "New CSAR-X RFP Should Help Repair AF Reputation"
Sept 19/07: ABC News reports that in Spring 2005, AFSOCOM officials changed a key performance parameter for CSAR-X, but labeled it as an administrative change rather than a fundamental change, in order to avoid a Joint Requirements Oversight committee process that would have delayed the project by 6 months or more. Initial requirements called for reassembly within three hours to make the helicopter mission capable. The KPP change altered that to "flight ready."
The Boeing H-47 variant, an aircraft with which AFSOCOM officials were well acquainted due to their experience with the MH-47G, just made that changed requirement. "USAF Made KPP Change To Keep CSAR-X On Schedule."
Aug 30/07: The GAO sustains the 2nd round of protests, and even recommends paying the protestors' attorney fees [File #B-299145.5; B-299145.6: HTML | PDF].
"We recommend that the Air Force permit offerors to revise both the cost/price and non-cost/price aspects of their proposals… Accordingly, we recommend that the Air Force permit offerors to revise both the cost/price and non-cost/price aspects of their proposals in response to the new evaluation scheme. We recognize that this represents a significant change in the Air Force's intended conduct of this procurement … and that the result could delay the acquisition. Nonetheless, in view of the fact that the record shows that the Air Force's change to its evaluation methodology could have affected the manner in which offerors prepared their proposals well beyond the O&S [operations and support] cost calculation, offerors should have the opportunity to revise their proposals in response. If the evaluation of revised proposals results in a determination that Boeing's proposal no longer represents the best value to the government, the agency should terminate its contract. We also recommend that LMSI and Sikorsky be reimbursed the costs of filing and pursuing their protests, including reasonable attorneys' fees. 4 C.F.R. sect. 21.8(d)(1). In accordance with 4 C.F.R. sect. 21.8(f)(1), the protesters' certified claims for such costs, detailing the time expended and costs incurred, must be submitted directly to the agency within 60 days after receipt of this decision."
See coverage from: Government Executive | The Hill magazine | Aviation Week on after-effects.
Late Aug: The September 2007 issue of the USAF's Air Force Magazine runs "The Struggle Over CSAR-X," outlining the program, the issues over the first round of protests, and the USAF's approach and position.
Aug 16/07: The Project On Government Oversight excerpts elements of Sikorsky's July 2/07 protest. One item was Air Force Secretary Michael Wynne's March 3/07 email to Lt. General John L. "Jack" Hudson saying that "I would like to stay with our selection" of Boeing's HH-47 Chinook helicopter for the combat search and rescue helicopter replacement (CSAR-X).
More context is required to really understand this snippet. Assuming that Sikorsky hasn't deleted a disclaimer in its quote (for instance, "I would like to stay with our selection, but if a revised process prompts a rethink then so be it."), one can interpret this two ways. One interpretation is that the re-submission process was a sham designed to ensure this course of action, and basically wasted everybody's time; the USAF's changes in response to the GAO ruling were certainly very narrow. Another possible interpretation is that Wynne is expressing a belief that the selection process picked the right helicopter overall, regardless of the RFP's criteria, given the real priorities at hand. A footnote in the Sikorsky protest speaks to this possibility, though it is not meant as a direct response to that email item:
"…the inherent inconsistency reflected in the record in this respect suggests that the Air Force's actual needs are unsettled and that the evaluation methodology does not square with what those needs actually may be. The appropriate course of action under such circumstances would be for the Air Force to withdraw Amendment 4, make a final assessment of what its needs actually are, develop evaluation criteria that are designed to assess offers against those needs, and issue an "Amendment 5," or a new consolidated RFP, that reflects a harmonious communion of needs and evaluation factors."
Then again, assume the USAF spent time doing that, and compiled an RFP whose weighting's left Sikorsky and Lockheed Martin's offerings disadvantaged, because it was very explicit about giving features like cost of operation a low priority and giving heavy weighting to benefits like fast delivery. How would that be materially different from the current situation, and wouldn't the content of the revision just spark another protest?
June 19/07: The U.S. Air Force said it wants the Government Accountability Office to act quickly on new protests filed. The GAO has offered to process the protests quickly, using mediation procedures if requested, and the Air Force has now said it would seek the speedy procedures. It has not changed its stance, however, and has no plans to change its program timeline in the meantime – including new cost data due this day, and the goal of picking a final winner in the Fall of 2007.
The Dow Jones report adds that barriers to that early decision may be mounting, and adds:
<"Lockheed Martin's US 101, using an aircraft made by a unit of Finmeccanica SpA (FNC.MI), was considered higher risk in part because of its performance on the VH-71 U.S. presidential helicopter program. Sikorsky's H-92 helicopter is the smallest of the three competitors."
July 2/07: Sikorsky submits its 2nd bid protest, aka. the "first supplemental protest." A copy can be found via the Project On Government Oversight [PDF].
June 11/07: Even before the new RFP's due date, Lockheed Martin submits its own protest, and the GAO confirms this via email. An Avitation Week report quotes Lockheed spokesman Greg Caires:
"Lockheed Martin has submitted a pre-award protest because we believe the Air Force's amended CSAR-X RFP does not comply with the corrective action recommended by the GAO earlier this year. We understand the urgent need for new CSAR aircraft and believe that a broader re-evaluation of bids, consistent with the GAO's recommendation, will result in an outcome that would better serve our nation's warfighters."
May 30/07: USAF publishes the revised RFP – and the changes are ever narrower than expected (see revised FedBizOpps page).
Aviation Week received USAF responses to the competitors. Will Operations and Support (O&S) items be re-evaluated? No, the amendment simply clarifies how they were calculated. Can the offeror adjust other factors, such as spares, support/test equipment, facilities, etc.? No. Will the USAF make any such adjustments? No. This means factors like differences in the cost to hangar the respective aircraft, tear down and build up those aircraft for transport, and ferry them for missions will not be considered.
Sikorsky claims that a Pentagon directive to consider fuel costs, including "hidden" infrastructure costs for transport and carrying fuel, is also ignored by the USAF's revised RFP. They have publicly said that they are "extremely disappointed," and refer to these changes as "unresponsive"; they have released a 5-page letter sharply criticizing the USAF decision, dated May 21 and signed by Sikorsky's director of government contracts, Ariel David [q.v. Reuters report]. Both Lockheed Martin and Sikorsky complain that the response is not in the spirit of the ruling, even as USAF Chief of Staff Moseley reportedly said that the USAF would not look kindly on on legal challenges, which could substantially delay the program.
Legal challenges may prove the least of Moseley's worries. Sikorsky's Connecticut includes Sen. Liberman [D-CT] who holds the balance of power in the Senate. Lockheed Martin's CSAR-X facility is in Sen. Hilary Clinton's state [D-NY]. Meanwhile, fellow Presidential candidate Sen. McCain [R-AZ] has submitted questions to the USAF regarding its CSAR-X bid process. Sikorsky has not ruled out lawsuits, but a company looking at all of its options may have a few here:
"Rest assured, Sikorsky will vigorously oppose any effort by the Air Force to repeat its mistakes, make new ones, or otherwise bypass the mandate for full and open competition."
May 14/07: Washington think-tank The Lexington Institute echoes some of the points made by Sen. Clinton [D-NY – Lockheed Martin's Owego facility is in her state] re: the suitability of the winning bid:
"The good news is that there was no conspiracy — as the Government Accountability Office has ruled, the source selection process was consistent with prevailing acquisition practices except for one relatively minor failing that will be corrected in the revised solicitation out this week. Now for the bad news: just about every pilot in the Air Force from the chief of staff on down thinks their acquisition officials picked the wrong helicopter in the initial selection. Here are a few items that got overlooked:"
CH-47 offers a helping
hand in Afghanistan
May 14/07: USAF officials announce the release of a draft amendment to the CSAR-X RFP. The final amendment is expected in early June 2007, with revised proposals expected "later this summer."
"The amended RFP will clarify the Air Force's evaluation of operations and support costs and will also provide the original offerors an opportunity to quantify and substantiate potential manpower efficiencies based on the reliability and maintainability characteristics of their proposed aircraft. Air Force subject matter experts from many career fields will then evaluate the offerors' proposed efficiencies. Air Force officials will then conduct a best-value assessment in accordance with the instructions outlined in the amended RFP."
April 25/07: Air Force officials announced their revised approach to the CSAR-X contract.
"…the Air Force expects to release a draft Request for Proposal amendment to the CSAR-X offerors in May, and will conduct meetings with the offerors to address comments and answer questions prior to the release of the official RFP amendment. "We believe the RFP amendment will meet both the letter and spirit of the GAO [Government Accountability Office] recommendation," said Sue C. Payton, Service Acquisition Executive… The amendment will clarify the Air Force's evaluation of Operation and Support costs and also give the offerors an opportunity to quantify and substantiate potential manpower efficiencies based on the reliability and maintainability characteristics of their proposed aircraft. Once the Air Force receives revised proposals from the offerors, Air Force officials will review and evaluate the offerors' proposed O&S efficiencies, and will conduct a new best value assessment based on an integration of the new O&S information along with the results of the original evaluation in the areas where the GAO found no problems."
Translation: we'll look at changing the contenders' scores for the operations and support component of our weighting, but unless that's enough to tip the balance and change the result, the award will still go to Boeing.
March 30/07: The GAO has issued their clarifications, effectively limiting grounds for reconsideration to the USAF's evaluation of operations and support costs. A statement from the US Air Force:
"The Government Accounting Office informed Air Force officials March 30 that all other protest issues surrounding the CSAR-X contract award have been denied. In a March 29 decision, the GAO denied all of the additional arguments raised by Sikorsky and Lockheed Martin Systems Integration, "finding that none furnished an additional basis for sustaining the protests."
…The Air Force will update the request for proposal with respect to the evaluation of operations and support costs, reopen discussions with offerors, and request revised proposals. If the evaluation of the revised proposals results in a change to the CSAR-X best value source selection, the Air Force will make any necessary changes in the contract award decision."
In other words, a re-solicitation on narrow grounds, not a re-competition on broad grounds.
March 27/07: The Lexington Institute pens an analysts' briefing entitled: "Saving CSAR: Combat Search-and-Rescue At Risk." The gist?
"…the Air Force asked GAO to identify all of the places where flaws may have occurred in the selection process, and those findings will form the basis for a re-solicitation… GAO may identify so many problems that the remedy ends up being a full re-compete between the three teams. Second, data released by GAO from the first round suggests the rival helicopters all bring unique virtues (and limitations) to the table that may produce the kind of close outcome in the second round likely to provoke further protests. Third, if Boeing does not prevail in the second round it could argue that its competitors were given unfair advantages by what they learned about their losses in the first round… the Air Force will be hard-pressed to bring the selection of a new search-and-rescue helicopter to closure."
March 22/07: Statement from the US Air Force "Air Force Responds to GAO CSAR-X Decision":
"The Air Force intends to issue an amendment to the Request for Proposal to clarify its intent with respect to the evaluation of Operations and Support (O&S) costs. The Air Force will issue an amendment after the GAO clarifies any remaining issues. The Air Force will ensure that all offerors are made aware of how Air Force manpower standards are applied and how the Air Force will assess CSAR-X manpower-associated O&S costs.
The Air Force has requested that GAO clarify whether any of the other issues contested during the protest, but not addressed in the GAO decision, are sustained or denied. The Air Force believes such information is important for purposes of complying with the GAO decision in a way that is transparent and fair to all offerors.
…Air Force officials said they understand that the GAO intends to issue its decision by June 15. The Air Force will consider and respond appropriately to the GAO's decision. If the evaluation of the revised proposals results in a change to the CSAR-X Best Value Source Selection decision, the Air Force will make any necessary changes in contract award."
March 20/07: Sen. Clinton's [D-NY] office
"Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton today questioned Air Force Secretary Michael W. Wynne and Air Force Chief of Staff General T. Michael Moseley about the Air Force's approach to the contract award for a new Combat Search and Rescue Helicopter, the CSAR-X program. In a hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee, of which Senator Clinton is a member, the Senator noted that the Government Accountability Office (GAO) recently ruled in favor of a bid protest regarding the Air Force's new Combat Search and Rescue Aircraft, the CSAR-X and then expressed her concerns about some of the public statements that the Air Force made in the aftermath of the decision. Lockheed Martin Owego was one of the bidders for the CSAR-X contract and now that the bidding has been reopened, Senator Clinton is working to make sure that the bidding process is fair and transparent. In response to her questioning, Secretary Wynne indicated that the Air Force would indeed take a broader approach to the evaluation of the proposals."
Transcript excerpt:
"…Senator Clinton: I understand very well how important this is to all of us but I believe that certain key performance parameters related to the terminal area were not listed as special interest items by the source selection team and I think that it might be appropriate, at least, to reconsider whether that would be something to include going forward… obviously we want to get it right, and I'm worried about the weight and the maneuverability and some of the issues that have now been pushed into the public arena because we do have to get it right."
Read the entire release page from Sen. Clinton's office, which includes a prepared statement by Sen. Clinton, transcripts of Sec. Wynne and Sen. Clinton's exchanges excerpted for the Q&A (full transcripts not available on committee site), and even a YouTube video.
March 15/07: Pentagon's Undersecretary Of Defense For Acquisition, Technology And Logistics Kenneth Krieg holds a press conference and discusses CSAR-X in response to questions. One of the key points he makes is the importance of speedy acquisition, a point that will later come under question by Sen. Clinton who notes that its overriding importance was not clear in the RFP.
Read the full transcript of Kenneth Krieg's briefing session.
HH-60G Pave Hawk
Feb 26/07: Excerpt from Sikorsky's release:
"We are pleased that the GAO has sustained Sikorsky's protest and are reviewing the GAO's decision to determine the appropriate course of action… We sought to ensure the selection process accurately evaluated the characteristics and performance of our HH-92(TM) SUPERHAWK… only helicopter in its size class certified to the latest U.S., Canadian and European safety standards…
This aircraft offers the lowest lifecycle costs of any medium lift helicopter. It is engineered to reduce routine maintenance requirements by 80 percent and operating costs by 40 percent when compared with past-generation helicopters…"
Boeing statement excerpt (via Rotorhub):
"We will take some time to review this decision to decide what our next steps will be regarding this contract. We still believe the HH-47 is the most capable platform… and provides the best value…"
Nov 9/06: USAF Gen. Michael T. Moseley, Chief of staff, announces the CSAR-X decision to the USAF community:
"Our ability to return isolated personnel to safety is a moral and ethical imperative, so we've made procurement of this new CSAR aircraft one of our highest weapon system procurement priorities. American and coalition war fighters can rest assured we will come to get them, no matter where they are. Today's battlefields are non-linear and non-contiguous, changing shape and venue with speed that outpaces and out-reaches legacy aircraft. The Air Force must have a more capable next-generation CSAR aircraft to better support US and coalition personnel isolated from friendly forces by distance, threat, weather and enemy action. We are committed to leaving no one behind – a commitment that gives all members of the joint and coalition team the confidence to perform vital work in hostile and uncertain circumstances.
We plan to acquire 141 CSAR-X helicopters to replace our aging inventory of HH-60G PAVE HAWK helicopters, and we expect to achieve Initial Operational Capability by the end of 2012 with the most capable CSAR aircraft ever. Range and payload remain the soul of an air force, and the HH-47 exceeds our requirements in both areas. It will be capable of flying faster over longer ranges and higher altitudes, day or night, during adverse weather conditions, while carrying more personnel and specialized equipment than our legacy platform. Its increased payload capability provides a dramatic improvement in the number of injured personnel that can be rescued per sortie. Additionally, the HH-47 will be net-ready and outfitted with advanced avionics giving crews vastly better battlespace awareness than ever before. HH-47 crews will employ the best force protection capabilities ever offered, including a suite of integrated defensive systems and onboard weapons that give them greater firepower, lethality, and standoff range than legacy systems."
Categories: Boeing, Finmeccanica, Helicopters & Rotary, Lobbying, Lockheed Martin, Official Reports, Policy - Procurement, United Technologies, USA