Federal Firearms License Kits And Also Guides – Free Or Acquired?
Each specific planning to run in company as a firearms or rounds importer or producer, or supplier in firearms shall submit an federal firearms license application, with the required fee against ATF in accordance with the directions on the kind and, pursuant to this receive the certificate required for such company from the primary, National Licensing Center. Other than as enabled in some unique instances, a permit must be held for each company as well as each location at which the applier is to do business.
Federal government concerns regulation, rules as well as making sure the guidelines and also laws are complied with. Government makes nothing at all. For instance, NASA does not in fact construct rocket parts, however they do construct and also oversee the whole entire procedure. If there were no subcontractors developing the pieces parts, what would NASA launch into space? Absolutely nothing!
To obtain a FFL certificate you should recognize that you must have stamina, strength, time, and also income. Managing numerous organizations and authorities organizations can typically time be a disappointment encounter.
Each specific seeking the advantages of a collector certified shall register an application, with the necessaried charge, against ATF in accord against the instructions on the kind too. This license is the one dealing with the collection of curios and relics. A different license could be gotten for each collection position, and that permit shall, based on the provisions of the regulation, entitle the licensee to transport, ship, get, and acquire curios and relics in interstate or foreign commerce. Also this permit lets one hand over curios and also relics in interstate or foreign commerce, to any type of some other individual accredited under the provisions of this license, for the duration posted on the permit.
This education will only start to teach you ways to actually be a gunsmith. federal firearms license www.nmt-inc.com. Formal exercise is merely a requirement to the project launching you to the resources and skills included and also giving you a refresher course on security. Some gunsmith's avoid this action and also go straight to get 2 of this ways to direct on how to come to be a gunsmith, yet that is not recommended.
It is pretty evident that you need a federal firearms permit (FFL) to operate a guns business and also purchase weapons for self cheaper. Evident as it might seem, the procedure of acquiring it is very a handful for some people and consequently some merely provide up on the procedure. Becoming a house based FFL supplier is a chance to make some huge cash and also is thus worth all the attempt to should get the licence. Fortunately enough the FFL application procedure has actually been made simpler thanks to help from individuals like Brandon Maddox who is an achieved FFL and SOT FFL course 3 licence holder.
A gunsmith is a trained plumber that makes, customizes, produces, replacements, repairs, cleanses, takes apart, assembles, inscribes, maintains and/or sells firearms. Competent as you can guess is a crucial word. Though gunsmiths often focus on one certain kind of tool or in one or two of the above stated applications, knowledge as well as know how of engineering, wood working and also metal working are all called for as a basic minimum.


text:
Six six businesses were feted at the 2016 Surrey Board of Trade Business Excellence Awards.
Surrey Board of Trade announces Business Excellence Award winners
Six businesses were honoured at the 18th annual award ceremony
Roughly 400 of the city's business leaders rubbed shoulders last night (Nov. 3) at the 18th annual Surrey Business Excellence Awards held at the Sheraton Vancouver Guildford Hotel. A total of six businesses picked up awards at the posh event honouring entrepreneurial endeavours emceed by Global News sports anchor Jay Janower.
"The Surrey Board of Trade focused on the strength and innovation within every entrepreneur to take an idea and use it as the foundation for building a business," said the board's CEO Anita Huberman. "They are inspirational – from the very small business to the large business to the not-for-profit service organization to the very innovative student entrepreneurs."
Curtis Christopherson was named business person of the year. The owner of an Innovative Fitness location in South Surrey, Christopherson also founded and owns a Denver-based company called RAD and has become a partner at Reflex Supplements in Surrey. Since his involvement with Reflex Supplements, the company has almost doubled in size and is now the most successful supplement retail chain in Western Canada.
Innovative Fitness, a professional fitness training company that offers one-on-one training with coaches, also earned the award for best medium-sized business (11 to 40 employees). Peninsula Strata Management Ltd. won for best small business (10 or fewer employees) and Bottom Line Ventures Ltd., which currently operates 14 Subway restaurants in the Lower Mainland, won for best large business. Bottom Line Ventures also won the third annual Corporate Social Responsibility Recognition Award.
Famoso Neapolitan Pizzeria picked up the hardware for best new business. The Guilford location, which opened in 2015, operates a full service bar and serves up menu items that are not available at other locations while offering traditional-style pizzas prepared the same way as in Naples, Italy.
The best non-profit nod went to Options Community Services, who have supported families and promoted community health in the region for nearly half a century. They operate over 80 different services which include: employment services, family and children's intervention services, homeless services, housing and mental health supports, a crisis line, services for immigrants, violence-prevention programs, youth and school based services, and specialized counselling services.
Foreign real estate investment stays low
B.C. Liberal delegates back ride sharing

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
The DHS Cutter Study, Trade-offs, and the Case for "Cutter X"
Posted on October 12, 2012 by Chuck Hill
I have had an opportunity to look a bit more closely at the Department of Homeland Security Cutter Fleet Study, "Options for the Future USCG Cutter Fleet Performance Trade-Offs with Fixed Acquisition Cost," by Alarik Fritz • Raymond Gelhaus • Kent Nordstromr (.pdf).
I highly recommend at least the synopsis, which is the first thirteen pages. I think the study is an honest attempt to determine the best mix for the Coast Guard fleet; it is quite well done. Basically it holds cost constant and looks at possible alternatives to build the most effective fleet possible. It builds on work done for the earlier Coast Guard Fleet mix studies, but unlike the CG studies, it looks at alternatives to the program of record. It looks at where the missions are being performed and considers the effects of weather on mission performance in four regions, the Northeast, Southeast, West, and Alaska.
The study considers:
trading National Security Cutters (NSC) for more Offshore Patrol Cutters (OPC) (Approx. two OPCs per NSC)
trading OPC as currently described for OPCs that have reduced capabilities but retain the seakeeping and endurance of the OPCs (This was postulated but not explored in depth. It did not appear to make much difference.)
trading OPCs for a modernized version of the 270 (approx. four mod-270s for three OPCs)
trading OPCs for an equal number of LCS (This was seen as a non viable choice because of the higher cost and lower seakeeping and endurance of the LCS)
The problems (and these were recognized by the study) are:
Further delays in beginning building ships severely impacts near term capability
A major Cutter fleet of only NSCs and mod-270s does not meet the needs for heavy weather capability where it does exist.
Because the Mod-270s have as large a crew as the OPCs, a larger number of ships would add to the operating cost of the fleet.
What comes through loud and clear, from this study is that
We need ships with the capability to do boat and helicopter ops in State Five Seas particularly in the Northeast and Alaska.
In the Southeast and West, where the primary missions are Drug Enforcement and Migrant Interdiction, we are a long way from a point of diminishing returns, that is, mission performance is most directly linked to the number of cutters, increasing in in almost direct proportion to the number available.
The cutters ability to launch boats and helicopters in State Five conditions are much less important in the West and Southeast where most of the cutters are normally deployed.
In simplistic terms, while we need some highly capable hulls, we also need even more hulls on patrol, but the additional hulls don't need to be particularly sophisticated. This leads me to the conclusion to the we really need another option, another class of ship, I'll call it "Cutter X." Think of this new class as taking the crew and equipment of a Webber class Fast Response Cutter (FRC) and putting them in a larger hull with more endurance and seakeeping, while accepting lower top speed than the FRC. We can take advantage of the training and corporate experience with the FRCs, if we add similarly equipped larger cutters.
I am going to talk about one possible fleet mix including this additional class. It is not necessarily the optimum mix, I'll leave that for further analysis, but I think it may illustrate the advantage of including this additional class. For this proposed new mix I believe we can hold acquisition and operating costs constant, ie the same as the program of record. The proposal would trade 24 units in the program of record (2 NSCs, 4 OPCs, and 18 FRCs) for 22 units of this additional class (depending on cost we might get more) and could allow us to:
avoid the worst of the disastrous drop in the number of major cutters that appears likely in the 2020s,
field more major (cruising) cutters (49 vs 33),
while proceeding with the OPC program as currently planned.
I'll compare this possible fleet mix to the Coast Guard Fleet as it existed in 2000/2001 and the fleet in the Program of Record (POR). on the basis of cutter days available and crewing requirements using both conventional and augmented crewing.
Before we do that, what would "Cutter X" look like? The design that I think comes closest to what I have in mind is the French built L'Adroit (also here and here). It is four times as large as the FRC at 1,450 tons but even with far less horsepower than the FRC (7,500 vs 11,600) it still does 21 knots. With the FRCs engines it would likely do about 24. It might be thought of as a modernized 210, in that unlike the 270 it has no medium caliber gun, fire control system, or ESM.
L'Adroit began sea trials in July 2011. DCNS photo
L'Adroit 285'x36'x11′, 7,500 HP 21 knots, crew 30 + additional accommodations for 29, endurance 30 days, 8,000 nmi @ 12, 1x20mm, helo deck for up to 10 ton Helo, hangar for 5 ton helo, UAV, ESM, missile and torpedo decoys
I find L'Adroit particularly appealing because, not only is it simple and run by a small crew (30), it even has a hanger (cleverly sited under the bridge) designed to house and carry out the maintenance on both a 5-ton helicopter (like the H-65) and UAVs at the same time. The flight deck can accommodate helicopters up to 10-tons (H-60?). It is actually a bit more sophisticated than we need in the also has ESM and missile and torpedo decoy systems. Range is very good at 8,000 nautical miles at 12 knots. Seakeeping, thanks to modern design and stabilizer technology, is probably at least as good at 270s and probably better.
(There are other similar ships that could be used as examples, see the addendum at the end of the post.)
As we have noted earlier, increased size doesn't necessarily add much to the cost of a ships. Adding only volume, storage, and larger fuel and ballast tanks, I think these ships can be produced for no more than three times the price of the FRCs, perhaps less than twice as much. I don't have prices for other examples, but for one, BAEs "Port of Spain" class, the original price for was only $80M each, less than twice the cost of a FRC and that figure included continued maintenance and training for the crew.
Basically my assumption is that the tradeoffs would work something like this:
1 NSC = 2 OPCs = 4 Cutter Xs = 12 FRCs
This equates to approx. prices of: $700M/NSC, $350/OPC, $175M/Cutter X, and $60M/FRC.
Lets compare the Fleets
As a baseline, take a look at the CG fleet as reported in the 2000/2001 Combat Fleets of the World (I happen to have a copy). It included:
12 Hamilton class 378s
13 Bear class 270s
16 Reliance class 210s
49 Island class 110s
or 93 vessels including 44 "cruising cutters" to use the old generic term.
The Program of Record if completed will include:
8 NSC
25 OPC
58 FRC
or 91 vessels including 33 cruising cutters.
The proposed alternative mix would include:
22 Cutter X
Cutter Days AFHP and Crew Requirements:
For the analysis below I have used the following as the personnel allowances for the new classes:
NSC 113
OPC 90 (still to be firmed up)
FRC 24 (includes two extra junior officers assigned to gain experience)
The personnel allowance for new class could be as little as 30 but is likely going to be more, if only as an opportunity to provide more at sea experience. Using the assumed personnel allowances and the trade-off identified earlier, the proposed mix would require no more personnel than the program of record unless the personnel allowance for "Cutter X" is more than 46. At most the personnel allowance should not be more than that of the 210s. My figures may be out of date, but at least at one point that was a crew of 62. I'll use this as the upper limit.
The 2000/2001 fleet theoretically could have provided 8,140 cruising cutter days away from homeport (AFHP) (44 cruising cutters x 185 days) and would have required a total personnel allowance of 5,509.
Without augmentation, the program of record would theoretically provide 6,105 cruising cutter days AFHP (33 cruising cutters x 185 days) and require a total personnel allowance of 4,526.
With Augmentation (increasing their personnel allowance by a third and running the cruising cutters 230 days/year) the program of record would theoretically provide 7,590 cruising cutter days and require a total personnel allowance of 5259.
Without augmentation, the proposed mix would theoretically provide 9,065 cruising cutter days AFHP (49 cruising cutters x 185 days) and require a total personnel allowance of between 4,188 (assuming a crew of only 30 for Cutter X) and 4,892 (assuming a crew of 62 for Cutter X).
With Augmentation (increasing their personnel allowance by a third and running the cruising cutters 230 days/year) the proposed mix would theoretically provide 11270 cruising cutter days AFHP (49 cruising cutters x 230 days) and require a total personnel allowance of between 5264 (assuming a crew of only 30 for Cutter X) and 6203 (assuming a crew of 62 for Cutter X).
What about the loss of FRCs? The proposal would trim 18 FRC from the POR. They are projected to operate up to 2500 hours per day. If we assumed that all 2500 hours were devoted to offshore cruising for the 18 additional units, that would add 1875 days AFHP to the POR for a total of 7,980 days AFHP for the un-augmented fleet and 9,465 days AFHP for the augmented POR. (disregarding the 40 additional FRC that are included in both proposals).
In summary Cutter Days Available:
————————————————–Un-Augmented———Augmented by 1/3
2000/20001 (cruising cutters only) 8,140 N/A
POR (cruising cutters only) 6,105 7,590
POR (w/1,875 additional FRC day AFHP) 7,980 9,465
Proposed Mix w/Cutter X (cruising cutters only) 9,065 11,270
It looks like this alternative provides an improvement of at least 13% over the program of record, possibly as much as 48.5% depending on how you view the FRCs as a patrol asset. It appears that the un-augmented version may be superior to the augmented version of the program of record while using far fewer people.
Is it doable? What is the timing? How would it mess with other programs?
Cutter X production could ramp up as FRC construction trails off. If we are unable to increase the FY2013 from the current two units, that will put the program at 20 units funded. With no NSCs planned for FY 2014 and 2015, hopefully there will be funding for six in FY2014. Out-years, beginning in FY2015 will require a new contract to complete the additional 14 units proposed. Assuming six units a year, in FY 2015 and 2016, the last two would be funded in FY2017.
If the CG starts soon they could fund the prototype unit of Cutter X in FY2017. L' Adroit was completed in approximately 13 months, so it is at least theoretically possible the first unit could be delivered well before the first OPC (expected FY2020). Replacing the FRC in the budget, two units a year could be funded in parallel with OPC construction.
Addendum: Other Patrol Vessels similar in concept:
HMS Clyde, 267x45x12, 8,250 HP 21 knots, crew 42 + accommodations for 20 more, endurance 7,800 nmi @ 12 knots, 1x30mm, Flight deck for up to Merlin (16 ton helicopter)
British River class OPV (UK) (and here), 261x45x12, 1,677 fl, 5,532 HP 20 knots, crew 30 + accommodations for 20 more, 1x20mm, no flight deck or hangar
BAE's Port of Spain class (Brazil and Thailand) (more here), 264x44x12, 1700 tons, 9,700 HP 25 knots, crew 34+5 trainees, endurance , 1x30mm, 2x25mm, Helo deck, but no hangar (Thai version HTMS Krabi has a 76mm Oto Melara and 2x30mm)
Italian Ship Vega, Cassiopia Class, Nov. 2001, by Antoio Munoz Criado
Cassiopea class (Italy), 262x39x12, 1,475 tons fl, 8,800 HP 21 knots, crew 60, endurance 35 days, 3300 nmi @ 17 knots (probably 5,000 at 12 or 13 knots) 76mm gun and FCS helo deck and hangar.
This entry was posted in Shipbuilding and tagged Budget, FRC, nsc, OPC, shipbuilding by Chuck Hill. Bookmark the permalink.
67 thoughts on "The DHS Cutter Study, Trade-offs, and the Case for "Cutter X""
chuckhhill on October 12, 2012 at 1:56 am said:
Another similar design: http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=659
H_K on October 12, 2012 at 3:05 am said:
Add the RNZN's OPVs, which I mentioned in my other post. Ice-strengthened, too. 😉 http://brickmuppet.mee.nu/files/nzopv.pdf
Link did not work for me, but I think I know the ship you are talking about:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protector_class_offshore_patrol_vessel
H_K on October 12, 2012 at 1:55 pm said:
Oops, to open the link you need to copy it and paste it into a new window. It's a pretty comprehensive PDF on the Protector OPV.
chuckhhill on October 12, 2012 at 5:18 pm said:
This class certainly shows what can be done at a modest cost. I understand that the design gained weight and the ice belt is now lower than intended–still effective, but they cannot add any additional weight–that could be fixed. I really don't like the fact that all its generator capacity is in a single compartment and that is separated from the engine room only by a single bulkhead.
All these ships (even FRC) have an above-deck emergency genset, so the survivability of the main gensets isn't as big of a deal IMHO… unless you need those gensets to power an emergency "get-me-home" propulsor.
That brings us back to the real question: redundant propulsion, yes or no? FRC and some of the larger foreign OPVs don't have any redundancy. "Cutter X", being more "offshore" than "oceanic," should stick to the same barebones standard IMHO.
I did not see the generator set. I also feel redundant propulsion on this class would be an unnecessary luxury, but if a drop down, trainable thruster were included, it would be a plus, and if the ship had that it could probably get along on a single main shaft or a better yet a single Azipod.
Good analysis, Chuck. I like this low-end "Cutter X" idea, especially as OPC has drifted into 378 territory… (usual story of requirements creep compounded by cuts to the NSC program, it seems). No surprise here, as I'm on the record as a fan of l'Adroit!
Your cost estimate of 2-3 times FRC seems just about right… To add a datapoint, New Zealand's 1,800t OPVs also cost ~3 times more than Australia's 270t PBs (NZ$90m vs. AU$26m). Both built in the same timeframe and in the same country, so almost an apples-to-apples comparison.
Therefore the cost differential between FRC and Cutter X should be somewhat less than 3x… since unlike the Kiwi OPVs, Cutter X would be built in a full production run. Also, FRC->Cutter X wouldn't be quite as big of a jump in size as Armidale->Otago.
Piero Pecora on October 12, 2012 at 4:56 am said:
It would be hard to get below a 60 person crew and still be able to simultaneously launch a helicopter, launch a boarding team, and man watch stations. Also, endurance isn't just fuel, it includes manning fatigue. I do like the concept though, OE for the FRC is three times that of a WPB. The difference between the OE of a OPC and WMEC-210 would be even starker. Maybe another option to consider is building a full compliment of OPC's but making most of them designed for domestic operations, i.e., 210's don't deploy out of hemisphere where as 270's do. You could benefit from lower construction costs of the common hull but strip most of the high-end capability such as major caliber weapons, ASR, fire control radars. Instead limit to FP weapons like the MK38. This would allow for all missions but defense readiness. Declare a small number of the class as out of hemisphere deployment capable and give them the full NTNO suite (DoD CONOP would drive the specific number of the class with the enhanced capabilities). The added benefit is that you have a proven wartime design and enough ships to meet the current Navy force requirements. If the budget improves, missions change, or Navy requirements grow then a program similar to the recent WMEC MEP could allow a quick conversion process. As others have previously stated, this would look similar to the life of the 327's.
We could phase this in rather easily. One-for-one replacement of the 210's with the domestic OPC would close the capability gap. This would allow the maturation of the Navy LCS and DDG-1000 programs, the artic fleet study, the easing of the budget issues, and a better understanding of international drivers. We continue to finalize the enhanced build, and at a certain point (probably about the time we are replacing the last WHEC's, starting to replace 270's and completing the FRC's) we shift to the enhanced build. Otherwise we would build out the entire OPC fleet as domestic and convert some when we go back to upgrade the originals (there are always a bunch of mid production upgrades).
When I originally started working on this concept, I was thinking of a more seaworthy ship (about 1,000 tons), but one without a helo capability with the expectation that it would work with land based air. That is still a possibility, and it would probably be a two FRC for one "cutter X" exchange or perhaps even better.
Crew requirements would depend a lot on how much we expected to do flight ops.
A lot of the foreign counterparts have crews of around 30, but I think they may not consider the boarding parties and those that perform aviation related evolutions part of the regular crew. Still accommodations for more than 60 are rare.
Modern davits or the L'Adroit's stern ramps can minimize the number of people required to do boat ops.
A haul down system could minimize personnel requirements for flight ops and allow them in more severe weather, but the Coast Guard seems to have given up on that.
If flight ops are to be rare, I think a crew of 30-35 is doable. If they are to be routine, without a haul down system, then yes, closer to 60, hence the range (30-62).
The study seemed to indicate that "de-contenting" the OPC would not save a lot. It would apparently still cost more then the "mod-270" so would have and exchange rate of less than 4 for 3.
I think we need to have a high-low mix so we can tailor the distribution to missions and the prevailing environment. That is the ice strengthened hull and seaworthiness of the OPCs is overkill for drug interdiction and illegal immigrant interdiction missions.
pored on October 12, 2012 at 1:55 pm said:
Chuck, I like the concept of what you have described here, but I think there is an even better way forward. Three of the alternate vessels listed, the HMS Clyde, British River Class, and the Port of Spain Class are all derivatives of the of the Vosper Thornycraft (now BAE Systems Surface Fleet). The original thought on the River Class, according to VT, is to provide a ship accessible in cost effectiveness and realistically designed for the mission at hand. How this was done, was the original River Class ships where built to commercial standards, not military specifications, being the ships are offshore patrol and picket ships for the British Isles, they are not intended to be combat ships of the line. The Royal Navy then requested that VT upgrade the River Class with an ice reinforced hull, some military specifications, and a flight deck and hanger to act as a picket ship for the Falkland Islands. The Port of Spain vessels are other, further derivative vessels of the River Class, first designed for the Trinidad and Tobago Navy. I think where the USCG needs to look is a similar specification, if not the use of the same class.
I think the USCG would get more capable and cost effective ships with taking a similar stand. We are a military service, and we are legally required to be able to defend the Coastal Defense Zones, but that being said, we don't need ships that are ships of the line. We need picket ships capable of conducting SAR, LE and providing surveillance and harassment of any enemy vessels that enter the Costal Defense Zones while waiting for Navy Forces to arrive. The River Class could fulfill all of these roles. The Coast Guard could buy River Class hulls to use in the Caribbean and Eastern Pacific to use for SAR and Counter-Narcotics. The more reinforced Clyde class hulls be homeported in regions where they would be more likely to encounter ice. The savings would in the fact of not providing a second class of ships for ice operations, and using the same class and only reinforcing half the hulls for more northern operations.
Most of these ships are built to something less than full warship standards. As long as it has the survivability features of the FRC, its large size will make it even more survivable. Certainly I'd pass on extreme quieting, shock hardening, "William" fittings, and wash-down systems.
I think I'd leave the OPCs as the class to work in ice, but this class might be a good fit for replacing WPBs in Alaska. I'd also like to see one or more out in Guam (if we are not going to put something bigger there) because of the long distances.
Anonymouse on October 13, 2012 at 1:57 am said:
Very interesting post. The only problem with yet another analysis of what the CG really needs is that it is yet another analysis of what the CG needs, instead of actual ships being constructed in actual shipyards being actually commissioned. The CG is becoming an expert on ship analysis instead of constructing them.
How about deciding on a 270/210 replacement and start building one – is that too much to ask?
Guy Gavin on October 13, 2012 at 2:08 am said:
The question should be asked by Congress and answered by the Coast Guard: Why should the Coast Guard be awarded any funding for ships when their own incompetence at maintaining the ships they have (and also attempting to acquire new ones) has not been addressed.
Until the Coast Guard demonstrates they are capable, they shouldn't get a dime more of additional taxpayer money IMO.
rlcullison on October 13, 2012 at 8:01 am said:
Most Coast Guard ships are more than forty years old and still going. They must doing somthing right!
Guy Gavin on October 13, 2012 at 6:04 pm said:
Obviously not considering it is their own mismanagement that has resulted in the forty year old ships still being in commission.
The Navy has a 30 YEAR shipbuilding and END OF LIFECYCLE plans. You ask someone in the Coast Guard about those and they have no clue what you are talking about. It is their own fault they are riding around in old ships.
imispgh on October 14, 2012 at 2:04 pm said:
BINGO!!! And that incompetence and pack of political will an courage extends to how ICGS and the contractors were and ARE being handled. ICGS had an "unconditional" performance guaranty in the Deepwater contract. That means they guaranteed the CG MISSION PERFORMANCE would be as the contract stated. In the VERY least it should not have degraded. ICGS owes for the 123s and the degradation of the MISSION capability of the CG. The CG should collect on this and then and ONLY then look for more taxpayer money.
Patrick2 on October 14, 2012 at 7:39 pm said:
Why should the CoastGuard collect a dime Michael? What will they do with the money? Does the fishing fleet really care that there won't be ships to harass them?
Aviation and the small boat stations do all the Real SAR anyway.
Eric Bigelow on October 13, 2012 at 4:02 pm said:
having served on 3 cutters and 1 squid ship i can tell you that the crews in general are going above and beyond in maintaining their rafts. the problems lie more with funds and the ages of the vessels. many are running at more then their recommended hours, which also causes maintenance headaches. anybody remember the 95's and the problems they had near the ends of their lives, restricted sea states and at least one i heard of with a broken back. cutting crew size on newer vessels will also impact maintenance issues.
i'd also like to add that i think that the upper echelon does not press the case for funding anywhere near hard enough, our responsibilties are expanding and our funding is lagging. i think the flag ranks need to take some classes from the navy and learn how to get down and dirty in the dc trenches, hell the navy got those piece o crap lcs's which wouldn't even make a passable cg cutter. stop bringing a nightstick to a 50 cal fight.
Bingo! Thank-you Eric.
Anonymouse on October 13, 2012 at 9:03 pm said:
Four words describe perfectly the reason why the Coast Guard is slowly becoming a maritime service with few seagoing assets – Integrated Coast Guard Systems. (and actually, you could further shorten it to one word – Deepwater.) That debacle was a mistake from the beginning, and is a big part of the reason Congress and OMB don't trust the Coast Guard and their plans to recapitalize the cutter fleet.
See my comment on the ICGS performance GUARANTY above.
IMO, the "support" network for existing assets bares the blame as well. Economizing on maintenance has helped stretch dollars, but the fleet is now paying for it.
Unfortunately our junior people are paying the price for the failure of leadership not only in the CG but also in the administration.
The problem goes back to about FY87 when we stopped funding replacement MECs while retaining 205s and 213s built in WWII.
As for "Deepwater," back in 1991 when I retired, it seemed obvious to me that hiring the vendors to tell you what to buy was not a good idea, but it was happening throughout the Federal Government. Outsourcing was being pushed and it hurt the Navy just as it did the Coast Guard. In house design expertise was destroyed in both the Coast Guard and the Navy.
It seems the Coast Guard has come a long way back in rebuilding their contracting organization.
You do not see half the whining on Navy sites that we all see here about how their assets are decrepit though Chuck. It would be fair to say that the Coast Guard has hurt itself far worse.
chuckhhill on October 14, 2012 at 10:39 pm said:
@Patrick2 "You do not see half the whining on Navy sites that we all see here about how their assets are decrepit though Chuck. It would be fair to say that the Coast Guard has hurt itself far worse."
Their assets are not nearly as decrepit. there are a couple of reasons for the this.
The Navy has a lot more political clout than the CG. The size of the Navy is a national issue, while the CG's constituency is a lot smaller. In spite of this, the Navy has shrunk considerably over the last few decades. I remember when it was more than 20 times larger than the CG. Now it is only about eight times larger. This has allowed them to shed their older platforms. Their job has not increased in size as the CG's has.
I do agree the the CG can do a better job of presenting it's case, and the Congressional Research Service has remarked on this. I'm preparing a post, contrasting the way the CG does it with the Navy does it.
Incidentally, Navy force levels for ships are here:
http://www.history.navy.mil/branches/org9-4.htm#2000
See my post above. What they need to press for is using the performance guaranty to fund the gap
Maybe if the money would go to DHS the department would be interested in collecting. Rewarding the Coast Guard by getting money back it misappropriated will do nothing to solve the problem of its own inefficiency and organization.
I agree with the points on the money being wasted if given to the senior leadership of the CG. That of course would have to be fixed. The Commandant clone good ole boy pipeline would have to be severed. Look at the Navy over the past 5 or so years weeding out the bad officers. The USCG needs a bit of that.
Which specific "bad officers" need to be weeded out Michael? You obviously feel there are some. Please name them.
Bill Wells on October 14, 2012 at 12:51 pm said:
What strikes me it that the current era of officer specialization in the Coast Guard today; this principle is not being extended to the cutters. The one-size fits all came into being during the late 19th-century, not from Service need, but from the desire to impress the Congress. The RCS wanted to impress the Congress into creating a retirement system for the officer corps by showing it was just as sound and proficient as the USN. There was the drive for some standardization, but this too was to make a national impression on those who criticized the Service for not being worth the money expended upon it. Remember, up to about 1880 the RCS had been self-supporting and did not receive annual appropriations from the Congress.
The RCS had a collection of worn out vessels that were not built for the jobs they were doing. If a model for specialization is needed then look at the Alaska cutters from about 1880 onward. Each was built for that climate. Then again, they only sailed there from April to about October and then scooted back for a much needed refit.
I realize that building cutters for specialized areas would be more expensive and reduce their use in other areas. However, the Coast Guard used fishing trawlers for some of the Greenland Patrol. It also sent 210s on Ice Patrol. Neither vessel type was suited for the task.
That is the problem, as we see today the Coast Guard is not remotely as sound or proficient as the USN.
Agreed. Specifically in the past 5 or 10 years. the weeding out of poor officers has been fantastic. The USCG needs a dose of that
Maybe he time has come to seperate the multiple civilian agencies that were combined to create the Coast Guard as a military service in the first place?
imispgh and Patrick2 you are reaching your limit on repetitive comments that really offer nothing new.
If you want to comment, please keep it succinct, and on topic.
Patrick2 on October 14, 2012 at 11:07 pm said:
The same can be said about yourself Chuck.
Patrick on October 15, 2012 at 2:51 am said:
It's his blog you goof. It's funny you would say the USCG is so poorly prepared after all the naval incidences lately. The navy is smaller just like the USCG. The other branches have had massive program failures. I agree with Chuck in that our issue is marketing and clout. In addition, the Coast Guard does not have the military industrial complex muscle because of the size of our programs. That was why Admiral Loy and his crew developed the Deepwater project in hopes of getting noticed by industry.
imispgh on October 15, 2012 at 10:17 am said:
Thank you for allowing me t post on threads like this. I plan to honor the rules in doing so.
Patrick2 on October 15, 2012 at 3:11 am said:
If all you have to offer is name calling, I have nothing to say back to you except to please change your name to avoid tarnishing the rest of us simarly named.
Patrick on October 15, 2012 at 12:09 pm said:
Patrick2, If you think being called a goof is name calling you surely could not have served long in the USCG. You forgot about respect you can be respectful to Chuck well disagreeing. I was simply trying to point out to you that it is his post. Along with that I do respond to your comment about the navy being better prepared. I feel like you are an alarmist with little to offer how to change it. You keep repeating the same comments again and again. Great fine, you presented your points. The Coast Guard like many agencies is facing a crisis of vision. The organization has mishandled the acquisition program for a number of reasons. The first I believe was because in the 1990 they the cut the staff in that division so badly they were ill prepared to handle such a large program.
Admiral Loy, worked to get us back on the radar of the industrial complex, because they lobby congressmen. To make us more enticing they made a huge package of vessels and aircraft updates. It failed like I said because it was beyond the scope of the USCG to handle such a big upgrade combined with the many theory changes after 9/11.
The Coast Guard is a great organization but it is in massive transition. I hope they will make the necessary changes to ensure it last in the capacity the US needs it to serve.
The Deepwater debacles were not caused by the program being to big for the USCG. Yes it is large but there were no real technology challenges. The issues occurred because ICGS screwed the USCG who rolled over and took it. That simple.
Each and every issue was foretold and/or avoidable.
123 hulls and electronic issues – foretold by ELC and given plenty of heads up by others. Easy to avoid – except for the fraud caused by Bollinger when they design the hull weak on purpose to save money on steal. But that has an easy fix too. Hold them accountable.
NSC hull issue – foretold by ELC and easy to avoid
FRC composite hull delay. Foretold by ELC and easy to avoid
All together this caused most of the massive delay and $$$ problems we see now.
The overall fix? Hold ICGS accountable for the mission degradation by using the performance guaranty in the contract. ICGS was paid to be in charge as the LSI and had contractual and guaranteed responsibility to take the USCG mission specs and ensure they could be realized. At the very least they should not have been degraded.
PACAREA Staff Weenie on October 16, 2012 at 1:18 am said:
Keep posting imispgh. Many of the kool aid drinkers here don't want to face the truth, but that does not mean you shouldn't stop saying it.
I walk a fine line though. I have been booted from every other site and would really like to not be booted from this one. I carry on in spite of our losing the appeal for the same reason I started this trek years before even knowing what a False Claims Act suit was. I feel that the men and women of th CG and the country deserve much better. No one is perfect and the solution will never be perfect. However there can never be even an acceptable solution without the INTENT to do the right thing. The USCG leadership and industry has never had even remotely adequate intent to to the right things. They all want the program guaranty to stay buried because it really is the solution. As these guarantees are very rare (as was the use of an LSI) the press and congress can't get their heads wrapped around it which surely doesn't help. At some point there will be a tragedy, someone will finally do their due diligence and the guaranty will be a big deal and a catalyst for change and to hold a lot of people accountable.
You need to keep charging on Mike. Clearly nobody else in the Coast Guard cares, in fact from reading here, they oppose you. If not you, who will?
Chuck, I agree with your idea of Cutter X. I do think our technology crept has gone out of control for our mission. The truth is the current format of cutters provides little defense in modern warfare. I think in the long run ridding ourselves of that mission and narrowing our focus would save us money.
I've covered what I think cutters might do in war time here: https://chuckhillscgblog.net/2012/02/10/what-might-coast-guard-cutters-do-in-wartime-part-2-coast-guard-roles/
With some rework, the larger cutters might serve as second line ASW ships, but the most probable roles look like they will involve controlling the movement of merchant and fishing vessels.. Conducting inspections of ships as part of a blockade or something similar to Operation MarketTime off Vietnam, preventing smuggling. In a major war with a near peer like China, it would be enforcing a distant blockade to keep them from getting essential resources like fuel.
With very few upgrades Cutter X could do that sort of thing.
Bill Wells on October 15, 2012 at 1:46 pm said:
There were only two civilian agencies that were used to create the Coast Guard. The Revenue Cutter Service and the Life Saving Service. The LSS got in only because of political pressure and the drive for a retirement system for them. The first recipient of benefit was Sumner I. Kimball. Even then, the LSS was never completely merged. The word merged did not mean assimilation. The LSS was not fully assimilated until well after WWII. However, the culture remains. This is a reason that I contend there has never been a "One Coast Guard." It is a cobbled group of varying interests. And getting back, the topic; these differences in culture and training cause conflicts in deciding what type of cutters it needs.
The Coast Guard remains somewhat buried in the "cruising cutter" syndrome of the Revenue Cutter Service as the primary emphasis. It also has side features of "harbor vessels" (the non-AToN black hulls) an d "patrol launches." The LHS was never merged either. It remained as it was and to a great degree still is as it was except the larger tenders have far greater ranking officers. Remember the LHS ran many of the buoy tenders with Warrant Officers after the merge. The 180s were a compromise between cruising and tender service vessels. They were the original one-size-fits-all vessels. Just look how they were manned, armed and constructed. Was it really necessary for them to be light ice capable? Their original designator "WAGL."
We see the words, combined and merged when the 1915 Act is discussed. However, the congressional language of the era is better suited. The Coast Guard was legislated to exist "in lieu" of the two services. I do not believe the intent was to actually merge them into a "one" service and much of this has to be considered when defining a seagoing culture for vessel acquisition. It is odd that no one looks at culture as a consideration in making decisions.
Patrick on October 15, 2012 at 2:16 pm said:
I was wondering what books that will give me a great peak into the history would you suggest? I have read most of what I can find on the book stories and some not so much. So it appears maybe the best stuff might be in article form since only a small fraction seem to in books.
Anything would be great,
Patrick M. Campbell
I am going off topic for a minute. Your question where to find comprehensive histories is a good one. With very few exceptions, they simply do not exist. The Coast Guard had never had a history program that puts an emphasis on its history. The emphasis is on public affairs.
It you read the books available, most are repetitions of former works. There is
little new material or research. The Coast Guard promotes consensus history in that it has a consistent theme and method. You will find very little that diverges from the formula. Dennis Noble author who goes off the trail.
The problem is finding a publisher. I've had three article rejected this year because the subject matter was considered too narrow for the readership or the topic would be of no interest to them. In addition, there are probably fewer than six academic historians who write about the Coast Guard. The rest write to the popular audience and spend no time in looking at the history critically. No one looks at how and why the Service is the way it is. Perhaps one day.
The Historian's Office at CGHQ does what it can but it is too small and underfunded. I've heard its annual budget is a measly (exclusive of salaries) $29,000. When I hear of billions being bantered about, I wonder why more funding for history is not possibly. I view history as an operational element. When Deepwater began, the planners were referred to a fine article on the boondoggle of the Hunter's Wheel fiasco. In this case, history did repeat in the
sense that an outside source with and untried and untested 'new' technology was allowed to bamboozle the RCS into a class of vessels that did not work and were eventually turned into lightships. or sold. The history was ignored as not being relevant to the 'current' era. Also ignored were the twenty large cutters built between 1929 and 1939. How was this done in an era of such fiscal devastation?
BMC on October 16, 2012 at 4:58 pm said:
Bill– you really should look into the self-publishing service offered by Amazon. You can offer your work on Kindle or use thier print on demand services. You might even make some $$.
Why should the public care about the Coast Guard when clearly by its own actions it does not care about its history then?
Pingback: GAO-12-918, "COAST GUARD, Portfolio Management Approach Needed to Improve Major Acquisition Outcomes" | Chuck Hill's CG Blog
Some information about how the French are handling a similar budget squeeze:
http://www.defensenews.com/article/20121020/DEFREG01/310200002/French-Navy-Seeks-Support-New-Patrol-Vessel?odyssey=tab
chuckhhill on June 2, 2013 at 7:36 pm said:
More information on L'Aroit here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sTQ_rgdhzxo&feature=player_embedded#!
and here: http://www.malaysiandefence.com/?p=3366
Pingback: Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation: Examining Cutter, Aircraft, and Communications Needs | Chuck Hill's CG Blog
Wow, How'd I miss this great thread?!?
I love the Cutter X idea, Chuck, especially for the Southeast/Gulf/Carribean and West coast areas. I also see the merit in shorting the FRCs slightly to get Cutter Xs to operate in the more-empty or longer-ranged areas of the Gulf or Carib.
Sometime, quite a time ago, we had a thread about the OPC where I advocated for an X-bow design for an arctic service cutter and a more traditional design to be the OPC to replace both classes of WMECs. This Cutter X would be ideal as the main OPC/WMEC class in SE and West, while a smaller class of 5-7 ice-reinforced, X-bow, slightly larger vessels could serve Alaska and the NorthEast. (I see little sense in making ALL the OPCs ice-reinforced, when at least half will spend virtually all their service-lives in warm waters.) That could also free all the WMSLs to operate where their range (and smaller numbers vs. WHECs they're replacing) would work best: Hawaii and Pacific Islands. (The arctic service cutters would free the WMSLs from most of their Alaskan duty.)
chuckhhill on February 28, 2014 at 12:51 am said:
Looks like the Russians have decided to build "cutter X": http://en.ria.ru/military_news/20140226/187907538/Russia-Launches-Construction-of-New-Patrol-Ship-Class.html
chuckhhill on March 1, 2014 at 12:17 am said:
More info on the Russian ships here: http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1598
A new version of the Gowind concept from DCNS: http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1894
Pingback: Singapore Builds "Cutter X" | Chuck Hill's CG Blog
Pingback: "Cutter X" Revisited | Chuck Hill's CG Blog
Pingback: We Need a Mother(ship) | Chuck Hill's CG Blog
Pingback: New French Friends in the Caribbean Neighborhood | Chuck Hill's CG Blog


text:
Le Rallye Dakar 1992 est le  Rallye Dakar. Après un prologue à Rouen, le départ a été donné le  du Château de Vincennes à Paris. Pour la première fois de son histoire, l'arrivée n'est pas à Dakar mais au Cap en Afrique du Sud.

Fait marquant
 Décès du pilote moto français Gilles Lalay lors de la  étape. Lalay entre en collision avec une voiture de l'organisation du Paris-Le Cap sur une piste congolaise. Il est tué sur le coup.

Étapes

Pays traversés
Au total, 11 pays sont traversés par cette édition :

 .

Participants
Au départ, le nombre d'engagés est de 332 (133 autos, 98 motos et 101 camions).

A l'arrivée, le nombre est de 169 véhicules (68 autos, 45 motos et 56 camions).

Classement final

Motos

Autos

Camions
Avant 1998, les camions sont intégrés à la catégorie « auto » et ne disposent pas de leur propre classement. En 1992, l'équipage de Francesco Perlini, Giorgio Albiero et Claudio Vinante, premier camion du général, termine 16e de la catégorie « autos / camions ».

Lien externe
 Le Dakar L'histoire d'un rallye de légende - 1992

Rallye Dakar
Sport automobile en 1992
Sport motocycliste en 1992
Sport en décembre 1991
Sport en janvier 1992

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


Access to eBooks, eAudiobooks and digital magazines is provided through the Western Australia Public Libraries Digital Media Collection.
Borrow, download and enjoy eBooks and eAudiobooks with the Libby or Overdrive apps or through your browser.
Explore a huge range of free downloadable magazines, which can be read on your PC or tablet.
See what items you currently have on reserve, if they are available to be picked up or see your current place in the reservation queue.
See your current loans and when they are due back.
See your current Inter Library Loan requests or purchase suggestions.
Cancel your current reservations, if they are no longer needed.
Create and update email alert profiles for new items.
Review, update and delete any ratings and comments you have created.
Check that your contact details are up to date.
View any SavedLists you have made in the library catalogue.
Locate the Account Login/Logout link at the top right of the screen or under the My Library menu.
Enter your borrower ID (which is the barcode from your library card) and your password.
If your Login is successful, your Account summary page will be displayed. You can access your Account information at any time during your Login session. If you have outstanding charges on your Account you may be prevented from performing certain transactions.
Locate the Account Login/Logout link at the top right of the screen or under the My Library menu. You can also Logout from your Account and Catalogue search pages. You will be returned to the Library Home Page.
Your Account summary page provides a detailed breakdown of your current Account information.
Reservations available for you to pickup.
If you have items currently overdue.
Any outstanding fines or charges you have.
This section displays a list of any current messages. Please delete messages if they are no longer current.
If there are any items in these categories, a link is provided to display detailed information for each loan. Use these links to renew your loans.
If there are any items in these categories, a link is provided to display detailed information for each reservation. Use these links to cancel your reservations.
If there are any items in these categories, a link is provided to display detailed information for each item. Use these links to cancel requests, amend your alert profiles, and update ratings and comments.
To reserve an item you'd like to borrow, begin by searching for a title in the library catalogue.
Search the collection using the Quick Search box at the top right of the homepage.
or use the Catalogue Search link under the Explore menu.
When you find the title you want, click on Place Reservation. You will also be shown how many other reservations are on this title, if any.
Enter your borrower ID and password, if you are not already logged in, and select which library you want to collect the item from.
If required, adjust the Not required after period.
Click proceed, details of your reservation will be displayed. This includes your current rank in the waiting list for the title.
Locate the Search our Collection at the top right of the homepage or locate the Catalogue Search link under the Explore menu.
Perform a search for titles you would like to reserve. If you retrieve more than one record, your results will be displayed in brief display.
Browse through your page of retrieved records and mark the checkbox for titles you would like to reserve.
Once you have selected all the titles you would like to reserve on the current page, select the Reserve Selections button displayed at the top and bottom of the page. If your search has retrieved 10 or less records, you may also select the Reserve All button if you would like to place a reservation for all the titles in your results.
The reservation form will be displayed. Any titles you are unable to reserve will be displayed at the top of the form, followed by the list of titles included in this reservation.
Enter your borrower ID and password if you are not already logged in.
Select the location from which you would like collect the items.
Select the number of titles you would like to have allocated to you to satisfy this reservation.
For example, you may have performed a search for titles on a particular subject and would like to borrow just one of the items retrieved but do not care which one. You would just like to have the first one available. In this case, select 1 from number of titles required. You can however also place a reserve on all the titles by choosing the All titles option.
Select an expiry period or enter a specific expiry date. Your reservation will be automatically cancelled if not satisfied by this date.
Enter any notes you would like to include then select the Submit button.
You will be advised if there are any charges or problems with your reservation. If all if well and you wish to proceed with your reservation, select the Continue button.
Select the Cancel button if you don't wish to place the reservation.
If you decided to proceed, details of your reservations will be displayed. This includes your current rank in the waiting list for each title.
This facility allows you to cancel your current reservations, if they are no longer required.
Login to your account to view your Account summary.
Select the link to display your current reservations.
If you want to cancel individual reservations, select by ticking the checkbox for each one you would like to cancel then click Cancel Selections.
Now please wait while the system processes your selections. Your list of reservations will be returned showing the result for each cancellation in the status column.
This facility allows you to renew loans online depending on the library's renewal policy.
Select the link to display all Current loans.
If you want to renew individual loans, select by ticking the checkbox for each loan you would like to renew then click Renew Selections.
Now please wait while the system processes your selections. Your list of loans will be returned showing the result for each renewal in the status column. Some renewals may not be successful. Please note the new due date for each loan.
If you are unable to find the item you are looking for in the local catalogue, you can place a request for an Interlibrary Loan (ILL) from another academic or public library.
Locate the Request an Item link under the My Library menu.
If you are not currently logged on you will be prompted to identify yourself for this transaction. Enter your borrower ID and password then select the Login button.
The Interlibrary Loan request form will be displayed. Please enter as much information as you can about the item you require. You must enter the title of the item. An author is highly recommended.
You will be advised by the Library when your item is ready to be picked up. You can also track the progress of your request or cancel your request by using the facilities in your Account.
Locate the Suggest a Purchase link under the My Library menu.
A confirmation page will be displayed. This will indicate if there are any charges associated with your request. It will also give you the option to return to your request form, to cancel the request, or to continue with your request.
You will be advised by the Library when the item is ready to be picked up. You can also track the progress of your request or cancel your request by using the facilities in My Library.
You can change your password online at any time using the facilities provided in your Account.
If you have forgotten your password and we have a record of your email address, we can send you an email containing your current password.
Visit our Forgot Your password? page (This can be found under the Help menu).
Enter your borrower ID and surname OR email address, first name and surname.
A password reset link will sent to your registered email address.
Please Contact Us if you don't have an email address registered with us.
As you browse through the records in your result set after performing a search in the Library Catalogue, you will notice that some records are displayed with a number of stars. This indicates that one or more reviews have been attached to the record displayed.
The number of stars displayed is an average of the ratings given to this record by the reviewers. Ratings are given as a number between 0 (very bad) and 10 (very good).
Find the book/DVD/etc. you want to give a star rating or review to. View it in full display.
Click on the 'Add your review' link at the bottom of the record. This will display a form for you to complete.
Select the link to display your ratings & Review records.
Select the record you would like to delete.
Select the record you would like to edit.
Make the required changes to the ratings level and your comment then click Update Comment. You can also delete this record from here as well.
Note: It is recommended that after creating a SavedList you email or download the list as your SavedList may be removed after a short amount of time.
Email details of the saved records to a nominated address.
Download details of the saved records to a local disk file.
Place a reservation on a selection of the records in your list, or place a reservation on all the records in the list (if there are 30 or less).
You do not need to Login to use My SavedList and there is no limit to the number of records you may have in your list.
If you retrieve more than one record, the records retrieved will be displayed in brief format along with a checkbox. Check the checkboxes for the records you would like to add to your SavedList, then click the Save Selections option at the top or bottom of the list of records. Your selected records will be added to your SavedList and the page of records will be redisplayed. You must save your selections from each page before moving to the next page of records.
If you have retrieved a single record from your search, or if you have selected a record from your retrieved set, the record will be displayed in full display. To add the record to your SavedList, simply click the Save Record option at the top or bottom of the record display. If the record is already in your SavedList, this will be indicated and the Save Record option will not appear.
Locate the My SavedList option in the My Library menu.
If you currently have any records in your list, the records will be displayed in brief display.
If you want to remove individual records select the records by ticking the checkbox for each one you would like to remove then click Remove Selections.
If you want to clear all records from your list, click Remove All.
Your SavedList will normally be kept on the system for two days. It will be automatically cleared after this time.
You can browse through the records in your SavedList as you would any other set of retrieved records. Your list will initially be presented in brief display. Click on a title link to display the selected record in full display.
You can use this option to sort the records in your list before emailing or downloading the records if required.
Click the Sort Set option to display the sort options available. This option will only be displayed if you have more than one record in your SavedList.
Select the required sort option and click the Sort Set button. Your SavedList will be redisplayed in the order selected.
This facility allows you to email your saved records to the nominated email address. You can select records from each page to include in the email, or you can email all records in your SavedList. You can choose to output the records in Citation format or Full format (please see below).
Select individual records from the current page if you only want to email specific records, or leave the checkboxes unchecked to email all records in your set. Select the Email option.
Select the output format you want.
Enter an email address in the Email To box.
Enter a subject for your email in the Subject box (or leave as the default).
This facility allows you to download the records in your SavedList to your computer or USB memory stick. You can select records from each page to download, or you can download all records in your SavedList. You can choose to output the records in Citation format or Full format (please see below).
Select individual records from the current page if you only want to download specific records, or leave the checkboxes unchecked to download all records in your set.
You will be prompted as to where you want to save the download text file.
The Library catalogue allows you to place reservations on individual records as you browse through the database. You can also place multiple reservations on a number of records as you retrieve sets of records from your searches. Using your SavedList, you can save individual records as you browse through the database. You can then access the records in your SavedList to place multiple reservations on selected records or on all items.
Search for the items you would like to place reservations for and add these items to your SavedList.
If you would like to place a reservation for all the items in your SavedList, select the Reserve All button displayed at the top and bottom of the page.
If you would like to place a reservation on selected items from each page of your SavedList, mark the checkboxes for your selected items and then select the Reserve Selections button.
Select the location from which you would like collect the item.
Select the number of titles you would like to have allocated you to to satisfy this reservation. For example, you may have performed a search for titles on a particular subject and would like to borrower just one of the items retrieved but don't really care which one. You would just like to have the first one available. In this case, select 1 from number of titles required. You can however also place a reserve on all the titles by choosing the All titles option.
You will be advised if there are any charges or problems with your reservation. If all if well and you wish to proceed with your reservation, select the Continue button. Select the Cancel button if you don't wish to place the reservation.
An alert profile allows you to create a profile that matches your preferences for items you would like to borrow. Whenever a new item that matches your profile is added to the library collection you will receive an email.
You can also use your alert profile online at any time to scan for new items matching your preferences.
Login to your Account and click the New Alert Profile tab.
Click the Search button to test your search to see if it retrieves the number and type of records you are expecting. This will apply your search preferences to the Library Catalogue and will display the records retrieved.
Make any adjustments to your search profile and retest the search, if required.
Select an alert frequency to indicate how often you would like the system to check the library catalogue for new works matching your search profile. For example, if you select Daily, the catalogue will be checked daily, but you will only receive an email if there is something new that matches your profile.
Provide a short description of your profile so that you can recognise it in your profile list.
Click the Save button to create your new profile. A message will be displayed to let you know your profile has been created and the form will be cleared to enable you to enter another profile if you want to.
You can update your alert profile and access your new profile set from your Account Summary page (see below).
Make any necessary adjustments to your search profile and re-test the search. Remember to change your description if you change your search criteria to retrieve different items.
Set the Profile Active Flag as required by checking or unchecking the Send Alerts option.
You can also access the records matching your search criteria online. Follow the steps above to access your existing alert profiles. Select the option to Display New Entries to find new records matching your search criteria, or select the option to Display Profile Set to find all records matching your search criteria. Once the records are displayed you can add reservations as you require. You can also save the records to your SavedList if your require.


text:
package com.intellij.testFramework.fixtures.impl;

import com.intellij.testFramework.builders.ModuleFixtureBuilder;
import com.intellij.testFramework.fixtures.HeavyIdeaTestFixture;
import com.intellij.testFramework.fixtures.IdeaProjectTestFixture;
import com.intellij.testFramework.fixtures.TestFixtureBuilder;
import com.intellij.util.pico.CachingConstructorInjectionComponentAdapter;
import com.intellij.util.pico.DefaultPicoContainer;
import org.jetbrains.annotations.NotNull;
import org.junit.Assert;
import org.picocontainer.MutablePicoContainer;

import java.lang.reflect.Field;
import java.util.Map;

/**
 * @author mike
*/
class HeavyTestFixtureBuilderImpl implements TestFixtureBuilder<IdeaProjectTestFixture> {
  private final HeavyIdeaTestFixtureImpl myFixture;
  private final Map<Class<? extends ModuleFixtureBuilder>, Class<? extends ModuleFixtureBuilder>> myProviders;
  private final MutablePicoContainer myContainer;

  HeavyTestFixtureBuilderImpl(HeavyIdeaTestFixtureImpl fixture, final Map<Class<? extends ModuleFixtureBuilder>, Class<? extends ModuleFixtureBuilder>> providers) {
    myFixture = fixture;
    myProviders = providers;

    myContainer = new DefaultPicoContainer();
    myContainer.registerComponentInstance(this);
  }

  private <M extends ModuleFixtureBuilder> M createModuleBuilder(Class<M> key) {
    Class<? extends ModuleFixtureBuilder> implClass = myProviders.get(key);
    Assert.assertNotNull(key.toString(), implClass);
    final CachingConstructorInjectionComponentAdapter
      adapter = new CachingConstructorInjectionComponentAdapter(implClass, implClass, null, true);
    return (M)adapter.getComponentInstance(myContainer);
  }

  @NotNull
  @Override
  public HeavyIdeaTestFixture getFixture() {
    return myFixture;
  }

  @Override
  public <M extends ModuleFixtureBuilder> M addModule(final Class<M> builderClass) {
    loadClassConstants(builderClass);
    final M builder = createModuleBuilder(builderClass);
    myFixture.addModuleFixtureBuilder(builder);
    return builder;
  }

  private static void loadClassConstants(final Class builderClass) {
    try {
      for (final Field field : builderClass.getFields()) {
        field.get(null);
      }
    }
    catch (IllegalAccessException e) {
      throw new RuntimeException(e);
    }
  }
}

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


text:
English Language and Literature, Content Writing, Copywriting, Copy Editing
Bachelor of Arts majoring in English Literature, Media and Writing, and Film Studies from the University of Cape Town
Joel Taylor uses his education and skills in research, content writing, and editing to create content for diverse topics that are easy to read and understand. Research and writing from different points of view formed the basis of his bachelor's degree, and he has learned to carry the developed skills into the articles he has written for various companies in different niches including health and nutrition, alternative medicines, music, and more.
Quote From Joel Taylor
Being an avid lover of storytelling, Joel has been working on a fantasy novel set in an imagined universe for over half a decade and dreams of becoming a bestselling author.
About Upstep's Editorial Process
At Upstep, our team of expert writers delivers articles to help you treat foot conditions and maintain proper foot health. Our team of podiatrists, physiotherapists, and experienced editors fact-check content to ensure relevance and accuracy. We only source content from reputable sites and academic research institutions and, where appropriate, cite it within our articles. Our content is rigorously reviewed before publication and upon considerable updates.
More about Our editorial process
Latest from Joel Taylor


The tone of my last post was entirely out of order. There's a serious UX issue at hand and my writing did nothing to bring that discussion to the fore. I hope Jason will accept my apology.
This entry was written by alex, posted on August 6, 2006 at 10:22 pm, filed under blog chatter and tagged vim. Bookmark the permalink. Follow any comments here with the RSS feed for this post. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.


text:
Home/News/Texas/NFL Playoffs: Week 18 completed roster to determine playoff field
NFL Playoffs: Week 18 completed roster to determine playoff field
Regan Send an email 3 weeks agoLast Updated: January 8, 2023
The NFL Week 18 game list is a must-see for anyone who loves high-stakes football, as long as they also enjoy the scoreboard-watching elements and slightly confusing playoff tiebreaks.
It's been an eventful week for players and fans who watched in horror Monday night as the Buffalo Bills rescue Damar Hamlin. fainted on the field and had to be given artificial respiration before leaving for the field in an ambulance. A few days later, the same players and fans happily watched Hamlin recover.
This makes it much easier to focus on the last week of the NFL, which will determine the fate of many teams in the playoffs.
One of the greatest quarterbacks of all time, Aaron Rodgers, is facing a situation where the Green Bay Packers take on the Detroit Lions. One of the greatest coaches of all time, Bill Belichick, and his New England Patriots need a win over the mighty Bills or they could end up on the couch watching the playoffs.
Kansas City took first place in the AFC overall standings with a 31–13 win over Las Vegas on Saturday. The first NFC spot is still open. It remains to be seen how much the AFC draw will be affected by the cancellation of the Bills-Bengals game following Hamlin's injury.
Here are some things worth seeing:
WHAT IS THE PLAY OFF FORMAT?
This is the third year in a row in the current NFL playoff format, featuring the top seven teams from both the AFC and NFC.
The four division winners in both conferences automatically receive the top four seeds, regardless of record, and then the top three top-scoring teams that did not win their division are wildcarded. This is why wildcard picks quite often have a better record but worse playoff seed than the team that finished division winner.
The No. 1 seeded team in each conference advances to the second round, while the No. 2 team hosts No. 7, No. 3 hosts No. 6, and No. 4 hosts No. 5 during Wildcard Weekend.
The NFL has a policy of re-seeding after each round of the playoffs. This means that no matter how the bracket started, the lowest seeded team will always advance to the higher seeded team.
The playoffs have four rounds: the wild-card round will take place on January 14-15, the divisional round on January 21-22, the conference championship games on January 29, and the Super Bowl on February 12. in Glendale, Arizona.
WHAT HAS CHANGED WITH THE CANCELLED BILLS-BENGALS?
The Bills-Bengals game had major playoff ramifications in the AFC, so the game being canceled due to Hamlin's injury could see some changes depending on Week 18 or playoff results.
The AFC Championship will be played at a neutral venue if the participating teams have played an unequal number of games and both could have finished first and host the game if all AFC clubs had played a full 17-game regular season.
The league is considering multiple venues, including indoor and outdoor stadiums.
There are plenty of scenarios – especially for the Bengals, Bills and Chiefs – depending on the results ahead. The list is quite long. AP is broken these potential matches.
WHAT ARE THE BIG GAMES GOING ON THIS WEEKEND?
In fairly straightforward playoff drama, the Jacksonville Jaguars beat the Tennessee Titans 20-16 on Saturday night to win the AFC South for the first time in five seasons. The Titans needed a win to make the playoffs.
packers and Rodgers also has a direct path to the playoffs.. If they beat the Detroit Lions on Sunday at Lambo Field, they'll hit the net. If they lose, they are out. The Lions are also on the hunt for the playoffs, but they need to beat the Packers and hope the Seahawks lose to the Rams.
WHAT OTHER GAMES TO WATCH IN WEEK 18?
On Sunday, the New England Patriots will face the Bills in a game that will be closely watched for many reasons.
First, there's the obvious storyline of the Bills playing less than a week after Hamlin's emotional situation. But there are also serious consequences for the playoffs.
The Patriots could punch their ticket into the postseason with an upset win. If they lose, they will need the help of other teams. The Bills are still in contention for the top spot in the AFC, depending on what the Chiefs do against the Raiders on Saturday night.
Also of note: the Miami Dolphins, who are probably under third quarterback Skylar Thompson. need a win over the New York Jets (and help from other teams) qualify for the playoffs. In Philadelphia, the Eagles could take first place in the NFC overall if they beat the New York Giants.
Even the Pittsburgh Steelers have a chance. They have to beat the Browns on Sunday and then hope the Patriots and Dolphins lose.
AP Pro Football journalist Rob Maaddi contributed to this report.
AP NFL: https://apnews.com/hub/nfl and https://twitter.com/AP_NFL.
Copyright 2023 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or distributed without permission.
Tyler Thrift celebrates fourth anniversary by giving away merchandise
The US Census estimates that more than 30 million people now call Texas home.
Greener return, free agency raises concerns over charter flights
Icy conditions cover parts of the hilly terrain.
Houston teacher to star in new season of 'The Revenant'
Man who shot Dallas officer in 2007 faces execution
Nevada says Tesla's possible tax breaks remain under wraps for now
Fayetteville-Cumberland Public Affairs Collaborates with Vision Resource Center for Dining & Dialogue
Local News: Nevada Regional Medical Center Board of Directors elects officers (02/01/23)
$40 million made available for new state parks, attractions, accommodations
The airline has reduced the cost of tickets from Tampa


text:
Wimbledon 4°c
Our Facebook feedsThis is Local London Facebook Page
Our Twitter feeds@local_london
Team building in Scotland
Met Police Careers
Other London Football
Other London Sport
Opt out or help out by Priyal Dhanjal, The Henrietta Barnett School
Two kidneys were given to two adults. One liver was given to one baby. One heart was given to one Max. All because of one road traffic accident in August 2017, in which Kiera Ball died at age 9.
Her family chose to donate her organs because they believed that this is what she would have truly wanted. This allowed Max Johnson, aged 9, to receive a life-saving heart transplant. Subsequently, his cardiomyopathy, a heart muscle disease, was prevented from worsening.
He had been waitlisted for 8 whole months, and instead of giving up, instead of moping around and instead of crying about his situation, he became an inspiration. Max shared his story and campaigned in favour of an opt-out system for organ donation, where people are automatically enrolled to donate organs. It is now predicted to save over 700 more lives each year and will be implemented in Spring 2020. Due to Max and Kiera's part in the situation, the law became known as the Max and Kiera, and the opt-out law.
Even though you are automatically enrolled into donating organs, you do still have the choice of whether you donate or not, and which organs you want to donate. A student stated "my eyes have seen my journey and my life." Would she want to donate those, I'm not so sure?
Automatic enrollment for becoming an organ donor after death has been thoroughly questioned by many. So is it wrong for the government to choose this, to decide this without letting the people play a part in the decision? Was the old system, where you had to sign yourself up, better than the new opt-out system, where you are automatically enrolled?
The opt-out system uses the idea of presumed consent, in which the NHS assumes you agree until you say you don't, for organ donation after death. However, consent is something that shows agreement explicitly and clearly, so does that make presumed consent wrong? The answer to that is no. Even though consent is not given explicitly, it is given implicitly, and this is still consent nonetheless.
By not objecting to organ donation in the opt-out system, your silence is implicit consent. Therefore, this makes me believe that even though we are automatically enrolled in the opt-out system, everyone is given the choice to accept that or not, even if your consent is presumed in the first place.
In England, 80% of the population currently support organ donation, but only 30% have signed up. Think about how many people's lives could be saved if the rest of the 43% signed up as well.
Organ donation is one of the greatest developments in science and saves hundreds of lives each year. People get a new chance to live, explore and thrive in life. By being a part of the change, you are doing one of the greatest things a human can ever do - help out.
Priyal Dhanjal
Do new years' resolutions work ? by Ibaado Mohamed, Nower Hill High School
Exploitation or what we signed up for? by Maisie Allan, Parmiter's School
Is the stress worth it? by Maisie Allan, Parmiter's School
Do video games cause violence? by Jai Raven, Nower Hill High School
Jumanji: The Next Level, a new level for the franchise? - Rathi, Nower Hill High School
Are GCSE English set texts too pessimistic for school? By Annika Nandi, The Henrietta Barnett School
'Magic goes wrong' by Eve Nicholls, the Henrietta Barnett School
Laughing matters:the state of a nation by Lavanya Singh
Kidz Kingdom - Maryam Ahmed, Kingsley Academy


JOB SUMMARY: This position is responsible for the safety, security and well being of the client's employees as well as its property, visitors, vendors and anyone conducting business at this facility.
Duties include reporting to the client and company staff of any issues or concerns which may arise. This includes all of the daily functions and/or emergencies which may occur.
Determines nature and countermeasures to problems encountered at the client's facility.
Administers prescribed emergency care to persons injured or ill at the client's facility.
Communicates with professional medical personnel at emergency treatment facility.
Operates all equipment and vehicles required to accomplish the required tasks involved with this position.
Conducts leadership and training with staff personnel.
Provides an atmosphere in which all client employees and visitors know that the client responds to and cares about their needs; provides a courteous, respectful and pleasant interaction with each client employee and visitor as perceived from their point of view; presents a good image of the client.
Monitors entrances and exits; acts to prevent unapproved or unlawful entry; controls entrances, the movement of people and vehicles, and parking; operates a gate and examines vehicle contents; monitors remote entrances using closed circuit television; operates remote access devices.
Patrols assigned site on foot or in vehicle; checks for unsafe conditions, hazards, security violations, blocked ingress and egress, mechanical problems, and unauthorized persons; inspects buildings, fire protection equipment and grounds using appropriate equipment and protective gear.
Prepares logs or reports as required for site; writes or types reports or enters information in a computer using standard grammar; inspects security control logs and takes action as required.
Responds to incidents of fire, medical emergency, bomb threat, flooding, water discharge, elevator emergency, hazardous materials, inclement weather, and other incidents or conditions following procedures established for the site, by the company, and/or through training or certification; performs Emergency Medical Care related duties in response to incidents; removes or assists in removal of victims from scene of accident or catastrophe, and provides related instructions to others as necessary.
Performs any "other" client/company specified duties.
Knowledge of or ability to learn all security operations and procedures.
May be required to work overtime with/without advance notice.
Frequent standing and walking, which may involve climbing stairs and walking up inclines and on uneven terrain.
Required lifting and/or moving related to emergency assistance and/or emergency equipment; depending upon assignment, may be occasional or frequent, and may involve weight or force in excess of 70 pounds.
Potential exposure to blood-borne pathogens requiring protective measures.


text:
Under 19s Overview
Prior to the creation of the League's 1946 Thirds competition (which became the U19s), the Richmond Football Club invested interest/time/money/resources/facillities in several junior side throughout the 1930s and 1940s.
In those decades there were a significant numbers of junior teams/Leagues in the Richmond District, that the club often referred to in their Annual Report. Richmond Districts, Kew Sub-Districts, Richmond Citizens Boys' League (under Stewart Hemmerde), Burnley CYMS, St Ignatius, Burnley (Eastern Suburban League ), the Opportunity Boys' Club, Richmond United, Richmond Rovers
In 1936, the Second Eighteen Annual Report lists that " Richmond Districts are now considered Richmond 3rd Eighteen, a move we trust will in the near future be for the benefit of football in Richmond"
In 1937 an Under 18s team was formed known as the Richmond Recruits. The press gave them the moniker ''Kittens"".
(In subsequent years it was an Under 19s team . There was also an Under 17s version)
Eight-one lads under 17 interviewed Mr G. Delaney in Yarra Park yesterday and sought inclusion in the junior side, which will play in the Melbourne Boys' League competition and which is to be fostered by the senior club. (The Argus April 14 1937 pg 20)
In 1939 the Richmond Football Club sponsored two teams, the Richmond Recruits (Melbourne Boys' League A grade) , and the Richmond Colts (Melbourne Boys' League B Grade). The Recruits played curtain raises to the Seniors. Each team had its own Committee and held its meetings in the RFC Pavilion.
In 1939 while trying to financially secure a coach, Jack Titus, then vice captain of senior team, agreed to coach the club on Tuesday and Thursday at training in the meantime.
"The well known 'Recruits' went out of existence this season, but in name only. The 2nd XVIII League, having formed a 3rd XVIII under age competition, Richmond entered a team which actually took the place of the Recruits. Vin Dyer is still doing an excellent job as manager, and although the team did not reach the final four, big improvements can be expected next season as the lads train with the 2nd XVIII and under the guidance of Alby Pannam, who takes great interest in the boys" (1946 Richmond Seconds Annual Report)
When the official VFL competition was created in 1946, the Richmond team was known as the "Richmond Thirds".
(The competition changed its name to the 'Under 19's from the 1960 season onwards. It ended at the end of 1991 and was replaced with the TAC Cup). "The Richmond Thirds was under the control of a Secretary, and the Second Eighteen Committee, and the majority of the players trained at Punt Road under Alby Pannam" (1946 RFC Annual Report)
In 1947, the Richmond Football Club formed an U18's competition - the only qualification being players must be under 18 and live in Richmond football district, of Richmond, Kew, Deepdene, Balwyn and small parts of Canterbury and Surrey Hill. Stewart Hemmerde appointed secretary of this competition
In 1950, the Richmond Junior League was disbanded due to lack of support from junior football clubs in the district.
A 4th 18 was then created under the name 'Richmond Junior F.C' and the 'managership of Stewart Hemmerde'.
This side was entered into the 3rd 18 League. As such there were 2 Richmond teams in the Thirds competition in 1950 - 'Richmond' and 'Richmond Junior F.C'
In 1968, H.A Haswell (Bert) received Life Member of the League , for having represented the Richmond Club as Third Eighteen Manager from 1957-1961 in which year he was appointed delegate on the Permit and Umpire Committee. He has served the League continuously for the past 12 years - VFL 2nds Annual Report 1968


The Single Page Business System is a series of one-page dashboards and tools which provide entrepreneurs and owners the most important data about their business (and life) very quickly.
Plus a bonus called the Single Page Proposal Template.
Core Day: This is 4 1/2 Hours of interactive time together, outlining the executive business plan, the strategic marketing plan, your life plan, as well new simplified talent management plan. The core day is broken down into four 55-minute interactive sessions, with a short break between each session.
Follow-Up: There are three 55-minute follow-up sessions to insure the Single Page Business Systems are implemented effectively as well to go over the Single Page Proposal Template. These are conducted at the following intervals: one week after the core day, two weeks after the core day, and one month after the core day.
The exclusive programs and events offered by Thom Quinn are often filled to capacity very quickly and there is a limited number of time slots devoted to the Copy Therapy Intensive (as Thom's time is limited). If you would like to be notified when registration opens, please sign up for Thom's Inner Circle at the bottom of this page for the early bird notification service and you will be allowed to apply for the program several days before the general public.
The cost of the program is $7997; however, you should not sign up for the Single Page Business System Intensive if you do not believe that converting many more leads into paying clients would be worth, at minimum, 10 times the fee.
This 'by application only' program is designed for entrepreneurs and business owners who want to enjoy life while building a great business.
Enrollment via application for the Single Page Business System Intensive begins on March 1, 2018.