text:
Certified Benz & Beemer Compares 2015 Audi A3 VS 2015 Mazda 6 Near Phoenix, AZ
2015 Mazda 6
The A3 Sedan's front seatbelts will tighten automatically in the event the vehicle detects an impending crash, improving protection against injury significantly. The Mazda6 doesn't offer pre-crash pretensioners.
For enhanced safety, the front and rear seat shoulder belts of the Audi A3 Sedan are height-adjustable to accommodate a wide variety of driver and passenger heights. A better fit can prevent injuries and the increased comfort also encourages passengers to buckle up. The Mazda6 has only front height-adjustable seat belts.
The A3 Sedan has a standard Secondary Collision Brake Assist, which automatically applies the brakes in the event of a crash to help prevent secondary collisions and prevent further injuries. The Mazda6 doesn't offer a post collision braking system: in the event of a collision that triggers the airbags, more collisions are possible without the protection of airbags that may have already deployed.
The A3 Sedan 2.0T has all-wheel drive to maximize traction under poor conditions, especially in ice and snow. The Mazda6 doesn't offer all-wheel drive.
The A3 Sedan offers optional Parking System Plus to help warn the driver about vehicles, pedestrians or other obstacles behind or in front of their vehicle. The Mazda6 doesn't offer a front parking aid.
Compared to metal, the A3 Sedan's plastic fuel tank can withstand harder, more intrusive impacts without leaking; this decreases the possibility of fire. The Mazda6 has a metal gas tank.
Both the A3 Sedan and the Mazda6 have standard driver and passenger frontal airbags, front side-impact airbags, side-impact head airbags, front-wheel drive, height-adjustable front shoulder belts, four-wheel antilock brakes, traction control and electronic stability systems to prevent skidding.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration does 35 MPH front crash tests on new vehicles. In this test, results indicate that the Audi A3 Sedan is safer than the Mazda6:
A significantly tougher test than their original offset frontal crash test, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety does 40 MPH small overlap frontal offset crash tests. In this test, where only 25% of the total width of the vehicle is struck, results indicate that the Audi A3 Sedan is safer than the Mazda6:
Overall Evaluation
Head Neck Evaluation
Head injury index
Peak Head Forces
0 G's
107.67 G's
Chest Evaluation
Hip & Thigh Evaluation
Hip & Thigh Injury Risk R/L
0%/0%
Lower Leg Evaluation
The A3 Sedan comes with a full 4 year/50,000 mile basic warranty, which covers the entire car and includes 24 hour roadside assistance. The Mazda6's 3 year/36,000 mile basic warranty expires 1 year and 14,000 miles sooner.
The A3 Sedan's corrosion warranty is 7 years longer than the Mazda6's (12 vs. 5 years).
Reliability Comparison
The Audi A3 Sedan's engines use a cast iron block for durability, while the Mazda6's engine uses an aluminum block. Aluminum engine blocks are much more prone to warp and crack at high temperatures than cast iron.
J.D. Power and Associates' 2014 Initial Quality Study of new car owners surveyed provide the statistics that show that Audi vehicles are better in initial quality than Mazda vehicles. J.D. Power ranks Audi 11th in initial quality, above the industry average. With 28 more problems per 100 vehicles, Mazda is ranked 28th, below the industry average.
J.D. Power and Associates' 2015 survey of the owners of three-year-old vehicles provides the long-term dependability statistics that show that Audi vehicles are more reliable than Mazda vehicles. J.D. Power ranks Audi 14th in reliability, above the industry average. With 2 more problems per 100 vehicles, Mazda is ranked 15th.
The A3 Sedan 1.8T's standard 1.8 turbo 4 cyl. produces 15 lbs.-ft. more torque (200 vs. 185) than the Mazda6's 2.5 DOHC 4 cyl. The A3 Sedan 2.0T's standard 2.0 turbo 4 cyl. produces 36 more horsepower (220 vs. 184) and 73 lbs.-ft. more torque (258 vs. 185) than the Mazda6's 2.5 DOHC 4 cyl.
The A3 Sedan's 2.0 turbo diesel produces 51 lbs.-ft. more torque (236 vs. 185) than the Mazda6's 2.5 DOHC 4 cyl.
As tested in Car and Driver the Audi A3 Sedan is faster than the Mazda6 (automatics tested):
A3 Sedan 1.8T
On the EPA test cycle the A3 Sedan TDI gets better fuel mileage than the Mazda6 i-ELOOP (31 city/43 hwy vs. 28 city/40 hwy).
For better stopping power the A3 Sedan's front brake rotors are larger than those on the Mazda6:
The A3 Sedan stops much shorter than the Mazda6:
The A3 Sedan's standard tires provide better handling because they have a lower 45 series profile (height to width ratio) that provides a stiffer sidewall than the Mazda6 Sport's standard 55 series tires. The A3 Sedan's optional tires have a lower 40 series profile than the Mazda6 Touring/Grand Touring's 45 series tires.
The A3 Sedan 2.0T Quattro handles at .92 G's, while the Mazda6 Grand Touring pulls only .82 G's of cornering force in a Motor Trend skidpad test.
The A3 Sedan 2.0T Quattro executes Motor Trend's "Figure Eight" maneuver 2 seconds quicker than the Mazda6 Touring (25.6 seconds @ .71 average G's vs. 27.6 seconds @ .62 average G's).
For better maneuverability, the A3 Sedan's turning circle is .6 feet tighter than the Mazda6's (36.1 feet vs. 36.7 feet).
The A3 Sedan is 1 foot, 4.1 inches shorter than the Mazda6, making the A3 Sedan easier to handle, maneuver and park in tight spaces.
As tested by Car and Driver, the interior of the A3 Sedan 2.0T Quattro is quieter than the Mazda6 Grand Touring:
Full-Throttle
A low lift-over trunk design makes loading and unloading the A3 Sedan easier. The A3 Sedan's trunk lift-over height is 26.3 inches, while the Mazda6's liftover is 28.5 inches.
A standard locking glovebox keeps your small valuables safer in the A3 Sedan. The Mazda6 doesn't offer locking storage for small valuables.
The power windows standard on both the A3 Sedan and the Mazda6 have locks to prevent small children from operating them. When the lock on the A3 Sedan is engaged the driver can still operate all of the windows, for instance to close one opened by a child. The Mazda6 prevents the driver from operating the other windows just as it does the other passengers.
The A3 Sedan's rain-sensitive wipers adjust their speed and turn on and off automatically based on the amount of rainfall on the windshield. This allows the driver to concentrate on driving without constantly adjusting the wipers. The Mazda6's standard manually variable intermittent wipers have to be constantly adjusted.
Heated windshield washer nozzles are optional on the A3 Sedan to prevent washer fluid and nozzles from freezing and help continue to keep the windshield clear in sub-freezing temperatures. The Mazda6 doesn't offer heated windshield washer nozzles.
In poor weather, headlights can lose their effectiveness as grime builds up on their lenses. This can reduce visibility without the driver realizing. The A3 Sedan offers available headlight washers to keep headlight output high. The Mazda6 doesn't offer headlight washers.
The A3 Sedan has a standard automatic headlight on/off feature. When the ignition is on, the headlights automatically turn on at dusk and off after dawn. When the ignition turns off, the headlights turn off after a delay timed to allow you to securely get to your front door. The Mazda6 only offers an automatic headlight on/off feature as an extra cost option.
Both the A3 Sedan and the Mazda6 offer rear vents. For greater rear passenger comfort, the A3 Sedan has standard rear air conditioning vents to keep rear occupants cool in summer or warm in winter. The Mazda6 doesn't offer rear air conditioning vents, only heat vents.
Bluetooth wireless connectivity is standard on the A3 Sedan, connecting the driver and passenger's cell phones to the vehicle systems. This allows them to use the vehicle's stereo and hand controls to place calls safely and easily. Mazda doesn't offer wireless connectivity on the Mazda6 Manual Sport.
The A3 Sedan will cost the buyer less in the long run because of its superior resale value. The Intellichoice estimates that the A3 Sedan will retain 54.23% to 55.18% of its original price after five years, while the Mazda6 only retains 48.13% to 48.51%.
The Car Book by Jack Gillis recommends the Audi A3 Sedan, based on economy, maintenance, safety and complaint levels.


text:
One Step Closer to Birdflight
NASA's Spanwise Adaptive Wing program gears up for a second round of test flights.
The 200lb Prototype Technology-Evaluation Research Aircraft (PTERA) landing during the first test series. The second set of tests will begin sometime this fall. (NASA)
By Zach Rosenberg
With the Spanwise Adaptive Wing, engineers hope to achieve something Nature figured out long ago.
By changing the vertical angle, or cant, of the outer part of an airplane's wings—the part closest to the wingtip—in flight, NASA researchers discovered that they could increase fuel efficiency and side-to-side (yaw) stability. It may not sound impressive, but it's a huge step that could save a lot of energy and take us closer to flying with the grace of birds.
The Spanwise Adaptive Wing project may finally make in-flight wing changes practical. One thing you might notice about birds is that they lack vertical stabilizers, which virtually every aircraft ever built relies on for stability and (thanks to the attached rudder) maneuving in the yaw axis. Airplane tails are designed to cope with the worst possible situations, but much of it simply isn't needed most of the time, according to Matt Moholt, SAW's principal investigator. "The vertical tail is oversized for the entire flight mission profile," he says.
Carrying around all that dead weight and extra drag is not ideal in an industry where every pound counts, but nobody has figured out how to both lop off the tail and provide yaw authority—until the SAW tests. The SAW team proved the concept feasible over three flight tests in late 2017/early 2018 on a 30 percent-scale 737, dubbed Prototype-Technology Evaluation and Research Aircraft (PTERA).
They found that canting the wings 45 degrees upwards provided enough yaw, but decreased lateral stability. Canting the wings down, on the other hand, provided stability but not much yaw. So an airplane capable of changing the cant of its wings inflight could get yaw when it's needed, then shift to get more stability when it's not.
"Can we generate enough yaw control from the wing tips to help remove or reduce the vertical tail? On the PTERA UAV we find that the answer is yes," says Moholt. "In fact, our next flight test campaign seeks to demonstrate this. The flight test data from the first campaign shows that we only need to deflect the wings up 40 degrees to gain enough yaw to eliminate a significant portion of the rudder."
SAW is possible thanks to a technology—shape-memory alloys—that wasn't available during the golden age of flight testing. These alloys expand in a predictable, directed way when exposed to high heat, so they can be much smaller and less complex than the large and sturdy control mechanisms used now.
Using shape-memory alloys for this purpose is new, so for now the SAW team is focused on making sure it works, rather than optimizing its efficiency, says Othmane Benafan, co-principal investigator and lead materials engineer for the project. Future experiments could swap out the dedicated battery system that now heats the alloy and use cartridge or induction heaters, which are more efficient, instead.
The team is experimenting with memory alloys on an F/A-18 wing, but for the moment has no immediate plans to fly on such a big jet. "The PTERA UAV test flight was on a 200-pound vehicle, so moving straight to a 25,000-pound F/A-18 flight test is too much of a leap," says Othmane. "We plan an intermediate step to test on a roughly 2000-pound vehicle."
The next round of PTERA flights, a month or two from now, will also fine-tune the wing-cant for fuel efficiency. "For our second flight test campaign, we will be flying an experimental control system which monitors fuel flow and is constantly moving the wing tips to find the optimal position from an efficiency perspective," says Moholt.
Artificial wings have never been ideal, and in comparison to birds, airplanes are awkward, ungraceful fliers. Birds easily and precisely morph and move their wings, and as a result can fly with an ease and flexibility that turn aeronautical engineers green with envy. Since metal (and increasingly, carbon-fiber) wings can't morph, every airplane wing is a careful compromise between what designers want it to do best and what it needs to do the rest of the time. Most commercial airline wings are carefully refined for high-altitude, high-speed cruise, and flying slowly for takeoff and landing requires peripheral changes—flaps and slats, spoilers and speedbrakes—whose function any bird would recognize but would find unbearably clumsy. A 737 requires thousands of feet of concrete to take off, but even the fastest birds can morph their wings such that a quick hop or very short run gives them enough lift to fly.
Not that we haven't tried emulating birds. The Wright Brothers' airplanes turned by warping the wooden-frame, cloth-covered wings, contorting them to increase lift on one and decrease on the other. (That method was very quickly replaced by ailerons, hinged panels on the wing's trailing edge, which are easier and simpler to build). Swing-wings were the rage among 1960s military jet designers—many birds also tuck their wings in for speed—but they were complex and maintenance-intensive, and never left the concept stage in the civilian world.
Seems there's still plenty to be learned from studying the biology of flight.
About Zach Rosenberg
Zach Rosenberg is an Associate Editor at Air & Space.
Flight Research Flight Test
The World According to Gottorf
Turn Up the Heat: Bacterial Spores Can Take Temperatures in the Hundreds of Degrees

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
The "Great Zero Carbon" Conspiracy, Aided by CV
Fri 10:59 am +00:00, 12 Feb 2021
posted by Weaver
The "Great Zero Carbon" Conspiracy
F. WILLIAM ENGDAHL
All Global Research articles can be read in 27 languages by activating the "Translate Website" drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
The globalist Davos World Economic Forum is proclaiming the necessity of reaching a worldwide goal of "net zero carbon" by 2050. This for most sounds far in the future and hence largely ignored. Yet transformations underway from Germany to the USA, to countless other economies, are setting the stage for creation of what in the 1970's was called the New International Economic Order.
In reality it is a blueprint for a global technocratic totalitarian corporativism, one that promises huge unemployment, deindustrialization and economic collapse by design.
Consider some background.
Klaus Schwab's World Economic Forum (WEF) is currently promoting his favorite theme, the Great Reset of the world economy. The key to it all is understanding what the globalists mean by Net Zero Carbon by 2050.
The EU is leading the race, with a bold plan to become the world's first "carbon neutral" continent by 2050 and reduce its CO2 emissions by at least 55% by 2030.
In an August, 2020 post on his blog, self-appointed global vaccine czar Bill Gates wrote about the coming crisis in climate:
"As awful as this pandemic is, climate change could be worse… The relatively small decline in emissions this year makes one thing clear: We cannot get to zero emissions simply—or even mostly—by flying and driving less."
With a virtual monopoly on mainstream media as well as social media, the Global Warming lobby has been able to lead much of the world into assuming that the best for mankind is to eliminate hydrocarbons including petroleum, natural gas, coal and even the "carbon free" nuclear electricity by 2050, that we hopefully might avoid a 1.5 to 2 degree Centigrade rise in average world temperature. There is only one problem with this. It's cover for a diabolical ulterior agenda.
Origins of 'Global Warming'
Many have forgotten the original scientific thesis put forward to justify a radical shift in our energy sources. It was not "climate change." Earth climate is constantly changing, correlated to changes in the emission of solar flares or sunspot cycles affecting Earth climate.
Around the turn of the millennium as the previous solar-led warming cycle was no longer evident, Al Gore and others shifted the narrative in a linguistic sleight-of-hand to "Climate Change" from Global Warming. Now the fear narrative has gotten so absurd that every freak weather event is treated as "climate crisis." Every hurricane or winter storm is claimed as proof that the Climate Gods are punishing us sinful CO2 emitting humans.
But wait. The entire reason for the transition to alternative energy sources such as solar or wind, and abandoning carbon energy sources, is their claim that CO2 is a greenhouse gas that somehow goes up to the atmosphere where it forms a blanket that supposedly warms the Earth below—Global Warming. Greenhouse gas emissions according to the US Environmental Protection Agency come mostly from CO2. Hence the focus on "carbon footprints."
What is almost never said is that CO2 cannot soar up into the atmosphere from car exhaust or coal plants or other manmade origins. Carbon dioxide is not carbon or soot. It is an invisible, odorless gas essential to plant photosynthesis and all life forms on earth, including us. CO2 has a molecular weight of just over 44 while air (mainly oxygen and nitrogen) has a molecular weight of only 29.
The specific gravity of CO2 is some 1.5 times greater than air. That would suggest that CO2 exhaust gases from vehicles or power plants do not rise into the atmosphere some 12 miles or more above Earth to form the feared greenhouse effect.
Maurice Strong
To appreciate what criminal action is unfolding today around Gates, Schwab and advocates of an alleged "sustainable" world economy, we must go back to 1968 when David Rockefeller and friends created a movement around the idea that human consumption and population growth were the major world problem. Rockefeller, whose wealth was based on oil, created the neo-Malthusian Club of Rome at the Rockefeller villa in Bellagio, Italy. Their first project was to fund a junk study at MIT called Limits to Growth in 1972.
A key organizer of Rockefeller's 'zero growth' agenda in the early 1970s was his longtime friend, a Canadian oilman named Maurice Strong, also a Club of Rome member. In 1971 Strong was named Undersecretary of the United Nations and Secretary General of the June 1972 Stockholm Earth Day conference. He was also a trustee of the Rockefeller Foundation.
Maurice Strong was a key early propagator of the scientifically unfounded theory that man-made emissions from transportation vehicles, coal plants and agriculture caused a dramatic and accelerating global temperature rise which threatens civilization, so-called Global Warming. He invented the elastic term "sustainable development."
As chairman of the 1972 Earth Day UN Stockholm Conference, Strong promoted population reduction and lowering of living standards around the world to "save the environment." Some years later the same Strong stated:
"Isn't the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn't it our responsibility to bring that about?"
This is the agenda today known as the Great Reset or UN Agenda 2030. Strong went on to create the UN Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), a political body which advances the unproven claim that manmade CO2 emissions were about to tip our world into irreversible ecological catastrophe.
Co-founder of the Club of Rome, Dr Alexander King, admitted the essential fraud of their environmental agenda some years later in his book, The First Global Revolution. He stated:
In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill … All these dangers are caused by human intervention and it is only through changed attitudes and behaviour that they can be overcome. The real enemy, then, is humanity itself.
King admitted that the "threat of global warming" was merely a ploy to justify an attack on "humanity itself." This is now is being rolled out as the Great Reset and the Net Zero Carbon ruse.
Alternative Energy Disaster
In 2011, acting on the advice of Joachim Schnellnhuber, of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), Angela Merkel and the German government imposed a total ban on nuclear electricity by 2022, as part of a 2001 government strategy called the Energiewende or Energy Turn, to rely on solar and wind and other "renewables." The aim was to make Germany the first industrial nation to be "carbon neutral."
The strategy has been an economic catastrophe. Going from having one of the industrial world's most stable low-cost and reliable electric generation grids, today Germany has become the world's most expensive electric generator. According to the German energy industry association BDEW, at the latest by 2023 when the last nuclear plant closes, Germany will face electricity shortfalls.
At the same time coal, the largest source of electric power, is being phased out to reach Net Zero Carbon. Traditional energy-intensive industries such as steel, glass production, basic chemicals, paper and cement manufacturing, are facing soaring costs and shutdowns or offshoring and loss of millions of skilled jobs. The energy inefficient wind and solar, today costs some 7 to 9 times more than gas.
Germany has little sun compared with tropical countries, so wind is seen as the major source for green power. There is a huge input of concrete and aluminum needed to produce solar or wind farms. That needs cheap energy—gas or coal or nuclear—to produce. As that is phased out, cost becomes prohibitive, even with no added "carbon taxes."
Germany already has some 30,000 wind turbines, more than anywhere else in the EU. The gigantic wind turbines have serious problems of noise or infrasound health hazards for residents nearby the huge structures, and weather and bird damage. By 2025 an estimated 25% of existing German windmills will need replacement and waste disposal is a colossal problem. The companies are being sued as the citizens realize what a disaster they are. To reach targets by 2030, Deutsche Bank recently admitted the state will need to create an "eco dictatorship."
At the same time the German push to end gasoline or diesel transport by 2035 in favor of e-vehicles is on course to destroy Germany's largest and most profitable industry, the auto sector, and take down millions of jobs. The lithium-ion battery-powered vehicles have a total "carbon footprint" when the effects of mining lithium and producing all parts are included, that is worse than diesel autos.
And the amount of added electricity needed for a zero carbon Germany by 2050 would be far more than today, as millions of battery chargers will need grid electricity with reliable power. Now Germany and the EU begin to impose new "carbon taxes," allegedly to finance the transition to zero carbon. The taxes will only make electric power and energy even more expensive, insuring the faster collapse of German industry.
According to those advancing the Zero Carbon agenda, it is just what they desire: the deindustrialization of the most advanced economies, a calculated decades-long strategy as Maurice Strong said, to bring about the collapse of industrialized civilizations.
To turn the present world industrial economy backward to a wood-burning, windmill turning dystopia where blackouts become the norm as now in California, is an essential part of a Great Reset transformation under the Agenda 2030: UN Global Compact for Sustainability.
Merkel climate adviser, Joachim Schnellnhuber, in 2015 presented the radical green agenda of Pope Francis, the encyclical letter, Laudato Si, as Francis' appointee to the Pontifical Academy of Science. And he advised the EU on its green agenda. In a 2015 interview, Schnellnhuber declared that "science" has now determined that the maximum carrying capacity of a "sustainable" human population was some six billion fewer people:
"In a very cynical way, it's a triumph for science because at last we have stabilized something –- namely the estimates for the carrying capacity of the planet, namely below 1 billion people."
To do that the industrialized world must be dismantled. Christiana Figueres, a World Economic Forum Agenda Contributor and former executive secretary of the UN's Framework Convention on Climate Change, revealed the true aim of the UN climate agenda in a February 2015 Brussels press conference where she stated, "This is the first time in human history that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally changing the economic development model that has reigned since the Industrial Revolution."
Figueres' 2015 remarks are echoed today by French President Macron at the January 2021 World Economic Forum's "Davos Agenda" where he claimed that "under the current circumstances, the capitalist model and open economy are no longer feasible." Macron, a former Rothschild banker, claimed that the "only way to get out of this epidemic is to create an economy that is more focused on eliminating the gap between the rich and the poor." Merkel, Macron, Gates, Schwab and friends will do so by bringing living standards in Germany and the OECD down to levels of Ethiopia or Sudan. This is their zero carbon dystopia. Severely limit air travel, car travel, people movement, closing "polluting" industry, all to reduce CO2.
Uncanny how conveniently the coronavirus pandemic sets the stage for the Great Reset and UN Agenda 2030 Net Zero Carbon.
https://www.thelibertybeacon.com/the-great-zero-carbon-conspiracy-aided-by-cv/


Your guide to Greenwood, California assisted living facilities. With so many senior housing options available, how do you know which one is right for your family?
Animal care is available, nurses are on staff, this community provides complimentary transportation, wheelchair accessible showers are available at this location, residents can arrange for a room at this property that will allow them to live in this location whatever their healthcare needs are and become, Spanish is spoken at this location, and this location was renovated in 2013.
Delicious and nutritious meals are provided to all residents even those with dietary restrictions, physical therapy is handled by the physical therapist that makes regular visits to this property, speech therapy is offered via a speech therapist who comes to the community often, staff can help residents monitor their blood sugar, caregiver employees can deal with any wandering issues a member of the community may have, complimentary transportation is on hand for residents, and residents can arrange for a room at this community that will allow them to live in this location whatever their healthcare needs are and become.
Tasty and healthy meals are provided to all residents even those with dietary restrictions, vegetarian food is provided, a visiting podiatrist helps keep your feet healthy, speech therapy is offered via a speech therapist who comes to the property often, this community administers patient medications, wheelchair accessible showers are available at this location, and aging in place allows residents to remain in one location as their care needs change.
Physical therapy can be done without leaving the community by a visiting physical therapist, staff is trained to deal with any wandering behaviors that might present themselves dealt with, Sunrise of Rocklin has the training to resolve any aggression that residents may have, trained staff monitors medication and reminds residents when it's time to take them, the property has a nurse that is able to administer injectable medicine, the community is convenient to bus lines in the area, and wheelchair accessible showers are available at this location.


Swimmers cut suit with support built in with comfortable thin straps over the shoulder creating a freedom flow top. Suit has a soft front liner and has elastic used around arms, neckline and leg openings. Suit is designed with a U-back allowing for maximum arm movement in this sun suit!