I asked Peter Dunne some questions related to this recently.
1. You recently attended a United Nations Commission on Narcotic Drugs Meeting, Vienna, Austria and spoke about New Psychoactive Substances. What reaction did you get in Vienna about New Zealand's Psychoactive Substances Act?
The response was positive and interested. I had separate meetings with the European Union, the Dutch, the British, the Americans the Australians and the head of the UN Commission where our legislation was the major topic. All are watching to learn from us, most we believe we are on the right track.
2. Are you happy with how the implementation of the Act is progressing?
I am very frustrated by the lack of response from local government. Only 5 of 71 Councils have so far prepared their local policies. Their tardiness is the major reason for the current public controversy.
3. Was the relationship between cannabis use and synthetic substitutes discussed, especially the effects of cannabis being illegal encouraging drug users to use legal but unknown drugs?
There was not much discussion about cannabis in Vienna, other than general confirmation that there should be no legal relaxation.
4. How are other countries dealing with the cannabis/legal high issues?
Many are applying bans, although all acknowledge that they are ineffective and merely drive things underground. That is why most are looking at what we are doing. In general, they seem to be about we were 2 to 3 years ago in this debate.
5. Is anything being done in New Zealand or being considered to being done about the claimed anomaly between far better known and claimed less harmful cannabis use remaining illegal while synthetic drugs are given approval to be sold.
6. What are the chances of New Zealand's laws relating to cannabis being reviewed in the next three years.
7. Now your Psychotic Substances Act has been successfully introduced and is being implemented do you have any plans for or do you want to try and address cannabis or any other recreational psychotic drug issues?
It is my personal view that is possible that in the future the regulated market approach could be applied to cannabis, but that is not a priority. In any case, all the pharmacological and toxicologist and international advice I receive strongly suggests cannabis would fail the low risk test.
Thanks for that Pete. Given the momentum in other parts of the world, I do think cannabis regulation might be closer than the minister indicates. I've spoken to an advocate who's had private conversations with a number of MPs who seem to see the contradictions in in the Misuse of Drugs Act being off-limits.
There's not much sign of a will on the surface for trying to address the cannabis anomalies.
Greens have had medicinal use of cannabis in their members bill mix in the past but Russel Norman stated recently that cannabis won't be a priority for them this election.
But I doubt that decriminalisation will be one of the top ten. But, that's up to the party to decide, but I doubt that will be.
"They can put on the table what they want to put on the table, but Labour's policy is not to decriminalise cannabis," says Mr Cunliffe.
I can't see how it will be addressed unless it manages to get into Parliament via a members bill. I've just searched "proposed members' bills" and there's nothing under cannabis or marijuana.
Searching under Bills only comes up with Metiria Turei's Misuse of Drugs (Medicinal Cannabis) Amendment Bill that didn't get past it's first reading in 2009.
Now ""It won't be one of our major priorities, but it is our policy and we're not ashamed of that," she says.
It's unlikely any of the National, NZ First, ACT, Maori or Mana parties will push it.
He shows precious little responsibility!
A 17-year-old synthetic cannabis addict is seeking help after being threatened for speaking out about the dangers of the drug.
Recently I had a chance to look at one of those synthetic product bags, it seemed to be full of twigs and sticks as well as some kind of leafy material, is this so it emulates the classic 'baggie'?
Surely smoking wood can't be good for humans - do the manufacturers have anything to say about that?
I am so tiered of the OTT reaction coming from all sorts of people who should know better.
It is ironic that it is Peter Dunn that is bringing sensible drug laws to NZ. If it does work out (and it is working well so far, despite the OTT BS from many who should know better) even Peter Dunn himself acknowledges that cannabis will go through this process.
In my town, the council recently published draft guidelines on where legal highs could be sold. The law prohibits them being sold in any dairies, service stations, or anywhere liquor can be sold. The council had also decided that it would be the main street only and nowhere within 50m of a community facility (e.g. the town hall, childcare centre, community house). So with all those restrictions, it left only a gift shop and a sewing machine repair business that could legally sell legal highs. And I don't think either have any interest in doing so.
If councils are so worried about it, why don''t they open their own outlet to sell it responsibly and shut down the other stores? As I understand it, as long as you have somewhere to go to buy the stuff, the council is complying with the law.
Perfect for a Needle Exchange perhaps?
Groups of young men have been using the garden behind a Nelson church as a hideaway to drink alcohol and smoke legal highs.
But there seems to be no political will to address it apart from the ALCP. The Greens seen lukewarm at best, it doesn't fit with their marketing strategy. Cunliffe says Labour won't decriminalise. No sign of anything from National on it. Winston and the rest aren't likely to do anything.
So we have momentum around the world, we have growing acknowledgement that things aren't working here as they are but no sign of any change.
Would this be a good issue to be driven non-partisan by the blogosphere?
excellent blog - demonstrates exactly what the media refuses to provide - rational EVIDENCE-based info instead of kneejerk ,moral-panic gibberish. I continue to be gobsmacked that we can mass-produce so many uni / polytech grads in this country & yet demonstrate a complete failure to engage with this issue [ie. drug policy the wider issue] withany degree of acumen or honesty - Russell over the years is an exception to this. Investigative journalism in this arena is a joke - AWOL ! The blatant & appalling double-standard vis-à-vis alchohol as opposed to various other relatively low harm [ but criminalised ] psychoactives is beyond ridiculous.
Yikes. Some of the quotes in those stories are pretty bizarre. "Synthetic heroin"? What shops exactly are selling that?
Labour Party Invercargill candidate Lesley Soper spoke at the protest. People had a right to be angry with the Government after it rushed through a piece of legislation allowing legal highs to be sold in the communities, she said.
Keep up your good work there Pete I appreciate it.
Can I just say, the young guy in the news on the legal highs, now dealing with retribution (but cant find that) is imo crying out for help. His initial story said help. People with addiction actually want to give up many times but often have noone to tell them "I'll help you, you can do it" The stopping can be the easy part . What one replaces it with can be the hardest part. You need to change friends ,environment, work. It is a bigger head shift than often assumed. " Just go to rehab" isn't the complete answer. One really needs support that sticks with them. Rehabs have buddies for this purpose as does AA but just one close friend who is always close, inclusive, is hard to find.You have probably alienated all of those who cared. Even more so in co dependant relationships Confidence is way down the rabbit hole and if we look closely, the drugs and alcohol help disguise that, so coming out the flip side requires getting that back ten fold. Back to where you were at the beginning is just that ,the beginning again.
Does Soper really not know that these things have been "sold in communities" for the past decade and this this legislation sharply curtails the ability for that to happen?
And does she know that it had strong cross-party support (including Labour) and only John Banks voted against it in the final vote?
If they reclassify substances with existing legislation on them, alcohol would surely fail. Perhaps that explains why no politician would dare open that door.
I think the short answer is that Lesley Soper doesn't know anything. I remain baffled by the Invercargill LEC's decision to select her.
I've contacted Peter Dunne's office for detail on what he said this morning about acute presentations falling since the Act came into force. They seem happy to help, so hopefully I'll have that information before too long. I'll also contact CARM, who do the official adverse response reporting.
It'll be nice to bring some data to the party.


From dampers and louvers, to air measuring systems and ERVs, Ruskin® is recognized for consistent innovation, engineering excellence and precision manufacturing.
Thanks for submitting your review of Pryme Radio Products. We'll email you as soon as it's published, (typically within 48 hours). We really value your contributions, and so does our community of business professionals. They count on honest reviews like yours.
Thanks for submitting your review of Pryme Radio Products.
Thanks for submitting your review of Ruskin Company. We'll email you as soon as it's published, (typically within 48 hours). We really value your contributions, and so does our community of business professionals. They count on honest reviews like yours.
Thanks for submitting your review of Ruskin Company.


text:
Home Dredging Today Great Yarmouth £40m Tidal Defense Scheme Gets Underway
Great Yarmouth £40m Tidal Defense Scheme Gets Underway
January 13, 2020, by dredgingtoday
Environment Minster Rebecca Pow MP and Environment Agency Chair, Emma Howard Boyd, joined local partners last Friday (January 10) to mark the start of work on an innovative £40 million project to upgrade vital flood defenses in Great Yarmouth.
The work, which is expected to complete next year, will upgrade the level of protection from tidal flooding to more than 4,500 homes and businesses in the local area.
The refurbishment works will extend the working life of the existing defenses, and the new innovative construction methods being used will significantly reduce the carbon footprint of the project.
This major project will see 46 flood defense walls refurbished at locations across the town using an innovative technique that will extend their lifespan by up to 30 years.
The refurbishment follows on from an initial five-year phase of work which included the use of a specialized dam to inspect and repair the steel sheet piles that form the flood walls.
Environment Minister, Rebecca Pow, said: "I'm delighted to be here to witness the start of work on this vital project which will see homes and businesses in Great Yarmouth better protected from flooding for decades to come."
Emma Howard Boyd, Chair of the Environment Agency said: "This important project will upgrade over 4km of coastal defenses for Great Yarmouth and the surrounding area, better protecting over 4,500 homes and businesses from tidal flooding. The £40.3 million investment, plus £6.2 million for ongoing maintenance, has come from a range of sources including £32.4 million provided by central government."
Partnership contributions have come from New Anglia Local Enterprise Partnership, £8.2 million through the Growth Deal program, and £2.8 million from the Anglian Eastern Regional Flood & Coastal Committee.
Norfolk County Council and Great Yarmouth Borough Council have also contributed towards the project and local quayside businesses are supporting through contributions and the provision of compound space.
This project forms part of the Environment Agency's £2.6bn investment in flood and coastal defenses, spanning from 2015-2021, which will better protect over 300,000 homes from the risk of flooding.
View post tag: flood defenses
View post tag: Great Yarmouth
Photo: Image source: Environment Agency
South Yorkshire defences repaired
The Environment Agency has repaired Flood defences across South Yorkshire, damaged by the November 2...
The Environment Agency is making good progress on the £30 million Burton-upon-Trent flood defence pr...
Building long-term coastal resilience across England
A transformative £200m program to improve the resilience of communities at risk of flooding and coas...
£40m boost for flood defence schemes
Works continue on the Hythe Ranges scheme
Improving biodiversity on Isle of Wight coasts

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Tag Archives: media
education, enlightenment, entertainment, social consciousness
February 12, 2016 freethought	Leave a comment
Look at the featured photograph of this piece. Now dependent upon your state of being, the image can be considered uplifting or demeaning. Case in point… Many people of color (POC) will consider the image deplorable, and without context issue comments such as, "ignorant or despicable". In fact, I'll venture to guess that they'll state that the adult figure is a poor example of a man and does not exemplify fatherhood. Edward L. Bernays, the father of modern advertising, stated in his book "Propaganda" written in 1928, "In almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons…who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind." You have to understand that manipulating the masses is reality, not a conspiracy. Thus, in a snapshot, I may have taken a photo of a father and son returning home from the gun range; the elder celebrating the fact that his seed is increasingly mastering weaponry to use for his personal defense, to an alleged "gang-banger" or "thug" administering poor ethical characteristics because of the discernment of Black men in society; though the image does make it hard to dispute. Conversely, the image of three young ladies welding firearms is thought of as being a "family rites of passage"; a family teaching their daughters the art of protecting themselves from the cruelties of this world. The funny thing is that in either scenario, based on their perception, the viewer will ultimately utter the phrase, "That's what THEY do!" Who shapes public opinion? Who's to blame for the distortion of perspective? Is it the media, the government; perhaps an unseen hand? Though all are integral to the mechanisms that barrage our psyche, we're in fact to blame for all these transgressions.
The thought is we're all human beings. So ideally, we should have an ability to coexist without race, creed or gender being an issue. During sporting events, we all root for the same teams; our camaraderie shaped by the colors and names shared on both the front and back of the uniform. During the Olympic Games, we cheer our fellow countrymen to victory in their designated sports as they begin their pursuit of metals ranging from bronze to gold; with pride reflective of the winning athlete's determination to reach the pinnacle of their chosen activity; tears streaming as their country's National Anthem blares from the speakers of our television sets. Yet those instances are mere microcosms as to what occurs on broader scale. Malcolm X explained it perfectly when he stated, "The media's the most powerful entity on earth. They have the power to make the innocent guilty and to make the guilty innocent, and that's power; because they control the minds of the masses." Additionally, he stated, "If you're not careful, the newspaper will have you hating the people who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the oppressing." The media controls the rhetoric; the government has been found to have implemented strategies to sway and frighten the population with specific stories to curb public opinion. In 1975, Operation Mockingbird, was uncovered by a committee called, "The United States Senate Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities" (the Church Committee), which was chaired by Senator Frank Church (Democrat – Idaho). Through their investigation, it was discovered that a program was developed in the 1950s for the purpose of "persuading American and foreign media, as well as to use the media as gatekeepers to prevent certain information from being published and reaching the masses." In addition, there are entities that attempt to control the power of our thoughts; one of which is the Council on Foreign Relations. Though it fancies itself as an independent, nonpartisan membership organization, think tank, and publisher; there is evidence to the contrary that shows that the CFR is a more sinister association that organizes media manipulation. You must understand that the media in the United States is controlled by six (6) corporations (General Electric, News Corp., Disney, Viacom, Time Warner and CBS) which include 1,500 newspapers, 1,100 magazines, 9,000 radio stations, 1,500 television stations and 2,400 publishers. This means most of the news and entertainment content shown on both the small and large screens are intendant on having an underlying agenda; one which alters the subconscious and manifests in our ideals. "The promotion of shallow, materialistic, ego-centric values and the obvious dumbing down of the American population is coming from these six (6) corporations. Think about that. These are the companies that glorify consumption, obedience, ignorance, the hyper-sexualization of youth, the glorification of war and government surveillance, and so on. The advertisers that support these media companies have tremendous sway over what makes it on the airwaves. They help to control public perception." We fail to notice because who wants to work hard in deciphering what content is being fed to them each time they engage in relaxing activities. The adage is "you are what you eat", so why wouldn't those same principles apply to what you observe? Isn't your brain consuming information and processing that data based on what's being seen or heard? "When you're watching television, you're watching the news, and you're being pumped full of fear. There's floods; there's AIDS; there's murder. Cut to commercial. Buy the Acura. Buy Colgate. If you have bad breath, they're not going to talk to you. If you have pimples that girl isn't going to fuck you. It's just a campaign of fear and consumption. That's what I think it's based on. This wild idea of 'keep everyone afraid and they'll consume.'" (Marilyn Manson) So help me understand the logic of this, watching two (2) hours of violence in a movie has no influence on the public's behavior, but a thirty (30) second Super Bowl ad worth$2-4 million dollars will make the customer run out and buy a product?
So now, let's discuss the elephant in the room. What is the relation between imagery and POC? Understand that our first interactions are made through visualization. The hieroglyphs of ancient civilizations and cave carvings indented on mountain walls tell stories in intricate detail which provide a connection to the past. We are naturally attracted by what we see and visual interpretations help formulate opinions and prove to shape our lives. Entertainment as we know it was created as a means of propaganda, with the intent to marginalize and demean. There's a reason why there's always been a negative, distorted perception of Blacks. From its advent, individuals such as T. D. Rice (back in the 1820's) and others prior to the Civil War performed in blackface creating the image of the "Sambo" and "Zip Coon". The movie "Birth of a Nation" directed by D. W. Griffith in 1915 lead to the rebirth and enormous rise in ranks of the Ku Klux Klan based on the subliminal messages relayed in the film. The screenplay was adapted from the novel and play The Clansman. It was released on February 8, 1915. The NAACP (founded in 1909) spearheaded an unsuccessful campaign to ban the film. The film suggested that the Ku Klux Klan restored order to the postwar South (Reconstruction). For decades after its release, the Klan used the movie as a recruitment tool. Let's bounce from entertainment to the realm of sports. During October 2005, the NBA implemented a dress code policy which was instituted by former commissioner David Stern to distance the league from its then "thuggish" image in the mainstream. The rule was made mandatory for players to wear a jacket and tie before games, after games, during interviews, on the bench while injured, and in attendance at league charity events. The policy drew criticism with Allen Iverson stating the following, "I feel like they want us to dress a certain way. They're targeting guys who dress like me; guys who dress hip-hop. Just because you put a guy in a tuxedo doesn't mean he's a good guy. You can put a murderer in a suit, but he's still a murderer. It sends a bad message to kids." Ten (10) years later, the NBA's sense of style has evolved to the point where several stars routinely make their own unique fashion statements such as Russell Westbrook, Dwyane Wade, and many others.
Perhaps you wish to continue deny the evidence presented before you in this piece. Yet, if I were to ask you to close your eyes and imagine the likeness of the deity you worship, many of you (admittedly or reluctantly) would see an image of the individual that Leonardo da Vinci was commissioned to paint by Rodrigo Borgia/Borja (Pope Alexander VI), Cesare Borgia. And since that time, his portrait has graced the covers of religious magazines; actors have portrayed his resemblance in television and cinema; and there are monuments crafted in his honor with the largest appearing in both Brazil and Nigeria. Another glance behind those same eyelids will have you believe an entire continent is savage, primitive and desolate. A land ripe with riches and natural resources is thought to be ravaged with war and famine from ocean to ocean – boarder to boarder; infomercials urge viewers to run to their telephones, and in three (3) minute intervals, a 800/866 number flashes on the screen petitioning the onlooker that for a mere $.45 per day, your contribution "can" uplift those in a poverty stricken state, providing a semblance of normalcy, with the proceeds having the ability to feed an entire family. And as you witness their frail, downtrodden frames illuminate the pixels of your small screen; stomachs seemingly touching their backs, you can't run fast enough to retrieve your ATM card. That of the fifty-four countries that occupy the landscape, your lasting image is that of barren huts, wild animals and sprawling deserts and fields, and not of cities, suburbs, shopping malls and highways? GTFOH! The same entities that sought to colonized Africa prior to 1914, seek to exploit the land and viewing public for their hard earned dollars and wealth, with a large portion of the funds never utilized by the people it was intended to assist.
Dr. Umar Johnson – Propaganda
So we condemn young boys and girls for being able to perform the latest dance craze and assume the participants do not have any intellectual capacity to recite the alphabet or solve simple math problems. That it's threatening to see young Black men with their shirts off and pants hanging pass their buttock. The Rza, one of the founding members of the infamous Wu-Tang Clan, a rap group based out of Staten Island, New York, who helped usher in the widespread branding, marketing and collaborate sell of urban wear by wearing oversized clothing, Timberland boots, which later led to the creation of the profitable clothing company Wu-Wear stated the following, "If I'm a cop and every time I see a young black youth, whether I watch them on TV, movies, or just see them hanging out, and they're not looking properly dressed, properly refined, you know, carrying himself, conducting himself proper hours of the day—things that a man does, you're going to have a certain fear and stereotype of them." We're petitioned to believe that when WE were dressed dignified prior to and during the Civil Rights movement, we were somehow more respected and taken more seriously; not taking into account that leaders during that era, such as Malcolm X, Martin Luther King, Jr., and Medgar Evers were murdered in the same clothing that was thought to be the salvation to being treated justly. Look no further than the postcards and old photographs that grace the internet with individuals being lynched wearing white collared shirts/blouses, pleated dresses/skirts and tailored slacks; strange fruit dangling from tree branches or burned alive at make shift stakes for daring to fight or live for something that is a universal right of all people. "Women grow up constantly bombarded with images of what society says is beautiful. These unrealistic ideals feature models that have makeup to cover their blemishes and Photoshop to change their physical features. The result is young girls that grow up obsessed with their outward appearance and feel pressure by society to achieve a look that is often impossible. When the girls fall short they feel inadequate and a downward spiral ensues. They purchase make-up full of toxic chemicals to cover up their skin and closets full of clothes to feel better about whom they are." (Truth Society) Consequently we sit back and watch the emasculation of our brothers via song or cinema then question how these trends (skinny jeans, skorts) began. "We've been robbed! We've been robbed!", as DeAndre Jordan scurries down the stairs clad in a black dress and blonde wig in the latest State Farm insurance commercial; or all of your favorite actors being requested to dawn a female hairpiece at some point during their careers or risk banishment the likes of Dave Chappelle if they dare speak out. Supporting a multibillion dollar industry with the Global Skin Lightening Market which was predicted to reach $10 billion dollars at the close of last year; that an individual has such disdain for their complexion that they're willing to alter their appearance for acceptance. This is all an end result of psychological conditioning. A picture of a spouse having dinner with the opposite sex discussing a business venture is seen as adulterous behavior; a young man (Jaden Smith) advertising woman's clothing is seen as eclectic and groundbreaking – "The image support the idea that a person can appear traditionally masculine and feminine at the same time"; an All Points Bulletin (APB) is issued over police airwaves for a suspected criminal act with persons of the same hue all "fitting the description". Ask Lionel Tate, then twelve (12) years of age, if his infatuation with the World Wrestling Federation didn't ultimately lead to his thirty (30) year imprisonment for imitating the moves of a famous wrestler which led to death of six-year old Tiffany Eunick. The thousand (1000) words that can be used to determine a photo's worth can be manipulated to be both beneficial or a detriment to the individual captured in the frame. It is our responsibility to distinguish between the two (2) and not pass judgment based upon the caption read atop the image. "No society wants you to become wise, it is against the investment of all societies. If people are wise they cannot be exploited. If they are intelligent they cannot be subjugated, they cannot be forced in a mechanical life, to live like robots… They will have the fragrance of rebellion around them. In fact, a wise man is afire, alive, aflame. He would like rather to die than to be enslaved." (Osho) "We Are The Change!" I'm gone! (b)
Allen IversonBirth of a NationCesare BorgiaCouncil of Foreign RelationsD. W. GriffithDavid SternEdward BernaysJaden SmithJesus ChristLionel TateMalcolm XMarilyn MansonmediaOperation MockingbirdPropagandaRussell WestbrookSamboT. D. RicetelevisionThe Church CommitteeThe RzaZip Coon
enlightenment, social consciousness
December 11, 2014 freethought	Leave a comment
(Grabs and taps mic) "Check 1, 2!" Good morning! In the spirit of #TBT I give you this. If you're like me, and burn the candle at both ends, you have a tendency to be awake at odd hours of the night. And while scanning the channels of your cable or satellite network, you may've come across an infomercial where an actor/actress from yesteryear appears and petitions you to donate just $.45 per day to supply food, water and medical supplies to a desolate area of Africa. Then the images are displayed for 20 something minutes, tugging at your heart strings; damn near bringing you to tears. Some people can't move fast enough to get to their ATM cards and dial the 800/866 numbers to donate their monies. That isn't the issue. The message is being planted in your subconscious. It gives the perception that an ENTIRE continent is poor, lives in squalor, wears tattered clothing and remains unkept. Those same descriptions could be attributed to other areas of the world if the camera constantly showed it and painted that picture. For those of you living in Miami, have you ever thought to yourself when a sporting event is televised, why they constantly show images of South Beach or the Grove when they go to or come back from commercial? Programmers know that by showing an attractive image, they could keep the viewers attention, give the allure of a fantasy society where when you visit Miami, it's all beauty, beaches, cocktails and scantly dressed women. You don't have to worry about TNT or ABC showing the Mint, Carol Mart, Tootsies or the Jackson's because it doesn't promote the bottom line & push the agenda. (Think about the intro to Rick Ross' video Hustlin') Now flash back to the images of Africa and what do you think now? If I present the image that people are poor, aren't self-sufficient, in constant need of assistance, etc., what kind of portrait does that paint. It's the equivalent of showing 1st 48 marathons for an entire month and attributing that behavior to one class of people. If you don't believe me, be real with yourself and ask this question. If someone asked you to imagine what the continent of Africa looked like (cities, neighborhoods, businesses, commerce, etc), what would it be? More than 70% percent of you would have a vision that it's f*cked up over there? Don't let the media fool you, there's beauty and vibrance everywhere; it's only a matter of if they'll show it to you or your willingness to seek it out. (Drops mic. The impact causes the instrument to reverberate on the cold concrete) "We Are The Change!" I'm gone! (b)
Africaimageryinfomercialmedia


Yes, it's worth three exclamation marks! Welcome back to our regularly scheduled program. It's been a while - 3 weeks around - since the last update, and I thank you guys for giving me that time. I had family matters to attend to and for the time-being it's relaxed a bit, so I'm back to feeling capable of paging once again. It was also probably a bit of art burnout, because I spent some time drawing different pieces of art instead of SF, and it really helped me recharge. So yes, back to work! And I mean SF work, haha.
I have a lot of things I want to mention but I think I'll wait for the next update before I do. I just want to express my sincere gratitude for all of your patience during the downtime.
The important announcement I want to make today is the new update schedule. It's become clear to me that I cannot keep up two updates a week consistently without falling back every couple of months, and it's been rather frustrating. So instead of simmering in that, I'm going to admit defeat and change the schedule.
From now on, updates will be on Monday and Thursday every week. On the last week of every month, though, I will only update once on Thursday.
In other words, once a month I am taking an update off. And after readers suggested Thursday instead of Wednesday, and I've tested it out myself, I've decided I like it. Yep. So we're sticking to it!
This update schedule is effective immediately, so you'll see the banner change this week. I really hope that this will work, and that readers won't mind the monthly break. ;3;* Feel free to voice your comments out below!
Alright, that's it from me for now. See you guys on Thursday!
And thank you! :) I'll always let readers know when I'm taking the break, no worries!
MADOU WHAT ARE YOU PLANNING.
He's... mebbedangerous? XDD just keep those eyes on him!
Rufi and Serpamia Flare is back!!!
I missed seeing this on the update list this last month.
Whatever works for you in terms of scheduling is all good here. Everyone should understand (hopefully).
In terms of today's page. Kylie is all serious business mode on getting Madou and Cain's stats up. At least she know Madou is probably holding back, but that comment he makes to Cain. Dang, dude.
Situation awareness is super important for the team healer!!
I never did ask CiciEnixa what flavour ice-lolly Kylie is nibbling on, now that I think about it... XD; Sea-Salt and Soda, maybe?
Thankyewww! <3 X3 I'm glad to be updating again, that's for sure :') I've been in the best mood since~!
The irony of making them both too busy to plot anything is the snark Grows.
Madou you're making me uncomfortable.
This is like Serpamia Flare Pre-Page 338.
Madouuuu you ebil devious fire gremlin of deviousness. I mean I know Madou isn't "nice", but at the same time, that grin could very easily be trolly XD I think it's good for Cain to keep an eye out for Madou, you should never get too comfy around him.
I wonder if Cain can boost Rufi's comic-making ability?
And thank you!! X3 It's good to be updating again!
Kylie's REALLY fast at luring mobs. @_@;; That taunt skill.
I'll explain what I mean in a PM/FB message.
I really like these interactions. Kylie is such an excellent character and Madou is really so darn cool.
Power leveling with herd and burn tactics!!! I remember doing this in EQ and COH! MUHAHAH!


This weekend I got that dreaded letter in my mailbox. A jury summons. Yep, it says I must report or else. The only excuses that fly are old-age, care for someone who can't take care of themselves, military service and maybe death. All my excuses, "I'm on the last draft of my work-in-progress," "I need to finish writing my query letters," "My four hours of daily writing cannot be interrupted," fall of deaf ears. The judge will toss me in jail if I don't show up on the appointed day at the appointed time. No ifs ands and buts.
Many of us have done so or have been summoned to do so several times in our lives. What do we hate about it? Actually, it's a very interesting process and one that reflects one foundation of our democracy: We are all entitled to a fair trail and are innocent until proven guilty. We are tried by our peers. Yet, more and more, juries are no longer our peers. They rarely look anything like us. The attorneys strive to find people who they can sway in their direction–in other words, people they can manipulate. If you're too smart or too intuitive, you probably won't get picked. If you know too much, you probably won't get picked. How can anyone consider this process democratic? Another thing that troubles me about jury duty is the wasted/down time. We report and we wait. We wait and wait some more. There is little efficiency afforded us. We live in a free country but try and leave when you've been called to serve on the jury. Just try it. You'll be held in contempt of court and subject to jail time. I've known people who give up their right to vote to avoid jury duty.
People watch. Better still, people observe. Check out their nonverbal cues. Listen to the dialogue all around you. Do what good writers do and learn how people relate to one another by watching.
Make up stories about the people you see. Be creative. Imagine what that person's life is like. Do they have kids? How do they feel about coming to jury duty?
Learn from the process. What happens in the courtroom? If you should get called, use that time to observe the courtroom environment. How the judge acts. What to the attorneys do?
Talk and visit with people. Find out their real stories. Stretch yourself to say 'Hello' to someone new.
As soon as you get home each evening, jot down some notes from the day. You probably won't be able to take notes during the trial or during the selection. It will be a test to your memory but be sure to record your notes as soon as you can. It'd be a shame to lose all that you learned.
What experiences have you had on jury duty?
BTW, many readers love trial books and television shows. Yet, we bristle when that summons hits our mailbox. Next time don't bristle, go and enjoy!


text:
Home Features Pelican's Perch #57:The Whyalla Report – Junk Science?
features_old
Pelican's Perch
Pelican's Perch #57:
The Whyalla Report – Junk Science?
On May 31, 2000, a Piper PA31-350 Chieftain operated by Whyalla Airlines crashed in South Australia after suffering catastrophic in-flight failure of both engines, killing the pilot and seven passengers. A year and a half later, the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) issued their 150-page investigation report and blamed the accident on buildup of
Published: August 17, 2002 Updated: June 13, 2019
In December, 2001, the ATSB (Australian Transport Safety Bureau, similar to the U.S.'s NTSB) published one of the worst accident reports I can remember reading.
In my opinion, the ATSB has taken junk science, pure speculation and profound ignorance to levels seldom before seen. They have not only perpetuated "Old Wives' Tales," but they have invented a few new ones. I'm afraid we'll be hearing about "lead oxybromide deposits" for all eternity. As best I can tell, that term seems to have been INVENTED in this accident report. (Try a search on the Internet for "lead oxybromide"!)
My main complaints about the ATSB report are:
The ATSB makes "lead oxybromide" deposits the central focus of the accident, when it is very unlikely that ANY "deposits" played ANY role in the accident;
The ATSB seems to leave the impression that the rich side of peak EGT is the only safe mixture setting to use; and
The "probable cause" is nowhere to be found in the voluminous 150-page report.
I had hoped that dreadful report would not be widely read before it might be corrected. Alas, FLYING magazine has now picked it up, it's all over the Internet, and those of us involved in dispelling some of the longstanding myths in the engine world are starting to get increasing numbers of questions about some of the utter drivel in the ATSB report.
So far, the only intelligent comments I've seen in the printed media are in The Aviation Consumer (June 2002, page 22), but space did not permit them to say very much.
FLYING (July 2002, page 72) did rather poorly in their main article, with several errors, but in relying utterly upon the information in the ATSB report, they were badly led astray. The sidebar to that article is even worse. More on this later, below.
"Aggressive Leaning"
The ATSB didn't exactly condemn lean-of-peak EGT (LOP) operations, but their investigation report sure implied that the leaner an engine is run, the more likely damage will be. Then some time later, in a letter, they admitted that LOP operations had nothing to do with the failure of the right engine with the hole in the piston from detonation and/or pre-ignition. Every single person who has asked me about the Whyalla report had the distinct impression that the ATSB was highly critical of LOP operations. It seems the report's authors bought into Lycoming's recommendations completely (even when they contradicted themselves), and proceeded down the primrose path from there. They speak of "aggressive leaning" in a very negative manner, leaving the impression that if leaning to 50F rich of peak EGT (ROP) is "too aggressive" (and it IS!), then leaning further must be even "MORE aggressive" (which it isn't).
This is a fable shared by most of the flying world, and by both TCM and Lycoming (in spite of their own engineering data from years ago). It is directly at odds with ALL of the old engineering data, with current test stand data, and with common sense.
Perhaps we need to add another curve to the power charts, and call it "Aggressiveness." Like EGT, CHT, and HP, it would "peak" at about the same point on the chart as CHT. That peak would then be "maximum aggressiveness," with "less aggressive" falling on BOTH sides of the peak.
Let me hammer this to death, and put it several different ways, for it is central to the issue, and central to the accident.
The problem lies in the widespread belief that "too lean," always refers to LOP operations. That's absolutely not true! In one recent gathering of pilots, the question was asked, "At what mixture setting (reference to peak EGT) will the engine (CHT) be the hottest?" The multiple-choice answers offered were 100 ROP, 50 ROP, Peak, 50 LOP, and 100 LOP. The result: 49 of the 50 chose "50 LOP."
The correct answer is 50 ROP. TCM, Lycoming, the old books, engineering principles, and actual data all confirm this. There is NO argument about this. So why do 98% of all pilots believe otherwise?
You can have a VERY rich mixture setting, and be "too lean." This might be the case if your engine requires 30 GPH for 38″ MP during climb, and you set anything less (27 GPH, as Whyalla did).
You can have a very lean mixture setting, and ALSO be "too lean." This might be the case where you have leaned so much that "too much" power is lost, or where the engine runs rough, or quits entirely.
You can also be "too rich" on both sides of the mixture curve. Engine manufacturers specify a fuel flow for full power, and frankly, most engines need every bit of it, some just a touch more. But if you supply too much fuel (with a boost pump, for example), you may cause it to produce less power, and in extreme cases, it will "flood" and quit. That's definitely "too rich!" If you are operating on the lean side of peak EGT and your CHTs get too high (380F to 400F or more), you are "too rich" and need to lean it a bit.
Without qualifying language, terms like "lean," "too lean," "rich," and "too rich" are meaningless! We all need to be MUCH more specific when using these terms, now that our "flat six" and "flat four" engines are capable of running on the lean side of peak EGT.
Follow me through here, this is CRITICAL for understanding:
When you lean from FULL RICH on a properly set up engine, EGT, CHT, power output, horsepower per pound of fuel, and internal combustion temperatures and pressures ALL rise at first. At some point during that leaning process, FIRST the Horsepower peaks, THEN the CHT and internal pressures peak, THEN the EGT peaks, THEN the HP per gallon peaks, all at slightly different fuel flows.
Take a look at this chart, courtesy of "Advanced Pilot Seminars Inc.," a new company being formed for the express purpose of giving seminars on engine management.
This is a "concept" chart, intended to represent all internal combustion, spark-fired, fixed-timing, gasoline-powered engines. It is taken from the TCM chart in the back of the Installation and Operations Manual, generalized, and the ICP (Internal combustion pressure) curve has been added from actual test stand data. The Brake Specific Fuel Consumption (BSFC) curve has been inverted, so instead of the customary "pounds per horsepower," it shows "horsepower per pound." This way, the BSFC curve also peaks.
Imagine a ruler held vertically, and moved from left (rich) to right (lean), representing the leaning process (a "mixture sweep"). Each of the curves will touch the ruler and show what that parameter is doing at that point on the mixture curve.
Once each parameter peaks, then with further leaning, it will start to drop again. If this were not so, we could not talk about "peak" at all!
You simply cannot say "too rich" or "too lean" without some qualification. You need to state what you want to do, what the parameters are, or where you start, and where you end.
For example, Lycoming is fond of saying something like, "Mixtures that are too lean are harmful to your engine."
The more accurate statement is, "Mixtures that are not rich enough, or mixtures that are not lean enough may be harmful to your engine." This is NOT a contradiction! The "harmful point" is a CENTER POINT. Again, look back at the graph.
Why doesn't Lycoming (or TCM) talk much about the lean side? Both have admitted that their engines CAN be run LOP, but they seem to feel that pilots are morons, and cannot be trusted to understand the issues. They seem to think operating LOP is more difficult (it's actually easier), and more dangerous (it's actually safer). I can't help but wonder if anyone at Lycoming has ever seen LOP operations demonstrated in a properly-instrumented engine, in-flight. I find it hard to believe they have, or I don't think they could maintain the views they seem to hold.
Take an engine set up at 50 ROP (rich of peak). Is it "too rich" or "too lean"? We cannot say, without knowing what else is going on. At any power setting above about 60 or 65%, 50 ROP is BOTH "too rich," and "too lean," in that it is the worst possible mixture setting for the engine, and moving the mixture EITHER way will improve things. On the other hand, at about 9,000 feet and above, with no turbo, 50 to 80 ROP is an EXCELLENT mixture setting, for it will produce just about the maximum possible power, and it won't overheat anything at and above that altitude. You NEED 50 to 80 ROP up there! But 50 to 80 ROP and full power at sea level will destroy your engine.
Lycoming, TCM, virtually all the media, and sadly, most pilots and mechanics are much too careless with these terms.
What Really Caused the Whyalla Crash?
The Underlying Cause: Inadequate Instrumentation?
In my opinion, the primary cause of this accident was CASA's failure to require, and the operator's failure to install and use, proper engine instruments that monitor the EGT and CHT of ALL cylinders, as the JPI EDM-700 and 800 do.
(Standard disclaimer here, no, I don't work with or for JPI, and I receive nothing of value from them. I bought mine at retail. They did (once) do a free minor upgrade for me once, without comment. When I called to say thanks, they just said, "Aw, it's nothing, we appreciate the nice things you've said." They have nothing I want, and I would not accept anything from them, anyway. The simple fact is that JPI makes the flat-out, hands-down, best device on the market for monitoring an internal combustion engine. I think it's negligent to operate without one, and it's criminal that CASA and the FAA doesn't require them in public-use recips.)
This simple device would have allowed Whyalla (and others) to operate this very high-performance engine much more intelligently, it would have paid for itself in fuel savings alone, and it would have warned them of their folly the instant they started using their dreadfully uninformed leaning procedures for climb in the Navajo Chieftain. The recording feature would have acted as an excellent flight recorder, for the memory chip would have preserved the final 70-odd hours of engine operation on both engines. That could have told us exactly what happened to the engines on the Whyalla crash aircraft, AND helped prevent such accidents in the future.
Instead, the FAA (and probably CASA) throw roadblocks in the way! You want to pull a useless factory single-point EGT gauge out and put a JPI in? "Oh, horrors, no, if the airplane came with that worthless EGT, you have to keep it, forever!" Suggest tossing the equally useless CHT gauge most factories install, and see how far you get with your local FSDO.
The Lycoming TIO-540J2 series of engines are good engines. They have some "different" design features, which have worked out pretty well in years of field experience. However, they are very high-powered engines that take the piston engine art and technology to just about the same performance levels found in the old high-powered big radial engines of yesteryear (some of which enjoyed 3,600-hour TBOs with decent instrumentation and techniques). The TIO-540J2x-series engine is universally considered the most difficult engine in the general aviation fleet with respect to detonation margins.
All this is somewhat reminiscent of the old Wright R-3350 engine. It had some early problems, and Wright did a number of changes mechanically, and together with the airlines and the military, they developed operating techniques that eventually made it perhaps the finest big radial of all. But they absolutely had to have BMEP (Brake Mean Effective Pressure) and fuel flow gauges to do it. Today's JPI is the "new and improved" equivalent of the old instrumentation.
Closely related to the failure to install a multi-probe engine monitor is the operator's ill-conceived procedure of leaning to an EGT of 1,500 F on the rich side of peak EGT during climb at high (36-38″ MP) power (note those qualifiers, they're critical!). NO ONE, to my knowledge, even hints that this might be "good." It is an absolute fact that it is very, very bad for any engine. It is a tribute to the basic engine that they suffer this insult for more than a few flights.
Please note it's not the EGT itself that is "bad for the engine." An EGT of 1,500 F CAN be a very nice, very good setting to use, IF IT'S ON THE LEAN SIDE OF PEAK. It CAN be okay, if the engine is operated at lower power settings (60% or so), if you can get the EGT that high. 1,500 F isn't going to melt a thing, rich or lean. However, on the rich side, at high power, we know from experience (and test stand data) that an EGT of 1500F or more at 38″ MP while ROP means other BAD things are going on in THIS engine. CHTs will be unacceptably high and going higher, peak pressures and temperatures within the combustion chamber will be soaring out of limits, and detonation will not be far away. At this point, the margins become so thin that if anything at all goes wrong, major engine damage or failure will result. This could well cause a pre-existing defect (as in a crankshaft) to suffer fatigue and failure much sooner, and it could cause long-term damage from detonation. This procedure could have accelerated the damage on both engines in the Whyalla crash, over time.
The Proximate Cause: A Flawed Crankshaft?
Beyond that, the cause of the crash was probably rather simple. BOTH engines were probably damaged to some degree before the fatal flight departed.
In my opinion, the left engine probably had a long-term defect in the crankshaft just waiting for some final stress to break it, a true time bomb. That defect may well have come with the crankshaft from the factory some 262 flight hours earlier. It strikes me as unlikely the damage was caused by bearing failure, since there was very little bearing debris found in the screens, AND the right engine was operated the same way, for much longer (presumably without a factory defect). If there had been a progressive bearing failure bad enough to damage the crankshaft, there would have been a lot more evidence in the oil screens. I cannot find any mention of oil analysis in the report. If this wasn't done, why not? If it was done, why wasn't it mentioned? Did the operator use oil analysis?
The right engine may have had some detonation damage from the operator's failure to maintain an adequately rich mixture during the climb phase of each flight. It probably had something else, perhaps a damaged helicoil, the part into which a spark plug is inserted, or perhaps a partially plugged fuel injector, or even just a single fuel injector that was within factory tolerances, but at the extreme low end of the +/- 4% flow tolerance for Lycoming nozzles. The report does mention that the injectors were tested, and found within limits. But what no one, including Lycoming, seems to understand is that if you have an engine with injectors at both ends of the 4% limit, you have an engine doomed to problems, or failure. Suppose five of the injectors are flowing 4% high, and one is flowing 4% low? That is enough to show a HUGE difference in the parameters, and may easily place one cylinder in detonation without any sign of it – until it fails. The single-point EGT won't show this, but the JPI Engine Monitor will, AND will issue a warning, as well!
I find it odd that a later Lycoming Mandatory Service Bulletin (SB-550) called for a massive recall of crankshafts built around the same time as the accident aircraft's left crankshaft, but I don't see any evidence that anyone pursued an examination of the failed crankshaft to see if it is – or should have been – part of the recall.
Consider the time line:
The Whyalla left engine was overhauled by Lycoming on or about January 6, 2000. It was installed in the airframe on February 13, 2000.
Reports from the field in Australia claim that it was acknowledged at the time of the crash in June of 2000 that the crankshaft was new when it was installed during the overhaul on January 6, 2000 by Lycoming.
Then, on February 1, 2002, just a little over a month after the ATSB report is issued, Lycoming issues SB-550. It has a long list of engine serial numbers, including a couple of dozen TIO-540J2B engines identical to the Whyalla engine that were grounded by the Service Bulletin.
At the end of SB-550, there is the following statement:
NOTE: If the crankshaft in your engine was replaced with a factory new part in the time period from 9/30/99 to the present, and your engine is a Lycoming turbocharged (L) TIO-540 engine rated at 300 horsepower or higher, please contact the factory to determine whether your engine is affected.
With this time line firmly in mind, it seems to me that there are only two possibilities:
The ATSB didn't know about the upcoming Lycoming crankshaft recall (surely Lycoming knew of the crash, and the failed crankshaft); or
The ATSB did know about the upcoming crankshaft recall – but then why wasn't there any mention in the report that there was a problem series of crankshafts made at the same time as the crankshaft in the Whyalla aircraft, nor any indication that a metallurgical investigation of that specific crankshaft was done?
I find either scenario troubling.
… and/or Bad Bearings?
What Lycoming doesn't mention in SB-550 (nor does the accident report) is that there is also an issue with connecting rod and main bearings. Apparently sometime in the last three years, there were some changes in the composition of the bearing alloy comprising the middle layer of this three-part bearing (three layers, bonded together). There have been a number of problems with bearing delaminations in Australia during the last three years, and this is apparently under investigation. This three-year period covers the same time frame in which the left engine on the Whyalla Navajo was installed. Sometime while these bearing failures were surfacing on the radar screen, Lycoming began supplying "Dana Clevite" bearings (a different brand) for replacement and field overhaul use in the Australian engines (One wonders if engines have passports to identify their nationality, or if the air is somehow "different" in Australia?).
Apparently the Australian CASA ("Civil Aviation Safety Authority," the Australian counterpart of the U.S. FAA) asked Lycoming, "why the change, and why only in Australia?" In reply, CASA was reportedly told that Aussies are the only ones with a bearing problem, and they need to check their gasoline.
Say what? Unless the gasoline was substantially out of octane specification (it wasn't), what could gasoline have to do with bearing failures? I suspect CASA was as speechless as I am over that VERY strange comment. Lycoming might as well have told them to check their beer! In fact, considering the taste of Aussie beer… well, never mind, I've got too many Aussie friends who actually like their beer, and I'm too old for bar fights.
When CASA regained the power of speech from that absurdity, they asked Lycoming why they were changing out ALL the bearings in ALL the engines in Piper Malibu Mirages (SB-547).
Lycoming's response was reportedly, "Oh, that was for 'product improvement' and there was no connection to the problem in Australia." Riiiight. Boy, do I have a crankshaft for you!
That the left crankshaft failed is undeniable. But crankshafts are MASSIVELY overbuilt because of their inherent critical single-point-failure nature. They simply do not fail in the absence of a metallurgical fault, or some very abnormal cause – such as a failed bearing.
Whether the crankshaft failed from a defect in the crankshaft itself, or from a failed bearing isn't germane to the accident – but it's interesting, to say the least. With a defective crankshaft and long-term fatigue (over 262 hours, some of it leaned for climb with attendant very high combustion chamber pressures), the failure would have been instant and massive, with no warning at all. The accessories would have stopped, depriving the engine of oil pressure. Without oil pressure, the left prop would have instantly feathered all by itself (by design on light twins), with no action from the pilot. "Autofeather" if you will.
With a bearing failure, it's even more interesting. When bearings fail, they get hot. WHITE hot, very quickly, and oil temperature will rise dramatically. This is especially true on the main crankshaft journal bearing on the big radial engines, for there is only one, and lots of oil passes through it. On the Whyalla "flat six," the rise might have been less evident. It's odd that the accident report mentions a series of flights a few months before the accident where the left engine was showing an oil temperature of 250 degrees. That's probably not related, because I don't think the engine would have operated for that long with a badly damaged con-rod bearing, but I wonder if it's possible … .
View from the Left Seat
The Obvious Scenario …
The obvious scenario is that the left engine crankshaft failed abruptly from fatigue at a long-term defect, and the engine automatically feathered due to loss of oil pressure. It occurred on a cloudy, moonless night over dark terrain. It would have been a nasty surprise, and a difficult situation, one I'd not like to face.
The very young pilot (22), perhaps a bit rattled (as anyone would have been), might have advanced the power on the right engine, while forgetting to increase the mixture. This is a VERY common error in training and on check rides, even with very high-time captains. We have ALL done that a time or three. When you do that, the cylinder head temperatures rise rapidly. After some short period of time (it could be as short as a few minutes) at that power setting, it is likely detonation would have begun. Another minute or two of light detonation, progressing to moderate and worse, and it would have turned into pre-ignition (a spur from a bad helicoil can easily get hot enough to remain white hot through the exhaust and intake stroke, lighting off the fuel/air mixture sometime before the spark plug's normal timing). Pre-ignition is the worst possible malfunction in the combustion chamber. This whole problem of failing to increase the mixture when the pilot increases power on the remaining "good" engine would be substantially more dangerous if there was a partially plugged injector, or if one injector was at the low end of Lycoming's 4% tolerance band, with the rest somewhere above that. This is fairly common and cannot be readily detected without a multi-probe engine monitor.
(Note that a JPI EDM-700/800 engine monitor not only would show that to the pilot instantly, but to the maintenance staff the first time they looked at the data.)
Once pre-ignition began on the right engine, it would have been catastrophic within seconds, causing that one cylinder to fail, with major vibration that could easily lead the pilot to believe the engine had failed completely.
However, this scenario does not explain the sudden drop in groundspeed at time 18:47:15. (See plots on page 3 and 4 of the accident report). To make the speed they did after that failure, according to the report, it would have been necessary to use a total of about 375 HP. (This calculation is not in the report, but the 375 HP number is.) That would mean that with one feathered, the pilot would have had to have set takeoff MP (or more), takeoff RPM, AND leaned it for "best power," substantially more power than the engine was rated or designed for. While he might have done this (briefly) to keep the airplane in the air, I cannot imagine a pilot dumb enough to press on to a distant destination, at night, over water, with that condition, especially with paying passengers aboard.
Sadly, the FAA, the media, and the public tend to jump to the conclusion that all pilots are stupid, and somehow cause the problems that lead to accidents. Pilot error IS usually involved in accidents, but we pilots usually don't make those mistakes without something leading us there.
… and an Alternative Theory
There is yet another theory that also makes a lot of sense, and does cover all the known facts.
Suppose that during or after yet another grossly insulting mixture setting on climbout the right engine finally holed the number six piston? This could have been from the 1500F TIT ("too lean" or "not rich enough," however you want to look at it) climb, or from the climb and the combination of a partially plugged nozzle or from a bad helicoil, or some combination thereof. At first, the vibration might not have been noticeable, but as the hole burned through the piston, no pilot could ignore it. The natural response would have been to reduce power (and RPM) on that (right) engine. The vibration would have gone away at some point, and with an initially small hole, the engine, throttled back, might well have produced a 100 or 150 HP, and would have seemed pretty normal. I've seen cases where an engine like that operated pretty normally for many hours at low cruise power settings. On each compression stroke, the fuel/air mixture will blow through the hole in the piston, pressurizing the case with fuel and air, and blowing out the breather, taking some small amount of oil vapor and oil spray with it. The spark plugs firing would probably light the fuel/air mix, adding heat, and eating at the hole. Eventually, that might have led to oil starvation, but it would have taken some time.
There are rumors the young pilot had been previously criticized for landing an airplane away from home with a problem, rather than bringing it home where maintenance could have been performed. I'd guess the young pilot felt his job was on thin ice.
Okay, so now (continuing with this theory) he's cruising along at reduced speed, with the right engine at reduced power (but "running fine"), left engine normal (or perhaps a little higher power setting than normal), everything is just fine. With the right engine making 125 HP, and the left engine making 250 HP (about 70%), the aircraft would have the required 375 HP to maintain the speed observed by reference to the radar track and known winds aloft. Under these circumstances, any of us might have been tempted to take it home, for all the usual reasons. Schedule, maintenance and personal needs might have driven that decision. Pilots usually prefer to go home, the passengers probably wanted to press on, etc. It might not have been the best decision, but in my opinion, it wasn't all that unreasonable, either. MANY of us have done similar things and survived, perhaps because of better luck. That's certainly not as dumb as pressing on home for a few miles, with one engine out completely, after a massive failure, as in the first scenario.
In hindsight, of course, it would have been a dreadful decision, but that's "Monday morning quarterbacking."
Somewhere out over the Spencer Gulf (page 3 of the report), Murphy stepped in, as he so often does. The 262 hours of fatigue accumulation in the left engine crankshaft (whether from failing bearings or original metallurgical origin, it doesn't make any difference) finally became critical, and the crankshaft failed. The prop probably feathered before the pilot even knew it, and the engine was useless.
Any attempt to pull more power out of the right engine (with the hole in the piston) would have resulted in heavy vibration, and would have quickly began eating that hole larger and larger. There wouldn't have been any more detonation or preignition, as there wasn't enough pressure and temperature to get there, but the hot gasses blasting through that hole would have acted like a cutting torch. The oil would disappear out the breather in minutes at high power. With one engine feathered, and the other at very limited power, it wouldn't have taken long to the splash. Depending on the RPM of the right engine, there might not have been enough vacuum to drive both horizons and both directional gyros, leaving only an electric turn and bank (which the ATSB called a "Turn and Balance" indicator – is that common Australian usage, perhaps?)
Could It Have Been Prevented?
A couple of scattered thoughts.
First, in either scenario, let's look at the possibility that the accident pilot added power to either engine, without enriching the mixture. I believe that mistakes like this come from engine failure procedures that are much too complex, with too many memory items, as taught in the old days by the military to fledgling pilots, and espoused in the FAA's "Flight Training Manual" for student pilots.
The best procedure is to identify the engine, feather it, maybe cut the mixture (to keep the engine from running in full feather), then take a deep breath, forget the failed engine, and do what is needed to FLY THE AIRPLANE NORMALLY on the remaining engine. When the situation is stable, then run any appropriate checklists for the engine failure/shutdown. In the accident aircraft, under the first scenario above (left engine failed first), the pilot probably had plenty of power already set on the right engine to make the destination, as he had already started a normal descent. But most multiengine instructors insist on "max power, right now" on the good engine, or "at least the next higher power setting," plus all kinds of other memory items. (I've seen up to 13 memory items on an emergency engine-failure checklist!) Many check pilots will insist on that on all check rides, whether the power is needed or not. Doing "as trained and checked" may have contributed to this fatal crash.
We DESPERATELY need BETTER multiengine training in general aviation! (I've written about this subject before, in "Pelican's Perch #4: Engine Failure!")
Second scattered thought: The Navajo and Chieftain engines (Lycoming TIO-540-J2B) are, as noted above, good engines, but notoriously among the most difficult-to-manage and easy-to-abuse engines in the general aviation fleet. Operated with proper intelligence and instrumentation (JPI or similar) and flown often, it is a fine engine, fully capable of going to TBO and beyond. It has a fine control system for controlling mixture in close coordination with the throttle, prop, and turbo system. In accordance with the very best engineering principles, it gives a very, very rich mixture at takeoff power, and then runs it somewhat leaner (but still very rich on the rich side) at the higher power settings just below takeoff power.
But even when operated in accordance with the Lycoming recommendations it is possible for the engine to operate so close to the detonation threshhold that any anomaly in the fuel setup, the spark timing, or a slightly damaged helicoil can lead to rapid destruction of the engine. Those recommendations may make for good marketing in terms of fuel flow and performance, but it's lousy engineering. Of course, by the time failures do occur, the warranty will have expired.
Given the critical margins, it's amazing the engines did as well as they did with the ill-conceived leaning procedures used during climbs at Whyalla Airlines.
The same engine CAN be operated very successfully at very high cruise power settings – if operated lean of peak TIT. Most will probably go far beyond TBO that way. To do that, you must have a good all-cylinder engine monitor, and you must have all cylinders at the same fuel/air ratios. There is good data on these engines that shows LOP works very well, with nicely lowered cylinder temperatures and reduced peak cylinder pressures for any given power. Apparently, from comments Lycoming makes to FLYING and in its official Lycoming publications (see "'Experts' Are Everywhere To Help You" on Lycoming's web site), someone at Lycoming does in fact understand this, but holds the opinion that pilots are too dumb to do it right, and therefore has shown a total lack of interest in seeing or acknowledging the existence of ANY data on this subject.
Lack of Communication
In fact, let me take a major slam at both Lycoming and TCM for their utter lack of interest in any form of communication with the outside world. From what I understand, letters generally go unanswered unless there is an immediate threat of litigation, and then the lawyers handle it. There seems to be NO way to communicate with these companies by email, a major blunder in my opinion. Both companies should have INTERACTIVE Web sites, with competent engineers responding directly to questions and correcting "those experts on the Internet." We could all learn something, and we'd have better engines, too. In fact, why hasn't a Lycoming person EVER made a single comment on my columns in an effort to correct them?
Let me take a slam at FLYING, while I'm at it. In the July issue, FLYING's writers print leaning recommendations obtained from both Lycoming and TCM. FLYING correctly notes that TCM agrees with GAMI's recommendations on leaning and its effects in the critical area from peak out to 50F rich of peak (there are some missing details here, but that's good enough for our purposes today). But then FLYING does something that I consider indefensible for a magazine article dealing with the subject of leaning: FLYING simply ignores the fact that the Lycoming leaning recommendation is directly and irreconcilably in conflict with the TCM recommendation.
There is NO significant difference in the combustion process or the metallurgy between TCM and Lycoming engines. If one can be safely operated lean of peak, then both can.
For the record, the comments attributed by FLYING to TCM, expressing agreement with the statements quoted from GAMI, is the side of the discussion which is correct from an engineering point of view. In my opinion, FLYING should not have given Lycoming a pass on that glaring conflict in leaning recommendations. It seems to me that they did a profound disservice to their readers.
(Say, do you think there is any chance that FLYING will ever ask me to write for them?)
More on "Lead Oxybromide"
The ATSB seems fixated on the term "lead oxybromide," and I could find NO reference to it, anywhere. A friend, knowledgeable in this area, did manage to dig up the following data, which MAY be what the ATSB is talking about, under another name, perhaps a colloquial name.
A search of Chemical Abstracts, 1967-date, and of Gmelin, Inorganic Chemistry Handbook shows (for the scientists out there):
Lead bromide oxide (Pb3Br2O2) (8CI, 9CI)
Other names: Lead bromide (Pb3Br2O2) (6CI)
Other names: Lead bromine oxide (Pb3Br2O2)
Component Ratio Registry No.
O 2 17778-80-2
Br 2 10097-32-2
Pb 3 7439-92-1
GMELIN Reg. No. (GRN): 419194 GMELIN
Molecular Formula (MF): Br2O2Pb3
Comp. Mol. Formula (CMF): Br2O2Pb3
Fragm. Mol. Formula (FRAGMF): Br2O2Pb3:1
Formula Weight (FW): 8.13406E2
Lin. Struct. Formula (LSF): PbBr2*2PbO
Melting Point = 709 degrees Celcius (sic)
Reference(s):
1. Handbook Volume: Pb: MVol.C2 (1969), Page: 371
2. Lamb, F. W.; Niebylski, L. M., J. Am. Chem. Soc., CODEN: JACSAT, 75, <1953>, 511 – 518
If we convert 709C, we get 1,308F.
(By the way, I so wish we Americans could/would switch to the far simpler and much more logical metric system! But all our data is in F, so I go along.)
That 1,308F melting point destroys the ATSB's whole thesis, if this is the "lead oxybromide" to which they refer.
Temperatures inside the combustion chamber vary widely. The actual fuel/air mixture can burn within that space at well over 3,000F. The tips of a spark plug, protruding slightly into that space normally run temperatures around 1,200 to 1,300F, and in very high power applications, up to 1,500F. Somewhere above that, the spark plug tip is known to cause pre-ignition. (These temperatures can only be measured by special spark plugs, and rather exotic equipment, but they are pretty accurate.)
We also know that pistons, being aluminum, lose half their strength at 400F, and melt around 700F. They actually track CHT fairly well, so figure they run a face temperature of about 400 to 450F. Close enough for our purposes, anyway.
But wait! If the combustion process runs at 3,000 degrees, how do pistons, or even the steel cylinder walls survive? First, there is a very thin thermal barrier, a "transition zone," with the cooler metal on one side, and the hot, intermittent combustion event on the other.
That combustion event is just a quick flash of that very high heat, during 20 degrees or so of crankshaft rotation. The rest of the 340 degrees of crank rotation, the temperatures are much cooler. During the intake stroke, the combustion chamber may even see a blast of sub-freezing air! It's like passing your hand through a candle flame. Do it quickly and you feel nothing, keep it there longer, and you'll find the melting point of skin.
Now, the key to all this: If a spark plug tip at 1,500F will not cause pre-ignition, then how can a substance that MELTS at 1,300F hang around in the combustion chamber long enough to rise to more than 1,500F, and trigger pre-ignition? That's right, it can't.
Conversely, if that same substance somehow attaches itself to the face of the piston, and acts as a heat sink, how can it possibly rise to a temperature sufficient to cause pre-ignition, without melting and blowing out the exhaust? If the surface gets hot enough to melt (1,300F), it simply erodes away, blows out the exhaust, and each combustion event will melt a little more. Pretty soon, no more "stuff."
Oh, by the way, you may be wondering, just what are those deposits?
Carbon, the raw material from which diamonds are made. Carbon, which has a very high melting point. Carbon, which IS capable of causing pre-ignition, once the carbon is hot enough – from detonation. Carbon deposits are found in engines run rich of peak for many hours. ONLY in engines run rich of peak, because if you run lean of peak, carbon deposits are eroded, converted to CO2, and blown out the exhaust!
Lead oxybromide? Bah, humbug!
– John Deakin
Dissecting the ATSB Report
Okay! Off my soapbox for a moment. Let's take a peek at some of the stuff in the report. I have extracted bits and pieces for comment, doing my best to maintain context. The report is in italics, my comments are in normal typeface.
On the evening of 31 May 2000, Piper Chieftain, VH-MZK, was being operated by Whyalla Airlines as Flight WW904 on a regular public transport service from Adelaide to Whyalla, South Australia…(text omitted)…The entire flight was conducted in darkness.
They might have added here, "… darkness, on a moonless, cloudy night, over barren terrain with few lights." I think that's very pertinent, it's a nightmare for any pilot.
The aircraft reached 6,000 ft and proceeded apparently normally at that altitude on the direct track to Whyalla. At 1856 CST, the pilot reported to Adelaide Flight Information Service (FIS) that the aircraft was 35 NM south-south-east of Whyalla, commencing descent from 6,000 ft. Five minutes later the pilot transmitted a MAYDAY report to FIS. He indicated that both engines of the aircraft had failed, that there were eight persons on board and that he was going to have to ditch the aircraft, but was trying to reach Whyalla.
Note that within FIVE MINUTES, he apparently went from beginning a normal descent with no mention of problems, to a double engine failure. He was apparently very calm, cool and collected on the radio.
On 9 June 2000, the wreckage of the aircraft was recovered for examination. Aside from the engines, no fault was found in the aircraft that might have contributed to the accident. Both engines had malfunctioned due to the failure of components of the engines.
Left Engine Failure
I get the impression that the broken crankshaft was found (but not by the ATSB), and the "investigation" focused on that almost to the exclusion of the hole in the piston on cylinder #6 on the right engine. One question that occurs immediately is about the magneto timing. That should have been checked on both engines, and reported. It might have had a major bearing on the accident, as a mistimed engine could have greatly accelerated detonation, pre-ignition, and contributed to the fatigue in the crankshaft. (Later information indicates the timing was checked and found normal – but not reported.)
The crankshaft of the left engine fractured at the Number 6 connecting rod journal.
Fatigue cracking was initiated by the presence of a planar discontinuity in the journal surface. It was evident that the discontinuity had been caused by localised thermal expansion of the nitrided journal surface following contact with the edge of the Number 6 connecting rod big end bearing insert. The crankshaft failed approximately 50 flights after fatigue crack initiation.
Please, will someone tell me how they came to that "50 flights" conclusion? The stress riser that was the point of origin for the fatigue crack was mostly likely there when the crankshaft was installed, or it was created later by the bearing delamination problem, nowhere discussed in the ATSB report. Cranks are massively overbuilt, and fatigue cracks don't appear by magic.
The Number 6 bearing insert was damaged during engine operation through the combined effect of:
high bearing loads created by lead oxybromide deposit induced preignition, and
Oh, RUBBISH. This accident report is the first mention of "lead oxybromide" I've ever seen! A fairly serious search of the Internet with several different search engines produced NO "hits" on that new term, EXCEPT ON THIS ACCIDENT REPORT! The deposits pictured are NORMAL deposits in any engine normally run rich of peak (ROP), and will disappear if temperatures rise above normal. In fact, a little detonation is a good way to clean those deposits off entirely! The richer the engine is run, the greater are those normal deposits. It's more common to see normal engines with them than without. There is no evidence that the ATSB bothered to check any normal engines, and now people will be pulling engines for no good reason.
(In fact, one well-meaning person has already tried to find a lab to "check his spark plugs for lead oxybromide deposits every 100 hours! No, I'm not joking! Hmm, now there's an opportunity for a new business, perhaps? Call it "Snake Oil Detection Services," or something.)
The ATSB used a picture from John Schwaner's "Sacramento Sky Ranch" website, and made it one of the central issues of the whole report! The picture can be found at http://www.sacskyranch.com/photopis.htm. In the report, the ATSB claims that the swirl pattern on the piston in the picture is a swirl pattern that is characteristic of detonation. This statement by the ATSB is one of those monumental blunders in report writing. It is the kind of blunder one makes when trying desperately to find evidence to support an erroneous pre-conceived notion of how some series of events took place.
The author of the ATSB report seems to have failed entirely to read what John Schwaner (correctly) said in the caption right under the picture! Here it is:
Swirl markings on top of piston are normal combustion pattern markings. They show how the hemispherical (dome shaped) cylinder head and the induction system swirls the mixture for better mixing and burning. [Emphasis by Deakin.]
Bullet item two in the ATSB report on why the bearing failed:
lowered bearing insert retention forces associated with the inclusion of an anti-galling compound between the bearing inserts and the housings.
The use of anti-galling compound is both common and recommended in the overhaul manuals. This one is a complete red herring.
Fatigue cracking in the Number 6 connecting rod big end housing had developed following the gradual destruction of the bearing insert.
The fatigue crack grew over time, perhaps even taking the full 262 hours to develop to the point of failure. I think the failure occurred without any warning to the pilot whatsoever, was quite abrupt, with the jagged ends rubbing against each other long enough to create the heat from friction that caused the rest of the damage, plus immediate feathering from lack of oil pressure.
(Most light twins are designed to be feathered by a large spring, and are kept out of feathering by engine oil pressure and governor oil pressure, both of which regulate RPM. To prevent the engines from feathering on shutdown, there are small centrifugal latches that prevent the blades from going into feather below about 400 RPM or so. Most single-engine airplanes are designed with the opposite setup, with the prop going flat with no oil pressure. Radials have a different system entirely.)
Right Engine Failure
The physical damage sustained by the right engine was restricted to the localised melting of the Number 6 cylinder head and piston. The piston damage had allowed combustion gases to bypass the piston rings.
I think it might be significant that only the #6 cylinder suffered this destruction. The most likely things that can cause this damage in a single cylinder are:
A "tang" from a damaged helicoil (the insert into which the spark plug is screwed). This tiny projection would probably have been harmless in normal operation, and might have existed for many, many hours, or even until TBO. However, once detonation began due to the application of high power with a mixture setting rich of peak, but not rich enough, that small helicoil projection could have become white hot during each combustion event, getting hotter and hotter, finally getting hot enough to keep enough heat through the subsequent exhaust and intake strokes to "pre-ignite" the fuel/air charge before the spark plug did so. It takes only a few degrees of this "pre-ignition" in advance of the normal timing to almost instantly run the temperature and pressure right out of sight, causing immediate destruction. The rest of the cylinders may have also experienced some detonation, but without a damaged helicoil, they didn't suffer the pre-ignition event.
If a single fuel injector was partially plugged, or even just out of calibration on the low side, that defect, in combination with the failure to use adequate fuel flow for the whole engine during the climb, or later when the pilot may have increased the power on the right engine, could have been enough to start the detonation that led to pre-ignition and the hole in the number six piston. Without a multi-probe engine monitor, the pilot would never have any idea that the fuel injector was partially plugged.
It could have been a combination of (1) and (2).
The damaged piston would have caused a loss of engine oil and erratic engine operation, particularly at higher power settings. Engine lubrication was still effective at impact, indicating that oil loss was incomplete and that the piston holing occurred at a late stage of the flight.
This is not completely correct. The progressively enlarging hole in the #6 piston would have ultimately prevented compression, and blown the fuel and air charge through the hole, pressurizing the crankcase. That would gradually, over several minutes, blow some of the oil in the sump overboard, and eventually that might have unported the oil pickup and starved the engine of essential lubrication and cooling. At reduced power settings, the engine should have been capable of pulling some power long enough to make the Whyalla airport (absent the failure of the left engine), but would have been running very, very rough with only five cylinders working. (Large radials with 18 cylinders have been known to run for hours with an inoperative (or even a detached) cylinder, with barely noticeable vibration.)
Speed variations, accompanied by track irregularities, then became more pronounced.
I wouldn't place too much credence on this data after the top of descent. We'd all wander around a bit, with a catastrophic engine failure at night, on instruments (Yes, the weather was good, but without surface lights, it would have been the same as instrument flight). Add in the possibility there was insufficient suction to drive the four primary gyros, two on the pilot's panel, two on the co-pilots (yes, ALL FOUR were vacuum-driven), and there's enough to cause some wandering, if not outright loss of control. Note too, there was one stall warning sound on the ATC tapes, during transmission from the pilot.
Executive Summary Conclusion
The power output from the left engine deteriorated during the first third of the cruise segment of the flight after the Number 6 connecting rod big end housing had fractured. The engine ceased operating completely 8-10 minutes later.
Okay. Yes, it's okay. Go ahead. Laugh out loud! There, now didn't that feel good? With that kind of damage, the failure of the crankshaft and engine would have been instant, and catastrophic, probably causing a hole in the case (which was apparently found a few weeks after the ATSB completed their initial examination of the engine without even seeing the hole). I don't believe this was the failure mode – the crank probably failed first, destroying the end of the con rod – but that's not all that important.
In response to the failure of the left engine, the pilot increased the power setting of the right engine.
A good bet, although it might not have been needed in the first scenario I suggested. A gentle "drift-down" might have been better, but that's "Monday-morning quarterbacking" and I won't criticize the pilot for that kind of decision. He probably did just what he'd been trained to do, but probably forgot to increase the mixture when he added manifold pressure.
Increased combustion chamber component temperatures via detonation within the right engine led to the Number 6 piston being holed. That resulted in the erratic operation of the right engine with reduced power and controllability and left the pilot with little alternative but to ditch the aircraft.
Maybe, maybe not. I believe there is a significant possibility in the first scenario above that the pilot might have been able to extract enough power from that engine to provide a slow "drift-down" to the runway at Whyalla, or to a closer airport, using cruise power or less.
The double engine failure was a dependent failure.
I am uncertain as to what this means. The one failure had little or nothing to do with the other. If the bearing in the left engine failed, and caused the crankshaft failure, THAT'S a "dependent" failure to me. The ATSB must have a different definition.
Examination of eight failures of Textron Lycoming engines from a number of operators that had occurred over the period January 2000 to November 2001 revealed that deposits of lead oxybromide on combustion chamber surfaces were not restricted to the engines from MZK; seven other engines had such [NORMAL] deposits.
I don't believe any were identified by other parties as "lead oxybromide," a term seemingly invented by the ATSB for this accident report. But in any event, they'd find those same normal deposits on engines that went to TBO … if they looked. The absence or presence of those deposits will depend on how the engine is operated. Mine are utterly clean, because I operate at very high cruise power, and LOP, leaving no deposits.
Anecdotal reports indicated that there were fewer engine problems (including component failures) in engines that were operated full rich during climb, and 'best power' during cruise, compared with those where the mixture was leaned during climb and 'best economy' cruise power was used.
This is disingenuous at best. They compare "good" (full rich at high power) with "bad" (best power at cruise) as if they go together, perhaps to prove the point they invented. The two power settings have nothing to do with each other. Very little leaning at full climb power (and higher) on the rich side of peak EGT is tolerable by any of the "high performance" engines, and the practice used by the Whyalla operator gives me cold chills.
Setting "best power" (approximately 80F ROP) at any power setting much above 60% is nearly the worst possible place to run any of these engines, unless you are a marketing type interested only in speed, and NOT interested in engine longevity! (The worst is at max CHT, at about 40F ROP.)
No, I'm Not Done
Next month, we'll turn to the accident report itself, and pinpoint the numerous errors that led to an utterly silly conclusion. It may take TWO more columns to cover all the points.
While I have presented two alternative scenarios above, we absolutely must leave open the possibility there are others. Accident investigation is not an exact science, and following the shreds of evidence is challenging indeed. Sadly, the ATSB blew it, badly.
Lead oxybromide, indeed! Good grief!
Be careful up there!


Furniture — This furniture, is one of the 15 designs published under the gallery: Simple Small Bathroom Design. In the next page, we have the small bathroom design of nifty designs small bathrooms for goodly small bathroom trend [ ... ]. While in	the previous page, we have the small bathroom design with fine ideas for small bathroom designs bathroom best [ ... ].


text:
Iridia Salazar, född den 14 juni 1982 i Mexico City, är en mexikansk taekwondoutövare.

Hon tog OS-brons i fjäderviktsklassen i samband med de olympiska taekwondo-turneringarna 2004 i Aten.

Referenser

Externa länkar

Mexikanska taekwondoutövare
Mexikanska olympiska bronsmedaljörer
Olympiska bronsmedaljörer 2004
Tävlande vid olympiska sommarspelen 2004 från Mexiko
Tävlande i taekwondo vid olympiska sommarspelen 2004
Personer från Mexico City
Födda 1982
Levande personer
Kvinnor

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


On Tuesday, April 17, 2018, the Supreme Court ruled in Sessions v. Dimaya that a portion of the Immigration and Nationality Act ("INA") was unconstitutional. Delivering the opinion of the Court, Justice Kagan explained that the result was dictated by Johnson v. United States. The Court, in both cases, held that residual clauses defining criminal conduct were void for vagueness.


Did you know that spectacle lenses can help make driving safer and more relaxed, even in the rain and at night?
Driving can be a real challenge for everybody – no matter how long the distance. Good vision is vital for safety.
Thanks to the new DriveSafe Design Technology, the optimised distance and intermediate viewing zones have reduced the need for horizontal head movements.
Thanks to the new DuraVision DriveSafe Coating, the wavelength that causes the distracting glare is removed, which reduces the uncomfortable glare when compared to other premium AR coatings.
Thanks to the new Luminance Design Technology which takes into account different light conditions and pupil sizes to improve the lens design for nature vision at all times. As a result, wearers have better vision in low-light conditions.
To find out more, pop in and ask us about the latest lenses released by the world leaders in lens technology designed specifically to make driving safer and more relaxed – an everyday solution that helps all drivers feel safer and more comfortable.
Next Post	Why come to Chic?


High pressure building in from the west will bring near-perfect weather across Central North Carolina today. We'll have a bright and sunny sky and readings topping out in the low to mid-70s.
This high will move southeast and become centered just south and southeast of our region tomorrow. It will provide a clear sky tonight and then a southwest flow of warmer air tomorrow pushing temperatures up into the lower to perhaps mid-80s in the afternoon.
An upper-level storm system currently causing rain and thunderstorms over parts of the central Plains will move eastward. A surface storm associated with this trough will track northeastward today and then into the northern Great Lakes by tomorrow morning. A southwest trailing cold front will move east and south in tandem with this surface storm. This front is projected to move into southern Virginia, perhaps into northern North Carolina Wednesday afternoon or Wednesday evening. This might bring a shower or thunderstorm to a few spots, mainly north of the Triangle later Wednesday afternoon or Wednesday evening.
This frontal boundary is expected to stall near the North Carolina/Virginia border Wednesday night and Thursday. This boundary could remain the focus for shower and thunderstorm development, especially near and north of the North Carolina/Virginia border.
Looking beyond Wednesday, another upper-level storm system moving into the Great Basin today will move eastward, forcing the development of a surface storm over West Texas. This storm will track northeast later this week and force the stalled front to move well north of Central North Carolina later Thursday and Thursday night.
The surface storm will help force a cold front into North Carolina on Friday and this will help bring an increased chance for showers and thunderstorms over Central North Carolina Friday and Friday night.
Drier and cooler weather should move into the region for the weekend.


text:
Q: ImportError: No module named modules.logic I get this whenever I start my program.
It did work till an hour ago, I must somehow have deleted something important
I have already found out here that it might have to do with __init__.py - However, I have one of those in every module.
Is there any other reason this could occur for?
If I checkout anything, I get this:
M   main.py
D   modules/__init__.py
M   modules/logic/game.py

However, I am not able to find out what this means (have you ever tried to google a single letter, like M, oder D?)

A: That output looks like you are using either svn or git. The letter D means the file were deleted, M means modified. The bad news is the file __init__.py was deleted. The good news is you can still recover them. Just google svn recover deleted file.
More importantly, you probably need to talk to the person who deleted it (use svn log) and learn the rationale behind it.
Update
It seems you are using git, but the advice is the same, the git command syntax in this context should be the same, or close to the svn syntax.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange