Home » Posts tagged "Cool"

Cool International Development Policy images

Some cool International development policy images:

CTBT Intensive Policy Course
International development policy
Image by The Official CTBTO Photostream
Photos from the opening of the course "Multilateral Verification, Collective Security: The Contribution of the CTBT", held from 16 – 20 July in Vienna, Austria.

Jean du Preez , Chief, External Relations and International Cooperation Section, CTBTO, opens the course by providing participants with the overview and objectives of the course.

Closing the Loop: Integrated Action for Disaster Resilience
International development policy
Image by World Bank Photo Collection
September 23, 2011 – Washington DC., 2011 World Bank / IMF Annual Meetings. With images of the devastation caused by the Great Tohoku earthquake and tsunami still fresh in our minds, we are now witnessing the greatest humanitarian crisis in decades in the Horn of Africa. The imperative of building disaster resilience is the common thread between these very different but equally tragic events.

Multilateral and bilateral donors engaged in a high level dialogue to discuss how humanitarian and development policy makers can work together to support the common objective of building resilience in communities and nations.
Panelist(s): Valerie Amos , Under-Secretary General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator, United Nations
Jun Azumi , Minister of Finance, Japan
Helen Clark , Administrator, United Nations Development Programme
Kristalina Georgieva , Commissioner, International Cooperation, Humanitarian Aid and Crisis Response, European Commission
Andrew Mitchell , Secretary of State for International Development, United Kingdom
Sadako Ogata , President, Japan International Cooperation Agency, Japan
Rajiv Shah , Administrator, US Agency for International Development, United States
Robert B. Zoellick , President, World Bank Group
Moderator(s): Zanny Minton-Beddoes , Economics Editor, the Economist, United States
Photo: © Ryan Rayburn / World Bank

Closing the Loop: Integrated Action for Disaster Resilience
International development policy
Image by World Bank Photo Collection
September 23, 2011 – Washington DC., 2011 World Bank / IMF Annual Meetings. With images of the devastation caused by the Great Tohoku earthquake and tsunami still fresh in our minds, we are now witnessing the greatest humanitarian crisis in decades in the Horn of Africa. The imperative of building disaster resilience is the common thread between these very different but equally tragic events.

Multilateral and bilateral donors engaged in a high level dialogue to discuss how humanitarian and development policy makers can work together to support the common objective of building resilience in communities and nations.
Panelist(s): Valerie Amos , Under-Secretary General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator, United Nations
Jun Azumi , Minister of Finance, Japan
Helen Clark , Administrator, United Nations Development Programme
Kristalina Georgieva , Commissioner, International Cooperation, Humanitarian Aid and Crisis Response, European Commission
Andrew Mitchell , Secretary of State for International Development, United Kingdom
Sadako Ogata , President, Japan International Cooperation Agency, Japan
Rajiv Shah , Administrator, US Agency for International Development, United States
Robert B. Zoellick , President, World Bank Group
Moderator(s): Zanny Minton-Beddoes , Economics Editor, the Economist, United States
Photo: Ryan Rayburn / World Bank

Photo ID:

Cool International Development Policy images

A few nice International development policy images I found:

Closing the Loop: Integrated Action for Disaster Resilience
International development policy
Image by World Bank Photo Collection
September 23, 2011 – Washington DC., 2011 World Bank / IMF Annual Meetings. With images of the devastation caused by the Great Tohoku earthquake and tsunami still fresh in our minds, we are now witnessing the greatest humanitarian crisis in decades in the Horn of Africa. The imperative of building disaster resilience is the common thread between these very different but equally tragic events.

Multilateral and bilateral donors engaged in a high level dialogue to discuss how humanitarian and development policy makers can work together to support the common objective of building resilience in communities and nations.
Panelist(s): Valerie Amos , Under-Secretary General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator, United Nations
Jun Azumi , Minister of Finance, Japan
Helen Clark , Administrator, United Nations Development Programme
Kristalina Georgieva , Commissioner, International Cooperation, Humanitarian Aid and Crisis Response, European Commission
Andrew Mitchell , Secretary of State for International Development, United Kingdom
Sadako Ogata , President, Japan International Cooperation Agency, Japan
Rajiv Shah , Administrator, US Agency for International Development, United States
Robert B. Zoellick , President, World Bank Group
Moderator(s): Zanny Minton-Beddoes , Economics Editor, the Economist, United States
Photo: Ryan Rayburn / World Bank

Photo ID: 092311_POS_Closing_The_Loop_014_F

Closing the Loop: Integrated Action for Disaster Resilience
International development policy
Image by World Bank Photo Collection
September 23, 2011 – Washington DC., 2011 World Bank / IMF Annual Meetings. With images of the devastation caused by the Great Tohoku earthquake and tsunami still fresh in our minds, we are now witnessing the greatest humanitarian crisis in decades in the Horn of Africa. The imperative of building disaster resilience is the common thread between these very different but equally tragic events.

Multilateral and bilateral donors engaged in a high level dialogue to discuss how humanitarian and development policy makers can work together to support the common objective of building resilience in communities and nations.
Panelist(s): Valerie Amos , Under-Secretary General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator, United Nations
Jun Azumi , Minister of Finance, Japan
Helen Clark , Administrator, United Nations Development Programme
Kristalina Georgieva , Commissioner, International Cooperation, Humanitarian Aid and Crisis Response, European Commission
Andrew Mitchell , Secretary of State for International Development, United Kingdom
Sadako Ogata , President, Japan International Cooperation Agency, Japan
Rajiv Shah , Administrator, US Agency for International Development, United States
Robert B. Zoellick , President, World Bank Group
Moderator(s): Zanny Minton-Beddoes , Economics Editor, the Economist, United States
Photo: Ryan Rayburn / World Bank

Photo ID: 092311_POS_Closing_The_Loop_019_F

Closing the Loop: Integrated Action for Disaster Resilience
International development policy
Image by World Bank Photo Collection
September 23, 2011 – Washington DC., 2011 World Bank / IMF Annual Meetings. With images of the devastation caused by the Great Tohoku earthquake and tsunami still fresh in our minds, we are now witnessing the greatest humanitarian crisis in decades in the Horn of Africa. The imperative of building disaster resilience is the common thread between these very different but equally tragic events.

Multilateral and bilateral donors engaged in a high level dialogue to discuss how humanitarian and development policy makers can work together to support the common objective of building resilience in communities and nations.
Panelist(s): Valerie Amos , Under-Secretary General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator, United Nations
Jun Azumi , Minister of Finance, Japan
Helen Clark , Administrator, United Nations Development Programme
Kristalina Georgieva , Commissioner, International Cooperation, Humanitarian Aid and Crisis Response, European Commission
Andrew Mitchell , Secretary of State for International Development, United Kingdom
Sadako Ogata , President, Japan International Cooperation Agency, Japan
Rajiv Shah , Administrator, US Agency for International Development, United States
Robert B. Zoellick , President, World Bank Group
Moderator(s): Zanny Minton-Beddoes , Economics Editor, the Economist, United States
Photo: Ryan Rayburn / World Bank

Photo ID: 092311_POS_Closing_The_Loop_050_F

Cool International Development Policy images

Check out these International development policy images:

Building Youth-Inclusive Democracies: Lessons from Kenya
International development policy
Image by CSIS: Center for Strategic & International Studies
In partnership with the International Youth Foundation
THURSDAY, MAR 14, 2013
A discussion with:
Earl Gast
Assistant Administrator, Bureau for Africa, U.S. Agency for International Development
Zipporah Maina
President, Cheptiret Youth Bunge
Silas Maru
President, National Youth Bunge Association
Sharon Morris
Director of Youth and Conflict Mitigation, Mercy Corps
Moderated by:
Nicole Goldin
Director, Youth Prosperity and Security Initative, Center for Strategic and International Studies
Thursday, March 14, 2013 3:00pm-4:30pm
B1 Conference Room, CSIS
1800 K. St. NW, Washington, DC 20006
Please RSVP to ppd@csis.org
Young people have historically been at the forefront of social and political movements. In Kenya, youth make up nearly 30% of the population, and are a source of great promise. Yet fueled by disenfranchisement, inequity, and rampant unemployment, youth were at the center of the violence following the 2007 Presidential elections. To begin to address the challenge of disaffected youth, USAID initiated its largest-ever youth program – Yes Youth Can!. Implemented by Mercy Corps and led by Kenyan youth, the Yes Youth Can! project is forging new ground in understanding and advancing youth inclusive democracy and governance.
Following the March 4th elections, please join us for a timely conversation on project, policy and comparative experiences, perspectives and lessons learned from Kenya in building youth inclusive democracies.
Follow @CSIS and #CSISLive for live updates
Programs
PACIFIC FORUM CSIS, PROJECT ON PROSPERITY AND DEVELOPMENT

Building Youth-Inclusive Democracies: Lessons from Kenya
International development policy
Image by CSIS: Center for Strategic & International Studies
In partnership with the International Youth Foundation
THURSDAY, MAR 14, 2013
A discussion with:
Earl Gast
Assistant Administrator, Bureau for Africa, U.S. Agency for International Development
Zipporah Maina
President, Cheptiret Youth Bunge
Silas Maru
President, National Youth Bunge Association
Sharon Morris
Director of Youth and Conflict Mitigation, Mercy Corps
Moderated by:
Nicole Goldin
Director, Youth Prosperity and Security Initative, Center for Strategic and International Studies
Thursday, March 14, 2013 3:00pm-4:30pm
B1 Conference Room, CSIS
1800 K. St. NW, Washington, DC 20006
Please RSVP to ppd@csis.org
Young people have historically been at the forefront of social and political movements. In Kenya, youth make up nearly 30% of the population, and are a source of great promise. Yet fueled by disenfranchisement, inequity, and rampant unemployment, youth were at the center of the violence following the 2007 Presidential elections. To begin to address the challenge of disaffected youth, USAID initiated its largest-ever youth program – Yes Youth Can!. Implemented by Mercy Corps and led by Kenyan youth, the Yes Youth Can! project is forging new ground in understanding and advancing youth inclusive democracy and governance.
Following the March 4th elections, please join us for a timely conversation on project, policy and comparative experiences, perspectives and lessons learned from Kenya in building youth inclusive democracies.
Follow @CSIS and #CSISLive for live updates
Programs
PACIFIC FORUM CSIS, PROJECT ON PROSPERITY AND DEVELOPMENT

Building Youth-Inclusive Democracies: Lessons from Kenya
International development policy
Image by CSIS: Center for Strategic & International Studies
In partnership with the International Youth Foundation
THURSDAY, MAR 14, 2013
A discussion with:
Earl Gast
Assistant Administrator, Bureau for Africa, U.S. Agency for International Development
Zipporah Maina
President, Cheptiret Youth Bunge
Silas Maru
President, National Youth Bunge Association
Sharon Morris
Director of Youth and Conflict Mitigation, Mercy Corps
Moderated by:
Nicole Goldin
Director, Youth Prosperity and Security Initative, Center for Strategic and International Studies
Thursday, March 14, 2013 3:00pm-4:30pm
B1 Conference Room, CSIS
1800 K. St. NW, Washington, DC 20006
Please RSVP to ppd@csis.org
Young people have historically been at the forefront of social and political movements. In Kenya, youth make up nearly 30% of the population, and are a source of great promise. Yet fueled by disenfranchisement, inequity, and rampant unemployment, youth were at the center of the violence following the 2007 Presidential elections. To begin to address the challenge of disaffected youth, USAID initiated its largest-ever youth program – Yes Youth Can!. Implemented by Mercy Corps and led by Kenyan youth, the Yes Youth Can! project is forging new ground in understanding and advancing youth inclusive democracy and governance.
Following the March 4th elections, please join us for a timely conversation on project, policy and comparative experiences, perspectives and lessons learned from Kenya in building youth inclusive democracies.
Follow @CSIS and #CSISLive for live updates
Programs
PACIFIC FORUM CSIS, PROJECT ON PROSPERITY AND DEVELOPMENT

Cool International Development Policy images

Some cool International development policy images:

Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center: SR-71 Blackbird and Space Shuttle Enterprise in the distance
International development policy
Image by Chris Devers
See more photos of this, and the Wikipedia article.

Details, quoting from Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum | Lockheed SR-71 Blackbird:

No reconnaissance aircraft in history has operated globally in more hostile airspace or with such complete impunity than the SR-71, the world’s fastest jet-propelled aircraft. The Blackbird’s performance and operational achievements placed it at the pinnacle of aviation technology developments during the Cold War.

This Blackbird accrued about 2,800 hours of flight time during 24 years of active service with the U.S. Air Force. On its last flight, March 6, 1990, Lt. Col. Ed Yielding and Lt. Col. Joseph Vida set a speed record by flying from Los Angeles to Washington, D.C., in 1 hour, 4 minutes, and 20 seconds, averaging 3,418 kilometers (2,124 miles) per hour. At the flight’s conclusion, they landed at Washington-Dulles International Airport and turned the airplane over to the Smithsonian.

Transferred from the United States Air Force.

Manufacturer:
Lockheed Aircraft Corporation

Designer:
Clarence L. "Kelly" Johnson

Date:
1964

Country of Origin:
United States of America

Dimensions:
Overall: 18ft 5 15/16in. x 55ft 7in. x 107ft 5in., 169998.5lb. (5.638m x 16.942m x 32.741m, 77110.8kg)
Other: 18ft 5 15/16in. x 107ft 5in. x 55ft 7in. (5.638m x 32.741m x 16.942m)

Materials:
Titanium

Physical Description:
Twin-engine, two-seat, supersonic strategic reconnaissance aircraft; airframe constructed largley of titanium and its alloys; vertical tail fins are constructed of a composite (laminated plastic-type material) to reduce radar cross-section; Pratt and Whitney J58 (JT11D-20B) turbojet engines feature large inlet shock cones.

Long Description:
No reconnaissance aircraft in history has operated in more hostile airspace or with such complete impunity than the SR-71 Blackbird. It is the fastest aircraft propelled by air-breathing engines. The Blackbird’s performance and operational achievements placed it at the pinnacle of aviation technology developments during the Cold War. The airplane was conceived when tensions with communist Eastern Europe reached levels approaching a full-blown crisis in the mid-1950s. U.S. military commanders desperately needed accurate assessments of Soviet worldwide military deployments, particularly near the Iron Curtain. Lockheed Aircraft Corporation’s subsonic U-2 (see NASM collection) reconnaissance aircraft was an able platform but the U. S. Air Force recognized that this relatively slow aircraft was already vulnerable to Soviet interceptors. They also understood that the rapid development of surface-to-air missile systems could put U-2 pilots at grave risk. The danger proved reality when a U-2 was shot down by a surface to air missile over the Soviet Union in 1960.

Lockheed’s first proposal for a new high speed, high altitude, reconnaissance aircraft, to be capable of avoiding interceptors and missiles, centered on a design propelled by liquid hydrogen. This proved to be impracticable because of considerable fuel consumption. Lockheed then reconfigured the design for conventional fuels. This was feasible and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), already flying the Lockheed U-2, issued a production contract for an aircraft designated the A-12. Lockheed’s clandestine ‘Skunk Works’ division (headed by the gifted design engineer Clarence L. "Kelly" Johnson) designed the A-12 to cruise at Mach 3.2 and fly well above 18,288 m (60,000 feet). To meet these challenging requirements, Lockheed engineers overcame many daunting technical challenges. Flying more than three times the speed of sound generates 316° C (600° F) temperatures on external aircraft surfaces, which are enough to melt conventional aluminum airframes. The design team chose to make the jet’s external skin of titanium alloy to which shielded the internal aluminum airframe. Two conventional, but very powerful, afterburning turbine engines propelled this remarkable aircraft. These power plants had to operate across a huge speed envelope in flight, from a takeoff speed of 334 kph (207 mph) to more than 3,540 kph (2,200 mph). To prevent supersonic shock waves from moving inside the engine intake causing flameouts, Johnson’s team had to design a complex air intake and bypass system for the engines.

Skunk Works engineers also optimized the A-12 cross-section design to exhibit a low radar profile. Lockheed hoped to achieve this by carefully shaping the airframe to reflect as little transmitted radar energy (radio waves) as possible, and by application of special paint designed to absorb, rather than reflect, those waves. This treatment became one of the first applications of stealth technology, but it never completely met the design goals.

Test pilot Lou Schalk flew the single-seat A-12 on April 24, 1962, after he became airborne accidentally during high-speed taxi trials. The airplane showed great promise but it needed considerable technical refinement before the CIA could fly the first operational sortie on May 31, 1967 – a surveillance flight over North Vietnam. A-12s, flown by CIA pilots, operated as part of the Air Force’s 1129th Special Activities Squadron under the "Oxcart" program. While Lockheed continued to refine the A-12, the U. S. Air Force ordered an interceptor version of the aircraft designated the YF-12A. The Skunk Works, however, proposed a "specific mission" version configured to conduct post-nuclear strike reconnaissance. This system evolved into the USAF’s familiar SR-71.

Lockheed built fifteen A-12s, including a special two-seat trainer version. Two A-12s were modified to carry a special reconnaissance drone, designated D-21. The modified A-12s were redesignated M-21s. These were designed to take off with the D-21 drone, powered by a Marquart ramjet engine mounted on a pylon between the rudders. The M-21 then hauled the drone aloft and launched it at speeds high enough to ignite the drone’s ramjet motor. Lockheed also built three YF-12As but this type never went into production. Two of the YF-12As crashed during testing. Only one survives and is on display at the USAF Museum in Dayton, Ohio. The aft section of one of the "written off" YF-12As which was later used along with an SR-71A static test airframe to manufacture the sole SR-71C trainer. One SR-71 was lent to NASA and designated YF-12C. Including the SR-71C and two SR-71B pilot trainers, Lockheed constructed thirty-two Blackbirds. The first SR-71 flew on December 22, 1964. Because of extreme operational costs, military strategists decided that the more capable USAF SR-71s should replace the CIA’s A-12s. These were retired in 1968 after only one year of operational missions, mostly over southeast Asia. The Air Force’s 1st Strategic Reconnaissance Squadron (part of the 9th Strategic Reconnaissance Wing) took over the missions, flying the SR-71 beginning in the spring of 1968.

After the Air Force began to operate the SR-71, it acquired the official name Blackbird– for the special black paint that covered the airplane. This paint was formulated to absorb radar signals, to radiate some of the tremendous airframe heat generated by air friction, and to camouflage the aircraft against the dark sky at high altitudes.

Experience gained from the A-12 program convinced the Air Force that flying the SR-71 safely required two crew members, a pilot and a Reconnaissance Systems Officer (RSO). The RSO operated with the wide array of monitoring and defensive systems installed on the airplane. This equipment included a sophisticated Electronic Counter Measures (ECM) system that could jam most acquisition and targeting radar. In addition to an array of advanced, high-resolution cameras, the aircraft could also carry equipment designed to record the strength, frequency, and wavelength of signals emitted by communications and sensor devices such as radar. The SR-71 was designed to fly deep into hostile territory, avoiding interception with its tremendous speed and high altitude. It could operate safely at a maximum speed of Mach 3.3 at an altitude more than sixteen miles, or 25,908 m (85,000 ft), above the earth. The crew had to wear pressure suits similar to those worn by astronauts. These suits were required to protect the crew in the event of sudden cabin pressure loss while at operating altitudes.

To climb and cruise at supersonic speeds, the Blackbird’s Pratt & Whitney J-58 engines were designed to operate continuously in afterburner. While this would appear to dictate high fuel flows, the Blackbird actually achieved its best "gas mileage," in terms of air nautical miles per pound of fuel burned, during the Mach 3+ cruise. A typical Blackbird reconnaissance flight might require several aerial refueling operations from an airborne tanker. Each time the SR-71 refueled, the crew had to descend to the tanker’s altitude, usually about 6,000 m to 9,000 m (20,000 to 30,000 ft), and slow the airplane to subsonic speeds. As velocity decreased, so did frictional heat. This cooling effect caused the aircraft’s skin panels to shrink considerably, and those covering the fuel tanks contracted so much that fuel leaked, forming a distinctive vapor trail as the tanker topped off the Blackbird. As soon as the tanks were filled, the jet’s crew disconnected from the tanker, relit the afterburners, and again climbed to high altitude.

Air Force pilots flew the SR-71 from Kadena AB, Japan, throughout its operational career but other bases hosted Blackbird operations, too. The 9th SRW occasionally deployed from Beale AFB, California, to other locations to carryout operational missions. Cuban missions were flown directly from Beale. The SR-71 did not begin to operate in Europe until 1974, and then only temporarily. In 1982, when the U.S. Air Force based two aircraft at Royal Air Force Base Mildenhall to fly monitoring mission in Eastern Europe.

When the SR-71 became operational, orbiting reconnaissance satellites had already replaced manned aircraft to gather intelligence from sites deep within Soviet territory. Satellites could not cover every geopolitical hotspot so the Blackbird remained a vital tool for global intelligence gathering. On many occasions, pilots and RSOs flying the SR-71 provided information that proved vital in formulating successful U. S. foreign policy. Blackbird crews provided important intelligence about the 1973 Yom Kippur War, the Israeli invasion of Lebanon and its aftermath, and pre- and post-strike imagery of the 1986 raid conducted by American air forces on Libya. In 1987, Kadena-based SR-71 crews flew a number of missions over the Persian Gulf, revealing Iranian Silkworm missile batteries that threatened commercial shipping and American escort vessels.

As the performance of space-based surveillance systems grew, along with the effectiveness of ground-based air defense networks, the Air Force started to lose enthusiasm for the expensive program and the 9th SRW ceased SR-71 operations in January 1990. Despite protests by military leaders, Congress revived the program in 1995. Continued wrangling over operating budgets, however, soon led to final termination. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration retained two SR-71As and the one SR-71B for high-speed research projects and flew these airplanes until 1999.

On March 6, 1990, the service career of one Lockheed SR-71A Blackbird ended with a record-setting flight. This special airplane bore Air Force serial number 64-17972. Lt. Col. Ed Yeilding and his RSO, Lieutenant Colonel Joseph Vida, flew this aircraft from Los Angeles to Washington D.C. in 1 hour, 4 minutes, and 20 seconds, averaging a speed of 3,418 kph (2,124 mph). At the conclusion of the flight, ‘972 landed at Dulles International Airport and taxied into the custody of the Smithsonian’s National Air and Space Museum. At that time, Lt. Col. Vida had logged 1,392.7 hours of flight time in Blackbirds, more than that of any other crewman.

This particular SR-71 was also flown by Tom Alison, a former National Air and Space Museum’s Chief of Collections Management. Flying with Detachment 1 at Kadena Air Force Base, Okinawa, Alison logged more than a dozen ‘972 operational sorties. The aircraft spent twenty-four years in active Air Force service and accrued a total of 2,801.1 hours of flight time.

Wingspan: 55’7"
Length: 107’5"
Height: 18’6"
Weight: 170,000 Lbs

Reference and Further Reading:

Crickmore, Paul F. Lockheed SR-71: The Secret Missions Exposed. Oxford: Osprey Publishing, 1996.

Francillon, Rene J. Lockheed Aircraft Since 1913. Annapolis, Md.: Naval Institute Press, 1987.

Johnson, Clarence L. Kelly: More Than My Share of It All. Washington D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1985.

Miller, Jay. Lockheed Martin’s Skunk Works. Leicester, U.K.: Midland Counties Publishing Ltd., 1995.

Lockheed SR-71 Blackbird curatorial file, Aeronautics Division, National Air and Space Museum.

DAD, 11-11-01

• • • • •

See more photos of this, and the Wikipedia article.

Details, quoting from Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum | Space Shuttle Enterprise:

Manufacturer:
Rockwell International Corporation

Country of Origin:
United States of America

Dimensions:
Overall: 57 ft. tall x 122 ft. long x 78 ft. wing span, 150,000 lb.
(1737.36 x 3718.57 x 2377.44cm, 68039.6kg)

Materials:
Aluminum airframe and body with some fiberglass features; payload bay doors are graphite epoxy composite; thermal tiles are simulated (polyurethane foam) except for test samples of actual tiles and thermal blankets.

The first Space Shuttle orbiter, "Enterprise," is a full-scale test vehicle used for flights in the atmosphere and tests on the ground; it is not equipped for spaceflight. Although the airframe and flight control elements are like those of the Shuttles flown in space, this vehicle has no propulsion system and only simulated thermal tiles because these features were not needed for atmospheric and ground tests. "Enterprise" was rolled out at Rockwell International’s assembly facility in Palmdale, California, in 1976. In 1977, it entered service for a nine-month-long approach-and-landing test flight program. Thereafter it was used for vibration tests and fit checks at NASA centers, and it also appeared in the 1983 Paris Air Show and the 1984 World’s Fair in New Orleans. In 1985, NASA transferred "Enterprise" to the Smithsonian Institution’s National Air and Space Museum.

Transferred from National Aeronautics and Space Administration

• • •

Quoting from Wikipedia | Space Shuttle Enterprise:

The Space Shuttle Enterprise (NASA Orbiter Vehicle Designation: OV-101) was the first Space Shuttle orbiter. It was built for NASA as part of the Space Shuttle program to perform test flights in the atmosphere. It was constructed without engines or a functional heat shield, and was therefore not capable of spaceflight.

Originally, Enterprise had been intended to be refitted for orbital flight, which would have made it the second space shuttle to fly after Columbia. However, during the construction of Columbia, details of the final design changed, particularly with regard to the weight of the fuselage and wings. Refitting Enterprise for spaceflight would have involved dismantling the orbiter and returning the sections to subcontractors across the country. As this was an expensive proposition, it was determined to be less costly to build Challenger around a body frame (STA-099) that had been created as a test article. Similarly, Enterprise was considered for refit to replace Challenger after the latter was destroyed, but Endeavour was built from structural spares instead.

Service

Construction began on the first orbiter on June 4, 1974. Designated OV-101, it was originally planned to be named Constitution and unveiled on Constitution Day, September 17, 1976. A write-in campaign by Trekkies to President Gerald Ford asked that the orbiter be named after the Starship Enterprise, featured on the television show Star Trek. Although Ford did not mention the campaign, the president—who during World War II had served on the aircraft carrier USS Monterey (CVL-26) that served with USS Enterprise (CV-6)—said that he was "partial to the name" and overrode NASA officials.

The design of OV-101 was not the same as that planned for OV-102, the first flight model; the tail was constructed differently, and it did not have the interfaces to mount OMS pods. A large number of subsystems—ranging from main engines to radar equipment—were not installed on this vehicle, but the capacity to add them in the future was retained. Instead of a thermal protection system, its surface was primarily fiberglass.

In mid-1976, the orbiter was used for ground vibration tests, allowing engineers to compare data from an actual flight vehicle with theoretical models.

On September 17, 1976, Enterprise was rolled out of Rockwell’s plant at Palmdale, California. In recognition of its fictional namesake, Star Trek creator Gene Roddenberry and most of the principal cast of the original series of Star Trek were on hand at the dedication ceremony.

Approach and landing tests (ALT)

Main article: Approach and Landing Tests

On January 31, 1977, it was taken by road to Dryden Flight Research Center at Edwards Air Force Base, to begin operational testing.

While at NASA Dryden, Enterprise was used by NASA for a variety of ground and flight tests intended to validate aspects of the shuttle program. The initial nine-month testing period was referred to by the acronym ALT, for "Approach and Landing Test". These tests included a maiden "flight" on February 18, 1977 atop a Boeing 747 Shuttle Carrier Aircraft (SCA) to measure structural loads and ground handling and braking characteristics of the mated system. Ground tests of all orbiter subsystems were carried out to verify functionality prior to atmospheric flight.

The mated Enterprise/SCA combination was then subjected to five test flights with Enterprise unmanned and unactivated. The purpose of these test flights was to measure the flight characteristics of the mated combination. These tests were followed with three test flights with Enterprise manned to test the shuttle flight control systems.

Enterprise underwent five free flights where the craft separated from the SCA and was landed under astronaut control. These tests verified the flight characteristics of the orbiter design and were carried out under several aerodynamic and weight configurations. On the fifth and final glider flight, pilot-induced oscillation problems were revealed, which had to be addressed before the first orbital launch occurred.

On August 12, 1977, the space shuttle Enterprise flew on its own for the first time.

Preparation for STS-1

Following the ALT program, Enterprise was ferried among several NASA facilities to configure the craft for vibration testing. In June 1979, it was mated with an external tank and solid rocket boosters (known as a boilerplate configuration) and tested in a launch configuration at Kennedy Space Center Launch Pad 39A.

Retirement

With the completion of critical testing, Enterprise was partially disassembled to allow certain components to be reused in other shuttles, then underwent an international tour visiting France, Germany, Italy, the United Kingdom, Canada, and the U.S. states of California, Alabama, and Louisiana (during the 1984 Louisiana World Exposition). It was also used to fit-check the never-used shuttle launch pad at Vandenberg AFB, California. Finally, on November 18, 1985, Enterprise was ferried to Washington, D.C., where it became property of the Smithsonian Institution.

Post-Challenger

After the Challenger disaster, NASA considered using Enterprise as a replacement. However refitting the shuttle with all of the necessary equipment needed for it to be used in space was considered, but instead it was decided to use spares constructed at the same time as Discovery and Atlantis to build Endeavour.

Post-Columbia

In 2003, after the breakup of Columbia during re-entry, the Columbia Accident Investigation Board conducted tests at Southwest Research Institute, which used an air gun to shoot foam blocks of similar size, mass and speed to that which struck Columbia at a test structure which mechanically replicated the orbiter wing leading edge. They removed a fiberglass panel from Enterprise’s wing to perform analysis of the material and attached it to the test structure, then shot a foam block at it. While the panel was not broken as a result of the test, the impact was enough to permanently deform a seal. As the reinforced carbon-carbon (RCC) panel on Columbia was 2.5 times weaker, this suggested that the RCC leading edge would have been shattered. Additional tests on the fiberglass were canceled in order not to risk damaging the test apparatus, and a panel from Discovery was tested to determine the effects of the foam on a similarly-aged RCC leading edge. On July 7, 2003, a foam impact test created a hole 41 cm by 42.5 cm (16.1 inches by 16.7 inches) in the protective RCC panel. The tests clearly demonstrated that a foam impact of the type Columbia sustained could seriously breach the protective RCC panels on the wing leading edge.

The board determined that the probable cause of the accident was that the foam impact caused a breach of a reinforced carbon-carbon panel along the leading edge of Columbia’s left wing, allowing hot gases generated during re-entry to enter the wing and cause structural collapse. This caused Columbia to spin out of control, breaking up with the loss of the entire crew.

Museum exhibit

Enterprise was stored at the Smithsonian’s hangar at Washington Dulles International Airport before it was restored and moved to the newly built Smithsonian’s National Air and Space Museum‘s Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center at Dulles International Airport, where it has been the centerpiece of the space collection. On April 12, 2011, NASA announced that Space Shuttle Discovery, the most traveled orbiter in the fleet, will be added to the collection once the Shuttle fleet is retired. When that happens, Enterprise will be moved to the Intrepid Sea-Air-Space Museum in New York City, to a newly constructed hangar adjacent to the museum. In preparation for the anticipated relocation, engineers evaluated the vehicle in early 2010 and determined that it was safe to fly on the Shuttle Carrier Aircraft once again.

President Herman Van Rompuy meeting with Bono, 09 Oct 2012 (Brussels)
International development policy
Image by President of the European Council
Today, Bono and President Van Rompuy had an interesting discussion about the EU development policies. They discussed the ongoing negotiations on the future European budget and transparency of extractive industries. They are both strongly committed to a Europe of values and people.

Wanted: fresh ideas for combating African poverty
International development policy
Image by Africa Renewal
The MDGs have been more successful that other UN development initiatives in mobilizing donor support. Photograph: UN Photo / P Mugabane

Amidst global crisis, a need to go beyond the MDGs.
The Millennium Development Goals are likely to remain important for the long-term task of eradicating poverty beyond 2015. But development policy is being challenged by a host of new and old issues brought into focus by the quadruple crises of the past three years: the food, climate, energy and financial crises. The favourable global economic and political conditions that existed when the MDGs were adopted in 2000 do not exist anymore. The crises and their aftermaths therefore require us to "think out of the box," to ask different questions and seek new ways of social and political mobilization to tackle the structural problems that perpetuate global inequalities.

Certainly the MDGs have marked a step forward. They have received unprecedented political commitment and forged a strong consensus on fighting poverty. They have helped expand the international debate over sustainable pro-poor development and over how to mobilize donor support for domestic efforts, especially in health, education and other social services.

When we look back at the range of UN conferences and what came out of them, the MDGs appear to have been more successful than most other attempts at setting international targets for development issues. They also have helped some civil society groups to hold governments in developing countries accountable for their decisions.

Wanted: fresh ideas for combating African poverty

Cool International Development Policy images

Some cool International development policy images:

Sharing Risk in a World of Dangers and Opportunities
International development policy
Image by CSIS: Center for Strategic & International Studies
The changing nature of international development has created a growing interest in the use of development finance instruments. As the availability of soft grant money decreases and acceptance of private-sector-led growth increases, development policy is shifting away from official development assistance to focus more on investment and trade. In this context, the U.S. government must use its development finance instruments more effectively. For more go to csis.org/event/sharing-risk-world-dangers-and-opportuniti…

Sharing Risk in a World of Dangers and Opportunities
International development policy
Image by CSIS: Center for Strategic & International Studies
The changing nature of international development has created a growing interest in the use of development finance instruments. As the availability of soft grant money decreases and acceptance of private-sector-led growth increases, development policy is shifting away from official development assistance to focus more on investment and trade. In this context, the U.S. government must use its development finance instruments more effectively. For more go to csis.org/event/sharing-risk-world-dangers-and-opportuniti…

Cool International Development Policy images

Some cool International development policy images:

SDP IWG – 3rd Plenary Session
International development policy
Image by UN Office on Sport for Development and Peace
Geneva, 2 October 2012

Special Adviser to the UN Secretary-General on Sport for Development and Peace, Wilfried Lemke, opening the 3rd Plenary Session of the Sport for Development and Peace International Working Group (SDP IWG) held at the UN Office at Geneva (UNOG), Switzerland.

More information at www.un.org/sport.

© UNOSDP/Antoine Tardy 2012

SDP IWG – 3rd Plenary Session
International development policy
Image by UN Office on Sport for Development and Peace
Geneva, 2 October 2012

Thulani Mabaso-Mahlangu, Deputy Programme Manager of ‘Youth Development trough Football’ (YDF) South Africa, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ), addressing the participants of the 3rd Plenary Session of the Sport for Development and Peace International Working Group (SDP IWG) held at the UN Office at Geneva (UNOG), Switzerland, as a keynote speaker.

More information at www.un.org/sport.

© UNOSDP/Antoine Tardy 2012

SDP IWG – 3rd Plenary Session
International development policy
Image by UN Office on Sport for Development and Peace
Geneva, 2 October 2012

Kai Troll, Director of Special Olympics Europe/Eurasia, addressing the participants of the 3rd Plenary Session of the Sport for Development and Peace International Working Group (SDP IWG) held at the UN Office at Geneva (UNOG), Switzerland, as a keynote speaker.

More information at www.un.org/sport.

© UNOSDP/Antoine Tardy 2012

Cool International Development Policy images

Check out these International development policy images:

Prof. Jacek Jania, President, Committee on Polar Research, Polish Academy of Science
International development policy
Image by Polish Institute of International Affairs
Conference: A MORE ACCESSIBLE ARCTIC: MYTHS, FACTS AND ISSUES AHEAD

On 1 March 2011 Embassy of Embassy of Canada to Poland and the Polish Institute of International Affairs organized a conference devoted to Arctic region.

“This half-day conference brought together Polish and Canadian Arctic experts and decision
makers to support and consider the emerging discussion in Poland on this important region.

Poland has been a distinguished member of the Arctic research community and a prominent
Observer State of the Arctic Council since its inception. While to Canadians the Arctic is home,
and to Polish researchers it is a challenging but familiar workplace, to much of the international
community and indeed Polish society it remains relatively unknown or misunderstood. Far from
being a ‘wild west’ frontier as it is sometimes portrayed, the Arctic is a well-governed and
thriving homeland to numerous indigenous communities with enormous development potential.

Canada’s vision for the Arctic is that of a stable region with clearly defined boundaries, dynamic
economic growth and trade, vibrant Northern communities, and healthy and productive
ecosystems. The Arctic Council is for Canada the well-established and principal forum for
international cooperation in these areas. Poland’s vision of the Arctic is similar, as an observer
in the Arctic Council, which convenes and supports sustained dialogue and cooperation.

Canada, like Poland, has made a strong commitment to Arctic science—the foundation for sound
policy- and decision-making on the environment. Canada was the single largest financial
contributor to International Polar Year research activities and has announced the construction
of a state of the art international High Arctic research facility in Cambridge Bay, and Poland
maintains a world-class scientific research base in Spitsbergen. New opportunities and
challenges are emerging across the Arctic, in part as a result of climate change and the pursuit
of resources. While this may well support social and economic development, it may also bring
new environmental threats, search and rescue incidents, civil emergencies and, potentially
even illegal activity*”.

*Quote from conference’s agenda

Cool International Development Policy images

Some cool International development policy images:

Dr. Olaf Osica, Deputy Director of the Centre for Eastern Studies
International development policy
Image by Polish Institute of International Affairs
Conference: A MORE ACCESSIBLE ARCTIC: MYTHS, FACTS AND ISSUES AHEAD

On 1 March 2011 Embassy of Embassy of Canada to Poland and the Polish Institute of International Affairs organized a conference devoted to Arctic region.
“This half-day conference brought together Polish and Canadian Arctic experts and decision
makers to support and consider the emerging discussion in Poland on this important region.

Poland has been a distinguished member of the Arctic research community and a prominent
Observer State of the Arctic Council since its inception. While to Canadians the Arctic is home,
and to Polish researchers it is a challenging but familiar workplace, to much of the international
community and indeed Polish society it remains relatively unknown or misunderstood. Far from
being a ‘wild west’ frontier as it is sometimes portrayed, the Arctic is a well-governed and
thriving homeland to numerous indigenous communities with enormous development potential.

Canada’s vision for the Arctic is that of a stable region with clearly defined boundaries, dynamic
economic growth and trade, vibrant Northern communities, and healthy and productive
ecosystems. The Arctic Council is for Canada the well-established and principal forum for
international cooperation in these areas. Poland’s vision of the Arctic is similar, as an observer
in the Arctic Council, which convenes and supports sustained dialogue and cooperation.

Canada, like Poland, has made a strong commitment to Arctic science—the foundation for sound
policy- and decision-making on the environment. Canada was the single largest financial
contributor to International Polar Year research activities and has announced the construction
of a state of the art international High Arctic research facility in Cambridge Bay, and Poland
maintains a world-class scientific research base in Spitsbergen. New opportunities and
challenges are emerging across the Arctic, in part as a result of climate change and the pursuit
of resources. While this may well support social and economic development, it may also bring
new environmental threats, search and rescue incidents, civil emergencies and, potentially
even illegal activity*”.

*Quote from conference’s agenda

Cool Green Economics images

Check out these green economics images:

REPORT CARD DAY FOR A SOCIALIST/MARXIST/COMMUNITY ORGANIZER………….A WELL DESERVED “F”
green economics
Image by SS&SS
March 14, 2011
Barack Obama: A Management Appraisal
By Frank Burke
In addition to examining the roots of Barack Obama’s political philosophy, an evaluation of his management style, such as might be undertaken by an independent business consultant, is likewise instructive.

The comparison is apt in that the United States government can be viewed from a business perspective as a service provider. In attempting to analyze problems that exist and evolve the correct remedies, consultants typically begin by observing the way in which management — especially top management — leads and interacts with the organization. This would begin with an examination of five key areas.

Management Style

In classic management theory, Barack Obama would have to be described as an abdicative manager.

The abdicative manager evidences a tendency to flee from responsibility and is frequently encountered in situations where he or she never wanted the job in the first place (for instance, a son or daughter who inherits a company or the individual who discovers that they are incapable of adequate performance). Abdication can be exhibited in a variety of ways, ranging from physically removing oneself through travel (the confusion of movement with action), to obsessing about personal interests or a limited range of controllable subjects.

Obama’s frequent vacations and absences, especially in times of crisis, coupled with his unwillingness to personally invest himself in key initiatives, are demonstrative of this style. An excellent example occurred after passage of the healthcare initiative. Having ceded authority in what would later be described as his key achievement to Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, he watched as they forced the bill through under a manufactured emergency that precluded lawmakers from having time to read it. He then went on a four-day vacation before signing it.

Team Building and Leadership

If a large organization is to function effectively, it is essential that the management team be composed of individuals who are experienced, capable, and able to function together smoothly in pursuit of stated objectives. To build the team, the top executive names a primary staff or inner circle to select other team members. The confident executive will not hesitate to recruit individuals whose ideas may deviate from his own, as long as they are competent and willing to work with other team members. Having access to multiple, even conflicting, points of view is essential to obtaining a realistic vision of events.

The Obama administration has been singularly ineffective in developing a workable team. The President’s inner circle has, for the most part, consisted of Chicago machine politicians. The appointment of numerous Czars, whose functions are neither well-articulated nor understood, has led to confusion on all levels and among the public. The selection mechanism is badly dysfunctional, as illustrated by the choice of self-proclaimed Communist Van Jones as Green Jobs Czar; under-age sex advocate Kevin Jennings as School Safety Czar; and multiple other controversial appointments. Cabinet appointees include Energy Secretary Steven Chu, (like Obama, an advocate of high gas prices); Attorney General Eric Holder, whose advocacy of racial preferences has resulted in serious dissension within the Justice Department; Janet Napolitano, a career politician with no training or experience in security as Secretary of Homeland Security; and Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State. Conflicts between Mrs. Clinton’s State Department and the administration, arising over a variety of foreign policy questions, have been painfully obvious.

At a time when the economy is in recession, and unemployment stands at historic highs, it is significant that less than seven percent of Obama’s appointees have any private sector experience. The number of administrative officials in high places who have left after two years or less is further evidence of the leadership vacuum.

Strategic Planning

A critical element of executive responsibility, strategic planning sets the mid- to long-term goals of the organization that form the rationale for shorter term and day-to-day activities. In any large business, strategic planning would involve allocation of existing resources, planning the corporate infrastructure, developing timely products and services to assure customer retention and expansion, targeting new opportunities, and phasing out systems no longer efficient or profitable.

Other than placating the far left — a small and shrinking segment of his "customer" base — it is difficult to discover any strategic direction in Obama’s thinking. Even his so-called singular achievement, ObamaCare, was poorly cobbled together without much direction. On questions including foreign policy, to the war in Afghanistan, trials for terrorists, closing the Guantanamo facility, etc., his actions have been tentative and unpredictable. Energy and environmental policies have clearly damaged not only employment opportunities but the nation’s infrastructure in terms of energy independence. Just as he permitted his party to proceed through 2010 without articulating a budget, his continued reluctance to advance any policy with regard to entitlements, leaves the administration – and the country – without a strategy and without a plan.

Crisis Management

The "3:00 a.m. Phone Call" TV commercial, produced by the Clinton campaign, was indeed prescient. That phone has rung numerous times, and it has gone unanswered. The failure to provide even moral encouragement to the demonstrators in Iran, coupled with the more recent waffling on the situations in Egypt and Libya, bespeak a president unsure of his policies and unable to react to events in a timely manner. As the drug wars in Mexico have escalated to critical mass, efforts to strengthen the border have languished. Reactions to real and attempted terrorist attacks on America soil have been met with response that is both tepid and uncertain.

Financial Acumen

Most chief executives spend time with stockholders, analysts, credit sources, and others discussing the financial status of the organization. Where there are problems, the CEO is expected to present a rational turnaround plan detailing the steps to be taken to ensure financial survival.

At a time when the national debt threatens to destabilize the entire economy, Obama’s only suggestion has been to engage in further spending. The lack of a cohesive financial policy has resulted in a global loss of faith in the U.S. dollar, possible economic collapse, and a threat of future inflation. In refusing to consider the recommendations of the Budget Task Force he appointed, it is clear that his grasp of finance and economics is less than rudimentary.

Lacking both the relevant education and experience, were he applying for an executive position in any company, he would in all likelihood be quickly rejected. His refusal to divulge school records and grades would also work against him. If the business to which he applied was involved in any form of sensitive or defense work, his past associations with radicals would result in the denial of any security clearance.

From a business standpoint, his lack of performance and organizational skills would demand that any ethical consultant approach the Board of Directors with a very strong recommendation that Mr. Obama be fired. Perhaps in 2012, he will be.

On the positive side, it must be noted that, were Mr. Obama an effective executive, his agenda might well be much further advanced.

COMMUNITY ORGANIZING/SOCIALIST/MARXIST/BUFFOON………..

Cool Green Economics images

A few nice green economics images I found:

Bracken Hendricks & Ambassador Klaus Scharioth
green economics
Image by Center for American Progress
With G20 member countries representing at least three quarters of global GDP, energy consumption and carbon emissions, they are in the position to offer a clear signal to the world that they are successfully tackling the double challenge of economic recovery and climate protection. They also have the human and financial resources necessary to push technological boundaries, creating positive spill-over effects and synergies needed to drive the much needed change.

Professor Ottmar Edenhofer from the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) and Sir Nicholas Stern from the London School of Economics (LSE) were commissioned by the German Foreign Office to conduct this study, with the aim of broadening the momentum for immediate G20 action at the London Summit in April 2009.

The main finding of the study recommends the G20 nations to focus their recovery programs on strategic areas such as energy efficiency, infrastructure and clean technology markets.