My understanding of Damascus steel knives, etc, is that separate pieces of iron and steel are first welded together. Then it is folded; the first fold yields 4 layers (since it started with 2 layers to begin with), each sucessive fold doubles the number of layers. To have 1024 layers doesn't require it to be folded 1000 times, if it were folded that many time the steel would become homogenous and lose the special qualities the technique gives it.
The alternating layers of hard and soft layers give the blade extreme flexability. The Rockwell hardness is dificult to determine, there is usually a wide variation, since it depends upon where on the blade it is tested, as well as the materials used. Etching the blade reveals the pattern of the folds and imparts a unique asthetic beauty to each blade.
Damascus regained popularity in the late 1980's when knife manufacturers learned how to mass produce these blades. I own 8 such knives produced by Parker circa 1988 to 1989.
I switched from Windows to Linux in April of this year. I have been pondering exactly what to do with all the now useless CD ROM program discs. I got an inspiration a couple of days ago.
I figure I'll apply for an artistic grant from the NEA to carry it out.
Take Windows program discs to shotgun skeet range and blast CDs in pieces full of holes.
Collect CDs and fragments thereof and mount them on a painted membrane stretched over a frame.
Place speakers behind the frame.
Mount lasers on wall or tripod and aim them at the CDs and fragments.
Play suitable music (theme music from StarWars perhaps) and crank up the volume.
Should produce a good lightshow. Plus I get a lot of satisfaction from blasting M$ software. Maybe I'll even invite certain attorney generals and DOJ officials to take some shots;-)
I plan to use those annoying AOL discs to perfect the shot effect on the CDs. Anyone have any ideas how to adapt a handheld skeet machine to accept CDs? Any other suggestions?
I think rather that the MPAA will use this format. JPEG2000 allows for a 'MetaData' field to incorporate non-image data as part of the file. Possibly this could include a 'Digital WaterMark,' or some other form of ID for thier IP.
The MPAA would likely develop software that would search files on a users computer for the ID or DWM.
There was an article (in the NY Times I believe) recently about an airline that got a search order issued by the court to search the HOME COMPUTERS of employees suspected of organizing a union sickout or some such thing.
So if your employer has a good enough reason?, he can even search your home computer.
If you want to avoid having your email searched at work or home, get several anonymous remailer accounts eg HotMail. Be sure to log out every time you use it. Use one account for mainly newsletters, the other for personal mail. If they note you have a HotMail account give them the account with the newsletters:-)
According to the latest details of the proposed breakup, Gates, Balmer, and HeadHonchos et al would be required to choose OS or APPs company. Then they would divest all stock owned in the other.
Which company so you think they'll choose? My guess would be APPs! There will afterall be too much competition from alternative OSes, Linux included:-)
I still think the DOJ and States should have insisted that M$ transfer to each $1Billion (or more) of M$ stock. Then when M$ misbehaves, just sell of stock to drive down the value to let M$ know you don't approve of what they're doing. After 5 years or so transfer any remaining stock (Fat Chance the way they behave;-) back to M$. Much better idea than splitting them up.
Interesting idea. But I think M$ would more likely ship an OEM version with many features disabled, to activate features visit M$ site, choose features you want activated (pay-per-feature), then pay with a credit card, or upgrade to the full version (enable all features) for a substantial additional fee, say $50 consumer and $100 or more for commercial. M$ would claim this pay-per-feature licensing, Inovation!
Basically Lessig states that privacy, who and how the internet is used can be controlled through the use of protocals. Lessig warns that things will only get worse, pay-per-use could become the norm, whether listening to music or reading a book or an article. Closed protocals can be written that eliminate privacy on-line and that result in oppression by those that write the code upon those that use the protocals. By keeping the protocals open freedom rather than oppression is more likely, similar to 'to many eyes all bugs are shallow,' also you can't 'hide' a 'reardoor' in an open protocal.
Of course no one would violate our trust and write oppressive closed protocals;-) The article is really relevant to what is happening right now. I bought the book and plan to give it a thorough read.
So tell me have you ever loaned a CD to someone to listen to? Have you ever done so with the knowledge that the person borrowing the CD may copy it? have you ever listened to a CD checked out from the local library? Have you ever copied a CD borrowed from the library? Well guess what? Now they do it via the internet!
There is another way to look at this also. The record companies are getting FREE promotion of their music. They couldn't pay radio stations for the promotion they are receiving by having people download MP3s and trade them to others. They should be GRATEFUL!
It should also be pointed out that carrying around MP3s is not very convenient or cheap. Have you seen the cost of Flash Memory?! CDs are more universal as a format for playing music. Not everyone owns a computer or MP3 player! Beleive it or not many people will buy the CD after listening to the MP3.
Most people still don't have DSL or eq connections, most people connect via 56k modems. No one wants to download an entire album over a 56k modem. They download a couple of songs usually.
The industries own figures show they made MORE money, not less.
The record industry should find ways to use the new medium of the internet instead of finding ways to thwart users. The internet provides a way for the industry to sell directly to uses EXACTLY the music they want. Custom music, delivered directly to the users computer. Music downloaded from the internet site should be CONSIDERABLY cheaper, because of all the savings by selling direct.
Guess what!? If you make music cheap enough people won't hassle with illegal copies. Lowering the price of CDs would also help.
The industry claims that people are ripping off artists, yet the industry pays musicians a paltry royalty for their music, most of the profits go to the record copmpanies.
Most artists would be better off giving away and selling music on MP3.com than signing with a record company. The real worrry of the music industry is being DISINTERMEDIATED! That's right the music industry fears that the internet will make them obsolete. Rather than embrace the internet and find new ways to make money, they want to sue everyone for even fair use of music. Just my $0.02 worth:-)
Help! I'm having trouble with my Computer! I put $100.00 in the money slot of my PC to send/. money, and now my computer isn't working right! I didn't get a receipt from/. either! Please help;-)
Alternatively if no break-up then I'd implement regulations to oversee MS behavior; then have M$ transfer $20Billion, that is $1Billion to each state and DOJ. If MS misbehaves any of the several states can sell off or threaten to sell off MS stock. Selling large amounts of stock would drive the value of the stock down or force MS to purchase the stock to keep the price up. This would really motivate MS to behave:-)
And be sure to send an email to M$ telling them you have complied so they can remove you from the list. You wouldn't want to get a duplicate mailing, would you?
In addition to behavorial remedys I propose the following: Have M$ transfer $20 Billion of M$ shares, $1B to each state and the DOJ. This will have several effects:
Reduces % of shares owned by M$
States and DOJ have voting rights
If M$ misbehaves any of the states or DOJ can threaten to sell off shares: Attorney General to Billy Gates: "Billy you've been misbehaving, knock it off or I'll sell off my shares until it takes 100 shares to buy a 6 pack of beer!"
Giving shares to the states and DOJ will give them the degree of control they want. Note that M$ couldn't just issue $20B of stock, that much, so suddenly would dilute the value of the stock too much. M$ would have to transfer stock it already owns! Sale of large amounts of stock by the states or DOJ would drive the price down, other investors would probably sell off further driving price down. The threat of doing so would keep M$ in line.
M$ has been whining ad nausem about innovation. If I were the judge I'd ask it to prove that it innovated any software product. M$ idea of innovation is stealing the ideas of others, that and buying out companies to get software.
MS hasn't even been innovative in its licensing of its software, M$ is just improving on the past monopolistic practices of others before them. I understand M$ now wants to charge companies fees based on the number of workstations that simultaneously access their own servers; this may be a true inovation, does anyone know?
I hope that one of the requirements for the settlements is that APIs and file formats are disclosed, and open standards adhered to, unextended and uncorrupted.
If he really does teach a computing class, how can he react this way? Must be his EGO:-) Apparently the reviews didn't match his opinion of himself;-)
I just know this prof has never read a newsgroup, and certainly never posted to one. I could just see him posting to a mythical alt.profs.computercourses, defending himself; it wouldn't look prety. Maybe he should take a computer course; Posting 101
Legal Disclaimer: This is an OPINION, my OPINION only. Don't get bent out of shape professor!
Yhea, no telling what kind of damage they could have done. Who knows, they might have lost the Token Ring in the Ethernet and put the computer diagnostics in endless loop. It might take sys admins months to recover the lost Token Ring!;-) Don't take life too seriously, you'll never get out alive:-)
Put that creativity to good use. If the university has extra ports and cable it should be put to use. This solution works for both. The students get internet, and the university gets it installed for free.
Here is the pertinent FAA Reg concerning Ultralight Aircraft. Click here for webpage.
FAR Part 103 Ultralight Vehicles SOURCE: Docket No. 21631, 47 FR 38776, Sept. 2, 1982, unless otherwise noted.
Subpart A - General 103.1 Applicability. This part prescribes rules governing the operation of ultralight vehicles in the United States. For the purposes of this part, an ultralight vehicle is a vehicle that:
(a) is used or intended to be used for manned operation in the air by a single occupant; (b) Is used or intended to be used for recreation or sport purposes only; (c) Does not have any U.S. or foreign airworthiness certificate; and (d) If unpowered, weighs less than 155 pounds; or (e) If powered:
Weighs less than 254 pounds empty weight, excluding floats and safety devices which are intended for deployment in a potentially catastrophic situation; Has a fuel capacity not exceeding 5 U5. gallons; Is not capable of more than 55 knots calibrated airspeed at full power in level flight; and Has a power-off stall speed which does not exceed 24 knots calibrated airspeed.
103.3 Inspection requirements. (a) Any person operating an ultralight vehicle under this part shall upon request, allow the Administrator or his designee, to inspect the vehicle to determine the applicability of this part. (b) The pilot or operator of an ultralight must, upon request of the Administrator, furnish satisfactory evidence that the vehicle is subject only to the provisions of this part.
103.5 Waivers. No person may conduct operations that require a deviation from this part except under a written waiver issued by the Administrator.
103.7 Certification and registration. (a) Notwithstanding any other section pertaining to certification of aircraft or their parts or equipment, ultralight vehicles and their component parts and equipment are not required to meet the airworthiness certification standards specified for aircraft or to have certificates of airworthiness. (b) Notwithstanding any other section pertaining to airman certification operators of ultralight vehicles are not required to meet any aeronautical knowledge, age, or experience requirements to operate those vehicles or to have airman or medical certificates. (c) Notwithstanding any other section pertaining to registration and marking of aircraft, ultralight vehicles are not required to be registered or to bear markings of any type.
Subpart B - Operating Rules 103.9 Hazardous operations. (a) No person may operate any ultralight vehicle in a manner that creates a hazard to other persons or property. (b) No person may allow an object to be dropped from an ultralight vehicle if such action creates a hazard to other persons or property.
103.11 Daylight operations. (a) No person may operate an ultralight vehicle except between the hours of sunrise and sunset. (b) Notwithstanding paragraph (a) of this section, ultralight vehicles may be operated during the twilight periods 30 minutes before official sunrise and 30 minutes after official sunset or, in Alaska, during the period of civil twilight as defined in the Air Almanac, if: (1) The vehicle is equipped with an operating anticollision light visible for at least 3 statute miles; and (2) All operations are conducted in uncontrolled airspace.
103.13 Operation near aircraft right-of-way rules. (a) Each person operating an ultralight vehicle shall maintain vigilance so as to see and avoid aircraft and shall yield the right-of-way to all aircraft. (b) No person may operate an ultralight vehicle in a manner that creates a collision hazard with respect to any aircraft. (c) Powered ultralights shall yield the right-of-way to unpowered ultralights.
103.15 Operations over congested areas. No person may operate an ultralight vehicle over any congested area of a city, town or settlement, or over any open air assembly of persons.
103.17 Operations in certain airspace. No person may operate an ultralight vehicle within an airport traffic area, control zone, airport radar service area, terminal control area, or positive control area unless that person has prior authorization from the air traffic control facility having jurisdiction over that airspace. [Doc. No. 23708, 50 FR 9259, Mar. 6, 1985] EFFECTIVE DATE NOTE: By Amdt. 103-4, 56 FR 65662, Dec. 17 1991 103.17 was revised, effective September 16, 1993. For the convenience of the user, the revised text follows.
103.17 Operations in certain airspace. No person may operate an ultralight vehicle within Class A, Class B, Class C, or Class D airspace or within the lateral boundaries of the surface area of Class E airspace designated for an airport unless that person has prior authorization from the ATC facility having jurisdiction over that airspace. [Doc. No 24456, 56 FR 65662, Dec. 17 1991]
103.19 Operations in prohibited/restricted areas. No person may operate an ultralight vehicle in prohibited or restricted areas unless that person has permission from the using or controlling agency, as appropriate.
103.20 Flight restrictions in the proximity of certain areas designated by notice to airmen. No person may operate an ultralight vehicle in areas designated in a Notice to Airmen under 91.143 or 91.141 of this chapter unless authorized by ATC. [Doc. No. 24454, 50 FR 4969, Feb. 5 1985, as amended by Amdt. 103-3, 54 FR 343311, Aug. 18, 1989]
103.21 Visual reference with the surface. No person may operate an ultralight except by visual reference with the surface.
103.23 Flight visibility and cloud clearance requirements. No person may operate an ultralight vehicle when the flight visibility or distance from clouds is less than that in the table found below. All operations in Class A, Class B, Class C, and Class D airspace or Class E airspace designated for an airport must receive prior ATC authorization as required in 103.17 of this part.
Airspace..........Flight Visibility...........Distance from clouds Class A (18,000' MSL & up) Not Applicable Not Applicable Class B (former TCA) 3 statute miles Clear of Clouds. Class C (former ARSN) 3 statute miles 500 feet below. 1,000 feet above. 2,000 feet horizontal. Class D (radio controlled tower) 3 statute miles 500 feet below. 1,000 feet above. 2,000 feet horizontal. Class E: (open airspace) 3 statute miles 500 feet below. Less than 10,000 feet MSL 1,000 feet above. 2,000 feet horizontal At or above 10,000 feet MSL 5 statute miles 1,000 feet below. 1,000 feet above. 1 statute mile horizontal Class G: (open airspace) 1 statute mile Clear of clouds. 1,200 feet or less above the surface (regardless of MSL altitude) More than 1,200 feet above the surface but less than 10,000 feet MSL. 1 statute mile 500 feet below. 1,000 feet above. 2,000 feet horizontal.
More than 1,200 feet above the surface and at or above 10,000 feet MSL 5 statute miles 1,000 feet below. 1,000 feet above. 1 statute mile horizontal
Also spliting Windows OS into separate inbedded, consumer, and corporate companies would encourage sharing of protocals for survival. Doing so would also benefit Linux, UNIX, Be and other OSes. The split off OS companies would also have to rely on 3rd party vendors for development tools if development software were also split into a separate corporation, further reenforcing interoperability. There is a method to my maddness, BAHHAHAHA!
I'm not sure this story is true, probably just an urban myth; I know because the story should have started an EX MI5 agent.Also I know with all the stuff about security drilled into their heads, they MUST be very security consious. I worked for US Military Intelligence (I know it's an oxymoron)and they were security nuts. Just your average GI (without any clearance) is required to lock their car doors or they can be charged for a security violation. I think they ought to check real close on this one.
These things fall under the category of Ultra-Light Aircraft and are regulated by the FAA. If memory serves, they must weigh in at less than 750lbs, gas supply is limited to only 4galons, can fly only during daylight VFR (visual) conditions, I believe a parachute (for the aaircraft) is also required, and must not have a passenger (fly solo) to be unlicensed. Note howerer that most people that fly them are licensed pilots. Most companies provide instruction to newbies, at least enough to get you off the ground safely! Most of the designs people refer to as helicopters aren't helicopters at all, but are autogyros. Autogyros can't take off and land vertically, they require forward speed to takeoff and land. Autogyros have the ability to autorotate the blade if you run out of gas or lose power to the blade. The blade pitch is critical in getting the blades to autorotate, that is why parachutes are required. also licensed pilots can fly these things with passengers, more gas etc.
The coolest ultralight I've seen is actually a rectangular ram-air parachute attached to a motorized frame. Forward speed fills the parachute and off you go. Steering is accomplished by pulling down on the risers (cords attached to the side of the parachute), it has a top speed of about 40 knots, it must be the safest ultra-light around, it is afterall a parachute.
Every year the EAA Experimental aircraft Association has its annual fyl-in at Oshkosh, Wisconsin, the last week in July, for more info click here.The EAA is the/. of the experimental and ultra-light aircraft community. The annual EAA fly-in makes the airport in Oshkosh the busiest airport in the world for one week. Ironically Oshkosh has trouble getting a commercial carrier to service Wittman airport with commercial flights.
If Judge Jackson hit M$ with a judgement large enough to really hurt, M$ would appeal and probably win. My idea of what he should do is splint M$ into separate companies:
Win CE
WIN 95 family
Win NT family
Office Software
Consumer Software
Developer Software
Internet
On top of that I'd force them to release all source code freely to developers for Windows APIs and document formats. Doing this would hut Bill more than any monetary fine could!
Slashdot Mirror
My understanding of Damascus steel knives, etc, is that separate pieces of iron and steel are first welded together. Then it is folded; the first fold yields 4 layers (since it started with 2 layers to begin with), each sucessive fold doubles the number of layers. To have 1024 layers doesn't require it to be folded 1000 times, if it were folded that many time the steel would become homogenous and lose the special qualities the technique gives it.
The alternating layers of hard and soft layers give the blade extreme flexability. The Rockwell hardness is dificult to determine, there is usually a wide variation, since it depends upon where on the blade it is tested, as well as the materials used. Etching the blade reveals the pattern of the folds and imparts a unique asthetic beauty to each blade.
Damascus regained popularity in the late 1980's when knife manufacturers learned how to mass produce these blades. I own 8 such knives produced by Parker circa 1988 to 1989.
I figure I'll apply for an artistic grant from the NEA to carry it out.
Should produce a good lightshow. Plus I get a lot of satisfaction from blasting M$ software. Maybe I'll even invite certain attorney generals and DOJ officials to take some shots
I plan to use those annoying AOL discs to perfect the shot effect on the CDs. Anyone have any ideas how to adapt a handheld skeet machine to accept CDs? Any other suggestions?
I think rather that the MPAA will use this format. JPEG2000 allows for a 'MetaData' field to incorporate non-image data as part of the file. Possibly this could include a 'Digital WaterMark,' or some other form of ID for thier IP.
The MPAA would likely develop software that would search files on a users computer for the ID or DWM.
When the first porn movies are released in this format, will thay call it DivXXX ?-)
Nah, BSOD is the Windows ReStartUp screen ;-)
How about a computer patent on a retractable drink holder?-)
There was an article (in the NY Times I believe) recently about an airline that got a search order issued by the court to search the HOME COMPUTERS of employees suspected of organizing a union sickout or some such thing.
:-)
So if your employer has a good enough reason?, he can even search your home computer.
If you want to avoid having your email searched at work or home, get several anonymous remailer accounts eg HotMail. Be sure to log out every time you use it. Use one account for mainly newsletters, the other for personal mail. If they note you have a HotMail account give them the account with the newsletters
According to the latest details of the proposed breakup, Gates, Balmer, and HeadHonchos et al would be required to choose OS or APPs company. Then they would divest all stock owned in the other.
:-)
;-) back to M$. Much better idea than splitting them up.
Which company so you think they'll choose? My guess would be APPs! There will afterall be too much competition from alternative OSes, Linux included
I still think the DOJ and States should have insisted that M$ transfer to each $1Billion (or more) of M$ stock. Then when M$ misbehaves, just sell of stock to drive down the value to let M$ know you don't approve of what they're doing. After 5 years or so transfer any remaining stock (Fat Chance the way they behave
Interesting idea. But I think M$ would more likely ship an OEM version with many features disabled, to activate features visit M$ site, choose features you want activated (pay-per-feature), then pay with a credit card, or upgrade to the full version (enable all features) for a substantial additional fee, say $50 consumer and $100 or more for commercial. M$ would claim this pay-per-feature licensing, Inovation!
Basically Lessig states that privacy, who and how the internet is used can be controlled through the use of protocals. Lessig warns that things will only get worse, pay-per-use could become the norm, whether listening to music or reading a book or an article. Closed protocals can be written that eliminate privacy on-line and that result in oppression by those that write the code upon those that use the protocals. By keeping the protocals open freedom rather than oppression is more likely, similar to 'to many eyes all bugs are shallow,' also you can't 'hide' a 'reardoor' in an open protocal.
;-) The article is really relevant to what is happening right now. I bought the book and plan to give it a thorough read.
Of course no one would violate our trust and write oppressive closed protocals
So tell me have you ever loaned a CD to someone to listen to? Have you ever done so with the knowledge that the person borrowing the CD may copy it? have you ever listened to a CD checked out from the local library? Have you ever copied a CD borrowed from the library? Well guess what? Now they do it via the internet!
:-)
There is another way to look at this also. The record companies are getting FREE promotion of their music. They couldn't pay radio stations for the promotion they are receiving by having people download MP3s and trade them to others. They should be GRATEFUL!
It should also be pointed out that carrying around MP3s is not very convenient or cheap. Have you seen the cost of Flash Memory?! CDs are more universal as a format for playing music. Not everyone owns a computer or MP3 player! Beleive it or not many people will buy the CD after listening to the MP3.
Most people still don't have DSL or eq connections, most people connect via 56k modems. No one wants to download an entire album over a 56k modem. They download a couple of songs usually.
The industries own figures show they made MORE money, not less.
The record industry should find ways to use the new medium of the internet instead of finding ways to thwart users. The internet provides a way for the industry to sell directly to uses EXACTLY the music they want. Custom music, delivered directly to the users computer. Music downloaded from the internet site should be CONSIDERABLY cheaper, because of all the savings by selling direct.
Guess what!? If you make music cheap enough people won't hassle with illegal copies. Lowering the price of CDs would also help.
The industry claims that people are ripping off artists, yet the industry pays musicians a paltry royalty for their music, most of the profits go to the record copmpanies.
Most artists would be better off giving away and selling music on MP3.com than signing with a record company. The real worrry of the music industry is being DISINTERMEDIATED! That's right the music industry fears that the internet will make them obsolete. Rather than embrace the internet and find new ways to make money, they want to sue everyone for even fair use of music. Just my $0.02 worth
Help! I'm having trouble with my Computer! I put $100.00 in the money slot of my PC to send /. money, and now my computer isn't working right! I didn't get a receipt from /. either! Please help ;-)
Alternatively if no break-up then I'd implement regulations to oversee MS behavior; then have M$ transfer $20Billion, that is $1Billion to each state and DOJ. If MS misbehaves any of the several states can sell off or threaten to sell off MS stock. Selling large amounts of stock would drive the value of the stock down or force MS to purchase the stock to keep the price up. This would really motivate MS to behave
And be sure to send an email to M$ telling them you have complied so they can remove you from the list. You wouldn't want to get a duplicate mailing, would you?
Giving shares to the states and DOJ will give them the degree of control they want. Note that M$ couldn't just issue $20B of stock, that much, so suddenly would dilute the value of the stock too much. M$ would have to transfer stock it already owns! Sale of large amounts of stock by the states or DOJ would drive the price down, other investors would probably sell off further driving price down. The threat of doing so would keep M$ in line.
M$ has been whining ad nausem about innovation. If I were the judge I'd ask it to prove that it innovated any software product. M$ idea of innovation is stealing the ideas of others, that and buying out companies to get software.
MS hasn't even been innovative in its licensing of its software, M$ is just improving on the past monopolistic practices of others before them. I understand M$ now wants to charge companies fees based on the number of workstations that simultaneously access their own servers; this may be a true inovation, does anyone know?
I hope that one of the requirements for the settlements is that APIs and file formats are disclosed, and open standards adhered to, unextended and uncorrupted.
If he really does teach a computing class, how can he react this way? Must be his EGO :-) Apparently the reviews didn't match his opinion of himself ;-)
I just know this prof has never read a newsgroup, and certainly never posted to one. I could just see him posting to a mythical alt.profs.computercourses, defending himself; it wouldn't look prety. Maybe he should take a computer course; Posting 101
Legal Disclaimer: This is an OPINION, my OPINION only. Don't get bent out of shape professor!
Yhea, no telling what kind of damage they could have done. Who knows, they might have lost the Token Ring in the Ethernet and put the computer diagnostics in endless loop. It might take sys admins months to recover the lost Token Ring! ;-) Don't take life too seriously, you'll never get out alive :-)
Put that creativity to good use. If the university has extra ports and cable it should be put to use. This solution works for both. The students get internet, and the university gets it installed for free.
Url for the webpage is here. Sorry about that, knew I forgot something (sheepish grin).
Here is the pertinent FAA Reg concerning Ultralight Aircraft. Click here for webpage.
FAR Part 103 Ultralight Vehicles SOURCE: Docket No. 21631, 47 FR 38776, Sept. 2, 1982, unless otherwise noted.
Subpart A - General 103.1 Applicability. This part prescribes rules governing the operation of ultralight vehicles in the United States. For the purposes of this part, an ultralight vehicle is a vehicle that:
(a) is used or intended to be used for manned operation in the air by a single occupant; (b) Is used or intended to be used for recreation or sport purposes only; (c) Does not have any U.S. or foreign airworthiness certificate; and (d) If unpowered, weighs less than 155 pounds; or (e) If powered:
Weighs less than 254 pounds empty weight, excluding floats and safety devices which are intended for deployment in a potentially catastrophic situation; Has a fuel capacity not exceeding 5 U5. gallons; Is not capable of more than 55 knots calibrated airspeed at full power in level flight; and Has a power-off stall speed which does not exceed 24 knots calibrated airspeed.
103.3 Inspection requirements. (a) Any person operating an ultralight vehicle under this part shall upon request, allow the Administrator or his designee, to inspect the vehicle to determine the applicability of this part. (b) The pilot or operator of an ultralight must, upon request of the Administrator, furnish satisfactory evidence that the vehicle is subject only to the provisions of this part.
103.5 Waivers. No person may conduct operations that require a deviation from this part except under a written waiver issued by the Administrator.
103.7 Certification and registration. (a) Notwithstanding any other section pertaining to certification of aircraft or their parts or equipment, ultralight vehicles and their component parts and equipment are not required to meet the airworthiness certification standards specified for aircraft or to have certificates of airworthiness. (b) Notwithstanding any other section pertaining to airman certification operators of ultralight vehicles are not required to meet any aeronautical knowledge, age, or experience requirements to operate those vehicles or to have airman or medical certificates. (c) Notwithstanding any other section pertaining to registration and marking of aircraft, ultralight vehicles are not required to be registered or to bear markings of any type.
Subpart B - Operating Rules 103.9 Hazardous operations. (a) No person may operate any ultralight vehicle in a manner that creates a hazard to other persons or property. (b) No person may allow an object to be dropped from an ultralight vehicle if such action creates a hazard to other persons or property.
103.11 Daylight operations. (a) No person may operate an ultralight vehicle except between the hours of sunrise and sunset. (b) Notwithstanding paragraph (a) of this section, ultralight vehicles may be operated during the twilight periods 30 minutes before official sunrise and 30 minutes after official sunset or, in Alaska, during the period of civil twilight as defined in the Air Almanac, if: (1) The vehicle is equipped with an operating anticollision light visible for at least 3 statute miles; and (2) All operations are conducted in uncontrolled airspace.
103.13 Operation near aircraft right-of-way rules. (a) Each person operating an ultralight vehicle shall maintain vigilance so as to see and avoid aircraft and shall yield the right-of-way to all aircraft. (b) No person may operate an ultralight vehicle in a manner that creates a collision hazard with respect to any aircraft. (c) Powered ultralights shall yield the right-of-way to unpowered ultralights.
103.15 Operations over congested areas. No person may operate an ultralight vehicle over any congested area of a city, town or settlement, or over any open air assembly of persons.
103.17 Operations in certain airspace. No person may operate an ultralight vehicle within an airport traffic area, control zone, airport radar service area, terminal control area, or positive control area unless that person has prior authorization from the air traffic control facility having jurisdiction over that airspace. [Doc. No. 23708, 50 FR 9259, Mar. 6, 1985] EFFECTIVE DATE NOTE: By Amdt. 103-4, 56 FR 65662, Dec. 17 1991 103.17 was revised, effective September 16, 1993. For the convenience of the user, the revised text follows.
103.17 Operations in certain airspace. No person may operate an ultralight vehicle within Class A, Class B, Class C, or Class D airspace or within the lateral boundaries of the surface area of Class E airspace designated for an airport unless that person has prior authorization from the ATC facility having jurisdiction over that airspace. [Doc. No 24456, 56 FR 65662, Dec. 17 1991]
103.19 Operations in prohibited/restricted areas. No person may operate an ultralight vehicle in prohibited or restricted areas unless that person has permission from the using or controlling agency, as appropriate.
103.20 Flight restrictions in the proximity of certain areas designated by notice to airmen. No person may operate an ultralight vehicle in areas designated in a Notice to Airmen under 91.143 or 91.141 of this chapter unless authorized by ATC. [Doc. No. 24454, 50 FR 4969, Feb. 5 1985, as amended by Amdt. 103-3, 54 FR 343311, Aug. 18, 1989]
103.21 Visual reference with the surface. No person may operate an ultralight except by visual reference with the surface.
103.23 Flight visibility and cloud clearance requirements. No person may operate an ultralight vehicle when the flight visibility or distance from clouds is less than that in the table found below. All operations in Class A, Class B, Class C, and Class D airspace or Class E airspace designated for an airport must receive prior ATC authorization as required in 103.17 of this part.
Airspace..........Flight Visibility...........Distance from clouds
Class A (18,000' MSL & up) Not Applicable Not Applicable
Class B (former TCA) 3 statute miles Clear of Clouds.
Class C (former ARSN) 3 statute miles 500 feet below. 1,000 feet above. 2,000 feet horizontal.
Class D (radio controlled tower) 3 statute miles 500 feet below. 1,000 feet above. 2,000 feet horizontal.
Class E: (open airspace) 3 statute miles 500 feet below. Less than 10,000 feet MSL 1,000 feet above. 2,000 feet horizontal At or above 10,000 feet MSL 5 statute miles 1,000 feet below. 1,000 feet above. 1 statute mile horizontal
Class G: (open airspace) 1 statute mile Clear of clouds.
1,200 feet or less above the surface (regardless of MSL altitude) More than 1,200 feet above the surface but less than 10,000 feet MSL. 1 statute mile 500 feet below. 1,000 feet above. 2,000 feet horizontal.
More than 1,200 feet above the surface and at or above 10,000 feet MSL 5 statute miles 1,000 feet below. 1,000 feet above. 1 statute mile horizontal
Also spliting Windows OS into separate inbedded, consumer, and corporate companies would encourage sharing of protocals for survival. Doing so would also benefit Linux, UNIX, Be and other OSes. The split off OS companies would also have to rely on 3rd party vendors for development tools if development software were also split into a separate corporation, further reenforcing interoperability. There is a method to my maddness, BAHHAHAHA!
I'm not sure this story is true, probably just an urban myth; I know because the story should have started an EX MI5 agent.Also I know with all the stuff about security drilled into their heads, they MUST be very security consious. I worked for US Military Intelligence (I know it's an oxymoron)and they were security nuts. Just your average GI (without any clearance) is required to lock their car doors or they can be charged for a security violation. I think they ought to check real close on this one.
These things fall under the category of Ultra-Light Aircraft and are regulated by the FAA. If memory serves, they must weigh in at less than 750lbs, gas supply is limited to only 4galons, can fly only during daylight VFR (visual) conditions, I believe a parachute (for the aaircraft) is also required, and must not have a passenger (fly solo) to be unlicensed. Note howerer that most people that fly them are licensed pilots. Most companies provide instruction to newbies, at least enough to get you off the ground safely! Most of the designs people refer to as helicopters aren't helicopters at all, but are autogyros. Autogyros can't take off and land vertically, they require forward speed to takeoff and land. Autogyros have the ability to autorotate the blade if you run out of gas or lose power to the blade. The blade pitch is critical in getting the blades to autorotate, that is why parachutes are required. also licensed pilots can fly these things with passengers, more gas etc.
/. of the experimental and ultra-light aircraft community. The annual EAA fly-in makes the airport in Oshkosh the busiest airport in the world for one week. Ironically Oshkosh has trouble getting a commercial carrier to service Wittman airport with commercial flights.
The coolest ultralight I've seen is actually a rectangular ram-air parachute attached to a motorized frame. Forward speed fills the parachute and off you go. Steering is accomplished by pulling down on the risers (cords attached to the side of the parachute), it has a top speed of about 40 knots, it must be the safest ultra-light around, it is afterall a parachute.
Every year the EAA Experimental aircraft Association has its annual fyl-in at Oshkosh, Wisconsin, the last week in July, for more info click here.The EAA is the
On top of that I'd force them to release all source code freely to developers for Windows APIs and document formats. Doing this would hut Bill more than any monetary fine could!