who suggested the name 'akashvani' for all india radio

"Akashvani" was first used in the context of radio by M. V. Gopalaswamy after setting up the nation’s first private radio station in his residence, "Vittal Vihar" (about 200 yards from AIR’s current location in Mysore) in 1936.[3] Akashvani seemed to be an appropriate name for a radio broadcaster and was later adopted as All India Radio's on-air name in 1957.

All India Radio

All India Radio (AIR), officially known since 1956 as Ākāshvāṇī ("Voice from the Sky"), is the national public radio broadcaster of India and a division of Prasar Bharati. Established in 1930,[2] it is the sister service of Prasar Bharati's Doordarshan, the national public television broadcaster. AIR has covered more than 99% of the Indian population as per the latest information given by Minister of Information and Broadcast. All India Radio is the largest radio network in the world. Its headquarters is at the Akashvani Bhavan in New Delhi. Akashvani Bhavan houses the Drama Section, the FM Section and the National Service. Akashvani Bhavan hosts Doordarshan Kendra (Delhi).

Ākāśavāni (आकाशवाणी) is a Sanskrit word meaning "celestial announcement," or "voice from the sky/heaven". In Hindu, Jain and Buddhist holy traditions, Akashvanis often featured in stories as a medium of communication from the heavens to mankind.

During the British Raj, broadcasting began in July 1923 with programmes by the Bombay Presidency Radio Club and other radio clubs. According to an agreement of 23 July 1927, the private Indian Broadcasting Company LTD (IBC) was authorised to operate two radio stations; the Bombay station began on 23 July 1927, and the Calcutta station followed on 26 August 1927. However, on 1 March 1930, the company went into liquidation. The government took over the broadcasting facilities, beginning the Indian State Broadcasting Service (ISBS) on 1 April 1930 on an experimental basis for two years, and then permanently in May 1932. On 8 June 1936, the ISBS was renamed All India Radio.[2]

On 1 October 1939, the External Service began with a broadcast in Pushtu; it was intended to counter radio propaganda from Germany directed to Afghanistan, Iran and the Arab nations. 1939 also saw the opening of the Dhaka station of eastern India, in what is now Bangladesh. This station catered and nurtured the pioneers of Bengali intellectuals. The foremost among them, Natyaguru Nurul Momen, became the trailblazer of talk-show in 1939. In 1942 he wrote and directed the first modern radio-play of this station. When India became independent in 1947, the AIR network had only six stations (in Delhi, Bombay, Calcutta, Madras, Lucknow, and Tiruchirappalli); three radio stations at Lahore, Peshawar and Karachi fell in the share of Pakistan. The total number of radio sets at that time was about 275,000 in India. On 3 October 1957, the Vividh Bharati Service was launched, to compete with Radio Ceylon. Television broadcasting began in Delhi in 1959 as part of AIR, but was split off from the radio network as Doordarshan on 1 April 1976.[4] FM broadcasting began on 23 July 1977 in Chennai, and was expanded during the 1990s.[5]

AIR has many services in a number of languages, each serving different regions across India.

Vividh Bharati is one of the best-known services of AIR. Its name roughly translates as "Diverse Indian", and it is also known as the Commercial Broadcasting Service (CBS). It is the commercially most accessible of the AIR networks and is popular in Mumbai and other large cities. Vividh Bharati offers a wide range of programmes including news, film music and comedy programs. It operates on different medium wave-band frequencies for each city.

Some programs broadcast on Vividh Bharati are:

AIR is planning to produce programmes in the Baluchi language, sources claim.[6]

The headquarters of the Regional Deputy Directors General are located at Delhi and Chandigarh (NR), Lucknow and Bhopal (CR), Guwahati (NER), Kolkata (ER), Mumbai and Ahmedabad (WR), Chennai and Bangalore (SR).[9] All frequencies are in kHz, unless otherwise noted.

The external services of All India Radio broadcast in 27 languages to countries outside India—primarily via high-power shortwave band broadcasts, although medium wave is also used to reach neighbouring countries. In addition to broadcasts targeted at specific countries by language, there is a General Overseas Service broadcasting in English with 8¼ hours of programming each day aimed at a general international audience. The external broadcasts were begun on 1 October 1939 by the British government to counter the propaganda of the Nazis directed at the Afghan people. The first broadcasts were in Pushto, beamed to Afghanistan and the North-West Frontier Province. Soon broadcasts began in other languages including Dari, Persian, Arabic, English, Burmese, Japanese, Chinese, Malay and French. The external services broadcast in sixteen foreign and eleven Indian languages, with a total programme output of 70¼ hours per day on medium- and shortwave frequencies.

Two high powered FM stations of All India Radio are under installation in Amritsar and Fazilka in Punjab to supplement the programs put out from transmitters operating from Jalandhar, New Delhi, Chandigarh and Mumbai and to improve the broadcast services during disturbed weather conditions in the border regions of Punjab.

Today, the External Services Division of All India Radio broadcasts daily in 57 transmissions with almost 72 hours covering over 108 countries in 27 languages, out of which 15 are foreign and 12 Indian. The foreign languages are Arabic, Baluchi, Burmese, Chinese, Dari, French, Indonesian, Persian, Pushtu, Russian, Sinhala, Swahili, Thai, Tibetan and English (General Overseas Service). The Indian languages are Bengali, Gujarati, Marathi, Kokani, Kashmiri, Hindi, Kannada, Malayalam, Nepali, Punjabi, Saraiki, Sindhi, Tamil, Telugu and Urdu.

The longest daily broadcast is the Urdu Service to Pakistan, around the clock on DTH and on short- and mediumwave for 12¼ hrs. The English-language General Overseas Service are broadcast 8¼ hours daily. During Hajj, there are special broadcasts beamed to Saudi Arabia in Urdu. The external services of AIR are also broadcast to Europe in DRM (Digital Radio Mondiale) on 9950 kHz between 1745-2230 UTC.

The transmissions are broadcast by high-power transmitters located at Aligarh, Bengaluru, Chennai, Delhi, Gorakhpur, Guwahati, Mumbai and Panaji on shortwave and from Jalandhar, Kolkata, Nagpur, Rajkot and Tuticorin on mediumwave. Soon All India Radio Amritsar will start a booster service on FM band too. Some of these transmitters are 1000 kW (1 MW) or 500 kW. Programs are beamed to different parts of the world except the Americas and received in very good Reception Quality in the Target areas. In each language service, the program consists of news, commentary, a press review, talks on matters of general or cultural interest, feature programmes, documentaries and music from India and the target region. Most programs originate at New Broadcasting House on Parliament Street in New Delhi, with a few originating at SPT Bengaluru, Chennai, Hyderabad, Jalandhar, Kolkata, HPT Malad Mumbai, Thiruvananthapuram and Tuticorin.

The External Services Division of AIR is a link between India and rest of the world, especially in countries with Indian emigrants and people of Indian origin. It broadcasts the Indian point of view on matters of national and international importance, and demonstrates the Indian way of life through its programs. QSL cards (which are sought-after by international radio hobbyists) are issued to radio hobbyists by AIR in New Delhi for reception reports of their broadcasts.

Direct-to-home service is the one in which a large number of channels are digitally compressed, encrypted, uplinked and beamed down over a territory from a very high power satellite. The DTH signals can be received directly at homes with the help of a small sized dish receive unit containing a Dish Antenna installed at the buildingâ€™s roof-top or on the wall facing clear south and one indoor.[10] DTH service is offered on 21 channels via Insat.

Details of the transmissions and frequencies are as follows:

Above transmissions are in addition to following existing DRM txn's:

All India Radio launched news-on-phone service on 25 February 1998 in New Delhi; it now has service in Chennai, Mumbai, Hyderabad, Indore, Patna and Bangalore. The service is accessible through STD, ISD and local calls. There are plans to establish the service in 11 more cities: Ahmedabad, Bhopal, Guwahati, Gwalior, Jabalpur, Jaipur, Kolkata, Lucknow, Ranchi, Shimla and Thiruvananthapuram. English and Hindi hourly news bulletins may be heard live.[11] News in MP3 format may be directly played from the site, and filenames are time-stamped. AIR news bulletins are available in nine regional languages (Tamil, Kannada, Gujarati, Bengali, Marathi, North East, Punjabi, Telugu and Urdu).

There is a long tradition of documentary features on AIR. There is great interest in radio documentaries, particularly in countries like India, Iran, South Korea and Malaysia. The doyen of English Features was Melville De Mellow and of Hindi Features was Shiv Sagar Mishra. This format has been revived because of its flexibility, cost-cutting capacity, messaging potential and creative potential with producers employed with AIR, all across the nation.

AIR's Central Drama Unit is responsible for the national broadcast of plays. Plays produced by the CDU are translated and produced by regional stations. Since its inception in the 1960s the unit has produced more than 1,500 plays, and the CDU is a repository of old scripts and productions. The National Programme of Plays is broadcast by the CDU of AIR the fourth Thursday of each month at 9.30Â pm. On the National Programme of Plays, the same play is produced in 22 Indian languages and broadcast at the same time by all regional and national network stations. The CDU also produces Chain Plays, half-hour dramas broadcast in succession by a chain of stations.

News Service Division's Social Media Cell is responsible for providing AIR news on new media platforms viz. websites, Twitter, Facebook and SMS. Social Media Cell was established on 20 May 2013.


what is the use of vmware view client

VMware Horizon View provides virtual desktop capabilities to users utilizing VMware's virtualization technology. A desktop operating system - typically Microsoft Windows - runs within a virtual machine on a hypervisor. The VMware View product has a number of components which are required to provide the virtual desktops, including:

VMware Horizon View

VMware Horizon View is a commercial desktop virtualization product developed by VMware, Inc for Microsoft Windows, GNU/Linux and Mac OS X Operating Systems. Its was first sold under the name VMware VDM, but with the release of version 3.0.0 in 2008 it was changed to "VMware View", changing again to "Horizon View" with the launch of version 6 in April 2014.[1][2]

Although VMware licenses vSphere hypervisor per physical CPU-socket,[3] it licenses VMware View per concurrent desktop.[4] The bundled hypervisor, vSphere for Desktops, is functionally equivalent to vSphere Enterprise Plus.[5]

VMware View has two licensing options, Enterprise and Premier. Enterprise comes with vSphere for Desktops, vCenter Server, and View Manager, and has an MSRP of $150 per concurrent desktop. View Composer, Persona Management, vShield Endpoint, and ThinApp are included in the Premier edition at an MSRP of $250 per concurrent desktop.[6]

In order to transport the desktop resources to users, keyboard, video, mouse and other interactions travel over a network connection. VMware View supports the VMware Blast Extreme, Microsoft RDP, and the Teradici PCoIP[7] protocols.

Users establish client connections to VMware View sessions by running the VMware View Client, through a web browser using HTML5[8], or using a thin client that supports the protocols in use. The VMware View client supports Windows, Mac OS X, and Linux, while ChromeOS is able to connect through the web browser.

Ubuntu 12.10 can login to VMware View desktops directly from the login screen.[9]

Version release history:

VMware View 3.1.3 (May 5, 2009)

VMware View 4 (November 9, 2009)

VMware Horizon 6.0 (June 19, 2014)

VMware Horizon 7.0 (March 22, 2016)


who do you play as in scp containment breach

The player controls a "Class-D" test subject designated D-9341 as he or she attempts to escape an underground research and containment facility operated by the SCP Foundation amidst a total containment breach of its hazardous anomalies, designated "SCP"s.[3] The player is pursued by numerous hostile SCPs; chief among these is SCP-173, a concrete statue capable of moving at high speeds when it is not directly observed. 173, along with other SCPs, must be evaded by D-9341 to avoid death, which is made more difficult by the player needing to periodically blink, enabling SCP-173 to attack if it is nearby.[4] Certain environments (such as rooms filled with decontamination gas) will cause the player to blink more often.[5]

SCP – Containment Breach

SCP â€“ Containment Breach is a free and open source indie supernatural horror video game developed by Joonas Rikkonen ("Regalis"). It is based on the paranormal fiction stories of the SCP Foundation website.[2]

One of the game's primary features is randomly generated rooms. All of the rooms in the game are randomly chosen from a set of hallways, chambers and offices, which are strung together to create the facility. These rooms are divided into three sets: the light containment zone, heavy containment zone and entrance zone. Each set contains a unique set of rooms and hallways that can be randomly generated, as well as its own artifacts and SCPs. Some SCPs, such as SCP-173 and SCP-106, may appear throughout the entire facility. [2] The zones become gradually harder as the player progresses; the heavy containment zone possesses more dangerous SCPs than the light containment zone, and the entrance zone marks the appearance of "Nine-Tailed Fox", a squad of nine elite soldiers deployed by the Foundation to recapture SCPs such as 173. NTF soldiers will shoot on sight and travel in teams, making them some of the most dangerous enemies encountered in the game.[citation needed]

Along the way, the player can find a wide variety of items to assist them in survival. These include tools such as gas masks, various electronic devices, batteries, and keycards for operating locked doors. They may also encounter benign or non-animate SCPs; an example being SCP-914, a large clockwork machine which is capable of refining items the player inserts into it into either worse or superior versions based on how its controls are set prior to activation.[6]

The game revolves around the SCP Foundation, a secret organization dedicated to containing anomalous artifacts, entities and locations that threaten the normality of the world.[7] At some point before the events of the game, several of the Foundation's containment sites are attacked by the Chaos Insurgency, a rogue element of the Foundation, forcing the relocation of many SCPs (the designation given to their contained anomalies) to an unspecified site. A Foundation task force known as Nine-Tailed Fox is established shortly thereafter to defend this site from any possible breaches in containment.[2]

The player takes the role of D-9341, a Class-D test subject (usually inmates on death row, who have been drafted to work for the Foundation)[8] who is forced along with two other test subjects to perform tests on an SCP known as SCP-173, a concrete statue that can move at high speeds when not in the direct line of sight of a person.[9][2][3][10]

During this testing routine, the site's power and door control systems begin to malfunction, allowing SCP-173 to kill the other two test subjects and escape into the ventilation system.[2][3] A site-wide broadcast then announces that several SCPs have breached containment, namely SCPs labeled Euclid and Keter, forcing the site to be put under lockdown. The player must then guide D-9341 around the facility while trying to survive many of the escaped SCPs which roam the facility, including SCP-106 (an entity resembling a decaying old man that may travel through matter and which attempts to drag the player into a pocket dimension to kill the player), and SCP-096 (a humanoid creature that will unavoidably chase and kill the player if they view the creature's face, but which is otherwise docile).[3] The player must additionally evade Nine-Tailed Fox soldiers deployed to recapture the SCPs, as they have been ordered to target and kill any stray Class-D personnel. Later in the game, the player encounters SCP-079, a malicious artificial intelligence inhabiting a microcomputer,[11] and learns that it caused the power outage when several Chaos Insurgency spies gave it control over the facility. From here SCP-079 will propose that the player reactivates the door control system, allowing SCP-079 to regain control over the doors, in exchange for helping the player escape the facility. If the player re-activates the door control system, SCP-079 will open the doors to two different exits, Gate A and B. From here 4 different endings can be reached.

The first and second endings can be reached by exiting the facility through Gate B. Upon reaching the surface, an alert is sent out stating that SCP-682 (a massive reptilian creature)[12] has broken out of the facility near Gate B and that nuclear warheads, kept in the base as a last-measure containment system, will be detonated in an attempt to destroy it. Shortly after, the warheads are detonated, vaporizing the entire area, including D-9341. At the end screen, a radio transmission will be heard as a radio operative requests the deployment of a task force to scout for remains at ground zero. However, the transmission is cut-off mid sentence as a large roar is heard, indicating that the nuclear blast was unsuccessful in destroying SCP-682. The second ending occurs if the player had disabled the nuclear warheads while they were inside the facility. Another alert is sent out advising all personnel to return to Gate B, with a group of soldiers converging on the player's position. The player is thereby killed shortly after.

The final two endings are accessed through the alternate exit entitled Gate A. The ending that plays out is dependent on whether or not the player re-contained SCP-106 while inside the facility. Should the player have not perform said task, SCP-106 will break out at Gate A, shortly before the use of a weapon called a H.I.D. (High Intensity Discharge) Turret is authorized to prevent its escape. The turret fires a concentrated beam of light, forcing SCP-106 to retreat due to its sensitivity towards light. While this is occurring, the player passes by the commotion to attempt to escape through a service tunnel, only to be halted by a group of Chaos Insurgency soldiers. The soldiers note that D-9341 holds too much valuable information to be retaken into the Foundation's custody, before warping them away. This leaves their fate unknown.

Finally, if the player has contained SCP-106, then several task force units will capture D-9341 instead. The end screen plays a recording of a report on D-9341, mentioning his/her extraordinary luck and ability to overcome any hazardous threats that the containment breach produced; the classification of D-9341 as an SCP subject is also considered.

The game was created by Finnish developer Joonas Rikkonen.[13] Prior to creating SCP â€“ Containment Breach, Rikkonen had played the game SCP-087 (about a seemingly endless stairwell and a mysterious entity that lurks within) and was impressed at how terrifying the game was given its relatively simple premise. Rikkonen decided to work on his own version, which he released as SCP-087-B; this minigame eventually became so popular that he decided to work on a larger game that included more SCPs. Rikkonen started to design his game in Blitz3D because, in his own words, "I was too lazy to start learning some other language or engine."[10] As the game was being designed, Rikkonen decided that the main enemy would be SCP-173 because it was a personal favorite and he also felt that implementing a blink function into the program would make gameplay more interesting.[10]

The game is highly atmospheric, as Rikkonen felt that the best way to create a truly scary game would be to focus on the environment and soundscape, rather than exclusively the monsters. In an interview with Edge magazine, he said:

I think one of the things that makes Containment Breach so scary is that the player is almost never safe, and even the slightest slip can end the game. You have to constantly stay alert for SCP-173, listening for any scraping sounds and carefully looking around when entering a new room. The randomly generated map and randomly placed events are an important part in making CB scary too. No matter how many times you play it, you can never be 100 percent sure what happens next. Iâ€™ve also spent a lot of time looking for and making the sounds and music clips for the game. Atmosphere is one of the key elements of a good horror game, and a well made soundscape adds a lot to the atmosphere.[10]

And while Rikkonen found them to be "a somewhat cheap way of scaring people", he implemented a number of jump scares to "keep the players on their toes."[10] He explained, "When you’re making a game about a creature that charges at you with supernatural speed when you’re not looking at it, you pretty much have to have some jump scares."[10]

When Rikkonen first started working on the game, he was graduating from upper secondary school. While he enjoyed making games, he had always considered it a mere hobby and a "pipe dream". However, after the success of the game Rikkonen decided to pursue game programming at the University of Turku.[citation needed]

The game has received generally positive reviews. Gaming website Rock, Paper, Shotgun said "It's Warehouse 13 without the quips and the quirks but with a lot more panic, screaming and hiding from creatures made of teeth and wire" adding that "it has a fairly weak model and texture at the moment but hopefully itâ€™ll turn into a massive collaboration".[4] Edge magazine gave the game a positive review, calling it an "indie title made in the low-end Blitz3D engine that casts a cheap-looking creature", but adding it "somehow manages to be scarier than most recent big-budget horror games combined."[10] Jay Is Games wrote that while the game was "not perfect and still a little buggy", it nevertheless "has some serious moments of inarticulate, squealing terror."[5] Nicholas Greene of GeekInsider wrote positively of the gameplay, specifically applauding the use of the blink timer. Greene also noted that its "somewhat dated appearance does absolutely nothing to make it less frightening".[14] The game was featured on PC Gamer's top 50 best free PC games at the number 22 spot, saying that "Containment Breach's power is doubled by drawing on the SCP mythos: a set of invented (or are they?) [sic] internet stories about horrors and monsters locked up by a shadowy organization".[15] With the release of version 0.8 in late 2013, Ian Birnbaum of PC Gamer once again reiterated the site's praise for the game, calling it "excellently scary".[16]


how many station roads are there in the uk

High Street is the most common street name in the UK, which according to a 2009 statistical compilation has 5,410 High Streets, 3,811 Station Roads and 2,702 Main Streets.[1]

High Street

High Street (or the High Street, also High Road) is a metonym for the concept (and frequently the street name) of the primary business street of towns or cities, especially in the United Kingdom and Commonwealth of Nations. To distinguish it from "centres" of nearby places it is frequently preceded unofficially by the name of its settlement. In a town it implies the focal point for business, especially shops and street stalls (if any) in town and city centres. As a generic shorthand presupposed upon linear settlements it may be used to denote more precise concepts such as the urban retail sector, town centre sectors of employment, all small shops and services outlets and even wider concepts taking in social concepts.[a]

The equivalent in the United States and some parts of Canada, as well as some Northern English and many Scottish towns, is Main Street.

The smallest High Street in Britain is located in a small market town in Devon called Holsworthy. The street itself is no more than 100 yards (100Â m) long and there are only three shops located on Holsworthy's High Street.

Already in Middle English the word "high" denoted a metaphorical meaning of excellence or superior rank ("high sheriff", "Lord High Chancellor", "high society"). "High" also applied to roads as they improved: "highway" was a new term taken up by the church and their vestries to during the 17th century as a term for all public roads between settlements.[2]

"High Street" gradually adopted a narrower meaning to describe thoroughfares with significant retail in large villages and towns. Since the 19th century which saw the building of more public roads (public highways), in countries using the term motorway, the term highway fell out of common speech as it became more specific to its legal definition, denoting any public road, as in the Highway Code.

In the United Kingdom geographic concentration of goods and services (including at industrial estates and out of town shopping centres) has reduced the share of the economy contributed to by workers in the high street. High street refers to only a part of commerce. The town centre in many British towns combines a group of outdoor shopping streets (one or more of which may be pedestrianised), with an adjacent indoor shopping centre.

The House of Commons in 2006 established an All Party Parliamentary Small Shops Group, which published a report titled High Street Britain 2015, warning against trends in high streets that were disadvantageous to small shops.[3] The report warns that the increase in chain stores on high streets contributes to the formation of clone towns, a concept set out by geographical theorists, which "creat[es] a loss of sociability" compared to traditional shopping. Members of the working group generally agreed that: "The demise of the small shop would mean that people will not just be disadvantaged in their role as consumers but also as members of communities â€“ the erosion of small shops is viewed as the erosion of the'social glue' that binds communities together, entrenching social exclusion in the UK."

The continued vitality of towns is predicated on a number of different variables. Research into town centre customer experience has highlighted the ongoing challenges faced by towns and cities and suggested that "[t]he town centre serves not only social, utilitarian or hedonic shopping purposes, but also supports out-of-hours entertainment and leisure services. The way that consumers perceive and use town centres has also fundamentally changed."[4] In order to address the issues threatening the sustainability of towns it is increasingly important to consider consumer behaviour and customer experience.

High Streets are less commonly seen in Ireland. Neither of Dublin's two main shopping streets (Grafton Street and Henry Street) carry this name, nor does its main thoroughfare (O'Connell Street). While Dublin has a High Street near Christchurch, it is not a shopping street.[5] The city of Cork's main shopping street is St. Patrick's Street; Limerick's, like Dublin, is also O'Connell Street (the name is used in a number of other Irish towns in honor of Daniel O'Connell).

Main Street is used in many smaller towns and villages. For example, the OSI North Leinster Town Maps book lists sixteen "Main Streets" and only two "High Streets" in its thirty-town index of street names. Similarly, the OSI Dublin Street Guide (covering all of Dublin City and County Dublin) lists twenty "Main Streets" and only two "High Streets". Killarney and Galway are two of the few large Irish towns in which the shopping streets are named High Street. Nonetheless, the term "high street" is often used in the Irish media to refer generically to shopping streets.

The term "High Street" is used to describe stores found on a typical high street to differentiate them from more specialised, exclusive and expensive outlets (often independent stores) â€” for example, "High Street banks" (instead of the less-common private or investment banks) or "High Street shops" (instead of boutiques).

The phrase "High Street banks" is used to refer to the retail banking sector in the United Kingdom.[6]

The equivalent in the United States, sometimes in Canada (where it is used interchangeably with high street) and Ireland is Main Street, a term also used in smaller towns and villages in Scotland and Australia. In Jamaica, North East England and some sections of Canada and the United States, the main commercial district is Front Street. In Cornwall, some places in Devon and some places in the north of England, the equivalent is Fore Street; in some parts of the UK Market Street is also used, although sometimes this may be a different area where street markets are currently (or were historically) centred. In Canada, east of Lake Superior, King Street and Queen Street are often major streets; "rue Principale", as the literal French language equivalent of "Main Street" is frequently used in Quebec towns, and "a village where the main street is still Main Street" is a phrase that is used in respect for small towns. The Dutch equivalent is Hoogstraat, of which examples are found in cities such as Brussels, Amsterdam, Antwerp, Bruges, Rotterdam and many towns. In Germany, the equivalent is Hauptstraße (Main Street), though this can also refer to a road with a lot of traffic (i.e., a highway). In Cologne the Hohe Straße (literally, High Street) is the main shopping street, but was named after a gate at its southern end (the Hohe Pforte, or High Gate).[7]

In some New England states, especially in Massachusetts, High Street is also used[examples needed].


when do medical students find out about residency

Match Day is a term used widely in the graduate medical education community to represent the day when the National Resident Matching Program or NRMP releases results to applicants seeking residency and fellowship training positions in the United States. Match Day for the NRMP Main Residency Match is on the third Friday of March each year, and Match Day ceremonies occur at many of the 155 medical schools in the United States where those results are announced. Match Days for the NRMP Fellowship Matches occur throughout the year because each Fellowship Match has its own schedule of dates. Other national matching plans like the American Osteopathic Association (AOA), American Urological Association, and the San Francisco Match (Ophthalmology) have dates on which they release their results. By participating in a national matching plan, applicants contractually agree to attend the residency, internship or fellowship programs to which they match. The same agreement applies to the programs; they are obligated to train the applicants who match to them. In 2017, Match Day hit a record-high as 35,969 U.S. and international medical school students and graduates vied for 31,757 residency positions.[1]

Match Day (medicine)

In the United States, applicants and programs that register with the NRMP participate in a process known as "the Match." Applicants for the NRMP Main Residency Match usually begin the application process in the summer, and programs review applications and invite selected candidates for interviews held between October and February. After the interview period is over, applicants submit to the NRMP a "rank-order list" of programs where they wish to train. Similarly, residency programs submit a rank order list of applicants they prefer to train. The process is blinded so that neither applicants nor programs see each other's rank order lists. Aggregate Match results can be found on the NRMP public website.

The two parties' rank order lists are processed using the NRMP's matching algorithm, which creates stable (a proxy for optimal) matches between applicants and programs.

On the Monday prior to Match Day for the Main Residency Match, applicants find out from the NRMP if (but not where) they matched. Applicants who match to a training position must wait until the Match Day on Friday to learn the location of that position. Applicants who do not match to a training position in the Main Residency Match may be eligible to obtain an unfilled position through the Match Week Supplemental Offer and Acceptance Program that concludes on Thursday, the day prior to Match Day.

Although the majority of U.S. allopathic medical school seniors match to one of their top three program choices, applicants may match to programs lower on their rank order list, especially when their preferred specialty for training is among competitive specialties such as Plastic Surgery, Dermatology, Neurosurgery, Ophthalmology, Orthopaedics, Otolaryngology, and Radiation Oncology.

The American Osteopathic Association (AOA) sponsors a similar but separate Match for osteopathic students and graduates, the results of which are announced in February, before release of the NRMP results. Osteopathic physicians (DOs) may participate in either the NRMP or AOA matching plan and obtain positions in programs accredited by either the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME), or Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine American Osteopathic Association (AOA). The AOA Match is being phased out as a result of the transition to a single accreditation system under the aegis of the ACGME.

Members of the U.S. military participate in their own selection process for programs located at military hospitals, clinics, and bases. The military selection usually occurs in mid-December to allow students who did not match to participate in other national matching plans[citation needed]


how many cities in the state of michigan

Michigan is a state located in the Midwestern United States. According to the 2010 United States Census, Michigan is the 8th most populous state with 7006988412900000000♠9,884,129 inhabitants but the 22nd largest by land area spanning 56,538.90 square miles (146,435.1 km2) of land.[1] Michigan is divided into 83 counties and contains 533 incorporated municipalities consisting of cities and villages.[2] Specifically, Michigan has 276 cities, 257 villages, and 1,240 townships.

List of cities, villages, and townships in Michigan


how many episodes are in season 4 of nikita

The fourth and final season of Nikita was announced on May 9, 2013. It premiered on November 22 and ended on December 27, 2013, containing six episodes.[1]

Nikita (season 4)

It is based on the French film Nikita (1990), the remake Point of No Return (1993), and a previous series La Femme Nikita (1997).


the portal doorway of the archaeological site of stonehenge is aligned to coincide precisely with

The prehistoric monument of Stonehenge has long been studied for its possible connections with ancient astronomy. The site is aligned in the direction of the sunrise of the summer solstice and the sunset of the winter solstice. Archaeoastronomers have made a range of further claims about the siteâ€™s connection to astronomy, its meaning, and its use.

Archaeoastronomy and Stonehenge

Stonehenge has an opening in the henge earthwork facing northeast, and suggestions that particular significance was placed by its builders on the solstice and equinox points have followed. For example, the summer solstice sun rose close to the Heel Stone, and the sunâ€™s first rays shone into the centre of the monument between the horseshoe arrangement. While it is possible that such an alignment could be coincidental, this astronomical orientation had been acknowledged since William Stukeley drew the site and first identified its axis along the midsummer sunrise in 1720.[1]

Stukeley noticed that the Heel Stone was not precisely aligned on the sunrise. The drifting of the position of the sunrise due to the precession of the equinoxes since the monument’s erection does not account for this imprecision. Recently, evidence has been found for a neighbour to the Heel Stone, no longer extant. The second stone may have instead been one side of a ‘solar corridor’ used to frame the sunrise.[2][3]

Stukeley and the renowned astronomer Edmund Halley attempted what amounted to the first scientific attempt to date a prehistoric monument. Stukeley concluded the Stonehenge had been set up “by the use of a magnetic compass to lay out the works, the needle varying so much, at that time, from true north.” He attempted to calculate the change in magnetic variation between the observed and theoretical (ideal) Stonehenge sunrise, which he imagined would relate to the date of construction. Their calculations returned three dates, the earliest of which, 460 BC, was accepted by Stukeley. That was incorrect, but this early exercise in dating is a landmark in field archaeology.[4]

Early efforts to date Stonehenge exploited changes in astronomical declinations and led to efforts such as H. Broome’s 1864 theory that the monument was built in 977 BC, when the star Sirius would have risen over Stonehenge’s Avenue. Sir Norman Lockyer proposed a date of 1680 BC based entirely on an incorrect sunrise azimuth for the Avenue, aligning it on a nearby Ordnance Survey trig point, a modern feature. Petrie preferred a later date of 730 AD. The relevant stones were leaning considerably during his survey, and it was not considered accurate.

An archaeoastronomy debate was triggered by the 1963 publication of Stonehenge Decoded, by Gerald Hawkins an American astronomer. Hawkins claimed to observe numerous alignments, both lunar and solar. He argued that Stonehenge could have been used to predict eclipses. Hawkins’ book received wide publicity, in part because he used a computer in his calculations, then a novelty. Archaeologists were suspicious in the face of further contributions to the debate coming from British astronomer C. A. ‘Peter’ Newham and Sir Fred Hoyle, the famous Cambridge cosmologist, as well as by Alexander Thom, a retired professor of engineering, who had been studying stone circles for more than 20 years. Their theories have faced criticism in recent decades from Richard J. C. Atkinson and others who have suggested impracticalities in the ‘Stone Age calculator’ interpretation.

Gerald Hawkins’ work on Stonehenge was first published in Nature in 1963 following analyses he had carried out using the Harvard-Smithsonian IBM computer. Hawkins found not one or two alignments but dozens. He had studied 165 significant features at the monument and used the computer to check every alignment between them against every rising and setting point for the sun, moon, planets, and bright stars in the positions they would have been in 1500 BC. Thirteen solar and eleven lunar correlations were very precise in relation to the early features at the site but precision was less for later features of the monument. Hawkins also proposed a method for using the Aubrey holes to predict lunar eclipses by moving markers from hole to hole. In 1965 Hawkins wrote (with J. B. White) Stonehenge Decoded, which detailed his findings and proposed that the monument was a ‘Neolithic computer’.

Atkinson replied with his article “Moonshine on Stonehenge” in Antiquity in 1966, pointing out that some of the pits which Hawkins had used for his sight lines were more likely to have been natural depressions, and that he had allowed a margin of error of up to 2 degrees in his alignments. Atkinson found that the probability of so many alignments being visible from 165 points to be close to 0.5 (or rather 50:50) rather that the “one in a million” possibility which Hawkins had claimed. That the Station Stones stood on top of the earlier Aubrey Holes meant that many of Hawkins’ alignments between the two features were illusory. The same article by Atkinson contains further criticisms of the interpretation of Aubrey Holes as astronomical markers, and of Fred Hoyle’s work.

A question exists over whether the English climate would have permitted accurate observation of astronomical events. Modern researchers were looking for alignments with phenomena they already knew existed; the prehistoric users of the site did not have this advantage.

In 1966, C. A. ‘Peter’ Newham described an alignment for the equinoxes by drawing a line between one of the Station Stones with a posthole next to the Heel Stone. He also identified a lunar alignment; the long sides of the rectangle created by the four station stones matched the moon rise and moonset at the major standstill. Newham also suggested that the postholes near the entrance were used for observing the saros cycle.[5]

Two of the Station Stones are damaged and although their positions would create an approximate rectangle, their date and thus their relationship with the other features at the site is uncertain. Stonehenge’s latitude is unusual in that only at this approximate latitude (within about 50 km) do the lunar and solar alignments mentioned above occur at right angles to one another. More than 50 km north or south of the latitude of Stonehenge, the station stones could not be set out as a rectangle.

Alexander Thom had been examining stone circles since the 1950s in search of astronomical alignments and the megalithic yard. It was not until 1973 that he turned his attention to Stonehenge. Thom chose to ignore alignments between features within the monument, considering them to be too close together to be reliable. He looked for landscape features that could have marked lunar and solar events. However, one of Thom’s key sites – Peter’s Mound – turned out to be a twentieth-century rubbish dump.

Although Stonehenge has become an increasingly popular destination during the summer solstice, with 20,000Â people visiting in 2005, scholars have developed growing evidence that indicates prehistoric people visited the site only during the winter solstice. The only megalithic monuments in the British Isles to contain a clear, compelling solar alignment are Newgrange and Maeshowe, which both famously face the winter solstice sunrise.

The most recent evidence supporting the theory of winter visits includes bones and teeth from pigs which were slaughtered at nearby Durrington Walls. Their age at death indicating that they were slaughtered either in December or January every year. Mike Parker Pearson of the University of Sheffield has said, “We have no evidence that anyone was in the landscape in summer.”[6]


what is the biggest parrot in the world

The largest parrot by length in the world, the hyacinth macaw is 100 cm (3.3 ft) long from the tip of its tail to the top of its head and weighs 1.2–1.7 kg (2.6–3.7 lb).[3][4] Each wing is 388–425 mm (15.3–16.7 in) long.[3] The tail is long and pointed.[3] Its feathers are entirely blue, lighter above. However, the neck feathers can sometimes be slightly grey.

Hyacinth macaw

The hyacinth macaw (Anodorhynchus hyacinthinus), or hyacinthine macaw, is a parrot native to central and eastern South America. With a length (from the top of its head to the tip of its long pointed tail) of about 100 cm (3.3 ft) it is longer than any other species of parrot. It is the largest macaw and the largest flying parrot species, though the flightless kakapo of New Zealand can outweigh it at up to 3.5 kg. While generally easily recognized, it can be confused with the far rarer and smaller Lear's macaw. Habitat loss and the trapping of wild birds for the pet trade have taken a heavy toll on their population in the wild, so the species is classified as Vulnerable on the International Union for Conservation of Nature's Red List,[1] and it is protected by its listing on Appendix I of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES).

English physician, ornithologist, and artist John Latham first described the hyacinth macaw in 1790 under the binomial name Psittacus hyacinthinus based on a taxidermic specimen sent to England.[2] It is one of two extant and one probably extinct species of the South American macaw genus Anodorhynchus.

The majority of the hyacinth macaw diet is nuts, from native palms, such as acuri and bocaiuva palms.[5] They have very strong beaks for eating the kernels of hard nuts and seeds. Their strong beaks are even able to crack coconuts, the large brazil nut pods, and macadamia nuts. The birds also boast dry, smooth tongues with a bone inside them that makes them an effective tool for tapping into fruits.[6] The acuri nut is so hard, the parrots cannot feed on it until it has passed through the digestive system of cattle.[5] In addition, they eat fruits and other vegetable matter. The hyacinth macaw generally eats fruits, nuts, nectar, and various kinds of seeds. Also, they travel for the ripest of foods over a vast area.[7]

In the Pantanal, hyacinth macaws feed almost exclusively on the nuts of Acrocomia aculeata and Attalea phalerata palm trees. This behaviour was recorded by the English naturalist Henry Walter Bates in his 1863 book The Naturalist on the River Amazons, where he wrote that

It flies in pairs, and feeds on the hard nuts of several palms, but especially of the Mucuja (Acrocomia lasiospatha). These nuts, which are so hard as to be difficult to break with a heavy hammer, are crushed to a pulp by the powerful beak of this macaw.

Charles Darwin remarked on Bates's account of the species, calling it a "splendid bird" with its "enormous beak" able to feed on these palm nuts.[9]

Limited tool use has been observed in both wild and captive hyacinth macaws. Reported sightings of tool use in wild parrots go as far back as 1863. Examples of tool use that have been observed usually involve a chewed leaf or pieces of wood. Macaws often incorporate these items when feeding on harder nuts. Their use allows the nuts the macaws eat to remain in position (prevent slipping) while they gnaw into it. It is not known whether this is learned social behavior or an innate trait, but observation on captive macaws shows that hand-raised macaws exhibit this behavior, as well. Comparisons show that older macaws were able to open seeds more efficiently.[10]

Nesting takes place between July and December, with nests constructed in tree cavities or cliff faces depending on the habitat.[11] In the Pantanal region, 90% of nests are constructed in the manduvi tree (Sterculia apetala). The hyacinth macaw depends on its predator, the toucan, for its livelihood. The toucan contributes largely to seed dispersal of the manduvi tree that the macaw needs for reproduction.[12] However, the toucan is responsible for dispersing 83% of the seeds of Sterculia apetala, but also consumes 53% of eggs preyed.[13] Hollows of sufficient size are only found in trees around 60 years of age or older, and competition is fierce.[12] Existing holes are enlarged and then partially filled with wood chips.[14] The clutch size is one or two eggs,[5] although usually only one fledgling survives[5] as the second egg hatches several days after the first, and the smaller fledgling cannot compete with the firstborn for food. A possible explanation for this behavior is what is called the insurance hypothesis. The macaw lays more eggs than can be normally fledged to compensate for earlier eggs that failed to hatch or firstborn chicks that did not survive.[15] The incubation period lasts about a month, and the male tends to his mate whilst she incubates the eggs.[5] The chicks leave the nest, or fledge, around 110 days of age,[citation needed] and remain dependent on their parents until six months of age.[5] They are mature and begin breeding at seven years of age.

Hyacinth macaws are the largest psittacine. They are also very even-tempered and can be calmer than other macaws, being known as "gentle giants".[16] An attending veterinarian must be aware of specific nutritional needs and pharmacologic sensitivities when dealing with them. Possibly due to genetic factors or captive rearing limitations, this species can become neurotic/phobic, which is problematic.[17]

The hyacinth macaw survives today in three main populations in South America: In the Pantanal region of Brazil, and adjacent eastern Bolivia and northeastern Paraguay, in the Cerrado region of the eastern interior of Brazil (Maranhão, Piauí, Bahia, Tocantins, Goiás, Mato Grosso, Mato Grosso do Sul, and Minas Gerais), and in the relatively open areas associated with the Tocantins River, Xingu River, Tapajós River, and the Marajó island in the eastern Amazon Basin of Brazil. Smaller, fragmented populations may occur in other areas. It prefers palm swamps, woodlands, and other semiopen, wooded habitats. It usually avoids dense, humid forest, and in regions dominated by such habitats, it is generally restricted to the edge or relatively open sections (e.g. along major rivers). In different areas of their range, these parrots are found in savannah grasslands, in dry thorn forest known as caatinga, and in palm stands,[11] particularly the Moriche Palm (Mauritia flexuosa).[18]

The hyacinth macaw is an endangered species due to the cage bird trade and habitat loss.[11] In the 1980s, an estimated 10,000 birds were taken from the wild and at least 50% were destined for the Brazilian market.[19] Throughout the macaw's range, habitat is being lost or altered due to the introduction of cattle ranching and mechanised agriculture, and the development of hydroelectric schemes.[11] Annual grass fires set by farmers can destroy nest trees, and regions previously inhabited by this macaw are now unsuitable also due to agriculture and plantations. Locally, it has been hunted for food, and the Kayapo Indians of Gorotire in south-central Brazil use its feathers to make headdresses and other ornaments. While overall greatly reduced in numbers, it remains locally common in the Brazilian Pantanal, where many ranch-owners now protect the macaws on their land.[20]

The hyacinth macaw is protected by law in Brazil and Bolivia,[11] and commercial export is banned by its listing on Appendix I of the CITES.[21] A number of long-term studies and conservation initiatives are in place; the Hyacinth Macaw Project in the Brazilian state of Mato Grosso do Sul has carried out important research by ringing individual birds, and has created a number of artificial nests to compensate for the small number of sites available in the region.[5]

The Minnesota Zoo with BioBrasil and the World Wildlife Fund are involved in hyacinth macaw conservation.[14][22]

Parrots as a whole, being of the family Psittacidae, are some of the most threatened birds in the world. This family has the most endangered species of all bird families, especially in the neotropics, the natural home of the hyacinth macaw, where 46 of 145 species are at a serious risk of global extinction.[23] This species qualifies as endangered on the IUCN Red List because the population has suffered rapid reductions with the remaining threats of illegal trapping for the cage bird trade and habitat loss [24] A few serious threats to the survival of the species in the Pantanal include human activities, mainly those resulting in habitat loss, the burning of land for pasture maintenance, and illegal trapping [25] The exceptionally noisy, fearless, curious, sedentary, and predictable nature of this species, along with its specialization to only one or two species of palm in each part of its range, makes them especially vulnerable to capture, shooting, and habitat destruction.[26] Eggs are also regularly preyed on by corvids, opossums, and coatis.[27] Adults have no known natural predators.[4] The young are parasitized by larvae of flies of the genus Philornis.[28]

Although the species has a low genetic variability, it does not necessarily pose a threat to their survival. This genetic structure accentuates the need for protection of hyacinth macaws from different regions to maintain their genetic diversity. Nevertheless, the most important factors negatively affecting the wild population prove to be habitat destruction and nest poaching.[29]

In the Pantanal, habitat loss is largely contributed to the creations of pastures for cattle, while in many other regions, it is the result of clearing land for colonization.[30] Similarly, large areas of habitat in Amazonia have been lost for cattle ranching and hydroelectric power schemes on the Tocantins and Xingu Rivers. Many young manduvi trees are then being grazed on by cattle or burnt by fire, and the Gerias is speedily being converted to land for mechanized agriculture, cattle ranching, and exotic tree plantations.[1] Annual grass fires set by farmers destroy a number of nest trees, and the rise of agriculture and plantations has made habitats formerly populated by the macaws unsuitable to maintain their livelihoods.[24] Moreover, increase in commercial demand for feather art by the Kayapo Indians threatens the species, as up to 10 macaws are needed to make a single headdress.[26]

In the event of the macaws being taken from their natural environment, a variety of factors alter their health such as inadequate hygiene conditions, feeding, and overpopulation during the illegal practice of pet trade. Once birds are captured and brought into captivity, their mortality rates can become very high.[30] Records reveal a Paraguayan dealer receiving 300 unfeathered young in 1972, with all but three not surviving. Due to the poor survival rates of the young, poachers concentrate more heavily on adult birds, which depletes the population at a rapid pace.[26]

According to Article 111 of Bolivian Environmental Law #1333, all persons involved in the trade, capture, and transportation without authorization of wild animals will suffer a two-year prison sentence, along with a fine equivalent to 100% of the value of the animal.[31] While many trackers have been arrested, the illegal pet trade still largely continues in Santa Cruz, Bolivia. Unfortunately, animal trafficking is not necessarily viewed as a priority in the city, leaving national departmental and municipal governments unwilling to halt the trade in city centers, and local police reluctant to get involved. This ideology has in turn resulted in a lack of enforcement regarding trade in both CITES-restricted species and threatened species, with little to no restrictions regarding humane treatment of the animals, disease control, or proper hygiene. In the trade centers, the hyacinth macaw demanded the highest price of US$1,000, proving it to be a very desirable and valued bird in the pet trade industry.[32]

In 1989, the European Endangered Species Programme for the hyacinth macaw was founded as a result of concerns about the status of the wild population and the lack of successful breeding in captivity.[31] Breeding in captivity still remains difficult, being that hand-reared hyacinth macaw offspring have demonstrated to have higher mortality rates, especially within the first month of life. Additionally, they have a higher incidence of acute crop stasis than other macaw species due, in part, to their specific dietary requirements.[33] The hyacinth macaw is protected by law in Brazil and Bolivia, and international trade is prohibited by its listing on Appendix I of the CITES.[24] Appendix I has banned exporting the bird in all countries of origin, and several studies and conservational initiatives have been taken.[1] The Hyacinth Macaw Project in the Caiman Ecological Refuge, located in the Pantanal, has employed artificial nests and chick management techniques, along with effectively raising awareness among cattle ranchers. Many ranch owners in the Pantanal and Gerais, to protect the birds, no longer allow trappers on their properties.[1]

A number of conservation actions have been proposed, including the study of the current range, population status, and extent of trading in different parts of its range. Additionally, propositions have been made to assess the effectiveness of artificial nest boxes, enforce legal measures preventing trade, and experiment with ecotourism at one or two sites to encourage donors.[1] Furthermore, the Hyacinth Macaw Project in Mato Grosso do Sul has carried out important research by ringing individual birds and has created a number of artificial nests to compensate for the small number of sites available in the region.[24] Furthermore, proposals to list the species as Endangered under the U.S. Endangered Species Act have been made to further protective measures in the USA and to create Bolivian and Paraguayan trade management authorities under presidential control.[26]

Each of the three main populations should be managed as a separate biological entity so as to avoid numbers dropping below 500. While the birds may be in decline in the wild, notably higher populations of captive macaws are being held in zoos and private collections. If success in managing and replanting the macawâ€™s food trees and erecting nest boxes as an experiment in the Pantanals is seen, the species could survive. Survival rates could also be enhanced if ranch owners would leave all large and potential nest trees standing and eliminate all trapping on their properties. Ultimately, should these factors work in tandem with erection of nest boxes, fencing off of certain saplings, and the planting of others, the long-term prospects of the hyacinth macaw species would be greatly improved.[26]

Images of hyacinth macaws in the Pantanal, Brazil

Manduvi Cougar Mountain Zoo


what is the spacex falcon 9 rocket for

In 2008, SpaceX won a Commercial Resupply Services (CRS) contract NASA's Commercial Orbital Transportation Services (COTS) program to deliver cargo to the International Space Station (ISS) using the Falcon 9 and Dragon capsule. The first mission under this contract launched in October 2012.

Falcon 9

Falcon 9 is a family of two-stage-to-orbit medium lift launch vehicles, named for its use of nine first-stage engines, designed and manufactured by SpaceX. Variants include the retired Falcon 9 v1.0 and Falcon 9 v1.1, as well as the current Falcon 9 Full Thrust, both partially-reusable launch systems powered by rocket engines utilizing liquid oxygen (LOX) and rocket-grade kerosene (RP-1) propellants.

The current "Full Thrust" version can lift payloads of up to 22,800 kilograms (50,300 lb) to low Earth orbit, and up to 8,300 kg (18,300 lb) to geostationary transfer orbit (GTO), when configured in expendable mode.[1] The first stage can be recovered and reused for GTO payloads up to 5,500 kg (12,100 lb), automatically landing after disconnection of the second stage.[13][1][14][15]

Altogether, the initial version 1.0 flew five times from June 2010 to March 2013 and version 1.1 flew fifteen times from September 2013 to January 2016. The "Full Thrust" version has been in service since December 2015. The Falcon Heavy derivative, slated for debut in January 2018, groups three Falcon 9 first stages together. SpaceX intends to certify the Falcon 9 to be human-rated for transporting NASA astronauts to the ISS as part of the Commercial Crew Development program. In October 2016, SpaceX CEO Elon Musk announced an upcoming "final upgrade" called Falcon 9 Block 5, which will feature increased engine thrust, improved landing legs, and other minor improvements to help recovery and reuse.[5]

While SpaceX spent its own money to develop its previous launcher, the Falcon 1, development of the Falcon 9 was accelerated by NASA funding parts of development costs and committing to purchase several commercial flights if specific capabilities were demonstrated. This started with seed money from the Commercial Orbital Transportation Services (COTS) program in 2006.[16][17] The contract was structured as a Space Act Agreement (SAA) "to develop and demonstrate commercial orbital transportation service"[17] including the purchase of three demonstration flights.[18] The overall contract award was US$278 million to provide development funding for Dragon, Falcon 9, and demonstration launches of Falcon 9 with Dragon. In 2011 additional milestones were added, bringing the total contract value to US$396 million.[19]

NASA became an anchor tenant for the vehicle in 2008,[20][21] when they contracted to purchase 12 Commercial Resupply Services launches to the International Space Station, whereby funds would be disbursed only after the initial COTS demonstration missions were completed and deemed successful. The space logistics delivery contract was worth US$1.6 billion for a minimum of 12 missions to carry supplies to and from the station.[22]

Musk has repeatedly said that, without the NASA money, development would have taken longer.

SpaceX has only come this far by building upon the incredible achievements of NASA, having NASA as an anchor tenant for launch, and receiving expert advice and mentorship throughout the development process. SpaceX would like to extend a special thanks to the NASA COTS office for their continued support and guidance throughout this process. The COTS program has demonstrated the power of a true private/public partnership and we look forward to the exciting endeavors our team will accomplish in the future.[20]

In 2011, SpaceX estimated that Falcon 9 v1.0 development costs were on the order of $300 million.[23] NASA evaluated that development costs would have been $3.6 billion if a traditional cost-plus contract approach had been used.[24] In 2014, SpaceX released total combined development costs for both the Falcon 9 and the Dragon capsule. NASA provided US$396 million while SpaceX provided over US$450 million to fund rocket and capsule development efforts.[25]

A 2011 NASA report "estimated that it would have cost the agency about US$4 billion to develop a rocket like the Falcon 9 booster based upon NASA's traditional contracting processes" while "a more 'commercial development' approach might have allowed the agency to pay only US$1.7 billion."[26]

Congressional testimony by SpaceX in 2017 suggested that the unusual NASA process of "setting only a high-level requirement for cargo transport to the space station [while] leaving the details to industry" had allowed SpaceX to design and develop the Falcon 9 rocket on its own at substantially lower cost. "According to NASA's own independently verified numbers, SpaceXâ€™s development costs of both the Falcon 1 and Falcon 9 rockets were estimated at approximately US$390 million in total."[26]

SpaceX originally intended to follow its light Falcon 1 launch vehicle with an intermediate capacity vehicle, the Falcon 5.[27] In 2005, SpaceX announced it was instead proceeding with development of the Falcon 9, a "fully reusable heavy lift launch vehicle", and had already secured a government customer. The Falcon 9 was described as being capable of launching approximately 9,500 kg (21,000 lb) to low Earth orbit, and was projected to be priced at $27 million per flight with a 3.7 m (12 ft) fairing and $35 million with a 5.2 m (17 ft) fairing. SpaceX also announced development of a heavy version of the Falcon 9 with a payload capacity of approximately 25,000 kg (55,000 lb).[28] The Falcon 9 was intended to enable launches to LEO, GTO, as well as both crew and cargo vehicles to the ISS.[27]

The original NASA COTS contract called for the first demonstration flight of Falcon in September 2008, and completion of all three demonstration missions by September 2009.[29] In February 2008, the plan for the first Falcon 9/Dragon COTS Demo flight was delayed by six months to late in the first quarter of 2009. According to Elon Musk, the complexity of the development work and the regulatory requirements for launching from Cape Canaveral contributed to the delay.[30]

The first multi-engine test (with two engines connected to the first stage, firing simultaneously) was successfully completed in January 2008,[31] with successive tests leading to the full Falcon 9 complement of nine engines test fired for a full mission length (178 seconds) of the first stage in November 2008.[32] In October 2009, the first flight-ready first stage had a successful all-engine test fire at the company's test stand in McGregor, Texas. In November 2009 SpaceX conducted the initial second stage test firing lasting forty seconds. This test succeeded without aborts or recycles. In January 2010, a full-duration (329 seconds) orbit-insertion firing of the Falcon 9 second stage was conducted at the McGregor test site.[33] The full stack arrived at the launch site for integration at the beginning of February 2010, and SpaceX initially scheduled a launch date of March 2010, though they estimated anywhere between one and three months for integration and testing.[34]

In February 2010, SpaceX's first flight stack was set vertical at Space Launch Complex 40, Cape Canaveral,[35] and on March 9, SpaceX performed a static fire test, where the first stage was to be fired without taking off. The test aborted at T-2 seconds due to a failure in the system designed to pump high-pressure helium from the launch pad into the first stage turbopumps, which would get them spinning in preparation for launch. Subsequent review showed that the failure occurred when a valve did not receive a command to open. As the problem was with the pad and not with the rocket itself, it didn't occur at the McGregor test site, which did not have the same valve setup. Some fire and smoke were seen at the base of the rocket, leading to speculation of an engine fire. However, the fire and smoke were the result of normal burnoff from the liquid oxygen and fuel mix present in the system prior to launch, and no damage was sustained by the vehicle or the test pad. All vehicle systems leading up to the abort performed as expected, and no additional issues were noted that needed addressing. A subsequent test on March 13 was successful in firing the nine first-stage engines for 3.5 seconds.[36]

In December 2010, the SpaceX production line was manufacturing one Falcon 9 (and Dragon spacecraft) every three months, with a plan to double the rate to one every six weeks.[37] By September 2013, SpaceX total manufacturing space had increased to nearly 1,000,000 sq ft (93,000 m2) and the factory had been configured to achieve a maximum production rate of 40 rocket cores per year.[38] The factory was producing one Falcon 9 vehicle per month as of November 2013. The company planned to increase to 18 vehicles per year in mid-2014, 24 per year by the end of 2014,[39][40] and 40 rocket cores per year by the end of 2015.[41]

These production rates were not achieved by February 2016 as previously planned; the company indicated that production rate for Falcon 9 cores had only recently increased to 18 per year, and the number of first stage cores that can be assembled at one time had doubled from three to six. The production rate was expected to grow to 30 cores per year by the end of 2016,[42] but as of AugustÂ 2016[update], SpaceX was working towards a production capacity of 40 cores per year,[43] the full factory capacity envisioned in 2013.[38]

Rockets from the Falcon 9 family have been launched 47 times over 7 years, resulting in 44 confirmed full mission successes (7001936000000000000♠93.6% success rate), one partial success (with primary orbital payload delivery completed, but a secondary payload left in a lower-than-planned orbit), one failure (with total loss of spacecraft), and the recent Zuma satellite unofficially reported lost despite SpaceX claiming nominal launch performance.[44] Additionally, one rocket and payload were destroyed before launch in preparation for an on-pad static fire test. 21 of 26 landing attempts (7001810000000000000♠81%) have succeeded in recovering the rocket's first stage, including the 17 latest ones.

The first rocket version Falcon 9 v1.0 was launched 5 times from June 2010 to March 2013, its successor Falcon 9 v1.1 15 times from September 2013 to January 2016 and the latest upgrade Falcon 9 Full Thrust 27 times from December 2015 to present.

The Falcon 9 is a two-stage, LOX/RP-1-powered heavy-lift launch vehicle. Both stages are equipped with Merlin 1D rocket engines; nine sea-level adapted versions on the first stage and one vacuum adapted version on the second stage. Every engine utilises a pyrophoric mixture of triethylaluminum-triethylborane (TEA-TEB) as an engine igniter.[51] The first stage engines are arranged in a structural form SpaceX calls "Octaweb".[52] Many cores include four extensible landing legs attached around the base of the Octaweb.[53] To control the descent of the boosters and center core through the atmosphere, SpaceX often uses grid fins which deploy from the vehicle after separation.[54] The legs will then deploy as the boosters return to Earth, landing each softly on the ground.[55]

The propellant tank walls and domes are made from aluminium-lithium alloy. SpaceX uses an all friction-stir welded tank, the highest strength and most reliable welding technique available.[4] The second stage tank of a FalconÂ 9 is simply a shorter version of the first stage tank and uses most of the same tooling, material and manufacturing techniques, reducing production costs.[4] The Falcon 9 interstage, which connects the upper and lower stage, is a carbon-fiber aluminum-core composite structure. Reusable separation collets and a pneumatic pusher system separate the stages. The original design stage separation system had twelve attachment points, which was reduced to just three in the v1.1 launcher.[56]

The Falcon 9 uses a payload fairing to protect (non-Dragon) satellites during launch. The fairing is 13 m (43 ft) long, 5.2 m (17 ft) in diameter, and is constructed of carbon fiber skin overlaid on an aluminum honeycomb core. SpaceX designed and fabricates fairings at their headquarters in Hawthorne, California. Testing of the design was completed at NASA's Plum Brook Station facility in spring 2013 where the acoustic shock and mechanical vibration of launch, plus electromagnetic static discharge conditions, were simulated on a full-size test article in a very large vacuum chamber.[57]

SpaceX uses multiple redundant flight computers in a fault-tolerant design. Each Merlin rocket engine is controlled by three voting computers, each of which has two physical processors that constantly check each other. The software runs on Linux and is written in C++.[58] For flexibility, commercial off-the-shelf parts and system-wide radiation-tolerant design are used instead of rad-hardened parts.[58] Each stage has stage-level flight computers, in addition to the Merlin-specific engine controllers, of the same fault-tolerant triad design to handle stage control functions.

SpaceX had predicted that its launches would have high reliability based on the philosophy that "through simplicity, reliability and low cost can go hand-in-hand" by 2011.[59] As of 8 January 2018[update] Falcon 9 has achieved 46 out of 48 primary missions, with one rocket destroyed in flight and one on the launch pad during fueling for an engine test, yielding a success rate of 7001958000000000000♠95.8%. For comparison, present industry benchmark, the Russian Soyuz series has more than 1,700 launches[60] with a success rate of 7001974000000000000♠97.4%.[61]

As with the company's smaller Falcon 1 vehicle, Falcon 9's launch sequence includes a hold-down feature that allows full engine ignition and systems check before liftoff. After first-stage engine start, the launcher is held down and not released for flight until all propulsion and vehicle systems are confirmed to be operating normally. Similar hold-down systems have been used on other launch vehicles such as the Saturn V[62] and Space Shuttle. An automatic safe shut-down and unloading of propellant occurs if any abnormal conditions are detected.[4] Prior to the launch date, SpaceX always completes a test of the Falcon 9 culminating in a firing of the first stage's Merlin 1D engines for three-and-a-half seconds to verify performance.[63]

Falcon 9 has triple redundant flight computers and inertial navigation, with a GPS overlay for additional orbit insertion accuracy.[4]

Like the Saturn rocket series from the Apollo program, the presence of multiple first-stage engines allow for mission completion even if one of the first-stage engines fails during flight.[4][64] Detailed descriptions of several aspects of destructive engine failure modes and designed-in engine-out capabilities were made public by SpaceX in a 2007 "update" that was publicly released.[65]

SpaceX emphasized over several years that the Falcon 9 first stage is designed for engine out capability.[4] The SpaceX CRS-1 mission in October 2012 was a partial success after an engine failure in the first stage: engine no.Â 1 experienced a loss of pressure at 79 seconds, and then shut down. To compensate for the resulting loss of acceleration, the first stage had to burn 28 seconds longer than planned, and the second stage had to burn an extra 15 seconds. That extra burn time of the second stage reduced its fuel reserves, so that the likelihood that there was sufficient fuel to reach the planned orbit above the space station with the secondary payload dropped from 99% to 95%. Because NASA had purchased the launch and therefore contractually controlled a number of mission decision points, NASA declined SpaceX's request to restart the second stage and attempt to deliver the secondary payload into the correct orbit. This risk was understood by the secondary payload customer at time of the signing of the launch contract. As a result, the secondary payload satellite reentered the atmosphere a few days after launch.[6]

SpaceX intended to recover the first stages of several early Falcon flights to assist engineers in designing for future reusability. They were equipped with parachutes but failed to survive the aerodynamic stress and heating during atmospheric re-entry following stage separation.[66] Although reusability of the second stage is more difficult, SpaceX intended from the beginning to make both stages of the Falcon 9 reusable.[67] Both stages in the early launches were covered with a layer of ablative cork and had parachutes to land them gently in the sea. The stages were also marinized by salt-water corrosion resistant material, anodizing and paying attention to galvanic corrosion.[67] Musk said that if the vehicle does not become reusable, "I will consider us to have failed."[68]

In late 2011, SpaceX announced a change in the approach, eliminating the parachutes and going with a propulsively-powered-descent approach.[69][70] Included was a video[71] said to be an approximation depicting the first stage returning tail-first for a powered descent and the second stage, with heat shield, reentering head first before rotating for a powered descent.[70][72] Design was complete on the system for "bringing the rocket back to launchpad using only thrusters" by February 2012.[55]

A reusable first stage was then flight-tested by SpaceX with the suborbital Grasshopper rocket.[73] Between 2012 and 2013, this low-altitude, low-speed demonstration test vehicle made eight VTVL test flights, including a 79-second round-trip flight to an altitude of 744 m (2,441 ft). In March 2013, SpaceX announced that, beginning with the first flight of the Falcon 9 v1.1 (the sixth flight overall of Falcon 9), every first stage would be instrumented and equipped as a controlled descent test vehicle. SpaceX continued their propulsive-return over-water tests, saying they "will continue doing such tests until they can do a return to the launch site and a powered landing.... [SpaceX] expect several failures before they 'learn how to do it right.'"[74]

For Falcon 9 Flight 6 in September 2013, after stage separation, the flight test plan called for the first-stage booster to first burn to reduce its reentry velocity, and then effect a second burn just before it reached the water. SpaceX stated they expected several powered-descent tests to achieve successful recovery,[75] before they could then attempt a landing on a solid surface.[74] Although not a complete success, the stage was able to change direction and make a controlled entry into the atmosphere.[76] During the final landing burn, the ACS thrusters could not overcome an aerodynamically induced spin, and centrifugal force deprived the landing engine of fuel leading to early engine shutdown and a hard splashdown that destroyed the first stage.[76]

After four more ocean landing tests, the first stage of the CRS-5 launch vehicle attempted a landing on a floating landing platform, the "Autonomous Spaceport Drone Ship" (ASDS) in January 2015. The rocket incorporated (for the first time in an orbital mission) grid fin aerodynamic control surfaces, and guided itself to the ship successfully, but ran out of hydraulic fluid and lost its steering ability, destroying it on impact with the landing platform.[77] A second attempt to land on a floating platform occurred in April 2015, on CRS-6. After the launch, Elon Musk communicated that the bipropellant valve had become stuck, and therefore the control system could not react rapidly enough for a successful landing.[78]

The first attempt to land the first stage of Falcon 9 on a ground pad near the launch site occurred on flight 20, the maiden flight of the Falcon 9 Full Thrust version in December 2015. The landing was successful and the first stage was recovered.[79][80] This was the first time in history that a rocket first stage returned to Earth after propelling an orbital launch mission and achieving a controlled vertical landing. The first successful first-stage landing on an ASDS occurred in April 2016 on the drone ship Of Course I Still Love You during the CRS-8 mission.

In total, sixteen test flights were conducted from 2013 to 2016, six of which achieved a soft landing and recovery of the booster. Since January 2017, SpaceX has stopped referring to landing attempts as "experimental" in their press releases, indicating that they are now considered a routine procedure; every landing attempt since has been successful.

The first operational re-use of a previously-flown Falcon 9 booster was successfully accomplished in March 2017[81] with B1021 on the SES-10 mission after CRS-8 in April 2016.[82] The booster landed a second time and was retired.[83] In June 2017, booster B1029 helped carry BulgariaSat-1 towards GTO after an Iridium NEXT LEO mission in January, again achieving the reuse and second landing of a recovered booster.[84] A third reflight of a flight-proven booster was performed in October 2017, on the SES-11/Echostar 105 mission, using the booster originally flown on CRS-10.[85]

Despite public statements that they would endeavor to make the Falcon 9 second-stage reusable as well, by late 2014, SpaceX determined that the mass needed for a re-entry heat shield, landing engines, and other equipment to support recovery of the second stage was at that time prohibitive, and indefinitely suspended their second-stage reusability plans for the Falcon line.[13][86] However, in 2017 they indicated that they might do experimental tests on recovering one or more second-stages in order to learn more about reusability to inform their new, much-larger, BFR launch vehicle development process.[87]

Payload fairings have survived descent and splashdown in the Pacific Ocean. In June 2015, wreckage of an unidentified Falcon 9 launch vehicle was found off the coast of The Bahamas, which was confirmed by SpaceX CEO Elon Musk to be a component of the payload fairing that washed ashore. Musk noted the possibility of fairing reusability in a statement: "This is helpful for figuring out fairing reusability."[88] In March 2017, SpaceX for the first time recovered a fairing from the SES-10 mission, aided by thrusters and a steerable parachute helping it glide towards a gentle touchdown on water.[47]

The original Falcon 9 v1.0 flew five successful orbital launches in 2010–2013. The much larger Falcon 9 v1.1 made its first flight in September 2013. The demonstration mission carried a very small 500 kg (1,100 lb) primary payload, the CASSIOPE satellite;[56] larger payloads followed for v1.1, starting with the launch of the large SES-8 GEO communications satellite.[89] Both Falcon 9 v1.0 and Falcon 9 v1.1 were expendable launch vehicles (ELVs). The third—and current—version of the Falcon 9 is the Falcon 9 Full Thrust which made its first flight in December 2015. The first stage of the Falcon 9 Full Thrust version is reusable.

The first version of the Falcon 9 launch vehicle, Falcon 9 v1.0, was an expendable launch vehicle that was developed in 2005–2010, and was launched for the first time in 2010. Falcon 9 v1.0 made five flights in 2010–2013, after which it was retired.

The Falcon 9 v1.0 first stage was powered by nine SpaceX Merlin 1C rocket engines arranged in a 3×3 pattern. Each of these engines had a sea-level thrust of 556 kN (125,000 pounds-force) for a total thrust on liftoff of about 5,000 kN (1,100,000 pounds-force).[4] The Falcon 9 v1.0 second stage was powered by a single Merlin 1C engine modified for vacuum operation, with an expansion ratio of 117:1 and a nominal burn time of 345 seconds. Gaseous N2 thrusters were used on the Falcon 9 v1.0 second-stage as a reaction control system.[90]

SpaceX expressed hopes initially that both stages would eventually be reusable.[91] But early results from adding lightweight thermal protection system capability to the booster stage and using parachute recovery were not successful,[66] leading to abandonment of that approach and the initiation of a new design. In 2011, SpaceX began a formal and funded development program for a reusable Falcon 9, with the early program focus however on return of the first stage.[55]

The Falcon 9 v1.1 ELV is a 60 percent heavier rocket with 60 percent more thrust than the v1.0 version of the Falcon 9.[56] It includes realigned first-stage engines[92] and 60 percent longer fuel tanks, making it more susceptible to bending during flight.[56] Development testing of the v1.1 first stage was completed in July 2013.[93][94] The Falcon 9 v1.1, first launched in September 2013, uses a longer first stage powered by nine Merlin 1D engines arranged in an "octagonal" pattern,[95][96] that SpaceX calls Octaweb. This is designed to simplify and streamline the manufacturing process.[97]

The v1.1 first stage has a total sea-level thrust at liftoff of 5,885 kN (1,323,000 lbf), with the nine engines burning for a nominal 180 seconds, while stage thrust rises to 6,672 kN (1,500,000 lbf) as the booster climbs out of the atmosphere.[3] The engines have been upgraded to the more powerful Merlin 1D. These improvements increased the payload capability from 9,000 kg (20,000 lb) to 13,150 kg (28,990 lb).[3] The stage separation system has been redesigned and reduces the number of attachment points from twelve to three,[56] and the vehicle has upgraded avionics and software as well.[56] Following the September 2013 launch, the second stage igniter propellant lines were insulated to better support in-space restart following long coast phases for orbital trajectory maneuvers.[39]

SpaceX President Gwynne Shotwell has stated the Falcon 9 v1.1 has about 30 percent more payload capacity than published on its standard price list, the extra margin reserved for returning of stages via powered re-entry.[98] Four extensible carbon fiber with aluminum honeycomb landing legs were included on later flights where landings were attempted.[99][74][75]

The "Full Thrust upgrade" version[100][101]—the third major version of the Falcon 9 launch vehicle following the Falcon 9 v1.0 (launched 2010–2013) and the Falcon 9 v1.1 (launched 2013 – January 2016)—has cryogenic cooling of propellant to increase density allowing 17% higher thrust, an improved stage separation system, a stretched upper stage that can hold additional propellant, and strengthened struts for holding helium bottles believed to have been involved with the failure of flight 19.[102]

SpaceX pricing and payload specifications published for the non-reusable Falcon 9 v1.1 rocket as of MarchÂ 2014[update] actually included about 30 percent more performance than the published price list indicated; the additional performance was reserved for SpaceX to do reusability testing with the Falcon 9 v1.1 while still achieving the specified payloads for customers. Many engineering changes to support reusability and recovery of the first stage had been made on the v1.1 version and testing was successful, with SpaceX having room to increase the payload performance for the Full Thrust version, or decrease launch price, or both.[103]

The Full Thrust version of the rocket has a reusable first stage after achieving its first successful landing in December 2015[104] and first reflight in March 2017.[105] However, plans to reuse the Falcon 9 second-stage booster have been abandoned as the weight of a heat shield and other equipment would impinge on payload too much for this to be economically feasible for this rocket.[13] The reusable booster stage was developed using systems and software tested on the Grasshopper and F9R Dev technology demonstrators, as well as a set of technologies being developed by SpaceX to facilitate rapid reusability.

In February 2017, SpaceXâ€™s CRS-10 launch was the first operational launch utilizing the new Autonomous Flight Safety System (AFSS) that is built into Falcon 9 Full Thrust launch vehicles. For all SpaceX launches after 16 March 2017, the autonomous AFSS has replaced "the ground-based mission flight control personnel and equipment with on-board Positioning, Navigation and Timing sources and decision logic. The benefits of AFSS include increased public safety, reduced reliance on range infrastructure, reduced range spacelift cost, increased schedule predictability and availability, operational flexibility, and launch slot flexibility."[106]

On the June 25, 2017 mission carrying the second batch of ten Iridium NEXT satellites, aluminum grid fins were replaced by titanium versions, to improve control authority and better cope with heat during re-entry.[107]

In 2017, SpaceX started including incremental changes to the Falcon 9 Full Thrust, internally calling it the "Block 4" version.[108] Initially only the second stage was modified to Block 4 standards, flying on top of a "Block 3" first stage for three missions: NROL-76 and Inmarsat-5 F4 in May 2017, and Intelsat 35e in July.[109] Block 4 was described as a transition between the Full Thrust v1.2 "Block 3" and the forthcoming Falcon 9 Block 5. It includes incremental engine thrust upgrades leading to the final planned thrust for Block 5.[110] The maiden flight of the full Block 4 design (first and second stages) was the NASA CRS-12 mission on August 14, 2017.[111]

In October 2016, Musk described a Falcon 9 "Block 5"[clarification needed] version that would have "a lot of minor refinements that collectively are important, but uprated thrust and improved legs are the most significant."[112] In January 2017 Musk added that the Block 5 version "[s]ignificantly improves performance & ease of reusability".[113] He described this version as the "final" version of the rocket.[112] Its maiden flight is planned for April 2018, which according to known launch schedules, would imply the launch of Iridium NEXT 51â€“55 and GRACE-FO 1 and 2.[114]

7,607[10][119] (late 2016)

As of JanuaryÂ 2018[update], the Falcon 9 has launched from three orbital launch sites: Launch Complex 39A of the Kennedy Space Center,[124] Space Launch Complex 4E of the Vandenberg Air Force Base,[68][76] and Space Launch Complex 40 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station; the latter was damaged in the Amos-6 accident in September 2016, but is operational again since December 2017.[125][126] SpaceX is also building a commercial-only launch facility at the Boca Chica site near Brownsville, Texas,[127][42] from which the Falcon 9 was previously expected to launch beginning in late 2018.[needs update]

At the time of the rocket's maiden flight in 2010, the price of a Falcon 9 v1.0 launch was listed from $49.9 to $56 million.[4] By 2012, the listed price range had increased to $54â€“$59.5 million.[128] In August 2013, the initial list price for a Falcon 9 v1.1 was $56.5 million;[129] it was raised to $61.2 million by June 2014.[130] Since May 2016, the standard price for a Falcon 9 Full Thrust mission (allowing booster recovery) is published as $62 million.[1] Dragon cargo missions to the ISS have an average cost of $133 million under a fixed price contract with NASA, including the cost of the capsule.[131] The DSCOVR mission, also launched with Falcon 9 for NOAA, cost $97 million[132]

In 2004, Elon Musk stated, "long term plans call for development of a heavy lift product and even a super-heavy, if there is customer demand. [...] Ultimately, I believe $500 per pound ($1100/kg) [of payload delivered to orbit] or less is very achievable."[133] At its 2016 launch price and at full LEO payload capacity, the Falcon 9 FT cost $2,719 per kilogram ($1,233/lb) for the expendable version. In comparison, at full GTO payload capacity, the Falcon 9 FT cost $7,470 per kilogram ($3,390/lb) for the expendable version and $11,273 per kilogram ($5,113/lb) for the 1st launch of the reusable version.

In 2011, Musk estimated that fuel and oxidizer for the Falcon 9 v1.0 rocket cost a total of about $200,000.[134] The first stage uses 150,000 L (39,000 US gal) of liquid oxygen and almost 95,000 L (25,000 US gal) of RP-1 fuel, while the second stage uses 28,000 L (7,300 US gal) of liquid oxygen and 17,000 L (4,600 US gal) of RP-1.[1]

Falcon 9 payload services include secondary and tertiary payload connection via an EELV Secondary Payload Adapter ring, the same interstage adapter first used for launching secondary payloads on US DoD missions that use the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicles (EELV) Atlas V and Delta IV. This enables secondary and even tertiary missions with minimal impact to the original mission. In 2011, SpaceX announced pricing for ESPA-compatible payloads on the Falcon 9.[135]


where is located the house of the hart to hart

The ranch-style house used for exterior filming was previously owned by actors Dick Powell and his wife, June Allyson. Powell was an old friend of both Robert Wagner and Aaron Spelling. The actual estate, known as Amber Hills, is situated on 48 acres in the Mandeville Canyon section of Brentwood, Los Angeles. In the series, the Harts' address is given as 3100 Willow Pond Road, Bel Air: the real address of the house is 3100 Mandeville Canyon Road.

Hart to Hart

Hart to Hart is an American mystery television series which premiered on August 25, 1979, on ABC. The show features Robert Wagner and Stefanie Powers who play Jonathan and Jennifer Hart, a wealthy couple who lead a glamorous jetset lifestyle and regularly find themselves working as amateur detectives in order to solve crimes in which they become embroiled. The series was created by novelist and television writer Sidney Sheldon. The series concluded after five seasons on May 22, 1984.

The premise of the show is summed up in the opening credits sequence, narrated by Max (the Harts' butler) as he introduces the characters:

This is my boss – Jonathan Hart, a self-made millionaire. He’s quite a guy. This is Mrs. H – she’s gorgeous. What a terrific lady. By the way, my name is Max. I take care of them, which ain't easy, 'cause their hobby is murder.

Beginning with Season 2 onward, the opening lines were slightly changed:

This is my boss – Jonathan Hart, a self-made millionaire. He’s quite a guy. This is Mrs. H – she’s gorgeous. She’s one lady who knows how to take care of herself. By the way, my name is Max. I take care of both of them – which ain’t easy; ‘cause when they met, it was murder.

Jonathan Hart (Robert Wagner) is the CEO of Hart Industries, a Los Angeles-based global conglomerate. His wife Jennifer (Stefanie Powers) is a beautiful freelance journalist. Living the jetset lifestyle, the Harts often find themselves involved in cases of smuggling, theft, corporate and international espionage and, most commonly, murder. At their opulent Bel Air estate, they are assisted by Max (Lionel Stander), their loyal, gravel-voiced butler, cook, and chauffeur who also helps with their cases. The Harts' beloved pet dog is a Löwchen called Freeway, so named because he was a stray that they found wandering on the freeway. The Harts own a Mercedes-Benz 300 TD diesel wagon, a dark green Rolls Royce Corniche convertible (replacing the Series III Bentley custom cabriolet in the first season), and a yellow Mercedes-Benz SL roadster (1979 450 SL, replaced by a 1981 380 SL) with personalized California vanity plates 3 HARTs, 2 HARTs, and 1 HART respectively. The opening credits sequence also shows Jonathan Hart driving a red Dino 246 GTS. They also own a Grumman Gulfstream II private jet, which is featured at the start of the opening credits.

Screenwriter and novelist Sidney Sheldon had originally written a script for CBS entitled Double Twist in the early 1970s about a married couple who were also both spies. The script remained unfilmed for several years before producers Aaron Spelling and Leonard Goldberg decided to update the idea for a potential television series. They offered the script to screenwriter Tom Mankiewicz, who had by that time written several screenplays including three of the James Bond films.

Their instruction to Mankiewicz was to update the script to make it more contemporary and viable for a potential weekly series. They also told Mankiewicz that if his draft was successful, he would also be able to direct the pilot episode himself.[1] Mankiewicz reworked Sheldon's original script and it was renamed Hart to Hart, emphasizing the romantic aspect of the couple. Mankiewicz also made his directorial debut with the pilot episode as planned, and remained a creative consultant to the series afterwards.

Spelling and Goldberg's initial choice for the role of Jonathan Hart was Cary Grant. However, Grant (who was 75 years old at the time) had effectively retired from acting some years earlier (with his last film Walk Don't Run in 1966). They then decided to find a younger actor who might embody the same style, zest and persona that Grant was famous for and offered the role to Robert Wagner. No one else was seriously considered for the role; George Hamilton had a high profile at the time and was suggested but Aaron Spelling said that if he was cast "the audience will resent him as Hart for being that rich. But no one will begrudge RJ [Wagner] a nickel."[2]

ABC wanted Wagner's real life wife Natalie Wood to co-star with him as Jennifer Hart but Wagner didn't think it was a good idea (however, Wood makes a cameo appearance in the pilot). Initial choices for the role of Jennifer Hart included Suzanne Pleshette, Kate Jackson and Lindsay Wagner, but Wagner suggested Stefanie Powers who had previously worked with him when she made a guest appearance in an episode of his action-adventure series It Takes a Thief in 1970.[2]

Wagner wanted Sugar Ray Robinson to portray Max but ABC-TV executives were worried about a black man playing the butler/houseman to a rich white couple. Eventually they cast Lionel Stander, who had also worked with Wagner in an episode of It Takes a Thief. In that episode ("King of Thieves"), he also played a character named Max who was a lifelong friend.

The main title theme for the series was scored by Mark Snow.

Fashion and jewelry designer Nolan Miller, who later designed the clothes for Dynasty, was the costume designer for show.

In 1993, almost a decade after the series ended, Wagner and Powers reunited for a series of Hart to Hart TV movies. Eight 90-minute telemovies were made in total between 1993-96:

Lionel Stander reprised his role as Max in five of the movies before his death (from lung cancer) November 30, 1994. His last ever screen appearance was in Secrets of the Hart, which aired in March 1995.

In September 2015, Deadline.com reported that NBC had made a script commitment to a Hart to Hart remake series featuring a gay male couple. Written by Christopher Fife and produced by Carol Mendelsohn and Julie Weitz, the new series is described as "a modern and sexy retelling of the classic series that focuses on by-the-book attorney Jonathan Hart and free-spirited investigator Dan Hartman, who must balance the two sides of their life: action-packed crime-solving in the midst of newly found domesticity."[3] A similar project had been announced more than a decade earlier in 2002, with Alan Cumming attached to star in a series being developed for ABC that was being touted as a "gay Hart to Hart". Titled Mr and Mr Nash, the planned series featured a gay couple, both interior designers, who "stumble upon a murder each week", but it ultimately never went into production.[4]

Sony Pictures Home Entertainment released the first two seasons of Hart to Hart on DVD in Regions 1 & 2 in 2005/2006.

In 2010/2011, Sony Pictures released all eight TV-Movies on DVD individually via the Warner Archive Collection. These were Manufacture-on-Demand (MOD) releases and are available exclusively through WBShop.com and Amazon.com. On October 2, 2012, Sony released all eight TV-Movies in two volume collections entitled Hart to Hart - TV Movie Collection, Volume 1 and Hart to Hart - TV Movie Collection, Volume 2.[5] These are also Manufacture-on-Demand (MOD) releases, available via Amazon.com and are part of the Sony Choice Collection.

On September 4, 2014, it was announced that Shout! Factory had acquired the rights to the series for Region 1. They released Season 3 in December 2014, Season 4 in February 2015, the fifth and final season in June 2015, and The Complete Series on May 30, 2017.[6][7][8][9][8][10]

On June 6, 2013 (June 7 in the Eastern Time Zone), Adult Swim aired an edition of The Greatest Event in Television History. Hosted by Jeff Probst, the program went behind the scenes during the making of a shot-for-shot remake of the Hart to Hart opening sequence, with Adam Scott and Amy Poehler respectively in the roles of Jonathan and Jennifer Hart, and Horatio Sanz as Max.[11] The remake followed a similar effort in the fall of 2012, adapting the opening credit sequence of Simon & Simon.