Monthly Archives: October 2017

Mestis 2001/02

Die Saison 2001/02 war die zweite Spielzeit in der Mestis, der zweithöchsten finnischen Eishockeyliga. Die Mestis-Meisterschaft gewann wie im Vorjahr Jukurit.

Jedes Team musste viermal gegen jedes andere Team in der Liga spielen. Ein Sieg in der regulären Spielzeit und nach Verlängerung brachte einer Mannschaft zwei Punkte. Ein Unentschieden und eine Niederlage nach Verlängerung wurde mit einem Punkt vergütet. Für eine Niederlage in der regulären Spielzeit gab es keine Punkte.

Abkürzungen: Sp = Spiele, S = Siege, SnV = Sieg nach Verlängerung, U = Unentschieden, NnV = Niederlage nach Verlängerung, N = Niederlagen, ET= Erzielte Tore, GT = Gegentore, TD = Tordifferenz, P = Punkte

Die Plätze 1-8 waren für die Play-offs qualifiziert. Für das Halbfinale qualifizierten sich die Mannschaften, die im Viertelfinale gegen ihren Gegner von fünf Spielen die meisten gewonnen hatten. Im Halbfinale wurde ebenfalls nach dem Modus Best-of-5 gespielt. Die Sieger der Halbfinals zogen ins Finale ein, während die Verlierer im kleinen Finale um den dritten Platz spielten. Im Finale wurden wieder fünf Spiele gespielt. Wer die meisten Spiele gewann, war Sieger der Saison. In der Runde um Platz 3 wurde lediglich ein Spiel gespielt.

Die jeweiligen Gegner wurden so zusammengestellt, dass die bestplatzierte Mannschaft gegen die schlechteste spielt, die zweitbeste customised football shirts, gegen die zweitschlechteste, und so weiter. Ein Spiel dauerte, so wie in der Hauptsaison, insgesamt 60 Minuten. Nach der regulären Zeit wurden Verlängerungen von jeweils 20 Minuten Länge gespielt bis ein Sieger durch ein entscheidendes Tor gefunden wurde.

Die beiden letztplatzierten Mannschaften der Mestis und die Gewinner der Play-offs aus der Suomi-sarja traten in einer Qualifikationsrunde in Hin- und Rückspiel um den Verbleib in der Mestis bzw. um den Aufstieg gegeneinander an.

Abkürzungen: Sp = Spiele, S = Siege, SnV = Sieg nach Verlängerung, U = Unentschieden, NnV = Niederlage nach Verlängerung, N = Niederlagen, ET= Erzielte Tore, GT = Gegentore, TD = Tordifferenz youth basketball uniforms, P = Punkte

Hokki Kajaani stieg in die Mestis auf, während Diskos in die Suomi-sarja abstieg. UJK blieb weiterhin in der Mestis und Kiekko-Oulu weiterhin in der Suomi-sarja.

2000/01 | 2001/02 | 2002/03 | 2003/04 | 2004/05 | 2005/06 | 2006/07 | 2007/08 | 2008/09 | 2009/10 | 2010/11 | 2011/12 | 2012/13

Barry (album)

Barry is the self-titled album released by singer and songwriter Barry Manilow in 1980 waterproof containers. The album reached Platinum status. The tracks were recorded at Evergreen Recording Studios in Burbank glass voss water bottle, California. Manilow co-wrote with Maurice White of Earth, Wind & Fire the album track “Only in Chicago”. “We Still Have Time” was taken from the film Tribute.

The album scored one top ten pop hit, “I Made It Through the Rain”, which reached number ten glass filter water bottle, in late 1980. This album was released at a time when Manilow’s success was having its greatest impact overseas, particularly in the UK water proof bag. His music was starting to be pushed almost entirely to adult contemporary music radio formats, known back then as easy listening. Although “I Made It Through the Rain” was his only Top-10 on the Hot 100 from this album, he managed to reach the Top-10 on the Adult-Contemporary lists with “Lonely Together” and the bouncy up-tempo “Bermuda Triangle” was a Top-20 hit in the UK in mid-1981. The album has yet to be released on CD in the US, but has had a CD release in Japan.

Above the Rim

Above the Rim is een Amerikaanse drama- en sportfilm uit 1994 van Jeff Pollack. De hoofdrollen zijn voor Duane Martin, Leon Robinson en Tupac Shakur.

In de Verenigde Staten bracht de film $16.192.320 op.

Above the Rim beschrijft het verhaal van een veelbelovend basketbalspeler en zijn relatie met zijn twee broers; de één is drugsdealer en de ander een basketbalspeler, maar nu bewaker op zijn vroegere middelbare school.

Een jong atleet doet zijn best om een professionele basketbalspeler te worden, maar komt in dit melodrama voor enkele moeilijke keuzes te staan. Kyle-Lee (Duane Martin) is een getalenteerd basketbalspeler op de middelbare school. Terwijl hij wacht op zijn toelating tot de Universiteit van Georgetown, krijgt hij te maken met een moeilijk dilemma tijdens een basketbaltoernooi. Hij moet kiezen of hij zijn goedhartige basketbaltrainer volgt of Birdie (Tupac Shakur), een plaatselijke misdadiger in de buurt. Kyle wantrouwt daarnaast de bewaker Shepherd, ook wel Shep genoemd (Leon Robinson), waar zijn moeder verliefd op is. Zijn trainer wil dat ook Shep meespeelt steel water bottle. Uiteindelijk komt Kyle erachter dat Shep de oudere broer van Birdie is. Na de tragische dood van een vriend, Nutso running phone belt, kan Shep het in zijn gedachten niet opbrengen om nog te spelen.

Morellino di Scansano

Morellino di Scansano ist seit dem 14. November 2006 ein DOCG (Denominazione di Origine Controllata e Garantita)-Weinanbaugebiet in der südlichen Toskana meat tenderizer singapore. In der Gegend um die Gemeinde Scansano wird die rote Rebsorte Sangiovese Morellino genannt. Das Weinbaugebiet liegt südlich und westlich von Scansano. Im Gegensatz zu dem nördlich angrenzenden größeren DOC-Gebiet Monteregio di Massa Marittima hat der Morellino di Scansano einen internationalen Bekanntheitsgrad erreicht.

Die ersten Nachweise über Weinbau bei Scansano finden sich im 19. Jahrhundert. Zuvor war eine agrarische Nutzung der Maremma nicht möglich. Das Gebiet war in der Antike ein ausgedehnter Salzsee (Lacus Prelius) und im Mittelalter eine nahezu unbewohnte Sumpflandschaft, in der die Malaria grassierte. Erst das flächendeckende Programm zur Trockenlegung der Sümpfe, Anlegung eines Kanalsystems und Kultivierung des Landes durch Großherzog Leopold II. schuf die Voraussetzungen für den Oliven- und Weinanbau. Mit einem Dekret per 6. Januar 1978 wurde das DOC-Gebiet (Denominazione di origine controllata) dennoch ca.&nbsp best lemon press;20 Jahre früher institutionalisiert als die Nachbargebiete im touristisch weniger entwickelten Umland, das bis in die 80er Jahre hinein vorrangig vom Bergbau lebte; die ersten Touristengebiete von internationaler Bedeutung lagen südlich von Grosseto rund um den Monte Argentario.

1992 wurde ein Winzer-Konsortium gegründet, das 22 größere Betriebe mit ca. 120 einzelnen Weingütern umfasst. Ziele des Konsortiums sind eine freiwillige Qualitätskontrolle und Bündelung des Vertriebs.

Mit dem Dekret vom 14. November 2006 („G.U. 278 29.11.2006“) gilt der Morellino di Scansano ab der Weinlese 2007 als DOCG. Vorher (seit 1978) besaß der Weine lediglich eine „kontrollierte Herkunftsbezeichnung“ – DOC.

Das DOCG-Gebiet umfasst die gesamte Gemeinde Scansano sowie Teile der Gemeinden Campagnatico, Grosseto, Magliano in Toscana, Manciano

United States Home DISKERUD 10 Jerseys

United States Home DISKERUD 10 Jerseys

BUY NOW

$266.58
$31.99

, Roccalbegna und Semproniano (alle in der Provinz Grosseto). Das Dekret grenzt das Gebiet genau anhand von Straßenzügen und Flussläufen ein. Im Jahr 2014 wurden von 1315 Hektar Rebfläche 77.268 Hektoliter DOCG-Wein erzeugt.

Kerngebiete liegen zwischen den Flussläufen von Ombrone und Albegna.

Artikel 2 des DOCG-Dekrets regelt, dass der Rotwein des DOCG-Gebiets zu 85 % aus Sangiovese bestehen muss. Der Rest dürfen Beimengungen anderer roter Rebsorten der Provinz Grosseto sein. Der Anbau von Weißwein und Vin Santo ist nicht reglementiert; bisher ist Morellino di Scansano ein reines Rotweinanbaugebiet. Um Überproduktion zu vermeiden, ist der Ertrag auf 90 Doppelzentner pro Hektar begrenzt. Zugleich wird eine 20%ige Toleranzgrenze zugelassen, da eine Messung in der Praxis kaum möglich ist. Als Richtwert wird vorgegeben, dass die Schüttung bei maximal 70 % liegen darf, das heißt aus 100 kg Beeren dürfen max. 70 Liter Wein mit DOCG-Etikett hergestellt werden.

„Riserva“ darf sich ein Wein nennen, der mindestens zwei Jahre im Fass gereift ist.

Laut Denominazione sollte der Wein folgende Eigenschaften aufweisen:

Brunello di Montalcino | Carmignano | Chianti (DOCG) | Chianti classico (DOCG)&nbsp soften meat;| Elba Aleatico Passito | Montecucco Sangiovese | Morellino di Scansano | Suvereto | Val di Cornia Rosso | Vernaccia di San Gimignano | Vino Nobile di Montepulciano

Lorica (ort)

Lorica är en ort i Colombia. Den ligger i departementet Córdoba, i den norra delen av landet, 500 km norr om huvudstaden Bogotá. Lorica ligger 10 meter över havet och antalet invånare är 40 605.

Terrängen runt Lorica är huvudsakligen platt tenderizer for beef, men åt nordväst är den kuperad. Terrängen runt Lorica sluttar söderut. Den högsta punkten i närheten är 245 meter över havet, 5,6 km nordväst om Lorica. Runt Lorica är det ganska tätbefolkat, med 139 invånare per kvadratkilometer. Lorica är det största samhället i trakten. Trakten runt Lorica består huvudsakligen av våtmarker. I trakten runt Lorica finns ovanligt många namngivna insjöar.

Savannklimat råder i trakten. Årsmedeltemperaturen i trakten är 25&nbsp hydration belt philippines;°C. Den varmaste månaden är februari, då medeltemperaturen är 28 °C, och den kallaste är november best gym bottle, med 24 °C. Genomsnittlig årsnederbörd är 1&nbsp reusable water bottles;787 millimeter. Den regnigaste månaden är augusti, med i genomsnitt 287 mm nederbörd, och den torraste är januari, med 34 mm nederbörd.

Reflection seismology

Reflection seismology (or seismic reflection) is a method of exploration geophysics that uses the principles of seismology to estimate the properties of the Earth’s subsurface from reflected seismic waves. The method requires a controlled seismic source of energy, such as dynamite or Tovex blast, a specialized air gun or a seismic vibrator, commonly known by the trademark name Vibroseis. Reflection seismology is similar to sonar and echolocation. This article is about surface seismic surveys; for vertical seismic profiles, see VSP.

Reflections and refractions of seismic waves at geologic interfaces within the Earth were first observed on recordings of earthquake-generated seismic waves. The basic model of the Earth’s deep interior is based on observations of earthquake-generated seismic waves transmitted through the Earth’s interior (e.g., Mohorovičić, 1910). The use of human-generated seismic waves to map in detail the geology of the upper few kilometers of the Earth’s crust followed shortly thereafter and has developed mainly due to commercial enterprise, particularly the petroleum industry.

Seismic reflection exploration grew out of the seismic refraction exploration method, which was used to find oil associated with salt domes. Ludger Mintrop, a German mine surveyor, devised a mechanical seismograph in 1914 that he successfully used to detect salt domes in Germany. He applied for a German patent in 1919 that was issued in 1926. In 1921 he founded the company Seismos, which was hired to conduct seismic exploration in Texas and Mexico, resulting in the first commercial discovery of oil using the refraction seismic method in 1924. The 1924 discovery of the Orchard salt dome in Texas led to a boom in seismic refraction exploration along the Gulf Coast, but by 1930 the method had led to the discovery most of the shallow Gulf Coast salt domes, and the refraction seismic method faded.

The Canadian inventor Reginald Fessenden was the first to conceive of using reflected seismic waves to infer geology. His work was initially on the propagation of acoustic waves in water, motivated by the sinking of the Titanic by an iceberg in 1912. He also worked on methods of detecting submarines during World War I. He applied for the first patent on a seismic exploration method in 1914, which was issued in 1917. Due to the war, he was unable to follow up on the idea. John Clarence Karcher discovered seismic reflections independently while working for the United States Bureau of Standards (now the National Institute of Standards and Technology) on methods of sound ranging to detect artillery. In discussion with colleagues, the idea developed that these reflections could aid in exploration for petroleum. With several others, many affiliated with the University of Oklahoma, Karcher helped to form the Geological Engineering Company, incorporated in Oklahoma in April, 1920. The first field tests were conducted near Oklahoma City, Oklahoma in 1921.

Early reflection seismology was viewed with skepticism by many in the oil industry. An early advocate of the method commented:

The Geological Engineering Company folded due to a drop in the price of oil. In 1925, oil prices had rebounded, and Karcher helped to form Geophysical Research Corporation (GRC) as part of the oil company Amerada. In 1930, Karcher left GRC and helped to found Geophysical Service Incorporated (GSI). GSI was one of the most successful seismic contracting companies for over 50 years and was the parent of an even more successful company, Texas Instruments. Early GSI employee Henry Salvatori left that company in 1933 to found another major seismic contractor, Western Geophysical. Many other companies using reflection seismology in hydrocarbon exploration, hydrology, engineering studies, and other applications have been formed since the method was first invented. Major service companies today include CGG, ION Geophysical, Petroleum Geo-Services, Polarcus, TGS and WesternGeco. Most major oil companies also have actively conducted research into seismic methods as well as collected and processed seismic data using their own personnel and technology. Reflection seismology has also found applications in non-commercial research by academic and government scientists around the world.

As with all human activities, seismic reflection surveys may have some impact on the Earth’s natural environment and both the hydrocarbon industry and environmental groups partake in research to investigate these effects.

On land, conducting a seismic survey may require the building of roads, for transporting equipment and personnel, and vegetation may need to be cleared for the deployment of equipment. If the survey is in a relatively undeveloped area, significant habitat disturbance may occur and many governments require seismic companies to follow strict rules regarding destruction of the environment; for example, the use of dynamite as a seismic source may be disallowed. Seismic processing techniques allow for seismic lines to deviate around natural obstacles, or use pre-existing non-straight tracks and trails. With careful planning, this can greatly reduce the environmental impact of a land seismic survey. The more recent use of inertial navigation instruments for land survey instead of theodolites decreased the impact of seismic by allowing the winding of survey lines between trees.

The main environmental concern for marine seismic surveys is the potential for noise associated with the high-energy seismic source to disturb or injure animal life, especially cetaceans such as whales, porpoises, and dolphins, as these mammals use sound as their primary method of communication with one another. High-level and long-duration sound can cause physical damage, such as hearing loss, whereas lower-level noise can cause temporary threshold shifts in hearing, obscuring sounds that are vital to marine life, or behavioural disturbance.

A study has shown that migrating humpback whales will leave a minimum 3 km gap between themselves and an operating seismic vessel, with resting humpback whale pods with cows exhibiting increased sensitivity and leaving an increased gap of 7–12 km. Conversely, the study found that male humpback whales were attracted to a single operating airgun as they were believed to have confused the low-frequency sound with that of whale breaching behaviour. In addition to whales, sea turtles, fish and squid all showed alarm and avoidance behaviour in the presence of an approaching seismic source. It is difficult to compare reports on the effects of seismic survey noise on marine life because methods and units are often inadequately documented.

The gray whale will avoid its regular migratory and feeding grounds by >30 km in areas of seismic testing.[citation needed] Similarly the breathing of gray whales was shown to be more rapid, indicating discomfort and panic in the whale. It is circumstantial evidence such as this that has led researchers to believe that avoidance and panic might be responsible for increased whale beachings although research is ongoing into these questions.

Offering another point of view, a joint paper from the International Association of Geophysical Contractors (IAGC) and the International Association of Oil and Gas Producers (OGP) argue that the noise created by marine seismic surveys is comparable to natural sources of seismic noise, stating:

“The sound produced during seismic surveys is comparable in magnitude to many naturally occurring and other man-made sound sources. Furthermore, the specific characteristics of seismic sounds and the operational procedures employed during seismic surveys are such that the resulting risks to marine mammals are expected to be exceptionally low. In fact, three decades of world-wide seismic surveying activity and a variety of research projects have shown no evidence which would suggest that sound from E&P seismic activities has resulted in any physical or auditory injury to any marine mammal species.”

Seismic waves are mechanical perturbations that travel in the Earth at a speed governed by the acoustic impedance of the medium in which they are travelling. The acoustic (or seismic) impedance, Z, is defined by the equation:

where V is the seismic wave velocity and ρ (Greek rho) is the density of the rock.

When a seismic wave travelling through the Earth encounters an interface between two materials with different acoustic impedances, some of the wave energy will reflect off the interface and some will refract through the interface. At its most basic, the seismic reflection technique consists of generating seismic waves and measuring the time taken for the waves to travel from the source, reflect off an interface and be detected by an array of receivers (or geophones) at the surface. Knowing the travel times from the source to various receivers, and the velocity of the seismic waves, a geophysicist then attempts to reconstruct the pathways of the waves in order to build up an image of the subsurface.

In common with other geophysical methods, reflection seismology may be seen as a type of inverse problem. That is, given a set of data collected by experimentation and the physical laws that apply to the experiment, the experimenter wishes to develop an abstract model of the physical system being studied. In the case of reflection seismology, the experimental data are recorded seismograms, and the desired result is a model of the structure and physical properties of the Earth’s crust. In common with other types of inverse problems, the results obtained from reflection seismology are usually not unique (more than one model adequately fits the data) and may be sensitive to relatively small errors in data collection, processing, or analysis. For these reasons, great care must be taken when interpreting the results of a reflection seismic survey.

The general principle of seismic reflection is to send elastic waves (using an energy source such as dynamite explosion or Vibroseis) into the Earth, where each layer within the Earth reflects a portion of the wave’s energy back and allows the rest to refract through. These reflected energy waves are recorded over a predetermined time period (called the record length) by receivers that detect the motion of the ground in which they are placed. On land, the typical receiver used is a small, portable instrument known as a geophone, which converts ground motion into an analogue electrical signal. In water, hydrophones are used, which convert pressure changes into electrical signals. Each receiver’s response to a single shot is known as a “trace” and is recorded onto a data storage device, then the shot location is moved along and the process is repeated. Typically, the recorded signals are subjected to significant amounts of signal processing before they are ready to be interpreted and this is an area of significant active research within industry and academia. In general, the more complex the geology of the area under study, the more sophisticated are the techniques required to remove noise and increase resolution. Modern seismic reflection surveys contain large amount of data and so require large amounts of computer processing, often performed on supercomputers or computer clusters.[citation needed]

When a seismic wave encounters a boundary between two materials with different acoustic impedances, some of the energy in the wave will be reflected at the boundary, while some of the energy will be transmitted through the boundary. The amplitude of the reflected wave is predicted by multiplying the amplitude of the incident wave by the seismic reflection coefficient





R




{\displaystyle R}


, determined by the impedance contrast between the two materials.

For a wave that hits a boundary at normal incidence (head-on), the expression for the reflection coefficient is simply

where






Z



1






{\displaystyle Z_{1}}


and






Z



2






{\displaystyle Z_{2}}


are the impedance of the first and second medium, respectively.

Similarly, the amplitude of the incident wave is multiplied by the transmission coefficient to predict the amplitude of the wave transmitted through the boundary. The formula for the normal-incidence transmission coefficient is

As the sum of the squares of amplitudes of the reflected and transmitted wave has to be equal to the square of amplitude of the incident wave, it is easy to show that

By observing changes in the strength of reflectors, seismologists can infer changes in the seismic impedances. In turn, they use this information to infer changes in the properties of the rocks at the interface, such as density and elastic modulus.[citation needed]

The situation becomes much more complicated in the case of non-normal incidence, due to mode conversion between P-waves and S-waves, and is described by the Zoeppritz equations. In 1919, Karl Zoeppritz derived 4 equations that determine the amplitudes of reflected and refracted waves at a planar interface for an incident P-wave as a function of the angle of incidence and six independent elastic parameters. These equations have 4 unknowns and can be solved but they do not give an intuitive understanding for how the reflection amplitudes vary with the rock properties involved.

The reflection and transmission coefficients, which govern the amplitude of each reflection, vary with angle of incidence and can be used to obtain information about (among many other things) the fluid content of the rock. Practical use of non-normal incidence phenomena, known as AVO (see amplitude versus offset) has been facilitated by theoretical work to derive workable approximations to the Zoeppritz equations and by advances in computer processing capacity. AVO studies attempt with some success to predict the fluid content (oil, gas, or water) of potential reservoirs, to lower the risk of drilling unproductive wells and to identify new petroleum reservoirs. The 3-term simplification of the Zoeppritz equations that is most commonly used was developed in 1985 and is known as the “Shuey equation”. A further 2-term simplification is known as the “Shuey approximation”, is valid for angles of incidence less than 30 degrees (usually the case in seismic surveys) and is given below:

where





R


(


0


)




{\displaystyle R(0)}


= reflection coefficient at zero-offset (normal incidence);





G




{\displaystyle G}


= AVO gradient, describing reflection behaviour at intermediate offsets and





(


θ



)




{\displaystyle (\theta )}


= angle of incidence. This equation reduces to that of normal incidence at





(


θ



)




{\displaystyle (\theta )}


=0.

The time it takes for a reflection from a particular boundary to arrive at the geophone is called the travel time. If the seismic wave velocity in the rock is known, then the travel time may be used to estimate the depth to the reflector. For a simple vertically traveling wave, the travel time





t




{\displaystyle t}


from the surface to the reflector and back is called the Two-Way Time (TWT) and is given by the formula

where





d




{\displaystyle d}






V




{\displaystyle V}


is the wave velocity in the rock.

A series of apparently related reflections on several seismograms is often referred to as a reflection event. By correlating reflection events, a seismologist can create an estimated cross-section of the geologic structure that generated the reflections. Interpretation of large surveys is usually performed with programs using high-end three-dimensional computer graphics.

In addition to reflections off interfaces within the subsuface, there are a number of other seismic responses detected by receivers and are either unwanted or unneeded:

The airwave travels directly from the source to the receiver and is an example of coherent noise. It is easily recognizable because it travels at a speed of 330 m/s, the speed of sound in air.

A Rayleigh wave typically propagates along a free surface of a solid, but the elastic constants and density of air are very low compared to those of rocks so the surface of the Earth is approximately a free surface. Low velocity, low frequency and high amplitude Rayleigh waves are frequently present on a seismic record and can obscure signal, degrading overall data quality. They are known within the industry as ‘Ground Roll’ and are an example of coherent noise that can be attenuated with a carefully designed seismic survey. The Scholte wave is similar to ground roll but occurs at the sea-floor (fluid/solid interface) and it can possibly obscure and mask deep reflections in marine seismic records. The velocity of these waves varies with wavelength, so they are said to be dispersive and the shape of the wavetrain varies with distance.

A head wave refracts at an interface, travelling along it, within the lower medium and produces oscillatory motion parallel to the interface. This motion causes a disturbance in the upper medium that is detected on the surface. The same phenomenon is utilised in seismic refraction.

An event on the seismic record that has incurred more than one reflection is called a multiple. Multiples can be either short-path (peg-leg) or long-path, depending upon whether they interfere with primary reflections or not.

Multiples from the bottom of a body of water (the interface of the base of water and the rock or sediment beneath it) and the air-water interface are common in marine seismic data, and are suppressed by seismic processing.

Cultural noise includes noise from weather effects, planes, helicopters, electrical pylons, and ships (in the case of marine surveys), all of which can be detected by the receivers.

Reflection seismology is used extensively in a number of fields and its applications can be categorised into three groups, each defined by their depth of investigation:

A method similar to reflection seismology which uses electromagnetic instead of elastic waves, and has a smaller depth of penetration, is known as Ground-penetrating radar or GPR.

Reflection seismology, more commonly referred to as “seismic reflection” or abbreviated to “seismic” within the hydrocarbon industry, is used by petroleum geologists and geophysicists to map and interpret potential petroleum reservoirs. The size and scale of seismic surveys has increased alongside the significant concurrent increases in computer power during the last 25 years. This has led the seismic industry from laboriously – and therefore rarely – acquiring small 3D surveys in the 1980s to now routinely acquiring large-scale high resolution 3D surveys. The goals and basic principles have remained the same best soccer t shirts, but the methods have slightly changed over the years.

The primary environments for seismic exploration are land, the transition zone and marine:

Land – The land environment covers almost every type of terrain that exists on Earth, each bringing its own logistical problems. Examples of this environment are jungle, desert, arctic tundra, forest, urban settings, mountain regions and savannah.

Transition Zone (TZ) – The transition zone is considered to be the area where the land meets the sea, presenting unique challenges because the water is too shallow for large seismic vessels but too deep for the use of traditional methods of acquisition on land. Examples of this environment are river deltas, swamps and marshes, coral reefs, beach tidal areas and the surf zone. Transition zone seismic crews will often work on land, in the transition zone and in the shallow water marine environment on a single project in order to obtain a complete map of the subsurface.

Marine – The marine zone is either in shallow water areas (water depths of less than 30 to 40 metres would normally be considered shallow water areas for 3D marine seismic operations) or in the deep water areas normally associated with the seas and oceans (such as the Gulf of Mexico).

Seismic surveys are typically designed by National oil companies and International oil companies who hire service companies such as CGG, Petroleum Geo-Services and WesternGeco to acquire them. Another company is then hired to process the data, although this can often be the same company that acquired the survey. Finally the finished seismic volume is delivered to the oil company so that it can be geologically interpreted.

Land seismic surveys tend to be large entities, requiring hundreds of tons of equipment and employing anywhere from a few hundred to a few thousand people, deployed over vast areas for many months. There are a number of options available for a controlled seismic source in a land survey and particularly common choices are Vibroseis and dynamite. Vibroseis is a non-impulsive source that is cheap and efficient but requires flat ground to operate on, making its use more difficult in undeveloped areas. The method comprises one or more heavy, all-terrain vehicles lowering a steel plate onto the ground, which is then vibrated with a specific frequency distribution and amplitude. It produces a low energy density, allowing it to be used in cities and other built-up areas where dynamite would cause significant damage, though the large weight attached to a Vibroseis truck can cause its own environmental damage. Dynamite is an impulsive source that is regarded as the ideal geophysical source due to it producing an almost perfect impulse function but it has obvious environmental drawbacks. For a long time, it was the only seismic source available until weight dropping was introduced around 1954, allowing geophysicists to make a trade-off between image quality and environmental damage. Compared to Vibroseis, dynamite is also operationally inefficient because each source point needs to be drilled and the dynamite placed in the hole.

A land seismic survey requires substantial logistical support. In addition to the day-to-day seismic operation itself, there must also be support for the main camp (for catering, waste management and laundry etc.), smaller camps (for example where the distance is too far to drive back to the main camp with vibrator trucks), vehicle and equipment maintenance, medical personnel and security.

Unlike in marine seismic surveys, land geometries are not limited to narrow paths of acquisition, meaning that a wide range of offsets and azimuths is usually acquired and the largest challenge is increasing the rate of acquisition. The rate of production is obviously controlled by how fast the source (Vibroseis in this case) can be fired and then move on to the next source location. Attempts have been made to use multiple seismic sources at the same time in order to increase survey efficiency and a successful example of this technique is Independent Simultaneous Sweeping (ISS).

Traditional marine seismic surveys are conducted using specially-equipped vessels that tow one or more cables containing a series of hydrophones at constant intervals (see diagram). The cables are known as streamers, with 2D surveys using only 1 streamer and 3D surveys employing up to 12 or more (though 6 or 8 is more common). The streamers are deployed just beneath the surface of the water and are at a set distance away from the vessel. The seismic source, usually an airgun or an array of airguns but other sources are available, is also deployed beneath the water surface and is located between the vessel and the first receiver. Two identical sources are often used to achieve a faster rate of shooting. Marine seismic surveys generate a significant quantity of data, each streamer can be up to 6 or even 8 km long, containing hundreds of channels and the seismic source is typically fired every 15 or 20 seconds.

A seismic vessel with 2 sources and towing a single streamer is known as a Narrow-Azimuth Towed Streamer (or NAZ or NATS). By the early 2000s, it was accepted that this type of acquisition was useful for initial exploration but inadequate for development and production, in which wells had to be accurately positioned. This led to the development of the Multi-Azimuth Towed Streamer (MAZ) which tried to break the limitations of the linear acquisition pattern of a NATS survey by acquiring a combination of NATS surveys at different azimuths (see diagram). This successfully delivered increased illumination of the subsurface and a better signal to noise ratio.

The seismic properties of salt poses an additional problem for marine seismic surveys, it attenuates seismic waves and its structure contains overhangs that are difficult to image. This led to another variation on the NATS survey type, the wide-azimuth towed streamer (or WAZ or WATS) and was first tested on the Mad Dog field in 2004. This type of survey involved 1 vessel solely towing a set of 8 streamers and 2 separate vessels towing seismic sources that were located at the start and end of the last receiver line (see diagram). This configuration was “tiled” 4 times, with the receiver vessel moving further away from the source vessels each time and eventually creating the effect of a survey with 4 times the number of streamers. The end result was a seismic dataset with a larger range of wider azimuths, delivering a breakthrough in seismic imaging. These are now the three common types of marine towed streamer seismic surveys.

Marine survey acquisition is not just limited to seismic vessels; it is also possible to lay cables of geophones and hydrophones on the sea bed in a similar way to how cables are used in a land seismic survey, and use a separate source vessel. This method was originally developed out of operational necessity in order to enable seismic surveys to be conducted in areas with obstructions, such as production platforms, without having the compromise the resultant image quality. Ocean bottom cables (OBC) are also extensively used in other areas that a seismic vessel cannot be used, for example in shallow marine (water depth <300m) and transition zone environments, and can be deployed by ROVs in deep water when repeatability is valued (see 4D, below). Conventional OBC surveys use dual-component receivers, combining a pressure sensor (hydrophone) and a vertical particle velocity sensor (vertical geophone), but more recent developments have expanded the method to use four-component sensors i.e. a hydrophone and three orthogonal geophones. Four-component sensors have the advantage of being able to also record shear waves, which do not travel through water but can still contain valuable information.

In addition to the operational advantages, OBC also has geophysical advantages over a conventional NATS survey that arise from the increased fold and wider range of azimuths associated with the survey geometry. However, much like a land survey, the wider azimuths and increased fold come at a cost and the ability for large-scale OBC surveys is severely limited.

In 2005, Ocean Bottom Nodes (OBN) – an extension of the OBC method that uses battery-powered cableless receivers placed in deep water – was first trialled over the Atlantis Oil Field in a partnership between BP and Fairfield Industries. The placement of these nodes can be more flexible than the cables in OBC and they are easier to store and deploy due to their smaller size and lower weight.

Time Lapse or 4D surveys are 3D seismic surveys repeated after a period of time. The 4D refers to the fourth dimension which in this case is time. Time Lapse surveys are acquired in order to observe reservoir changes during production and identify areas where there are barriers to flow that may not be detectable in conventional seismic. TIme Lapse surveys consist out of a baseline survey and a monitor or repeat survey, acquired after the field was under production. Most of these surveys have been repeated NATS surveys as they are cheaper to acquire and most fields historically already had a NATS baseline survey. Some of these surveys are collected using ocean-bottom cables because the cables can be accurately placed in their previous location after being removed. Better repetition of the exact source and receiver location leads to improved repeatability and better signal to noise ratios. A number of 4D surveys have also been set up over fields in which ocean bottom cables have been purchased and permanently deployed. This method can be known as Life of Field Seismic (LoFS) or Permanent Reservoir Monitoring (PRM).

OBN has proven to be another very good way to accurately repeat a seismic acquisition. The world’s first 4D survey using nodes was acquired over the Atlantis Oil Field in 2009, with the nodes being placed by a ROV in a water depth of 1300-2200m to within a few meters of where they were previously placed in 2005.

There are three main processes in seismic data processing: deconvolution, common-midpoint (CMP) stacking and migration.

Deconvolution is a process that tries to extract the reflectivity series of the Earth, under the assumption that a seismic trace is just the reflectivity series of the Earth convolved with distorting filters. This process improves temporal resolution by collapsing the seismic wavelet, but it is nonunique unless further information is available such as well logs, or further assumptions are made. Deconvolution operations can be cascaded, with each individual deconvolution designed to remove a particular type of distortion.

CMP stacking is a robust process that uses the fact that a particular location in the subsurface will have been sampled numerous times and at different offsets. This allows a geophysicist to construct a group of traces with a range of offsets that all sample the same subsurface location, known as a Common Midpoint Gather. The average amplitude is then calculated along a time sample, resulting in significantly lowering the random noise but also losing all valuable information about the relationship between seismic amplitude and offset. Less significant processes that are applied shortly before the CMP stack are Normal moveout correction and statics correction. Unlike marine seismic data, land seismic data has to be corrected for the elevation differences between the shot and receiver locations. This correction is in the form of a vertical time shift to a flat datum and is known as a statics correction, but will need further correcting later in the processing sequence because the velocity of the near-surface is not accurately known. This further correction is known as a residual statics correction.

Seismic migration is the process by which seismic events are geometrically re-located in either space or time to the location the event occurred in the subsurface rather than the location that it was recorded at the surface, thereby creating a more accurate image of the subsurface.

The goal of seismic interpretation is to obtain a coherent geological story from the map of processed seismic reflections. At its most simple level, seismic interpretation involves tracing and correlating along continuous reflectors throughout the 2D or 3D dataset and using these as the basis for the geological interpretation. The aim of this is to produce structural maps that reflect the spatial variation in depth of certain geological layers. Using these maps hydrocarbon traps can be identified and models of the subsurface can be created that allow volume calculations to be made. However, a seismic dataset rarely gives a picture clear enough to do this. This is mainly because of the vertical and horizontal seismic resolution but often noise and processing difficulties also result in a lower quality picture. Due to this, there is always a degree of uncertainty in a seismic interpretation and a particular dataset could have more than one solution that fits the data. In such a case, more data will be needed to constrain the solution, for example in the form of further seismic acquisition, borehole logging or gravity and magnetic survey data. Similarly to the mentality of a seismic processor, a seismic interpreter is generally encouraged to be optimistic in order encourage further work rather than the abandonment of the survey area. Seismic interpretation is completed by both geologists and geophysicists, with most seismic interpreters having an understanding of both fields.

In hydrocarbon exploration, the features that the interpreter is particularly trying to delineate are the parts that make up a petroleum reservoir – the source rock, the reservoir rock, the seal and trap.

Seismic attribute analysis involves extracting or deriving a quantity from seismic data that can be analysed in order to enhance information that might be more subtle in a traditional seismic image, leading to a better geological or geophysical interpretation of the data. Examples of attributes that can be analysed include mean amplitude, which can lead to the delineation of bright spots and dim spots, coherency and amplitude versus offset. Attributes that can show the presence of hydrocarbons are called direct hydrocarbon indicators.

The use of reflection seismology in studies of tectonics and the Earth’s crust was pioneered in the 1970s by groups such as the Consortium for Continental Reflection Profiling (COCORP), who inspired deep seismic exploration in other countries such as BIRPS in Great Britain and ECORS in France. The British Institutions Reflection Profiling Syndicate (BIRPS) was started up as a result of oil hydrocarbon exploration in the North Sea. It became clear that there was a lack of understanding of the tectonic processes that had formed the geological structures and sedimentary basins which were being explored. The effort produced some significant results and showed that it is possible to profile features such as thrust faults that penetrate through the crust to the upper mantle with marine seismic surveys.

The following books cover important topics in reflection seismology. Most require some knowledge of mathematics, geology, and/or physics at the university level or above.

Further research in reflection seismology may be found particularly in books and journals of the Society of Exploration Geophysicists, the American Geophysical Union, and the European Association of Geoscientists and Engineers.

Réseau routier du Territoire de Belfort

Cet article présente l’histoire, les caractéristiques et les événements significatifs ayant marqué le réseau routier du département du Territoire de Belfort en France.

Au , la longueur totale du réseau routier du département du Territoire de Belfort est de 1 305 kilomètres, se répartissant en 24 kilomètres d’autoroutes, 21 kilomètres de routes nationales, 542 kilomètres de routes départementales et 718 kilomètres de voies communales. Il occupe ainsi le 96e rang au niveau national sur les 96 départements métropolitains quant à sa longueur et le 37e quant à sa densité avec 2,1 kilomètres par km2 de territoire.

Le Territoire de Belfort est né en 1871 du traité de Francfort qui mettait fin à la guerre de 1870. Il devient un département en 1922.

Devant l’état très dégradé du réseau routier au lendemain de la Première Guerre mondiale et l’explosion de l’industrie automobile, l’État, constatant l’incapacité des collectivités territoriales à remettre en état le réseau routier pour répondre aux attentes des usagers, décide d’en prendre en charge une partie. L’article 146 de la loi de finances du prévoit ainsi le classement d’une longueur de l’ordre de 40 000 kilomètres de routes départementales dans le domaine public routier national.

En ce qui concerne le département du Territoire de Belfort, ce classement devient effectif à la suite du décret du .

En 1972, un mouvement inverse est décidé par l’État. La loi de finances du prévoit le transfert dans la voirie départementale de près de 53 000 kilomètres de routes nationales. Le but poursuivi est :

Le transfert s’est opéré par vagues et par l’intermédiaire de plusieurs décrets publiés au Journal officiel hydration backpack running. Après concertation, la très grande majorité des départements a accepté le transfert qui s’est opéré dès 1972. En ce qui concerne le département du Territoire de Belfort, le transfert est acté avec un arrêté interministériel publié au journal officiel le .

Une nouvelle vague de transferts de routes nationales vers les départements intervient avec la loi du 13 août 2004 relative aux libertés et responsabilités locales, un des actes législatifs entrant dans le cadre des actes II de la décentralisation où un grand nombre de compétences de l’État ont été transférées aux collectivités locales. Dans le domaine des transports, certaines parties des routes nationales sont transférées aux départements et, pour une infime partie, aux communes (les routes n’assurant des liaisons d’intérêt départemental).

Le décret en Conseil d’État définissant le domaine routier national prévoit ainsi que l’État conserve la propriété de 8 000 kilomètres d’autoroutes concédées et de 11 800 kilomètres de routes nationales et autoroutes non concédées et qu’il cède aux départements un réseau de 18 000 kilomètres.

Dans le département du Territoire de Belfort, le transfert est décidé par arrêté préfectoral signé le . 47 kilomètres de routes nationales sont déclassées. La longueur du réseau routier national dans le département passe ainsi de 68 kilomètres en 2004 à 21 en 2006 pendant que celle du réseau départemental s’accroît de 478 à 531 kilomètres.

Le réseau routier comprend cinq catégories de voies : les autoroutes et routes nationales appartenant au domaine public routier national et gérées par l’État, les routes départementales appartenant au domaine public routier départemental et gérées par le Conseil général du Territoire de Belfort et les voies communales et chemins ruraux appartenant respectivement aux domaines public et privé des communes et gérées par les municipalités. Le linéaire de routes par catégories peut évoluer avec la création de routes nouvelles ou par transferts de domanialité entre catégories par classement ou déclassement running pack, lorsque les fonctionnalités de la route ne correspondent plus à celle attendues d’une route de la catégorie dans laquelle elle est classée. Ces transferts peuvent aussi résulter d’une démarche globale de transfert de compétences d’une collectivité vers une autre.

Au , la longueur totale du réseau routier du département du Territoire de Belfort est de 1&nbsp fabric lint remover;305 kilomètres, se répartissant en 24 kilomètres d’autoroutes, 21 kilomètres de routes nationales, 542 kilomètres de routes départementales et 718 kilomètres de voies communales. Il occupe ainsi le 96e rang au niveau national sur les 96 départements métropolitains quant à sa longueur et le 37e quant à sa densité avec 2,1 kilomètres par km2 de territoire.

Trois grandes réformes ont contribué à faire évoluer notablement cette répartition : 1930, 1972 et 2005.

L’évolution du réseau routier entre 2002 et 2011 est donnée dans le tableau ci-après.

Cette section a pour objet de recenser les événements marquants concernant le domaine de la Route dans le département de Territoire de Belfort depuis 1990. Seront ainsi citées les déclarations d’utilité publique, les débuts de travaux et les mises en service. Seuls les ouvrages les plus importants soit par leur coût soit par leur impact (déviation de bourgs) seront pris en compte. De même il est souhaitable de ne pas recenser les projets qui n’ont pas encore fait l’objet d’une déclaration d’utilité publique.

Legge quadro

La legge quadro, dette anche legge cornice, nel diritto italiano, sono delle leggi della Repubblica italiana, aventi validità sull’intero territorio statale.

Esse contengono i principi, nelle materie indicate nel previgente testo dell’art 117 cost. III comma, entro cui poteva esprimersi la funzione legislativa delle Regioni a statuto ordinario.

Dopo la riforma Costituzionale avvenuta con la legge 18 ottobre 2001 n. 3 (“Modifiche al titolo V della parte seconda della Costituzione“) la categoria delle leggi quadro formalmente non esiste più. Sono tuttavia ancora vigenti numerose leggi-quadro emanate prima del 2001.

Nel settore delle costruzioni, in riferimento alle opere pubbliche, il termine si riferisce alla legge 11 febbraio 1994 n. 109 (“Legge. quadro in materia di lavori pubblici“) e successive modificazioni, anche conosciuta come Legge Merloni.

Oggi è in vigore il Nuovo Codice degli Appalti e delle Concessioni, D best everyday water bottle. Lgsl. 50/2016 ed il regolamento di esecuzione ed attuazione del precedente D.Lgs 163/2006:

D meat tenderiser tool.P.R. 207/2010 ( in attuazione delle direttive 2004/17/CE e 2004/18/CE )

Per quanto riguarda il servizio sociale, la riforma dell’assistenza è stata approvata tramite la legge 8 novembre 2000 n. 328 (“Disposizioni per la realizzazione di un sistema integrato di interventi e servizi sociali“).

La legge quadro di tutela dei soggetti disabili è la Legge 5 febbraio 1992 n. 104 (“Legge-quadro per l’assistenza, l’integrazione sociale e i diritti delle persone diversamente abili“).

Principali obiettivi sono la rimozione delle cause invalidanti e la promozione dell’autonomia e della socializzazione.
Finalità sono: garantire il rispetto della dignità umana e i diritti di libertà e autonomia; garantire la piena integrazione familiare, scolastica, lavorativa e sociale; assicurare servizi e prestazioni per la prevenzione, la cura e la riabilitazione e la tutela giuridica ed economica.

Axel Ljungman

Axel Vilhelm Ljungman (født 1. september 1841 i Ljungs socken, Bohuslän, død 27. oktober 1901 i Göteborg) var en svensk zoolog og riksdagsmedlem.

Han blev student i Uppsala 1859 og udnævntes till fil.dr. i 1872 ved Uppsala universitet og var 1871-84 docent i zoologi der, men var næsten vedvarende tjenesteledig for at løse opgaver til fremme af det bohuslänska sildefiskeri. For at sikre dettes rationelle udøvelse og for at belyse sildens levevis og -betingelser samt sildefiskeriet skrev han blandt andet en række skrifter (hvoraf flere oversatte i “Report of United state commission of fish and fisheries”) og artikler i det af ham selv redigerede “Bohuslänsk fiskeritidskrift” 1884-1895 samt i “Nordisk tidskrift för fiskeri” (ved hvis årgange 5-7, 1879-1782, han virkede som medredaktør) med flere, desuden i “Öfversigt af Vetenskapsakademiens förhandlingar” (årgangene 21, 23

United States Away BECKERMAN 15 Jerseys

United States Away BECKERMAN 15 Jerseys

BUY NOW

$266.58
$31.99

, 27, 28), hvor han leverede bidrag til kundskab om ophiuriderne.

Årene 1880-82 og 1885-96 tilhørte han Göteborgs og Bohus läns landsting belt water bottle holder. 1881-99 var han medlem af 2 kammer for Orust och Tjörn, skrev flere forslag og sad i udvalgene tillfälligt utskott 1883-84, konstitutionsutskottet 1885-87 og 1891-98 (1887 how much meat tenderizer to use, 1891-98 som viceformand) og bankoutskottet 1888-90. I riksdagen virkede han foruden i fiskerispørgsmål i øvrigt for kommunikationsvæsenet og især for telefonnettets udvidelse i Bohuslän. I politisk henseende var han moderat konservativ. Han var medlem af kommittéen angående havsfiskeriets ordning i Göteborgs og Bohus län i 1892-1894 og stillede forslag til lov om ret til fiskeri i 1894 samt angående kommunalbeskatningen i 1897. I 1900 udnævntes han til karantänsmästare på Känsö.

Han udgav blandt andet Några ord om den unionella frågans lösning i 1895 vedrørende den svensk-norske union.

i Nordisk familjebok (2. oplag, 1912), forfattet af F. T.-m

VMFA-312

Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 312 (VMFA-312) is a United States Marine Corps F/A-18 Hornet squadron. Also known as the “Checkerboards”, the squadron is based at Marine Corps Air Station Beaufort, South Carolina and falls under the command of Marine Aircraft Group 31 (MAG-31) and the 2nd Marine Aircraft Wing (2nd MAW).

Marine Fighter Squadron 312 (VMF-312) was commissioned on June 1, 1943, at Page Field, Parris Island, South Carolina. Originally it was part of MAG-31, 1st MAW. As first aircraft the squadron received 10 SNJ-4 Texans and one F4U-1D Corsair. As their unit crest the squadron members choose a satan-like bulldog wearing a flying helmet and carrying -at that time- six .50 caliber machineguns (the armament of the Corsair) drawn by Technical Sergeant James R. Wroble. In honor of their commanding officer, Major Richard M. Day, the men nicknamed their squadron “Day’s Knights”. Also at this time, the Checkerboards emblem began to appear on both the cowling and rudder of the aircraft.

After being transferred in August 1943 to MAG-32, 3rd MAW, the squadron relocated to San Diego, California, and departed Parris Island on January 2, 1944, and headed for Miramar. They departed MCAS Miramar on February 28, 1944 and headed for Marine Corps Air Station Ewa on Hawai. VMF-312 trained at Ewa for 3 months and then headed out for Espiritu Santo, New Hebrides to become part of MAG-11, 2nd MAW.

Assigned to Marine Aircraft Group 11 on June 25, 1944, the squadron was transported to Espiritu Santo, New Hebrides, where they received 24 FG-1 Corsairs. VMF-312’s first combat action came on April 12, 1945 during the Battle of Okinawa as part of Marine Aircraft Group 33 (MAG-33), when four squadron aircraft intercepted 20 Japanese Zeros and achieved eight kills without a loss. VMF-312 continued to operate from Kadena Air Base on Okinawa until the cessation of hostilities. By war’s end, the squadron had accounted for 59.5 air combat kills in the Pacific Theater.
Between September 1945 and February 1946 VMF-312 participated in the occupation force stationed on Okinawa.

Returning to the United States in February 1946 best looking water bottle, the squadron began operations at Marine Corps Air Station El Toro still as part of MAG-33, where the squadron completed a transition to F7F-3 Tigercats, a single seat day fighter variant of the two seat Tigercat night fighter. Although the night fighters continued in service for several years, the day fighter version proved unsuitable, and VMF-312 transitioned back to Corsairs, this time F4U-4s, a higher performance model.

The squadron transferred to Marine Aircraft Group 12, MCAS El Toro in July 1950 and was alerted for deployment and service in the Korean War. The first VMF-312 aircraft flew in Korea on September 19, 1950. Flying out of Wonson Air Base, the Checkerboards flew missions in support of the 1st Marine Division during the Battle of Chosin Reservoir. Redeployed in March 1951 aboard the light carrier USS Bataan (CVL-29), the Checkerboards were assigned escort and blockade missions. Leaving the ship in June 1951, the squadron amassed 4,945 accident-free hours of carrier operations while logging 1 youth football uniforms packages,920 carrier landings. After a short period of ground based close air support operations, the squadron returned to sea, first with Bairoko, then with Bataan, and later with Sicily.

While aboard Bataan, the Checkerboards became the first piston engine squadron to shoot down a jet aircraft, when Captain Jesse Folmar shot down a MiG-15 jet fighter with 20 mm cannon fire. On June 8, 1953, the Checkerboards were relieved by VMF-332, and returned to the United States in anticipation of transitioning to F9F Panthers at Marine Corps Air Station Miami, Florida.

The Panthers were replaced with FJ-2 Furies (the naval version of the F-86 Sabre) and later FJ-3 Furies, while they in their turn were being replaced in mid-1959 by F8U-1 Crusaders. Concurrent with the reassignment in February 1966 to MCAS Beaufort was the transition to yet another aircraft, the F-4B Phantom II, and redesignation as Marine Fighter Attack Squadron (VMFA-312). Crewed with a pilot and Radar Intercept Officer, and capable of speeds of up to mach 2, the Phantom served as a formidable combat weapon with the Checkerboards for over 20 years.

During the Vietnam War, the Checkerboards performed the vital mission of training combat aircrews prior to their deployment to Southeast Asia. In 1973, the squadron received the newer F-4J aircraft, with its much improved radar and avionics, as well as improved aerodynamic design.

In 1979, the Checkerboards became the first 2nd Marine Aircraft Wing fighter squadron to deploy to the Western Pacific under the Unit Deployment Program (UDP). Since joining the UDP cycle, VMFA-312 has made five six-month deployments to the Western Pacific as well as participated in numerous training deployments around the United States. Upon completion of the first six-month UDP rotation, the Checkerboards became the first squadron to receive the F-4S variant of the Phantom, which incorporated leading edge slats as well as advanced radar. In July 1987, VMFA-312 retired its F-4 aircraft and transitioned to the F/A-18A Hornet.

In 1993, VMFA-312 participated in Operation Provide Promise and Operation Deny Flight over Yugoslavia. They also flew missions over Iraq in support of Operation Southern Watch while operating from the Red Sea.

In March 1995, the squadron deployed once again with Carrier Air Wing 8 aboard Theodore Roosevelt for its second consecutive Mediterranean deployment. During the cruise, VMFA-312 participated in Operations Southern Watch from the Red Sea and Persian Gulf, then Operation Sharp Guard and Operation Deny Flight from the Adriatic Sea.

In late August and September 1995, the Checkerboards conducted their first direct combat sorties since Vietnam in support of the United Nations resolutions in Operation Deliberate Force. NATO’s decision to conduct immediate air strikes against Bosnian-Serb ammunition bunkers, communication and control facilities, and logistical storage buildings heavily tasked both the air wing and the Checkerboards.

The Checkerboards along with CVW-3 began missions in support of Operation Southern Watch, on November 27, 1998. The mission would change as the order came down to commence Operation Desert Fox, December 16, 1998. The air campaign lasted four nights and would end with the following: (1) 100% sortie completion rate, (2) 44 combat night sorties, (3) 120.2 combat hours, (4) 74% of assigned targets destroyed, (5) 27 HARM fired, 53 LGB’s dropped, the first combat deployment of the AGM-154 JSOW and (6) over 95,500 lb of ordnance loaded. In the four nights of operations, the “Checkerboards” had zero injuries or casualties.

Carrier Air Wing Three entered the North Persian Gulf and began Operation Southern Watch missions on January 3, 2001. Nearly two weeks later, the Checkerboards were proud to christen Harry S. Truman with her first combat engagement. On January 20, a VMFA-312 jet destroyed an anti-aircraft artillery site, which was threatening coalition aircraft in Southern Iraq. On February 16, five VMFA-312 aircraft participated in a large force strike against numerous targets in the vicinity of Baghdad.

The Checkerboards deployed aboard Enterprise in August 2003. They arrived in the Persian Gulf in October and began support of Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF). In November, VMFA-312 became the first squadron in the carrier air-wing to release ordnance in support of OIF. The Checkerboards remained in their area of operations until the end of January before transiting towards home.