Liberalism vs. Antiliberism essays

Liberalism vs. Antiliberism essays Political scientists have long debated the proper course to consider, resolve, and overcome conflict so to maintain order. In particular, the conflicts of the individual vs. society the rights of the individual vs. the rights he or she must relinquish in order to be a part of society have generated much controversy. Man has proved to be an insatiable creature, perpetually hungry for that which he does not have. As mans desires grow, so does his want for money and power. The quest for such, which represent societal status, consumes his life. Indeed, man is inherently selfish. He holds an innate disposition against sharing wealth and power with others. However, this conflict must be resolved in order for man to live in society. Through the ages, many have tried to propose an incisive solution to this problem. To fit the political and socioeconomic conditions of the time, those solutions have employed and manipulated the ideas of past thinkers. Two starkly contrasting ideolo gies emerged: liberalism and antiliberalism. In this paper, I will reference several prominent thinkers of both ideologies. I will highlight their ideas within the historical context they formulated them. This analysis will serve to contrast the differences between liberalism and antiliberalism. Liberalism is based on the philosophy of freedom and equal rights. From its rise as an anti-Roman Catholic reaction, it is a repudiation of absolute rule. Liberalism called for the liberation of those oppressed under absolute rule; it is the belief that all human beings possess rights. Moreover, it asserts that humans are endowed with the ability to realize their rights. As rational and equal human beings, individuals have the ability to recognize problems and solve them. This enables a natural progressive improvement in society. John Locke is considered as the founder of liberalist political thought. In fact, Lockian political tho...

Gloster Meteor - Gloster Meteor Jet

Gloster Meteor - Gloster Meteor Jet Gloster Meteor (Meteor F Mk 8): General Length: 44 ft., 7 in.Wingspan: 37 ft., 2 in.Height: 13 ft.Wing Area: 350 sq. ft.Empty Weight: 10,684 lbs.Loaded Weight: 15,700 lbs.Crew: 1Number Built: 3,947 Performance Power Plant:2 Ãâ€" Rolls-Royce Derwent 8 turbojets, 3,500 lbf eachRange: 600 milesMax Speed: 600 mphCeiling: 43,000 ft. Armament Guns: 4 Ãâ€" 20 mm Hispano-Suiza HS.404 cannonsRockets: up to sixteen 60 lb. 3 in. rockets under wings Gloster Meteor - Design Development: Design of the Gloster Meteor began in 1940 when Glosters chief designer, George Carter, began developing concepts for a twin-engine jet fighter. On February 7, 1941, the company received an order for twelve jet fighter prototypes under the Royal Air Forces Specification F9/40 (jet-powered interceptor). Moving forward, Gloster test flew its single-engine E.28/39 on May 15. This was the first flight by a British jet. Assessing the results from the E.38/39, Gloster decided to move forward with a twin-engine design. This was largely due to the low power of early jet engines. Building around this concept, Carters team created an all-metal, single-seat aircraft with a high tailplane to keep the horizontal tailplanes above the jet exhaust. Resting on a tricycle undercarriage, the design possessed conventional straight wings with the engines mounted in streamlined nacelles mid-wing. The cockpit was located forward with a framed glass canopy. For armament, the type possessed four 20 mm cannon mounted in the nose as well as the ability to carry sixteen 3-in. rockets. Initially named Thunderbolt, the name was changed to Meteor to prevent confusion with the Republic P-47 Thunderbolt. The first prototype to fly took off on March 5, 1943 and was powered by two De Havilland Halford H-1 (Goblin) engines. Prototype testing continued through the year as various engines were tried in the aircraft. Moving to production in early 1944, the Meteor F.1 was powered by twin Whittle W.2B/23C (Rolls-Royce Welland) engines. In the course of the development process, prototypes were also used by the Royal Navy to test carrier suitability as well as sent to the United States for assessment by the US Army Air Forces. In return, the USAAF sent an YP-49 Airacomet to the RAF for testing. Becoming Operational: The first batch of 20 Meteors were delivered to the RAF on June 1, 1944. Assigned to No. 616 Squadron, the aircraft replaced the squadrons M.VII Supermarine Spitfires. Moving through conversion training, No. 616 Squadron moved to RAF Manston and began flying sorties to counter the V-1 threat. Commencing operations on July 27, they downed 14 flying bombs while assigned to this task. That December, the squadron transitioned to the improved Meteor F.3 which had improved speed and better pilot visibility. Moved to the Continent in January 1945, the Meteor largely flew ground attack and reconnaissance missions. Though it never encountered its German counterpart, the Messerschmitt Me 262, Meteors were often mistaken for the enemy jet by Allied forces. As a result, Meteors were painted in an all-white configuration for ease of identification. Before the end of the war, the type destroyed 46 German aircraft, all on the ground. With the end of World War II, development of the Meteor continued. Becoming the RAFs primary fighter, the Meteor F.4 was introduced in 1946 and was powered by two Rolls-Royce Derwent 5 engines. Refining the Meteor: In addition to the chance in powerplant, the F.4 saw the airframe strengthened and the cockit pressurized. Produced in large numbers, the F.4 was widely exported. To support Meteor operations, a trainer variant, the T-7, entered service in 1949. In an effort to keep the Meteor on par with new fighters, Gloster continued to improve the design and introduced the definitive F.8 model in August 1949. Featuring Derwent 8 engines, the F.8s fuselage was lengthened and the tail structure redesigned. The variant, which also included a Martin Baker ejection seat, became the backbone of Fighter Command in the early 1950s. Korea: In the course of the Meteors evolution, Gloster also introduced night fighter and reconnaissance versions of the aircraft. The Meteor F.8 saw extensive combat service with Australian forces during the Korean War. Though inferior to the newer swept-wing MiG-15 and North American F-86 Sabre, the Meteor performed well in a ground support role. In the course of the conflict, the Meteor downed six MiGs and destroyed over 1,500 vehicles and 3,500 buildings for a loss of 30 aircraft. By the mid-1950s, the Meteor was phased out of British service with the arrival of the Supermarine Swift and Hawker Hunter. Other Users: Meteors continued to remain in the RAF inventory until the 1980s, but in secondary roles such as target tugs. During the course of its production run, 3,947 Meteors were built with many being exported. Other users of the aircraft included Denmark, the Netherlands, Belgium, Israel, Egypt, Brazil, Argentina, and Ecuador. During the 1956 Suez Crisis, Israeli Meteors downed two Egyptian De Havilland Vampires. Meteors of various types remained in frontline service with some air forces as late as the 1970s and 1980s. Selected Sources Military Factory: Gloster MeteorHistory of War: Gloster MeteorRAF Museum: Gloster Meteor

Response to cave of forgotten dreams Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Response to cave of forgotten dreams - Essay Example Doing so, Herzog nudges the contemporary viewers to reconsider the existing notions and concepts regarding creativity, art and art appreciation. Herzog’s documentary pursues a mesmerizing journey back in time; say almost 32,000 years ago, to depict the earliest known art work created by mankind. If taken in a starkly pragmatic context, in consonance with the popular cinema as it is perceived today, prehistoric charcoal pictures should not ideally be the stuff of a gripping and thought provoking cinema. However, it is not so with Cave of Forgotten Dreams. Herzog’s usage of the 3D technology to film the ancient art work in a way redefines cinema. The nonstop projection of 3D images aided by the interviews of the experts and scientists, gives way to a creative space that is both contemporary as well as primordial, a space in which the viewers can shed their preconceived notions to think afresh about the fundamental nature and meaning of humanness. Doing so, Herzog deliberately facilitates relevant insights into the essence of mankind. All life forms live and thrive in the cradle of nature, yet it is only the mankind that has the ability to appreciate, cherish and imitate beauty. This capacity to appreciate and imitate beauty is the true essence of humanness and art. This capacity is ancient, prehistoric, raw, rough and wild, while at the same time being contemporary, current, sophisticated, delicate and civilized. There is some essential essence, energy or ether that though indiscernible, could very much be felt and experienced, which connects the so called rawness, wildness and roughness of the prehistoric man to the sophistication, sensitivity and civilization of the contemporary humanity through the medium of art. In the light of this vision of art and humanity, it is easy to understand the comment made by Julien Monney in the film that an Aborigine rock art Painter in

Corporate Structures and Governance Arrangements Coursework

Corporate Structures and Governance Arrangements - Coursework Example In the pre-bureaucratic corporate structure, there is a centralized structure with the role of strategic decision making left to the top management leaders, which is the best for solving very simple problems. This system is very common among the small corporate and mostly communication is done on one-on-one basis. Though, it lacks a fundamental role, that is, standardization of roles and responsibility, the consequences of this structure on managerial accountability is that it helps the strategic director to influence and control development and growth of the corporate organization2. How Appointment Rights and Removal Rights Differ and Their Consequences Having looked at the Hampel Report, one comes to consensus that corporate structures and governance arrangement vary from one country, an individual can use the same rights differ across the jurisdiction. The main explanation for this is that the structure of a particular and how it is governed would define how decisions and appointm ent rights come about in that particular corporation and as a result each decision comes about with its consequences3. It is how rights are allocated that would ensure that the corporation gives quality performance. For example, in a corporate structure where decision rights and appointments are left in the hands of the shareholders, there is a common tendency that the organisation would experience some positive effects in its operations. That is, the shareholders are at times driven by the desire to reap the highest revenues and profits from the company4. Therefore, it would make sure the appointment and removal of directors from the corporation is done in a transparent way and the appointments done based on merit. In countries where decision making and appointment rights are left to the chief executive officer because he/she has broader business knowledge than the shareholders. The main argument for the proponents of this structure is that the chief executive officer knows how eff ective the mangers are in their daily business operations. In fact, they know when and how to make strategic decisions. However, the consequences of this structure are that it takes a lot of time to transfer certain decision making information to the rest of the organisation. It is also tedious to make all the decisions by oneself, and in case of the appointment and dismissal of directors, then one can consider the action taken to be personal and bias, and this can bring about some unnecessary, tension, conflict and tension in the organisation5. Another different structure is that which foresees all the decisions and appointment rights based on the management, especially if the corporation is a family enterprise. This method is always considered cheaper in terms of experts/employees hiring costs. However, this structure and governance arrangement has its own demerits. Despite the savings on expenditure, decision making in this case is guided more by emotions and this out rightly aff ects the corporation negatively6. It also seeks to over centralize powers and rights to make decisions to the family members, this would mean that there might be lack of relevant information flowing down to other stakeholders of the corporation. However, it is important to note that decision rights and appointments have their own effects. Therefore, one should not be

Morgan Motor Company Essay Example for Free

Morgan Motor Company Essay Morgan Motor Company (MMC) began as a family company and has remained that way over the years. Decisions were largely driven by steady demand for their luxury product. Traditionally, decision-making was premised on production quotas that kept supply slightly behind demand. While the company made a profit, it was not enough to sustain the company in the long term due increasing costs caused by inefficient methods of production. The key area for improvement was strategic planning based on detailed and accurate information. The implementation of the strategic plan would require a review of human resource management practices in order for MMC to develop into an organisation that valued continuous innovation. MMC could gain valuable information about its environment through SWOT analysis, which could be used to inform strategic planning decisions. The company survived difficult circumstances (e. g. World War II) and demonstrated its ability to diversify through the manufacture of munitions. Another key strength is the global demand for their differentiated product. Its domestic and international appeal creates an important opportunity to further expand its global customer base. However, the potential threat associated with this opportunity is uncertainty in a number of dimensions in MMC’s â€Å"general environment† (Samson Daft, 2009). Economic and political and legal factors in other countries could potentially impact on MMC’s sales, as was the case in the late 1960s where strict emission control regulations caused their US market to collapse. In this instance, domestic demand absorbed its impact and highlighted the importance of maintaining a diverse client base that could absorb the impact of any environmental changes. A sales and marketing department that is production led is ineffective in improving revenue and achieving the aim of increased profits. Additionally, this production led sales creates an artificial view of demand for its product. Thorough research of its client attributes coupled with careful planning and stronger collaboration between the sales and marketing and production departments enables the formulation of agreed sales targets. The key benefits of setting targets are: 1. integration with production planning, which reduces the likelihood of over-investment in inventory; 2. a proactive sales and marketing department that devises strategies to improve sales; and 3. measureable targets that can be used to evaluate efficiency and effectiveness. Despite having a keen and loyal workforce, the presence of change aversion confirmed that incremental change was initially more effective than radical change which may have created an unproductive atmosphere of dissent amongst its workforce. Moreover, steady demand for their product led to complacency, which justified Peter Morgan’s caution about change. This could be interpreted as lack of vision and is reflected in the lack of innovation and under-capitalisation of MMC’s machine shop. In a study done on Toyota (UK) Ltd. , it was noted that the traditional car manufacturing base in the UK was located in the West Midlands and these were â€Å"rich in precision engineering skills† (Winfield Kerrin, 1996, p. 50). MMC’s proximity to this manufacturing hub created opportunities for research and development by inspecting some of these manufacturers in an effort to improve their production practices and processes, specifically focussing on how technology could be used to improve efficiency. This acknowledgement of the power of technology finally came in the form of Charles’ introduction of a manufacturing resource planning computer system and use of CAD/CAM. Perhaps differences in generational attributes enabled Charles Morgan to more easily embrace technology. However, the positive outcome was product innovation such as design features to improve aerodynamics. Examination of how human resource management practices could transform MMC from an organisation where everyone defends their own corner into a team-based learning organisation was a natural progression once management accepted the need for change. In the first instance, focus should be on developing managers to help facilitate organisational change (Waldersee, 1997) and enable them to be effective role models within the company. Training solutions and interventions should target general areas such as effective teamwork and communication, motivating workers and encouraging innovation. Additionally, where there are identified skills gaps, it should also target content-specific areas e. g. contemporary sales and marketing practices would make up for the sales director’s lack of recent sales experience. Once again, Charles was led by example by enrolling in an MBA, thus demonstrating his commitment to ongoing education and development. Although collectivism has traditionally been associated with eastern cultures (Hartel, Fujimoto, Straybosch, Fitzpatrick, 2007), motor companies like Ford and Toyota moved away from Taylorism and demonstrated the value of teamwork in vehicle manufacturing (Winfield Kerrin, 1996). However, MMC’s reward system of individual production bonuses did not acknowledge the value of teamwork. Moreover, an unspecified dollar amount that was eroded by inefficiencies in the production process did not provide an incentive to improve production. Not only should these individual production bonuses be quantified, the company should also consider a reward system for foremen to acknowledge their efforts in encouraging individuals and teams to achieve higher production. The present day success of MMC is testament to management’s vision and commitment to continuous product and process innovation. Examination of their website confirms their ability to stay current through value adding which resulted in features in their cars such as lightness and environmental friendliness. This has enabled them to cater both for the on-road user and the racing arena, as is evident in the videos available on their website. Furthermore, offering factory tours not only gives potential customers insight into the manufacturing process, it also provides the company with the opportunity to share some of its knowledge with others. The insight gained by watching the video on MMC’s factory processes makes it evident that the MMC today is collaborative both internally and with its external stakeholders.

Alone and Unhappy :: Creative Writing Essays

Alone and Unhappy She sat on the Q train waiting for her stop. The time was finally here. She was just an hour away from happiness. Beverly Rd, Church St, Atlantic Ave she got up and off the train. She followed the rush of people to catch the 2 train into the city. The 2 or 3 train never came regularly so she waited patiently. In the distance she heard a couple of Mexicans playing the accordion and the guitar. She could not make out the song, but they sounded pretty good. Finally the 2 train pulled in and she boarded. She observed her surroundings to pass the time. It wasn’t a short trip from Brooklyn to the city. There was a Hispanic mother and her little son sitting across from her. The son stared at her the whole ride. She wondered if he could see right through her. His eyes were blank and still. She courteously smiled at the boy and he gave her the finger and laughed to himself. She gave the boy the finger and moved on to the next person that caught her attention. It was an older white man. He gave her a disapproving look and turned his head. She felt embarrassed now for her actions, but the boy started it. The train stopped and she thought it was her stop. She rushed to get up and noticed it was only 14th St. If she was pale, she would be beet red at this point. She gracefully sat back down and tried to fan herself to get rid of the flushed feeling in her cheeks. When she finally gained her composure, she noticed a man was standing in front of her against the doors. He just took her breath away. How gorgeous he was just standing there. She could not keep her eyes off him. He noticed and looked a little uncomfortable.

Flight 587 Crash Investigation

This paper examines the disaster of American Airlines flight 587 on November 12, 2001 in New York City. At least 265 people died in this tragedy making its one of the major disasters in modern aviation history. In the immediate aftermath of the accident, there were great fears that this could be another outcome of a terrorist attack on the U. S soil. Official investigations, however, quickly ruled out any terrorist involvement. Findings indicated that the weak wake turbulence caused by an airplane that took off slightly before flight 587 initiated an unfortunate chain of events that resulted in the catastrophe.The final report of the NTSB held the faulty rudder control system design of Airbus A300-600, and the inadequate pilot training program of American Airlines to be chiefly responsible. In addition, the allegedly quirky response behavior of the first officer at the controls of the airplane is considered a critical factor. However, many people, common men and experts alike, are no t convinced of the validity of the NTSB investigations. Introduction On the morning of November 12, 2001, Tom Lynch, a retired firefighter, is on Rockaway Beach Boulevard taking his regular morning exercise march.He watches an airplane complete a banked turn and start towards the ocean. Then, all of a sudden, he sees a small explosion in the fuselage behind the wing. Two more seconds elapse and suddenly there is a second explosion, engulfing most of the plane in flames. It was the American Airlines Flight 587. Two months after 9/11 – this Airbus 300-600 left John F. Kennedy International Airport en route to Santa Domingo, the Dominican Republic. Less than three minutes after takeoff, the aircraft crashed in a blazing inferno in the heart of the neighborhood of Bell Harbor, Queens. All 251 passengers along with 9 crew members perished.Most remarkably, only five people died on the ground. 44 fire trucks and 200 firefighters were rushed to the scene. Soon, the disaster of AA Fli ght 587 would be found not to be due to terrorism, but to mechanical failure. However, in the stark post 9/11 environment of the day, it was difficult for many people to believe that planes could still fall from the sky for reasons unrelated to terrorism. Feelings and fears were especially strong and these were exacerbated this fresh tragic event. As the author S. D. Manning (2003) put it, â€Å"This crash jarred a city (and a nation) still scarred and numb from the agony it has already endured†The Investigation Tonight, American holds its collective breath, Prays this nightmare is due to mechanical failure, Not premeditated design. The sheer irony would shame Kafka – It's not the disaster itself but its cause That bothers us, enslaves us to out TV's; We pray that it’s something man-made, not man. – L. D. Brodsky. (2002). As the aircraft climbed from John F. Kennedy airport, some people on the ground saw an explosion and fire on the underneath side of the aircraft, which was quickly followed by parts falling off the aircraft, including the vertical stabilizer and rudder.During the aircraft's fall, engines came away from the wings. Falling separately, one engine landed on Beach 129th Street the other engine on Beach 126th. The plane then plunged to the ground on the narrow strip of land known as Rockaway, in Belle Harbor at Queens. The plane's tail broke off and fell into Jamaica Bay, more than a mile from the primary crash site. Although a few stray remnants landed here and there, the fuselage and wings pounded into the home on the corner of Beach 131st Street and Newport Avenue. The plane's impact, subsequent explosions, and fire destroyed other homes.The rudder and the tail fin were found first along the flight path, followed by the engines and then the main wreckage. According to the NTSB, the tail fin and rudder of the plane sheared off as it accelerated. The aircraft began a climbing turn over Jamaica Bay when it encountered tu rbulence caused by the wake vortices generated by a Japan Airlines 747 that had taken off just one minute forty-five seconds earlier. Records from the flight data recorder later recovered from the crash site showed that the turbulence had cause movements of flight 587's rudder, part of which, together with the vertical tail fin, became detached from the aircraft.Control of the aircraft was lost and it fell from the sky. This was the second deadliest crash in US history, but it also, â€Å"was the first example where we had an in-flight failure of a major structural component of an aircraft that in fact was made of composite materials,† as NTSB Chairwoman Marion Blakley would assert later. From the outset, the investigation into the loss of the American Airlines aircraft was conducted on the premise that it was an accident. There seemed to be no immediate indication it was anything else, except for the numerous eyewitness accounts of fire and explosion just before the aircraft plummeted.Officials were keen to reiterate that there was nothing to suggest any foul play had been involved in the loss of the aircraft. Coming so soon after the September 11th outrages, another terrorist assault in America would have been untenable and morally damaging. The President had declared war on terrorism. Congress had been actively involved in developing new legislation to contain the threat that al-Qaeda posed to civil aviation operations. The possibility of a terrorist strike seemed a little farfetched in the state of intensely heightened vigilance that the air transportation industry was in during the aftermath of 9/11.Even if there was foul play involved, it could have been more of a sabotage than the explosion of a bomb. Though terrorism was suspected by everyone, it could not be substantiated. The main difficulty of associating the loss of AA587 with terrorism was the manner of its destruction. If the tail assembly did lie at the root of the problem, then sabotage when the aircraft was on the ground appeared a more likely scenario than a suitcase bomb or a suicidal passenger detonating a device on board the plane. Accident scenarios had to be explored first.Marion Blakley said in an interview on CNN Newsnight on the day of the crash: One of the things that we're very committed to doing is to have a full investigation from a system standpoint, mechanical standpoint, looking at the history of this flight, the crew, the human factors that may have been involved. Immediately following the loss of flight 587, a 40-strong NTSB Go Team under the Investigator-in-Charge Robert Benzon was sent to the site of the crash (NTSB News, 2001). As was the norm, their work was supported by other agencies and companies considered appropriate by the board.The NTSB used the American Airlines facility at Tulsa for a detailed examination of the aircraft engines. No evidence was found of a fire, bird strike, or other pre-impact malfunction. The auxiliary power unit ( used to power the aircraft when it is on the ground) was sent to Honeywell, its manufacturer. Nothing wrong was found with the unit. The tail fin and rudder assemblies underwent visual inspection in New York before being sent to the NASA Langley Research Center in Hampton, Virginia.Extensive preliminary tests at Langley sought to identify whether the vertical stabilizer and rudder had had any damage or faults before the accident. None were found. Although the flight data recorder indicated significant rudder movement before the crash, there was nothing to show why this had happened (NTSB News 2002). That both engines separated from the wings as the aircraft fell from a comparatively low height posed another question: Could the engines have been sabotaged, if not by an explosive device, then by some other means so far undetected by the NTSB investigators?â€Å"Investigators suspect a catastrophic engine event as the likely cause of an airline crash Monday in New York,† went CN N. com’s headline on the very day of the accident. However, the primary focus of the investigation eventually shifted to the rudder system. The NTSB team flew to France to work with experts from Airbus Industrie, the aircraft's manufacturer, at their headquarters in Toulouse. The purpose of this visit was to study at firsthand the mechanism of the rudder system and to simulate the pattern of the aerodynamic loads that may have affected the vertical stabilizer during the failure of flight 587.If the investigators could not identify a possible mechanical or structural reason for the accident, they would have been left considering the impossible. Even though they may not have found any terrorist involvement in the loss of AA flight 587, in the absence any other demonstrable reason for the crash, terrorism would be back in focus. Flight History Flight 587 was an Airbus A300-600, Registration Number N14053. It took off from JFK International Airport at 9:14:29 A. M. on November 12 , 2001 in clear weather conditions. At 0915:44.7, the captain Edward States asked, â€Å"little wake turbulence, huh? † to which the first Officer, Sten Molin, replied, at 0915:45. 6, â€Å"yeah. † At 9:15:51, when the plane was 2,000 feet and was over Jamaica Bay, the first officer initiated a series of emergency control inputs and called for the emergency â€Å"escape† maneuver. During the wake turbulence encounter, the airplane’s pitch angle increased from 9? to 11. 5? , decreased to about 10? , and increased again to 11?. At 9:16:01. 9, F. O. Molin was heard on ATC uttering â€Å"losing control.†The airplane crashed 13 seconds later, it was airborne for less than 106 seconds. At 0915:58. 5, the CVR (Cockpit Voice Recorder) recorded the sound of a loud bang. At that time, the airplane was traveling at an airspeed of about 251 knots. â€Å"Hang onto it, Hang onto it,† were the last words of the Captain Edward States, as recorded on the CVR The Crew Background The captain was 42 years of age and the first officer 34. They were hired by American Airlines in July 1985, and March 1991 respectively. The captain had 1,922 hours total flyingtime in military and general aviation before his employment with American Airlines, and 8,050 hours total flying time thereafter which included 3,448 hours as pilot-in-command and 1,723 hours as a pilot-in-command for A300 specifically. His last proficiency check took place on June 21, 2001; and his last pilot-in-command line check occurred on July 31, 2001. He consumed alcohol sparingly and never during a time around his work schedule. According to a colleague, he was an extremely good pilot, very relaxed and competent.The first officer had 3,220 hours total flying time in commercial and general aviation before his employment with American Airlines, and 4,403 hours total flying time, which included 1,835 hours as second-in-command for A300 specifically. Both the captain and the first of ficer had no FAA records that indicated any incident history or enforcement action. One pilot who worked with the first officer, however, described him as being â€Å"very aggressive† on the rudder pedals after a wake turbulence encounter. Except for that, his overall skills were described as excellent, and â€Å"well above the norm. †The 5M ConceptThe 5M concept is a risk assessment tool used to graphically illustrate how the dynamic interaction of the man, the machine and the media (that is, environment) converge to produce either a successful mission or if unsuccessful, a mishap. Man-category encompasses aircrew members, their training, selection, proficiency, habit patterns, performance, and personal factors. Factors under â€Å"performance† heading include awareness, perceptions, saturation, distraction, channelized attention, stress, confidence, adaptive skills, and fatigue (physical, motivational, sleep deprivation, circadian rhythm, klutz).â€Å"Persona l factors† include job satisfaction, values, families/friends, command/control, discipline (internal and external), and communication skills. The Machine-category encompasses the various design, maintenance, logistics, and other technical data related to the aircraft. The Media is the environment in which aircrew fly and includes factors and forces that are related to climactic, operational, hygienic conditions. The fourth category is the management. Management regulates standards, procedures, and controls.The interaction between the 4M’s Man, Media, Machine, and Management determine the desired outcome, or the Mission. When outcome fails to meet anticipated goals, these 5 M’s must be thoroughly reassessed (Civil Air Patrol). The Shell Model The factors that affect the outcome of each flight can be assessed under the SHELL Model: Software, Hardware, Environment, Liveware (outer ring) and Liveware (inner ring). Software is what makes the system work, and includes guidelines, regulations, operation specifications, and company policy and procedures.Hardware is the physical equipment that is necessary for a flight to operate. The category â€Å"Environment† relates to the broad external context that can affect the flight or the pilot, and includes factors such as weather, g-forces, and ambient light. Liveware represents the human factors. The outer ring includes air traffic controllers, flight service briefers, dispatchers, other crewmembers, pilots of other aircraft, flight attendants.The inner ring is the most important part of the SHELL model and includes various variables affecting the competence and performance of the pilots (Shields 2002). The NTSB Findings The NTSB officials very early on in the investigation suggested the cause of the crash might be due to wake turbulence from an aircraft that departed earlier. However, many experts doubted that the light turbulence from such an encounter would register on the scale of the type o f extreme turbulence that aircraft undergo from atmospheric disturbances such as in the vicinity of thunderstorms.Commercial jets are built to withstand forces up to 2. 5 G-forces, while the turbulence that hit the plane was one tenth of a G-force — barely strong enough to be even noticed (Dyer 2002). The Board then suggested that the composite vertical stabilizer may be faulty. However, this does not address the numerous reports of reliable witnesses, such as policemen and firemen, concerning fire and explosions coming from the aircraft before the vertical stabilizer ripped from the aircraft.Finally, after three years of investigations, National Transportation and Safety Board stood by its wake turbulence hypothesis. However, it was only a triggering event. The report, under the heading â€Å"Probable Cause† placed most of the blame on the first office for his â€Å"unnecessary and excessive rudder pedal inputs. † It goes on to say, â€Å"Contributing to these rudder pedal inputs were characteristics of the Airbus A300-600 rudder system design and elements of the American Airlines Advanced Aircraft Maneuvering Program† (NTSB 2004).The NTSB's conclusion was that the cause of the crash was the tail separating from the fuselage, which happened as a result of pilot placing loads on the tail that exceeded its ultimate limit – which in turn was an outcome of pilot’s rudder movements. He put excessive pressure on the rudder pedal in response to the wake turbulence caused by the JAL flight that preceded them. But why did the pilot move the rudder pedals as aggressively as he did? This became an issue of great controversy.The NTSB report dwells on the previously observed tendency of the first officer to place inappropriate pedal inputs, which in tandem with two other reasons, the deficient pilot training system and the defective Airbus rudder control system, resulted in a colossal disaster: The Safety Board’s investigat ion determined that three main factors influenced the first officer’s rudder use during the accident sequence: a tendency to react aggressively to wake turbulence, as evidenced by his responses to previous wake turbulence encounters; his pilot training, including the training he received at American Airlines regarding wake turbulence, upset recovery, and rudder pedal use; and the characteristics of the A300-600 rudder control system. (NTSB 2004)These findings resulted in a mammoth row between Airbus and American Airlines is –– with Airbus contending that the first officer’s inappropriate response caused because of his improper training by American Airlines, and the American Airlines contending the Airbus’ rudder pedal system unusually sensitive.The NTSB RecommendationsThe NTSB report discusses several safety issues relevant to the Flight 587 disaster, focusing on characteristics of the A300-600 rudder control system design, A300-600 rudder pedal in puts at high airspeeds, aircraft-pilot coupling, flight operations at or below an airplane’s design maneuvering speed, and upset recovery training programs. Airbus Industrie and American Airlines have acted upon industry-wide amendments to ensure safety of operation of aircraft.American Airlines continue to operate the Airbus A300, Airbus are confident of the structural and functional integrity of their plane – although many AA pilots and those of other airlines sought transfer to supposedly much more stable Boeing airplanes in the wake of the disaster. Conclusion New Yorkers may be resilient, But they have their breaking points, And they must be getting close to them. Like all of us, they want to believe That something like a shorting wire, Exploding fuel tank, or malfunctioning turbofan Is the reason at least 265 perished in Queens. – L. D. Brodsky. (2002).The biggest unresolved issue in this entire tragic episode of Flight 587 crash were the flames and the ex plosions noted by over 50% of over 400 witnesses. In its report, the NTSB attributes them to either an â€Å"initial release of fuel† or the â€Å"effects of engine compressor surges. † Both of them could have been caused due to out-of-control motion during the airplane's precipitous descent. However, one must remember that the airplane had just took over and was not at a great height, and most importantly that the witnesses observed the fire before anything else happened.In effect, the fire could not have been set off during the descent and as a result of the descent. Most of the witnesses are unequivocal about it and stand vehemently by their testimony to this day. Many quarters have felt that the NTSB prematurely declared the crash to be an accident and hastily concluded that the tail separation was the initiating event without adequate analysis of all the evidence, and especially without giving proper credence to witness testimony – and later went on to bols ter its convenient preconceived notions.Today, claims of NTSB cover-up and conspiracy theories pointing to terrorist involvement abound around this subject – making the tragedy of flight 587 a lingering mystery.References:Brodsky, L. D. (2002). Shadow War: A Poetic Chronicle of September 11 and Beyond, Volume Two. St. Louis, Missouri : Time Being Books Civil Air Patrol. Civil Air Patrol Guide to Operational Risk Management. Retrieved 3 March 2007 from www. orwg. cap. gov/Safety/CAPguidetoORM. pdf Dyer, N. (2002). The Mystery of Flight 587?What Caused the Crash of Flight 587? Science World. Feb 25 2002. Retrieved 3 March 2007 from http://www. findarticles. com/p/articles/mi_m1590/is_10_58/ai_83667600Manning, S. D. (2004). American Dream, A Search for Justice. New York : A&M Publishing NTSB News (2001).American Airlines Flight 587. National Transportation and Safety Board. 12 November 2001. Retrieved 3 March 2007 from http://www. ntsb. gov/events/2001/AA587/default. htm   NTS B News. (2002).Fourth Update on NTSB Investigation into Crash of American Airlines Flight 587. National Transportation and Safety Board. January 15, 2002. Retrieved 3 March 2007 from http://www. ntsb. gov/Pressrel/2002/020115. htm NTSB. (2004).Aircraft Accident Report. National Transportation and Safety Board. October 26, 2004. Retrieved 3 March 2007 from http://www. ntsb. gov/publictn/2004/AAR0404. pdf Shields. J. (2002).SHELL Model. Josh's Little Aviation Place on the Web. Retrieved 3 March 2007 from http://people. aero. und. edu/~jshields/CRM/shell_model. htm