The Formation of Ice upon Exposed Parts of an Airplane in Flight

In order to experimentally study the conditions leading to ice formation on aircraft surfaces, an aircraft was equipped with small auxiliary surfaces and aerodynamic shapes similar to struts, wires, Pitot heads, etc. This airplane was flown at an altitude where a temperature of 32 F was encountered, at such times as cloud formations could be found at the coincident altitude. Here it was discovered that ice formed rapidly in regard to quantity,character, shape, and rapidity of formation. An examination of this data, which confirms observations of pilots, indicates that the weight of ice collected can very possibly be sufficient to force the airplane to rapidly lose altitude on account of the increased loads. However, it is more evident that the malformation of the aerodynamic shapes may so increase the drag and reduce the lift so as to produce a loss of altitude even greater in consequence, the combination of the two working in the same direction having a double effect. Other adverse consequences are noted. The recommendation for the guidance of those who must encounter these conditions appears to lie entirely along the lines of avoidance

Conflict of Laws (2009)

States\u27 and nations\u27 laws collide when foreign factors appear in a lawsuit. Nonresident litigants, incidents outside the forum, parallel lawsuits, and judgments from other jurisdictions can create problems with personal jurisdiction, choice of law, and the recognition of foreign judgments. This article reviews Texas conflicts cases from Texas state and federal courts during the Survey period from October 1, 2007, through September 30, 2008. The article excludes cases involving federal-state conflicts, intrastate issues such as subject matter jurisdiction and venue, and conflicts in time, such as the applicability of prior or subsequent law within a state. State and federal cases are discussed together because conflict of laws is mostly a state law topic, except for a few constitutional limits, resulting in the same rules applying to most issues in state and federal courts. Although no data are readily available to confirm this, Texas is no doubt a primary state in the production of conflict-of-laws precedents. This results not only from its size and population, but also from its placement, bordering four states, a civil-law nation, and international shipping. Only California shares these factors, with the partial exception of the states bordering Quebec. Furthermore, Texas courts experience every range of conflict-of-laws litigation. In addition to a large number of opinions on garden variety examples of personal jurisdiction, Texas courts produce case law every year on internet-based jurisdiction, prorogating and derogating forum selection clauses, federal long-arm statutes with nationwide process, international forum non conveniens, parallel litigation, international family law issues, and private lawsuits against foreign sovereigns. Interstate and international judgment recognition and enforcement offer fewer annual examples, possibly a sign of that subject\u27s administrative nature that results in only a few reported cases. Texas state and federal courts provide a fascinating study of conflicts issues every year, but the volume of case law now greatly exceeds this Survey\u27s ability to report on them, a function both of journal space and authors\u27 time. Accordingly, this Survey period\u27s article focuses on selective cases

Conflict of Laws (2009)

States\u27 and nations\u27 laws collide when foreign factors appear in a lawsuit. Nonresident litigants, incidents outside the forum, parallel lawsuits, and judgments from other jurisdictions can create problems with personal jurisdiction, choice of law, and the recognition of foreign judgments. This article reviews Texas conflicts cases from Texas state and federal courts during the Survey period from October 1, 2007, through September 30, 2008. The article excludes cases involving federal-state conflicts, intrastate issues such as subject matter jurisdiction and venue, and conflicts in time, such as the applicability of prior or subsequent law within a state. State and federal cases are discussed together because conflict of laws is mostly a state law topic, except for a few constitutional limits, resulting in the same rules applying to most issues in state and federal courts. Although no data are readily available to confirm this, Texas is no doubt a primary state in the production of conflict-of-laws precedents. This results not only from its size and population, but also from its placement, bordering four states, a civil-law nation, and international shipping. Only California shares these factors, with the partial exception of the states bordering Quebec. Furthermore, Texas courts experience every range of conflict-of-laws litigation. In addition to a large number of opinions on garden variety examples of personal jurisdiction, Texas courts produce case law every year on internet-based jurisdiction, prorogating and derogating forum selection clauses, federal long-arm statutes with nationwide process, international forum non conveniens, parallel litigation, international family law issues, and private lawsuits against foreign sovereigns. Interstate and international judgment recognition and enforcement offer fewer annual examples, possibly a sign of that subject\u27s administrative nature that results in only a few reported cases. Texas state and federal courts provide a fascinating study of conflicts issues every year, but the volume of case law now greatly exceeds this Survey\u27s ability to report on them, a function both of journal space and authors\u27 time. Accordingly, this Survey period\u27s article focuses on selective cases

Conflict of Laws (2010)

States\u27 and nations\u27 laws collide when foreign factors appear in a lawsuit. Nonresident litigants, incidents outside the forum, parallel lawsuits, and judgments from other jurisdictions can create problems with personal jurisdiction, choice of law, and the recognition of foreign judgments. This Article reviews Texas conflict cases from Texas state and federal courts during the Survey period from November 1, 2008, through October 31, 2009. The Article excludes cases involving federal-state conflicts; intrastate issues, such as subject matter jurisdiction and venue; and conflicts in time, such as the applicability of prior or subsequent law within a state. State and federal cases are discussed together because conflict of laws is mostly a state-law topic, except for a few constitutional limits, resulting in the same rules applying to most issues in state and federal courts. Although no data are readily available to confirm this, Texas is no doubt a primary state in the production of conflict-of-laws precedents. This results not only from its size and population, but also from its placement bordering four states, as well as a civil-law nation, and its involvement in international shipping. Only California shares these factors, with the partial exception of the states bordering Quebec. Texas courts experience every range of conflict-of-laws litigation. In addition to a large number of opinions on garden-variety examples of personal jurisdiction, Texas courts produce case law every year on Internet-based jurisdiction, prorogating and derogating forum-selection clauses, federal long-arm statutes with nationwide process, international forum non conveniens, parallel litigation, international family-law issues, and private lawsuits against foreign sovereigns. Interstate and international judgment recognition and enforcement offer fewer annual examples, possibly a sign of that subject\u27s administrative nature that results in only a few reported cases. Texas state and federal courts provide a fascinating study of conflicts issues every year, but the volume of case law now greatly exceeds this Survey\u27s ability to report on them, a function both of journal space and authors\u27 time. Accordingly, this Survey period\u27s article focuses on selective cases

Join forces or cheat: evolutionary analysis of a consumer-resource system

International audienceIn this contribution we consider a seasonal consumer-resource system and focus on the evolution of consumer behavior. It is assumed that consumer and resource individuals live and interact during seasons of fixed lengths separated by winter periods. All individuals die at the end of the season and the size of the next generation is determined by the the consumer-resource interaction which took place during the season. Resource individuals are assumed to reproduce at a constant rate, while consumers have to trade-off between foraging for resources, which increases their reproductive abilities, or reproducing. Firstly, we assume that consumers cooperate in such a way that they maximize each consumer's individual fitness. Secondly, we consider the case where such a population is challenged by selfish mutants who do not cooperate. Finally we study the system dynamics over many seasons and show that mutants eventually replace the original cooperating population, but are finally as vulnerable as the initial cooperating consumers