Came here for the Bloody Masterpiece, got to enjoy that and delicious food also! Food on top of a drink, you can't go wrong! Also the bacon wrapped cheddar balls and the cheese crack was delicious! You can also get those on top of a Bloody Mary! Fun atmosphere, friendly staff.
There is no doubt about it. Higgins offers traditional Eastern Shore favorites for the entire family to enjoy. Of course, the house specialties include all-you-can-eat crabs, crab legs, fried chicken, steamed shrimp and baby back ribs. In addition, there is a full menu offering a variety of delicious soups, appetizers and entrees. Open daily.
Apart from the application to pre-cracked bulk materials under static loading, the cohesive model can be applied to almost every problem of the integrity of materials and structural components. The model is gaining increasing interest for application, it is in particular ideally suited for large amounts of crack extension and the behaviour of interfaces, such as phase boundaries, coatings, bonded joints, delamination in layered materials, and fibres in matrices as well as the prediction of fracture paths. Crack extension in bulk materials will be shown in some detail whereas other areas of application outside the experience gained at GKSS will only be briefly touched upon in this chapter. They demonstrate the enormous range of problems which can be treated using the cohesive model.
Although enlargement of the BoT set of pictures has helped clarify the various failure modes described by Henry Law and others at the enquiry, it has also revealed yet more mysteries. Why were the jacking columns left in (Figures 25 and 26) Perhaps there may have been problems in stabilising the structure as it was being built, the attached wings on the two columns shown in the pictures allowing extra struts to be inserted. There is no mention of these designs in the enquiry, and other useful information from the enquiry itself is now lost, such as drawings made by witnesses and extra pictures taken at the time of failed components.
Various engineers examined and specified the failure mode, especially Wöhler in Germany. It was he who developed apparatus to test axles in a realistic way by applying both repeated bending and rotation to the shaft. He recognised the importance of stress concentrators for starting cracks, and showed how two distinct zones occur: a slow crack growth region and the fast growth part where the crack accelerated suddenly to break the component into two halves.
\"Get it!\" I called out, reaching for the wheel. It was the first officer's leg to fly, but suddenly there were four hands at the yoke, turning it to the left as far as it would go. Even with full opposite aileron -- something seldom used in normal commercial flying -- the ship kept rolling to the right.
Chances are you've heard the term \"wake turbulence\" before. If you can picture the cleaved roil of water that trails behind a boat or ship, you've got the right idea. With aircraft, however, wake effect is exacerbated by a pair of vortexes that spin from the wingtips. At the wings' outermost extremities, the higher-pressure air beneath is drawn toward the lower-pressure air on top, resulting in a circular flow that trails behind the aircraft like a pronged pair of sideways tornadoes.
The vortexes are normally invisible, but are occasionally revealed when passing through mist or cloud, as seen in this sensational image. They are most pronounced when a plane is heavy and slow -- that is, when the wing is working hardest to produce lift. Thus, prime time for an encounter is during approach or departure. As the vortexes rotate -- at speeds that can top 300 feet per second -- they begin to diverge, and they sink. If you live near an airport, stake out a spot close to a runway and listen carefully as the planes pass overhead; you can often hear the vortexes' whiplike percussions as they drift toward the ground.
As a rule, bigger planes whip up bigger, more virulent wakes. And as you'd expect, smaller planes are considerably more vulnerable should they run into one. For a wide-body jetliner, wake encounters are rarely serious; for those like our 19-seater, they are a known and carefully avoided hazard. This is one of the reasons certain radio call signs include the suffix \"heavy\" (as listeners to United Airlines' Channel 9 audio feature will recognize). It's a reminder for crews and controllers alike that said flight requires a wider than normal buffer zone. During approaches, non-heavies following a heavy require at least five, and sometimes as many as six miles, of separation. On takeoff, they need two minutes of wait time at the end of the runway. (In the United States, \"heavies\" are those planes whose maximum takeoff weights exceed 255,000 pounds. Outside the U.S., the International Civil Aviation Organization has its own, marginally heavier \"heavy\" designation, though the term is not used over the radio.)
Landing in Philadelphia, we had our half a dot. In fact it may have been a full dot. We were especially attuned because we knew the preceding traffic was a Boeing 757. Technically, the twin-jet 757 isn't a heavy. A midsize jet, it's barely one-third the heft of a 747, 777 or A340. But what it lacks in weight it makes up for with a nasty aerodynamic quirk, producing an outsize wake rivaling or exceeding that of its larger siblings. A 1990 study by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration pronounced the 757's vortexes to be the most powerful ever recorded. Does this look like something you'd wanna tangle with -- the plane like a storm unto itself Check out the spin from that left-wing core.
Our experience was highly unusual in its severity, but typical in that it lasted merely a few seconds, leaving everybody unscathed. I haven't raised this topic to scare you, and of the accidents in which wakes are listed as the primary cause, the vast majority have involved small, noncommercial aircraft. One exception was a crash in 1972, when a DC-9 got too close to a Lockheed L-1011. But wide-body jets like the Lockheed were new at the time, and the dangers of wingtip vortexes weren't fully understood.
Five years ago this month, wake turbulence played a role in the crash of American Airlines Flight 587 in New York City, but exactly how is easily misconstrued. Moments after takeoff from JFK airport, the flight was struck by vortexes from a Japan Airlines 747 ahead. The crew, the first officer in particular, then overreacted, repeatedly commanding full, back-and-forth deflection of the rudder, overstressing the tail and causing it to separate. The overreaction itself was traceable, in part, to design of the Airbus A300's rudder system, engineered in such a way that pilots could inadvertently summon violent deflections with relatively light inputs. There may also have been a preexisting stress crack in the tail's composite skeleton -- the result of a powerful turbulence encounter years earlier -- though this has never been proved. A300 crews have since been retrained.
Additionally, I would add to the discussion record that, just as with articles tagged in the Wikify Project, the Airport Project recognizes that there will be for a time a large backlog of existing articles with un-wikified destinations. We would not expect that everyone making a small edit to an article feel obligated to wiklink all of the destinations contained there. We would simply ask that, given spare time while editing, editors take a crack at wikilinking. Once these changes are made to the style guide(s), I'll personally commit to tackling some of the major airports myself. --Chaswmsday (talk) 11:40, 21 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
For future destinations, add: \"[begins date service begins]\" - after the destination. Starting dates must be provided with full date including the year and references should be provided.
That's my impression too. Otherwise most destination lists would be woefully incomplete right now. In a certain sense, same-aircraft/flight # throughout multi stop routes are no more \"serving\" a destination than is a connecting flight. Does getting off one plane and getting on another mean you are getting to your destination less \"directly\" Given how long stopovers can be, connections are often faster. Aeromexico started a direct Boston-Cancun flight a few years ago, with a stop in Mexico City. Only someone who likes spening a lot of extra time in an airplane would have selected that flight. That's why it's more logical and consistent to me to have the destination section limited to nonstop. The next best option is putting a symbol by non-nonstop destinations. But granted, this is all a grey/semantic area. 153554b96e