Articles

2.8: New Page


2.8: New Page

Meghan Markle ‘upset people early on’ when she joined the Firm

Prince William and Kate Middleton have released a new set of portraits to celebrate their 10-year “tin” wedding anniversary.

In the shots — taken at Kensington Palace this week by photographer Chris Floyd — the pair match in blue ensembles, with William in a shirt and sweater combo and Kate in a wrap dress.

You’ll recall that William, 38, and Middleton, 39, wed in Westminster Abbey on April 29, 2011, and have since welcomed three children: Prince George, 7, Princess Charlotte, who turns 6 on Sunday, and Prince Louis, 3.

The pair were on official duties in northeast England on Tuesday, meeting with youngsters aided by the Cheesy Waffles Project, designed to help those with learning disabilities transition into adulthood.

People magazine notes that “there was a poignancy to the timing of their visit,” as the CWP is partially funded by an organization called the Key, which itself was one of 26 groups given an infusion of funds in 2011 when William and Kate asked for donations to their Royal Wedding Charitable Gift Fund in lieu of presents.

In decidedly less warm and fuzzy royal news, any rapprochement between William’s brother, Harry, and senior members of the royal family reportedly hit the skids last week, pinned on continuing leaks “from the Sussex side,” according to the Sun.

Harry met privately with William and their father, Prince Charles, following Prince Philip’s funeral for a stab at reconciliation following the continuing drama over Harry and wife Meghan Markle’s bombshell Oprah Winfrey interview — and, more broadly, Megxit — though any progress they made at that talk was temporary.

Harry and Meghan biographer Omid Scobie recently claimed Markle had spoken to the Queen, “[breaking] the ice for future conversations,” but added that “outstanding issues have not been addressed at any great length.”


More Light Capture

The larger Z Mount and extremely short flange distance means Nikkor Z lenses can gather substantially more light for thrilling low-light performance and maximum apertures up to f/0.95.

More Sharpness

The combination of new optical formulas and Nikkor ’s proven glass types results in greater resolution from the center of the frame to the far edges. No need to stop down these lenses.

More Data Transfer

The larger Z Mount allows for faster communication between lens and camera for improved performance across the board.

Less Distortion

Even at their widest apertures, Nikkor Z lenses show virtually no distortion—flare, ghosting, coma, chromatic, axial and spherical aberration are all greatly minimized.


Nikon announces first macro Z lenses: Nikkor Z MC 50mm f/2.8 & Nikkor Z MC 105mm f/2.8 VR S

Since the Z6 and Z7 cameras launched alongside a trio of lenses in late 2018, Nikon has rapidly expanded its series of Nikkor Z lenses. Among the 16 existing Nikkor Z lenses, there are bright primes, fast zooms and affordable lenses. However, until today, there hasn't been a macro lens in the lineup. Nikon has today expanded its Nikkor Z system lenses to a total of 18 (20 if you include the 1.4x and 2x teleconverters) with a pair of new Nikon Z MC primes.

'As the first native micro Nikkor Z lenses, the Nikkor Z MC 105mm and Nikkor Z MC 50mm strengthen our expanding Z series lineup, adding yet another category of powerful optics,' said Jay Vannatter, Executive Vice President, Nikon Inc. 'Together, both lenses represent a new category for the Nikkor Z lineup, yet each have their own personalities and advantages that creators are bound to love.'

Before diving into the new lenses, it's worth pointing out that Nikon refers to the lenses as 'micro' lenses rather than 'macro' lenses. This is because Nikon's 'Micro' lenses incorporate reduction optics rather than enlarging optics. While its close-up lenses offer a 1:1 reproduction ratio, which puts them squarely in macro photography territory, the optics aren't enlarging the subject. This article will use the term 'macro' because it's essentially the industry standard.

Nikkor Z MC 50mm f/2.8

The Nikkor Z MC 50mm f/2.8 lens is designed to be a compact macro lens. It's portable while still allowing you to get very close to your subject. It's also a faster lens than a standard kit lens. It's essentially a standard prime lens with a bright maximum aperture and macro capabilities. The lens has a 1:1 maximum reproduction thanks to its minimum focus distance of 0.16m (0.53 feet).

It's not an S Line lens, but Nikon promises strong optical performance and smooth bokeh. It's a small, sharp design with dust and drip resistance, although Nikon isn't going so far as to say that it is weather sealed. The lens weighs only 260 grams (9.2 ounces), 40% lighter than the AF-S Micro Nikkor 60mm f/2.8G ED lens. The new 50mm micro lens is 66mm (2.6") long with a maximum diameter of 74.5mm (3").

The is not internally focusing. Rather, as you focus closer, the lens barrel extends, exposing minimum focus distance and reproduction ratio markings printed on the lens barrel. The lens has a control ring, which is also available to use for manual focus. The lens includes a metal mount a lens hood. The filter thread is 46mm.

In total, the lens includes 10 elements in 7 groups. There's a single ED element and an aspherical element. Autofocus is driven using a combination of STM technology and a GMR stepping motor.

The Nikkor Z MC 50mm is also compatible with Nikon's ES-2 film digitizing adapter set. You can screw this adapter set onto the front of the lens for digitizing 35mm film.

The Nikkor Z MC 50mm f/2.8 lens will be available starting June 24 for a suggested price of $649.95.

Nikkor Z MC 105mm f/2.8 VR S

The Nikon Z MC 105mm f/2.8 VR S lens is a 1:1 macro lens with built-in vibration reduction (VR). When paired with the in-body image stabilization (IBIS) available in some of Nikon's Z cameras, including its Z6 and Z7 series cameras, the 105mm f/2.8 VR S promises up to 4.5 stops of VR. This is a full stop better than its F mount counterpart, which utilizes 2-axis stabilization rather than 5-axis stabilization. The MC 105mm f/2.8 VR S is the third FX-format Z lens with built-in VR.

To achieve 1:1 reproduction, the lens has a minimum focusing distance of 0.29m (0.96'). At this distance, the lens has a maximum aperture of f/4.5 rather than f/2.8. This isn't unusual for Nikon's micro lenses, as it has been the case before, including with the AF Micro 105mm f/2.8D lens, which has a max aperture of f/5.0 at its 1:1 focusing distance. The AF Micro ED 200mm f/4 D ED lens slows down to f/5.3 at 1:1.

Nikon promises reliable, smooth, quick and accurate autofocus performance with its new 105mm macro lens. The lens incorporates a multi-focus STM system. The multi-focus system comprises two motors moving a pair of distinct groupings of elements within the lens. This focusing system positively impacts image quality, promising less chromatic aberration, fringing, and color bleeding. In terms of autofocus speed, a new AF algorithm promises improved performance in changing light conditions. To improve focusing speed at macro distances, a focus limiter switch allows you to set the lens to focus only at close-focus distances to a maximum of 0.5m (1.6').

Along with the STM system, the lens promises edge-to-edge sharpness and clean bokeh due to advanced optical technologies. The Nikkor Z MC 105mm f/2.8 VR S, unlike the Nikkor Z MC 50mm f/2.8, is part of Nikon's S Line. The S Line has an even higher standard than Nikon's gold ring F mount lenses. As an S Line lens, the 105mm macro includes Nano Crystal Coating and ARNEO coating to suppress flare and ghosting effects. In terms of glass, the lens includes 16 elements across 11 groups. Among the 16 elements are a trio of ED elements and a single aspherical lens. The aspherical element is large and at the rear of the lens, which Nikon states help reduce field curvature from infinity to close-up.

The lens internally focuses, meaning that its length doesn't change with focal distance. The lens is weather-sealed as well, ensuring it withstands the rigors of professional use. The front element also includes fluorine coating, making it scratch-resistant and easier to clean. The new macro lens includes a focus ring, lens function button, control ring, limiter switch and lens info panel. The info panel can display distance, aperture and ISO as well as reproduction ratio, which is a first for the Nikon Z system lens. You may also notice updated branding, in the form of a new metallic Nikkor S badge on the lens, which we expect to see on future S Line lenses.

The lens weighs 630g (22.3 oz.), which is 90 grams lighter than Nikon's F mount 105mm f/2.8 VR macro lens. The new Nikkor Z MC lens is 140mm (5.6") long with a maximum diameter of 85mm (3.4"). The lens has a 62mm filter thread and ships with a round locking lens hood.

Nikon Ambassador Joey Terrill used the new 105mm lens ahead of its unveiling and had this to say, 'The NIKKOR Z MC 105mm f/2.8 VR S is unquestionably the most exceptional lens I've ever used. The clarity, color fidelity, and breathtaking sharpness are present in every image. Pictures feel textural and dimensional while maintaining stunning subject accuracy. It is the perfect match for the extraordinary resolution and expansive dynamic range of the Z camera sensors, and the nuance from tone to tone feels as pure as photography can be. It's very likely this lens will be permanently affixed to my camera going forward.'


Geoprocessing tools

3D Analyst toolbox

Point Cloud toolset

The LAS Dataset toolset has been renamed the Point Cloud toolset and includes additional tools for working with I3S point cloud scene layers.

  • Tools that modify LAS class codes, such as Classify LAS Building , can now update LAS dataset pyramids in place, eliminating the need to rebuild the pyramids from scratch after the edits.
  • The Extract LAS tool now supports input of LAS-compatible point cloud scene layers that reference scene layer package files ( .slpk ).

Classification (Deep Learning) toolset

  • Prepare Point Cloud Training Data —Generates data to train deep learning models for point cloud classification.
  • Train Point Cloud Classification Model —Trains deep learning models for point cloud classification.
  • Classify Point Cloud Using Trained Model —Classifies point clouds using deep learning models.

Raster toolset

  • Reclassify —The Reclassification parameter now allows you to generate a remap table based on the values of the input raster. The Classify option opens a dialog box where you can specify a data classification method and the number of classes.

Visibility toolset

Analysis toolbox

Overlay toolset

  • Apportion Polygon has been enhanced with new options in the Apportion Method parameter and the newly enabled Estimation Features parameter. Use these parameters together to perform more accurate apportionment and attribute summarization by weighting the areas that receive high proportions of the summary values using point or line estimation features.

Aviation toolbox

Airports toolset

Heliport Obstruction Identification Surfaces toolset

  • ICAO Annex 14 Heliports —Generates obstruction identification surfaces (OIS) for heliports based on ICAO Annex 14 Volume II specifications.

Obstruction Identification Surfaces toolset

Charting toolset

The new Cartography toolset contains tools that adjust and align features. These tools can be integrated into your aeronautical chart production pipeline.

  • Add Aviation Line Bypass —Adjusts route polyline features that overlap point features.
  • Rotate Aviation Features —Aligns features to a grid or to the page.
  • Generate Derived Airspace Geometry —A new parameter has been added that exports derived airspace parts to a separate feature class.

Business Analyst toolbox

Analysis toolset

  • Find Nearby Locations —Contains new and enhanced features of its equivalent Business Analyst Desktop tool, Proximity Analysis (Locator Report).

Cartography toolbox

Annotation toolset

  • Convert Labels to Annotation —Supports batch mode and honors the Annotation Text String Field Length environment.
  • Tiled Labels to Annotation —Honors the Annotation Text String Field Length environment.
  • Contour Annotation —Honors the Annotation Text String Field Length environment.

Conversion toolbox

LAS toolset

SAS toolset

New at ArcGIS Pro 2.8 , the SAS -ArcGIS Bridge consists of two new geoprocessing tools for converting between SAS datasets and Esri tables, as well as the SWAT and SASPY Python packages, which allow you to use SAS procedures and custom SAS code in notebooks. Additionally, SAS is now an alliance in the Esri Partner Network.

Data Management toolbox

Features toolset

  • Calculate Geometry Attributes —Now supports calculating values into new fields as well as existing fields. To calculate into a new field, specify the name of a field that does not exist in your dataset. The field type is determined by the geoprocessing property being calculated into the field.
  • Multipart to Singlepart —The tool has been rewritten for improved performance.
  • Minimum Bounding Geometry —The Geometry Type parameter's Convex Hull , Circle and Envelope options are now supported with a Standard or Basic license.

Fields toolset

  • The Calculate Field and Calculate Fields tools include a new Enforce Domains parameter that controls whether the calculations can violate existing coded-value or range domains set on the field.

General toolset

  • Append —Uses a new feature service API for faster data loading when the target dataset is a feature service.

Layers and Table Views toolset

  • Make Aggregation Query Layer —Creates a query layer that summarizes, aggregates, and filters DBMS tables dynamically based on time, range, and attribute queries, and joins the output to a feature layer for displaying results on a map.

Package toolset

  • Upgrade Scene Layer —Upgrades a scene layer package to the current I3S version in SLPK format or output to i3sREST format for use in ArcGIS Enterprise .
  • Extract Package —Now supports extracting vector, tile, and scene layer packages to a cloud store using the Target Cloud Connection parameter.

Raster toolset

  • Copy Raster —supports NetCDF as both an input and output format. The NetCDF format supports single-band data. For multidimensional and multiband data such as satellite data, the first band will be used. The type of NetCDF format supported for output follows the CF (Climate and Forecast) conventions.

Geocoding toolbox

  • Create Locator —Feature ID was added as a new locator role field, which is used to collapse duplicate features in the reference data for each primary locator role. The primary Join ID is no longer used to collapse duplicate geometries.
  • Reverse Geocode —The SUBADDRESS feature type was added as a possible match type that is returned when you find the nearest address to a point location.

Image Analyst toolbox

Classification and Pattern Recognition toolset

The Segmentation and Classification toolset has been renamed the Classification and Pattern Recognition toolset to better reflect the purpose and utility of the tools.

  • Train Random Trees Regression Model —Models the relationship between explanatory variables and a target dataset using random trees analysis.
  • Predict Using Regression Model —Predicts data values using the output from the Train Random Tree Regression Model tool.

Deep Learning toolset

  • Detect Objects Using Deep Learning —Allows the Mask environment to be set.
  • Export Training Data For Deep Learning —The following enhancements have been made:
    • Additional Input Raster —New input parameter that allows new image translation workflows to be performed.
    • CycleGAN —New metadata format.
    • Input Feature Class Or Classified Raster Or Table Feature Class —This parameter now accepts a folder as a data type.
    • Additional Input Raster —New input parameter that allows new image translation workflows to be performed.
    • CycleGAN —New metadata format.
    • Export Tiles —New metadata format.
    • BDCN Edge Detector (Pixel classification)
    • HED Edge Detector (Pixel classification)
    • Multi Task Road Extractor (Pixel classification)
    • ConnectNet (Pixel classification)
    • Pix2Pix (Image translation)
    • CycleGAN (Image translation)
    • Super-resolution (Image translation)
    • Change Detector (Pixel Classification)
    • Image Captioner (Image Translation)

    Motion Imagery toolset

    • Video Multiplexer —You can now encode video moving target indication (VMTI) data in a .csv file into an associated video file.

    Multidimensional Analysis toolset

      —The following enhancements have been made:
      • The Aggregation Method parameter has a new Percentile option. Two new parameters are available in support of this statistical option: Percentile value and Percentile interpolation type .
      • The new Dimensionless parameter specifies whether the layer will have dimension values.

      Statistical toolset

      • Zonal Statistics and Zonal Statistics as Table —Improved performance when the Input value raster parameter value is a float and is used with the Median or Percentile setting of the Statistics type parameter.

      Indoors toolbox

      • Create Indoor Dataset —Creates an indoor dataset containing the necessary feature classes to maintain floor plan data using a streamlined schema that conforms to the ArcGIS Indoors Information Model.
      • Generate Occupant Features —The Output Occupant Feature Class parameter now includes a SITE_ID field that is used in the Indoor Space Planner app.
      • The following tools now support indoor datasets that are created using the Create Indoor Dataset tool, as well as Indoors geodatabases that are created using the Create Indoors Database tool:
        • Configure Indoor Positioning
        • Generate Occupant Features
        • Generate Unit Openings
        • Import BIM To Indoor Dataset
        • Import Floorplans To Indoors Geodatabase

        Indoors Network toolset

        • Create Indoor Network Dataset —Creates an indoor network dataset containing the necessary feature classes to maintain indoor network data using a streamlined schema that conforms to the ArcGIS Indoors Information Model.
        • The following tools now support indoor datasets and indoor network datasets that are created using the Create Indoor Dataset and Create Indoor Network Dataset tools, as well as Indoors geodatabases that are created using the Create Indoors Database tool:
          • Classify Indoor Pathways
          • Generate Facility Entryways
          • Generate Floor Transitions
          • Generate Indoor Pathways
          • Thin Indoor Pathways

          Intelligence toolbox

          Conversion toolset

          Location Referencing toolbox

          Configuration toolset

            —Allows you to connect to and register external event data with your LRS, even if the data is stored and maintained outside of the geodatabase. This tool allows you to set up a read-only connection to external event data, which you can then use to keep the route and measure information of the external event in sync with the LRS using the Relocate Event tool.

          Maritime toolbox

          S-57 toolset

          Multidimension toolbox

          NetCDF toolset

          Raster Analysis toolbox

          Use Proximity toolset

          • Distance Accumulation , Distance Allocation , and Optimal Region Connections tools—Improvements in geodesic accuracy and performance. The ability of the tools to consider units of vertical coordinate system has been enhanced.

          Use Proximity (Legacy) toolset

          Summarize Data toolset

          • Summarize Raster Within and Zonal Statistics As Table —Improved performance when the Input value raster parameter value is a float and is used with the Median or Percentile setting of the Statistics type parameter.

          Ready To Use toolbox

          Elevation toolset

          • Profile , Summarize Elevation , and Viewshed —Updated with 10-meter resolution data for Latvia, Lithuania, and Slovakia.
          • Profile —A new 500-meter resolution has been added to the supported DEM resolutions based on the worldwide GEBCO data.

          Network Analyst toolset

            and Find Routes—Two output parameters output_direction_points and output_direction_lines have been added.
        • All tools have an Ignore Invalid Locations parameter that specifies whether invalid input locations are ignored when the analysis runs.
        • Spatial Analyst toolbox

          Distance toolset

          New conceptual help topics for Distance analysis are available.

          • Distance Accumulation , Distance Allocation , and Optimal Region Connections —Improvements in geodesic accuracy and performance have been made. The ability of the tools to consider units of vertical coordinate system has been enhanced. toolset—The geodesic accuracy and performance have been improved for Euclidean Allocation, Euclidean Back Direction, Euclidean Direction, and Euclidean Distance.

          Multidimensional Analysis toolset

          • Aggregate Multidimensional Raster —The following enhancements have been made:
            • The Aggregation Method parameter has a new Percentile option. Two new parameters are available in support of this statistical option: Percentile value and Percentile interpolation type .
            • The new Dimensionless parameter specifies whether the layer will have dimension values.

            Raster Creation toolset

            • Create Constant Raster , Create Normal Raster , and Create Random Raster —In Python , the type of the output extent parameter was updated to be a composite of Envelope and Extent.

            Reclass toolset

            • Reclassify —The Reclassification parameter now allows you to generate a remap table based on the values of the input raster. The Classify option opens a dialog box where you can specify a data classification method and the number of classes.

            Segmentation and Classification toolset

            • Export Training Data For Deep Learning —The following enhancements have been made:
              • Additional Input Raster —New input parameter that allows new image translation workflows to be performed.
              • CycleGAN —New metadata format.
              • Input Feature Class Or Classified Raster Or Table Feature Class —This parameter now accepts a folder as a data type.

              Surface toolset

              The Viewshed 2 tool has been renamed Geodesic Viewshed .

              Zonal toolset

              • Zonal Statistics and Zonal Statistics as Table —Performance improvement when the Input value raster parameter value is a float and is used with the Median or Percentile setting of the Statistics type parameter.

              Spatial Statistics toolbox

              Mapping Clusters toolset

              • Density Based Clustering —The new Time Field and Search Time Interval parameters identify clusters of points in space and time.

              Utilities toolset

                Time Series Smoothing —Smooths the values of one or more time series. You can use moving averages (backward, forward, or centered) as well as an adaptive method based on linear regression.

              Territory Design toolbox

              Territory Solution toolset

              Topographic Production toolbox

              Cartography toolset

              Cartographic Refinement toolset

              Make Masks From Rules now includes the option to ignore color in a rule and to copy target or source attributes to the final output.

              Data Management toolset

              Extract Data By Feature now has an optional SQL query filter that can be applied to all feature classes.


              WordPress.org

              I’m very excited to announce to everyone that the latest and greatest version of WordPress, version 2.8 “Baker,” is immediately available for download. 2.8 represents a nice fit and finish release for WordPress with improvements to themes, widgets, taxonomies, and overall speed. We also fixed over 790 bugs. This release is named in honor of noted trumpeter and vocalist Chet Baker. Here’s a quick video overview of everything in the new release:

              The first thing you’ll notice is that visually 2.8 feels a lot like 2.7, just with some minor tweaks here and there. However once you’ll dig in you’ll begin to appreciate the changes.

              Major New Improvements

              First and foremost, 2.8 is way faster to use. We’ve changed the way WordPress does style and scripting.

              The core and plugin updaters in previous versions of WordPress have been such a success we decided to bring the same to themes. You can now browse the entire theme directory and install a theme with one click from the comfort of your WordPress dashboard.

              If you make edits or tweaks to themes or plugins from your dashboard, you’ll appreciate the new CodePress editor which gives syntax highlighting to the previously-plain editor. Also there is now contextual documentation for the functions in the file you’re editing linked right below the editor.

              If you were ever frustrated with widgets before, this release should be your savior. We’ve completely redesigned the widgets interface (which we didn’t have time to in 2.7) to allow you to do things like edit widgets on the fly, have multiple copies of the same widget, drag and drop widgets between sidebars, and save inactive widgets so you don’t lose all their settings. Developers now have access to a much cleaner and robust API for creating widgets as well.

              Finally you should explore the new Screen Options on every page. It’s the tab in the top right. Now, for example, if you have a wide monitor you could set up your dashboard to have four columns of widgets instead of the two it has by default. On other pages you can change how many items show per page.

              And Even More

              The Future

              We’re already thinking hard about the next versions, 2.9 and 3.0. Keep an eye out for improved media handling, better dependency checking, versioning of templates and themes, and of course the fabled merging of WordPress and MU announced at WordCamp San Francisco two weeks ago.


              During the First World War the Railway Operating Division of the Royal Engineers requisitioned about 600 locomotives of various types from thirteen United Kingdom railway companies the first arrived in France in late 1916. [1] As the war became prolonged it became clear that the ROD needed its own standard locomotive, so the ROD adopted the Great Central Railway Class 8K 2-8-0 designed by John G. Robinson in 1911.

              There were three batches of orders. The first batch of orders were placed between February and June 1917 for 223 locomotives. [2] The second batch of orders was for 100 locomotives, placed between February and August 1918 onwards, followed by an order for 188 more in Autumn 1918 to sustain the UK's locomotive manufacturing industry after the war. [1] The 521 ROD 2-8-0s were built as follows: 369 by the North British Locomotive Company, 82 by Robert Stephenson and Company, 32 by Nasmyth, Wilson and Company, 32 by Kitson and Company and six by the Great Central Railway's Gorton Works. [3]

              Of the initial order for 325 locomotives, 311 were shipped to France for war service. [4] The locomotives were mainly used to haul military supply and troop trains, plus some services for civilians.

              After the Armistice of 11 November 1918 many of the class returned from France to the UK in 1919 and 1920. One ROD 2-8-0 duty remaining until the latter year was a through troop train from Cologne to Calais. [5]

              After the war British railway companies had a backlog of locomotives that required overhaul and repair: 498 ROD 2-8-0s were loaned to nine railway companies between 1919 and 1921 to cover goods traffic while the backlog was cleared. [6] The ROD 2-8-0s were then placed into storage around the country until they were disposed of.

              They were then sold as follows: [7]

              Date Company Quantity acquired New class Notes
              1919 Great Central Railway 3 GCR Class 8K Renumbered 1, 5, and 8
              1919 Great Western Railway 20 GWR 3000 Class Renumbered 3000–3019
              1920 London and North Western Railway 30 LNWR Class MM Renumbered 2400-2430 later to LMS
              1923 London and North Eastern Railway 125 LNER Class O4 Renumbered 6253–6377
              1925 Great Western Railway 80 GWR 3000 Class Renumbered 3020–3099
              1925 London and North Eastern Railway 48 LNER Class O4 Renumbered 6495–6542
              1927 London and North Eastern Railway 100 LNER Class O4 Renumbered 6543–6642
              1927 London, Midland and Scottish Railway 75 LMS ex-ROD 2-8-0 acquired mostly for their tenders - 30 resold without tenders for export to China, 25 scrapped, 20 placed in service

              The Great Western Railway bought 20 ROD locos in 1919 and a further 80 in 1925. The locomotives were widely spread over much of the GWR system, being used on heavy freight trains. The first withdrawals were made in 1927, but 45 survived to be taken over by British Railways in 1948 and the last three survivors were not withdrawn until October 1958. [8]

              The London and North Western Railway bought 30 locos in 1920. [9] In the grouping in 1923 these entered the stock of the London, Midland and Scottish Railway, which bought another 75 of the class in 1927. The ROD's range of operations on the LMS was restricted by its high axle loading. Withdrawals began in 1928 and the last was gone by 1932. [10] Some of the LMS examples were exported to China as China Railway KD4.

              The largest purchaser of the RODs was the London and North Eastern Railway which bought 273 between late 1923 and early 1927 to supplement its 130 existing GCR Class 8K locos. The combined fleet served widely throughout the LNER system and many were modified over the years to prolong their useful life. In 1941 the War Department requisitioned 92 locomotives for use overseas (see below). Withdrawal of the first ex-LNER RODs was made by British Railways in 1959 and the last was retired from the Doncaster area in April 1966. [11]

              Thirteen RODs were purchased direct from the UK War Department in the 1920s by J & A Brown and shipped to Australia, for use on the privately owned Richmond Vale Railway. The last of the 13 RODs was withdrawn in 1973 and three survive. [12]

              During the Second World War the War Department needed heavy freight engines so in September 1941 it requisitioned 92 LNER locos. 61 were RODs bought by the LNER in the mid-1920s and 31 were GCR Class 8K locos. They were shipped to Egypt and Palestine, where they worked on Egyptian State Railways, Palestine Railways, the Haifa, Beirut and Tripoli Railway between Palestine and Lebanon, the Chémin de Fer Damas-Hama et Prolongements in Syria, and Iraqi State Railways. Iraqi State Railways had six examples and designated them class RD: in March 1967 at least one remained in storage at Shalchiyah works outside Baghdad awaiting disposal. [13] In 1952 the UK shipped a final five RODs to the Middle East. [14] [15] Some remained in service in the Suez Canal Zone until 1955, then passed into Egyptian State Railways stock until withdrawal in 1961 and were all scrapped . [16]

              J & A Brown, a coal mining company in the Hunter Valley area of New South Wales, Australia, bought thirteen RODs to replace the older locos used on their Richmond Vale railway line. Nine of these were built by the North British Locomotive Company, three by the Great Central Railway and one by Kitson and Company. They were bought between March 1925 and March 1927. The first three locos arrived complete on the SS Boorara in February 1926 and were unloaded in Sydney and hauled to their home base at Hexham. In late 1927 the rest arrived in crates on Brown's new ship the SS Minmi on its maiden voyage to Hexham. The dismantled locos were gradually reassembled with the last locos not being complete until 1931, but all thirteen locos were never in service at the one time. The maximum number in service at any one time was ten during 1954. The class survived until 28 June 1973 when 24, was withdrawn.


              Notes

              (As amended Apr. 30, 1979, eff. Aug. 1, 1979 Mar. 10, 1986, eff. July 1, 1986 Apr. 25, 1989, eff. Dec. 1, 1989 Apr. 30, 1991, eff. Dec. 1, 1991 Apr. 22, 1993, eff. Dec. 1, 1993 Apr. 29, 1994, eff. Dec. 1, 1994 Apr. 24, 1998, eff. Dec. 1, 1998 Apr. 29, 2002, eff. Dec. 1, 2002 Apr. 25, 2005, eff. Dec. 1, 2005 Apr. 16, 2013, eff. Dec. 1, 2013 Apr. 28, 2016, eff. Dec 1, 2016 Apr. 25, 2019, eff. Dec. 1, 2019.)

              Notes of Advisory Committee on Rules—1967

              This rule is based upon Supreme Court Rule 40. For variations in present circuit rules on briefs see 2d Cir. Rule 17, 3d Cir. Rule 24, 5th Cir. Rule 24, and 7th Cir. Rule 17. All circuits now limit the number of pages of briefs, a majority limiting the brief to 50 pages of standard typographic printing. Fifty pages of standard typographic printing is the approximate equivalent of 70 pages of typewritten text, given the page sizes required by Rule 32 and the requirement set out there that text produced by a method other than standard typographic must be double spaced.

              Notes of Advisory Committee on Rules—1979 Amendment

              The proposed amendment eliminates the distinction appearing in the present rule between the permissible length in pages of printed and typewritten briefs, investigation of the matter having disclosed that the number of words on the printed page is little if any larger than the number on a page typed in standard elite type.

              The provision is made subject to local rule to permit the court of appeals to require that typewritten briefs be typed in larger type and permit a correspondingly larger number of pages.

              Subdivision (j). Proposed new Rule 28(j) makes provision for calling the court's attention to authorities that come to the party's attention after the brief has been filed. It is patterned after the practice under local rule in some of the circuits.

              Notes of Advisory Committee on Rules—1986 Amendment

              While Rule 28(g) can be read as requiring that tables of authorities be included in a reply brief, such tables are often not included. Their absence impedes efficient use of the reply brief to ascertain the appellant's response to a particular argument of the appellee or to the appellee's use of a particular authority. The amendment to Rule 28(c) is intended to make it clear that such tables are required in reply briefs.

              The amendment to Rule 28(j) is technical. No substantive change is intended.

              Notes of Advisory Committee on Rules—1989 Amendment

              The amendment provides that the corporate disclosure statement required by new rule 26.1 shall be treated similarly to tables of contents and tables of citations and shall not be counted for purposes of the number of pages allowed in a brief.

              Notes of Advisory Committee on Rules—1991 Amendment

              Subdivision (a). The amendment adds a new subparagraph (2) that requires an appellant to include a specific jurisdictional statement in the appellant's brief to aid the court of appeals in determining whether it has both federal subject matter and appellate jurisdiction.

              Subdivision (b). The amendment requires the appellee to include a jurisdictional statement in the appellee's brief except that the appellee need not include the statement if the appellee is satisfied with the appellant's jurisdictional statement.

              Subdivision (h). The amendment provides that when more than one party appeals from a judgment or order, the party filing the first appeal is normally treated as the appellant for purposes of this rule and Rules 30 and 31. The party who first files an appeal usually is the principal appellant and should be treated as such. Parties who file a notice of appeal after the first notice often bring protective appeals and they should be treated as cross appellants. Local rules in the Fourth and Federal Circuits now take that approach. If notices of appeal are filed on the same day, the rule follows the old approach of treating the plaintiff below as the appellant. For purposes of this rule, in criminal cases “the plaintiff” means the United States. In those instances where the designations provided by the rule are inappropriate, they may be altered by agreement of the parties or by an order of the court.

              Notes of Advisory Committee on Rules—1993 Amendment

              Note to paragraph (a)(5). The amendment requires an appellant's brief to state the standard of review applicable to each issue on appeal. Five circuits currently require these statements. Experience in those circuits indicates that requiring a statement of the standard of review generally results in arguments that are properly shaped in light of the standard.

              Notes of Advisory Committee on Rules—1994 Amendment

              Subdivision (a). The amendment adds a requirement that an appellant's brief contain a summary of the argument. A number of circuits have local rules requiring a summary and the courts report that they find the summary useful. See, D.C. Cir. R. 11(a)(5) 5th Cir. R. 28.2.2 8th Cir. R. 28A(i)(6) 11th Cir. R. 28–2(i) and Fed. Cir. R. 28.

              Subdivision (b). The amendment adds a requirement that an appellee's brief contain a summary of the argument.

              Subdivision (g). The amendment adds proof of service to the list of items in a brief that do not count for purposes of the page limitation. The concurrent amendment to Rule 25(d) requires a certificate of service to list the addresses to which a paper was mailed or at which it was delivered. When a number of parties must be served, the listing of addresses may run to several pages and those pages should not count for purposes of the page limitation.

              Committee Notes on Rules—1998 Amendment

              The language and organization of the rule are amended to make the rule more easily understood. In additional to changes made to improve the understanding, the Advisory Committee has changed language to make style and terminology consistent throughout the appellate rules. These changes are intended to be stylistic only.

              Several substantive changes are made in this rule, however. Most of them are necessary to conform Rule 28 with changes recommended in Rule 32.

              Subdivision (a). The current rule requires a brief to include a statement of the case which includes a description of the nature of the case, the course of proceedings, the disposition of the case—all of which might be described as the procedural history—as well as a statement of the facts. The amendments separate this into two statements: one procedural, called the statement of the case and one factual, called the statement of the facts. The Advisory Committee believes that the separation will be helpful to the judges. The table of contents and table of authorities have also been separated into two distinct items.

              An additional amendment of subdivision (a) is made to conform it with an amendment being made to Rule 32. Rule 32(a)(7) generally requires a brief to include a certificate of compliance with type-volume limitations contained in that rule. (No certificate is required if a brief does not exceed 30 pages, or 15 pages for a reply brief.) Rule 28(a) is amended to include that certificate in the list of items that must be included in a brief whenever it is required by Rule 32.

              Subdivision (g). The amendments delete subdivision (g) that limited a principal brief to 50 pages and a reply brief to 25 pages. The length limitations have been moved to Rule 32. Rule 32 deals generally with the format for a brief or appendix.

              Subdivision (h). The amendment requires an appellee's brief to comply with Rule 28(a)(1) through (11) with regard to a cross-appeal. The addition of separate paragraphs requiring a corporate disclosure statement, table of authorities, statement of facts, and certificate of compliance increased the relevant paragraphs of subdivision (a) from (7) to (11). The other changes are stylistic no substantive changes are intended.

              Committee Notes on Rules—2002 Amendment

              Subdivision (j). In the past, Rule 28(j) has required parties to describe supplemental authorities “without argument.” Enforcement of this restriction has been lax, in part because of the difficulty of distinguishing “state[ment] . . . [of] the reasons for the supplemental citations,” which is required, from “argument” about the supplemental citations, which is forbidden.

              As amended, Rule 28(j) continues to require parties to state the reasons for supplemental citations, with reference to the part of a brief or oral argument to which the supplemental citations pertain. But Rule 28(j) no longer forbids “argument.” Rather, Rule 28(j) permits parties to decide for themselves what they wish to say about supplemental authorities. The only restriction upon parties is that the body of a Rule 28(j) letter—that is, the part of the letter that begins with the first word after the salutation and ends with the last word before the complimentary close—cannot exceed 350 words. All words found in footnotes will count toward the 350-word limit.

              Changes Made After Publication and Comments. No changes were made to the text of the proposed amendment or to the Committee Note, except that the word limit was increased from 250 to 350 in response to the complaint of some commentators that parties would have difficulty bringing multiple supplemental authorities to the attention of the court in one 250-word letter.

              Committee Notes on Rules—2005 Amendment

              Subdivision (c). Subdivision (c) has been amended to delete a sentence that authorized an appellee who had cross-appealed to file a brief in reply to the appellant's response. All rules regarding briefing in cases involving cross-appeals have been consolidated into new Rule 28.1.

              Subdivision (h). Subdivision (h)—regarding briefing in cases involving cross-appeals—has been deleted. All rules regarding such briefing have been consolidated into new Rule 28.1.

              Committee Notes on Rules—2013 Amendment

              Subdivision (a). Rule 28(a) is amended to remove the requirement of separate statements of the case and of the facts. Currently Rule 28(a)(6) provides that the statement of the case must "indicat[e] the nature of the case, the course of proceedings, and the disposition below," and it precedes Rule 28(a)(7)'s requirement that the brief include "a statement of facts." Experience has shown that these requirements have generated confusion and redundancy. Rule 28(a) is amended to consolidate subdivisions (a)(6) and (a)(7) into a new subdivision (a)(6) that provides for one "statement," much like Supreme Court Rule 24.1(g) (which requires "[a] concise statement of the case, setting out the facts material to the consideration of the questions presented, with appropriate references to the joint appendix. "). This permits but does not require the lawyer to present the factual and procedural history chronologically. Conforming changes are made by renumbering Rules 28(a)(8) through (11) as Rules 28(a)(7) through (10).

              The statement of the case should describe the nature of the case, which includes (1) the facts relevant to the issues submitted for review (2) those aspects of the case's procedural history that are necessary to understand the posture of the appeal or are relevant to the issues submitted for review and (3) the rulings presented for review. The statement should be concise, and can include subheadings, particularly for the purpose of highlighting the rulings presented for review.

              Subdivision (b). Rule 28(b) is amended to accord with the amendment to Rule 28(a). Current Rules 28(b)(3) and (4) are consolidated into new Rule 28(b)(3), which refers to "The statement of the case." Rule 28(b)(5) becomes Rule 28(b)(4). And Rule 28(b)'s reference to certain subdivisions of Rule 28(a) is updated to reflect the renumbering of those subdivisions.

              Changes Made After Publication and Comments. After publication and comment, the Committee made one change to the text of the proposal and two changes to the Committee Note.

              During the comment period, concerns were raised that the deletion of current Rule 28(a)(6)'s reference to "the nature of the case, the course of proceedings, and the disposition below" might lead readers to conclude that those items may no longer be included in the statement of the case. The Committee rejected that concern with respect to the "nature of the case" and the "disposition below," because the Rule as published would naturally be read to permit continued inclusion of those items in the statement of the case. The Committee adhered to its view that the deletion of "course of proceedings" is useful because that phrase tends to elicit unnecessary detail but to address the commenters' concerns, the Committee added, to the revised Rule text, the phrase "describing the relevant procedural history."

              The Committee augmented the Note to Rule 28(a) in two respects. It added a reference to Supreme Court Rule 24.1(g), upon which the proposed revision to Rule 28(a)(6) is modeled. And it added—as a second paragraph in the Note—a discussion of the contents of the statement of the case.

              Committee Notes on Rules—2016 Amendment

              Rule 28(a)(10) is revised to refer to Rule 32(g)(1) instead of Rule 32(a)(7), to reflect the relocation of the certificate-of-compliance requirement.

              Committee Notes on Rules—2019 Amendment

              The phrase "corporate disclosure statement" is changed to "disclosure statement" to reflect the revision of Rule 26.1.


              Contents

              At the time of the Cherokee's introduction, Piper's primary single-engined, all-metal aircraft was the Piper PA-24 Comanche, a larger, faster aircraft with retractable landing gear and a constant-speed propeller. Karl Bergey, [12] Fred Weick and John Thorp designed the Cherokee as a less expensive alternative to the Comanche, with lower manufacturing and parts costs to compete with the Cessna 172, although some later Cherokees also featured retractable gear and constant-speed propellers.

              The Cherokee and Comanche lines continued in parallel production, serving different market segments for over a decade, until Comanche production was ended in 1972, to be replaced by the Piper PA-32R family. [2]

              The original design Edit

              The original Cherokees were the Cherokee 150 and Cherokee 160 (PA-28-150 and PA-28-160), which started production in 1961 (unless otherwise mentioned, the model number always refers to horsepower). [2]

              In 1962, Piper added the Cherokee 180 (PA-28-180) powered by a 180-horsepower (134-kW) Lycoming O-360 engine. The extra power made it practical to fly with all four seats filled (depending on passenger weight and fuel loading) and the model remains popular on the used-airplane market. [2] In 1968, the cockpit was modified to replace the "push-pull"-style engine throttle controls with quadrant levers. In addition, a third window was added to each side, giving the fuselage the more modern look seen in current production. [13]

              Piper continued to expand the line rapidly. In 1963, the company introduced the even more powerful Cherokee 235 (PA-28-235), which competed favorably with the Cessna 182 Skylane for load-carrying capability. The Cherokee 235 featured a Lycoming O-540 engine de-rated to 235 horsepower (175 kW) and a longer wing which would eventually be used for the Cherokee Six. It included tip tanks of 17-gallon capacity each, bringing the total fuel capacity of the Cherokee 235 to 84 gallons. [2] The aircraft had its fuselage stretched in 1973, giving much more leg room in the rear. The stabilator area was increased, as well. In 1973, the marketing name was changed from "235" to "Charger". In 1974, it was changed again to "Pathfinder". Production of the Pathfinder continued until 1977. No 1978 models were built. In 1979, the aircraft was given the Piper tapered wing and the name was changed again, this time to Dakota. [ citation needed ]

              In 1964, the company filled in the bottom end of the line with the Cherokee 140 (PA-28-140), which was designed for training and initially shipped with only two seats. [2] The PA-28-140 engine was slightly modified shortly after its introduction to produce 150 horsepower (112 kW), but kept the -140 name.

              In 1967, Piper introduced the PA-28R-180 Cherokee Arrow. This aircraft featured a constant-speed propeller and retractable landing gear and was powered by a 180-horsepower (134-kW) Lycoming IO-360-B1E engine. A 200-hp (149-kW) version powered by a Lycoming IO-360-C1C was offered as an option beginning in 1969 and designated the PA-28R-200 the 180-hp model was dropped after 1971. [14] At the time the Arrow was introduced, Piper removed the Cherokee 150 and Cherokee 160 from production. [2] [15] [16]

              The Arrow II came out in 1972, featuring a five-inch fuselage stretch to increase legroom for the rear-seat passengers. [14] In 1977, Piper introduced the Arrow III (PA-28R-201), which featured a semi-tapered wing and longer stabilator, a design feature that had previously been introduced successfully on the PA-28-181 and provided better low-speed handling. It also featured larger fuel tanks, increasing capacity from 50 to 77 gallons. [16]

              The first turbocharged model, the PA-28R-201T, was also offered in 1977, powered by a six-cylinder Continental TSIO-360-F engine equipped with a Rajay turbocharger. A three-bladed propeller was optional. [14]

              In 1979, the Arrow was restyled again as the PA-28RT-201 Arrow IV, featuring a "T" tail that resembled the other aircraft in the Piper line at the time. [16]

              In 1971, Piper released a Cherokee 140 variant called the Cherokee Cruiser 2+2. Although the plane kept the 140 designation, it was, in fact, a 150-hp plane and was shipped mainly as a four-seat version. In 1973, the Cherokee 180 was named the Cherokee Challenger and had its fuselage lengthened slightly and its wings widened and the Cherokee 235 was named the Charger with similar airframe modifications. [2] In 1974, Piper changed the marketing names of some of the Cherokee models again, renaming the Cruiser 2+2 (140) simply the Cruiser, the Challenger to the Archer (model PA-28-181), and the Charger (235) to Pathfinder. [15]

              Piper reintroduced the Cherokee 150 in 1974, renaming it the Cherokee Warrior (PA-28-151) and giving it the Archer's stretched body and a new, semi-tapered wing. [2] [15]

              In 1977, Piper stopped producing the Cruiser (140) and Pathfinder (235), but introduced a new 235-hp (175-kW) plane, the Dakota (PA-28-236), based on the Cherokee 235, Charger, and Pathfinder models, but with the new semi-tapered wing. [15]

              The PA-28-201T Turbo Dakota followed the introduction of the PA-28-236 Dakota in 1979. The airframe was essentially the same as a fixed-gear Arrow III and was powered by a turbocharged Continental TSIO-360-FB engine producing 200 hp (149 kW). The aircraft did not sell well and production ended in 1980. [17]

              In 1977, Piper upgraded the Warrior to 160 hp (119 kW) PA-28-161, changing its name to Cherokee Warrior II. This aircraft had slightly improved aerodynamic wheel fairings introduced in 1978. Later models of the Warrior II, manufactured after July 1982, incorporated a gross weight increase to 2,440 pounds, giving a useful load over 900 pounds. This same aircraft, now available with a glass cockpit, was available as the Warrior III and was marketed as a training aircraft. [5] [18]

              PA-32 Edit

              In 1965, Piper developed the Piper Cherokee Six, designated the PA-32, by stretching the PA-28 design. It featured a lengthened fuselage and seating for one pilot and five passengers. [15]

              Brazilian, Argentinian and Chilean production Edit

              PA-28s were built under license in Brazil as the Embraer EMB-711A and EMB-711C Corisco (PA-28R-200), EMB-711B (PA-28R-201), EMB-711T (PA-28RT-201) and EMB-711ST Corisco Turbo (PA-28RT-201T) and the EMB-712 Tupi (PA-28-181). Argentinian production was carried out by Chincul SACAIFI of San Juan, Argentina. Chincul S. A. built 960 airplanes between 1972 and 1995, including the Cherokee Archer, Dakota, Arrow and Turbo Arrow. [19] The PA-28-236 Dakota was also assembled under license by the Maintenance Wing of the Chilean Air Force (which later became known as ENAER). By September 1982, 20 Dakotas had been assembled in Chile. [20]

              New Piper Aircraft Edit

              The original Piper Aircraft company declared bankruptcy in 1991. In 1995, the New Piper Aircraft company was created. It was renamed Piper Aircraft once again in 2006. The company originally produced one variant, the 180-horsepower (134 kW) Archer LX (PA-28-181), [21] and began testing two diesel versions, with 135 and 155 hp. [22]

              As of 2017, four variants of the PA-28 are in production:

              • Arrow [23] with retractable landing gear, a 200 hp (149 kW) fuel injected Lycoming IO-360-C1C6 engine, a 137 kn (254 km/h) TAS maximum cruise speed, 880 nmi (1,630 km) range and a Garmin G500 avionics suite
              • Archer [24] with a 180 hp (134 kW) Lycoming O-360-A4M engine, a 128 kn (237 km/h) TAS maximum cruise speed, 522 nmi (967 km) range and a Garmin G1000 avionics suite
              • Archer DX [25] with a 155 hp (116 kW) Continental CD-155 engine, a 123 kn (228 km/h) TAS maximum cruise speed, 848 nmi (1,570 km) range and a Garmin G1000 avionics suite
              • Warrior [26] with a 160 hp (119 kW) Lycoming O-320-D3G engine, a 115 kn (213 km/h) TAS maximum cruise speed, 513 nmi (950 km) range and a Garmin G500 avionics suite

              Wing Edit

              Originally, all Cherokees had a constant-chord, rectangular planform wing, popularly called the "Hershey Bar" wing because of its resemblance to the convex, rectangular chocolate bar.

              Beginning with the Warrior in 1974, Piper switched to a semi-tapered wing with the NACA 652-415 profile and a 2-foot-longer (0.61 m) wingspan. The constant chord is maintained from the root to mid-wing, at which point a tapered section sweeping backwards on the leading edge continues until the tip. Both Cherokee wing variants have an angled wing root i.e., the wing chord is greater at the root, with the leading edge swept back as it leaves the fuselage body, rather than the wing meeting the body at a perpendicular angle.

              Debate is ongoing about the relative benefits of the two wing shapes. According to the Cherokee's lead designer, Fred Weick, the semi-tapered wing was introduced to "improve stall characteristics and increase wingspan," and side-by-side testing of the two shapes found that with the semitapered wing, "the plane had better climb and flatter flight characteristics" [27] The original 1974 version of the wing had a structural weakness that caused a structural failure during an aerobatic maneuver, but that was fixed for all later wings. [28] According to Terry Lee Rogers (summarizing interviews with Weick), "the outboard wing sections had a different taper than the wing root, which permitted them to retain control even when the inboard sections were stalled." [28]

              However, designer John Thorp, who collaborated with Weick in the late 1950s on an early 180 hp version of the PA-28 (with Hershey-bar wings) and was not involved in the later semi-tapered design, publicly disagreed: "Tapered wings tend to stall outboard, reducing aileron effectiveness and increasing the likelihood of a rolloff into a spin." [29]

              Aviation journalist Peter Garrison is also in the Hershey-bar wing camp, claiming that the semitapered shape has a neutral effect on drag: "to prevent tip stall, designers have resorted to providing the outboard portions of tapered wings with more cambered airfoil sections, drooped or enlarged leading edges, fixed or automatic leading edge slots or slats and most commonly, wing twist or "washout". The trouble with these fixes is that they all increase the drag, cancelling whatever benefit the tapered wing was supposed to deliver in the first place." [29]

              Flight controls Edit

              For the Cherokee family, Piper used their traditional flight-control configuration. The horizontal tail is a stabilator with an antiservo tab (sometimes termed an antibalance tab). The antiservo tab moves in the same direction of the stabilator movement, making pitch control "heavier" as the stabilator moves out of the trimmed position. Flaps can extend up to 40° and 25° flaps are normally used for a short- or soft-field takeoff. The ailerons, flaps, stabilator and stabilator trim are all controlled using cables and pulleys. [30]

              In the cockpit, all Cherokees use control yokes rather than sticks, together with rudder pedals. [30] The pilot operates the flaps manually using a Johnson bar located between the front seats: for zero degrees, the lever is flat against the floor and is pulled up to select the detent positions of 10, 25, and 40°. [30]

              Older Cherokees use an overhead crank for stabilator trim (correctly called an antiservo tab), while later ones use a trim wheel on the floor between the front seats, immediately behind the flap bar. [30]

              All Cherokees have a brake lever under the pilot side of the instrument panel. Differential toe brakes on the rudder pedals were an optional add-on for earlier Cherokees and became standard with later models. [30]

              Some earlier Cherokees used control knobs for the throttle, mixture, and propeller advance (where applicable), while later Cherokees use a collection of two or three control levers in a throttle quadrant. [30]

              Cherokees normally include a rudder trim knob, which actually controls a set of springs acting on the rudder pedals rather than an external trim tab on the rudder—in other words, the surface is trimmed by control tension rather than aerodynamically. [30]


              No. 202.28: Continuing Temporary Suspension and Modification of Laws Relating to the Disaster Emergency

              NOW, THEREFORE, I, Andrew M. Cuomo, Governor of the State of New York, by virtue of the authority vested in me by Section 29-a of Article 2-B of the Executive Law, do hereby continue the suspensions and modifications of law, and any directives, not superseded by a subsequent directive, made by Executive Order 202 and each successor Executive Order up to and including Executive Order 202.14, for thirty days until June 6, 2020, except as modified below:

              • The suspension or modification of the following statutes and regulations are not continued, and such statutes, codes and regulations are in full force and effect as of May 8, 2020:
                • 10 NYCRR 405.9, except to the limited extent that it would allow a practitioner to practice in a facility where they are not credentialed or have privileges, which shall continue to be suspended 10 NYCRR 400.9 10 NYCRR 400.11, 10 NYCRR 405 10 NYCRR 403.3 10 NYCRR 403.5 10 NYCRR 800.3, except to the extent that subparagraphs (d) and (u) could otherwise limit the scope of care by paramedics to prohibit the provision of medical service or extended service to COVID-19 or suspected COVID-19 patients 10 NYCRR 400.12 10 NYCRR 415.11 10 NYCRR 415.15 10 NYCRR 415.26 14 NYCRR 620 14 NYCRR 633.12 14 NYCRR 636-1 14 NYCRR 686.3 and 14 NYCRR 517
                • Mental Hygiene Law Sections 41.34 29.11 and 29.15
                • Public Health Law Sections 3002, 3002-a, 3003, and 3004-a to the extent it would have allowed the Commissioner to make determination without approval by a regional or state EMS board
                • Subdivision (2) of section 6527, Section 6545, and Subdivision (1) of Section 6909 of the Education Law as well as subdivision 32 of Section 6530 of the Education Law, paragraph (3) of Subdivision (a) of Section 29.2 of Title 8 of the NYCRR, and sections 58-1.11, 405.10, and 415.22 of Title 10 of the NYCRR
                • All codes related to construction, energy conservation, or other building code, and all state and local laws, ordinances, and regulations which would have otherwise been superseded, upon approval by the Commissioner of OPWDD, as applicable only for temporary changes to physical plant, bed capacities, and services provided for facilities under the Commissioners jurisdiction.

                IN ADDITION, I hereby temporarily suspend or modify the following if compliance with such statute, local law, ordinance, order, rule, or regulation would prevent, hinder, or delay action necessary to cope with the disaster emergency or if necessary to assist or aid in coping with such disaster, for the period from the date of this Executive Order through June 6, 2020:

                • Sections 7-103, 7-107 and 7-108 of the General Obligations Law to the extent necessary to provide that:
                  • Landlords and tenants or licensees of residential properties may, upon the consent of the tenant or licensee, enter into a written agreement by which the security deposit and any interest accrued thereof, shall be used to pay rent that is in arrears or will become due. If the amount of the deposit represents less than a full month rent payment, this consent does not constitute a waiver of the remaining rent due and owing for that month. Execution in counterpart by email will constitute sufficient execution for consent
                  • Landlords shall provide such relief to tenants or licensees who so request it that are eligible for unemployment insurance or benefits under state or federal law or are otherwise facing financial hardship due to the COVID-19 pandemic
                  • It shall be at the tenant or licensee’s option to enter into such an agreement and landlords shall not harass, threaten or engage in any harmful act to compel such agreement
                  • Any security deposit used as a payment of rent shall be replenished by the tenant or licensee, to be paid at the rate of 1/12 the amount used as rent per month. The payments to replenish the security deposit shall become due and owing no less than 90 days from the date of the usage of the security deposit as rent. The tenant or licensee may, at their sole option, retain insurance that provides relief for the landlord in lieu of the monthly security deposit replenishment, which the landlord, must accept such insurance as replenishment.
                  • Subdivision 2 of section 238-a of the Real Property Law to provide that no landlord, lessor, sub-lessor or grantor shall demand or be entitled to any payment, fee or charge for late payment of rent occurring during the time period from March 20, 2020, through August 20, 2020 and
                  • Section 8-400 of the Election Law is modified to the extent necessary to require that to the any absentee application mailed by a board of elections due to a temporary illness based on the COVID-19 public health emergency may be drafted and printed in such a way to limit the selection of elections to which the absentee ballot application is only applicable to any primary or special election occurring on June 23, 2020, provided further that for all absentee ballot applications already mailed or completed that purported to select a ballot for the general election or to request a permanent absentee ballot shall in all cases only be valid to provide an absentee ballot for any primary or special election occurring on June 23, 2020. All Boards of Elections must provide instructions to voters and post prominently on the website, instructions for completing the application in conformity with this directive.
                  • The suspension of the provisions of any time limitations contained in the Criminal Procedure Law contained in Executive Order 202.8 is modified as follows:
                    • Section 182.30 of the Criminal Procedure Law, to the extent that it would prohibit the use of electronic appearances for certain pleas
                    • Section 180.60 of the Criminal Procedure Law to provide that (i) all parties’ appearances at the hearing, including that of the defendant, may be by means of an electronic appearance (ii) the Court may, for good cause shown, withhold the identity, obscure or withhold the image of, and/or disguise the voice of any witness testifying at the hearing pursuant to a motion under Section 245.70 of the Criminal Procedure law—provided that the Court is afforded a means to judge the demeanor of a witness
                    • Section 180.80 of the Criminal Procedure Law, to the extent that a court must satisfy itself that good cause has been shown within one hundred and forty-four hours from May 8, 2020 that a defendant should continue to be held on a felony complaint due to the inability to empanel a grand jury due to COVID-19, which may constitute such good cause pursuant to subdivision three of such section and
                    • Section 190.80 of the Criminal Procedure Law, to the extent that to the extent that a court must satisfy itself that good cause has been shown that a defendant should continue to be held on a felony complaint beyond forty-five days due to the inability to empanel a grand jury due to COVID-19, which may constitute such good cause pursuant to subdivision b of such section provided that such defendant has been provided a preliminary hearing as provided in section 180.80.

                    IN ADDITION, by virtue of the authority vested in me by Section 29-a of Article 2-B of the Executive Law to issue any directive during a disaster emergency necessary to cope with the disaster, I hereby issue the following directives for the period from the date of Executive Order through June 6, 2020:

                    • There shall be no initiation of a proceeding or enforcement of either an eviction of any residential or commercial tenant, for nonpayment of rent or a foreclosure of any residential or commercial mortgage, for nonpayment of such mortgage, owned or rented by someone that is eligible for unemployment insurance or benefits under state or federal law or otherwise facing financial hardship due to the COVID-19 pandemic for a period of sixty days beginning on June 20, 2020.
                    • Executive Order 202.18, which extended the directive contained in Executive Orders 202.14 and 202.4 as amended by Executive Order 202.11 related to the closure of schools statewide, is hereby continued to provide that all schools shall remain closed through the remainder of the school year. School districts must continue plans for alternative instructional options, distribution and availability of meals, and child care, with an emphasis on serving children of essential workers.

                    G I V E N under my hand and the Privy Seal of the State in the City of Albany this seventh of May in the year two thousand twenty.


                    Watch the video: EPLAN Preplanning, Version: Property arrangement (October 2021).