History.

National Formosa University was founded in 1980 as Provincial Yunlin Institute of Technology by the Taiwan Provincial Government. Tien-Chin Chang was appointed as its first president. Five departments were established: Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering, Mechanical and Materials Engineering, Mechanical Design, Power Mechanical Engineering, and Electrical Engineering.  In 1981, the school changed its name to National Yunlin Institute of Technology (NYIT). The departments of Electro-Optical Engineering and Automation Engineering were added to NYIT in 1988.  In 1989 Cheng-Kuan Yu was appointed as the second president by the Ministry of Education. In 1991, the English name of NYIT was changed to National Yunlin Polytechnic Institute (NYPI). The Department of Industrial Engineering and Management was established. Two years later, the Department of Vehicle Engineering was established. In 1994, the Department of Aeronautical Engineering started. With the approbation from the Ministry of Education in 1997, NYPI was renamed to National Huwei Institute of Technology (NHIT), whose five-year junior college system was to be replaced gradually by two-year and four-year college systems.  Due to the retirement of President Cheng-Kuang Yu in 1999, Feng-Tsun Chen, Dean of Academic Affairs, served as the acting president. Chien-Chang Lin became the first elected president. The Department of Information Management was established in 2000. On year later. The Department of Applied Foreign Languages began. In 2002, the Department of Computer Science and Information Engineering, the Department of Finance, the Graduate Institute of Electro-Optical and Materials Science, and the Graduate Institute of Power Mechanical Engineering were established. In 2003, the Department of Business Administration and the Department of Biotechnology began. In 2004, NHIT was renamed National Huwei University of Science and Technology (NHUST). Four colleges were established: Applied Arts & Science, Engineering, Electrical & Computer Engineering, and Management. The Department of Multimedia Design, the Department of Leisure Management, the Graduate Institute of Industrial Engineering and Management, and the Graduate Institute of Mechanical and Electro-Mechanical Engineering were established. A master's degree program was added to the Department of Information Management. In 2005, the English name of NHUST was changed to National Formosa University (NFU). President Chien-Chang Lin retired; Yeong-Ley Tsay, dean of Academic Affairs, served as the acting president. The Department of Electronic Engineering was established. The master's degree and doctoral degree programs were initiated at the Department of Electrical Engineering and the Graduate Institute of Electro-Optical and Materials Science, respectively. In 2006, Jenn-Der Lin assumed the presidency of NFU. The Graduate Institute of Materials Science and Green Energy Engineering and the Graduate Institute of Business and Management were established. The Department of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering was renamed the Department of Mechanical and Computer-Aided Engineering. The Department of General Education and the Center of Teacher Education were merged and became the Center for General Education. In 2007, the Graduate Institute of Aeronautical and Electronic Engineering and the Graduate Institute of Innovation Engineering and Precision Technology were established. The Department of Leisure Management was renamed the Department of Leisure and Recreation.  In 2008, the Department of Computer Science and Information Engineering, the Department of Automation Engineering, and the Department of Biotechnology began master's degree programs. The Department of Mechanical Design Engineering and the Department of Leisure and Recreation established master's degree programs in 2009. The Department of Electronic Engineering and the Department of Vehicle Engineering established master's degree programs the next year. In 2011, the Department of Finance established a master's degree program. The Executive Yuan consented to NFU's procurement of a new campus. The preparatory center for the new campus was started. In 2012, the Executive Yuan allocated a land of 17.18 hectares in THSR Yunlin Station area for NFU new campus. In 2013, NFU received funding from the Subsidy Directions for Developing Technological University Paradigms, the Ministry of Education. Wen-Yuh Jywe was elected as the president.

National Formosa University (NFU; ) is a technical university in Huwei District, Yunlin County, Taiwan. It is the only university in Taiwan to include the historical name of Formosa in its title. NFU was established in Huwei Township in 1980.


History.

The first example of molecular imprinting is attributed to M. V. Polyakov in 1931 with his studies in the polymerization of sodium silicate with ammonium carbonate. When the polymerization process was accompanied by an additive such as benzene, the resulting silica showed a higher uptake of this additive. By 1949, the concept of instructional theory molecular imprinting was used by Dickey; his research precipitated silica gels in the presence of organic dyes and showed imprinted silica had high selectivity towards the template dye.  Following Dickey’s observations, Patrikeev published a paper of his ‘imprinted’ silica with the method of incubating bacteria with gel silica. The process of drying and heating the silica promoted growth of bacteria better than other reference silicas and exhibited enantioselectivity. He later used this imprinted silica method in further applications such as thin layer chromatography (TLC) and high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC). In 1972, Wulff and Klotz introduced molecular imprinting to organic polymers. They found that molecular recognition was possible by covalently introducing functional groups within the imprinted cavity of polymers. The Mosbach group then proved it was possible to introduce functional groups into imprinted cavities through non-covalent interactions, thus leading to non-covalent imprinting. Many approaches regarding molecular imprinting have since been extended to different purposes.

Type of Molecular Imprinting.

Covalent.

In covalent imprinting, the template molecule is covalently bonded to the functional monomers that are then polymerized together. After polymerization, the polymer matrix is cleaved from the template molecule, leaving a cavity shaped as the template. Upon rebinding with the original molecule, the binding sites will interact with the target molecule, reestablishing the covalent bonds. During this reestablishment, kinetics associated with bond binding and bond breakage are obtained back. The imprinted molecule is then released from the template, in which it would then rebind with the target molecule, forming the same covalent bonds that were formed before polymerization. Advantages through utilizing this approach include the functional group being solely associated with the binding sites, avoiding any non-specific binding. The imprinted molecule also displays a homogenous distribution of binding sites, increasing the stability of the template-polymer complex. However, there are a few number of compounds that can be use to imprint with template molecules via covalent bonding, such as alcohols, aldehydes and ketones, all of which have high formation kinetics. In some cases, the rebinding of the polymer matrix with the template can be very slow, making this approach time inefficient for applications that require fast kinetics, such as chromatography.

Non-covalent.

With non-covalent imprinting, interaction forces between template molecule and functional monomer are the same as the interaction forces between the polymer matrix and analyte. The forces involved in this procedure can include hydrogen bonds, dipole dipole interactions, and induced dipole forces. This method is the most widely used approach to create MIPs due to easy preparation and the wide variety of functional monomers that can be bound to the template molecule. Among the functional groups, methacrylic acid is the most commonly used compound due to its ability to interact with other functional groups. Another way to alternate the non-covalent interaction between the template molecule and polymer is through the technique ‘bait and switch’. In this process, functional groups first non-covalently bond with the binding site, but during the rebinding step, the polymer matrix forms irreversible covalent bonds with the target molecule.

Ionic/Metallic.

Ionic imprinting, which involves metal ions, serves as an approach to enhance template molecule and functional monomer interaction in water. Typically, metal ions serve as a mediator during the imprinting process. Cross-linking polymers that are in the presence of a metal ion will form a matrix that is capable of metal binding. Metal ions can also mediate molecular imprinting by binding to a range of functional monomers, where ligands donate electrons to the outermost orbital of the metal ion. In addition to mediating imprinting, metal ions can be utilized in the direct imprinting. For example, a metal ion can serve as the template for the imprinting process.

Applications.

One application of molecular imprinting technology is in affinity-based separations for biomedical, environmental, and food analysis. Sample preconcentration and treatment can be carried out by removing targeted trace amounts of analytes in samples using MIPs. The feasibility of MIPs in solid-phase extraction, solid-phase microextraction, and stir bar sorption extraction has been studied in several publications. Moreover, chromatography techniques such as HPLC and TLC can make use of MIPs as packing materials and stationary phases for the separation of template analytes. The kinetics of noncovalently imprinted materials were observed to be faster than materials prepared by the covalent approach, so noncovalent MIPs are more commonly used in chromatography.  Another application is the use of molecularly imprinted materials as chemical and biological sensors. They have been developed to target herbicides, sugars, drugs, toxins, and vapors. MIP-based sensors not only have high selectivity and high sensitivity, but they can also generate output signals (electrochemical, optical, or piezoelectric) for detection. This allows them to be utilized in fluorescence sensing, electrochemical sensing, chemiluminescence sensing, and UV-Vis sensing. Forensic applications that delve into detections of illicit drugs, banned sport drugs, toxins, and chemical warfare agents are also an area of growing interest.  Molecular imprinting has steadily been emerging in fields like drug delivery and biotechnology. The selective interaction between template and polymer matrix can be utilized in preparation of artificial antibodies. In the biopharmaceutical market, separation of amino acids, chiral compounds, hemoglobin, and hormones can be achieved with MIP adsorbents. Methods to utilize molecular imprinting techniques for mimicking linear and polyanionic molecules, such as DNA, proteins, and carbohydrates have been researched. An area of challenges is protein imprinting. Large, water-soluble biological macromolecules have posed a difficulty for molecular imprinting because their conformational integrity cannot be ensured in synthetic environments. Current methods to navigate this include immobilizing template molecules at the surface of solid substrates, thereby minimizing aggregation and controlling the template molecules to locate at the surface of imprinted materials. However, a critical review of molecular imprinting of proteins by scientists from Utrecht University found that further testing is required.  Pharmaceutical applications include selective drug delivery and control drug release systems, which make use of MIPs’ stable conformations, fast equilibrium release, and resistance to enzymatic and chemical stress. Intelligent drug release, the release of a therapeutic agent as a result of a specific stimuli, has also been explored. Molecularly imprinted materials of insulin and other drugs at the nanoscale were shown to exhibit high adsorption capacity for their respective targets, showing huge potential for newfound drug delivery systems. In comparison with natural receptors, MIPs also have higher chemical and physical stability, easier availability, and lower cost. MIPs could especially be used for stabilization of proteins, particularly selective protection of proteins against denaturation from heat.

Molecular imprinting is a technique to create template-shaped cavities in polymer matrices with predetermined selectivity and high affinity. This technique is based on the system used by enzymes for substrate recognition, which is called the "lock and key" model. The active binding site of an enzyme has a shape specific to a substrate. Substrates with a complementary shape to the binding site selectively bind to the enzyme; alternative shapes that do not fit the binding site are not recognized.


Route.

The line runs mainly over the tracks of three railway lines: The trains of the Rhein-Wupper-Bahn (RB 48) stop at all stations on the line. They run daily from 5 am to 20 pm at hourly intervals between Wuppertal Hauptbahnhof and Bonn-Mehlem. Additional services run from Wuppertal to Cologne every hour, so on this section there is a service approximately 30-minutes.  Until December 2007, the service ran to Wuppertal-Oberbarmen, but was shortened due to a reduction in federal funding and operated only in the off-peak. The service to Wuppertal-Oberbarmen was restored in December 2015. The section of the line in Rhineland-Palatinate that was formerly served regularly, was served from 2003 to 2015 by only one service operated to Remagen in the evening and returning next morning. Since December 2015, the service south of Bonn-Mehlem has been abandoned entirely.

Rolling stock.

Since December 2015, Bombardier Talent 2 EMUs have been operated by National Express. They run regularly as a five car set coupled to a three car set. National Express also holds two spare sets of coaches and locomotives of class 182 (EuroSprinter) for the operation on the RB 48.  Until the timetable change in December 2007, the Rhein-Wupper-Bahn was operated mostly using locomotive-hauled push–pull trains. This were usually made up of five “n-carriages” (Silberling), hauled by class 111 electric locomotives. Trains were often hauled by class 110 locomotives and occasionally class 425 electric multiple units in coupled sets were operated. After December 2007, RB 48 were at first operated only with class 425 in coupled sets. The ET 425 sets became available when Abellio Rail NRW won some tenders for operating services in North Rhine-Westphalia. Between the minor change of timetable in June 2009 and the regular timetable change in December 2009, some services were again operated with class 110 locomotives with five to six n-carriages, as not enough carriages were available due to the need for software modifications to the ET 425 vehicles.

History.

In December 2002, the Rhein-Wupper-Bahn replaced the North Rhine-Westphalian section of the former "Rhein-Wupper-Express" (RE 6), which ran between Koblenz and Wuppertal. The current RB 48 serves all stations served by Rhein-Wupper-Bahn on this section, with the exception of Hurth-Kalscheuren. The Rhein-Wupper-Express originally consisted of six n-carriages without a control car, pulled by class 110 locomotives. From 2001, following a three-part electric multiple units, consisting of two class 425 sets and one class 426 set.  The Rhein-Wupper-Bahn originally ran between Remagen and Wuppertal-Oberbarmen and was operated using coupled class 425 sets. In December 2003 it was shortened to terminate at Bonn-Mehlem because Rhineland-Palatinate would not provide sufficient funds for operations in its section.  After the motor coaches of the class 425 sets suffered massive brake problems in the autumn of 2003, in early September 2004 operations of the Rhein-Wupper-Bahn were changed as a precaution under the "H'04" program to push-pull trains of five n-carriages hauled by class 110 locomotives. Modifications to the class 425 sets were completed three years later, in late 2007. Since then class 425 EMUs have run in double sets.  In December 2007, the Rhein-Wupper-Bahn was cut back from Wuppertal-Oberbarmen to Wuppertal Hauptbahnhof. This enabled the service to be run as Bonn–Wuppertal and Köln–Wuppertal cycles, saving a train set. One train runs late in the evening to Wuppertal-Oberbarmen, where it is parked overnight before returning early in the morning to Bonn.  In February 2013, a tender for operation of the Rhein-Wupper-Bahn from 2015 to 2030 was won by National Express. Service to Wuppertal-Oberbarmen were resumed in December 2015. During peak times, half-hourly services have been extended to Bonn.

Prospects.

There are plans to convert the Rhein-Wupper-Bahn service into an S-Bahn service. This would run at 20-minute intervals. This might run on a modified route between Opladen and Köln-Mülheim on the current freight line through Leverkusen-Morsbroich. This would provide better services to the suburbs of Dünnwald and Höhenhaus. It would be possible to run the service as line S 16 to Bonn, however, parts of the Left Rhine line would have to be increased to four tracks (the Cologne S-Bahn western ring). It is also possible that the new line S 16 would end in Cologne and line S 6 from Essen would be extended to Bonn.

The Rhein-Wupper-Bahn is a Regionalbahn service in the German state of North Rhine-Westphalia. It connects the cities of Wuppertal, Solingen, Leverkusen, Cologne and Bonn and it is operated by National Express.


History.

Disk II.

Apple did not originally offer a disk drive for the Apple II, which used data cassette storage like other microcomputers of the time. Apple early investor and executive Mike Markkula asked cofounder Steve Wozniak to design a drive system for the computer after finding that a checkbook-balancing program Markkula had written took too long to load from tape. Wozniak knew nothing about disk controllers, but while at Hewlett-Packard he had designed a simple, five-chip circuit to operate a Shugart Associates drive.  The Apple II's lack of a disk drive was "a glaring weakness" in what was otherwise intended to be a polished, professional product. Speaking later, Osborne 1 designer Lee Felsenstein stated, "The difference between cassette and disk systems was the difference between hobbyist devices and a computer. You couldn't have expected, say, VisiCalc, to run on a cassette system." Recognizing that the II needed a disk drive to be taken seriously, Apple set out to develop a disk drive and a DOS to run it. Wozniak spent the 1977 Christmas holidays adapting his controller design, which reduced the number of chips used by a factor of 10 compared to existing controllers. Still lacking a DOS, and with Wozniak inexperienced in operating system design, Steve Jobs approached Shepardson Microsystems with the project. On April 10, 1978 Apple signed a contract for $13,000 with Shepardson to develop the DOS.  Shortly after the disk drive project began in late 1977, Steve Jobs made several trips to Shugart's offices announcing that he wanted a disk drive that would cost just $100. After Wozniak finished studying IBM disk controller designs, Jobs then demanded that Shugart sell them a stripped disk drive that had no controller board, index sensor, load solenoids, or track zero sensor. Although puzzled by this request, Shugart complied and provided Apple with 25 drive mechanisms that they could use as prototypes in developing a disk system for the Apple II. The prototypes received the designation of SA-390.  Wozniak studied North Star Computers and others' more complex floppy controllers. He believed that his simpler design lacked their features, but realized that they were less sophisticated; for example, his could use soft-sectored disks. Following the Shugart controller's manual, Wozniak attempted to develop an FM-type controller with 10 sector per track storage, but realized that Group Coded Recording could fit 13 sectors per track. Wozniak called the resultant Disk II system "my most incredible experience at Apple and the finest job I did", and credited it and VisiCalc with the Apple II's success.  The Disk II was very successful for Apple, being the cheapest floppy disk system ever sold up to that point and immensely profitable for the company, in addition to having nearly 20% more storage space than standard FM drives. For a while, the only direct competitor in the microcomputer industry was the TRS-80 Model I, which had used only standard FM storage for 85k. Both the Atari 8-bit and Commodore 64's disk drives' throughputs were much slower than the Disk II's 15 KB/s, seriously affecting their ability to compete in the business market. However, the advantage of Wozniak's design was somewhat nullified when the cost of double-density MFM controllers dropped only a year after the Disk II's introduction.  The initial Disk II drives (A2M0003) were modifications of the Shugart SA-400, which was the first commercially available -inch diskette drive. Apple purchased only the bare drive mechanisms without the standard SA-400 controller board, replaced it with Wozniak's board design, and then stamped the Apple rainbow logo onto the faceplate. Early production at Apple was handled by two people, and they assembled 30 drives a day. By 1982, Apple switched to Alps drives for cost reasons.  Normal storage capacity per disk side was 113.75 KB with Apple DOS 3.2.1 and earlier (256 bytes per sector, 13 sectors per track, 35 tracks per side), or 140 KB with DOS 3.3 and ProDOS (256 bytes per sector, 16 sectors per track, 35 tracks per side). The 16-sector hardware upgrade introduced in 1980 for use with DOS 3.3 modified only the controller card firmware to use a more efficient GCR code called "6 and 2 encoding". Neither the drive itself nor the physical bit density was changed. This update had the disadvantage of not automatically booting older 13 sector Apple II software.  Since the Disk II controller was completely software-operated, the user had total control over the encoding and format so long as it was within the physical limits of the drive mechanism and media. This also allowed software companies to use all sorts of ingenious copy protection schemes.  The Shugart SA-400, from which the Disk II was adapted, was a single-sided, 35-track drive. However, it was common for users to manually flip the disk to utilize the opposite side, after cutting a second notch on the diskette's protective shell to allow write-access. Most commercial software using more than one disk side was shipped on such "flippy" disks as well. Only one side could be accessed at once, but it did essentially double the capacity of each floppy diskette, an important consideration especially in the early years when media was still quite expensive.  In the Disk II, the full-height drive mechanism shipped inside a beige-painted metal case and connected to the controller card via a 20-pin ribbon cable; the controller card was plugged into one of the bus slots on the Apple's mainboard. The connector is very easy to misalign on the controller card, which will short out a certain IC in the drive; if later connected correctly, a drive damaged this way will delete data from any disk inserted into it as soon as it starts spinning, even write-protected disks such as those used to distribute commercial software. This problem resulted in numerous customer complaints and repairs, which led to Apple printing warning messages in their user's manuals to explain how to properly install the connector. They used different connectors that could not be misaligned in later drives. DB-19 adapters for the original Disk II were eventually available for use with Apple's later connector standard.  Up to 14 drives could be attached to one Apple II or Apple IIe computer - two drives per controller card, one card per slot, and there were seven usable slots per computer. While the DOS and ProDOS operating systems worked equally well with the card in any of the normal slots (i.e. all except slot 0 of the Apple II/II+ or the special memory expansion slots of the later models), Apple's printed manuals suggested using slot 6 for the first controller card; most Apple II software expects this slot to be used for the main -inch disk drive and fails otherwise. A Bell & Howell version of the Disk II was also manufactured by Apple in a black painted case, which matched the color of the Bell & Howell version of the Apple II Plus, which Apple was already manufacturing.

Disk III.

In 1978, Apple intended to develop its own "FileWare" drive mechanism for use in the new Apple /// and Lisa business computers then being developed. They quickly ran into difficulties with the mechanisms, which precluded them from being incorporated in the Apple ///. That machine thus continued to use the same Shugart design as the Disk II.  The first variation of the Disk II introduced for the Apple ///, called the Disk III (A3M0004), used the identical drive mechanism inside a modified plastic case with a proprietary connector. With some modification both drives are interchangeable. Though Apple sought to force the purchase of new drives with the Apple ///, many former Apple II users quickly devised a way to adapt their existing and cheaper Disk II drives, however only one external Disk II was supported in this manner. The Disk III was the first to allow daisy chaining of up to three additional drives to the single 26-pin ribbon cable connector on the Apple ///, for a total of 4 floppy disk drives – the Apple /// was the first Apple to contain a built-in drive mechanism. The Apple III Plus changed its 26-pin connector to a DB-25 connector, which required an adapter for use with the Disk III.

FileWare.

In 1983, Apple finally announced a single and dual external drive ("UniFile" and "DuoFile") implementing the 871-kilobyte "FileWare" mechanism used in the original Apple Lisa, as a replacement for the Disk II & /// drives. However, due to the reliability problems of the Apple-built "Twiggy" drive mechanisms, the products never shipped.

DuoDisk.

In 1983, along with the introduction of the Apple IIe, Apple initially offered a combination of two, two third-height, 140-kilobyte Disk II drive mechanisms side-by-side in a single plastic case, called the DuoDisk 5.25 (A9M0108), which could not be daisy-chained. The unit was designed to be stacked on top of the computer, and beneath the monitor. Each unit required its own disk controller card (as each card could still control only two drives) and the number of units was thus limited to the number of available slots; in practice, few uses of the Apple II computer can make good use of more than two -inch drives, so this limitation mattered little. Originally released with a DB-25 connector, to match that of the Apple III Plus, it was the first to adopt Apple's standard DB-19 floppy drive connector.

Disk IIc.

The Disk IIc (A2M4050) was a half-height -inch floppy disk drive introduced by Apple Computer in 1984 styled for use alongside the Apple IIc personal computer, the only Apple II to contain a -inch built-in disk drive mechanism. The disk port on the original IIc was only designed to control one additional, external -inch disk drive, and as such, this particular drive omitted a daisy-chain port in back. It was possible to use it on other Apple II models, so long as it came last in the chain of drive devices (due to lacking a daisy-chain port); but since the Disk IIc was sold without a controller card, the Apple IIc computer needing none, it had to be adapted to an existing Disk II controller card in this case. Essentially the same as the full-height Disk II, Apple sold the Disk IIc for US$329, and other companies later sold similar drives for less.

-inch drive.

In 1984, Apple had opted for the more modern, Sony-designed -inch floppy disk in late-model Lisas and the new Apple Macintosh. Accordingly, they attempted to introduce a new -inch 800-kilobyte floppy disk format for the Apple II series as well, to eventually replace the 140-kilobyte Disk II format. However, the external UniDisk 3.5 drive required a ROM upgrade (for existing Apple IIc machines; new ones shipped after this time had it from the factory) or a new kind of disk controller card (the so-called "Liron Card", for the Apple IIe) to be used. The much larger capacity and higher bitrate of the -inch drives made it impractical to use the software-driven Disk II controller because the 1-megahertz 6502 CPU in the Apple II line was too slow to be able to read them. Thus a new and much more advanced (and correspondingly expensive) hardware floppy controller had to be used. And many original Apple IIs could not use the new controller card at all without further upgrades. Also, almost all commercial software for the Apple II series continued to be published on -inch disks which had a much larger installed base. For these reasons the -inch format was not widely accepted by Apple II users. The Apple 3.5 Drive used the same 800-kilobyte format as the UniDisk 3.5", but it did away with the internal controller, which made it cheaper. Unlike all earlier Apple II drives, it was designed to work with the Macintosh too, and among Apple II models, it was compatible only with the Apple IIGS and the Apple IIc+ models, which both had a faster main CPU. On the Apple IIGS, whose improved audiovisual capacities really demanded a higher-capacity disk format as well, the -inch format was accepted by users and became the standard format. Though Apple eventually offered a 1.44-megabyte SuperDrive with matching controller card for the Apple II series as well, the -inch Disk II format drives continued to be offered alongside the newer -inch drives and remained the standard on the non-IIGS models until the platform was discontinued in 1993.  Officially, the following -inch drives could be used on the Apple II:  The 400-kilobyte and 800-kilobyte Macintosh external drives (M0130 and M0131) are incompatible with standard Apple II controllers as they do not support the drives' automatic disk eject feature, although they could be used with third-party controllers.

UniDisk 5.25" and Apple 5.25 Drive.

Along with the UniDisk 3.5", Apple introduced the UniDisk 5.25 (A9M0104) in a plastic case, which modernized the appearance of the Disk II to better match the Apple IIe. Since the UniDisk 5.25" could fully replace the Disk II in all its uses, the original Disk II was canceled at this point. This was followed in 1986 by a Platinum-gray version which was renamed Apple 5.25 Drive (A9M0107), companion to the Apple 3.5 Drive, and introduced alongside the first Platinum-colored computer, the Apple IIGS. Essentially these were both single half-height Disk II mechanisms inside an individual drive enclosure, just like the Disk IIc had been. All of these drives introduced a daisy chain pass-through port. While the drives are essentially interchangeable among Apple II computers, both with each other and with the earlier drives, only the Apple 5.25 Drive can be used with the Apple IIe Card on a Macintosh LC.

Apple PC 5.25" Drive.

There is one -inch drive made by Apple that is completely incompatible with all the drives named above. In 1987 Apple sought to better compete in the IBM dominated business market by offering a means of cross-compatibility. Alongside the release of the Macintosh SE & Macintosh II, Apple released the Apple PC 5.25" Drive which required a separate custom PC 5.25 Floppy Disk Controller Card, different for each Mac model. It is the only -inch drive manufactured by Apple that can be used by the Macintosh.  This drive was for use with industry standard double-sided -inch 360-kilobyte formatted flexible disks. It was similar in appearance to the Disk IIc. Through the use of a special Macintosh Apple File Exchange utility shipped with it, the drive could read files from, and write files to, floppy disks in MS-DOS formats. Software "translators" could convert documents between WordStar and MacWrite, among others. This drive is not just incompatible with all Apple II computers, but also with the Apple IIe Card for the Macintosh LC; it cannot be used to allow a Macintosh to read from or write to -inch Apple II formatted disks either.  This drive was made obsolete by the industry-wide adoption of -inch disks and was replaced by the -inch Apple FDHD Drive, which could not only read and write all then-existing native Macintosh, DOS and Windows formats, but the Apple II ProDOS format as well.

Disk II Cable Pinout.

This table shows the pinout of the original 1979 Disk II controller and newer 1983 Uni/Duo Disk I/O controller (655-0101).  The circuitry of these two controllers are identical. The Disk II header pin numbering is per the Disk II controller card silkscreen and the circuit schematic given in the DOS 3.3 manual. The Uni/Duo Disk D-19 pinout is taken from the "Apple //c Reference Manual, Volume 1".  NOTES:

The Disk II Floppy Disk Subsystem, often rendered as Disk ][, is a -inch floppy disk drive designed by Steve Wozniak and manufactured by Apple Computer, Inc. It went on sale in June 1978 at a retail price of US$495 for pre-order; it was later sold for $595 () including the controller card (which can control up to two drives) and cable. The Disk II was designed specifically for use with the Apple II personal computer family to replace the slower cassette tape storage. These floppy drives cannot be used with any Macintosh without an Apple IIe Card as doing so will damage the drive or the controller.


Early life.

Noe Canjura was born in 1922 in Apopa, a village in the Republic of El Salvador in Central America, to a humble family of landless peasants. The infertile soil of the region meant survival was difficult. Canjura worked in a sawmill- often spending the night there- to pay part of his school expenses and lessen the load on his father.  He developed an interest in drawing at the age of seventeen, subsequently studying painting at the Academy of Painting of Valero Lecha in San Salvador from 1942 to 1946. From 1942 onward, Canjura's work was exhibited throughout El Salvador, and later also in Guatemala. In 1948 he embarked on study in Mexico City; there, he was strongly influenced by Diego Rivera, then at the height of his fame. Canjura later gained inspiration from the art of Gauguin, particularly his concepts of formal order in painting and the use of curves. That year also saw his first exhibition in the United States.

Life in Paris.

In 1949, supported by a five-year government scholarship, Canjura went to France to study at the École nationale supérieure des Beaux-Arts. Despite influence from the work of Courbet and Le Nain, he preferred to represent the sombre, harsh living conditions of his native country. He had his first one-man show in Paris in 1953, and lived there from then on. To support himself he undertook manual labour. His marriage to Madeleine Bachelet, also an artist, brought a greater financial security that allowed him to dedicate himself to his art. Returning briefly to El Salvador in 1957, the influence of his life in Paris led him to see his country from a new perspective, and colour and light came to play a greater part in his works. The city of Paris purchased four of Canjura's paintings between 1959 and 1965 for its permanent collection.  Canjura was a member of the Société Nationale des Beaux-Arts and the Salon de la Jeune Peinture. He was a regular exhibitor, and invited every year to Maurice Boitel's group in the Salon "Comparaisons". The National Museum of El Salvador and the Hamishka Leomanouth Museum at Ein Harod, Israel also purchased his paintings. He was awarded the "Prune d'Argent" by the Salon Peintres de Provence in 1965.

Death and legacy.

Canjura died in Morienval, France on September 29, 1970, aged 48, and buried at the cemetery of Notre Dame de Morienval. He was survived by his daughter and granddaughter.  He is regarded as 'an almost mythical figure in El Salvador- the barefoot goatherd... who went on to be a successful artist in Paris'; his work is considered to be influenced by 'the memory of the dramatic colors and of the tropical light of El Salvador'. His time in France led to the development of 'an increasingly abstract style of luminous colours and diffused shapes'.

References.

Specific

Noe Canjura (Apopa, El Salvador, August 14, 1922 - Morienval, France, September 29, 1970) was a Salvadoran painter and a prominent figure in 20th century modern art in France. His art was 'imbued with a social conscience and laden with religious symbolism'.


Overview.

Highly accelerated life testing (HALT) techniques are important in uncovering many of the weak links of a new product. These discovery tests rapidly find weaknesses using accelerated stress conditions. The goal of HALT is to proactively find weaknesses and fix them, thereby increasing product reliability. Because of its accelerated nature, HALT is typically faster and less expensive than traditional testing techniques.  HALT is a test technique called test-to-fail, where a product is tested until failure. HALT does not help to determine or demonstrate the reliability value or failure probability in field. Many accelerated life tests are test-to-pass, meaning they are used to demonstrate the product life or reliability.  It is highly recommended to perform HALT in the initial phases of product development to uncover weak links in a product, so that there is better chance and more time to modify and improve the product.  HALT uses several stress factors (decided by a Reliability Test Engineer) and/or the combination of various factors. Commonly used stress factors are temperature, vibration, and humidity for electronics and mechanical products. Other factors can include voltage, current, power cycling and combinations of them.

Typical HALT procedures.

Environmental stresses are applied in a HALT procedure, eventually reaching a level significantly beyond that expected during use. The stresses used in HALT are typically hot and cold temperatures, temperature cycles, random vibration, power margining, and power cycling. The product under test is in operation during HALT and is continuously monitored for failures. As stress-induced failures occur, the cause should be determined, and if possible, the problem should be repaired so that the test can continue to find other weaknesses.  Output of the HALT gives you: 1. Multiple failure modes in the product before it is subjected to demonstration testing 2. Operating limits of the product (upper and lower). These can be compared with a designer's margin or supplier specifications 3. Destruct limits of the product (limit at which product functionality is lost and no recovery can be made)

Test chambers.

A specialized environmental chamber is required for HALT. A suitable chamber also has to be capable of applying pseudo-random vibration with a suitable profile in relation to frequency. The HALT chamber should apply random vibration energy to 10,000 Hz in 6 DOF (degrees of freedom). Sometimes HALT chambers are called repetitive shock chambers because pneumatic air hammers are used to produce vibration. The chamber should also be capable of rapid changes in temperature, 50 degrees C/minute should be considered a minimum rate of change. Usually high power resistive heating elements are used for heating and liquid nitrogen (LN2) is used for cooling.

Fixtures.

Test fixtures must transmit vibration to the item under test. They must also be open in design or use air circulation to produce rapid temperature change to internal components. Test fixtures can use simple channels to attach the product to the chamber table or more complicated fixtures sometimes are fabricated.

Monitoring and failure analysis.

The equipment under test must be monitored so that if the equipment fails under test, the failure is detected. Monitoring is typically performed with thermocouple sensors, vibration accelerometers, multimeters and data loggers. Common causes of failures during HALT are from weak product design, poor workmanship, and poor manufacturing. Failures to individual components such as resistors, capacitors, diodes, printed circuit boards occur because of these issues.

Military application.

HALT is conducted before qualification testing. By catching failures early, flaws are found earlier in the acceptance process, eliminating repetitive later-stage reviews.

A highly accelerated life test (HALT), is a stress testing methodology for enhancing product reliability. HALT testing is currently in use by major manufacturing and research & development organizations to improve product reliability in a variety of industries, including electronics, computer, medical, and military.


Plot.

Arun Sharma (Sunny Deol) is a spy working for India's spy agency Research and Analysis Wing (RAW). He sets up a spy network under the identity of Major Batra to get information about Pakistani terrorist activities across the India-Pakistan border. Reshma (Preity Zinta), who is from the same village, joins this network; Arun trains Reshma to spy and they fall in love. Reluctantly, he sends her across the border to work undercover as a maidservant in Colonel Hidayatulla's (Deep Dhillon) house. Hidayatulla is associated with terrorists Isaq Khan and Maulana Azhar.  Reshma's identity as a spy is identified in front of Isaq Khan, Maulana Azhar and Colonel Hidayatulla. She escapes and returns to India with important information. Arun expresses his love for Reshma and proposes marriage to her. The ceremony is cut short when terrorists attack the venue. Reshma goes missing and Arun is presumed dead.  Arun realizes Isaq Khan and Maulana Azhar are responsible for the attack. He fakes his own death and plans to infiltrate their terrorist network. Arun follows them to Canada and discovers they are planning to create a nuclear bomb. Reshma is found to be alive in Pakistan and in the care of Dr. Salman; she is taken to Canada and has surgery on her legs. Her doctor is Shaheen (Priyanka Chopra), who is the daughter of Mr. Zakaria (Kabir Bedi), an associate of Isaq Khan. Reshma learns Arun is alive and is in Canada.  Arun changes his identity to that of nuclear scientist called Wahid, who is working at a Canadian nuclear research organization. Wahid pretends to be in love with Shaheen because he wants to become a part of Zakaria's group, and marries Shaheen to win their trust. Reshma meets Wahid at the time of his marriage to Shaheen. Arun is very happy to see Reshma alive but knows they cannot be together so she leaves. Reshma is heartbroken at the wedding.  Arun exposes Maulna Azhar, Zakaria and Isaq Khan's plan to obtain a nuclear bomb. The Canadian and Indian governments find out the terrorists' plan has been destroyed by Arun. The terrorists hijack a train to escape. Arun comes to the rescue. Shaheen dies while helping Arun, who kills Isaq Khan and the other terrorists. Arun returns to Kashmir and tells the story to his colleague, and meets Reshma in Kashmir. Arun and Reshma are finally married.  Credits adapted from Bollywood Hungama.

Production.

Director Anil Sharma had planned to make "The Hero: Love Story of a Spy" before the release of his record-breaking film "" (2001). Sharma said he wanted to make an espionage film and contemplated making something like James Bond for a long time but realised Indian films did not have the budget that is needed to make a film on such a scale. Sharma then thought of making a film based on India's spy network and, unlike his last historical film, set it in the early 2000s. His idea was to make a family film with no sex and violence. After the success of "Gadar: Ek Prem Katha", Sharma decided to make "The Hero: Love Story of a Spy", which was written by Shaktimaan. As a part of his research for the film, Sharma interacted with Army personnel to understand the working methods of its intelligence section.  The Shah brothers of Time Magnetics—Dhirajlal Shah, Hasmukh Shah and Pravin Shah—were engaged to produce the film. Aiming for high production values, Sharma mounted the film on a huge budget and scale he said was needed for a story of this proportion. He also said the film was a risk, especially when the Indian film industry was going through a slump. Sharma defended the huge budget, saying "But everything is risky; even walking on the street is risky. I knew before I started how much it would cost. I think the two years I gave to the film are more important than the budget. The money may come back, the time won't. Films these days don't work because filmmakers don't give enough time to them."  Sharma had cast Sunny Deol, who starred in "Gadar: Ek Prem Katha", in the role of an Indian spy. The director felt that the film was very different from their previous collaboration because Deol played a "subtle spy" who did not "scream and shout" (Deol's trademark in his films). Deol streaked his hair blond and wore several disguises in the film, which made him uncomfortable. Preity Zinta was cast in the female lead as a naive Kashmiri village girl while Priyanka Chopra was cast in the supporting role of a Pakistani-born Canadian doctor. Kabir Bedi and Amrish Puri completed the cast. The costumes for the cast was designed by Simple Kapadia, Abu Jani, Sandeep Khosla, Neeta Lulla and Sheetal India. Sanjay Dhabade was the production designer for the film. Several huge sets were constructed, including a massive glass house on water. The cinematography was handled by Kabir Lal.  Principal photography took place in Kullu and Manali in India, and at locations in Canada and Switzerland. Some of the filming was done in Lonavala and Film City. Half of the film was shot in India while the other half was filmed in Canada and Switzerland. Filming in freezing weather conditions in Canada and Switzerland proved to be difficult for the cast, who had to be transported to rooms with heaters every five minutes. Sometimes the temperatures fell to. The action set pieces were designed by Allan Amin and international action experts were hired to coordinate the stunts. In one of the "heavy duty" action scenes, eight helicopters were used in the filming. The producers of the film engaged the professional wrestler Big Guido as Bedi's bodyguard for an action sequence. For one scene, Deol had to jump off an tall peak, which he felt was difficult. The climax of the film was shot at Jungfrau in temperatures of. To shoot the scene, Lal propped himself on top of an open helicopter to capture the Jaungfrau Heights from in. The shot took two hours to film. After landing, he collapsed and was immediately rushed to the hospital. The songs were choreographed by Ganesh Acharya. The film was edited by Suresh Urs.

Soundtrack.

The soundtrack of "The Hero: Love Story of a Spy" was composed by Uttam Singh, and the lyrics were written by Anand Bakshi and Javed Akhtar. Initially Bakshi was the sole lyricist on the soundtrack but during production he fell ill. Bakshi wrote the lyrics for a few songs after his recovery but after his death, Akhtar was brought in to write the lyrics for the rest of the songs. The film contains six original tracks with vocals provided by Udit Narayan, Alka Yagnik, Jaspinder Narula, Sunidhi Chauhan, Sardool Sikander and Hariharan. The soundtrack was released on 20 February 2003 by Times Music.  Bollywood Hungama said the soundtrack does not have "anything great or extraordinary to offer" and that the music is below expectations considering the budget and scale of the film. Planet Bollywood rated the album 6 out of 10, calling it "simply passable, nothing spectacular" and saying the music is not what was expected from such a big film. The reviewer said "Dil Main Hai Pyar" is the best song on the album, noting "its enjoyable characteristics" and saying it had "the potential to become very popular".

Budget and trade analysis.

After the record-breaking success of Deol's and Sharma's previous collaboration "Gadar: Ek Prem Katha" which became the highest-grossing Indian film of all time at that point of time, their next collaboration was highly anticipated and a lot was expected from it. According to Taran Adarsh, there were "gargantuan" expectations from the new film. "The Hero: Love Story of a Spy" was much talked about for its budget and scale. Adarsh said the producers had spared no expenses in making it a film of "epic proportions" and "grand production values", writing, "The money spent is visible in every frame, the grand look of the film just cannot be overlooked". The film was also talked about for including stunts that were new to Bollywood cinema.  Industry experts and trade analysts declared "The Hero: Love Story of a Spy" the most expensive Indian film ever made at that point, with some estimating its budget between 50 to 55 million. According to Box Office India, the film had a budget of 35 million, including the production and marketing cost. Sharma refused to confirm the exact budget but agreed it was an expensive film, telling Subhash K. Jha; "The producers have gone on record about the budget. I cannot tell you the exact cost. But yes, it is an expensive film". The director, however, was extremely unhappy with the hype around the film's budget because he did not want to raise audience expectations. Rajesh Thadani said the film should have been made on a lower budget because the economics of film-making had changed and that restraining a film's budget was "the need of the hour". A distributor told Rediff.com making such a costly film in the 2000s was not a viable proposition and that audiences had become extremely unpredictable. He added; ""Devdas", with all its hype, barely managed to recover its cost. For "The Hero" to succeed, it will have to do better than "Devdas"."  When "The Hero: Love Story of a Spy" was in production, revenues of the Bollywood film Industry were declining and many were hopeful the film would help revive the industry. The film's trailers and promos created "enormous" to "positive" buzz in the public and media, but some trade analysts were sceptical about its high budget and its potential box-office earnings. An editor of "Box Office" said the recovery of the cost of a film like this, which had been filmed on "an extra-large canvas", was impossible from the Indian market alone. He said big-budget films like this mostly rely on overseas markets, which was uncertain for this film because it offered nothing new to overseas audiences as a "James Bond type of movie" that had been done several times before. Trade analyst Amod Mehra was more hopeful about the film, saying he hoped it would help revive the Bollywood film industry, which had "virtually gone dead", and that "the public is anticipating something as thrilling and fast-paced as "Gadar". If he has kept the pulse of the public in mind, I see no reason why [the film] won't run well."

Release.

As "The Hero: Love Story of a Spy" was nearing its release, the 2003 Bollywood Producers' strike prevented the release of new Hindi films in theaters after 1 April 2003. Deol was displeased about the strike because he felt postponing a big film like this was not an affordable option, saying; "When a producer has spent so much money promoting and publicising a film like "The Hero", how is he expected to scrap his campaign, postpone his film and start from scratch?". "The Hero: Love Story of a Spy" was released on 11 April 2003 on 500 screens despite the ongoing ban on the release of Hindi films. The film had a good opening at the box office, collecting 22.2 million on its opening day and 63.1 million in its opening weekend in India, and had the worldwide opening-weekend revenue of over 111.5 million. In its first week, the film collected over 107 million at the domestic box office and over 188.2 worldwide. In a report published in Rediff.com, Jha said the strike proved to be beneficial for "The Hero: Love Story of a Spy" because it had sustained a steady second-week run. During its box office run, the film grossed 414.5 million in India and over 36.8 million in the overseas market, making a worldwide gross of over 451.3 million. It was the third-highest-grossing Indian film of the year but the film's box-office gross was considered to be below expectations due to the high cost of production.  "The Hero: Love Story of a Spy" was released by Time as a single-disc, NTSC-format DVD on 8 July 2003 across all regions. A DVD version released by Venus Records contains some bonus features, including a "making-of" documentary and a collection of Deol's songs. A Video CD version was released at the same time. Tip Top Video released the film internationally on an an-regions, PAL-Widescreen format DVD. A VHS version was released on 1 September 2003. Another version of the DVD was later released by Moser Baer across all regions on an NTSC-format single disc.

Reception.

"The Hero: Love Story of a Spy" garnered mixed reviews from critics. Deepa Gumaste of Rediff.com praised the film, calling it a "comicbook spy movie", comparing it to "Die Another Day" and "", and writing; "At last an original "desi" spy who combines the guile and charm of James Bond and the raw appeal of Rambo!" She said the cinematography is a "treat for the eyes with exquisite footage of the picturesque landscapes" and wrote; "For once in a Hindi film, foreign locations have actually been put to good use". Lawrence Van Gelder of "New York Times" was appreciative of the film, noting its "multiple pleasures" and writing; "Stretching from the snow-capped peaks of Kashmir to the ski slopes of Canada, mingling gunplay, spectacular explosions and chases with songs, dances and romance, this colorful Indian spy adventure constitutes the cinematic equivalent of the delightful and inconsequential escapism of a 700-page summer beach novel".  Sify gave "The Hero: Love Story of a Spy" film three out of five, writing; "The central theme gets more spice with a love story giving much role to play for Preity and Priyanka. The action sequences are well shot and Sunny essays his role with skill as usual." Kevin Thomas of "Los Angeles Times" called the film "straightforward escapist fare" with the sensibility of an "old-fashioned comic-book", and said it "may be corny" and "unintentionally amusing at times" but it is also "a lot of fun" and has "all the classic elements of a Bollywood blockbuster taken to a spectacular level". The BBC's Manish Gajjar called the film "great escapist" cinema and praised the performances, writing; "the role of Ravi Khanna was tailor- made for Sunny Deol. He got a chance to exhibit the various looks of a secret agent... Preity Zinta is radiantly refreshing throughout the film whilst ex-Miss World, Priyanka Chopra appears natural considering that this is her debut film".  Derek Elley of "Variety" said "The Hero: Love Story of a Spy" is "wildly over-the-top" but "undeniably entertaining". Praising the performances, Elley wrote; "Deol makes a solid, rather than exciting hero, better in military duds than his increasingly outre disguises, and Puri overacts wildly as the villain. Femme leads are much more engaging, with Zinta typically sparky and likable, and mega-looker Chopra making a solid screen debut as a modern urban miss." Anupama Chopra of "India Today" said the narrative has flair, noting the love story, including the courtship and consequent separation that has "emotional vigour" works to some extent but the spying part is a problem. She wrote; "The leads try hard—Deol appears suavely sincere and Zinta vulnerable—but Shaktiman's script doesn't hold. The incendiary dialogue got whistles but the comic-book discussions on nuclear bombs were a sleeping pill." Taran Adarsh of Bollywood Hungama criticised the "superficial" writing but praised the technical aspects of the film, such as the "terrific" visuals and "awe-inspiring" action sequences, and said it "lacks the soul to make you cry and make your heart go out for the on-screen characters... [the film] has gloss and hype as its trumpcards, but... lacks in emotions, music and a taut screenplay".

The Hero: Love Story of a Spy is a 2003 Indian spy thriller film that was directed by Anil Sharma and produced by Time Magnetics. The film stars Sunny Deol, Preity Zinta, Miss World 2000 Priyanka Chopra, Kabir Bedi and Amrish Puri. It marked the Bollywood film debut of Chopra. Written by Shaktimaan, the film tells the story of an undercover Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) agent who must gather intelligence about cross-border terrorism and stop the terrorist responsible for it, and his separation from his fiance.


Background.

In the 17th century, Hamburg was an important coastal town, well fortified but an attractive target to pirates. Particularly troubled by the corsairs of the Barbary Coast, and following the loss in June 1622 of eight fully laden cargo ships, the city determined that it needed to create a fleet of armed convoy ships to protect its interests, escorting merchant and other vessels.  The plans for the construction of "Leopoldus Primus" and the probably largely identical "Wapen von Hamburg" started in 1663. The first mention of these plans can be found in the "Minutes of the Admiralty" of 4 June 1663. While previously they had relied for protection on converted merchant ships, Hamburg now looked to full-fledged warships. On 23 September, the council proposed to build two frigates, and the citizenry voted to enact the plan.  Not much is known about the construction of the "Leopoldus Primus". Construction was delayed for unknown reasons, and for several years there were debates about who should take charge of funding the ships, but construction finally began, led by an unknown Dutch ship-master, in 1667. Builders of the period were secretive, so plans were not recorded or shared. The Hamburg sculptor Christian Precht, also known for his work in churches, was hired to create a representation of Leopold I for the stern. This figure is now on display at the Museum of Hamburg History.  The naming of such an important vessel after a strict Catholic Emperor in distant Vienna for a city like Hamburg, Lutheran and uninterested in imperial affairs, was quite unusual. A handwritten contemporary poem suggests that the ship was named for the association of Leopold with military success, perhaps against the Ottoman Empire at the Battle of Saint Gotthard.  The ship was operational in 1668, at some point between April and September. Her first captain was Leopoldus M. Dreyer.

Construction, equipment and crew.

There are few records describing the size and appearance of "Leopoldus Primus" or her sister ship, "Wapen von Hamburg". Dimensions are unknown. What is known is that the ship was built on the model of leading Dutch design. Wolfgang Quinger, in "Wappen von Hamburg I" (1980), suggests that the pair may have been more or less replicas of the Dutch ship "Aemilia". If this is so, "Leopoldus Primus" would have had a length of about and a width of almost. To get over the shoals in the river Elbe, the hull was probably built after the "Rotterdam form". The ship was elaborately decorated with Baroque carvings and sculptures.  The "Leopoldus" had 54 guns. The heaviest caliber were on the lower gun deck with the lighter on the upper aft decks. When the ship was docked for a length time in Hamburg, the guns could be unloaded and moved to the ramparts of the city to protect it, as was done during a Danish attack on Hamburg in 1686.  "Leopoldus Primus" had a crew, depending on length and purpose of travel, from around 150 to 250 men, of which about 15 to 20 were officers, including the captain and his lieutenant as well as ministers and the commander of the soldiers. The crew was not stable, but employed for the duration of the trip. Voluntary recruits rather than being pressed into service, they were expected to equip themselves, and more died from diseases caused by unclean conditions on the ship than from battle, at as high a rate as four to one. The 40 to 60 soldiers aboard were better trained and disciplined, taken from the ranks of the city's soldiery or reassigned from other convoy ships.

Operations and decommissioning.

The success of "Leopoldus Primus" is supported by many reports. Captain Berend Jacobsen Karpfanger took her through a number of successful battles against pirates. One highlight is Karpfanger's defense against five French ships in the Elbe estuary on 11 September 1678. Fifty whaling ships were returning to Hamburg from Greenland when the frigates attacked. After a 12-hour battle, two of the French frigates were sunk and the rest put to flight. None of the Hamburg ships were lost, although "Leopoldus Primus" sustained slight damages. Only two of the crew of "Leopoldus" were killed, with one man injured. In other activities, the ship was used in 1686 to protect Hamburg from Denmark.  In 1702, "Leopoldus Primus" was the oldest of the three then existing Hamburg convoy ships when it was badly damaged in a storm. Her captain, Captain Schroeder, had to take port in Falmouth, and it was determined that she was not worth the expense of repair. Schroeder reported this to Hamburg, who rejected a proposal to sell the ship and instead brought her home. There, they determined that if repaired she might continue to sail for another decade. They repaired her at a cost of 3500 marks (1166 pounds) and she was back on the seas, voyaging to Greenland, in 1703.  Before her next trip, concerns that she was not seaworthy were raised, and although some felt she could still manage the voyage to England a few more times, others felt the cost of further repairs was a poor risk. Thirty-six years after embarking on her career as the first convoy ship, "Leopoldus Primus" was taken out of commission. In 1705, she seems to have been scrapped, probably in Hamburg.  Overall, "Leopoldus Primus" undertook 22 trips to the Iberian Peninsula, three trips to England and nine trips to protect whalers to Greenland. Among the convoy ships of Hamburg, she had more missions than any other with the "Admiralität von Hamburg", which had 32, as her closest rival.

The Leopoldus Primus, also called "Leopold I", was the first convoy ship commissioned to protect the Free and Hanseatic City of Hamburg. She was designed for use against piracy on the trade routes to Spain, Portugal, and West Africa and to accompany whalers to Greenland. Named in honor of Holy Roman Emperor Leopold I, she was put into service in 1668 and scrapped in 1705 after 34 major missions. She was probably identical with the Wapen von Hamburg, which went into service shortly after her.


Orbit and classification.

Located in the outermost part of the main-belt, "Oulu" is a member of the Hilda family, a large orbital group of asteroids that are thought to have originated from the Kuiper belt. They orbit in a 3:2 orbital resonance with the gas giant Jupiter, meaning that for every 2 orbits Jupiter completes around the Sun, a Hildian asteroid will complete 3 orbits. As it does not cross the path of any of the planets, it will not be pulled out of orbit by Jupiter's gravitational field, and will likely remain in a stable orbit for thousands of years.  It orbits the Sun at a distance of 3.4–4.6 AU once every 7 years and 11 months (2,891 days). Its orbit has an eccentricity of 0.15 and an inclination of 6° with respect to the ecliptic. In 1938, "Oulu" was first identified as at Bergedorf Observatory. Its observation arc, however, begins one month after its official discovery observation.

Physical characteristics.

"Oulu" is characterized as a dark and reddish P-type asteroid in the Tholen taxonomy, of which only a few dozens bodies are currently known.

Slow rotator and likely tumbler.

In May 2009, a rotational lightcurve of "Oulu" was obtained from photometric observations by Slovak astronomer Adrián Galád at Modra Observatory. Lightcurve analysis gave a rotation period of 132.3 hours with a brightness variation of 0.33 in magnitude (). It is among the top few hundred slow rotators.  "Oulu" is likely in a state of non-principal axis rotation, which is commonly known as tumbling. It is the largest such object ever observed "(also see List of tumblers)".

Diameter and albedo.

According to the surveys carried out by the Infrared Astronomical Satellite IRAS, the Japanese Akari satellite, and NASA's Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer with its subsequent NEOWISE mission, "Oulu" measures between 65.00 and 91.05 kilometers in diameter, and its surface has an albedo between 0.031 and 0.06.  The "Collaborative Asteroid Lightcurve Link" agrees with IRAS, that is, an albedo of 0.0366 and a diameter of 82.72 kilometers using an absolute magnitude of 9.62. In May 2002, Vasilij Shevchenko and Edward Tedesco observed an occultation by "Oulu", that gave a diameter of 65.0 kilometers with an occultation albedo of 0.0594.

Naming.

This minor planet was named for the northern Finnish town Oulu, the birthplace of the discoverer. The official was published by the Minor Planet Center on 30 January 1964 ().

1512 Oulu, provisional designation, is a dark Hildian asteroid, slow rotator and possibly the largest known tumbler orbiting in the outermost region of the asteroid belt. With a diameter of approximately 80 kilometers, it belongs to the fifty largest asteroids in the outer main-belt. The body was discovered on 18 March 1939, by Finnish astronomer Heikki Alikoski at Turku Observatory in Southwest Finland and named for the Finnish town Oulu.


History.

On 10 August 1904 the Bavarian state government authorised the construction of a 26.9 kilometre long branch from Waldkirchen to the Czech border beyond Haidmühle. It was not expected that the line itself would make a profit; it was built to form a junction with the Bohemian railway network. It was opened on 15 November 1910. As a result of the state treaty agreed with Austria on 22 November 1904 this branch line was given a junction with Bohemia at Haidmühle to the United Bohemian Forest Branch Line company to their branch line from Haidmühle to Schwarzes Kreuz (Czech: Černý Kříž) with junctions to Winterberg (Bohemia) (Vimperk), Prachatitz (Prachatice) and Krummau (Český Krumlov). The station building and goods shed at Haidmühle were used jointly by both railway companies and the customs authorities.  The route ran from Waldkirchen initially in an easterly direction to Neureichenau and then northeast towards the border station, gaining 346 m in height. In its early years and after the forced annexation of the Sudetenland through trains ran from Passau to Haidmühle, whilst the Freyung line was given at junction at Waldkirchen.  Plans from the Czech side to extend the route again to Haidmühle, in order to build a better connexion there to Bavarian bus services, were scrapped. However, there are currently plans to reactivate the "Ilztalbahn", and reinstate a bus link between Waldkirchen and Nove Udoli.

Museum railway.

Between Nové Údolí (German: Neuthal) station and the end of the border bridge in Germany there is a railway museum, housed in three old goods wagons and which recounts the history of the line, as well as museum railway, the "Pošumavská jižní dráha" (PJD), which is described as the shortest international railway in the world. The line is 105 metres long and links Czech and German national territory. It can only be joined in the Czech Republic and the line is not joined to the Czech (ČD) national railway network. A journey down the line takes 24 seconds.

Traffic.

Due to the low axle load permitted on branch lines, special Bavarian "Lokalbahn" (branch line) locomotives ran on the line. In particular, for goods trains the Bavarian BB II (later DRG Class 98.7) Mallet locomotives from Bw Passau were used. From the early 1930s to the start of the Second World War four-wheeled diesel railbuses of DRG Class 135 and 137, together with their corresponding trailer cars, also ran to Freyung and Haidmühle. In addition the employment of Bavarian Pt 2/3 (later DRG Class 70.0) locomotives was reported.  After the line was refurbished and the track and ballast strengthened, DRG Class 64 locomotives took over the passenger services and DRG Class 81s the goods traffic. Later diesel engines were also used as were Uerdingen railbuses for passenger duties.

Closoure and Dismantling.

On the imposition of the Iron Curtain a section of the line on the Czech side of the border was remove and the importance of the Waldkirchen – Haidmühle line rapidly waned. Only shuttle services continued and all trains ran from Passau to Freyung. On 26 May 1963 passenger services to Haidmühle were withdrawn. Between Haidmühle and Jandelsbrunn goods traffic ceased on 31 December 1975 and between Jandelsbrunn and Waldkirchen on 1 October 1994. After the tracks were lifted the trackbed was used for the Adalbert Stifter cycle path.

The Waldkirchen–Haidmühle railway was a branch line in Bavaria, in southern Germany. It ran from Waldkirchen to Haidmühle in the Bohemian Forest and had a junction there to the line from Haidmühle to Wallern, run by the former United Bohemian Forest Branch Line company ("Vereinigte Böhmerwald-Lokalbahnen"). It branched at Waldkirchen from the Passau – Freyung branch line ("Ilztalbahn"). The line was finally closed in 1994.


Etymology.

The word "buerg" or "burg" originates from the Latin "burere" to burn. In the south of Belgium, the day is still known as "dimanche des Bures".

History.

The burning of fires apparently originated with pagan feasts in connection with the spring equinox on 21 March. The current tradition of holding it on the first Sunday of Lent is therefore probably an approximation based on the Christian calendar. While the tradition is waning in Belgium, France and Germany, since the 1930s Luxembourg has revived the Buergbrennen festivities with some 75% of villages celebrating the occasion. Originally the bonfire seems simply to have consisted of a heap of wood and straw but as time went by, a central pillar of tree branches was introduced. A crosspiece was later attached near the top of the pillar, giving it the appearance of a cross.  The buergbrennen was once celebrated only by the men in the village, women only being admitted under exceptional circumstances. The most recently married men played a special role, the honour of lighting the fire falling on the last man to have wed. But the newly-weds also had the responsibility of collecting wood for the fire or paying others to assist in the work. At the end of the festivities, they were expected to entertain those taking part, either at home or in local inns. The tradition began to die out in the 19th century because of the high costs involved, but in the 20th century local authorities revived the tradition, taking over responsibility for the arrangements and the costs involved.

Buergbrennen today.

The local authorities or youth organisations usually make the arrangements for the Buergbrennen. They collect wood, often old Christmas trees, from the inhabitants and make the "buerg" or bonfire, usually on the top of a neighbouring hill and clad with hay to ensure rapid burning. There is often a cross rising high above the centre of the fire. Torchlight processions to the bonfire sometimes take place and there are usually stands for food and drink. The firemen are present to ensure against accidents. In some areas, the most recently married couple have the honour of lighting the fire.

Buergbrennen is a celebration centred on a huge bonfire which takes place on the first Sunday in Lent in Luxembourg and surrounding areas. In Germany it is called "Burgbrennen", in France and Belgium it is known as the "dimanche des Brandons". It is based on old traditions representing the end of winter and the coming of spring.


Establishment.

Origin, 1891–1893.

In November 1891, notice was given of a private bill that would be presented to Parliament for the construction of the Hampstead, St Pancras & Charing Cross Railway (HStP&CCR). The railway was planned to run entirely underground from Heath Street in Hampstead to Strand in Charing Cross. The route was to run beneath Hampstead High Street, Rosslyn Hill, Haverstock Hill and Chalk Farm Road to Camden Town and then under Camden High Street and Hampstead Road to Euston Road. The route then continued south, following Tottenham Court Road, Charing Cross Road and King William Street (now William IV Street) to Agar Street adjacent to Strand. North of Euston Road, a branch was to run eastwards from the main alignment under Drummond Street to serve the main line stations at Euston, St Pancras and King's Cross. Stations were planned at Hampstead, Belsize Park, Chalk Farm, Camden Town, Seymour Street (now part of Eversholt Street), Euston Road, Tottenham Court Road, Oxford Street, Agar Street, Euston and King's Cross. Although a decision had not been made between the use of cable haulage or electric traction as the means of pulling the trains, a power station was planned on Chalk Farm Road close to the London and North Western Railway's Chalk Farm station (later renamed Primrose Hill) which had a coal depot for deliveries.  The promoters of the HStP&CCR were inspired by the recent success of the City and South London Railway (C&SLR), the world's first deep-tube railway. This had opened in November 1890 and had seen large passenger numbers in its first year of operation. Bills for three similarly inspired new underground railways were also submitted to Parliament for the 1892 legislative session, and, to ensure a consistent approach, a Joint Select Committee was established to review the proposals. The committee took evidence on various matters regarding the construction and operation of deep-tube railways, and made recommendations on the diameter of tube tunnels, method of traction, and the granting of wayleaves. After preventing the construction of the branch beyond Euston, the Committee allowed the HStP&CCR bill to proceed for normal parliamentary consideration. The rest of the route was approved and, following a change of the company name, the bill received royal assent on 24 August 1893 as the "Charing Cross, Euston, and Hampstead Railway Act, 1893".

Search for financing, 1893–1903.

Although the company had permission to construct the railway, it still had to raise the capital for the construction works. The CCE&HR was not alone; four other new tube railway companies were looking for investors – the Baker Street & Waterloo Railway (BS&WR), the Waterloo & City Railway (W&CR) and the Great Northern & City Railway (GN&CR) (the three other companies that put forward bills in 1892) and the Central London Railway (CLR, which had received assent in 1891). Only the W&CR, which was the shortest line and was backed by the London and South Western Railway with a guaranteed dividend, was able to raise its funds without difficulty. For the CCE&HR and the rest, much of the remainder of the decade saw a struggle to find investors in an uninterested market. A share offer in April 1894 had been unsuccessful and in December 1899 only 451 out of the company's 177,600 £10 shares had been part sold to eight investors. Like most legislation of its kind, the act of 1893 imposed a time limit for the compulsory purchase of land and the raising of capital. To keep the powers granted by the act alive, the CCE&HR submitted a series of further bills to Parliament for extensions of time. Extensions were granted by the "Charing Cross Euston and Hampstead Railway Acts, 1897", "1898", "1900", and "1902".  A contractor was appointed in 1897, but funds were not available and no work was started. In 1900, foreign investors came to the rescue of the CCE&HR: American financier Charles Yerkes, who had been lucratively involved in the development of Chicago's tramway system in the 1880s and 1890s, saw the opportunity to make similar investments in London. Starting with the purchase of the CCE&HR in September 1900 for £100,000, he and his backers purchased a number of the unbuilt tube railways, and the operational but struggling Metropolitan District Railway (MDR).  With the CCE&HR and the other companies under his control, Yerkes established the UERL to raise funds to build the tube railways and to electrify the steam-operated MDR. The UERL was capitalised at £5 million with the majority of shares sold to overseas investors. Further share issues followed, which raised a total of £18 million (equivalent to approximately £ today) to be used across all of the UERL's projects.

Deciding the route, 1893–1903.

While the CCE&HR raised money, it continued to develop the plans for its route. On 24 November 1894, a bill was announced to purchase additional land for stations at Charing Cross, Oxford Street, Euston and Camden Town. This was approved as the "Charing Cross, Euston and Hampstead Railway Act, 1894" on 20 July 1895. On 23 November 1897, a bill was announced to change the route of the line at its southern end to terminate under Craven Street on the south side of Strand. This was enacted as the "Charing Cross, Euston and Hampstead Railway Act, 1898" on 25 July 1898.  On 22 November 1898, the CCE&HR published another bill to add an extension and to modify part of the route. The extension was a branch from Camden Town to Kentish Town where a new terminus was planned as an interchange with the Midland Railway's Kentish Town station. Beyond the terminus, the CCE&HR line was to come to the surface for a depot on vacant land to the east of Highgate Road (occupied today by the Ingestre Road Estate). The modification changed the Euston branch by extending it northwards from Euston to connect to the main route at the south end of Camden High Street. The section of the main route between the two ends of the loop was omitted. Included in the bill were powers to purchase a site in Cranbourn Street for an additional station (Leicester Square). It received royal assent as the "Charing Cross, Euston and Hampstead Railway Act, 1899" on 9 August 1899.  On 23 November 1900, the CCE&HR announced its most wide-ranging modifications to the route. Two bills were submitted to Parliament, referred to as No. 1 and No. 2. Bill No. 1 proposed the continuation of the railway north from Hampstead to Golders Green, the purchase of land and properties for stations and the construction of a depot at Golders Green. Also proposed were minor adjustments to route alignments previously approved. Bill No. 2 proposed two extensions: from Kentish Town to Brecknock Road, Archway Tavern, Archway Road and Highgate in the north and from Charing Cross to Parliament Square, Artillery Row and Victoria station in the south.  The extension to Golders Green would take the railway out of the urban and suburban areas and into open farmland. While this provided a convenient site for the CCE&HR's depot it is believed that underlying the decision was Yerkes' plan to profit from the sale of development land previously purchased in the area that would rise in value when the railway opened.  The CCE&HR's two bills were submitted to Parliament at the same time as a large number of other bills for underground railways in the capital. As it had done in 1892, Parliament established a joint committee under Lord Windsor to review the bills. By the time the committee had produced its report, the parliamentary session was almost over and the promoters of the bills were asked to resubmit them for the following 1902 session. Bills No. 1 and No. 2 were resubmitted in November 1901 together with a new bill – bill No. 3. The new bill modified the route of the proposed extension to Golders Green and added a short extension running beneath Charing Cross main line station to the Victoria Embankment where it would provide an interchange with the existing MDR station (then called Charing Cross). The bills were again examined by a joint committee, this time under Lord Ribblesdale. The sections which dealt with the proposed north-eastern extension from Archway Tavern to Highgate and the southern extension from Charing Cross to Victoria were deemed to not comply with parliamentary standing orders and were struck-out.

Hampstead Heath controversy.

A controversial element of the CCE&HR's plans was the extension of the railway to Golders Green. The route of the tube tunnels took the line under Hampstead Heath and strong opposition was raised, concerned about the effect that the tunnels would have on the ecology of the Heath. The Hampstead Heath Protection Society claimed that the tunnels would drain the sub-soil of water and the vibration of passing trains would damage trees. Taking its lead from the Society's objections, "The Times" published an alarmist article on 25 December 1900 claiming that "a great tube laid under the heath will, of course, act as a drain; and it is quite likely that the grass and gorse and trees on the Heath will suffer from the loss of moisture... Moreover, it seems to be established beyond question that the trains passing along these deep-laid tubes shake the earth to its surface, and the constant jar and quiver will probably have a serious effect upon the trees by loosening their roots."  In fact, the tunnels were to be excavated at a depth of more than below the surface, the deepest of any on the London Underground. In his presentation to the joint committee, the CCE&HR's counsel disparagingly refuted the objections: "Just see what an absurd thing! Disturbance of the water when we are 240 feet down in the London clay – about the most impervious thing you can possibly find; almost more impervious than granite rock! And the vibration on this railway is to shake down timber trees! Could anything be more ludicrous than to waste the time of the Committee in discussing such things presented by such a body!"  A second railway company, the Edgware & Hampstead Railway (E&HR), also had a bill before Parliament which proposed tunnels beneath the Heath as part of its planned route between Edgware and Hampstead. The E&HR had planned to connect to the CCE&HR at Hampstead but, to avoid the needless duplication of tunnels between Golders Green and Hampstead, the two companies agreed that the E&HR would instead connect to the CCE&HR at Golders Green.  The Metropolitan Borough of Hampstead had initially objected to the line but gave consent on the condition that a station be constructed between Hampstead and Golders Green to provide access for visitors to the Heath. A new station was added to the plans at the northern edge of the Heath at North End where it could also serve a new residential development planned for the area. Once Parliament was satisfied that the extension would not damage the Heath, the CCE&HR bills jointly received royal assent on 18 November 1902 as the "Charing Cross, Euston and Hampstead Railway Act, 1902". On the same date, the E&HR bill received its assent as the "Edgware and Hampstead Railway Act, 1902".

Construction, 1902–1907.

With the funds available from the UERL and the route decided, the CCE&HR started site demolitions and preparatory works in July 1902. On 21 November 1902, the CCE&HR published another bill which sought compulsory purchase powers for additional buildings for its station sites, planned the take-over of the E&HR and abandoned the permitted but redundant section of the line from Kentish Town to the proposed depot site near Highgate Road. This bill was approved as the "Charing Cross, Euston and Hampstead Railway Act, 1903" on 21 July 1903.  Tunnelling began in September 1903. Stations were provided with surface buildings designed by architect Leslie Green in the UERL house-style. This consisted of two-storey steel-framed buildings faced with red glazed terracotta blocks with wide semi-circular windows on the upper floor. Each station was provided with two or four lifts and an emergency spiral staircase in a separate shaft.  While construction proceeded, the CCE&HR continued to submit bills to Parliament. The "Charing Cross, Euston and Hampstead Railway Act, 1904", which received assent on 22 July 1904, granted permission to buy additional land for the station at Tottenham Court Road, for a new station at Mornington Crescent and for changes at Charing Cross. The "Charing Cross, Euston and Hampstead Railway Act, 1905" received assent on 4 August 1905. It dealt mainly with the acquisition of the subsoil under part of the forecourt of the South Eastern Railway's Charing Cross station so that the CCE&HR's station could be excavated during the 3 months closure following the recent roof collapse.  The sale of the building land at North End to conservationists to form the Hampstead Heath extension in 1904, meant a reduction in the number of residents who might use the station there. Work continued below ground at a reduced pace, and the platform tunnels and some passenger circulation tunnels were excavated, but North End station was abandoned in 1906 before the lift and stair shafts were dug and before a surface building was constructed.  Tunnelling was completed in December 1905, after which work continued on the construction of the station buildings and the fitting-out of the tunnels with tracks and signalling equipment. As part of the UERL group, the CCE&HR obtained its electricity from the company's Lots Road Power Station, originally built for the electrification of the MDR; the proposed Chalk Farm generating station was not built. The final section of the approved route between Charing Cross and the Embankment was not constructed, and the southern terminus on opening was Charing Cross. After a period of test running, the railway was ready to open in 1907.

Opening.

The CCE&HR was the last of the UERL's three tube railways to open and was advertised as the "Last Link". The official opening on 22 June 1907 was made by David Lloyd George, President of the Board of Trade, after which the public travelled free for the rest of the day. From its opening, the CCE&HR was generally known by the abbreviated names "Hampstead Tube" or "Hampstead Railway" and the names appeared on the station buildings and on contemporary maps of the tube lines.  The railway had stations at: Golders Green branch Highgate branch  The service was provided by a fleet of carriages manufactured for the UERL by the American Car and Foundry Company and assembled at Trafford Park in Manchester. These carriages were built to the same design used for the BS&WR and the GNP&BR and operated as electric multiple unit trains without the need for separate locomotives. Passengers boarded the trains via folding lattice gates at each end of cars which were operated by Gate-men who rode on the outside platform and announced station names as trains arrived. The design became known on the Underground as the 1906 stock or Gate stock.

Co-operation and consolidation, 1907–1910.

Despite the UERL's success in financing and constructing the Hampstead Railway in only seven years, its opening was not the financial success that had been expected. In the Hampstead Tube's first twelve months of operation it carried 25 million passengers, just half of the 50 million that had been predicted during the planning of the line. The UERL's pre-opening predictions of passenger numbers for its other new lines proved to be greatly over-optimistic, as did the improvement in passenger numbers expected on the newly electrified MDR – in each case achieving only around fifty per cent of their targets.  The lower than expected passenger numbers were partly due to competition between the tube and sub-surface railway companies, but the introduction of electric trams and motor buses, replacing slower, horse-drawn road transport, took a large number of passengers away from the trains. The problem was not limited to the UERL; all of London's seven tube lines and the sub-surface MDR and Metropolitan Railway were affected to a degree and the reduced revenues generated from the lower numbers of passengers made it difficult for the UERL and the other railways to pay back the capital borrowed and pay dividends to shareholders.  In an effort to improve the financial situation, the UERL together with the C&SLR, the CLR and the GN&CR began, from 1907, to introduce fare agreements. From 1908, they began to present themselves through common branding as the "Underground". The W&CR was the only tube railway that did not participate in the arrangement as it was owned by the mainline London and South Western Railway.  The UERL's three tube railway companies were still legally separate entities with their own management and shareholder and dividend structures. There was duplicated administration between the three companies and, to streamline the management and reduce expenditure, the UERL announced a bill in November 1909 that would merge the Hampstead Tube, the Piccadilly Tube and the Bakerloo Tube into a single entity, the London Electric Railway (LER), although the lines retained their own individual branding. The bill received assent on 26 July 1910 as the "London Electric Railway Amalgamation Act, 1910".

Extensions.

Embankment, 1910–1914.

In November 1910, the LER published notice of a bill to revive the unused 1902 permission to continue the line from Charing Cross to Embankment. The extension was planned as a single tunnel, running in a loop under the Thames, connecting the ends of the two existing tunnels. Trains were to run in one direction around the loop stopping at a single-platform station constructed to provide an interchange with the BS&WR and MDR at Embankment station. The bill received assent as the "London Electric Railway Act, 1911" on 2 June 1911. The loop was constructed from a large excavation north-west of the MDR station and was connected to the sub-surface line with escalators. The station opened on 6 April 1914 as:

Hendon and Edgware, 1902–1924.

In the decade after the E&HR received royal assent for its route from Edgware to Hampstead, the company continued to search for finance and revised its plans in conjunction both with the CCE&HR and a third railway company, the Watford & Edgware Railway (W&ER) which had plans to build a line linking the E&HR to Watford.  Following the enactment of the "Watford and Edgware Railway Act, 1906", the W&ER briefly took over the powers of the E&HR to construct the line from Golders Green to Edgware. Struggling to find funds, the W&ER attempted a formal merger with the E&HR through a bill submitted to Parliament in 1906, with the intention of constructing and operating the whole of the route from Golders Green to Watford as a light railway but the bill was rejected by Parliament and, when the W&ER's powers lapsed, control returned to the CCE&HR.  The E&HR company had remained in existence and had obtained a series of acts to preserve and develop its plans. The "Edgware and Hampstead Railway Acts, 1905", "1909" and "1912" granted extensions of time, approved changes to the route, gave permissions for viaducts and a tunnel and allowed the closure and re-routeing of roads to be crossed by the railway's tracks. It was intended that the CCE&HR would provide and operate the trains and this was formalised by the "London Electric Railway Act, 1912", which approved the LER's take over of the E&HR.  No immediate effort was made to start the works and they were postponed indefinitely when World War I started. With wartime restrictions in place, construction work for the railway was prevented. Yearly extensions to the earlier E&HR acts were granted under special wartime powers each year from 1916 until 1922, giving a final date by which compulsory purchases had to be made of 7 August 1924. Although the permissions had been maintained, the UERL could not raise the money needed for the works. Construction costs had increased considerably during the war years and the returns produced by the company could not cover the cost of repaying loans. The project was made possible when the government introduced the Trade Facilities Act 1921 by which the Treasury underwrote loans for public works as a means of alleviating unemployment. With this support, the UERL raised the funds and work began on extending the Hampstead tube to Edgware. The UERL group's Managing Director/Chairman, Lord Ashfield, ceremonially cut the first sod to begin the works at Golders Green on 12 June 1922.  The extension crossed farmland, meaning it could be constructed on the surface more easily and cheaply than a deep tube line below the surface. A viaduct was constructed across the Brent valley and a short section of tunnel was required at The Hyde, Hendon. Stations were designed in a suburban pavilion style by the UERL's architect Stanley Heaps. The first section opened on 19 November 1923 with stations at:  The remainder of the extension opened on 18 August 1924 with stations at:

Kennington, 1922–1926.

On 21 November 1922, the LER announced a bill for the 1923 parliamentary session. It included the proposal to extend the line from its southern terminus to the C&SLR's station at Kennington where an interchange would be provided. The bill received royal assent as the "London Electric Railway Act, 1923" on 2 August 1923.  The work involved the rebuilding of the below ground parts of the CCE&HR's former terminus station to enable through running and the loop tunnel was abandoned. Tunnels were extended under the Thames to Waterloo station and then to Kennington where two additional platforms were constructed to provide the interchange to the C&SLR. Immediately south of Kennington station, the CCE&HR tunnels connected to those of the C&SLR. The new service was opened on 13 September 1926 to coincide with the opening of the extension of the C&SLR to Morden. The Charing Cross to Kennington link had stations at:  The C&SLR had been under the control of the UERL since its purchase by the group in 1913. An earlier connection between the CCE&HR and the C&SLR had been opened in 1924 linking the C&SLR's station at Euston with the CCE&HR's at Camden Town. With the opening of the Kennington extension, the two railways began to operate as an integrated service using the newly built Standard Stock trains. On tube maps the combined lines were shown in a single colour although the separate names continued in use into the 1930s.

Move to public ownership, 1923–1933.

Despite improvements made to other parts of the network, the Underground railways were still struggling to make a profit. The UERL's ownership of the highly profitable London General Omnibus Company (LGOC) since 1912 had enabled the UERL group, through the pooling of revenues, to use profits from the bus company to subsidise the less profitable railways. However, competition from numerous small bus companies during the early 1920s eroded the profitability of the LGOC and had a negative impact on the profitability of the whole UERL group.  In an effort to protect the UERL group's income Lord Ashfield lobbied the government for regulation of transport services in the London area. Starting in 1923, a series of legislative initiatives were made in this direction, with Ashfield and Labour London County Councillor (later MP and Minister of Transport) Herbert Morrison, at the forefront of debates as to the level of regulation and public control under which transport services should be brought. Ashfield aimed for regulation that would give the UERL group protection from competition and allow it to take substantive control of the LCC's tram system; Morrison preferred full public ownership. After seven years of false starts, a bill was announced at the end of 1930 for the formation of the London Passenger Transport Board (LPTB), a public corporation that would take control of the UERL, the Metropolitan Railway and all bus and tram operators within an area designated as the London Passenger Transport Area. The Board was a compromise – public ownership but not full nationalisation – and came into existence on 1 July 1933. On this date, the LER and the other Underground companies were liquidated.

Legacy.

Finding a suitable name for the combined CCE&HR and C&SLR routes proved a challenge for the LPTB and a number of variations were used including "Edgware, Morden & Highgate Line" in 1933 and "Morden-Edgware Line" in 1936. In 1937, "Northern line" was adopted in preparation for the uncompleted Northern Heights plan. Today, the Northern line is the busiest on the London Underground system, carrying 206.7 million passengers annually, a level of usage which led it to be known as the "Misery line" during the 1990s due to overcrowding and poor reliability.

The Charing Cross, Euston and Hampstead Railway (CCE&HR), also known as the Hampstead Tube, was a railway company established in 1891 that constructed a deep-level underground "tube" railway in London. Construction of the CCE&HR was delayed for more than a decade while funding was sought. In 1900 it became a subsidiary of the Underground Electric Railways Company of London (UERL), controlled by American financier Charles Yerkes. The UERL quickly raised the funds, mainly from foreign investors. Various routes were planned, but a number of these were rejected by Parliament. Plans for tunnels under Hampstead Heath were authorised, despite opposition by many local residents who believed they would damage the ecology of the Heath.