Kuchar holds on to win Memorial

Matt Kuchar, left, accepts the trophy from Jack Nicklaus after winning the Memorial golf tournament Sunday, June 2, 2013, in Dublin, Ohio. (AP Photo/Jay LaPrete)

Matt Kuchar, left, accepts the trophy from Jack Nicklaus after winning the Memorial golf tournament Sunday, June 2, 2013, in Dublin, Ohio. (AP Photo/Jay LaPrete)

Matt Kuchar reacts after sinking a birdie putt on the 18th green during the final round of Memorial golf tournament on Sunday, June 2, 2013, in Dublin, Ohio. Kucher won the tournament. (AP Photo/Jay LaPrete)

Matt Kuchar raises the trophy after winning the Memorial golf tournament Sunday, June 2, 2013, in Dublin, Ohio. (AP Photo/Jay LaPrete)

Matt Kuchar reacts after hitting out of the bunker on the second hole during the final round of the Memorial golf tournament on Sunday, June 2, 2013, in Dublin, Ohio. (AP Photo/Darron Cummings)

Matt Kuchar tees off the third hole during the final round of the Memorial golf tournament on Sunday, June 2, 2013, in Dublin, Ohio. (AP Photo/Darron Cummings)

DUBLIN, Ohio (AP) ? Most of the perks from winning the Memorial were evident to Matt Kuchar soon after his 20-foot birdie putt tumbled into the final hole Sunday.

He looked just beyond the 18th green to where 3-year-old son Carson was giving a high-five to tournament host Jack Nicklaus. He had the first multiple-win season of his PGA Tour career. Kuchar went to a career-best No. 4 in the world ranking. He is all but assured of returning to Muirfield Village in October as part of the Presidents Cup team.

"To walk off the green and to greet Mr. Nicklaus and have him congratulate me, that's something I'll certainly never forget," he said.

Perhaps the greatest benefit was one only Kuchar could feel ? confidence.

And that's a big deal with the U.S. Open approaching.

Kuchar missed only one fairway and held off a hard-charging Kevin Chappell over the last three holes to close with a 4-under 68 for a two-shot victory. The win came one week after he was runner-up by one shot at the Colonial.

"Great golf breeds more great golf," Kuchar said. "Winning tournaments breeds winning more tournaments. Anytime you can get comfortable playing in that final group, finishing off a tournament, winning a tournament is a huge amount of confidence. Heading into Merion, I'll have a lot of confidence.

"I'm looking forward to my chances there at Merion."

He sure played the kind of golf that goes a long way at the U.S. Open, which starts June 13 at Merion Golf Club outside Philadelphia.

Muirfield Village was such a demanding test that Tiger Woods had two triple bogeys in the same tournament for the first time since 1997 and wound up with the second-highest tournament score in his career at 8-over 296.

"It happens. It happens to us all," Woods said. "Go home next week and practice."

Not having Woods around didn't make the task any easier for Kuchar.

Right when he thought the tournament was in hand, Chappell birdied three of his last four holes. Two shots behind going to the 18th, Chappell stuffed his approach to tap-in range for birdie. Kuchar needed only two putts from 20 feet for the win, and instead he rolled the birdie putt into the hole and thrust his fist into the air as he smiled.

He's always smiling, and he had good reason on this day. He joined Woods has the only players to win more than once this year on tour ? Kuchar also won the Match Play Championship in February ? and his game is peaking heading into a summer of majors, the one missing piece for the 35-year-old American.

"His bad shots hit greens. And he's really good with the putter," Chappell said. "And he just doesn't make very many mistakes."

Chappell, who missed four birdie attempts inside 10 feet on the front nine, still closed with a 68. He played his last 25 holes without a bogey.

Kyle Stanley ran off four birdies in a five-hole stretch to end the front nine and pull within one shot, but he fell back with a bogey on the par-5 11th and never caught up. Stanley fell out of a tie for second on the 17th hole, and it was costly. A runner-up finish would have put him inside the top 50 and allowed him to skip 36 holes of U.S. Open qualifying on Monday. He closed with a 71 and finished alone in third, which will move him to just inside the top 60.

The top 60 after next week are exempt to the U.S. Open.

"Mentally, I'm pretty drained right now," Stanley said. "I would have shot a million this week if I didn't make putts. So I'm really happy about that."

Kuchar finished at 12-under 276 and will be looked upon as one of the favorites in two weeks at the U.S. Open.

"There are a couple of things I thought were missing from my pedigree," Kuchar said. "A major championship is on the list, and a multiple-win season was on the list. That's something that at the beginning of the year when I set goals, I wanted to have a multiple-win year. And making the Presidents Cup team was on the list. ... To have kind of sealed the deal with winning this tournament feels really good.

"Having a multiple-win season is nice to be able to check that one off the list."

Nicklaus offered some help on that other item.

"If Matt would ask me, 'What would you do coming up with Merion?' I would only," Nicklaus said before Kuchar leaned into his microphone and interrupted him.

"What would you do coming up with Merion?" Kuchar said.

Nicklaus suggested going a week early, as he always did in winning his record 18 majors. By the time Nicklaus was done talking, Kuchar was making plans to go to Merion on Tuesday.

Woods already has been to Merion, a course he had not seen. Muirfield Village was a course he knows well, with a record five wins. What followed can only be written off as a most peculiar week.

Woods had won three of his last four tournaments ? the exception was a tie for fourth at the Masters ? and then he turned in some shocking scores. Woods had a 44 on the back nine Saturday, the worst 9-hole score of his pro career. He tied for 65th and was 20 shots behind, the largest deficit in a full-field event. He was 30 shots behind at Firestone in 2010 at the depth of his struggles, and he was 20 shots behind in the 1996 Tour Championship at age 20. Both those tournaments have limited fields without a cut.

He attributed this week to his putting, and it was hard to argue. Woods is leading the tour in the key putting statistic, and he was 71st out of 73 players this week. He had a pair of three-putts from inside 5 feet.

Rory McIlroy closed with a 72 and finished 18 shots behind.

Kuchar was at his best off the tee. He didn't miss a fairway until the 17th hole, when he found a bunker to the right of the fairway. Chappell, coming off a 10-foot par save on the 16th hole, made a 20-foot birdie putt on the 17th to get within two shots. Kuchar had to make a 5-foot par putt to keep the two-shot margin, and Chappell kept coming at him. He started walking after his approach to the 18th when he hit it.

"There at the end, it got scary," Kuchar said. "He made a great run at the end."

Kuchar never looks as though he is under much stress, and for so much of Sunday, he wasn't.

Starting the final round with a two-shot lead, he made a 15-foot birdie putt on the opening hole and led by at least two shots for all but two holes.

Associated Press

Source: http://hosted2.ap.org/APDEFAULT/347875155d53465d95cec892aeb06419/Article_2013-06-02-Memorial/id-9ba740b70f934776a3720ea694ab9848

Con Edison LaGuardia Airport weather radar the weather channel national grid LIPA Garcinia Cambogia

Miley Cyrus Unveils Sexy New Single Cover Art

Source: http://www.thehollywoodgossip.com/2013/06/miley-cyrus-unveils-sexy-new-single-cover-art/

chaka khan taylor swift safe and sound delilah nevis 2012 sports illustrated swimsuit same day flower delivery valentines day cards

NASA's F-8 Digital Fly By Wire Program (part 1) | The Lexicans

A quick history of flight control systems:

December 17 1903, the Wright brothers make the first powered, sustained flight at Kitty Hawk, North Carolina. Cables and pulleys were the flight control system of the day.

A system of pulleys and cables enabled the Wright Brothers were the first to take to the air in controllable flight on 17 December 1903. Aircraft of World War 1 methods to control aircraft remained basically the same cable and pulley system. Pilot control inputs through stick and rudder pedals were transmitted to the control surfaces via pulleys and cables.

Fokker DR1. Representative for a typical World War 1 aircraft.

By the time World War 2 started aircraft were more complex, faster and far more capable. Most flight control systems at the time remained cables and pulleys but the problem of stability remained. There needed to be a method for reducing the constant need for pilot control input especially during long flights.

Boeing?s B-29 Superfortress. Typical configuration for a World War 2 aircraft.

By the late 1940s a very primitive ?assisted flight control system? had flown from Newfoundland to England aboard a C-54 entirely under the control of a flight program punched out on cards.

Douglas C-54 Skymaster

Wartime technological leaps enabled postwar aircraft designs not only increase in speed but also increase in size. At 1000 knots there simply isn?t enough time for a human being to react. The larger size of aircraft also meant there was a great deal more inertia for a human to struggle to control. Due to the increase in aircraft size, inertia and dynamic pressure, without some from of mechanical assistance flying would become too difficult for pilots to handle because of the force amount of force required to move to control surface. The solution was to connect the pilot?s stick and rudder pedals to hydraulics which were, in turn, connected to surfaces with which to control the aircraft.

Development of hydraulic flight control systems meant there was no direct connection between the stick/rudder pedals and the control surface. Pilots develop a sense of what an aircraft is doing, not only from visual cues, but also from seat of the pants flying to understand orientation of the airplane.? Hydraulic systems brought about the need for ?artificial feel systems? that replicated force feedback to the pilot through the stick and from the control surface.

Hydraulic flight controls are heavier than pulleys and cables, adding weight to the aircraft. That translates into less weight overall an aircraft can use for a given task. Less weight devoted to fuel for range in a fighter, less weight devoted to cargo or passengers in the airlines. In spaceflight weight is also a critical issue. The more a spacecraft weighs, the more thrust is required to bring that space to orbit. Controlling a spacecraft with hydraulics to going to be too heavy.

NASA used a simple binary logic flight control program in the Mercury program. The logical design consisted of a control signal that transmitted ?on/off? commands for firing of the maneuvering rockets. The attitude of the spacecraft could be changed by the pilot?s moving a hand controller with the direction of the controller?s movement indicating pitch, roll or yaw to the control system. The control system then sent appropriate signals to fire the correct sets of rockets to achieve the desired effect. The Mercury flight control system was only capable of attitude control.

The Mercury capsule as displayed at the Udvar-Hazy Center of the National Air and Space Museum.

By 1968 all the NASA was focused on putting a human on the moon. Grumman, designer of the Lunar Module, was tasked with NASA and MIT to develop a flight control system capable of landing on the moon. The flight control system for the Lunar Module was called PGNCS ?(Primary Guidance, Navigation and Control System?pronounced ?pings?). Considerable experience in developing PGNCS was gained by engineers that worked on the Polaris SLBM and Atlas ICBM programs.

The Grumman Lunar Module on display at the National Air and Space Museum.

PGNCS had all the elements that were going to be needed to develop a flight control system. The most important element was the inertial measurement unit. The Lunar Module used 3 IMUs (inertial measurement units), 1 each for each axis of flight (pitch, roll and yaw). The IMU generated analog signals that had to be read by one of the first digital computers.

Schematic cutaway of the IMU in the Lunar Module.

This video details the development of the IMU and integration with the Lunar Module?s flight control system (it?s a fascinating 3-part series).

The LLRV

The LLRV?(Lunar Landing Research Vehicle)?was developed to test flight control laws (programming code) for the Lunar Module here on Earth. The LLRV used reaction control jets because the Moon has 1\6th of the Earth?s gravity. The LLRV was not an aerodynamic vehicle as it used solely engine thrust to get airborne.? Once flight control laws were developed, testing of the LLRV wound down but a group led by NASA thought that software developed and tested on the LLRV and the Apollo Lunar Lander might be beneficial to aircraft control. After LLRV, computers, sensors and actuators became advanced enough to start flight-testing.

Computers in flight control systems come into 2 distinct types. Analog and digital. Mechanical analog computers operate by creating a mechanical analogy between the position of numbers on various scales and the products, quotients, squares, cube roots, etc that it?s used to calculate. In terms of flight control computers, control laws are hard-wired via the circuitry in the computer. While analog computer is resistant to power surges and viruses it?s very difficult to re-program. That requires a physical reconfiguration of the embedded circuits. Analog computers also run at higher temperatures because data is in the form of amplitudes and temperature effects modulate the amplitude.

The first vehicular use of an analog computer was with the German A-4 [V-2] rocket of World War 2 fame. The A-4 used an electronic analog computer that modeled the differential equations of the control laws and accepted voltage values and input and generated voltage as output to an amplifier. The amplifier then sent those commands to the control surface actuators. This technology formed the basis for digital computers almost 40 years later.

Digital computers on the other hand read data in binary, ?1?s and ?0?s. Data needs to be converted to binary string of bits before it can be used by the computer. The problem is these bit streams, coming from multiple sources, can be too dense and rapid for proper computer processing into readable data sets. After 1963 improvements in transistors and work on ?sampling theory? made the use of digital computers more widespread not only in aviation but a whole range of applications.

NT-33 In-Flight Simulator

In 1954, the NT-33 In-flight Simulator was developed to test other equipment that would be needed in a digital flight control system. The NT-33 tested improvements in gyroscopes, actuators, effectors, stability augmentation and pitot-static systems. Also in 1957 the USAF flew a modified B-47 (53-2280) with fly-by-wire channel in the pitch axis.

JB-74E 53-2280 Fly By Wire test-bed aircraft.

By early 1971 the NASA Office of Advanced Research and Technology wanted to see more technology transferred from the Apollo program. Luckily for them the flight control computer was, up that time, one of the most reliable computers ever built. Soon the office approved for a feasibility study to install Apollo flight control system hardware into an F-8 Crusader.

A stock Vought F-8C Crusader BuNo 146993 from VF-191 ?Red Lightnings.?

The F-8 Crusader is a single seat, single engine, carrier borne fighter from the 1950s. The ?sader, as it?s properly known, gained a fearsome reputation as a MiG killer in the skies over North Vietnam however by the 1970s the ?sader was being phased out in-favor of the newer F-4 Phantom II. NASA chose the ?sader because it was readily available and cost effective. The intention was to modify the ?sader by removing the horizontal stabilizers and placing them in front of the wings (as canards). The F-8s centerline air inlet? would have been unaffected by this modification. However this was considered too costly to be included in the program.

By 1970 NASA acquired 4 F-8Cs on their way to the boneyard and sent them to the Dryden Flight Research Center. Money for NASA?s Digital Fly By Wire was appropriated $1 million dollars for the first year. Over time the entire cost of the program, which ran just over 10 years, would run $12 million dollars. The program itself would be conducted in 3 phases starting in early 1971. Phase I, scheduled to start in 1971, would have 2 goals: ensuring the technology worked and developing the tools to move forward. Phase IB would introduce a second computer in the flight control system and begin to test and develop system redundancy. Phase II, scheduled to run Q2 of 1974, was to concentrate on gaining knowledge and developing techniques for increasing computer reliability. Over time the schedule wasn?t met but the objective for each phase never changed. Over the next year Flight Research Center hardware and software engineers began modification work on the F-8 aircraft.

Vought F-8C NASA 802 Digital Fly By Wire Test-bed aircraft.

The next segments will cover modification of the F-8 aircraft, phases of the flight test program and benefits to future aircraft programs.

Like this:

Like Loading...

Source: http://thelexicans.wordpress.com/2013/06/01/nasas-f-8-digital-fly-by-wire-program-part-1/

andy reid redskins sugar bowl downton abbey season 3 2013 Calendar chris christie sofia vergara

Cat Attacks Printer Paper (VIDEO)

Cats hate printers, we all know that. But perhaps it's been the paper that's the issue all along.

Via Tastefully Offensive

Also on HuffPost:

"; var coords = [-5, -72]; // display fb-bubble FloatingPrompt.embed(this, html, undefined, 'top', {fp_intersects:1, timeout_remove:2000,ignore_arrow: true, width:236, add_xy:coords, class_name: 'clear-overlay'}); });

Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/01/cat-attacks-printer-paper_n_3372055.html

klay thompson kate upton the great gatsby the great gatsby one world trade center Benghazi Ariel Castro

Donald Rumsfeld on Afghanistan War: 'It?s not combat, as such'

Politics Confidential

Donald Rumsfeld made a habit of collecting adages to live by over the course of his decades-long government career. His collection began as a stack of index cards, which then transformed into a White House document dubbed ?Rumsfeld?s Rules? by President Ford, and has now evolved into a book.

Most of Rumsfeld?s new book Rumsfeld?s Rules focuses on lessons in leadership, but it also sheds new light on the early days of the Bush administration?s ?War on Terror.?

The former secretary of defense reveals in the book that he doesn't recall the National Security Council ever having a formal discussion ?to consider the consequences and costs of a long-term and large-scale military presence? in Afghanistan.

When asked by Politics Confidential about the apparent lack of decision-making, Rumsfeld qualifies that U.S. military operations in Afghanistan are a unique situation: ?Well, it's not combat, as such. It's different than a World War II combat or a Korean War combat. It's even different from the beginning of the attack on Afghanistan, when the Taliban were defeated within a matter of weeks.?

Rumsfeld is reflective about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and says he regrets how drawn out the conflicts have been.

?I think the motivation was proper, the problem is, the Department of Defense?is not organized and trained and equipped to nation build,? Rumsfeld says. ?We can create an environment that a country has a chance.?

While he believes that both Iraq and Afghanistan now have a chance to build stable futures, Rumsfeld says he was against the decision to occupy Iraq long-term from the beginning.

?The president was elected and he gets to decide things,? Rumsfeld says. ?I personally favored a more rapid transition to Iraqi control?Don't leave the impression that you can run a country that you can't run.?

Rumsfeld also says he disagreed with Bush?s decision to give the name ?War on Terror? to the United State?s fight against Islamist extremists.

?I was uncomfortable with the word war, because it suggested that it was going to be one with bullets and the Department of Defense would be the lead on it,? he says. ?The ?Global War on Terror? I felt was not a perfect characterization of what we were engaged in. And I thought we'd do better against it if we'd willingly identify who the enemy was. And the enemy is not terror, the enemy is radicals, a small minority, or some minority in that faith that is determined to impose their will on other people.?

Rumsfeld says he has no doubt his critics will denounce the book and say he didn?t live by the rules he professes, but that doesn?t bother the former Secretary of Defense, known for his combative and unforgiving leadership style.

?Dogs don't bark at parked cars,? Rumsfeld says, quoting one of the adages from his book. ?If you do something, somebody's not going to like it. Somebody's going to like it, but somebody isn't going to like it.?

To hear more about Rumsfeld?s rules, and his defense of the rules that are proving controversial, check out this episode of Politics Confidential.

ABC's Eric Wray, Alexandra Dukakis, Hank Disselkamp, and Gary Rosenberg contributed to this episode.

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/power-players-abc-news/donald-rumsfeld-afghanistan-war-not-combat-112319248.html

psychosis dianna agron million hoodie march tebow trade mike the situation jacksonville jaguars jacksonville jaguars

NASA's Actual Plan to Deflect an Approaching Asteroid

Asteroid

Asteroids are frightening things. With the approach of QE2, a big one that would end civilization, the galaxy briefly put Earth on notice.

Thankfully, QE2 is slated to miss the planet tonight.

"Scientists have concluded that the asteroid poses no threat to planet Earth," White House spokesman Josh Earnest told reporters on Friday, reassuring mankind it will live another day. "I never really thought I'd be standing up here saying that, but I guess I am."

But what if an asteroid were headed straight for Earth?

NASA evidently has us covered. In 2005, in a bill authorizing space-program funds, Congress asked NASA for a plan to identify, track and deflect - yes, deflect - all manner of PHOs (potentially harmful objects) that could pose a threat.

The directive, according to NASA, is known as the George E. Brown Jr. Near-Earth Object Survey Act, named after the late Democratic chairman of the Committee on Science, Space and Technology, who died in 1999 and didn't live to see NASA's asteroid plan on paper. Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-Calif., successfully included it in the 2005 bill.

With that congressional prompt, NASA considered many science-reality options, including some that bore resemblance to film plots.

Among the solutions NASA studied were firing a nuclear missile at the asteroid, landing a nuclear bomb on the surface, drilling into the great space rock and exploding a nuclear bomb there (which Bruce Willis attempted to do in the film, "Armageddon"), and all those same strategies with conventional bombs.

The scientists also gamed out some weirder possibilities designed with more warning time in mind.

Those included flying a spacecraft near the asteroid for a long time to act as a "gravity tractor" and pull it off course (deemed ineffective, unsurprisingly); using a large mirror to focus sunlight and "boil off" some material from the asteroid; a spacecraft "rendezvous" with the asteroid to "boil off" some material using a "pulse laser"; landing on the asteroid, drilling into it, and "eject[ing] material from PHO at high velocity"; "attach[ing]" a spacecraft to the asteroid and pushing it out of the way; and what NASA called the "Enhanced Yarkovsky Effect" - altering the reflectiveness of a rotating asteroid and counting on the "radiation from sunheated material" to push the asteroid off course.

NASA charted how effectively each method could push a gigantic space rock off course.

The blue horizontal lines show different scenarios and the momentum change needed to deflect them. The top line (F) shows the amount of momentum change needed to deflect a comet with short (nine to 24 months) warning. The bottom lines, A1 and A2, show two scenarios for "[t]he 330 meter asteroid, Apophis, before its close approach to Earth in 2029."

NASA Chart 1 NASA chart 2

The winner: nuclear bomb. For a fast-approaching comet, the only recourse may be drilling into it and detonating a nuclear bomb, as the top line in the top graph shows.

But, in general, NASA favored simply firing a missile at a space rock and detonating it nearby. Landing on the asteroid, or drilling into it, would make for a better explosion, but NASA was wary of fragmenting the big rock.

Unfortunately, nuclear explosions in space are banned under a 1 967 U.N. space treaty, so other nations would have to sign off on the plan.

From the 2007 NASA report to Congress:

In the impulsive category, the use of a nuclear device was found to be the most effective means to deflect a PHO. Because of the large amount of energy delivered, nuclear devices would require the least amount of detailed information about the threatening object, reducing the need for detailed characterization. While detonation of a nuclear device on or below the surface of a threatening object was found to be 10-100 times more efficient than detonating a nuclear device above the surface, the standoff detonation would be less likely to fragment the target. A nuclear standoff mission could be designed knowing only the orbit and approximate mass of the threat, and missions could be carried out incrementally to reach the required amount of deflection. Additional information about the object's mass and physical properties would perhaps increase the effectiveness, but likely would not be required to accomplish the goal. It should be noted that because of restrictions found in Article IV of the "Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space," including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies, use of a nuclear device would likely require prior international coordination. The study team also examined conventional explosives, but found they were ineffective against most threats.

So there you have it: The government's plan if an asteroid approaches is to shoot a nuclear missile at it. The planet has George E. Brown, Dana Rohrabacher and NASA to thank.

Also Read

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/nasas-actual-plan-deflect-approaching-asteroid-234624320--abc-news-politics.html

NFL schedule 2013 Boston Explosion West Texas American Airlines Carlos Arredondo Pat Summerall Martin Richard

Bloomberg: HTC cancels plan for 12-inch Windows RT tablet, fears weak demand

Unlike companies such as Samsung, which have the freedom to throw products against the wall only to see whether they stick, HTC is forced to be more calculated with its efforts. With this in mind, Bloomberg now reports that HTC has canceled its plan for a 12-inch Windows RT tablet, which was previously rumored to be in the works alongside a smaller 7-inch Windows RT slate. Sources spoke to Bloomberg on anonymity, but suggested the decision was made based on concern that the 12-inch tablet would be too expensive to generate considerable demand. Coinciding with the launch of the 7-inch RT tablet -- which is now pegged for September or October -- Bloomberg sources also suggest that HTC will launch a similar 7-inch Android tablet in the same time frame. Talk about hedging one's bets.

Filed under: Tablets, HTC

Comments

Source: Bloomberg

Source: http://feeds.engadget.com/~r/weblogsinc/engadget/~3/eBzIG3dNet0/

Superbowl Commercials 2013 Grammy nominations 2013 Lynsi Torres Fall Out Boy Alabama hostage mta Beyonce Superbowl