document_title: C4 carbon fixation

question_text: where does calvin cycle occur in c4 plants

text: C4 carbon fixation

text: C4 pathway[edit]

text: The first experiments indicating that some plants do not use C3 carbon fixation but instead produce malate and aspartate in the first step of carbon fixation were done in the 1950s and early 1960s by Hugo P. Kortschak[2] and Yuri Karpilov.[3] The C4 pathway was elucidated by Marshall Davidson Hatch and C. R. Slack, in Australia, in 1966; it is sometimes called the Hatch-Slack pathway.[4]

text: In C3 plants, the first step in the light-independent reactions of photosynthesis involves the fixation of CO2 by the enzyme RuBisCO into 3-phosphoglycerate. However, due to the dual carboxylase and oxygenase activity of RuBisCo, some part of the substrate is oxidized rather than carboxylated, resulting in loss of substrate and consumption of energy, in what is known as photorespiration. In order to bypass the photorespiration pathway, C4 plants have developed a mechanism to efficiently deliver CO2 to the RuBisCO enzyme. They utilize their specific leaf anatomy where chloroplasts exist not only in the mesophyll cells in the outer part of their leaves but in the bundle sheath cells as well. Instead of direct fixation to RuBisCO in the Calvin cycle, CO2 is incorporated into a 4-carbon organic acid, which has the ability to regenerate CO2 in the chloroplasts of the bundle sheath cells. Bundle sheath cells can then utilize this CO2 to generate carbohydrates by the conventional C3 pathway.

text: The first step in the pathway is the conversion of pyruvate to phosphoenolpyruvate (PEP), by the enzyme pyruvate orthophosphate dikinase. This reaction requires inorganic phosphate and ATP plus pyruvate, producing phosphoenolpyruvate, AMP, and inorganic pyrophosphate (PPi). The next step is the fixation of CO2 into oxaloacetate by the enzyme PEP carboxylase. Both of these steps occur in the mesophyll cells:

text:
PEP carboxylase has a lower Km for HCO−
3 — and, hence, higher affinity — than RuBisCO. Furthermore, O2 is a very poor substrate for this enzyme. Thus, at relatively low concentrations of CO2, most CO2 will be fixed by this pathway.

text: The product is usually converted to malate, a simple organic compound, which is transported to the bundle-sheath cells surrounding a nearby vein. Here, it is decarboxylated to produce CO2 and pyruvate. The CO2 now enters the Calvin cycle and the pyruvate is transported back to the mesophyll cell.

text: Since every CO2 molecule has to be fixed twice, first by 4-carbon organic acid and second by RuBisCO, the C4 pathway uses more energy than the C3 pathway. The C3 pathway requires 18 molecules of ATP for the synthesis of one molecule of glucose, whereas the C4 pathway requires 30 molecules of ATP. This energy debt is more than paid for by avoiding losing more than half of photosynthetic carbon in photorespiration as occurs in some tropical plants,[citation needed] making it an adaptive mechanism for minimizing the loss.

text: There are several variants of this pathway:

text:
The 4-carbon acid transported from mesophyll cells may be malate, as above, or aspartate.
The 3-carbon acid transported back from bundle-sheath cells may be pyruvate, as above, or alanine.
The enzyme that catalyses decarboxylation in bundle-sheath cells differs. In maize and sugarcane, the enzyme is NADP-malic enzyme; in millet, it is NAD-malic enzyme; and, in Panicum maximum, it is PEP carboxykinase.

text: C4 Kranz leaf anatomy[edit]

text: The C4 plants often possess a characteristic leaf anatomy called kranz anatomy, from the German word for wreath. Their vascular bundles are surrounded by two rings of cells; the inner ring, called bundle sheath cells, contains starch-rich chloroplasts lacking grana, which differ from those in mesophyll cells present as the outer ring. Hence, the chloroplasts are called dimorphic. The primary function of kranz anatomy is to provide a site in which CO2 can be concentrated around RuBisCO, thereby avoiding photorespiration. In order to maintain a significantly higher CO2 concentration in the bundle sheath compared to the mesophyll, the boundary layer of the kranz has a low conductance to CO2, a property that may be enhanced by the presence of suberin.[5]

text: Although most C4 plants exhibit kranz anatomy, there are, however, a few species that operate a limited C4 cycle without any distinct bundle sheath tissue. Suaeda aralocaspica, Bienertia cycloptera, Bienertia sinuspersici and Bienertia kavirense (all chenopods) are terrestrial plants that inhabit dry, salty depressions in the deserts of the Middle East. These plants have been shown to operate single-cell C4 CO2-concentrating mechanisms, which are unique among the known C4 mechanisms.[6][7][8][9] Although the cytology of both genera differs slightly, the basic principle is that fluid-filled vacuoles are employed to divide the cell into two separate areas. Carboxylation enzymes in the cytosol can, therefore, be kept separate from decarboxylase enzymes and RuBisCO in the chloroplasts, and a diffusive barrier can be established between the chloroplasts (which contain RuBisCO) and the cytosol. This enables a bundle-sheath-type area and a mesophyll-type area to be established within a single cell. Although this does allow a limited C4 cycle to operate, it is relatively inefficient, with the occurrence of much leakage of CO2 from around RuBisCO. There is also evidence for the exhibiting of inducible C4 photosynthesis by non-kranz aquatic macrophyte Hydrilla verticillata under warm conditions, although the mechanism by which CO2 leakage from around RuBisCO is minimised is currently uncertain.[10]

text: The evolution and advantages of the C4 pathway[edit]

text: C4 plants have a competitive advantage over plants possessing the more common C3 carbon fixation pathway under conditions of drought, high temperatures, and nitrogen or CO2 limitation. When grown in the same environment, at 30 °C, C3 grasses lose approximately 833 molecules of water per CO2 molecule that is fixed, whereas C4 grasses lose only 277. This increased water use efficiency of C4 grasses means that soil moisture is conserved, allowing them to grow for longer in arid environments.[11]

text: C4 carbon fixation has evolved on up to 61 independent occasions in 19 different families of plants, making it a prime example of convergent evolution.[12] This convergence may have been facilitated by the fact that many potential evolutionary pathways to a C4 phenotype exist, many of which involve initial evolutionary steps not directly related to photosynthesis.[13] C4 plants arose around 35 million years ago[12] during the Oligocene (precisely when is difficult to determine) and did not become ecologically significant until around 6 to 7 million years ago, in the Miocene Period.[14] C4 metabolism originated when grasses migrated from the shady forest undercanopy to more open environments,[15] where the high sunlight gave it an advantage over the C3 pathway.[16] Drought was not necessary for its innovation; rather, the increased resistance to water stress was a by-product of the pathway and allowed C4 plants to more readily colonise arid environments.[16]

text: Today, C4 plants represent about 5% of Earth's plant biomass and 3% of its known plant species.[11][17] Despite this scarcity, they account for about 23% of terrestrial carbon fixation.[14][18] Increasing the proportion of C4 plants on earth could assist biosequestration of CO2 and represent an important climate change avoidance strategy. Present-day C4 plants are concentrated in the tropics and subtropics (below latitudes of 45°) where the high air temperature contributes to higher possible levels of oxygenase activity by RuBisCO, which increases rates of photorespiration in C3 plants.

text: Plants that use C4 carbon fixation[edit]

text: About 8,100 plant species use C4 carbon fixation, which represents about 3% of all terrestrial species of plants.[18][19] All these 8,100 species are angiosperms. C4 carbon fixation is less common in dicots than in monocots, with only 4.5% of dicots using the C4 pathway, compared to 40% of monocots. Despite this, only three families of monocots utilise C4 carbon fixation compared to 15 dicot families. Of the monocot clades containing C4 plants, the grass (Poaceae) species use the C4 photosynthetic pathway most. Forty-six percent of grasses are C4 and together account for 61% of C4 species. These include the food crops maize, sugar cane, millet, and sorghum.[20][21] Of the dicot clades containing C4 species, the order Caryophyllales contains the most species. Of the families in the Caryophyllales, the Chenopodiaceae use C4 carbon fixation the most, with 550 out of 1,400 species using it. About 250 of the 1000 species of the related Amaranthaceae also use C4.[11][22]

text: Members of the sedge family Cyperaceae, and members of numerous families of Eudicots -including Asteraceae (the daisy family), Brassicaceae (the cabbage family), and Euphorbiaceae (the spurge family)- also use C4.

text: Trees which use C4 include Paulownia.

text: Converting C3 plants to C4[edit]

text: Given the advantages of C4, a group of scientists from institutions around the world are working on the C4 Rice Project to turn rice, a C3 plant, into a C4 plant by studying the C4 plants maize and Brachypodium.[23] As rice is the world's most important human food—it is the staple food for more than half the planet—having rice that is more efficient at converting sunlight into grain could have significant global benefits towards improving food security. The team claim C4 rice could produce up to 50% more grain—and be able to do it with less water and nutrients.[24][25][26]

text: The researchers have already identified genes needed for C4 photosynthesis in rice and are now looking towards developing a prototype C4 rice plant. In 2012, the Government of the United Kingdom along with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation provided $14 million over 3 years towards the C4 Rice Project at the International Rice Research Institute.[27]


document_title: More Than You Know (Youmans, Rose and Eliscu song)

question_text: who wrote the song more than you know

question_tokens: who wrote the song more than you know

root

text: "More Than You Know" is a popular song, composed by Vincent Youmans with lyrics by Billy Rose and Edward Eliscu. The song was published in 1929.

tag: p

text: The song was introduced in the Broadway musical Great Day where it was sung by Mayo Methot. It was also popularized on the stage and radio by Jane Froman.[1] The most popular contemporary recordings[1] were by Helen Morgan (Victor catalog number 22149),[1][2] and by Libby Holman (Brunswick catalog number 4613).[1][3]

text: The song was subsequently featured in three musical films: Hit the Deck (1955), sung by Tony Martin; Funny Lady (1975), sung by Barbra Streisand (who first recorded it for her 1967 studio album, Simply Streisand); and The Fabulous Baker Boys (1989) sung by Michelle Pfeiffer. It has been recorded by many artists.

text: Recorded versions[edit]

text:
Mildred Bailey (recorded November 9, 1936, released by Vocalion as catalog number 3378, with the flip side "Long about Midnight";[4] re-recorded February 12, 1942, released by Decca as catalog number 4267B, with the flip side "I Think of You",[5] and re-released in 1951 by Decca as catalog number 27919, with the flip side "Georgia on My Mind"[6])
Count Basie and his orchestra (recorded November 17, 1941; released by OKeh as catalog number 6584, with the flip side "Down for Double"[7])
Randy Brooks and his orchestra (recorded May 2, 1946, released by Decca as catalog number 27205, with the flip side "Holiday Forever"
Dr. John, In a Sentimental Mood released April 25, 1989.[8]
Sonny Burke and his orchestra (released by OKeh as catalog number 5955, with the flip side "Count Basically"[9])
Billy Butterfield and his orchestra (released by Capitol as catalog number 815, with the flip side "How Am I to Know?"[10])
Benny Carter and his orchestra (vocal: R. Felton; recorded November 1, 1939, released by Conqueror as catalog number 9460[11] and by Vocalion as catalog number 5508,[12] both with the flip side "Shufflebug Shuffle"[11][12])
Russ Case and his orchestra (released by MGM as catalog number 30335, with the flip side "It's Only a Paper Moon"[13])
Buddy Clark (recorded August 21, 1947, released by Columbia as catalog number 37911, with the flip side "When Day Is Done"[14])
Judy Clay (released 1961 in the United States by Ember as catalog number 1080[15] and in Canada by Reo Records as catalog number,[16] both with the flip side "I Thought I'd Gotten Over You"[15][16])
Larry Clinton and his orchestra (released by Cosmo Records as catalog number 704, with the flip side "I Don't Know Why"[17])
Perry Como [recorded March 12, 1946 (released by RCA Victor as catalog number 20-1877-B with the flip side "Surrender",[18][19] and by HMV records in the United Kingdom as catalog number with the flip side "A Garden in the Rain"[18]) and January 11, 1951[18] (released by RCA Victor as catalog number 20-4033, with the flip side "Without a Song"[20]), Re-recorded in 1957 with Mitchell Ayers & His Orchestra on the LP "Dream Along with Me" (RCA/Camden CAS-403).
Bing Crosby recorded the song in 1956[21] for use on his radio show and it was subsequently included in the box set The Bing Crosby CBS Radio Recordings (1954-56) issued by Mosaic (catalog MD7-245) in 2009.[22]
Morton Downey (recorded April 1946, released by Majestic as catalog number 1047, with the flip side "My Romance"[23])
Mike Durso and his orchestra (released by MGM as catalog number 30644, with the flip side "I've Told Ev'ry Little Star"[24])
Billy Eckstine with Lou Bring's orchestra (released by MGM as catalog number 11948, with the flip side "Give Me Another Chance"[25])
Larry Elgart and his orchestra (recorded January 26, 1954; released by Decca as catalog number 29043, with the flip side "You're Driving Me Crazy"[26])
Ruth Etting (recorded November 12, 1929; released by Columbia as catalog number 2038D with the flip side "A Place to Call Home"[27])
Benny Goodman Trio (recorded April 24, 1936, released by Victor as catalog number 25345[28] and by Bluebird as catalog number 10723,[29] both with the flip side "Nobody's Sweetheart"[28][29])
Larry Green (released by RCA Victor as catalog number 20-3664, with the flip side "Time on My Hands"[30])
Walter Gross (piano solo; released by MGM as catalog number 30467A, with the flip side "Tea for Two"[13] and by Musicraft as catalog number 387, with the flip side "Sometimes I'm Happy"[31])
Johnny Guarnieri (recorded November, 1947, released by Majestic as catalog number 1229, with the flip side "Smoke Gets in Your Eyes"[23])
Corky Hale (released 1970 by Bell as catalog number 864, with the flip side "Maybe Tomorrow"[32])
Erskine Hawkins and his orchestra (recorded October 2, 1939; released by Bluebird as catalog number 10504A, with the flip side "Uptown Shuffle"[29])
The Hi-Lo's (on their 1962 LP, This Time It's Love, with orchestral accompaniment arranged and conducted by Clare Fischer [33])
Libby Holman and orchestra (recorded November 1929; released by Brunswick as catalog number 4613, with the flip side "Happy Because I'm in Love"[3])
Carol Lawrence (released 1962 by Ava as catalog number 102, with the flip side "Tell Me Lies"[34])
James Moody (released by Royal Roost as catalog number 545, with the flip side "Deep Purple"[35])
Helen Morgan (recorded October 8, 1929, released by Victor as catalog number 22149B, with the flip side "What Wouldn't I Do for That Man?",[2] also released by Victor as catalog number 27684, with the flip side "Give Me a Heart to Sing to"[36])
Gene Mumford (released by Columbia as catalog number 41233, with the flip side "Please Give Me One More Chance"[37])
Red Norvo and his orchestra (vocal: Mildred Bailey; recorded February 10, 1938, released by Brunswick as catalog number 8085, with the flip side "Serenade to the Stars"[38])
Flip Phillips (recorded approximately 1945, released by Signature as catalog number 28123B, with the flip side "Without Woody"[39])
Debbie Reynolds and Tony Martin (released by MGM as catalog number 30877, as a medley with "A Kiss or Two," with the flip side "I Know that You Know"[24])
Jennie Smith (released 1968 by GNP Crescendo as catalog number 401, with the flip side "I Wanna Be Free"[40])
Muggsy Spanier and his orchestra (recorded June 1, 1942, released by Decca as catalog number 4328B[5] and by Brunswick as catalog number 80142,[41][42] both with the flip side "American Patrol"[5][41][42])
Barbra Streisand (recorded 1967 for Simply Streisand album;[43] recorded 1975 for Funny Lady album.[44])
Lee Wiley (recorded 1951, released by Columbia as catalog number 39803, with the flip side "Rise 'n' Shine"[45])
Teddy Wilson and his orchestra (recorded January 30, 1939; released by Brunswick as catalog number 8319[38] and by Columbia as catalog number 36117 both with the flip side "Sugar"[38]

tag: ul


document_title: Flying Tigers

question_text: where were the flying tigers based in china

text: Flying Tigers

text: Origin[edit]

text: The American Volunteer Group was largely the creation of Claire L. Chennault, a retired U.S. Army Air Corps officer who had worked in China since August 1937, first as military aviation advisor to Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek in the early months of the Sino-Japanese War, then as director of a Chinese Air Force flight school centered in Kunming. Meanwhile, the Soviet Union supplied fighter and bomber squadrons to China, but these units were mostly withdrawn by the summer of 1940. Chiang then asked for American combat aircraft and pilots, sending Chennault to Washington as an adviser to China's ambassador and Chiang's brother-in-law, T. V. Soong.

text: Since the U.S. was not at war, the "Special Air Unit" could not be organized overtly, but the request was approved by President Franklin D. Roosevelt himself. The resulting clandestine operation was organized in large part by Lauchlin Currie, a young economist in the White House, and by Roosevelt intimate Thomas G. Corcoran. (Currie's assistant was John King Fairbank, who later became America's preeminent Asian scholar.) Financing was handled by China Defense Supplies – primarily Tommy Corcoran's creation – with money loaned by the U.S. government. Purchases were then made by the Chinese under the "Cash and Carry" provision of the Neutrality Act of 1939.[1] Previously in the 1930s, a number of American pilots including Annapolis graduate Frank Tinker had flown combat during the Spanish Civil War on the Republican side. Members were organized into the Yankee Squadron.

text: Chennault spent the winter of 1940–1941 in Washington, supervising the purchase of 100 Curtiss P-40 fighters and the recruiting of 100 pilots and some 200 ground crew and administrative personnel that would constitute the 1st AVG. He also laid the groundwork for a follow-on bomber group and a second fighter group, though these would be aborted after the Pearl Harbor attack.

text: Original American Volunteer Group[edit]

text: Of the pilots, 60 came from the Navy and Marine Corps and 40 from the Army Air Corps. (One army pilot was refused a passport because he had earlier flown as a mercenary in Spain, so only 99 actually sailed for Asia. Ten more army flight instructors were hired as check pilots for Chinese cadets, and several of these would ultimately join the AVG's combat squadrons.) The volunteers were discharged from the armed services, to be employed for "training and instruction" by a private military contractor, the Central Aircraft Manufacturing Company (CAMCO), which paid them $600 a month for pilot officers, $675 a month for flight leaders, $750 for squadron leaders (no pilot was recruited at this level), and about $250 for skilled ground crewmen.[4]

text: Some of the pilots were also orally promised a bounty of $500 for each enemy aircraft shot down, but no one knew if that would actually happen until they returned home and found the funds deposited in their bank.[citation needed]

text: Although sometimes considered a mercenary unit, the AVG was closely associated with the U.S. military. Most histories of the Flying Tigers say that on 15 April 1941, President Roosevelt signed a "secret executive order" authorizing servicemen on active duty to resign in order to join the AVG. However, Flying Tigers historian Daniel Ford could find no evidence that such an order ever existed, and he argued that "a wink and a nod" was more the president's style.[5] In any event, the AVG was organized and in part directed out of the White House, and by the spring of 1942 had effectively been brought into the U.S. Army chain of command.

text: During the summer and fall 1941, some 300 men carrying civilian passports boarded ships destined for Burma. They were initially based at a British airfield in Toungoo for training while their aircraft were assembled and test flown by CAMCO personnel at Mingaladon Airport outside Rangoon. Chennault set up a schoolhouse that was made necessary because many pilots had "lied about their flying experience, claiming pursuit experience when they had flown only bombers and sometimes much less powerful aeroplanes."[6] They called Chennault "the Old Man" due to his much older age and leathery exterior obtained from years flying open cockpit pursuit aircraft in the Army Air Corps. Most believed that he had flown as a fighter pilot in China, although stories that he was a combat ace are probably apocryphal.[7]

text: Of the 300 original members of the CAMCO personnel, 9 were Chinese-Americans recruited from America's Chinatowns.  All 9 were trained at Allison Engineworks in Indianapolis, Indiana: all were P-40 mechanics.  Upon arrival in Kunming, 2 other Chinese-Americans were hired, a Ford Motor truck specialist and a doctor.  Total original Chinese-Americans were 11.  Prior to July 4, 1942, 3 of the P-40 mechanics resigned.  The official AVG roster lists the original 8.[citation needed]

text: The AVG was created by an executive order of Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek. He did not speak English, however, and Chennault never learned to speak Chinese. As a result, all communications between the two men were routed through Soong Mei-ling, "Madame Chiang" as she was known to Americans, and she was designated the group's "honorary commander."

text: Chennault fighter doctrine[edit]

text: Chennault preached a radically different approach to air combat based on his study of Japanese tactics and equipment, his observation of the tactics used by Soviet pilots in China, and his judgment of the strengths and weaknesses of his own aircraft and pilots. The actual average strength of the AVG was never more than 62 combat-ready pilots and fighters. Chennault faced serious obstacles since many AVG pilots were inexperienced and a few quit at the first opportunity. However, he made a virtue out of these disadvantages, shifting unsuitable pilots to staff jobs and always ensuring that he had a squadron or two in reserve. (The AVG had no ranks, so no division between officers and enlisted soldiers existed.[8])

text: Chennault and the Flying Tigers benefited from the country's warning network, called "the best air-raid warning system in existence":[8]

text: Starting from areas in Free China, in hundreds of small villages, in lonely outposts, in hills and caves, stretching from near Canton through all Free China to the capital in Chungking and to Lanchow, far northwest, are a maze of alarm stations equipped with radios and telephones that give instant warning of the approach of Japanese planes.[8]

text: When Japanese aircraft attacked, Chennault's doctrine called for pilots to take on enemy aircraft in teams from an altitude advantage, since their aircraft were not as manoeuvrable or as numerous as the Japanese fighters they would encounter. He prohibited his pilots from entering into a turning fight with the nimble Japanese fighters, telling them to execute a diving or slashing attack and to dive away to set up for another attack. This "dive-and-zoom" technique was contrary to what the men had learned in U.S. service as well as what the Royal Air Force (RAF) pilots in Burma had been taught; it had been used successfully, however, by Soviet units serving with the Chinese Air Force.[9]

text: Curtiss P-40[edit]

text: AVG fighter aircraft came from a Curtiss assembly line producing Tomahawk IIB models for the Royal Air Force in North Africa. The Tomahawk IIB was similar to the U.S. Army's earlier P-40B model, and there is some evidence that Curtiss actually used leftover components from that model in building the fighters intended for China.[10] The fighters were purchased without "government-furnished equipment" such as reflector gunsights, radios and wing guns; the lack of these items caused continual difficulties for the AVG in Burma and China.

text: The 100 P-40 aircraft were crated and sent to Burma on third country freighters during spring 1941. At Rangoon, they were unloaded, assembled and test flown by personnel of Central Aircraft Manufacturing Company (CAMCO) before being delivered to the AVG training unit at Toungoo.[11] One crate was dropped into the water and a wing assembly was ruined by salt water immersion, so CAMCO was able to deliver only 99 Tomahawks before war broke out. (Many of those were destroyed in training accidents.) The 100th fuselage was trucked to a CAMCO plant in Loiwing, China, and later made whole with parts from damaged aircraft. Shortages in equipment with spare parts almost impossible to obtain in Burma along with the slow introduction of replacement fighter aircraft were continual impediments although the AVG did receive 50 replacement P-40E fighters from USAAF stocks toward the end of its combat tour.

text:
AVG fighter aircraft were painted with a large shark face on the front of the aircraft. This was done after pilots saw a photograph of a P-40 of No. 112 Squadron RAF in North Africa,[12] which in turn had adopted the shark face from German pilots of the Luftwaffe's ZG 76 heavy fighter wing, flying Messerschmitt Bf 110 fighters in Crete. (The AVG nose-art is variously credited to Charles Bond[13] and Erik Shilling.) About the same time, the AVG was dubbed "The Flying Tigers" by its Washington support group, called China Defense Supplies.[14]
The P-40's good qualities included pilot armor, self-sealing fuel tanks, sturdy construction, heavy armament, and a higher diving speed than most Japanese aircraft – qualities that could be used to advantage in accordance with Chennault's combat tactics.[15] Chennault created an early warning network of spotters that would give his fighters time to take off and climb to a superior altitude where this tactic could be executed.[16]

text: Combat history[edit]

text: This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (December 2012) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

tag: table

text: The port of Rangoon in Burma and the Burma Road leading from there to China were of crucial importance. Eastern China was under Japanese occupation, so all military supplies for China arrived via the Burma route. By November 1941, when the pilots were trained and most of the P-40s had arrived in Asia, the Flying Tigers were divided into three squadrons: 1st Squadron ("Adam & Eves"); 2nd Squadron ("Panda Bears") and 3rd Squadron ("Hell's Angels").[6] They were assigned to opposite ends of the Burma Road to protect this vital line of communications. Two squadrons were based at Kunming in China, and a third at Mingaladon Airport near Rangoon. When the United States officially entered the war, the AVG had 82 pilots and 79 aircraft, although not all were combat-ready.  Tiger Erik Shilling, part of the third squadron commented:. "This was the beginning of the greatest adventure I would ever hope to experience. It wasn't until years later that I fully realized the magnitude and significance of this first step, to be a lifelong adventure in the mystic Far East." [17]

text: The AVG's first combat mission was on 20 December 1941, when aircraft of the 1st and 2nd squadrons intercepted 10 unescorted Kawasaki Ki-48 "Lily" bombers of the 21st Hikōtai attacking Kunming. The bombers jettisoned their loads before reaching Kunming. Three of the Japanese bombers were shot down near Kunming and a fourth was damaged so severely that it crashed before returning to its airfield at Hanoi. Later, Chinese intelligence intercepted Japanese communications indicating that only 1 out of the 10 bombers ultimately returned to base. Furthermore, the Japanese discontinued their raids on Kunming while the AVG was based there. One P-40 crash-landed; it was salvaged for parts. This mission was one of the earliest American aerial victories in the Pacific War.

text: Defense of Rangoon[edit]

text: The first squadron had flown up to Kunming to defend the terminus of the Burma Road and saw some combat action on 20 December 1941 while defending Rangoon from Japanese bombers, taking down four of them and disrupting their attack on Burma Road.[18]

text: At this time, the focus of Japan's offensive efforts in the AVG's coverage area was southern Burma. The 3rd Squadron – 18 aircraft strong – defended Rangoon from 23–25 December. On 23 December, Mitsubishi Ki-21 "Sally" heavy bombers of the 60th, 62nd and 98th Sentai, along with single-engined Mitsubishi Ki-30 "Ann" attack bombers of the 31st Sentai, sortied against Rangoon. They were escorted by Nakajima Ki-27 "Nate" fighters of 77th Sentai. The Imperial Japanese Army Air Force (JAAF) formation was intercepted by the AVG and RAF Brewster Buffalos of 67 Squadron. Eight Ki-21s were shot down for the loss of three AVG P-40s. The 60th Sentai was particularly hard hit – it lost five out of the 15 bombers it had dispatched. Nevertheless, Rangoon and Mingaladon airfield were successfully bombed, with the city suffering more than 1,000 dead. Two Buffalos and two P-40s were destroyed on the ground, and one P-40 crashed when it attempted to land on a bomb-damaged runway.

text: On 25 December, the JAAF returned, reinforced by Ki-21s of 12th Sentai and Nakajima Ki-43 Hayabusas (Oscars) of the 64th Sentai (Colonel Tateo Katō's Flying Squadron). A total of 63 bombers escorted by 25 fighters were committed. These were intercepted by 14 P-40s of the AVG's 3rd Squadron and 15 Buffalos of 67 Squadron. In the two encounters, 35 Japanese bombers and fighters were shot down. The Allies lost two pilots and five P-40s.[17] Mingaladon airfield was once again damaged, and eight Buffalos were destroyed on the ground.

text: After its losses in the 23–25 December battles, the 3rd Squadron was relieved by the 2nd Squadron "Panda Bears", which carried out a series of raids on JAAF airbases in Thailand. The Japanese had moved aircraft to Malaya to finish off Singapore, and its remaining aircraft in the area (the 77th, 31st and 62nd Sentai) launched fighter sweeps and counter raids on the Allied airfield at Mingaladon.

text: On 12 January, the Japanese launched their Burma Campaign. Significantly outnumbered, the AVG was gradually reduced through attrition, but often exacted a disproportionate toll of their attackers. On 24 January, six Ki-21s of the 14th Sentai escorted by Ki-27s attacked Mingaladon. All the Ki-21s were shot down by the AVG and RAF defenders. On 28 January, a fighter sweep of 37 Ki-27s was engaged by 16 AVG P-40s and two RAF fighters. Three "Nates" were shot down for the loss of two P-40s. The next day, another sweep of 20 Ki-27s of the 70th Sentai was met by 10 Allied fighters (eight P-40s and two Hawker Hurricanes). Four were shot down for the loss of no Allied aircraft.

text: Despite these minor victories and Chennault's reinforcement of the "Panda Bears" with pilots from the "Adam and Eves", by mid-February, only 10 P-40s were still operational at Mingaladon. Commonwealth troops retreated before the Japanese onslaught, and the AVG was pressed into the ground attack role to support them. One unfortunate result of these missions was a prolonged air attack on a suspected Japanese column on 21 February that turned out to consist of Commonwealth troops. More than 100 Allied lives were lost in this friendly fire incident. On 27 February, after hearing that the RAF was retreating and pulling out its radar equipment, the AVG withdrew to bases in northern Burma.

text: By 24 January, the Flying Tigers had destroyed 73 Japanese aircraft while losing only five themselves — a notable performance, considering the AVG was outnumbered and faced experienced and fully trained Japanese pilots. The main disadvantage of JAAF fighter pilots of this period was the near-obsolescence of their predominant fighter type in the theater, the Ki-27. Though more maneuverable than the P-40, its armament and performance was inferior. Lightly constructed and armed, it could not withstand frontal attacks nor could it out-dive Allied fighters such as the P-40; if it attempted to, it often came apart in the air. In fact, its cruising speed was less than that of the Ki-21 bombers it was intended to escort.[18]

text: Retreat into China[edit]

text: After Rangoon was lost to the Japanese at the end of February, the AVG relocated to Magwe, a small British airfield more than 300 miles north of Rangoon. Chennault started moving elements of the now reconstituted 3rd Squadron to Magwe as reinforcement to his worn down 1st and 2nd squadrons. Aircraft attrition became so high that at this point, individual squadron distinctions became meaningless, and all three squadrons had elements based there, along with a number of RAF aircraft. In total, the Allies had 38 aircraft, including eight P-40s and 15 Hawker Hurricanes. Opposing them were 271 Japanese aircraft, including 115 fighters. Although the AVG and the RAF scored some successes against the JAAF, Magwe was continuously bombed, including a very heavy raid on 21 March by 151 bombers and fighters. On 23 March with only four aircraft left, the AVG was forced to relocate to Loiwing, just across the Chinese border. The Tigers crossed into China on a rickety suspension bridge over a deep gorge. A few months later, they came back to destroy the bridge so no Japanese soldiers could come across that way into China.[19]

text: Reinforced by new P-40E "Kittyhawks" and by repaired aircraft from the AVG's excellent maintenance group, 12 P-40s were based at Loiwing on 8 April. Despite the long retreats, their losses and incessant air combat, the AVG still retained their abilities. That day, 12 Oscars from the 64th Sentai raided the base. In the ensuing series of dogfights, four Ki-43s were downed in exchange for one P-40E destroyed on the ground. During this period, Chinese and American commanders pressured Chennault to order his pilots to undertake so-called "morale missions". These were overflights and ground attacks intended to raise the morale of hard-pressed Chinese soldiers by showing they were getting air support. The AVG's pilots seethed with resentment at these dangerous missions (which some considered useless), a feeling which culminated in the so-called "Pilot's Revolt" of mid-April. Chennault suppressed the "revolt" and ordered the ground attack missions to continue. But despite their efforts, the Allied situation in Burma continued to deteriorate. On 29 April the AVG was ordered to evacuate Loiwing and relocate to Baoshan in China.

text: Like the AVG's other bases, Baoshan was repeatedly bombed by the Japanese Army Air Force. Still, the AVG scored against their JAAF tormentors, bringing down four "Nates" of the 11th Sentai on 5 May and two "Anns". By 4 May, the successful Japanese Burma offensive was winding down, except for mopping up actions. One of these was an attempt by a regiment of the Japanese 56th Division to drive for Kunming, an effort that was stopped by the Chinese army operating with strong air support from the AVG. On 7 May  the Japanese Army began building a pontoon bridge across the upper Salween River, which would allow them to move troops and supplies into China and drive towards Kunming. To stem this tide, 2nd Squadron Leader David Lee "Tex" Hill led a flight of four new P-40Es bombing and strafing into the mile deep Salween River Gorge. During the next four days, the AVG pilots flew continuous missions into the gorge, effectively neutralizing the Japanese forces. This prevented a Japanese advance on Kunming and Chungking; the Japanese never advanced farther than the west bank of the upper Salween. Claire Chennault later wrote of these critical missions, "The American Volunteer Group had staved off China's collapse on the Salween." Despite being on the defensive thereafter, the AVG continued to harass the JAAF with raids on their Vietnamese bases.

text: With the Burma campaign over, Chennault redeployed his squadrons to provide air protection for China. The Doolittle Raid had prompted the Japanese to launch an offensive to seize AVG air bases that could be used for attacks on the Japanese homeland. By 1 June, personnel that would form the nucleus of the new USAAF 23rd Fighter Group (the AVG's replacement) were beginning to trickle into the theater. Some of the last missions the AVG flew were defending Guilin against raids by JAAF Nates, Lilys, and new Kawasaki Ki-45 Toryu ("Nick") heavy fighters. The AVG's last combat was over Hengyang on the day it was disbanded, 4 July 1942. In this final action, the AVG shot down four Ki-27s with no AVG losses.

text: Assessment of the AVG[edit]

text: The AVG lacked many resources. Despite its location in areas with malaria and cholera, it had only "four doctors, three nurses and a bottle of iodine." Pilots found the food disgusting, and the slow mail from home and lack of women hurt morale. A squadron had 45 maintenance personnel compared to the normal more than 100, and only one base could perform major repairs.[8] Nonetheless, the AVG was officially credited with 297 enemy aircraft destroyed, including 229 in the air.[21] Fourteen AVG pilots were killed in action, captured, or disappeared on combat missions. Two died of wounds sustained in bombing raids, and six were killed in accidents during the Flying Tigers' existence as a combat force.

text: The AVG's kill ratio was superior to that of contemporary Allied air groups in Malaya, the Philippines, and elsewhere in the Pacific theater. The AVG's success is all the more remarkable since they were outnumbered by Japanese fighters in almost all their engagements. The AVG's P-40s were superior to the JAAF's Ki-27s, but the group's kill ratio against modern Ki-43s was still in its favor. In Flying Tigers: Claire Chennault and His American Volunteers, 1941–1942, Daniel Ford attributes the AVG's success to morale and group esprit de corps. He notes that its pilots were "triple volunteers" who had volunteered for service with the U.S. military, the AVG, and brutal fighting in Burma. The result was a corps of experienced and skilled volunteer pilots who wanted to fight.

text: During their service with the Nationalist Chinese air force, 33 AVG pilots and three ground crew received the Order of the Cloud and Banner, and many AVG pilots received the Chinese Air Force Medal. Each AVG ace and double ace was awarded the Five Star or Ten Star Wing Medal.

text: Members of the AVG[edit]

text:
Gregory "Pappy" Boyington broke his contract with the AVG[22] in the spring of 1942 and returned to active duty with the U.S. Marine Corps. He went on to command the "Black Sheep" Squadron and was one of two AVG veterans (the other being James H. Howard of the USAAF) to be awarded the Medal of Honor.
David Lee "Tex" Hill later commanded the USAAF 23rd Fighter Group.[23]
Charles Older earned a law degree postwar, became a California Superior Court judge, and presided at the murder trial of Charles Manson.[24]
Kenneth Jernstedt was a long-time Oregon legislator and mayor of his home town of Hood River.[25]
Robert William Prescott [26], founder of the first scheduled cargo airline in America named Flying Tiger Line.
Allen "Bert" Christman, who bailed out at Rangoon, was strafed and killed while parachuting to the ground in January 1942, had earlier scripted and drawn the Scorchy Smith and Sandman comic strips.[27]
Journalist Joseph Alsop served as Chennault's "staff secretary" while the AVG trained at Rangoon; he was interned at Hong Kong on Christmas Day, 1941.

text: Aces[edit]

text: Nineteen pilots were credited by the AVG with five or more air-to-air victories:[21]

text:
Robert Neale: 13 victories
Ed Rector: 10.5 victories
David Lee "Tex" Hill: 10.25 victories
George Burgard: 10 victories
Robert Little: 10 victories
Charles Older: 10 victories
Robert T. Smith: 8.9 victories
William McGarry: 8 victories
Charles Bond: 7 victories
Frank Lawlor: 7 victories
John V. "Scarsdale Jack" Newkirk: 7 victories
Robert Hedman: 6 victories
C. Joseph Rosbert: 6 victories
J. Richard Rossi: 6.25 victories
Robert Prescott: 5.5 victories
Percy Bartelt: 5 victories
William Bartling: 5 victories
John Garrity: 5 victories
Edmund Overend: 5 victories
Robert Sandell: 5 victories
Robert H. Smith: 5 victories

text: Legacy[edit]

text: Transition to the USAAF[edit]

text: The success of the AVG led to negotiations in spring 1942 to induct it into the USAAF. Chennault was reinstated as a colonel and immediately promoted to brigadier general commanding U.S. Army air units in China (initially designated China Air Task Force and later the 14th Air Force), while continuing to command the AVG by virtue of his position in the Chinese Air Force. On 4 July 1942, the AVG was replaced by the 23rd Fighter Group. Most AVG pilots refused to remain with the unit as a result of the strong arm tactics by the USAAF general sent to negotiate with them. However, five pilots accepted commissions in China including "Tex" Hill, one of Chennault's most loyal devotees, with others remaining for a two-week transition period. (U.S. airmen and the press continued to use the "Flying Tiger" name to refer to USAAF units in China to the end of the war, and the name continues to be applied to certain air force and army aviation squadrons.) Most AVG pilots became transport pilots in China, went back to America into civilian jobs, or rejoined the military services and fought elsewhere in the war.[28]

text: One of the pilots drawn to the success of the AVG was Robert Lee Scott, Jr. who was flying supplies into Kunming over the Hump from India. He convinced Chennault to loan him a P-40 which he flew to protect the supply route; his aggressiveness led to Chennault's recruiting him as commander of the 23rd Fighter Group. Scott brought recognition to his exploits and those of the Flying Tigers with his 1943 best-selling autobiography God is My Co-Pilot that was then made by Warner Bros. into a popular film in 1945.

text: Tributes and memorials[edit]

text: There are several museum displays in the United States honoring the Flying Tigers. The National Museum of the United States Air Force in Dayton, Ohio, has an extensive display dedicated to the AVG, including an A-2 jacket worn by an AVG pilot in China, a banner presented to the AAF by the Chinese government, and a P-40E. The National Museum of Naval Aviation in Pensacola, Florida also has a Flying Tiger display. The Chennault Aviation Museum in Monroe, Louisiana has an extensive collection of Flying Tigers and AVG memorabalia. The AVG monument in the National Museum of the United States Air Force Memorial Garden features a marble sculpture of a pagoda crowned with a brass model of a P-40; the monument stands nearly 14 feet tall.  The Palm Springs Air Museum has a display of memorabilia inside a mockup of AVG ground facilities, with a P-40N painted in AVG markings.  Finally, a memorial to the AVG and 14th AF is located at Vandenberg Air Force Base in California, depicting a P-40 in AVG markings with a bronze plaque describing the unit's history and Vandenberg's role as headquarters for the 14th AF.

text: There are also several memorials to the AVG in Asia. In Chiang Mai, Thailand, a marble obelisk was dedicated on 11 November 2003, inscribed to Chennault; to Jack Newkirk, who was killed in North Thailand on 24 March 1942; and to Charles Mott and William McGarry, who were shot down and captured in Thailand. In Taiwan, Madame Chiang Kai-Shek requested a statue of Chennault in the New Park of Taipei to commemorate this wartime friend after his death (the statue has since been relocated to Hualian AFB). A Flying Tigers Memorial is located in the village of Zhijiang, Hunan Province, China and there is a museum dedicated exclusively to the Flying Tigers. The building is a steel and marble structure, with wide sweeping steps leading up to a platform with columns holding up the memorial's sweeping roof; on its back wall, etched in black marble, are the names of all members of the AVG, 75th Fighter Squadron, and 14th Air Force who died in China. In 2005, the city of Kunming held a ceremony memorializing the history of the Flying Tigers in China, and on 20 December 2012, the Flying Tigers Museum opened in Kunming. The date is the 71st anniversary of the first combat from Kunming of the Flying Tigers. The Memorial Cemetery to Anti-Japanese Aviator Martyrs in Nanjing, China features a wall listing the names of Flying Tiger pilots and other pilots who defended China in World War II, and has several unmarked graves for such American pilots.[29]

text: The largest private museum in China, Chengdu Jianchuan Museum, devotes a wing in its military section to the history of the Flying Tigers, including a tribute wall featuring a thousand porcelain photos of members of the Flying Tigers as well as many historical artifacts from the era.[30]

text: In March 2015, the Flying Tiger Heritage Park was opened in Guilin in collaboration with the Flying Tiger Historical Organization. The park is built on the site of Yangtang Airfield and includes a museum, aircraft shelters, and relics of a command post located in a cave.[31]

text: Flying Tigers wrecks[edit]

text: The wreckage of a P-40 with CAF serial number P-8115 is on display in Chiang Mai, Thailand. The aircraft is believed to be that flown by William "Mac" McGarry when he was hit by anti-aircraft fire while flying top cover over Chiang Mai on 24 March 1942. The aircraft crashed into the rain forest in northern Thailand. McGarry was captured and interrogated, and spent most of the war in a Thai prison. Toward the end of the war the Office of Strategic Services (OSS) arranged for the Free Thai Movement to spirit him out of the prison to a PBY Catalina in the Gulf of Thailand. The wreck of his P-40 was discovered in 1991, and consists of the P-40's Allison engine, Hamilton Standard propeller and parts of the airframe. Today the wreckage is displayed at the Tango Squadron Wing 41 Museum in Chiang Mai, Thailand.[32][33]

text: The wreck of another AVG P-40 is believed to be in Lake Dianchi (Lake Kunming). The fighter is believed to be a P-40E piloted by John Blackburn when it crashed into the lake on a gunnery training flight on 28 April 1942, killing the pilot. His body was recovered from the aircraft, which was submerged in 20 feet of water. In 1997 a U.S.-Chinese group called the Sino-American Aviation Heritage Foundation was formed to locate the aircraft and possibly raise and restore it. In March 1998, they contacted the China Expedition Association about conducting the recovery operation. Over 300 aircraft are believed to have crashed into Lake Dianchi (including a second AVG P-40) so locating the aircraft proved difficult. In 2003, an aircraft believed to be Blackburn's was found embedded in nine feet of bottom silt. An effort was made in September 2005 to raise the aircraft, but the recovery was plagued with difficulties and it remains deep under the lake bottom. Since the aircraft was complete and relatively undamaged when John Blackburn's body was removed from it in 1942, it is hoped that the aircraft will be in good condition and capable of being restored, possibly to flying condition.

text: Recognition by the United States[edit]

text: Just before their 50th reunion in 1992, the AVG veterans were retroactively recognized as members of the U.S. military services during the seven months the group was in combat against the Japanese. The AVG was then awarded a Presidential Unit Citation for "professionalism, dedication to duty, and extraordinary heroism." In 1996, the U.S. Air Force awarded the pilots the Distinguished Flying Cross and the ground crew were all awarded the Bronze Star Medal.[34]

text: Popular culture[edit]

text: A number of feature films have referenced the AVG directly or indirectly, the most famous being Flying Tigers, a 1942 black-and-white film from Republic, starring John Wayne and John Carroll as fighter pilots. Other wartime films with an AVG angle included The Sky's the Limit (1943, starring Fred Astaire as a Flying Tiger ace on leave); Hers to Hold (1943, with Joseph Cotten); God is My Co-Pilot, (1945, with Dennis Morgan as Robert Lee Scott, Raymond Massey as Chennault, and John Ridgely as Tex Hill); and China's Little Devils (1945).

text: Similarly, the Flying Tigers have been the focus of several novels, including Tonya, by Pappy Boyington; Remains, by Daniel Ford; Spies in the Garden, by Bob Bergin and Tiger Ten by William D Blankenship. A novel for younger readers was Tiger, Lion, Hawk by Earle Rice Jr.

text: In the Star Wars guidebook The Essential Guide to Warfare, an X-wing Starfighter squadron named the "Lightspeed Panthers" was mentioned in the book. Warfare co-author Paul R. Urquhart confirmed in Warfare's endnotes that the squadron was intended to be a direct reference to the Flying Tigers.[35]

text: The Air Force Falcons football team saluted the Chinese military and the United States Navy and Marine Corps by wearing special Flying Tigers uniforms, including sharktooth designs on the helmets, for two games during the 2016 college football season.[36] The team first wore the uniform for its September 10 game against Georgia State, and again for the Arizona Bowl against South Alabama.[37]


document_title: Job Definition Format

question_text: a jdf file that serves as job ticket includes information like

text: Job Definition Format

text: For printing proofing[edit]

text: Introduction to proofing[edit]

text: Before describing the implementation of proofing in JDF, it's better to know a little about the terminology that will be used.

text:
Proofing: the process of producing a printed output on a device (proofer) that emulates the best it can the supposed printed output on press (the final production device that can be a conventional press, a digital press…) where the final printed product will be produced. Prepress proofing (or off-press proofing) provide a visual copy without creating a press proof (the process is cheaper).
Soft proofing: the same as proofing, but the proofer is actually a screen.
Approval: the process of approving or rejecting the proofing (or the soft proofing). Comments and annotations may be added to describe the reasons of the decision and to give instructions on what changes to do.

tag: ol

text: The original input files have to be processed to be printed on the final press (interpreting, rendering, screening, color management....) and the same to be printed on the proofer (different characteristics). The decision on which of the processing steps will be executed once (common both for printing on the proofer and on the press) and which not will depend on many parameters (characteristics of the proofer device, user requirements, workflow requirements…). The proofing has to take in account the consistency between the press and the proofer.

text: Proofing in JDF[edit]

text: In JDF 1.1, proofing and soft proofing were defined as an atomic process on which the input were all the parameters required for a successful process. This has some drawbacks:

text:
Lack of flexibility: the semantics is specific for one workflow therefore limited to the definition of the processes and the resources that it can take as input.
Lack of control: it is difficult to define the input resources with all the information required for control.
Duplication: similar information has to be used to define both proofing and printing. If different resources are used, this will result in duplication.

text: From JDF 1.2 proofing and soft proofing were deprecated in behalf of a combined process to specify the proofing workflow. The job ticket explicitly defines the processing and provides the flexibility to implement them in different workflows. In order to do that, the atomic processes were made capable of keeping all the information necessary to specify different configurations/options.

text: Combined processes for proofing[edit]

text: It is impossible to describe proofing by a unique combination of processes which in turn will depend on the capabilities of the RIPs (Raster image processor), the devices used for proofing and the proofing production workflow. It is still possible to define a generic combined process for the proofing. This will allow it to describe its step in a workflow. The generic combined proofing process combines the following JDF processes:

text:
ColorSpaceConversion (1): converts the contents of the input RunList from the input color spaces to the color model of the press.
Interpreting: interprets the input RunList file(s) and converts them to an internal display list in order to go through the Rendering.
Rendering: renders the raster data.
ColorSpaceConversion (2): converts the data from the press color model to the proofer device color model.
Screening: screens the raster data.
Imposition: if imposition proofing is done, combines the pages and marks on the imposed sheets.
ImageSetting: specifies the actual printing of the proof. Depending on the characteristics of the proofing device DigitalPrinting can be used as well.

text: The ordering is not completely strict (same result may be achieved with different order combination of steps), but there are some precedence rules: the first color space conversion must be done before the second one, rendering must be done after interpreting, screening in turn must be done after rendering and the second color conversion, ImageSetting/DigitalPrinting must be done after screening.

text: Combined processes for soft proofing[edit]

text: Compared to proofing, since no printed proof is produced, no ImageSetting/DigitalProofing processes are required. Moreover, the rendered data is sent directly to the Approval process that must implement a user interface to show those data on the display and allow him/her to approve/reject the proof and eventually annotate it using digital signature. All the ordering consideration are still valid.

text: Considerations on JDF atomic processes[edit]

text: ColorSpaceConversion[edit]

text: In a production workflow with proofing, there must be both the conversion of the input asset color spaces to the press color space and the one of press color space to the proofer color space. So in JDF two different ColorSpaceConversion processes are required and depending on the exact workflow and on the capabilities of the devices, they can be included in the same combined process.

text: Interpreting and rendering[edit]

text: Input data to the proofing combined process usually required both interpreting (with the exception of JDF ByteMap) and rendering. In these cases they will be included in the combined process describing the proofing step.

text: Screening[edit]

text: Two possibilities:

text:
Proofer can emulate the screening of the press: Screening should be performed once at the ripping combined process and the halftoned data should be sent directly to the proofing combined process.
Proofer is a "contone proofer": one Screening process for the press and one for the proofer.

text: ImageSetting/Digital Printing[edit]

text: For printing the proof ImageSetting/DigitalPrinting process has to be specified at the end of the proofing combined process in order to define how the proof is actually printed.

text: Approval[edit]

text: Must be executed before the final production printing can be started.

text: HP example: cutting of proofing time[edit]

text: HP incorporates JDF into its proofing products. Even if it's only one step in the total process JDF cuts time from the printing process making printers more efficient because proofing traditional generation and delivery of proofs can take days.

text: HP sends PDF files to a remote proofing. JDF file enables the inclusion of job information (color profiles, job ticket details...) that is sent to the client. In the future marking up the proof and digital signatures for approval will be implemented.


document_title: Two-state solution

question_text: who came up with the two state solution

question_tokens: who came up with the two state solution

text: Two-state solution

text: History of the two-state solution

text: The first proposal for the creation of Jewish and Arab states in the British Mandate of Palestine was made in the Peel Commission report of 1937, with the Mandate continuing to cover only a small area containing Jerusalem. The recommended partition proposal was rejected by the Arab community of Palestine,[8][9] and was accepted by most of the Jewish leadership.

text: Partition was again proposed by the 1947 UN Partition plan for the division of Palestine. It proposed a three-way division, again with Jerusalem held separately, under international control. The partition plan was accepted by the Jewish leadership. However, the plan was rejected by the leadership of Arab nations and the Palestinian leadership, which opposed any partition of Palestine and any independent Jewish presence in the area. The 1948 Arab-Israeli War for control of the disputed land broke out on the end of the British Mandate, which came to an end with the 1949 Armistice Agreements. The war resulted in the fleeing or expulsion of 711,000 Palestinians, which the Palestinians call Nakba, from the territories which became the state of Israel.[10]

text: 1948 Palestinian exodus § History

text: UN resolution 242 and the recognition of Palestinian rights

text: After the 1967 Arab–Israeli war, the United Nations Security Council unanimously passed resolution 242 calling for Israeli withdrawal from the territories occupied during the war, in exchange for "termination of all claims or states of belligerency" and "acknowledgement of sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every state in the area". The Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), which had been formed in 1964, strongly criticized the resolution, saying that it reduced the question of Palestine to a refugee problem.[11]:18

text: In September 1974, 56 Member States proposed that "the question of Palestine" be included as an item in the General Assembly’s agenda. In a resolution adopted on 22 November 1974, the General Assembly affirmed Palestinian rights, which included the "right to self-determination without external interference", "the right to national independence and sovereignty", and the "right to return to their homes and property". These rights have been affirmed every year since.[2][11]:24

text: PLO acceptance of two-state solution

text: The first indication that the PLO would be willing to accept a two-state solution, on at least an interim basis, was articulated by Said Hammami in the mid-1970s.[12][13]

text: Security Council resolutions dating back to June 1976 supporting the two-state solution based on the pre-1967 lines were vetoed by the United States,[14] which supports a two-state solution but argued that the borders must be negotiated directly by the parties. The idea has had overwhelming support in the UN General Assembly since the mid-1970s.[15]

text: The Palestinian Declaration of Independence of 15 November 1988, which referenced the UN Partition Plan of 1947 and "UN resolutions since 1947" in general, was interpreted as an indirect recognition of the State of Israel, and support for a two-state solution. The Partition Plan was invoked to provide legitimacy to Palestinian statehood. Subsequent clarifications were taken to amount to the first explicit Palestinian recognition of Israel.[16][17]

text: Diplomatic efforts

text: In 1975, the General Assembly established the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People. In 1976, the Committee presented two sets of recommendations, one concerned with the Palestinians' right of return to their homes and property, and the other with their rights to self-determination, national independence and sovereignty. The Security Council discussed the recommendations but failed to reach a decision due to the negative vote of the United States.[11]:25

text: After the First Intifada began in 1987, considerable diplomatic work went into negotiating a two-state solution between the parties, beginning with the Madrid Conference in 1991. The most significant of these negotiations was the Oslo Accords, which officially divided Palestinian land into three administrative divisions and created the framework for how much of Israel's political borders with the Palestinian territories function today. The Accords culminated in the Camp David 2000 Summit, and follow-up negotiations at Taba in January 2001, but no final agreement was ever reached. The violent outbreak of the Second Intifada in 2000 had demonstrated the Palestinian public's disillusionment with the Oslo Accords and convinced many Israelis that the negotiations were in vain.

text: Possible two-state solutions have been discussed by Saudi and US leaders.[18] In 2002, Crown Prince (King until January 2015) Abdullah of Saudi Arabia proposed the Arab Peace Initiative, which garnered the unanimous support of the Arab League while Israeli leaders continually refuse to discuss the initiative. President Bush announced his support for a Palestinian state, opening the way for United Nations Security Council Resolution 1397, supporting a two-state solution.[19][20]

text: At the Annapolis Conference in November 2007, three major parties—The PLO, Israel, and the US—agreed on a two-state solution as the outline for negotiations. However, the summit failed to achieve an agreement.

text: Following the conflict that erupted between the two main Palestinian parties, Fatah and Hamas, Hamas took control of the Gaza Strip, splintering the Palestinian Authority into two polities, each claiming to be the true representatives of the Palestinian people. Fatah controlled the Palestinian National Authority in the West Bank and Hamas Governed in Gaza.

text: The latest initiatives were the 2013–14 Israeli–Palestinian peace talks under the guidance of John Kerry, the United States Secretary of State. These talks also failed to reach an agreement.

text: Viability

text: By 2010, when direct talks were scheduled to be restarted, continued growth of settlements on the West Bank and continued strong support of settlements by the Israeli government had greatly reduced the land and resources that would be available to a Palestinian state creating doubt among Palestinians and left-wing Israelis that a two-state solution continued to be viable.[21] In January 2012 the European Union Heads of Mission report on East Jerusalem found that Israel's continuing settlement activities and the fragile situation of the Palestinian population in East Jerusalem, as well in area C, was making a two-state solution less likely.[22] The Israeli Foreign Ministry rejected this EU report, claiming it was "based on a partial, biased and one sided depiction of realities on the ground."[23] In May 2012, the EU council stressed its "deep concern about developments on the ground which threaten to make a two-state solution impossible'.[24]

text: On 29 November 2012, the UN General Assembly voted by 138 to 9, with 46 abstentions to recognize Palestine as a "non-member observer state". On the following day, Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu announced the building of 3,000 new homes on land to the east of East Jerusalem, in an area referred to as "E-1".[25] The move was immediately criticized by several countries, including the United States, with Israeli ambassadors being personally called for meetings with government representatives in the UK, France and Germany, among others. Israel's decision to build the homes was described by the Obama administration as "counterproductive", while Australia said that the building plans "threaten the viability of a two-state solution". This is because they claim the proposed E-1 settlement would physically split the lands under the control of the Palestinian National Authority in two, as the extent of the PNA's authority does not extend all the way to the River Jordan and the Dead Sea.[26][27][28][29][30] Israel's Labor party has voiced support for the two-state solution, with Isaac Herzog stating it would be "in Israel's interests".[31]

text: Settlements in the West Bank

text: The UN resolutions affirm the illegality of settlements in West Bank, including East Jerusalem.[32] Proposals have been offered[by whom?] for over 50 post-evacuation compensation of settlers for abandoned property, as occurred following Israel's withdrawal of settlements from Gaza in 2005 and from the Sinai Peninsula in 1982.[33] Some settlers in those previous withdrawals were forcibly removed by the IDF.

text: Public opinion in Israel and Palestine

text: Many Palestinians and Israelis, as well as the Arab League,[34] have stated that they would accept a two-state solution based on 1949 Armistice Agreements, more commonly referred to as the "1967 borders". In a 2002 poll conducted by PIPA, 72% of both Palestinians and Israelis supported at that time a peace settlement based on the 1967 borders so long as each group could be reassured that the other side would be cooperative in making the necessary concessions for such a settlement.[35] A 2013 Gallup poll found 70% of Palestinians in the West Bank and 48% of Palestinians in Gaza Strip, together with 52% of Israelis supporting "an independent Palestinian state together with the state of Israel".[36]

text: Support for a two state solution varies according to the way the question is phrased. Some Israeli journalists suggest that the Palestinians are unprepared to accept a Jewish State on any terms.[37][38] According to one poll, "fewer than 2 in 10 Arabs, both Palestinian and all others, believe in Israel's right to exist as a nation with a Jewish majority."[39] Another poll, however, invoked by the US State Department, suggests that "78 percent of Palestinians and 74 percent of Israelis believe a peace agreement that leads to both states living side by side as good neighbors" is "essential or desirable".[40]

text: In a 2007 poll, almost three quarters of the Palestinian respondents in the West Bank and Gaza Strip approved either a binational or two-state solution; 46% preferred the two-state solution, and 26% preferred the binational solution.[41] Support is lower among younger Palestinians; U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice noted: "Increasingly, the Palestinians who talk about a two-state solution are my age."[42] A survey taken before the outbreak of fighting in 2014 by the Washington Institute for Near East Policy found that 60 percent of Palestinians say the goal of their national movement should be "to work toward reclaiming all of historic Palestine from the river to the sea" compared to just 27 percent who endorse the idea that they should work "to end the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza and achieve a two state solution." WINEP says that "this is a new finding compared to similar (but not identical) questions asked in the past, when support for a two-state solution typically ranged between 40–55 percent".[43]

text: The two-state solution also enjoys majority support in Israeli polls although there has been some erosion to its prospects over time.[44] A 2014 Haaretz poll asking "Consider that in the framework of an agreement, most settlers are annexed to Israel, Jerusalem will be divided, refugees won't return to Israel and there will be a strict security arrangement, would you support this agreement?", only 35% of Israelis said yes.[43]

text: Other solutions

text: Another option is the binational solution, which could either be a twin regime federalist arrangement or a unitary state,[45] and the Allon Plan, also known as the "no-state solution."

text: Three-state solution

text: The three-state solution has been proposed as another alternative. The New York Times[46] reported that Egypt and Jordan were concerned about having to retake responsibility for Gaza and the West Bank. In effect, the result would be Gaza returning to Egyptian rule, and the West Bank to Jordanian.[47]

text: Proposal of dual citizenship

text: A number of proposals for the granting of Palestinian citizenship or residential permits to Jewish settlers in return for the removal of Israeli military installations from the West Bank have been fielded by such individuals[48] as Arafat,[49] Ibrahim Sarsur[50] and Ahmed Qurei.

text: Israeli Minister Moshe Ya'alon said in April 2010 that "just as Arabs live in Israel, so, too, should Jews be able to live in Palestine." … "If we are talking about coexistence and peace, why the [Palestinian] insistence that the territory they receive be ethnically cleansed of Jews?".[51]

text: The idea has been expressed by both advocates of the two-state solution[52] and supporters of the settlers and conservative or fundamentalist currents in Israeli Judaism[53] that, while objecting to any withdrawal, claim stronger links to the land than to the state of Israel.


document_title: Fivefold ministry

question_text: where did the term five-fold ministry come from

text: Fivefold ministry

text: Definitions[edit]

text: Apostle is a derivation of the Greek word apostolos, the word means someone or something who is sent. Apostolos was used to refer to a ship or a group of ships. Later it designated a bill, invoice, or passport.[5]

text: Prophet is reception and declaration of a word from the Lord through a direct prompting of the Holy Spirit and the human instrument thereof.[6]

text: Evangelist is a NT term referring to one who proclaims the gosepl of Jesus Christ.

text: Pastor is a common translation of the Greek noun poimen and its verb form; also the Hebrew ra'ah. Literally, a shepherd or one who keeps animals but used figuratively of those called by God to feed, care for and lead His people, who are His "flock".[7]

text: Teacher is one who instructs others.[8]

text: Five offices in the New Testament[edit]

text: Ephesians 4:11 refers to five offices in the church: apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers. Other passages also refer to these things as spiritual gifts. Romans 12:4-8, for example, includes teaching and prophesying as spiritual gifts, and 1 Corinthians 12 lists apostles, prophets and teachers in the context of spiritual gifts. 1 Corinthians 14 provides instructions on the proper use of prophecy in church meetings.[third-party source needed]

text: However, there is an objection to this use of Ephesians. 4:11 in that this passage talks about a one-time event in the past (“and he gave”), when Christ ascended into heaven (Ephesians 4:8–10) and then at Pentecost poured out initial giftings on the church, giving the church apostles, prophets, evangelists, and pastor-teachers (or pastors and teachers).  Whether or not Christ would later give more people for each of these offices cannot be decided from this verse alone but must be decided based on other New Testament teachings on the nature of these offices and whether they were expected to continue.  While there were other prophets, evangelists, and pastor-teachers established by Christ throughout all of the early churches, there was only one more apostle given after this initial time (Paul, “last of all,” in unusual circumstances on the Damascus Road).[9]

text: Qualifications[edit]

text: Paul refers to the "signs" of an apostle in 2 Corinthians 12:11-12, and notes that he performed these "with signs and wonders and mighty works" (NIV). Some argue that in 1 Corinthians 9:1, Paul suggests that having seen Jesus is a qualification of being an apostle while opponents to this belief argue that he is merely defending his authority to make the statements from the previous chapter regarding sin and grace. Paul also notes in 1 Corinthians 9:2 that the Corinthians are the "seal" of his apostleship.[third-party source needed]

text: The qualifications of overseers are listed in 1 Timothy 3:2-7 and Titus 1:6-9. These are mainly moral, with the additional qualification of being "able to teach".[third-party source needed]

text: Apostle

text: 1. An apostle must have the character qualifications of an Elder

text: 2. An apostle will have a Servant spirit

text: 3. An apostle will have Spiritual Authority

text: 4. An apostle will be a Spiritual Father

text: 5. An apostle must be sound in Doctrine

text: 6. An apostle will be clothed with humility

text: 7. An apostle will be noted in patience

text: 8. An apostle will be exemplary as a leader

text: 9. An apostle should manifest the qualities of Divine love[10]

text: Prophet

text: 1. Must have the qualifications of an elder

text: 2. Must possess character qualities [11]

text: Evangelist

text: 2. Full of the Holy Spirit

text: 3. Full of faith, wisdom

text: 4. Of good report among his local church[12]

text: Pastor

text: 2. Must have character, domestic and spiritual qualifications found in 1 Timothy[13]

text: Teacher

text: 1. Must have the qualifications of a bishop and elder[14]

text: New Testament people[edit]

text: A number of people in the New Testament are said to hold one or more of these offices:

text: Apostles: The Twelve (Luke 6:13-16), Matthias (Acts 1:24-26), Paul (Galatians 1:1), Barnabas (Acts 14:14), Andronicus and Junia (Romans 16:7)[third-party source needed]

text: Prophets: The company from Jerusalem (Acts 11:27-28), Agabus (Acts 21:10-11), Judas and Silas (Acts 15:32) and the daughters of Philip (Acts 21:9)[third-party source needed]

text: Teachers: Apollos (Acts 18:25), Paul (2Timothy 1:11)[third-party source needed]

text: Evangelists: Philip (Acts 21:9)

text: In addition to this, Acts 13:1-3 lists some "prophets and teachers" in Antioch: Barnabas, Simeon called Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen and Saul (who later became Paul).[third-party source needed]

text: History[edit]

text: After the close of the Apostolic Age, Christian writers still referred to the existence of prophets. For example, Irenaeus wrote of second century believers with the gift of prophecy,[15] while Tertullian, writing of the church meetings of the Montanists (to whom he belonged), described in detail the practice of prophecy in the second century church.[16] It is, however, the teaching of Edward Irving and advent of the Catholic Apostolic Church in 1832 that marks the earliest known movement of what is commonly labeled as fivefold ministry.[third-party source needed] The church ordained twelve apostles and had specific understandings of the roles of prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers.[third-party source needed]

text: This trend picked up steam in 1948 with the Latter Rain Movement giving renewed emphasis to fivefold ministry, and soon after with the Charismatic Movement and Third Wave movements, led by figures such as the late C. Peter Wagner, who was the leading figure in what he coined as the New Apostolic Reformation, which emphasized the specific need for apostolic leadership in the Church, among the other fivefold anointings.[third-party source needed]

text: More recently, Alan Hirsch and Michael Frost have coined the acronym APEPT to refer to Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists, Pastors and Teachers.[17] In the revised edition of their work, they have adjusted the acronym to APEST: Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists, Shepherds and Teachers.[18]