Technical Training Template - North Carolina Department Of: Fill & Download for Free

Q. What are the best universities around the world in Ph.D in Nano-science and nanotechnology program?A. Previously posted.7 Best Nanotechnology Engineering Schools in the WorldKey US Universities in NanotechnologyKey Figures in Nanotechnology, Pt. IKey Figures in Nanotechnology, Pt. II7 Best Nanotechnology Engineering Schools in the WorldPublished on December 7, 2015 at 3:00 am by DR. ARSIM BYTYQINanotechnology discoveries resulting from 7 best nanotechnology engineering schools in the world will have broad implications for our society in the future. As nanotechnology makes significant inroads into every aspect of our lives, more and more people benefit from it. However, most scientists agree that nanotechnology did not bring the real and significant changes yet, and this is estimated to happen in the coming decade, as companies, research groups, and universities are rapidly moving forward with their research and development programs. At the same time, governments are increasing investments and have allocated more funding to explore the field of nanotechnology. For example, the US as a leader among 10 best countries in nanotechnology has decided to allocate billions of dollars for nanotechnology explorations as a new way to maintain the leadership in the competitive global economy. No doubt that this effort will result in more discoveries in a wide variety of fields like genetic engineering, manufacturing, food production, computers, robots, etc. However, the power associated with such advantages will require strict governmental rules and regulations in order to prevent the risks of unethical practices. Identifying the implications of nanotechnology in society will have an important role in making this field a success story. This is also the aim of 7 best nanotechnology engineering schools in the world.Irina Kozorog/Shutterstock.comWhile the number of schools and colleges that offer attractive programs in nanotechnology is increasing, we are providing the list of the most successful nanotechnology engineering schools in the world based on their dedication to research, education, facilities, and industrial cooperation. The ranking takes into consideration the survey results presented by Small Times Magazine and world ranking results for top leading universities in nanotechnology. Total score represents the performance of each school/University in research, education, facilities, and industry outreach.7. Purdue UniversityTotal score 4.5The nanotechnology programs of this university are more focused and connected to the Birck nanotechnology center in Discovery Park. This center is well recognized for offering excellent education, facilities, commercialization and outreach in the field of nanotechnology.cybrain/Shutterstock.com6. The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC)Total score 7This university has many departments dedicated to the field of nanotechnology. It’s been among the top ranking universities for many years. The main centers focused on nanotechnology work are Institute for advanced materials, nanoscience and technology (IAM), the Carolina center of cancer nanotechnology excellence and the Center for environmentally responsible solvents and processes.SUWIT NGAOKAEW/Shutterstock.com5. University of VirginiaTotal score 7This university is ranked on the list of 7 best nanotechnology engineering schools in the world, thanks to variety of programs offered in the field of nanotechnology. There are research programs in engineering disciplines, computer and information science, bioengineering and nanotechnology. The survey in Small Time Magazine has listed it among the best places for students in the field of micro and nanotechnology.4. Rice UniversityTotal score 9.5Robert F. Curl Jr and Richard E. Smalley - Rice UniversityThis university is considered among the first pioneers in the field of nanotechnology which gained more reputation when two of its faculty members received the Nobel Prize in chemistry. The reputational work and dedication of its staff members were the driving force behind the financial support received to perform research work in field of nanoscience and nanotechnology.science photo/Shutterstock.com3. University of MichiganTotal score 12The university of Michigan is among rare educational institutions that could synergize its medical and physical sciences. This university has a large number of faculty staff as well as undergraduate and graduate students in the field of nanotechnology. Moreover, the nanofabrication facility is offered for free to university and industrial researchers.2. Cornel UniversityTotal score 13.5This university has established the infrastructure for nanotechnology programs long before it becomes a priority field for other universities and colleges. It is characterized with advanced techniques and facilities that support researchers to develop various micro and nanofabricated devices.Pressmaster/Shutterstock.com1. SUNY Polytechnic InstituteTotal score 16.5Among many departments within this university, the SUNY Polytechnic Institute, formerly the College of Nanoscale Science and Engineering (the University of Albany), is the first one dedicated to nanotechnology education, research, and economic outreach. It has a significant number of publications in the field of nanotechnology and is well known for nano commercialization, micro commercialization, and micro research. With strong support from industry, the young college has solidified its reputation among 7 best nanotechnology engineering schools in the world.Key US Universities in NanotechnologyPosted on September 16, 2014 by Karla L.Fortunately for all of us, many universities have become very active in the pursuit of nanotechnology research. For this reason it is no simple matter to say which are the top universities for nanotechnology and which have made the most progress in the field. Today there are many universities with nanofabrication facilities, advanced research centers, prominent scientists in residence, and groundbreaking educational programs specifically dedicated to nanotechnology.In 2011 Small Times ranked the top 20 US university nanotechnology programs according to their level of impact. In addition, the National Nanotechnology Infrastructure Network (NNIN) comprises many important university nanotechnology departments. From these sources and others, here are some of the key US universities in nanotechnology.Arizona State University, The Arizona Initiative for Nano-Electronics (AINE)The Arizona Initiative for Nano-Electronics (AINE) is made up of the Center for Solid State Electronics Research (CSSER), the LeRoy Eyring Center for Solid State Sciences (LE-CSSS), and the BioDesign Institute. This network is dedicated to fostering research in computational nanoscience, molecular electronics, nanoelectronics, nanoionics, and nanophotonics in the ASU community. ASU is considered one of the top universities for nanotechnology with its educational programs ranked sixth in the U.S. by Small Times, its facilities including nanofabrication ranked third, and its commercial endeavors ranked first. ASU researchers made major advances with DNA nanotechnology in 2013.Purdue University, The Birck Nanotechnology CenterThe Birck Nanotechnology Center has consistently ranked highly among key US universities in nanotechnology since the mid-2000s. It is home to 45 faculty, and as many as 180 graduate students. Birck boasts a 25,000 square foot Class 1 nanofabrication cleanroom, the Scifres Nanofabrication Laboratory, including a biomolecular cleanroom. The building also houses a wealth of other specialized nanotechnology laboratories. The Birck Center just received a $12 million DOE grant in June of 2014 towards its continued research on clean energy technology.Rice University, The Richard E. Smalley, Institute for Nanoscale Science and TechnologyMaterials Science & NanoengineeringThe Smalley Institute (SI) is known as one of the world class nanotechnology programs and research centers in the world. Ranked fourth overall among key US universities in nanotechnology by Small Times, the Institute has been housed in its 70,000 square foot Dell Butcher Hall space since 1997. More than half of all engineering and natural science faculty at Rice belong to the Smalley Institute. Richard Smalley, for whom the SI was named, was one of the discoverers of the carbon buckyball. Discovery of Buckyballs a Nobel effort by professors.Stanford University, Stanford Nanofabrication Facility (SNF)The Stanford Nanofabrication Facility (SNF) is almost thirty years old, and although it was originally conceived as an electronics-based research facility, in that time it has produced notable research in many subfields. The SNF has at its heart a 10,000 sqare foot cleanroom which features a full complement of device fabrication tools. Recent discoveries include work with nanowires to improve battery life, while older research dealt with the structures of viruses and the ways that they can assist nanoscale design. The facility actively supports researchers exploring applications in astronomy, biology, medicine, and physics, to name just a few areas. The SNF has been supported by the National Science Foundation through the NNIN.State University of New York, Albany (SUNY Albany), College of Nanoscale Science and Engineering (CNSE)The College of Nanoscale Science and Engineering at SUNY Albany was ranked first by Small Times for education, facilities, and industrial outreach. The program is funded by in excess of $20 billion from high-tech investments. CNSE brings together hundreds of students with more than 3,000 faculty, scientists, researchers, and corporate partners from companies like IBM, Intel, and Applied Materials for research and development in nanotechnology. The CNSE facility is a 1.3 million-square-foot complex which is the only place with 300mm and 450mm wafer computer chip pilot prototyping and demonstration lines within 135,000 square feet of Class 1 capable cleanrooms.University of Minnesota, Minnesota Nano Center (MNC)Ranked tenth by Small Times in particular for its industry outreach, Minnesota Nano Center (MNC) is a $20 million facility. It supports research in three subsets of nanotechnology: biomedical applications, nano materials, and small-scale devices. The MNC features a 5,000 square foot Class 100 cleanroom, a 3,000 square foot Class 100 clean room, full facilities for microfabrication, and 4,000 additional square feet of lab space. The MNC gives undergraduates a chance to work in nanotechnology at UM or one of 13 other universities in the U.S. with their summer internship program; this large and popular program is connected to the National Nanotechnology Infrastructure Network’s Research Experience for Undergraduates (REU) Program and the NSF. A related MNC program offers summer training in nanotechnology for teachers.University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill (UNC), Institute for Advanced Materials, Nanoscience, and Technology (IAM); the Carolina Center of Cancer Nanotechnology Excellence (C-CCNE); the Center for Environmentally Responsible Solvents and Processes (CERSP); the Carolina Institute for NanoMedicine; and the Center for Nanotechnology in Drug Delivery (CINM)The UNC, located in the “research triangle,” is a nanotechnology center. The Carolina Institute for NanoMedicine is an umbrella program that houses both the Carolina Center of Cancer Nanotechnology Excellence and the Center for Nanotechnology in Drug Delivery. The Institute for Advanced Materials, Nanoscience, and Technology is part of the Department of Applied Sciences. IAM coordinates interdisciplinary research efforts between UNC-Chapel Hill’s polymer science, nanomaterials, and nanobiosciences departments. Small Times ranked UNC Chapell Hill fifth overall for research among key US universities in nanotechnology.Key Figures in Nanotechnology, Pt. IPosted on September 11, 2014 by Karla L.Although many people think of nanotechnology as a very new field, in fact is has been burgeoning for years. A look at some of the key figures in nanotechnology provides a much broader perspective and helps illuminate the future of the field.Erwin MuellerPenn State University Professor of Physics Erwin Mueller became the first person to “see” atoms in 1955 when he invented the field-ion electron microscope. He became a professor of physics at Penn State University and moved to Pennsylvania several years before the discovery in 1952, and became a citizen of the United States in 1962. He was later elected to the National Academy of Sciences and went on to help found one of the earliest programs in nanotechnology at Penn State.Richard P. FeynmanOne of the most colorful characters in the modern history of science, Richard Feynman was the 1965 Nobel Prize Winner in Physics for his work in quantum electrodynamics. This work had important consequences for nanotechnology, but it was his 1959 talk at Caltech, “There’s Plenty of Room at the Bottom,” that is typically credited with jumpstarting thought about manipulation of individual atoms. In his talk, Feynman described the basic parameters of what would only later be called nanotechnology, and also challenged scientists and engineers to work at the atomic level, offering $1,000 prizes.Norio TaniguchiTokyo Science University Professor Norio Taniguchi coined the phrase“nanotechnology” during his work on ultraprecision machining in 1974, more than a decade after Feynman’s famous Caltech lecture. Taniguchi’s basic definition still stands today: “’Nano-technology’ mainly consists of the processing of separation, consolidation, and deformation of materials by one atom or one molecule.” In 1999, Taniguchi received the first Lifetime Achievement Award from the European Society for Precision Engineering and Nanotechnology as an acknowledgement of his body of work.K. Eric DrexlerDr. Drexler established key principles of engineering at the nanoscale in his 1981 paper presented to the National Academy of Sciences (NAS). He also authored the famous Engines of Creation: The Coming Era of Nanotechnology in 1986, which is often remembered more for a dystopian vision of the future than for its exploration of nanomachines. However, he later indicated that the problems he described in 1986 would not come to pass and went on to serve as Chief Technical Consultant for Productive Nanosystems and as Chief Technical Advisor working with DNA nanotechnology for Nanorex. Drexler holds a PhD in Molecular Nanotechnology from MIT and today is an Academic Visitor in residence at Oxford University.Robert F. Curl, Sir Harold W. Kroto, and Richard E. SmalleyC&EN 970106-Fullerenes Gain Nobel StatureRobert Curl, Harold Kroto, and Richard Smalley became key figures in nanotechnology by introducing their discovery of carbon buckyballs, or fullerenes, to the world in 1985. This discovery was crucial to the developing field of nanotechnology because they possess unique chemical properties and are capable of similarly unique technical applications. Since the discovery of buckyballs and other fullerenes, many new compounds have been created, many caged inside buckyballs themselves. Curl, Kroto, and Smalley shared the 1996 Nobel Prize in chemistry for their discovery.Key Figures in Nanotechnology, Pt. IIPosted on September 12, 2014 by Karla L.This article is a continuation of our look at some of the key figures in nanotechnology. This perspective provides a much broader understanding of nanotechnology and helps illuminate the future of the field.Calvin Quate, Christoph Gerber, and Gerd Karl BinnigCalvin Quate, Christopher Gerber, and Gerd Binnig are best known for being the team behind the invention of the Atomic Force or Scanning Probe Microscope in 1986, a tool actively used today for nanoscale imaging, measurement, and manipulation. Quate began the work in 1985 and it led to the ability to reveal atomic detail and therefore do nanotechnology generally. The three shared the Nobel Prize for this invention. Quate received his PhD from Stanford in 1950 and is Professor Emeritus of Electrical Engineering and Applied Physics at Standford and also the head of the Quate Group at the Gintzon Lab. Christoph Gerber is a Professor of Physics for the Universitat Basel and on the Advisory Board for the Journal of Nanotechnology. Gerd Binnig is with the IBM Zurich Labs.Sumio IijimaSumio Iijima is a physicist who is best known for his invention of the carbon nanotube in 1991. Carbon nanotubes are used in water filters, batteries, sports equipment, and fuel cells. Since that time, his research in nanomaterials has continued and he has won numerous awards in nanotechnology and physics. He is also a Professor in the Faculty of Science and Technology at Meijo University in Japan.Nadrian SeemanNadrian C. Seeman - DNA: Not Merely the Secret of LifeNadrian C. “Ned” Seeman is a nanotechnologist and crystallographer best known for inventing the field of DNA nanotechnology. He is the Margaret and Herman Sokol Professor of Chemistry at New York University. Seeman studied biochemistry at the University of Chicago and crystallography at the University of Pittsburgh. He has published more than 250 papers and won numerous awards, including the Emerging Technologies Award, the Feynman Prize, the MIT Alexander Rich Medal, the NYACS Nichols Medal, the SCC Frontiers of Science Award, the Sidhu Award, the Tulip Award in DNA Computing, and the World Technology Network Award in Biotechnology.Robert LangerTEDxBigApple - Robert Langer - Biomaterials for the 21st CenturyRobert Langer is the David H. Koch Institute Professor in the MIT Department of Chemical Engineering. The most cited engineer in history, he has written more than 1,250 articles. Langer also holds almost 1,050 patents all over the world, many of which have been licensed to various biotechnology, chemical, medical device, and pharmaceutical companies. Langer designs nanoparticles that improve drug delivery systems, especially for cancer treatments. He was a member of the FDA’s SCIENCE Board from 1995 to 2002, and its chairman from 1999 to 2002. Langer has won more than 220 awards, including the United States National Medal of Science (2006) and the 2008 Millennium Prize. He belongs to the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, the National Academy of Sciences, and the National Academy of Inventors.Joseph DesimoneTED Talk on 3 D PrintingJoseph DeSimone is Chancellor’s Eminent Professor of Chemistry at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and the William R. Kenan, Jr. Distinguished Professor of Chemical Engineering at North Carolina State University. He is best known for applying nanotechnological methods to the design of new medicines, vaccines, and cancer treatments. Recent breakthroughs his group has revealed include the use of a unique method of nanoparticle fabrication called PRINT (Particle Replication In Non-wetting Templates), which allows researchers to directly fabricate and harvest monodisperse, shape-specific nano-biomaterials and maintain simultaneous control over both their structure and function. DeSimone is a member of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. He is also a fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.George M. WhitesidesTED Talk Toward a science of simplicityGeorge M. Whitesides is a professor of chemistry at Harvard University, but he is well-known for his work in multiple areas, including biochemistry, catalysis, materials and surface science, microfluidics, nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy (NMR), physical organic chemistry, and nanotechnology. He has created a “lab on a chip” using nanotechnology that that will allow healthcare workers in the field to diagnose multiple ailments by simply putting a drop of blood or urine on a tiny, color-changing chip. He holds more than 50 patents and has written more than 950 research papers. He has also co-founded several companies, including Genzyme. Whitesides has helped develop the field by mentoring more than 300 scientists and through his work engineering self-assembling molecules and clean energy solutions.Meyya MeyyappanDr. Meyya Meyyappan is the Director and Senior Scientist of the Ames’ Center for Nanotechnology, NASA, which he founded in 1997. He was one of the co-founders of the Interagency Working Group on Nanotechnology (IWGN), which was formally recognized by the United States Office of Science and Technology Policy in 1998. The purpose of the IWGN comprises top minds in nanotechnology from across the U.S. who advocate for the field’s presence as a national initiative. He was written more than 175 articles and given more than 200 talks worldwide. Meyyappan was the President of the Nanotechnology Council of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers from 2006 to 2007 and has received numerous awards, including his 2009 induction into the Silicon Valley Engineers Council Hall of Fame, which was based on his contributions to nanotechnology.

United States a leader among 10 best countries in Nanotechnology7 Best Nanotechnology Engineering Schools in the WorldPublished on December 7, 2015 at 3:00 am by DR. ARSIM BYTYQINanotechnology discoveries resulting from 7 best nanotechnology engineering schools in the world will have broad implications for our society in the future. As nanotechnology makes significant inroads into every aspect of our lives, more and more people benefit from it. However, most scientists agree that nanotechnology did not bring the real and significant changes yet, and this is estimated to happen in the coming decade, as companies, research groups, and universities are rapidly moving forward with their research and development programs. At the same time, governments are increasing investments and have allocated more funding to explore the field of nanotechnology. For example, the US as a leader among 10 best countries in nanotechnology has decided to allocate billions of dollars for nanotechnology explorations as a new way to maintain the leadership in the competitive global economy. No doubt that this effort will result in more discoveries in a wide variety of fields like genetic engineering, manufacturing, food production, computers, robots, etc. However, the power associated with such advantages will require strict governmental rules and regulations in order to prevent the risks of unethical practices. Identifying the implications of nanotechnology in society will have an important role in making this field a success story. This is also the aim of 7 best nanotechnology engineering schools in the world.Irina Kozorog/Shutterstock.comWhile the number of schools and colleges that offer attractive programs in nanotechnology is increasing, we are providing the list of the most successful nanotechnology engineering schools in the world based on their dedication to research, education, facilities, and industrial cooperation. The ranking takes into consideration the survey results presented by Small Times Magazine and world ranking results for top leading universities in nanotechnology. Total score represents the performance of each school/University in research, education, facilities, and industry outreach.7. Purdue UniversityTotal score 4.5The nanotechnology programs of this university are more focused and connected to the Birck nanotechnology center in Discovery Park. This center is well recognized for offering excellent education, facilities, commercialization and outreach in the field of nanotechnology.cybrain/Shutterstock.com6. The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC)Total score 7This university has many departments dedicated to the field of nanotechnology. It’s been among the top ranking universities for many years. The main centers focused on nanotechnology work are Institute for advanced materials, nanoscience and technology (IAM), the Carolina center of cancer nanotechnology excellence and the Center for environmentally responsible solvents and processes.SUWIT NGAOKAEW/Shutterstock.com5. University of VirginiaTotal score 7This university is ranked on the list of 7 best nanotechnology engineering schools in the world, thanks to variety of programs offered in the field of nanotechnology. There are research programs in engineering disciplines, computer and information science, bioengineering and nanotechnology. The survey in Small Time Magazine has listed it among the best places for students in the field of micro and nanotechnology.4. Rice UniversityTotal score 9.5Robert F. Curl Jr and Richard E. Smalley - Rice UniversityThis university is considered among the first pioneers in the field of nanotechnology which gained more reputation when two of its faculty members received the Nobel Prize in chemistry. The reputational work and dedication of its staff members were the driving force behind the financial support received to perform research work in field of nanoscience and nanotechnology.science photo/Shutterstock.com3. University of MichiganTotal score 12The university of Michigan is among rare educational institutions that could synergize its medical and physical sciences. This university has a large number of faculty staff as well as undergraduate and graduate students in the field of nanotechnology. Moreover, the nanofabrication facility is offered for free to university and industrial researchers.2. Cornel UniversityTotal score 13.5This university has established the infrastructure for nanotechnology programs long before it becomes a priority field for other universities and colleges. It is characterized with advanced techniques and facilities that support researchers to develop various micro and nanofabricated devices.Pressmaster/Shutterstock.com1. SUNY Polytechnic InstituteTotal score 16.5Among many departments within this university, the SUNY Polytechnic Institute, formerly the College of Nanoscale Science and Engineering (the University of Albany), is the first one dedicated to nanotechnology education, research, and economic outreach. It has a significant number of publications in the field of nanotechnology and is well known for nano commercialization, micro commercialization, and micro research. With strong support from industry, the young college has solidified its reputation among 7 best nanotechnology engineering schools in the world.Key US Universities in NanotechnologyPosted on September 16, 2014 by Karla L.Fortunately for all of us, many universities have become very active in the pursuit of nanotechnology research. For this reason it is no simple matter to say which are the top universities for nanotechnology and which have made the most progress in the field. Today there are many universities with nanofabrication facilities, advanced research centers, prominent scientists in residence, and groundbreaking educational programs specifically dedicated to nanotechnology.In 2011 Small Times ranked the top 20 US university nanotechnology programs according to their level of impact. In addition, the National Nanotechnology Infrastructure Network (NNIN) comprises many important university nanotechnology departments. From these sources and others, here are some of the key US universities in nanotechnology.Arizona State University, The Arizona Initiative for Nano-Electronics (AINE)The Arizona Initiative for Nano-Electronics (AINE) is made up of the Center for Solid State Electronics Research (CSSER), the LeRoy Eyring Center for Solid State Sciences (LE-CSSS), and the BioDesign Institute. This network is dedicated to fostering research in computational nanoscience, molecular electronics, nanoelectronics, nanoionics, and nanophotonics in the ASU community. ASU is considered one of the top universities for nanotechnology with its educational programs ranked sixth in the U.S. by Small Times, its facilities including nanofabrication ranked third, and its commercial endeavors ranked first. ASU researchers made major advances with DNA nanotechnology in 2013.Purdue University, The Birck Nanotechnology CenterThe Birck Nanotechnology Center has consistently ranked highly among key US universities in nanotechnology since the mid-2000s. It is home to 45 faculty, and as many as 180 graduate students. Birck boasts a 25,000 square foot Class 1 nanofabrication cleanroom, the Scifres Nanofabrication Laboratory, including a biomolecular cleanroom. The building also houses a wealth of other specialized nanotechnology laboratories. The Birck Center just received a $12 million DOE grant in June of 2014 towards its continued research on clean energy technology.Rice University, The Richard E. Smalley, Institute for Nanoscale Science and TechnologyMaterials Science & NanoengineeringThe Smalley Institute (SI) is known as one of the world class nanotechnology programs and research centers in the world. Ranked fourth overall among key US universities in nanotechnology by Small Times, the Institute has been housed in its 70,000 square foot Dell Butcher Hall space since 1997. More than half of all engineering and natural science faculty at Rice belong to the Smalley Institute. Richard Smalley, for whom the SI was named, was one of the discoverers of the carbon buckyball. Discovery of Buckyballs a Nobel effort by professors.Stanford University, Stanford Nanofabrication Facility (SNF)The Stanford Nanofabrication Facility (SNF) is almost thirty years old, and although it was originally conceived as an electronics-based research facility, in that time it has produced notable research in many subfields. The SNF has at its heart a 10,000 sqare foot cleanroom which features a full complement of device fabrication tools. Recent discoveries include work with nanowires to improve battery life, while older research dealt with the structures of viruses and the ways that they can assist nanoscale design. The facility actively supports researchers exploring applications in astronomy, biology, medicine, and physics, to name just a few areas. The SNF has been supported by the National Science Foundation through the NNIN.State University of New York, Albany (SUNY Albany), College of Nanoscale Science and Engineering (CNSE)The College of Nanoscale Science and Engineering at SUNY Albany was ranked first by Small Times for education, facilities, and industrial outreach. The program is funded by in excess of $20 billion from high-tech investments. CNSE brings together hundreds of students with more than 3,000 faculty, scientists, researchers, and corporate partners from companies like IBM, Intel, and Applied Materials for research and development in nanotechnology. The CNSE facility is a 1.3 million-square-foot complex which is the only place with 300mm and 450mm wafer computer chip pilot prototyping and demonstration lines within 135,000 square feet of Class 1 capable cleanrooms.University of Minnesota, Minnesota Nano Center (MNC)Ranked tenth by Small Times in particular for its industry outreach, Minnesota Nano Center (MNC) is a $20 million facility. It supports research in three subsets of nanotechnology: biomedical applications, nano materials, and small-scale devices. The MNC features a 5,000 square foot Class 100 cleanroom, a 3,000 square foot Class 100 clean room, full facilities for microfabrication, and 4,000 additional square feet of lab space. The MNC gives undergraduates a chance to work in nanotechnology at UM or one of 13 other universities in the U.S. with their summer internship program; this large and popular program is connected to the National Nanotechnology Infrastructure Network’s Research Experience for Undergraduates (REU) Program and the NSF. A related MNC program offers summer training in nanotechnology for teachers.University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill (UNC), Institute for Advanced Materials, Nanoscience, and Technology (IAM); the Carolina Center of Cancer Nanotechnology Excellence (C-CCNE); the Center for Environmentally Responsible Solvents and Processes (CERSP); the Carolina Institute for NanoMedicine; and the Center for Nanotechnology in Drug Delivery (CINM)The UNC, located in the “research triangle,” is a nanotechnology center. The Carolina Institute for NanoMedicine is an umbrella program that houses both the Carolina Center of Cancer Nanotechnology Excellence and the Center for Nanotechnology in Drug Delivery. The Institute for Advanced Materials, Nanoscience, and Technology is part of the Department of Applied Sciences. IAM coordinates interdisciplinary research efforts between UNC-Chapel Hill’s polymer science, nanomaterials, and nanobiosciences departments. Small Times ranked UNC Chapell Hill fifth overall for research among key US universities in nanotechnology.Key Figures in Nanotechnology, Pt. IPosted on September 11, 2014 by Karla L.Although many people think of nanotechnology as a very new field, in fact is has been burgeoning for years. A look at some of the key figures in nanotechnology provides a much broader perspective and helps illuminate the future of the field.Erwin MuellerPenn State University Professor of Physics Erwin Mueller became the first person to “see” atoms in 1955 when he invented the field-ion electron microscope. He became a professor of physics at Penn State University and moved to Pennsylvania several years before the discovery in 1952, and became a citizen of the United States in 1962. He was later elected to the National Academy of Sciences and went on to help found one of the earliest programs in nanotechnology at Penn State.Richard P. FeynmanOne of the most colorful characters in the modern history of science, Richard Feynman was the 1965 Nobel Prize Winner in Physics for his work in quantum electrodynamics. This work had important consequences for nanotechnology, but it was his 1959 talk at Caltech, “There’s Plenty of Room at the Bottom,” that is typically credited with jumpstarting thought about manipulation of individual atoms. In his talk, Feynman described the basic parameters of what would only later be called nanotechnology, and also challenged scientists and engineers to work at the atomic level, offering $1,000 prizes.Norio TaniguchiTokyo Science University Professor Norio Taniguchi coined the phrase “nanotechnology” during his work on ultraprecision machining in 1974, more than a decade after Feynman’s famous Caltech lecture. Taniguchi’s basic definition still stands today: “’Nano-technology’ mainly consists of the processing of separation, consolidation, and deformation of materials by one atom or one molecule.” In 1999, Taniguchi received the first Lifetime Achievement Award from the European Society for Precision Engineering and Nanotechnology as an acknowledgement of his body of work.K. Eric DrexlerDr. Drexler established key principles of engineering at the nanoscale in his 1981 paper presented to the National Academy of Sciences (NAS). He also authored the famous Engines of Creation: The Coming Era of Nanotechnology in 1986, which is often remembered more for a dystopian vision of the future than for its exploration of nanomachines. However, he later indicated that the problems he described in 1986 would not come to pass and went on to serve as Chief Technical Consultant for Productive Nanosystems and as Chief Technical Advisor working with DNA nanotechnology for Nanorex. Drexler holds a PhD in Molecular Nanotechnology from MIT and today is an Academic Visitor in residence at Oxford University.Robert F. Curl, Sir Harold W. Kroto, and Richard E. SmalleyC&EN 970106-Fullerenes Gain Nobel StatureRobert Curl, Harold Kroto, and Richard Smalley became key figures in nanotechnology by introducing their discovery of carbon buckyballs, or fullerenes, to the world in 1985. This discovery was crucial to the developing field of nanotechnology because they possess unique chemical properties and are capable of similarly unique technical applications. Since the discovery of buckyballs and other fullerenes, many new compounds have been created, many caged inside buckyballs themselves. Curl, Kroto, and Smalley shared the 1996 Nobel Prize in chemistry for their discovery.Key Figures in Nanotechnology, Pt. IIPosted on September 12, 2014 by Karla L.This article is a continuation of our look at some of the key figures in nanotechnology. This perspective provides a much broader understanding of nanotechnology and helps illuminate the future of the field.Calvin Quate, Christoph Gerber, and Gerd Karl BinnigCalvin Quate, Christopher Gerber, and Gerd Binnig are best known for being the team behind the invention of the Atomic Force or Scanning Probe Microscope in 1986, a tool actively used today for nanoscale imaging, measurement, and manipulation. Quate began the work in 1985 and it led to the ability to reveal atomic detail and therefore do nanotechnology generally. The three shared the Nobel Prize for this invention. Quate received his PhD from Stanford in 1950 and is Professor Emeritus of Electrical Engineering and Applied Physics at Standford and also the head of the Quate Group at the Gintzon Lab. Christoph Gerber is a Professor of Physics for the Universitat Basel and on the Advisory Board for the Journal of Nanotechnology. Gerd Binnig is with the IBM Zurich Labs.Sumio IijimaSumio Iijima is a physicist who is best known for his invention of the carbon nanotube in 1991. Carbon nanotubes are used in water filters, batteries, sports equipment, and fuel cells. Since that time, his research in nanomaterials has continued and he has won numerous awards in nanotechnology and physics. He is also a Professor in the Faculty of Science and Technology at Meijo University in Japan.Nadrian SeemanNadrian C. Seeman - DNA: Not Merely the Secret of LifeNadrian C. “Ned” Seeman is a nanotechnologist and crystallographer best known for inventing the field of DNA nanotechnology. He is the Margaret and Herman Sokol Professor of Chemistry at New York University. Seeman studied biochemistry at the University of Chicago and crystallography at the University of Pittsburgh. He has published more than 250 papers and won numerous awards, including the Emerging Technologies Award, the Feynman Prize, the MIT Alexander Rich Medal, the NYACS Nichols Medal, the SCC Frontiers of Science Award, the Sidhu Award, the Tulip Award in DNA Computing, and the World Technology Network Award in Biotechnology.Robert LangerTEDxBigApple - Robert Langer - Biomaterials for the 21st CenturyRobert Langer is the David H. Koch Institute Professor in the MIT Department of Chemical Engineering. The most cited engineer in history, he has written more than 1,250 articles. Langer also holds almost 1,050 patents all over the world, many of which have been licensed to various biotechnology, chemical, medical device, and pharmaceutical companies. Langer designs nanoparticles that improve drug delivery systems, especially for cancer treatments. He was a member of the FDA’s SCIENCE Board from 1995 to 2002, and its chairman from 1999 to 2002. Langer has won more than 220 awards, including the United States National Medal of Science (2006) and the 2008 Millennium Prize. He belongs to the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, the National Academy of Sciences, and the National Academy of Inventors.Joseph DesimoneTED Talk on 3 D PrintingJoseph DeSimone is Chancellor’s Eminent Professor of Chemistry at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and the William R. Kenan, Jr. Distinguished Professor of Chemical Engineering at North Carolina State University. He is best known for applying nanotechnological methods to the design of new medicines, vaccines, and cancer treatments. Recent breakthroughs his group has revealed include the use of a unique method of nanoparticle fabrication called PRINT (Particle Replication In Non-wetting Templates), which allows researchers to directly fabricate and harvest monodisperse, shape-specific nano-biomaterials and maintain simultaneous control over both their structure and function. DeSimone is a member of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. He is also a fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.George M. WhitesidesTED Talk Toward a science of simplicityGeorge M. Whitesides is a professor of chemistry at Harvard University, but he is well-known for his work in multiple areas, including biochemistry, catalysis, materials and surface science, microfluidics, nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy (NMR), physical organic chemistry, and nanotechnology. He has created a “lab on a chip” using nanotechnology that that will allow healthcare workers in the field to diagnose multiple ailments by simply putting a drop of blood or urine on a tiny, color-changing chip. He holds more than 50 patents and has written more than 950 research papers. He has also co-founded several companies, including Genzyme. Whitesides has helped develop the field by mentoring more than 300 scientists and through his work engineering self-assembling molecules and clean energy solutions.Meyya MeyyappanDr. Meyya Meyyappan is the Director and Senior Scientist of the Ames’ Center for Nanotechnology, NASA, which he founded in 1997. He was one of the co-founders of the Interagency Working Group on Nanotechnology (IWGN), which was formally recognized by the United States Office of Science and Technology Policy in 1998. The purpose of the IWGN comprises top minds in nanotechnology from across the U.S. who advocate for the field’s presence as a national initiative. He was written more than 175 articles and given more than 200 talks worldwide. Meyyappan was the President of the Nanotechnology Council of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers from 2006 to 2007 and has received numerous awards, including his 2009 induction into the Silicon Valley Engineers Council Hall of Fame, which was based on his contributions to nanotechnology.INDUSTRIESNano Global Corp. | Nanotechnology ApplicationsApplications Across Many IndustriesThis product line is powered by Amosil-Q, which finds practical, life-saving applications across many industries. From the medical field to schools to public settings, Nano Global’s product line can be used to protect against germs wherever health and safety is a priority, including:HealthcareAntimicrobial defense is arguably among most one of the important areas of focus for healthcare providers when ensuring the safety and well being of patients and staff. Nano Global’s products powered by Amosil-Q will inevitably strengthen healthcare capacities by optimizing personal protective equipment, care settings, and tools used in the field to empower and protect healthcare workers. Learn More >>HospitalityContinuous and reliable cleanliness is essential to the hospitality industry. Venues like casinos, cruise liners, hotels, and resorts are self-contained ecosystems, often rivaling the size of small cities, open 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. Through the implementation of Nano Global’s product line onto all pertinent surfaces, employees and customers will be continuously protected against the unwelcome spread of germs. Learn More >>Travel and Public TransitIn today’s world, millions of people utilize a variety of public transportation platforms daily. When many people congregate into a confined space, they are frequently accompanied by a wide variety of germs, most of them benign but several of which are harmful to people and capable of doing causing serious harm. Nano Global’s technology powered by Amosil-Q will ultimately enhance passenger and transportation employee comfort by providing a unique and robust multilayer of defense against germs. Learn More >>Energy and Natural ResourcesEnergy is arguably one of the modern world’s most important industries. Without energy, nothing happens in the world today. And, within the energy industry, oil and gas is a dominant sector. Nanotechnology solutions make improvements in that space as well, such as the Nano Global Amosil-Q technology. It serves as a uniquely simplistic and persistent resolution to a variety of issues within this sector concerning microbial contamination. Learn More >>GovernmentAntimicrobial defense is crucial to healthy living conditions within the tight living quarters and mobile field operations of the defense environment. Consistent microbial prevention and decontamination ensures the health of all personnel and an effective and uninterrupted work environment. To address this need, Nano Global’s products powered by Amosil-Q demonstrate long-term antimicrobial properties against numerous viral, bacterial and fungal species. Learn More >>

Airplanes don’t know, and don’t have to.Pilots have to know, and the science and art of navigation has been developed entirely for that purpose.Navigation in aviation means knowing where you are at this moment, and how to go from here to there.▲The navigational challenge: how do you get to the airport?Navigation first started with pilotage: the pilot looks at the ground features below and identifies them on a map to tell him/her where she is.▲Look down and……▲…follow the railroad tracks!▲Advertisement of Strandard Oil Company for their aerial markers.▲Early rooftop markings for pilots, in 10-foot letters.▲Pre-World War II rooftop marking▲Early rooftop neon signsMarking Aerial HighwaysBy the end of the Second World War, the US was well along the way to laying out markers on the ground for aerial navigation:THE United States system of air markers —which consists of orientation symbols painted on roofs and sides of buildings and on highways and water towers—may become a world-wide boon to private pilots as a result of recommendations recently adopted by the International Civil Aviation Conference at Chicago.The conference, adopting a committee report setting forth the standard American marker as a model for other countries, said such air guides should be placed wherever necessary to determine aircraft position, and specified that “every city and town may be marked.”The air marker, which is now recognized as standard for this country and is expected to serve as the pattern for an international system, is more complete than markers erected before the war.The major difference is that symbols for latitude and longitude have been added.Today’s air marker includes the name of the town in which it is located—or the nearest town, if the marker is outside city limits—latitude and longitude in degrees and minutes, an arrow pointing true north, and another arrow pointing toward the nearest airport having paved runways.Special symbols may be added to direct pilots to air parks.Letters and symbols, with a few exceptions, are chrome yellow on a black background.Ten feet is the minimum height for letters on roofs of buildings and ground markers must be at least 20 feet high.The United States already has far more air guides for private flyers than other countries but is only “off to a good start” toward providing an adequate system of markers throughout the country.The CAA-sponsored program to install air markers began in 1935, and 30,000 markers were completed by December, 1941.The program to erect air markers was halted soon after Pearl Harbor when the Army ordered all markers removed along the east, west, and gulf coasts.Nearly 2,500 markers—representing six years’ work—were blacked out in six weeks with labor crews provided by the Army.But the wartime setback was not without benefit to the marker program.The fact that the War Department thought the markers would help invaders landing on the coasts did more than anything else to sell the nation on their value.With the air marking program discontinued at the outset of the war, the Army found—as early as the spring of 1942—that many pilots flying near training bases were getting lost and cracking up.Consequently, a call went out to CAA for air markers in 50-mile areas around the training fields.Air markers went up in 50-mile areas around Alabama’s Maxwell Field, Thunderbird and Falcon Fields in Arizona, Langley Field in Virginia, and scores of other training fields in Texas, North Carolina, Florida, and other states.The program calls for markers in every town and village.Cities require several markers, at least one on each side of the city.A projected goal of 100,000 markers throughout the country is “far too conservative” to meet the needs of private pilots.Air markers mean to private flyers what the nation’s highway signs mean to automobile drivers—there can’t be too many.In order to speed the installation of aerial highway signposts, she gives technical assistance to interested local groups on request.Complete directions for erecting markers are contained in the CAA Air Marking Bulletin No. 12, available on request.WPA funds were formerly allocated for the national air marking program, but no federal funds are now available.Financing is now a function of state aeronautical associations and local groups—Rotary clubs, pilot clubs, and business groups.CAA is now marking the roofs of its hundreds of range and communications station buildings in accordance with the new system as a maintenance job, and state and local groups are undertaking their own programs with the CAA extending technical assistance when needed.Amelia Earhart was the original sponsor of the federal air-marking program.She and Phoebe Omlie, another aviation pioneer now with CAA, devised the pro-gram and Miss Earhart sold it to the Government on the theory that private flying must be made safe before it could become popular with the average citizen.Thus, in 1935, a nation-wide air marking program was launched under sponsorship of the old Bureau of Air Commerce.WPA labor and funds were used as were contributions of state aeronautical commissions, committees, and local groups.Some 30,000 markers were sprinkled through all states in the six years preceding Pearl Harbor at an average cost of about $100 per marker.They went a long way toward eliminating the wide-spread practice of buzzing railroad depots to peer at the names of towns placed under eaves, a direct cause of numerous crack-ups, injuries, and deaths.As a result of intensive studies during the past three years, post-war signposts will be much better than pre-war.Inclusion of latitudes and longitudes enable pilots to “pinpoint” their locations and make it possible for the air marking system, as known in the United States, to be used internationally. An improved type of block lettering has been devised for increased visibility.International orange and white, and a variety of other colors, including silver, have been used for markers in the past.But chrome yellow on black, which can be seen from 3,000 feet, has been proved to have greater visibility than any other color combination and is suitable for more different backgrounds of varying terrain.When terrain tends to obscure colors, whitepainted crushed stone or concrete markers are favored.Chrome yellow on black was chosen following a series of tests and flight observations during which nearly all color combinations were checked in different areas of the country.In planning a suitable distribution air markers, the CAA divided the cot try into “grids,” each 15 miles square markers to be placed near the con of each grid so that a flyer cannot out of sight of a marker any considerable length of time.The original “grid” plan has been modified somewhat, as it I became apparent that the most travellled routes require more markers and that very large cities should have as many a dozen.While painted rooftop markers are “the best possible type” from a visibility standpoint, other types are more suitable for certain sections of the country.The rooftop marker is best in mild climates where there is not much snow.In northern sections, where snows may last a long time, markers should be painted on the sides rather than the tops of buildings so that they are not obscured by snow.Markers in regions with heavy snowfall may also be painted on sides of silos, grain elevators, or water towers.Letters and arrows formed of crushed rock and painted white are recommended for mountain sides.In desert areas, letters should be made of metal strips with enamel coating and mounted on posts a few feet above the ground so that sand drifts will not obscure them.Air markers may also be placed on highways in areas where there is not too much snow, and a large number of these highway markers have already been installed.They are not considered as satisfactory as rooftop markers, however. Another variation of the air marker is formation of letters and symbols with small shrubs on lawns, road intersections and cloverleaf drives.In climates where shrubs lost their leaves in winter they should be evergreen. In all cases, ground markers must have letters at least 20 feet in height, while 10 feet is the minimum for rooftop markers.Many markers erected before the war were too small. If the name of a town is long, it is better to abbreviate the name than to reduce the size of the letters.Width of the letters should be one-eighth of the height.Wider letters may blur, however. In selecting a rooftop, the following factors should be considered: the roof should be in good condition; it should be a prominent roof near the center of the community or near a main highway or road; the view should not be obstructed by overhanging trees or tall adjacent buildings; it should be located where it will not be obstructed by smoke.These rules also apply to highway air markers.The CAA will advise as to a suitable location for markers, but no CAA approval of the site is necessary.All air markers installed before the war now need repainting, and latitudes and longitudes should be added.The 2,500 markers which were blacked out need replacement and more than 70,000 new ones must be installed.Maintenance of markers is not expected to be a serious problem.Rooftop markers need repainting about every three years, depending on weather conditions.Highway markers must be repainted whenever necessary, and CAA recommends that they be inspected at least twice a year for signs of wear.Ground markers of crushed stone bound together with cement require only an occasional repainting with a white cement and skimmed milk mixture.Other ground markers, constructed of loose aggregate, should be repainted at least once a year.Pruned shrub markers require constant care and upkeep.CAA has made no recommendations as to how communities shall maintain their markers, but it is suggested that civic groups may volunteer for the job.CAA flight surveys to check condition of all markers may soon be authorized.In many states, plans for extensive air marking systems are well advanced—work has already been started on some.The Army last fall removed its ban on markers on the east and gulf coasts and only the area 150 miles inland along the west coast is now subject to the restrictions.Although labor and equipment shortages are hindering installations elsewhere to some extent, there is much enthusiasm for the program.State aeronautical commissions in Tennessee, Alabama, South Carolina, Minnesota, Nebraska, Illinois, West Virginia, and Connecticut have their programs ready and some work started. In Massachusetts, North Carolina and Missouri—states which have no aeronautical commissions—committees have planned state-wide programs in which cities will participate by placing their own markers.The Civil Air Patrol is backing the program in North Carolina, and the CAP in Texas has begun a project to mark 500 Texas towns.Chambers of commerce in the state are also cooperating.Pennsylvania has a well-advanced program.In many other states, legislation providing funds and working methods is under way.Illuminated air markers are included in the post-war sky-sign program.These will be much more expensive to construct, maintain, and operate, but they will be the last word in aerial signposts.Two general illumination systems are applicable: direct light, in which markers are outlined by exposed incandescent lamps or gaseous-discharge tubes, placed along the center line of letters and symbols; and reflected light, in which case either floodlight projectors with spread lenses or industrial reflectors are arranged to give a uniform distribution of light over the entire surface of the markers.The direct light method is more effective than floodlighting because it gives greater brilliance.Either method may be used for roof markers, while reflected light is considered best for ground markers.Oil companies have installed a very few illuminated markers—a general installation program is not an immediate prospect.Incidentally, while the exact origin of air markers is somewhat clouded, Mrs Noyes believes the idea originated with large oil companies.Several years before the national air marker program was launched, several oil companies began to mark all the towns where they had gas stations.The Standard Oil Company of Ohio constructed many markers, while Standard Oil of California and the Richfield Oil Company had large pre-war air marking programs on the west coast—and did their own obliterating after the Army’s ban was imposed.To aid groups planning air marker installations, CAA has designed a set of three plywood templates with which unskilled laborers can lay out any letter of the alphabet or any figure from 10 to 20 feet in height.Templates are available to interested groups.The air marking bulletin tells how to use the templates, how to mix paint, how to select the site, and gives other pointers needed by groups embarking on air marking programs.Air markers now offer the simplest, cheapest, and most effective guides for private flyers and it is anticipated that they will be needed for a number of years.Eventually, radio aids may be perfected for the private pilot so that the system of air markers will no longer be required—but that day, according to CAA, is a long way off.How far the international marker program will be extended in the immediate future is a question that will have to go unanswered until a final agreement is approved by all nations concerned.This should be on the books by mid-1945.▲Giant shrubbery marker, 1945▲Metal marker in the desert, 1945In the early days of flying, towns had their names painted on big white letters on top of their water tanks, so pilots passing over could read those from up above and know where they were.Today. getting from here to there is no longer a matter of raising a wet finger to determine the direction of the wind and flying from bonfire t0 bonfire through the dark night.Since aerial navigation began with pilotage, here is something for aviation fans.An Ode to Pilotage(The following clearly does not apply to commercial airline aviation, since they have heavy-duty equipment, heavy-duty procedures, and heavy-duty training in the usage of that equipment, and therefore airliners never get lost.)Pilotage, the most basic navigational technique available to pilots, is the technique that falls into disuse soonest after pilots discover the ability of VORs to lead them by the hand from one place to another.Pilotage involves drawing a line from your departure airport to your destination on a sectional chart and marking checkpoints along the line.Once you launch, you hold a predetermined—or adjusted—compass course as you monitor your progress across the ground and over your checkpoints.It is the technique that falls into disuse soonest after pilots discover the ability of VORs to lead them by the hand from one place to another.There are, nevertheless, times when the old ways are necessary, and even times when they are better than the new ones.VORs do not serve well in mountainous terrain, for instance.Sometimes they are too widely spaced or in the wrong places: the airport at which you want to land may be far from a VOR, or you may be making a trip into a foreign country where a VOR, or even an ADF, is as much a bemusing oddity as a navigational aid.Or weather may force you down to an altitude so low that radio reception is lost or undependable.Pilotage is indispensable for low-level flying in weather—although it is also most difficult under those conditions.On the other hand, in the sense that they enable a pilot to fly in a straight line where VORs may lead him on a zigzagging course, it can serve as free area navigation.There’s another thing that one forgets too easily: that is the pleasure of attending to the ground as you fly.Most pilots are inclined to fly higher and higher, because high altitudes offer a number of attractions: generally better fuel efficiency, higher speeds, smoother and cooler air, better radio reception and, to the extent that they use it, better visibility for pilotage.But flying high is also quite boring.Peter Garrison, a private pilot who writes for many aviation publications, writes:There is a certain point at which scenery ceases to give pleasure, and it isn’t too far up.From 7,000 or 8,000 feet above the ground, even great scenic chestnuts like the Grand Canyon are stale.From 500 or 1,000 feet, however, even flat, monotonous farmlands become a fascinating panorama, and the sight of cows grazing, and of the web of their paths to and from water, gives a benign satisfaction.Just be sure you know the location of all the tall towers.At that low an altitude, time passes quickly.When your attention is riveted by the passing scene, you forget to be bored.Nothing makes an airplane faster than a good distraction, and the few miles an hour you lose by descending from the empyrean are dwarfed by your feeling of surprise when you find yourself at your destination after a flight that seems to have only just begun.The best of both worlds, actually, is to combine pilotage with the radios, but not to allow yourself to become completely dependent on the avionics.You might, for instance, plan a flight to make a straight course from departure to destination, passing over or near one or two VORs on the way, but otherwise relying on pilotage.Non-directional beacons or AM radio station transmitters can also be used, if you have an ADF, to help keep you on course.You don’t have to fly over them; it’s sufficient to keep track of your progress by verifying when you pass to the right or left, and to get some sense of your position by comparing your heading with the bearing of the ADF needle.Though you can time the swing of the needle as you pass abeam a station and compute the station’s distance, a little bit of practice gives you a feel for “close,” “medium” and “far” in terms of fast, medium and slow needle swings.More precision than that is rarely necessary, unless you’re completely lost.Pilotage requires almost continuous attention.The whole point is to know exactly where you are on the map at all times, and to do this you constantly have to compare the chart with the terrain below.If you let ambiguities or doubtful identifications creep in, you can quickly get lost.If you can’t find enough landmarks, or if cloud cover obscures the scenery, you have to fall back on dead reckoning.Dead reckoning takes its ominous name from the word “deductive”; it ought really to be “ded” reckoning. It is a supremely rational style of navigation.It argues that if you know your speed, your direction and the time you have been maintaining them, then you know where you are and, conversely, that to get somewhere it is sufficient to know your speed and direction, and then to navigate entirely by the clock.Pilots are sceptical of dead reckoning, but only because they don’t use it enough.The story of Lindbergh dead reckoning for 20 hours across the Atlantic and making his landfall in Ireland precisely where he had planned is somewhat overworked—it was as much luck as anything else—but the principle is sound, and ferry pilots daily repeat his trick, with more meaningful success because they know the winds with greater certainty than Lindbergh did.One feels astonished to make a perfect landfall after 10 hours without a navigational fix, but there is no reason to.Direction, speed and time determine position absolutely.Dead reckoning only supplements pilotage, however; visual navigation begins and ends with pilotage, and only fills in its gaps with dead reckoning.In hazy weather, where slant visibility may be only a mile or two, a ground track must be held with great accuracy or a landmark may slide by unnoticed.The same is true when flying at very low altitude: 1,000 or 2,000 feet above the ground, a pilot can see only a few miles to either side of his course, and landmarks that might be obvious from a higher altitude may not be recognizable.But if the pilot knows ground-speed, flies a heading precisely and keeps up with timing—the sine qua nons of dead reckoning—the chances of the next check-point being visible are best.Direction, speed and time determine position absolutely.Dead reckoning only supplements pilotage, however; visual navigation begins and ends with pilotage, and only fills in its gaps with dead reckoning.In hazy weather, where slant visibility may be only a mile or two, a ground track must be held with great accuracy or a landmark may slide by unnoticed.The same is true when flying at very low altitude: 1,000 or 2,000 feet above the ground, a pilot can see only a few miles to either side of his course, and landmarks that might be obvious from a higher altitude may not be recognizable.But if the pilot knows ground-speed, flies a heading precisely and keeps up with timing—the sine qua nons of dead reckoning—the chances of the next check-point being visible are best.Picking landmarks that fence you in is important in places where there aren’t a lot of strong features on the ground.In Alaska, northern Canada or South America, occasional roads and rivers may be the only recognizable features in the landscape.In order to find a destination, it may be necessary to aim well to one side of the course, fly until reaching a certain river or road, and then turn to follow it.The more you intend to rely on pilotage and the less on radio, the more sense it makes to alter your straight course to take advantage of natural pathways.When you’re planning a cross-country for your private license, you may be encouraged to draw a straight line from origin to destination and to pick landmarks near the line to navigate by.Sometimes, however, it’s better to be humbler, and let the landmarks draw the line themselves.Especially in mountain flying, a detour—even a large detour—to bring you near some unmistakable landmark is preferable to the efficiency of a straight line on which you may get lost.Some aerial pathways serve better than others.Highways and railroad tracks are usually unambiguous; rivers are less so, al-though a large river may be as good as an interstate.Valleys in the mountains can be very poor; the topological coloration on charts implies that a valley will appear very clearly defined when in reality it might be barely discernible.Mountain peaks also make mediocre landmarks, unless they are isolated; among a group of peaks, differences in height may be disguised by differences in distance.Landmarks are even harder to find if you use a chart with too small a scale.Except under the best conditions—such as following a coastline—sectional charts are vastly preferable for pilotage to world and oversee charts. The clock is no less important than the compass in navigation.During long legs, it’s wise to note on the map the time of passage of each landmark, and to look ahead at future landmarks and note the time you expect to pass them.If you lose track of your position, you will then at least have a record of your last definite fix.When you are using landmarks that lie athwart your track, like highways or rivers, it’s surprisingly easy to lose track of your lateral position.I had a striking demonstration of that last fall, during a vacation in South America.On a flight from Lima, Peru to Bogota, Colombia, we crossed the Andes just north of Lima, briefly received a couple of radio beacons in eastern Peru, and then dead reckoned for about three hours over the headwaters of the Amazon.It was extremely hazy, and the slant visibility was three or four miles at best.Visibility hardly mattered, however, because there were few identifiable features below anyway.There was only jungle, broken here and there by rivers that seemed determined to mimic all other rivers.Sometimes dark rainsqualls swung across our path. In this situation there was only one way to proceed: hold heading, keep track of time, and wait for something recognizable to appear.The uncertainty seemed endless, but finally—and this is the common, though not inevitable outcome of navigating through seemingly featureless wastes—an unmistakable landmark appeared, a little town called Putumayo with an airstrip, an island and a hook in the river all its own.We had enough fuel to take us all the way up to the Caribbean, if need be, so no matter how ineptly I had navigated, we eventually would have figured out where we were.When the conditions for pilotage are particularly bad, it’s always essential to have some sure-fire landmark somewhere ahead. In the United States, that sure-fire landmark is almost always available in the form of a radio beam.Visual navigation is one of the basic skills that we allow to rust when technology frees us from dependence on them.But technology is never entirely reliable, and at any rate, a skill is a skill; we should not let something so hard-won slip away.Those skills are the foundations of our training in navigation.Besides, it’s good to renew one’s acquaintance with a landscape that, between air pollution and creeping urbanization, is becoming harder and harder to find.❑