Building Under Construction Proposal - Sun General Insurance: Fill & Download for Free

The story of development of the swept wing and the delta wing is long and fascinating. Bear with me while I try to complete it in two parts.The swept wing came first. It enabled aircraft to fly near the speed of sound - “transonic speed” - and is the basis of every single medium-to-long-range commercial transport aircraft as well as executive jet.▲ America’s first jet airplane: the Bell XP-59A Airacomet. The characteristic swept wings of today’s jet aircraft are absent; this was just an experiment to try out jet propulsion. This object is on display in the Boeing Milestones of Flight Hall exhibition at the National Air and Space Museum in Washington, DC.▲ Want high-speed cruise in an executive jet? You need swept wings! This Hawker 400XP can do 441 knots true airspeed at 41,000 feet. MMO (Maximum Operating Mach number) limit is 0.78 Mach. Many executive jets have even higher limits; even up to 0.91 Mach!It’s a recognized fact that swept wings can delay and postpone the effects of compressibility to higher air speeds—so much so that wings swept 45° or more allow flight speeds close to Mach 1.0—the speed of sound, while a conventional straight wing would be getting into trouble at about Mach 0.7. However, since swept wings benefit simply by the fact that they form an angle to the airstream it actually makes no difference whether they’re swept to the rear or to the front. Wings swept to the rear are more common but forward sweep works just as well.The Germans were the first to identify the benefits of wing sweep at high speeds and the Allies learned much from captured German research. So, in a general way, all swept-wing airplanes can trace their roots to wartime Germany.At the end of World War II, the Germans were striving mightily to take advantage of the swept-wing idea and had designed numerous experimental fighters and bombers with this futuristic shape. Their first sweptwing jet bomber, however—the Junkers Ju-287, had its wings swept forward. Our own Boeing B-47, on the other hand, the second sweptwing jet bomber to be built, has wings swept to the rear. While the aerodynamic benefits are similar for both planes, their overall arrangement is radically different—so much so that there is literally no similarity of any component.▲Junkers Ju-287 forward swept wing aircraftSince sweep produces effects that vary with the cosine of the sweep angle, we might expect that either forward or aft sweep would yield the same results.To a first approximation, this is true; but, many other considerations can be important in comparing designs with forward and aft sweep.The B-47, powered by six General Electric J-35 axial flow jet engines of 4,000 pounds thrust each in 1949. Four of these engines are mounted in pairs on outriggers under the inboard section of the wings. The other two engines are mounted one near each wing tip. Design began in September, 1945.Historically these have led designers to adopt aft-swept wings for most aircraft, but this was not universally true. The Hansa Jet was a forward-swept wing business jet designed in the 1960’s. Its forward swept wing permitted a larger cabin without a wing spar interrupting the floor. Some sailplanes have slight forward sweep to provide better visibility.Wing sweep helps delay Mach effects as an airplane approaches the speed of sound, Mach 1. But wing sweep also reduces the efficiency of a wing at low speed, so landing and takeoff runway lengths grow, and a highly swept wing can have poorly damped Dutch roll characteristics and difficult stall behavior. These issues can be resolved with leading edge devices and other techniques.In the 50’s, commercial aviation was undergoing big changes: the biggest since the dawn of aviation: jet engines and transonic speed enabled by wing sweepback.The British had two aces in their hands: the swept-wing jet-powered 490-mile-an-hour de Havilland Comet, and the turboprop Vickers Viscount.▲ The BOAC Comet jet, 1952. The first commercial jetliner was the de Havilland Comet I, which first flew in 1949; entered scheduled operation with BOAC in 1952. Comet I was withdrawn in 1954 following two tragic accidents. Improved Comet 2 and Comet 3 followed, and from these came the Comet 4 which entered commercial service with BOAC on the transatlantic run just shortly before Pan American World Airlines inaugurated its Boeing 707 jetliners.If anyone 10 years ago had predicted such astonishing progress within a decade, derision would have been his reward. Yet there the Comet stood one day in August 1951, its clean form silhouetted against the impressive terminal at Karachi—London 4,545 miles and 11 flying hours behind. Such proving-flight times became commonplace for the so-called Comet I, powered by four Ghost engines of 5,000 pounds thrust, of which BOACwas purchasing nine. Speed and range were to be boosted upward in the Comet II, to have four Avon engines of 6,500 pounds thrust, and BOAC had 11 of these on order. Comets carried from 36 to 48 passengers. “Britain,” said Sir Miles Thomas, BOAC Chairman, “is after world leadership and we're going to get it.”“Nobody beats us at this game. Nobody.”America was outraged. A popular aviation magazine at the time said: “So the air world stands now at the threshold of 500-mile-an-hour speeds with all they mean, potentially, to business, recreational habits and international relations. Now that everybody concedes British jet transports will be the unchallenged first to race the sun along the world's commercial air routes, a modest new effort is afoot to get United States development out of the doldrums. We have lost the first round; we have no chance of participating in the beginning of turbine-powered air transportation.”“The de Havilland Comet, which British Overseas Airways Corporation expects to put into passenger service this spring—slicing in half many present scheduled flying times—will enjoy at least two years of freedom from competitive types in the judgment of a U. S. government survey group”.But the United States “may not have lost an irretrievable amount in competitive position by delaying until this time,” said the Foreign Survey Group of the Civil Aeronautics Administration's Prototype Aircraft Advisory Committee, providing: (1) there is intensive testing at once of turbine aircraft to gain design, operating and airport data and (2) a start is made on actual aircraft development.“Present BOAC plans call for introduction of jet transports on the London-Rome-Cairo route this spring, to be followed by similar service on London-Cairo-Johannesburg and London-Singapore routes.“First operations thus are largely over land routes with intermediate airports and terminals where the holding and approach problems are at a minimum.“Use of Comets on New York-Bermuda and New York-Nassau routes probably is 18 months away and, because the Comet II is yet to be developed, transatlantic operations into New York are not likely until 1954.“BOAC also contemplates round-the-world operations including, apparently, a segment crossing North America which would link with services of another Comet customer, British Commonwealth Pacific Airlines. When the extent to which BOAC's plans spread into the future is realized, the prospects for America overcoming the British lead are better appreciated.”“In the whole field of civil transport development, using turbine power, Britain has an eight-year start on America and has invested an estimated $400,000,000 of government funds.”“On the U. S. airline side, 1952 saw the largest expansion of transport fleets in history; the types were the Super-Constellation, DC-6B, Convair Liner and Martin 404. Added to these was the new DC-7 of which American Airlines ordered 25. Power units of the DC-7 were Wright compound engines, boosting the cruising speed of the ship to 360 miles an hour. These planes were scheduled for delivery late next year and in early 1954.”▲The Lockheed Constellation: the last of the big piston-engined transports.“Once British planes are established on various airlines, they will be hard for American manufacturers to dislodge because of initial investment, the spares program and training, the CAA's Foreign Survey Group pointed out. It also made the point that jet transports then being designed would have a long life since they would fly in the 550 to 600-mile-an-hour range, just below transonic speed.”▲American concern over rapid British jet developments was reflected in this magazine cover of the June 1952 issue.It seems fate sided with the Americans, because in a few years, the Comet got embroiled in a series of crashes, and when it came back to flying again, the Americans had run away with the jet transport market.After the discovery of the reasons for the structural failures of the Comets, de Havilland engineers turned over to Boeing masses of information to help Boeing "design out" the potential for disaster in the 707s.By the mid-50’s, commercial aviation in the US, and later, the whole world, was about to be transformed by the appearance of jet transports with aft-swept wings from three different manufacturers: Boeing (the Boeing 707), Douglas (the Douglas DC-8), and Convair (the Convair 600 and Convair 880).Boeing 707. The American-built 707 made its maiden flight July 15, 1954.Douglas DC-8Convair 600Buseman and JonesCredit for inventing the swept-back wing goes to Adolph Buseman, who, in 1935, proposed the wing planform as an approach for avoiding compressibility stall at supersonic speeds. Robert T. Jones “discovered” the swept-back wing in 1945 and was the first American to propose such a wing planform.The swept-back wing, swept-forward wing, delta wing, and many others are legacies of German World War II aerodynamics research. Incidentally, the Germans had flown a pure flying wing “stealth” jet fighter-bomber in 1945, which, because of its shape and wooden construction, they found to be invisible on radar.Adolf Busemann, the inventor of the swept wing, went to the USA, where he continued his research, first at NASA and then as a professor at the University of Colorado in Boulder.Busemann helped design many aircraft for the forerunner of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration before retiring from government work in 1970.He became a professor of aerospace engineering at the University of Colorado in 1963 and his wind-tunnel research there led him to advise NASA on the use of ceramic tiles, which could withstand high temperatures better than aluminium, on the space shuttle.Several months before any reports of Busemann, his papers, or his knowledge of the principles of the swept wing arrived back in the United States, an intuitive young aerodynamicist at NACA Langley by the name of Robert T. Jones came to explore the benefits of swept wings on his own.Jones, a man with no college degree but a superb command of mathematics and a life-long enthusiasm for flying, first became interested in wing sweep in the summer of 1944 while engaged in a study of the aerodynamic configuration of guided missiles.During an August meeting involving the design of a new glide bomb, Jones learned from Roger W. Griswold, president of Ludington-Griswold of Saybrook, Connecticut, a manufacturer of air-to-air missiles and other flying weapons, that Griswold’s company had built a wind tunnel model of a dart-shaped missile conceived by Michael Gluhareff, a Russian emigre who was the chief designer in the Vought-Sikorsky Aircraft Division of the United Aircraft Corporation.Jones knew that Prandtl’s twenty-five-year-old theory of lift was applicable to bodies with high aspect ratio, but that it did not work for bodies—like Gluharefi’s dart-shaped missile—with low aspect ratio. Nevertheless, Jones was intrigued by the prospect of the missile’s unconventional form and, as soon as Griswold left Langley, he began to study it on the basis of a new theory of his own making.One day in early 1945, while playing with the highly sophisticated mathematics of potential flows (also called “vortex-free” or “irrotational” flow) at supersonic speed, it dawned on Jones that he was obtaining the same simple formulas with compressible flow equations as he had from his crude lifting theory for incompressible flow.”He then recalled that Professor Tsien had reported finding that certain slender projectiles exhibited no influence of compressibility when revolving at high speed. Jones immediately pulled his old paper out of his desk and incorporated his compressible flow equations into it. Hsue-Shen Tsien at GALCIT (Guggenheim Aeronautical Center, California Institute of Technology) had derived for supersonic flow around projectiles and other slender bodies in 1938 .To his growing wonderment, he discovered that there seemed to be no compressibility effect for slender wings, no Mach number effect. Jones sought a physical explanation for the total lack of compressibility effects on the theoretical performance of slender wings.After making a series of complicated calculations, he recognized that the physical explanation was related to the effect of “sweepback” on the lift of large-span wings.Jones guessed that his sweep theory would show that the effective Mach number would be much less than that of the flight Mach number even for moderately swept and thick wings. He did not realize how much less the effective Mach number could be until he tried sweeping the leading edge of a slender wing back behind the Mach cone, the idealized cone-shaped zone of disturbance that theoretically emanated from a body moving through the air at supersonic speed. (In his 1935 Volta paper, a paper Jones still did now know about, Busemann had kept the wing ahead of the Mach cone.)The effective Mach number of the highly swept wing then appeared to be in the astonishing range of three to five times less than that of straight-wing planforms! The sweep smoothed out the sharply bending streamlines of supersonic flow that otherwise would have affected the wing adversely. This enabled a purely subsonic type of airflow to exist on the wing’s surface.Robert Thomas Jones, whose design for the swept-back jet wing enabled planes to break the sound barrier, died August 11, 1999 at his home in Los Altos Hills. He was 89.The Delta WingThe delta wing made it possible to take aircraft from beyond transonic speeds to supersonic speeds.The delta wing configuration also had its origins in Germany, in particular, the research work of Dr. Alexander Lippisch.By 1952, the airplane industries of the United States, Sweden and Russia were flight-testing deltas, while France and Canada had deltas under construction, but Britain then possessed an edge on other powers in accumulated experience with the “flying triangle”; her airplane industry was testing five different models. It was thought deltas then taking shape in British plants might well place this futuristic planform in the forefront of modern combat airplane development.Britain’s extensive delta program was formulated shortly after the War as a bold attempt to jump the swept-wing era that was obviously dawning at that time. The results of German research indicated that the delta planform had possibilities for combat airplanes at both ends of the size scale, but, tempering enthusiasm with caution, a series of flying mock-ups and research airplanes of delta planform were put in hand before any serious design work on operational deltas was inaugurated.▲ British Avro 707B Delta-Winged prototype for the Avro Vulcan bomberMeanwhile, as a form of insurance against delays in delta development, work on more orthodox swept-wing combat airplanes proceeded. It was indeed fortunate that the British airplane industry did not put all its eggs in the delta basket, for the problems of the “flying triangle” proved difficult to solve. It was not until September ’49 that flight testing of the first British delta began, and then a further setback in the program came when this airplane was totally destroyed barely a month after test flying had started.▲British jet deltas fly in delta formation. In the lead is the Vulcan, first delta wing jet bomber, which went in super-priority production for the RAF. Top and bottom right are the Avro 707Als, developed to test the delta planform in flight. Top center is the 707B, used to investigate low-speed flying characteristics, and bottom center is the 707C, designed to familiarize pilots with delta handling.Despite these initial reverses, many British airplane designers were willing to stake their reputations on the delta, and although British airplane manufacturers as a whole did not believe the delta to be necessarily the panacea for the airplane of the future, they were later firmly convinced that this planform was the next step in the design of high-speed combat aircraft, for the delta offered the designer a golden opportunity to get down to a really thin wing section in terms of thickness/chord ratio, and this is the “flying triangle’s” most outstanding attraction.The delta is intuitively associated with the tailless type of airplane; as to whether the tail is really needed depends on the role of the aircraft and operational requirements.All tailless deltas are likely to suffer to some degree from lack of damping in pitch—there being no horizontal surface placed well aft of the CG—and this has a bearing on most flying maneuvers.The low aspect ratio of the delta planform would appear to be a design contradiction where long ranges are a requirement, but at the altitudes to which air combat has now risen the delta planform comes into its own, and induced drag losses may be more than compensated for by the possibility of building wings with a thickness/chord ratio of 10 per cent, down to as low as seven per cent. In fact, at high Mach numbers, some alleviation of compressibility effects is given by reducing aspect ratio.The delta planform leads to a very stiff structure without the use of thick wing skins, strength becoming the determining factor rather than structural stiffness, thus avoiding the inefficiency of conventional swept surfaces which have to be excessively strong in order to obtain necessary torsional stiffness, and diminishing aeroelastic distortion at high speeds and its effects on stability or control power.In the US, in 1951, the weapons system concept now having come into vogue, Convair was authorized to develop a delta interceptor which would carry the Hughes Falcon homing missile, and house the Hughes MA-1 fire-control system. When the USAF first contracted with Consolidated Vultee Aircraft Corporation for a supersonic fighter plane, engineers were faced with two new and difficult problems. The proposed craft was designated the XF-92 and was planned for a “delta-winged” configuration. It was to be powered by a ram jet engine with rocket propulsion (not JATO) for take-off. After considerable study, the two problems of delta wing and ram jet propulsion seemed to be too much to solve on the same plane.The USAF somewhat reluctantly decided to tackle them independently and “killed” the XF-92 project.Its demise was short-lived, however, as the photograph on the cover indicates. Convair completed a delta-winged plane known as the Convair 7002 originally intended solely as a research plane. But the 7002 presumably has shown itself to be practical enough for a warplane, and was redesignated the XF-92A. It was a flying test laboratory designed to investigate the first of the two major research challenges—the characteristics of an aircraft with a delta wing.▲ Convair XF-92 on a magazine cover, 1949.The next evolution of this aircraft was the F-102 which will go down in history as the first operational delta wing. Not to become engrossed with the aerodynamics involved in the delta wing, it might be interesting to note briefly certain advantages that accrue from this radically new airfoil.The “102”had wonderful inherent power-curve stability and control characteristics. Absence of a distinct stall point and of adverse trim effects at low speed invoked pilots’ admiration. This is impressive because fundamentally the target of the delta wing is better performance at extreme altitude and at transonic and supersonic speeds. The military pilot is always looking for stability of his gun platform under combat conditions. He simply can’t shoot or bomb if his aircraft is continuously fighting him at combat throttle.Under modern conditions, the pilot may be in combat in the transonic range, where he could expect wing buffeting and control reversal. Here, the delta wing traverses the so called barrier without more than a tremor.It should be noted, too, that the delta wing provides a larger airfoil area than any other planform without invoking penalty in weight or performance. The engineer finds his structural problem simplified since he can get exceptional strength and rigidity in relation to weight. Additionally, he can use the large wing area for integral fuel storage. The concept of the delta planform might well have fallen on its face, however, had not another fortunate element of research come to its rescue. This was provided by one of NACA’s aerodynamists, Dr. Richard Whitcomb, who developed the “area rule” wherein by a pinching in of the fuselage where the wing is largest, he could greatly reduce transonic drag.In 1953, Convair reoccupied Plant Two in San Diego and, still researching and testing in the field of the weapons-system interceptor, began to turn out an occasional operational aircraft. Production went into high gear in November, 1955, and Air Defense Command received its first F-102A in the spring of 1956. Four production orders followed, including the trainer, TF-102A.▲Convair ad for the F-102A, Sep 1957Meantime, the F-106, an advanced weapons-system interceptor, was being tooled up in two versions—the single-seat 108A and the two-place version, 106R. Slightly larger than the F-102, the F-106 was more versatile, both in performance and in advanced armament and fire control. It was more than an expanded version of the 102, yet was largely a result of its predecessor.The student of airframe construction would notice that the 106 cockpit had been moved forward and lowered in the interest of pilot visibility and better locating of electronic equipment. He would notice, too, a larger and more swept vertical fin and larger air-inlet ducts moved aft to a point barely ahead of the leading edge of the wing. The Whitcomb area rule in the 106 was more accentuated than in the 102.▲Convair F-106 “Dela Dart”▲ Convair XB-58, Hustler, USAF's first delta wing bomber. Power is supplied by four podded General Electric J79 turbojet engines rated at well over 10,000 lbs. thrust each. Performancewise it is in supersonic class and is capable of carrying both nuclear and thermo-nuclear weapons. Photo shows the Hustler during roll-out for engine run-up tests at Convair's Fort Worth, Tex., plant, 1956. Framework around nose is towing cradle.And of course, don’t forget Concorde!

PROGRESS IN CHHATTISGARH about the infrastructural development are stated below, in this the Politician of Chhattisgarh has played a major role.Bangalore-based framework GMR Infrastructure Ltd has affirmed that initial 685 MW unit of GMR Chhattisgarh Energy Ltd's (GCEL's) 1370 MW supercritical coal-based warm power plant will be produced at Raikheda in Chhattisgarh's Raipur District accomplished synchronization with the network on 2 October. GCEL is the GMR Group's first supercritical coal-based warm power plant which will gain the initial move towards ground in Chhattisgarh. The unit utilized fuel oil to accomplish the synchronization. The venture was executed by Doosan of Korea. There is advancement in the authorizing of GCEL's second unit of 685 MW.Subsequent to 2013, the GMR Group has charged two coal-based warm power plants—the 2x300 MW GMR's EMCO Energy Ltd at Warora in Maharashtra and three units of the 4x350 MW GMR Kamalanga Energy Ltd at Kamalanga in Odisha. The GMR bunch had marked the notice of comprehension (MoU) with the Government of Chhattisgarh for the force plant in 2008 and got environment freedom and agree to set up in 2011. GCEL will take into account the force needs of different states in the nation. It has 15 power era resources of which eight are operational and seven are under different phases of advancement.The state government looked into the advancement of the Memoranda of Understanding (MoUs) it had marked with various corporate houses for interest in the state. It is yet another step towards progress in Chhattisgarh. It made a stringent move against the corporate that had neglected to gain any ground in its venture arrangement in the state. The administration considered scrapping the MoUs with such gatherings. There was a presentation in which the senior authorities of the corporate were welcomed in the meeting to give the http://presentation.By Chhattisgarh State Investment Promotional Board (SIPB) records, in each of the 121 MoUs had been marked in the state somewhere around 2001 and 2010 with an expected speculation proposition of Rs 192126.09 crore. More focus was given to those MoUs which have not made any progess. The noticeable recommendations incorporate Tata Steel's 5.5 Million Tons for each annum (MTPA) Greenfield Integrated Plant in Bastar locale of Chhattisgarh. The organization had marked Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with the state government in June 2005 for the undertaking. The organization was not ready to apportion area to the organization.The other essential proposition incorporated the 3.2 MTPA steel plant of Essar Steel in anxious Dantewada locale for which MoU was marked a month after the Tata's assention which guarantees the advancement in Chhattisgarh.152 ViewsUpvoteDownvoteCommentShareRahul Sharma, Intrested in politicsWritten Feb 15Chhattisgarh infrastructure is growing fastest with the development of New Raipur. Overall 14 major roads and 17 railways are constructed and under-construction in the year 2015.Govenment is going to invest huge amount in Chhattisgarh infrastructure and telecommunication development.Chhattisgarh's new Vidhan Sabha, Jaitkamh, Circuit house and Amanka Bridge is some of the recent successful projects of Chhattisgarh Public Work Department.Chhattisgarh foundation is becoming speediest with the improvement of New Raipur. General 14 noteworthy streets and 17 railroads are developed and under-development in the year 2015.Govenment is going to put tremendous sum in Chhattisgarh framework and telecom advancement.Chhattisgarh's new Vidhan Sabha, Jaitkamh, Circuit house and Amanka Bridge is a portion of the late effective undertakings of Chhattisgarh Public Work Department.From a quaint landlocked superstition ridden, hub of illiteracy and poverty, Chhattisgarh has en-strengthened itself to become one of the prominent electricity reserves of the nation, distributing power to the neighboring states, and yes has got rid of the Neolithic traditions like witchcraft and such to some extent( although the same is prevalent in the country in many states).The state has made incredible journey from primary healthcare infested with the red tapeism and lack of resources to the newly inaugurated AIIMS in Raipur, and many private and non-profit clinics and multi-specialty hospices opening up throughout the state providing better healthcare without picking the pocket.The more truly remarkable achievement would be the brilliant town planning of the currently under development Naya Raipur City proposed to be the new capital of the state. It is the first green capital of the nation and also a smarter city. The fourth planned city since independence.Chhattisgarh has en-strengthened by itself to turn into one of the popular electricity reserves of the nation, distributing power to the nearby states, and yes has got rid of the Neolithic traditions like witchcraft and such to some extent.The more truly amazing achievement would be the brilliant town setting up of the currently under development Naya Raipur City recommended to be the new capital of the state. It is the first green capital of the nation and also a smarter city. The fourth planned city since independence. Development in Chhattisgarh is establishing in every sector of Chhattisgarh from agriculture to infrastructure.Currently CSEB Chhattisgarh, it provides power sector to several states due to its excess production. That’s why Chhattisgarh is Fastest Growing State in India It power hubs are Bilaspur and Korba.All over Chhattisgarh, NTPC has a thermal plant jointly with 2980 MW ability from Sipat, Bilaspur along with a arctic plant getting 2600 MW ability from korba, although CSEB’s units possess a arctic ability regarding 1780 MW along with hydel ability regarding 130 MW.Chhattisgarh features a people of more than 20. 8 million (Census 2001). It's people width remains at 154 persons for each sq. kilometer, much lower compared to the most India-normal connected with 324 persons for every sq. kilometer. Inhabitants growth fee inside Chhattisgarh remained at 18% amongst 1991-2001, a lesser amount than the particular countrywide growth fee connected with 21. 3% amongst identical time period.Cultural national infrastructure:Chhattisgarh authorities is usually to a fantastic magnitude focusing on the particular improvement connected with sociable bottom get power while all-encompassing methodology inside general financial improvement on the talk about. The condition of coaching bottom will be continuously enhancing inside talk about. Based on the 2001 studies, Chhattisgarh features a guy education and learning fee connected with 77. 4%, and that is two. 1% higher than the particular countrywide typical. The standard effectiveness fee inside talk about will be sixty-four. 7%. Hawaii provides 116 authorities educational facilities, 15 developing schools, 10 polytechnics, seven exclusive substance retail store schools, a pair of therapeutic educational facilities as well as 3 dentist educational facilities permanently.An additional growing city termed 'Naya Raipur' is being developed a lot more than 8, 000 hectare inside talk about. City as well as Professional Advancement Business (CIDCO) continues to be selected as the consultant for this starting, that'll incorporate a car heart along with a mineral water present activity in order to meet the particular requirements connected with all-around two. 5 million by simply 2031. Chhattisgarh likewise provides plans to put together a five-star hotels with a large tradition concentration inside Naya Raipur. The actual Chhattisgarh Professional Advancement Business provides set up 4 kinetic growth concentrates, a few modern parks as well as 3 coordinated Chhattisgarh Facilities growth focuses.Admittance connected with Chhattisgarh Infrastructure national infrastructure:Chhattisgarh can be an region bolted suggest that will be encompassed by simply six Indian states - Uttar Pradesh, Jharkhand, Orissa, Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra as well as Madhya Pradesh. This specific can make it's geographic region essential. Because they build up it's bottom, the state of hawaii can certainly utilize it's geographic region to increase a logistics as well as national infrastructure system to be able to function the particular section.Chhattisgarh features a accumulated it's real base to be able to bring in the particular factor connected with home and therefore exterior financial specialists. Transportation continues to be granted large heart the state of hawaii provides practically 24, 678 mls connected with countrywide thruway in which records to the 71% connected with mixture street construction inside talk about. You will find 225 mls (6%), 3213 mls (9%) connected with true region streets, as well as 4814 mls (14%) connected with various other spot village streets inside talk about. The actual large street system spreading inside talk about is really a stable aspect for pulling in massive desire for the state of hawaii.Since its origin the foundation of the state "horticulture", has been enabled with appropriations and ventures that has contributes a development bend in the agronomics. The state is still viewed as the RICE BOWL OF INDIA with home to more than 22,000 assortments of indigenous rice. Not just this has helped the state economy and thriving, it has additionally influenced the differed areas of state framework structure logistics, transportations to the very nuts and bolts.Although, different financial experts and pundits have minimized the state`s monetary development, Chhattisgarhsablebadiya.inhave done significant to draw in remote speculation and enhance the nature of essential infra. Bu the state have surpassed its own desires as far as logistical infra and usage of its complete arrangements, making it a good example for recently bud states.The streets have been broadened and rustic and remote ranges associated. A tar street or even a CC street surges life into the heart of rustic Chhattisgarh giving channel to interfacing the town with power and essential pleasantries of life. As the state gloats of surplus power, there are still hoods in the deciduous edges of the state that stay dull and sad because of the inaccessibility of power, telecom and fundamental social insurance. The central point being the Maoist revolt. In spite of the insurrection issues, with the assistance of the paramilitary, numerous a plagued regions, have been made open to progress and improvement.Innovation have been on the front line of all the development profit of any states success. With the coming of specialized varsities and establishment, the state has created a harvest of IT and tech empowered era, a considerable lot of whom have stayed back or returned after their fruitful endeavor with the IT goliaths of the south and abroad, contributing essentially to the tech-tonics of the state.The administration in its most recent IT approach have underlined on pushing E-administration and empowering IT over all space of the general public. This is straightforwardly proportionate to more interest in the IT part of the state. IT drives alternate divisions including open and differed private administrations.Since the advancement of the state and its foundation is at the command of innovation, the administration has speedily utilized every conceivable intend to guarantee that the state is a showcase of an excellency and development and engaged individuals and urban.Energy Policy in ChhattisgarhChhattisgarh State Renewable Energy Advancement Agency, has been constituted on 25th May 2001 under the Department of Energy, Government of Chhattisgarh for consumption of diverse plans relating to Replenishable Energy sources and Energy Conservation exercises. It is usually enlisted under Society Work 1973 with the prevailing body being Energy Deparment, Govt. of Chhattisgarh. CREDA is set up while the State Nodal Firm by State Govt. intended for improvement and promotion of non-routine and renewable wellsprings of vitality. A significant portion of the program many of these as National Program in Bio-gas Development, Solar Cold weather, Solar Photo Voltaic, Universal remote Village Electrification and Biomass Gasifier, maintained Ministry of Non-Conventional and Renewable Energy Sources (MNRE), Government of India are executed simply by CREDA.Sanskritik Chhattisgarhgoo.glhas now become effective in industrial sector as well.Solar Energy Plan in ChhattisgarhThe Federal government of Chhattisgarh as of late declared its Point out Solar Approach. The strategy is extremely far reaching out to and has got the target to energize speculation of Rs. 10, 000 crore in the state. The technique will be pertinent coming from issuance and will retain running till 31st Mar 2017. The combination limit focused on is coming from 500 to 1000 MW comprising of framework linked, sunlight based parks and sun based housetops kind ventures. Like other express strategies this one on top of that declared about motivators just like interest endowment, settled capital sponsorship, power obligation permission, VAT exception and thus forth. It is similarly specified that for RPO the master vision of aggressive based offering can probably be accessible. Every the professional jets is going to be given by a solitary window freedom and CREDA is selected because it he Nodal Organization for each and every one of the tasks.Wind energy plan in Chhattisgarh:CREDA will certainly lead a study to distinguish the spots via where wind vitality can be created with the collaboration of the non-public part, the arrangement stated, including that open tenders would be welcomed to get setting up the breeze plants. Just those economical specialists, having the knowledge of setting up and running plants of 3 megawatt, would be allowed to build wind industrial facilities. Stipulating which the financial experts concerned will need to handle matrix interface and support, the approach said the point out government and the office buildings chose by it will have the main right in the force manufactured by these kinds of units. The duty will be altered by the Chhattisgarh Electricity Regulatory Commission. Get that as it may possibly, the rose would become allowed to offer energy to some other office buildings when of the express government declining to get electricity. According to the layout, government area would become given to establishing the wind vitality plants temporarly while of 30 years or perhaps for the length of time of the starting, whichever is less. In the off chance that the wind vitality vegetable is to be established up on private terrain, the proprietor concerned will be paid yearly lease at the rate of Rs 5, 000 for each and every area of land. All clearances worried for setting up the task can be released in line with the procurement of Chhattisgarh Industrial Promotion Act. On top of that, those setting up breeze vitality plants would get qualified for concessions staying accommodated new commercial businesses in line with the state's mechanical technique.

This is going to be a very long answer, because the epistemology of science is empiricism.And the epistemology of religion is empiricism in its simplest form as well as combined forms of rationalism and coherantism.And the epistemology of history is also empiricism, along with a few other things.None of them are methodological naturalism. Methodological naturalism is kind of a meaningless buzz word that gets bandied about in the culture wars between atheism and theism.Naturalism is a metaphysical view that assumes nothing exists beyond the material world of nature itself, so methodological naturalism is just the applied method of that philosophical assumption; neither is epistemology.The word epistemology is derived from the Greek episteme, meaning knowledge, and logos, meaning the study of.WHAT IS THE EPISTEMOLOGY OF SCIENCE?Epistemology asks, “What is knowledge?” How do we know what we know? What do we even mean when we say we know something? What is our source of knowledge, and how do we know it’s reliable? What are the scope and limitations of knowledge? These questions have been asked—and never fully answered—by philosophy, science, religion, history, sociology and more for over 2000 years.Science is more than just the collection of facts. It’s a way of knowing that requires a strong philosophical underpinning. The Uniformity of Nature—that the laws of nature are forever constant and apply the same way to all matter across both time and space, is one of those philosophical assumptions that underlies all the inferences of science. There is some indication it may, at times, be a false assumption—maybe, for example, where the origins of the universe are concerned—but for functioning here, on this planet, it’s a necessary one.Consider the following statements:The earth is a spheroid.The earth spins daily on its axis.The earth orbits the sun annually.We all agree these statements are accurate, right?Why?The fact is, even most physics majors couldn’t explain the basis for these statements. The facts underlying these understandings aren’t clear.Aristotle argued against them so well his reasoning held sway for 2000 years. He argued that if the earth were spinning we would feel it; we would encounter prevailing winds, we would see the oceans cast off the equator, find that projectiles are left behind when thrown into the air; he thought the earth would move like a swift sailing ship, and since that wasn’t what was happening, that proved it wasn’t moving. That was his personal experience of motion and what logic told him. That’s what he knew.So on what basis do scientists make the above claims? How do they know? And how do you and I know they’re right?If a person claims to know something they should be able to provide evidence for their claim. But most of us simply accept the claims of science without knowledge of the evidence—like people used to accept religion.Real knowledge, then, is to some extent a justified belief: a belief with support for its claim. A belief with evidence equals knowledge.There are several ways of knowing things, and even though all ways of knowing would not be considered scientific, all ways of knowing will at some point involve human reasoning. This human reasoning will include logic.But logic relies on premises; if premises are inaccurate the conclusions will be as well; therefore, premises need evidence to insure accuracy whenever possible. The evidence is empiricism.The simplest form of empiricism one might know is through personal experience. Burn your hand, you know it and you have the evidence to prove it. You possess the knowledge based on reason sustained by ample evidence. That is the simplest most basic type of empirical evidence based on observation.Observation is key in science.But history is littered with evidence-based models now discarded that were once thought to constitute knowledge: even scientific knowledge is tentative.HOW DO SCIENTISTS KNOW WHAT THEY KNOW?Induction, deduction, and abduction—the process of generating hypotheses—are at the heart of science. Science studies particulars using the scientific method; a hypothesis is a specific question or statement that can be tested and observed, data recorded, evidence obtained and the hypothesis can then be either verified or falsified. One answer to one question: did the mice eat the food or didn’t they?Or to quote from an article, “Scientific Epistemology” by Carl J. Wenning:Scientific knowledge is belief based on reason and empirical evidence; while it is tentative, it is still quite durable and, in most cases of established science…unlikely to change. A scientific understanding of nature is an understanding that has been tested against the empirical evidence that nature provides, and not found wanting; a scientific law, hypothesis, and theory can be tested against empirical evidence with the use of predictions.”(Taken from: “Scientific Epistemology: How Scientists Know What They Know;” Carl J. Winning, Physics Dept. Illinois State Univ.; Normal, Ill.; 61790–4560)This kind of empiricism can’t work for history. Napolean can’t be brought into a lab and observed. The Fall of Rome can’t be experimented upon. Religion has that same limitation. And even science has things that are beyond the reach of this type of empirical research. But science has developed the means of solving those riddles—such as the origin of the universe and the origin of life—that science cannot apply the scientific method to. Science uses a method called the hypothetico—deductive method. History and religion must gather as much data and information as possible, then go back to logic and reasoning.From this point on all paths diverge.THE EPISTEMOLOGY OF HISTORYOne of the atheist’s I respect here is Tim O’Neill. He wrote an interesting article on why history isn’t scientific where he discusses some of the epistemology of history.HOW DOES HISTORY KNOW WHAT IT KNOWS?Just because history is not a hard science does not mean it can't tell us about the past or can't do so with a degree of certainty. Early historians like Herodotus established the beginnings of the methods used by modern historical researchers, though historians only began to develop a systematic methodology based on agreed principles from the later eighteenth century onwards, using the techniques of Barthold Niebuhr(1776-1831) and Leopold von Ranke (1795-1886).The Historical Method is based on three fundamental steps, each of which has its own techniques:1. Heuristic - This is the identification of relevant material to use as sources of information. These can range from the obvious, such as a historian of the time's account of events he witnessed personally, to the much less obvious, like a medieval manor's account book detailing purchases for the estate. Everything from archaeological finds to coins to heraldry can be relevant here. The key word here is "relevant", and there is a high degree of skill in working out which sources of information are pertinent to the subject in question.2. Criticism - This is the process of appraisal of the source material in the light of the question being answered or subject being examined. It involves such things as determining the level of "authenticity" of a source (Is it what is seems to be?), its "integrity" (Can its account be trusted? What are its biases?), its context (What genre is it? Is it responding or reacting to another source? Is it using literary tropes that need to be treated with scepticism?) Material evidence, such are archaeology, architecture, art , coins etc needs to be firmly put into context to be understood. Documentary sources also need careful contextualisation - the social conditions of their production, their polemical intent (if any), their reason for production (more important for a political speech than a birth certificate, for example) , their intended audience and the background and biases of their writer (if known) all have to be taken into account.3. Synthesis and Exposition - This is the formal statement of the findings from steps 1 and 2, which each finding supported by reference to the relevant evidence.Here is Tim’s full post: Why History isn't Scientific (And Why It Can Still Tell Us About the Past)History has no philosophical underpinning akin to the uniformity of nature to unite it or to unite an understanding or interpretation of it. And there are dozens of different theories for its interpretation.There are no causal laws or universal generalizations within human affairs. However, there is such a thing as social causation, proceeding through the workings of human agency and the constraints of institutions and structures. A legitimate historiographical goal is to identify causal mechanisms within historical processes, and these mechanisms invariably depend on the actions of historical actors situated within concrete social relations.Likewise, a basic epistemology of historical knowledge can be described. Historical knowledge depends on ordinary procedures of empirical investigation, and the justification of historical claims depends on providing convincing demonstration of the empirical evidence that exists to support or invalidate the claim.There is such a thing as historical objectivity, in the sense that historians are capable of engaging in good-faith interrogation of the evidence in constructing their theories of the past. But this should not be understood to imply that there is one uniquely true interpretation of historical processes and events. Rather, there is a perfectly ordinary sense in which historical interpretations are underdetermined by the facts, and there are multiple legitimate historical questions to pose about the same body of evidence. Historical narratives have a substantial interpretive component, and involve substantial construction of the past.The discipline of history consists of many threads, including causal explanation, material description, and narrative interpretation of human action.(“The Philosophy of History” by Daniel Little; Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy; This entry was first published on Sun Feb 18, 2007. It was last modified on Oct 13, 2016.)EPISTEMOLOGY OF RELIGIONContemporary epistemology of religion may be called post modern in the sense of being a reaction to the Enlightenment, in particular to… evidentialism. (Compare Vanhoozer 2003.) … Evidentialism implies that no full religious belief (i.e., a religious belief held with full confidence) is justified unless there is conclusive evidence for it, or it is self-evident. The content of religious experience has been stipulated not to count as evidence.( "The Epistemology of Religion" BY Peter Forest; Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy; This entry was first published on Wed Apr 23, 1997. It was last modified on Feb 6, 2014.)This is like trying to evaluate the likelihood of the success of a marriage without allowing the content of the emotional experience between the two people involved to count as evidence about it! That’s inherently ridiculous. It’s the only thing that should count as evidence!Much contemporary epistemology of religion seeks to avoid the extremes both of the Enlightenment evidentialism and of fideism... Call the injunction to avoid these extremes the problematic of contemporary epistemology of religion…Although pre-dating the current debate, Newman's rejection of …evidentialism is relevant to the problematic of contemporary epistemology of religion...His procedure was to examine how in fact people made up their minds on non-religious issues and argue that by the same standards religious beliefs were justified. As a result he qualified evidentialism by insisting that an implicit and cumulative argument could lead to justified certainty. (See Mitchell 1990.)If Newman is right then evidentialism is slightly wrong. Instead of requiring belief to be proportioned to the evidence, full belief is justified if the case for it holds “on the balance of probabilities.” Hence a natural theology consisting of merely probable arguments, such as Swinburne's, can still show full religious belief to be justified.HOW DO WE KNOW WHAT WE KNOW?It should be noted here at the start that we get knowledge of God from understanding not all questions are scientific questions. And this—all by itself— is an important idea. Science has tremendous value and has done more for mankind than probably any other single pursuit—but it cannot answer all questions all by itself. So, even if it isn’t possible to put God in a lab like a monkey, that doesn’t prove He isn’t real.We begin open to the possibility that science does not have all answers to all questions, that evidentialism is not how people actually function, that certainty is impossible about anything—even within science itself—that probability is sufficient, and we move on through the rest listed here in genuine “seeking after God” efforts to see if belief is reasonable and justified.The epistemology of religion—our knowledge of God—almost always begins from PERSONAL introspection and experience.An influential contemporary rejection of evidentialism is reformed epistemology, due to Wolterstorff (1976) and Plantinga (1983). As Plantinga develops it in his paper (1983), beliefs are warranted without Enlightenment-approved evidence provided they are (a) grounded, and (b) defended against known objections. Such beliefs may then themselves be used as evidence for other beliefs...Plantinga has proposed an account of warrant as proper functioning. This account seems to entail that S's belief that p is grounded in event E if (a) in the circumstances E caused S to believe that p, and (b) S's coming to believe that p was a case of proper functioning (Plantinga 1993b).It should be noted that the term “warrant” used elsewhere in philosophy as a synonym for “justified” (as in “warranted assertibility”) is used by Plantinga to mean that which has to be adjoined to a true belief for it to be knowledge. (See Plantinga 1993a).Reformed epistemologists assert that ordinary religious experiences of awe, gratitude, contrition, etc., ground the beliefs implied by the believer's sincere reports of such experiences, provided they can be said to cause those beliefs. Such grounded beliefs are warranted provided they can be defended against known objections. They can then be used as evidence for further religious beliefs.there is a non-physical reality that is of supreme value that humans can become aware of through prayer and meditation. It is in the nature of consciousness, intelligence, compassion and bliss. Human awareness of it is meant to lead to the realization of those qualities in our lives and in the world, the cessation of egotism, and the overcoming of self-centeredness that is so pervasive.Jenny Hawkins's answer to Why are you a Christian? What made you believe? Are there any personal reasons or experiences that specifically solidified your faith?We get knowledge of God empirically and objectively. This is the one atheists are always saying: “I won’t believe in God till I can put Him in a lab and run enough tests I can prove He’s real—and even then I’m not sure I’ll be sure!” Ha ha. But the truth is we do have empirical information about God—just not direct empirical data of God Himself: it’s impossible to get physical evidence of the non-physical. But we can’t put gravity in a lab and we can still prove it by proving its effects, and we do have the same kind of information about the effects of God. We are unable to test the “thing in itself” but the “effects” are measurable.Reformed epistemology might be thought of as a modification of evidentialism in which the permissible kinds of evidence are expanded. Notable in this context is Alston's work arguing that certain kinds of religious experience can be assimilated to perception (Alston 1991).The difference between reformed epistemology and Enlightenment-style evidentialism is also shown by a consideration of revelation and inspiration…the question of whether a belief is genuinely grounded in religious experience or is genuinely grounded in inspiration is one that several religious traditions have paid attention to, with such theories as that of discernment of spirits (Murphy, 1990, ch 5).Support for the accuracy and dependability of the Bible is increasing as more historical and archaeological research gets done. ARCHAEOLOGY AND THE BIBLERecently Plantinga (2000) has defended an account of divine inspiration, which he calls the Aquinas/Calvin model.The definition of the simplest form of empiricism from science was personal experience. If it is valid there, it has to be valid here as well.Personal observations and experiences are substantiated with evidence from the observations and experiences of others. When these are combined and assessed in conjunction with rational principles, inferences can be reached about the effects of God in people’s lives: the effects are measurable.Clear thinking on religion and society is a research compilation of 139 studies done over a 30 year periodIt’s the same kind of empirical data the social and psychological sciences use. It seems to support Plantinga’s claim.We learn of God through the second-hand knowledge of other witness testimonies, such as church, books, conferences, radio, additional sources, and through education and training.Nature itself is one of the ways we know God: creation speaks to the believer of God; that’s what it says in the book of Romans, and elsewhere, and that’s what it does. There is the fact of life itself. It is not simply that the origin of life has not been explained and the atheist is making the assumption science will someday have all answers to all questions. It is the nature of life.We get knowledge of God from the origin, nature, quality and quantity of life, from many fortuitous unexplainable “coincidences” in nature itself. “The Science of God” by Gerald L. Schroeder.We get knowledge of God from complexity. Every human experience we have, with no exception, reveals that for ordered complexity to arise and remain stable, something has to cause its retention. Complexity can cause random acts—like shaking a basket with many small pieces of paper, each with a letter of the alphabet on it; as the letters fall to the bottom of the basket, it’s possible they may land in a way that forms a word (complexity)—but that word will always be lost with more tossing unless something happens to glue those letters in place. And here on earth, something did. Something just went mad with that gluestick! Because even the simplest of microbes are information packed.We see God in DNA. Basic living cells contain “libraries” of complex information sequestered in their genes; information that is of no direct use to them—but that will be of use to their descendants. Explaining that without recourse to planning is virtually impossible; it defies logic. And it’s not that this one thing alone is so singularly convincing that there is a god; it’s that there are dozens and dozens of what non-believers refer to as “one coincidence” after another. How many coincidences does it take to make a person begin to feel gullible?If I am walking along a beach and I see writing in the sand, I don’t immediately think what an amazing coincidence. I think it most likely someone wrote it. Why would I think otherwise about DNA?For anyone who supports parsimony in scientific theory (Ockam’s razor) and takes the approach that a good hypothesis should embrace ALL the data, the best hypothesis explaining the origins of life (and the universe) is most likely a theistic one.We get knowledge of God philosophically and logically.We get knowledge of God from Rationalism and logic/The cosmological argument is compelling; the multiverse is silly. Anyone who can argue for empiricism and then turn around and support the concept of a multiverse over and against a God speaks with forked tongue.The teleological argument is particularly compelling. The very nature of order has too many logic problems without theism: chaos is natural, not order. The second law of thermodynamics seems applicable.Chance is unsupportable. A living, thinking, purposed, self-aware intelligent being “born accidentally” from a purposeless, non-living, mindless, process just could never happen simply because: MONKEYS DON’T WRITE SONNETSThe limits of materialism/naturalism are logically insupportableGodel’s mathematical proof of God. All empiricism can do is get us facts. Facts give us the means to find truth, but are not sufficient by themselves to get us there. Then how does one go about finding truth? As Godel showed, within a closed system—like arithmetic—truth can build up to a point where it is no longer provable: there are truths that are true but are not verifiable.Science carefully states it does not pursue truth; but religion does. It pursues a Truth that exceeds empirical verifiability by its very nature. Truth exceeds every logical attempt to encase and define it; yet truth is a power to which the mind and behavior must submit on pain of failure, for if you don’t you act in accordance with falsehood.Truth is a universal, but in itself, it is not the ultimate; it is defined by the Ultimate, like beauty and justice and reason itself, it represents our highest ideals and goals.And therein lies the true scope of the knowledge of religion.Humans form beliefs (Fishbein & Ajzen (1975)) through direct observation and interaction (I touch the table, I believe this is a table). Next, we form beliefs through logic (philosophy, deduction, induction, math); through the information gained from our inner circle (such as family, school or church doctrine); and information gained from outside that circle, in education and areas that challenge and expand our beliefs. As we cognitively process it all, we make inferences we then form into beliefs in a mental framework.While there are differences of approach, there is evidence for theism, but evidence of a probable rather than a conclusive kind justifying belief, but not full belief if you are fully committed to holding to the complete a priori Enlightenment evidentialist view.With what we understand of how human beings think and make decisions now, though, it seems particularly un-enlightened to do so.IN CONCLUSIONThere is no certainty in anything. There is only probability.All three areas share some empirical qualities while having vastly different goals and functions.