« April 2008 | Main | June 2008 »
Posted at 06:59 AM in Family History/Yarns from the Past | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)
Month | Minimum Temperature |
Maximum Temperature |
Mean Temperature |
HDD | CDD | Precipitation |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
January | 20.3 | 40.1 | 30.2 | 1087 | 0 | 0.84 |
February | 25.3 | 47.2 | 36.3 | 819 | 0 | 1.02 |
March | 34.4 | 57.3 | 45.9 | 594 | 2 | 2.71 |
April | 43.7 | 66.9 | 55.3 | 302 | 19 | 2.57 |
May | 54.0 | 76.0 | 65.0 | 89 | 93 | 4.16 |
June | 63.9 | 87.1 | 75.5 | 5 | 330 | 4.25 |
July | 69.1 | 92.9 | 81.0 | 0 | 503 | 3.31 |
August | 67.9 | 91.6 | 79.8 | 0 | 454 | 2.94 |
September | 59.3 | 82.2 | 70.8 | 49 | 221 | 2.96 |
October | 46.9 | 70.2 | 58.6 | 235 | 35 | 2.45 |
November | 33.9 | 54.5 | 44.2 | 620 | 1 | 1.82 |
December | 24.0 | 43.1 | 33.6 | 965 | 0 | 1.35 |
Annual | 45.2 | 67.4 | 56.4 | 4765 | 1658 | 30.38 |
The above table is from NOAA, for Wichita's Mid-Continent Airport, which is the nearest reporting station to our home. Note the "normal" rainfall for May--4.16". Note, also, that May's "normal" rainfall is exceeded only by that for Jun--4.25". May is usually one of our wet months.
Both of the homes that we have built here in Derby have been on creek lots, so we have experienced some flooding. When Dudette and Bogie were young, I had to carry them out of our house, through knee-deep water, to take them up the street to a neighbor's home. Our house was, at that time (around Midnight on a day in May of 1969) surrounded on three sides by water. That was the worst that flooding ever got while we lived in that house, and we knew that more than 1/2 (front to back) of our back yard was in the then-currently mapped flood plain. This house is about 2.5 miles, as the crow flies, from the previous house--situated on a different creek that flows into the Arkansas River--below the point where the Little Arkansas and Big Arkansas Rivers join).
When we built this house in 1999, the builder (who had been the foreman during construction of our home in 1968) set its elevation 3 feet higher than was required by city code. The back yard, here, is a bit over 1/2 (front-to-back measurement) within the now-currently mapped flood plain. Only the portion of our yard that is not in flood plain is planted in lawn, although I have planted a few bushes that are within the flood plain. Nearly each May, we have witnessed the engulfing of a portion of our "far back" yard by the swollen creek. Yesterday, at 4:30 AM, the flooding encroached on our lawn--outside the flood plain. I wasn't up to see it, being abed listening to BBC, but Hunky Husband told me about it. When I arose at 6:30 AM, the waters had already receded to the point where they were no higher than I had observed in previous years.
Most years, I have taken photos; but, unless one is airborne, flood photos are pretty unimpressive. They just don't do justice to the happening. I can tell you that when I could get back into a portion of our woods (most was still under water), flotsam had been left in trees--at the level of my eyes, or higher! I had carefully stacked about 20 timbers, each 5' to 8' long and 4" to 10" in diameter, that I had sawed (by hand with a bow saw) from the downed hackberry tree (photos in Year 2008), also addressed in Progress on Downed Tree. All of the timbers had been swept away! Did it take the smaller limbs that were full of branches and leaves? No way. The trashy stuff is still there--the waters only took the good stuff! The waters also swept away the remainder (about 35 pounds) of a 40-pound-block of salt that I keep in the woods for the deer, and the perforated plastic tub that held it. Fortunately, I had brought the two perforated plastic tubs that I use to feed deer and wild turkey, to the patio a couple of days ago. Unaccountably, the tubular aluminum rocking chair that had been my mothers, and which I had re-webbed for her in the early 1990s, was still there. It is normally kept folded, leaning against a tree in the woods, so that I may take a break, sit a spell, and watch the birds when I am working in the woods. It was flat on the ground. Amazing! It gladdens my heart.
A photo of the receding water is posted, first. At the left in the photo is the corner post of the neighbor's fence. At its highest, the water surrounded that corner post. (I should mention that the neighbor has a wooden fence down to the flood plain boundary, from which point he has chain link.) In the center of the photo is a 4" x 4" post with a bird nesting box and squirrel guard that I mounted to it. Mama Eastern Bluebird is sitting on a clutch of 5 eggs (I checked that only bluebird eggs were in her nest, yesterday, because I had observed a female brown-headed cowbird sitting atop the nesting box). No...I don't expect you to see her! There is another post/squirrel guard/nesting box that is out in the middle of the water; but, it doesn't show up in the photo. There is a bluebird nest inside it, and the bluebirds visit it, but there are no eggs.
The second photo is of the downed hackberry tree, showing that the timbers have been moved and that the water is still out of the creek banks.
So...how much rain did we get? Not all that much, by Florida standards: 2.76" on the 27th, 1.94" on the 26th, 2.05 on the 25th, 1.07 on the 24th, and enough before the 24th to give us a monthly total (so far) at our house of 11.07 in May 2008. (Thanks to Hunky Husband for the statistics.) Since the flooding, it has continued to sprinkle/light rain off-and-on, but nothing serious.) At the very least, our May 2008 total rainfall will be 2.65 times the normal. Actually, some of that total is in hail, but not a significant amount. The largest hail was large marble sized. That's the report, for now
P.S. In the table, HDD = heating degree days and CDD = cooling degree days. How they are computed, I've not determined. They undoubtedly are useful to businesses who are trying to guestimate the cost of doing business in this area.
Posted at 02:10 AM in Current Activities/Affairs, Fauna | Permalink | Comments (7)
No, I'm not talking cooking, here! These photos are of our resident toad, Cutie. Cutie has lived in the window well outside my kiln room for at least the past 2+ years (this is her/his 3rd summer). Note the splotches of mud on the outside of the window: We had well over an inch of rain during the night--while Protection KS was being hit by a tornado. If you wonder, the toad is about 3" long as s/he sits on her/his haunches.
Posted at 11:39 AM in Fauna | Permalink | Comments (11) | TrackBack (0)
TypePad has recently changed the functioning of the page that we use in composing postings. They are phasing the new functionality in, some proportion of their users at a time. My time came during this last week. For the most part, I like the new way better than the old. Something that I ran across while reading about the changes was an article on how to optimize the download time for one's blog--if one is using TypePad. Fortunately, by blind luck, many of the optimizations are already implemented in my blog; but, a link was provided to a fascinating tool--a Stopwatch that measures download time!
I use dial-up for internet access, so I expect slow downloads. I measured the download times on some of the list of blogs that appear in the left-hand sidebar of this blog. It validated my reluctance to visit some of the blogs by measuring the download time for one of them (a Blogger-provided blog) at just under 2.5 minutes! For comparison, most of the blogs downloaded in under 15 seconds, and a couple downloaded in as little as 3 or 4 seconds (both were TypePad-provided blogs).
If you wish to measure download times for your internet access for various blogs, be aware that you will get a deceptively short time for blogs that you have visited since you last deleted your cookies. In my own case, the times that I got before deleting the cookies were only 1/3 to 2/3 as long as after the cookies were deleted. (I also deleted temporary files and histories while I was at it, but I don't think that would make much, if any difference.) Have fun!
Posted at 11:21 AM in Computers/Phones/Cameras | Permalink | Comments (9) | TrackBack (0)
Exchange of comments on Not Really Blue Irises:
________________________________________________________________________________________
There are very few truly blue flowers out there. The only ones that my memory tells me I've seen blue examples of are delphiniums and hydrangeas. I know there are others out there, but most seem to have a tinge of purple to them (to my eyes anyway).
Posted by: Bogie | May 18, 2008 at 05:40 AM
Posted by: Cop Car | May 18, 2008 at 10:35 AM
I am always trying to find blue flowers and where some will look blue in photos and certain lighting, very few actually are. The challenge goes on
Posted by: Rain | May 19, 2008 at 12:05 PM
Bogie & Rain--Bogie was correct. When I went out to take pictures of the tiny "weed", up close, I could see that the blossoms have a bit of red in them. I'll try to post a photo, when I have time, but the blossoms themselves are not much larger than the head of a straight pin.
________________________________________________________________________________________
The camera's battery was too drained to take photos that day. The next day, the plants were in the shade (with blossoms closed) by the time I thought of it. Today I went out to do the deed. As it turns out, on closer inspection, the "weed" that I mentioned fighting is actually two different varieties, if not species (never having studied botony or biology, I lack the language.) Now, I am ready to post the photos; but, my hp Image Zone software will not open so that I can crop the photos (to save pixels) and so that I may save the photo files in the correct format for uploading. Now, much later, the software has been uninstalled and installed. Here are some photos.
Weed #1 has blossoms that I measured to be 0.1" across. In sunlight, I can see a faint tinge of reddishness in the throat of the blossoms, which you can probably see too if you click to enlarge the photo of the blossoms. The first photo shows a Weed #1 that I pulled from the ground and laid on a concrete step to show the plant off, better. The second photo shows a close-up of the blossoms on a Weed #1 that is still rooted in the ground.
Weed #2 has blossoms that measure only 0.05" across. I can detect no red in the throat of its blossoms; but, at such a small size I'm doing well to see the blossoms at all.
The two weeds seem to mingle in many places; thus, I had not noticed that there are two distinct plants. They are both prolific in my foundation planting beds. If you can identify either one or both, please do so!
The bonus photo for this posting is of an amaryllis that is in bloom, from a bulb that I purchased from Wal-Mart a few months ago. Unfortunately, the carry-over bulb from Christmas of 2005 does not seem inclined to bloom, this year.
Posted at 02:44 PM in Flora | Permalink | Comments (6) | TrackBack (0)
Buffy has been seeking a truly blue iris. A couple of years ago, I posted a photo of our irises that excited her--they looked blue. Well, the real irises did not look blue--at least, not to me. I don't know whether our perceptions of color differ (undoubtedly, they do--I just don't know if that is the source of our conversation), but I do know that photos often differ from "true" colors and that different monitor settings can change the colors. In addition, even my perception of color differs with distance. I recently uploaded a photo with "Cornflower Blue Irises" in it (please see Year 2008 album), which Buffy noted. From a distance, the "Cornflower Blue" isn't a bad description; but, when I look at them up close, they are distinctly purple to me.
To the left is the original photo of 5-21-2006. On the right is a photo of two different kinds of irises that we have that have similar, bluish color values.
The frilly irises are some that I bought from Wal-Mart while the smooth irises (off of the same plants as in the photo to the left) are probably descendents of Mom's plants. (I do wish that I had documented the names of the irises that came from Wal-Mart.) It is amazing what a difference the shade/lighting makes!
The final iris photo shows the plants, today, that are shown in the original photo, above left. Note the difference in the color of the bluish iris toward the foreground (it is in shade) and the color of the irises in the background that have dappled sun on them. Please accept my word for it that, in person, the bluish irises in all three of these photos (and in the "Cornflower Blue" photo) are the same hue.
While I'm at it, this is a photo of a bloom on one of the miniature roses that I bought from Wal-Mart, Thursday. These Magic Carrousel [sic] roses are supposed to mature to a plant size of 24" x 24". The blossom shown is just under 1" across. I think they are gorgeous!
Posted at 11:45 AM in Flora | Permalink | Comments (8) | TrackBack (0)
Having an abundance of iris blooms, I posted several photos in the Year 2008 Album. None of the irises cost me very much money--many being descendents of my mother's irises, some being irises that crept over from a neighbor's yard, and the remainder having been purchased from Wal-Mart, perhaps 4 or 5 years ago. Since I'm partial to irises, I couldn't resist adding the photos.
Now, for Buffy, I'll post a photo of my basil--planted last year--that over-wintered, beautifully. As I recall, the basil seeds were pretty much just thrown on the ground--between a tomato plant and the back porch steps.
There are enough strawberries for Hunky Husband to have had a good-sized dish of them, sweetened, for dessert, last night. I prefer to eat mine (unsweetened) as soon as I can get them from stem to mouth!
Posted at 04:51 PM in Flora | Permalink | Comments (6) | TrackBack (0)
Had I known it was to be televised, I would have tuned in earlier. As happened, I caught the last 60% of PBS's Live from Lincoln Center, this evening--a broadcast of a "semi-staged" version of Camelot. The production was magic!
From the PBS website:
"The upcoming New York Philharmonic presentation of Camelot will reunite Director Lonny Price and Producer Thomas Z. Shephard, the Philharmonic's Broadway production team. Price was Director for the previous Philharmonic performances of Sweeney Todd and Candide, and Shephard was Producer for last season's memorable My Fair Lady. The conductor, also a veteran of Philharmonic Broadway shows, will be a true Broadway legend, Paul Geminiani. The cast? Truly stars of stage, screen, opera and television: Gabriel Byrne, Marin Mazzie, Nathan Gunn, Fran Drescher, Christopher Lloyd and Bobby Steggert."
Who would have thought to cast Fran Drescher as Morgan L'Fei?
Posted at 11:02 PM in Arts/Entertainment | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)
While driving by McConnell AFB, yesterday, Hunky Husband and I noted a small helicopter maneuvering over the air field. In the discussion that ensued, HH mentioned a heavy helicopter. The HH-46 being the one with which I am most familiar, I asked if it was the one he had in mind. No, he thought it was a heavy helicopter--he thought it might be the H-47, if that was a Chinook. Neither of us was certain, at the time, but the H-47 is, indeed the Chinook.
Let's take a look at the two (both photos are public).
First, the H-47 Chinook (photo by courtesy of flickr, Uploaded on January 31, 2008 by James Gordon ). From a Global Security.org website page,
"The CH-47 is a twin-engine, tandem rotor helicopter designed for transportation of cargo, troops, and weapons during day, night, visual, and instrument conditions. The aircraft fuselage is approximately 50 feet long. With a 60-foot rotor span, on each rotor system, the effective length of a CH-47 (with blades turning) is approximately 100 feet from the most forward point of the forward rotor to the most rearward point on the aft rotor. Maximum airspeed is 170 knots with a normal cruise speed of 130 knots. However, speed for any mission will vary greatly depending on load configuration (internal or external), time of day, or weather conditions. The minimum crew for tactical operations is four, two pilots, one flight engineer, and one crew chief. For more complex missions, such as NVG operations and air assaults, commanders may consider using five crew members and add one additional crew chief."
Now, the H-46 Sea Knight (photo by courtesy of the U.S. Naval Test Pilot School website). From a Global Security.org website page,
"The H-46 is a twin-turbine powered dual-piloted tandem-rotor helicopter. H-46 aircraft are powered by two General Electric T-58 Series engines. The aircraft is 16 feet 8 inches tall. There are six rotor blades on the aircraft, each measuring 25 feet 6 inches. With blades spread, the aircraft is 84 feet 4 inches long. The average weight of the H-46 is 18,000 pounds, with a maximum lift capability of 6,000 pounds. It can carry 25 combat-loaded troops, or can be outfitted to carry medical evacuation litters in case of disaster. It has the fuel endurance to stay airborne for approximately two hours, or up to three hours with an extra internal tank. The cabin contains provisions for accommodating 25 troops and crew members. The cabin also contains an integral cargo and rescue system."
On another page, the cited website addresses the HH-46A version of the H-46:
"Also known to the Marines as the Frog....It is often mistaken for the Chinook, but the CH-46 has three wheels instead of the four the Chinook usually has and the Chinook is larger. The original model is the CH-46A.
....
"The SAR [Search and Rescue] version of this helicopter is the HH-46A; it has Doppler search radar and a radio beacon finder, as well as a hoist with a capacity of 300 kg. For over water SAR, the HH-46A should be equipped with an operable doppler with hover coupler and, if installed, an operable Loran C Navigation Receiver. Utilization of the HH-46 hover coupler shall be at the discretion of the SAR HAC. Day/night hover operations are prohibited in all situations where the pilot has insufficient visual cues, either natural or artificial, to maintain a stabilized hover, unless the appropriate hover equipment is utilized."
So, what's the big deal, to me? As a reservist in the US Navy, serving my two-week summertime active duty training (ACDUTRA) stint at Naval Air Station Pensacola, I met the HH-46A up close and personal. The first week of ACDUTRA, I was a supervisor in the corrosion control branch working on small jet aircraft (VC4 squadron, as I recall?); but, during the second week, I was a supervisor in the airframes branch, working on helicopters (the HC16 squadron?) It was an awesome experience. The squadron comprised 10 HH-46As and four of the much smaller Hueys (UH-1), one Huey of which was never going to fly again--a hangar queen. As a clutz, I was always apprehensive about working atop the HH-46s, especially when my boot soles were slick with hydraulic fluid; but what's an AMS1 to do? The flight crew of one of the HH-46As even made sure that I had the opportunity to take part in one of the shake-down flights out over the Gulf of Mexico. One young crew member (I was easily twice as old as he) dredged up a flight suit (green bag) that was too small for him, and gave it to me so that I would be properly attired for the flight. I still have the suit! My assignment was to monitor the recently-repaired/replaced hydraulic systems that snaked through the cabin, for leaks. No leaks occurred and I had two hours of enjoyment.
On Friday of my second week, we were able to launch all 10 HH-46As and the 3 airworthy Hueys on a formation flight, for which the local news media were called in. It was newsworthy because it was the first time the birds had all been able to launch at the same time, for a good long while. It was a great experience! By the way, the HH-46As at Pensacola provided SAR capability to NAS Pensacola and its surrounds.
Posted at 09:53 AM in Aerospace, Family History/Yarns from the Past | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0)
Bogie and I traded a couple of comments, on the In Appreciation of Strong Backs posting, having to do with the progress being made in "disposal" of a tree that was downed on our lot. The tree had been downed by the wind, in March, as mentioned in Big Blow. At that time, the back yard was still boggy from all of the rain that we had had, so I could not get to the tree, physically. I didn't even know what kind of tree it was. I conjectured, first, that it was a walnut. Later, when I could get a little closer, I thought it might be a cottonwood. I posted a couple of pictures in the photo album Year 2008, when I could get close enough to do so.
Originally, the tree lay, supported by branches that rested on the ground; but, mostly by trees that entrapped the downed tree in their embraces. The main trunk of the downed tree struck a 45-degree angle with the ground. Little by little, I've been working on the tree. Bogie's and my previously cited comment exchange to the posting (concerning Dudette and Wonderful Granddaughter's helping me move furniture) included the following:
"Too bad I don't live closer - I would have been happy to save everyone's bad backs, knees, wrists (and whatever else is wrong with all you older kinfolk out there).
Glad HH got his chair up there anyway, hopefully his recovery will go smoothly!
Posted by: Bogie | May 02, 2008 at 06:10 AM
"I could use your help in getting that tree all sawed up into pieces that I can drag--lol! I'm beginning to think that I'll need to call in a tree service. It's been a good exercise program for me, lo these last few weeks; but, it's getting to the point where I don't have the experience to do what needs to be done, safely. The tree is being supported in a multitude of places by a multitude of living trees (4 or 5 of which I have cut down in the process of trying to get the trunk on the ground). One big problem with calling in the tree service is that I believe that they will need to bring in heavy equipment (at the very least a heavy-duty snorkel) which may damage HH's lawn.
Posted by: Cop Car | May 02, 2008 at 08:21 AM
"I am sure that tree services are used to people and their lawns - and more than likely have the equipment to deal with it (WS's only equipment is chain saw and 4 wheeler, which does fine). Sure, big equipment is more expedient, but there are multiple ways of doing thing. At the very least, it never hurts to ask - especially since they have the experience and knowledge to do things SAFELY!
Posted by: Bogie | May 04, 2008 at 05:58 AM
It all has become moot, Bogie. I delayed calling the tree service long enough, and the winds have been strong enough, for the downed tree to decide to settle down to a stable position.
The trunk is not perfectly flat on the ground, but it is now resting on the stub of a major limb--one that is about 30 degrees off of the "bottom" side of the trunk. I had worked on that limb (cutting it about 10 feet from the crotch to remove the remaining 25 feet [I believe that it was more like 40 feet] of the limb) to get it ready to fulfill the supporting role.
I had hoped that the downed tree would settle onto the ground, being kept from "rolling" in one direction by the support limb that I had prepared and in the other direction by the four-foot-tall length of trunk that I left when I took out one of the surrounding trees that had helped to support the downed tree. The trunk of the support that I removed was also to serve as a guide to the trunk of the downed tree as it settled toward the ground. The problem had been that the trunk was being supported by limbs that were hung up on surrounding, tall trees.
The tree is now in a position that is safe for me to continue working, and that isn't a danger to kids who may be adventuring along the creek. Whew! My exercise program has been preserved.
Posted by: Cop Car | May 04, 2008 at 04:51 PM
Now that you know the story, I'll post some photos taken after my day's work, today.
The first photo shows how the limb (branching toward the bottom of the photo) supports the trunk of the downed tree, keeping it from rolling toward the camera. The final cut that I made on that branch is at the point where, in the photo, the branch appears to bend to the horizontal. I had made two other cuts to that limb--working my way toward the trunk--to get some of the limb out of the way. At the time that I was sawing on it, the limb was a couple of feet off of the ground, but with the rotation that the trunk experienced as it fell, the cut section is now laying on the ground. [And now, on the right, a similar photo taken today, 5 May 2008, with a 4-foot measuring stick resting on the limb, at the point of final cut. Yes, the measuring stick is 48 inches, not 36 inches--a gift from Hunky Husband's father.]
The second photo shows, toward the right hand end of the downed tree's trunk, the stub of one of the trees that I cut off. There were many trees supporting the trunk of the downed tree--some huge, some small. I took out several of the small ones (the one shown is about 8" D, where I cut it), but many were too large for me to want to bring down. Note that, the cut off tree stub guided the downed tree as it fell on down to the ground, and that it helps prevent rolling of the downed tree away from the camera. [And now, on the right, a similar photo taken today, 5 May 2008, with a 4-foot measuring stick leaning against the stub. I was only off by a couple of inches when I guessed the four-foot height.]
Unfortunately, I failed to snap an overview of the downed tree, today; but, this photo is from 10 Mar 2008. Oh, by the way, the downed tree has sprouted leaves from many of its branches allowing me to definitely identify it as a Hackberry! All of the small trees that I took out had been Hackberries, but I didn't know we had such a huge Hackberry back there. [And now, on the right, a photo taken today, 5 May 2008, showing more of the downed tree. Note the small tree, center front, bent under the weight of a limb of the downed tree. Several such bent trees can be seen in the photo on the left.]
According to the Nature Hills Nursery website,
"The Hackberry tree, Celtis Occidentalis, is a superior tree that withstands heat, drought, wind, and alkaline soils. The Hackberry tree is tall, and has similar spread, with ascending arching branches, and some drooping branches. Hackberry trees have a large spreading crown with red-orange fruit in the fall.
"This deciduous tree has low water requirements, and a high tolerance to salt and alkali soils and urban conditions. Light green summer foliage turns to a yellow fall color. The Hackberry is a moderate growing rugged tree. The trunk takes on a corky appearance as it matures."
Further, the web site states the mature height to be 50-75 feet with a spread of 25-40 feet. The downed tree was, in my guess, 70 feet high with a spread of 50 feet. After reading what the nursery has to say, I guess I'll have to grant more respect to all of the Hackberries that we have. They are so prolific around here that I think of them as weeds.
One more photo--of our first bouquet of irises for 2008:
Posted at 08:05 PM in Flora | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)
There is a teeny tiny "weed" that I fight which has truly blue (but not deep blue) flowers. It may even be something that I planted (like an herb, perhaps) that got away from me and that I don't remember, so don't know what it is. Perhaps I should post a photo to let you help me, Bogie.