text:
The 5th Anti-Aircraft Brigade (5 AA Bde) was an air defence formation of the British Army during the Second World War. It was formed as a searchlight brigade to protect the British Expeditionary Force's bases just before the Battle of France. After the Dunkirk evacuation it was reformed as a conventional anti-aircraft (AA) brigade and served through the rest of the war in Anti-Aircraft Command, defending various parts of the United Kingdom against bombing raids and V-1 flying bombs. It continued to serve in the Regular Army during the early postwar years.

Origin
As the British Expeditionary Force (BEF) in France expanded during the Phoney War period, new headquarters (HQs) were formed to control the various groups of AA guns and searchlights (S/Ls) of the Royal Artillery  (RA) and Royal Engineers (RE) that were deployed to defend its field formations and base installations. 5th AA Brigade HQ was formed at Blackdown on 2 February, redesignated 5th Searchlight Brigade on 6 April, and sent to France shortly before the Battle of France began on 10 May. Its commander was Brigadier Edmund Rait-Kerr,  RE, who had been commandant of the Army's School of Electric Lighting at Gosport. Coming directly under General Headquarters (GHQ) the brigade's role was to administer the S/L units deployed to protect airfields, ports, and the BEF's forward gun areas.

Order of Battle May 1940

At the beginning of the Battle of France the brigade had the following composition:
 1st Searchlight Regiment, Royal Artillery – Regular Army
 1, 2, 3, 4 S/L Batteries – 1 and 2 Btys were newly arrived, replacing RE companies
 2nd Searchlight Regiment, RA – Regular Army
 5, 6, 8 S/L Btys
 3rd (Ulster) Searchlight Regiment, RA – Supplementary Reserve
 9, 10, 11, 12 S/L Btys

Battle of France
When the Battle of France began on 10 May, the BEF started its planned advance north into Belgium (Plan D), but the German Army broke through the Ardennes to the east, forcing the BEF to withdraw again. 1st and 3rd Searchlight Batteries were ordered to hold the bridges on the La Bassée–Béthune Canal 'at all costs' against attacks from the south. They deployed their Boys anti-tank rifles and Bren guns, using S/L lorries as roadblocks, while French forces withdrew through them. The towns were bombed and S/L positions were machine-gunned by Luftwaffe fighters. 4th Searchlight Bty, deployed round Lille, saw constant enemy air activity. On 17 May it detached a group of riflemen with Boys rifles to defend 5 AA Bde HQ at Lens while the remainder joined the Bethune canal guards. On that day 1st S/L Bty was ordered back to Calais, a move made difficult because all the roads were choked with refugees. There it operated in the S/L role to defend the port.

Meanwhile, Army Group A had cut the BEF's lines of communication into France and driven it back towards the coast at Dunkirk, cutting off the British troops at Calais and Boulogne from the main force. When planning the evacuation from Dunkirk (Operation Dynamo), the BEF's commanders decided that Calais and Boulogne should still be held as supply points for further fighting or possible exit points for a final withdrawal.

Calais

By 20 May, 1st and 2nd S/L Btys of 1st S/L Rgt, with part of 2nd S/L Rgt, were deployed as a screen of S/L detachments one mile apart round the east side of Calais and Lt-Col Goldney of 1st S/L Rgt was appointed AA Defence Commander for the town. They were joined on 22 May by 30th Infantry Brigade, just before advanced German troops began probing the defences, beginning the Siege of Calais. On the night of 22/23 May the AA units engaged Luftwaffe raiders that bombed Calais, starting fires. But ground attack was now the biggest danger, and the S/L men had to man the perimeter as infantry, a role for which they (mainly older Territorials, raw militiamen and a few ex-RE reservists) were untrained. Nevertheless, they put up a stout fight, halting tank columns for several hours before they were overwhelmed. The remnants were forced back to the citadel and harbour, where some were evacuated by sea but most became Prisoners of war (PoWs) when the citadel fell on 26 May. The town's three-day defence, holding up Heinz Guderian's XIX Panzerkorps, had provided some respite for the Dunkirk evacuation.

Hondeghem
2nd Searchlight Rgt was more widely spread. While part went to Calais, a Troop of one officer and 80 men found themselves attached to K Battery, Royal Horse Artillery, with orders to help hold the small village of Hondeghem which was on the main German axis of advance. The gunners fought a valiant action on 26 May then, running short of ammunition, they charged the German positions and broke through, giving them a route out towards Dunkirk. By now, 2nd S/L Rgt had 5 Bty completely missing, 6 Bty had over 50 per cent missing and 8 Bty was missing just under a quarter. By the time the evacuation was complete, the Regiment had lost over 50 men killed and approximately half the regiment captured.

Dunkirk
3rd (Ulster) Searchlight Rgt fared much better. Its batteries were deployed relatively close together around the Dunkirk perimeter with 12 Bty in the town itself. On 19 May, after some hard fighting often against tanks, the bulk of the regiment was ordered to destroy their searchlights and make for Dunkirk. By 21 May, 9, 10 and 11 Btys were in defensive positions around the port while 12 Bty continued in its S/L role inside the town.  Over the next six days the regiment withstood many attacks from the enemy. Once the decision had been made on 24 May to evacuate, the HQs of 2 AA Bde and 5 AA Bde bore the brunt of AA defence of Dunkirk and the beaches, taking over those remnants of AA units that made their way back to the port. On 27 May 3rd S/L Rgt was relieved; RHQ and 9, 10 and 11 Btys were evacuated to England the next day. Two Troops of 12 Battery were evacuated in small boats the following day, while the rest of the battery was ordered to destroy the remaining lights and assist in the defence of the beaches. They were eventually taken off the beach in small batches by 31 May. 3 (Ulster) S/L Rgt had been very lucky with only 28 killed, 41 wounded and three men taken prisoner.

Home defence
Orders were issued on 13 July for the brigade to be reformed (as 5th AA Brigade) in the Gloucester area within 5 AA Division of AA Command. It became a mixed AA formation containing heavy (HAA) and light (LAA) gun units as well as S/L units. The Gloster Aircraft Company factory at Brockworth, Gloucestershire, was a strategic target in the area and was protected by 24 HAA guns.

Order of Battle July 1940
By about 18 July the reformed HQ had taken over the following units:
 85th (Tees) HAA Rgt – returned from Dunkirk and re-equipped with 3.7-inch guns
 88th HAA Rgt – newly formed in London with 3.7-inch guns
 47th LAA Rgt – newly formed
 37th (Tyne Electrical Engineers) S/L Rgt – returned from France
 68th S/L Rgt – from 46 AA Bde

Blitz

In November 1940, as the Luftwaffes night bombing campaign against British cities (The Blitz) was getting under way, there was a major reorganisation of AA Command. 5 AA Division's responsibilities were split, with 9 AA Division created to cover the South Midlands and South Wales. 5 AA Brigade came under this new formation, with responsibility for covering Gloucester and Hereford. There were few air raids in 5 AA Bde's area, although the Gloster  works at Brockworth and Hucclecote were targeted. Otherwise, enemy air activity was reported as 'slight' and 'small scale', and was mainly heading towards Birmingham and Coventry in the neighbouring 11 AA Division area, with one raid on Cheltenham on 11 December.

From November 1940 searchlights were deployed in clusters of three lights in an attempt to improve the chances of picking up enemy bombers and keeping them illuminated for engagement by AA guns or Royal Air Force (RAF) night-fighters. Eventually, one light in each cluster was to be equipped with Searchlight Control (SLC) radar and act as 'master light', but the radar equipment was still in short supply.

Order of Battle 1940–41

During the Blitz, which ended in May 1941, the composition of 5 AA Bde was as follows:
 85th (Tees) HAA Rgt
 174 HAA Bty – attached to 61 AA Bde until Summer 1941
 175 HAA Bty
 220 HAA Bty – attached to 45 AA Bde until Summer 1941
 413 HAA Bty – joined by May 1941
 88th HAA Rgt (part) – transferred to 1 AA Division by May 1941
 47th LAA Rgt
 66, 131 LAA Btys
 85 LAA Bty – attached to 8 AA Division
 37th (TEE) S/L Rgt
 307, 308, 348, 349 S/L Btys

Mid-War
In the Summer of 1941 AA Command began to receive purpose-built SLC radar in sufficient numbers to allow some S/Ls to be 'declustered' into single-light sites. These were redeployed into 'Indicator Belts' of radar-controlled S/L clusters covering approaches to the night-fighter sectors, repeated by similar belts covering AA Command's Gun Defence Areas (GDAs). Inside each belt was a 20-mile deep 'Killer Belt' of single S/Ls spaced at  intervals in a 'Killer Belt' cooperating with night-fighters patrolling defined 'boxes'. The pattern was designed to ensure that raids penetrating deeply towards the Midlands GDAs would cross more than one belt, and the GDAs had more S/Ls at close spacing. The number of LAA units to protect Vital Points (VPs) such as aircraft factories and airfields was growing, albeit slowly. At this stage of the war, experienced units were being posted away to train for service overseas, which led to a continual turnover of units. However, newly formed units continued to join AA Command, the HAA and support units increasingly becoming 'Mixed' units, indicating that women of the Auxiliary Territorial Service (ATS) were fully integrated into them.

In December 1941 Lt-Col R.C.M. Raikes was promoted from 79th (Hertfordshire Yeomanry) HAA Rgt to command 5 AA Bde.

Order of Battle 1941–42

During this period 5 AA Bde was composed as follows:
 52nd (London) HAA Rgt – from 61 AA Bde January 1942; left AA Command February 1942; to Ceylon
 154, 155, 271 HAA Btys
 58th (Kent) HAA Rgt – from 6 AA Division Autumn 1941; to 4 AA Division January 1942
 207, 208, 264 HAA Btys
 85th (Tees) HAA Rgt – to 6 AA Division Autumn 1941
 174, 175, 220, 413 HAA Btys
 143rd (Mixed) HAA Rgt – new unit formed January 1942; to 67 AA Bde June 1942
 474 HAA Bty – from 138th HAA Rgt June 1942
 489 (M) HAA Bty – attached to 8 AA Division; transferred to 150th (M) HAA Rgt April 1942
 494, 495 (M) HAA Btys
 496 (M) HAA Bty – attached to 45 AA Bde
 34th LAA Rgt – from 5 AA Division March 1942; to 6 AA Division April 1942
 65, 92, 246 LAA Btys
 46th LAA Rgt – from 12 AA Division June 1942
 137, 219, 243 LAA Btys
 47th LAA Rgt – to 8 AA Division Autumn 1941
 85, 131, 258 LAA Btys
 77th LAA Rgt – new unit joined Summer 1941; left AA Command February 1942; to India
 269, 270, 286 LAA Btys
 112th (Durham Light Infantry) LAA Rgt – newly converted from 47th (DLI) S/L Rgt, joined before May 1942, to 61 AA Bde May 1942
 364, 365, 366, 367 LAA Btys
 37th (TEE) S/L/ Rgt – to 11 AA Division  June 1942
 307, 308, 348, 349 S/L Btys

Hit and run

The AA defences of Southern England were severely tested from March 1942 by the Luftwaffes 'hit-and-run' attacks against towns along the South Coast, and there was a pressing need for more LAA guns to be deployed in that area. In June 1942, 5 AA Bde HQ was transferred to reinforce 5 AA Division defending the South Coast. (Unlike most of AA Command's Territorial Army brigades, which retained their strong regional identities, 5 AA Bde was regularly relocated and/or resubordinated as required.)

In October 1942 AA Command abolished its hierarchy of divisions and corps, and established a single tier of AA Groups corresponding to the Groups of RAF Fighter Command. 5 AA Brigade came under 2 AA Group covering South East England (outside London) and affiliated to No. 11 Group RAF.

The turnover of units accelerated with the need to provide AA cover for the Allied invasion of North Africa (Operation Torch) in late 1942 followed by the landings in Sicily and Italy in 1943. 21st Army Group was established in early 1943 to begin preparing for the Normandy Landings (Operation Overlord). As the threat from the Luftwaffe waned, AA Command was forced to release men for other duties, and a number of searchlight units were disbanded or converted, and some batteries were disbanded.

Order of Battle, 1942–43
Within 5 AA Division/2 AA Gp, the brigade had a completely new and rapidly changing order of battle (temporary attachments omitted):
 64th (Northumbrian) HAA Rgt – from 72 AA Bde August 1942; left November 1942 and went to North Africa
 170, 180, 268 HAA Btys
 97th (London Scottish) HAA Rgt – from 35 AA Bde June 1942; left AA Command August 1942 and went to Sicily and Italy
 298, 299, 319, 376 HAA Btys
 106th HAA Rgt – joined from 2 AA Division July; left November 1942 and went to North Africa
 270, 327, 331 HAA Btys
 332 HAA Bty – disbanded August 1942
 107th HAA Rgt – joined from 35 AA Bde November 1942; to 21st Army Group by March 1943
 334, 335, 337 HAA Btys
 128th HAA Rgt – joined from 10 AA Division June; to 2 AA Division July 1942
 287, 309, 407, 436 HAA Btys
 146th HAA Rgt – from 7 AA Division by October 1942
 176, 414, 465 HAA Btys
 148th (M) HAA Rgt – from 35 AA Bde June 1942; returned by March 1943
 505, 508, 523, 529 (M) HAA Btys
 174th HAA Rgt – newly formed October; to 3 AA Gp November 1942; returned by March 1943
 249, 331, 348 HAA Btys
 179th (M) HAA Rgt – newly formed October 1942
 564 (M) HAA Bty – to 183rd (M) HAA Rgt January 1943
 584, 606 (M) HAA Btys
 607, 641 (M) HAA Btys – joined by March 1943
 4th LAA Rgt – formerly 3rd (Ulster) S/L Rgt (see above); from 27 (Home Counties) AA Bde November 1942; to 21st Army Group April 1943
 7, 8, 10 LAA Btys
 19th LAA Rgt – joined April 1943; left AA Command May 1943
 60, 104, 290 LAA Btys
 46th LAA Rgt – from 65 AA Bde September 1942; left November 1942 and went to North Africa
 137, 219, 243 LAA Btys
 70th LAA Rgt – from 1AA Gp December 1942; left by March 1943 and went to North Africa and Italy
 208, 209, 215 LAA Btys
 84th LAA Rgt – from 12 AA Division August; to 35 AA Bde November 1942
 201, 251, 461, 448 LAA Btys
 97th LAA Rgt – from 65 AA Bde June 1942; to 47 AA Bde by March 1943
 221, 232, 301, 480 LAA Btys
 108th LAA Rgt – attached from 52nd (Lowland) Infantry Division November1942; returned May 1943
 354, 355, 356 LAA Btys
 112th (DLI) LAA Rgt – returned April 1943; to 21st Army Group May 1943
 364, 365, 366 LAA Btys
 124th (Highland) LAA Rgt – from 47 AA Bde November1942
 404, 411, 412 LAA Btys
 131st LAA Rgt – from 71 AA Bde November 1942; returned May 1943
 432, 433, 434, 435 LAA Btys
 139th LAA Rgt – from 5 AA Gp April 1943; later to 21st Army Group
 94, 177, 230 LAA Btys
 71st (East Lancashire) S/L Rgt – from 4 AA Gp April 1943; reduced to cadre September 1943
 462, 463, 464 S/L Btys
 409 AA Gun Operations Room (GOR) at Fareham – until October 1942
 28, 29 Sub-operations rooms
 313 AA GOR at Newhaven, East Sussex – from October 1942
 5 AA Bde Mixed Signal Office Mixed Sub-Section – part of 2 Company, 5 AA Division Mixed Signal Unit, Royal Corps of Signals until October 1942
 409 AA GOR Mixed Signal Section
 4 Mixed Signal Company HQ – part of 2 AA Group Signals, RCS, from October 1942
 5 AA Bde Mixed Signal Office Mixed Sub-Section
 313 AA GOR Mixed Signal Section

After the constant turnover, 5 AA Bde was reduced to just two operational units by August 1943: 179th (M) HAA Rgt and 130th (Queen's Edinburgh, Royal Scots) LAA Rgt.

Order of Battle 1943–44
After August 1943, 5 AA Bde's composition was as follows:
 124th HAA Rgt – from 1 AA Gp September; to 3 AA Gp October 1943
 219, 410, 412, 415 LAA Btys
 134th (M) HAA Rgt – from 4 AA Gp October 1943
 459, 460, 461,  583 (M) HAA Btys
 179th (M) HAA Rgt – to 4 AA Gp October 1943
 584, 606, 607, 641 (M) HAA Btys
 19th LAA Rgt – returned January 1944
 84th LAA Rgt – returned from 38 AA Bde August 1943; to Shetland Garrison January 1944
 201, 448, 461 LAA Btys – disbanded January 1944
 251 LAA Bty
 130th LAA Rgt – to 71 AA Bde August 1943
 406, 407, 428, 446 AA Btys
 140th LAA Rgt – from 3 AA Gp August; to 5 AA Gp October 1943
 418, 420, 429, 430 LAA Btys
 313 GOR at Newhaven
 316 GOR at Brighton
 346 GOR at Chichester
 4 (M) Signal Co
 5 AA Bde (M) Signal Section Office
 313, 316, 346 GOR (M) Signal Sections
 18 Line Maintenance Section

Operation Overlord

2 AA Group was responsible for defending the assembly camps, depots and embarkation ports for Operation Overlord. In November 1943 it was also ordered to plan for the expected onslaught of V-1 flying bombs (codenamed 'Divers') against London, to which it responded by planning a thick belt of 8-gun HAA positions across the likely flight path, backed by LAA guns. Meanwhile, the Group also had to deal with a sharp increase in Luftwaffe air raids trying to reach London during the winter of 1943–4 (the so-called 'Little Blitz'). AA Command relieved the burden on 2 AA Group by bringing down 6 AA Group HQ from Scotland and giving it responsibility for the Overlord ports in the Solent–Portsmouth area. 5 AA Brigade, together with 134th (M) HAA Rgt, 19th LAA Rgt and its GORs, transferred to the command of 6 AA Group in March 1944.

Order of Battle March–August 1944
During this period 5 AA Bde's composition was as follows:
 134th (M) HAA Rgt
 459, 460, 461, 583 (M) HAA Btys
 138th HAA Rgt – from 102 AA Bde May 1944
 419, 424, 437, 438 HAA Btys
 19th LAA Rgt – to 3 AA Gp June 1944
 221, 263, 294 LAA Btys
 85th LAA Rgt – from 67 AA Bde May 1944
 52, 201, 304, 448 LAA Btys
 136th LAA Rgt – from 5 AA Gp May; to 67 AA Bde July 1944
 386, 453, 474 HAA Btys

Operation Diver

The first V-1 missiles were fired against London in June, a week after D-Day, and Operation Diver was activated. 2 AA Group's HAA batteries left their 'Overlord' sites and moved to pre-planned sites across the 'funnel' of V-1 flightpaths. 5 AA Brigade was one of four reinforcing brigade HQs moved into the Group within two weeks, taking over units deployed in the area. However, the results were disappointing, and after a fortnight AA Command changed its tactics. Firstly, mobile HAA guns were replaced with static installations that could traverse more quickly to track the fast-moving targets. These were emplaced on temporary 'Pile platforms' named after the Command-in-Chief of AA Command, Gen Sir Frederick 'Tim' Pile. Secondly, the HAA gun belt was moved to the coast and interlaced with LAA guns to hit the missiles out to sea. This new belt was divided into six brigade sectors, with 5 AA Bde HQ taking charge of one sector under 1 AA Gp. The whole process involved the movement of hundreds of guns and vehicles and thousands of servicemen and women, but a new 8-gun site could be established in 48 hours. The guns were constantly in action, but the success rate against the 'Divers' steadily improved, until over 50 per cent of incoming missiles were destroyed by gunfire or fighter aircraft. This phase of Operation Diver ended in September after the V-1 launch sites in Northern France had been overrun by 21st Army Group.

Order of Battle August 1944
When it rejoined 2 AA Gp, 5 AA Bde's composition was as follows:
 127th HAA Rgt
 396, 411, 422, 433 HAA Btys
 136th HAA Rgt
 182, 409, 432, 468 HAA Btys
 140th LAA Rgt
 457, 459, 464 LAA Btys
 95th LAA Rgt
 297, 302, 460 LAA Btys

Order of Battle September–November 1944

After it redeployed under 1 AA Gp in September, 5 AA Bde's composition was as follows:
 119th HAA Rgt – from 40 AA Bde November 1944
 372, 377, 378 HAA Btys
 138th HAA Rgt
 419, 424, 437, 438 HAA Btys
 141st (M) HAA Rgt – to 2 AA Gp October 1944
 486, 490, 493 (M) HAA Btys
 183rd (M) HAA Rgt – to 2 AA Gp October 1944
 564, 591, 608, 640 (M) HAA Btys
 85th LAA Rgt – returned by October 1944
 52, 201, 304, 438

 98th LAA Rgt – from 102 AA Bde November 1944
 305, 306, 481 LAA Btys
 131st LAA Rgt – to 57 AA Bde October 1944
 432, 433, 434 LAA Btys
 135th LAA Rgt
 445, 447, 450 LAA Btys
 136th LAA Rgt – to 102 AA Bde November 1944
 386, 453, 474 LAA Btys
 140th LAA Rgt – returned from 102 AA Bde November 1944
 457, 459, 464
 143rd LAA Rgt – to 2 AA Gp October 1944

By October 1944, 5 AA Bde's HQ establishment was 11 officers, 9 male other ranks and 28 members of the ATS, together with a small number of attached drivers, cooks and mess orderlies (male and female). In addition, the brigade's Mixed Signal Office Section comprised 5 male other ranks and 19 ATS.

Winter 1944–45
A new phase of Operation Diver began when the Luftwaffe began launching V-1s from aircraft over the North Sea. AA Command had to reorganise its defences, stripping HAA guns from inland sites and moving them to the coast of East Anglia, together with Pile platforms and accommodation huts. In November 1944 a new 9 AA Gp was formed to take over the 'Diver' defences in East Anglia and 5 AA Bde was transferred to this new formation.

By the end of 1944, 21st Army Group was suffering a severe manpower shortage, particularly among the infantry.  At the same time the Luftwaffe was suffering from such shortages of pilots, aircraft and fuel that serious aerial attacks on the United Kingdom could be discounted. In January 1945 the War Office began to reorganise surplus anti-aircraft regiments in the UK into infantry battalions, primarily for line of communication and occupation duties in North West Europe, thereby releasing trained infantry for frontline service.

Order of Battle November 1944–May 1945

After 5 AA Bde was transferred to 9 AA Gp it had the following composition:
 119th HAA Rgt – left December 1944
 372, 377, 378 HAA Btys
 122nd HAA Rgt – joined by March 1945
 397, 400, 401 HAA Btys
 127th HAA Rgt – returned December 1944
 396, 422, 433 HAA Btys
 134th (M) HAA Rgt – returned by March 1945
 459, 460, 461 (M) HAA Btys
 138th HAA Rgt – left by March 1945
 419, 424, 437, 438 HAA Btys
 143rd (M) HAA Rgt – returned by March 1945
 494, 495 HAA Btys
 67th LAA Rgt – left to become a garrison unit December 1944
 200, 202, 279 LAA Btys
 135th LAA Rgt – left December 1944
 445, 447. 450 LAA Btys

Postwar
After Victory in Europe, AA Command was rapidly run down. 9 AA Gp was disbanded and 5 AA Bde reverted to the command of 2 AA Gp, with 127th and 140th HAA Rgts, 14th and 19th LAA Rgts under command. By November 1945, 5 AA Bde comprised just 140th and 150th HAA Rgts.

When AA Command was reorganised in 1947 it had some Regular units under its control in addition to its largely Territorial make-up. These included some under 5 AA Bde based at Aldershot under 2 AA Gp, which covered Southern and South-Western England. These units were all disbanded by the late 1950s.
 44 S/L Rgt – originally 3rd Field Rgt; converted to 44th HAA Rgt by 30 September 1948, disbanded March 1958
 77 HAA Rgt – originally 6th HAA Rgt, to British Army of the Rhine 1951
 78 S/L Rgt – originally 1st S/L Rgt (see above), converted to 78th HAA Rgt by 30 September 1948, disbanded February 1954
 97 HAA Rgt – originally 150th HAA Rgt (see above), disbanded by 10 November 1948

5 AA Brigade was converted into 5 Army Group Royal Artillery (AA) in British Army of the Rhine on 1 November 1950, replacing a disbanded formation. It was placed in suspended animation on 31 March 1958 and formally disbanded on 1 January 1962.

Footnotes

Notes

References
 Major L.F. Ellis, History of the Second World War, United Kingdom Military Series: The War in France and Flanders 1939–1940, London: HM Stationery Office, 1954/Uckfield, Naval & Military Press, 2004.
 Major L.F. Ellis, History of the Second World War, United Kingdom Military Series: Victory in the West, Vol II: The Defeat of Germany, London: HM Stationery Office, 1968/Uckfield: Naval & Military, 2004, .
 Gen Sir Martin Farndale, History of the Royal Regiment of Artillery: The Years of Defeat: Europe and North Africa, 1939–1941, Woolwich: Royal Artillery Institution, 1988/London: Brasseys, 1996, .
 J.B.M. Frederick, Lineage Book of British Land Forces 1660–1978, Vol II, Wakefield, Microform Academic, 1984, .
 Maj-Gen B.P. Hughes, Honour titles of the Royal Artillery, Woolwich: Royal Artillery Institution, 1975.

 Airey Neave, The Flames of Calais: A Soldier's Battle 1940, London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1972/Barnsley: Leo Cooper, 2003, .
 Sir Frederick Pile's despatch: "The Anti-Aircraft Defence of the United Kingdom from 28th July, 1939, to 15th April, 1945" London Gazette 18 December 1947.
 Brig N.W. Routledge, History of the Royal Regiment of Artillery: Anti-Aircraft Artillery 1914–55, London: Royal Artillery Institution/Brassey's, 1994,
 Col J.D. Sainsbury, The Hertfordshire Yeomanry Regiments, Royal Artillery, Part 2: The Heavy Anti-Aircraft Regiment 1938–1945 and the Searchlight Battery 1937–1945; Part 3: The Post-war Units 1947–2002, Welwyn: Hertfordshire Yeomanry and Artillery Trust/Hart Books, 2003, .

External sources
 BBC WW2 People's War.
 Keith Brigstock 'Royal Artillery Searchlights', presentation to Royal Artillery Historical Society at Larkhill, 17 January 2007.
 British Army units from 1945 on
 Generals of World War II
 History Net.
 Royal Artillery 1939–1945
 Graham Watson, The Territorial Army 1947

Military units and formations established in 1940
Air defence brigades of the British Army
Anti-Aircraft brigades of the British Army in World War II

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


Image Title: Furniture Antique Glass Pendant Lights For Low Ceilings Tips With Regard To Cool Pendant Lights Ideas. Filename: furniture-antique-glass-pendant-lights-for-low-ceilings-tips-with-regard-to-cool-pendant-lights-ideas.jpg. Image Dimension: 800 x 787 pixels. Images Format: jpg/jpeg. Publisher/Author: Murray Miller. Uploaded Date: Monday - March 04th. 2019 02:50:47 AM. Category: Architecture. Image Source: decoist.com.
Tap The Thumbnail Bellow to See Related Gallery of "Furniture Antique Glass Pendant Lights For Low Ceilings Tips With Regard To Cool Pendant Lights Ideas"


[252 U.S. 126, 130] Mr. Paul Synnestvedt, of Philadelphia, Pa., for respondent.
In 1909 Mathew T. Chapman and Mark C. Chapman filed an application for a patent on an 'improvement in deep well pumps.' The mechanism involved was complicated, the specification intricate and long, and the claims numbered 34. The application met with unusual difficulties in the Patent Office, and, although it had been regularly prosecuted, as required by law and the rules of the Office, it was still pending without having been passed to patent in 1915, when the controversy in this case arose.
Almost 20 months later, on June 6, 1915, the Chapmans filed a divisional application, in which the claims of the Wintroath patent were copied and on this application such proceedings were had in the Patent Office that on March 24, 1916, an interference was declared between it and the Wintroath patent.
Wintroath admits that the invention thus in issue was clearly disclosed in the parent application of the Chapmans, but he contends that their divisional application, claiming the discovery, should be denied, because of their delay of nearly 20 months in filing, after the publication of his patent and the Chapmans, while asserting that their parent application fully disclosed the invention involved, admit that the combination of the Wintroath patent was not specifically claimed in it.
Pursuant to notice and the rules of the Patent Office, Wintroath, on April 27, 1916, filed a statement declaring that he conceived the invention contained in the claims of his patent 'on or about the 1st of October, 1910,' and thereupon, because this date was subsequent to the Chapman filing date, March 10, 1909, the Examiner of Interferences notified him that judgment on the record would be entered against him unless he showed cause within 30 days why such action should not be taken.
Within the rule day Wintroath filed a motion for judgment in his favor 'on the record,' claiming that conduct on the part of the Chapmans was shown, which estopped [252 U.S. 126, 134] Them from making the claims involved in the interference and which amounted to an abandonment of any rights in respect thereto which they may once have had. The Chapmans contended that such a motion for judgment could not properly be allowed 'until an opportunity had been granted for the introduction of evidence.' But the Examiner of Interferences, without hearing evidence, entered judgment on the record in favor of Wintroath, and awarded priority to him, on the ground that the failure of the Chapmans to make claims corresponding to the interference issue for more than one year after the date of the patent to Wintroath, constituted equitable laches which estopped them from successfully making such claims. This holding, based on the earlier decision by the Court of Appeals in Rowntree v. Sloan, 45 App. D. C. 207, was affirmed by the Examiner in Chief, but was reversed by the Commissioner of Patents, whose decision, in turn, was reversed by the Court of Appeals in the judgment which we are reviewing.
In its decision the Court of Appeals holds that an inventor whose parent application discloses, but does not claim, an invention which conflicts with that of a later unexpired patent, may file a second application making conflicting claims, in order to have the question of priority of invention between the two determined in an interference proceeding, but only within one year from the date of the patent, and that longer delay in filing constitutes equitable laches, which bars the later application. By this holding the court substitutes a one-year rule for a two-year rule which had prevailed in the Patent Office for many years before the Rowntree decision, rendered in 1916, and the principal reason given for this important change is that the second application should be regarded as substantially an amendment to the parent application, and that it would be inequitable to permit a longer time for filing it than the one year allowed by R. S. [252 U.S. 126, 135] 4894 (Comp. St. 9438), for further prosecution of an application after office action thereon.
The question presented for decision is, whether this conclusion is justifiable and sound, and the answer must be found in the statutes and rules of the Patent Office made pursuant to statute, prescribing the action necessary to be taken in order to obtain a patent, for the whole subject is one of statutory origin and regulation.
The statute which is fundamental to all others in our patent law (R. S. 4886, as amended March 3, 1897, 29 Stat. 692, c. 391 [Comp. St. 9430]), provides with respect to the effect of a United States patent upon the filing of a subsequent application for a patent on the same discovery, which is all we are concerned with here, that any discoverer of a patentable invention, not known or used by others in this country, before his invention or discovery, may file an application for a patent upon it, at any time within two years after it may have been patented in this country. Such a prior patent is in no sense a bar to the granting of a second patent for the same invention to an earlier inventor, ventor, provided that his application is filed not more than two years after the date of the conflicting patent. The applicant may not be able to prove that he was the first inventor, but the statute gives him two years in which to claim that he was and in which to secure the institution of an interference proceeding in which the issue of priority between himself and the patentee may be determined in a prescribed manner.
This section, unless it has been modified by other statutes, or in effect by decisions of the courts, is plainly not reconcilable with the decision of the Court of Appeals, and should rule it. Has it been so modifled?
The section of the Revised Statutes dealing with inventions previously patented in a foreign country (R. S. 4887, as amended March 3, 1903, 32 Stat. 1225 [Comp. St. 9431]), provides that no patent shall be granted on an [252 U.S. 126, 136] application for a patent if the invention has been patented in this or any foreign country more than two years before the date of the actual filing of the application in this country.
Section 4897 of the Revised Statutes (16 Stat. 202, c. 230, 35 [ Comp. St. 9443]), in dealing with the renewal of an application in case of failure to pay the final fee within six months of notice that a patent has been allowed, provides that another application may be made for the invention 'the same as in the case of an original application.' But such application must be made within two years after the allowance of the original application.
And in R. S. 4920 (Comp. St. 9466), providing for pleadings and proofs in infringement suits it is provided that when properly pleaded and noticed the defendant may prove in defense that the patent declared on had been patented prior to the plaintiff's supposed invention 'or more than two years prior to his application for a patent therefor,' and also that the subject-matter of the patent 'had been in public use or on sale in this country for more than two years' before the plaintiff's application for a patent.
Thus through all of these statutes runs the time limit of two years for the filing of an application, there is no modification in any of them of the like provision in R. S. 4886, as amended (Comp. St. 9430), and no distinction is made between an original and a later or a divisional application, with respect to this filing right.
A brief reference to the decisions will show that until the Rowntree Case, the courts had left the filing right under R. S. 4886, as untouched as the statutes thus had left it.
There is no suggestion in the record that the original application of the Chapmans was not prosecuted strictly as required by the statutes and the rules of the Patent Office, and therefore it is settled their rights may not be denied or diminished on the ground that such delay may [252 U.S. 126, 137] have been prejudicial to either public or private interests.
'A party seeking a right under the patent statutes may avail himself of all their provisions, and the courts may not deny him the benefit of a single one. These are questions not of natural but of purely statutory right. Congress, instead of fixing seventeen, had the power to fix 30 years as the life of a patent. No court can disregard any statutory provisions in respect to these matters on the ground that in its judgment they were unwise or prejudicial to the interests of the public.' United States v. American Bell Telephone Co. Et al., 167 U.S. 224, 247 , 17 S. Sup. Ct. 809, 813 (42 L. Ed. 144).
In reissue cases, where there was no statutory time prescribed for the making of an application for the correction of a patent, and although unusual diligence is required in such cases, this court adopted the twoyear rule as reasonable by analogy to the law of public use before an application for a patent. Mahn v. Harwood, 112 U.S. 354, 363 , 5 S. Sup. Ct. 174, 6 Sup. Ct. 451; Wollensak v. Reiher, 115 U.S. 96, 101 , 5 S. Sup. Ct. 1137.
To this we must add that not only have later or divisional applications not been dealt with in a hostile spirit by the courts, but, on the contrary, designed as they are to secure the patent to the first discoverer, they have been favored to the extent that where an invention clearly disclosed in an application, as in this case, is not claimed therein but is subsequently claimed in another application, the original will be deemed a constructive reduction of the invention to practice and the later one will be given the filing date of the earlier, with all of its priority of right. Smith & Griggs Manufacturing Co. v. Sprague, 123 U.S. 249, 250 , 8 S. Sup. Ct. 122; Von Recklinghausen v. Dempster, 34 App. D. C. 474, 476, 477.
These, a few from many, suffice to show that prior to the Rowntree Case, the decisions did not tend to modification of the statutory two-year rule.
The Court of Appeals recognizes all this law as applicable to an original application, but it finds warrant for [252 U.S. 126, 138] cutting the time limit to one year in the case of later applications in three reasons, viz.: Because it is inequitable to allow so long a time as two years for filing a new application, claiming a discovery for which a patent has issued; because such a time allowance is contrary to public policy, as unduly extending the patent monopoly if the new application should prevail; and, finally and chiefly, as we have pointed out, because, regarding such a later application as substantially an amendment to the original application the court discovers, in analogy to the time allowed by statute for amendment to applications (R. S. 4894), a reason for holding that the failure for more than one year to make a later, in this case a divisional, application, amounts to fatal laches.
However meritorious the first two of these grounds may seem to be they cannot prevail against the provisions of the statutes (United States v. American Bell Telephone Co., supra), and the third does not seem to us persuasive because of the difference in the kind of notice which is given to the applicant cant under R. S. 4894, and that given him when a patent is issued conflicting with his application.
The one-year provision of R. S. 4894, as amended March 3, 1897, 29 Stat. 693 (Comp. St. 9438), is that an applicant for a patent, who shall fail to prosecute his application within one year after Patent Office action thereon, 'of which notice shall have been given' him, shall be regarded as having abandoned his application, unless the Commissioner of Patents shall be satisfied that such delay was unavoidable. But when a conflict between inventions disclosed in applications escapes the attention of the Patent Office Examiners (R. S. 4904 [Comp. St. 9449]), and a patent is issued, with claims conflicting with the disclosures of a pending application, the applicant receives only such notice of the conflict as he is presumed to derive from the publication of the patent. In the one case the notice [252 U.S. 126, 139] is actual and specific, in the other it is indefinite and constructive only. When the great number of patents constantly being issued is considered, many of them of a voluminous and complicated character, such as we have in this case, with many and variously worded claims, such an implied notice must necessarily be precarious and indefinite to a degree which may well have been thought to be a sufficient justification for allowing the longer two-year period to inventors who must, at their peril, derive from such notice their knowledge of any conflict with their applications.


Our Zest range of soft fabrics is inspired by nature and will be the stylish addition to your home.
Revamp your home with a beautiful Zest Berry Roman blind.
The blinds are very good quality, and delivered as promised. The price was excellent.
The service was very efficient. The blind fitted perfectly and the colour and pattern were true to the pictures on the website.
Very pleased with the service and the quality of the product. The blind looks great and was easy to fit.
Very well made blinds, pattern joins in material really good. Customer service and speed of delivery excellent.
Delivery as stated. Blinds and fixings are excellent quality.
Good quality blind custom made and halftime the price to some high street stores. Excellent quality and delivery time also great. Very well made.


Classes and Events — Curds & Co.
View our calendar here or scroll through the list of classes here.
Settle in for an evening of fun and/or learning when you join us for a class at Curds & Co.
Date night, girls night out, or just breaking out of a rut, are all good reasons to eat cheese.
Space is limited and classes fill quickly!
We offer a full curriculum of fun, tasty, informative, and memorable events.
CHEESE FOCUSED and WINE FOCUSED classes guide you through exciting pairings in a non-intimidating evening of food and drink.
Dig deep and learn about one of the eight different types of cheese and what makes them special. Sign up for one class or enjoy all 8!
Go far away in the comfort of our classroom and experience the world of cheese in a focus country.
Pack your bags and join us for experiences near and far. Visit goat farms in the spring for kidding season or grab your passport and travel the world.
Go beyond tasting and discover more about you and your palette. Dive deep into each of our 6 different flavor pairing profiles or spend time with the senses of the season.
Don't just sit there, do something! Our Art of the Cheese Plate class will have you prepping bries and slicing Goudas in no time. In our Cheese Plate Personality class you discover more about yourself and your cheesy ways.
From exciting collaboration with other food forward companies, to our mysterious BLINDFOLDED!, you'll experience an evening to remember.


David Nalbandian's countryman, Maximo Gonzalez, has defeated Pablo Carreno-Busta of Spain in the first round of ATP Kitzbuhel which is taking place in Austria.
Busta was given 8th seed in this tournament and he was supposed to emerge victorious against a qualifier like Gonzalez, but, it wasn't to be.
It was not a mere defeat. It was a hammering, an embarrassing result for Busta. Yes, he managed to win a set, but, he never looked better than his opponent.
Busta got trailed by 0-3 in the first set and couldn't manage to wipe out that deficit ever after that. The start was poor for him in the following set too and it seemed that he might be losing in the straight sets, but, he bounced back with a couple of breaks to seal that set and equalize the proceedings.
But, in the decider, Gonzalez was dominant again as he clinched the match in style with 6-3, 4-6, 7-5 score line.
Gonzalez, who is an experienced player now having spent quite a few years in the professional circuit, is presently at the 83rd position in the World rankings. Busta is 28 places ahead of him at no. 55.
Apart from Busta, the only other seeded player who was in action yesterday in Kitzbuhel was Dominic Thiem. He was up against the Brazilian player Joao Souza.
That match was also a three setter, but, there was no upset there as Thiem pulled it off to move ahead in the tournament.
The 20-year old Austrian had actually put himself in trouble by serving quite a few double faults in the earlier parts of the match, but, he made up for that later on with superb winners.
Thiem is the 5th seeded player in the tournament. He is the 50th ranked player in the world.


please blog more about your silk experience and training. I recently started silk training a couple of weeks ago and love IT!! I leave for Kuwait tomorrow and trying to find a way I can still train with silks while I'm over there. Hoping I can rig it in my apartment.


text:
Basketball is primarily associated with certain countries. Obviously, the United States where the game was created and home to the NBA. But also, Canada, where the creator of the game was born; Europe and China. But one part of the world often gets overlooked, and that part of the world has played a big part in the development of basketball. I am talking about the land down under: Australia.
It did not take long after its creation for the game of basketball to make its way from Springfield, Massachusetts, to nearly half way around the world in Australia. The first recorded game of basketball was played at a gym in Adelaide in 1897.
Unlike the United States and the rest of the world, basketball did not take off in the Australia until well into the 20th century. Australia did not make the summer Olympics until 1956, and only made it that year because the games where held in Melbourne. The Aussies finished 12th, which is their worst finish to date.
Australia started to become a fixture in the Summer games following the 1972 games, and has appeared in every games since. Their 13 consecutive Olympic appearances is both the longest current active streak and longest streak in Olympic history. it should be noted however, that the United States did qualify for the 1980 Moscow games but did not participate. Australia's 15 Olympic appearances are tied for 2nd most with Brazil and behind only the United States 19 appearances.
Australia has finished 4th four times, doing so in 1988, 1996, 2000, and 2016. Because of their 4th place finishes, they have yet to medal in the Olympics. The 2021 games in Tokyo are probably Australia's best chance to finally medal in the Olympics.
Much like the United States, Australia has put a lot less effort into the basketball world championships or as it is now called the FIBA world cup. Australia made its first appearance in the World Cup in 1970, where they finished 12th. The Aussies have had mixed results in the World Cup, in 1982 they finished 5th, but followed that up four years later in 1986 with 17th place finish. In 2019 they finished an Aussie best 4th.
One place where Australia has dominated is in the FIBA Oceanic cup. From 1971-97 they won every tournament. They did not participate in 1999 due to the Olympics being held in Sydney and receiving an automatic bid in the Olympic games. But in 2003 they won it again. Their one slip up was in 2009 when they lost to New Zealand.
Success in basketball is becoming more and more common for Australia and they are competing with the best teams in the world. In 2019, they defeated the United States for the first time when the US sent NBA players.
Australia has been sending players to the NBA and some have been rather successful. In the 1990s the greatest Australian basketball player was Andrew Gaze. Gaze played 22 seasons in the NBL as is by far the best player that league has ever saw. But when Gaze attempted to make the transition to the NBA he struggled. Gaze a 7-time NBL MVP played a total of 26 games with the Washington Bullets and San Antonio Spurs of the NBA. Gaze did become one of the few NBL champions to also win an NBA championship and one of only two NBL MVPS (The other being Andrew Bogut) to win an NBA title.
Starting in the early 2000s many Australian talents began finding their way into the NBA. Until 2000 only 5 Australian players, Luc Longley, Gaze, Shane Heal, Mark Bradtke, and Chris Anstey, played in the NBA. Of the five, only Longley had a relevant NBA career. Since 2000, 16 players from Australia have suited up for an NBA team.
2004 is when the shift for Australia really started to happen, that year Andrew Bogut, who played collegiately at the University of Utah, was selected #1 overall in the NBA draft. Bogut went on to become thus far, the only all-NBA player to never make an all-star team, as well as win a title with the Warriors. Bogut is arguably the greatest non-all-star in NBA history.
In 2012 another Australian born player was drafted #1 overall in Kyrie Irving. Irving, however, is a US citizen and represents the United States internationally. Irving would be the first Australian born player to be selected to an all-star game.
In 2018 a third Australian would be drafted #1 when Ben Simmons was selected. Simmons also became an all-star, and he and Irving are considered top 20 players in the NBA right now.
Australia will be a team to be reckoned with in the future. They have a deep roster going into the 2021 Olympics that includes NBA notables: Aron Bynes, Andrew Bogut, Thon Maker, Joe Ingles, Patty Mills, Ben Simmons, Matthew Dellavedova and Dante Exum. It is likely that they challenge the elites teams like Argentina, France and the United States for a medal.
Posted in Celtics, Jazz, NBA All-star, News, Spurs, Suns, Warriors
Rockets swap Westbrook for Wall

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Q: Using NSDateFormatter to convert Int to Month String I've been using another answer on here to do this. I'm storing my date as Int's in my DB but I want it to display as a full month in the UI. So on refresh/reload I'm trying to get the Int month value -> convert to String full month -> display that in textfield.
I've currently got it logging out the months and the full date but in the textfield on reload it shows as (null) / 05 / 1993
What am I doing wrong??
NSString *monthString = [self.datePickerFormat monthSymbols] [(self.birthdayMonth - 1)];
NSLog(@"%@",monthString);

NSString *dateString = [NSString stringWithFormat:@"%@ / %ld / %ld",monthString,(long)self.birthdayDay,(long)self.birthdayYear];
NSLog(@"%@",dateString);

self.birthdayField.text = [NSString stringWithFormat:@"%@",dateString];

self.birthdayMonth is an Integer. self.datePickerFormat is a NSDateFormatter that i've declared as a property. EDIT: Ok the logs don't come back with correct months so I don't know what's happening..
Is there another better way of doing this too? Thanks for any help!

A: To get month name from month number, use date formatter this way:
NSInteger month = 7;
NSDateFormatter *dateFormatter = [[NSDateFormatter alloc] init];
NSString *monthString = dateFormatter.monthSymbols[(month-1)];

Month name will be in your phone locale language. Although it's not recommended, you can override locale settings:
dateFormatter.locale = [NSLocale localeWithLocaleIdentifier:@"en_US"];

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


text:
Q: Specific table view on mobile only with CSS I have a table layout, and it looks good on desktop (769px+).

    Product
    Unit Price
    Qty
    Subtotal

        Image
        Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet
        31.23 USD
        2 pcs
        62.46 USD
        x

        Image
        Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet
        31.23 USD
        2 pcs
        62.46 USD
        x

        Image
        Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet
        31.23 USD
        2 pcs
        62.46 USD
        x

But I want this a little bit different on my mobile (and tablet) (768px-).
Here is a JSFiddle example: http://jsfiddle.net/etd89po5/

You can see: the current table is on the upper picture, and I want the same appearance as the table below, but I dont want to duplicate the HTML code (for example: make two tables, and hide one with media query), I want to do this with CSS only.
If it is necessary, I can change the table elements to divs.
Any ideas?

A: Keep it as a
 for accessibility definitely. In your media query for smaller sizes, you could do something like:
@media all and (max-width: 768px) {
    tr { display: block; border: 1px solid grey; padding: 1em; text-align: center; }
    td { display: inline; padding: 0 .5em; }
}

That wouldn't force a line break though. The easiest way to get around that would be to add a
 element to your second cell and hide it in your desktop CSS:
td>br { display: none; }
@media all and (max-width: 768px) {
    td>br { display: block; }
}

A: Can you do this?

Full table:

....

....

@media only screen and (min-device-width: 768px){
 #desktop{
  display:block;
 }
 #mobile{
  display:none;
 }
}
@media only screen and (min-device-width: 480px){
 #desktop{
  display:none;
 }
 #mobile{
  display:block;
 }
}


Singapore Invites, launched by the Singapore Tourism Board, encourages residents and people from around the world to invite their family and friends to experience Singapore together. In the first of a five-part series, street dancers Marcus Tan and Rachel Lee share a slice of Singapore that holds a special place in their hearts.
Street dancers Marcus Tan and Rachel Lee often find themselves back at square one, literally.
Their favourite spot in Singapore is a life-size chess board called Giant Chess at the Sports Hub, on Level 3, above the Singapore Sports Museum.
The black-and-white board, painted on the floor, comes with 24-inch chess pieces that enable gameplay; but that is not why the couple go there. They practise popping, the style of dancing in which they specialise.
The square, and a nearby grass patch, present them with unobstructed dancing space; but it is the view that makes it special to them.
"It's in the perfect location, among different backdrops. There's the city skyline, Flyer, the Tanjong Rhu estate and the Indoor Stadium," said Mr Tan, 30, a marketing manager. The chess board is a quirky feature, in contrast to the urban Singapore he can see from there, he added.
They won't get this itinerary if they Google to find 10 things to do in Singapore.
Mr Marcus Tan and Ms Rachel Lee have entertained their foreign dancer friends many times. These locations come in tops for dancing on their list - with good reason.
Located in Orchard Link, it is central and the best place to catch all kinds of dancers and dance styles. There are also other street artists taking part in events and activities such as parkour and cheerleading. Power points are provided for speakers as well.
It is sheltered and there is good ventilation. There are power points for speakers to use. Like *Scape, it is centrally located, and offers dining and shopping options nearby.
A popular dancing spot, it boasts a big open space. It also attracts heavy human traffic, so there is always an audience.
There are many different spots for dancing - and air-conditioning too. This makes it one of the more comfortable places to practise.
These spots, say the couple, are the most convenient locations for dancers to meet up with those living nearby.
He also appreciates the spot for the openness and freedom it provides. What is more, the area is always lit up, making it a good place to practise or have a gathering, even late into the night.
Ms Lee, 26, a freelance designer, said it has all that a tourist needs to enjoy Singapore's skyline, except crowds. The couple practise dancing there at least once a week.
Having travelled all over the world to dance, they have fellow dancers from other countries asking to be taken around Singapore every other month.
Such friends are lucky, as they see parts of Singapore that other tourists usually do not. Apart from the Sports Hub, the Esplanade underpass, *Scape in Orchard Link and even the Rail Corridor are popular spots among dancers here.
Mr Tan also takes his guests on a three- to four-hour drive round Singapore. "Usually, it's after dinner. We will be too full to dance or do anything else, so a road trip is the best thing to do," he said.
The drive also offers their friends an authentic side of Singapore, said Ms Lee.
They would go to places such as Geylang, where they sit by the roadside to eat tropical fruits such as durian, mangosteen and rambutan.
Other places include Labrador Park, Little India and Changi Village. The road trip would sometimes turn up gems. Once, they chanced upon an Egyptian-themed house on Sentosa, complete with a pair of pharaohs at the entrance.
The drive would also take them to places such as Jurong Hill, which has a lookout tower on its summit and offers a bird's eye view of Jurong.
Ms Lee said she likes being able to take friends to lesser-known parts of Singapore: "They won't get this itinerary if they Google to find 10 things to do in Singapore."


text:
Klaus Wilms (* 5. März 1939 in Kiel) ist ein deutscher Hämatologe und Onkologe und emeritierter Professor an der Julius-Maximilians-Universität Würzburg.

Leben
Wilms studierte Humanmedizin an der Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel und der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München und promovierte 1963 zum Thema "Vergleichende Untersuchungen an antibioticaresistenten Enterobacteriaceen". Nach dem medizinischen Staatsexamen arbeitete er in Krankenhäusern in Waiblingen, Heidenheim an der Brenz und Wiesbaden und am Universitätsklinikum Tübingen. Von 1965 bis 1967 war er als "Research Fellow" an der Universität zu Köln und danach wieder am Universitätsklinikum Tübingen tätig, wo er sich 1972 zum Thema "Untersuchungen der DNS-Synthese in menschlichen Blutzellen als Grundlage für die Therapie der akuten Leukämien" habilitierte, ein Jahr später erhielt er die Venia legendi. 1975 absolvierte Wilms einen Forschungsaufenthalt an der Division of Oncology der University of Washington in Seattle, 1978 wurde er zum außerplanmäßigen Professor der Eberhard Karls Universität Tübingen ernannt. 1982 wurde Wilms auf den Lehrstuhl Innere Medizin II der Julius-Maximilians-Universität Würzburg berufen und war dort außerdem Direktor der Medizinischen Poliklinik (heute Medizinische Klinik und Poliklinik II) des Universitätsklinikums Würzburg. Während dieser Tätigkeit war er von 1991 bis 1994 Mitglied der Kommission zur Gründung einer medizinischen Fakultät an der Technischen Universität Dresden. Er war zudem Dekan und Prodekan der Würzburger Medizinischen Fakultät. Klaus Wilms wurde 2004 emeritiert und trat in den Ruhestand ein.

Auszeichnungen
 Träger des Bundesverdienstkreuzes Erster Klasse (1999)
 Träger des Bayerischen Verdienstordens (2005)
 Ehrenmitglied der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Innere Medizin (2011)
 Dr. Emil Salzer-Preis (1973)
 Träger der Medaille "Bene Merenti in Gold" der Julius-Maximilians-Universität Würzburg (2011)
 Albert-Kölliker-Lehrpreis der Medizinischen Fakultät der Julius-Maximilians-Universität Würzburg (2004)
 Ehrenmitglied der Siebold-Gesellschaft Würzburg

Mitgliedschaften
 Universitätsbund Würzburg
 Kuratorium der Treuhandstiftung "Futura" des Bürgerspitals zum Heiligen Geist Würzburg

Weblinks
 Übersicht über die Publikationen von Klaus Wilms auf PubMed

Einzelnachweise

Mediziner (20. Jahrhundert)
Internist
Hämatologe
Onkologe
Träger des Bundesverdienstkreuzes 1. Klasse
Träger des Bayerischen Verdienstordens
Hochschullehrer (Julius-Maximilians-Universität Würzburg)
Deutscher
Mediziner (21. Jahrhundert)
Geboren 1939
Mann


text:
If you want an iPhone X for the holidays, start planning now
Phil Schiller, Apple's senior vice president of worldwide marketing, introduces the new iPhone X during a special event at the Steve Jobs Theater in September in Cupertino, Calif. (Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)
By Hayley Tsukayama
Hayley Tsukayama
Reporter covering consumer technology
If you're planning on getting an iPhone X in time for the holidays, you may have a harder time getting your hands on one than usual, according to analysts.
Several Apple analysts have said that the number of people who want an iPhone X will far outstrip the number of phones available at launch — and even well into 2018. Daniel Ives of GBH Insights said this week that he thinks it could be April or even May before the balance between supply and demand settles and people simply will be able to walk into a store and buy one.
"Based on our analysis, survey work, and pent up demand we believe preorder demand could top 40 million units of iPhone X roughly 'doubling' current supply," Ives said in a note this week to investors.
The potential for a longer wait, analysts say, is due to how complicated the iPhone X is to make. Between the new type of screen and the new facial-recognition sensors, Apple is having to deal with a different set of components than usual.
The imbalance between supply and demand is expected to be pretty large: Analyst Ming-Chi Kuo of KGI Securities predicts that Apple will have 2 million or 3 million phones ready when they hit stores on Nov. 3.
In its holiday quarter in 2016, Apple sold 74.5 million iPhones — keep in mind that there was no iPhone X-like phone last year and that the iPhone 7 was considered a modest seller, because of incremental upgrades.
Demand for the iPhone X is thanks to its advanced facial recognition, a new type of screen and a new depth-sensing camera. The phone will also be able to use the facial-recognition technology for payments. Other features include wireless charging, which is also available on the iPhone 8 and iPhone 8 Plus, and the addition of "Portrait Mode" to the front-facing camera. (That means better selfies, of course.)
The anticipation for the iPhone X, which will start at $999, has softened sales of the iPhone 8 and iPhone 8 Plus as customers wait to compare the models, a trend that analysts started noting after those phones launched last month. A September-October survey from 451 Research found that 69 percent of consumers were interested in buying an iPhone in the next 90 days — the highest number the firm has recorded since Apple redesigned the iPhone 6 in 2014, to have a larger screen.
The iPhone X opens for preorder on Friday online at 3:01 a.m. Eastern time and will be on sale in stores a week later. If you want to land an iPhone X in time for the holidays, then it's best to try to get in on the first rush of orders. In other words, plan your shopping a bit earlier than you would in other years — at least, if you want to avoid wrapping up an IOU instead of an iPhone X.
Hayley Tsukayama Hayley Tsukayama covers consumer technology for The Washington Post. A Minnesota native, she joined The Post in 2010 after completing her master's degree in journalism. Follow
Dow 27,366.3
NASDAQ 8,230.68