The Park Avenue Bank and Charles J. Antonucci, Sr. Essay Example

The Park Avenue Bank and Charles J. Antonucci, Sr. Paper It was at this time that Charles J. Ontological, Sir. , became the president and CEO of the Park Avenue Bank. He also assumed a place on the Banks Board of Directors. Antagonistic was responsible for organizing a group of investors that invested more than $10 million into the Park Avenue Bank in 2004, which had four retail branches In the Manhattan and Brooklyn areas of New York City, and he apparently Impressed those Investors with his previous work in turning around troubled banks (Well and Bray). In addition to holding CEO, president, and board positions for the Park Avenue Bank, Antagonistic was also involved in a number f other businesses. Antagonistic was also the 100% owner of Bedford Consulting Group, Inc. , Easy Wealth Group, Ltd. , and the Park Avenue Property and Casualty Insurance Company. Additionally, he had 20% ownership in three properties in Fishkill, NY: one at 1042 Main Street, another at 2 Broad Street, and the last at 48 Jackson Street. Furthermore, Antagonistic also held 20% ownership In a company called TTS Capital. All of these businesses will play roles In the schemes In which Ontological engaged. In short, Antagonistic abused his position at the Park Avenue Bank by engaging in at least eight different schemes involving fraud and/or misuse of company funds. We will write a custom essay sample on The Park Avenue Bank and Charles J. Antonucci, Sr. specifically for you for only $16.38 $13.9/page Order now We will write a custom essay sample on The Park Avenue Bank and Charles J. Antonucci, Sr. specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer We will write a custom essay sample on The Park Avenue Bank and Charles J. Antonucci, Sr. specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer In a majority of these schemes, he had help in the form of co- conspirators, none of whose identities have been revealed at this point. The main co- conspirator will be referred to as Mr.. X throughout this paper. Although it is unknown how many people work for him, at least three of Mr.. Axs employees and/or associates also conspired with Ontological. Those three are referred to as Mr.. W, Mr.. Y, and Mr.. Z. Mr.. X became a client of the Park Avenue Bank in 2007, and he brought with him a umber of different businesses, each one of which required a separate account at the Bank. In the complaint against Antagonistic, those businesses are referred to as the Oxygen-related entities and include the following companies: Oxygen Unlimited, LLc; oxygen unsuited II, LLc; RAH; SQ, LLc; River Falls Botanical services; SAD Realty, Inc. ; and TTS Capital, LLC. As was noted above, Ontological had 20% ownership of TTS Capital. As with the businesses that Antagonistic owned, many of the Oxygen- related entities figured into the scams that Antagonistic and his co-conspirators carried out. One additional company that played a key role was the US Insurance Group, or USIA. USIA also had an account at the Bank, and Oxygen Unlimited had a 25% put option on USIA, which suggests that Mr.. X had a hand in USIA as well. Furthermore, Mr.. Axs administrative assistant was an account signer on all of the Oxygen-related entitles as well as on ten SUSIE account. As tatterdemalion, Ontological was Involved in at least eight different schemes in his time at the Park Avenue Bank. One of these involved the leasing and maintenance of the three properties in Fishkill, NY, in which he had partial ownership. Beginning sometime in 2005, the Park Avenue Bank began leasing the house at 1042 Main Street. The first floor of the house was reserved for the Bedford Consulting Group, which was owned by Antagonistic, and the second floor was used as an office by Bank employees. Additionally, the Bank paid approximately $750,000 to have a storage center built behind the house to accommodate the Banks information technology recovery equipment. The Park Avenue Bank also entered into lease agreements in 2008 for both the property at 2 Broad Street and at 48 Jackson Street. Although Antagonistic indicated that both properties would be used as storage/ assister recovery sites by the Bank, as of 2010, the Bank had yet to use either property in any way. However, despite using only one of the three properties, the Bank paid out more than $1 million in rent and other expenses to these three properties. At no time was it disclosed that Antagonistic had part ownership of any of these buildings. Another scheme involves another one of the companies that Antagonistic owned Easy Wealth Group, Ltd. In early 2006, Antagonistic approached one of his associates with a business opportunity: Easy Wealth was losing money, and Antagonistic was hoping to recoup his investment. He therefore asked his associate to take over the business, promising that the Park Avenue Bank would provide financing. Antagonistic helped his associate prepare the necessary loan paperwork, making it appear that the associate had owned Easy Wealth since 2004 and omitting any connection with Antagonistic. He also helped to create false documents for the application, including a falsified profit and loss statement for Easy Wealths 2005 fiscal year, and false personal financial statements for his associate. Based on the falsified application, the Bank approved a loan of $300,000 to Easy Wealth. At no time as Antibiotics ownership or and financial interest in Easy Money disclosed. In fact, Antagonistic himself personally approved the $300,000 loan. Shortly after his associate was approved for the loan, Antagonistic asked his associate for $70,000 in two interest- free loans. Both times, the associate made checks payable to Bedford Consulting Group. Antagonistic finally repaid some of the money in 2008, but never repaid $20,000 of the loan nor any of the interest that the associate had to pay on the money. Between May 2006 and June 2009, Antagonistic incrementally approved credit increases to Easy Wealth from the original $300,000 to $400,000. He also twice extended the loan due date by a year (for a total of two years), and then in April 2009 extended the due date by another 90 days. In June 2009, Easy Wealth ceased to operate and Antibiotics associate filed for bankruptcy. At that time, Easy Wealth still owed the Bank the entire $400,000 balance. The Bank therefore had to write off the entire amount of the loan, causing a $400,000 loss. As mentioned earlier, Antagonistic had 20% ownership in one of the Oxygen-related entities, TTS Capital. In November 2008, TTS Capital opened an account at the Park Avenue Bank, but no money was deposited r transferred into that account. During 2008, Mr.. W, who worked for Mr.. X, wrote two checks against the TTS Capital Account, totaling $67,000. Antagonistic had one of his employees approve the overdraft fees and pay the checks. In November 2009, the bank was forced to write off those overdraft fees, causing a $67,000 loss. At no point In tale was It Lacrosse Tanat Ontological Ana a Atlanta Interest In I SF capita Antagonistic also approved a number of other overdraft fees on various Oxygen-related entities. In fact, as was disclosed in a Department of Justice Press Release, Antagonistic approved approximately $8. Lion worth of overdrafts from 2007 to 2009 on various accounts associated with Mr.. X. In exchange for this service, Antagonistic was allowed to use Mr.. Axs personal plane. According to witnesses, Antagonistic took at least 10 flights on Mr.. Axs plane, none of which Antagonistic paid for. According to the complaint filed against him, Antagonistic flew, among other places, to Phoenix, Arizona, to attend the Super Bowl in February 2008, to Augusta, Georgia, to watch the Masters Golf Tournament, to Florida to visit a relative, and to Panama. Again, at no time was his relationship with Mr.. X disclosed. In 2009, the Bank failed to approve some overdraft fees on some of the Oxygen-related accounts, and some checks written against those account therefore bounced. Mr.. Axs administrative assistant informed Antibiotics assistant that the free plane rides were over and that Antagonistic could no longer use Mr.. Axs personal plane. Perhaps the most notorious scheme in which Antagonistic engaged involved his alleged investment of $6. 5 million into the Park Avenue Bank. According to the IBID and NYSE, banks are rated as well-capitalized, adequately capitalized, and intellectualized. In August 2008, Antagonistic was informed that the Bank had been downgraded from well capitalized to merely adequately capitalized. By early October 2008, the Bank had been further downgraded to intellectualized. In order to appease regulators and restore the Banks position, Antagonistic invested what he claimed to be $6. 5 million of his own money into the Bank in exchange for common stock from the holding company. He did this over three separate transactions: a $2. 6 million investment made on October 8, 2008; another $2. 4 million investment made on October 16, 2008; and a final $1. 5 million investment made on November 17, 2008. In reality, these investments were a sham. The $6. 5 million was actually money from the Bank that was transferred to a variety of accounts and then reinvested into the Bank under the guise of a large personal investment from Antagonistic. On October 6, 2008, Oxygen Unlimited, one of the companies with which Mr.. X was associated, drew down $2. 6 million against an existing line of credit. The money was then deposited on the same day into the Oxygen Unlimited II account. Later that day, the entire amount was then transferred to the SIGH account, with which Mr.. X was also associated. Yet still on the same day, the entire $2. Lion was then transferred from the SIGH account to a Bank of America account for Bedford Consulting Group. As mentioned earlier, Antagonistic owned 100% of Bedford. On October 7, a check written for $2. 6 million from Bedford Consulting Group was deposited into Antibiotics personal checking account at the Park Avenue Bank. On October 8, Antagonistic wrote a check to the Bank for $2. 6 million, calling it a personal capital investment. After making this investment, Antagonistic wrote a letter to the IBID asking that that Banks status be restored to adequately capitalized so that the Bank could continue to accept brokered deposits. Based on this information, the IBID did in fact grant the waiver and allowed The Park Avenue Bank to engage in certain brokered deposit transactions (Bevel). On October 14, 2008, Oxygen Unlimited line of credit was increased to $6. 4 million. On the same day, barely a week after drawing down $2. 6 million, Oxygen Unlimited drew down an allotting amount was deposited into the Oxygen Unlimited II account. On October 15, the $1. 6 million was transferred to the SIGH account. Also on October 15, 2008, Antagonistic approved an $800,000 loan to USIA, which was deposited into the USIA account on he same day. That brought the total transferred or deposited into the USIA account on October 15 to $2. 4 million. On the same day, SIGH wired $2. 4 million to the Bedford Consulting Group account at Bank of America. Also on the same day, a check for $2. 4 million was issued from the Bedford Consulting Group and deposited into Antibiotics personal checking account at the Park Avenue Bank. On October 16, Antagonistic wrote a check to the Bank for $2. 4 million, again calling it a personal capital investment. On November 15, 2008, Antagonistic approved an additional $2. Million in a line of credit to USIA. On November 17, SIGH drew down $1. 5 million from this newly extended line of credit and deposited the money into the SIGH account at the Bank. On November 10, SIGH wired the $1. 5 million to the Bedford Consulting Group account at Bank of America, Just as had previously occurred with the two prior investments. On November 10, a $1. 5 million check was issued from Bedford and was deposited into A ntibiotics personal checking account at the Park Avenue Bank, again, Just as had occurred with the two prior investments. On November 17, Antagonistic made a final personal capital investment of $1. Million to the Park Avenue Bank. This brought his total investment to $6. 5 million. In exchange for his investment, Antagonistic gained 308,349 shares of Park Avenue Bannock, Inc. , the Park Avenue Bank holding company. This brought Antibiotics common stock ownership in Park Avenue Bannock to 316, 617 shares, from Just over 1% to approximately 52% of the common stock issued and available. This in effect made him a majority shareholder. Prà ªt Barbara, the United States attorney for the Southern District of New York, is quoted by Wiser and Dash as saying that Antibiotics personal capital investment was the functional equivalent of Monopoly money. Yet this did not stop Antagonistic from trying to gain as much leverage as he could from his supposed investment. On October 14, 2008, the Treasury Department announced the beginning of the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP). On November 14, 2008, the Park Avenue Bank applied for $11,352,480 in TAPER funds. The application was accompanied by a letter from the Banks outside counsel, who indicated in the letter that the Bank had managed to raise $5 million in capital by October 17, 2008, due to the capital investment by Antagonistic (the additional $1. Million was not yet invested at the time of the letter). In addition, according to witnesses, while the application was being reviewed, Antagonistic stressed to the IBID in multiple phone conversations that he had made a sizable personal investment, and that this investment should count favorably toward the Bank getting approved for TARP funds. And in December 2008, when the Bank sent the IBID its proposed capital restoration plan, it noted as an important matter than Antagonistic had invested $6. 5 million as part of the effort to stabilize and restore the Banks capital position (Bevel). Unfortunately for Antagonistic, the Banks financial situation continued to deteriorate while its TARP application was under review, and in February 2009, Antagonistic was informed that the IBID would not be able to recommend the Park Avenue Bank for approval of TARP funds. The Bank subsequently withdrew its application, later indicating in a press release that the Walworth was completely voluntary Owe to ten Banks change AT pollen regarding TARP funds. Antagonistic is quoted in multiple sources as having said, l dont need TARP money, I dont necessarily want TARP money, we are a strong bank, and management is committed to putting capital in as it is needed. To add to Antibiotics woes, in April 2009, USIA filed for bankruptcy. As was described earlier, SIGH had an $800,000 loan and another $1. Million in credit that was funneled through various accounts so that Antagonistic could make his investments. At the time that USIA filed for bankruptcy, the entire $2. 3 million balance was still outstanding. Antagonistic did not want the $6. 5 million scam uncovered, so he could not risk SIGH defaulting on the $2. 3 million outstanding it would raise too many red flags. So another scheme was devised in order to pay off the $2. Million that SIGH owed the Park Av enue Bank. In June 2009, SQ, one of the Oxygen-related entities, purchased a majority of stock in General Employment Enterprise, Inc. GEE). Mr.. W became the chairman of GEEs Board of Directors and appointed Mr.. Y as CEO of GEE. Both Mr.. W and Mr.. Y work for Mr.. X. SQ required GEE to open an account at the Park Avenue Bank and to transfer funds into that account. On July 23, 2009, $2. 3 million was transferred from the GEE account to a Park Avenue Insurance account, which was also at the Park Avenue Bank. As aforementioned, Antagonistic owned Park Avenue Property and Casualty Insurance Company, which is the company with which the Park Avenue Insurance account was associated. The $2. 3 million transfer was authorized by Mr.. Y, who was at the time CEO of GEE. On August 17, 2009, Antagonistic used the $2. 3 million to pay off Gigs outstanding balance. In order to cover the misappropriation of GEEs funds, Antagonistic created a bogus 90-day Certificate of Deposit Receipt, which Mr.. Y showed to the GEE Board of Directors when asked about the missing $2. 3 million. In early October of 2009, Antagonistic returned a certification of the CD, falsely indicating that the $2. Million CD existed when in fact it did not. Numerous bank employees have verified that no 90-day, $2. 3 million CD for GEE ever existed. From November 24 to December 9, 2009, $2. 3 million was wired to the GEE Park Avenue account from various Oxygen-related entities, none of which had business dealing with GEE. The final scam of which Antagonistic is accused involved defrauding two Florida pastors out of $103,940. In 2009, the two Florida pastors and their congregation raised some money to start construction on a church (they currently met at a rented store front, but were hoping for something more permanent). The pastors had met with architects and contractors and were looking into financing options when they met Mr.. Z. As previously mentioned, Mr.. Z worked for Mr.. X. Mr.. Z told the pastors that he could quadruple their money by investing in discounted treasury bonds which would sell at a profit in foreign markets. Mr.. Z provided fabricated proof that he had engaged in such transactions previously and that he worked for the Park Avenue Bank in New York. The pastors bought in to the scam and wired $103,940 to the Park Avenue Insurance account at the Park Avenue Bank on July 3, 2009. Antagonistic enthroned the Park Avenue Insurance account, as was previously detailed. The pastors, of course, never saw a return on their investment, nor have they been able to reclaim any of the original investment. They called the bank, sent letters to the bank, and even visited the bank in New York in an attempt to see Antagonistic, for whom they believed Mr.. Z worked. It all amounted to nothing. In the five weeks following the transfer AT ten Into Nils Park Avenue Insurance account, Ontological wrote $35,000 in checks to Mr.. Z and transferred $60,000 of those funds to his personal checking account. In September 2009, Antagonistic directed his assistant to book a flight for Mr.. Z to Switzerland. On October 27, 2009, Antagonistic was interviewed by IBID examiners and was specifically questioned about the source of the $6. 5 million that he purportedly invested. During the interview, Antagonistic was presented with a diagram that showed the movement of funds from Park Avenue Bank loan proceeds, to Oxygen Unlimited, Oxygen Unlimited II, and USIA, to the Bedford Consulting Group, and ultimately to Antagonistic himself. Antagonistic tried to convince the examiners that the $6. 5 million came from the sale of some of the Bedford stock to Mr.. W, but the numbers did not line up. On October 30, Antagonistic resigned his position at the bank. On March 12, 2010, the NYSE seized the Park Avenue Bank and appointed the IBID as received. The IBID sold the bank to Valley National Bank out of New Jersey, which immediately took control of operations (Wiser and Dash). On March 15, Charles J. Antagonistic, Sir. Was arrested at his home. He was charged with 10 counts of fraud, bribery, embezzlement, and misappropriation of funds (Wee and Bray). In researching this case, I was struck repeatedly at how Antagonistic was able to get away tit so much without being caught. While it is true that he was ultimately caught, his shenanigans remained undetected for some time, and when they were brought to light, it wasnt by the Bank or the Banks auditors, who were conspicuously missing from the complaint filed against Antagonistic. Ironically, Antagonistic was under investigation for 5 months before the claim was filed against him, and he was under investigation because the Ecuador office of the Department of Homeland Securitys U. S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) learned of a person interested in engaging in an illegal business deal with Antagonistic. The matter was turned over first to the New York ICE office, then to the El Dorado Task force, which specifically investigates financial crimes (Wee and Bray, ICE Press Release). All in all, the counts against him read almost like fiction that one man could have done so much in such a relatively short period of time. And the unnamed co-conspirators makes it read like a business mob story. But unfortunately, it is all true. One man, who put his personal greed ahead of his professional duties, helped to bring about the end of he Park Avenue Bank (Prà ªt Barbara, as quoted in Minister).

Cylinder Deactivation Variable Engine Displacement

Cylinder Deactivation Variable Engine Displacement What is cylinder deactivation? It is a method used to create a variable displacement engine that is able to supply the full power of a large engine under high load conditions as well as the fuel economy of a small engine for cruising. The Case for Cylinder Deactivation In typical light load driving with large displacement engines (e.g. highway cruising), only about 30 percent of an engine’s potential power is utilized. Under these circumstances, the throttle valve is only slightly open and the engine has to work hard to draw air through it. The result is an inefficient condition known as pumping loss. In this situation, a partial vacuum occurs between the throttle valve and the combustion chamber- and some of the power that the engine makes is used not to propel the vehicle forward, but to overcome the drag on the pistons and crank from fighting to draw air through the small opening and the accompanying vacuum resistance at the throttle valve. By the time one piston cycle is complete, up to half of the potential volume of the cylinder has not received a full charge of air. Cylinder Deactivation to the Rescue Deactivating cylinders at light load forces the throttle valve be opened more fully to create constant power, and allows the engine to breathe easier. Better airflow reduces drag on the pistons and the associated pumping losses. The result is improved combustion chamber pressure as the piston approaches top dead center (TDC) and the spark plug is about to fire. Better combustion chamber pressure means a more potent and efficient charge of power is unleashed on the pistons as they thrust downward and rotate the crankshaft. The net result? Improved highway and cruising fuel mileage. How Does it All Work? In a nutshell, cylinder deactivation is simply keeping the intake and exhaust valves closed through all cycles for a particular set of cylinders in the engine. Depending on the design of the engine, valve actuation is controlled by one of two common methods: For pushrod designs- when cylinder deactivation is called for- the hydraulic valve lifters are collapsed by using solenoids to alter the oil pressure delivered to the lifters. In their collapsed state, the lifters are unable to elevate their companion pushrods under the valve rocker arms, resulting in valves that cannot be actuated and remain closed.For overhead cam designs, generally a pair of locked-together rocker arms is employed for each valve. One rocker follows the cam profile while the other actuates the valve. When a cylinder is deactivated, solenoid controlled oil pressure releases a locking pin between the two rocker arms. While one arm still follows the camshaft, the unlocked arm remains motionless and unable to activate the valve. By forcing the engine valves to remain closed, an effective â€Å"spring† of air is created inside the deactivated cylinders. Trapped exhaust gasses (from previous cycles before the cylinders were deactivated) are compressed as the pistons travel on their upstroke and then decompressed and push back on the pistons as they return on their down stroke. Because the deactivated cylinders are out of phase, (some pistons traveling up while others are traveling down), the overall effect is equalized. The pistons are actually just going along for the ride. To complete the process, fuel delivery for each deactivated cylinder is cut-off by electronically disabling the appropriate fuel injection nozzles. The transition between normal operation and deactivation is smoothed by subtle changes in ignition and camshaft timing as well as throttle position all managed by sophisticated electronic control systems. In a well-designed and executed system, the switching back-and-forth between both modes is seamless- you really don’t feel any difference and have to consult the dash gauges to know that its happened. Read more about cylinder deactivation at work in our review of the GMC Sierra SLT flex-fuel, and see the instant fuel economy it generates in the GMC Sierra test drive photo gallery.

Cylinder Deactivation Variable Engine Displacement

Cylinder Deactivation Variable Engine Displacement What is cylinder deactivation? It is a method used to create a variable displacement engine that is able to supply the full power of a large engine under high load conditions as well as the fuel economy of a small engine for cruising. The Case for Cylinder Deactivation In typical light load driving with large displacement engines (e.g. highway cruising), only about 30 percent of an engine’s potential power is utilized. Under these circumstances, the throttle valve is only slightly open and the engine has to work hard to draw air through it. The result is an inefficient condition known as pumping loss. In this situation, a partial vacuum occurs between the throttle valve and the combustion chamber- and some of the power that the engine makes is used not to propel the vehicle forward, but to overcome the drag on the pistons and crank from fighting to draw air through the small opening and the accompanying vacuum resistance at the throttle valve. By the time one piston cycle is complete, up to half of the potential volume of the cylinder has not received a full charge of air. Cylinder Deactivation to the Rescue Deactivating cylinders at light load forces the throttle valve be opened more fully to create constant power, and allows the engine to breathe easier. Better airflow reduces drag on the pistons and the associated pumping losses. The result is improved combustion chamber pressure as the piston approaches top dead center (TDC) and the spark plug is about to fire. Better combustion chamber pressure means a more potent and efficient charge of power is unleashed on the pistons as they thrust downward and rotate the crankshaft. The net result? Improved highway and cruising fuel mileage. How Does it All Work? In a nutshell, cylinder deactivation is simply keeping the intake and exhaust valves closed through all cycles for a particular set of cylinders in the engine. Depending on the design of the engine, valve actuation is controlled by one of two common methods: For pushrod designs- when cylinder deactivation is called for- the hydraulic valve lifters are collapsed by using solenoids to alter the oil pressure delivered to the lifters. In their collapsed state, the lifters are unable to elevate their companion pushrods under the valve rocker arms, resulting in valves that cannot be actuated and remain closed.For overhead cam designs, generally a pair of locked-together rocker arms is employed for each valve. One rocker follows the cam profile while the other actuates the valve. When a cylinder is deactivated, solenoid controlled oil pressure releases a locking pin between the two rocker arms. While one arm still follows the camshaft, the unlocked arm remains motionless and unable to activate the valve. By forcing the engine valves to remain closed, an effective â€Å"spring† of air is created inside the deactivated cylinders. Trapped exhaust gasses (from previous cycles before the cylinders were deactivated) are compressed as the pistons travel on their upstroke and then decompressed and push back on the pistons as they return on their down stroke. Because the deactivated cylinders are out of phase, (some pistons traveling up while others are traveling down), the overall effect is equalized. The pistons are actually just going along for the ride. To complete the process, fuel delivery for each deactivated cylinder is cut-off by electronically disabling the appropriate fuel injection nozzles. The transition between normal operation and deactivation is smoothed by subtle changes in ignition and camshaft timing as well as throttle position all managed by sophisticated electronic control systems. In a well-designed and executed system, the switching back-and-forth between both modes is seamless- you really don’t feel any difference and have to consult the dash gauges to know that its happened. Read more about cylinder deactivation at work in our review of the GMC Sierra SLT flex-fuel, and see the instant fuel economy it generates in the GMC Sierra test drive photo gallery.

Cylinder Deactivation Variable Engine Displacement

Cylinder Deactivation Variable Engine Displacement What is cylinder deactivation? It is a method used to create a variable displacement engine that is able to supply the full power of a large engine under high load conditions as well as the fuel economy of a small engine for cruising. The Case for Cylinder Deactivation In typical light load driving with large displacement engines (e.g. highway cruising), only about 30 percent of an engine’s potential power is utilized. Under these circumstances, the throttle valve is only slightly open and the engine has to work hard to draw air through it. The result is an inefficient condition known as pumping loss. In this situation, a partial vacuum occurs between the throttle valve and the combustion chamber- and some of the power that the engine makes is used not to propel the vehicle forward, but to overcome the drag on the pistons and crank from fighting to draw air through the small opening and the accompanying vacuum resistance at the throttle valve. By the time one piston cycle is complete, up to half of the potential volume of the cylinder has not received a full charge of air. Cylinder Deactivation to the Rescue Deactivating cylinders at light load forces the throttle valve be opened more fully to create constant power, and allows the engine to breathe easier. Better airflow reduces drag on the pistons and the associated pumping losses. The result is improved combustion chamber pressure as the piston approaches top dead center (TDC) and the spark plug is about to fire. Better combustion chamber pressure means a more potent and efficient charge of power is unleashed on the pistons as they thrust downward and rotate the crankshaft. The net result? Improved highway and cruising fuel mileage. How Does it All Work? In a nutshell, cylinder deactivation is simply keeping the intake and exhaust valves closed through all cycles for a particular set of cylinders in the engine. Depending on the design of the engine, valve actuation is controlled by one of two common methods: For pushrod designs- when cylinder deactivation is called for- the hydraulic valve lifters are collapsed by using solenoids to alter the oil pressure delivered to the lifters. In their collapsed state, the lifters are unable to elevate their companion pushrods under the valve rocker arms, resulting in valves that cannot be actuated and remain closed.For overhead cam designs, generally a pair of locked-together rocker arms is employed for each valve. One rocker follows the cam profile while the other actuates the valve. When a cylinder is deactivated, solenoid controlled oil pressure releases a locking pin between the two rocker arms. While one arm still follows the camshaft, the unlocked arm remains motionless and unable to activate the valve. By forcing the engine valves to remain closed, an effective â€Å"spring† of air is created inside the deactivated cylinders. Trapped exhaust gasses (from previous cycles before the cylinders were deactivated) are compressed as the pistons travel on their upstroke and then decompressed and push back on the pistons as they return on their down stroke. Because the deactivated cylinders are out of phase, (some pistons traveling up while others are traveling down), the overall effect is equalized. The pistons are actually just going along for the ride. To complete the process, fuel delivery for each deactivated cylinder is cut-off by electronically disabling the appropriate fuel injection nozzles. The transition between normal operation and deactivation is smoothed by subtle changes in ignition and camshaft timing as well as throttle position all managed by sophisticated electronic control systems. In a well-designed and executed system, the switching back-and-forth between both modes is seamless- you really don’t feel any difference and have to consult the dash gauges to know that its happened. Read more about cylinder deactivation at work in our review of the GMC Sierra SLT flex-fuel, and see the instant fuel economy it generates in the GMC Sierra test drive photo gallery.

History of the Jet Ski

History of the Jet Ski Personal water craft have been around for more than half a century. The â€Å"Jet Ski,† however, is a trademark used by Kawasaki for its line of personal motorized water craft. Although the word Jet Ski has now become a more generic term describing all personal watercraft, well use it to refer specifically to the Kawasaki vessels. Early Years The earliest water scooters- as they were originally called- were introduced to Europe in the mid 1950s by motorcycle makers looking to expand their markets. The British company Vincent produced some 2,000 of its Amanda water scooters in 1955, but it failed to create the new market Vincent had hoped for. Despite the failure of European water scooters to catch on in the 1950s, the 60s saw continued attempts at tinkering with the idea. The Italian company Mival introduced its Nautical Pleasure Cruiser, which required users to hang onto the craft from behind. Australian motocross enthusiast Clayton Jacobsen II decided to design his own version so that its pilots would be standing up. His big breakthrough, though, was switching from the old outboard motors to an internal pump-jet. Jacobsen made his first prototype out of aluminum in 1965. He tried again a year later, this time opting for fiberglass. He sold his idea to the snowmobile manufacturer Bombardier, but they failed to catch on and Bombardier gave up on them. With patent back in hand, Jacobsen went to Kawasaki, which brought out its model in 1973. It was called the  Jet Ski. With the benefit of Kawasaki’s marketing, the Jet Ski won a loyal audience as a way to waterski without the need  for a boat. It was a small audience, however, as remaining on board while standing up- especially in choppy water- remained a challenge. Jet Skis Go Big The next decade planted the seeds for an explosion in the  popularity of personal water craft. For one thing, new models were introduced that let  riders do what they could do back on the old water scooters. The ability to sit down helped pilot stability. New designs not only improved stability further, but they allowed for two riders at a time, introducing a social element to personal water crafts. Bombardier got back into the game with the introduction of the Sea-Doo, which went on to become the best-selling personal watercraft in the world. With further advances in engine technology and emissions, today’s personal water craft enjoy new-found success in every metric. They can go faster than ever, reaching 60 miles an hour. And they now sell more than any boat in the world. Jet Ski Competitions As the popularity of personal water craft started to take off, enthusiasts started to organize races and competitions. The premiere racing series event is the  P1 AquaX, which launched in the United Kingdom in May 2011. London-based sports promoter Powerboat P1  created the racing series and expanded to the United States in 2013. And by 2015, as many as  400 riders from 11 countries had signed up to compete in an AquaX event. The organizers are looking to expand to other countries.

Cell Biology Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Cell Biology - Essay Example They found out that when antibodies of GRASPs were introduced, daughter cells resulting from mitosis had improper stacking of cisternae membranes. Nonetheless, the findings have been inconclusive due to other studies using equally logical and accepted techniques. The studies conducted by other scientists employing gene knockout (removal of gene responsible for GRASP production) and siRNA depletion on animal cells, such as that of Behnia et al (2007), have shown that proper stacking occurred even in the absence of GRASPs. General protein secretion was also unencumbered. Furthermore, the absence of GRASPs in plants has not prevented them from acquiring proper stacking of the cisternia membranes. It is in the confusion regarding the true physiological function of the GRASPs that Kutzen and his colleagues conducted their study. They sought an explanation on why GRASPs exists by determining and establishing its role in cellular development. The authors present a new perspective on the physiological role of GRASPs. They contend that these proteins are not needed for conventional protein secretion, growth (i.e. stacking) and viability of vegetative cells. Their importance lies in making sure that AcbA, a protein that initiates spore differentiation, are secreted. Since AcbA lacks a signal sequence for its transport to the site where terminal differentiation occurs, GRASPs present an unconventional mechanism that facilitates the secretion and transportation of AcbA. Since spore differentiation ultimately results to fruiting bodies containing mature spores, GRASPs can be thought of as necessary for the reproductive mechanism of the cell and not the stacking of the membranes. 3.0 Major Findings Thru the use of cells of Dictyostelium, a type of mold, the authors found that GRASPs are not necessary for insuring cell growth and viability. This was the result of comparing the Golgi structure of cells containing GRASP and those without thru the use of immunoflourescence microscopy. The structure, even the stacking of the Golgi membranes, was similar for both cases. In proving their hypothesis, the authors studied the prespore cell type of the mold. With molds that have GRASPs as the control and those without as the experimental variable, they were able to determine that the viability of the mature spores in the control was 100% as compared to the 25% of those negative for GRASPs. Digging deeper, the authors were able to determine that the decrease in viability was the result of the insignificant production of SDF-2, a major peptide factor necessary for proper spore formation. According to the Anjard and Loomis (2005), SDF-2 is generated in the cleaving of AcbA. The cleaving of the protein AcbA initiates a loopback process that ultimately results to a successful sporulation event. The question now that faced the authors was to determine how GRASPs affected the production of AcbA. After having conducted Western blot analysis on moulds which did not have GRASPs, they found that AcbA was still as abundant as that in normal conditions. The only logical

Discuss the qualities of effective business leaders. Reference at Research Paper

Discuss the qualities of effective business leaders. Reference at least two business leaders . What methods do they use to create a culture of motivation and high performance - Research Paper Example They should have the ability to influence their subordinates in a positive manner with the aim that they are motivated to perform much better. A democratic working style is much better than an authoritarian working style for the leader. A leader with a democratic outlook will strive towards the betterment of the organization rather than his personal benefits. Effective business leaders are usually self-starters and they themselves always strive to improve their performance. They make themselves always available in their organization (Harvard Business School, â€Å"Becoming an effective leader†). Leaders should be visionaries and they should have the capability to articulate their vision to their employees. They should have good communication skills; they should be willing to take risks and always should have the willingness to learn (Holbeche, L., â€Å"Motivating People in Lean Organizations†). Bill Gates has been described many a times as a fierce competitor but no one can deny the fact that he is a great visionary who has always been a step ahead of his times. Microsoft has certain practices that contribute in motivating their employees. The product designers of Microsoft work in small teams. They are provided assignments that are challenging and they are also given recognition for their work. Performance assessment is carried out twice a year in Microsoft. Certain performance objectives are set and employees may compare themselves against those objectives. These self-evaluations are rated by their managers. The rating ranges from exceptional to a very low level. The low level of performance means that it is not matching up to a certain minimum standard. The good performance is rewarded by increase in salary. Bill Gates personally visits those employees who have performed exceedingly well and they are honored for their achievement. The employees are awarded by giving sha res of the company to