There are two final notes I must add to the conclusion. In a way, you might call them disclaimers. One is about the South West Airlines 'ordeal'. I don't I made a post in itself about it, but I'm still not sure if they actually got fined. It didn't state it clearly on the internet through various articles, but my aviation safety teacher said they did. I would like to think that they did get fined and it wasn't for show, but, I'm not sure. Either way it wasn't a good thing and hopefully these inspection problems won't happen again any time soon. Second note is I may find the need to edit a thing or two later on, but I don't think I'll need to.
While human factors is a broad category, it presents just as much risk if not more than the others do. All we have to do to reduce accident, incursion and incident rates is raise the safety standards and improve technology as soon as practicable. It may take a long time to completely revamp an aircraft, but all improvements made go a long way, no matter how costly. In aviation there are still many things to be improved navigation and safety wise, even for air traffic controllers. The bottom line is, we have to continue to be vigilant, cautious and safe when dealing with aircraft and all things related to flight, no matter how safe any aircraft and place may be.
As for a final note to anyone who may read this end of my little project, my updates won't stop here! Anything I find interesting in my course of learning anything under the sun related to aviation will be put here, mainly for memory purposes, keeping track of what I've learned, how I feel about the things I learn, and/or perhaps just because I can! Oh, also because I love helicopters and aviation is awesome.
Thursday, April 24, 2008
How Safe is Safety? Part 4-Lessons Learned
We all learn from our mistakes, especially when we suffer from aviation accidents of various degrees in severity. We learn from incidents too. While this second to last concluding post is brief, this further proves despite incidents and no matter how many accidents have occured in the past, jet aircraft are safe. As will be discussed later, some of the blame for various contributing factors and probable causes in each accident can be non-related to human error. These 'other' factors (under broad ranges) include weather and terrorism. The other two points blame to the humans responsible: the industry and human error-or on a broader scope, human factors.
However, you can't point the blame for any single type of factor. Accidents always involve a mix of factors-some of which often can't be confirmed. If you go to a site like airline-safety.net, you'll find many accident reports that are incredibly extensive-and a large portion of the findings aren't confirmed. A few accident scenarios never happen again after one bad accident, while others do in with varying contributing factors; only until later do we act on certain issues that are revealed because of those accidents.
Some of the many accidents that I learned about in my aviation safety class proves all this. For example, take the United Airlines Flight 585 accident and the Us Air flight 427. Both were 737 accidents and the first occurred in 1991, the second occurred in 1994. Granted thats a long time ago, but one of the major causes of the accident was not weather related, but a fault by the Boeing industry-there was some kind of failure in the rudder design that made the plane loose control. I'm not going to describe into the accident because I'm lazy, but if you're curious, look both of these accidents up-the NTSB had lots of trouble with learning about what really went wrong with the first accident in 1991 until the SECOND one happened. Then after that Boeing revamped the 737's rudder system, and the aircraft became more reliable. Things like this happen over and over again in the aviation world-we just have to continue to be as careful as possible.
However, you can't point the blame for any single type of factor. Accidents always involve a mix of factors-some of which often can't be confirmed. If you go to a site like airline-safety.net, you'll find many accident reports that are incredibly extensive-and a large portion of the findings aren't confirmed. A few accident scenarios never happen again after one bad accident, while others do in with varying contributing factors; only until later do we act on certain issues that are revealed because of those accidents.
Some of the many accidents that I learned about in my aviation safety class proves all this. For example, take the United Airlines Flight 585 accident and the Us Air flight 427. Both were 737 accidents and the first occurred in 1991, the second occurred in 1994. Granted thats a long time ago, but one of the major causes of the accident was not weather related, but a fault by the Boeing industry-there was some kind of failure in the rudder design that made the plane loose control. I'm not going to describe into the accident because I'm lazy, but if you're curious, look both of these accidents up-the NTSB had lots of trouble with learning about what really went wrong with the first accident in 1991 until the SECOND one happened. Then after that Boeing revamped the 737's rudder system, and the aircraft became more reliable. Things like this happen over and over again in the aviation world-we just have to continue to be as careful as possible.
Wednesday, April 23, 2008
How Safe is Safety Part 3: The Technology on Board
To further back up my point that aircraft are safe, let's look at some of the features typical jet aircraft have. Smaller aircraft occasionally have these features as well. Because I'm feeling lazy I'm going to list all of what I know instead of trying to use lengthy paragraphs:
1.) On board Doppler weather radar (I have no idea what it's called)
2.) auto pilot
3.) airborne distance measuring equipment
4.) stall warning
5.) multiple engines
6.) most large aircraft have some kind of Global Positioning System for navigation
7.) built in slides for passengers to use in emergencies
8.) lighting
9.) oxygen masks available to every passenger and crew member
10.) auto/speed braking systems
11.) de-icing mechanisms for wings
12.) computerized warning systems
13.) ASD B-some aircraft have this (this is surface/aircraft detection equipment)
14.) soon jet aircraft will also have enhanced infrared visibility for bad weather or night departures.
15.) yaw dampers
16.) vortex generators/wing design takes part in enhancing the stability of aircraft
17.) equipment that allows pilots to detect signs of a stall and fix a stall have been developed: the stick shaker and the auto slat gapper (which, if anyone asks what it is, I'm not entirely sure and i only know from one of my classes that it eliminates the threat of the stall).
19.) the structure of airframes and the material the aircraft's body consists of have also been developed with aerodynamics and safety in mind.
20.) wing spoilers
(and more? I'm actually not sure!)
Of course, with all these things in a single aircraft and more being developed, its no wonder their gross weight is so high and their systems so intricate. The bigger the aircraft, the more wiring it contains. A 747 has about 250 MILES of wiring. A Dash 8 has about 23 miles of wiring. MILES! That's a lot of wiring. If you search on google for the amount of wiring in certain types of aircraft, you'll get a wide range of numbers. The bigger the numbers, the more complex they are-but that also means they're very safe. A single aircraft is hard to repair or revamp, true. But, unless there's an accident, the industry hardly ever needs to go that far. And as said before, accidents these past few years have become less, and less, and LESS.
Well I've grown a headache over the day, so this post is done. Next time, I'll be posting significant accidents that we have learned from in the past to give you an idea of where aviation has come safety and technology wise from over the course of history.
1.) On board Doppler weather radar (I have no idea what it's called)
2.) auto pilot
3.) airborne distance measuring equipment
4.) stall warning
5.) multiple engines
6.) most large aircraft have some kind of Global Positioning System for navigation
7.) built in slides for passengers to use in emergencies
8.) lighting
9.) oxygen masks available to every passenger and crew member
10.) auto/speed braking systems
11.) de-icing mechanisms for wings
12.) computerized warning systems
13.) ASD B-some aircraft have this (this is surface/aircraft detection equipment)
14.) soon jet aircraft will also have enhanced infrared visibility for bad weather or night departures.
15.) yaw dampers
16.) vortex generators/wing design takes part in enhancing the stability of aircraft
17.) equipment that allows pilots to detect signs of a stall and fix a stall have been developed: the stick shaker and the auto slat gapper (which, if anyone asks what it is, I'm not entirely sure and i only know from one of my classes that it eliminates the threat of the stall).
19.) the structure of airframes and the material the aircraft's body consists of have also been developed with aerodynamics and safety in mind.
20.) wing spoilers
(and more? I'm actually not sure!)
Of course, with all these things in a single aircraft and more being developed, its no wonder their gross weight is so high and their systems so intricate. The bigger the aircraft, the more wiring it contains. A 747 has about 250 MILES of wiring. A Dash 8 has about 23 miles of wiring. MILES! That's a lot of wiring. If you search on google for the amount of wiring in certain types of aircraft, you'll get a wide range of numbers. The bigger the numbers, the more complex they are-but that also means they're very safe. A single aircraft is hard to repair or revamp, true. But, unless there's an accident, the industry hardly ever needs to go that far. And as said before, accidents these past few years have become less, and less, and LESS.
Well I've grown a headache over the day, so this post is done. Next time, I'll be posting significant accidents that we have learned from in the past to give you an idea of where aviation has come safety and technology wise from over the course of history.
Monday, April 21, 2008
aircraft complexity part two: another incident...
Link to a recent aviation article is below. Remember to right click and open in new tab, please.
Alaska Airlines Evacuation
So, in my last post, I ranted about an issue the FAA should crack down on and make Boeing fix (or something). This is yet another cockpit fumes incident. And a very recent one at that, just this past weekend, the 18th I believe. They had to evacuate the entire plane. You think we would have fixed this problem by now...but maybe the aircraft IS too complex to dig deep enough into the problem and fix every one of the aircraft that have had this problem. In the past and present, that's a lot of aircraft to keep tabs on...
Alaska Airlines Evacuation
So, in my last post, I ranted about an issue the FAA should crack down on and make Boeing fix (or something). This is yet another cockpit fumes incident. And a very recent one at that, just this past weekend, the 18th I believe. They had to evacuate the entire plane. You think we would have fixed this problem by now...but maybe the aircraft IS too complex to dig deep enough into the problem and fix every one of the aircraft that have had this problem. In the past and present, that's a lot of aircraft to keep tabs on...
Friday, April 18, 2008
How Safe is Safety?-part 3-The Complexity of Jet Aircraft
Jet aircraft are built to define the word safe-and many people may agree. Based off what I know so far, they are safe because of the way they are aerodynamically designed, that they have accurate navigational and aircraft in-flight stability instruments that have been improved over the decades. Additionally, 90 percent of all jet aircraft, especially commercial aircraft can fly safely in a mode most of us are familiar with called auto pilot. However, they may also argue that the structure of these jet aircraft is complex. It's true. they have to be. And because these aircraft are so complex-just like a human body itself is, an aircraft isn't perfect and may have design or mechanical flaws that need attention.
Both in the past and recently, aircraft like the 757 and Airbus have on rare incidents experienced wiring deficiencies in the cockpit, causing toxic fumes to leak out and on some incidents, break glass. In and outside the US in the past some pilots have had to make forced landings because of the fumes. As feared by the NTSB, no matter how many incidents in the past with various airlines have suffered from fumes entering the cockpit, I believe the risk potential can suddenly become very high if we continue to sit back and not do anything about it. The NTSB's safety recommendations have yet to be enforced by the FAA, which to me is very worrisome (Knudson, 2008, para 6). It's stated in one UK article that the fumes that might enter any 757 isn't high enough to present any significant health risks (Barret, 2006, para 17). However, some disagree. No matter what the real cause of the fumes in all the incidents that have been left in the dark for so long, it's still a threat to flight safety.
Think about it, no matter how much of a health to risk this problem with some of the cock pits really is and no matter how many incidents were really caused by the deficiency, we can't sit back and allow these aircraft to risk having the same problems with fumes in the cockpit. Since 2004, the industry is luckily looking into this problem more thoroughly than before.
In another article by CNN, it states that again the FAA has overlooked the significance of their duty as what I often think of them as 'the people that make safety regulations to keep the airlines inline and and safe'. "The latest concerns about planes follow a CNN report last month that an FAA supervisor allowed Southwest Airlines to postpone required safety inspections. After that report, Rep. James Oberstar, D-Minnesota, questioned whether FAA had changed from a watchdog to a lapdog. He said there was "a pendulum swing away from vigorous enforcement of regulatory compliance, toward a carrier-friendly, cozy relationship with the airlines" (Griffin and Jonston, 2008, para 24, 25). But it seems somehow even with American Airlines and Southwest Airlines (which rest assured will be discussed later), that they have some how become more 'relaxed' about less serious safety compromising threats.
Also stated in this article, it explains what the type of toxins the fumes are and where they think its located "The chemical name for the dangerous ingredient getting into passenger aircraft is triorthocresyl phosphate, more commonly known as TCP. It is an additive of engine oil used in commercial aircraft" (para 6). Just take a look at these three different incidents as posted on guardian.co.uk, The Observer.
1.) FlyBe, 8 December 2004
Flight crew became incapacitated. According to the CAA report into the incident, the first officer 'felt unwell (faint and breathless with shaking hands) and oxygen was administered for the last 20 minutes of flight'. The captain also had a headache with flu-like symptoms and was 'in a state of euphoria'. He had to land the plane single-handedly.
2.) Citiexpress, 25 July 2005
One flight crew member and two cabin attendants felt dizzy and unwell during take-off and cruise, according to the CAA. Oxygen given to one of cabin crew.
3.) British Airways, 31 August 2005
One pilot incapacitated during flight. CAA report spoke of 'abnormal smells' and the co-pilot allegedly suffered with headaches, had difficulty concentrating and focusing with spots before the eye, and experienced 'severe vomiting'.
If those incidents don't compromise safety enough because of one minor deficiency I don't know what does. I don't care how significant or insignificant the health risk involved is. What many pilots are concerned about (and from the standpoint of being one too), it does a have a high significance in affecting the pilot and co pilots' ability to fly the aircraft well. Look at all the different conditions these pilots and crew (and more) suffered. Because their ability to fly the aircraft safely was compromised, any number of distractions or skipping items on a checklist during any phase of site can drastically increase the safety of any flight.
What I still have trouble believing is why the FAA isn't being more forceful about this. To me, they're kind of like the police (or in a way should be). If something isn't right and impairs the safety of the community and its people, they need to step in and do something about the problem by making some rules and setting boundaries. Why, if you happen to wonder? Because it's their job is to do just that. I think in this case they have taken far too long in making sure these aircraft get the deficiencies checked and fixed as soon as possible, no matter how much it may cost the industry. Anyone who believes in further improving airliner safety would agree that this is definitely something important that we should not ignore. Also, I'm not the only one out there who agrees that these issues with cockpit fumes may one day cause an accident before we take some aggressive action.
However, no matter how far back this problem dates, this is the only flight safety compromising issues I've found so far. I would personally be curious to know if anyone has found anything else aside from what's happened with Southwest Airlines and the bankruptcy of Frontier and Aloha Airlines. Remember, this is a blog involving all aviation related observations I continue to make throughout my life. If anyone who reads this is unclear about anything, feel free to ask questions. All though this is for a college assignment, this is also a blog that I'm making out my own interest, any one is free to react to this blog.
As you can see, I had a lot to rant about regarding this particular issue. This issue supports the idea that while aircraft may be safe, they can only be as safe as we allow them to be. This issue also supports the main point of this particular entry, that aircraft are naturally complex. One little deficiency such as this may cause serious flight safety risks, as one can see from some of the handful of incidents that have occurred over the years. If we never fix the problem because of the cost or whatever the reason, it's OUR fault, not the aircraft's if an accident happens down the road. Take this issue away and one can see why yet again it is accurate to believe that lots of the aircraft out there are very safe. I'm definitely not denying the fact that this issue needs to be resolved and the FAA really needs to play their role right. The FAA needs to wake up and shape up.
Both in the past and recently, aircraft like the 757 and Airbus have on rare incidents experienced wiring deficiencies in the cockpit, causing toxic fumes to leak out and on some incidents, break glass. In and outside the US in the past some pilots have had to make forced landings because of the fumes. As feared by the NTSB, no matter how many incidents in the past with various airlines have suffered from fumes entering the cockpit, I believe the risk potential can suddenly become very high if we continue to sit back and not do anything about it. The NTSB's safety recommendations have yet to be enforced by the FAA, which to me is very worrisome (Knudson, 2008, para 6). It's stated in one UK article that the fumes that might enter any 757 isn't high enough to present any significant health risks (Barret, 2006, para 17). However, some disagree. No matter what the real cause of the fumes in all the incidents that have been left in the dark for so long, it's still a threat to flight safety.
Think about it, no matter how much of a health to risk this problem with some of the cock pits really is and no matter how many incidents were really caused by the deficiency, we can't sit back and allow these aircraft to risk having the same problems with fumes in the cockpit. Since 2004, the industry is luckily looking into this problem more thoroughly than before.
In another article by CNN, it states that again the FAA has overlooked the significance of their duty as what I often think of them as 'the people that make safety regulations to keep the airlines inline and and safe'. "The latest concerns about planes follow a CNN report last month that an FAA supervisor allowed Southwest Airlines to postpone required safety inspections. After that report, Rep. James Oberstar, D-Minnesota, questioned whether FAA had changed from a watchdog to a lapdog. He said there was "a pendulum swing away from vigorous enforcement of regulatory compliance, toward a carrier-friendly, cozy relationship with the airlines" (Griffin and Jonston, 2008, para 24, 25). But it seems somehow even with American Airlines and Southwest Airlines (which rest assured will be discussed later), that they have some how become more 'relaxed' about less serious safety compromising threats.
Also stated in this article, it explains what the type of toxins the fumes are and where they think its located "The chemical name for the dangerous ingredient getting into passenger aircraft is triorthocresyl phosphate, more commonly known as TCP. It is an additive of engine oil used in commercial aircraft" (para 6). Just take a look at these three different incidents as posted on guardian.co.uk, The Observer.
1.) FlyBe, 8 December 2004
Flight crew became incapacitated. According to the CAA report into the incident, the first officer 'felt unwell (faint and breathless with shaking hands) and oxygen was administered for the last 20 minutes of flight'. The captain also had a headache with flu-like symptoms and was 'in a state of euphoria'. He had to land the plane single-handedly.
2.) Citiexpress, 25 July 2005
One flight crew member and two cabin attendants felt dizzy and unwell during take-off and cruise, according to the CAA. Oxygen given to one of cabin crew.
3.) British Airways, 31 August 2005
One pilot incapacitated during flight. CAA report spoke of 'abnormal smells' and the co-pilot allegedly suffered with headaches, had difficulty concentrating and focusing with spots before the eye, and experienced 'severe vomiting'.
If those incidents don't compromise safety enough because of one minor deficiency I don't know what does. I don't care how significant or insignificant the health risk involved is. What many pilots are concerned about (and from the standpoint of being one too), it does a have a high significance in affecting the pilot and co pilots' ability to fly the aircraft well. Look at all the different conditions these pilots and crew (and more) suffered. Because their ability to fly the aircraft safely was compromised, any number of distractions or skipping items on a checklist during any phase of site can drastically increase the safety of any flight.
What I still have trouble believing is why the FAA isn't being more forceful about this. To me, they're kind of like the police (or in a way should be). If something isn't right and impairs the safety of the community and its people, they need to step in and do something about the problem by making some rules and setting boundaries. Why, if you happen to wonder? Because it's their job is to do just that. I think in this case they have taken far too long in making sure these aircraft get the deficiencies checked and fixed as soon as possible, no matter how much it may cost the industry. Anyone who believes in further improving airliner safety would agree that this is definitely something important that we should not ignore. Also, I'm not the only one out there who agrees that these issues with cockpit fumes may one day cause an accident before we take some aggressive action.
However, no matter how far back this problem dates, this is the only flight safety compromising issues I've found so far. I would personally be curious to know if anyone has found anything else aside from what's happened with Southwest Airlines and the bankruptcy of Frontier and Aloha Airlines. Remember, this is a blog involving all aviation related observations I continue to make throughout my life. If anyone who reads this is unclear about anything, feel free to ask questions. All though this is for a college assignment, this is also a blog that I'm making out my own interest, any one is free to react to this blog.
As you can see, I had a lot to rant about regarding this particular issue. This issue supports the idea that while aircraft may be safe, they can only be as safe as we allow them to be. This issue also supports the main point of this particular entry, that aircraft are naturally complex. One little deficiency such as this may cause serious flight safety risks, as one can see from some of the handful of incidents that have occurred over the years. If we never fix the problem because of the cost or whatever the reason, it's OUR fault, not the aircraft's if an accident happens down the road. Take this issue away and one can see why yet again it is accurate to believe that lots of the aircraft out there are very safe. I'm definitely not denying the fact that this issue needs to be resolved and the FAA really needs to play their role right. The FAA needs to wake up and shape up.
How Safe is Safety-part 2: What about Regulatory Issues?
Jet aircraft have been around for a long time. While there has been an overall decrease in accidents in the United States in the past five years, a few accidents or incidents are bound to occur (Schlamm, 2007). Humans will always be in charge of the aircraft they create no matter how big or small they are. Recently as early as April, countless flights have been canceled due to MD 80s suddenly needing inspections as required by the Federal Aviation Administration. "Cozy relationships between the airlines and the Federal Aviation Administration are to blame for the flight cancellations to do maintenance, according to Tilmon." (Cross and Tripp, 2008, para 8). I for one don't completely understand how the FAA and the airliners could let this happen. Did they just start slacking off inspections? "This marks the third straight day of mass groundings at American, the nation's largest carrier. It has scrubbed more than 2,400 flights since Tuesday"(Cross and Tripp, 2008, para 16). Despite having found three or four different articles and a couple videos via google about these flight cancellations, I found no evidence of them being fined-these topics are all over the internet. In some sources they even blame the threats of large million dollar fines for show. What kind of way to standardize and enforce safety regulations is that, if it's true? This same blog recently mentioned reveals an incredibly wide range of reactions to what's going on.
If American Airlines failed to complete their inspections (slapped on the wrist or not), risk would have been much greater. In April, many travellers ended up being stranded, seriously delayed and unpleased with American Airlines. While they waited, no matter how upset, American Airlines was working as best as they could to make sure their aircraft were safe for them. This particular article provided doesn't say if the airlines was fined, but whatever the case, they're still running and now that it is half way through April, I expect things should resume as normal. Next time around, I'm certain that no matter 'what's going on', American Airlines will continue to adhere to and improve their safety standards thus allowing their jet aircraft to continue to be reliable.
Regardless of this recent error made, aircraft design and technology is still developing and continuing to be improved, making aircraft far more reliable than they used to be in the 1950's or so. I strongly believe it is valid to claim that the creation of these aircraft have been a brilliant thing and will not be put to shame. Therefore, Airlines like American will do everything they can no matter what issues they face to make sure their aircraft meet the proper safety standards. It will further be proven and emphasized that it's how we manage and maintain them that make jets safe. South West Airlines have also recently missed their inspection deadlines. But, despite the fine threats, no real problems with their aircraft have been heard of yet. If the airlines can put their act together and work to live up to their standards, the airlines' aircraft will certainly remain relatively safe.
If American Airlines failed to complete their inspections (slapped on the wrist or not), risk would have been much greater. In April, many travellers ended up being stranded, seriously delayed and unpleased with American Airlines. While they waited, no matter how upset, American Airlines was working as best as they could to make sure their aircraft were safe for them. This particular article provided doesn't say if the airlines was fined, but whatever the case, they're still running and now that it is half way through April, I expect things should resume as normal. Next time around, I'm certain that no matter 'what's going on', American Airlines will continue to adhere to and improve their safety standards thus allowing their jet aircraft to continue to be reliable.
Regardless of this recent error made, aircraft design and technology is still developing and continuing to be improved, making aircraft far more reliable than they used to be in the 1950's or so. I strongly believe it is valid to claim that the creation of these aircraft have been a brilliant thing and will not be put to shame. Therefore, Airlines like American will do everything they can no matter what issues they face to make sure their aircraft meet the proper safety standards. It will further be proven and emphasized that it's how we manage and maintain them that make jets safe. South West Airlines have also recently missed their inspection deadlines. But, despite the fine threats, no real problems with their aircraft have been heard of yet. If the airlines can put their act together and work to live up to their standards, the airlines' aircraft will certainly remain relatively safe.
Friday, April 11, 2008
How Safe is Safety? part 1
Hundreds of jet aircraft are flown everyday all over the world. Despite their complexity, over the years there have been less and less major accidents in the USA. However, the US still has the most accidents because we fly the most. Technology is constantly being improved and as a positive result, aircraft are as well. Aircraft technology is improved for the primary reason to reduce the risk of human error in flight. There are many things technology can do to improve flight safety and at the same time help make the job for pilots safer and less stressful as well. The more we fly the more risk-exposed we become. Some may argue that because humans made them, jets are only as safe as we can make them. However, it can be proven they are through and through. Some will argue that there are still plenty of risks involved, especially with how complex large jet aircraft are, or even with how much time it takes to upgrade or revamp each aircraft. Being heavily interested in aviation and a student helicopter pilot, I intend to reflect on all that I have learned so far in my classes and over whatever I continue to learn through out the remainder of this semester. The next several blog posts will be analyzing the good and bad sides to commercial jets, discussing some of the common risks we've faced in the past and more importantly-what we face today. Despite these issues, I will prove just how safe jets really are.
(To viewers not in my English 111 class, if you wish to refer to anything I use or say in these next several posts, feel free too. I will be using APA format, so please give credit where it's due.
Another thing worth mentioning, I will provide hyper links to the sources I cite in these posts. If you actually click on them once the article will open in the SAME window. Unless you don't mind clicking back a whole bunch don't do this. I recommend you highlight what I cite, right click it with the mouse or button on your laptop and open it in a new tab. It'll save you from going back to posts all the time.)
(To viewers not in my English 111 class, if you wish to refer to anything I use or say in these next several posts, feel free too. I will be using APA format, so please give credit where it's due.
Another thing worth mentioning, I will provide hyper links to the sources I cite in these posts. If you actually click on them once the article will open in the SAME window. Unless you don't mind clicking back a whole bunch don't do this. I recommend you highlight what I cite, right click it with the mouse or button on your laptop and open it in a new tab. It'll save you from going back to posts all the time.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)