Difference between revisions of "Milestone-Proposal talk:Invention and First Demonstration of Radar"

Line 1: Line 1:
== Discussion -- [[User:Administrator1|Administrator1]] ([[User talk:Administrator1|talk]]) 09:51, 9 March 2015 (CDT) ==
Add discussion comments regarding this Milestone here.
== Advocate comments -- [[User:Tksarkar|Tksarkar]] ([[User talk:Tksarkar|talk]]) 14:29, 11 September 2018 (UTC) ==
== Advocate comments -- [[User:Tksarkar|Tksarkar]] ([[User talk:Tksarkar|talk]]) 14:29, 11 September 2018 (UTC) ==

Revision as of 14:31, 11 September 2018

Advocate comments -- Tksarkar (talk) 14:29, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

IEEE Milestone proposal 2015-01 Invention of Radar 1904

1) The advocate, upon review of the proposal, designates the IEEE technical field associated with the technology of the milestone proposal. Designations could be general such as computers, communications, or power or specific such as oceanic engineering, aerospace electronics, or electron devices. It is important that the advocate designate the technical field of the proposal because it can provide a source of expertise through an IEEE Society and/or Technical Society (S/Cs). Many IEEE S/Cs have a history committee, technical committees, journal editors and distinguished lecturers who may help in the identifying of experts.

The advocate must consult experts in the technical field associated with the proposal. The advocate must consult as many experts as needed, however, at least two must be consulted. If the advocate has expertise in the technology, then only one additional expert is needed.

If the advocate has difficulty identifying expert(s) to verify the significance of the technology advance, the advocate should consult with the volunteer Milestone Coordinator and the History Committee chair.

This proposal is suitable for Antenna sand Propagation Society Aerospace and Electronic Systems Geophysics and remote sensing Microwave Theory and Techniques' '

2) Is the proposal for an achievement rather than for a person?

This proposal is for the achievement of an individual on the first proposal for the development of a RADAR

3) Does the location being proposed for the milestone plaque have a direct and logical connection with the work (e.g. where the achievement was developed, tested, demonstrated, or installed)? The proposers must supply a copy of a letter of permission from the site owner allowing the mounting of a plaque before the proposal can be submitted. Is the location truly publicly-accessible?

The location is quite suitable as the first demonstration of this concept in this city

4) Can the plaque site physically support the weight of the plaque? Is there space to fit the plaque’s dimensions? I do not know the answer to this question. But since it is proposed I assume it is a suitable location.

5) Is there an IEEE organizational unit(s) willing to sponsor the milestone?

Antenna sand Propagation Society as I am the chair of the Membership Geographical Activity committee and so I can say for sure!

6) Is the work truly a significant achievement vs. an incremental improvement to an existing technology?

This is a revolutionary concept as this was the first development of RADAR.

7) Were there prior or contemporary achievements of a similar nature? If so, what sets this achievement off from them?

No there were no prior hardware activity regarding this.

8) Whether the achievement (or the particular version of the technology being proposed) truly led to a functioning, useful, or marketable technology.

Yes, this led to thee development of RADAR.

9) Is the proposal adequately supported by significant references and citations (minimum of five, but as many as needed to support the milestone), such as patents, contemporary newspaper articles, journal articles, or citations to pages in scholarly books? At least one of the references must be from a scholarly book or journal article. The references should establish the dates, location, and importance of the achievement. The text of the materials, not just the references, must be present. If the supporting texts are copyright-encumbered and cannot be posted on the ETHW for intellectual property reasons, the proposers must send a copy to the History Center so that it can be forwarded to the advocate. The advocate is responsible for reading the supporting texts and ensuring that they support the claims made in the proposal.

Yes, there is adequate support.

10) Are the scholarly references recent? If not, has there been more recent scholarly research which ought to be taken into account?

Yes, the references are both historic and current.

11) If the names of individual persons are mentioned in the citation, care should be taken that those persons are the engineers (as opposed to, say, the program managers) who designed the technology.

The presentation is acceptable.

12) The citation’s word length must not exceed 70 words (the maximum which will fit on the plaque). 60-65 words are preferred for aesthetic reasons.


13) Is the citation understandable by the general public (e.g. spell out acronyms, avoid jargon)?


14) Milestone plaques are permanent and will be read by future viewers. Is the citation phrased in a way that does not depend on present perspective? Will it be understandable in the future?"


15) After the process has been completed, the proposal will be either rejected, approved, or approved only after required changes are made.

I strongly request to have this milestone approved.