Railway Accounting Officers AssociationBiblio.com
2371 risultati
rif. B9781013532054Hardback. New. hardcover
rif. B9781014190680Paperback / softback. New. paperback
rif. 45861469-nnew. unknown
rif. A9780371994443Paperback / softback. New. paperback
rif. A9780461990782Paperback / softback. New. paperback
rif. 1331966809.Gpaperback. Good. Access codes and supplements are not guaranteed with used items. May be an ex-library book. paperback
rif. 133013625X.Gpaperback. Good. Access codes and supplements are not guaranteed with used items. May be an ex-library book. paperback
1999rif. AME_9780471355182Wiley 1999. 1St. Paperback. New/New. Wiley paperback
1956rif. 025605Howell North Books 1956. First Edition . Cloth. Near Fine/Near Fine. Bright & unopened. Maps in back pocket. Covers looking fresh with shiney gilting. Faint line of fading at lower front and upper spine. Price-clipped jacket very nice and crisp with just a touch of shelfwear. Inner side of jacket has mild foxing. Howell North Books hardcover
1977rif. 016079Sioux Falls SD: American Pop Corn Company 1977. Soft cover. Near Fine. The First Family of American Pop Corn. Stapled booklet of 48 pp. with stiff card covers. Printed on thick ivory paper and full of vintage pop corn product photos & stories and personalities of the Jolly Time Pop Corn company. Includes 4 recipes of Smith family favorites. A clean crisp copy. Covers have some very light soiling mainly on rear. American Pop Corn Company paperback
1999rif. 91332Washington DC: United States General Accounting Office 1999. Presumed First Edition First Printing. Wraps. Very good. 28 pages. Footnotes. This is a "Report to the Chairman Subcommittee on Defense Committee on Appropriations House of Representatives". Satellite control systems are used to ensure that satellites reach their planned orbits and perform their intended missions while in orbit. There are two types of satellite control operations-platform control and payload control. Platform controls involves monitoring the health and status and managing the operations of a satellite's physical structure sometimes called the bus. Payload controls involves monitoring the health and status and managing the operations of a satellite's mission equipment. Specific satellite control functions consist of 1 locating satellites and receiving and processing data from them 2 following satellites' motion over time and 3 transmitting signals to satellites. These three functions are called telemetry tracking and commanding and are performed by a network of ground command and control centers ground antennas and communication capabilities between the centers antennas and satellites. There are two types of satellite control networks-common and dedicated. DOD operates two common networks that provide primary or backup control for communications environmental monitoring navigation and intelligence satellites. Examples include the Defense Satellite Communications System Defense Meteorological Satellite Program and Global Positioning System. DOD also operates several dedicated networks that control missile warning communications and intelligence missions. DOD has made minimal progress in integrating and improving its satellite control capabilities in accordance with 1996 national space policy. In 1992 DOD identified a need for an integrated satellite control system to achieve standardization and interoperability across military services and individual satellite programs. In 1995 the Air Force which controls most of DOD's satellites characterized its satellite control capabilities as aging inefficient and costly to operate. The Air Force initiated an effort to standardize these capabilities and achieve full implementation in 2003-a first step toward an integrated and interoperable DOD capability. Air Force officials chose to proceed with a conceptual design over operational alternatives. However in 1997 the Air Force terminated this effort because of schedule delays resulting from software development problems and the additional amount of software that needed to be written. Air Force Space Command representatives are now recommending that the use of the Air Force's existing satellite control capabilities be extended to 2005 to provide time to acquire an improved capability. Until then the Air Force will be unable to reduce approximately $400 million it spends annually to operate maintain sustain and modernize satellite control capabilities. The Navy's satellite control capabilities are not as old inefficient or costly to operate as the Air Force's capabilities. Although the Navy upgraded its capabilities in the early 1990s another upgrade is planned because the company that provided the existing capabilities no longer provides software support services. DOD has taken limited action to foster integrated and interoperable satellite control for all government space activities since it was directed to do so by the 1996 national space policy. Prior studies recommended that a high-level interagency management group be established to oversee implementation of integrated systems across agency lines. Although DOD established a senior steering group in 1998 to address national security space management and integration issues government space agencies continue to plan for satellite control capabilities on an independent basis rather than coordinate and integrate their efforts on an interagency basis. Considering the long-standing need to replace the Air Force's aging and costly satellite control capabilities and the Navy's more recent plan to upgrade its capabilities DOD has an opportunity to revitalize its effort to achieve integrated satellite control by acquiring a standardized capability. A resumed search for such a capability is appropriate because it would also provide an opportunity to review Air Force satellite control decisions for future space-based infrared and communication satellite programs that are currently in development. Commercial off-the-shelf products that could perform core functions for controlling satellites are available and several studies have advocated the use of such products. In making a selection among alternatives DOD could reduce acquisition risk by employing best commercial practices-a key element of DOD's acquisition reform initiatives. Commercial firms place a premium on demonstrated performance before making critical decisions rather than on predicted performance as was the case with the Air Force's 1995 selection. We are recommending that the Secretary of Defense take actions to revitalize efforts to 1 integrate and improve DOD's satellite control capabilities using commercial products and practices and 2 foster integration and interoperability of satellite control among government space activities. United States General Accounting Office paperback
1994rif. 91327Washington DC: United States General Accounting Office 1994. Presumed First Edition First Printing. Wraps. Very good. 31 1 pages. Footnotes. Figure. Table. This is a "Report to Congressional Requesters". The space shuttle is the only U.S. launch system capable of carrying people to and from space. It has operated for over 10 years and is likely to be used well into the next century. As the shuttle ages the National Aeronautics and Space Administration NASA will be faced with increased need to update and replace various components due to obsolescence or to enhance safety. At Congress; request GAO reviewed the shuttle program lo determine 1 the assumptions NASA has made regarding the length of time the current shuttle fleet will be in operation and 2 NASA'S processes and criteria for selecting needed safety and obsolescence upgrades. NASA has not made explicit assumptions about how long the current shuttle fleet will remain in operation. However based on its budget projections and approach to defining a new launch system the current fleet cannot be replaced for at least another 12 to 15 years. NASA'S projections of its likely budgets through fiscal year 1999 will not support simultaneous development of the space station and a new launch vehicle. NASA has a process for identifying and assessing needed upgrades. However NASA does not use life-cycle cost as a criterion for evaluating potential safety upgrades and it does not always consider alternatives when selecting an approach to implementing an improvement. Without life-cycle cost estimates NASA cannot determine whether an upgrade project is affordable within the context of the program and the agency's overall budget and out-year plans. Therefore it is possible that inappropriate program decisions on upgrades may be made. NASA managers do not have a precise basis for estimating life-cycle costs for decision purposes because of uncertainty about how Iong the current fleet will remain in operation. Since the shuttle fleet must operate for at least another 12 to 15 years it would seem logical that NASA officials could use that time period as a minimum basis for estimating life-cycle costs. NASA'S approach to funding the Safety and Obsolescence Upgrade program may increase programmatic risks. The program manager believes that funding is adequate to develop upgrade projects that have already been approved. However recent budgets have not included funds for early design studies of other potential upgrades or to cover unforeseen contingencies. Not conducting early design studies to establish the feasibility of a potential upgrade could mean that projects are not started when they are needed or projects are initiated before they are adequately defined. Also the lack of contingency funds means that if approved projects encounter unexpected problems the projects may have to be stretched out and costs may increase. This situation raises questions as to whether the decision to start two new projects in fiscal year 1995 adequately reflect budget constraints and inherent technical and cost risks. In commenting on a draft of this report NASA said that it agreed in principle with our recommendations. The agency stated however that some safety upgrades are made without a full life-cycle cost analysis because of the emphasis on safety. Safety is NASAS highest priority and relative cost is a lesser consideration. We agree that NASA must heavily weigh safety considerations in such decisions. We believe however that prudent management requires an estimate of total costs to ensure that NASA managers understand the full implications of their decisions and that the projects are affordable within the context of NASA'S total budget and future plans. United States General Accounting Office paperback
1994rif. 91338Washington DC: United States General Accounting Office 1994. Presumed First Edition First Printing. Wraps. Very good. 27 1 pages. Footnotes. Figures. Tables. This is a "Report to the Ranking Minority Member Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management Committee on Governmental Affairs U.S. Senate". The National Aeronautics and Space Administration's NASA goal is to launch assemble and operate an earth-orbiting microgravity and life sciences research laboratory-International Space Station Alpha-starting in 1997. Congress requested that we review NASA's efforts to develop a robust life and microgravity sciences research community for the space station. Specifically we reviewed 1 what NASA is doing to assess the required size of the research community needed for the space station and to ensure that such a community will be available 2 how NASA will ensure that the research selected for the space station will be the best possible and 3 whether a recently canceled Shuttle research flight adversely affected NASA's efforts to develop a research community for the space station. In June 1994 we reported to you on the impact of the expanded Russian role on space station funding and research. We stated that Russian participation in the space station would substantially increase overall station research resources. However the degree to which the U.S. research community will benefit from these increased resources has yet to be determined. NASA has taken an initial step to assess the size of the space station's research community but it is not intending to develop this community by directly soliciting proposals to do research on the space station. Instead NASA is focusing on developing a comprehensive research program that emphasizes more ground-based research and uses space flight only for research efforts that require a microgravity environment in space. To accomplish this program NASA wants to greatly increase the number of ground-based investigators. This science-oriented approach is reasonable but funding levels could jeopardize it unless NASA adjusts its funding priorities. To achieve its goal NASA would need increased funding for its life and microgravity sciences research and analysis over fiscal years 1995 to 1999-the formative years for the initial development of space station-related research. However NASA expects such funding to remain constant. The result could be a smaller than desired number of investigators in the ground-based research program from which station-based research will be selected. The existing process of using peer review panels to judge the scientific merit and microgravity-related relevance of experiments for the space station will continue. The peer review scores for 285 life and microgravity sciences research proposals show that NASA's funding decisions were generally consistent with the findings of the peer review panels: most top-rated proposals and none of the lowest rated ones were funded. But peer review panels and NASA sometimes disagreed on the scientific merit and relevance of these proposals. For example 4 of the 15 U.S. experiments selected by NASA for a July 1994 Space Shuttle research flight-the International Microgravity Laboratory-were not among those rated highest in the peer review process. NASA's efforts to increase the size of its life and microgravity sciences research community are not likely to be adversely affected by the February 1994 cancellation of the third Spacelab Life Sciences flight SLS-3. The U.S. principal investigators on that flight stated that although they were concerned about NASA's lack of communication about the flight cancellation most of them have been accommodated on other space flights and they generally will be able to meet their experiment objectives. All of the investigators with whom we spoke also plan to continue submitting proposals for future NASA research opportunities. United States General Accounting Office paperback
rif. 1330287479.Gpaperback. Good. Access codes and supplements are not guaranteed with used items. May be an ex-library book. paperback
rif. 38548391like new. unknown
rif. 38548391-nnew. unknown
rif. 0365881821.Gpaperback. Good. Access codes and supplements are not guaranteed with used items. May be an ex-library book. paperback
1991rif. 100158367United states general accounting office 1991. Bon état intérieurs propres bonne tenue. in4. 1991. Agrafé. 2 volumes. United states general accounting office unknown
rif. biblio3355book Condition: Brand New. International Edition. Softcover. This is a Brand New High-Quality Textbook. Different ISBN and cover image with US edition.Fast shipping and ship within 48hours by UPS/DHL global express service to any US destination within 3-5 business days. We do not ship to Po Box APO and FPO address. Some book may show some sales disclaimer word such as "Not for Sale or Restricted in US" on the cover page. Some international textbooks may come with different exercises or cases or chapters compare to US edition paperback
1994rif. N102Durham N.C.: Insurance Accounting and Systems Association 1994. Softcover. Very Good. red cover gilt lettering minor scuffing pages clean binding very good; 4to - over 9¾ - 12" tall DE4. Insurance Accounting and Systems Association unknown
1991rif. 69291Washington DC: U.S. General Accounting Office 1991. Presumed first edition/first printing. Wraps. Good. Cover has slight wear and soiling. Mailing label residue on back cover. vi 168 p. 28 cm. Illustrations. Note on Sources. Index. "GAO/OP-3-HP"--Cover. This is one of the United States General Accounting Office History Program. From Wikipedia: "The Government Accountability Office GAO is an independent agency which provides to the United States Congress audit evaluation and investigative services. As such it is part of the legislative branch of the United States government. The GAO was established as the General Accounting Office by the Budget and Accounting Act of 1921. The act required the head of the GAO to "investigate at the seat of government or elsewhere all matters relating to the receipt disbursement and application of public funds and shall make to the President.and to Congress.reports and recommendations looking to greater economy or efficiency in public expenditures". According to the GAO's current mission statement the agency exists to support the Congress in meeting its constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and ensure the accountability of the federal government for the benefit of the American people. The name was changed in 2004 by the GAO Human Capital Reform Act to better reflect the mission of the office. While most other countries have government entities similar to the GAO their focus is primarily on conducting financial audits. The GAO's auditors conduct not only financial audits but also engage in a wide assortment of performance audits." U.S. General Accounting Office paperback
rif. 53811431like new. unknown
2019rif. 2-109075602XIndependently published 2019. Paperback. New. 541 pages. 11.00x8.50x1.22 inches. Independently published paperback
2019rif. 2-1090680333Independently published 2019. Paperback. New. 554 pages. 11.00x8.50x1.25 inches. Independently published paperback
rif. 1265051569-10-1McGraw Hill. 13. New. The item is brand new never used or read. It's in perfect condition and may include supplements and/or access codes or come shrink-wrapped. McGraw Hill unknown
