Jets of the Boeing 737 Max 9 will remain grounded while examinations are still ongoing.

The aviation authority in the United States has announced that 171 Boeing 737 Max 9 aircraft would continue to be grounded until it is satisfied that the aircraft are safe to fly.

In the aftermath of a portion of the fuselage of an Alaska Airlines plane falling off on Friday, the Federal Aviation Administration has begun conducting inspections of the aircraft.

That "keeping the flying public safe" was the FAA's top concern, according to the agency.

The cancellation of flights for thousands of passengers occurred as a result of major airlines in the United States grounding dozens of the jets.

"We have grounded the affected airplanes, and they will remain grounded until the FAA is satisfied that they are safe," the agency said in a statement on Sunday. "We have grounded the affected airplanes."

Flights in the United States have been most impacted by disruptions.

United Airlines and Alaska Airlines are the airlines that operate the great majority of Boeing 737 Max 9s in the United States. Additionally, Turkish Airlines, Copa Airlines of Panama, and Aeromexico have grounded jets of the same kind in order to conduct inspections.

Additionally, on Sunday, Alaska announced that it had cancelled 163 flights, which is equivalent to a 21% cancellation rate. Roughly 25,000 individuals were impacted by this. Travel problems caused by the grounding of several of the airline's planes are expected to continue until at least the middle of the week, according to the company.United Airlines has grounded 79 aircraft and announced on Sunday that it had decided to cancel about 180 flights.

In the meantime, authorities are continuing their hunt for the plug door, which they believe fell to the ground in the western suburbs of Portland. They have made a request to the general public for assistance in locating the panel.

There was an incident that occurred on Friday, and according to flight monitoring data, Alaska Airlines flight 1282, which was traveling from Portland, Oregon to Ontario, California, reached an altitude of 16,000 feet (4,876 meters) before beginning an emergency descent.

It was reported by passengers on board that a significant portion of the outer shell of the aircraft fell to the ground immediately after the plane took off.

Imagery that was distributed to various news organizations reveals that the night sky and the lights of Portland are visible through the break in the fuselage. Additionally, insulation material and other debris can be seen.

The gap was described as "as wide as a refrigerator" by one passenger, while another passenger stated that a child's blouse was ripped off by the wind when the plane made its emergency landing for the emergency landing.

Returning to Portland, the aircraft, which was carrying 177 passengers and crew members, made a safe landing. Several passengers were injured, however Alaska reported that none of them were seriously hurt.

As a result of a number of safety concerns, the Boeing 737 Max has been said to as "the most scrutinized transport aircraft in history."

After two aircraft of the same kind crashed in circumstances that were comparable to each other, resulting in the deaths of all on board, the Max was grounded for a period of one and a half years in March of 2019.

Following the resolution of a supply problem that necessitated the company to do extensive checks of both its inventory and its newly manufactured aircraft, Boeing announced more recently that it would accelerate the rate at which it delivered the 737 Max.

According to the data provided by Boeing, around 1,300 737 Max aircraft have been delivered to customers.

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) issued a request to airlines last month, urging them to assess Max models for the possibility of a loose bolt in the rudder control systems.

tkh tkh tkh tkh tkh tkh tkh tkh tkh tkh tkh tkh tkh tkh tkh tkh tkh tkh tkh tkh tkh tkh tkh

Sergei Surovikin'seen in first photo since Wagner mutiny' in Ukraine conflict

An online snapshot seems to show a Russian general who has been missing since the Wagner mercenary force staged a mutiny in June.

Wagner boss Yevgeny Prigozhin, who died in a plane crash last month, was reportedly close to Sergei Surovikin.

According to rumors, Gen. Surovikin is being questioned about his suspected involvement in the rebellion.

However, a photo that purports to represent Russia's former commander in Ukraine has been shared online.

Sergei Surovikin, the general, has been relieved of his duties and has been dismissed. In good health and living in Moscow with his family. This photo was taken today," Ksenia Sobchak, a prominent figure in Russian media, captioned the image on Monday on the messaging app Telegram.

The BBC has not yet confirmed that the photograph showing a man in sunglasses and a woman with red hair who appears to be the general's wife Anna is genuine.

Separately, Russian writer Alexei Venediktov tweeted on Telegram, "General Surovikin is at home with his family. He is now on leave and available to serve in the Defense Department.

Find out who the ruthless commander Surovikin is.
Wagner's boss Prigozhin has spent a lot of his life on the edge.
On June 23 and 24, Wagner's mercenaries briefly mutinied and threatened to march on Moscow.

The tragedy that took the lives of Prigozhin and nine people on August 23 near Moscow sparked widespread panic. Many people felt the Wagner chief was "dead man walking" following the failed revolt.

During the mutiny, General Surovikin was last seen on camera pleading with the Wagner forces to stop their violence.

Days later, media reports said he had been arrested, but his whereabouts remain unknown.

The Russian general was put in charge of Ukrainian forces in October, but he was replaced three months later.

During Russian operations in Syria, he earned the nickname "General Armageddon" for his ruthlessness.

India is getting ready to send its first expedition to the sun with the Aditya-L1 spacecraft

Just a few days after India made history by being the first country to land on the moon near the moon's south pole, the country is getting ready to launch its very first observation mission to the Sun.

On Saturday at 11:50 India time, or 06:20 GMT, the Aditya-L1 rocket is scheduled to take off from the launch pad at Sriharikota.

It will be situated one percent of the way between the Earth and the Sun, which corresponds to a distance of 1.5 million kilometers (93 million miles).

According to the Indian space agency, the journey will take approximately four months to complete.

The Hindu god of the sun, Surya, who is also known by his other name, Aditya, was honored with the naming of India's first space-based mission, which was designed to investigate the largest object in our solar system.

And the abbreviation L1 refers to the Lagrange point 1, which is the precise location between the sun and earth where the Indian spacecraft will be positioned.

A Lagrange point is a location, as described by the European Space Agency (ESA), in which the gravitational influences of two big objects, such as the Sun and the Earth, cancel each other out, making it possible for a spacecraft to "hover" in that region.

After Aditya-L1 has arrived at this so-called "parking spot," it will be able to orbit the Sun at the same rate that Earth does. Because of this, the satellite will have a very low need for fuel in order to function.

A momentous landing was made by India close to the moon's south pole.
The lunar rover from India successfully completed its first steps on the moon.
Where has India's rover been going on the moon, and what has it been doing there?
According to the Indian Space Research Organization (Isro), once the spacecraft has lifted off, it will complete a number of orbits around the Earth before it is sent on its way to L1.

Aditya-L1 will be able to conduct research and keep a continual eye on the Sun from its perch in this strategic location, even when the Sun is obscured by other celestial bodies, such as during an eclipse.

According to sources in the Indian press, the total cost of the mission is estimated to be 3.78 billion rupees, which is equivalent to $46 million or £36 million. The Indian Space Research Organization (Isro) has not disclosed the cost of the mission.

According to Isro, the orbiter is equipped with seven scientific instruments that will watch and analyze the solar corona, which is the layer at the very top; the photosphere, which is the surface of the Sun or the part that is visible from Earth; and the chromosphere, which is a very thin layer of plasma that lies between the photosphere and the corona.

The research will provide scientists with a better understanding of solar activity, such as solar wind and solar flares, as well as their effect on the weather on Earth and in the vicinity of space in real time.

According to Mylswamy Annadurai, a former Isro scientist, the Sun constantly influences the weather on Earth through radiation, heat, the passage of particles, and magnetic fields. At the same time, it has an effect on the weather in space, according to him.

"The efficiency with which the satellites perform their functions is affected by the weather in space." Solar winds or storms have the potential to disrupt the electronic components of satellites and even cause power networks to fail. However, there are certain holes in our understanding of space weather, as Mr. Annadurai stated to the BBC.

More than 50 satellites are now in orbit over India. These satellites supply the nation with a variety of important services, such as communication linkages, data on the weather, and the ability to anticipate pest infestations, droughts, and oncoming natural disasters. The United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs (UNOOSA) estimates that there are roughly 10,290 satellites still in orbit around the earth, with nearly 7,800 of them being operational at any given time.

According to Mr. Annadurai, Aditya will assist us in gaining a deeper understanding of the star on which our lives depend and even provide us with a warning about it.

"Knowing the activities of the Sun, such as solar wind or a solar eruption, a couple of days ahead of time will help us move our satellites out of harm's way," said the scientist. Because of this, the amount of time that our satellites spend in space will be extended.

He goes on to say that the mission will, above all else, assist in enhancing our scientific understanding of the Sun, which is a star that is 4.5 billion years old and is responsible for keeping our solar system together.

It has only been a few days since India successfully landed the world's first-ever probe near the lunar south pole, and now the country is turning its attention to the sun.

India is now the only nation in the world to have successfully completed a soft landing on the moon, joining the United States of America, China, and the erstwhile Soviet Union as the only other countries to have done so.

The Solar Orbiter journey to the Sun has begun, and the probe will make a historic transit through the Sun's atmosphere.
If the Aditya-L1 mission is successful, India will become one of a limited handful of nations that are already conducting research on the sun.

In 1981, Japan was the first country to send a mission to the Sun in order to research solar flares. Since the 1990s, the United States National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the European Space Agency (ESA) have been monitoring the Sun.

Solar Orbiter was jointly launched by NASA and the European Space Agency in February of 2020. Its mission is to conduct in-depth research on the Sun by observing it from a close range and collecting data that, according to scientists, will shed light on the factors that influence the Sun's dynamic behavior.

And in 2021, NASA's newest spacecraft, the Parker Solar Probe, made history by becoming the first spacecraft to fly through the corona, which is the name for the sun's outer atmosphere.

In October, Australia will have a historic vote for Indigenous people through a referendum on their voice

On October 14, the citizens of Australia will participate in a historic referendum to decide whether or not to establish an Indigenous Voice to Parliament.

If successful, the vote would recognize Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in the country's constitution and establish a permanent body for them to give advice on laws. Additionally, the vote would establish a body for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people to give advice on legislation.

In Australia, there is a heated debate going on about the plan right now.

Since the beginning of virtually the next half century, the nation has not had a referendum that was successful.

In order for it to be successful, it is necessary for the majority of Australians to vote in favor of it. In addition to this, there must be support from the population at large in at least four of Australia's six states.

The parliament would subsequently be responsible for designing and debating the body's make-up, its functions, and its powers; but, the body's recommendations would not carry any legal weight.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese referred to the election as "a once-in-a-generation chance to bring our country together and to change it for the better" when he made the announcement at a rally in Adelaide. The election will take place on May 18th.

He explained that "a committee of Indigenous Australians, chosen by Indigenous Australians, giving advice to government so that we can get a better result for Indigenous Australians" would make up "The Voice."

"You are being asked... to say yes to an idea whose time has come - to say yes to an invitation that comes directly from Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people themselves," the invitation reads. "You are being asked to say yes to an idea whose time has come."

The recommendation was included in a significant document that was published in 2017 and titled the Uluru Statement from the Heart. The declaration is considered to be the best call to action for reforms that will affect First Nations Australians, despite the fact that it was not unanimously agreed upon by its signatories, which number over 250 Indigenous leaders.

What exactly is the plan for Australia's Voice to Parliament?
The fact that Australia is the only country in the Commonwealth that has never signed a treaty with its Indigenous people is one of the reasons why campaigners believe the Voice is such a vital step towards reconciliation.

Indigenous Australians are subjected to disproportionately high levels of disadvantage across society, which is an issue that Australia has been having trouble addressing for a long time.

Peter Dutton, the leader of the opposition party and an opponent of Voice, has stated that there is little detail supporting the concept and has controversially asserted that it might racially divide Australians.

However, a large number of opponents of the motion, including Mr. Dutton, have been accused of distributing false material and engaging in racial slurs.

They, in turn, have leveled accusations of elitism and disregard for the legitimate concerns of average Australians at the Yes campaign.

Advocates for mental health have warned that the level of intensity and tone of the debate is having a negative impact on Indigenous people.

The most recent referendum that was held in Australia was in 1999, when the country decided against transitioning to a republic.

Only eight of Australia's total of 44 referendums have been successful, with the most recent one taking place in 1977. None of them have been passed without the support of both political parties.

China takes retaliatory action in response to Japan's release of purified nuclear water following the Fukushima disaster

The contentious dumping of treated waste water from the Fukushima nuclear plant into the Pacific Ocean has begun in Japan, which has sparked protests in the surrounding area and retribution from Beijing.

China is Japan's largest customer for fish, but on Thursday, China said that it will stop all imports of seafood from Japan.

The Japanese government maintains that the water is safe to drink, and numerous scientists concur. The idea has also received approval from the nuclear watchdog of the United Nations.

However, detractors argue that the release should be postponed until additional research has been conducted on the topic.

Over the next three decades, the nuclear reactor will release more than one million metric tons' worth of water that has been stored there.

China, which has been the most outspoken opponent of the plan ever since it was disclosed two years ago, referred to the water discharge as a "extremely selfish and irresponsible act" and claimed that Japan was "passing an open wound onto the future generations of humanity."

Shortly after that, China's customs agency made the announcement that an existing ban on seafood imports from Fukushima and some other prefectures in Japan will immediately be expanded to cover the entirety of Japan in order to "protect the health of Chinese consumers."

The measure is intended to have a negative impact on the economy, and Japan has acknowledged that its companies will suffer a "significant" loss as a result. Together, Mainland China and Hong Kong make up about half of Japan's total seafood export revenue, purchasing more than $1.1 billion (£866 million) worth of seafood from Japan each year.

Analysts, however, believe that the responses from China, in particular, are driven more by politics than they are by real concerns.

The relationship between Tokyo and Beijing has worsened in recent years as a result of Tokyo's growing proximity to the United States and its support for Taiwan, a self-ruled island that is claimed by China.

The Fukushima controversy has a negative impact on Japan's seafood industry.

"This incident is more of a symptom than a cause of worsening Sino-Japanese relations," said Chinese foreign policy expert Neil Thomas with the Asia Society Policy Institute. "This incident"

If Beijing's relationship with Tokyo was in a better situation, it's possible the Chinese capital would have made less of a fuss about the water release.

In response, Japan is likely to "reject this criticism, but they are unlikely to do anything provocative," according to James DJ Brown, a professor at Temple University's Japan campus who specializes in Japanese foreign policy. Brown is quoted as saying that Japan is unlikely to do anything else that could be considered provocative.

"Even though the government of Japan is deeply troubled by what it views as the aggressive actions of the Chinese Communist Party, they are aware that it is in their best interests to maintain stable relations with their larger neighbor."

On the other hand, the delay might not be necessary for very long. Some commentators are of the opinion that China will not continue to enforce the prohibition.

According to Mr. Thomas, "China's growing economic difficulties could mean that any ban is relatively brief and narrow, so as to limit the negative impact on Chinese importers and business sentiment," and he added this.

In addition, certain Japanese seafood has been prohibited on the market in South Korea for a very long time. On the other hand, the response from the authorities of that country on Thursday was more quiet.

"What is important now is whether Japan, as it promised to the international community, strictly follows the scientific standards and transparently provides information," Prime Minister Han Duck-soo said.

Despite their long-standing animosity toward one another, South Korea and Japan have grown closer in recent years. They stand together in their support of the together States while confronting the dangers posed by China and North Korea.

On the other hand, the vast majority of people living in South Korea are against the release of the water, and on Thursday demonstrators in Seoul attempted to storm the Japanese embassy. Hong Kong and Tokyo each saw their own versions of the angry demonstrations.

In the meantime, Mark Brown, the chair of the Pacific Islands Forum, which had criticized the idea in the past, stated that the organization now believes the plan "meets international safety standards."

"Negligible impact" on the surrounding natural environment

Since the Fukushima nuclear power plant was destroyed by a tsunami in 2011, the power plant company Tepco has been continuously pouring water into the reactors in order to cool down the fuel rods. This indicates that the factory produces contaminated water on a daily basis, which is then treated and stored in extremely large tanks.

Even after being treated, the water still has unacceptable quantities of the radioactive chemicals tritium and carbon-14, both of which are difficult to eliminate. The answer that Japan has come up with is to first dilute it with seawater and then release it into the ocean.

In spite of the fact that over one thousand tanks have been refilled, Japan maintains that this cannot be a viable long-term solution. It has been maintained that the water can be safely discharged after it has been treated and diluted.

The plan has received support from a significant number of scientists, who believe it to be plausible. The International Atomic Energy Agency of the United Nations has also stated that the plan satisfies international criteria and that it would have a "negligible" impact on the environment if it were implemented.

The authorities have committed to keeping a high level of transparency while also assuring that the radiation levels in the ocean would be regularly monitored.

However, there are some people who are still skeptical in light of Tepco's track record. The firm has in the past been accused of not being transparent enough regarding the accident, which is something that it has now apologized for.

Even though it is regular procedure for nuclear reactors to dispose of treated water in the ocean, opponents have pointed out that the amount that is being released from Fukushima is on a scale that has never been seen before and is far larger.

Some researchers believe that there should be a greater emphasis placed on research into the potential effects that it might have on the seafloor and on marine life. Greenpeace, an organization that advocates for environmental protection, is likewise in favor of keeping the water contained within the tanks until more advanced methods of water treatment are developed.

The idea has caused coastal towns and fishermen in Japan a great deal of ire in particular. They are concerned that it will damage their ability to make a living because some frightened consumers will avoid purchasing fish from the area, which has not fully recovered economically since the tragedy that occurred in 2011.

According to the most recent polls, there is a significant gap in opinion regarding the subject among the general population of Japan, with just half of respondents backing the release of the water.

Keiko Kisei, a demonstrator in Tokyo, told Reuters on Thursday that she believes there should have been many other means... rather than dumping it into the water. "I think there should have been many other methods," she said.

"However, they made the decision to release the water and so cause problems for the rest of the world. It defies all reasonable expectations in every way.