Four married couples attend a party. Each person shakes hands with every other person, except their own...












1












$begingroup$


My book gave the answer as 24. I thought of it like this:



You have four pairs of couples, so you can think of it as M1W2, M2W2, M3W3, M4W4, where
M is a man and W is a woman. M1 has to shake 6 other hands, excluding his wife. You have to do this 4 times for the other men, so you have 4 * 6 handshakes, but in my answer you are double counting. How do I approach this?






combinatorics







share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    In your answer, you both overcounted and undercounted, and incidentally these happened to cancel out and give you the correct answer without having to do anything further. You did $4 times (text{Handshakes done by the men})$, which overcounted the man-man handshakes, but left out the woman-woman handshakes.
    $endgroup$
    – M. Vinay
    36 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    And that's easily fixed by counting all such handshakes in the same way, not just those done by men, so you get $48$. And now, as you said, you have indeed double-counted. But if you know it's exactly double counting, you can get the answer by halving it!
    $endgroup$
    – M. Vinay
    29 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    I recommend when you have a problem like this you can't solve, try solving an easier version first, like only 2 couples and anything goes.
    $endgroup$
    – DanielV
    11 mins ago
















1












$begingroup$


My book gave the answer as 24. I thought of it like this:



You have four pairs of couples, so you can think of it as M1W2, M2W2, M3W3, M4W4, where
M is a man and W is a woman. M1 has to shake 6 other hands, excluding his wife. You have to do this 4 times for the other men, so you have 4 * 6 handshakes, but in my answer you are double counting. How do I approach this?






combinatorics







share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    In your answer, you both overcounted and undercounted, and incidentally these happened to cancel out and give you the correct answer without having to do anything further. You did $4 times (text{Handshakes done by the men})$, which overcounted the man-man handshakes, but left out the woman-woman handshakes.
    $endgroup$
    – M. Vinay
    36 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    And that's easily fixed by counting all such handshakes in the same way, not just those done by men, so you get $48$. And now, as you said, you have indeed double-counted. But if you know it's exactly double counting, you can get the answer by halving it!
    $endgroup$
    – M. Vinay
    29 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    I recommend when you have a problem like this you can't solve, try solving an easier version first, like only 2 couples and anything goes.
    $endgroup$
    – DanielV
    11 mins ago














1












1








1





$begingroup$


My book gave the answer as 24. I thought of it like this:



You have four pairs of couples, so you can think of it as M1W2, M2W2, M3W3, M4W4, where
M is a man and W is a woman. M1 has to shake 6 other hands, excluding his wife. You have to do this 4 times for the other men, so you have 4 * 6 handshakes, but in my answer you are double counting. How do I approach this?






combinatorics







share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$




My book gave the answer as 24. I thought of it like this:



You have four pairs of couples, so you can think of it as M1W2, M2W2, M3W3, M4W4, where
M is a man and W is a woman. M1 has to shake 6 other hands, excluding his wife. You have to do this 4 times for the other men, so you have 4 * 6 handshakes, but in my answer you are double counting. How do I approach this?






combinatorics




combinatorics






share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










asked 44 mins ago









ZakuZaku

592




592












  • $begingroup$
    In your answer, you both overcounted and undercounted, and incidentally these happened to cancel out and give you the correct answer without having to do anything further. You did $4 times (text{Handshakes done by the men})$, which overcounted the man-man handshakes, but left out the woman-woman handshakes.
    $endgroup$
    – M. Vinay
    36 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    And that's easily fixed by counting all such handshakes in the same way, not just those done by men, so you get $48$. And now, as you said, you have indeed double-counted. But if you know it's exactly double counting, you can get the answer by halving it!
    $endgroup$
    – M. Vinay
    29 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    I recommend when you have a problem like this you can't solve, try solving an easier version first, like only 2 couples and anything goes.
    $endgroup$
    – DanielV
    11 mins ago


















  • $begingroup$
    In your answer, you both overcounted and undercounted, and incidentally these happened to cancel out and give you the correct answer without having to do anything further. You did $4 times (text{Handshakes done by the men})$, which overcounted the man-man handshakes, but left out the woman-woman handshakes.
    $endgroup$
    – M. Vinay
    36 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    And that's easily fixed by counting all such handshakes in the same way, not just those done by men, so you get $48$. And now, as you said, you have indeed double-counted. But if you know it's exactly double counting, you can get the answer by halving it!
    $endgroup$
    – M. Vinay
    29 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    I recommend when you have a problem like this you can't solve, try solving an easier version first, like only 2 couples and anything goes.
    $endgroup$
    – DanielV
    11 mins ago
















$begingroup$
In your answer, you both overcounted and undercounted, and incidentally these happened to cancel out and give you the correct answer without having to do anything further. You did $4 times (text{Handshakes done by the men})$, which overcounted the man-man handshakes, but left out the woman-woman handshakes.
$endgroup$
– M. Vinay
36 mins ago




$begingroup$
In your answer, you both overcounted and undercounted, and incidentally these happened to cancel out and give you the correct answer without having to do anything further. You did $4 times (text{Handshakes done by the men})$, which overcounted the man-man handshakes, but left out the woman-woman handshakes.
$endgroup$
– M. Vinay
36 mins ago












$begingroup$
And that's easily fixed by counting all such handshakes in the same way, not just those done by men, so you get $48$. And now, as you said, you have indeed double-counted. But if you know it's exactly double counting, you can get the answer by halving it!
$endgroup$
– M. Vinay
29 mins ago




$begingroup$
And that's easily fixed by counting all such handshakes in the same way, not just those done by men, so you get $48$. And now, as you said, you have indeed double-counted. But if you know it's exactly double counting, you can get the answer by halving it!
$endgroup$
– M. Vinay
29 mins ago












$begingroup$
I recommend when you have a problem like this you can't solve, try solving an easier version first, like only 2 couples and anything goes.
$endgroup$
– DanielV
11 mins ago




$begingroup$
I recommend when you have a problem like this you can't solve, try solving an easier version first, like only 2 couples and anything goes.
$endgroup$
– DanielV
11 mins ago










3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes


















2












$begingroup$

Suppose the spouses were allowed to shake each other's hands. That would give you $binom{8}{2} = 28$ handshakes. Since there are four couples, four of these handshakes are illegal. We can remove those to get the $24$ legal handshakes.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$





















    2












    $begingroup$

    You may proceed as follows using combinations:




    • Number of all possible handshakes among 8 people: $color{blue}{binom{8}{2}}$

    • Number of pairs who do not shake hands: $color{blue}{4}$


    It follows:
    $$mbox{number of hand shakes without pairs} = color{blue}{binom{8}{2}} - color{blue}{4} = frac{8cdot 7}{2} - 4 = 24$$






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$





















      1












      $begingroup$

      $k$ couples entails $2k$ people. If we imagine each couple going in sequential order, couple 1 will each have to shake $2k-2$ couple's hands for each individual, or $4k-4$ handshakes for couple 1 total. Since there is 1 fewer couple every time a new couple shakes hands, there will be $4k-4i$ handshakes by the $i$-th couple. So the total number of handshakes is given by:



      $$sum_{i=1}^k (4k-4i) = sum_{i=1}^k4k - sum_{i=1}^k4i = 4k^2 - 4frac{k(k+1)}{2} = 4(k^2 - frac{k^2+k}{2}) = 4(k^2 - (frac{k^2}{2} + frac{k}{2})) = 4(frac{k^2}{2}-frac{k}{2}) = 2(k^2-k)$$



      for $k$ couples. Plugging in $k$ = 4 verifies a solution of 24 for this case.






      share|cite|improve this answer










      New contributor




      beefstew2011 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.






      $endgroup$













      • $begingroup$
        Well, that quite goes against the grain of combinatorics, since you've listed nearly all cases. Try to count without listing. Think lazy!
        $endgroup$
        – M. Vinay
        33 mins ago










      • $begingroup$
        True. I'll delete this.
        $endgroup$
        – beefstew2011
        33 mins ago










      • $begingroup$
        Undeleted with more general answer.
        $endgroup$
        – beefstew2011
        12 mins ago











      Your Answer





      StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
      return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
      StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
      StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
      });
      });
      }, "mathjax-editing");

      StackExchange.ready(function() {
      var channelOptions = {
      tags: "".split(" "),
      id: "69"
      };
      initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

      StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
      // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
      if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
      StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
      createEditor();
      });
      }
      else {
      createEditor();
      }
      });

      function createEditor() {
      StackExchange.prepareEditor({
      heartbeatType: 'answer',
      autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
      convertImagesToLinks: true,
      noModals: true,
      showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
      reputationToPostImages: 10,
      bindNavPrevention: true,
      postfix: "",
      imageUploader: {
      brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
      contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
      allowUrls: true
      },
      noCode: true, onDemand: true,
      discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
      ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
      });


      }
      });














      draft saved

      draft discarded


















      StackExchange.ready(
      function () {
      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3151152%2ffour-married-couples-attend-a-party-each-person-shakes-hands-with-every-other-p%23new-answer', 'question_page');
      }
      );

      Post as a guest















      Required, but never shown

























      3 Answers
      3






      active

      oldest

      votes








      3 Answers
      3






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes









      2












      $begingroup$

      Suppose the spouses were allowed to shake each other's hands. That would give you $binom{8}{2} = 28$ handshakes. Since there are four couples, four of these handshakes are illegal. We can remove those to get the $24$ legal handshakes.






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$


















        2












        $begingroup$

        Suppose the spouses were allowed to shake each other's hands. That would give you $binom{8}{2} = 28$ handshakes. Since there are four couples, four of these handshakes are illegal. We can remove those to get the $24$ legal handshakes.






        share|cite|improve this answer









        $endgroup$
















          2












          2








          2





          $begingroup$

          Suppose the spouses were allowed to shake each other's hands. That would give you $binom{8}{2} = 28$ handshakes. Since there are four couples, four of these handshakes are illegal. We can remove those to get the $24$ legal handshakes.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$



          Suppose the spouses were allowed to shake each other's hands. That would give you $binom{8}{2} = 28$ handshakes. Since there are four couples, four of these handshakes are illegal. We can remove those to get the $24$ legal handshakes.







          share|cite|improve this answer












          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer










          answered 23 mins ago









          Austin MohrAustin Mohr

          20.5k35098




          20.5k35098























              2












              $begingroup$

              You may proceed as follows using combinations:




              • Number of all possible handshakes among 8 people: $color{blue}{binom{8}{2}}$

              • Number of pairs who do not shake hands: $color{blue}{4}$


              It follows:
              $$mbox{number of hand shakes without pairs} = color{blue}{binom{8}{2}} - color{blue}{4} = frac{8cdot 7}{2} - 4 = 24$$






              share|cite|improve this answer









              $endgroup$


















                2












                $begingroup$

                You may proceed as follows using combinations:




                • Number of all possible handshakes among 8 people: $color{blue}{binom{8}{2}}$

                • Number of pairs who do not shake hands: $color{blue}{4}$


                It follows:
                $$mbox{number of hand shakes without pairs} = color{blue}{binom{8}{2}} - color{blue}{4} = frac{8cdot 7}{2} - 4 = 24$$






                share|cite|improve this answer









                $endgroup$
















                  2












                  2








                  2





                  $begingroup$

                  You may proceed as follows using combinations:




                  • Number of all possible handshakes among 8 people: $color{blue}{binom{8}{2}}$

                  • Number of pairs who do not shake hands: $color{blue}{4}$


                  It follows:
                  $$mbox{number of hand shakes without pairs} = color{blue}{binom{8}{2}} - color{blue}{4} = frac{8cdot 7}{2} - 4 = 24$$






                  share|cite|improve this answer









                  $endgroup$



                  You may proceed as follows using combinations:




                  • Number of all possible handshakes among 8 people: $color{blue}{binom{8}{2}}$

                  • Number of pairs who do not shake hands: $color{blue}{4}$


                  It follows:
                  $$mbox{number of hand shakes without pairs} = color{blue}{binom{8}{2}} - color{blue}{4} = frac{8cdot 7}{2} - 4 = 24$$







                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  share|cite|improve this answer



                  share|cite|improve this answer










                  answered 22 mins ago









                  trancelocationtrancelocation

                  12.6k1826




                  12.6k1826























                      1












                      $begingroup$

                      $k$ couples entails $2k$ people. If we imagine each couple going in sequential order, couple 1 will each have to shake $2k-2$ couple's hands for each individual, or $4k-4$ handshakes for couple 1 total. Since there is 1 fewer couple every time a new couple shakes hands, there will be $4k-4i$ handshakes by the $i$-th couple. So the total number of handshakes is given by:



                      $$sum_{i=1}^k (4k-4i) = sum_{i=1}^k4k - sum_{i=1}^k4i = 4k^2 - 4frac{k(k+1)}{2} = 4(k^2 - frac{k^2+k}{2}) = 4(k^2 - (frac{k^2}{2} + frac{k}{2})) = 4(frac{k^2}{2}-frac{k}{2}) = 2(k^2-k)$$



                      for $k$ couples. Plugging in $k$ = 4 verifies a solution of 24 for this case.






                      share|cite|improve this answer










                      New contributor




                      beefstew2011 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.






                      $endgroup$













                      • $begingroup$
                        Well, that quite goes against the grain of combinatorics, since you've listed nearly all cases. Try to count without listing. Think lazy!
                        $endgroup$
                        – M. Vinay
                        33 mins ago










                      • $begingroup$
                        True. I'll delete this.
                        $endgroup$
                        – beefstew2011
                        33 mins ago










                      • $begingroup$
                        Undeleted with more general answer.
                        $endgroup$
                        – beefstew2011
                        12 mins ago
















                      1












                      $begingroup$

                      $k$ couples entails $2k$ people. If we imagine each couple going in sequential order, couple 1 will each have to shake $2k-2$ couple's hands for each individual, or $4k-4$ handshakes for couple 1 total. Since there is 1 fewer couple every time a new couple shakes hands, there will be $4k-4i$ handshakes by the $i$-th couple. So the total number of handshakes is given by:



                      $$sum_{i=1}^k (4k-4i) = sum_{i=1}^k4k - sum_{i=1}^k4i = 4k^2 - 4frac{k(k+1)}{2} = 4(k^2 - frac{k^2+k}{2}) = 4(k^2 - (frac{k^2}{2} + frac{k}{2})) = 4(frac{k^2}{2}-frac{k}{2}) = 2(k^2-k)$$



                      for $k$ couples. Plugging in $k$ = 4 verifies a solution of 24 for this case.






                      share|cite|improve this answer










                      New contributor




                      beefstew2011 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.






                      $endgroup$













                      • $begingroup$
                        Well, that quite goes against the grain of combinatorics, since you've listed nearly all cases. Try to count without listing. Think lazy!
                        $endgroup$
                        – M. Vinay
                        33 mins ago










                      • $begingroup$
                        True. I'll delete this.
                        $endgroup$
                        – beefstew2011
                        33 mins ago










                      • $begingroup$
                        Undeleted with more general answer.
                        $endgroup$
                        – beefstew2011
                        12 mins ago














                      1












                      1








                      1





                      $begingroup$

                      $k$ couples entails $2k$ people. If we imagine each couple going in sequential order, couple 1 will each have to shake $2k-2$ couple's hands for each individual, or $4k-4$ handshakes for couple 1 total. Since there is 1 fewer couple every time a new couple shakes hands, there will be $4k-4i$ handshakes by the $i$-th couple. So the total number of handshakes is given by:



                      $$sum_{i=1}^k (4k-4i) = sum_{i=1}^k4k - sum_{i=1}^k4i = 4k^2 - 4frac{k(k+1)}{2} = 4(k^2 - frac{k^2+k}{2}) = 4(k^2 - (frac{k^2}{2} + frac{k}{2})) = 4(frac{k^2}{2}-frac{k}{2}) = 2(k^2-k)$$



                      for $k$ couples. Plugging in $k$ = 4 verifies a solution of 24 for this case.






                      share|cite|improve this answer










                      New contributor




                      beefstew2011 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.






                      $endgroup$



                      $k$ couples entails $2k$ people. If we imagine each couple going in sequential order, couple 1 will each have to shake $2k-2$ couple's hands for each individual, or $4k-4$ handshakes for couple 1 total. Since there is 1 fewer couple every time a new couple shakes hands, there will be $4k-4i$ handshakes by the $i$-th couple. So the total number of handshakes is given by:



                      $$sum_{i=1}^k (4k-4i) = sum_{i=1}^k4k - sum_{i=1}^k4i = 4k^2 - 4frac{k(k+1)}{2} = 4(k^2 - frac{k^2+k}{2}) = 4(k^2 - (frac{k^2}{2} + frac{k}{2})) = 4(frac{k^2}{2}-frac{k}{2}) = 2(k^2-k)$$



                      for $k$ couples. Plugging in $k$ = 4 verifies a solution of 24 for this case.







                      share|cite|improve this answer










                      New contributor




                      beefstew2011 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.









                      share|cite|improve this answer



                      share|cite|improve this answer








                      edited 13 mins ago





















                      New contributor




                      beefstew2011 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.









                      answered 35 mins ago









                      beefstew2011beefstew2011

                      687




                      687




                      New contributor




                      beefstew2011 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.





                      New contributor





                      beefstew2011 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.






                      beefstew2011 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.












                      • $begingroup$
                        Well, that quite goes against the grain of combinatorics, since you've listed nearly all cases. Try to count without listing. Think lazy!
                        $endgroup$
                        – M. Vinay
                        33 mins ago










                      • $begingroup$
                        True. I'll delete this.
                        $endgroup$
                        – beefstew2011
                        33 mins ago










                      • $begingroup$
                        Undeleted with more general answer.
                        $endgroup$
                        – beefstew2011
                        12 mins ago


















                      • $begingroup$
                        Well, that quite goes against the grain of combinatorics, since you've listed nearly all cases. Try to count without listing. Think lazy!
                        $endgroup$
                        – M. Vinay
                        33 mins ago










                      • $begingroup$
                        True. I'll delete this.
                        $endgroup$
                        – beefstew2011
                        33 mins ago










                      • $begingroup$
                        Undeleted with more general answer.
                        $endgroup$
                        – beefstew2011
                        12 mins ago
















                      $begingroup$
                      Well, that quite goes against the grain of combinatorics, since you've listed nearly all cases. Try to count without listing. Think lazy!
                      $endgroup$
                      – M. Vinay
                      33 mins ago




                      $begingroup$
                      Well, that quite goes against the grain of combinatorics, since you've listed nearly all cases. Try to count without listing. Think lazy!
                      $endgroup$
                      – M. Vinay
                      33 mins ago












                      $begingroup$
                      True. I'll delete this.
                      $endgroup$
                      – beefstew2011
                      33 mins ago




                      $begingroup$
                      True. I'll delete this.
                      $endgroup$
                      – beefstew2011
                      33 mins ago












                      $begingroup$
                      Undeleted with more general answer.
                      $endgroup$
                      – beefstew2011
                      12 mins ago




                      $begingroup$
                      Undeleted with more general answer.
                      $endgroup$
                      – beefstew2011
                      12 mins ago


















                      draft saved

                      draft discarded




















































                      Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


                      • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                      But avoid …



                      • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                      • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                      Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                      To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      StackExchange.ready(
                      function () {
                      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3151152%2ffour-married-couples-attend-a-party-each-person-shakes-hands-with-every-other-p%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                      }
                      );

                      Post as a guest















                      Required, but never shown





















































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown

































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown







                      -

                      Popular posts from this blog

                      What other Star Trek series did the main TNG cast show up in?

                      Image
                      .everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0; } 4 I'm referring to Picard, Riker, Data, Worf, Geordi, Dr. Crusher, Wesley Crusher, Chief O'Brien and family, Deanna Troi, Guinan. I know Picard and Worf show up on DS9, though I haven't seen it myself. I'm curious what happened to the characters after that last episode of TNG? star-trek star-trek-tng share | improve this question edited 10 hours ago Ham Sandwich 6,051 2 25 75 ...
                      Read more

                      Berlina muro

                      Image
                      La berlina muro ĉe Bethaniendamm, 1986 La berlina muro aŭ simple la muro [1] , nomita ankaŭ "kontraŭfaŝisma remparo" en propaganda lingvo de la iama Germana Demokratia Respubliko, estis parto de la interngermana limo, kiu dividis de la 13-a de aŭgusto 1961 ĝis la 9-a de novembro 1989 okcidentan Berlinon de la orienta parto de la urbo kaj de la ĉirkaŭa tereno de la GDR. Ĝi estis unu el la plej famaj simboloj de la malvarma milito kaj de la disdivido de Germanio. Pli ol simpla muro, la berlina muro estis fakte tuta defendokonstruaĵo kun du muroj, ena malplena strio, rondirvojo, gardturoj kaj alarmsistemoj. Dum la provo transiri la severe garditan limon al okcidenta Berlino multaj homoj estis mortigitaj. La preciza nombro de viktimoj estas pridisputita kaj ne certa; la nombroj anoncataj varias inter 86 kaj 238 mortintoj. La malplifortiĝo de Sovetunio kaj la politiko de liberigo gvidita de Miĥail Gorbaĉov ebligis al la orientgermanoj faligi la 9-an de novembro 1989 l...
                      Read more

                      Berlina aerponto

                      Image
                      Flugkoridoroj dum la blokado de Berlino La Berlina aerponto estas la provizigo de okcidenta Berlino per aviadiloj fare de la aliancanoj inter la 23-a de junio 1948 kaj la 12-a de majo 1949 dum la blokado de Berlino fare de la sovetia armeo. Enhavo 1 Historio 1.1 La aerkoridoroj 1.2 Unuaj flugoj 1.3 Plibonigo de la aerponto 1.4 Fino de la aerponto 1.5 Rozinbombiloj 1.6 Bilanco 2 Flughavenoj 2.1 Berlino 2.2 Okcidenta Germanio 3 Aviadiloj de la berlina aerponto 4 15-a datreveno de la aerponto 5 Bibliografio 6 Referencoj 7 Eksteraj ligiloj Historio | General Lucius D. Clay, militguberniestro de la usona okupadzono Jam antaŭ la berlina aerponto estiĝis la malgranda aerponto . La estro de la sovetia militadministracio en Germanio, Vasili Daniloviĉ Sokolovski, ordonis la 1-an de aprilo 1948, kiel reago al la konferenco de Londono inter britoj, francoj kaj reprezentantoj de Benelukso pri aligo de Germa...
                      Read more