Iraq is now creeping away from murderous authoritarianism to face the more normal messes of a creaky Third World nation: corruption, poverty, health problems, miserable public services. And that is vastly preferable to what came before.
American Enterprise editor-in-chief Karl Zinsmeister just got back from Iraq, and he looks at the war’s progress from short and long-term historical perspectives.
His conclusion: perhaps the sky isn’t falling after all.
If you want to read the Arthur Cherenkoff media analysis Zinsmeister refers to, it’s available here.
To quote Frank Costanza, “I’m back, baby!”. United Airlines exited bankruptcy protection today. I suppose that should be cause for celebration, as many (most?) people doubted the legacy carrier would even make it this far.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m hoping for the best. United is a historic airline — it was founded by Boeing and has ties to the earliest days of aviation. But my gut feeling is that UAL’s prospects are still murky at best.
For one thing, unions are going to be putting the screws to the barely-in-the-black finances almost immediately.
Several of United’s unions, still stinging from steep pay cuts and other concessions in bankruptcy, issued statements putting management on notice that they expect to see better results for all their sacrifices. “With bankruptcy behind us, there are no more excuses, no room for error and no second chances,” said Mark Bathurst, head of the pilots’ union.
To my ears, “better results” means restoring the pay cuts that have allowed the airline to exit bankruptcy in the first place. If United were to report “better results”, the unions would push that much harder for more money, making it impossible for the company to get ahead.
I’m a pilot, so I know what these guys are worth. I wouldn’t begrudge them a six figure salary. I just don’t see where the money will come from. Whether the company got into trouble because of management incompetence or some other factor, it is where it is. Unless an airline is in bankruptcy, they have little recourse against a strike. Simply surviving seems a best case scenario for the foreseeable future.
A friend works for Northwest and is certain that airline’s pilots will be going on strike — a move that will likely force a shutdown. With so many other airlines on the ropes, United is going to be facing tough times, not to mention a very poor reputation, even by industry standards.
United used to offer some of the best customer service, but the cuts have eliminated much of what made flying the “friendly skies” special in the first place. UAL still has some advantages, though. Their frequent flier program, for example. I take advantage of that through the United Visa card, and have built up enough points for several free round-trip tickets anywhere in the United States.
The more time I spend in this industry, the less I understand how any airline can make money. I see GA singles going for $300 an hour, King Air charters at $3,000, and bizjets at more than twice that. A 737 with 100 passengers at $200 per seat is only bringing in $20,000. Between fuel , landing fees, maintenance, crew salaries, insurance, and capital costs, I just don’t see how any airline ever made money, even when times were good.
It’s the most wonderful time of the year! Or…. perhaps not if you live in the Anaheim Hills area.
ANAHEIM – A wildfire pushed by Santa Ana winds quickly spread over 800 acres of the Cleveland National Forest a few miles east of Orange County suburbs on Monday.
No homes were immediately involved but State Route 241 was closed in the area of the blaze, dubbed the Sierra Fire after a peak where it began.
More than 200 federal, state and county firefighters battled the fire, said forest spokeswoman Joan Wynn.
The blaze began about 4:30 a.m., and its cause remained under investigation, Wynn said.
Winds were blowing at 35 mph, and smoke stained skies brown across the Los Angeles metropolitan region.
SR241 is a major connector between Riverside and Orange Counties, a tollroad that (somewhat) alleviates a nighmarishly miserable drive for commuters who’ve been pushed further and further from their jobs by high real estate prices. I don’t even want to think about how badly this will snarl traffic on the highways.
And in the air, come to think of it. This TFR will probably leave some people wishing they had checked NOTAMs a little more carefully before takeoff:
The thing I’m curious about is how aircraft will get into Orange County’s John Wayne Airport. The ILS approach cuts right through the TFR area, and my reading of the TFR text does not indicate any possibility of waivers for planes flying under ATC control. I wonder how jets flying the KAYOH4 arrival are being handled.
It appears that Corona Airport juuuuust clears the east side of the TFR. On the sectional excerpt, you can see the junction of the 91 Freeway and Highway 71, which is inside the TFR. So I suppose as long as aircraft departing runway 25 didn’t extend upwind much beyond the airport boundary, they’d be ok.
On the other hand, the FAA’s TFR site does print the following disclaimer at the bottom of every page:
Depicted TFR data may not be a complete listing. Pilots should not use the information on this website for flight planning purposes.
Sort of begs the question of who you should turn to for an accurate graphical depiction of the TFR boundaries. If you can’t rely on the FAA for accurate aviation information…
Yes, these are the things I think about on my day off.
Snow is a funny thing. It reinforces the essential truth that airplanes are both incredibly strong and terribly fragile.
Snow looks pretty, but when enough collects on the top of an aircraft’s wing while it’s parked on the ramp, the sheer weight of that snow can be enough to damage it. I can’t find it at the moment, but AVweb has a great photo of a piston single with a broken wing from snow accumulation. Other times, the weight of all that frozen stuff will push the tail down to the ground, leaving the nose high in the air as though the airplane is on the verge of flying away.
A good friend who just moved to Susanville, CA sent me this photo of his Skylane sitting on the ramp. He said, “Four people were expecting to witness a crash and I made a perfect landing with 100 ft overcast on 6″ of fresh snow on the runway!”
I launched on a night cross country flight this evening with a pilot who’s approaching his checkride date. He’s got over 100 hours logged, largely because he’s doing his primary training in an SR22.
The big question mark for me before departure was how the wildfires in the Santa Ana canyon would affect this VFR flight. Since Dan is based out at Chino, I got a poor man’s weather briefing from him. The smoke was headed westbound and then south. I didn’t realize it at the time, but the fires were on the south side of the 91 freeway. For some eason I’d assumed they were on the north side, closer to Prado Dam. Once I discovered their true location, the smoke patterns made more sense. The Santa Ana winds blow the smoke westward until the terrain drops down, then it heads south.
Nevertheless, METARs and TAFs all across the L.A. basin were solid VFR. Just as we rolled down the runway, the tower reported a change to 2500 broken. I explained that this METAR was made by a weather observer on the ground who, while professionally trained, is a human and sometimes gets it wrong. This was one of those times, and the skies were actually clear. Since the official forecast was VFR, we were legal to depart. And once in the air, we could maintain VFR conditions, so it was all good.
At TOA, at least. As we headed eastbound, the visibility steadily declined. The line between the smoke-covered areas and the crystal-clear ones was so well defined that I filed a PIREP with Flight Watch:
CNO UA /OV TOA-VPLSA/TM 0530/FL065/TP SR20/WX IMC FU S LINE TOA-SANTA ANA CANYON
OK, so they got the aircraft type wrong. The gist of it is right. This is the first time I’ve ever seen a fire so prominent that it can be used as a VFR checkpoint.
After we returned, it hit me: flying around here is tough! We went from Torrance to Redlands on a path that took us right over a 5000′ MSL flight restriction. At one point, we were above class D, 1000′ below class B, just north of class C, 1000′ above the fire TFR, and just north of another TFR (Disneyland), all the while navigating in marginal visibility.
Glenn over at RantAir links to an interesting article on noise abatement problems at Denver International Airport.
There’s not much I can add. The article speaks for itself.
Congratulations to the Virgin GlobalFlyer team! Aside from a couple of blown tires, they got the ship home in one piece.
After surviving a major fuel loss, some turbulence that nearly ripped his plane apart, and blowing out two tires on the landing, American adventurer Steve Fossett Saturday broke the world’s flight distance record after traveling more than 26,000 miles (about 42,000 km) in 76 hours.
It sounds like they had a few tense moments at the end.
Minutes after officially setting the new world record over Shannon, Ireland, Fossett lost electricity aboard the single-engine turbofan aircraft and had to perform an emergency landing in Bournemouth, on the coast of southern England.
“As I was making my descent, the generator light came on and, as pilots, we know that’s really serious,” the 61-year-old millionaire said, noting the aircraft’s back-up- battery lasts only about 25 minutes.
“I had to get the plane on the ground.”
I’m not sure why the failure of a generator would require declaring an emergency, but then I don’t fly turbine equipment.
You know, despite the impressive numbers Fossett generated with his latest record breaking flight, I remain far less impressed with GlobalFlyer than I was — and still am — with its predecessor, Voyager.
Think about it. The Voyager flight was twenty years ago, when everything from satellite navigation to advanced composite design was either unavailable or in it’s infancy. The autopilot was a comparative piece of junk. Ditto for the ANR headsets, radar, and avionics. Fossett flew with glass panel instruments, internet access, and more.
The lightweight Williams engine that powers the GlobalFlyer wasn’t even on the drawing board back in 1986. Heck, instead of a turbine powerplant, Voyager did it with reciprocating engines. And they did it on 95% less money, building the aircraft themselves, refusing foreign sponsorship in order to make it an “all American” venture.
It’s hard to imagine, but in the early 80s, the scene at Mojave Airport was much different. If you wanted to put a project like Voyager togther, you had to scrape for every dime. Today, anything with Burt Rutan’s name on it can bring in millions in venture capital. If Rutan wanted $10 million for a new project, there’s no shortage of people ready to write a check, no questions asked. Heck, if I had the money I’d be getting in line to drop some his way.
Most impressive of all is that Voyager did it first, at a time when just about everyone said circumnavigating the globe without refueling was impossible.
It sounds as thought I don’t think much of Steve Fossett. On the contrary, it’s great to see people pushing the envelope. He seems to be a modern day Howard Hughes, albeit without the eccentricities and recklessness. I offer my heartfelt congratulations to their entire team.
And I noticed that someone else did the same. A class act.
I just got home a few minutes ago, exhausted after spending two long days in an intensive class studying the finer points of judging competitive aerobatics.
My employer sponsored this seminar, better know as a “judges school”, where those of us who are involved in the sport can satisfy one of the requirements for becoming an accredited IAC aerobatic judge.
I came away impressed once again with the two dozen aerobatic pilots I’ve come to know over the past year. They’re an intelligent, well-considered group who take flying upside down seriously. People who’ve invested — and continue to invest — their time, money, and attention in this fine sport. People who take the risks seriously, countering them with world-class training and a dedication to following the rules.
I also came home to some bad news on the AP newswire.
ROSEVILLE, California (AP) — A single-engine plane that appeared to have been performing an aerobatic stunt lost control and crashed into a suburban home Sunday, killing at least two people and sparking a fire that gutted the house, police said.
The crash left a gaping, smoldering hole in the two-story house it directly hit and set fire to an adjacent house, damaging the garage and attic, said Roseville Fire Marshall Dennis Mathisen. One body was visible in the wreckage.
The plane — which the FAA identified as a 1996 Glasair II — appeared to be doing an aerobatic maneuver when it crashed just before 11:30 a.m., Roseville Police spokeswoman Dee Dee Gunther said.
“The pilot appeared to be coming down low for some kind of maneuver that brought him to within 500 feet of the rooftops,” she said. “And then he appeared to lose control and crashed into one of the houses.”
Rick Wurster, who lives about a half mile from the crash, saw the plane attempting to make a figure eight.
“He couldn’t pull up because he didn’t have enough altitude,” Wurster said. “I saw him do two spins and then go over the tree line. A second later, I heard two booms.”
This is the other side. Reckless behavior exhibited by the unqualified.
I firmly believe aerobatics are a safe activity, assuming they’re performed in a safe location by a properly trained pilot. The investigation into this one is just starting, but this Glasair crash may be another case of massive error in pilot judgement. I say “may” because initial media reports after an accident are often inaccurate. Even preliminary NTSB reports often contain errors.
Nevertheless, I can say with certainty that no one should be performing aerobatics over homes. It is both unwise and highly illegal. I’ve seen footage of the crash site, and it’s definitely a congested area.
In fact, 14 CFR 91.303 prohibits aerobatics in six places:
- over any congested area
- over an open air assembly of people
- within an airport surface area
- on an airway
- below 1500 feet above the ground
- when in-flight visibility is less than 3 miles
Since we’re on the topic, it’s worthwhile to define aerobatics. For the purposes of 91.303, it refers to “an intentional maneuver involving an abrupt change in an aircraft’s attitude, an abnormal attitude, or abnormal acceleration, not necessary for normal flight.”
Now I wouldn’t put too much stock in an AP news story, but if the reported eyewitness accounts are anywhere near reality, this pilot was way out of line. He shouldn’t have been flying at 500′ over those homes, even in straight and level flight, unless he was in the process of taking off or landing.
So how dangerous is this kind of thing? Well, there were about 1,200 general aviation accidents last year. According to the Air Safety Foundation, “Low-level maneuvering was the leading cause [of accidents] again this year, as it has been for the last five, holding steady at about 25 percent of fatal accidents.” Low level maneuvering is a synonym for low level aerobatics, something 99.9% of the pilot population has absolutely no business messing with.
By the same token, Sport Aerobatics magazine reported that 2005 saw only 10 airshow or contest-related mishaps, the second lowest total in the past two decades.
Ten accidents. Is that a lot? I don’t know. But I do know this: airshows are one of the most popular events on the planet.
In the 1990s, airshows were the second most popular spectator sport in North America with over 18 million people attending more than 400 airshows annually. In 1998, airshows drew nearly twice the attendance figures of NFL football.
These airshows consist almost entirely of hard core, low level aerobatics. A year with only 10 mishaps sounds pretty good to me, especially when compared with 300 low level maneuvering accidents among the greater general aviation community.
The inescapable conclusion is that unless one has received appropriate aerobatic and spin training from a qualified instructor, aerobatics should be avoided. Though I’m undoubtedly talking to a brick wall, I’ll say it again: low level aerobatics are especially deadly. They should only be attempted by extremely experienced, highly trained aerobats flying purpose-built equipment under tightly controlled conditions.
If pilots would stick to this simple rule, fatalities would drop by 25%, the largest single killer of aviators would be eliminated, and this beleagured avocation would avoid further damage to its public image.
Wake up, people.
NEW YORK (FORTUNE) - If you want to know where real estate prices are headed in California’s Orange County, the man to talk to is Gary Watts. The Mission Viejo broker has 35 years of experience and doubles as a spokesman for the O.C.’s Association of Realtors.
But it’s his track record more than his resume that has won him serious credibility with his peers. In 1989 he earned the nickname “Scary Gary” by correctly predicting that the housing market in Southern California was headed for a tumble. Then, in 1996, he was one of the first to call the area’s rebound. Since 1997, Orange County home prices have seen a 195 percent rise. Will the good times last another year? Gary doesn’t hesitate. “Fifteen percent is pretty much in the bag for Orange County in 2006,” he says. “It’s impossible for prices to go down this year.”
Nothing’s impossible, Gary. The very same article notes that single family home inventory in Boston has increased 79% over last year. Foreclosures up by a whopping 45%. Boston finds itself in one of only three states whose population declined in 2005. Interest rates are higher, while real wage growth has lagged far behind real estate appreciation.
Perhaps Boston and Orange County are just in different time zones.
California may not be suffering from Boston’s woes, but we do have serious problems stemming from overcrowding. No job market is going to fix the infrastructure problems we’ve got around here. There just aren’t enough homes, roads, hospitals, or schools to deal with this many people. It’s only unfortunate that no one thought about this when they elected to build homes 18″ from one another.
Maybe the real estate sector is just hyping itself. Can you trust a real estate agent to provide an honest assessment of the market? There is an inherent conflict of interest, especially since this guy is a spokesman for the local realtors assocation.
I hear you saying, “Perhaps the average homeowner can be relied upon for a dose of sanity.”
Yale’s Shiller surveyed Orange County residents last year on what they expected home prices to do over the next ten years. The average expectation was a 23 percent return — per year!
My first thought was, “Has Schiller double checked his math? Maybe they meant 2.3%.” My second was that O.C. residents have been watching too many episodes of that dreadful TV show.
Twenty three percent! Mr. Watts’ 15% prediction sounds like a comparative doomsday scenario.
The median home price in Orange County is currently $800,000. If the market returns 23% per year, by 2016 the median price would be just over $6.3 million. That’s a total return of 786% over 10 years. From current levels.
Sadly, since I own a condominium, my place would probably only be worth $3 million. But that’s a fair price to pay for a tiny 2 bedroom, 1 bath apartment, don’t you think?
It’s getting to the point where I turn to the real estate section for my humor fix. Seinfeld was never this funny. I just wish someone had told me that multi-level marketing schemes were legal again — I could have made a bundle.
Seriously, though, if you want reality, it’s encapsulated in the midst of the Fortune article with two salient points:
- Southern California has become a hotbed for “exotic” mortgages, such as interest-only and negative amortization loans
- the strength of the local economy is simply delaying the inevitable slowdown — for now
It’s as simple as that.
To my eyes, the signs of a market frenzy are undeniable. High prices, weird mortgages, record forecosures, and of course high levels of speculation.
Last year more than a quarter of all residential home sales in the U.S. were for investment purposes, and 18% fell into the vacation/second home category. That was the national trend — keep in mind that in California it’s much higher.
In other words, one of every three homes purchased last year was not for a primary residence. The buyer never intended to live in the home, so they were not investing for long-term longevity, but for short-term appreciation that would allow a quick gain, or as a rental in which they’d be able to make immediate positive cash flow.
I haven’t hear this talked about too much, but it seems to me that California’s Proposition 13 is doing a lot to sustain the frenzy. It locks in a relatively fixed basis for property tax computation. While high prices mean high tax rates, Prop 13 eliminates a big “unknown” in real estate ownership. Homeowners in other states have no such protection, so they are at the whim of politicans to decide their tax rates. Their tax might be $2,000 this year and $4,000 next year. Markets hate uncertainty, so Prop 13 gives investors a perceived edge in this state.
I love flying and scuba diving, so it would seem only natural that I’d like this.
It’s a cool idea, yet somehow still very sad.
Of course, much like Homer crying as he eats the last buffalo, I’ll still dive the wreck.
I don’t know how airliners are supposed to die. It sucks to see them cut up, parted out, melted down, sunk, or relegated to a dusty museum or boneyard.
Basically, I think all airplanes should always remain airworthy and be flown by people who love them.
See? This is why I could never leaseback an airplane. Too much attachment.
Hey, here’s a cool idea: sink a few planes, and build an entire airport under water! It would be especially neat if you could put a few seaplanes down there. Lord knows there are already enough of them under water, all you’d have to do is collect them into one place.
I’ve had a couple of eyebrow raising moments in the cockpit over the past year. What keeps me coming back for more — besides the fact that I just love to fly — is the notion that a fair number of aviators have been through far worse, often bizzare mechanical breakdowns like the one-in-a-billion United 232 hydraulic failure.
Aside from their entertainment value, they teach a valuable lesson: keep your cool, apply good judgement, rely on your training, and you’ll be amazed at what can be overcome.
A former Navy A-6 pilot went through just such an incident during the Gulf War when his bombardier/naviagor’s ejection seat malfunctioned in spectacular fashion. He refers to the “luck of the Irish” — I can only assume he’s not talking about a football team from North Bend, Indiana — but I think you’ll agree that for every bit of luck there was twice as much professionalism and talent from all involved which saw this thing through to a happy end.
Anyway, read through the story. It comes with photos, video clips, audio recordings, and eyewitness accounts that take you through the incident from every angle.
It’s not just a movie anymore.
Vaginal rejuvenation costs thousands of dollars and is done with a laser. It includes a variety of procedures, such as women getting their labia made smaller because it is uncomfortable for them to engage in physical activity or have intercourse, women getting their vaginal canal tightened as it was pre-baby delivery, and other women going one step further by getting their hymen (the gateway to the vaginal canal) tightened. This last procedure can, in a sense, make a woman a virgin again.
You’d think this would come from some scurrilous sex-related site, but alas it’s from CNN anchor Anderson Cooper’s “360″ show weblog.
I know this kind of thing is common in parts of the world where women who aren’t virgins (and sometimes, even if they are) get a free stoning in the town square. But isn’t it ironic that, although this procedure is available in the U.S. for largely cosmetic reasons, we share this odd distinction with countries like Saudi Arabia? They’d never consider botox. But a hymenoplasty? Get thee to a doctor, stat!
Cooper’s article was sort of humorous, but many of the comments it engendered were just plain sad. Here’s one:
In 1983 I taught English at the Women’s branch of King Saud Univ., in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Being a virgin when one marries (and it is always an arranged marriage) is, in many cases, a literal matter of life and death for a young woman in that country, and parades of men, led by a new groom bearing proof in the form of bloody sheets after the wedding night, were de rigeur in outlying districts. This type of surgery was, if sub rosa, not unusual at that time in the country, even if a woman was a virgin but had lost her hymen via other means, so that there would be no doubt in the groom’s mind. The attitude toward virginity was summed up by a male student I discussed this with: “Would you rather buy a new car, or a used car?”
Nothing quite like a university student who is unable or unwilling to differentiate between a car and a human being. The commenter was referencing events from nearly a quarter of a century ago, but I’d imagine it’s much the same there today.
Of course, if Saudi Arabia is a bit too far away for your taste, you may not have to travel that far. Chad from Austin, TX writes:
There are still culturally rich places in America, like my birthplace in South Texas, where a woman’s virginity in the marriage bed is a source of honor for her family and groom; its absence had been grounds for annullment and disowning. I’ve seen billboards for vaginal rejuvination there for at least 3 years.
AVweb reports a setback in Airbus’ attempt to get the mammoth A380 certified:
Airbus is downplaying test results in which an A380 wing undergoing static testing failed slightly before the required design limit.
The wings are supposed to take 1.5 times the design load limit but this one failed at 1.45 times, about 3.3 percent shy of the certification requirement.
Airbus spokeswoman Barbara Kracht said the wing will need some “refinements” but the aircraft is on schedule for certification and first deliveries late this year. “We will need to find out from the data what is really needed but it’s certainly not a redesign of the wing,” Kracht told Associated Press.
In order for an aircraft to be certified here in the U.S., it must withstand the maximum “g” loading specified for that category, plus a 50% overload factor. For example, in the Normal category, the aircraft must withstand a positive load of 3.8g and a negative load of -1.52g at maximum gross weight. It must also be able to withstand an additional 50% of those loads without failing.
These “static” tests, as they’re called, are accomplished on the ground by mechanically loading up the wings. Sometimes this is done by simply placing sandbags on the wings to simulate a load. Large manufacturers like Boeing and Airbus use slightly more expensive methods. I’ve seen video of a 777 wing being tested to failure — the wings bent up to the point where they almost touched. In other words, it handled far more than the required loading.
The requirements for the Transport category are set out in 14 CFR 25.337(b)-(d):
(b) The positive limit maneuvering load factor n for any speed up to Vn may not be less than 2.1+24,000/ (W +10,000) except that n may not be less than 2.5 and need not be greater than 3.8 — where W is the design maximum takeoff weight.
(c) The negative limit maneuvering load factor –
(1) May not be less than −1.0 at speeds up to VC; and
(2) Must vary linearly with speed from the value at VC to zero at VD.
(d) Maneuvering load factors lower than those specified in this section may be used if the airplane has design features that make it impossible to exceed these values in flight.
So if the plane is going to be certified in the Transport category, it will have to handle somewhere between 2.5 and 3.8 positive G — plus 50% — depending on the maximum takeoff weight.
I’ve never heard of an aircraft failing to withstand the 1.5x test. That’s not to say it’s never happened, just that I’m not familar with such an ocurrance.
However you slice it, this has got to be a huge embarrassment for Airbus. Even if the flaw was simply a construction defect in the prototype, it will bring into question every other aspect of the A380’s design and construction in the minds of potential customers, not to mention the flying public.
It’s a bona fide public relations disaster. I expect Boeing will get major mileage out of this one, though if they’re smart they will tread carefully. After all, Boeing will soon be seeking certification of its own new design, the 787 Dreamliner, and Airbus’ PR folks will certainly be looking to return the favor.
