This gallery contains 6 photos.
A friend of mine gave me a copy of the new game SkyDrift for my birthday (thanks, Graham!). Before I get started, let me confess that as a pilot I hold any game that involves flying to a very high standard. … Continue reading
It appears that LightSquared is prepared to sue the FCC if the FCC does not issue approval for the company to begin installation and operation of approximately 40,000 towers in the US to provide universal 4G data service across the country. At a glance that may not seem like a big deal, and may even be considered business as usual. However, the issue is a much more complicated one since the network LightSquared is proposing uses a band of frequencies right next to the frequencies that the GPS system uses. During testing, it was demonstrated that there was considerable interference with the operation of some GPS receivers when the receivers were in proximity to the proposed towers.
A number of industries that rely on GPS have been watching this process with considerable unease. The aviation industry in particular is concerned, since the NextGen ATC system that the FAA is working on will rely heavily on GPS. In many industries, interference from LightSquared’s proposed network could cause problems of varying severity, but in aviation any GPS interference could have disastrous consequences.
On the other side of the coin, LightSquared blames the interference on GPS receivers that “hunt” for signals and pick up signals from frequencies that are outside those used by the GPS satellites. They state that the manufacturers of the receivers have ignored standards to prevent receivers from picking up frequencies from outside the GPS band of frequencies. They certainly have a point if, in fact, current receivers do pick up signals that are not coming from the GPS satellites, and those signals are causing interference with the ability of the receiver to calculate an accurate position.
LightSquared actually claims to have a “Simple, Affordable Solution” to the potential problem of interference. However, they make no mention of exactly what “affordable” is. They also seem to imply that existing GPS receivers can be retrofitted with their solution, but given the millions of receivers currently in operation, from cell phones all the way up to airliners and military equipment, will all of the existing receivers be able to be retrofitted? LightSquared claims that the fix will not “increase the selling price” of new receivers to the consumer, but how much will a retrofit of an existing receiver cost?
LightSquared’s simple solution was “developed in a matter of days,” and apparently tests were positive for reducing or eliminating interference. However, I am somewhat skeptical of a one-size-fits-all solution to this problem, especially where aviation is concerned. GPS receivers intended for use in navigation of aircraft are extremely fine-tuned. If the solution created by LightSquared is limited to blocking any frequencies outside of the GPS spectrum, then it may very well work as intended. It will, however, need to be tested in every GPS receiver approved for use in aviation, in every configuration. LightSquared may find their house coming down around their ears if an airliner full of passengers crashes and it is determined that LightSquared’s network was responsible for sending the aircraft off course.
Yesterday, the FAA released AD 2011-08-51 in response to the in-flight fuselage rupture experienced by Southwest Airlines flight 812 an April 1st. The AD calls for NDT inspections of 737 classic models (-300, -400, -500) with more than 30,000 flight cycles, and every 500 flight cycles after that.
So, what does that mean? A flight cycle is essentially the same as a flight. When an aircraft takes off, climbs to cruise altitude, descends and lands, that is all counted as one flight cycle. So this AD only applies to aircraft that have performed 30,000 flights or more (the Southwest aircraft involved in the fuselage rupture incident had accumulated 39,781 flight cycles).
What about the NDT inspections? When checking for cracks in metal that cannot be detected by the naked eye, a technique called eddy current testing is performed. Essentially what happens is a low electrical current is put into the metal at one point, and the current is read at another point. By knowing what the current should be in a new piece of metal, the tester can determine if there are any flaws or cracks in the metal being tested, and the severity of any flaws or cracks.
Why weren’t these aircraft already being checked for cracks? Well, they were. They just weren’t being checked in the location where the problem occurred last Friday. Why not? The simple answer is that no aircraft had experienced problems with fatigue cracks in that area before, so no one thought to look there. It is unfortunate, but a lot of the regulations involving aviation are written in blood. Typically someone has to be hurt or killed, or placed in a dangerous situation as happened on Friday, for attention to be drawn to a previously unknown and unconsidered problem. Thankfully Friday’s Southwest flight ended without any injuries, and hopefully the inspections required by the FAA’s AD 2011-08-51 will catch any more problems before they get to the point where the tops of aircraft are peeling open in flight.
The UAE’s General Civil Aviation Authority (GCAA) released an update to the preliminary report on the crash of a UPS Boeing 747 freighter just after takeoff from Dubai International Airport last September. It appears that, at least for now, suspicions of terrorist involvement in the incident are no longer being considered, even though Al Qaeda claimed responsibility for the crash.
The update indicates that shortly after takeoff, a fire started in the main cargo hold of the aircraft. The smoke and fumes from the fire entered the cockpit, where the crew’s oxygen and air conditioning equipment failed to provide adequate protection to the crew. The captain was apparently forced to leave the flight deck when his oxygen mask failed to provide sufficient oxygen. The report goes on to state that the smoke and fumes in the cockpit were so dense that the crew was unable to see their instruments in order to descend and return to the airport.
The next question to be answered is what caused the fire in the first place.
A Gulfstream G650 crashed in Roswell, NM yesterday morning, killing the two pilots and two engineers who were on board. Gulfstream confirmed the incident yesterday, and today released the identities of the four employees that were on the aircraft.
Gulfstream G650 (image courtesy of Gulfstream)
The G650 is Gulfstream’s flagship design, and is its newest offering in the ultra-large cabin segment of the business aircraft industry. The model is still undergoing flight testing, and the aircraft that crashed yesterday was undergoing takeoff performance checks at the time of the incident. Initial reports indicate that the aircraft lifted off of the runway briefly, before descending to a hard impact that collapsed the landing gear. The aircraft then burst into flames.
My deepest sympathies go out to the families of those men who tragically lost their lives yesterday.
Yes, I know. This is somewhat old news, but I only just learned about it yesterday. It seems that Teledyne Technologies Incorporated (NYSE: TDY) has agreed to sell its subsidiary Teledyne Continental Motors to AVIC International Holding Corporation, a large Chinese company that has been given charge of designing and manufacturing Chinese commercial aircraft.
TCM is one of two major manufacturers of aircraft piston engines in the US (the other is Lycoming, a subsidiary of Textron). As such, the company has about half of the market share for piston engines in aircraft in the US, and roughly the same market share for general aviation aircraft around the world. TCM employs about 400 workers in Mobile, Alabama, where the company is based.
At first glance, this seems like another bunch of jobs that are being swept off to China. However, AVIC appears to be interested in keeping TCM’s production facility in Mobile, and actually increasing the number of workers as demand for piston aircraft is expected to increase throughout the world, but especially in China.
So it would seem that this is actually a win-win situation for both TCM and AVIC. AVIC gains access to a well-known, well-respected piston engine manufacturer, and TCM gains access to not only a well-known, well-respected supplier for aviation companies around the world, but also a potentially huge market for piston engines in China. There are currently fewer than 1,000 general aviation aircraft operating in China and, as the aviation regulations in China are gradually loosened, that number could see explosive growth in the next ten years.
The sale is expected to go through in the first quarter of 2011, after receiving anti-trust clearance and approvals from both the US and Chinese governments. Since TCM is not involved in any defense-related manufacturing or technology, there should not be any objections to prevent the sale from being completed.
Teledyne has an interesting PDF document detailing the benefits of the sale, and it is well worth reading.
I have completed my fifth game, and uploaded it to the site. This game is called Koala-BR8, and no, I did not come up with the name. Koala-BR8 was actually quite a lot of fun to put together, as well as quite frustrating at times.
Koala-BR8 is a puzzle game, in which you are trying to move a number of Koalas around in each level, avoiding hazards while trying to get them to the exit. Sound simple? Not quite. The catch is that when you press one of the arrow keys, all of the Koalas on the screen move in the same direction (unless there is something in the way that would prevent one or more of them from moving in that direction). It still sounds simple, but with exploding TNT and moving circular saws to avoid, it can present a surprising challenge.
I enjoyed making this game primarily because, as with Super Rainbow Reef, all of the levels that are included are entirely my own design. That was also what made this game frustrating to make. There are currently only five levels included, with increasing difficulty as you progress through the game. However, I made two or three times as many levels, and discarded them after realizing that they simply cannot be completed successfully. This was a problem that I ran into with the last level of the game, but I liked that one too much to throw it out, so I ended up making several changes to the level to enable the player to complete the level. In doing so, I think I actually decreased the difficulty of the level quite a bit (though it is still quite challenging).
Go ahead and give it a try and let me know what you think. Feedback is always welcome. As with the previous games, just unzip the file you downloaded, read the ReadMe file, then run the executable file. There is nothing to install.
As always, a big thank you to The Game Maker’s Apprentice for providing the graphics and audio for the game.
My fourth game, Super Rainbow Reef, is now complete and available. To be honest, if it had been left up to me I most likely would not have done this game. However, I was pleasantly surprised with how it turned out. Yes, it is a little cheesy, and there are only six levels, but some of the mods that I did to the final game for my class assignment turned out to be relatively complex and I am rather pleased with the final result.
Super Rainbow Reef is similar in concept to games like Brick Breaker. There are a few differences, though. There is a gravity element in the game, so the “ball” (a starfish in this game) doesn’t travel in straight lines. Also, the aim of the game is not to clear all of the blocks off of the screen to complete the level (though you do get a bonus if you clear them all). Instead, you are trying to hit all of the octopuses (called Big Legs) in order to proceed to the next level. If you manage to make it to level six, have fun. I made that one particularly diabolical.
Once again, click the link, unzip, read the ReadMe file, then run the .exe to play the game. Nothing to install. Comments and critiques are always welcome.
Thank you again to The Game Maker’s Apprentice for providing the graphics and audio for the game. After putting the basic game together with the book, I modded the game fairly extensively to fulfill the requirements for my assignment. Go ahead and give the game a try. I was quite pleasantly surprised by how much I enjoyed playing it to test everything out.
My third Game Maker game, Lazarus, is now complete, uploaded, and ready for you to try. As with the two previous games, there is nothing to install. Just download the .zip file, extract it, read the ReadMe and run the .exe.
This game is a puzzle game. You are trying to stack falling boxes to help you get out of the various levels while avoiding having the boxes fall on your head. It is also fairly simple, and there are currently only five levels, but there are some elements in this game that were not present in my previous games.
As always, constructive criticism would be greatly appreciated. I look forward to hearing your thoughts on this game as I start working on the next one.
Another big thank you to The Game Maker’s Apprentice for providing the graphics and audio for the game, as well as the instructions to get the basic game created. Extra mods beyond what was covered in the book were done for my class assignment.
Lately I have been hearing a lot of noise about how the manufacturing industry in the US is dead, thanks primarily to outsourcing of jobs to China and other low-cost countries. Being the natural skeptic that I am, I thought it might be worthwhile to dig into the question a bit. Where better to go than straight to the source, MAPI/Manufacturers Alliance.
A news release from MAPI/Manufacturers Alliance on January 13th, 2011 indicates that the industry’s composite index fell from 77% to 75% in December, 2010. On this index, 50% is the dividing line between expansion and contraction, “a leading indicator of the manufacturing sector,” and it was “the fifth consecutive quarter the index has been above the 50 percent threshold.” Right off the bat, things certainly don’t seem to be all that bad.
The report then mentions that a record low of 21% was recorded in March, 2009. That would seem to be a fairly large improvement in the manufacturing industry in just under two years, and right in the middle of a fairly sluggish “recovery” in the economy.
It doesn’t stop there, though. The report goes on to mention that the percentage of manufacturing companies operating above 85% capacity climbed to 33.3%, an improvement of more than 16% over the rate three months prior in September.
A number of other industry indexes are mentioned in the report, with most of them seeing modest improvements. But what does all of that mean? It doesn’t say anything about the actual size of the industry. Modest gains in a small industry don’t really mean all that much, right?
To answer that question, I had to go a little further back, unfortunately. The New York Times published an article in February, 2009 that asked much the same question I wanted to have answered. In the heart of the recession, The New York Times reported that 207,000 manufacturing jobs were lost in the month of January, 2009 alone, and that the industry was at a 28-year low (just two months before the low point mentioned in the MAPI/Manufacturers Alliance report).
However, the article quickly goes on to mention some surprising numbers. The value of goods manufactured in the US in 2007 was worth $1.6 trillion, and that “for every $1 of value produced in China factories, the United States generates $2.50.” In fact, the US is still the leading manufacturer of goods in the world by value.
So, what happened to the manufacturing industry? Where did all the jobs go, and why are so many factories sitting empty and silent? According to NYT, the manufacturing industry has shifted towards the high-end and high-tech. $80 billion worth of autos and auto parts were manufactured in 2007. “$200 billion worth of aircraft, missiles and space-related equipment.” Most of the “$16.5 billion worth of farming equipment” manufactured by John Deere was sold outside of the US.
The jobs that are being lost to “low-cost” countries are the low-end manufacturing jobs, like clothing and consumer goods. High-end manufacturing is on the rise, according to MAPI/Manufacturers Alliance. But what does all of that mean for the industry as a whole? According to NYT, US manufacturers accounted for 80% of what we consumed thirty years ago. In 2009, that number was down to 65%.
A 15% drop is nothing to laugh about, certainly. Consider this, though: In the last thirty years, how much has the American desire to consume increased? I would not be surprised if it far outstripped our ability to produce everything that we wanted (needed?) to consume.
Where would that leave the manufacturers? If unable to keep up with demand, prices would skyrocket and consumers would go to other sources for their needs. I do not find it surprising at all that when manufacturers found that they could obtain double, triple, or even more capacity in China for the same cost as they could in the US, that they would quickly take advantage of that opportunity. It not only allows them to meet demand in the US at a price that US consumers are willing to pay, but it also allows them to spread their brand and products into one of the largest markets outside of the US.
Outsourcing should not be viewed as a curse. Yes, it can be painful, but instead we should look at it as an opportunity to reinvent our country. We’ve done it before, and we can do it again. I don’t have the answers to help resolve the problem and get people back to work, but if we stopped focusing on where jobs are going and started focusing on how we are going to replace them, we might start to see some progress being made.
