Qantas bets on EK

31 August 2012

The Qantas - Emirates rumours are running wild at the moment. Something will be announced. No one knows quite what it will be.

But Tim Clarke - Emirates CEO - will arrive in Sydney on 5 September. There will follow a number of announcements.

Speculation: The removal of FRA from the QF schedule - Frankfurt and Heathrow are the only European destinations flown by Qantas. Qantas flights to LHR will presumably also be taken over by Emirates - maybe not immediately.

Qantas to codeshare on all Emirates flights to Dubai and onward flights to Europe.

This will not be just a code share - there is more to the deal that simply putting Qantas passengers onto Emirates jets.

There is speculation that Qantas will get some of the near future slots for 777 deliveries to Emirates. Emirates has some 100 airframes on order. Emirates would get two of Qantas' existing Heathrow landing slots; taking the daily DXB- LHR flights from 5 to 7.

The code-share agreement is believed to include route swaps whereby Emirates would operate the majority of flights on some routes such as those out of Perth to Europe. Qantas would give up Perth to Singapore and passengers would fly on Emirates through Dubai.

There are concerns - what happens to Qantas’s longstanding revenue-sharing agreement with British Airways on the kangaroo route between Australia and the UK. What happens to Qantas' membership of the One World alliance.

"I don't understand this – it just means less and less Qantas," was one analyst quote adding that "it is just a huge downgrading of the Qantas presence and handing it over to Emirates."

Last week Qantas cancelled orders for 35 Boeing Dreamliner aircraft. Although the cancellation will boost Qantas's bottom-line earnings in 2012-13, it has raised questions about a further shrinking of the airline’s international network. Some 777s would at least replace some of that capacity.

For the highly paid Alan Joyce this is all about turning around the Qantas international operations, which lost $450 million last financial year.

The selling point of the code-share deal to investors and consumers is that the two airlines would have a combined eight A380 superjumbos flying each day from Australia to Dubai, and offer a large number of destinations beyond the Emirates base.

An Emirates equity stake in Qantas remains unlikely; although a successful commercial agreement might bring the two airlines much closer together.

Pan Am's view of Thailand from 1960

31 August 2012

Why the Paralympics matter so much

30 August 2012

There is a risk of being patronising about the Paralympics; there is also a risk of being too politically correct. But the sheer happiness of the 4,500 plus athletes at the Olympics opening ceremony said all that needed to be said.

For these athletes this is their achievement; their ambitions realised. And in reality it does mean more than the able bodied games; because these athletes have looked at adversity and said sod it - I can beat this.

And for the rest of us watching the twin messages are ever clearer; be grateful for what you have and make the very best of what you are given.

But the ceremony did not beat home this message. It was a ceremony of ideas based on the theme of enlightenment from the 18th-century onrush of scientific knowledge and the quest for the rights of man to the Hadon collider.

The opening ceremony was lower budget; it might have erred on the over-serious; it probably over did the umbrella theme. But it had Stephen Hawking who declared: "Look up at the stars and not down at your feet. Try to make sense of what you see, and wonder about what makes the universe exist. Be curious."

The opening ceremony covered everything from the Big Bang to Black Holes to Newton's theories of gravity (62,000 apples all bitten at the same time!) to the universal declaration of human rights; to a recreation of the Large Hadron Collider at CERN.

It was more profound than playful. More classical than pop.

The musical highlight was Elin Manahan Thomas singing Handel's Eternal Source of Light Divine accompanied by a solo trumpeter. The music changed to an aerial ballet featuring the disabled dancer David Toole and the 42 disabled volunteers. The soundtrack to the performance, a rendition of the Antony Johnson song Bird Gerhl by 16-year-old singer Birdy. This was followed by the joyful badness of Ian Dury's Spasticus Autisticus.

The closing music - a rousing gospel rendition of "I am what I am" felt entirely appropriate.

The only problem with the ceremony was its length - largely due to the parade of athletes from 164 teams; this took time. I fell asleep at G and woke up at R....so don't ask me what the Mexican team were wearing but apparently they looked great.

Even the national anthem sounds better in sign language.

In welcoming the athletes, officials and spectators Lord Coe said that "sport is about what you can do, what you can achieve, the limits you can reach, the barriers you can break. Sport shows what is possible. Sport refuses to take no for an answer."

Embracing these games is about changing (or evolving) perceptions of the rights and roles of disabled people in our national life. The opening ceremony – passionate, smart, moving and original – honoured the athletes and set the tone.

Baby EK

29 August 2012

A baby born on Emirates flight 322 to Manila last week has been named Ek;  EK is the two letter flight code for Emirates.

The plane had to make an emergency landing in Vietnam for the Filipina woman and her baby to receive treatment on August 22.

Two nurses and four flight attendants reportedly helped deliver and care for the child, who was premature at 27 weeks. One of the nurses says after seeing the mother in pain, she followed her to bathroom where she found the newborn inside the toilet turning bluish-brown.

Pilots landed the Boeing 777 (EK332) at Ho Chi Minh City’s Tan Son Nhat airport after mid-day on August 22 to offload the Filipina mother, identified as ‘Nedz’, and her new-born son, whom the parents planned to name ‘EK’ (the Emirates airline code), for emergency treatment.

The baby was delivered thousands of feet over Indo-China and about two-and-a-half hours before expected touchdown in Manila.

“I was sitting beside them,” Karen Caballes-Santos, one of the two nurses, told Dubai's XPRESS newspaper. A licensed nurse in the Philippines, she flew back to Manila unexpectedly after finding a job in Dubai, though not as a nurse.

“When I saw the mother walking toward the toilet, she seemed to be in pain. The father was restless… walking back and forth, nearly in tears, so I offered to help,” she said.

Caballes-Santos said she found the baby inside the toilet turning bluish-brown. “He was in a cyanotic condition due to lack of oxygen.”

The nurses then helped aspirate amniotic fluid from the baby’s mouth, nose and ears. Four flight attendants also attended the mother after the delivery. Oxygen masks were given to the mother and child. “I told the mother, ‘Your baby is alive, don’t worry.’ That’s when they calmed a little.”

The nurses helped clean the baby with cabin blankets and wash the mother. They kept him warm with two LED reading lamps attached to the passenger seats.

The baby’s parents work as hotel staff in Dubai. The 35-year-old mother and her husband had decided to deliver their first-born at home in Manila to save on costs.

XPRESS has learnt the mother was discharged on Friday, but the baby remains in critical care.

Happy and Glorious

29 August 2012

As the Paralympics start tonight lets go back a couple of week's to the Queen and James Bond from the opening ceremony. Brilliant. Sorry about the Barry Davies comentary.

And this is the IOC's best of London 2012 condensing two weeks into just over 4 minutes

The London Airports debate

29 August 2012

The expansion of London Heathrow Airport is under debate in the UK at the moment. The trouble is the debate seems to have been hijacked by the operators of Heathrow Airport - determined to maximise the return on their investment rather than as part of any clear sighted strategy for London's airports.

The expansion of Heathrow was supported by businesses, some of the aviation industry, the British Chambers of Commerce, the Confederation of British Industry, the Trades Union Congress and the then Labour government. It was opposed by Conservative and Liberal Democrat parties as opposition parties and now as a coalition government.

The expansion would see a shorter third runway built to the north of the existing runways with a new terminal six. There would be significant property demolition and relocation required.

The principal argument stated in favour of expanding Heathrow is to enhance the economic growth of the UK. As the UK's major hub airport, Heathrow is able to attract many transfer passengers and so is able to support a very wide range of direct flight destinations at high frequencies.

It remains (just) the world's busiest airport based on the number of international passengers. The government claims that Heathrow's connectivity helps London and the South East compete with other European cities for business investment, which in turn produces economic benefits for the rest of the UK.

I am less than convinced about this claim of Heathrow to be a transfer hub. To some extent it is for British Airways (and the One World alliance) at terminal 5; flying passengers from Europe and then onto the USA, Asia and Africa. But for most other airlines Heathrow is a spoke not a hub. The same is true for most of the major European airports that serve as a hub primarily for their national airlines and its alliance partners; eg Frankfurt for Lufthansa and Star Alliance.

The government's argument is that Heathrow is on the brink of suffering a decline in connectivity. Heathrow’s runways are now operating at around 99% capacity, which increases delays when flights are disrupted, and risks competing European airports gaining destinations at Heathrow's expense.

But the reality is that passengers from most airlines flying into London are coming to see London not to go somewhere else. It is very different to Dubai for instance.

Take the middle east airlines; passengers from Emirates, Qatar, Gulf Air, Etihad are not connecting in London. The reality is that they use London for its convenience.

The same with passengers from the UK; for most of the country it is easier to travel to Heathrow than it is to Gatwick or Stansted. Though as the middle east carriers and some US carriers have discovered passengers are very happy to avoid London altogether and fly from their local airport. If you live in Manchester and want to holiday in Thailand you fly to Doha, Abu Dhabi or Dubai and connect their. It is far more agreeable than taking a car or train to London and leaving from Heathrow.

Another argument for Heathrow's third runway is that it would improve flight connections to UK cities. Several cities have seen their connections to Heathrow reduced or lost over recent years as airlines have reallocated the airport's limited capacity to more profitable long-haul flights. The last thing Heathrow needs is more domestic flights. It does need to be at the hub of an improved high speed rail system.

London is well supplied with airports; but the lack of investment in Gatwick and Stansted have hurt; as have the poor connections between the airfields. Both airports are still single runway operations.

Gatwick Airport (formerly London Gatwick Airport), in Crawley, West Sussex was purchased by Global Infrastructure Partners (GIP), the owners of London City Airport, for £1.51 billion in October 2009. Since late-2011, Gatwick has attracted a number of new full-service airlines, including Air China, Air Nigeria, Caribbean Airlines, Hong Kong Airlines (now cancelled), Korean Air, Lufthansa, Turkish Airlines and Vietnam Airlines. This is part of the airport's sensible strategy to get more higher-spending business travellers to use it to counterbalance its dependence on European low-cost and charter markets, as well as to increase year-round capacity utilisation by smoothing out peaks and troughs in slot usage.

Several options to expand Gatwick have been considered, including a third terminal and a second runway to the south of the existing runway. This would allow Gatwick to handle more passengers than Heathrow does today. If a second runway is approved, a new terminal could be sited between the two runways. This could either complement or replace the current South Terminal, depending on expected future traffic developments.

The problem for Gatwick is that under an agreement with the local community, a second runway could not be built before 2019. But it must be inevitable that it will be built. This is far more likely than a 3rd runway at Heathrow.

Even with its single runway it appears that Gatwick can manage up to 45million passengers a year. Air China is starting daily direct flights from Beijing to Gatwick, and Korean Air is launching services to Seoul.

Another plan is for a high-speed rail link between Gatwick and Heathrow Airport. This rail link would form part of a plan to combine the UK's two biggest airports into a "collective" or "virtual hub" dubbed Heathwick. The scheme envisages a 35-mile high-speed rail route linking the two airports in 15 minutes, with trains travelling at a top speed of 180 mph parallel to the M25 and passengers passing through immigration or check-in only once. Maybe a cut down version makes more sense. The virtual hub is unlikely; improved rail connections should be a must have.

London Stansted Airport in Essex is a hub for a number of major European low-cost carriers, being the largest base for low-cost giant Ryanair with over 100 destinations served by the airline. In 2011 it was the fourth busiest airport in the United Kingdom after Heathrow, Gatwick and Manchester.

There is also London Luton Airport in Bedfordshire. This is only used by about ten passenger airlines. The largest operator by far is EasyJet, which is headquartered there, and for whom Luton is among their largest bases. Easyjet flights account for approximately a half of passenger movements through the airport.

Wizz Air is comfortably the second largest, however Luton is not a base of the airline. Half of its movements are between 07:00 and 08:00, and there are periods of up to 5 hours where there are no arrivals or departures of Wizz Air flights. El Al operates the largest passenger aircraft to Luton, a Boeing 767-200, but very occasionally will substitute for this a Boeing 777-200 when there is exceptionally high demand. Again poor transport connections have harmed the growth of this airport.

There is also little London City Airport in Docklands with a short runway; limited apron space and a curfew. And more recently London Southend Airport has expanded with EasyJet signing a ten-year contract with Stobart Group in June 2011. The airline now operates around 70 flights per week from Southend, using three Airbus A319 aircraft based at the airport.

Even Oxford Airport is known as London Oxford Airport.

The Boris airport in the Thames estuary will not happen. The East of London is simply too inaccessible for the rest of the country. But what is needed is a sensible aviation policy that expands Stansted and Gatwick and provides better connections between the three major airports. 

RIP Neil Armstrong; a hero for the ages

26 August 2012

Men Walk on the Moon - The New York Times - 21 July 1969
Man on the moon: moment of greatness that defined the American century
Neil Armstrong One Small Step
Rest in Peace, Rocket Man
Neil Armstrong - The Economist's outstanding obituary
Find NASA’s extensive Apollo 11 photo archives here, here and here.
The Onion’s moon landing “front page” always captured the scale of the achievement best.
The Man and the Moon
Made ‘Giant Leap’ as First Man to Step on Moon

"I put up my thumb and shut one eye, and my thumb blotted out the planet Earth. I didn't feel like a giant. I felt very, very small." -- Neil Armstrong.

Obituary - from The Guardian.

Neil Armstrong, the first man to walk on the moon, has died aged 82. The former US astronaut, who will go down on history as the most famous pioneer of space exploration, passed away as the result of heart complications following surgery.

As commander of the Apollo 11 mission, he became the first person to set foot on the moon, on 20 July 1969, fulfilling the longheld dream of the United States to get there before the Soviet Union. His first words as he stepped on to the surface – "That's one small step for (a) man, one giant leap for mankind" – instantly became one of the most recognisable phrases ever spoken.

Armstrong underwent heart bypass surgery earlier this month, just two days after his birthday on 5 August, to relieve blocked arteries.

His family released a statement on Saturday describing him as a "reluctant American hero who always believed he was just doing his job".

It read: "We are heartbroken to share the news that Neil Armstrong has passed away following complications resulting from cardiovascular procedures. Neil was our loving husband, father, grandfather, brother and friend. Neil Armstrong was also a reluctant American hero who always believed he was just doing his job. He served his nation proudly as a Navy fighter pilot, test pilot, and astronaut.

"While we mourn the loss of a very good man we also celebrate his remarkable life and hope that it serves as an example to young people around the world to work hard to make their dreams come true, to be willing to explore and push the limits, and to selflessly serve a cause greater than themselves."

Other tributes have come flooding in for the astronaut as news of his death spread across the world. US president Barack Obama hailed Armstrong as one of America's greatest heroes. In a statement issued by the White House, he said the crew of Apollo 11 carried with them the aspirations of an entire nation when they set out for the moon in 1969. He later tweeted: "Neil Armstrong was a hero not just of his time, but of all time. Thank you, Neil, for showing us the power of one small step."

Armstrong was joined on his moon landing by Buzz Aldrin and the pair spent nearly three hours walking on the lunar surface, collecting samples, conducting experiments and taking photographs. Last night Aldrin called Armstrong "a true American hero and the best pilot I ever knew". The Apollo 11 mission turned out to be Armstrong's last space flight. The following year he was appointed to a desk job at Nasa, later becoming a lecturer in engineering at Cincinnati University.

In 1961 President Kennedy had declared before the United States Congress that the US would have a man on the moon before the turn of the decade and the moon walk marked America's victory in the cold war space race. An estimated 600 million people – a fifth of the world's population – watched and listened to the moon landing, the largest audience for any single event in history.

The crew of Apollo 11 were not chosen for the mission because they were in any way special among the elite group of test pilots who comprised the corps of American astronauts: it was simply their turn on the flight roster. If an earlier plan had succeeded, the crew of Apollo 10 would have made the first moon walk in May 1969, but because of delays in the development of the lunar module that mission became a full dress rehearsal for a lunar landing, all bar a touchdown.

Armstrong cut his teeth as an astronaut in March 1966 as commander of the Gemini 8. The mission also involved the first serious space emergency, highlighting the dangers of manned space launches when the public were beginning to take their seemingly effortless success for granted. The Gemini 8 mission was designed to perform the first docking in space by astronauts. The Soviet Union had already demonstrated automated docking of two unmanned vehicles in orbit. Armstrong and his crewmate, David Scott, were to rendezvous with a 7,000lb Agena rocket target vehicle.

They found the Agena and docked successfully, but when they tried a pre-arranged manoeuvre of the combined spacecraft it went into a spin. Armstrong disengaged from the Agena, thinking the problem was there, but the tumbling worsened. The Agena steadied but the Gemini capsule kept turning at 360 degrees a second and was in danger of colliding with the Agena.

The fault was clearly on Gemini. It was discovered later that one of 16 Gemini thruster rockets was stuck. As he was unable to stop the spacecraft turning with the main thrusters, Armstrong shut them down and brought the Gemini craft under control using a second set of 16 thrusters that were intended only to control the capsule's re-entry in to the Earth's atmosphere.

Mission Control ordered Armstrong and Scott to cut the flight short and they splashed down in a contingency recovery area in the Pacific Ocean. The drama of surviving man's first space emergency completely obscured the fact that it was on the Gemini 8 mission that the US had overtaken the Soviet Union in space technology

Armstrong was born in Wapakoneta, Ohio, and from a young age was fascinated with aviation, experimenting with model airplanes and a home-built wind tunnel. At 15 he began flying lessons in an Aeronca Champion, and by 16 acquired his student pilot's licence. In 1947, he enrolled at Purdue University on a Navy scholarship to pursue a degree in aeronautical engineering, but in 1949 the Navy called him to active duty in the Korean War. As a navy pilot, he flew 78 combat missions. He was shot down once and received three medals for his military service. In 1952 he returned to his studies and completed his BSc at Purdue and an MSc in aerospace engineering at the University of Southern California.

In 1955 he became a civilian research pilot at the Lewis research centre of the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (Naca), the forerunner of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (Nasa). Later that year, he transferred to Naca's high-speed flight station (today, Nasa's Dryden flight research centre) at Edwards Air Force Base in California as an aeronautical research scientist, and then as a pilot. He was a test pilot on many pioneering high-speed aircraft, including the 4,000mph X-15. He flew over 200 different models of aircraft, including jets, rockets, helicopters and gliders.

Armstrong was engaged in both piloting and engineering aspects of the X-15 programme from its inception. He completed the first flight in the aircraft equipped with a new self-adaptive flight control system and made seven flights in the rocket plane. In 1962 he was of the nine test pilots chosen by Nasa for its second astronaut-training programme.

Four years later Armstrong made his successful recovery of the Gemini 8 spacecraft in a situation that, if misjudged, could easily have resulted in the death of the crew. That achievement was also invaluable in helping Nasa meet the target set in May 1961 by President John F Kennedy for the USA to establish, as a national goal, a manned landing on the moon by the end of the decade.

The choice among competing techniques for achieving a moon landing still needed some intensive research and development. The method ultimately employed, of a lunar-orbit rendezvous, was influenced strongly by the experience with Gemini 8, and there was an element of poetic justice in Armstrong being at the helm again for the first manned lunar landing attempt.

On 16 July 1969, Apollo 11 blasted off for the moon. Four days later, at 4.18pm EDT (Eastern Daylight Time), the Eagle lunar lander was guided to land on a plain near the southwesten edge of the Sea of Tranquility. At 10.56pm Armstrong stepped off the ladder of the Apollo 11 lunar module and became the first human being to set foot on the moon. Twenty minutes later Buzz Aldrin joined him for two hours of ceremonies and moon-rock collecting. They unveiled a plaque and read the text to a worldwide TV audience, "Here men from the planet earth first set foot on the moon July 1969 AD. We came in peace for all mankind."

After raising the American flag and talking to President Nixon by radiotelephone, the two astronauts took numerous photographs, carried out the lunar surface experiments assigned to the mission and collected 22kg of samples of lunar soil and rocks. All the astronauts' lunar activities were televised in black-and-white. Meanwhile, Michael Collins continued orbiting the moon alone in the Columbia command module. Armstrong and Aldrin re-entered the lunar module and closed the hatch at 1.11am on 21 July. The Eagle took off from the moon at 1.54pm, having spent 21 hours 36 minutes on the lunar surface. It docked with Columbia at 5.35pm.

After splashdown in the Pacific on 24 July, decontamination procedures began. The astronauts were carried by helicopter to the recovery ship, USS Hornet, where they entered a mobile quarantine facility to begin a period of observation under strict quarantine conditions. The command module was recovered and also removed to the quarantine facility, and the rock samples and film were flown to Houston.

Following the moon landing and the subsequent world tours by the crew of Apollo 11, Armstrong became deputy association administrator for aeronautics, Nasa headquarters office of advanced research and technology from 1969 to 1971, when he resigned. For the next eight years he was professor of aerospace engineering at the University of Cincinnati. Numerous industrial appointments followed, including New York's AIL Systems, where he was chairman from 1981 until 2001. In 1979 he was chairman of the board of Ohio's Cardwell International; from 1982 to 1992 chairman of Computing Technologies for Aviation, in Virginia.

In 1985-86 he served on the National Commission on Space, a presidential committee to develop goals for a national space programme into the 21st century; and was also vice-chairman of the committee investigating the Space Shuttle Challenger disaster in 1986. During the early 1990s he presented an aviation documentary series for television entitled First Flights. Earlier this year he spoke at an event to mark the 50th anniversary of the orbiting of the Earth by the first American to do so, John Glenn.

Armstrong is survived by his second wife, Carol, and two sons from his first marriage, which ended in divorce.

• Neil Alden Armstrong, astronaut, born 5 August 1930; died 25 August 2012

The rise and fall of the Lance Armstrong myth

25 August 2012

Before Bradley Wiggins the nest known racing biker in the world was Lance Armstrong. But Armstrong's story is of both triumph and deceit. Sadly he will now be remembered for the latter.

Armstrong overcame life-threatening testicular cancer to win the Tour de France seven times and put the race on the map in the US. He has also done more than most athletes for charity in building a global foundation helping millions of cancer survivors. He went mountain biking with former US president George W Bush and even talked of running for governor of Texas.

But doping accusations pursued him for years. And late last Thursday he finally did what he rarely has in the past and abandoned the fight. He still claims his innocence. However, in abandoning any defence he must be hoping that the most damning of evidence against him is ever made public and that some part of his reputation remains intact.

Armstrong, 40, announced he would no longer challenge an investigation by the US Anti-Doping Agency (Usada) into allegations that every one of his Tour de France victories from 1999 to 2005 was tainted by the use of banned substances such as the blood-booster EPO and steroids, as well as blood transfusions, testosterone and cortisone.

Usada immediately banned him from competition cycling for life and stripped of his Tour de France titles.

Armstrong has still not admitted to drug use. He simply protests that the media attention is overwhelming and that he is the subject of an unfair witch-hunt.

"There comes a point in every man's life when he has to say: 'Enough is enough.' For me, that time is now," he said. "I have been dealing with claims that I cheated and had an unfair advantage in winning my seven Tours since 1999. The toll this has taken on my family and my work for our foundation and on me leads me to where I am today – finished with this nonsense."

The move came after a US court ruled against Armstrong's attempts to block Usada's investigation. He consistently maintained he never failed a test for banned substances, although that is disputed. But Usada said its investigation revealed a systematic programme of drug misuse in Armstrong's team and claimed 10 of the cyclist's former team mates would testify that he was at the heart of it. The agency also told Armstrong it has blood samples from two and three years ago that are "fully consistent" with illegal doping.

His withdrawal from the case is widely interpreted as an admission of guilt – albeit of a crime in a sport that was saturated in illegal drug use at the time. Armstrong was doing what so many other bikers were doing.

Bicycling magazine greeted the news with the headline "The Truth Hurts" on its cover. Its editor, Peter Flax, said the case against Armstrong was overwhelming. "In my mind there's no doubt that these activities transpired," he said. "But he's also an inspiration to millions."

Bernard Hinault, the French five times winner of the Tour de France, told ouest-france.fr: "This is a problem that should have been sorted out 10 or 15 years ago but which never was."

Jan Ullrich, a German former rider who was three times runner-up to Armstrong – and has faced doping allegations of his own – said: "I've ended my career and I have always said that I'm proud of my second places. It doesn't really bother me that much."

His climb down leaves in its wake the wreckage of a career now widely accepted to have been built on a lie, and raises questions over the future of his sporting legacy. Armstrong's sponsors, which have paid a total of about $10m a year, will be embarrassed and some are likely to drop him although his principal backer, Nike, said it would stand by the shamed athlete.

 "Lance has stated his innocence and has been unwavering on this position. Nike plans to continue to support Lance and the Lance Armstrong Foundation, a foundation that Lance created to serve cancer survivors," it said. I suspect that position ay change over time.

Among the adverts Armstrong made for Nike was one in which he toyed with the doping allegations: "Everyone wants to know what I'm on. What am I on? I'm on my bike busting my ass six hours a day."

The Armstrong case has yet to rest, with cycling's global governing body, the International Cycling Union, demanding USADA hand over its evidence. The Court of Arbitration for Sport could ultimately have a final say on his guilt or innocence.

Microsoft makeover

25 August 2012 The Associated Press

 Microsoft’s corporate logo has a new look, setting the stage for a wave of products designed to cast the world’s largest software maker in a new light.

The makeover unveiled Thursday marks the first time that Microsoft has revamped its logo since February 1987. The Internet was barely around then, and cellphones were considered a luxury.

At the time, Microsoft was putting the finishing touches on the second version of its Windows operating system. Two of Microsoft’s biggest nemeses — Google co-founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin — were just 13 years old. And Apple co-founder Steve Jobs was just in the second year of an 11-year exile from the company that went on to invent the iPod, iPhone and iPad after he returned.

The new Microsoft logo is seen at the company’s latest store inside the Prudential Center mall in Boston. — AP

By revamping its logo, Microsoft is trying to signal that it has changed its thinking and its products to cater to people who are interacting with technology much differently than just a decade ago, let alone a quarter century.

Now, more computing tasks are being done on touch-based devices such as smartphones and tablets instead of personal computers tethered to keyboards and mice. Many software applications are now supplied over high-speed Internet connections for a monthly fee instead of being installed on individual computers.

Microsoft believes a radical change to Windows will ensure that the company survives the technological upheaval. Windows 8, due to hit the market on October 26, displays software applications in a mosaic of tiles and has been engineered so it works on both touch-based tablets and traditional PCs. The company also is releasing its own Windows 8-powered tablet to compete against the iPad, accompanied by a new version of Office applications tailored for such devices. There also will be a Windows 8 operating system for smartphones. The new logo ushers in “one of the most significant waves of product launches in Microsoft’s history,” Jeff Hansen, the company’s general manager of brand strategy, wrote in a blog post.

The redesign features the Microsoft name in a lighter, straight font called Segoe to replace the italic bold type used in the old standby. The new logo also includes the familiar red, blue, yellow and green colours used in the flag on Microsoft’s Windows operating system, but the colours will be in a square box instead of the curvy template that has been in place for years. Those colour boxes invoke the tiles that will be central to Windows 8.

“The ways people experience our products are our most important ‘brand impressions,’” Hansen wrote. “That’s why the new Microsoft logo takes its inspiration from our product design principles while drawing upon the heritage of our brand values, fonts and colours.”

The new logo made its debut on Thursday on Microsoft’s websites, as well as three of its stores in Boston, Bellevue, Washington and Seattle, which is located near the company’s Redmond, Washington, headquarters.

This is Microsoft’s fifth logo since Bill Gates and Paul Allen founded the company 37 years ago.

Apple's sour taste

25 August 2012

On Friday a San Jose, California court found Samsung guilty of infringing upon six out of seven Apple patents and awared more than $1 billion in damages awarded to Apple.

The jury accepted Apple’s claim that Samsung devices were “slavishly copies” of Apple’s iPhone and iPad.

So what next. Samsung will of course appeal.

But what will Apple do: it has the precedent now to go after any and every OEM out there.

Apple self righteously claim that “we make these products to delight our customers, not for our competitors to flagrantly copy....the lawsuits between Apple and Samsung were about much more than patents or money. They were about values.”

Values that are now abundantly clear to everyone playing in the smartphone space. Value that apparently support a monopoly position and that say there is only one technology - ours.

Samsung said the verdict should be viewed "as a loss for the American consumer...it will lead to fewer choices, less innovation, and potentially higher prices...it is unfortunate that patent law can be manipulated to give one company a monopoly over rectangles with rounded corners, or technology that is being improved every day by Samsung and other companies....consumers have the right to choices, and they know what they are buying when they purchase Samsung products. This is not the final word in this case or in battles being waged in courts and tribunals around the world, some of which have already rejected many of Apple's claims. Samsung will continue to innovate and offer choices for the consumer."

Apple praised the court for "sending a loud and clear message that stealing isn't right...the mountain of evidence presented during the trial showed that Samsung's copying went far deeper than even we knew."

This fight is only just starting; there is simply too mush at stake.

One issue still to be decided is whether to grant injunctions that could prevent Samsung from selling products that infringe on Apple's patents. A hearing is scheduled for September 20.

But this really is a home town win - it is a Californian court preserving, rather bizarrely, Chinese jobs!

The court verdict suggest that at least in the USA there will be a ban on many mobile devices from Samsung and other manufacturers as an emboldened Apple tries to create an unprecedented monopoly.

The ultimate loser will be competition in the technology marketplace, with even more power accruing to a company that already has too much.

Crucially, the jury found none of Apple's patents invalid, despite substantial evidence that others anticipated many of the innovations that Apple put together when it released its first iPhone.

It is likely that Samsung did mimic much of the functionality of the iPhone. But Samsung is not the first company to take a technology and make it better. Did the company that put rubber onto metal wheels to give a softer ride infringe patents or make something good better?

Apple is winning no friends - it has used its huge cash reserves to become a corporate bully.

Apple will settle for nothing less than outright capitulation by Samsung – and, by extension, other Android device makers. If Apple is successful, either all Android manufacturers will pay Apple a license fee, or Apple will simply make it too expensive, via lawsuits, for other phone makers to compete.

Apple wants control over how we use technology. It locks down the iOS, requiring that apps be offered or sold only though its own portal, and limits competition when a developer is doing anything that might have an impact on its own business.

Apple fans are ecstatic at the prospect.

But no one who believes in invention and creativity should want Apple, or any other company, dictating – in fundamental ways – how we compute and communicate.

Air Asia seeks Singapore license

23 August 2012

After almost a decade of trying and failing to set up a Singapore-based budget carrier, AirAsia is planning to give it another go.

Its new Singapore CEO Logan Velaitham has confirmed that Asia's largest budget airline group is preparing to apply for a Singapore Air Operator's Certificate (AOC), effectively enabling it to set up a Singapore-based airline.

He said that as a precursor to the application, AirAsia has made a preliminary presentation to the Ministry of Transport to "demonstrate" AirAsia's commitment and contribution to Singapore.

"Singapore is critical for us and we have been delivering the numbers," he said. "Even without an AOC, our arrivals, tourist numbers and contribution to the Singapore economy have been growing rapidly. Imagine what we could do if we have a Singapore-based carrier?"

AirAsia is believed to have applied for a Singapore AOC several times in the past eight years; the last time was in December 2010. But in a one-sentence response late yesterday evening, a Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore (CAAS) spokesman said the regulator "has not received any formal AOC application from AirAsia".

But having a carrier based out of one of Asia's biggest hub airports would fill a bit gap in AirAsia founder Tony Fernandes's ambition to establish a pan-Asean carrier group. The now Jakarta-based Mr Fernandes already oversees a thriving airline group headquartered in Malaysia, but with associates in Thailand, Indonesia, the Philippines and Japan.

Last year Air Asia flew 3.52 million passengers into Changi. The airline operates 277 flights here, employs over 80 people and enjoys a load factor of around 80 per cent on our Singapore services.

AirAsia's Changi operation also provides a significant volume of feeds to the networks of AirAsia and AirAsia X through Kuala Lumpur to destinations like Australia, the Indian sub- continent and elsewhere.

Under existing rules, a Singapore AirAsia would need to be 51 per cent held by Singaporean entities, with Malaysia's AirAsia Bhd controlling the remaining 49 per cent stake. The airline is evaluating various potential Singapore partners.

A Singapore AOC could see many of the airline's new jets being based here. AirAsia hit the headlines in June last year when it placed a record order for 200 new A320s at the Paris Air Show. It currently has 105 planes in its fleet.

A new airline would also boost budget airline passenger numbers at Changi, where the 13 low-cost carriers currently already account for almost 30 per cent of total traffic.

It would also provide significant competition to SIngapore Airlines' regional interests held through SilkAir and Tiger Airways.

Ten Commandments for Flying

23 August 2012 - from : Thom Rainer is the president and CEO of LifeWay Christian Resources

"I have flown over two million miles, and I have witnessed so many weird, dumb, and rude things while flying. But I have also witnessed many good and noble things. I recently saw a person give up his seat to a soldier who was on standby. The soldier was returning from Afghanistan and had not seen his family in over a year.

So with the perspective of the good, the bad, and the ugly, I have devised my own ten commandments for flying. Some are positive and some are, well, not.

1.Thou shall be kind to your fellow passengers. Everyone has struggles and problems. A kind word can make a world of difference.
2.Thou shall not talk loudly on your cell phone during those times you are permitted to talk. We are glad you love your spouse and that the burger was great, but that's not for the world to know.
3.Thou shall help elderly passengers and others who need assistance. Traveling for many is a big physical burden. Help lighten their burden.
4.Thou shall not wear heavy perfume or cologne. If the passenger next to you is gagging, you know you overdid it.
5.Thou shall be kind to young moms who have crying children. These moms are stressed and don't need your indignation to stress them further.
6.Thou shall not eat smelly foods on the plane. Not only do the foods smell, flatulence typically follows.
7.Thou shall make certain your carry-on luggage fits in the overhead bins. We may be delayed as the flight attendants take your luggage and check it in.
8.Thou shall not take off your shoes during the flight. You may think it's comfortable, but the rest of the passengers will be tempted to find the nearest midair exit.
9.Thou shall fly only when you're healthy. Otherwise the recycled air will deliver your influenza germs to all the passengers.
10.Thou shall not make dumb comments that include words like "bomb," "gun," "hijack," or "terrorist." If thou does make those dumb comments, be prepared to spend time with a lot of new friends in confined quarters."

Not a bad list.....especially the smelly feet note!

Hangover 3 - The Royals

23 August 2012

Prince Harry is trending on Twitter ! But the English newspapers don't want to publish the pictures of Prince (he really can be an idiot) Harry naked in a high rollers' suite in Las Vegas this week while playing strip billiards.

The Leveson inquiry is being blamed for the English press not touching this. But Buck (rhymes with "Oh **ck") House has confirmed that the pictures on the TMZ celebrity news site are genuine.

You know you want to see them - this is the link.

As TMZ gleefully reports: "We're told Harry, along with a large entourage, went down to the hotel bar and met a bunch of hot chicks ... and invited them up to his VIP suite.

Once in the room, things got WILD ... with the group playing a game of strip pool that quickly escalated into full-on royal nudity.

Some of the partiers snapped photos of the madness. In one photo, a fully nude Harry cups his genitals while a seemingly topless woman stands behind him.

In another photo, a naked Harry is bear-hugging a woman who appears to be completely naked as well. "

It was the Wynn Hotel btw. The next revelation will be who was the girl being groped in the pictures.

The Guardian idiotically reports that "Royal aides are understood to be urging the British media to respect the prince's privacy and not republish the photographs, which are likely to have been taken without his consent."

Nonsense - in the days of smart phones everyone takes pictures at a party. Consent is irrelevant and of course he knew pictures were being taken.

After the royals tried to make him look respectable and useful by allowing Harry to represent them at the Olympics closing ceremony.

I don't care what he does - it is just the self righteoous hypocrisy that annoys me. In the end the royals are rich brats paid for by the British taxpayer.

Of course it could just be that Prince Harry was playing charades and had only been asked to act out Julian Assange.

You could almost feel sorry for him: He wears a Nazi SS uniform and people complain, he takes it all off and they still complain.

Though maybe Harry should choose his friends better - one is clearly far from loyal! And where were his minders and security people - taking the pictures maybe!

Turning a blind eye

22 August 2012

The Nation newspaper's headline today - "Tiger Pub declared unsafe; new rules to be enforced on island"

No sh*t Sherlock.....the pub burned down at 4am on 17 August killing four young people and seriously burning another eleven.

The Nation says that "a team comprising the Phuket governor, an architect, a building inspector, a civil engineer and a provincial electricity official inspected the scene on Monday and found that most of the steel bars on the second floor had been badly damaged by the heat. The pub is 15 years old."

With an army of media in tow to make it look like the officials are doing something.

The paper continues: "Phuket Governor Tri Akkaradecha, said entertainment venues were inspected nightly to ensure safety and check that operators abided by the law on operating hours, drugs and arms possession."

Nonsense. if there are any daily visits is is just for tea money to be allowed to stay open after the official 2am close. Do the officials who make the useless statements actually believe what they are saying?

"Police said an initial inspection found that the building was fitted with required emergency exits, extinguishers and exit signs." Making sure that no one says that the police ar eto blame then!

The bigger tragedy is that this keeps happening and will keep on happening.

Is Ordos the next Dubai?

18 August 2012

Miss Yu Wenxia

Miss China today won the title of Miss World, triumphing on home soil in a mining city on the edge of the Gobi desert.

The first runner-up was Sophie Elizabeth Moulds of Wales and the second runner-up was Jessica Michelle Kahawaty of Australia. Both mining nations - which cannot be a coincidence in Ordos.

Built on the arid and sparsely populated steppes of Inner Mongolia and around 700km from the nearest beach, Ordos makes an unlikely setting for the world's biggest beauty pageant.

But 116 contestants - the highest number ever - still wore their finest evening gowns and swimwear on Saturday night for the contest, which is watched annually by around a billion people around the globe; mostly in China!

Ordos has been built over the last decade on the back of a coal mining boom that has transformed it but it is still widely considered a ghost town as the pictures show in this link: Ordos, China: A Modern Ghost Town.

The beauty queens have been in China rehearsing for nearly a month, soaking up traditional Mongolian culture by churning yoghurt in a nomad's yurt and donning local attire to climb a sand dune.

The city has a vast town square dedicated to the mighty Mongolian warrior Genghis Khan. The mining boom triggered a frenzy of building in the city, but the local government has been unable to fill the vast tower blocks that have sprung up.

Enthusiastic competitors seemed unfazed, expressing optimism that with the help of the pageant, the city could leave that reputation behind and take its place alongside other global centres of glitz and glamour.

"Ordos could be the next Dubai," said Marielle Wilkie, representing the Caribbean nation of Barbados.

Albanian contestant Floriana Garo chimed in with her own bold prediction. "In ten years, this city will be booming," she said.

Architecture in Ordos -- where the city museum is shaped like an undulating blob -- is "world class", added Markysa O'Loughlin, representing St. Kitts and Nevis, also in the Caribbean.

The mostly Chinese audience erupted in cheers when it was announced that the home candidate, Yu Wenxia, had been awarded the title.

"When I was young I felt very lucky because so many people helped me and I hope in the future, I can help more children to feel lucky," said Yu, who was wearing a glittering blue dress, after the result was announced.

Thaksin lives

17 August 2012 by Nicholas Farrelly for Inside Story - Australia

Thailand’s former prime minister, Thaksin Shinawatra, just won’t go away. Since 2005 his opponents have thrown everything at him – a coup, a jail sentence, a terrorism charge – in a dogged campaign to remove the country’s most popular politician from its political future. His supporters, the telegenic Red Shirts, have been threatened, imprisoned, beaten up and, in dozens of cases, shot dead on the streets of Bangkok during the unruly protests that punctuated the country’s political conflict in 2010.

But Thaksin lives to fight another round. And now, with his sister, Yingluck Shinawatra, celebrating her first year in the prime ministerial hot seat, the telecommunications billionaire and creator of Southeast Asia’s most successful recipe for populist politics is more aggressively pursuing his options for a triumphant return to the kingdom.

In April, he was in neighbouring Laos, to make offerings and generate good karma. Then he visited Cambodia to address tens of thousands of cheering Red Shirt supporters bussed across the border to welcome their hero; while there, he also scheduled a round of golf with Cambodian strongman Hun Sen. This swaggering regional tour, conducted under one of the heaviest security blankets imaginable, certainly served its purpose: it got tongues wagging.

Thaksin’s international movements are becoming more frequent and high profile. His travel to democracies that were wary of his presence, such as Britain and the United States, is adding to his statesmanlike mystique. He is the roving, unofficial ambassador for his sister’s government, a government elected in the glow of his enduring popularity.

Through all of the ups and downs – ever since his Thai Rak Thai (Thais Love Thais) political party was first elected back in 2001 – Thaksin has enjoyed consistent voter support at a level unprecedented in Thai history. This means that his plan to return to Thailand, perhaps before the end of 2012, presents a special conundrum for a society where old wounds are unhealed and the stench of recent violence infuses political debate.

It was in April and May 2010 that Thais last experienced the horror of raging battles on the streets of Bangkok: Thais killing Thais for political ends. Over ninety died, and hundreds were injured. Culpability for those events is yet to be fully apportioned and partisan judgments about responsibility still prevail. A recipe for “reconciliation” – still only half-cooked, and considered unpalatable by many on all sides of politics – has served to muddle assessments of exactly what should happen next.

Earlier this year the ban on political activities by 111 former executives of the Thai Rak Thai party expired. This means that Thaksin’s “A-team,” including former ministers, tacticians and dealmakers, is available for political appointments. Some of them may no longer feel energised by politics and will opt to stay out of the fray; others are likely to be reintroduced to the battle with renewed vigour. Among Thaksin’s most trusted lieutenants are a few still very much spoiling for a fight.

Their unfinished business centres on the September 2006 coup that ousted Thaksin and Thai Rak Thai from power. The move was attributed to a nexus of palace and military interests threatened by Thaksin’s overwhelming popularity, ego, wealth and ambition.

In the years since then, Thailand’s military, palace, bureaucratic and judicial power brokers have remained sensitive about any discussion of the political role of the royal family. In recent years the country’s lese-majesty law, which demands harsh penalties for any perceived slights against the king or senior royals, has become newly problematic. Since the crackdown on the Red Shirt protests of April and May 2010, anti-palace graffiti and slogans have infused rallies with radical sentiments.

But those Red Shirts who had hoped that Prime Minister Yingluck would support the reformist or revolutionary impulses among rank-and-file Red Shirts have been disappointed. Instead, she has been pictured paying her respects to the king’s enforcer, Privy Council chairman General Prem Tinsulanonda, and doing whatever else she can to remain cosy with military and palace insiders.

Under her government, Thailand continues to lock up critics of the palace and determinedly pursues legal proceedings against any minnows who dare challenge royal prestige. What Yingluck’s government knows is that the lese-majesty law holds back an avalanche of scrutiny and criticism looming over the palace. They have decided that this is not the time to unleash its destructive potential.

The perverse consequence of continuing to clamp down on critical references to the royal family is that intrigue, scuttlebutt and animosity multiply. Discussions of the most sensitive topics have not been eradicated and, like a festering wound, are left to draw attention in ways unwanted and uncomfortable. The current consensus that Thai society benefits from restrictions on royal commentary has become Yingluck’s only defence against more radical Red Shirt elements.

In return for deference to certain palace priorities, Yingluck appears to enjoy the connivance of the military officers who deposed her brother in 2006. They are still deeply uncomfortable with the Shinawatra dynasty, and on occasion uniformed officers voice their concerns in public. Perhaps they now also appreciate that a coup, no matter how appealing in the short-term, is profoundly disruptive to long-term political planning.

During this fragile stalemate between the warring sides, some important disputes have been taken to the courts. In July, Thailand’s Constitutional Court was forced to pass judgement on the legality of the government’s efforts to amend the post-coup constitution. Opponents of constitutional change, who are drawn from the anti-Thaksin ranks, have asserted that Yingluck’s government is quietly working to undermine the monarchy through changes to the law. The ruling, if it went against the government, had the potential to ignite yet another storm of protest and counter-protest. Many in Thailand breathed a sigh of relief when the court ruled in the government’s favour.

Intriguingly, no large-scale anti-government demonstrations have taken place during the first year of Yingluck’s prime ministership. Even the most active anti-Thaksin street campaigner, Sondhi Limthongkul, has found himself distracted and exposed. In a sign that the high level backing he received for his earlier political activism has thinned, he was sentenced in February 2012 to twenty years’ imprisonment.

But the confrontation between pro- and anti-Thaksin forces is definitely not over. New groups of anti-Thaksin activists have emerged and appear to be readying themselves for future struggles.

The battle will not end until the relationship between the palace and political power is settled once and for all. There are a number of factors that have emerged in the past year to make the intersection of charismatic royal authority and popular political mandates all the more problematic.

First, the electoral popularity of Thaksin is, on the evidence from 2011, a strong as ever. The Pheua Thai (For the Thais) party, the third iteration of Thaksin’s original Thai Rak Thai, won 265 of the 500 seats. It governs in coalition with five other parties, including Chart Thai Pattana and Phalang Chon.

Thaksin commands the affection of the many Thais who feel that his rule from 2001 to 2006 was a golden age. They relish the thought of a Thailand that is strong and proud, able to take its place at the highest tables internationally. They still crave the attention that he lavished on the concerns of ordinary folk: the labourers, farmers and other workers who rallied to his side. They may not feel Thaksin was their saviour but he did, at least, make an effort to speak their language. And as memories have faded during his years of absence, his spin doctors have increasingly been able to present his rule as a blissful time.

Indeed, the politics of Thailand’s recent past is caught in a chamber of realities and counter-realities where self-serving narratives are filled with half-truths. There is no disinterested version of the story on which reconciliation and peace can be built.

Second, Thaksin is explicitly mulling the timing of a possible return to Thailand. Partly he is seeking to salvage his legacy and write yet another chapter in the country’s political history. But he also has assets at stake – perhaps $2 billion, confiscated after the 2006 coup.

In exile, his disembodied presence, a regular fixture of phone-ins, conference calls and interviews, has replaced the flesh-and-blood Thaksin. There are signs that he is tired of that role: his 390,000 followers on Twitter have not heard from him since November last year.

What Thaksin now needs is a deal. He is seeking an amnesty for his 2008 corruption conviction and some arrangement to return confiscated assets. Beyond that, the terms of any deal with his enemies are the subject of great speculation.

His opponents remain preoccupied with the palace succession and the need to ensure the continuity of the Chakri dynasty. There are also those hoping to keep control of what Forbes estimates could be a $30 billion royal fortune.

With this up for grabs, those who launched the coup in 2006 may feel that while Thaksin is a nuisance he is not the main enemy. For some, the bloodshed and lost opportunities since 2006 could also have catalysed a sense that endless struggle with Thaksin is counterproductive. And they also know that many Thais are quietly sick and tired of the political conflict that has become so prevalent since Thaksin was deposed.

The $30 billion question is: what happens when eighty-four-year-old King Bhumibol dies? It remains the question that nobody is prepared to touch. But if we have understood anything of Thailand’s political action since the 2006 coup then any tentative answer matters a great deal. It provides an explanation for what we have seen and what, we assume, lurks just out of sight. On everyone’s lips there is an unspoken view that things could get very bad as Thailand seeks to clarify its longer term political future.

Unresolved questions about Crown Prince Vajiralongkorn’s reckless behaviour haunt the equation. His apparent incapacity to generate consistent popular goodwill must infuriate those pragmatic types who have sought to provide every chance for his success. Innuendo about his lifestyle has only been reinforced in recent years by WikiLeaks’s release of confidential – and critical – official commentary, which has shifted longstanding speculation into a new realm of plausibility and awkwardness. Millions of Thais have stopped believing in the official, benign portrayal of the Crown Prince.

From this perspective, Thaksin’s rule, for all of its problems of patronage, violence and greed, is comparatively appealing. At the ballot box it wins every time.

Under these circumstances the final months of 2012 are likely to see more aggressive efforts by Thaksin to return to the kingdom. He will not want to miss an opportunity to pay his final respects to King Bhumibol. It is easy to overlook Thaksin’s own royalist views and the fact that he has worked very closely with the palace and the military in the past. The coup put an end to that, but Yingluck’s words and actions have signalled that rapprochement is conceivable.

Radical shifts in allegiance have happened before in Thai politics and they will happen again. Far from being a republican trouble-maker, Thaksin may ultimately prove a key ally for the palace in any future crisis. His capacity for personal reinvention is legendary, and this means that as he and the palace both face the challenges of the years ahead they may find that a common cause can guarantee mutual survival.

Thaksin has a track record of indestructibility. It makes sense that in the difficult years to come the palace will want him on their side. •

Nicholas Farrelly is a Research Fellow in the Australian National University’s College of Asia and the Pacific. In 2006 he co-founded New Mandala, a website on Southeast Asian politics.