Month: August 2012

  • Top Two Finishers in Beijing Trade Places

    Jed Jacobsohn for The New York Times

    Sally Pearson of Australia celebrating after winning the women’s 100-meter hurdles with a time of 12.35 seconds. More Photos »

     

    Jed Jacobsohn for The New York Times

    The Algerian Taoufik Makhloufi rebounded from being briefly kicked out the Olympics with a victory in the men’s 1,500. More Photos »

     

    Multimedia

     

     
    Latest Results: Track and Field
    • 17.55ft Greece
    • 17.55ft Ukraine
    • 17.55ft United States
    • 17.55ft Croatia
    • 17.55ft France
    • 17.55ft Poland

    • 17.55ft Kazakhstan
    • 17.55ft Czech Republic
    • 17.06ft Spain
    • 17.06ft Latvia
    • 17.06ft Belarus

     

     

    ugust 7, 2012
     

    Top Two Finishers in Beijing Trade Places

     

    By  and ANDREW DAS

     

    LONDON — As Australia’s Sally Pearson sailed over hurdle after hurdle Tuesday, a crowd of 80,000 at Olympic Stadium erupted in a roar, but she said she could not hear a thing.

    It was like she was racing the 100-meter hurdles by herself, churning her legs in silence as the finish line grew near. So when she turned to see Dawn Harper of the United States next to her as they crossed the finish, it startled her.

    “Wow, she’s really close,” Pearson recalled thinking. “Did she come first?”

    Deep down, though, Pearson said she knew the gold medal was hers. And she was right. She saw her name pop up on the scoreboard and collapsed to the track that was moist with rain, sobbed and let the moment sink in.

    “I’ve got every title now that I’ve ever wanted to win,” she said.

    Pearson set an Olympic record with her time of 12.35 seconds, and Harper was right behind her in 12.37 to win the silver medal. Kellie Wells of the United States, who finished in 12.48 seconds, won the bronze. Lolo Jones, also of the United States, was fourth.

    Pearson, 25, was the favorite going into the race because she had been nearly unbeatable recently. According to track and field’s international governing body, she has won 32 of her last 34 races.

    Yet Harper, the 2008 Olympic champion, seemed undeterred by those statistics. She swore off Twitter and Facebook, and even shut off her phone many times before the Olympics, because she knew what people were saying about the race.

    When people would send her texts hinting that she might not win because Pearson is so good, she bristled.

    “What kind of text is that?” she said with a laugh. “Delete!”

    Harper did not appear to be upset about her loss. She said she felt enormous pressure to win coming into the race as the Olympic champion, so she was proud that she did not crumble. “Yea for me!” she said.

    “I ran pretty darn fast today,” said Harper, who, along with Wells, ran a personal best.

    Jones had also run fast, for her season’s best time of 12.58, but that was no consolation. As Pearson waved to the crowd and Harper and Wells danced around waving the United States flag, Jones stood beneath the grandstands with her hands on her head. Tears rolled down her cheeks.

    At the 2008 Beijing Games, she was the race favorite but tripped on the second-to-last hurdle and finished seventh. On Tuesday, she barely made it to the final as the eighth runner to qualify. Then, in the final, she ran a solid race. But she simply was not fast enough.

    “Obviously, I’m crushed,” Jones said. “I kind of figured I was out, but I didn’t know. I was hoping — a prayer, a chance — that I would squeak away a medal.”

    Jones, 30, has overcome back surgery and hamstring injuries to compete in these Olympics and said she had hoped to retire after the 2016 Rio Games. But her fourth-place finish might have changed that plan.

    “Now that you had two bittersweet Olympics, it’s like, man, I don’t know,” she said. “Every time I come here I get burned.”

    But it is possible to bounce back from one Olympics to the next. Pearson proved that.

    In a heartbreaking loss, she finished second to Harper in Beijing, but the roles were reversed this time. Harper said it was Pearson’s exceptional speed, she is a six-time Australian national champion in the 100 meters, and nearly flawless technique that sealed her win.

    Pearson also was determined to win. After seeing Harper’s time of 12.46 second in the semifinals, she made herself a promise.

    “I’m going to stamp my name on this race and make sure everybody knows I’m here,” she said. And she followed through.

    ALGERIAN WINS 1,500 As Taoufik Makhloufi sprinted away from the field with more than half a lap to go in the 1,500-meter final, it became clear why he had been saving his energy. Pumping his legs to a victory on the same track where he had jogged to a stop in an 800-meter race a day earlier — earning a brief ejection from the Games — Makhloufi coasted to the gold medal in the 1,500 in 3 minutes 34.08 seconds.

    Leonel Manzano of the United States, who was in fifth place after the final turn, matched Makhloufi’s speed but not his timing and won the silver in 3:34.79, the first medal for an American in the 1,500 since Jim Ryun’s silver in 1968. Abdalaati Iguider of Morocco took the bronze in 3:35.13, holding off another American, Matt Centrowitz, by a step.

    Makhloufi, 24, had been tossed out of the Games on Monday after he slowed and then stopped in an 800-meter heat. Meet officials accused him of violating the Olympic ideal by not giving an honest effort, but Algerian officials successfully argued that Makhloufi had not quit, but had merely withdrawn from the race because of a knee injury. That explanation looked increasingly ridiculous as he left the 1,500 field in his dust.

    “Every person who wins a race forgets about his injuries and his pains, and I forgot about mine,” Makhloufi said with a devilish smile.

    The remarkable performance by Manzano, who edged Centrowitz at the United States trials, was as surprising as the outing by the three Kenyans in the race was dismal. The Kenyans, who had qualified 1-2-3 for the 12-man final, finished 6th, 11th and 12th. It was the first time since 1992 that a Kenyan did not win a medal in the event. ANDREW DAS

    SHIRT LOST; GOLD FOUND Ivan Ukhov, a shaggy-haired Russian known more for once showing up drunk for a meet than for being the world’s top-ranked high jumper, took the gold in the event with an interesting performance that included the disappearance of his shirt.

    Ukhov never found it. Instead, he borrowed one from his teammate Andrey Silnov, who had been eliminated and pinned on a new number. He cleared 2.38 meters (about 7 feet 8 inches) and took one attempt at what would have been an Olympic record of 2.40 (7-10) before starting his celebration.

    At a news conference, Ukhov said of his shirt, “It miraculously disappeared,” as the other medalists laughed. “They have all told me they did not take it.”

    Erik Kynard of the United States won the silver, and three athletes — Mutaz Essa Barshim of Qatar, Derek Drouin of Canada and Robbie Grabarz of Britain — tied for the bronze.ANDREW DAS

    2 AMERICANS QUALIFY FOR 800 Nick Symmonds and Duane Solomon of the United States qualified for the 800-meter final with the two best third-place times in the three semifinals. Symmonds finished in 1:44.87 and Solomon in 1:44.93. Symmonds, who ran the second of the three semifinals, said he thought his time would have been good enough to qualify, but he stayed on the track to watch the third heat just in case.

    “It’s a little nerve-racking to do it the way I did it but I’m in and that’s all that matters,” Symmonds said. “I was trying to telepathically tell Duane to slow it down a little bit but he ran just exactly what he needed to do.”

    The last time two Americans ran in the 800 final was at the Barcelona Games in 1992. Johnny Gray won the bronze that year. ANDREW DAS

     

    Copyright. 2012. The New York Times Company. All Rights Reserved

  • What do all the controls in an airplane cockpit do?

    Tim MorganPrivate pilot: airplane single-e…

     
    All of them?  If you’re talking about a commercial airliner, then there’s hundreds and hundreds.  There are big, fat manuals describing what they all do.  But, since you asked, buckle up.

    Every airplane is different.  Unlike learning to drive a car, you can’t just hop from one plane to another.  A pilot needs familiarization (and in some cases, a whole new type of license) to fly a different kind of plane.  Some are piston-powered; some are jet-powered.  Some have electrically-driven controls; some are hydraulically-driven.  Some have emergency oxygen; some don’t.  And so on.  All the switches, dials, and knobs in the cockpit control the various aircraft systems, and every aircraft has different systems.

    Let’s take a very popular airliner, the 737.  And of course, different 737s are different, so let’s just invent a 737 that we can use.  A typical one.  Here’s a photo of a 737.

    Pretty typical small-body airliner.  For our example, we’re going to be flying a 737-600, a modernized 737 with glass-cockpit displays and digital avionics.

    So, before we can talk about what all the switches in the cockpit do, we need to know what systems the 737-600 has onboard.  So without further ado, here is a non-complete list of all the systems that the pilot or copilot might need to manage:

    Engine: Our 737 has two CFM56-7 turbofan engines with thrust-reversing capability. The engines are started by an APU (auxiliary power unit) — the APU is itself a mini-jet engine that is used to start the two big boys under the wing.  (The APU is started by the battery, if you’re curious.)  Fuel flow to the engines is electronically controlled.

    Fuel: The 737 has three fuel tanks: one in each wing, and a center tank in the fuselage.  Electrically-powered fuel pumps transfer fuel from the tanks to the engines.  Each tank has two redundant fuel pumps, for a total of six.  The center tank drains first, then the wing tanks.  Normally the left center fuel pump sends fuel to the left engine, and vice versa, but there is a cross feed valve that opens to allow the left center pump to provide fuel pressure to the right engine in the event the right center pump fails (or vice versa).

    Hydraulics: The engines power three redundant hydraulic systems (systems A and B, and the standby system) which actuate the flight controls (elevators, rudder, ailerons) that maneuver the aircraft in flight.  The hydraulic system also powers the landing gear, flaps, and slats, thrust reversers, as well as a few other minor things.  System A and B each power a subset of the preceding list, with the standby system providing emergency hydraulic power to the critical systems only.

    Electrical: Each engine (including the APU) has its own generator that can power the aircraft’s electronics (lights, avionics, galley, in-flight entertainment, etc.).  When the engines are off, the aircraft uses an onboard battery to power its systems.  There is also a standby battery in the event the main battery is drained.  The aircraft can also accept external ground power from a mobile generator.  Each electrical source (battery, generator, ground power) can be hooked up to one of two transfer buses that move the electricity to aircraft systems. Typically in flight each engine generator is hooked up to one of the transfer buses. In the event one electrical source (APU, battery) must power both transfer buses, a bus tie system connects the two buses.

    Bleed air: Bleed air (siphoned from each engine) powers the air conditioners and anti-ice system, and pressurizes the hydraulic and fuel pumps.  The airplane is split into two separate “zones” which can have their own temperature settings.  The aircraft can also accept external air from a mobile air cart.

    Oxygen: The 737 has two independent oxygen systems — one for flight crew and one for passengers. In the event of depressurization, the oxygen masks will drop and oxygen canisters will supply pressurized oxygen to the passengers and flight crew.

    Navigation: The 737 is equipped with two independent GPS antennas and three IRUs (inertial reference units).  An IRU is a gyroscope that records changes in acceleration.  By integrating these changes over time, the airplane can track its position, though it gets increasingly inaccurate over time.

    Radios: The 737 has three communication (COMM) radios and three navigation (NAV) radios.  The COMM radios let the pilot talk to ATC and the NAV radios let the pilot navigate to or from ground radio navigation stations.  There’s also an onboard weather radar that sends out radio waves ahead of the plane looking for storm clouds.

    OK, let’s get started.  I’ll start with the pilot’s side of the main panel.

    The two main displays in front of the pilot are the PFD (primary flight display; left) and ND (navigational display; right). The pilot and copilot each have a set, and there is a pair of shared DUs (display units) in the center (arranged top-and-bottom). Each can independently display one of a few different screens of information.  In the above picture, the top DU is showing engine information and the bottom DU is blank.

    The information shown on the PFD is the airspeed tape (left side), the attitude indicator (center — shows the sky and ground pictorially), the altitude tape (right side), and the rate-of-climb indicator (far right).  Along the top, the current autopilot mode is shown (autopilot is currently off).  On the bottom is the heading indicator.  The yellow text are some warnings and the green text is the altimeter setting (more on that later).  The purple text is the autopilot speed and altitude settings (more on that later too).

    The navigation information shown is the current heading (solid line) and the course dialed into the FMC (flight management computer; more on that later — it’s the dotted purple line). Two white blocks of text show information about the next waypoint and and some general position information.  The green text shows information about how accurately the jet can guess its position.

    The engine information shown: On the top left are two dials; they indicate the N1 setting for the left and right engine.  N1 is a measure of engine power — at 100% N1, the engine is producing maximum power (right now the engines are at 22.5% N1).  The second row shows the engine’s EGT (exhaust gas temperature, currently 411 °C), another measure of engine power and also an important thing to monitor — if the exhaust gas is too hot, you’re in trouble.  To the right of the dials is a grid where engine warnings would pop up.  On the bottom right are the fuel gauges; it shows the fuel in each of the three tanks and the total fuel onboard (40,200 gallons).

    Between the top DU and the pilot’s ND are the standby flight instruments.  In the event that the PFD fails, the pilot can still get critical flight information from these backup instruments.  The top one is the standby flight display — it looks just like the regular PFD.  The big white knob sets the altimeter setting (again, more on that later).  The + and – buttons on the right side control brightness.  The APP button on the top-left toggles between two different displays relating to landing the aircraft: approach and back-course.  When these modes are active, the pilot gets additional help in guiding the plane down to the runway.  The HP/IN button to the right of that button toggles between American and European units.  The RST button on the bottom left resets the instrument to displaying straight and level, in case it “tumbles” during heavy maneuvering.  (You should only press this button when the plane actually is straight and level.)

    Below the standby flight display is the standby HSI (horizontal situation indicator — it’s a heading indicator that also has the ability to navigate you to a waypoint).  The knob on the standby PFD sets the altimeter setting (again, more on that later).  The two dials below the standby HSI set the course that the pilot would like to fly to or from one of two radio navigation fixes he would have tuned in (e.g., I wish to fly to the Oakland VOR on the 090° course).  The dials show the course you dialed in with the knobs, and indicate how accurately you are flying that course.

    Above the standby attitude indicator is a small dial labeled YAW DAMPENER.  The yaw dampener helps the pilot smooth out turns by coordinating aileron and rudder input.  When the bar is centered, the turn is smooth.  When the bar slides left or right, the yaw dampener needs to add right or left rudder to the turn to smooth it out.  This lets the pilot check if the yaw dampener is working properly.

    There is one little light above the PFD; this is a warning light that tells the pilot when that the below-glidesope alert is active.  (The glideslope is the proper glide path down to a runway.  If you’re too far below it, you’re going to get leaves in your engines.)  Pressing the light inhibits the warning, in case the pilot really does know what he’s doing.

    To the right of that light, above and between the PFD and ND, are two knobs; these control what systems are linked to the pilot’s displays.  Normally the left screen shows the PFD and the right screen shows the ND, but if one of your screens fails, you could switch up which screen displays which system.  These knobs let you do that.

    To the right of those knobs are a set of three lights in a well; these light up to tell the pilot when the autopilot has disconnected, the auto throttle has disconnected, or there is an error on the FMC (again, FMC explained later). The switch to the right tests the lights.  The switch to the right of that switch is the master warning lights switch; it controls the brightness of all warning lights, and tests all warning lights.

    Below the well are three more lights.  They light up to tell the pilot when the speed brake is extended, when the speed brake should notbe extended, and when the autopilot is failing to trim the aircraft properly (an aircraft is in trim when it can fly straight and level without continuous input from the pilot or autopilot; an aircraft out of trim will slowly pitch up or down).

    To the left of the pilot’s PFD is a digital clock with count up timer and sweep second hand.  The CHR button on the top left of the clock face starts/stops/resets the chronometer.  The two buttons on the top right are used to set the time and toggle between local time/UTC time/date display.  On the bottom-left, the two buttons control the elapsed time counter, which is used to time the entire flight.  Lastly, on the bottom-right, the + and – buttons are used to set the time.

    Below that is a switch that toggles between the normal (hydraulic system A) or alternate (hydraulic system B) nose wheel steering (NWS) system.  (NWS turns the nose wheel on the ground and allows the plane to steer during taxi.)

    Alright, next up, the knobs below the pilot’s PFD and ND.  On the very left is a pull-lever labeled FOOT AIR, to make the pilot’s feet comfortable, followed by WINDSHIELD AIR, which defogs the main windows.

    To the right are five knobs.  They control the brightness of the four displays (PFD, ND, upper DU, and lower DU) and the brightness of the panel itself (flood lights that light the whole panel).

    Then to the right we’ve got two more knobs, that control the brightness of the background lights, and another set of flood lights that light the top portion of the panel (which we’ll see later).

    Now to the right of those knobs we see a small screen with a keyboard.  That’s the FMC, or flight management computer.  This is a computer into which the pilot enters the route he wants to fly, the altitude he wants to fly it at, and all sorts of other information about the flight.  From that the computer calculates the best speed to fly each leg of the flight, how long it will take, whether there’s enough fuel, etc.  The pilot can also enter in restrictions (can’t be above 250 knots below 10,000 feet, for example), and the autopilot will obey those restrictions.  The FMC has a multitude of other functions, like finding nearby airports in an emergency, or calculating holding patterns, etc.  There’s pages and pages of features.

    To the right of the FMC is the lower DU, and then the copilot’s very own FMC.  There’s some stuff above his FMC that we can’t really see well, so let’s take a closer look to the right of the previous image.

    The big round handle is the landing gear lever.  Pull it up and the gear retracts; push it down and the gear extends.  Above the lever are three landing gear lights.  They’re green when the gear is down, red when the gear is in motion or not fully extended, and unlit when the gear is up.  It’s typically a good idea to check for “three green” before landing.

    To the left of the gear lights is the flaps indicator.  The flaps are a pair of flat surfaces on each wing that can extend outward to increase the surface area of the wing.  This allows the plane to fly at slower speeds (say, for landing).  Right now the needle shows the flaps at 0° (fully retracted).  They can be extended all the way out to 40° for very slow landings.

    To the left of the flaps indicator are the auto brake controls.  The auto brake can automatically start braking after landing.  The top light illuminates when the auto brake disarms due to a malfunction, reminding the pilot that it’s now his job to stop the plane.  The middle knob sets the braking intensity, from OFF (no auto braking) up to 3 (hard braking), with a special RTO setting (rejected takeoff — hold on to your hand rests).

    The two lights below the flaps indicator light when the flaps are moving or extended, respectively.  The light below the auto brake knob illuminates when there is a malfunction in the anti-skid system, warning the pilot not to apply excessive brake pressure and cause a skid.

    To the left of all that are a pair of small knobs, a switch, and two pushbuttons.  The right knob controls where the aircraft gets its calculated reference airspeeds — important airspeeds that must be called out during takeoff.  They can be automatically calculated by the FMC, or as a fallback, entered manually using this knob.  The left knob controls what max. N1 limit is displayed on the upper DU.  Like the reference airspeeds, it can be automatically calculated by the FMC or manually entered.  The setting appears as a red line on the N1 dials displayed below on the DU.

    The FUEL FLOW switch below the N1 setting knob controls the fuel flow indicator; normally it shows the fuel flow rate, but can temporarily act as a fuel “triptometer” — showing fuel used since the last reset, and marking a reset point.

    The three buttons to the right of that switch control what’s shown on the lower DU, either engine information (ENG) or information on the aircraft’s other systems (SYS).  The C/R button is cancel/recall — press it once to “cancel” any warnings shown on the DU (makes them disappear), and press it again to “recall” those warnings (makes them reappear).

    To the right of the landing gear lever are the copilot’s PFD and ND, the copilot’s cockpit illumination controls, and air controls (not shown).  They mostly mirror the pilot’s.

    OK, let’s move on to mode control panel (MCP).  It sits on top of the main panel:

    On the left side are the controls for the pilot’s ND.  The top-left knob (MINS) is where the pilot dials in the minimum approach altitude.  This is the lowest the pilot can go before he must see the runway to land.  If he can’t see the runway, he has to abort the landing.  Setting this knob will let the plane say “MINIMUMS” when the pilot reaches this altitude, as a reminder. Then, going right, we’ve got an FPV button that toggles display of the flight path vector on the PFD (basically a little circle showing you where your airplane is trending; e.g., if it floats above the artificial horizon you know your plane is climbing).  Then a button (MTRS) that toggles between metric and English units for international flights.  And lastly a knob (BARO) for changing the altimeter setting: that’s the outside surface air pressure.  The pilot needs to do this so the altimeter indicates an accurate altitude.

    Second row: The first switch (VOR1/ADF1) toggles the left data block on the ND between VOR and ADF information.  (VOR and ADF are two kinds of radio navigation.)  Then we’ve got a knob that sets which of the different screens the ND is displaying (currently the MAP screen).  The ND can show an overhead map view (as shown), or a plan view, or an approach and landing view, etc.  The next knob over sets the range of the ND (the zoom knob).  And then there’s another switch that’s like the VOR/ADF switch on the left side, but for the right data block.  (These data blocks are not currently shown ND.)

    The bottom row of buttons toggle on and off the display of different “data layers” on the ND.  In the photo the ND is pretty sparse — it’s just showing the compass rose and course line.  The pilot could use these buttons to show weather radar, nearby airports, topographic terrain, etc.

    To the right of that cluster, spanning the remaining width of the MCP, are the autopilot controls.  When the pilot is not actually flying the airplane by grabbing the yoke, he is dialing in instructions to the autopilot using this panel.

    At the very left side of the MCP is the course knob and window.  This knob sets an inbound or outbound course to fly towards a radio navigation facility (e.g., fly to the Newark VOR via the 270° radial).  Below and to the right of that knob is the F/D (flight director) switch.  Turning on the flight director is like “assisted autopilot”: The autopilot doesn’t actually fly the plane, but shows you on the PFD what you should be doing to fly the plane in the way it wants you to.  It’s extra guidance for the pilot who still wishes to hand-fly.

    Just above the F/D switch is a tiny little light labeled “MA” (for master — though it’s unlit so you couldn’t tell). There are actually two of these lights; one on the left side and one on the right — you can see the right one on the other side of the photo.  These correspond to the two FCCs (flight control computers) that power the autopilot.  If the left light is on, the left FCC is doing the F/D calculations.  If the right is on, the right FCC is doing the F/D calculations.  Normally the left FCC manages the pilot’s F/D, but if the pilot’s FCC fails, it could be managed by the copilot’s FCC.

    Moving over to the right, we’ve got the A/T (auto throttle) arm switch.  The auto throttle can control the throttles automatically to maintain a set airspeed or N1.  To the right of the switch is a knob that dials in the airspeed/N1 setting, and above it a display showing the current airspeed/N1 setting.  There are lines moving out to the bottom-left and bottom-right, connected to buttons.  These enable the different auto throttle modes — N1 (maintain an N1), SPEED (maintain an airspeed), and LVL CHG (level change; sets throttles appropriately for climbs and descents).

    There’s also a small button to the left of the knob called C/O (changeover), which toggles the display between airspeed (in knots) and Mach number.  At higher altitudes, speed in Mach becomes more important than speed in knots.

    The other small button to the right of the knob is the SPD INTV (speed intervention) switch.  If your FMC is calculating your speed for you, but you temporarily want to maintain a different speed, press this button and dial in your speed.  Press it again to return to flying the FMC’s calculated speed.

    Above that button is the VNAV button, which turns on the vertical navigation autopilot mode.  This mode will fly the vertical profile programmed into the FMC, beginning climbs and descents as the FMC commands.

    To the right of the VNAV button is the heading knob and related buttons and window. This knob is used to set a heading for the autopilot to fly.  The button just below the knob turns on heading mode, commanding the autopilot to fly that heading.

    To the right of the knob is a row of three buttons.  The top turns on LNAV (lateral navigation) mode.  This mode flies the plane through the waypoints programmed into the FMC.  Turning on both LNAV and VNAV mode will have the plane fly exactly the 3D route programmed into the FMC.  The middle button turns on VORLOC mode, where the plane flies to a VOR (radio navigation fix) using the onboard nav radio and the course dialed into the course window.  The bottom button is APP (approach) mode, where the plane flies an ILS signal down to a runway.  ILS is a very accurate radio navigation system that can guide a plane precisely onto a runway for landing.

    Next column to the right is the altitude setting.  We got a knob and a window for setting the altitude, and two mode buttons: ALT HLD (altitude hold), and V/S, which holds a specified vertical speed.  To the right of the knob is a small ALT INTV (altitude intervention) button that works like the SPD INTV button.  Then we got a knob and a window for dialing in a desired vertical speed in feet per minute.

    Moving right is a grid of four buttons.  These control the two autopilot computers (A and B).  The top row of buttons turn on autopilot command mode (where it has total command over the aircraft), and the bottom row turns on CWS (command with steering) mode.  CWS is a special mode where the pilot pushes the controls to get the plane flying in the way he wants, and then releases the controls — the autopilot then takes over the flying.  There are two redundant autopilot systems, and both must be active to make an autopilot-controlled approach and landing.

    The big bar below the grid of buttons disengages the autopilot and gives the pilot full control of the aircraft.  To the right of that grid are some duplicated controls from the left side that are in easier reach of the copilot.

    The other panel we can see in this image is the Ground Proximity Warning System (GPWS).  The panel is below the copilot’s ND, containing three large black switches.

    The GPWS warns the pilot when it detects that the aircraft may hit the ground.  The three switches are used to turn on and off three types of ground-proximity audio warnings: “TOO LOW – FLAPS” (when the plane thinks you may have forgotten to extend your flaps before landing), “TOO LOW – GEAR”(when the plane thinks you may have forgotten to lower your gear before landing), and “TOO LOW – TERRAIN” (when the plane thinks you may have forgotten about that mountain between you and the runway).

    Above and to the left of the switches is a warning light indicating when the GPWS is inoperative, and a SYS TEST button that tests the GPWS.

    Now let’s look above the main panel, on the glare shield:

    The red Fire Warning light is bad news when it lights up, but you can silence the alarm bell by pressing it.  The yellow Master Caution light is also bad news; pressing it “acknowledges” the caution and turns off the light.  To the right of the Master Caution light is a grid of lights that indicate what is generally wrong with the airplane.  (Nothing is illuminated right now, but examples are FLT CONT [flight controls] and ELEC [electrical system].)  The copilot has his own Fire Warning and Master Caution lights, as well as a separate grid of different annunciators.

    The CLOCK button on the very left operates the chronograph, same as the CHR button on the clock face.

    Let’s take a look at what’s to the left of the pilot’s seat:

    The wheel on the right side of the image is the tiller wheel, used to steer the airplane on the ground.  Below it are two knobs; the forward one controls the brightness of the map light (the red-capped light on the left side of the image).  The rear knob has no function.

    Behind the knobs is the pilot’s emergency oxygen mask.

    Let’s move on to the throttle console now!

    At the center are the throttles.  Push forward to burn more gas, pull back to save money.  There’s one for each engine.  There are also paddles behind each throttle lever that control the thrust reversers.  Pull up to apply reverse thrust during landing.  There are buttons underneath each throttle grip (not shown) that engage TO/GA  (takeoff/go-around) mode.  Press either button and the throttles automatically set for either a takeoff or an aborted landing.  The black buttons on the side of each throttle grip cause the auto throttle to disengage, giving throttle control back to the pilot.

    The pair of levers below the throttle are the fuel cutoff levers.  Pulling either of these levers down will cut off fuel to that engine.  They’re used to shut the engines down in an emergency or as part of a routine shutdown.

    The big wheel is the trim wheel.  If the plane is floating up hands-off, push the wheel forward to apply forward trim.  And vice versa.  Nurse the wheel as needed to get the plane to fly straight without any pressure on the yoke from the pilot.  To the right of the trim wheel is the trim indicator.

    Next to the trim wheel is the parking brake lever, and behind it a light that illuminates when the parking brake is set.  Also next to the trim wheel is the speed brake lever — pull back to deploy the spoilers and slow down; push forward to clean up the plane and speed up.

    To the right of the throttles is the flap lever, which sets the flap position.

    Below the flap lever are the stabilizer trim cutout switches.  There’s one switch for the autopilot’s automatic control of trim, and another switch for the pilot-controlled electric trim system.  If either system were malfunctioning and trimming the aircraft incorrectly, you could disable it and just trim the plane manually using the big trim wheel.  Note that these are backup trim cutout switches — the normal trim cutout switch is on the yoke.

    OK, let’s move away from the throttle quadrant to the bottom portion of the center console.  At the top are the bright red fire extinguisher handles, labeled “1″ and “2″ (for engine 1 [left] and 2 [right]), and “APU” for the APU fire extinguisher.  To the left of the engine 1 extinguisher is the OVERHEAT switch, which selects between redundant A and B engine overheat detection circuits.  Below that is a light that illuminates if an overheat is detected in the left engine, and below that a switch that tests the A and B detection circuits.

    Between the engine 1 and APU handles are lights that warn of: a fire in the wheel well, a fault in the A or B fire detection circuit (depending on the position of the OVERHEAT switch), a fault in the APU fire detection circuit, or a discharged APU bottle (you only get one!).

    Between the APU and engine 2 fire extinguisher handles is a similar set of test switches and warning lights for the right engine, and a big black BELL CUTOUT button (obscured) that silences the fire warning bell if the pilot should get sick of it.  To the right of the engine 2 handle is the bottle test switch and lights that tell the pilot that each of the three extinguisher bottles is working properly.  There are also a pair of lights indicating that the left or right bottles have already been used.

    Moving down to the very top-left side of the center console is the COMM1 radio panel.  The left window shows the active frequency: the frequency the pilot would be talking over if he were to key in the mic while COMM1 was set.  Then to the right we have the standby window, which is where the pilot dials in the next frequency he wants to talk to.  When he’s ready to switch frequencies, he presses the transfer button in between the two windows, and he’s on a new frequency.  The two knobs set the larger and smaller digits of the standby frequency.  There’s also a test button and an on/off button below the right and left windows, respectively.  The grid of six buttons in the bottom center choose which radio the COMM1 panel is connected to: There are three VHF radios, two HF radios, and an AM radio.  The HF SENS knob is used to set the sensitivity when COMM1 is connected to the HF radio: HF is a very long-range radio system used in overwater flights, and can require fine-tuning of sensitivity.

    Moving right, we have the cargo file panel.  We have two green lights that light up when the TEST button below it is held down, to show that the two cargo fire extinguisher bottles are working.  We got two small knobs that choose between each of two fire detection circuits for the forward and aft cargo locations (so two circuits per location, two locations total).  To the right is a light that illuminates if a fault is detected in any fire detection circuit.  Below the knobs are two lights that illuminate should a fire be detected in the forward or aft cargo compartment.  To the right of those lights is a guarded button; flip the guard and press down to extinguish the cargo fire.  It doubles as a light telling you you’ve already discharged your bottle.

    To the right of that is the COMM2 radio, which works the same as the COMM1 radio.

    Below the COMM1 radio control is the NAV1 radio control.  This works like the COMM radios except the pilot doesn’t talk over the radio; the airplane uses the radio signal to navigate to a station.  There’s a test button that drives the NAV1 needle (on the ND or the backup HSI) to a known heading; if the needle is on that heading, the radio is working.

    To the right of NAV1 are the weather radar controls.  The left knob sets the gain (sensitivity) of the weather radar, and the right knob is used to tilt the radar up or down, to scan for storm clouds above or below.  The buttons select different display modes, such as WX (weather only) or WX+T (weather and turbulence).  In case you’re curious, the radar can detect turbulence by noticing when rain droplets change direction as they fall.

    Then, moving right, we’ve got the NAV2 radio, same as the NAV1 radio.

    Below the NAV1 radio is the audio selector panel.  The top row of buttons sets who the pilot is talking to when he keys in the mic.  He can talk over COMM1 or COMM2, he can talk to the flight attendants or to all the passengers, etc.

    The two rows of knobs below that set the volume for each of the many different radios and other audio sources that go into the pilot’s headset.

    The bottom right switch is a backup push-to-talk switch for mic keying. (The normal PTT switch is on the yoke.) Move up to talk over the radio, and move down to talk over the intercom.

    To the right is the MASK/BOOM switch, which toggles between the oxygen mask microphone and the boom microphone for transmissions.  The pilot would only use the MASK position of the oxygen mask deployed in an emergency.

    The V-B-R knob controls what audio is filtered out from nav radio stations.  In “V”, only weather information is heard (which is sometimes broadcast over a nav radio).  In “B”, both weather information and the morse code identifier is heard.  In “R”, only the morse code identifier is heard (to verify that the pilot tuned in the correct station, and the station is working properly).

    The ALT-NORM switch on the right toggles between normal and emergency mode for the communications system.

    To the right of the pilot’s intercom controls is the HGS (heading guidance system) controls.  The pilot uses this panel to input information into the HGS.  The HGS then displays telemetry to the pilot over the HUD (more on that later) to help him land.  The pilot presses a button on the left (such as RWY for runway length), then enters the data using the numeric keypad on the right.  Once he’s entered all the data, the HGS can then help guide him down to a landing.  There’s also a clear button and brightness controls along the bottom.

    To the right is the copilot’s mic and intercom controls, which are the same as the pilot’s.

    Below the pilot’s intercom controls is the ADF panel, which controls the ADF, a very old form of radio navigation.  The bottom-left knob switches between ADF mode (for navigating to the radio signal) and ANT mode (for listening to the radio signal).  The right knob mutes and un-mutes the radio signal.  The pilot would listen to the radio signal to hear the morse code and make sure he’s tuned the correct frequency, and ergo navigating to the correct station.

    To the right of the ADF radio is the transponder controls.  The transponder is a device that intercepts an incoming radar beam (from an ATC radar) and sends it back out with information about the aircraft.  ATC uses this information to get more information about an aircraft than it could from just an unmodified radar return.

    The top left knob selects between one of two redundant transponders.  The middle window is the transponder code.  Every aircraft is assigned a four-digit code when it’s under ATC control; you dial it in with the two knobs below and on either side of the window.

    The top right knob turns on the transponder and sets its mode.  XPNDR turns on altitude reporting, which sends back the plane’s current altitude (which can be hard for radar alone to determine) with the radar beam.  TA additionally transmits the plane’s unique identifier.  And TA/RA will also allow the transponder to receive data broadcast from ATC to all nearby aircraft over the radar beam.  This data includes the locations of other aircraft that the radar is picking up.

    Note that the four-digit squawk code is different from the unique ID transmitted in TA mode — the four digit squawk code can be reused many times in a day, whereas the unique Mode S ID is assigned once to one aircraft for all time.

    The bottom left knob sets whether to use the pilot’s or copilot’s altimeter when reporting altitude back.  The middle IDENT button performs an identification function.  This causes the aircraft to “light up” on ATC’s radar.  ATC will often ask an aircraft to “ident” to figure out who they’re talking to.  The top middle light indicates a transponder failure.

    To the right of the transponder controls, below the copilot’s intercom panel, is the COMM3 radio panel, same as the COMM1 and COMM2 panels.

    The bottom left panel controls the brightness of the center panel and flood lights.

    At bottom center are additional trim controls.  The aileron trim controls are on the bottom left, allowing the pilot to trim left-wing-down or right-wing-down if the plane is drifting left or right.  The indicator is in on the yoke.  The knob on the bottom right is rudder trim, and its indicator is above the knob

    To the right of that is the stabilizer trim override switch.  In the NORM position, the yoke trim cutout switch is operational.  In the OVRD position, the two trim cutout switches on the throttle quadrant (discussed above) are operational.

    At the very bottom right are the cockpit door controls.  The door can be unlocked, locked, or automatically controlled using the right knob.  The two lights indicate when the door is unlocked and when the locking mechanism has failed.

    We’re almost done — let’s do the overhead console!  Let’s start with the top half.

    The red switch at top-left controls the in-flight WiFi; it can be in normal or override-off mode.

    Below that switch are the IRU controls.  At the top we have a window that displays information, and a knob that controls what information is displayed.  It can display the current lat/lon, the wind direction and speed, the airplane heading and speed, etc.  All of this information comes from the IRS (inertial reference system).

    Below that is a knob that toggles the display between using the left or right IRS (there are two after all).  To the right is a keypad used to enter in the initial lat/lon of the aircraft.  (Remember that the IRUs only measure changes in position, so without an initial position, they can’t give any useful information.)  Normally this is done using the FMC, but it’s here too as a backup.

    Below the IRS panel are some warning lights showing when an IRU has failed, or is on battery backup power, and a pair of knobs that set the left and right IRU mode.  IRUs have to spin up and align before they can be used for navigation, a process that takes 10 minutes.  So the IRU must first be put into ALIGN mode for 10 minutes or so before it can be moved into NAV mode.  If the pilot is in a hurry, he can put the IRU into the emergency ATT (attitude-only) mode, but he will get no position information and only attitude information.

    To the left are two slanted sets of lights: That’s the leading-edge flaps indicator.  The flaps actually have two components: The part that extends backwards and the part that extends forwards (the slats).  These lights indicate whether the slats are in motion, extended, or retracted.

    Below the slats indicators is a single, lone caution light.  It illuminates when the PSEU (proximity switch electronic unit) has failed.  The PSEU monitors the sensors that determine if the landing gear is up or down, if the aircraft is flying or on the ground, etc.

    To the right of the IRS panel is the SERVICE INTERPHONE switch, which turns on a backup system for talking with the flight attendants.  Below that is the DOME WHITE switch, that turns on and off the bright white dome light that floods the whole cockpit.  (Not good for night vision.)

    Then, one column to the right at the top, is an intercom panel for the observer (a third flight deck member who sits in an observer seat).

    Below the observer intercom panel are two thrust reverser caution lights that illuminate if there is a problem with the left or right thrust reverser.  Below that are two switches and lights that toggle between the primary and alternate EEC (electronic engine computer).  Each engine has two EECs, one for backup.  The EEC controls the flow of fuel into the engine to get a desired power, as set by the throttle, but will also limit power as necessary to prevent damaging the engine.

    Below the EEC controls is the emergency oxygen indicator.  The flight crew has its own independent emergency oxygen system, and this dial shows how much oxygen is left in that system.

    To the right of that is a switch and a light — flip the switch to make the passenger oxygen valves fall down from the ceiling.  The light illuminates to show that the passenger oxygen is on and flowing to the masks.

    Below that are three backup gear-down lights; in case the main ones go out, the pilot can still be sure his gear is down before he lands.

    On the very right is the flight recorder switch, used to test the flight recorder (that records telemetry to the black box in case of a crash).  The light to the right of it illuminates if the flight recorder fails.  The two buttons to the right of the light test the airspeed warning system that sounds an alarm when the plane busts its maximum airspeed.

    Then below that we’ve got two stall warning test buttons.  Press them to test each of the two redundant stall warning systems.  (A stall occurs when the aircraft is no longer flying fast enough to generate lift.  It’s bad enough to warrant an aural warning.)

    On to the lower portion of the overhead panel:

    At the top-left corner are the flight control systems.  The two black switches at the top turn on and off the A and B hydraulic flight control systems, which allow the pilot to steer the jet in the air.  The warning lights to the right of and below those switches warn the pilot if there isn’t enough hydraulic pressure to power the flight controls.  There is also a STBY RUD position on each switch that switches rudder control to the standby hydraulic system.

    The bright red switch in the middle of that panel turns on the alternate flaps system, which uses the standby hydraulic system to get the flaps down or up in an emergency.  The red switch turns on the system, and then the smaller switch to the right raises or lowers the flaps.

    Below and to the left are another pair of black switches; these turn on and off hydraulic A and B power to the speed brakes.  The lights to the right warn of speed brake failures.  Below that is the yaw dampener on/off switch and failure light.

    Moving right, we have a lone switch that turns on and off the cockpit video camera, and then below it a digital display; this shows information about the electrical system (amps and volts being put out by the battery and generators).  Below that are three warning lights indicating when the battery is powering things that the generator ought to be powering, or other electrical failures.  To the right is the MAINT button, which is used by ground personnel to test the system.

    Below the warning lights are the controls for the electrical system display.  It’s split into two sides — the left is for DC equipment, and the right is for AC equipment.

    On the right is a knob that sets which electrical system’s information is appearing on the display; it can display information from the main battery, standby battery, battery bus, and each of three generator transfer busses, as well as a test mode.

    Below that knob is the battery on/off switch — this is the first switch you’d want to flip when you entered the cockpit.

    Moving to the right half of the panel (the “AC” half),  we’ve got another knob for setting which system’s information is shown on the panel (standby battery, external ground power, engine 1/2 generator, APU generator, battery inverter, or test mode), and two on-off switches for two electrical accessory systems.  Below it is a GALLEY switch that supplies electrical power to the galley for “cooking” airline food.

    Moving right, we’ve got two knobs controlling the brightness of the circuit breaker lights (which are behind the copilot’s seat) and the overhead panel lights.

    Right again, and we get seven switches in two rows and a plethora of lights.  These are the heating/anti-ice controls.  The top row of switches controls the window heat (defog/anti-ice).  There are four heated windows (four switches), and the center switch tests the overheat detection system.  The lights illuminate when the heating system is on or when it’s overheated and automatically turned off.

    Below that are the probe heat switches.  The pitot probe sticks out from the outside of the airplane and measures ram air pressure; this is used to calculate airspeed.  It must be heated to avoid icing.  The switches turn on probe heat, and the lights illuminate when there is a problem with the probe heaters, or when the auxiliary probe heaters are activated.

    The next panel down contains the anti-ice switches.  On the left we have the wing anti-ice switch, and two lights showing that the anti-ice valves are open.  On the right, we have the engine anti-ice switches, one for each engine, and lights showing when each valve is open.  The additional lights indicate problems with the engine anti-ice system.

    Moving right, at the top, are the temperature controls.  The top middle knob sets whether the temperature dial below is showing the passenger cabin air temperature or supply duct air temperature.  To the left and right are dials indicating how much cold outside air is being mixed with hot engine air to produce the desired air temperature for each of the two passenger cabin zones.  At the bottom are two knobs that control the temperatures of each of the two zones.  There is an auto setting and a manual cold/hot setting.  The warning lights indicate an overheat condition when there is not enough cold air to bring the hot air down to the desired temperature.

    Moving back to the left side, in the middle, are the navigation source switches.  Normally, the pilot’s radio navigation instruments are powered by the NAV1 radio, and the copilot’s by the NAV2 radio, but this switch lets you set one radio to power both sets of instruments.

    The IRS switch does the same thing, but for the two IRSes, and the FMC switch for the pilot and copilot FMCs.  The displays source knob and displays control panel switch control whether each DU control panel and source switch (discussed earlier) configures its own DU, or whether the panels both configure the same DU.

    To the right of that is the standby battery controls. The two red switches connect and disconnect the standby batteries from DC (left) or AC (right) power.  The center switch turns on and off the standby battery.  The middle warning light illuminates when the standby battery is off.  The left and right lights illuminate when the standby battery is powering the DC or AC busses.

    Moving right to the center column, there is an EQUIP COOLING panel, with two switches and two lights.  The switches control the equipment cooling fans (supply and exhaust), which must be on to keep the avionics cool.  The lights indicate when the fans are off.

    Below that are the emergency exit lights controls.  The switch turns on and off the emergency exit lights, and the light indicates when the exit lights are illuminated.

    Moving right, we get a big cluster of lights above and below four switches.  These are the hydraulic pump switches.  There are four hydraulic pumps: an electrically-powered and an engine-powered pump for each engine.  The inboard switches power the electric pumps, and the outboard switches power the engine-driven pumps.  The top warning lights indicate when a pump detects low hydraulic fluid pressure or an overheat of an electric pump.

    One of the bottom cluster of lights will illuminate if any one of the many exit doors are open in the aircraft.  All of these lights should be off before the plane starts taxiing.

    Moving right, we see a dial above a set of switches.  These are the air system controls.  The dial indicates the air pressure in the air ducts.  The switch above and to the right of it turns on and off the recirculating fan, which recirculates air (and interesting odors) throughout the cabin.  Below that is the overheat test button that tests the overheat detectors.

    The switches below and to the left and right of the dial control the left and right packs.  A pack is an air conditioning unit that provides conditioned air to the cabin and other accessories — it can be turned off, placed in auto mode, and forced to maximum output (HIGH).  Directly below the dial is the isolation valve switch, which controls the isolation valve.  When the valve is closed, each pack has its own independent source of air.  When the valve is open, the packs can share air between them.

    The button below that switch resets a tripped overheat light.  The lights to the left and right of the button indicate when a pack has overheated.

    Below those lights are three switches; they control the source of air.  The outboard switches select bleed air from the left and right engine; the middle switch selects bleed air from the APU.

    Above the air control panel are three lights; they light up to show cautions related to the air system, such as a “dual bleed” situation (air being fed from both engines and the APU at the same time).

    Moving back to the left side, below the navigation controls, is a dial surrounded by lights.  The dial indicates the temperature of fuel in the tanks (to watch out for freezing fuel).  The blue lights to the left and right illuminate if a fuel valve is closed.  The blue light below and to the center illuminates if the cross feed valve is open.  The orange lights flanking that light illuminate if either of the two fuel filters is being bypassed.

    Below that are the fuel pump controls.  The big knob in the top center opens or closes the cross feed valve.  Below that are controls for the two center tank fuel pumps, and low-pressure warning lights.  Below those switches are controls and warnings lights for the two fuel pumps for each of the wing tanks.

    To the right, we have a single switch, the ground power switch, which toggles on and off external ground power (if it’s hooked up to the plane).  Below that are the generator controls.  The big black switch in the middle turns on or off the automatic bus transfer system, that automatically transfers power between buses to ensure AC power is available.  The lights to the left and right indicate if the engine 1 or engine 2 transfer buses have failed.

    Below that is a row of four switches.  The outboard switches control the left and right engine generators, and the inboard switches control the two APU generators.  The lights illuminate when a generator is not powering systems because another generator is doing the job for it.

    Below that is a row of four caution lights, indicating faults in the generator system.  Then below that we’ve got an EGT dial for the APU. (Since the APU is itself a mini-jet engine, its EGT must also be monitored.)  To the right is the pilot’s windshield wiper knob — park, intermittent, low- and high-speed; the copilot’s wiper controls are just to the right

    Moving to the center column, we’ve got the No Smoking and Fasten Seatbelts switches (though No Smoking has been taped over with a new meaning — “chime”), and two buttons.  The left makes a “bing-bong” chime that gets a flight attendant at your beck and call, and the right sounds a horn to external ground personnel working near your jet.  The light below the GRD CALL switch indicates when a flight attendant or ground person would like to talk to you (the reverse of the call buttons).

    Moving right again, below the cluster of lights, is the cockpit voice recorder (CVR) controls.  The black grille in the middle is the cabin mic for the voice recorder.  The red button erases the CVR’s memory banks (this can only be done when on the ground, before you get clever). The green button tests the CVR and illuminates the little light to the right if everything is working.

    Below that is the cabin pressure dial.  The dial has two needles, one indicating the current cabin altitude (the altitude that the cabin “feels” like it’s at given the air pressure), and one indicating the difference between the outside and inside air pressure.  (It can’t be too high.)

    To the right of that is the ALT HORN CUTOUT button, that silences the landing gear warning horn, if, for example, the pilot knows the landing gear is down but for whatever reason the airplane still thinks the gear is up, and is complaining loudly about it.

    The dial below the cabin pressure dial is the rate of change of cabin pressure — it indicates ear-popping “descents” or “climbs” in cabin pressure.

    Moving over to the right, we see the cabin pressure controls.  We have two windows and two knobs, for setting the cruising altitude (the cruising cabin pressure will be based on this) and the altitude of the airport we’re landing at (so that by the time we land, the cabin pressure has been equalized).  To the right of those windows is a dial indicating the position of the outflow valve, which releases excess pressure to the ambient atmosphere.

    Below that are the manual outflow valve controls.  The top switch opens or closes the valve when in manual control, and the knob below toggles between automatic, alternate automatic, and full manual control of the outflow valve.

    Moving to the left side of the very bottom row, we have a row of four wide switches.  These turn on and off the landing lights, which illuminate the runway at night.  Then we have a pair of smaller switches — these are the runway turnoff lights, which illuminate the left or right side of the aircraft.  The switch to the right of that turns on the taxi lights, which are less blindingly bright than the landing lights.

    Moving right again, we have the APU start switch, which is used to power the APU.  Once the APU is powered up, you can start the engines.  Which brings us to…

    The engine start panel is to the right of the APU start switch.  There are two knobs, that control the engine starters for the left and right engines.  The starter has four modes: GRD (ground start), OFF, CONT (continuously monitor the engine and automatically restart if it dies), and FLT (in-flight restart).  The switch in the middle determines which igniters to use — only the left or right engine, or both engines.

    Moving right again are a set of five more lights switches.  They control, in order, the logo lights (lights up the airline logo), position and strobe lights (to help other planes find us at night), anti-collision lights (same purpose), wing lights (to mark the edges of our wingtips at night), and wheel well lights (to light up the wheel well for maintenance crews).

    At the very bottom left is the HUD (heads-up display), currently folded up.  You can pull it down to get helpful symbology superimposed over the view ahead.  The knob controls HUD brightness.

    Below the overhead panel is the standby compass and a switch controlling the compass light:

    There are some controls sprouting out from the yoke too:

    As you can see, the pilot has a handy checklist in the center of the yoke with a movable tab to keep his place.  On the left side, the two trim switches trim the airplane nose-up and nose-down.  The button on the side disengages the autopilot.  On the right side, the numeric display can be set so the pilot doesn’t forget his flight number.  Not shown is the push-to-talk switch, which is held down when the pilot wishes to speak over the radio.

    And lastly, behind the copilot’s seat is a large bank of circuit breakers:

    And that’s it!  I hope you enjoyed this tour!

     
    Copyright. 2012. Tim Morgan@Quora.com All Rights Reserved

  • Indigestion for ‘les Riches’ in a Plan for Higher Taxes

    Thomas Humery for The International Herald Tribune

    Vincent Grandil, a tax lawyer in Paris, said many of his wealthy clients were asking him if they should bother to remain in France.

     

    Photos by: Julien M. Hekimian/Getty Images; Eric Gaillard/Reuters; Yuri Kadobnov/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

    Some rich citizens have already left. In recent years, the actress and model Laetitia Casta, the chef Alain Ducasse and the singer and actor Johnny Hallyday all moved away to avoid high taxes.

     

    August 7, 2012
     

    Indigestion for ‘les Riches’ in a Plan for Higher Taxes

     

    By 

     

    PARIS — The call to Vincent Grandil’s Paris law firm began like many others that have rolled in recently. On the line was the well-paid chief executive of one of France’s most profitable companies, and he was feeling nervous.

    President François Hollande is vowing to impose a 75 percent tax on the portion of anyone’s income above a million euros ($1.24 million) a year. “Should I be preparing to leave the country?” the executive asked Mr. Grandil.

    The lawyer’s counsel: Wait and see. For now, at least.

    “We’re getting a lot of calls from high earners who are asking whether they should get out of France,” said Mr. Grandil, a partner at Altexis, which specializes in tax matters for corporations and the wealthy. “Even young, dynamic people pulling in 200,000 euros are wondering whether to remain in a country where making money is not considered a good thing.”

    A chill is wafting over France’s business class as Mr. Hollande, the country’s first Socialist president since François Mitterrand in the 1980s, presses a manifesto of patriotism to “pay extra tax to get the country back on its feet again.” The 75 percent tax proposal, which Parliament plans to take up in September, is ostensibly aimed at bolstering French finances as Europe’s long-running debt crisis intensifies.

    But because there are relatively few people in France whose income would incur such a tax — perhaps no more than 30,000 in a country of 65 million — the gains might contribute but a small fraction of the 33 billion euros in new revenue the government wants to raise next year to help balance the budget.

    The French finance ministry did not respond to requests for an estimate of the revenue the tax might raise. Though the amount would be low, some analysts note that a tax hit on the rich would provide political cover for painful cuts Mr. Hollande may need to make next year in social and welfare programs that are likely to be far less popular with the rank and file.

    In that regard, the tax could have enormous symbolic value as a blow for egalité, coming from a new president who has proclaimed, “I don’t like the rich.”

    “French people have an uncomfortable relationship with money,” Mr. Grandil said. “Here, someone who is a self-made man, creating jobs and ending up as a millionaire, is viewed with suspicion. This is big cultural difference between France and the United States.”

    Many companies are studying contingency plans to move high-paid executives outside of France, according to consultants, lawyers, accountants and real estate agents — who are highly protective of their clients and decline to identify them by name. They say some executives and wealthy people have already packed up for destinations like Britain, Belgium, Switzerland and the United States, taking their taxable income with them.

    They also know of companies — start-ups and multinationals alike — that are delaying plans to invest in France or to move employees or new hires here.

    Whether many wealthy residents will actually leave and companies will change their plans, of course, remains to be seen. Some of the criticism could be political posturing, aimed at trying to dissuade the government from going through with the planned tax increase.

    But some wealthy people left after Mr. Mitterrand raised taxes in the 1980s. And more recently, the former Victoria’s Secret model Laetetia Casta, the restaurateur Alain Ducasse and the singer Johnny Hallyday caused a stir by moving to countries just across the border to escape the French treasury’s heavy hand.

    There is no question Mr. Hollande is under fiscal pressure. He has pledged to reduce France’s budget deficit, currently 4.5 percent of the nation’s gross domestic product, to 3 percent by next year, to meet euro zone rules.

    The matter of how best to hit that target, though, is as much a political question as a fiscal one. Mr. Hollande was elected in May on a wave of resentment against “les riches” — company executives, bankers, sports stars and celebrities whose paychecks tend to be seen as scandalous in a country where the growing divide between rich and poor touches a cultural nerve whose roots predate Robespierre.

    Half the nation’s households earn less than 19,000 euros a year; only about 10 percent of households earn more than 60,000 euros annually, according to the French statistics agency, Insee.

    There is currently no plan to change the tax rates for most people, which is 14 percent for the poorest and 30 percent for the next rung. For higher earners — people with incomes above 70,830 euros a year — the tax rate will soon rise to 44 percent, up from 41, in a change that was already set before Mr. Hollande’s election.

    A tax accountant in Paris with many wealthy clients, Steve Horton, has calculated that a two-parent, two-child household with taxable annual income of a bit more than 2.22 million euros ($2.75 million) now has after-tax take-home pay of about 1.1 million euros ($1.35 million) under France’s current tax system.

    That household would end up with 780,000 euros, or $966,000, if the Hollande tax took effect, Mr. Horton says. (The same family, with comparable income in Manhattan, would take home $1.55 million, the dollar equivalent of 1.25 million euros, after paying federal, state and city income taxes, he calculated.)

    Taxes are high in France for a reason: they pay for one of Europe’s most generous social welfare systems and a large government. As Mr. Hollande has described it, the tax plan is about “justice,” and “sending out a signal, a message of social cohesion.”

    That struck a chord with voters angry about the wealth divide. And it is supported by some economists, including Thomas Piketty, a professor at the Paris School of Economics, who has conducted studies indicating that high earners will not work less hard if taxed more. But some say France could send out the wrong signal.

    “People have an acceptable amount of taxes they are willing to pay,” said Mr. Horton, the accountant, “and if it goes above that, they will move somewhere that’s more reasonable.”

    “The thing French politicians don’t seem to understand or care about is that when you tax away two-thirds of someone’s earnings to appeal to voters, productive people who can enrich businesses and the economy won’t come — or they will just leave,” said Diane Segalen, a corporate headhunter.

    She said she had been close to sealing a deal for a seasoned executive in London to join one of France’s biggest companies earlier this year, when Mr. Hollande made his 75 percent vow.

    “When the guy heard that, he said, ‘I’m not coming,’ and withdrew from the process,” said Mrs. Segalen, the head of the Segalen et Associés, a consulting firm.

    For Mrs. Segalen, the proposal is the latest red flag in a country that has long labored under the image of being a difficult place to do business. France has a 33 percent corporate tax rate — the euro zone’s second-highest, after Malta’s 35 percent. That contrasts with the 12.5 percent rate in Ireland, which has deliberately kept a lid on corporate taxes as a lure to businesses.

    “It is a ridiculous proposal, but it’s great for us,” said Jean Dekerchove, the manager of Immobilièr Le Lion, a high-end real estate agency based in Brussels. Calls to his office have picked up in recent months, he said, as wealthy French citizens look to invest or simply move across the border amid worries about the latest tax.

    “It’s a huge loss for France because people and businesses come to Belgium and bring their wealth with them,” Mr. Dekerchove said. “But we’re thrilled because they create jobs, they buy houses and spend money — and it’s our economy that profits.”

    <nyt_correction_bottom>

    This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:

    Correction: August 7, 2012

     

    An earlier version of this article misspelled the given name of Laetitia Casta as Latitia.

     

    Copyright. 2012. The New York Times Company. All Rights Reserved

  • The Folly of Attacking Outsourcing

    August 7, 2012
     

    The Folly of Attacking Outsourcing

     

    By 

     

    The middle class, I’m sure you’ve heard, is under threat by cheap foreign labor. We must be having an election soon. President Obama’s assault on Mitt Romney for sending jobs overseas draws from a playbook used repeatedly by politicians of the right and left over the last two decades.

    In 1992, Ross Perot ran for president on the strength of the “giant sucking sound” of jobs going to Mexico. Four years later, Pat Buchanan tried to gain the Republican nomination by promising to repeal the North American Free Trade Agreement and withdraw from the World Trade Organization. In 2004, John Kerry accused George W. Bush of providing tax breaks to outsourcers.

    What’s most revealing about the political assault on outsourcing is that while the critique of foreign commerce has moved decisively from the fringes into the political mainstream, our political leaders have yet to turn their rhetorical skepticism into policy.

    Americans’ fear of foreign trade has grown sharply in the last 20 years, in tandem with a rising tide of globalization that has exposed American workers to overwhelming competition from laborers in developing countries.

    In 1994, the year Nafta went into effect, trade amounted to 22 percent of the nation’s gross domestic product. By the eve of the financial crisis in 2008, it amounted to 31 percent. Over this period, the share of Americans who believed trade was a threat to the economy rose to 52 percent from 38 percent. Still, though our political leaders may feel workers’ pain, they have stopped short of following voters’ preferred prescriptions.

    Last year, the White House pushed through free trade agreements with South Korea, Colombia and Panama despite the fact that only 38 percent of Americans supported the deals and 41 percent opposed them. Most Americans fear China’s rise as an exporting powerhouse. Many think Congress should slap tariffs on Chinese imports to compensate for its manipulation of the exchange rate. But the Obama administration, like the Bush administration before it, has repeatedly refused to do so.

    A disconnect between campaign rhetoric and policy is hardly surprising. The most committed critics of the nation’s trade policies will argue that President Obama, like his predecessors, has been co-opted by pro-trade corporate interests. But the political contradictions wrought by globalization ring of more than politics as usual. More likely, our political leaders haven’t figured out what to do about this relentless economic force that is reshaping the American economy and society.

    This is boxing the political class into a somewhat sterile debate. Political leaders promising that globalization can be slowed, stopped or even reversed by raising barriers against imports or penalizing companies that send jobs overseas are offering false comfort. They are also distracting voters from a necessary debate about how to make the relentless tide work for the American middle class even as it brings impoverished nations like India and China into the modern economy.

    The political debate about globalization tends to get stuck between a couple of propositions: on the one hand, globalization tends to reduce prices of goods and services and bolster economic growth, helping companies become more efficient. On the other, it hurts the workers who are brought into direct competition with cheaper labor overseas. Yet the debate often ignores an essential fact: regardless of who wins and who loses from the process, it is pretty much irreversible.

    Businesses are too far along in the process of globalizing their supply chains, building international production lines that draw ideas, components and resources from wherever they are best, most abundant or cheapest in the world. In 2006, intracompany trade accounted for nearly 33 percent of the nation’s imports and more than 27 percent of its exports. Raising a wall against a given import would short-circuit production lines around the world, including in the United States.

    What’s more, most growth over the next decade will happen in big developing countries beyond the nation’s borders. Using barriers and penalties to bar imports and discourage outsourcing — which would surely draw retaliation from other countries — would unhitch the nation from the world’s main economic engines.

    But the fact that globalization is here to stay doesn’t mean that nothing can be done for workers, who have come to fear the process of global integration as a zero-sum game, which ends with their jobs moving somewhere where labor is cheaper. Some of the prescriptions are straightforward. Ambivalence toward globalization is not unique to the United States. But Americans tend to be more fearful of the impact of trade than, say, Europeans.

    One reason is that American workers are particularly ill equipped to cope with the dislocations caused by foreign competition. An American worker who loses her job to trade or technology will find herself in a much worse spot than if she was, say, German or French. For starters, she will lose her health insurance. And her unemployment benefits will be considerably less generous.

    The United States also does a poor job of educating workers to take advantage of globalization’s opportunities. We were once the most educated nation in the world — the first to provide universal high school education and the first to provide widespread access to college. But college graduation rates have stagnated and are now at the same rate they were a generation ago, while a host of other countries have barreled ahead. The lag leaves American workers particularly exposed to foreign competition for lower-skilled jobs — which has been weighing down their wages for more than a decade.

    Coping with globalization isn’t going to get easier, as companies in developing countries continue to rise up the technological ladder to produce more advanced goods in direct competition with workers in the United States.

    Multinational companies’ freedom to move their money across borders, to wherever the return is highest, raises new issues. Corporations can relocate to escape taxes and regulation, setting up shop where the rules are easiest. Investment in machines and high-technology plants abroad erodes the productivity edge that American workers hold over workers in China or Brazil.

    The challenges call for a more sophisticated debate about trade. American policy makers might consider global taxation treaties, to reduce the scope for tax competition. They could engage foreign countries in a debate on global standards — overcoming mistrust of American protectionism to develop rules protecting workers from abuse by footloose corporations seeking the cheapest labor. And they could think about the kind of safety net needed to protect workers from the dislocations that the relentless onslaught of globalization is sure to bring.

    The Obama administration has made some progress along these lines. The Obama health care law is the single most important contribution to the nation’s social safety net since the administration of Lyndon B. Johnson, ensuring that workers who lose their jobs in the future do not also lose their health insurance. But President Obama has yet to move beyond blunt criticism of outsourcing to sketch out a strategy to embrace the inevitable march of globalization.

    He could still criticize Mitt Romney. But the most useful critique of Mr. Romney’s stance is not that he favors outsourcing but that the rest of his economic platform — which proposes cuts in government spending on education, unemployment insurance and other social programs to pay for tax cuts for high-income Americans — would undercut the nation’s ability to cope in the globalized economy he appears to champion.

    Hewing to the standard anti-outsourcing playbook may gain a few votes in November. But American workers need more. They need a set of policies that gives them a stake in the fruits of the more prosperous global economy that globalization can bring.

    E-mail: eporter@nytimes.com

    Twitter: @portereduardo

     

    Copyright. 2012. The New York Times Company. All Rights Reserved

  • Why not in Vegas?: As it was about the money, Romney could have skipped Israel

    Thomas L. Friedman / Why not in Vegas?: As it was about the money, Romney could have skipped Israel

    August 3, 2012 12:08 a
     
     
     

    I’ll make this quick. I have one question and one observation about Mitt Romney’s visit to Israel. The question is this: Since the whole trip was not about learning anything but about how to satisfy the political whims of the right-wing, super pro-Bibi Netanyahu, American Jewish casino magnate Sheldon Adelson, why didn’t they just do the whole thing in Las Vegas?

    I mean, it was all about money anyway — how much Mr. Romney would abase himself by saying whatever the Israeli right wanted to hear and how big a jackpot of donations Mr. Adelson would shower on the Romney campaign in return. Really, Vegas would have been so much more appropriate than Jerusalem. They could have constructed a plastic Wailing Wall and saved so much on gas.

    The observation is this: Much of what is wrong with the U.S.-Israel relationship today can be found in that Romney trip. In recent years, the Republican Party has decided to make Israel a wedge issue. In order to garner more Jewish (and evangelical) votes and money, the GOP decided to “out-pro-Israel” the Democrats by being even more unquestioning of Israel.

    This arms race has pulled the Democratic Party to the right on the Middle East and has basically forced the Obama team to shut down the peace process and drop any demands that Israel freeze settlements. This, in turn, has created a culture in Washington where State Department officials, not to mention politicians, are reluctant to even state publicly what is U.S. policy — that settlements are “an obstacle to peace” — for fear of being denounced as anti-Israel.

    Add on top of that the increasing role of money in U.S. politics and the importance of single donors who can write megachecks to super PACs — and the fact that the main Israel lobby, AIPAC, has made itself the feared arbiter of which lawmakers are “pro” and which are “anti-Israel” and, therefore, who should get donations and who should not — and you have a situation in which there are almost no brakes, no red lights, around Israel coming from America anymore.

    No wonder settlers now boast on op-ed pages that the game is over, they’ve won, the West Bank will remain with Israel forever — and they don’t care what absorbing all of its Palestinians will mean for Israel’s future as a Jewish democracy.

    It is into this environment that Mr. Romney wandered to add more pandering and to declare how he will be so much nicer to Israel than big, bad Obama. This is a canard. On what matters to Israel’s survival — advanced weaponry and intelligence — Defense Minister Ehud Barak told CNN on Monday, “I should tell you honestly that this administration under President Obama is doing in regard to our security more than anything that I can remember in the past.”

    While Mr. Romney had time for a $50,000-a-plate breakfast with American Jewish donors in Jerusalem, with Mr. Adelson at his elbow, he did not have two hours to go to Ramallah, the seat of the Palestinian Authority, to meet with its president, Mahmoud Abbas, or to share publicly any ideas on how he would advance the peace process.

    He did have time, though, to point out to his Jewish hosts that Israelis are clearly more culturally entrepreneurial than Palestinians. Israel today is an amazing beehive of innovation — thanks, in part, to an influx of Russian brainpower, massive U.S. aid and smart policies. It’s something Jews should be proud of. But had Mr. Romney gone to Ramallah he would have seen a Palestinian beehive of entrepreneurship, too, albeit small, but not bad for a people living under occupation. Palestinian business talent also built the Persian Gulf states. In short, Mr. Romney didn’t know what he was talking about.

    On peace, the Palestinians’ diplomacy has been a fractured mess, and I still don’t know if they can be a partner for a secure two-state deal with even the most liberal Israeli government. But I do know this: It is in Israel’s overwhelming interest to test, test and have the U.S. keep testing creative ideas for a two-state solution. That is what a real U.S. friend would promise to do. Otherwise, Israel could be doomed to become a kind of apartheid South Africa.

    And here is what I also know: The three U.S. statesmen who have done the most to make Israel more secure and accepted in the region all told blunt truths to every Israeli or Arab leader: Jimmy Carter, who helped forge a lasting peace between Israel and Egypt; Henry Kissinger, who built the post-1973 war disengagement agreements with Syria, Israel and Egypt; and James Baker, who engineered the Madrid peace conference. All of them knew that to make progress in this region you have to get in the face of both sides. They both need the excuse at times that “the Americans made me do it,” because their own politics are too knotted to move on their own.

    So how about all you U.S. politicians — Republicans and Democrats — stop feeding off this conflict for political gain. Stop using this conflict as a backdrop for campaign photo-ops and fundraisers. Stop making things even worse by telling the most hard-line Israelis everything that they want to hear, just to grovel for Jewish votes and money, while blatantly ignoring the other side.

    There are real lives at stake out there. If you’re not going to do something constructive, stay away. They can make enough trouble for themselves on their own.

    Thomas L. Friedman is a syndicated columnist for The New York Times.
    First Published August 3, 2012 12:00 am

    Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/opinion/perspectives/thomas-l-friedman-why-not-in-vegas-as-it-was-about-the-money-romney-could-have-skipped-israel-647378/#ixzz22iwYLkSa

  • Usain Bolt Defends Gold in 100 Meters 9.63 s

    Josh Haner/The New York Times

    Usain Bolt of Jamaica finished first in the men’s 100-meter final on Sunday

     

    Chang W. Lee/The New York Times

    Usain Bolt drew away in the final 20 meters in the men’s 100-meter final.

     

    Usain Bolt Defends Gold in 100 Meters

     

    By 

     

    LONDON — Four years later, still no one can catch Usain Bolt.

    An unimpressive start did little to keep Bolt from roaring past the rest of the field in the men’s 100 meters at the London Games on Sunday, and he crossed the finish line first, in an Olympic record 9.63 seconds, the second fastest time ever run.

    His Jamaican training partner, Yohan Blake, won the silver medal in 9.75 seconds, matching his personal best. Justin Gatlin of the United States, the 2004 Olympic champion whose career was derailed by steroid use, made a comeback with bronze in 9.79 seconds.

    “Right now the entire world says he’s unbeatable and right now he is,” said Tyson Gay of the United States, the fourth-place finisher. “I tried my best. I just came up short.”

    Back problems, issues with the starts of his races and skepticism about his sustained desire after winning three Olympic gold medals at the 2008 Beijing Games had attended Bolt’s presence in London. No more.

    He began to draw away in the final 20 meters on Sunday with his long strides and became the first man to repeat as 100-meter champion in a race on the track. Carl Lewis won the 100 at the 1984 Los Angeles Games and initially the silver at the 1988 Seoul Games; he was awarded the gold after the Canadian sprinter Ben Johnson was stripped of his title upon testing positive for steroids.

    Later this week, Bolt will seek to become the first man to repeat as Olympic champion at 100 and 200 meters.

    The charismatic Bolt, 25, set world records in the 100 and 200 at the Beijing Olympics, then stunningly lowered them again at the 2009 world track and field championships to 9.58 and 19.19. Apart from being the fastest man in the world, he also, as many saw it, became a savior for the sport, which has recently struggled for attention and for credibility after repeated doping scandals.

    But back problems and issues with his sprinting technique over the last two years had made Bolt appear vulnerable. At the recent Jamaican Olympic trials, he was defeated in the 100 and 200 by Blake, his countryman and training partner. Blake ran the year’s fastest 100 time of 9.75 seconds at the trials. In the 200, Blake ran Bolt down from behind, something few thought possible.

    In Sunday’s Olympic semifinal, though, the 6-foot-5 Bolt won his heat in 9.87, seeming relaxed and in form with powerful and elegant strides. He let off the accelerator before the finish and held his right index finger aloft, signaling that it could be premature to discount him as the world’s No. 1 sprinter.

    Blake, 22, responded with a 9.85 semifinal heat. He longed to be an athlete as a boy, but he was drawn at first to cricket, not track. He has said his family struggled financially and that he sometimes had to sell empty beer bottles to afford school and to carry water on his head for long distances because none was available at home.

    He began playing cricket at age 12, but his school principal noticed his speed and encouraged him to become a sprinter. Four years ago, Blake watched at home on television while Bolt won three gold medals (including the 4×100-meter relay).

    Since then, Bolt has nicknamed Blake the Beast for his rapacious training habits. Last year, Blake won the 100 at the world track and field championships after Bolt false-started. In 2011, Blake also ran the second-fastest 200 in history in 19.26 seconds.

    Gatlin is the 2004 Olympic champion, but the credibility of his career has suffered greatly. In 2006, Gatlin received a four-year suspension from competition after testing positive for illicit use of testosterone, the male sex hormone that is used in synthetic form by athletes as a muscle-building steroid.

    Gatlin denied that he was doping. He accused a massage therapist of sabotaging him by rubbing a testosterone cream onto his legs. The therapist denied the accusation. Gatlin’s former coach, Trevor Graham, and others in his one-time training group, including Marion Jones, also faced bans in the Bay Area Laboratory Cooperative, or Balco, scandal.

    After his long, enforced layoff, Gatlin has exceeded his previous speed at age 30, a rare occurrence. He ran a personal best of 9.80 earlier this year and posted the fastest semifinal time on Sunday in 9.82 seconds.

     

    Copyright. 2012. The New York Times Company. All Rights Reserved

     
  • An Olympics Vigil, From 30,000 Feet

    Leon Neal/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

    At the Northolt airfield on London’s western fringe, at least one pilot is strapped into the cockpit of a $200 million, 1,400-mile-an-hour Typhoon fighter at all times, day and night. Here, helicopters carrying snipers are also deployed to protect London.

    August 1, 2012
     

    An Olympics Vigil, From 30,000 Feet

     

    By 

     

    ROYAL AIR FORCE STATION NORTHOLT, England — More than 70 years after squadrons of Spitfire and Hurricane fighters flew from here into an epic air battle with Hitler’s Luftwaffe, pilots flying the fastest fighter interceptors in Britain’s modern arsenal have been cast in a similar role. But instead of waves of German bombers in the Battle of Britain, these pilots are guarding against a more elusive enemy: terrorists who might seek to rain destruction on the Olympic Games from the air.

    While the pilots are loath to talk about the threat, officials acknowledge that they have prepared for a nightmare situation in which terrorists hijack an airliner or executive jet and try to fly it into the 80,000-seat Olympic Stadium or one of the other 30 or more spectator-packed sites around the capital. The specter of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on New York and Washington hangs over the operation, and the lessons learned from those attacks are central to the planning of the mission here.

    At the Northolt airfield on London’s western fringe — best known in more recent times as the airfield where Princess Diana’s coffin was brought to England after her fatal car crash in Paris in 1997 — at least one pilot is strapped into the cockpit of a $200 million, 1,400-mile-an-hour Typhoon fighter at all times, day and night.

    With helmet, pressure suit and gloves on, the pilot has a no-fail mission: to scramble in an instant to intercept — and, if necessary, shoot down — any aircraft posing a threat to Olympics installations.

    “It’s a very short tether we’re on,” Squadron Leader Gordon Lovett, 37, commander of the Royal Air Force’s No. 3 Squadron, said in his flight overalls as one of six Typhoon pilots deployed with the four fighters assigned to the Northolt mission. He described the operation as mainly one of deterrence, to pose a sufficiently formidable threat that would make any would-be attackers realize that their chances of a successful strike were practically nonexistent.

    “Hopefully, they won’t even think about it,” he said.

    He warned that there should be no doubts of the Typhoon’s ability to shoot down any aircraft that failed to respond to radio warnings, flares, lasers or pilot-to-pilot hand signals to divert intruders away from London to a landing elsewhere.

    The decision to shoot down a plane, he said, would be made at what military commanders have called “the highest authority,” meaning Prime Minister David Cameron.

    “We’re quite blessed in not having to make the decision for ourselves,” Squadron Leader Lovett said. “Conscience wouldn’t have much time to get a foot in the door. It would all be over very quickly, before you’d had time to think about it.”

    Organizers of the last two Summer Olympics, in Beijing and Athens, adopted similar air defense plans, deploying military aircraft and, as in London, batteries of ground-to-air missiles in a ring around the main Olympic sites. In London’s case, that includes two missile detachments on high-rise rooftops near the Olympic Park in East London and four others set in open parkland about a mile away.

    What has raised concerns in London is that Britain has been listed by its own security and intelligence agencies as being at high risk of a catastrophic attack by Islamist militants, partly because of its alliance with the United States in the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, but partly, too, because of the large number of terrorist cells known to be active in the communities where Britain’s one and a half million Muslims live.

    R.A.F. officers say that with years to plan since the Games were awarded to London in 2005, they have had time to fashion a shield against not only hijacked airliners, but also against an array of other airborne threats. These, they say, include light aircraft, hot-air balloons, fixed-wing gliders, hang gliders, microlight planes, airships, unmanned drones and even remote-controlled model aircraft capable of carrying small bombs.

    The main defense against lighter, lower-altitude and slower threats consists of sniper-carrying helicopters based at an army base in Ilford, east of the Olympic Park, and aboard the Ocean, a Royal Navy helicopter carrier moored in the Thames a couple of miles south of the park. Military commanders believe that with the Typhoons, the Puma and Lynx helicopters and the Starstreak missile batteries, they can deal with any airborne threat, at any altitude, in minutes.

    The Royal Air Force’s state of readiness was demonstrated last week when a Typhoon was scrambled from Northolt to intercept a Boeing 757 airliner flying at 30,000 feet over the coast of Brittany, in northern France, after the aircraft failed to respond to British air traffic controllers for a few minutes. The aircraft, carrying more than 240 passengers and crew members on its way from Tunisia to Glasgow, Scotland, finally identified itself as it flew over the English Channel. By that time, the Typhoon, climbing above 15,000 feet less than a minute from takeoff, was well on its way to challenge the airliner.

    Normally, fighters on standby are based at airfields on Britain’s east coast, flying “quick reaction alert” missions that intercept the four-engine Russian Bear bombers and airborne spy planes that continue to run occasional training missions that approach British-controlled airspace, 20 years after the cold war ended. Olympics flight security is far more difficult, Squadron Leader Lovett said, not least because the restricted flight zone around the Olympic Park, reaching out about 35 miles, includes three major civilian airfields — principally Heathrow Airport, with about 1,200 flights a day — making London’s skies among the busiest in the world.

    The main challenge, the pilots say, is to anticipate and adapt to what would-be terrorists might do and deny them the element of surprise that aided the 9/11 attackers.

    “It’d be a mistake to think we know everything the potential terrorist might come up with,” said Wing Cmdr. Shane Anderson, 42, the Australian-born leader of the R.A.F.’s 33 Squadron, flying Puma helicopters out of the Ilford base. “What we have to do is to be adaptive, and achieve intellectual overmatch.” In plain terms, the aircrews and mission controllers have to outthink the enemy.

    “We have to plan for the extreme,” he said.

    This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:

    Correction: August 3, 2012

     

    The Royal Air Force Station Northholt Journal article on Thursday, about Britain’s air defense plans for the Olympic Games, described incorrectly the missiles deployed around the main Olympics sites in London and in Beijing and Athens during the two previous Summer Olympics. They are ground-to-air missles, not air-to-ground.

     

    Copyright. The New York Times Company. All Rights Reserved

     

  • Romney Unfit and Unworthy ton Become President. Reason Why is Here.

     
    There are some people sitting in chairs that attach an enormous amount of responsibility to their occupancy. In those places there is likely to be a Wall Street Journal. Financial Times of London. New York Times, the Economist. Decisions are made, and serious consideration is given to what goes into the basis for the decisions. The United States Government, the point at which almost all influential individuals and groups of individuals keep one eye focused , has relevance on a Global scale. All of the above matters affect the lives of almost everyone who is alive , and at this moment in time considers themselves a member of the human race.

    As all of the above is self evident, a slam dunk no brainier, then is there anyone who is reading this who could please explain to me how the people responsible for creating the Campaign of Mitt Romney, can act like they are, in pounding the American public, by polluting the airwaves, denigrating the political process, and posturing themselves in an ignorant and condescending manner, as they repeatedly and incessantly misrepresent what Barack Obama intended to communicate, even conceding that the President used poor syntax, and loosely phrased wording to allow someone to exploit the temptation to try and mislead and gain traction on the basis of an obvious, and ongoing conspiracy to mislead and deceive the American people.

    No one believes that Barack Obama was telling small business owners they did not build their business. An eight year old is able to intuit subtlety, and this is not a complicated point. What he was speaking about was the incredibly complex interplay and cooperation that it requires for anything worthwhile to happen at all, anywhere, under ideal conditions. Obama was pointing out that no man, single handed accomplishes significant progress. There is always, to a varying degree perhaps,  a team of family, friends, co workers, employees, etc. That is what he meant, if you think otherwise I am sure there is help for you. 

    And even in light of all this, the entire United States, at this very moment, is being blanketed by an ad campaign , costing millions of dollars, that has only one intent. To deliberately, and completely misrepresent to the American people, the message the President was trying to communicate. Mitt Romney begins his quest for Americans to trust him to lead us, by immediately going to extraordinary and extreme measures to distort our own reality in a barrage of prevarication and slimy campaign tactics. 

    Honestly, Mitt Romney has already shown me enough to have me know that he is completely disconnected from the vast majority of the American people. Who the hell does he think he is, to attempt to patronizingly lead the electorate to make decisions about who they should choose to have as their leader, with the wool that he is pulling over their proverbial eyes. It is lying, and it is the audacious behavior of someone who, by virtue of his wealth and social status, feels entitled to behave in a condescending and patronizing manner. Obama may not be a great President, but if ever I said anything , anywhere, that meant anything to anyone, then please listen to me now.

    DO NOT, REGARDLESS OF WHATEVER ELSE YOU DO THIS YEAR OR FOR THE REST OF YOUR LIFE, i REPEAT, DO NOT VOTE FOR ROMNEY TO BE PRESIDENT IN 2012. hE IS UNWORTHY TO REPRESENT PEOPLE WHO HE HAS SHOWN HE DOES NOT RESPECT OR CARE ABOUT. Michael P. Whelan. Las Vegas, Nevada. 

    Collapse this post

  • Newly Wed and Quickly Unraveling

    July 26, 2012
     

    Newly Wed and Quickly Unraveling

     

    By WENDY C. ORTIZ

     

    I WOKE up with my head on an unfamiliar pillow in a bungalow in the high desert of California, 140 miles from my dilapidated apartment in the Koreatown section of Los Angeles.

    It was my wedding day. Not only was my head on a strange pillow, it also housed a terrible rhythmic pounding. My feet were sore from dancing on the wood floor of a bar the night before. A righteous hangover seemed ominous, but there was no time to contemplate this.

    Ours would not be a traditional Mexican-American wedding; we couldn’t afford mariachis, for one. Yet I still needed to gather lilies, daisies and roses from the local grocery stores, shower, get into my orange mail-order dress, and put on my tiger’s-eye earrings before I went and got hitched.

    There was another omen I decided to overlook. It was early March: I had chosen this day months before for its full moon, enchanted by the notion that it would also be a full lunar eclipse. I would be 33, an auspicious age to begin a new life. What I overlooked was that the date was in the middle of Mercury retrograde, supposedly the time of year when one should avoid signing contracts or making life-altering decisions because of the potent possibility of reversal. Hence, retrograde.

    Regardless of superstition or omen, here were my friends, who had come from all points on the United States map, and there was my dress and my new brown cowboy boots. And there was my soon-to-be husband and his vintage tuxedo, waiting to marry me.

    The night before the trek out to the Mojave Desert, I had a funny exchange with a friend from work, a lesbian in a long-term relationship.

    Years earlier, when we were both new to the organization, she sat down in my office and we instantly began talking about our mothers. Soon we were eating Thai food and discussing films and plans with our partners, all of it creating a friendship of years. I appreciated many things about her, and she me, especially how we were total opposites. As the adage goes, opposites attract. My fiancé even knew that part of it, jokingly referring to her as my “boyfriend.”

    That day before I embarked on my wedding trip, she and I kept missing each other. My phone rang as I barreled down the hill from work, car windows down, smoking my second cigarette of the day (because I had started smoking again in those months of gut-wrenching anxiety leading up to my wedding). I answered, one hand on the wheel, the wind blasting my face. There she was, my friend.

    I had left her a message on a Post-it written in two different ink colors (even the pen seemed to be conspiring to keep us from having contact that day) saying I was sorry not to see her just as I was about to go out and become not-single. On the phone she referred to the note, the universe’s plan to keep us apart, in a way that sounded jokingly outraged. The delicious frisson of acknowledgment made me squirm in my seat.

    I thought of this conversation that late winter morning of the wedding in the town of Joshua Tree. By summer of that year, I realized that in marrying I had made a mistake of tragic proportions.

    A secret courtship with my friend at work began on the longest day of that year. There is no way around this: I cheated on my husband. I followed a longing that had been calling me all through adolescence, college and into adulthood.

    Months before our wedding, when my fiancé had said, “I talked to my therapist, and she thinks we should discuss your sexual orientation,” I had responded brusquely: “Why? I’m in love with you.”

    End of conversation. It was the beginning of something I thought of as the Compromise: the commitments one begins knitting together to start a married life with another, even if those commitments are a little frayed, of a different texture. The unspoken things began taking sips of oxygen out of the rooms we lived in, slowly, adeptly.

    Summer turned into fall of my newlywed year. I couldn’t extricate myself from my hidden relationship. The questions felt like bruises I kept pressing: Are these just postmarriage high jinks? How will I go about ending the affair? Do I even want it to end?

    I continued being married because I wasn’t sure what else to do. I smoked more cigarettes, became thinner and felt sicker. A little voice was asking me, then telling me, to make a decision.

    After the first of the new year, I came out to my husband. I turned over in bed to face him, and the sobs burst out of me and pooled between us. My chest heaved, my face was wet and contorted, but I forced the words out, finally, despite the pain.

    He sat up in bed, brought his hands to his face, and wailed.

    I knew neither of us would sleep that night and possibly many more nights.

    I was ready to shoulder the blame. I steeled myself for the hatred that might come my way from my spouse, not to mention the judgment and blame that might come from his friends and loved ones.

    Instead, that night, and days after, he listened. Amid his crying, his mourning, he listened.

    Even after he was aware of my betrayal, he was willing to give me a simple, civil, clear-cut divorce. Some part of him understood the magnitude of my realization, the voice I had not been heeding for half of my life. He understood that my ability to be truthful to myself had to take precedence, even as much as it hurt him and would change his life as profoundly as it would mine.

    He let me move out in peace.

    I took all my belongings to the tiniest studio ever, a place I imagined I could fold up and put in my pocket. I could see every detail of my life in this space, with its hint of a closet and its private patio where I sat and envisioned the unfolding of the next part of my life. The Mexican sage and the lone palm tree just outside the patio whispered and waved at me as I sat, weathering waves of loss, fear and finally, hope.

    I had never fancied myself a late bloomer, and yet there I was, part of that population of 30-something people who come out, and, unintentionally, take down a couple of people (or more) in the process.

    In the autumn, the divorce papers arrived in the mail, stamped, official.

    As I unsealed the envelope, I knew there was a certain kind of love I might never have been privy to until that moment. It was the love of someone who knew me, who had loved me and then had to let me go, in that way you hear about in stories and songs through the ages.

    He let me go respectfully, mindfully and lovingly, as best he could while in his own dark lake of loss.

    I was grateful, am grateful, to have received such a gift.

    A FEW years have passed since the summer of that sublime courtship. My partner and I still haven’t married, but only because the voters of California won’t let us.

    We learned how to be together through the epic transitions we were enduring: I, coming out to my family (who have been mysteriously and lavishly accepting, breaking all stereotypes of how a Mexican-American family might respond) and everyone else; she, ending a relationship of more than a decade, the one I inadvertently had helped end.

    We had a baby. We bought a house. I had not pictured these domestic scenarios when I was married to a man.

    Amid this new life, I sometimes dream about my ex-husband, whom I have run into a couple of times since our divorce.

    In one dream, he sees me on the streets of downtown Los Angeles. He walks toward me, unflinching and envelops me in a warm hug.

    This hug seems to communicate everything, encompassing the history of our relationship, from our sticky beginnings in a dirty Hollywood bar, to our sweet friendship, to the rocky road of a relationship I often resisted.

    The last time I ran into him in real life, I was standing with my partner, some friends and our 6-month-old baby girl. Too many people wanted brunch on a beautiful day, and we just happened to pick the same spot.

    My ex-husband was with a woman who wore a great vintage dress. He and I hugged. There were introductions. I had to imagine that the truth of the situation — clear and precise — was present with us on that sidewalk, and we all could live with it.

    When I said goodbye to him and his girlfriend, they walked away holding hands. I felt a sweet contentment. Things in their own complicated and beautiful ways had worked out for each of us.

     

    Wendy C. Ortiz, a writer and psychotherapist intern in Los Angeles, is a founder and curator of the Rhapsodomancy Reading Series.

     

    COPYRIGHT.2012 The New York Times Company. All Rights Reserved

  • Gore Vidal’s quotes, quips memorialized on Twitter

    Gore Vidal’s quotes, quips memorialized on Twitter

    August 1, 2012 |  9:38 am
     
     

     

    Gore Vidal, who died Tuesday at his Hollywood Hills home, was known for his unmatched wit and one-liners.

    The Times’ obituary, written by Elaine Woo, noted that the prolific author “demolished intellectual rivals like Norman Mailer and William F. Buckley Jr. with acidic one-liners, establishing himself as a peerless master of talk-show punditry.” She also described him as a “glorious gadfly on the national conscience.”

    “Style,” Vidal once said, “is knowing who you are, what you want to say, and not giving a damn.”

    PHOTOS: Gore Vidal | 1925 – 2012

    That quote — and numerous others — are circulating on the Internet and in social media on Wednesday, as a new generation is introduced to Vidal’s greatest quips, including this gem: “The United States was founded by the brightest people in the country — and we haven’t seen them since.”

     

    Copyright. 2012. The LA.Times. All Rights Reserved