Category: Uncategorized

Our flight school went through a period of hiring Norwegian citizens as helicopter instructors. These guys went through a rigorous training program here in the U.S. and then had the right to work for 12-18 months as “practical training.” After that, the U.S. immigration bureaucracy worked aggressively to push these skilled English-fluent workers out of our country in favor of more folks such as Dzhokhar Tsarnaev and his family.

I caught up with one of these alumni recently and found out that he was flying the magnificent Sikorsky S-92 helicopter out to offshore oil rigs. At the current exchange rate, which is much less favorable for Norwegians than previously, a first officer earns about $100,000 per year and a captain $150,000 per year. They work 14 days on, 14 days off. The “on” days consist of flying 6-8 hours while the off days can be spent in Oslo or anywhere else in the world. Housing near the base costs about $750 per month and is the responsibility of the pilot. Commercial 45-minute flights to or from Oslo cost about $100 (another $200 per month).

I learned that finding the offshore rig is not the idiot-proof process that one would imagine. Instead of a GPS-guided approach down to the helipad the pilots look for the rigs using the S-92’s weather radar. If they can’t identify the rig visually within 0.75 nautical miles then it is time for a missed approach. Many offshore rigs have a similar appearance and are clustered together. Therefore it is not uncommon for a helicopter to land on the wrong rig.

Related:

 

• sad S-92 crash on the way out to a Canadian rig
• Lockheed Martin buys Sikorsky for 1.1X revenue

Full post, including comments

“Europe Should See Refugees as a Boon, Not a Burden” is a New York Times editorial that is typical of a view espoused by politicians eager to preside over a larger population. Young hard-working immigrants will make a country rich and enable Ponzi schemes such as Social Security and Medicare to keep going (a better ratio of workers to government-dependents). At the same time we hear that roughly 3000 migrants arrive on the shores of Greece every day. “Greece’s Dismal Demographics” is a 2013 New York Times article on the aging/shrinking Greek population:

The most frightening figure is a Eurostat projection which estimates that, in 2050, 32.1 percent of the Greek population will be over 65, compared with 16.6 percent in 2000. And this projection was made in 2007, before the crisis hit Greece’s population. We were still living high, before widespread unemployment, hasty retirement and the emigration of those with the skills to succeed abroad. New projections will most likely be much worse.

If the Times is correct, won’t Greece benefit hugely from the waves of migrants arriving on her shores? If Greece can hold onto most of these new arrivals, and not let Germany lure them farther north, shouldn’t it be the case that Greece will soon be much richer than Germany?

Separately, if immigrants lead to wealth, why are European Union officials having to force EU members to accept immigrants? (WSJ: “EU Move to Force Relocation of Migrants Deepens Divisions in Europe”)

Full post, including comments

Burning Man attendees answer the question of whether or not drug use leads to confusion: SF Weekly article on Missed Connections following Burning Man.

Separately, “Drug Dogs Sniffing the U.S. Mail at Burning Man, and Armed BLM Agents Becoming Impromptu Mailmen” says that drug-sniffing dogs had a high false-positive rate at Burning Man. Or maybe they just wanted to be gifted some pickles…

Full post, including comments

“Popemobiles Through Time” (nytimes):

To the chagrin of security personnel, [Pope] Francis prefers to communicate with the people without a bulletproof barrier, which he described as being inside a “sardine can.”

“It’s true that anything could happen,” he told a Barcelona newspaper. “But let’s face it, at my age I don’t have much to lose.”

One of my most rewarding experiences as MIT was teaching a section (“recitation”) of a math course for Al Drake (superb textbook: Fundamentals of Applied Probability Theory). Professor Drake lived his subject as well as taught it. When diagnosed with leukemia he purchased a motorcycle, reasoning that the conditional probability of him dying in a motorcycle accident had been reduced.

 

Full post, including comments

In August 2013 I wrote a posting about how Boston’s Longfellow Bridge would cost at least 4X to renovate, in constant dollars, what it cost to build with circa 1900 construction techniques. In January 2015 I added a posting about a rumor that the project was a year behind schedule. I found this August 2015 WBUR article saying that the project has been delayed for an additional two years and that the projected budget was substantially higher than I quoted in my original posting. Thus it seems that, if there are no additional setbacks, the renovation will take roughly as long as the original construction and cost about 6X as much, after adjustments for inflation.

I’m thinking that even if Bernie Sanders gets elected and Congress gives him the $18 trillion that he wants to spend (WSJ), the country won’t look substantially different in terms of infrastructure.

Related:

• U.S. versus German infrastructure spending and results
• High-speed Rail in California versus China

Full post, including comments

About ten years ago I wrote about immigrant-driven Chinese-made motorhomes (RVs) that could alleviate the pain of sitting in American traffic jams and paying American labor rates for RV construction.

My recent trip to Burning Man (slides), at the intersection of RVs and high-tech, got me thinking about the potentially revolutionary consequences of a self-driving RV. If Google can make us a self-driving car, why not a self-driving 40′ Class A motorhome? Now the RV becomes like a cruise ship. You spend the day in a National Park, tuck everyone into bed, and then let Google drive you to the next National Park overnight. You wake up to find that Larry and Sergei have selected a campsite for you, extended the awning, and put out the lawn chairs and table for breakfast.

How awesome will this be for aging Gen Xers? (let’s assume that the Baby Boomers will die off before Google can leap through all of the regulatory hurdles)

What about the potential for increased fuel consumption? When television was invented people thought that Ivy League lectures and Shakespeare plays would be popular. In the 1970s nobody would have predicted that improvements in engine efficiency would result in suburban Americans buying pavement-melting SUVs. Right now we have prototype Google self-driving cars that are the apex of environmental responsibility. Could it be that self-driving technology, by eliminating the main problem with 40′ RVs (ungainly to drive and park), will result in a renewed arms race among Americans for who can have the biggest most gas-guzzling vehicle on the road?

What else changes if an RV can drive itself? Would it be reasonable to revive my idea of using an RV as a defense against urban gridlock?

Related:

• our family’s dream RV floorplan (garage for bicycles in the back; four separate sleeping areas)

Full post, including comments

I saw a headline last month that read “U.S. sends six F-16s to Turkey.” The next line in the crawl was “Total deployment of 300 Air Force staff.” Thus it would seem that, even when locals are maintaining and securing the airport and hangar, it takes 50 U.S. military personnel to keep a single-engine jet running.

Full post, including comments

Two conversations from Burning Man…

A father: “I don’t mind if my daughter is gay. Maybe I will get to hang out with Dick Cheney’s daughter. Also I won’t have to kill any boys.”

A mother: “It wouldn’t be so bad if my boys turn out to be gay. Then they won’t be at risk for a woman having sex with them and later accusing them of rape.”

The latter comment led to a discussion of Owen Labrie, in the news shortly before Burning Man following his partial acquittal on charges of raping a fellow high school student at St. Paul’s in New Hampshire (nytimes). “She probably started it to get cash out of his family,” said one Burner, “and then when they wouldn’t or couldn’t pay she had no choice but to keep going.” (As noted in this posting about Missoula, being a rape victim could have led to $millions from the school.) “The same thing happened at my boarding school in Argentina,” said another Burner. “The girl was a notorious liar and she’d had sex with a lot of guys so the guy wasn’t convicted, but his life was ruined just by the accusation.” What happened to him ultimately? She responded that “He and his family had to emigrate to the U.S. and start over.”

Full post, including comments

“Your Guide To Dieselgate: Volkswagen’s Diesel Cheating Catastrophe” (Jalopnik) succeeds where our nation’s big newspapers have failed. The core issue seems to be that Volkswagen claimed to have succeeded at something that had eluded all other automakers: a clean diesel engine without a Selective Catalyst Reduction (SCR) system:

In order to meet tougher emissions regulations that went into effect in 2008, most automakers started supplying their diesel cars with tanks of a urea-based solution (often referred to as “AdBlue”) that cuts down on nitrogen oxide emissions.

But VW and Audi said the 2.0-liter four-cylinder engine on the smaller cars was able to meet the requirements without a urea injection system — although many people have wondered exactly how.

On Friday, the EPA announced they found the TDI cars contained “a sophisticated software algorithm” which detected when the car was being tested for emissions. When that happens, the software drastically reduces the emissions as compared to normal driving, indicating to testers that the car had passed.

Chris Cunningham’s comment to the WSJ: “Cars are no longer a mechanical device we directly control, they’ve evolved into glorified computer games we risk our lives on. Hopefully this scandal will help open the code up to more external reviews for all cars.”

My comment to a friend who was expressing shock and horror at VW’s actions: “Who could have imagined that a company co-founded by Adolf Hitler would eventually do something to irritate people?”

It is kind of interesting to me that VW competitors didn’t figure this out a long time ago. Suppose that the SCR adds $250 to the cost of making a diesel car. Wouldn’t Ford, for example, have tried to figure out how to copy’s VW’s innovation and also save itself the same $250 per car? Why wouldn’t Ford have put a VW TDI car through a bunch of real-world tests and then announced that its big competitor was cheating?

I’m still looking for the newspaper article that clearly explains all of the emissions controls on a modern diesel car engine. And, separately, I wonder how this will affect the nascent market for aircraft diesels (sadly much heavier than traditional gas engines but they run on Jet-A fuel, which is much cheaper and more widely available worldwide).

What do folks think will happen to VW? I am going to bet that the Tesla- and Prius-driving shareholders, who had no idea that this was happening, get a thorough beating while employees who perpetrated the crimes against Mother Earth keep cashing paychecks. (as with banks)

Related:

• Stupid question of the day: What did Volkswagen actually do with its emissions control software?

Full post, including comments

The news media is full of sound and fury regarding something that Volkswagen did with diesel engine emissions control software, e.g., “VW Is Said to Cheat on Diesel Emissions; U.S. to Order Big Recall” (nytimes). The journalists either can’t or don’t bother to explain what Volkswagen actually did.

Readers: Can you help explain this? What does the software in question control? The Times says “The Environmental Protection Agency accused the German automaker of using software to detect when the car is undergoing its periodic state emissions testing.” What does this mean? Only when something is plugged into a connector under the hood? Then “During normal driving situations, the controls are turned off, allowing the cars to spew as much as 40 times as much pollution as allowed under the Clean Air Act, the E.P.A. said.” Can this be true? What is there in a VW that can cut or increase pollution by 40X?

Related:

• “Stupid Ahmed Mohamed question”

 

Full post, including comments