(#67-1) December 7 2014. Am I obsessively interested in airships? Absolutely. It’s a relatively harmless vice—providing I don’t start collecting them.

FEW THINGS—APART FROM AN AIRSHIP—CAN LIFT AND TRANSPORT REALLY HEAVY BULKY THINGS OVER BOTH LAND AND SEA

NONE CAN BEAT AN AIRSHIP’S COST

 

You can theoretically build a vast conventional winged aircraft capable of carrying bulky objects weighing hundreds of tons—but both the capital and running costs are prohibitive—as are the associated support costs. You need proportionately huge airfields—and then how to transport the large heavy object ‘the last mile’ to where it is actually needed? It is almost certainly too large for roads—and, in many parts of the world, there aren’t any roads. Then you have to consider the environmental implications. A vast aircraft would burn a vast amount of fuel and produce a vast amount of pollution (probably including noise).

All in all, vastly impractical.

An airship has long seemed like the best solution, but the fundamental problem with an airship has always been controllability. The sheer bulk of such things makes them vulnerable to the wind—and the lift generated by helium gas makes them hard to land unless you bleed off (and thus waste) the expensive gas. Accordingly, you waste the minimum which means your now only-slightly-heavier-than-air airship is vulnerable to every passing gust of wind when on the ground. So, you both tie and weigh this large thing down--which is labor intensive, awkward, time-consuming, and expensive. And the wind does not necessarily abate while this tom-foolery is going on—so, sooner or late, something is going to go seriously wrong.

Airships haven’t caught on—so far—for good, practical reasons—as well as the normal ones of vested interests, ignorance, human inertia, and so on.

Years ago, I came to the conclusion that the best solution would be to compress the helium—and this reduce its power to lift—but somehow no one seemed to get around to actually trying that approach—and my world is that of words, not applied technology (though if you looked at my track record, you would wonder—I have been involved with technology surprisingly often—though more in a strategic sense than hands on).

A company called AEROS seems to have come up with the best series of solutions—including compressing and not wasting the helium—and seem well on their way towards producing a commercially viable airship.

Included in a range of airships, they have projected a model capable of carrying 500 tons which can cruise at 100 knots, travel an impressive 5,100 nautical miles, fly at up to 12,00 feet, and carry something up to 455 x 74 x 54 feet in size.

That would be a truly extraordinary capability—which would totally transform a whole range of human activities from agriculture, to building construction to disaster relief. You could mass produce complete houses and fly them to where they are needed. The possibilities are practically endless.

Check out their particularly informative website at www.aeroscraft.com

There are a few things to note about the above—the DRAGON DREAM.

• It is a dirigible—in that it has a rigid frame.
• By airship standards, it is highly maneuverable because of its Vectored Thrust Engines and low-speed control system. So it can take off and land vertically—and even hover.
• It doesn’t have a conventional undercarriage. It has ‘landing-cushions’ which operate rather like a hovercraft except that the thrust can be reversed so that the landing-cushions actually grip. This ingenious capability allows it to tolerate heavier wind conditions.
• Its large cargo bay is internal—and can be loaded or unloaded by hoisting the payload into the hovering airship. This solves numerous problems—and means that no special ground facilities are required.
• Fuel consumption is projected to be roughly a third of that of a traditional aircraft. Find a way of giving the external skin solar cell generating capability—which we are close to doing—and, under some conditions, it could be totally solar powered.

It is seriously impressive—American ingenuity at its best. If we applied such thinking to the rest of our current challenges, we wouldn’t have any! I have no doubt at all we would come up with new ones.

Are we investing serous money in it yet? So far—about $35 million has been involved. That is minute—and entirely inadequate.

Here it is worth recalling that vested interests—who do very nicely out of the status quo—do not necessarily want to be faced with a whole new mode of transport which turn the economics of their industry upside down.

Could solar-powered airships function as ‘airship trains?’ Well, they wouldn’t be as fast as we would like—but there would be no cost of either land or tracks—fuel costs would be minimal--and, very roughly, you could cross the U.S. in a day. That would be entirely adequate for many purposes.

The one category of aircraft I haven’t looked into in detail as yet are Wing In Ground Effect aircraft which also are not receiving the attention they deserve.

Watch this space.

VOR words 804.

---

(#66-1) December 6 2014. Frankenstein was called ‘Victor’ too. I plead guilty to being involved in the current e-mail, electronic gadgetry and media craziness—but have the strong sense we need to rein in this monster (and maybe strangle it).

LET ME EXAGGERATE TO MAKE A POINT

PRACTICALLY EVERYONE IS SO BUSY BEING DISTRACTED THAT WE SEEM TO HAVE LOST THE ART OF EXECUTION (EXCEPT PEOPLE)—LET ALONE OF THINKING

HOW CAN WE REGAIN SOME SEMBLANCE OF SANITY? OR DID WE EVER HAVE IT?

Yes, I’m exaggerating. Clearly things are being done or we wouldn’t have a functioning society—and we do have that despite its imperfections. When I go to the market to buy a gallon of milk, it is normally there—and so on. When you consider the complexity of over 320 million people living together under one flag, that is pretty amazing. On the other had, we have had quite a few thousand years to work out things like roads,  schools, who does what, and mass entertainment (to give just a few examples)—so maybe we shouldn’t be so impressed. After all, people have to do something with their lives—and if enough people fiddle away long enough, you end up with the Leaning Tower of Pisa, the Neutron Bomb, and Kim Kardashian.

Who knew? Fiddling covers a multitude of human activity..

What I do wonder about a great deal is whether we give nearly enough thought to having a pleasant and satisfying quality of life in such a fashion that we live long healthy lives—and don’t screw up the environment.

Here I think we don’t show up so well. In fact, I am far from sure that many of us think this kind of way at all. The figures show that we work (without being engaged), commute in the worst environmentally damaging way possible (one person per car), consume unhealthy food and entertainment made by dubious corporations to excess, are heavily dependent on meds, don’t exercise, need pills to sleep, and largely ignore the plight of the less fortunate. On top of that, half of us have a chronic condition, we age sicker than Europeans—and die three years younger.

Well, so what you may say. That’s what freedom is all about.

Really?

Leaving aside that contentious issue—the U.S. is only really free if you have money—and lots of it—I really have to wonder at the effects on society of everyone being so busy communicating trivia to everyone else that we don’t have time to sit back and figure out a better way.

Personally, e-mail has been my nemesis this year—but, that apart (a considerable qualification—I bow my head in shame) I avoid commuting, don’t drive, rarely text, eat modestly, and think twice before either accepting or making a phone call.

Is that good enough? Absolutely not—but it does mean that I end up with long periods of time when I can focus without distraction.

And what else matters if you are a writer?

Do I mean that? What about family, friends, and saving the planet—not to mention the opposite sex.

That’s my secret.

VOR words 451.

---

(#65-1) December 5 2014 Do most people look beyond the immediate? Do they even look?

WE SEEM ADDICTED TO MORE OF THE SAME. THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT WE ARE GOING TO GET (EXCEPT WORSE).

JOB NUMBERS , INVESTMENT, CORPORATE PROFITS, THE STOCK MARKET, CAR SALES & GROWTH—UP—AND THE PRICE OF GAS DRAMATICALLY DOWN

SO LET’S ALL HATE THE PRESIDENT UNDER WHOSE WATCH THIS HAS ALL HAPPENED ,

On the face of it, all of the above appears to be good news—and, arguably it is in the short term—though I have reservations.  However, it also indicates that we are a nation of addicts addicted to a deeply flawed business model—and unsustainable way of life—and have largely closed our minds to thoughts of change despite overwhelming evidence that we must.

So what’s new?

Then again, I could be absolutely and completely wrong (though of course I’m not).

Let me argue my position.

• The 2008 Great Recession was fundamentally caused by the excesses of Financialization—and by the Big Banks in particular. Six years later, the Big Banks are even bigger—largely thanks to government subsidies and the Federal Reserve—and we have done virtually nothing to remedy the root causes of the crisis. In fact, we haven’t even prosecuted any of the people whose policies and management caused the economic carnage. That being so, a similar crisis is likely to happen again. The track record is clear. Inadequately regulated financial institutions have to be bailed out repeatedly by the taxpayer—in fact such institutions count on it. Have we forgotten the Savings and Loan crisis? Look up the records and you will see a pattern of such egregious behavior..
• We are the most unequal society in the developed world and there is now plenty of evidence to indicate that this situation is harmful to the economic wellbeing of most Americans. We have done absolutely nothing about this socially corrosive issue—which gets worse by the day.
• Growth is not a good thing for most Americans if its fruits merely accrue to a small group of the ultra rich and their followers—which is the current situation. In fact, it is a bad thing because it pushes prices up—and more and more ordinary Americans into higher and higher debt.
• We have problems every which way from low pay to poor working condition, from a rigged economy to corporate dominance of our political system—yet we seem hell bent on doing precisely nothing. Why not? It’s easier to do nothing. It’s what couch potatoes do.

I could list more of the same for paragraph after paragraph.—but if I continue I’ll depress myself (and that would never do).

Whatever the future holds for the U.S., it is all material for the writer—and where would stories be without drama. And that is guaranteed.

Am I optimistic?

Primarily, I’m curious. It’s fun to have a seat in the arena and watch great events unfold—and blood be spilled (providing it’s someone else’s).

Gimme a beer. Pass the popcorn. Bring on the lions!

VOR words 485.

---

(#64-1) December 4 2014. The things you think you know how to do—but really could and should get a whole lot better at—especially if you are a writer. Let’s start with listening.

FINE TUNING YOUR SENSIBILITIES

BEING ABLE TO REALLY AND TRULY LISTEN IS EXCEPTIONALLY IMPORTANT. FEW OF US DO THAT REALLY WELL

WE HAVE EVOLVED A CONSUMPTION CULTURE—NOT A LISTENING ONE.

I have been giving a great deal of thought recently to how much people know and understand—two states it is important not to confuse. Just for starters, most of us almost certainly know more than we understand—but our comprehension is limited by lack of context, intellectual curiosity, education, intelligence, or some combination thereof. I should probably add impatience and laziness. We often tend to be too impatient to think things through—and laziness speaks for itself. Thinking is hard work. Totally focused thinking is something else again. It is so exhausting—it is downright relaxing.

Am I missing anything? Yes, I am—and it is a factor of no small significance. It is fear. All too often we are afraid to think things through. The conclusions might make us uncomfortable—drag us out of our comfort zones—and worse. Best not to go there.

Actually, ‘best not to go there’ is almost certainly the wrong conclusion—but it is almost certainly the easiest one.

A writer is in the business of communicating thought into the written word, but in order to do that effectively, he or she has to have some idea about his readers knowledge, comprehension and capabilities.

How do you do that? You try and be as culturally aware as possible—both through human communication, and through the normal channels such as the media. Many writers aren’t too good at that because we are, by nature of our craft, more cerebral than many, and since book writers , in particular, generally write alone, we lead—by many standards—rather  isolated lives.

It is a moot point as to whether we writers are as isolated as many consider us to be. We might not engage in social intercourse for as much time as the general public, but we endeavor to compensate by being acute observers of the human condition, and by being as empathetic as possible. The best of us also read a great deal (by which I mean prodigiously), travel, deliberately have many and diverse experiences, and—perhaps above all—we listen.

We also never stop working. Writing is a 24/7 occupation because even when a writer is asleep, his subconscious is grinding away. Damn useful!

Listening is a curiously important—and much under-rated—skill and it includes the ability to encourage your subject to talk while you, in the main, stay silent. To do it well requires total focus. In fact, it can be so intense, it is almost like an out-of-body experience.

I know that after I have completed a successful interview, I feel almost dazed—and typically it takes me long minutes to wind down.

Am I a good listener?

When I’m prepared, focused, and on form, I’m an excellent one. I just wish I could be better still. Writing isn’t about being totally satisfied. It’s about striving for the impossible—perfection.

I find interviewing nearly as satisfying as the actual process of writing—but not quite.

Writing is just plain beyond words.

VOR words 502.

---

 

 

(#63-1) December 3 2014. Just when you get used to one way of doing things, another damn thing comes along. Makes you long for the days of the Roman legions when weapons systems were stable for hundreds of years.

THOUGHTS ON DISRUPTIVE MILITARY TECHNOLOGIES

SO HOW DO YOUR COUNTER MISSILES TRAVELING AT NEARLY 8,000 MILES PER HOUR?

RIGHT NOW, YOU PROBABLY CAN’T. THE CHINESE HAVE JUST COMPLETED THE THIRD TEST OF THEIR NEW WU-14 HYPERSONIC GLIDE MISSILE

If the Chinese make a success of their hypersonic missile program—which seems highly likely—they will have a weapons system which will seriously undermine the credibility of the aircraft carrier as our traditional way of telling them to back off (from invading Taiwan, for instance).

Such missiles will threaten much else, of course, but the aircraft carrier has such a special place in our self-image as the most powerful nation in the world that I thought I would place it front and center.

Reportedly they, the Chinese, plan to deploy the Wu-14 as soon as 2020—and a scramjet version by 2025.

Can we defend against such extraordinarily fast weapons? Lasers would seem to be the only solution—but, as matters stand, defensive lasers of adequate power don’t seem to be as far advanced as is necessary.

The most likely outcome—at least in the short to medium term—seems the likelihood that our main defense will the deterrent value of having our own hypersonic missiles (which we are working on).

MAD—Mutually Assured Destruction—hypersonic style.

Should we continue to rely on the aircraft carrier as we have in the past? Well, fortunately, hypersonic missiles are unlikely to be possessed by most of our enemies for many decades—if ever. They are technologically complex and vastly expensive.

But, even so, one has to wonder whether the time hasn’t come for the Navy to re-think how it does business. Should we, for instance, rely more on our hypersonic equivalent for global strike and rely less on aircraft carriers?

This, I guess, is one of my less cheery posts.

VOR words 295.

---

(#62-1) December 2 2014. Middle-Class costs up by $10,600 since 2000. Incomes up by less than 1 percent. To repeat myself—there is something seriously wrong with the current American Business Model.

MASSIVE MIDDLE-CLASS DECLINE.

CONTEMPLATING A BROKEN BUSINESS MODEL—WHICH WE DON’T SEEM TO BE TRYING TO FIX

“The vast majority of Americans, at all coordinates of the economic spectrum, consider themselves middle class; this is a deeply ingrained, distinctly American cognitive dissonance.”
Ellen Cushing

“A smaller government reflecting the needs of the middle class and poor is superior to a big government reflecting the needs of the privileged and powerful.”
Robert Reich

“Watching middle-class conservatives vote for politicians who've proudly pledged to screw them and their children over fills me with the same exasperated contempt I feel for rabbits who zigzag wildly back and forth in front of my tires instead of just getting off the goddamn road.”
Tim Kreider, We Learn Nothing

---

 

It has taken a truly amazing length of time for people to wake up to the plight of the American Middle Class. Things started to go wrong for the Middle Class back in 1973. A recent report by the Center for American Progress reflects an even worse situation that I had thought (and what I thought was bad enough).

Let me quote from the CAP report.

The Cost of Key Pillars of Middle Class Security Has Risen By $10,600 Since 2000

We often write about the challenges income inequality poses in helping the middle class get ahead: the wealthiest are taking a bigger and bigger share of income while for most people, wages are stagnating. But there is another side to this equation: the cost of making ends meet is rising fast too, and maintaining a middle-class quality of life is rising along with it. A breakthrough new report by the Center for American Progress analyzes these costs, as well as stagnant incomes, to demonstrate just how much the middle-class has been squeezed this decade.

CAP’s analysis, “The Middle-Class Squeeze,” shows that for a typical median income married couple with two children, the collective cost of basic pillars of middle class security — including child care, higher education, health care, housing, and retirement –rose by an estimated $10,600 between 2000 and 2012. At the same time, incomes have flattened. For this typical family, acquiring middle-class security cost 30 percent more between 2000 and 2012, but they earned less than one percent more.

The report goes into detail about each pillar and recommendations for how alleviate the squeeze, and here some of the key findings:

• Jobs: Improving our lackluster jobs picture is the first task to address the middle-class squeeze. That means boosting demand by putting money back into the pockets of hard-working Americans. It also means investing in education and workforce-development programs, strengthening unions, and ensuring basic workplace protections to maximize workforce participation.
• Health care: Health care costs for families have risen dramatically, from $11,790 total to over $20,000. An average family of four’s premium and out-of-pocket costs have on average almost doubled, from $4,600 to $8,600 per year. The Affordable Care Act has already made a difference for millions of Americans, but there is plenty more to be done to cut costs while making sure people have access to high-quality coverage.
• Child care:Child care is more expensive than median rent in all 50 states. The estimated cost of a high-quality public preschool program ranges from $6,500 to $11,000 — a cost that is simply out of reach for many families. To address this, among a number of important policies, the federal government should partner with states to provide high-quality preschool to all 3- and 4-year-olds.
• Higher education: While income is staying the same or even declining among families, the cost of higher education has skyrocketed. From 2000 to 2012, higher education costs have risen 62 percent. We must restore public investment in higher ed, through programs such as Pell grants, to help low- and lower-middle-income students.
• Housing:The cost of owning a home has risen, on average, nearly $3,000: from $10,200 to $13,000 per year. Half of renters spend over 30 percent of their income on rent. New mortgages are at a 17-year low, with many middle-class families locked out of the market.
• Retirement: While the costs of other essentials increase, it is no surprise that saving for retirement has become much more difficult for those in the middle class. Now, approximately half of all American households in danger of having insufficient savings for retirement.

These middle class pillars are driving how much Americans can spend on other more basic things as well. CAP’s report found that as a result of this middle-class squeeze, a typical middle-class family had $5,500 less for basic necessities like groceries, clothing, and emergency savings by 2012, compared to 2000.

BOTTOM LINE: The United States’ middle class used to be the world’s wealthiest. But the combination of stalled income and rising costs for essential pillars of middle class life have made that no longer the case. Middle class families are the driver of economic growth in this country. But now the middle class is being squeezed, and squeezing American opportunity and economic growth along with it.

---

(#61-1) December 1 2014. Department of fantastic photographs taken by my sister, Lucy Ayettey Lyons

SHE HAS THE EYE

WHERE SOME SEE THE INDUSTRIALIZED UNDERBELLY OF A CITY—LONDON, IN THIS CASE—LUCY SEES BEAUTY. SHE IS SO RIGHT.

CAMDEN CANAL, LONDON

SOME BEAUTY NEEDS NO QUALIFICATION

MY NIECE, FAITH AYETTEY LYONS, TAKEN BY HER MOTHER, MY SISTER, LUCY

I love the written word—but sometimes words are superfluous.

VOR words c.55.

---