Politics 5 - Utopian Conflict

The probability of war in a state of Utopia can be assured if it happens to be inhabited by human beings.  Humans often yearn for greater things, just as explorers sought for something beyond the rainbow creating the need for sailing ships, which led to conflict and, thus, the enthusiasm for building stealth fighter jets, which would be pointless if unused ... would they not?

Ownership is a form of power and (as we know) ultimate power ultimately corrupts.  The human animal is possessed of this characteristic much more than other animals and, therefore, finding a Utopia on this Earth is unlikely, unless .... 

In the Utopia that I would have mastery over, there would be a major constitutional statement made, apart from the usual Freedoms, which would be the prohibition of any form of military conflict.

Ha, what a dreamer this guy is!

Well, I agree that the world is unprepared for such an idea today.  Therefore, let us discuss a future possibility.

Obviously, a form of deterrent must be developed — remember, we are dealing with human beings — and policing would be necessary.

Thus, each country would have a defence system composed entirely of armed UAVs (drones) controlled by highly advanced intelligent computers with decision-controls unable to be overridden by humans, and capable of determining the probable type of any threat and dealing with it — purely as a defensive action, and incapable of escalating into an extended attack mode.

It is also assumed that a future U.N. should have full and fair powers, without any veto, throughout the world, that would mandate this idea globally.  The result, hopefully, would be a world free from conflict and free from effective human interference.

Photo - Flying

Flying at the Aéro Club de Montréal in Québec

Aerospace 3 - Fighter Confrontation

I always find the aerospace industry interesting, and military aerospace more so.  By definition, everything related to the military is political and I am, very much, a political individual.

Therefore, I should like to comment on two ongoing global stories relating to fighter aircraft.

Firstly, the Lockheed Martin F-16 (Flying Falcon) fighter aircraft that is flown by pilots of 26 different countries and, although first flown in 1978, remains a formidable aircraft today ... albeit with some modifications.

One country that has enjoyed being equipped with this aircraft is Taiwan, assisted by the U.S. by virtue of the Taiwan Relations act.  But the earlier purchase F-16 A/B aircraft are in urgent need of refurbishment or a new purchase upgrade to the latest F-16 C/D version.  Of course, that appears to be a problem for the Obama administration who, it seems, do not wish to enrage the Chinese Communist Party in Beijing who will, again, display their sabre rattling posture.  Nevertheless, the U.S. has, now, agreed to a refurbishment contract for the older aircraft, which is interesting because it seems that refurbishment will take longer to facilitate compared to buying the new F-16 C/D version.  Perhaps, that is expected, but unlikely, to appease Beijing.

Thus, there we have it, politics.  Although I am sure that the U.S. is also wary about espionage, considering the improving relationship between Taiwan and the mainland, and Russia's recent display of anger at China’s recent copying of Russian aircraft.

Personally, I would approve the immediate sale of the F-16 C/D to Taiwan (the order was placed 6 years ago) ... and let the arms of the CCP tire as they rattle their sabres.

Secondly, the Lockheed Martin F-35 (Lightning) stealth fighter is also coveted by Taiwan, but it seems an unlikely purchase at the present time.  Personally, I would be happy if Canada transferred its order of F-35s to Taiwan ... and I do not mean to appear flippant.

The F-35 remains in an extraordinarily problematical pre-production/testing phase, even though some examples have been delivered to the USAF as training aircraft.  The delivery dates to various countries have been extraordinarily delayed and costs have risen to a unit cost of $133 million.

Early models missed performance requirements because they weighed too much, and extensive redesign was required to reduce the weight;  Recently, it was reported that only 50% of the aircraft’s software had been written and would take another six years and 110 additional software engineers to complete the software;  There has been a long list of design failures;  Many pilots have commented on the comparatively short range, and studies have shown that it could cost as much as 40% more to maintain than previous aircraft.

Australia has reduced some of its original options to purchase and, instead, has ordered the new Boeing F-18F (Super Hornet) aircraft to supplement its existing F-18A squadrons, and replace the GE F-111.

Canada, which is increasing its presence in the Arctic territories, continues to argue, unintelligently, that the single engine, shorter range, F-35 is the ideal aircraft to replace the twin engine CF-18 A/B, even though an engine failure over Arctic territories is not conducive to enthusiastic pilots.

Once again ... politics.

I have been deliberately brief with these comments (really) in the hope that it may encourage continuing participation in the discussion — F-16 C/Ds for Taiwan and a cancellation of F-35s for Canada.

Food 3 - Ruffled Feathers

I intended to title this blog My Pet Peeves, but that seemed to describe a rant when I simply want to describe things that ruffle my feathers in the restaurant scene ... and I must apologize to the ornithologists hoping for the location of a new species.  But you are here now, and I seek discussion.

In my opinion, restaurants are commercial establishments and, therefore, whether fast food or multi-starred, they are obliged to conduct acceptable business practices.  That means that all customers should be quite satisfied when they leave — it is that simple.  Any restaurateur who mentions that there are some customers who can never be satisfied is, probably, someone lacking fine business skills.

Of course, there are a few people who feel that the quality of food and service in a fast food place should be equal to that of a fine dinning place which, in a sense, is correct.  But there is a culture of dining out that is often misunderstood.  For example, in a self-service fast food restaurant, when you have eaten, you are required to take your tray of empty packets and cups to the trash bin and, if you are a messy eater, the staff will eventually clean the table.  It is the height of rudeness and a display of your lack of cultural awareness to do otherwise.  While I am at this location, I must mention that when newspapers are provided to read, please return them to the rack with the pages correctly collated.  Yes, you can!

Leaving places of burgers and deep-fried chicken aside, let me venture into places of fine dining.  Of course, according to Monsieur Michelin, there are different levels of fine quality and all of them should satisfy most customers.

I shall try to recall from reviews that I have written without identifying specific restaurants, because my feathers can be ruffled in more than one restaurant.  Being retired, I am never one who enjoys lunch before noon and, therefore, always expect staff to be awake — and ready to welcome me.

In a fine dining restaurant there should always be a maitre’d or a senior server who conducts the same service.  I imply by this, someone to greet you immediately and, thus, make you feel welcome.  Having been made to feel welcome, one may be prepared to accept a short wait for a table, otherwise, one could be excused for leaving because of the assumption that there would continue to be examples of poor quality.

Surprisingly, I am not impressed when my order arrives in less time than it should take to cook, indicating previous cooking and, obviously, I am not referring to roast chicken, for example.

There has been a trend for a while for a quiet change to be observed in lunch menus.  I refer to the appetizer being served together with the entree.  Is one expected to eat the warmest item last, even if it is an appetizer?  Does it mean one less plate to wash?  Please do not do this.

At this point, I should mention that I am the last person to complain to the manager.  It is of no interest to me that the chef will cook another plate for me, or I will not be charged for the wine.  Restaurateurs, my lunch has been ruined!  I shall not return.  Referring to my second paragraph, I wonder how many restaurants would be prepared to offer a 150% credit coupon to customers who have a genuine reason to be unsatisfied?  This ought to be as common a practice as expecting a 20% tip.

Fish and Chips at Palm Resorts, Karachi
Photographer:  Umair Mohsin

Being short of space, I should like to describe my latest peeve.  Firstly, allow me to point out that my home-cooked Coq au Vin has been given much credit and I do know how to enjoy a medium-rare beef steak, but occasionally, my taste buds crave for a simple plate of fish and chips.  Most cooks will provide this dish, but I continue to seek a professional chef that creates an extraordinary multi-star version.  In other words, batter that does not represent a tortoise shell, with such thickness that the batter internally remains uncooked, there is so little fish that, due to embarrassment, two pieces are usually provided and, thus, the ratio of batter to fish is about 4:1.  Is it so un-British to suggest a course in Japanese tempura cooking?  Oh, and there is never a need for potato chips (fries) to be overcooked sticks of saturated fat.

Finally, allow me to request that menus are occasionally changed ... at least seasonally.

Bon appétite!

Quotation - "... Examine Ourselves."

Confucius   孔夫子

見賢思齊焉；見不賢而內自省也。

"When we see men of worth, 
we should think of equaling them; 

when we see men of a contrary character, 
we should turn inwards and examine ourselves."