It was reported on a few sources over the last few days that the Chinese authorities are preparing for ‘anything’ at the Beijing Olympics and have fielded Surface to Air Missile (SAM) systems around the Olympic stadium.

Photographs and videos have clearly shown what appears to be HQ-7 short-range infrared homing missile launchers emplaced around the ‘Bird’s Nest’ stadium. I can only really guess from the photos and footage at the distance from the stadium but my estimate would be that they are less than 1km (0.62 miles) away. Each SAM site (common wisdom would say there should be more than one, some sources indicate there are two) is deployed on a trailer with a separate search radar. Some minor effort has been made to provide camouflage but unfortunately the launchers stick out like a sore-thumb against the surrounding concrete structures.

The HQ-7 search radar has an 18km (11.18 mile) range and provides target designation for the HQ-7’s fire-control systems. The HQ-7 launcher itself can begin J-band radar tracking at 17km (10.5 miles) and optical tracking at 15km (9.3 miles). Whether the optical tracking would be useful through Beijing’s infamous ’smog’ I do not know.

Maximum firing range for most aircraft targets is about 8.6km (5.3 miles) so this really is just beyond the scope of close-in weapon systems.

The deployment of the HQ-7 SAMs, in itself a ‘battlefield’ weapon, with the confines of a city does raise a question or two about public safety and purpose. Are the possible targets hijacked airliners or actual military aircraft (from whatever source) ? Whatever sort of aircraft were to be engaged, at 5-6 miles from the stadium, according to Google Maps, the incoming target would fall in densely-populated suburbs. The amount of collateral damage would presumably be a function of the size of the destroyed target. I presume the Chinese authorities view the loss of a up to a couple of ‘city blocks’ as acceptable when weighed against the security of the Olympic site.

Then there is a question of safety of operation of the SAM site itself. The E/F-band search radar rotates continuously and will be powered at all times when active. While radiated power attenuates with the distance from the radar, television news sources showed the public walking within a few meters of the search radars. An actual engagement would increase the danger in the immediate area many times. I’m not sure how the tube-launcher end-caps are removed but it could well be pyrotechnic. The HQ-7 missile’s solid motor then fires and propels the missile to Mach-2+ in just a couple of seconds. Although I couldn’t find a HQ-7 launch video, one would assume the flame/efflux from the missile in the vicinity of the launch platform would be considerable.

Whatever China’s reasoning for these sort-range SAM sites is, it is to be hoped that they are never used from their current emplacements.

Qantas 747 similar to the one involved

A Qantas Airlines Boeing 747 departing Hong Kong for Australia today suffered a rapid or explosive decompression at altitude and was forced to make an emergency descent followed by an emergency landing at Manila in the Philippines. All passengers and crew departed the aircraft safely.

There were a total of 346 passengers and 19 crew on board the aircraft when a section just forward of the starboard mainwing leading edge despressurised the hull. The crew apparently then initiated an emergency descent, oxygen masks being dropped for the passengers. The emergency descent is made in order to reach a safe altitude at which it is possible to breathe normally without oxygen assistance.

The aircraft then made a declared emergency landing at Manila in the Phillipines where the extent of the damage was photographed by news agencies. It appears from photographs that the front-most part of the fusealage ‘blister’ which blends the starboard wing-root is completely missing with a smaller hole through the pressure hull into the baggage compartment. Some debris is evident in the hole looking rather like loose items of luggage. It is probably fair to speculate that some passengers may find they are missing some items.

Some interviewed passengers recall the captain stating that there was a hole in a ‘door’. As far as I know, there isn’t a door at this section of the fuselage but there appears to be creasing near the foremost edge of the cabin exit door above the damaged area. This may have lead to a ‘door open’ alert on the flight deck. It is possibly worth noting that this door is entirely distinct from the large R5 cargo door which separated from United Airlines flight 811.

Aircraft Identity (This is not definitive information, do not treat it as such!)

Some of the pictures show the letters on the nose gear door to be ‘JK’. On Qantas aircraft this appears to be the last two letters of the aircraft registration for the purpose of identification while parked on the apron. If this is the case, this would indicate that the aircraft is VH-OJK, a Boeing 747-438, construction number 25067 built 1991. [Source]

Flight Number

The flight number is now being widely reported as QF30

Media Response

I actually found some quite responsible, restrained media reporting at the BBC online website. BBC television news was, however, it’s usual irresponsible self with a presenter trying to lead an interviewee into relating a story which did not exist. It is fair to say that pretty much everyone the including crew would be scared, you’d be inhuman not to be, but there was no real evidence of ‘panic’ or ‘terror’ as some news outlets would have you believe by their headlines. During the descent into Manila, as evidenced by video shot by a passenger, people remained relatively calm. The BBC quotes one passenger:

“Everyone was fairly calm, partly because they didn’t realise the extent of it,”

France 24 probably gets my award as the least sensational reporters (as of this time) as, despite having a rather short article, they just relate the facts as they were known and nothing else.

A quicky picked up from The Register.

Company orders 16 licences from Hewlett Packard

Company receives a huge cardboard box containing 16 smaller cardboard boxes which each contain a sheet of ESD-protection foam wrapped around two A4-sheets of paper AKA ‘the licences’.

You have to see the pictures to understand.

I have no idea how HP can justify the energy and resources required to manufacture, pack and ship like this when the licences could be easily put in one stiff envelope and sent by recorded mail or special delivery.

Even better, in this day and age (the 21st century!) they could send the licences as a digitally signed document attached to an email.

Britain’s famous Land Rover assembly lines will not be operating tomorrow or next Thursday as workers at the Solihull plant have been told to prepare for a ‘four-day week’.

The move by Land Rover management is believed to be as a result of diminished sales due to the UK credit crunch affecting both private and corporate car buyers.

The Solihull work force has been told to report as normal but will likely stand idle as the lines are shut down to save on power and material costs. This may also serve to prevent a large stockpile of vehicles forming which would be presumably expensive to store.

Land Rover was recently bought from Ford by Indian company Tata who have stated an intent to keep Land Rover manufacturing in the UK. However, the costs of the UK operation will undoubtly be playing on the minds of the board at Tata who will know they could call on far cheaper labour and facilities at their other plants across the globe.

My guess at Land Rover’s best course of action would be to press ahead swiftly with the development of the new ‘Baby Land Rover’, making it the lightest design possible and trying to squeak-out the highest possible fuel economy. A low price point would be beneficial too but there are many constraints on this, not least the soaring cost of raw materials.

uSwitch.com, a price comparison company has conducted a “Quality of Life Index” survey of 10 Western European countries which found the UK and Ireland to have the worst quality of life.

Spain and France came out on top with long life expentancies and generally lower costs.

The uSwitch survey notes that although the British have the highest net income after tax, they also have to pay some of the highest prices in Europe for fuel and power. Coupled with low expenditure on Education, fewer holidays and a late retirement age, Britain appears to be a pretty awful place to be living as a European.

I have to admit the uSwitch survey does have a rather biased feel for example the wording of:

Emigration: 41,026 Brits fled UK in 2006, the highest number in Europe, with total
emigration increasing by 30% in the UK since 2001.

(emphasis mine)

However, I can’t for the life of me work out the rationale for the bias. Perhaps uSwitch really do want to be ‘consumer champions’ or perhaps they have an ulterior motive.

Also noted is that the CPI figure stated in the survey report was out of date by the time the report embargo lifted (report states 3.3%, actual is 3.8%)

Download uSwitch report [PDF]

I read on Bloomberg earlier that the rate of increase in unemployment in the UK last month increased at it’s fastest rate since 1992 when Britain was in the depths of it’s last major recession.

That’s not to say that the total number unemployed is as bad (yet). The number current stands at 1.68 million unemployed (but obviously increasing fast) representing 5.2% of the potential workforce.

The latest job casualties appear to be with construction and developers who had previously been working to fill the UK property asset bubble with high density housing which is now proving almost unsalable. While some may indulge in scadenfreud over this, it’s worth remembering that there are large numbers hard working labourers being put out of work who may be difficult, if not impossible to retask.