To Start Page

TOP
Voice of Diaspora

English - L'Anglais
Important News

Dutch - Nederlands
Belangrijke nieuws

French - Français
Nouvelles importantes

German - Deutsch
Wichtige News

Bosnian-Bosanski
Važne vijesti

Important News, Belangrijke nieuws, Nouvelles importantes, Wichtige News, Fontos hírek, Importanti novitŕ, Pomembne novice, Importante Notícias, Viktiga nyheter



Ing. Salih CAVKIC
orbus editor in chief

Belang van Limburg
De Morgen
De Standard
Het Laatste Nieuws
La Libre Belgique
Nieuwsblaad

VRT
VRTNieuws

N-TV.DE
Deutsche Welle
West-D. Zeitung


The man of the year

Guy Verhofstadt
Mr. Guy Verhofstadt

The man of the year
L'homme de l'an
De man van het jaar
2009


A proven Democrat, protector and fighter for justice and human rights in the World.

Een bewezen Democraat, beschermer en strijder voor rechtvaardigheid en mensenrechten in de Wereld.

Un prouvé démocrate, protecteur et combattant pour la justice et des droits de l'homme dans le Mond.

Eine bewährte Demokrat, Beschützer und Kämpfer für Gerechtigkeit und Menschenrechte in der Welt.

Dokazani demokrat,
 zaštitnik i borac za pravdu i ljudska prava u Svijetu.





Guarantee
Peace in the World


Mr. Barak Hossein Obama

Guarantee
peace in the world

Garantie
vrede in de wereld

Garantie
la paix dans le monde

Garantie des Friedens in der Welt

Zabezpečenie
mieru vo svete

Garancija
mira u svijetu





Murray Hunter
University Malaysia Perlis



Perpetual Self conflict: Self awareness as a key to our ethical drive, personal mastery, and perception of entrepreneurial opportunities.
Murray Hunter




The Continuum of Psychotic Organisational Typologies
Murray Hunter




There is no such person as an entrepreneur, just a person who acts entrepreneurially
Murray Hunter




Groupthink may still be a hazard to your organization - Murray Hunter



Generational Attitudes and Behaviour - Murray Hunter



The environment as a multi-dimensional system: Taking off your rose coloured glasses - Murray Hunter



Imagination may be more important than knowledge: The eight types of imagination we use - Murray Hunter



Do we have a creative intelligence? - Murray Hunter



Not all opportunities are the same: A look at the four types of entrepreneurial opportunity - Murray Hunter



   The Evolution of Business Strategy - Murray Hunter



How motivation really works - Murray Hunter



Evaluating Entrepreneurial Opportunities: What’s wrong with SWOT? - Murray Hunter



 The five types of thinking we use - Murray Hunter



Where do entrepreneurial opportunities come from? - Murray Hunter



  How we create new ideas - Murray Hunter



How emotions influence, how we see the world? - Murray Hunter



People tend to start businesses for the wrong reasons - Murray Hunter



One Man, Multiple Inventions: The lessons and legacies of Thomas Edison - Murray Hunte


   
Does Intrapreneurship exist in Asia? - Murray Hunter



 What’s with all the hype – a look at aspirational marketing - Murray Hunter



   Integrating the philosophy of Tawhid – an Islamic approach to organization - Murray Hunter



Samsara and the Organization - Murray Hunter



Do Confucian Principled Businesses Exist in Asia? - Murray Hunter



 Knowledge, Understanding and the God Paradigm - Murray Hunter



On Some of the Misconceptions about Entrepreneurship - Murray Hunter




How feudalism hinders community transformation and economic evolution: Isn’t equal opportunity a basic human right? - Murray Hunter



The Dominance of “Western” Management Theories in South-East Asian Business Schools: The occidental colonization of the mind. - Murray Hunter



Ethics, Sustainability and the New Realities - Murray Hunter



The Arrival of Petroleum, Rockefeller, and the Lessons He taught Us - Murray Hunter - University Malaysia Perlis



 Elite educators idolize the “ high flying entrepreneurs” while deluded about the realities of entrepreneurship for the masses: - Murray Hunter



Lessons from the Invention of the airplane and the Beginning of the Aviation Era - Murray Hunter



Missed Opportunities for ASEAN if the ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) fails to start up in 2015 - Murray Hunter






 


Missed Opportunities for ASEAN if the ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) fails to start up in 2015

Murray Hunter

ASEAN potential as a major trade player

Although the pundits state that the ASEAN Free Trade Area (AFTA) and ASEAN Economic community (AEC) will be in place by 2015, there are signs on the ground in many of the member nations, this is far from the case.

With the rapid growth and development of China and to a lesser extent India, the ASEAN region has been largely out of global focus in recent times. Although in terms of GDP, the ASEAN region cannot come even close to matching the other blocks like the China, the US, EU, India, and Japan; trade and consumption figures are very interesting.

Exports from the ASEAN region to the rest of the world were USD 1.25 Trillion in 2011, not too far behind China at USD 1.89 Trillion, the EU USD 1.79 Trillion, and the US at USD 1.5 Trillion. ASEAN exports were higher than Japan at USD 800.8 Billion, and India 298.2 Billion.

What is even more interesting is that the ASEAN region is also a very high consumption block indicated by its imports from the rest of the world at USD 1.06 Trillion, which was much higher than India at USD 451 Billion, and Japan at USD 794.7 Billion. ASEAN still trails China at USD 1.74 Trillion, with the EU at USD 2 Trillion and US at USD 2.314 Trillion.

If one looks at mobile telephone usage as rough indicator of consumption, ASEAN usage (569 million) is much higher than the EU (466 million) and ASEAN has a higher per-capita usage than China and Japan. Finally the population growth rate within the ASEAN block is much higher than any of the other blocks.


Table 1. A regional Comparison of Indicators[1].
 


Country

ASEAN

US

China

India

Japan

EU

Population

621.15 Mil

313.85 Mil

1,343.2 Mil

1,205 Mil

127.36 Mil

503.8 Mil

Pop. Growth

1.4%

0.899%

0.481%

1.312%

(0.077%)

0.212%

GDP (PPP)

3.33 Tr.

15.04 Tr.

11.29 Tr.

4.46 Tr.

4.389 Tr.

15.39 Tr.

GDP per Capita

5,361

48,100

8,400

3,700

34,300

34,000

Budget Rev.

376.25 Bil.

2.30 Tr.

1.64 Tr.

196.4 Bil.

1.97 tr.

7519 Tr.

Budget Exp.

411.73 Bil.

3.6 Tr.

1.79 Tr.

308.8 Bil.

2.495 Tr.

8298 Tr.

Investment % GDP

26.7%

12.4%

54.2%

32.8%

20.9%

18.8%

Exports

1.25 Tr.

1.51 Tr.

1.89 Tr.

298.2 Bil.

800.8 Bil.

1.79 Tr.

Imports

1.06 Tr.

2.314 Tr.

1.74 Tr.

451 Bil.

794.7 Bil.

2.0 Tr.

Unemployment

4.89%

17.6%

6.5%

9.8%

4.6%

9.5%

Mobile Phone Users

569 Mil.

279 Mil.

859 Mil.

752 Mil.

121 Mil.

466 Mil.

Internet Users

83.51 Mil.

498 Mil.

389 Mil.

61.3 Mil.

99.2 Mil

247 Mil.

Poverty %

17.8%

15.1%

13.4%

25%

16%

 


This makes the ASEAN region one of the most interesting growth markets in the world. ASEAN as a single trade entity also has the potential to strongly influence world affairs through its trade strength.

The agreement to form the ASEAN Free Trade Area(AFTA) in Singapore back in 1992, and later the ASEAN Economic Community (AEC), with the objective of streamlining banking, finance, transport infrastructure, customers regulations, human capital mobility, and economic policy embodying AFTA by 2015 may potentially enable the region to exercise this influence.

However this promise of great opportunity that could propel much of the ASEAN region into great prosperity and influence, may falter due to the current unpreparedness of ASEAN members in most areas of integration. The writer believes that this is not just a lagging schedule, as has been suggested by many, but most of the region's members are currently inwardly focused upon their own domestic interests which may lead to the failure of achieving the implementation of the AEC by 2015. Moreover, a parochial rather than any regionally orientated mindset currently persists in Bangkok, Jakarta, Putra Jaya, Manila, Hanoi, and Naypyidaw, suggesting that this position may not change in the immediate future.

Inward Focus

Without going into detail, many ASEAN governments are facing watershed issues that may well set out how their respective societies will look for many future generations. Consequently their focus is currently inward upon domestic issues.

The Yinluck Shinawatra led government in Thailand has many deep issues to solve which not only concern the government's immediate survival, but the way Thailand may be governed in the future. Shinawatra must find a way to work with the palace and the military without being seen to betray her peasant constituency in the North-east of the country who very deeply feel many injustices over the last six years since the coup d'état ousting her brother Taksin Shinawatra. In addition there will be a transition to a new monarch in the near future which according to commentators may bring some uncertainty. This is not to mention the insurgency in the South of Thailand which has seen an escalation over the last few months, potential floods again over the next few months, which last year devastated industry around Bangkok and surrounding areas, where long term solutions are scant.

In Malaysia the Mohd. Najib Tun Razak Barisan Nasional led government has been in power for 55 years and is tired. The opposition Pakatan Rakyat under the leadership of Anwar Ibrahim looks to be in a very strong position for the coming 13th general election that must be held before May 2013. The Barisan Nasional has the fight of its life ahead just to survive and cannot rely on its traditional strong-holds like Johor, Sarawak, and Sabah to carry it through this time. The country has been in a quasi-election mode for some time, and with the focus on survival, there has been little interest in regional issues.

In Myanmar, President Thein Sein recently reshuffled the cabinet to reportedly strengthen his own personal position and maintain forward reform momentum. Myanmar is heading down a road of reform where it hasn't gone before and the potential outcomes are still uncertain. Although Aung San Suu Kyi has been released from house arrest, many foreign governments have dropped sanctions, and the government has made peace settlements with a number of ethnic insurgency groups (yet many more like the Rohingyas need to be solved), there is little focus or interest in the regional issues at this point.

Indonesia went through its political turmoil more than a decade ago with the riots in 1998 that eventually brought the resignation of Suharto. With 3 presidents between 1998-2004, Indonesia is emerging as a vibrant multi-party democracy with Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono as President since 2004. The country is still plagued with corruption, natural disasters, regional pressure for autonomy, and poverty. Political diversity may be hindering the creation of a national vision of development that all in a bipartisan fashion can engage. Coupled with the logistics of managing an archipelago more than 4,000 KMs long, the Indonesian focus is still primarily concerned with economic management, although there is a general belief that an ASEAN market would in the long term benefit the country.

Corazon Aquino was swept to the presidency during the peoples' power revolution of 1986, ousting Ferdinand Marcos. Since her term as president there have been a further four elected presidents of the Republic of the Philippines, with her son Benigno Aquino III as the current president. Political power in the Philippines is still very much based upon favour and alliance of 'political warlords' in each regional subdivision and this partly explains why the former first lady Imelda Marcos and children, although forced to flee the country in 1986, were welcomed back and today hold positions of power as a provincial governor and members of the legislatures. The Philippine government's focus currently remains upon the issues of poverty, which at 32.9% of the population is the highest in the region. Democracy in the Philippines has not seemed to solve the country's fundamental issue of poverty. Like Indonesia, the Philippines is also an archipelago which presents many problems for development. The government still has to deal with the Abu Sayyaf in the south of the country, regular natural disasters, and rampant corruption.

Finally, although Vietnam has tried to reform the economy with the 'doi moi' programs of the mid 1980s, the country is still basically a centrally planned economy. More than 20% of GDP is agriculture based and state owned enterprises account for more than 40% of GDP. Vietnam has a large trade deficit even though exports are rising rapidly. Controls have been put in place to stem further blow outs in the trade deficit, bringing more state control over the economy rather than liberalization. State debt is also high with some state firms in deep financial trouble which is eroding the country's financial ratings and even causing some political instability at leadership level. The Vietnamese economy, along with that of Cambodia and Laos are far from ready for integration within the framework of the AEC.

Currently there is an absence of any leader with regional vision within ASEAN. The leaders of the region don't appear to have the relationships like their predecessors once had, as emerging democracies and development have their own demands. The club of dictators has gone. Further the various leaders still have different visions of ASEAN. Even the pro AEC ASEAN Secretary General Dr. Surin Pitsuwan who kept the integration momentum going is preparing to hand over the position to a less experienced diplomat from one of the less developed members, potentially leading to a further vacuum in leadership on the issue.

The beneficiaries?

The constituency that one would expect to support an integrated ASEAN economy, regional conglomerates appears to still be lukewarm to the concept. Although companies like Air Asia, CIMB Bank, Bangkok Bank, SingTel, and Siam Cement are taking advantage of the region as a market, they are the exception. The majority of ASEAN conglomerates are ethnic Chinese who settled across the region building up their empires along common models of trading, real estate, finance and insurance, retail, and banking activities. These firms are well connected in their own countries and haven't historically done well business wise in countries within the region where their connections are weak. Consequently these firms prefer to diversify business interests within their home country rather than expand across the region.

One can easily get the impression when visiting Bangkok, Jakarta, Kuala Lumpur, and Manila that business there is a widely diversified ownership of business, where in fact regional businesses in ASEAN countries today are still in the hands of a small number of families. Many of these companies are yet to develop the regional mindset necessary to take up the opportunities that the AEC offers. They may actually enjoy the current protection that is afforded them from outside competition.

At the same time the ASEAN region is dominated by SMEs which account for approximately 98% of all enterprises and some75-85% of total employment. Many of these are subsistence based enterprises employing no innovation in their business models. AFTA and the AEC will provide very few opportunities to these enterprises, except in the area of tourism.

ASEAN member states still see each other as competitors, competing with each other to attract direct foreign investment. Competing education and medical hubs have been set up which aim to attract international customers at the lowest cost. How the paradigm of collaboration rather than competition can be developed still remains to be seen.

Lagging preparation and the barriers to overcome

Infrastructure and logistic networks the AEC required for increased trade within the region are still very much work in progress. With the exception of Singapore, major highways, railways, deep water ports are still under construction. Many border crossings are extremely congested, and the high speed railway between Thailand, Laos and Southern China is still only just an idea.

The banking system is not yet integrated, little has been done in the way of streamlining customs procedures which is hindering the implementation of high quality logistic systems across the region. Little exists in the way of a regionally based media to culturally integrate the region.

Existing ASEAN initiated projects like the Indonesia-Malaysia-Thailand Growth Triangle (IMT-GT), and the East ASEAN Growth Area (BIMP-EAGA) have existed more as ideals rather than anything that has substance on the ground. Above all there has been no attempt to integrate monetary or fiscal policy within the ASEAN region which would be necessary within any common market.

ASEAN states are still very much in different stages of growth, spread across a wide development continuum. The contrast between developed Singapore and Laos, Myanmar, Vietnam, and Cambodia is extremely wide, much more than any other region around the world. This diversity presents even greater challenges where assistance given by the more developed members of ASEAN could be construed as interference by the lesser developed nations. This is still a very sensitive issue within ASEAN today.

In addition, each country within ASEAN is in a different stage of legal system development, which is very important as the legal system creates the framework upon which business is conducted. Even if the common market is pronounced to be in existence by 2015, this factor alone will be a major impediment for companies within the region. There is too much folklore within the business communities about specific ASEAN country legal systems that make them shy away from direct investment.

At government level there are still many bilateral issues that can potentially hinder and set back collaboration. Only just recently the Thai and Cambodian army had a number of skirmishes over the Preah Vihear Temple ruins along their common border. Cambodia is concerned about Lao dam construction, Malaysia and Indonesia are yet to settle some maritime and land borders in Borneo, the Philippines still has a claim on Sabah, Singapore and Malaysia had a number of spats concerning water, land reclamation, and rock formations in the South-China Sea that went as far as the International Court of Justice (ICJ). Vietnam and Cambodia are still in dispute over outlying islands along their common border.

The region is way behind schedule in the implementation of the AEC. Many unresolved issues concerning agriculture and non-tariff barriers are yet to be resolved. The less developed countries of Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, and Vietnam are also holding back progress.

If the ASEAN region fails to create an effective and integrated common market in 2015 which is truly competitive, with free flow of skills, and capital, ASEAN will be severely disadvantaged vis-a-vis China, the US, Japan, and the EU, at a delicate time when the current détente is in flux and transformation.

It may be ASEAN's own inward focus and inbred parochialism that prevents it sitting at trade, political, and economic forums as equal partners with influence and stature. This may also prevent ASEAN entering into an era of diverse economic prosperity in the near future from the synergies and market size an AEC would bring.

It is highly unlikely the AEC will be in place with any effective form by 2015 unless it becomes a high policy priority within each member government. The outcome most likely is the formation of an AEC in a compromised form, consistent with the track record of past ASEAN compromises since its formation back in 1967.


Notes and References

[1] Source: ASEAN Statistics (2011) http://www.aseansec.org/publications/ASEAN-Statistics-Leaflet-SKI2011.pdf http://www.doingbusiness.org/data https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/


September 2012


Lessons from the Invention of the airplane and the Beginning of the Aviation Era

Murray Hunter - University Malaysia Perlis

No other concept had been dreamed about more than the ability of man to undertake powered flight. Ever since the Greek Mythology of Icarus and Daedalus, man has been on a great quest to discover the secret of flight and when man finally managed to fly, this discovery was to change the way he lived upon this Earth. Like the advent of the automobile, powered manned flight was not a single invention but a gathering together of necessary knowledge to allow flight to be possible. This knowledge began being collected by the Chinese who flew kites for the first time somewhere around 500 BC.

The kite was an important step in achieving powered manned flight because it showed that something heavier than air could stay aloft. The kite may have been the invention of the Chinese philosophers Mozi and Lu Ban during the 5th Century BC. Although not fully understood at the time, the kite showed the basic laws of aerodynamics at work. Air flowing over a kite’s wing will have a high pressure below the wing and a low pressure above the wing, giving the kite lift. This lift also produces drag at the bottom of the kite opposite to the oncoming wind. When the kite is tethered to a guide-wire the forces of the wind against the tension from the guide-wire forces the kite into the air along a vector opposed to the tension of the guide-wire and wind. Some kites have tails to stabilize the direction of the kite adding the force of drag to the equation pulling on the tail, thus keeping the kite stable and upright.

A box kite design provides relatively high amounts of lift and most of the early aircraft of the Twentieth Century were inspired by this design. The box kite was invented by the Australian inventor Lawrence Hargrave in 1893 in his attempts to develop his own manned flying machine. Series of tandem box kites were able to lift Hargrave 16 feet off the ground[1].

In 1738 a Dutch-Swiss mathematician published an important aerodynamic principal in his book Hydrodynamica, which stated that any air (or fluid) flow as speed increases will result in a simultaneous decrease in pressure over a solid surface, which became known as Bernoulli’s principal. Air running over the top of an airfoil will run faster than the air running under the bottom of the airfoil thus creating a decrease of temperature and pressure which provides lift. The significance of this to flight is that Bernoulli’s principal explains the concept of lift and allows lift to be calculated on airfoils.

In 1799 Sir George Cayley was credited with formally identifying the four aerodynamic forces acting upon flight – lift, gravity, thrust and drag. Cayley believed that that any drag created by a flying machine must be countered by thrust in order for level flight to occur, which led to a better understanding that any design of a flying machine must minimize drag. These discoveries led to the development of cambered wings, which enabled them to create the force of lift for an aircraft. According to a recent discovery of Cayley’s school notebooks, he pondered over the problems like the angle of attack much earlier than previously thought in his early years[2]. Cayley designed an efficient cambered wing with the correct dihedral angle that provided lateral stability in flight, where he deliberately set the centre of gravity below the wings for that purpose[3]. Cayley’s model gliders incorporated all these features, monoplane wings with back horizontal stabilizers, looking similar to modern aircraft of today. There was possibly a glider built by Cayley in 1853 that was piloted by his grandson George John Cayley[4].

The propeller has a long history of development for nautical use which had to be applied to flight. One of the major challenges to the Wright Brothers in developing an airplane for their first flight at Kitty Hawk was that there was no aircraft propeller readily developed, so had to develop one on their own. They found that a propeller is essentially a wing and therefore they utilized early wind tunnel data on their wing experiments. They found that the relative angle of attack of the propeller had to be different along the propeller blade and therefore had to be twisted slightly.

The Wright brothers believed that the ability to fly depended upon balance and control, rather than the power of an engine to propel the airplane forward. This perhaps came from their background as bicycle makers where balance was essential. Control in the air was an important issue as there had been many deaths of aeronauts in gliding and balloon accidents over a number of years.

The Wright brothers further believed they had enough knowledge about wings and engines and decided it was important to practice control in gliding before powered flight so the needs of control could be understood[5]. They believed that previous practice used by Lilienthal of balancing and controlling a glider through redistributing body weight was fatally flawed[6]. Many before them including Langley and Chanute considered changing direction in midflight would be like moving a ship’s rudder for steering while the aircraft remained in straight and level flight[7][8]. Wilbur Wright observed that birds change direction in flight by changing their angle at the end of the wings to make their body’s roll to the left or right and he thought that this would also be a good way for an aircraft to change direction by banking left or right by changing the wing tilt through the use of a moveable airfoil on the sides of the wing. Again this was something similar to a bicycle going at high speed where a rider would distribute his or her weight to the side of a turn[9].

In 1900 the Wright brothers after researching the best place to do glide tests and taking advice from Octave Chanute went to Kitty hawk, North Carolina. The area had a good breeze coming onshore from the Atlantic, a soft sandy ground to land on, and was relatively remote for privacy. The first glider was based more on the work of previous pioneers and resembled the Chanute-Herring glider which flew well near Chicago back in 1896 and some aeronautical data that Lilienthal had published. The wings were cambered according to the theories of Sir George Cayley. The Wrights placed a horizontal elevator in front of the wings as they believed this would help them stop any nose dives that killed Lilienthal[10] and did not build a tail for the glider as at this stage as they thought it unnecessary. Most of the glider tests were unmanned with the glider held by ropes so glide characteristics could be studied.

The second glider in 1901 had its wings greatly enlarged in an attempt to increase lift. Approximately 100 flights were made at varying distances from 50 to 400 feet. The glider stalled a number of times but “pancaked” out and landed flat due to the forward elevator. This changed the brothers thinking towards the canard design[11], which they used until 1910. In general the second glider was very disappointing as it failed to yaw adequately to the wing ailerons, where the nose of the glider pointed away from the turn as the wings produced differential drag and didn’t have the lift that they had expected. This left the Wright brothers feeling very down about the prospects of manned flight.

The Wright brothers discovered that the equation that Lilienthal had been using to calculate lift was incorrect. Lilienthal and the Wright brothers both used the “Smeaton coefficient” in the lift equation which had a constant of 0.0054, overstating lift. The Wright brothers believed and determined through some bicycle tests that the coefficient was more like 0.0033 and adjusted their designing accordingly. Knowing that building gliders was expensive and trial and error was very time consuming they built their own wind tunnel so they could test models to speed up their experimentation and learning. These experiments proved to be very fruitful and they made an important discovery that longer and narrower wings (i.e., larger aspect ratio) would provide a better lift to drag ratio than broader wings. They also reduced the camber of airfoils which made them more efficient for banking. They totally discarded Lilienthal’s calculations and relied solely on their own data.

The third glider had some other design changes including a rear fixed vertical rudder which would assist in turning. The brothers flew the third glider unmanned like the first two trials. The glider gave the expected lift and allowed tighter turns without the amount of differential wing drag that occurred on the earlier gliders. However the rudder caused a new problem. When in a tight turn and trying to level back out again the glider failed to respond to the airfoil corrections and persisted in a tighter turn where the glider would slide towards the lower wing. The brothers found that by making the rudder movable this problem did not reoccur so with a movable rudder and wing airfoils the pilot had to control both the airfoils and rudder when maneuvering the glider. This enabled the brothers to make very controlled turns.

The three-axis control for the glider was a major breakthrough for controlled flight. It made the aircraft very controllable in flight and was the result of almost 1,000 test glides at Kitty Hawk. Some aeronautical historians believe that this is where the airplane was really invented[12].

The powered Wright Flyer I constructed of spruce and covered with muslin. The engine was built with an aluminum block by the brothers. The Wrights decided on twin pusher counter rotating propellers to cancel out the torque. They suffered many delays at Kitty Hawk with broken propeller shafts. After a number of attempts the brothers finally got the airplane off the ground on 17th December 1903 with a flight distance of 120 feet. The first flights received little publicity. Over the following year the second aircraft the Wright Flyer II made many flights at Dayton with many hard landings and minor mishaps. Much progress was made in 1904 with some longer flights lasting a few minutes but the airplane was still very difficult to control.

In 1905 the brothers made all the controls independent of each other so pitch, roll, and yaw could be controlled separately of each other. After a nearly fatal crash the brothers rebuilt the flyer with a much larger rudder and forward elevator placed further away from the wings. This made control much easier and led to a number of much longer flights. Ironically the media had ignored this story that Wilbur and Orville Wright made the first flights with a powered flying machine and later would become national heroes at their own doorstep[13][14].

The brothers believed that they now had a flying machine with practical utility that they could sell. They were finally granted a patent in 1906 and in 1907 went to Europe to sell their airplane. In early 1908 the Wright brothers finally signed contracts with a French company and the US Army. Wilbur made a number of demonstration flights showing advanced maneuvers during 1908 which captured the attention and admiration of the world.

The Wright brothers’ patent was challenged vigorously in the law courts for a number of years and Wilbur Wright also challenged any other flyer who infringed them. This took up a lot of time and it prevented the brothers from developing new aircraft designs. By 1911 the Wright airplanes were considered inferior to many of the new European designs. Wilbur passed away in 1912 and the brothers won their court case against Curtiss which had been going on for a few years. With the arrival of the First World War, the US Government found that American technology was behind the European builders and encouraged companies to cross license their technologies.

Businesswise the invention of the airplane did not lead to a great number of aircraft sales and the brothers formed an exhibition team which was later disbanded due to a number of team member deaths. Between 1910 and 1916 the Wright Company operated a flying school at Huffman Prairie, Dayton, training more than 100 pilots. In addition with the large number of airplane accidents and deaths the safety of the plane came into question by the US Army. Orville Wright sold the Wright Company in 1915 and took on public service as an elder aviation statesman becoming director of the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA), which he served for 28 years. It was only after the First World War when airplanes made a contribution to field warfare as a reconnaissance, fighter and bomber, and larger airplanes could carry passengers and cargo with much better safety that the aviation industry started to boom from the 1920s onwards.

So what are the lessons we learn from the invention of the airplane?

What we see is that an invention cannot occur until all relevant knowledge that makes it possible exists. There must be no knowledge gap, or else any idea is a fantasy. For example, Jules Verne’s imaginative novel From the Earth to the Moon in 1865 could only become reality with the Apollo Moon landing in 1969 when all necessary technology actually existed.

However the inventor must go the final step and either synthesize all previous knowledge or incrementally enhance what knowledge already exists to complete the invention. This often requires having the confidence to disregard previous generally accepted knowledge with your own generated knowledge obtained through your trials and experimentation.

What we also see is that any invention that does not fulfill the present needs of consumers or industry will not initially be commercially viable. In the cases of the early automobiles and aircraft, they were not at an advanced enough state for potential users to accept them because of the primitive state of the invention and social situation surrounding it, i.e., early automobiles not practical due to faults and UK laws had to be amended to make the invention acceptable an means of transport.

Inventions can only be commercially successful is if a use is found for it, i.e., early aircraft could be utilized in a war situation during the First World War. The story of the development of the airplane shows how essential trial and error or learning by doing is essential to the successful development of any invention.
 



Notes and References

[1] Hudson, S.W. & Ruhen, O. (1977). Lawrence Hargrave: Explorer, Inventor and Aviation Experimenter, Cassel, Sydney.

[2] Dee, R. (2007). The Man Who Discovered Flight: George Cayley and the First Airplane, Toronto, McClelland and Stewart.

[3] Ackroyd, J.A.D. (2002). Sir George Cayley, the father of aeronautics, Notes Rec. R. Soc., Vol. 56, No, 2, pp. 161-181.

[4] Dee, R. (2007). "The Man Who Discovered Flight".

[5] Crouch, T.D. (2003). The Bishop’s Boys: A life of Wilbur and Orville Wright, New York, W.W. Norton & Company.

[6] Tobin, J. (2004). To Conquer the Air: The Wright Brothers and the Great Race to Flight, New York, Simon & Schuster, P. 53.

[7] This was a very different attitude to other pioneers at the time like Ader, Maxim, and Langley who believed that after attaching an engine to an airframe they could just go out and fly it without any experience.

[8] Crouch, T.D. (2003). The Bishop’s Boys: A life of Wilbur and Orville Wright, New York, W.W. Norton & Company.

[9] Tobin, J. (2004). "To Conquer the Air"

[10] Jakab, P. L. (1997). Visions of a Flying Machine: The Wright Brothers and the process of invention, Washington, DC, Smithsonian.

[11] Canard is French for duck and in aeronautic refers to a wing configuration where the forward wings have a smaller area than the back wings, which adds to lift.

[12] Langewiesche, W. (1944). Stick and Rudder: An explanation of the art of flying, New York, McGraw-Hill.

[13] Tobin, J. (2004). "To Conquer the Air", P. 211.

[14] However the Wright Brothers themselves can be part of the blame for this as they discouraged media attention in fear of competitors stealing their ideas and they would not be able to get a patent.


24.09.2012
 


 
World Security Network reporting from London in the United Kingdom, September 15, 2012
Dear Cavkic Salih,
"The U.S. must enforce all possible measures against hate speeches and crimes in America and not simply argue that this is not possible because of the First Amendment. Under the fixed rules of The Holy Qur’an it is forbidden to attack people who did not insult you. All acts of self-defense have to be directed against the attacker personally. Therefore a protest against the film is in line with Islam, but not any attack on U.S. citizens."

For many years the independent World Security Network Foundation (WSN) has promoted the Human Codes of Tolerance and Respect through its global project www.codesoftolerance.com to enhance tolerance and respect towards other religions, races and ethnic minorities with a focus on Islam (also on Facebook).

Below are our WSN proposals on how to react to the 14-minute trailer that mocks the Holy Prophet as a womanizer, child molester and ruthless killer (called “Innocence of Muslims”, posted in YouTube) and the angry reactions across the Muslim World, including the killing of U.S. Ambassador John Christopher Stevens in Benghazi (Libya) and three of his staff members:

1. A double strategy of containment, condemning the insulting video clip on one side and violence against people who have nothing to do with the film on the other is necessary. We also have to promote the Golden Nuggets of tolerance we all share in our global village (see Hubertus Hoffmann, Codes of Tolerance Speech in Dubai UAE here).

2. The video clip violates the world religion of Islam, as well as insulting attacks on the Holy Qur’an, the Holy Bible in Nigeria or India or the Holy Torah the Palestine. In a world of 7bn individuals you will always have some who misbehave and hurt the religious convictions of others.

3. The U.S. must enforce all possible measures against hate speeches and crimes in America and not simply argue that this is not possible because of the First Amendment. The burning of the Qur’an by Terry Jones in Florida led to the killing of UN personal in Afghanistan and now this film has resulted in the killing of the U.S. Ambassador in Libya. U.S. federal prosecutors and courts must act now to protect Americans. The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938 in U.S. 465 in 1987 under which several Canadian films were defined as "political propaganda," requiring their sponsors to be identified. Something like this should be required with hate propaganda films as well.

4. Republican U.S. Presidential candidate Mitt Romney said in a statement on September 11, 2012: "It's disgraceful that the Obama administration's first response was not to condemn attacks on our diplomatic missions, but to sympathize with those who waged the attacks. "This was not only wrong and far from the style of a true president but also a counter-productive attack on the acting president. He too needs a double strategy approach and must avoid collecting voters on a national tragedy.

5. If a single American insults Islam with one YouTube video, he is not representing 300 million Americans at all. The only man who represents all Americans is the U.S. President.

"John Christopher Stevens, US Ambassador to Libya since May 2012, was killed on September 13, 2012 inside the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya by protestors. I demand that the city of Benghazi name an important street or public place in front of the U.S. consulate after U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens, for, together with his country, the United States of America, he contributed to making the revolution in Libya and the overthrow of Col. Gaddafi possible."
6. Under the fixed rules of The Holy Qur’an it is forbidden to attack people who did not insult you. All acts of self-defense have to be directed against the attacker personally. Therefore a protest against the film is in line with Islam, but not any attack on U.S. citizens. Moreover, any slogan suggesting that “America” is responsible for the act of one man contradicts Sharia and the Holy Qur’an. Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi, Afghan President Karzai, Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki or the new Prime Minister of Libya Mustafa Abushagur should condemn the short film, but it is just as important to make clear these Islamic rules do not allow attacks on any people who have not attacked you. In a symbolic gesture, these Muslim leaders as well as imams in the Arab world must invite American citizens in front of TV cameras to make that statement very clear. This is their political and religious responsibility; otherwise they themselves offend against the Holy Prophet and the Holy Qur’an. Not only U.S. officials, but all Western leaders, foreign ministers and diplomats must make that very clear in letters to them now.

7. I demand that the city of Benghazi name an important street or public place in front of the U.S. consulate after U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens, for, together with his country, the United States of America, he contributed to making the revolution in Libya and the overthrow of Col. Gaddafi possible.

8. We have to cut the dangerous tit-for-tat strategy of the radicals who provoke a spiral of confrontation, while making it clear that a majority of 99.99 percent of the people tolerate and respect all other religions and want a global village of peace and love. We should not leave the public attention and media coverage to the few criminals only.

This newsletter of the global World Security Network Foundation is dedicated to U.S. Ambassador John Christopher Stevens and three of his team-members killed serving a free and better Libya as true American patriots and global concerned citizens.


Dr. Hubertus Hoffmann
President and Founder
World Security Network Foundation

 



The International Institute for Middle-East and Balkan Studies (IFIMES) from Ljubljana, Slovenia, regularly analyses events in the Middle East and the Balkans. IFIMES has analysed current events following the non-fulfilment of promises given by the leading political parties in Bosnia and Herzegovina to EU high representatives to reach by 31 August 2012 a political agreement on the implementation of the European Court of Human Rights judgement in the Sejdić-Finci case. The most interesting sections from the analysis entitled “BiH: THE MOSCOW – BELGRADE – BANJA LUKA – SARAJEVO TRANSVERSAL” are published below.



BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA:

THE MOSCOW – BELGRADE – BANJA LUKA – SARAJEVO TRANSVERSAL

Bakhtyar Aljaf,  Director of IFIMESThe presidents of the leading political parties in the Parliamentary Assembly of Bosnia and Herzegovina – the Social Democratic Party of BiH (SDPBiH), the Alliance of Independent Social Democrats (SNSD), the Party of Democratic Action (SDA), the Union for a Better Future of BiH (SBBBiH), Serbian Democratic Party (SDS), Croatian Democratic Union of BiH (HDZBiH) and Croatian Democratic Union 1990 (HDZ 1990) – jointly met in Brussels on 27 June 2012 where they agreed with EU Commissioner for Enlargement and European Neighbourhood Policy Štefan Füle to reach a political agreement by 31 August 2012 on the implementation on the Sejdić-Finci judgement and make the necessary amendments to the Constitution to make it compliant with the European Court of Human Rights judgement in the case of “Sejdić and Finci against Bosnia and Herzegovina“.

The implementation of the Sejdić-Finci judgement questions the foundations of the constitutional system in Bosnia and Herzegovina and reveals the background of events related to that judgement. This justifiably raises doubts as to whether membership in NATO and the European Union (EU) really represents the goal of the main political party leaders in Bosnia and Herzegovina?


POSTPONING AND/OR PREVENTING NATO MEMBERSHIP

In the Sejdić - Finci judgement Bosnia and Herzegovina was ordered to amend the provisions of its Constitution as well as the Election Act so as to enable the individuals who do not declare themselves as members of “constituent peoples of Bosnia and Herzegovina” to stand for election as members of the BiH Presidency and delegates to the House of Peoples of the Parliamentary Assembly of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

On December 22, 2009, the Grand Chamber the European Court of Human Rights (Applications Nos. 27996/06 and 34836/06) adopted the judgement in the Sejdić-Finci case, finding that the applicants Dervo Sejdić (Roma) and Jakob Finci (Jewish) as the members of minority communities were deprived of their right to stand for election to the House of Peoples, which is contrary to Article 14 of the European Convention (prohibition of discrimination in relation to the rights laid down in the Convention) in conjunction with Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 thereto (freedom of election), and to stand for election to the Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina, which represents a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 12 (general prohibition of discrimination).

By offering solutions for the implementation of the Sejdić-Finci case the leading political parties are trying to make some fundamental constitutional changes and realise their secret strategic interests such as to postpone Bosnia and Herzegovina's full membership in NATO and eventually even to prevent it. The importance of NATO membership for Bosnia and Herzegovina has been stressed by Dr. Nerzuk Ćurak, professor at the Faculty of Political Sciences in Sarajevo, in his article “Is Bosnia and Herzegovina an important country? Geopolitical Dilemmas and the Imperative of Statehood („Je li Bosna i Hercegovina važna zemlja? Geopolitičke dileme i imperativ državnosti“) (Sarajevo, 2009), in which he, among other, wrote: “The one who controls Bosnia and Herzegovina with its two-entities controls former Yugoslavia; the one who controls former Yugoslavia controls the West Balkans; the one who controls the West Balkans prevents the balkanisation of the West.

Current political events clearly point to the existence of a transversal in Bosnia and Herzegovina that encompasses the Moscow – Belgrade – Banja Luka triangle and which is, according to western geopolitical analysts, getting strong ties with Sarajevo through Zlatko Lagumdžija (SDP) and Fahrudin Radončić (SBBBiH). A worrying fact arising from those analyses is that there are certain attempts to realise a plan that could eventually prevent Bosnia and Herzegovina's membership in the strongest military and political alliance in the world, which would, if it was fully obtained, ensure security and stability of the region as well as favourable environment for foreign investments that would consequently lead to economic development. Based on the current status of Bosnia and Herzegovina and its partnership relations with NATO, the above stated transversal would infiltrate into the security system of NATO, EU and other international institutions and agencies ensuring the security of western countries.


A THREAT TO THE US NATIONAL SECURITY AND TO NATO'S SOUTH WING

The transversal that stems from Moscow has two direct branches – one is connected with Podgorica (Montenegro) and the other with Tehran. There are several other transversals also stemming from or passing through Russia.

The question is what role Zlatko Lagumdžija (SDP) and Fahrudin Radončić (SBBBiH) play in this transversal and whose interests they serve – since it is already obvious that dubious Russian money, which stems especially from Montenegro, will find its shelter in the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

The background of the reconstruction of power in Bosnia and Herzegovina has revealed that the aim is to enable Lagumdžija's and Radončić's staff to take over the Ministry of Foreign Affairs as well as the Defence Ministry, while Radončić himself would occupy the position as the Minister of Security of Bosnia and Herzegovina. This would enable them to assume full control of the key governmental departments responsible for the process of NATO accession and for the security system of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Consequently, the security system of Bosnia and Herzegovina would be directly connected with Moscow, which has a transversal connection with Tehran.

A faked conflict between Milorad Dodik and Zlatko Lagumdžija represents a staged show for the public, while in fact they are trying to get the “political dead man” Lagumdžija back to life as Dodik's closest ally, although according to public opinion polls he and his SDP have lost significant support among the Bosniak electorate. With his accentuated anti-Tehran statements Radončić is actually trying to hide the real goals of his politics. Zlatko Lagumdžija's recent participation at the summit of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) in Makkah represents another of his misuses of OIC – the aim of his unnecessary participation at the Makkah summit was to regain the trust of the Bosniak electorate.

Connecting the security system of Bosnia and Herzegovina with Moscow and Tehran represents a direct threat to the US national security and to NATO's south wing, which requires additional efforts from the competent agencies of the US in fighting organised criminal activities such as trafficking in drugs, human beings and arms and money laundering. They should closely investigate the involvement of certain politicians in Bosnia and Herzegovina with those criminal activities and verify the origin, value and volume of their illegitimate property.



LOCAL ELECTION – THE TRUST IN POLITICAL LEADERS AND PARTIES PUT AT TEST

The local election in Bosnia and Herzegovina scheduled for 7 October 2012 will test the trust enjoyed by political leaders and parties. Milorad Dodik and his SNSD have been constantly losing support in the Republika Srpska entity. On the other hand, the unsuccessful reconstruction of power in Bosnia and Herzegovina has revealed the real intentions of its initiator, which has lead to a decrease of voters' support for Lagumdžija and his SDP-a as well as for Radončić and his SBBBiH – who are actually closely connected with Milorad Dodik, as proven by numerous secret meetings between Dodik and Radončić.

The IFIMES International Institute believes that certain superpower countries will have to strengthen their presence in Bosnia and Herzegovina and the region in order to prevent the irresponsible politicians from bringing Bosnia and Herzegovina into a crisis that could escalate in an undesired direction. It is therefore important to ensure strong cooperation between the US investigation and security agencies, which will have to focus on certain politicians in Bosnia and Herzegovina who are the leaders and/or patrons of organised crime and corruption in that country. The results of local election will strike a heavy blow against the Moscow – Belgrade – Banja Luka – Sarajevo transversal and most probably eliminate certain politicians and parties that have been important players on the political scene in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Ljubljana, August 30, 2012

The International Institute for Middle-East and Balkan Studies (IFIMES), Ljubljana

Director:

Bakhtyar Aljaf






02.09.2012



PUBLICATIONS:


      From Europe, to the US, Japan, and onto China: The evolution of the automobile - Murray Hunter

     
Missed Opportunities for ASEAN if the ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) fails to start up in 2015 - Murray Hunter

      Lessons from the Invention of the airplane and the Beginning of the Aviation Era - Murray Hunter

      Elite educators idolize the “ high flying entrepreneurs” while deluded about the realities of entrepreneurship for the masses: - Murray Hunter

     
The Arrival of Petroleum, Rockefeller, and the Lessons He taught Us - Murray Hunter - University Malaysia Perlis

      Ethics, Sustainability and the New Realities - Murray Hunter

      The Dominance of “Western” Management Theories in South-East Asian Business Schools: The occidental colonization of the mind. - Murray Hunter

      How feudalism hinders community transformation and economic evolution: Isn’t equal opportunity a basic human right? - Murray Hunter

      On Some of the Misconceptions about Entrepreneurship - Murray Hunter

      Knowledge, Understanding and the God Paradigm - Murray Hunter

      Do Confucian Principled Businesses Exist in Asia? - Murray Hunter

      Samsara and the Organization - Murray Hunter

      Integrating the philosophy of Tawhid – an Islamic approach to organization. - Murray Hunter

      What’s with all the hype – a look at aspirational marketing - Murray Hunter

      Does Intrapreneurship exist in Asia? - Murray Hunter

      One Man, Multiple Inventions: The lessons and legacies of Thomas Edison - Murray Hunter

     People tend to start businesses for the wrong reasons - Murray Hunter

    
How emotions influence, how we see the world? - Murray Hunter

     How we create new ideas - Murray Hunter

     Where do entrepreneurial opportunities come from? - Murray Hunter

     The five types of thinking we use - Murray Hunter

     Evaluating Entrepreneurial Opportunities: What’s wrong with SWOT? - Murray Hunter

     How motivation really works - Murray Hunter

     The Evolution of Business Strategy - Murray Hunter

     Not all opportunities are the same: A look at the four types of entrepreneurial opportunity - Murray Hunter

     Do we have a creative intelligence? - Murray Hunter

     Imagination may be more important than knowledge: The eight types of imagination we use - Murray Hunter

    
The environment as a multi-dimensional system: Taking off your rose coloured glasses - Murray Hunter

     Generational Attitudes and Behaviour - Murray Hunter

     Groupthink may still be a hazard to your organization - Murray Hunter

  
  Perpetual Self conflict: Self awareness as a key to our ethical drive, personal mastery, and perception of entrepreneurial opportunities - Murray Hunter

     The Continuum of Psychotic Organisational Typologies - Murray Hunter

    
There is no such person as an entrepreneur, just a person who acts entrepreneurially - Murray Hunter

     Go Home, Occupy Movement!!-(The McFB– Was Ist Das?) - prof. dr. Anis Bajrektarevic

     Diplomatie préventive - Aucun sičcle Asiatique sans l’institution pan-Asiatique - prof. dr. Anis Bajrektarevic

    
Democide Mass-Murder and the New World Order - Paul Adams


 






Koninkrijk Belgie - Monarchie Belgique










Maasmechelen Village

Maasmechelen Village




Adria





Bosnian
Važne vijesti

Bulgarian
Важни новини

Catalan
Notícies importants

Czech
Důležité zprávy

Danish
Vigtige nyheder

Dutch
Belangrijke nieuws

English
Important News

Estonian
Tähtis Uudised

French
Nouvelles importantes

German
Wichtige News

Greek
Σημαντικές ειδήσεις

Hungarian
Fontos hírek

Irish
Fógra tábhachtach Nuacht

Italian
Importanti novitŕ

Latvian
Svarīga Jaunumi

Lithuanian
Svarbu Naujienos

Portuguese
Importante Notícias

Slovenian
Pomembne novice

Spanish
Noticias importantes

Swedish
Viktiga nyheter




BALKAN AREA
BALKAN AREA




prof. dr. Anis Bajrektarevic
prof. dr. Anis Bajrektarevic



Go Home, Occupy Movement!! - (The McFB – Was Ist Das?) -
prof. dr. Anis Bajrektarevic




Diplomatie préventive - Aucun sičcle Asiatique sans l’institution pan-Asiatique - prof. dr. Anis Bajrektarevic\/span|



ADDENDUM – GREEN/POLICY PAPER: TOWARDS THE CREATION OF THE OSCE TASK FORCE ON (THE FUTURE OF) HUMAN CAPITAL
prof. dr. Anis Bajrektarevic




Gunboat Diplomacy in the South China Sea – Chinese strategic mistake -
Anis H. Bajrektarevic




Geopolitics of Quantum Buddhism: Our Pre-Hydrocarbon Tao Future
prof. dr. Anis Bajrektarevic




The Mexico-held G–20 voices its concerns over the situation in the EURO zone - Anis H. Bajrektarevic




Maasmechelen Village




Maasmechelen Village