Friday, March 21, 2014

How to Clean your Surveillance Earpiece Tube

With very little information on the internet about earpiece’s, it is very rare when we get a chance to re post, with permission, an article from this industry.


 


A surveillance earpiece is a listening device that transmits sound for hands-free communication. It is a good communication accessory for two-way communication that is mostly used in security operations and mobile phones. If you are working in industries like transportation, aviation, security, mining and other industries that has intensive security, earpiece tubes are important equipment to you.


Because of this, it is important to keep your earpiece tube clean to maintain its efficiency and effectiveness for longer years. HiTech Wireless compiles some easy tips on how to clean your earpiece tube:


1. Disconnect and remove tube from transducer clip.



2. Check for wax and debris on the inside of tube, elbow and tube key.



3. Completely submerse the tube along with tube key.



4. Using an air can, dry and blow out any additional debris and water from the tube.



5. Finally, wipe the tube down with a dry towel. Remember to repeat the procedure should you see more debris or wax in the ear tube.


There are other things you can do to keep your surveillance earpiece clean and working effectively, such as, storing it in a place where dust and dirt cannot enter the tube, cleaning it periodically, and using it properly. For more tips on cleaning and maintenance of earpiece tubes, visit Earpieceonline.co.uk.



How to Clean your Surveillance Earpiece Tube

Tuesday, March 18, 2014

Security Radio Equipment

These are troubling times for our nation and indeed for the world at large. Our little corner of the history books will be blighted by a global recession and civil unrest as political opportunists fan the flames of religious and racial tensions. In the midst of all this turbulence, there’s us, the regular people, caught up in the middle of the maelstrom.


In a world fraught with buzzwords like ‘terrorism’ ‘counter-terrorism’ ‘contamination’ ‘organized crime’ and ‘data theft’, its easy to feel like you’re always at risk, only ever one diplomatic blunder or power hungry 



madman away from World War 3. In such a world, an increase in security is often felt to be the only way to achieve peace of mind. Enter the world’s high security professionals.


Whether providing security for public figures, guarding prominent buildings, patrolling national boundaries or keeping the Internet safe from hackers, high security is an enormous and varied industry that demands much from its workers. Public and private security firms are stretched to deal with all the issues and potential problems that they have to tackle.


Fortunately, two-way radios make their work a lot easier. The same type of radios that are used by the military can be affordably purchased by the security services, as and when needed.


These radios are rugged and durable, they can withstand almost any weather type and they have strong, long lasting batteries that allow for hours of field work. Two-way radios are by far the quickest and most reliable form of portable communication, not as clumsy as a pager or as temperamental as a phone. In addition, two-way radios are incredibly easy to use, meaning that training is a doddle.


Working alongside state-of-the-art surveillance technology, non-lethal weaponry and bleeding edge computer security programs, the simple, effective (and simply effective) two-way radio is still the security services first and finest friend.


Whether on foot or in vehicles, whether standing guard or co-ordinating the efforts of a team, two-way radios are an absolutely indispensable part of the high security industry, making them a vital component of the nation’s peace of mind.


You’ll find two-way radios helping to keep secure our data centres, cash warehouses, government buildings, military bases, secure storage facilities and even more sites than we have the space to name.


The world may be a conflicted, sometimes frightening place, but the high security workers around the globe are helping us to sleep at night and using two-way radios to do it. 



Security Radio Equipment

Monday, March 10, 2014

How do waterproof headphones work?

Asked by Betty from Hammersmith


I take it you’re a newer reader and you therefore aren’t aware of my dislike for recommending specific sets of headphones. In a usual case, (like when one reader asked me to recommend sweat-proof headphones) I have to answer with “it depends on a multitude of factors, such as how often you use them, how important sound quality is to you or even (in that one case) how much you tend to sweat. However, I’m not going to let you down, Betty, because waterproof headphones are actually a bit different…


 


There are several companies that specialize in designing totally waterproof headphones, some of which I’ll be glad to recommend to you. However, at this point, I really must stress that I have never owned, borrowed, or even reviewed a pair of waterproof headphones, so although I am happy to point you in the right direction, I (metaphorically, of course) wash my hands of responsibility if they don’t quite work. My advice to you is to try Headsetonline.co.uk first and read the customer reviews (especially the negative ones), before making your purchase.


 


Anyway, now that’s over and done with…


 


A company called ‘Swimmer LTD’ specialize in all things swimming related, with special emphasis on watertight cases for iPods, smartphones and even iPads. They also sell headphones, of course and their site features customer reviews for most of their products.


 


Another company called ‘H20 Audio’ also makes waterproof headphones and FINIS have a set called the ‘SwimP3’ which, dopey name aside, seems to be rather well-regarded by swimmers. The ‘SwimP3’ utilizes bone conduction technology, which is probably the best way to go if you’re planning on listening to music whilst swimming.


 


Bone conduction, in case you don’t know, simply bypasses the outer ear and stimulates the tiny inner ear bones (called ‘ossicles’), just as an organic sound would, your brain then interprets this sound exactly the same way as it would if you’d heard it in your ear, only, because your outer ear is not directly being used, you are free to wear earplugs (which some swimmers like to do).


 


These suggestions are by no means your only options though; there are a veritable ton of companies out there all manufacturing products exactly like the ones you want. So, whilst I can’t give any of them a personal seal of approval (sorry about that), I can at least offer a helping hand. Is that enough, Betty?


 



How do waterproof headphones work?

Wednesday, March 5, 2014

Legendary female wrestling pioneer Mae Young passes on, aged 90

Pioneering female professional wrestler Mae Young has passed away aged 90.


To date, Mae Young is the only professional wrestler in history (male or female) to have had documented matches in nine different decades. She began wrestling in 1939, at the onset of the Second World War and her last match took place in 2010.


Young, real name Johnnie Mae Young, was originally billed as ‘The Amazing’, ‘The Queen’ or ‘The Great’ Mae Young but was ultimately far better known simply as Mae Young. She enjoyed one of the most celebrated and unique careers in the history of professional wrestling.


Young’s wrestling debut came whilst she was still a teenager, after starring in the boy’s amateur wrestling team at school. During World War 2, she became a popular attraction, inspiring many other women to become professional wrestlers.


In 1951, Young was crowned as the first ever NWA Florida (National Wrestling Alliance) Women’s Champion and eventually became the NWA’s first United States Women’s Champion.


During the 50’s, Young wrestled for the WWWA (World Women’s Wrestling Association), bringing credibility and popularity to Women’s wrestling. She remained a draw throughout her career.


Modern day wrestling fans know Young best for her stint with the WWF (World Wrestling Federation – now known as World Wrestling Entertainment, or WWE) from 1999-2000, in which she played a more comedic role. However, despite being nearly 80 years old, Young was still highly active as a wrestler. She participated in matches and storylines with her best friend, The Fabulous Moolah, another pioneer of Women’s wrestling and multi-time Women’s Champion (who had been partly trained by Young).


Mae Young would appear on WWE television, playing a number of roles from comedy character to respected veteran, throughout the next decade, with her final appearance being a celebration of her 90th birthday in 2013.


Memorable moments from her WWE tenure include being kissed by The Rock, giving the ‘Bronco Buster’ finisher to former WCW (World Championship Wrestling) boss Eric Bischoff, being beaten up by Tag Team wrestlers The Dudley Boyz and becoming ‘pregnant’ by Olympic weightlifter and former World Heavyweight Champion Mark Henry. “She will be missed as much as anyone I’ve ever known!” said Henry.


In 2008, Mae Young was inducted into the WWE Hall of Fame.


Since the announcement of Young’s death, tributes have flooded in from the wrestling world. Former WWE Champion-turned actor The Rock said, “She is a wrestling pioneer. I truly had deep affection and respect for ‘Auntie Mae’ Young”


WWE boss Vince McMahon said, “Her longevity in sports entertainment may never be matched, and I will forever be grateful for all of her contributions to the industry. On behalf of WWE, I extend our sincerest condolences to her family and friends.”


‘Rowdy’ Roddy Piper wrote, “”May Young was a wonderful lady! When I started in the business May teased me a lot. Love you May!” Multiple time WWE, WCW and NWA Champion Ric Flair called Young “An incredible person and pioneer of the wrestling business” Whilst, in an emotional Tweet, Jake ‘The Snake’ Roberts wrote, “Nobody, male or female, loved & respected the wrestling business more than her. True legend.”


Mae Young will be remembered by her fans as a pioneer and a female icon, as well as a charismatic performer with a great sense of humor. She was genuinely among the toughest human beings, be they male or female, to ever step between the ropes. 


 


SOURCES


http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/mae-young-dead-womens-wrestling-3025555


http://www.ontheredcarpet.com/Mae-Young-dies:-WWE-Hall-of-Famer-was-90/9394471  



Legendary female wrestling pioneer Mae Young passes on, aged 90

Top 5 Tablets To Buy This year

2013 has been a roller coaster year for tablets and for technology in general, and although a lot of that can be attributed to a giant lamp voiced by Bill Nighy (and if you missed the reference then you missed out on one of the year’s best movies), even more still can be ascribed to the good taste and ludicrously high standards (“what do you mean there’s no ‘time travel’ app!?) of YOU, the British consumer.


In order to continue this upward trend, we put our heads together and compiled a list of the year’s best tablets. You may be surprised at what comes first (actually, no, you won’t. We’ll say that right now. There are no surprises waiting for you at number one). Anyway, read on…


5. Amazon Kindle Fire HDX


The Amazon Kindle Fire HDX is, not to put too fine a point on it, awesome. The screen is breathtaking, the processor moves faster than David Cameron visiting a housing estate and the WiFi is better than ever (and, frankly, it was always pretty good).


But better even than that, is the price. Amazon continue to offer cracking tablets at amazing prices. You’re looking at £200 for one of these bad boys. It won’t break the bank like an iPad and it won’t disappoint like one of the many false economy ‘budget’ tablets out there.


That said; the earlier Kindle Fire HD is still one of the top 5 tablets out there if you’re looking to save a bit of dosh. Yeah, it has been out for a while now, but any Kindle version you care to name is going to be worth the money.


4. LG G Pad 8.3


2014 is going to be a good year for LG, and well; they’ve got to be about due, don’t they. After making a number of QGB (quite good, but…) products over the last couple of years, the G Pad is a welcome return to form. Fast, smart and groovy, everything about the G Pad screams care and attention, from the branding to the strong (yet lightweight and beautiful) aluminium casing.


Plus, 8.3 inches is an inspired size for a tablet. Not as cumbersome as a 10-Inch leviathan, but bigger than a 7-Inch ‘I may as well be a smartphone’ titch. What should, by all rights, have been a design disaster has, in fact, turned out to combine the best of both worlds. We can’t wait to see what those Korean lads and ladies come up with next.


3. Samsung Galaxy Note 3


The Samsung Galaxy Note 3 is a strong contender for best Android tablet of 2013, which makes it a very strong contender for best Android tablet ever made. However, it just loses the top spot to the Nexus (for reasons that we’ll discuss in a minute).


With a quad-core processor that’s beefier than a field of buffalo and a truly wonderful screen, this tablet is a joy to use. Add to this the sweet design job and you’re definitely on to a winner. You can even record video in HD. Yeah, it is true that nobody actually records videos on their tablet, but still, its nice to know that if you did, the video footage would be almost worth the beating you’d (justly) receive.


In short, this is a marvellous tablet and a genuine credit to Android devices everywhere.


2. Google Nexus 7 (2013 version)


Now, if you’re not an ‘Apple-ite’ (feel free to use that term), then your list ends here and, frankly, you certainly won’t go wrong if you choose to buy anything off this list with your Christmas money. However, whilst we’re talking value for money, they still don’t come much better than the Nexus series.


How the tech bods at Google can improve on this device is beyond me, but they have. In addition, they’ve also kept the cost down. This, like the Kindle Fire before it, is a winning device because it not only offers the best Android tablet experience in the world right now (in fact, ever), but it also does it whilst staying in the £200 price range. We actually can’t say enough good things about this series; we expect Google to carry on scoring big in 2014.


iPad Air


The iPad Air or any version of the iPad, is the best gosh-darn tablet in the world right now. That’s just how it is. The iPad beats every other tablet ever made and anything else is just wishful thinking.


Fast, sleek and sexy, the iPad looks like it costs what it costs, so there can be no savings here. Frankly, the cash-strapped need not apply. Apple don’t care if you can afford their products or not, because they know that deep down you’re willing to mortgage your very soul in order to own them.


Now, we aren’t the sort of smarmy, yuppie-types who swoon over the Apple logo just because of some sort of fickle allegiance, we’re the sort of sticky, geeky types who swoon over the Apple products simply because they are so damned good.


Maybe one day we’ll do a list that doesn’t have an iPad in the number one slot. Maybe. However, dear reader; today is not that day. 



Top 5 Tablets To Buy This year

Tuesday, March 4, 2014

Tablet Wars: Who"s Xooming Whom?




With a Xoom well beyond it’s sell by date, namely inside the first indoctrination of the apple ipad, here’s a glance at an article from the time, with the honeycomb android platform, there’s lots of commentators saying it is the significant rival to that ipad, and every one seem to be looking forward to the opportunity for this tablet. The xoom is a dead duck, a enthusiasts thing if you can buy one, and gone in the record of that tablet PC. It is beautiful isn’t it

 


Motorola Inc. (NYSE: MOT)’s first Android 3.0 tablet — the Xoom — is out today on the Verizon Wireless 3G network and will be upgradeable to 4G Long Term Evolution (LTE) at a later date.


The device is getting mixed reviews. Many like the new operating system but wince at the price tag, which is $800 without a contract or $600 with the standard two-year ball and chain. Still, at least some potential customers are liking the new machine:


“Just played around with the xoom at verizon store,” writes designer/blogger Gordon Fraser on Twitter. “Love honeycomb!”


What they say
The big daddy of tech reviews, Walt Mossberg at The Wall Street Journal, has some good words on the Honeycomb tablet. “I consider it the first truly comparable competitor to Apple’s hit iPad,” he writes.


Naturally, Mossberg isn’t so impressed with the price of the device and so ends with this sting: “As much as I like the Xoom and Honeycomb, I’d advise consumers to wait to see what Apple has up its sleeve next before committing to a higher price for the Motorola product.”


Meanwhile, there’s a minor catch to the planned upgrade to LTE for the Xoom, as CNET notes: “Consumers who buy Motorola’s new Xoom tablet when it hits stores today [Thursday] will have to send their tablets back to Motorola if they want to upgrade to 4G LTE.


Hey, at least it’s a free upgrade! Verizon says the LTE option should be available in about 90 days.


Motorola has also been hit with a trademark lawsuit over the product’s name by — you guessed it! — the Xoom Corporation. You might think that consumers could easily tell the difference between a tablet and an electronic payment company, but Florian Mueller at the FOSS Patents blog isn’t so sure.


“I … wouldn’t view Xoom’s action as just a ridiculous ‘troll’ suit,” he writes. See Mueller’s post for an in-depth overview of the multiple issues in the suit.


What we say
See below for more on the Xoom:


Naturally, Mossberg isn’t so impressed with the price of the device and so ends with this sting: “As much as I like the Xoom and Honeycomb, I’d advise consumers to wait to see what Apple has up its sleeve next before committing to a higher price for the Motorola product.”


Meanwhile, there’s a minor catch to the planned upgrade to LTE for the Xoom, as CNET notes: “Consumers who buy Motorola’s new Xoom tablet when it hits stores today [Thursday] will have to send their tablets back to Motorola if they want to upgrade to 4G LTE.


Hey, at least it’s a free upgrade! Verizon says the LTE option should be available in about 90 days.


Motorola has also been hit with a trademark lawsuit over the product’s name by — you guessed it! — the Xoom Corporation. You might think that consumers could easily tell the difference between a tablet and an electronic payment company, but Florian Mueller at the FOSS Patents blog isn’t so sure.


“I … wouldn’t view Xoom’s action as just a ridiculous ‘troll’ suit,” he writes. See Mueller’s post for an in-depth overview of the multiple issues in the suit.


source – http://www.lightreading.com/mobile/4g-lte/tablet-wars-whos-xooming-whom/d/d-id/684479















Tablet Wars: Who"s Xooming Whom?

Monday, March 3, 2014

Thursday, February 27, 2014

What’s the difference between UHF and VHF (and which one is better)?

Asked by Wendy from Stoke-On-Trent


Hi Wendy,


 


I’ll start by supplying a bit of background to anybody reading this and wondering what on earth you’re talking about.


 


UHF (Ultra-High Frequency) is any radio frequency range between 300 MHz and 3GHz.


 


VHF (Very High Frequency) is any radio frequency range between 30 MHz and 300MHz.



 


If you buy a two-way radio, it will operate on either one or the other. This cannot be changed and the two frequencies are thoroughly incompatible, so it really pays to know what you’re buying.


 


So, as for which one is better, it basically depends greatly on what you want the radio for. Since you didn’t specify this in the email, I’ll make my answer quite general (however, if this doesn’t answer your question, then you can always pop another email my way and I’ll reply to that one).


 


If you’re working in an indoor or urban environment, then a UHF radio will work best. I say this because UHF penetrates buildings and large objects better than VHF, (generally speaking).


 


Conversely, if you’re working outside, then VHF is likely to be the better choice. It handles open spaces better and passes through organic matter better than UHF signals do. Essentially, the less inorganic material there is between the VHF sender and the receiver, the better.


 


Overall, the UHF radio slightly outperforms the VHF version. Both have their advantages/drawbacks, but UHF has a stronger signal and deals much better with obstacles. However, as I told Maria from Spain a couple of months back, mountains represent real problems for radios of either kind. In fact, they are mostly useless for skiing and anything else mountain-related. Not that there are very many mountains in Stoke-On-Trent, to the best of my knowledge.


 


Just remember when making your choice, that the final decision is an important one. Very often, I learn that somebody has bought a radio to replace a damaged model, only to find that the network they plan on using it with is the opposite frequency.


 


Very few companies will do anything about it, so it really does pay to make sure you know exactly what you want before you spend your hard-earned wonga.


 


I hope that helps you. Drop me a line if you’re still not sure and we’ll take it from there. 


 



What’s the difference between UHF and VHF (and which one is better)?

Wednesday, February 26, 2014

Rediscovery of Knee Ligament Validates 19th Century Paper

Doctors have discovered that an important knee ligament, first described in an 1879 paper, before being subsequently ignored for well over a century, is actually a very real and important body part.


Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tears are a common problem for many athletes. They are notoriously difficult to repair and the recovery is a tough and painful process that can take up to a year. Following treatment, however, many patients still complain of aches and pains and it is not at all uncommon for the joints to fail the necessary pivot-shift tests (performed so the doctors can check the success of their surgeries). Repeat injuries are also inexplicably common.


Last month, it was announced that a team of Flemish doctors appears to have finally solved this persistently vexing riddle and, in so doing, they validated a discovery made over a century ago.


Paul Segond, a 19th century French surgeon who is known for greatly aiding the development of Obstetrics and Gynaecology (as well as describing the Segond fracture), wrote of the ligament as a “pearly, fibrous band” in 1879. Segond posited that it was an additional ligament, but anatomists did not consider the initial discovery to be accurate.


After reading Segond’s paper and deciding that there may be something to it after all, the team of knee surgeons and an anatomist began investigating the possibility that Segond’s mystery ligament was, in fact, a very real part of the Human body.


The team examined the knees of 41 cadavers, finding that 40 of them actually contained Segond’s ligament, just as he’d described it a hundred years earlier.


With this (re)discovery now published and proven, the ligament has been named as the anterolateral ligament (ALL).


The anterolateral ligament joins the other joint structures in the knee considered most important by doctors and anatomists, such as the lateral femoral epicondyle (LFE), lateral collateral ligament (LCL), Gerdy’s tubercle (GT), popliteus tendon (PT), popliteofibular ligament (PFL), and, of course, the aforementioned anterior cruciate ligament (ACL).


Surgeons are already considering ways in which to repair ALL tears and damage, with the hopes of improving the quality of life for anyone who suffers any ligament damage to the knees. This rediscovery is likely to become a very significant one in the field of sports and athletics, across both amateur and professional playing fields.


 


SOURCES


 


http://www.scientificamerican.com/gallery_directory.cfm?photo_id=7737D2E0-994F-A7AD-8721A14249EB4E02



Rediscovery of Knee Ligament Validates 19th Century Paper

Tuesday, February 18, 2014

Tech We’d Like to See: Androids

Essentially, an android is a Human-like robot designed to mimic the appearance, mannerisms and body language of a flesh and blood person. However, even that definition is a flimsy one, as science fiction writers have come up with numerous weird and wonderful ways to create many new types of androids (at least on the page).


Sometimes an android is built by an alien race and thus resembles its creators. Sometimes an android is mostly robotic, but has some recognizably Human traits and sometimes an android is a bioorganic machine that is ‘grown’ rather than built (making it very similar to the legendary homunculus creatures of ancient myth, or even the Golem of Jewish folklore). 


The difference, essentially, between a robot and an android is that an android is designed to look more Human (for one reason or another) and a robot looks, well, like a robot (and that’s opening a whole other can of worms, if you’re interested in that, start with Al Jazari and go from there).


Why we want it?


The applications for Human-like robots are actually endless. Android firefighters could rescue people from areas inaccessible to Human beings, android surgeons would never miss a mark and their pleasant, Human-like appearance would certainly be preferable to some sort of scary surgical machine (if we were forced to choose, that is).


Androids could fill up many jobs that regular people simply don’t want to do (but hopefully in a money-less environment to avoid putting people out of said jobs). If we are still using money by the time the androids show up, then android stock-brokers could use their computer-minds to analyse and prefigure oncoming trends months in advance, rendering the entire economy as one clear, safe equation.


Androids could actually be extremely beneficial to the world, but I’m going to avoid the ethical consequences of their creation in this piece. You can discuss that amongst yourselves.


When can we expect it?


Robotics is an area of science that has come along in leaps and bounds recently. It may yet prove to be the breakthrough discipline of this era (following biology, psychology and, arguably, information technology before it).


In Japan, the ‘Intelligent Robotics Lab’ have developed what they call an ‘Actroid’, which is an android by any other name. Able to mimic breathing, movement, blinking and speaking, these machines are actually quite a startling sight! However, despite running a complex form of A.I (artificial intelligence), the Actroid’s ‘brain’ is actually accessed and operated via an external computer.


A bit more recently, in 2011, Danish professor Henrik Schärfe unveiled a robot version of himself. He’s not quite Noonien Soong, but it’s definitely a start!


I think we’ll see realistic androids in at least some workplaces by 2050, but as to proper, artificial people, I’m not sure that the majority of the Human race would ever actually allow such beings to be created. Having said that, if these early pioneering scientists get a consistently strong reaction to their creations, then I certainly wouldn’t rule anything out.


Cool Factor (assuming they don’t rise up and enslave us all): 5/5



Tech We’d Like to See: Androids

Saturday, February 15, 2014

Why Can’t I Use a Radio or a Phone on an Aeroplane?

The real reason is that the signals generated by your radio receiver (yes, it generates signals as well as receives them) can interfere with the aeroplane’s navigation equipment.


 


In an article for ‘The Straight Dope’, published in 1987, Cecil Adams (who ran a similar, but far superior, column to this one) explained it far better than I could. He said,


 


“Most modern receivers use something called a “local oscillator,” which is sort of an internal transmitter. The oscillator generates signal A, which is mixed with the somewhat raw incoming signal B to produce nice, easy-to-work-with signal C. There’s usually some sort of shielding around the oscillator, but it’s not always effective and sometimes errant signals leak out to make life difficult for other radio equipment nearby. If the other equipment happens to be an aircraft navigation device, somebody could wind up digging furrows with a $25 million plow. So do your bit for air safety and bring a tape player instead.”


 


Of course, you can replace ‘tape player’ with ‘iPod’ and not lose anything in the discussion…Feasibly, you could replace ‘iPod’ with ‘smartphone’ and lose even less.


 


However, the oscillator isn’t always going to cause a major problem, in fact, 9 times out of 10 you’ll be fine, but is it really worth endangering the lives of every passenger aboard the plane just so you can catch up on the football results?


 


Any answer other than ‘no’ would be inhumanly monstrous. Unless, of course, its a penalty shootout…


 


Actually, I’m over-exaggerating somewhat, in fact, not even your mobile would be likely to cause that much damage. In theory it could, but the reality for phones being banned is a little bit less terrifying, as www.Wired.com’s Cliff Kuang explains:


 


“Sure, your mobile can interfere with avionics — in theory. But in practice, it’s far from likely. Cockpits and communications systems have been protected against electromagnetic meddling through safeguards like shielded wiring and support structures since the 1960s. So why the resistance? Part of it, naturally, comes from the call carriers. When phones ping for signals at 35,000 feet, they can hit hundreds of towers at once, necessitating complicated parsing of roaming agreements. Providers don’t want the hassle if they’re not being properly compensated, so the government has left the plane ban in place”.


 


So, essentially, it’s not worth the risk to use a radio receiver on a plane and you can’t make calls because it would be a bugger to regulate, as well as a logistical nightmare to deal with, for the phone companies. That’s about it, really. 



Why Can’t I Use a Radio or a Phone on an Aeroplane?

Friday, February 14, 2014

Batman & Son preview released by Warner Bros and DC Entertainment

Warner Bros. and DC Entertainment have released a trailer for their upcoming animated feature ‘Son of Batman’. The film will be an adaptation of the 2006 story ‘Batman & Son’, which was written by Grant Morrison and drawn by Andy Kubert.


The comic story deals with the introduction of Bruce Wayne’s son, Damian Wayne, who also happens to be the grandchild of Batman’s nemesis Ra’s Al Ghul. The original story was published in Batman issues 655-658 and proved to be somewhat polarizing amongst the DC Comics fanbase.


The trailer hints that this film will be slightly different from the original story, with a greater emphasis seemingly placed on Damian’s membership within the League of Assassins, the worldwide organisation headed up by his grandfather.


The trailer also suggests that Deathstroke, known to younger fans from the popular ‘Teen Titans’ TV series, will be the main antagonist in the film version, instead of Talia, who was the principle enemy of the comic book story.


It also seems unlikely that this film will take up its potentially broader role as the opening chapter in Grant Morrison’s epic, 7-year Batman story arc; a story which ended with Damian’s controversial death in 2013. For now, it seems that this film will be a one-off.


DC Entertainment’s animated features have proven to be very popular with fans. Film adaptations of well-loved Batman stories such as ‘Batman: Year One’, ‘The Dark Knight Returns’ and ‘Under the Red Hood’ are all big sellers for download or on DVD/Blu Ray.


Jason O’Mara will voice Batman in the new film, whilst Morena Baccarin will voice Damian’s mother, Talia. Completing the casting are Carlo Esposito as Ra’s Al Ghul and Stuart Allen, who is voicing the titular character.


Bat-fans can expect to download or buy ‘Son of Batman’ late in the spring. 



Batman & Son preview released by Warner Bros and DC Entertainment

Monday, February 10, 2014

Tech We’d Like To See: The Dead Actor’s Studio

Imagine a young Marlon Brando starring alongside Johnny Depp, or Audrey Hepburn playing rival to Sandra Bullock as Marilyn Monroe stops by for a catty cameo.


Depending on how you look at it, this is either tantalizing ‘fantasy film making’ or else an utterly horrible, cash-in exercise in Hollywood excess. Whatever your viewpoint, it does seem likely that someone, somewhere will try this in the near future.


About three years ago, the news broke that George Lucas, the genius behind the ‘Star Wars’ merchandise (and a couple of related movies), was buying up the likeness rights to a plethora of iconic, yet deceased, leading men and famous actresses from Hollywood’s golden age. His plan? To use a concoction of existing footage, CGI and motion capture to create reasonable facsimiles of classic Hollywood stars and have them appear in future films, despite the notable handicap of being, well, dead.


Initially, it was just for one project, but it raised the prospect of other films being made, as well as a number of interesting philosophical issues. 


The majority of critics reacted negatively to the notion of these ‘Franken-films’, some saying that the magic of an individual acting performance would be notably absent in the films, others upset that the actors themselves could potentially ‘star’ in projects that they may not have supported in life.


It really must be said, however, that blockbuster movies like 2009’s ‘Avatar’ and 2011’s ‘Rise of the Planet of the Apes’ already received plaudits for their use of motion capture techniques and CGI ‘acting’. It is an accepted part of modern cinema, like it or not.


Lest we forget, George Lucas’ own ‘Star Wars’ films also featured a number of purely CG characters. In our era, we are becoming very used to CG characters; even CG versions of real actors are commonplace. It really isn’t a huge leap of imagination (or available technology) to foresee deceased stars headlining blockbusters once again.


We are also living in a world that specializes in the glorification of deceased idols and recycled imagery (take a look at this month’s music magazines and count how many times you see Jimi Hendrix, Kurt Cobain or other dead stars on the covers). Look at the movie magazines as they feature young DeNiro as Travis Bickle, or Ray Liotta as Henry Hill. We, as consumers, are being conditioned to expect our stars to be able to do anything we can imagine, including coming back from the dead.


Why we want it:


 


The question here, to at least some degree, is ‘do we want it?’ but for now, I’m going to be positive and assume that we do…


Bringing classic actors back to ‘life’ would be a daring and controversial decision and would inspire all kinds of debates. It would also, no doubt, stimulate the film industry by providing literally hundreds of thousands of new prospects, pairings and casting choices.


On the downside, it would probably create an updated version of the old Hollywood studio system that would likely prove to be a legal nightmare involving no small amount of heartache for the families of the stars being featured. It could also have the negative effect of holding down upcoming talent.


However, many Hollywood actors do what they do for a shot at immortality and this is, frankly, the closest that they are likely to get to that goal. It would not surprise me at all if ‘likeness rights’ contracts started containing an ‘after death’ clause that specified use of the actor’s image in posthumous film projects. 


Culturally speaking, in a world where dead musicians like Hendrix and 2Pac routinely release albums and where popular music is dominated by the ‘sampling’ (and in some cases, outright theft) of other works, or where film texts constantly, almost obsessive-compulsively, reference each other (in what has become the intertextual equivalent of an M.C Escher drawing), rehashing the stars of the past seems like an obvious choice.


Dead icons could spice up Hollywood by adding controversy, class and bankability to the summer’s contrived blockbuster selection. Plus, all their skeletons, secrets and shameful actions are already a matter of public record, so there’s no ill-timed revelatory ‘gossip’ that’s going to rear up and threaten the production.


Even those who oppose the making of such movies will still have to watch them in order to write the requisite bad reviews, this simply proves the old adage that controversy generates cash. 


When can we expect it?


Oh snap, it already happened. In the year 2000, actor Oliver Reed sadly died during the filming of Ridley Scott’s ‘Gladiator’. In order for him to finish what would become his final role, the VFX team created a CG ‘mask’ of Reed’s face and used a body double to complete their film.


Remember that car advert with Steve McQueen? It has already begun.


Real, workable CGI stars are already a reality, but the technology does not yet exist to create a completely CG James Dean for a sequel to ‘Rebel Without a Cause’. I’d give it maybe 10-20 years before we start seeing the stars in respectful, tasteful cameo roles, or else old actors performing alongside their younger selves. After that, it’ll be 3-5 years before we see the screen idols like Errol Flynn, Clark Gable and Grace Kelly headlining movies again.


Cool factor 3/5 – It really depends on how these ‘stars’ are handled. The results could, potentially, be beautiful codas to a star’s career (which is how they could be sold to the audience), but they could also be horribly insulting, denigrating the work of great actors and actresses. Time is going to tell, as usual…



Tech We’d Like To See: The Dead Actor’s Studio

Who He is & How He Came to be A Review of Batman: Year One

“Gotham City. Maybe it’s all I deserve, now. Maybe it’s just my time in Hell…”


As an opening line, it’s right up there with the one about the dead dog in the alleyway that greets you as you first read ‘Watchmen’. Right away, you can tell that this book is something special. It just grabs you and steadfastly refuses to let go.


Ignoring the controversy caused by this particular reprinting (that’s a blog for another time), what we have here is an enduring graphic classic. It is a gritty piece of exquisitely rendered pulp-noir that has been in high demand since its first printing (in four single issues) back in 1987.


I’ll delve into the backstory, even though you probably know it all by now. In 1986, DC comics decided to revamp their entire line of characters and comic books. Following a monster comics event known as ‘Crisis on Infinite Earths’ the readers and creators found themselves with a veritable tabula rasa upon which to create new stories and furnish them with the rich tapestry of established DC comics concepts, characters and ideas. To this end, The Batman was given an expanded origin story that reflected the sombre, acidic, sometimes brutal nature of his more recent adventures.


Writer Frank Miller volunteered for this daunting task and hand picked rising young star David Mazzucchelli to tackle the art duties. The rest, as they say, is history.


I’m not even going to bother to find faults or flaws with this masterful piece of pulp storytelling. I’m sure they are there, if you care to look for them, but I’m afraid that, when it comes to this volume, I’m like the old man who still swears that his aged wife is as beautiful and radiant as the day he married her. I don’t see flaws, only beauty.


Told largely from the point of view of young Lieutenant Jim Gordon (recently transferred to the Gotham Police Department from Chicago), ‘Batman: Year One’ follows both the Dark Knight and his greatest ally through their most formative 12 months. There are no supervillains; there is no Bat-signal, no Batmobile and no Robin. There are just two men who have embarked on individual missions to make this world a better place and happen to cross paths somewhere along the way.


Everything in this book is stripped back, stark and uncompromising. A freezing cold colour palette (although that depends on which version you read) amplifies the emotional alienation of both men, as Gordon becomes slowly separated from his Wife and Bruce Wayne becomes (arguably) annexed from his sanity.


The violence is savage, claustrophobic and hard hitting. A nihilistic riposte to the day-glo captions of the Adam West and Burt Ward TV show of the 60’s, its cartoon ‘BIFFS’ and ‘POWS’ rendered here as achingly wince inducing as possible.


Here, Batman is forced to rely on training and ingenuity, he makes mistakes, but he’s still Batman and that’s what counts.


Both men are stretched to breaking point throughout the course of this book, but, crucially, both men find ways to rise above it with single-minded, (some might say obsessive) determination and a staunch clarity of vision only possible in great works of fiction.


Mention this book to any seasoned comic reader, no matter how cynical and web-weary, and they’ll grow misty-eyed and nostalgic. It is, like a classic of cinema or an album that tethers one to a benighted, embellished youth, an experience to be savoured and enjoyed. Again and again. 



Who He is & How He Came to be A Review of Batman: Year One