Search This Blog

Tuesday, 16 July 2013

North Korean weapons in Panama?

To pick up the thread from the post “Nationalconflicts lead to maritime security risks worldwide”:

“…Another example of how conflicts in one part of the world affect shipping in a seemingly safe corner of the world is the discovery…” …is the news about “undeclared weapons” on a ship from Cuba to North Korea detained in Panama. The details are however sketchy and blurry pictures on twitter are only blurry pictures even if they come from a president tweet. No matter how sophisticated the equipment turns out to be every maritime security incident lead to new challenges.

Arctic research without validation!

I’m an engineer, but can appreciate the fact that many problems can’t be solved with new technology or by solving an equation. Since June, when I visited the ASME conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering (OMAE 2013), I’ve been revisiting a thought several times:
In the opening speech to the arctic symposium at the conference it was clearly stated that in arctic engineering everything starts with the arctic operation. Without understanding the intended operation there is no point in doing the engineering. This sounds very true and important to understand…

But then the presentations started and none of the ones I visited even reflected on the intended operation. Many presentations discussed calculations in model scale and calibration with model tests and when there were questions about agreement with the full scale situation everybody said: “Don’t know, we don’t have any full scale data”.
So my impression from the conference (hope it’s wrong) is that all over world there are a lot of researchers doing arctic studies with the aim make arctic operations feasible (and risk assessment on arctic operations) without validated relevant data. The excuse is that the full scale tests needed are very expensive. But maybe the tests it is more worthwhile than putting the money on research that can’t be validated?