Skip to main content

Now Appearing in Chicago

I have been to Chicago once. To be precise I flew through it, as a hub, enjoying (if that's the word) the most frightening landing I've ever experienced on a plane.

We were a few minutes late and the (presumably ex fighter-) pilot up front was determined to make up time. He took us into such a steep angled turn that those on the right of the plane were looking directly downwards out of their windows. Passengers were screaming. Suddenly he snapped the plane horizontal. We landed, I kid you not, less than three seconds later. I was with a group of experienced airline staff, and every one of them was white as a sheet.

So you might imagine my second approach to Chicago was with even more trepidation. But no. In fact I didn't even notice I'd been. This is because that estimable newspaper, the Chicago Sun-Times has kindly syndicated my contribution to Vulpes Libris on its website. That's what I call virtual travel.

Comments

  1. cromercrox18 March 2009 at 09:05

    Chicago was the first city in the U S and A that I ever visited, and that perhaps explains why I am rather fond of it. I got the El from O'Hare and pitched up downtown. I emerged into the kind of urban canyon I'd only ever seen in the movies, and to cap it all there was a blues band busking on the corner. I felt I'd landed in the Blues Brothers. I've since been there several times. Grungy, Grimy, Great.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Brian Clegg18 March 2009 at 11:46

    My dad used to go there on business a lot and was very fond of it. He particularly liked the combination of the skyrise city and the lakeside.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Cath@VWXYNot?19 March 2009 at 22:43

    My worst ever landing was in Washington DC. We came down hard, bounced up, tilted, came back down on one wheel, then the other one slammed down, causing the first one to jump back up in the air.

    Once we came under full control, the flight attendant came on the radio and said "Ladies and Gentlemen, welcome to DC. Please be careful when opening the overhead lockers, as contents may have shifted during" and then she dissolved into hysterical laughter.

    The best landing was in Tel Aviv. As we approached the runway, most of the people on the plane (I don't know if they were all together, or if this is some Israeli custom) started to hum one slowly rising note, and as soon as we touched down, everyone burst into the same song, complete with enthusiastic clapping and even some dancing. Oh, and the safety video featured the Pink Panther. Other than the frequent bomb threats, El Al is a great airline. I'll forgive them the six hour security line-up that caused half of my group to miss the return flight.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Why I hate opera

If I'm honest, the title of this post is an exaggeration to make a point. I don't really hate opera. There are a couple of operas - notably Monteverdi's Incoranazione di Poppea and Purcell's Dido & Aeneas - that I quite like. But what I do find truly sickening is the reverence with which opera is treated, as if it were some particularly great art form. Nowhere was this more obvious than in ITV's 2010 gut-wrenchingly awful series Pop Star to Opera Star , where the likes of Alan Tichmarsh treated the real opera singers as if they were fragile pieces on Antiques Roadshow, and the music as if it were a gift of the gods. In my opinion - and I know not everyone agrees - opera is: Mediocre music Melodramatic plots Amateurishly hammy acting A forced and unpleasant singing style Ridiculously over-supported by public funds I won't even bother to go into any detail on the plots and the acting - this is just self-evident. But the other aspects need some exp
117 comments
Read more

Is 5x3 the same as 3x5?

The Internet has gone mildly bonkers over a child in America who was marked down in a test because when asked to work out 5x3 by repeated addition he/she used 5+5+5 instead of 3+3+3+3+3. Those who support the teacher say that 5x3 means 'five lots of 3' where the complainants say that 'times' is commutative (reversible) so the distinction is meaningless as 5x3 and 3x5 are indistinguishable. It's certainly true that not all mathematical operations are commutative. I think we are all comfortable that 5-3 is not the same as 3-5.  However. This not true of multiplication (of numbers). And so if there is to be any distinction, it has to be in the use of English to interpret the 'x' sign. Unfortunately, even here there is no logical way of coming up with a definitive answer. I suspect most primary school teachers would expands 'times' as 'lots of' as mentioned above. So we get 5 x 3 as '5 lots of 3'. Unfortunately that only wor
25 comments
Read more

Why backgammon is a better game than chess

I freely admit that chess, for those who enjoy it, is a wonderful game, but I honestly believe that as a game , backgammon is better (and this isn't just because I'm a lot better at playing backgammon than chess). Having relatively recently written a book on game theory, I have given quite a lot of thought to the nature of games, and from that I'd say that chess has two significant weaknesses compared with backgammon. One is the lack of randomness. Because backgammon includes the roll of the dice, it introduces a random factor into the play. Of course, a game that is totally random provides very little enjoyment. Tossing a coin isn't at all entertaining. But the clever thing about backgammon is that the randomness is contributory without dominating - there is still plenty of room for skill (apart from very flukey dice throws, I can always be beaten by a really good backgammon player), but the introduction of a random factor makes it more life-like, with more of a sense
6 comments
Read more