UFO Conjecture(s)

Tuesday, April 23, 2013

The UFO Propulsion System?

raven.jpg

Scouring through our archived material, I came across a paper, entitled 21st Century Propulsion Concept.

Seventy-three pages with references to anti-gravity and electrostatic systems that have been tested over the years, at the behest of the United States Air Force, complicit with the United State Navy (of course).

I've selected portions of the PDF to highlight the abstruse content.

Note the references: experimental devices, Anti-Gravity discs, The Flying Saucer [movie], Flying Apparatus, and UFO Encounter I:

http://FKBureau.homestead.com

The paper more than hints that the U.S. militaries have been studying and testing propulsion systems with some connections to flying saucers.

Why that connection?

I've included captures from the paper which interested parties might wish to pursue.

The Navy always shows up in these accounts of esoteric experiments and tests, even though the experiments and tests are for things that fly. not things that sail.

I'm interested in your comments.

RR

14 Comments:

  • Quite a long time ago, I received an email from a former USAF mechanic, who worked in the field and when looking over a winged craft that had made an unscheduled stop, he noticed a very unusual rig electrical attached to the underside of the plane. He asked the pilot what it was for, and the pilot simply responded it was to "make the plane go faster."
    At the time, I thought this may be a confabulation and later I found they were experimenting with charging the wings to reduce drag.
    However, his tale was in relation to a post I had written on memory, and he claimed that shortly afterward he could not account for two days. This had not happened before or since. I asked myself if the two instances were related, yet he clearly recalled what he saw, if he saw it. Call it a footnote, a bit of folklore but...I honestly have no clue ( except the experimentation bit) on which side his account falls.
    We discussed further his experience with missing time and the odd apparatus on the plane seemed off topic at the time, now I wonder.
    I am familiar with the backstory on the Townsend craft and some time ago, I did an article on a similar claim whose hangar demonstration was witnessed by writers from Popular Science magazine. It's in the online archives somewhere.

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Tuesday, April 23, 2013  

  • An excerpt form the Popular Science Article

    "It was downright spooky. Without a sound, the peculiar, spiky contraption rose straight up, hovered awhile, climbed higher. Then it did a few graceful turns, stopped again, and just sat there silently in midair. It seemed like levitation --- some trick to overcome gravity. I could not shake off the feeling that I was attending a kind of spiritual seance, or maybe a Buck Rogers show, instead of an engineering demonstration. The eerie scene took place in the big barn like laboratory of Electron-Atom Inc., research firm in Long Island City, New York, devoted to the development of a new kind of flying machine. I had been invited to watch a scale model being put through its paces by remote control. What we saw was by far the oddest aircraft since the Wright Brothers' motorized kite.

    It had no prop. No jet. No wings. In fact, it had no moving parts at all looking somewhat like an old-fashioned bedspring, the rectangular rig is the nearest thing to a magic carpet. It needs no runway, takes off vertically and is expected to climb as high as 60 miles. It can crawl through the air like a snail, or go faster than a jet. Nobody yet knows the speed limit.After a while, I closed my mouth. But David Yorysh, one of the project engineers, noticed my puzzlement..."

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Tuesday, April 23, 2013  

  • Found it.
    In August of 1964, Popular Mechanics entitled "Major DeSeversky's Ion-Propelled Aircraft" by Hans Fantel

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Tuesday, April 23, 2013  

  • Thanks. See The Conquest of Gravity @ http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com.au/2009/12/conquest-of-gravity.html

    By Blogger new illuminati, at Tuesday, April 23, 2013  

  • One of the best books I have read on this anti-gravity spin is Nick Cook's The Hunt For Zero Point Energy" who is an aviation editor with Jane's Aviation. It seems former Navy higher ups have gone to private firms working experimentally on this..coincidence?

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Tuesday, April 23, 2013  

  • Per Rich, "The Navy always shows up in these accounts of esoteric experiments and tests, even though the experiments and tests are for things that fly. not things that sail."

    The Navy is just as equally interested in flying, as well as, sailing. And the Navy likes hi-tech gadgets. At the dawn of the "space age", the Navy heavily competed with both the Air Force and the Army to be the military agency for military space launches...remember Project Vanguard? Vanguard was not quite the failure as we have always been led to believe, but the initial problems of the project doomed it to the dust bin.

    By Blogger Tim Hebert, at Tuesday, April 23, 2013  

  • Who the hell is Townsend Brown?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Townsend_Brown

    By Blogger Frank Stalter, at Tuesday, April 23, 2013  

  • Part 1

    Rich:

    If you’re asking whether the Biefeld-Brown effect is what’s at work in powering TrUFOs, the short answer is no.

    Without slogging through all the mathematical details (which would probably make readers’ eyes glaze over) let me just state the following: The B-B effect is a real, small, well understood effect that has nothing whatsoever to do with gravity. It is one and the same as what is referred to as “ion wind”.

    The way it works is that a tiny fraction of the molecules in the air around us are ionized all the time. That means that one electron from a molecule is separated and free to move around, while the rest of the molecule from which the electron was detached (the ion) has a single positive charge and is also free to move around. If you put two metal conductors in the air (wires, metal plates, whatever) and charge them up with electricity, the free electron will want to move toward the positive pole and the ion will want to move in the opposite direction toward the negative pole. The ion is more than 50,000 times more massive than the electron, so that even though the flow of electric charge is equal and opposite, the flow of mass is highly unequal. In trying to accelerate the ions toward the negative pole, the pair of conductors and whatever it is attached to is forced in the opposite direction toward the positive pole (Newton’s law). It always works in that direction when the apparatus is immersed in air, never the other direction. If you place the apparatus in a sealed chamber and slowly evacuate the air, the size of the effect scales down, in direct proportion to the amount of air in the chamber. When the chamber is as empty of air as you can get it with a vacuum pump, the effect disappears. However, even with a very good vacuum pump, there is always some residual gas left. There are also some scattered dust particles flying around. The dust particles can have either positive or negative charge and so can appear to move toward either pole, depending on what their state of charge happens to be, at the moment. They also impact the electrodes, creating momentary forces. Thus, when you measure the force on the apparatus under these conditions, it will appear to be small, and to fluctuate in both directions, even when the chamber is “empty”. I believe this effect is what is being referred to in the quotation you provide which states, in part “..a residual force acts in the opposite direction to electrical wind forces…”

    By Blogger Larry, at Wednesday, April 24, 2013  

  • Part 2

    The magnitude of the effect is independent of how the apparatus happens to be oriented with respect to the gravity field, which demonstrates that it can in no way be referred to as “antigravity”. It has no discernable connection to gravity.

    What the B-B effect does do is to shove positively charged air molecules (ions) around by use of an electric field. Those ions bump into the molecules next to them, which bump into the ones next to them, etc. in a cascade effect. The net result is a small but steady wind produced by the electric field pushing on the ions, hence the name “ion wind” or “electrical wind”. You can watch a video of a homemade, kluged-up version of this at the following url: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zkAJQ0Ggh_Y


    The most important thing to know about the B-B effect is that it is small. About 5 to 10 years ago, an underground movement started up around a version of the B-B device known as a “lifter”. (See Wikipedia, under ‘ionocraft’). The typical lifter is shown levitating vertically when 40,000 volts or so is applied. What they don’t show is that there is a heavy, high voltage power supply which has to be plugged into the wall socket in order to provide enough power to lift off.

    You may ask how I know all this? A friend and professional colleague of mine used to be a civilian senior scientist for an unnamed US military laboratory. His regular job involved working with classified but conventional aerospace vehicles. However, he also had the reputation locally of being the guy who was interested in UFOs. At the peak of the “lifter” craze, he was approached by an entirely different military branch and asked to see if the technology of “lifters” could be applied to design militarily useful Unpiloted Air Vehicles (UAVs). Part of the project was to do the lab testing to see how the B-B effect varied with voltage, electrode size, air pressure, etc., and whether there were any surprises or hidden effects. I have seen the laboratory data, and there are no mysterious results that point to quantum effects, antigravity, or new physics of any kind. It’s ion wind.

    Also, the effect is—as I have said—weak. It’s so weak that you can’t make a lifter that will lift off vertically under its own power, if that power has to be supplied by an onboard battery or generator. However, it may occur to someone that the lifter configuration could be made into a wing configuration. In that case, the lifter would only have to provide the thrust to move an aircraft forward, not to lift it vertically. This has recently been discussed in the open literature by some researchers at MIT: http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2013/ionic-thrusters-0403.html

    Without getting into details, I’ll just say that it’s already been done. It’s kind of cool; it flies around buzzing and hissing from the corona discharge and is surrounded by a blue glow. It’s kind of a flying bug zapper. But it’s not a UFO.

    By Blogger Larry, at Wednesday, April 24, 2013  

  • The T. Brown connection makes me think of Leon Davidson, and his "it's all a CIA Psyops Program" to cover something else...not that it is mind you. ;)

    By Blogger Bob Koford, at Wednesday, April 24, 2013  

  • As usual Larry I find your comments and information invaluable.

    (I told Tony Bragalia that just last night.)

    Reading the paper I understood the effect and process (and testing) to be small scale.

    However, it was the flying saucer and flying disc references that fascinate (me).

    After all this was a paper for the AF (which the Navy wanted to see also.)

    I think there are some references that a ressearcher might follow up on...Mr. Bragalia thinks so too.

    Some of the dates also intrigue.

    Again, thanks for the erudition.

    We, all of us, see your comments, here and at Kevin Randle's blog, as enlightening and reasonable.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Wednesday, April 24, 2013  

  • Bob,

    I had a small working arrangement with Leon Davidson in the 70s.

    (The correspondence is online here someplace.)

    I liked his dogged interpretation of the Socorro symbol and his use of the Air Force Blue Book material for hypothesizing.

    His death,like Richard Hall's, left a vast lacuna in ufology, which is okay with our friend Gilles Fernandez I assume -- not the deaths but the lacunae.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Wednesday, April 24, 2013  

  • Here is a reference to the use of plasmas in experimental conventional winged craft
    http://www.spacedaily.com/news/future-00o.html
    What is interesting is the possibility of covert testing as well as the sightings of more plasma like effects from UAV sightings in recent years. This fits into the mechanics story, is it was so.
    Then there's the rife and long rumored circumstantial accounts of the Reich's experiments at the end of the war with high energy plasma drives which seem too fantastical but then they had developed stealth technology ( too late) for winged craft and submarines that was verified by the Northrup guys. Perhaps history does repeat itself.

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Wednesday, April 24, 2013  

  • If you'd like to know how it all works, check this out.

    http://interstellarpropulsion.blogspot.com/p/thesis-on-mechanics-of-gravity.html

    By Blogger James Vian, at Saturday, September 21, 2013  

Post a Comment

<< Home