I want one, do you? it is a simple machine ever play with a Child's TOY TOP, Spin a Quarter, you ask how can this be? due to the Jet propelled single intake fan spinning at 55,000 RPM this rotation this Centrifugal this Gyroscopic effect, You can not fall over EVER. this basic concept discovered hundreds of years ago allows some fantastic toys to be built... :)
@frickandfracksicem I have a question regarding your theory on Gyroscopic effect.. Say the X-jet is on the ground. The pilot starts the motor and brings the revs up to speed. He lifts off the ground and hovers. The gyroscopic effect is keeping the unit steady at this point. How does the pilot tilt the unit forwards and backwards when this gyroscopic effect is resisting any changes in axial movement ? More so,why doesn't Torque Induced Precession occur while attempting this ?
@ViperWK ok fair question, (one point) the fins in the Nozzle control rotation, with out them the WASP airframe would spin like a top,(you know this).. Answer to posed question: By shifting the center of gravity of the vehicle relative to the thrust axis of the engine,engine is approx 12 degrees pitched forward,due to the angle of the engine the pilots ability to maintain balance, example riding a bicycle or motorcycle this is similar to WASP operations, loose balance and you fall.
@frickandfracksicem Thanks. That didn't answer my question though..Once a Gyroscope is spun up it doesn't want to change its axis.. Balance has nothing to do with this, nor torque twist which jet engines don't get. When torque is applied to the side of a gyroscope it transfers the kinetic energy to 90 degree's of the axis. If the pilot leaned forward the unit would want to pull either left or right, or possibly enter into a wide conical shaped wobble..
@frickandfracksicem Back in the 1940's there was a single engine fighter in which most of it's engine block spun with the propeller creating quiet a large centrifugal force. Pilots kept crashing and dying in these things as the planes would tend to dive downwards when they tried to lean left or right. Im not sure if you own a push bike. If so pull the front wheel off it. Hold the end's of the axle and spin it . Try and twist and move the wheel around.. Tell me what occurs ?
This is what happens when you let government get too big, they become a corrupt military complex and they hide everything from you. Star Wars toys is apparently only available to military people who want to control and enslave you!
In the process of locating Vendors for parts AND I found one of the Military WASP II Pilots, too bad Robert Courter (Bell Test Pilot) he passed away in the 90's.
To all concerned: even if bearing 4/5 fail the engine continues to operate at 52,500 rpm,run out of fuel, you have 3 minutes to land, so stated in report No.2203-933021 from October 15, 1967...
too bad I can't post 45 years of records obtained through the Freedom of Information ACT, look up US Patent 4,447,024 if you want the FACTS: Contract No.DA23-204-AMC-037112(T) Report No.2203-933021: (I WANT ONE) why use wheels when I can fly far faster,time IS money. remember to play
@ViperWK The Patent for the WR19 was files in 1968 and expired in 1988, this US PATENT has been located, and all the Technical Drawings are being acquired, The Bell flying jet belt, WASP ONE AND WASP TWO are just the application, the WR19 does make a good Turbine powered speed boat, personally I want to see if it can travel at 100 miles an hour...
It is a good thing it has never been available for the public. Just imagine what kind of accidents the use of this machine would lead to. This thing is creepy. How would it diversify criminal activities or spying. This idea is a utopia tinged with inconsistency. If there is some failure of the engine while i fly at 45 feet above the ground..... what would i do.... wishing to fall on something big and soft. No way i would fly this thing.
@Barox213 They would be no different to flying a small helicopter. Licensing would be limited and you could only fly in restricted air space. Umm id think you'd hear one of these flying above your house. Criminals can use helicopters, what's the difference ?. At low altitudes you'd be just as screwed if you were in a helicopter. At medium to high altitudes you could simply parachute from an Xjet. You cant parachute from 99% of helicopters.You'd likely die.Which is better ?
@ViperWK If it's not really different from an helicopter then why did they just invented it. They invented it in the idea that it would have more maneuverability than an helicopter and the design of the thing makes it obvious. Licensing would be limited... to whom or what. The US government is unable to defend the pentagon from a single big plane.... do you really think they are able to police the entire US airspace efficiently with myriads of flying toilets.... i don't.
@Barox213 You said these would be dangerous if the public had access to them.. If these were allowed for civilian use you would have to be licensed to own or fly one .The licence's would be limited and restricted so not just any old Joe could own one. Ok say a criminal or terrorist stole one of these..What difference would this be to stealing say a small Gyro-copter..Both are about the same in size and have the same capability yet plenty of Gryo-copter's exist which aren't a problem.?
@Barox213 What damage can these things actually do ? Flying one into a building aint going to much is it .lol. Ok , I know what your going to say next .. aaww a terrorist could drop a bomb from one of them ?, aaww a terrorist could fire a sniper rifle from one of them. Well they could do all that from a small helicopter just as easily. Actually it would be even better with a helicopter (you could hold more explosives). Do you see the massive flaw in your logic and reasoning yet ?
@Barox213 Its no different to a small helicopter dude.. lol It is just as dangerous in the wrong hands... Well actually no, i tell a lie... It cant hold as much explosives as a helicopter.. Its range is far less than a helicopter..
Seriously, "THEY" don't want you to have this US PATENT 4,447,024.. I have been told to shut up, too bad not going to be good... Gonna build this Machine Because the Tech is available to ANY machine shop since 2003...
@frickandfracksicem Your just as crazy as the rest of the delusional Yanks on here. Must be something they put in your tap water.. BTW.. The patent doesn't contain the design plans nor anything technical.. It just has a simple sketched drawing showing a basic concept of how the pilot stands and where the engine sits in the Pod . There's no technical details in at all, just a broad description of what it does, that's it..
I have the Design Plans, I KNOW how this Design works, Review United States Patent Number 4,447,024, which is expired... the 1974 WASP ONE used the WR19 Serial Number 3 Fan Jet Engine, which was paid for by DARPA/Department of Defense 32 years ago... "YOU" own the RIGHT to this information, all you have to do is shut off the TV and ASK for this VERY COOL Technology, Serious ask any Attorney... WE THE PEOPLE have the RIGHT and "I WANT IT" or I will die trying to acquire this TECH.
Wanna Guess what my "Speciality" was... you have the opportunity to review US Patent Number 4,447,024 and learn how the design works or keep talking BS... Seriously ask the Listed patent attorney for the "build" Plans or "DARPA" it's your "RIGHT" just like you have the "RIGHT" to Vote... Seriously with Carbon Fiber "you" ca reduce the Weight of the Air frame by 100 pounds, SO that means "you" can fly for 90 minutes at 60 miles an hour, Traffic Jams are "history"... SUCKER.
The WR 19 engine weighs 68 pounds, Air frame weighs:332 fully loaded with fuel total weight is:500 pounds that means the fuel weighed: 100 pounds... plus or minus 10 pounds... US Patent Number 4,447,024 the 1974 WASP one used the WR19 Serial Number 3 Fan Jet engine which is on Display in the Smithsonian... "I Want ONE" working towards acquiring the build plans every day, when I have enough information I am writing a "Hayes" Technical Manual to everyone can build one, I don't need to be "rich"
@MultiIPwnage Don't forget, they also had to pull out its cold fusion reactor before placing it in the museum. Don't want some kid accidentally turning it on hovering down the corridor with it..
@ViperWK Dude it's just a Jet engine that is capable of powering a cruise missile for 2,889.06 miles with a Tach Nuke, in the payload bay, "alcm" which can fly through your bedroom window and tactically vaporize your body into the after life... no big deal...
Found the US PATENT 4,447,024 under Williams and titled Airborne Vehicle, this patent has expired, any one can obtain a copy and have the drawing with detailed information on how Sam Williams invention works, meeting with engineering firm to go over the proposed manufacturing of this Airborne Vehicle.
Kerosene is "jet" fuel... the WASP II used the F107 Cruise missile engine and is on Display at the Museum of Flight in Seattle Washington... The WASP I used the WR19-7 which was also used in the Bell "flying belt".
The WASP with the F107 engine was classified which by the way has been "TERMINATED" due to the F107 engine being "obsolete" the F107-400 replaced it a LOOONG time ago.
If you want the WR19-7 go to a Machine Shop with a 5-Axis mill and make one-the engine was made 45 years ago.
Why it was never sold to civilians ? Jet engine fuel is expensive and not to mention hasardous to manipulate. This vehicle has absolutely no protections for its pilote and frankly, that looks terribly unsafe and unstable.
@shinryohji Looks very stable in the video to me ? .... Too stable if you know what i mean ;) .. Fuel is cheap and safe ? . Could run 1000's of these compared to 1 Hercules aircraft..
OOPS... I know why this is not for sale any where...the "motor" is used in Missiles and therefor it is classified and restricted from export.... this means the technology can't be sent out of the united states, this motor is used in Cruise Missiles which can fly through your window after flying a hundred miles.
yeah, I'm worked up...not. You're not worth even coming back to this site. I was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt...at first but it's obvious that was misplaced. You sure do seem to "laugh a lot" LOL. hahaha LOL hahaha. I'm not searching for info. I KNOW IT; it's you that's searching all over the net to see if you can find that diameter. LOL.....what to know how I know? HAHAHA....LOL; I'm not telling you.
@cdamistaken I laugh a lot because you are freaking funny!!!! Really? I am not worth coming back to this site? You sure have a lot to say. You are not going anywhere! I demand that you stay on this site!!!! I am sure you have a lot more to say so don't leave. You are the subject matter expert. What would we do without your commentary?
What information do you think I want from you? I ALREADY LISTED the info...I KNOW...YOU DON"T. No assumptions...just FACT. It's a MULTIPLE CHOICE....the answer is listed but it's obvious you don't know the answer. DUH.
You also mentioned how bad the US Government was didn't you? Now you want me to give you info? ...To prove you wrong? LOL This is not a work project genius. Who said anything about NASA suing the Government? Wow, aren't we bright? Officially if we had to request info from another branch that's not the procedure. It would be a lot easier but there would be limits to how that info could be used. There is protocol you know for work projects. This is not one of those. LOL
Calm down people. LOL ViperWk you'll get pictures but I am not on your schedule. LOL. You assume a lot cdamistaken. What? You think that by making these sweeping accusations I will give you information? Where have I seen that tactic before? Didn't you mention Bin Laden? Hmmmmm.
maybe he likes being seen as a liar?? After-all he CLAIMS he works for NASA.....A US Gov Agency.....the SAME US Gov that said NO to the XJet....yet now we are to believe that NASA sued the Excutive branch of the US Gov to get the build plans of a private corps rejected project so the same US Gov could build it for "Commercial" uses? hhhuh? AND we are to believe everything else from this story teller without a single piece of proof....not even answering a simple MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTION. LOL.
prove to everyone you have an F112 ...the answer is listed here....I'll even make it even easier for you....take "D" away....it's one of the three measurments...but you already knew that right? RIGHT.......we're all convinced. Talk about LOL.....trust me...I'm sure all "your" workers are laughing their asses off. I'm sure....what's your excuse now for not answer this time...I'm not worth proving anything too? BUT you feel everyone who thinks it's a US Gov Black project...you must correct.
@cdamistaken Did I ask you for info on the F112 or the F107? We have a 112 here and I have all the info I need. You really are the daily laugh at my building. It's funny how you demand information and get all worked up about the Xjet. Now I am a waste of skin. LOL . I love it! We look forward to what you are going to say next. You do not disappoint. He he!.The F107 in the XJet is modified cdamistaken. Really it is! LOL
@AROUGHMAN worked up? Not even close...you're the one who likes to tell everyone to not name call...while calling them name after name like a child on the playground..i believe that's called HYPOCRISY, mr.dictionary. You're also the one so worked up about your stories, you can't even keep them straight so you look like your arguing with yourself or you are? It's so funny how you say things and don't even remember you said the opposite minutes before.....worse than a Texas politician....perry.
@AROUGHMAN You feel the need to tell me this: "The F107 in the XJet is modified cdamistaken. Really it is" but won't answer a simple question in which I already know the answer...(as proven by the correct answer being listed.....or is it?? LOL ) that would prove to everyone you're legit but you refuse to answer and prove. The ONLY logical reason is your a FRAUD...which we all smelled a liar from the word go. hahahahahahahahah...
There you have it folks....you make the call...fraud or legit?
can't answer a SINGLE question that anyone who actually has seen an F112 can answer.....like the FAN DIAMETER....approx. NOPE, can't answer that....it's TOOO Vital to "his" project....and "HIS GUYS" wouldn't approve....and HIS GUYS are LAUGHING....at US....not the LIAR posing as a NASA SCIENTIST. What a JOKE and a waste of skin.....yes, I have NO CLUE what-so-ever about the F112 and the xjet. Not a clue one....except........
everyone with an IQ under 45 are believing "NASA Scientist", Aroughman, despite his CONSTANT Conflicts with HIMSELF......yes, we're actually loosing the conversation because we've been caught LYING OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN. NOPE, can't use a regular F107 engine because it was "HEAVILY" Modified by making it none counter rotating so the turbine assemblies give it Gyroscopic affects....ooops, now we have the famed "F112" engine......IN OUR BUILDING....an you touched one....with your hand..mon
When I am ready ViperWk, When I am ready. On another note, Curiosity is on it's 354 million mile journey to Mars! Have a great day everyone. We sure are the launch was perfect.
@AROUGHMAN oh Surprise, a quick snap at the slightest chance get out of sending them. I'll wait., but i guarantee that you wont send anything.. I already gave you my email a week ago.. My Inbox is still empty , just like your promises..
Nope I didn't expect anything from a story teller. Why would you prove anything..like the fan diameter or any other proof...why would anyone; it's "top secret" and terribly vital to "your project"
I am not claiming anything Guys. Don't worry about what we are using. LOL I love it! You guys are too funny. We have an F112 and a number of other engines in our building I don't even have to fly to a museum to play with one. LOL We love how you guys get so worked up on here. I can't tell you how much we laugh at you numb nuts arguing and getting crazy about something you have no clue about. This is no exception. LOL
@AROUGHMAN I love it when Sociopath nutbag's prance around on a high. They get this false sense of confidence when they "think" they have managed to fool all the others or think they are winning the conversation..
Are you CLAIMING that you're now going to use a Williams F112-WR-100 turbofan to power your xjet or are you just telling us about your field trip to the meseum?
Aroughman...what was your FOIA request lawsuit file number; which "executive branch of the us gov" did u file against and in which county/state did you file this "request"?
So now you're going to claim you're going to use the f112-wr-100 turbofan to power your xjet? The F112 uses counter-rotating fas/turbine assemblies that eliminate gryoscopic effects....oops.
Gee, yesterday aroughman posted a dictionary def. That he thought fit us..."Hater".. I have a def for mr scientist: Pathological liar- of pathology;disease, sick, characterized by an unhealthy compulsion to lie.
Wow, I'm so entertained by your trip to the museum. Did you get a lolly pop too? There are only 3 outside the military and the X36A project...two engines had to be "barrowed" for the X50 project. Of those three in "civilian" hands only ONE is runnable..the other two made high speed impacts during "testing"....so you found the one runner or one of the two pancakes?
@AROUGHMAN Yeah right...You didn't send any pic's before when you said you would and likely never will. Even if you do i bet you 1 million dollars the pics you send will show nothing of your fantasy claims about a Gyro modded engine or anything relevant.. I invite you to prove me wrong.. I'll publicly eat my words if you can prove any of your claims..
I hope this doesn't make you guys break out in hives but I had my hands on an F112 just this past Monday. LOL Good luck to you two little angry men. He he he
Guys guys guys. This is so uneven. Even thought you guys are trying to use my words. That's all you have. I HAVE A PLAN!!! LOL. You guys are still trying to figure out what we know. You don't have a clue how it is built and what it can do. You think I am going to be intimidated by your words and give you guys clues. Ain't gonna happen. Now I don't have an engine? Now you know what we have ViperWk? I think you are going to be disappointed. LOL
The reality is this: Even if the "NASA scientists" had a chassis completed and handed to him, he doesn't have THE Key component...the engine...a reliable compatible engine...one he is confused over..saying there are and are not available engine...one he's "working one" and when they get to "spooling" up one oftwo designs he's working on. He's LIGHT YEARS away from even teathered flight.
There you go again applying selective reading. Everyone knows the Freedom of information Act only applies to the government. We asked the government for the info and got enough to acquire the plans from someone other than Williams. Did you know that there are others out there that have a copy of the plans besides Williams? Woah how can that be? If you keep searching like we did you can get there too. The bible is right. Instead of being a Hater seek like we did and you shall find.
@AROUGHMAN Could you please provide the Contact information for acquiring the "Plans" for the WASP one and WASP two, Links would be helpful, my email is scottwatson42@comcast.net By studying history I wish to avoid the mistakes and doing the work twice is a waste of time which I don't have.
Yes, yes, yes CD, the Freedom of Information Act only applies to government stored information. When a project is proposed to the Government the Government is required to keep all records of the proposed project including design information and safety studies. We asked for but got limited info. We didn't acquire the plans from the Military but got enough info to purchase the designs from another individual. Williams is a private company yes. They were not interested in selling it.
cdamistaken. You really don't know what you are talking about and I am not going to call you names or argue with you. The weight of the pilot of the XJet was limited and not just because of the lift requirements. Man you guys are funny! I live in Space huh? You have no clue what you are talking about but if it makes you feel good to call me names go ahead. You have a hard lesson coming with your civilian F107 LOL.
I love it! You guys are looking things up and using your mind. If I have to deal with some name calling then so be it. It's worth the knowledge that you will gain. And Yes cdamistaken I do work for NASA. I know that you don't like the government but NASA too? Wow, there's just no pleasing you. LOL
What you guys don't seem to get is that I really don't mind all the negative comments. I am confident in what I know and who I am. I have dealt with a lot more amateur students than you guys. I am glad that you are looking things up and trying to understand the XJet. LOL. You are even reading the dictionary! This is great. You guys are looking for information and learning something! Keep going. You will have that Aha moment and it will all start to make sense.
2. Hater: A person who feels anger and/or jealousy for someone who has succeeded in something they have worked hard for. A being who speaks badly,and/or takes negative actions in attempt to create problems for a successful person.
@AROUGHMAN ahhh the good ol "Hater' throw back.. (yawn) , Hey everyone, the bad mean person is just a big mean "hater'.. Don't listen to any of the the points that he makes because he's just a big meany who hates me for no reason and is just making stuff up to dis' me.... sobbb..
1. Hater: A person that simply cannot be happy for another person's success. So rather, they make a point of trying to expose a flaw in that person. Hating, the result of being a hater, is not exactly jealousy. The hater doesnt really want to be the person he or she hates, rather the hater wants to knock somelse down a notch.
@AROUGHMAN ahhh the good ol "Hater' throw back.. (yawn) , Hey everyone, the bad mean person is just a big mean "hater'.. Don't listen to any of the points that he makes because he's just a big meany who hates me for no reason and is just making stuff up to dis' me.... sobbb..
Viperwk My comment was about the original setup of the Xjet. What you don't know was that the weight of the pilot was very limited. If you weigh 190 lbs like I do, because of how this thing is balanced/gyroed to fly the way it does I wouldn't be able to pilot the XJet based on the plans. For a larger person to fly the Xjet a larger Engine is required. There are other engines that can facilitate that. Delusional LOL. I have a term for you - Read the following:
@AROUGHMAN The pilot requiring to have an "exact" weight for this thing to stay stable and steady is totally absurd..This thing has two fuel tanks which hold around est 132 lbs of fuel.. As it fly's along it consumes this fuel causing it's weight to reduce as it goes along.. By the end of a flight run the weight dynamic of the pod has dramatically changed..You are delusional... FYI, Sociopath's also have delusions of grandeur and over compensate. Explains the 5:1 posting ratio you make.
@AROUGHMAN Did you see the size of the pilot in the video...He was a big plump fellow..... Holes , holes, holes, holes, holes, holes, holes, holes, holes, holes, holes, ... when do they stop..
@AROUGHMAN Your reference to the Xjet and F107 was.. 1) "No other engine on the market is small enough and weight compatible to do the design".. This was in a conversation in which you said that only a Williams F107 could be used to build an Xjet, yet there are plenty of engines out there which even have MORE thrust to weight ratio (which you now acknowledge ? ) Even some slightly later Williams engines of that era had 1000lbs.. (better than 600lbs) ... holes holes n' more holes..
I wonder if Williams International knew that it was NASA who hired that lawyer to sue them for FOIA on the Xjet???...I wonder if that would have changed anything....hmmm not only does Aroughman claim he works at NASA but also many of his guys..subordinates? .
@cdamistaken Just to also add.. Correct me if im wrong.. Don't FOIA's only apply to public/government stored information. Isn't Williams a private company..? hmm , so how did Aroughman FOIA a private company of there information. ? The government doesn't hold the design plans as they lost interest in the project and never bought it.. We know that Williams owns the design, (not the government), as they spent many years trying to sell it to others. How does someone FOIA a private company ;-)
@ViperWK If I recall correctly the WASP one and WASP two was Financed by ARPA or is DARPA correct? First it was the Marines then the ARMY so if the Logic is extended a little, the plans for the proposed design would have to go through the DARPA evaluation program, so I believe the plans were available at one time from DARPA... Do you have the Patent number??
Just in the middle of reading my dictionary at the moment.. I looked up the word "Sociopath" today... Its quite an interesting condition.. Apparently they can be quite intelligent people who sound extremely persuasive and articulated when they speak but are actually completely delusional, live in a fantasy world, and chronically lie..
I am sure you are going to be combing for the info. You better start reading. We have college students here at NASA that can tell exactly how the XJet works just by looking at the flight characteristics. You guys are still looking for dust trails. lol. First it didn't fly. Now it does! We are making progress.
cdamistaken. I'll save my comments. I wish you the best of luck on your Xjet and your F107 in civilian hands. LOL Yes, I am just like the US Government. Different stories, No proof but so far advanced that it would blow you little vile talking mind. No amount of name calling will make me just hand over what we know. You are just going to have to figure it out. I just hope you don't kill yourself in the process. And by the way, the are other powerplants that will work and the Xjet is Gyroed.
I will help you guys out again as you two are pretty comfortable just assuming things. There are other powerplants available today that can work in a similar setup. The issue is even with an F107, the engine among other things has to be modified. Isn't it funny that cdmistaken's discovery of the patent number was what I was saying from the get go? I told you that it was available and that you guys had to have the patent number to pull it up. I was right, right and right again! Just admit it man.
@AROUGHMAN again with the CLAIMS with NO evidence. You CLAIM there are other suitable powerplants yet you never state what turbines are currently available for a "similar setup". OH, and you couldn't have been further from being "RIGHT" about the patent. It IS searchable and CAN be found on the USPTO's website by doing a proper search.....AND NO you DON"T Need the patent number to pull it up. Proved your point? WTF you talking about? CLAIMS with NO EVIDENCE...work for the US GOV?
@AROUGHMAN ...."Isn't it funny that cdmistaken's discovery of the patent number was what I was saying from the get go? I told you that it was available and that you guys had to have the patent number to pull it up. I was right, right and right again!"=======NO!!! you were WRONG WRONG WRONG....and WRONG AGAIN.
One does NOT need the patent number to search it...just the correct inquiry input.....SO "just admit it man"...YOU ARE WRONG..."just admit it man".
@AROUGHMAN More quotes from you .. 1) "No other engine on the market is small enough and weight compatible to do the design".. Lets fast forward to your more recent quote 2) "There are other powerplants available today that can work in a similar setup"....
Now maybe you two - cdamistaken and ViperWk can put your brains together to try to figure how it all works. LOL. I bet you can't wait to see what we are doing here in Houston. By the way, why didn't you ask Williams how it worked? or if it flew? That would be too easy I guess. While you two are sitting at home being desktop scientists we are actually doing something about the Xjet. Keep typing guys. I understand it makes you feel good about yourselves to think that you are smarter than you are.
@AROUGHMAN you should consider reading YOUR OWN COMMENTS....then you might keep your storieS straight. You're just like the US Gov....tell one story one day; another the next; another a few days later and all the while never offering PROOF or Evidence....just take your word for it....after all you're not a liar....neh, not a liar....at least not the way YOU define LIAR....just believe you; you killed Osama and buried him at sea....no, we're not going to release that evidence...it might hurt...
@AROUGHMAN YEAH, we'll see who who actually get's an "xjet" ready first. You've already shown your hand.....you're not even CLOSE to having one ready....you don't even have one of those powerplants you CLAIM (once again with all your baseless CLAIMS) is available.
CLAIMS, CLAIMS, CLAIMS CLAIMS CLAIMS.....and so far you're "0 for ALL"....a TOTAL LOOOOOSER with nothing but CLAIMS.
OK ViperWk. You proved my point. The patent IS available as I told you. You guys were all saying that it was Top Secret. I am glad I got you to apply yourselves. Now you are really being a wanker. I didn't pay a lawyer for the patent. We paid a lawyer to get the plans. Maybe Williams will give you that info too. LOL. Before you start calling people names READ the bloody patent especially the part about modification.
@AROUGHMAN Mods? Yes.....Gyro's NO....All you did was regurgitate what was on the patent...nothing new...JUST what you read....you're no "scientist"....you're the idiot that sits in your moms basement posting shit like you know something but reality begs to differ. You're a NOTHING that has amounted to NOTHING and will ALWAYS AMOUNT TO NOTHING but posting online makes you feel smart and makes you feel like you're going to amount to something but then there's reality.
@cdamistaken I concur.. The exact quote from Aroughman was . "They gyroed the engine" .. 1)There are no gyro based sensors that manipulate the engine.. 2) There is no Gyroscopic prepossession modification to the engine.. As i had picked right from the start, Aroughman is just one of these internet kooks/trolls that roam discussion boards spinning fantasy type BS .. Just about everything he has said has had holes in it... Works for NASA... lol
@AROUGHMAN "You guys were all saying that it was Top Secret.".....WHERE did we say this?
Trust me, the name calling is WELL SUITED even before reading the "bloody patent..about modification"....yeah, the engine was modified....Lubrication had to be modified.....so did starting.....but YOU CLAIMED the engine was modified to provide Gryosopic effects...AFTER you CLAIMED it had Gyros and AFTER you back peddled about that too...
@AROUGHMAN Here's a few quotes from you .. 1) " Dude, the PATENT is not easy to find".. Not easy to find ? , all you have to do is type the right keywords into the gov's website, that's it ... 2) " If you know where to look and have a good LAWYER, it's easy to get the the info you want from the government. We acquired the PATENT number as a result of our inquiry".... So you did all of this to get the PATENT number (not the plans).... Back flips , twisting of words, and hole digging....
@ViperWK Please supply the patent number and I will purchase the Patent information, my email is scottwatson42@comcast.net I have looked at #94 WASP on display at the Museum of flight here in Seattle Washington, to me the design looks fairly simple, but then the 1974 evaluation of "Too Complicated" is based on a Society that did not have the INTERNET.
We initially hired a lawyer to attempt to get a copy of the plans via the Freedom of Information act. We ended up getting it but not through our request. We did however get the patent number and other info that resulted in us buying the plans in an around about way. I didn't need a lawyer to get the patent number. I tell you what ViperWk send me your email address. We are working with two engine types when we get to spool up stage or maybe before. I will send you some pics of what we are doing.
@AROUGHMAN Ok, i'm willing to believe that the design is publicly available. This is plausible considering that Williams failed to sell this to anyone, even after 20 years. As its got no evident value to it then i guess there's no reason why the design would be kept secret or classified..My sceptical view on this stands firm but hey im more than willing to listen what you've got as long as it has substance to it. Hell, i'll even become a cheerleader for your project if im found wrong .
@ViperWK Don't be a wanker. I told you I would send you some material when I am ready and I will. It's fun chatting with you on Youtube but I do have a lot that I am involved with so being on the blog has to come to an end. I am not giving you details on the system on youtube and you can't grasp the dynamics of how the platform works so you'll just have to wait and see what we do. Smiro1001 and all you other guys NO! I am not giving away or selling plans.
@AROUGHMAN You just disappeared without saying anything so its quite reasonable to ask.. ? Its not that i cant grasp how it works, its that you have failed to explain anything other provide an interesting cat and mouse talk about gyro's.. No one else here has managed to decipher your explanation either.. I'm happy to see photos of the project your doing, but to date you've not proven anything at all, nor been able to address the valid points that ive raised.. Good luck with it anyway...
@AROUGHMAN you're telling others not to be a wanker? amazing.
You paid a lawyer to get you that? paid big bucks..haha!.....I'm guessing you never called Williams and ASKED them nicely to give you the info. I did and guess what.....they gave it to me. Amazing.
Patent number is 4447024, Can be accessed by clicking here: ht tp://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=4447024.PN.&OS=PN/4447024&RS=PN/4447024
Take the space out between the "HT TP". Amazingly, this patent was applied for Feb 8th 1982 and granted May 8th 1984. I don't know why it doesn't show up in "inventor" name search nor the key words but IF you ask, it might be given to you.
I would think that all mr roughman's comments and BS could come back to bite him in the ass later....IF they ever get an "xjet" off the ground. Someone could bring all this BS to light and his company's "credibility" will be about as useful and as much as aroughman's "credibility" is now......worthless!!! ALL CLAIMS, NO PROOF. ALL WANKER. I'm SURE people will want to do big business with someone that's ALL BS. I know I wouldn't chunk down $200K with a BS'er.
No claims. That the patent is publicly available - which it is, and that we have plans - which we do. Then someone began jumping down my throat about why it couldn't have flown. I'll tell you what. If ViperWK asks me nicely, I will think about giving you guys the number. How's that for a bone even if I think it's ridiculous that you think I have a need to prove anything. If he had asked me for the # in the beginning I would have given it gladly. Too much name calling for it to be easy now.
@AROUGHMAN Its been good that the recent discussion has become more "productive" with some actual relevant responses exchanged. That being said though i cant seem to get a clear explanation from you as to why the x-jet is able to lean and tilt with relative ease just using the pilots weight when gyroscopic precession of the engine (either natural or artificially increased) is preventing the vertical axis from changing angle..
@AROUGHMAN Regarding the Patent , many have asked you about this but you've strictly stated that you are not going to share the copy you have.. Why the reversal, so now you are willing to possibly share it ?... I went to the USPTO website.. I used every possible conceivable keyword in the search but nothing came up at all.. ?
@ViperWK That's why I said it's not easy to find but it does exist. Ask me nicely and say "pretty please" and I will ponder sending you a BS copy or give you the patent number. It is easy access for me because of what I do. In fact Both you and cdmistaken send me a message and ask me nicely for the patent and I may indulge you. It's easier to catch a fly with honey than vinegar. LOL. Maybe I should have asked what type of engineering you do as this should be easy for you to figure out.
@AROUGHMAN Ok, ive done abit of research. All US patents lodged before 1976 aren't searchable by "text" . You have to already know the patent number of the patent your wanting to get a copy of.. It looks like there are many patent agents out there (such as Questel) which will search the patent archive records for you for a fee. This is not hard to do. You don't need any special contacts or fancy lawyers to do it. You just apply on-line, pay a fee, then wait..
Dude, the patent is not easy to find. Fortunately for us in the USA, we have the Freedom of Information Act. If you know where to look and have a good lawyer, it's easy to get the the info you want from the government. We acquired the patent number as a result of our inquiry and a contact that netted us the plans. I am looking at it online right now but you need the # to access it. That's how I knew that the Xjet was not Classified. Everyone here assumed it was making false comments so I posted
@AROUGHMAN Thanks for the childish offer but seeing the patent doesn't really matter to me. The physic's of this craft just don't add up, nor can it add up. The explanation given doesn't add up nor address any of the physical issues ive raised. I thank you for at-least responding with something however. Im willing to keep my mind open on this if the mechanical modification made to the engine was explained, though there is no possible conceivable way this thing could fly the way that it does..
Viperwk I feel no need to share the patent info but it's available. You showed me that you were willing to seriously try to understand from another perspective. I didn't like the direction of our initial conversation but you tried. For that, I am looking at the possibility of reversing my position - if cdmistaken doesn't piss me off before then.
It works because of the angular velocity of rotation vs torque in relation to thrust. Don't think of a hockey puck being moved around by a hockey stick. Think of a Puck on an air hockey table. The puck floats but still maintains it's orientation especially if spinning. By tilting the table the puck can be moved in any direction.
Dude, I am still shocked that you don't get it. No No No. Resistance is the thing that makes it work. Individual vectors are not required. Come on. You are thinking 2 dimensional. A gyroscope tilts at right angles but that leaning is countered. The hockey puck is not a good analogy. Think of a heavy balloon full of air spinning on the tied end. Now think of the end releasing the air pressure (thrust) Now think of the thrust will do as torque affect the angle of the spinning Balloon.
If you have for example a powered gyro with a motor that allow it to spin continuously on a fixed axis. the table supports the assembly from below and the vertical axis will resist movement. thrust does something different. It adds a vectoring plane.
@AROUGHMAN I understand that.. With no resistance holding the bottom of the jet engine on the "lateral" plan the engine can be pushed around on the "lateral" plane in any direction much like a puck on a ice hockey rink. Your not understanding the original point that ive been making..The X-jet needs to "TILT" forward or backward to move around. The gyroscopic precision effect is resisting the pilot trying to "TILT" it.. The pod must "TILT" to move..
@AROUGHMAN Your example is only valid if the X-jet always stays vertically straight the entire time and never leans or tilts. Using your interpretation of gyroscopic precession the only way that the X-jet could move in any direction would be if it had individual vector thrusters on all sides of it..Think of the end of a ice hockey stick pushing the puck around.. The puck cant lean, it has to be nudged from the side.. The X-jet doesn't work this way..
Ok you are not thinking. Adjusting torque on a top spinning on a fixed table is not the same thing. If you move the table the top will move in any direction you want it to. Not the same thing. Think about it. When you figure this out you will get it.
I made arrangements to measure the WASP in the Museum of Flight,Seattle Washington, next we take detailed pictures and start CAD scanning the Nozzle.
frickandfracksicem 10 hours ago
I want one!
frickandfracksicem 5 days ago
I want one, do you? it is a simple machine ever play with a Child's TOY TOP, Spin a Quarter, you ask how can this be? due to the Jet propelled single intake fan spinning at 55,000 RPM this rotation this Centrifugal this Gyroscopic effect, You can not fall over EVER. this basic concept discovered hundreds of years ago allows some fantastic toys to be built... :)
frickandfracksicem 1 week ago
@frickandfracksicem I have a question regarding your theory on Gyroscopic effect.. Say the X-jet is on the ground. The pilot starts the motor and brings the revs up to speed. He lifts off the ground and hovers. The gyroscopic effect is keeping the unit steady at this point. How does the pilot tilt the unit forwards and backwards when this gyroscopic effect is resisting any changes in axial movement ? More so,why doesn't Torque Induced Precession occur while attempting this ?
ViperWK 1 day ago
@ViperWK ok fair question, (one point) the fins in the Nozzle control rotation, with out them the WASP airframe would spin like a top,(you know this).. Answer to posed question: By shifting the center of gravity of the vehicle relative to the thrust axis of the engine,engine is approx 12 degrees pitched forward,due to the angle of the engine the pilots ability to maintain balance, example riding a bicycle or motorcycle this is similar to WASP operations, loose balance and you fall.
frickandfracksicem 10 hours ago
@frickandfracksicem Thanks. That didn't answer my question though..Once a Gyroscope is spun up it doesn't want to change its axis.. Balance has nothing to do with this, nor torque twist which jet engines don't get. When torque is applied to the side of a gyroscope it transfers the kinetic energy to 90 degree's of the axis. If the pilot leaned forward the unit would want to pull either left or right, or possibly enter into a wide conical shaped wobble..
ViperWK 9 hours ago
@frickandfracksicem Back in the 1940's there was a single engine fighter in which most of it's engine block spun with the propeller creating quiet a large centrifugal force. Pilots kept crashing and dying in these things as the planes would tend to dive downwards when they tried to lean left or right. Im not sure if you own a push bike. If so pull the front wheel off it. Hold the end's of the axle and spin it . Try and twist and move the wheel around.. Tell me what occurs ?
ViperWK 9 hours ago
This is what happens when you let government get too big, they become a corrupt military complex and they hide everything from you. Star Wars toys is apparently only available to military people who want to control and enslave you!
healthjunkie1 1 week ago
In the process of locating Vendors for parts AND I found one of the Military WASP II Pilots, too bad Robert Courter (Bell Test Pilot) he passed away in the 90's.
frickandfracksicem 1 week ago
На таких летающих ступах, наша баба Яга летала уже давно. Класная штука.
grafenkov 1 week ago
I WANT ONE!!!
frickandfracksicem 1 week ago
Fun times, found a machine shop to manufacture the HP CORE, building a copy of the WASP, one piece at a time,do a Freedom of Information ACT request:
Contract No. DAAE07-81-C-4101) this is from the 1981 WASP II Program... someone told me to be quite, I never do what I am told.
frickandfracksicem 2 weeks ago
Where can I find the music?
Vaskeklut666 3 weeks ago
To all concerned: even if bearing 4/5 fail the engine continues to operate at 52,500 rpm,run out of fuel, you have 3 minutes to land, so stated in report No.2203-933021 from October 15, 1967...
too bad I can't post 45 years of records obtained through the Freedom of Information ACT, look up US Patent 4,447,024 if you want the FACTS: Contract No.DA23-204-AMC-037112(T) Report No.2203-933021: (I WANT ONE) why use wheels when I can fly far faster,time IS money. remember to play
frickandfracksicem 3 weeks ago
@ViperWK The Patent for the WR19 was files in 1968 and expired in 1988, this US PATENT has been located, and all the Technical Drawings are being acquired, The Bell flying jet belt, WASP ONE AND WASP TWO are just the application, the WR19 does make a good Turbine powered speed boat, personally I want to see if it can travel at 100 miles an hour...
frickandfracksicem 3 weeks ago
It is a good thing it has never been available for the public. Just imagine what kind of accidents the use of this machine would lead to. This thing is creepy. How would it diversify criminal activities or spying. This idea is a utopia tinged with inconsistency. If there is some failure of the engine while i fly at 45 feet above the ground..... what would i do.... wishing to fall on something big and soft. No way i would fly this thing.
Barox213 3 weeks ago
@Barox213 They would be no different to flying a small helicopter. Licensing would be limited and you could only fly in restricted air space. Umm id think you'd hear one of these flying above your house. Criminals can use helicopters, what's the difference ?. At low altitudes you'd be just as screwed if you were in a helicopter. At medium to high altitudes you could simply parachute from an Xjet. You cant parachute from 99% of helicopters.You'd likely die.Which is better ?
ViperWK 3 weeks ago
@ViperWK If it's not really different from an helicopter then why did they just invented it. They invented it in the idea that it would have more maneuverability than an helicopter and the design of the thing makes it obvious. Licensing would be limited... to whom or what. The US government is unable to defend the pentagon from a single big plane.... do you really think they are able to police the entire US airspace efficiently with myriads of flying toilets.... i don't.
Barox213 2 weeks ago
@Barox213 You said these would be dangerous if the public had access to them.. If these were allowed for civilian use you would have to be licensed to own or fly one .The licence's would be limited and restricted so not just any old Joe could own one. Ok say a criminal or terrorist stole one of these..What difference would this be to stealing say a small Gyro-copter..Both are about the same in size and have the same capability yet plenty of Gryo-copter's exist which aren't a problem.?
ViperWK 2 weeks ago
@Barox213 What damage can these things actually do ? Flying one into a building aint going to much is it .lol. Ok , I know what your going to say next .. aaww a terrorist could drop a bomb from one of them ?, aaww a terrorist could fire a sniper rifle from one of them. Well they could do all that from a small helicopter just as easily. Actually it would be even better with a helicopter (you could hold more explosives). Do you see the massive flaw in your logic and reasoning yet ?
ViperWK 2 weeks ago
@ViperWK Anyway, the government will never approve it to be sold publicly... there is too much security issues with this device. Good luck with that.
Barox213 2 weeks ago
@Barox213 Its no different to a small helicopter dude.. lol It is just as dangerous in the wrong hands... Well actually no, i tell a lie... It cant hold as much explosives as a helicopter.. Its range is far less than a helicopter..
ViperWK 2 weeks ago
@Barox213 /watch?v=Z2Pyk4mvkw4&feature=related
ViperWK 3 weeks ago
Seriously, "THEY" don't want you to have this US PATENT 4,447,024.. I have been told to shut up, too bad not going to be good... Gonna build this Machine Because the Tech is available to ANY machine shop since 2003...
frickandfracksicem 1 month ago
@frickandfracksicem Your just as crazy as the rest of the delusional Yanks on here. Must be something they put in your tap water.. BTW.. The patent doesn't contain the design plans nor anything technical.. It just has a simple sketched drawing showing a basic concept of how the pilot stands and where the engine sits in the Pod . There's no technical details in at all, just a broad description of what it does, that's it..
ViperWK 1 month ago
I have the Design Plans, I KNOW how this Design works, Review United States Patent Number 4,447,024, which is expired... the 1974 WASP ONE used the WR19 Serial Number 3 Fan Jet Engine, which was paid for by DARPA/Department of Defense 32 years ago... "YOU" own the RIGHT to this information, all you have to do is shut off the TV and ASK for this VERY COOL Technology, Serious ask any Attorney... WE THE PEOPLE have the RIGHT and "I WANT IT" or I will die trying to acquire this TECH.
frickandfracksicem 1 month ago
Wanna Guess what my "Speciality" was... you have the opportunity to review US Patent Number 4,447,024 and learn how the design works or keep talking BS... Seriously ask the Listed patent attorney for the "build" Plans or "DARPA" it's your "RIGHT" just like you have the "RIGHT" to Vote... Seriously with Carbon Fiber "you" ca reduce the Weight of the Air frame by 100 pounds, SO that means "you" can fly for 90 minutes at 60 miles an hour, Traffic Jams are "history"... SUCKER.
frickandfracksicem 1 month ago
The WR 19 engine weighs 68 pounds, Air frame weighs:332 fully loaded with fuel total weight is:500 pounds that means the fuel weighed: 100 pounds... plus or minus 10 pounds... US Patent Number 4,447,024 the 1974 WASP one used the WR19 Serial Number 3 Fan Jet engine which is on Display in the Smithsonian... "I Want ONE" working towards acquiring the build plans every day, when I have enough information I am writing a "Hayes" Technical Manual to everyone can build one, I don't need to be "rich"
frickandfracksicem 1 month ago
US PATENT 4,447,024 under Williams and titled Airborne Vehicle, get the Info and contact the Listed Attorney...
frickandfracksicem 1 month ago
It was probably considered a threat to national security and stored in a secret goverment base, and they must of forgotten about it.
MultiIPwnage 1 month ago in playlist I ♥ VTOL's
@MultiIPwnage lol
ViperWK 1 month ago
@ViperWK and of course later put in a museum
MultiIPwnage 1 month ago
@MultiIPwnage Don't forget, they also had to pull out its cold fusion reactor before placing it in the museum. Don't want some kid accidentally turning it on hovering down the corridor with it..
ViperWK 1 month ago
@ViperWK Dude it's just a Jet engine that is capable of powering a cruise missile for 2,889.06 miles with a Tach Nuke, in the payload bay, "alcm" which can fly through your bedroom window and tactically vaporize your body into the after life... no big deal...
frickandfracksicem 1 month ago
Found the US PATENT 4,447,024 under Williams and titled Airborne Vehicle, this patent has expired, any one can obtain a copy and have the drawing with detailed information on how Sam Williams invention works, meeting with engineering firm to go over the proposed manufacturing of this Airborne Vehicle.
frickandfracksicem 1 month ago
Here is the US PATENT for the WASP/X-JET Patent NO. 4447024
It costs $3.00 to buy the information, DO SHARE IT with everyone you know, Thank YOU!!!
frickandfracksicem 1 month ago
Kerosene is "jet" fuel... the WASP II used the F107 Cruise missile engine and is on Display at the Museum of Flight in Seattle Washington... The WASP I used the WR19-7 which was also used in the Bell "flying belt".
The WASP with the F107 engine was classified which by the way has been "TERMINATED" due to the F107 engine being "obsolete" the F107-400 replaced it a LOOONG time ago.
If you want the WR19-7 go to a Machine Shop with a 5-Axis mill and make one-the engine was made 45 years ago.
frickandfracksicem 1 month ago
Oh' I reckon engine failure could be a bit of an issue!!!
ebr62933 1 month ago
@ebr62933 We see plenty of helicopters flying around ?.. Engine failure is a risk just like with anything else..
ViperWK 1 month ago
I like this song
xXhighwolfXx 1 month ago in playlist Williams WASP X-Jet
Why it was never sold to civilians ? Jet engine fuel is expensive and not to mention hasardous to manipulate. This vehicle has absolutely no protections for its pilote and frankly, that looks terribly unsafe and unstable.
shinryohji 2 months ago
@shinryohji but its so cool
10babiscar 2 months ago
@shinryohji Looks very stable in the video to me ? .... Too stable if you know what i mean ;) .. Fuel is cheap and safe ? . Could run 1000's of these compared to 1 Hercules aircraft..
ViperWK 2 months ago
OOPS... I know why this is not for sale any where...the "motor" is used in Missiles and therefor it is classified and restricted from export.... this means the technology can't be sent out of the united states, this motor is used in Cruise Missiles which can fly through your window after flying a hundred miles.
frickandfracksicem 2 months ago
Bet we could copy this.... lets locate the engine and go from there.
frickandfracksicem 2 months ago
I am sorry to disappoint you but your knowledge on the XJet is limited. Maybe we should change the topic to the m134 minigun Hero. LOL
AROUGHMAN 2 months ago
yeah, I'm worked up...not. You're not worth even coming back to this site. I was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt...at first but it's obvious that was misplaced. You sure do seem to "laugh a lot" LOL. hahaha LOL hahaha. I'm not searching for info. I KNOW IT; it's you that's searching all over the net to see if you can find that diameter. LOL.....what to know how I know? HAHAHA....LOL; I'm not telling you.
cdamistaken 2 months ago
@cdamistaken I laugh a lot because you are freaking funny!!!! Really? I am not worth coming back to this site? You sure have a lot to say. You are not going anywhere! I demand that you stay on this site!!!! I am sure you have a lot more to say so don't leave. You are the subject matter expert. What would we do without your commentary?
AROUGHMAN 2 months ago
What information do you think I want from you? I ALREADY LISTED the info...I KNOW...YOU DON"T. No assumptions...just FACT. It's a MULTIPLE CHOICE....the answer is listed but it's obvious you don't know the answer. DUH.
cdamistaken 2 months ago
Let's not get so worked up. Breathe cdamistaken breathe! You are assuming and getting way ahead of yourself.
AROUGHMAN 2 months ago
You also mentioned how bad the US Government was didn't you? Now you want me to give you info? ...To prove you wrong? LOL This is not a work project genius. Who said anything about NASA suing the Government? Wow, aren't we bright? Officially if we had to request info from another branch that's not the procedure. It would be a lot easier but there would be limits to how that info could be used. There is protocol you know for work projects. This is not one of those. LOL
AROUGHMAN 2 months ago
Calm down people. LOL ViperWk you'll get pictures but I am not on your schedule. LOL. You assume a lot cdamistaken. What? You think that by making these sweeping accusations I will give you information? Where have I seen that tactic before? Didn't you mention Bin Laden? Hmmmmm.
AROUGHMAN 2 months ago
maybe he likes being seen as a liar?? After-all he CLAIMS he works for NASA.....A US Gov Agency.....the SAME US Gov that said NO to the XJet....yet now we are to believe that NASA sued the Excutive branch of the US Gov to get the build plans of a private corps rejected project so the same US Gov could build it for "Commercial" uses? hhhuh? AND we are to believe everything else from this story teller without a single piece of proof....not even answering a simple MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTION. LOL.
cdamistaken 2 months ago
And YES...WASTE OF SKIN....ALL LIARS ARE A WASTE OF SKIN.
cdamistaken 2 months ago
prove to everyone you have an F112 ...the answer is listed here....I'll even make it even easier for you....take "D" away....it's one of the three measurments...but you already knew that right? RIGHT.......we're all convinced. Talk about LOL.....trust me...I'm sure all "your" workers are laughing their asses off. I'm sure....what's your excuse now for not answer this time...I'm not worth proving anything too? BUT you feel everyone who thinks it's a US Gov Black project...you must correct.
cdamistaken 2 months ago
How about I make it easy for you, aroughman?
The fan diameter on an F112 is:
A. 8.75 inches
B. 9.875 inches
C. 10.50 inches
D. None of the above.
cdamistaken 2 months ago
@cdamistaken Did I ask you for info on the F112 or the F107? We have a 112 here and I have all the info I need. You really are the daily laugh at my building. It's funny how you demand information and get all worked up about the Xjet. Now I am a waste of skin. LOL . I love it! We look forward to what you are going to say next. You do not disappoint. He he!.The F107 in the XJet is modified cdamistaken. Really it is! LOL
AROUGHMAN 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@AROUGHMAN How about I make it easy for you, aroughman?
The fan diameter on an F112 is:
A. 8.75 inches
B. 9.875 inches
C. 10.50 inches
D. None of the above.
cdamistaken 2 months ago
@AROUGHMAN worked up? Not even close...you're the one who likes to tell everyone to not name call...while calling them name after name like a child on the playground..i believe that's called HYPOCRISY, mr.dictionary. You're also the one so worked up about your stories, you can't even keep them straight so you look like your arguing with yourself or you are? It's so funny how you say things and don't even remember you said the opposite minutes before.....worse than a Texas politician....perry.
cdamistaken 2 months ago
@AROUGHMAN You feel the need to tell me this: "The F107 in the XJet is modified cdamistaken. Really it is" but won't answer a simple question in which I already know the answer...(as proven by the correct answer being listed.....or is it?? LOL ) that would prove to everyone you're legit but you refuse to answer and prove. The ONLY logical reason is your a FRAUD...which we all smelled a liar from the word go. hahahahahahahahah...
There you have it folks....you make the call...fraud or legit?
cdamistaken 2 months ago
can't answer a SINGLE question that anyone who actually has seen an F112 can answer.....like the FAN DIAMETER....approx. NOPE, can't answer that....it's TOOO Vital to "his" project....and "HIS GUYS" wouldn't approve....and HIS GUYS are LAUGHING....at US....not the LIAR posing as a NASA SCIENTIST. What a JOKE and a waste of skin.....yes, I have NO CLUE what-so-ever about the F112 and the xjet. Not a clue one....except........
cdamistaken 2 months ago
everyone with an IQ under 45 are believing "NASA Scientist", Aroughman, despite his CONSTANT Conflicts with HIMSELF......yes, we're actually loosing the conversation because we've been caught LYING OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN. NOPE, can't use a regular F107 engine because it was "HEAVILY" Modified by making it none counter rotating so the turbine assemblies give it Gyroscopic affects....ooops, now we have the famed "F112" engine......IN OUR BUILDING....an you touched one....with your hand..mon
cdamistaken 2 months ago
When I am ready ViperWk, When I am ready. On another note, Curiosity is on it's 354 million mile journey to Mars! Have a great day everyone. We sure are the launch was perfect.
AROUGHMAN 2 months ago
@AROUGHMAN You'll never send any pic's.. I'm not even gonna bother waiting..
ViperWK 2 months ago
@ViperWK If you don't want to wait, that is on you.
AROUGHMAN 2 months ago
@AROUGHMAN oh Surprise, a quick snap at the slightest chance get out of sending them. I'll wait., but i guarantee that you wont send anything.. I already gave you my email a week ago.. My Inbox is still empty , just like your promises..
ViperWK 2 months ago
Nope I didn't expect anything from a story teller. Why would you prove anything..like the fan diameter or any other proof...why would anyone; it's "top secret" and terribly vital to "your project"
cdamistaken 2 months ago
Forget eating your words ViperWk. I'll take the million dollars. Do you even have a million dollars? LOL
AROUGHMAN 2 months ago
@AROUGHMAN Tapity tap tap .. You've been promising these pic's for about a week.. You've sent nothing at all..?
ViperWK 2 months ago
Just so you know cdamistaken I may be all those other things but definitely not diseased or sick. Passed my Class 1A recently. LOL
AROUGHMAN 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Do you actually think I am going to give you that info cdamistaken? Are you not going to just DEMAND that I release the information? LOL
AROUGHMAN 2 months ago
I am not claiming anything Guys. Don't worry about what we are using. LOL I love it! You guys are too funny. We have an F112 and a number of other engines in our building I don't even have to fly to a museum to play with one. LOL We love how you guys get so worked up on here. I can't tell you how much we laugh at you numb nuts arguing and getting crazy about something you have no clue about. This is no exception. LOL
AROUGHMAN 2 months ago
@AROUGHMAN I love it when Sociopath nutbag's prance around on a high. They get this false sense of confidence when they "think" they have managed to fool all the others or think they are winning the conversation..
ViperWK 2 months ago
Are you CLAIMING that you're now going to use a Williams F112-WR-100 turbofan to power your xjet or are you just telling us about your field trip to the meseum?
cdamistaken 2 months ago
Aroughman...what was your FOIA request lawsuit file number; which "executive branch of the us gov" did u file against and in which county/state did you file this "request"?
cdamistaken 2 months ago
So now you're going to claim you're going to use the f112-wr-100 turbofan to power your xjet? The F112 uses counter-rotating fas/turbine assemblies that eliminate gryoscopic effects....oops.
cdamistaken 2 months ago
Gee, yesterday aroughman posted a dictionary def. That he thought fit us..."Hater".. I have a def for mr scientist: Pathological liar- of pathology;disease, sick, characterized by an unhealthy compulsion to lie.
cdamistaken 2 months ago
I'm curious, about how large was the fan of the F112 you put your hands on monday? i
cdamistaken 2 months ago
Wow, I'm so entertained by your trip to the museum. Did you get a lolly pop too? There are only 3 outside the military and the X36A project...two engines had to be "barrowed" for the X50 project. Of those three in "civilian" hands only ONE is runnable..the other two made high speed impacts during "testing"....so you found the one runner or one of the two pancakes?
cdamistaken 2 months ago
I'm still going to send you some pics. ViperWk. I am going to watch you shrivel in jealousy. You guys are funny. Man this is entertaining!
AROUGHMAN 2 months ago
@AROUGHMAN Yeah right...You didn't send any pic's before when you said you would and likely never will. Even if you do i bet you 1 million dollars the pics you send will show nothing of your fantasy claims about a Gyro modded engine or anything relevant.. I invite you to prove me wrong.. I'll publicly eat my words if you can prove any of your claims..
ViperWK 2 months ago
I hope this doesn't make you guys break out in hives but I had my hands on an F112 just this past Monday. LOL Good luck to you two little angry men. He he he
AROUGHMAN 2 months ago
Your own words:
Sept 27th: "No other engine on the market is small enough and weight compatible to do the design but we are working on it.".......
Nov 14th "We are working with two engine types when we get to spool up stage or maybe before. I will send you some pics of what we are doing."
NO EnGINE
cdamistaken 2 months ago
Guys guys guys. This is so uneven. Even thought you guys are trying to use my words. That's all you have. I HAVE A PLAN!!! LOL. You guys are still trying to figure out what we know. You don't have a clue how it is built and what it can do. You think I am going to be intimidated by your words and give you guys clues. Ain't gonna happen. Now I don't have an engine? Now you know what we have ViperWk? I think you are going to be disappointed. LOL
AROUGHMAN 2 months ago
The reality is this: Even if the "NASA scientists" had a chassis completed and handed to him, he doesn't have THE Key component...the engine...a reliable compatible engine...one he is confused over..saying there are and are not available engine...one he's "working one" and when they get to "spooling" up one oftwo designs he's working on. He's LIGHT YEARS away from even teathered flight.
cdamistaken 2 months ago
I like this string of comments:
Nov 9th "I have no interest in making them available to anyone outside our circle in Houston. "
Nov 10th " I was considering sharing info but forget it now."
Nov 10th "I can't wait for my guys to read your comments."
The SAME day nov 10th "Wow! We are really laughing now."
cdamistaken 2 months ago
Name calling? Like this:
Aroughman start with name calling Nov 9th "some idiot from Australia"
Nov 10th says viper is acting like a two year old and calls him "juvenile"
Nov 10th- "you idiot"
Nov 10th "smarty pants"
Nov 10th "Calling me names isn't going to make you smarter or able to understand it. LOL You are funny!"
Nov 10th "hahaha dummy"
Nov 10 " The turkey you talked to..."
cdamistaken 2 months ago
There you go again applying selective reading. Everyone knows the Freedom of information Act only applies to the government. We asked the government for the info and got enough to acquire the plans from someone other than Williams. Did you know that there are others out there that have a copy of the plans besides Williams? Woah how can that be? If you keep searching like we did you can get there too. The bible is right. Instead of being a Hater seek like we did and you shall find.
AROUGHMAN 2 months ago
@AROUGHMAN Ohhh the tangled web we weave just keeps getting bigger and bigger..
ViperWK 2 months ago
@AROUGHMAN Could you please provide the Contact information for acquiring the "Plans" for the WASP one and WASP two, Links would be helpful, my email is scottwatson42@comcast.net By studying history I wish to avoid the mistakes and doing the work twice is a waste of time which I don't have.
frickandfracksicem 1 month ago
Yes, yes, yes CD, the Freedom of Information Act only applies to government stored information. When a project is proposed to the Government the Government is required to keep all records of the proposed project including design information and safety studies. We asked for but got limited info. We didn't acquire the plans from the Military but got enough info to purchase the designs from another individual. Williams is a private company yes. They were not interested in selling it.
AROUGHMAN 2 months ago
cdamistaken. You really don't know what you are talking about and I am not going to call you names or argue with you. The weight of the pilot of the XJet was limited and not just because of the lift requirements. Man you guys are funny! I live in Space huh? You have no clue what you are talking about but if it makes you feel good to call me names go ahead. You have a hard lesson coming with your civilian F107 LOL.
AROUGHMAN 2 months ago
I love it! You guys are looking things up and using your mind. If I have to deal with some name calling then so be it. It's worth the knowledge that you will gain. And Yes cdamistaken I do work for NASA. I know that you don't like the government but NASA too? Wow, there's just no pleasing you. LOL
AROUGHMAN 3 months ago
@AROUGHMAN You don't work for NASA , but you do live in space... lol
ViperWK 3 months ago
What you guys don't seem to get is that I really don't mind all the negative comments. I am confident in what I know and who I am. I have dealt with a lot more amateur students than you guys. I am glad that you are looking things up and trying to understand the XJet. LOL. You are even reading the dictionary! This is great. You guys are looking for information and learning something! Keep going. You will have that Aha moment and it will all start to make sense.
AROUGHMAN 3 months ago
@AROUGHMAN aww the crazy man just pat me on the head and gave me a lolly... shucks..
ViperWK 3 months ago
2. Hater: A person who feels anger and/or jealousy for someone who has succeeded in something they have worked hard for. A being who speaks badly,and/or takes negative actions in attempt to create problems for a successful person.
AROUGHMAN 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@AROUGHMAN ahhh the good ol "Hater' throw back.. (yawn) , Hey everyone, the bad mean person is just a big mean "hater'.. Don't listen to any of the the points that he makes because he's just a big meany who hates me for no reason and is just making stuff up to dis' me.... sobbb..
ViperWK 3 months ago
1. Hater: A person that simply cannot be happy for another person's success. So rather, they make a point of trying to expose a flaw in that person. Hating, the result of being a hater, is not exactly jealousy. The hater doesnt really want to be the person he or she hates, rather the hater wants to knock somelse down a notch.
AROUGHMAN 3 months ago
@AROUGHMAN ahhh the good ol "Hater' throw back.. (yawn) , Hey everyone, the bad mean person is just a big mean "hater'.. Don't listen to any of the points that he makes because he's just a big meany who hates me for no reason and is just making stuff up to dis' me.... sobbb..
ViperWK 3 months ago
Viperwk My comment was about the original setup of the Xjet. What you don't know was that the weight of the pilot was very limited. If you weigh 190 lbs like I do, because of how this thing is balanced/gyroed to fly the way it does I wouldn't be able to pilot the XJet based on the plans. For a larger person to fly the Xjet a larger Engine is required. There are other engines that can facilitate that. Delusional LOL. I have a term for you - Read the following:
AROUGHMAN 3 months ago
@AROUGHMAN The pilot requiring to have an "exact" weight for this thing to stay stable and steady is totally absurd..This thing has two fuel tanks which hold around est 132 lbs of fuel.. As it fly's along it consumes this fuel causing it's weight to reduce as it goes along.. By the end of a flight run the weight dynamic of the pod has dramatically changed..You are delusional... FYI, Sociopath's also have delusions of grandeur and over compensate. Explains the 5:1 posting ratio you make.
ViperWK 3 months ago
Comment removed
ViperWK 3 months ago
@AROUGHMAN Did you see the size of the pilot in the video...He was a big plump fellow..... Holes , holes, holes, holes, holes, holes, holes, holes, holes, holes, holes, ... when do they stop..
ViperWK 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@AROUGHMAN Your reference to the Xjet and F107 was.. 1) "No other engine on the market is small enough and weight compatible to do the design".. This was in a conversation in which you said that only a Williams F107 could be used to build an Xjet, yet there are plenty of engines out there which even have MORE thrust to weight ratio (which you now acknowledge ? ) Even some slightly later Williams engines of that era had 1000lbs.. (better than 600lbs) ... holes holes n' more holes..
ViperWK 3 months ago
I wonder if Williams International knew that it was NASA who hired that lawyer to sue them for FOIA on the Xjet???...I wonder if that would have changed anything....hmmm not only does Aroughman claim he works at NASA but also many of his guys..subordinates? .
cdamistaken 3 months ago
@cdamistaken Just to also add.. Correct me if im wrong.. Don't FOIA's only apply to public/government stored information. Isn't Williams a private company..? hmm , so how did Aroughman FOIA a private company of there information. ? The government doesn't hold the design plans as they lost interest in the project and never bought it.. We know that Williams owns the design, (not the government), as they spent many years trying to sell it to others. How does someone FOIA a private company ;-)
ViperWK 3 months ago
@ViperWK If I recall correctly the WASP one and WASP two was Financed by ARPA or is DARPA correct? First it was the Marines then the ARMY so if the Logic is extended a little, the plans for the proposed design would have to go through the DARPA evaluation program, so I believe the plans were available at one time from DARPA... Do you have the Patent number??
frickandfracksicem 1 month ago
I can see the article now..."NASA scientists, Aroughtman, claims on youtube....
cdamistaken 3 months ago
Just in the middle of reading my dictionary at the moment.. I looked up the word "Sociopath" today... Its quite an interesting condition.. Apparently they can be quite intelligent people who sound extremely persuasive and articulated when they speak but are actually completely delusional, live in a fantasy world, and chronically lie..
ViperWK 3 months ago
I am sure you are going to be combing for the info. You better start reading. We have college students here at NASA that can tell exactly how the XJet works just by looking at the flight characteristics. You guys are still looking for dust trails. lol. First it didn't fly. Now it does! We are making progress.
AROUGHMAN 3 months ago
cdamistaken. I'll save my comments. I wish you the best of luck on your Xjet and your F107 in civilian hands. LOL Yes, I am just like the US Government. Different stories, No proof but so far advanced that it would blow you little vile talking mind. No amount of name calling will make me just hand over what we know. You are just going to have to figure it out. I just hope you don't kill yourself in the process. And by the way, the are other powerplants that will work and the Xjet is Gyroed.
AROUGHMAN 3 months ago
I will help you guys out again as you two are pretty comfortable just assuming things. There are other powerplants available today that can work in a similar setup. The issue is even with an F107, the engine among other things has to be modified. Isn't it funny that cdmistaken's discovery of the patent number was what I was saying from the get go? I told you that it was available and that you guys had to have the patent number to pull it up. I was right, right and right again! Just admit it man.
AROUGHMAN 3 months ago
@AROUGHMAN again with the CLAIMS with NO evidence. You CLAIM there are other suitable powerplants yet you never state what turbines are currently available for a "similar setup". OH, and you couldn't have been further from being "RIGHT" about the patent. It IS searchable and CAN be found on the USPTO's website by doing a proper search.....AND NO you DON"T Need the patent number to pull it up. Proved your point? WTF you talking about? CLAIMS with NO EVIDENCE...work for the US GOV?
cdamistaken 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@AROUGHMAN ...."Isn't it funny that cdmistaken's discovery of the patent number was what I was saying from the get go? I told you that it was available and that you guys had to have the patent number to pull it up. I was right, right and right again!"=======NO!!! you were WRONG WRONG WRONG....and WRONG AGAIN.
One does NOT need the patent number to search it...just the correct inquiry input.....SO "just admit it man"...YOU ARE WRONG..."just admit it man".
cdamistaken 3 months ago
@AROUGHMAN More quotes from you .. 1) "No other engine on the market is small enough and weight compatible to do the design".. Lets fast forward to your more recent quote 2) "There are other powerplants available today that can work in a similar setup"....
ViperWK 3 months ago
Now maybe you two - cdamistaken and ViperWk can put your brains together to try to figure how it all works. LOL. I bet you can't wait to see what we are doing here in Houston. By the way, why didn't you ask Williams how it worked? or if it flew? That would be too easy I guess. While you two are sitting at home being desktop scientists we are actually doing something about the Xjet. Keep typing guys. I understand it makes you feel good about yourselves to think that you are smarter than you are.
AROUGHMAN 3 months ago
@AROUGHMAN you should consider reading YOUR OWN COMMENTS....then you might keep your storieS straight. You're just like the US Gov....tell one story one day; another the next; another a few days later and all the while never offering PROOF or Evidence....just take your word for it....after all you're not a liar....neh, not a liar....at least not the way YOU define LIAR....just believe you; you killed Osama and buried him at sea....no, we're not going to release that evidence...it might hurt...
cdamistaken 3 months ago
@AROUGHMAN YEAH, we'll see who who actually get's an "xjet" ready first. You've already shown your hand.....you're not even CLOSE to having one ready....you don't even have one of those powerplants you CLAIM (once again with all your baseless CLAIMS) is available.
CLAIMS, CLAIMS, CLAIMS CLAIMS CLAIMS.....and so far you're "0 for ALL"....a TOTAL LOOOOOSER with nothing but CLAIMS.
cdamistaken 3 months ago
OK ViperWk. You proved my point. The patent IS available as I told you. You guys were all saying that it was Top Secret. I am glad I got you to apply yourselves. Now you are really being a wanker. I didn't pay a lawyer for the patent. We paid a lawyer to get the plans. Maybe Williams will give you that info too. LOL. Before you start calling people names READ the bloody patent especially the part about modification.
AROUGHMAN 3 months ago
@AROUGHMAN Mods? Yes.....Gyro's NO....All you did was regurgitate what was on the patent...nothing new...JUST what you read....you're no "scientist"....you're the idiot that sits in your moms basement posting shit like you know something but reality begs to differ. You're a NOTHING that has amounted to NOTHING and will ALWAYS AMOUNT TO NOTHING but posting online makes you feel smart and makes you feel like you're going to amount to something but then there's reality.
cdamistaken 3 months ago
@cdamistaken I concur.. The exact quote from Aroughman was . "They gyroed the engine" .. 1)There are no gyro based sensors that manipulate the engine.. 2) There is no Gyroscopic prepossession modification to the engine.. As i had picked right from the start, Aroughman is just one of these internet kooks/trolls that roam discussion boards spinning fantasy type BS .. Just about everything he has said has had holes in it... Works for NASA... lol
ViperWK 3 months ago
@AROUGHMAN "You guys were all saying that it was Top Secret.".....WHERE did we say this?
Trust me, the name calling is WELL SUITED even before reading the "bloody patent..about modification"....yeah, the engine was modified....Lubrication had to be modified.....so did starting.....but YOU CLAIMED the engine was modified to provide Gryosopic effects...AFTER you CLAIMED it had Gyros and AFTER you back peddled about that too...
cdamistaken 3 months ago
@AROUGHMAN Here's a few quotes from you .. 1) " Dude, the PATENT is not easy to find".. Not easy to find ? , all you have to do is type the right keywords into the gov's website, that's it ... 2) " If you know where to look and have a good LAWYER, it's easy to get the the info you want from the government. We acquired the PATENT number as a result of our inquiry".... So you did all of this to get the PATENT number (not the plans).... Back flips , twisting of words, and hole digging....
ViperWK 3 months ago
@ cdamistaken. Buy a full copy of the patent from the Patent office..
ViperWK 3 months ago
@ViperWK Please supply the patent number and I will purchase the Patent information, my email is scottwatson42@comcast.net I have looked at #94 WASP on display at the Museum of flight here in Seattle Washington, to me the design looks fairly simple, but then the 1974 evaluation of "Too Complicated" is based on a Society that did not have the INTERNET.
frickandfracksicem 1 month ago
We initially hired a lawyer to attempt to get a copy of the plans via the Freedom of Information act. We ended up getting it but not through our request. We did however get the patent number and other info that resulted in us buying the plans in an around about way. I didn't need a lawyer to get the patent number. I tell you what ViperWk send me your email address. We are working with two engine types when we get to spool up stage or maybe before. I will send you some pics of what we are doing.
AROUGHMAN 3 months ago
@AROUGHMAN Ok, i'm willing to believe that the design is publicly available. This is plausible considering that Williams failed to sell this to anyone, even after 20 years. As its got no evident value to it then i guess there's no reason why the design would be kept secret or classified..My sceptical view on this stands firm but hey im more than willing to listen what you've got as long as it has substance to it. Hell, i'll even become a cheerleader for your project if im found wrong .
ViperWK 3 months ago
@AROUGHMAN Where'd he go .. ? Disappeared as quick as he came !
ViperWK 3 months ago
@ViperWK Don't be a wanker. I told you I would send you some material when I am ready and I will. It's fun chatting with you on Youtube but I do have a lot that I am involved with so being on the blog has to come to an end. I am not giving you details on the system on youtube and you can't grasp the dynamics of how the platform works so you'll just have to wait and see what we do. Smiro1001 and all you other guys NO! I am not giving away or selling plans.
AROUGHMAN 3 months ago
@AROUGHMAN You just disappeared without saying anything so its quite reasonable to ask.. ? Its not that i cant grasp how it works, its that you have failed to explain anything other provide an interesting cat and mouse talk about gyro's.. No one else here has managed to decipher your explanation either.. I'm happy to see photos of the project your doing, but to date you've not proven anything at all, nor been able to address the valid points that ive raised.. Good luck with it anyway...
ViperWK 3 months ago
Comment removed
cdamistaken 3 months ago
Comment removed
cdamistaken 3 months ago
@AROUGHMAN you're telling others not to be a wanker? amazing.
You paid a lawyer to get you that? paid big bucks..haha!.....I'm guessing you never called Williams and ASKED them nicely to give you the info. I did and guess what.....they gave it to me. Amazing.
Patent number is 4447024, Can be accessed by clicking here: ht tp://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=4447024.PN.&OS=PN/4447024&RS=PN/4447024
cdamistaken 3 months ago
Take the space out between the "HT TP". Amazingly, this patent was applied for Feb 8th 1982 and granted May 8th 1984. I don't know why it doesn't show up in "inventor" name search nor the key words but IF you ask, it might be given to you.
cdamistaken 3 months ago
I would think that all mr roughman's comments and BS could come back to bite him in the ass later....IF they ever get an "xjet" off the ground. Someone could bring all this BS to light and his company's "credibility" will be about as useful and as much as aroughman's "credibility" is now......worthless!!! ALL CLAIMS, NO PROOF. ALL WANKER. I'm SURE people will want to do big business with someone that's ALL BS. I know I wouldn't chunk down $200K with a BS'er.
cdamistaken 3 months ago
@cdamistaken Your a bloody champion cdamistaken... I cant wait to see this "magical" gyro/engine system... lol .. Are you going to buy a copy ?
ViperWK 3 months ago
@ViperWK Buy a copy? From whom and of what?
cdamistaken 3 months ago
Comment removed
cdamistaken 3 months ago
No claims. That the patent is publicly available - which it is, and that we have plans - which we do. Then someone began jumping down my throat about why it couldn't have flown. I'll tell you what. If ViperWK asks me nicely, I will think about giving you guys the number. How's that for a bone even if I think it's ridiculous that you think I have a need to prove anything. If he had asked me for the # in the beginning I would have given it gladly. Too much name calling for it to be easy now.
AROUGHMAN 3 months ago
Comment removed
cdamistaken 3 months ago
@AROUGHMAN Its been good that the recent discussion has become more "productive" with some actual relevant responses exchanged. That being said though i cant seem to get a clear explanation from you as to why the x-jet is able to lean and tilt with relative ease just using the pilots weight when gyroscopic precession of the engine (either natural or artificially increased) is preventing the vertical axis from changing angle..
ViperWK 3 months ago
Comment removed
cdamistaken 3 months ago
@cdamistaken No!
AROUGHMAN 3 months ago
Comment removed
cdamistaken 3 months ago
@AROUGHMAN Regarding the Patent , many have asked you about this but you've strictly stated that you are not going to share the copy you have.. Why the reversal, so now you are willing to possibly share it ?... I went to the USPTO website.. I used every possible conceivable keyword in the search but nothing came up at all.. ?
ViperWK 3 months ago
@ViperWK That's why I said it's not easy to find but it does exist. Ask me nicely and say "pretty please" and I will ponder sending you a BS copy or give you the patent number. It is easy access for me because of what I do. In fact Both you and cdmistaken send me a message and ask me nicely for the patent and I may indulge you. It's easier to catch a fly with honey than vinegar. LOL. Maybe I should have asked what type of engineering you do as this should be easy for you to figure out.
AROUGHMAN 3 months ago
@AROUGHMAN Ok, ive done abit of research. All US patents lodged before 1976 aren't searchable by "text" . You have to already know the patent number of the patent your wanting to get a copy of.. It looks like there are many patent agents out there (such as Questel) which will search the patent archive records for you for a fee. This is not hard to do. You don't need any special contacts or fancy lawyers to do it. You just apply on-line, pay a fee, then wait..
ViperWK 3 months ago
@AROUGHMAN hello can you pritty please send me a copy of the plans to this email: xtreme_303@hotmail.com thank you.
smitro1001 3 months ago
@AROUGHMAN "pretty please" my I have the Patent number for the WASP and access to the plans. scottwatson42@comcast.net
frickandfracksicem 1 month ago
Dude, the patent is not easy to find. Fortunately for us in the USA, we have the Freedom of Information Act. If you know where to look and have a good lawyer, it's easy to get the the info you want from the government. We acquired the patent number as a result of our inquiry and a contact that netted us the plans. I am looking at it online right now but you need the # to access it. That's how I knew that the Xjet was not Classified. Everyone here assumed it was making false comments so I posted
AROUGHMAN 3 months ago
@AROUGHMAN Thanks for the childish offer but seeing the patent doesn't really matter to me. The physic's of this craft just don't add up, nor can it add up. The explanation given doesn't add up nor address any of the physical issues ive raised. I thank you for at-least responding with something however. Im willing to keep my mind open on this if the mechanical modification made to the engine was explained, though there is no possible conceivable way this thing could fly the way that it does..
ViperWK 3 months ago
Viperwk I feel no need to share the patent info but it's available. You showed me that you were willing to seriously try to understand from another perspective. I didn't like the direction of our initial conversation but you tried. For that, I am looking at the possibility of reversing my position - if cdmistaken doesn't piss me off before then.
AROUGHMAN 3 months ago
There is a very easy way to explain this but I want you to get it in relation to the Xjet.
AROUGHMAN 3 months ago
Comment removed
cdamistaken 3 months ago
It works because of the angular velocity of rotation vs torque in relation to thrust. Don't think of a hockey puck being moved around by a hockey stick. Think of a Puck on an air hockey table. The puck floats but still maintains it's orientation especially if spinning. By tilting the table the puck can be moved in any direction.
AROUGHMAN 3 months ago
Dude, I am still shocked that you don't get it. No No No. Resistance is the thing that makes it work. Individual vectors are not required. Come on. You are thinking 2 dimensional. A gyroscope tilts at right angles but that leaning is countered. The hockey puck is not a good analogy. Think of a heavy balloon full of air spinning on the tied end. Now think of the end releasing the air pressure (thrust) Now think of the thrust will do as torque affect the angle of the spinning Balloon.
AROUGHMAN 3 months ago
If you have for example a powered gyro with a motor that allow it to spin continuously on a fixed axis. the table supports the assembly from below and the vertical axis will resist movement. thrust does something different. It adds a vectoring plane.
AROUGHMAN 3 months ago
@AROUGHMAN I understand that.. With no resistance holding the bottom of the jet engine on the "lateral" plan the engine can be pushed around on the "lateral" plane in any direction much like a puck on a ice hockey rink. Your not understanding the original point that ive been making..The X-jet needs to "TILT" forward or backward to move around. The gyroscopic precision effect is resisting the pilot trying to "TILT" it.. The pod must "TILT" to move..
ViperWK 3 months ago
@AROUGHMAN Your example is only valid if the X-jet always stays vertically straight the entire time and never leans or tilts. Using your interpretation of gyroscopic precession the only way that the X-jet could move in any direction would be if it had individual vector thrusters on all sides of it..Think of the end of a ice hockey stick pushing the puck around.. The puck cant lean, it has to be nudged from the side.. The X-jet doesn't work this way..
ViperWK 3 months ago
Ok you are not thinking. Adjusting torque on a top spinning on a fixed table is not the same thing. If you move the table the top will move in any direction you want it to. Not the same thing. Think about it. When you figure this out you will get it.
AROUGHMAN 3 months ago
What happens if you tilt the table on one end or the other?
AROUGHMAN 3 months ago
@AROUGHMAN The top stays upright as much as possible..?
ViperWK 3 months ago