| Subject: Re: T.D. Barne's comments on AREA 51 book |
| From: "miso@sushi.com" <miso@sushi.com> |
| Date: 06/06/2011, 04:44 |
| Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.area51 |
On Jun 5, 5:56 am, emoneyjoe <emoney...@iglou.com> wrote:
On Sat, 4 Jun 2011 17:20:59 -0700 (PDT), "m...@sushi.com"
<m...@sushi.com> wrote:
On Jun 4, 1:43 pm, emoneyjoe <emoney...@iglou.com> wrote:
On Fri, 3 Jun 2011 23:29:54 -0700 (PDT), "m...@sushi.com"
<m...@sushi.com> wrote:
On Jun 3, 5:33 pm, emoneyjoe <emoney...@iglou.com> wrote:
On Thu, 2 Jun 2011 23:41:32 -0700, "Craig 'Lumpy' Lemke"
<lu...@digitalcartography.com> wrote:
emoneyjoe wrote:
I think all the stories
of fallout over area51 somehow got
exaggerated into bomb stories.
Point, obviously, is that there weren't 100 nukes
anywhere. And zero at area 51.
Great investigative reporting.
Notwithstanding the bit about how the base, apparently
operating in 1947, received Russian juvenile spacecraft
pilots.
"Information never before made public before my book"
Lump
It is easy to see the book author was a _little_
clueless, but I don't know what you mean by not
100 nukes.
Are you separating the atomic from the nuclear,
wiki says there was well over 1,000 all together, but
apparently many if not most were underground (or
in the Pacific, and one or more in space).
I visited my Aunt in North Las Vegas in 1963 and
her husband drove up the highway every morning,
I knew he was a tunnel man, and no telling which way
or how far the tunnels went or how deep they were.
I worked in a foundry in 1954 making compressor
blades with screw thread shanks in a building payed for
by the AEC, the blades were for a rather large turbine
compressor for that era, and there was some talk of
an atomic powered airplane, but we didn't have any
blueprints or plans of the engine, just a section of
both the rotor and stator to see if the blades fit
properly.
I don't remember what year, but I new an
engineer at NASA that said he was working
running a jet engine in a wind tunnel that produced
way over 100 decibels and his ears were bothering him.
I have wondered if the compressor was for an
airplane or just an air mover for ventilating a tunnel
or building.
The Ben Rich book says that Kelly Johnson
had a pilot look for a place to test the U-2 in 1954,
and there was nothing at the dry lake then, but
the government built a hanger and runway in
a short time to start flight testing in 1955, but
the book is so self inconsistent I have no faith
in any of the dates.
I recently saw images of a model of the
SR-71/A-12 being tested on a radar test range
and the caption said area51 in the 1950s, but
there was no model of either until late in 1959,
and Ben Rich said Lockheed had no radar
range even by 1980.
Either there is intentional misinformation
or really bad memory by some.
I can document that I invented stealth
shapes in the 1975-1976 time frame and
wrote about the way to implement it in May
of 1977, but Russian engineers or mis-figured
children pilots had nothing to do with it.
In 1947 Russia had nothing that could have
placed any kind of craft in New Mexico airspace.
Books are written to sell, but some authors
seem to think BS sells better than facts.
The nuclear powered plane was Project Pluto. I met a machinist who
worked on the project.
It was a bad idea to begin with because the power required
is so great, a B-50 with four R-4360s is equivalent to at least
12,000 horsepower or 10 megawatts and the new big 2-engine
airliners are ten times that.
I think the reactor tested in a B-36 was less than
5 megawatts, sounds like a lot, but nowhere near enough.
The F117A IIRC was based on Russian documents. It was in Ben Rich's
book.
Maybe, but the number of self-inconsistencies makes
me wonder, I suspect that when the competition between
the 5 or 6 companies was going on, Lockheed was using
the model of the A-12/SR-71, and at some point in 1976
or 1977 went to the flat surfaces.
My name is the last reference on the list of patents
on the second page of the reissue patent, if there would
not have been security involved I think Lockheed would
have been forced to negotiate splitting royalties with me
because I mailed in a patent application on flat surfaces
more than a month before the Air Force hand-carried
their patent application to the patent office.
There is some issue with "first to file" and "first to
invent", and I intentionally did not put the details of
my invention on paper in December of 1978, I felt
what I wrote in May of 1977 in the Space Act of 1958
requirement that went to NASA was all that was needed
to know to first implement the technology.
I don't know if the image file of that paper made
it on all servers, it was on my server, but I don't suscribe
to Giganews anymore, I can't afford it.
If you have the Ben Rich book I can point out
the inconsistencies, I have more faith in the crash
dates of the two Have Blue articles than in the other
text.
I can't think of any reason for errors in dates
more than 30 years ago other than trying to hide
something, but I have no idea what it could be.
At least Ben Rich didn't claim they got the
technology from aliens. :-)
Ken Fischer
I have Ben Rich's book in hardcover and softback. I've been collecting
soft cover copies of his book and a few similar books to put in
geocachces around the range.
I wonder if there is local news coverage that gave the
date of the two Have Blue planes, the notes by Bill Park in
the Ben Rich book give the dates as May 4, 1978 and
July, 1979.
That makes the first paragraph in the book a gross
error about the August, 1979 date of a radar test of the
number two Have Blue.
I see your point. This assumes only two Have Blue were built, which
seems to be the case.
I'll see if I can be "you know who" to comment on the discrepancy.
Incidentally, that August 1979 test was done in daylight. If only we
would would be so lucky today. All you see in daylight is proficiency
training. Granted I didn't mind watching a F117A fly around Groom
doing SFO training, but it certainly wasn't like watching a secret
project fly. Almost like clockwork they bring the conventional
aircraft out around 10AM.