B2 vs Combat Disc

Is the forum really open? After THIRTEEN YEARS?
Post Reply
Mark D Moody
Space Cadet
Posts: 28
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2024 7:58 pm
Spam Prevention: Yes

B2 vs Combat Disc

Post by Mark D Moody »

Here’s another one to ponder….
Since the B2 allegedly uses a flame jet generator and it supposedly can recycle the ion output, shouldn’t the disc version be able to do the same thing?
I mean, even if the disc doesn’t incorporate a flame generator, but just a high voltage source, shouldn’t those same expelled ions be capable of being recycled?
Hmmmm…
natecull
Keeper of the Flame
Posts: 538
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 10:35 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: B2 vs Combat Disc

Post by natecull »

Since the B2 allegedly uses a flame jet generator and it supposedly can recycle the ion output, shouldn’t the disc version be able to do the same thing?
The words "allegedly" and "supposedly" are bearing so much load in that sentence that one can see them visibly wobble.

I'm obviously not plugged into classified military networks but as far as I'm aware, the only hint that the B2 has anything to do with Townsend Brown comes from the highly speculative writings of Paul LaViolette. I'm not 100% convinced that that connection exists out side of his imagination.

Paul LaViolette is, in my opinion, a slippery character. I really don't have a handle on who or what he was, and what he actually did outside of writing weird speculation way outside the scientific mainstream for fringe publishers. Ie, who funded and employed him in his "day job". And I think I have been even more confused in the past because there appear to be two separate Paul A LaViolettes! I thought that name and initial would have been pretty unique but nope.

One who founded the Starburst Foundation in 1984 and died in 2022 at age 75 (https://starburstfound.org/LaViolette2/ ... tml#papers), and a completely unrelated one who is either 66, or at least no older than 70, and a medical technology investor (https://ir.edwards.com/governance-susta ... 09e9c766d1 )

So separating out which of the two Paul A LaViolettes are which will help a lot!

Interestingly, it seems Paul "Antigravity Squadron" LaViolette was involved with the 1970s Club of Rome, much to the delight of right-wing conspiracy theorists everywhere:
Laszlo, E., LaViolette, P. A., et al. Goals for Mankind: A report to the Club of Rome on the New Horizons of Global Community. New York: Dutton, 1977.

LaViolette, P. A. & Murray, R.. "Assessing the solar transition." In I. Laszlo and J. Bierman (Eds.) Goals in a Global Community Vol. l, (Technical Papers to the 4th Report to the Club of Rome). Pergamon Press, New York, 1977, pp. 221 ­ 278.
From his early papers posted on ResearchGate ( https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Paul-Laviolette ) PLV's speculations about weird ether physics seem to go back to the mid-1970s, right about the same time the Psychotronics group and/or Fundamental Fyziks Group were spinning up. If I'm not mistaken, I think PLV also was into "radionics" and the Borderland Sciences circle.

What any of this has to do with legitimate scientific research, I'm not sure. I have nothing particularly against the freaky New Age 1970s ESP hippies, of whch PLV seems to have been one, but... there are large gaps missing in his CV. Like "entire life and career" shaped gaps. And I'd kind of like to know what those are before I decide to believe everything he said about the B2 bomber.

However:
recycle the ion output
Once again, Stan Deyo - another slippery character of roughly the same generation - became obsessed as of the mid-1970s with this idea of "recycling the ions" in a flying disc. He felt that this recycling was the important factor in whatever it was that was in the strange dreams he'd been having.

Regards, Nate
Going on a journey, somewhere far out east
We'll find the time to show you, wonders never cease
Thomas Blaty
Space Cadet
Posts: 11
Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2024 12:49 am
Spam Prevention: Yes
Location: Huntington Beach,CA-USA
Contact:

Re: B2 vs Combat Disc

Post by Thomas Blaty »

Much to the delight of the right wing conspiracy theorists? As opposed to the left wing conspiracy theorists? Not sure what you mean by this.

So you're saying that TT Brown's Flame Jet Generator idea is bogus?
User avatar
Jan Lundquist
Keeper of the Flame
Posts: 432
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2023 7:19 pm
Spam Prevention: Yes

Re: B2 vs Combat Disc

Post by Jan Lundquist »

Heh-heh. Welcome to the weeds, Thomas. We have plenty of them. There are paths through all of this Brown/post Brown history, but they are sometimes hard to see. Paths get overgrown with myths that everyone soon assumes to be true.

I don't think the FJG was bogus at all, but AFAIK, it has not been proven to be used in the B2 Bomber. Not that Townsend's legacy work isn't in there somewhere,only that it may be applied differently than we think.

Nate, I noticed the same thing about the older LaViolette. I was never able to figure out where he fit in the big picture. Was it he who first promoted the photo of the glowing aura of a B2 in flight? It was a striking picture, but I seem to recall that it was meant to prove that the skin of the plane was electrified, which flight line techs vehemently denied.

I see from your links that La Violette, collaborated with Hungarian scientist Ervin Laszlo, who has quire a reputable background in systems science, but who also wrote Reconnecting to the Source: The New Science of Spiritual Experience, How It Can Change You, and How It Can Transform the World, St. Martin's Essentials, 2020.

Great title! I hope is is more accessible than some of his other work.

Jan
Thomas Blaty
Space Cadet
Posts: 11
Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2024 12:49 am
Spam Prevention: Yes
Location: Huntington Beach,CA-USA
Contact:

Re: B2 vs Combat Disc

Post by Thomas Blaty »

Thanks for the welcome to the weeds, Jan. My brother worked in the aircraft industry in northern CA. He knew a guy that was deeply involved in the B2 program. When I told my brother about the rumors of the FJG being used on the B2 he asked the guy about it and he confirmed the rumors but could not go into any details about it.

Also, do you have any knowledge of the Northrop engineers work in the 1960's to ionize the leading edges of aircraft wings to reduce or eliminate the sonic boom?
User avatar
Jan Lundquist
Keeper of the Flame
Posts: 432
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2023 7:19 pm
Spam Prevention: Yes

Re: B2 vs Combat Disc

Post by Jan Lundquist »

Thanks, Thomas. classified information automatically remains classified for 50 years. Unless there is a compelling reason not to do so, most are declassified at that time. The B-2, introduced in 1997, is only middle-aged by those standards, so we will have to live with second and third person reports for a while longer.

I recall hearing about the sonic boom reduction research, but never from a first hand report, and don't recall is there was any level of detail about how it was being done. The things that were being achieved through stealth research all seemed magically impossible to me, so if I heard about plasma and ions it went over my head.

Jan
natecull
Keeper of the Flame
Posts: 538
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 10:35 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: B2 vs Combat Disc

Post by natecull »

Hi Thomas:
Much to the delight of the right wing conspiracy theorists? As opposed to the left wing conspiracy theorists? Not sure what you mean by this.
There certainly are left-wing conspiracy theorists (LaViolette himself might count as one) but I am not referring to them here.

I grew up in the 1980s with a bunch of books targeted at the church market, and whose political leanings would be seen as "right-wing" today. Many of those books alleged a wide variety of conspiracies: usually with Communism, the Roman Catholic Church, Freemasonry, and "the Illuminati" as the villains; they also often included the United Nations, European Union ("Common Market"), the "New Age Movement" and anyone with an interest in paranormal activity. Some of these writers were American, and some were English. Some of these writers overlapped with the American John Birch Society, and some with the fearful side of the British UFOlogy scene. There was often a spiritual take on UFOs - even back in the 1970s, in response to Spielberg's "Close Encounters" - which is recognisable today as that of Nick Redfern's "Collins Elite". It's wild seeing, eg, Lue Elizondo this last week touching on much the same ideas, such as "Jack Parsons and his weird rituals at JPL, and all the Freemasons at NASA"; these stories have been around a while.

The Club of Rome and the famous 1970s "Limits to Growth" computer simulation was a favourite conspiracy of this group of conspiracy theorists. They believed that ecology and any hints of "limits" was a Communist and/or Illuminati plot to rule the world by slowing economic growth. This idea is still very popular on the political right today.

The reason why these particular conspiracy theorists of my youth would be delighted about LaViolette being involved with Club of Rome, is that they liked to believe that all of the groups they feared were linked together, but very often had a hard time proving the links (often because they didn't exist). So someone like LaViolette ticks both the "omg paranormal-experiencing New Ager" and the "omg evil growth-limiting ecologist" boxes. Result!
So you're saying that TT Brown's Flame Jet Generator idea is bogus?
I don't know, because I'm not sure if it's ever been built.

It's very easy to write a diagram on the back of an envelope saying "here's what I think should happen if I build this device, it's gonna be really cool", but it's another thing to actually build the device, test it, and demonstrate the coolness. Townsend Brown did a lot of back-of-envelope sketches, or at least much of the open-world documents we have from him are in that category. Maybe there are classified ones with better data.

I do know that there's a USAF document from the 1960s/1970s somewhere on DTIC talking about research done into MHD-type generators (Townsend's "EHD" is not MHD, but they're somewhat similar in some respects). It was in some data dump or other as "proof" that the USAF took Townsend's FJG.... but to me, it's a bit of a depressing read. It seems like whatever USAF was testing - and it wasn't obviously the same as Townsend's device - it was quite hard to build and get good results from. This suggests that a) MHD generators are not easy things, and b) if a Flame Jet Generator was in fact much easier, and USAF knew about it in the 1960s, then why on earth were they wasting their time on the MHD route?

Ok, here's two DTIC docs similar to what I might have read. One from 1976, and one from 1986 (by a "Captain John W Power", which is an awesome name, 10/10, full marks.)

The 1976 one (https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/tr/pdf/ADA038612.pdf - Final Report, Avco Everett Research Laboratory) is depressing because it begins:
This report presents results of a study of the feasibility of portable MHD electric power generator systems operating at power densities in the
channel of 500 MW/m3 and higher. ... Major development, for both systems, is required for the lightweight superconducting magnet which represents the heaviest single component of the generator. Another area of development required, for pulsed operation, is for burners, particularly of solid fueled burners capable of the required duty cycle. The potential for electrical breakdown and damage in the channels is considerably in excess of experience to date , because of the high power density operation, and development may be required in channel technology.
ie: It needs a superconducting magnet (! not something Townsend's needed) and it has big problems with arcing. Waiting on superconducting technology is something that could block your whole development path; that's not what you'd do, in my opinion, if you had a much simpler alternative.

The 1986 one (https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/tr/pdf/ADA178869.pdf) begins with a literature review with more detail about Avco Everett:
The first patents for MHD generators in the U.S. appeared around 1910, but they were rather vague about operating specifics (27:5). The first sizable generator was built in 1938 in the U.S. but was a failure. The failure was due to not knowing enough about ionized gases and the need for much higher temperatures (17:329). In 1959, the Avco Everett Research Laboratory successfully made an MHD generator with an output of 11.5kW
(27:5). Other experiments followed, including one by the Air Force. Working with the Advanced Research Projects Agency in the early 1960's, the Air Force built an MHD generator powered by an alcohol and oxygen rocket engine. The fuel consumption was 100 lb/sec giving a power output of 32MW, of which 8.2MW was used by the generator's magnets (27:8).

The interest of the Air Force in MHD power generation continued, particularly in the area of portable MHD systems. The component testing of an airborne MHD power source was completed in 1969 (23:1). The generator was a linear channel using a superconducting magnet and intended to power a 250kW plasma arc lamp for target acquisition at night (23:1). The program was terminated before full operational testing could be done (23:145). By 1978, research was again being conducted to design a lightweight MKD generator, one that would produce 30MW (32:2). The project explored the use of both solid and liquid fuel combustors (shown in Fig. 4 and Fig. 5) with the liquid fuel being JP-4 and liquid oxygen (32:2)
Takeaways from this: One, it's very cool that Avco Everett were doing MHD generators (with cryogenically cooled superconducting magnets) in 1959, because it's close to Townsend's "EHD" paper,. But two: yeah, where exactly could Townsend's generator fit into this development path? If it was real and worked, wouldn't it have absolutely clobbered this complicated, heavy MHD stuff in performance? So why keep researching MHD?

More history details - even more depressing - from a 1984 NASA paper (James Lee Smith - https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/198 ... 017390.pdf )
The first patents dealing with MHD power generation began to appear in 1910. These patents ' were very vague about the method of ionization and the resulting electrical properties of the working ,fluid or plasma. Magnetohydrodynamics first became a distinct science because of the efforts of scientists (specifically astronomers) who were trying to understand certain astrophysical phenomena. During and after World War II the pursuit of controlled nuclear fusion created additional quests for plasma knowledge [2:5].

In the 1940's a large, sophisticated MHD generator was built at Westinghouse Electric; it failed because sufficient knowledge of the properties of ionized gases was still not available.

In 1959, an experimental MHD generator was built at AVCO that produced 11.5 kW of power and obtained a sufficiently strong interaction between the gases and the magnetic field to cause an appreciable pressure drop. The plasma was argon at a temperature of 30000K [2:5].

Calculations in the 1950's and 1960's indicated quick success. An ambitious, large scale program was undertaken in America. Although progress was made, these large scale programs were not successful.

Scientists turned to small experimental setups in which many problems were solved [3:1 ].

In 1964 work began on a generator to supply power for a high-enthalpy wind tunnel at the Arnold Engineering Development Center in Tullahoma, Tennessee. This project is still operating [2:8].

The MHD generator for the wind tunnel at Arnold Engineering is known as LORHO. It was designed to produce 20 MW peak, and actually achieved 18 MW for ten seconds [3:4].

In 1963, Avco-Everett Research Laboratory designed, built, and put into operation the first large MHD generator that worked. It produced 32 MW for a few seconds. It was called the Avco Mark V [3:4].

A new project is in progress at Arnold Engineering. It will be discussed later.
World development of MHD has been on a relatively intense basis during the last fifteen years, though less than that for nuclear reactors. The major countries that are doing MHD research are Great Britain, France, Germany, Poland, Japan, the United States, and the Soviet Union. America and Russia are doing most of the development.

National fuel situations have led to different types of development in various countries. In Russia natural gas MHD is being developed. While the USA is working with coal and Japan is working with oil [3:2-3].
And once again: the absence of Townsend's claimed device on not just classified military aircraft, but the entire energy infrastructure of the USA is keenly felt.

However: if the 1950s and 1960s were a boom time where people expected rapid progress in MHD (and/or EHD) generators, but these ideas didn't ultimately work out for technical reasons - then it's very easy to slot Townsend's FJG into this scene as just one more of many attempts.

The founder of Avco-Everett is one of those fun people: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Kantrowitz
Arthur Robert Kantrowitz (October 20, 1913 – November 29, 2008) was an American scientist, engineer, and educator.
During his graduate studies at Columbia, Kantrowitz started working as a physicist in 1936 for the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA), work he would continue for ten years. While obtaining his Ph.D., Kantrowitz was supervised by Edward Teller.[5] In 1938, he began construction of the Diffusion Inhibitor, the first known attempt to build a working fusion power reactor. The name was deliberately chosen to disguise its purpose, but it was eventually found out and the funding was cancelled.

He went on to teach at Cornell University for the next ten years and later founded the Avco-Everett Research Lab (AERL) in Everett, Massachusetts, in 1955. He developed shock tubes, which were able to produce the extremely hot gases needed to simulate atmospheric re-entry from orbital speeds, thereby solving the critical nose cone re-entry heating problem and accelerating the development of recoverable spacecraft. He was AERL's director, chief executive officer, and chairman until 1978 when he took on a professorship at Dartmouth College. From 1956 to 1978 he also served as a vice president and director of Avco Corporation.
Kantrowitz's interdisciplinary research in the area of fluid mechanics and gas dynamics led to contributions in the field of magnetohydrodynamics and to the development of high-efficiency, high-power lasers. He first suggested a system of laser propulsion to launch bulk payloads into orbit, using energy from ground-based lasers to increase exhaust velocity and thereby reduce the propellant-to-payload mass ratio.[citation needed] His concepts on laser propulsion were published in 1988.[6]

His early research included supersonic diffusers and supersonic compressors in the early 40s, which has since been applied to jet engines. He invented the total energy variometer in 1939, used in soaring planes, and is the co-inventor of an early scheme for magnetically contained nuclear fusion, patent application, 1941. In 1950, he invented a technique for producing the supersonic source for molecular beams; this was subsequently used by chemists in research that led to two Nobel Prizes.[7]
Jan:
I seem to recall that it was meant to prove that the skin of the plane was electrified, which flight line techs vehemently denied.
Yes, that's the other problem I have with LaViolette's claims. It seems that for every person who has a story about "my uncle works for ~~Nintendo~~ Lockheed and definitely the B-2 does something spooky with electricity", there's another person who says the opposite, that it's perfectly normal.

It seems to me that if you're charging an aircraft that also runs on ordinary jet fuel to several million volts, that you might have a few issues with sparks. And you might not want those sparks to mix with the fuel. I dunno: I'd just rather not, if it were me. But I also know that high-performance military aircraft are incredibly dangerous things already, so maybe it would just be another risk to add to the pile.

Nate
Going on a journey, somewhere far out east
We'll find the time to show you, wonders never cease
User avatar
Jan Lundquist
Keeper of the Flame
Posts: 432
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2023 7:19 pm
Spam Prevention: Yes

Re: B2 vs Combat Disc. More Flame Jet Generator

Post by Jan Lundquist »

Re: flame jet generator.

The Air Force Technical Command, at the Foreign Technology division of the Wright Patterson AFB collected an announcement of the Electric Current Jet Flame Generator in a 1960 bulletin of Soviet inventions.

https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/citations/trecms/AD0259247

But Townsend had coined the Flame Jet Generator descriptor in 1952. The fact that he was using it openly then, tells me it was part of his Prairie Chicken routine, believing it to be the part of his Hawaii demonstration that had been blown by the Philby Spy Ring. The nest, according to "Twigsnapper" remained hidden in the ocean.

Townsend would not actually patent his Electrokinetic Generator until 1957 while the Browns were living in Umatilla. The family was there, he told Linda, because he had to "check on a construction job. This most certainly had something to do with the build up of the Navy's satellite launch sites at Cape Canaveral, an hour to the east.

He filed the patent, under Whitehall Rand, a registered Delaware corporation with a logo portraying the globe encircled by orbiting craft.

(Ironically coincidental, or not, there was, at this time, a gentleman by the name William Bradford Whitehall/Whitehill* Rand, a geological engineer who had developed the first fleet of ships equipped for undersea drilling and exploration, who had just become a consultant of importance in his own right. His life work would earn him a memorial tribute from the National Academies. https://nap.nationalacademies.org/read/1966/chapter/47)

Townsend's patent is fascinating to read, because of the very looong list of functions which he claims it will fill. It is also interesting to see the titles of the papers which cite it. Some of those names/peoples have flitered into the known universe of Browniana, most have not.

https://patents.google.com/patent/US302 ... tCitations.

*Spelled both ways on the National Academies website: Whitehall in the address, Whitehill in the article.

Jan
natecull
Keeper of the Flame
Posts: 538
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 10:35 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: B2 vs Combat Disc

Post by natecull »

The Air Force Technical Command, at the Foreign Technology division of the Wright Patterson AFB collected an announcement of the Electric Current Jet Flame Generator in a 1960 bulletin of Soviet inventions.
Oh, that's interesting! Looking at the announcement, it appears to be a MHD device like Kantrowitz's, involving a magnetic field, not purely electrostatic like Townsend's.
Electric Current Jet Flame Generator
( FLAMMENOSTRUYNYY GENERATOR ELEKTRICHKSKOGO TOKA )
by A.I.Moskvitin
from Byulloten' Izobreteniy (Bulletin of Inventions ) No21, Nov.1960,pp.31-32

1, Electric current jet flame generator, in which the stream of hot gas travels from the combustion chamber through an expansion nozzle situated in the magnetic field of an excitation system and containing current stripping electrodes, characterized by the fact that to increase the thermal stability of the nozzle walls and to raise the thermal efficiency of the installation, the nozzle walls are provided with inserted in it electric conductors, forming a focusing winding around which the current is directed in direction opposite of that of the operating current in the gas, to force away the gaseous stream from the walls and to seal the gas in the nozzle a result of electrodynamic repulsion of the current carrying gas stream from the winding conductors.
a gentleman by the name William Bradford Whitehall/Whitehill* Rand
How fascinating! The possibility that "Whitehall Rand" might have even been a person. Did I know this one, or not? I can't remember; there are so many weird synchronicities around Townsend that it's just one more to add to the pile.

From the article:
In 1966 Scripps Institution was preparing a bid to the National Science Foundation for the Deep Sea Drilling Project... Bill was considered a key candidate for the position of program manager... Bill stayed with the project until after the first trial runs in 1967
That would be the same Scripps Institution of Oceanography (deeply involved in WW2 and post-WW2 Navy stuff) that had previously initiated and been part of the Mohole drilling project (1958-1966 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Mohole ) in which Beau Kitselman had also been involved. In fact it looks like the Deep Sea Drilling Project was Mohole's successor, specifically intended to solve organizational problems in the first one:
In September 1963 the new director of NSF Leland Haworth addressed the AMSOC Committee to state that Mohole should consist of two programs, the deep drilling under Brown and Root and a shallow drilling program.[4] Lill expressed similar advice to the leaders of the oceanographic institutions in March 1964, advising the four main institutions to combine their interests into one large drilling project.[7][4] The principal institutions agreed to form the Joint Oceanographic Institutions Deep Earth Sampling (JOIDES) program in May 1964.[4] This event was the formation of the Deep Sea Drilling Project of the National Science Foundation.[7]
and:
Townsend's patent is fascinating to read, because of the very looong list of functions which he claims it will fill. It is also interesting to see the titles of the papers which cite it. Some of those names/peoples have flitered into the known universe of Browniana, most have not.
Mmm. The ones before 2000 in particular are interesting:

US3095167A * 1960-01-05 1963-06-25 Horace C Dudley Apparatus for the promotion and control of vehicular flight
US3283241A * 1962-10-05 1966-11-01 Stuart G Forbes Apparatus for field strength measurement of a space vehicle
US3398685A * 1961-09-11 1968-08-27 Litton Systems Inc Ion drag pumps
US3639831A * 1968-11-12 1972-02-01 Autometrics Co Method and apparatus for producing a directable current-conducting gas jet for use in a method for inspecting and measuring nonconductive film coatings on conductive substrates
US3774865A * 1972-01-03 1973-11-27 O Pinto Flying saucer
US4839581A * 1986-11-13 1989-06-13 Peterson Jr Thomas F Absolute electrical potential measuring apparatus and method

O Pinto's "Flying Saucer" I think already made its way into the 1980s (even 1970s) fringe literature. Horace Dudley, who experimented with electrostatically charging rockets, is also known, I think. A fun story if I recall correctly, but not particularly anomalous.

The 1962/1966 "Stuart G Forbes" one is actually assigned to NASA and notes:
Methods and apparatus of this general nature find one application in space vehicles of the general type discussed in an article entitled, Electrostatic Propulsion, Proceedings of the IRE, volume 48, Number 4, April 1960, pages 477 through 491. A further and perhaps more detailed description of ionic propulsion systems which provides a background from which the present invention proceeds may be found in Space Technology, edited by Howard Seifert, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York (1959).
Townsend's patent is one of eight citations for this one. Another one is: Stanley B Jones' "US2872638A * 1955-03-31 1959-02-03 California Research Corp Ocean bottom stratigraphy surveying" which has a nice Navy flavour to it.

Going in the other direction: Townsend's patent cites four, including a 1940 one by Bela Karlovitz, the actual inventor of MHD ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B%C3%A9la_Karlovitz ) . A more interesting one is Alfred W Simons' 1933 "Electrostatic Generator" which is definitely not MHD (no magnetic field): https://patents.google.com/patent/US2004352A/en

Downstream of Simons - so looking at Townsend's peers - we see the phrase "electrogasdynamics" appear in 1969 as a description of this kind of system - perhaps as a specialisation of "electrohydrodynamics" for gases rather than liquids.

Alvin Marks' 1949 "charged aerosol" generator ( https://patents.google.com/patent/US2638555A/en ) may give some clue as to another difference between MHD and EHD systems: the focus on voltage vs power. Townsend was particularly interested in high voltage with his Flame Jet Generator. High voltage, however, does not necessarily mean high power - it can be very low amperage. That might be why USAF continued to research tricky, heavy, superconducting magnet MHD systems for actual power generation even if they already had a high-voltage jet generator. A quote from Marks' patent:
This invention relates to the production of electrical power from heat without the intervention of moving mechanical parts, except in the auxiliaries. The type of heat-to-electrical power conversion device herein employed is generally known by the term ion-convection generator. Prior art devices of this general type have produced extremely high voltages and very low current densities, and were thus not suitable for purposes of general utility, such as for ordinary power requirements for the running of electrical motors or lighting circuits. The prior art devices have been rather limited to employment for the operation of X-ray machines and the like Where high voltages and low currents were serviceable. The present invention relates more particularly to a low-voltage-high-current device of the ion-convection type.
Where Townsend's device fits on the voltage/current spectrum is something I need to check, but since he talked about about millions of volts, and his other devices were in the tens of thousands of volts but milliamps range, I imagine he was probably okay with low current.

So the FJD being poor as an overall generator, but ok at being specifically a very-low-voltage-very-high-current device for the very specific kind of electrostatic applications which need that, would mean it could fit into the overall technology/industry map from the 1960s on. It wouldn't disrupt power generation and energy utilities, it wouldn't stop research into MHD, and it could potentially have been used on the B-2, if it turns out that extremely high voltages actually do useful things.

Nate
Going on a journey, somewhere far out east
We'll find the time to show you, wonders never cease
Thomas Blaty
Space Cadet
Posts: 11
Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2024 12:49 am
Spam Prevention: Yes
Location: Huntington Beach,CA-USA
Contact:

Re: B2 vs Combat Disc

Post by Thomas Blaty »

Hi Nate, thanks for the detailed reply! Sorry I'm just now getting back to you but for some reason I'm not getting notifications.

As far as MHD propulsion, I remember the first I'd heard of it was from an article in Popular Science about an MHD boat the Japanese were working on. It had a ridiculous amount of cryogenic equipment for the super conductor which took up most of space on board but only managed a speed of around 5 knots. After reading that I pretty much gave up on the idea of MHD propulsion.
Thomas Blaty
Space Cadet
Posts: 11
Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2024 12:49 am
Spam Prevention: Yes
Location: Huntington Beach,CA-USA
Contact:

Re: B2 vs Combat Disc

Post by Thomas Blaty »

Thanks for all the patent links Nate! Some interesting stuff going on there. I have the Dudley patent. Got it from Rex Research back in the 80's.

Anymore thoughts on EHD propulsion? For my next project I'm planning on building a disc (from carbon fiber) and using the Coanda Effect for lift. There will be a centrifugal impeller that will blow air over the upper surface. I also plan on charging the upper surface with high voltage, either straight DC or pulsed. I'm hoping it will help entrain the air from the fan (and maybe some of the ambient air as well) over the upper surface and down around the bottom. Anyway, just a fun little project to keep me out of trouble. :D

Also, in another thread you mentioned a book called "Anti gravity and UFO'S" Volume 1 by Raymond A Nelli from High Energy Electrostatic Research, which was founded in 1956 interestingly enough. I happen to have a copy of that book. Got it way back in 1982 when it first came out. It has some wear and tear but is still readable. It has 443 pages and is mostly patents. It also has around 70 pages of ideas for experiments. Not a whole lot of info on TT Brown, nothing new anyway. I'd be more than happy to post it to you but the charges are pretty outrageous. You're looking at around $260NZD> :shock:
natecull
Keeper of the Flame
Posts: 538
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 10:35 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: B2 vs Combat Disc

Post by natecull »

Also, in another thread you mentioned a book called "Anti gravity and UFO'S" Volume 1 by Raymond A Nelli from High Energy Electrostatic Research, which was founded in 1956 interestingly enough. I happen to have a copy of that book. Got it way back in 1982 when it first came out. It has some wear and tear but is still readable. It has 443 pages and is mostly patents.
Hi Thomas. I'd forgotten about Nelli! Searching today, I see that he was a patent examiner ( https://patents.justia.com/examiner/raymond-a-nelli ) which would explain why his book was patents, and there's also a 2021 obituary for him:

https://www.ringtownfuneral.com/obituary/Raymond-Nelli
Official Obituary of Raymond Nelli
July 21, 1938 ~ July 14, 2021 82 Years Old

...

Raymond A. Nelli, 82, a resident of Clifton, VA, passed away Wednesday, July 14th, 2021, after a brief illness.

Raymond was born in Philadelphia, on July 21, 1938, a son of the late Josephine (DiMeo) Nelli-Allen and Guerino Nelli.

He attended Drexel University, obtaining his degree in electrical engineering, then entered and served his county in the US Army and later the Army Reserves.

A passionate scientist, Ray worked for the United States Government, retiring from the US Patent Office. His passion was researching electricity and magnetic principles, and he published many papers in these disciplines. He was involved in community outreach with school students, sharing his passions, and to his enjoyment, he was fond of shocking people with his electrical gadgets.

Ray was also an accomplished acordian player, recording and sharing his music with relatives and friends. He was also passionate about astronomy and photography, having his own darkroom in his home. At the end of the day, he took time to enjoy a good cigar.

In addition to his parents, Ray was preceded in death by his wife, Alice (Cherneski) Nelli, in 2006. He is survived by nieces and nephews, cousins, and friends.
Going on a journey, somewhere far out east
We'll find the time to show you, wonders never cease
Thomas Blaty
Space Cadet
Posts: 11
Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2024 12:49 am
Spam Prevention: Yes
Location: Huntington Beach,CA-USA
Contact:

Re: B2 vs Combat Disc

Post by Thomas Blaty »

Hi Nate. I did not know that he was a patent examiner. Thank you for that information. And the fact that he was born in 1938 and High Energy Electrostatic Research was founded in 1956 would have made him 18 years old at the time. Hmm, interesting.
Post Reply