Is there an I.P.E.R.T maglev PRT operating at Los Alamos? (fwd)

[jbs]

u
Subject: Is there an I.P.E.R.T maglev PRT operating at Los Alamos?

If anyone can help determine the validity of the I.P.E.R.T maglev system,
supposedly in operation at Los Alamos, please use this starting point in you
investigation.

> <http://precipblog.blogspot.com/2013/11/a-brief-look-at-international-personal.html>

[Tim J.]

Hi Jerry,

The man says 

       "This was a 12 mile system and had 14 stations. It was elevated at 21 feet and was powered off the city electric grid by a waste to power system which I will explain next."

If that's true it would be visible on Google earth.  I had a quick look but couldn't find anything.

It sounds like PRT "vapourware" to me.

Tim J.

[Tim J.]

My thought was hardly original; I've just noticed that the blog concludes.

A Final Word 

The NewsCenter asked a Los Alamos National Laboratory public information contact about the existence of a maglev transit system. She replied she has not seen such a thing there, and she has been at LANL since 1996. Her exact reaction was "Wow, 12 miles [of] track and 14 stations? We'd see that from Google Earth, wouldn't we?" And we can't . 

Tim J.

[Eric Johnson]

The thing that caught my eye was the statement about IPERT being classified and there are no photos. Umm, there are a lot of classified programs out there and there are unclassified photos of them. We even let the Russians get tail photos of the F-117 back in 1998 as part of one inspection when it was still very classified & it still is, even with them sitting in mothballs.

I'm thinking this is vaporware.

Eric

[jbs]

Note that the man (Workman) said "this system WAS ..." could that mean that it has been taken down?

-----------------------------------

On Mon, 25 Nov 2013, Tim J. wrote:

> My thought was hardly original; I've just noticed that the blog concludes.

> A Final Wordￜ

> The NewsCenter asked a Los Alamos National Laboratory public information
> contact about the existence of a maglev transit system. She replied she
> has not seen such a thing there, and she has been at LANL since 1996.
> Her exact reaction was "Wow, 12 miles [of] track and 14 stations? We'd

> see that from Google Earth, wouldn't we?"ￜAnd we can'tￜ.ￜ

>
> Tim J.
>
> On Tuesday, 26 November 2013 17:21:55 UTC+11, Tim J. wrote:
> Hi Jerry,

> The man saysￜ
> ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ"This was a 12 mile system and had 14 stations. It was elevated

> at 21 feet and was powered off the city electric grid by a waste to
> power system which I will explain next."
>

> If that's true it would be visible on Google earth. ï¿œI had a quick look

> but couldn't find anything.
>
> It sounds like PRT "vapourware" to me.
>
> Tim J.
>
> On Tuesday, 26 November 2013 06:08:51 UTC+11, jbs wrote:
>
>
> u
> Subject: Is there an I.P.E.R.T maglev PRT operating at Los
> Alamos?
>
> If anyone can help determine the validity of the I.P.E.R.T
> maglev system,
> supposedly in operation at Los Alamos, please use this
> starting point in you
> investigation.
>
> ><http://precipblog.blogspot.com/2013/11/a-brief-look-at-international-persona
> l.html>
>
>

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "transport-innovators" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to transport-innova...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to transport-...@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/transport-innovators.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>
>

[Jack Slade]

This is not unusual,  and not just for miitary projects.  Remember how secretive BA was with the heathrow PRT project.  NASA is almost as bad,  but the one thing we can count on is that it is not underground,  therefore should be visible.

 

Jack Slade

> <http://www.google.com/url?q=http%3A%2F%2Fprecipblog.blogspot.com%2F2013%2F11%2Fa-brief-look-at-international-personal.html&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNHOiVzVNJghkjoiTD-nwWTf0O9sEA>

[Eric Johnson]

One would also think it would be readily visible in the photos of the lab buildings and surrounding areas. Yet, this site has multiple photos and no PRT guideway, stations, or other components are visible.

Then look at the aerial maps and the parking lots, roads, etc look like they've been there for 5-10+ years. 

Finally, if it was built in 2003-2005 timeframe, it would've had post 9/11 security measures in-place. The most logical would be to keep cars outside of the fence and have folks walk up to the check point & board PRT at that time vs the guard shacks & multiple lanes at these locations. Since there are no large parking lots at Pajarito Road/Hwy 4 gate on the east side, Jemez Rd/501 on the north side that also leads me to wonder about it's existence.

Eric

[Jack Slade]

I would think it is impossible to build and then remove that length of guideway without somebody remembering it.  Nobody that I hve ever known would build a 12 mile system to see if it works,  when less than 1 mile would suffice for design and test purposes.

 

Jack Slade

From: jbs <j...@u.washington.edu>
To: transport-innovators <transport-...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2013 10:51:30 AM
Subject: [t-i] Re: Is there an I.P.E.R.T maglev PRT operating at Los Alamos? (fwd)

Note that the man (Workman) said "this system WAS ..." could that mean that it has been taken down?

-----------------------------------
On Mon, 25 Nov 2013, Tim J. wrote:

> My thought was hardly original; I've just noticed that the blog concludes.
>      A Final Word 

> The NewsCenter asked a Los Alamos National Laboratory public information
> contact about the existence of a maglev transit system. She replied she
> has not seen such a thing there, and she has been at LANL since 1996.
> Her exact reaction was "Wow, 12 miles [of] track and 14 stations? We'd

> see that from Google Earth, wouldn't we?" And we can't . 
>

> Tim J.
>
> On Tuesday, 26 November 2013 17:21:55 UTC+11, Tim J. wrote:
>      Hi Jerry,
> The man says 

>        "This was a 12 mile system and had 14 stations. It was elevated
> at 21 feet and was powered off the city electric grid by a waste to
> power system which I will explain next."
>

> If that's true it would be visible on Google earth.  I had a quick look

> but couldn't find anything.
>
> It sounds like PRT "vapourware" to me.
>
> Tim J.
>
> On Tuesday, 26 November 2013 06:08:51 UTC+11, jbs wrote:
>
>
>      u
>      Subject: Is there an I.P.E.R.T maglev PRT operating at Los
>      Alamos?
>
>      If anyone can help determine the validity of the I.P.E.R.T
>      maglev system,
>      supposedly in operation at Los Alamos, please use this
>      starting point in you
>      investigation.
>
>      ><http://precipblog.blogspot.com/2013/11/a-brief-look-at-international-persona
>      l.html>
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "transport-innovators" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an

> email to transport-innovators+unsub...@googlegroups.com.

> To post to this group, send email to transport-...@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/transport-innovators.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

>
>

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "transport-innovators" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to transport-innovators+unsub...@googlegroups.com.

[Ivan Workman]

[Jack Slade]

Jerry,  that is the same site we looked at already.  Is there supposed to be something new in there?

 

Jack Slade

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "transport-innovators" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to transport-innova...@googlegroups.com.

[Ivan Workman]

Hi foks,

 

I am Ivan Workman. I am co-President & co-founder of IPERT & my partner Roger Freely is the main inventor of the IPERT system. The blogger did not double check with myself or my partner get all of his information correctly and yes we are operating in a stealth start up mode due to this problem of skepticism. My partner and I will have a copy of our summation about the project and if you have any questions or doubts to freely contact me or my partner online at ivanw...@gmail.com or my partner at iper...@gmail.com. We will be offline until Monday of next week after the Thanksgiving holiday.

 

Sincerely,

 

Ivan Workman

[Rick D]

"The blogger did not double check with myself or my partner get all of his information correctly and yes we are operating in a stealth start up mode due to this problem of skepticism."

Unfortunately this response at first seems as wishy-washy and untrustworthy as Skytran claims and responses. Blame errors on the media. Without identifying what the errors are or what the reality is.

Seems like a method to dodge responsibility for claims. A very simple matter to take the original report/article, correct it, reword slightly, and release as a press release.

I think I'm not the only one that awaits with interest the distribution of the "summation about the project".

Rick D.

(I'm reading the list, but am not permitted to post. So, I have added the emails that I have of list members in BCC. Jerry Roane has not replied yet to say if or when I will no longer be moderated, only that he cannot moderate while away over the holiday.)

[Mr_Grant]

When was the last time I posted to this list? I can't recall. Dinosaur times. But I feel I must comment on Ivan Workman's protestations.

"The blogger did not double check with myself or my partner get all of his information correctly [sic] and yes we are operating in a stealth start up mode due to this problem of skepticism."

As far as claims of Shocked, Shocked Outrage go this is just so precious. First, after The 2nd Email, Workman failed to respond to my repeated information requests which, believe me, at the time were all sweetness and light, as well as highly non-confrontational. My article only reproduced Workman's own words and noted the obvious holes in his account.

Second, it's backwards for him to claim IPERT is in 'stealth start up mode' because of skepticism, as though the skepticism came first. Workman is seeking investors to pony up millions of dollars -- and attempting to leverage it by dropping the name of a US Government scientific facility -- to copy a technology he claims exists but absolutely refuses to provide a shred of evidence for it. Workman is the one who is creating the skepticism.

David Gow

Editor, the PRT NewsCenter

bit.ly/prtnews

[Jack Slade]

I agree with you.  I am ex-military myself,  and if any project is so classified that pictures cannot be taken then how would it be possible to post messages to a list?  Anything that is classified remains so even after a person leaves the military service.

 

Jack Slade

From: Mr_Grant <davi...@gmail.com>
To: transport-...@googlegroups.com
Cc: j...@u.washington.edu

[Rick D]

"attempting to leverage it by dropping the name of a US Government scientific facility"

And seeing as NASA/Ames Research Park has been taken...

There are, without doubt, some sensitive things at the labs. However, there is a lot about the labs that is not secret. Surely a working transportation system would appear in one of the many photos available on the net:

https://www.google.ca/search?q=los+alamos+labs&client=firefox-a&hs=sjk&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=NC-WUoWoCdLesAS714HQDA&ved=0CAkQ_AUoAQ&biw=1133&bih=634#imgdii=_

Why would a transportation system be secret? Why would a transportation system be built, tested, and commissioned at Los Alamos national Laboratories and not elsewhere?

Seems hard to believe that a ground transportation system is so secret that it has successfully been hidden from all. Plenty is known, or at least photographed, about top secret aircraft for pete's sake.

Heck, they're promoting their commitment to green transportation on their website:
http://www.lanl.gov/community-environment/environmental-stewardship/sustainability/goals/greening-transportation.php

And all they show is walking, bikes, and a goofy looking bus.

You'd think that if they had a functioning maglev system at some point they'd give it mention somewhere.

Rick D.

[Kirston Henderson]

Are you next going to announce that this is a U.S. Government funded development by some "high tech" agency.  If it isn't for some classified military use, why the high level of "stealth?"  Patent protection should protect the technology (except in some places such as China).  I understand the skepticism because there are a lot of people out there who simply can not believe our system even after we have produced and tested a fully functional prototype for demo purposes and anyone who can read the various patents and a little technical savy is free to understand the technology.  Of course, some of them will not believe it even when it goes into commercial operation.

Kirston Henderson

[Bruff]

Our resident shameless self-promoter Kirston writes: "there are a lot of people out there who simply can not believe our system even after we have produced and tested a fully functional prototype ... some of them will not believe it even when it goes into commercial operation."

 

And then there's those who, like me, just want to see a video showing this supposed fully functioning prototype on a real guideway, at advertised speed and headway, and switching. Maybe something along the lines of CabinTaxi. Please? 

Bruff

 

[Mr_Grant]

New -- "IPERT Part II"

http://kinetic.seattle.wa.us/newsprt.html#ipert2

[Richard Gronning]

Hi David,

Nice job of investigative reporting!
Could this be the Roger Freely that is being talked about?
http://articles.latimes.com/1991-10-01/local/me-3561_1_thousand-oaks

Dick

[Mr_Grant]

Hello Dick,

I saw that article, unfortunately it doesn't contain enough clues to be worth following up on.

David

[Ivan Workman]

Hello David,

You guys call that investigative reporting!? Seems to me, you guys like nothing better to do than to do a smear campaign on every other startup PRT firm, from what I have heard from several other startup PRT firms. Real Professional! You guys aren't any better than TMZ. The sleaziest form of investigative reporting there is. If you want somebody to really smear, go after DR. ANDERSON at PRT International, considering almost all of his work is plagiarized from every other inventor/developer of PRT including Walt Disney who developed the PEOPLE MOVER at Disneyland.

By the Way, the Patent office doesn't make the patent numbers available on military patents, only civilian and company held patents, so you won't find patent numbers or names for either myself or Roger Freely or for Maglev PRT. Only we know the patent numbers and won't give them out freely for our own reasons. The Los Alamos Project Summation is on it's way and so is an update to Roger Freely's Linkedin Profile within the next week. As for the PIO denying anything of the sort for PRT or any other military project at LANL which is standard operating procedure at the Los Alamos Nuclear Labs, now known as LANL since the name was changed a few years ago.

My partner Roger Freely is the main inventor of the IPERT Maglev PRT system and Co-President of IPERT, I added a few modifications later to make the system better. There is a lot more happening with transportation from the military side of things for the last 20 years than you civilians will ever know.

Yes, we don't have a website up yet or a business license but that will be soon as funds permit. Legally, you can raise up to $5 Million dollars without a business license for a business startup.

As for the 2004 date in David Gow's blog, that date is correct because the US Air Force has their own weather station that reports to all the other government agency weather stations and had Hurricane Katrina on their radar since it started forming in 2004 in the mid-Atlantic as it was predicated to be a 100 year storm. The Maglev PRT system came online a few days after Hurricane Katrina hit Louisiana.

As for David Gow, he doesn't understand how difficult it is to get funding for any transportation system or any business in today's economy. David, if you think it is so easy to commercialize a new transportation technology, you try get funding, then come back and talk to me. You want to dis my background from my Linkedin Profile, I personally choose not to put everything on it. 

As for my background and my partner Roger Freely's, both of our backgrounds are quite varied as we have worked in a lot of fields both for other companies and as consultants and a lot more not listed. Electric Vehicles, monorail, amusement park rides, and people mover technologies is how I originally got into maglev and PRT. I am also an Active Member of the Monorail Society, the Electric Auto Association, a Past Member of the Orange Empire Railway Museum, which specializes in Trolleys, Gas, Diesel-Electric, Battery Electric, and Steam Locomotives and rolling stock. Plus, I have worked at Disneyland as a ride operator, even though I never had an opportunity to work on operating the Monorail at Disneyland (which is a 7 year wait list to become an operator, even though I tried. I did spend a lot of time on the People Mover, the Monorail, and the Steam Trains growing up and spent some time in the monorail & steam shops at Disneyland and at Knott's Berry Farm as I was friends with a few of the workers at both parks and asked a lot of questions. Plus, I do my own research, study a lot, and ask lots of questions. Don't you dare tell others, that I don't know transportation. I know a lot more than a lot of other people do.

Sincerely,

Ivan Workman 

[Ivan Workman]

As for the Maglev PRT system, when the contract was up, it was destroyed all the way down to the ground level. I know where the system was and if you knew where to look, you will still find the concrete pads where some of the stations were. Most of the stations connected to the second floor of the buildings at LANL. Most of the routing was over existing roads. Very little was at ground level. That's why you won't find much on Google earth, they did an excellent job of making sure you couldn't see that anything was really there. Standard operating procedure at LANL. When they finish a project, they usually destroy the buildings with it and then deny it's existence.

Sincerely,

Ivan Workman

[Ivan Workman]

Correct, the system was destroyed in 2011-2012 time period.

Sincerely,

Ivan Workman

On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 7:51 AM, jbs <j...@u.washington.edu> wrote:

Note that the man (Workman) said "this system WAS ..." could that mean that it has been taken down?

-----------------------------------

On Mon, 25 Nov 2013, Tim J. wrote:

My thought was hardly original; I've just noticed that the blog concludes.
      A Final Word 

The NewsCenter asked a Los Alamos National Laboratory public information
contact about the existence of a maglev transit system. She replied she
has not seen such a thing there, and she has been at LANL since 1996.
Her exact reaction was "Wow, 12 miles [of] track and 14 stations? We'd

see that from Google Earth, wouldn't we?" And we can't . 

Tim J.

On Tuesday, 26 November 2013 17:21:55 UTC+11, Tim J. wrote:
      Hi Jerry,
The man says 

       "This was a 12 mile system and had 14 stations. It was elevated
at 21 feet and was powered off the city electric grid by a waste to
power system which I will explain next."

If that's true it would be visible on Google earth.  I had a quick look

but couldn't find anything.

It sounds like PRT "vapourware" to me.

Tim J.

On Tuesday, 26 November 2013 06:08:51 UTC+11, jbs wrote:


      u
      Subject: Is there an I.P.E.R.T maglev PRT operating at Los
      Alamos?

      If anyone can help determine the validity of the I.P.E.R.T
      maglev system,
      supposedly in operation at Los Alamos, please use this
      starting point in you
      investigation.

      ><http://precipblog.blogspot.com/2013/11/a-brief-look-at-international-persona
      l.html>


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"transport-innovators" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an

email to transport-innovators+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to transport-innovators@googlegroups.com.

Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/transport-innovators.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "transport-innovators" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to transport-innovators+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to transport-innovators@googlegroups.com.

[Ivan Workman]

Everyone on the LANL is under a blanket confidentiality agreement and had to sign one for the Maglev PRT system as well. We were testing for 9/11 security, among other things including speed tests, etc.

Sincerely,

Ivan Workman

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to transport-innova...@googlegroups.com.

[Ivan Workman]

Even though the project has been declassified by the military and destroyed. My Partner Roger Freely was the main inventor and Project Leader/Project Manager. He is the only one that has the authority to make it public or not. He was given permission to commercialize from the US government within the last year and a half. We tried to get pictures of the system when it was in operation, all of it confiscated by LANL, even when asked, they denied it. They had the system destroyed after the contract was up because they weren't interested in continual usage of it. It was offered to the city of Los Alamos and turned down due to the city being in bankruptcy at the time and heavily in debt.

Sincerely,

Ivan Workman

[Ivan Workman]

This is standard operating procedure in the US government, spend money to develop a technology, show that it works, then destroy it so it doesn't end up in military hands, and disavow all knowledge of something ever being produced or worked on. Depending on the project allow the people to eventually commercialized. Heavily entrenched businesses are lobbying the government to prevent new disruptive technology from reaching the marketplace. Examples of such places: Edward's Air Force Base, Area 51, LANL, etc.

Sincerely,

Ivan Workman

[Ivan Workman]

When we get to a point, we will release a visual animation video because we are making enhancements to our technology for the Maglev PRT system based on our work at LANL and on other operating Maglev systems in Japan that my partner was a consultant on.

Sincerely,

Ivan Workman

[Dave Brough]

Questions/observations.

How fast could it go?

Headway? .5 second.

What's so special about PRT that it had to be classified anyway? And then not only destroyed, but the site sanitiized.

Anything classified can always be declassified.

And even at that, an FOI request would show it, albeit with redactions.

Bruff

[Dave Brough]

On the subject of the military building something, then destroying it, in the mid-50s, my dad worked on one of Canada's major aerospace efforts, an advanced jet fighter known as the Avro Arrow. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avro_Canada_CF-105_Arrow

And while the aircraft was - and according to some, would be still - one of the best-ever fighters, it became a political cause celeb, to the point where, after the government changed, the first thing the in-coming PM did was to axe the program. And to prevent it from every being resurrected, that including axing (literally!) the flying prototypes and shredding every document that existed on it. That, in itself was a tragedy, but the real tragedy was that the cream of Canada's aviation industry - thousands of highly-skilled workers - now had no way to earn a living. Which is how many ended up at NASA or there abouts, including my dad, who found work at southern California's Rocketdyne, the outfit that built the huge J-series of engines for the Apollo program. 

Bruff

[Eric Johnson]

Ivan,

Since you've been around this project for years, then you also know there have been many advanced transit systems proposed that sounded like they had serious work completed to only turn into vaperware. Thus you shouldn't be surprised by our skepticism since we've also seen it to. 

You say it was a classified system, yet I don't see anything about this system that justifies making it classified per US law. The US Navy is pursuing rail guns and some of the technology is classified while they happily put neat videos out of them banging away with it. 

You say it was 12 miles long and it was in place for some 7-8 years. Yet numerous photos of Los Alamos from that time show nothing of this innovative system that would be easily visible in any exterior shots or aerial mapping. https://www.google.com/search?q=Los+Alamos+National+Laboratory&espv=210&es_sm=93&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=KkKlUv_vB8WdyQGQkoH4Bw&ved=0CAkQ_AUoAQ&biw=1241&bih=583#facrc=_&imgdii=_&imgrc=D_HJmFuVUSnN1M%3A%3B89SqZlHtQHJJLM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fsfreporter.com%252Fsantafe%252Fimgs%252Fmedia.images%252F6461%252FWIPP%252520truck.widea.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.sfreporter.com%252Fsantafe%252Farticle-6516-red-dawn.html%3B607%3B472

Goggle maps has very good high resolution photos of the grounds and I can't see any indications of vertical supports that have been removed, nor any building sites that have been demolished recently. The fact that Los Alamos has many mature pine trees simplifies the search of their grounds. 

So, I'm very puzzled about the lack of any evidence to support your claims. I look forward to seeing your videos and photos.

Eric 

[Bruff]

My math skills were never really very good (plus it's past my bedtime), but taking Ivan's numbers and claim (that the $144M cost was paid back in 3 yrs at $2.50 ride), I come up with $144,000,000/$2.50 = 57,600,000 rides/3 yrs = 19,200,000 rides/yr/365 = 52,600 rides/day/2 = 26,300 employees going and that same 26,000 returning (assuming 7-day ops, and only one shift). Not only is that a lot of employees, it's likely one of the greatest crush loads this side of Tokyo. 

With those kinds of numbers, Ivan should have no difficulty lining up investors. And if he can back his claims up, that will include me.

Bruff

[Rick D]

Well done Mr Grant for kicking the hornets nest as it were.

With all writing from Ivan, I'm struck by the almost complete absence of information provided on this system.

Either this thing is declassified, or it isn't. There are photos on the net of nuclear powered missiles (the Pluto nuclear ramjet), stealth bombers, rail guns, and a plethora of secret projects.

Why the hell is a transportation project so secret? If you believe the conspiracy theory woven by Ivan, how to explain the lie that is the claim the government always builds and destroys without a trace?

WTH was the prototype so secret that the ground was (as Bruff put it) completely sanitised and not even regularly spaced disturbed earth was left?

If it really was that secret, is it declassified now? If it's declassified, there wouldn't only be a couple of guys talking about it. It would be declassified for all of the thousands of people that rode it to at least mention its existence. The patents would be declassified as well. If they aren't what proof is there that there is protection for any investors?

But here's an inconvenient truth: The LANL promotes its "green" transportation initiatives on their website. All they have is walking, biking, and buses. We've heard of a taxi service too.

So that means, if they didn't want to continue using this supposedly functional and successful system, that the system does not compare favorably to using buses.

Or is there another government conspiracy theory explanation for that as well.

I wish anyone who puts up money based on these unsubstantiated stories and claims the best of luck.

Rick D.

(Some of my posts lately have been allowed by Jerry R. Until I am sure I am no longer moderated, I will add the emails that I have of list members in BCC. If receiving my messages twice when they pass moderation bothers you, I will remove your name.)

[Bruff]

Eric

Here's an article that shows how the government can classify inventions. It may well be that the Maglev invented by Mr. Freely had national security implications, perhaps along the lines of the rail gun you mentioned. It certainly would be a world-beater if it could get a pod up to 14,000 mph. 

Bruff

[Eric Johnson]

Bruff,

That would be "out of this world" too!  Or at least very close to it!  lol...

Eric

[eph]

This might be a good reason to file a patent with a different country to avoid being robbed of an invention.


F.

[Dave Brough]

Good point about filing in other countries, F. 

Brings up the question of whether, if one PTO, say the US, classified it, the inventor could go to another (say Canada), and patent and actually build it and not be charged with 'aiding enemies'. From what I see, the US is the only country that actually has that provision, altough I'm sure that if someone wanted to patent a nuke, he might have some visitors. Note that the "classified for national security"-label can be challenged. In the case mentioned, it took years and a lot of money, and he lost his civil case for damages (because, the court ruled, he "lacked business experience", Brings up the question of how you get business experience...presumably by being IN business in the first place). Welcome to America!

Bruff

[Dave Brough]

 Ivan Workman wrote (the system) It was offered to the city of Los Alamos and turned down due to the city being in bankruptcy at the time and heavily in debt.

That being the case, there should be some public record of what was offered, right?

[WALTER BREWER]

Without comment on the politics, there may be a logical airplane design rationale for scrapping Arrow.

 

I'm not rally up on the timing, but about then the adjistible sweep wing was beginning to appear.

Delta wings are good for very high speeds, but TO and landing speeds are high. The Shuttle used a big rocket that didd other hhings, but noeice the drag parachute forlanding.

Variable sweep alows more efficient lift generation, and better efficiency for boosting range.

For high and supersonic flight where high sweep is needed, it shifts aft to become essentialy a delta wing.

 

Wa your dad at Rocketdyne for the erlier ICBM and space launch programs?

 

For an event in San Diego about 20 years ago, I tip my hat to the Canadian Air Force.

Our house overlooked Miramar Navy Airforce base about 6 to 8 miles away.

Good spot for the annual airshow including Blue Angle precision flight team

But Canadians did one better on a different occasion.

Their presision team was about a dozen then. For some reason it was not able to complete a flight, probable furthe south. So they landed at Miramar---- 4 at a time in Delta formation on the runway.

Very imptessive sight.

 

Walt Brewer

[Ivan Workman]

We did get the system up to 825mph with a passenger on board in an jet fighter flight suit: Mr.Freely himself was the live test dummy but, realistically, most people aren't comfortable past 150mph. The us military has a lot in the way of maglev technology along with their allies in development that is all being classified. Japan is the furthest along in maglev technology that is in use on a daily basis yet it is not reported in the world media because people don't believe maglev technology works.

Sincerely,

Ivan Workman

--

[Ivan Workman]

We ran our maglev PRT system at an average speed of 25-55mph with 3-5 second headways for safety because you really don't need anything less than that. The 825mph was a one time test to see what it could do. No problems resulted on the system from that one time test.

Sincerely,

Ivan Workman

[Jack Slade]

Ivan:  it is not that I don't believe in Maglev Technology:  I do....in fact,  I considered it myself,  but did not have the resources and training required to develop it,  so I settled for the  substitute of a conveyor system,  with no belt,  powered by ordinary electric motors.  This is far easier for most people to understand....or so I thought.

 

Guess what?  Most of the people on this list can't even understand that.  Can you understand why they have trouble contemplating Maglev,  especially when you claim to have broken the sound barrier with it? 

 

So I have a different question,  or two:

 

Did you have a magnetic switch that could change tracks,  and at what spacing,  and,

How did you hide the sonic boom.

 

Jack Slade

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to mailto:transport-innovators%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to transport-...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/transport-innovators.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

[Dave Brough]

Walt wrote:

Without comment on the politics, there may be a logical airplane design rationale for scrapping Arrow.

 

Indeed, Walt, there was, starting with the fact that the Cdn military didn't even want it. Next, there was the fact, that although it could go like a bat out of hell, it couldn't do it for very long, it's combat radius being just 400 miles. Not good, considering that it was guarding a country close to 6,000 miles wide. But most important, it was designed as an interceptor, supposedly to counter the Soviet threat of a bomber attack over the pole. In that role, it was obsolete before it became servicable, coincidentally, the very day it was rolled out the same day the Soviets launched Sputnik. In other words, in an ICBM, the Russians now had no reason to use bombers to deliver the Big One. Perhaps the saddest part, technology wise (above the 30,000 direct and indirect workers), was that in addition to cancelling the aircrct, they also canceled the development of a dedicated engine, which even if the Arrow came to nothing, it certainly could have 

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

Interestingly enough, there was recent talk of regurgitating the Arrow as a replacement for the aging feet of F-18's in place of the F-35 raptor. https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=582915575096109&set=vb.402158416505160&type=2&theater

 Wa

s

your dad at Rocketdyne for the erlier ICBM and space launch programs?

 

I had returned to Canada (the hard way - on a bicycle) and didn't have a lot of contact, but I recall that he started with Rockedyne (Canoga Park) in about 1964.  

 

For an event in San Diego about 20 years ago, I tip my hat to the Canadian Air Force precision 

aerobatic

team.

...

they landed at Miramar---- 4 at a time in Delta formation on the runway.

Very impressive sight.

That would have been the Snowbirds 

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

 Canada's bootstrap aerobatics team. Contrasted to the Blue Angels, etc., which fly F-16's, the crazy Kanuks use antique early 60's trainers so old its own military doesn't even use them. As for support aircraft, they're the only major airshow team that uses no support aircraft. What you sees is is what they gots. And the last time I looked into a cockpit, all it had for navigation was an ADF and a roadmap.

Bruff

[Larry Blow]

Congratulations to Ivan and the IPERT team for creative writing about the former Los Alamos installation. 

Seriously, running a 12-mile-long campus shuttle vehicle at 25-55mph speeds seems plausible enough, but claiming to have run a one-time (manned) test at 825 mph on the same track without any resulting system problems is imagineering of the highest order.  Heck, the fastest known maglev train in the unclassified world, running in Japan, needed a full 11.4 miles to attain its Guinness-Record (manned) speed of "only" 361 mph back in 2003. 

Larry Blow
MaglevTransport, Inc.

[Ivan Workman]

In response to Larry Blow:

Weight makes a huge difference with speed: 2 1/2 ton or 5,000 lbs. PRT Pod versus a 50Ton or 100,000 lbs. maglev train vehicle like Transrapid. We attained 825mph on one manned test within a 10 mile, of course before that we did do several unmanned tests at that speed to see what would happen. Our system ran for 8 years and the only thing that we had to do was replace one magnet at a station which took only 30 minutes to replace. Our PRT pods were built by a major supplier that is still in business today. By the way, the Laws of Physics were made to be broken.

Sincerely,

Ivan Workman

--

[Kirston Henderson]

I regret to inform you that this statement is absurd and does not
reflect well on your credibility. I won't bother to mention my
educational background.

On Dec 11, 2013, at 12:46 PM, Ivan Workman wrote:

> In response to Larry Blow:

[Rick D]

Let's consider basic physics.

Force creates acceleration. Regardless of size or weight, the important thing is to achieve the required acceleration (or deceleration).

If this story is fact and not fiction, we could infer two things:

1 - the installed system would have been ridiculously over-powered and far more expensive than necessary.

2 - the system was more or less a simple straight line.

Now tell us Ivan,

WTH was the system so overpowered?

If 10 out of the 12 miles of system at LANL were a straight line, what exactly did the system interconnect?

WTH is a transportation system so top secret that no one out of thousands of riders will comment on it, and world records made in it aren't published?

WTH wouldn't employees object to paying for onsite transportation when parking was free and from all indications other free onsite transportation is available?

[eph]

The laws of physics are definitely broken in some of the narrative.


F.

[Jerry Roane]

Kirston

I don't know what your issue is with the claimed speed.  It is only

2,217,600 furlongs per fortnight

Jerry Roane   

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "transport-innovators" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to transport-innovators+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to transport-innovators@googlegroups.com.

[Eric Johnson]

Ivan,

What G forces were involved in this test? That's a very amazing stat for sure.

Eric

[Larry Blow]

Ivan, I realize that weight influences attainable speed for a small manned PRT vehicle.  I also realize that other things come into play as well, including vehicle shape/structural strength, track (straightaway) length, track smoothness, installed track/vehicle power, bank angles, and acceptable accel/decel limits for humans, among others.  Oh, and there's that breaking the sound barrier thing, too, 'cause even at Los Alamos' altitude (7,320 feet) and the corresponding 740-mph speed-of-sound level, you're claiming to go 85 mph faster...

Without bearing down too hard on it, your 825-mph claim seems delusional, at least to me.  Maybe others in this group can figure out how to do it and chime in.

Larry Blow

MaglevTransport, Inc.

[Kirston Henderson]

Was he claiming that his speed broke some law of physics?  I couldn't tell.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to transport-innova...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to transport-...@googlegroups.com.

[Richard Gronning]

What kind of G forces would be generated with the acceleration from zero to 825 mph in 6 miles?

On 12/11/2013 6:30 PM, Kirston Henderson wrote:

Was he claiming that his speed broke some law of physics?  I couldn't tell.

On Dec 11, 2013, at 2:18 PM, Jerry Roane wrote:

Kirston

I don't know what your issue is with the claimed speed.  It is only

2,217,600 furlongs per fortnight

Jerry Roane   

On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 2:12 PM, Kirston Henderson <kirston....@megarail.com> wrote:

        I regret to inform you that this statement is absurd and does not reflect well on your credibility.  I won't bother to mention my educational background.

On Dec 11, 2013, at 12:46 PM, Ivan Workman wrote:

In response to Larry Blow:

By the way, the Laws of Physics were made to be broken.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "transport-innovators" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to transport-innova...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to transport-...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/transport-innovators.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "transport-innovators" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to transport-innova...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to transport-...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/transport-innovators.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

[Jack Slade]

This is not much more G than a normal takeoff in an airline,  and certainly a lot less than carrier takeoffs.  I don't see it as a problem,  but the sonic boom would have been.  The Avro Arrow did a fly-past at our Parliament buildings just before the program was cancelled.  It slipped to just above the sound barrier(  Intentionally?) and broke about $200,000 worth of windows in out Capital. 

The other problem would be the interaction of that airflow with the guideway:  the guideway is strong,  but strong airframes have been ripped apart by that same airflow.

There is also no way to hide or disguise the bang:  it would be heard for miles around.

 

Jack Slade

From: Richard Gronning <rgro...@gofast.am>
To: transport-...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2013 9:53:47 PM
Subject: Re: [t-i] Re: Is there an I.P.E.R.T maglev PRT operating at Los Alamos? (fwd)

What kind of G forces would be generated with the acceleration from zero to 825 mph in 6 miles?

On 12/11/2013 6:30 PM, Kirston Henderson wrote:

Was he claiming that his speed broke some law of physics?  I couldn't tell.

On Dec 11, 2013, at 2:18 PM, Jerry Roane wrote:

Kirston

I don't know what your issue is with the claimed speed.  It is only

2,217,600 furlongs per fortnight

Jerry Roane   

On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 2:12 PM, Kirston Henderson <kirston....@megarail.com> wrote:

        I regret to inform you that this statement is absurd and does not reflect well on your credibility.  I won't bother to mention my educational background.

On Dec 11, 2013, at 12:46 PM, Ivan Workman wrote:

In response to Larry Blow:

By the way, the Laws of Physics were made to be broken.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "transport-innovators" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to mailto:transport-innovators%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to transport-...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/transport-innovators.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "transport-innovators" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to transport-innova...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to transport-...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/transport-innovators.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "transport-innovators" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to transport-innova...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to transport-...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/transport-innovators.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

[WALTER BREWER]

0.72 g.   (If acceleration constant.)

 

Walt Brewer

----- Original Message -----

From: Richard Gronning

To: transport-...@googlegroups.com

Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2013 9:53 PM

Subject: Re: [t-i] Re: Is there an I.P.E.R.T maglev PRT operating at Los Alamos? (fwd)

[eph]

That's what I get too - 7 m/s^2.  Wonder why "an jet fighter flight suit" was needed.


F.

[Kirston Henderson]

If they were traveling on a curved guideway some pretty high g-forces would be experienced in the lateral direction.

[eph]

Are there curves?  If there are, they won't be superelevated correctly for the speed.  We don't know anything about the alignment, the type of magnetic suspension, propulsion, structures etc...  all mysteries (or more likely BS).


F.

[Larry Blow]

Speaking of curves, shown in the attachment is at least part of the service area for a campus PRT system connecting the administrative buildings at the Los Alamos lab.  Note the scale on the figure and try to imagine a system travelling even at 100 mph -- much less 825 mph -- through such an area.  I've been to the Lab and find such a contention laughably improbable.

In response, I expect to hear that, since I do not actually know the track layout of the alleged IPERT system, it was located in another area of the Lab, off limits to the public, that's much straighter in alignment.  Or something to that effect.

Larry Blow
MaglevTransport, Inc.

[WALTER BREWER]

Thus the vacuum tube systems.

 

Though occupants need pressurization.

 

Walt Brewer

----- Original Message -----

From: Larry Blow

To: transport-...@googlegroups.com

Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2013 3:25 PM

Subject: Re: [t-i] Re: Is there an I.P.E.R.T maglev PRT operating at Los Alamos? (fwd)

--

[WALTER BREWER]

Some pressure might help.

 

Walt Brewer

----- Original Message -----

From: eph

To: transport-...@googlegroups.com

Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2013 10:36 PM

Subject: Re: [t-i] Re: Is there an I.P.E.R.T maglev PRT operating at Los Alamos? (fwd)

[Larry Blow]

One of Ivan's posts from Tuesday caught my eye when it said, "Weight makes a huge difference with speed: 2 1/2 ton or 5,000 lbs. PRT Pod versus a 50Ton or 100,000 lbs. maglev train vehicle like Transrapid. We attained 825mph on one manned test within a 10 mile..." for two reasons:

First, weight: a Transrapid maglev can be no shorter than two sections, each weighting about 50 metric tons, so the lightest Transrapid is on the order of 100 metric tons, or 220,000 pounds...No two-section trains have ever in service anywhere except on a test track.  The world-record speed for commercial maglevs (311 mph) was set in 2003 in Shanghai with an unmodified infrastructure using a five-section train weighing 550,000 pounds, or 110 times the weight of the alleged IPERT pod.  OK, then, weight makes a difference.

Second, speed: attaining 825mph on a manned test would mean that the IPERT could be recognized as the new land-speed record holder, as suggested in the attached screenshot from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_vehicle_speed_records and would also be the second manned ground vehicle to break the sound barrier.  The first, Thrust SSC, a 10-ton machine powered by two Rolls-Royce Spey 202 jet engines, is the current speed leader, having gone 763.035 mph in 1997, according to http://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/world-records/2000/land-speed-%28fastest-car%29 -- still 62 mph slower than IPERT, though. 

Due to the classified history of the IPERT system, this second point will probably be deemed irrelevant if we hear anything again from Ivan.

Larry Blow
MaglevTransport, Inc.

[Richard Gronning]

For once I am sitting back, relaxing, and enjoying the skepticism on this site. I'll also have to say that, while healthy skepticism, given politely, is warranted, cynicism isn't.

A couple of points, the .72 G's is quite satisfactory. (Thanks Jack!) While a rocket sled needs an on-board propulsion, a light vehicle could use electric propulsion in the track.

The other point is why does Ivan even need to write in to this site? If he has a prestigious lab behind him, he should just be able to contact various city-county-state-federal entities and a system would be built. I know about certain developments and the developers ar far too busy to discuss what they are doing. I've seen developers who do discuss their developments. Usually it is in between opportunities.

Dick

[eph]

Dick,
.72 G was thanks to Walter.

I sure would like to see the arrangement that generated the upwards of (not accounting for transonic drag etc...) 7,500 kW of power needed to propel this manned podcar at 825 mph.


F.

[Eric Johnson]

Walt,

Minor clarification. A flight suit is basically a set of fire retardant coveralls. A g-suit is used to help fighter pilots deal with 4+ G loads by putting air pressure on the legs to keep blood from pooling in them. There are also special breathing exercises that pilots can do to decrease blood pooling too.

If this was a 1G acceleration there would be no need for either. Though there could be some gov red tape that required it.

Eric

[Jack Slade]

It is also a minor point,  and means nothing important.  The guy is in the Military:  he has to wear something what else would anybody expect him to wear?  My concern would be that testing done this way could lose everything on the first test

 

The Military never tests anything at full speed or full power as a starting point.  The norm would be a whole a whole series of tests first,  getting close to the sound barrier,  before trying to break it. 

 

Jack Slade

From: Eric Johnson <itse...@gmail.com>
To: transport-...@googlegroups.com
Cc: catc...@verizon.net
Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2013 5:33:58 PM
Subject: Re: [t-i] Re: Is there an I.P.E.R.T maglev PRT operating at Los Alamos? (fwd)

--

[Eric Johnson]

Larry,

Let's add in the fact that the aerodynamics of a PRT pod used for 25-55 MPH operations is completely different from one that can do 825 MPH (Think VW Bug vs a sleek Ferrari) . The choice is one or the other. Then add in the structure of the pod where we want a simple light weight vehicle designed to carry passenger loads up to 1000 pounds with basically an efficient wind protection skin. This would shred apart or get badly deformed above 200 MPH. 

What about the effects to exposed guideway components? This air pressure would likely rip out any boxes just bolted to the guideway surface (think plastic bag floating in highway traffic and moving erratically around as cars pass by).

We have the same issues with the guideway as structural loading is extremely different for the two speeds. How about the ability for the guideway electronics to handle the block power switching. 825 MPH is 1210 feet per second and if each block was 100 feet long, the system would have to power up 12 per second or have the track fully powered up for the test.

They would need an emergency braking system that far exceeded previous requirements.

I could go on. But, I'll leave it at this point that I'm sadly very skeptical over many of his statements.

Eric

[Ivan Workman]

We were pulling 6 1/2 g's on the PRT system.

Ivan Workman

--

[Ivan Workman]

The Maglev PRT system was designed as a Working System and we knew it was going to work, plain and simple. Each employee made an average of 4 trips a day at $1.50 per trip maximum. All employees at Los Alamos were required to sign a 20 year confidentially agreement for our project plus they are required to sign millions of confidentially agreements to work onsite because of all the confidential projects that are being worked on onsite at LANL. All employees were forced to park in front of the administration building and forced to ride the PRT system or walk. Most choose to ride the PRT system. That is how it was set up. As for destruction of the system, it did cost the US Government $200-$300 Million dollars to destroy it.

Ivan Workman

On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 1:50 PM, Jack Slade <skytr...@rogers.com> wrote:

I would think it is impossible to build and then remove that length of guideway without somebody remembering it.  Nobody that I hve ever known would build a 12 mile system to see if it works,  when less than 1 mile would suffice for design and test purposes.

 

Jack Slade

From: jbs <j...@u.washington.edu>
To: transport-innovators <transport-...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2013 10:51:30 AM
Subject: [t-i] Re: Is there an I.P.E.R.T maglev PRT operating at Los Alamos? (fwd)

Note that the man (Workman) said "this system WAS ..." could that mean that it has been taken down?

-----------------------------------
On Mon, 25 Nov 2013, Tim J. wrote:

> My thought was hardly original; I've just noticed that the blog concludes.
>      A Final Word 
> The NewsCenter asked a Los Alamos National Laboratory public information
> contact about the existence of a maglev transit system. She replied she
> has not seen such a thing there, and she has been at LANL since 1996.
> Her exact reaction was "Wow, 12 miles [of] track and 14 stations? We'd
> see that from Google Earth, wouldn't we?" And we can't . 
>
> Tim J.
>
> On Tuesday, 26 November 2013 17:21:55 UTC+11, Tim J. wrote:
>      Hi Jerry,
> The man says 
>        "This was a 12 mile system and had 14 stations. It was elevated
> at 21 feet and was powered off the city electric grid by a waste to
> power system which I will explain next."
>
> If that's true it would be visible on Google earth.  I had a quick look
> but couldn't find anything.
>
> It sounds like PRT "vapourware" to me.
>
> Tim J.
>
> On Tuesday, 26 November 2013 06:08:51 UTC+11, jbs wrote:
>
>
>      u
>      Subject: Is there an I.P.E.R.T maglev PRT operating at Los
>      Alamos?
>
>      If anyone can help determine the validity of the I.P.E.R.T
>      maglev system,
>      supposedly in operation at Los Alamos, please use this
>      starting point in you
>      investigation.
>
>      ><http://precipblog.blogspot.com/2013/11/a-brief-look-at-international-persona
>      l.html>

>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "transport-innovators" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an

> email to transport-innovators+unsub...@googlegroups.com.

> To post to this group, send email to transport-...@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/transport-innovators.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

>
>

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "transport-innovators" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to transport-innovators+unsub...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to transport-...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/transport-innovators.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

[Ivan Workman]

Los Alamos used the existing parking lots while the PRT system was working and in place. All existing parking lots buildings, etc. stayed in place and were not changed with a majority of the PRT system following the existing road system. I can show you exactly where the PRT system routing went on Google maps but, your going to have to sign an NDA before I give out that information as well as most of the information to a lot of your questions. The law of physics is very different for PRT & maglev than for anything else. A lot of the Maglev physics was done in conjunction with our Japanese partners.

If you want specifics, you can sign a NDA and we'll talk to you about the system and send the summation. I am not going to disclose secrets on this site.

Sincerely,

Ivan Workman

Co-President of IPERT

 

On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 12:56 PM, Eric Johnson <itse...@gmail.com> wrote:

One would also think it would be readily visible in the photos of the lab buildings and surrounding areas. Yet, this site has multiple photos and no PRT guideway, stations, or other components are visible.

Then look at the aerial maps and the parking lots, roads, etc look like they've been there for 5-10+ years. 

Finally, if it was built in 2003-2005 timeframe, it would've had post 9/11 security measures in-place. The most logical would be to keep cars outside of the fence and have folks walk up to the check point & board PRT at that time vs the guard shacks & multiple lanes at these locations. Since there are no large parking lots at Pajarito Road/Hwy 4 gate on the east side, Jemez Rd/501 on the north side that also leads me to wonder about it's existence.

Eric

On Monday, November 25, 2013 11:21:55 PM UTC-7, Tim J. wrote:

Hi Jerry,

The man says 

       "This was a 12 mile system and had 14 stations. It was elevated at 21 feet and was powered off the city electric grid by a waste to power system which I will explain next."

If that's true it would be visible on Google earth.  I had a quick look but couldn't find anything.

It sounds like PRT "vapourware" to me.

Tim J.

On Tuesday, 26 November 2013 06:08:51 UTC+11, jbs wrote:

u
Subject: Is there an I.P.E.R.T maglev PRT operating at Los Alamos?

If anyone can help determine the validity of the I.P.E.R.T maglev system,
supposedly in operation at Los Alamos, please use this starting point in you
investigation.

> <http://precipblog.blogspot.com/2013/11/a-brief-look-at-international-personal.html>

[Ivan Workman]

The FOI act won't get you this information. The FOI only gets you only information the government is willing to make public.

Sincerely,

Ivan Workman

On Sun, Dec 8, 2013 at 6:02 PM, Dave Brough <daveb...@gmail.com> wrote:

Questions/observations.

How fast could it go?

Headway? .5 second.

What's so special about PRT that it had to be classified anyway? And then not only destroyed, but the site sanitiized.

Anything classified can always be declassified.

And even at that, an FOI request would show it, albeit with redactions.

Bruff

[Ivan Workman]

Obviously Rick, you don't understand how the military works and how things are declassified or classified information. People in the US government wanted it destroyed because it worked too well and if implemented would put millions of people out of work in the Oil, automotive, and transportation industries. We had zero problems and zero defects with the PRT system. If the government wants to deny something, they can completely sanitize it, deny it's existence, ruin the inventor's credentials, etc. I have seen it done and so has my business partner.

Sincerely,

Ivan Workman

On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 7:12 AM, Rick D <woog...@yahoo.com> wrote:

Well done Mr Grant for kicking the hornets nest as it were.

With all writing from Ivan, I'm struck by the almost complete absence of information provided on this system.

Either this thing is declassified, or it isn't. There are photos on the net of nuclear powered missiles (the Pluto nuclear ramjet), stealth bombers, rail guns, and a plethora of secret projects.

Why the hell is a transportation project so secret? If you believe the conspiracy theory woven by Ivan, how to explain the lie that is the claim the government always builds and destroys without a trace?

WTH was the prototype so secret that the ground was (as Bruff put it) completely sanitised and not even regularly spaced disturbed earth was left?

If it really was that secret, is it declassified now? If it's declassified, there wouldn't only be a couple of guys talking about it. It would be declassified for all of the thousands of people that rode it to at least mention its existence. The patents would be declassified as well. If they aren't what proof is there that there is protection for any investors?

But here's an inconvenient truth: The LANL promotes its "green" transportation initiatives on their website. All they have is walking, biking, and buses. We've heard of a taxi service too.

So that means, if they didn't want to continue using this supposedly functional and successful system, that the system does not compare favorably to using buses.

Or is there another government conspiracy theory explanation for that as well.

I wish anyone who puts up money based on these unsubstantiated stories and claims the best of luck.

Rick D.

(Some of my posts lately have been allowed by Jerry R. Until I am sure I am no longer moderated, I will add the emails that I have of list members in BCC. If receiving my messages twice when they pass moderation bothers you, I will remove your name.)

On Sunday, December 8, 2013 9:02:39 PM, Dave Brough <daveb...@gmail.com> wrote:

Questions/observations.

How fast could it go?

Headway? .5 second.

What's so special about PRT that it had to be classified anyway? And then not only destroyed, but the site sanitiized.

Anything classified can always be declassified.

And even at that, an FOI request would show it, albeit with redactions.

Bruff

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "transport-innovators" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to transport-innova...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to transport-...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/transport-innovators.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

[eph]

Ivan,
What was the average trip length? 


F.

[Ivan Workman]

Not necessarily. If there was, it is deeply buried.

Sincerely,

Ivan Workman

On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 1:20 PM, Dave Brough <daveb...@gmail.com> wrote:

 Ivan Workman wrote (the system) It was offered to the city of Los Alamos and turned down due to the city being in bankruptcy at the time and heavily in debt.

That being the case, there should be some public record of what was offered, right?

[Larry Blow]

OK, so now we hear that IPERT testing subjected its lone passenger -- wearing a jet fighter flight suit -- to speeds of 825mph and 6.5 Gs, which is more G-forces than any operational roller coaster in the world...as suggested in the attached screenshot from http://rollercoaster.wikia.com/wiki/Highest_G-Force_on_a_Roller_Coaster

He was probably strapped into his seat very securely...

Larry Blow
MaglevTransport, Inc.

[Ivan Workman]

Less than 6.5 Gs.

Sincerely,

Ivan Workman

[Ivan Workman]

It was just a safety precaution.

Sincerely,

Ivan Workman

[Rick D]

Ivan,

Do yourself a favour and shut up. Seriously.

You're only damaging your reputation with these messages and I'm seriously starting to think you're a Poe.

What kind of declassification makes everyone involved stay quiet, yet here you are making claims and talking about the system. That kind of contradiction is from the realm of conspiracy theory.

[Ivan Workman]

Maximum of 6.5g's.

Sincerely,

Ivan Workman

[Jeff Davis]

"The law of physics is very different for PRT & maglev than for anything else"

 

What if I didn't go to law school or study law, do the laws of physics still apply?

Will there be different laws of physics for buses, and a different set for LRTs, and a different set for APMs, and a different set for regular cars, etc?  What about airplanes, do they have their own set of laws of physics?

In regards to the 6.5 g's and supersonic speed of 825 mph on a land based vehicle, what can I say but impressive.  I'll bet the sonic boom that accompanied the PRT vehicle was also impressive.  Also, the power consumption would have been fantastic.

 

Finally, I must say that your statements about the performance of this system and how the generally accepted laws of Physics do not apply to your particular application, and that these generally accepted laws are meant to be broken are very consistent with previous email postings and general opinions of some major contributors to this group.  You and your 6.5 g acel/decel, 825 mph system will fit in quite nicely with some of the major contributors to this group............

 

Finally, finally, I suspect that if/when Area 51 is finally made accessible to the general public they will undoubtedly discover the remains of your PRT System.

 

Jeff

---

[Ivan Workman]

The PRT system was in a high security area. Google Maps had it all blacked out and so did the satellites. As for the manned test at 825mph, it was all done outdoors on the main guideway. The main administration building station, was just that, an offline station. All stations were offline just like a regular PRT system. If you looked at the Microsoft campus Taxi 2000 video, our system was very similar except with the vehicle design and using magnets instead of wheels.

Sincerely,

Ivan Workman

[Ivan Workman]

With a full Jet Fighter flight suit with a full jet aircraft 5 point restraint at 6.5 Gs. That is correct.

Sincerely,

Ivan Workman

--

[Ivan Workman]

As for further information, if you seriously want it, contact me or my partner Roger Freely directly, sign our NDA, then we'll discuss it. I am tired of dealing with idiots that think they know it all, when they actually don't know anything. Unlike most of you, we did have a real operating system at one time for 8 years and it ran successfully.

Sincerely,

Ivan Workman

Co-President, Co-Founder, & Co-Inventor

International Personal Express Rapid Transit

714-797-2236

ivanw...@gmail.com

Roger Freely

Co-President, Co-Founder, & Co-Inventor

International Personal Express Rapid Transit

714-797-2236

iper...@gmail.com

[Jeff Davis]

Ooops, I forgot.

 

On behalf of the Federation of Galactic Transport Innovators you have demonstrated that you fully qualify to be one of them.  (Unfortunately I don't qualify for this honor)

 

"Space Cadet IW-101, please report to launch bay 2 and join up with some of the other like-thinkers."

 

Now, once you denounce established safety regulations and standards we can promote you to Space Cadet IW-102.

 

Jeff

---

From: Jeff Davis [mailto:jeff.d...@verizon.net]
Sent: Friday, December 13, 2013 5:12 PM
To: 'transport-...@googlegroups.com'
Subject: RE: [t-i] Re: Is there an I.P.E.R.T maglev PRT operating at Los Alamos? (fwd)

 

"The law of physics is very different for PRT & maglev than for anything else"

 

What if I didn't go to law school or study law, do the laws of physics still apply?

Will there be different laws of physics for buses, and a different set for LRTs, and a different set for APMs, and a different set for regular cars, etc?  What about airplanes, do they have their own set of laws of physics?

In regards to the 6.5 g's and supersonic speed of 825 mph on a land based vehicle, what can I say but impressive.  I'll bet the sonic boom that accompanied the PRT vehicle was also impressive.  Also, the power consumption would have been fantastic.

 

Finally, I must say that your statements about the performance of this system and how the generally accepted laws of Physics do not apply to your particular application, and that these generally accepted laws are meant to be broken are very consistent with previous email postings and general opinions of some major contributors to this group.  You and your 6.5 g acel/decel, 825 mph system will fit in quite nicely with some of the major contributors to this group............

 

Finally, finally, I suspect that if/when Area 51 is finally made accessible to the general public they will undoubtedly discover the remains of your PRT System.

 

Jeff

---

From: transport-...@googlegroups.com [mailto:transport-...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Ivan Workman

Sent: Friday, December 13, 2013 4:46 PM
To: transport-...@googlegroups.com

[Larry Blow]

Ivan, you just posted two related things that cut into the plausibility of IPERT story you've been weaving on this site:

• "a majority of the PRT system following the existing road system," and
  
• "the law of physics is very different for PRT & maglev than for anything else"

Call me cynical, but I do not believe a PRT vehicle/system of any sort has the ability to follow existing roads at the Laboratory for more than half (a majority) of its trip length at speeds approaching anything near 825 miles per hour.  And that's because I'm convinced that the laws of physics do indeed apply to PRT and maglev...something that's really never been in question until IPERT appeared on the scene.

Larry Blow
MaglevTransport, Inc.

[Ivan Workman]

Only the inventors and the people on our team are the only ones able to talk about the maglev PRT system. I have been there and seen the system work.

As for you or anyone else on this list, I am not taking any of you seriously anymore and won't be posting anything more dealing with IPERT until we have our funding in place and our system in operation. My team will have the last laugh. You are all nothing more than a bunch of naysayers.

By the way, You don't need a test track before you have a working system if you know what the hell you are doing, which most of you don't. I don't see any of you with a working system and you all claim to be working in the transportation industry. You are no better than Dr. Anderson from PRT International, a bunch of wannabe's that really don't want to see PRT work or you can't understand it.

The Japanese are light years ahead of the US when it comes to transportation technology. No wonder why most American's take their business overseas and leave the USA with nothing because people aren't open-minded to even try something new, much less take a risk on something that works such as monorail.

So for any of you who are serious, contact me directly:

Sincerely,

Ivan Workman

Co-President, Co-Founder, & Co-Inventor

International Personal Express Rapid Transit

714-797-2236

ivanw...@gmail.com

Roger Freely

Co-President, Co-Founder, & Co-Inventor

International Personal Express Rapid Transit

714-797-2236

iper...@gmail.com

[Ivan Workman]

Well, Larry, I guess you never really understood magnetics. I have two people that are Japanese on my team that have been working on maglev and magnets for well over 60 years of their life, both of them. They have worked or consulted on every maglev system in existence. I'll take their word over yours any day of the week. Any company working on maglev and magnets that didn't follow their advice had people killed or had to destroy and rebuild the maglev transportation systems.

Sincerely,

Ivan Workman

--

[Ivan Workman]

It was originally a combination of US Air Force, Army Corps of Engineers, and private enterprise. My partner was the project lead and in the US Air Force.

Sincerely,

Ivan Workman

On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 11:24 PM, Kirston Henderson <kirston....@megarail.com> wrote:

Are you next going to announce that this is a U.S. Government funded development by some "high tech" agency.  If it isn't for some classified military use, why the high level of "stealth?"  Patent protection should protect the technology (except in some places such as China).  I understand the skepticism because there are a lot of people out there who simply can not believe our system even after we have produced and tested a fully functional prototype for demo purposes and anyone who can read the various patents and a little technical savy is free to understand the technology.  Of course, some of them will not believe it even when it goes into commercial operation.

Kirston Henderson

On Nov 26, 2013, at 5:33 PM, Ivan Workman wrote:

Hi foks,

 

I am Ivan Workman. I am co-President & co-founder of IPERT & my partner Roger Freely is the main inventor of the IPERT system. The blogger did not double check with myself or my partner get all of his information correctly and yes we are operating in a stealth start up mode due to this problem of skepticism. My partner and I will have a copy of our summation about the project and if you have any questions or doubts to freely contact me or my partner online at ivanw...@gmail.com or my partner at iper...@gmail.com. We will be offline until Monday of next week after the Thanksgiving holiday.

 

Sincerely,

 

Ivan Workman

[Ivan Workman]

The Laws of Physics is a science, not a definite science. You don't have to take my word for it, check out what the Japanese are doing.

Sincerely,

Ivan Workman

On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 12:12 PM, Kirston Henderson <kirston....@megarail.com> wrote:

        I regret to inform you that this statement is absurd and does not reflect well on your credibility.  I won't bother to mention my educational background.

On Dec 11, 2013, at 12:46 PM, Ivan Workman wrote:

In response to Larry Blow:

By the way, the Laws of Physics were made to be broken.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "transport-innovators" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to transport-innovators+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to transport-innovators@googlegroups.com.

[Larry Blow]

Ivan, nobody ever said I was that smart, especially about magnetics, but after checking into some of the details, your story's just too fantastic for me to believe. 

I wish you luck, and look forward to you and Roger getting your funding and putting the system into operation so you can tell all of us, "I told you so."

Larry Blow

MaglevTransport, Inc.

[Jeff Davis]

Larry,

Now you speak up?  There have been so many wacky ideas floated around for so long and only now do you raise the issue of 'plausibility'?  Where have you been?  What about the request for some flexibility in the safety rules, regulations, and standards intended to protect human life (that was plausible?)?  What about the rolling death gas chambers (that was plausible?)?  What about the statements that if it was invented by railroad engineers it is not applicable to PRT (that was plausible?)?  What about the comparisons between high-g amusement rides and PRT, and don't forget the statement that women and children are resilient when it comes to high-g accelerations and decelerations (that was plausible?)?

 

I say Ivan W. SO fits in with this group, complete with the 6.5 g accelerations, 825 mph land speeds, mystery system that no has ever heard of, but lots of people rode it and it was completely visible to everybody, and no evidence that it ever existed, but he claims it did, etc.

 

If you're going to make stupid statements, might as well go big!

 

Jeff

---

From: transport-...@googlegroups.com [mailto:transport-...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Larry Blow

Sent: Friday, December 13, 2013 5:30 PM
To: transport-...@googlegroups.com

--

[eph]

Jeff,
Larry is interested in MagLev, most of us know that.

Name names instead of making vague statements about the list.  PLEASE.


F.

[Larry Blow]

Jeff, up until Wednesday of this week I was not able to comment due to disclosure restrictions.  Believe me, I wanted to post, but felt restrained.  Now I'm not.

Larry Blow
MaglevTransport, Inc.

[Jeff Davis]

What I am waiting for is the counter offer stating that if IPERT can do 6.5 g and 825 mph, their proposed system will do 7.5 g and 925 mph.

 

Jeff

---

From: transport-...@googlegroups.com [mailto:transport-...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Larry Blow
Sent: Friday, December 13, 2013 7:22 PM
To: transport-...@googlegroups.com
Cc: 'Rick D'; Jeff Davis
Subject: Re: [t-i] Re: Is there an I.P.E.R.T maglev PRT operating at Los Alamos? (fwd)

 

Jeff, up until Wednesday of this week I was not able to comment due to disclosure restrictions.  Believe me, I wanted to post, but felt restrained.  Now I'm not.

Larry Blow
MaglevTransport, Inc.

--

[Eric Johnson]

Ivan,

Did you use a regular vehicle or was it a special made vehicle for this test?

Eric

[Kirston Henderson]

I must have missed something in my education. Just what are the
initials I, P, E, R, & T supposed to stand for?

[Jack Slade]

Imaginery Personal Elevated Rapid Transit?

 

Jack Slade

From: Kirston Henderson <kirston....@megarail.com>
To: transport-...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Saturday, December 14, 2013 1:05:17 AM
Subject: Re: [t-i] Re: Is there an I.P.E.R.T maglev PRT operating at Los Alamos? (fwd)

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "transport-innovators" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to transport-innovators+unsub...@googlegroups.com.

[Larry Blow]

Kirston, your education's not missing anything...the system we've been discussing is called "International Personal Express Rapid Transit," or IPERT. 

Jerry Schneider tipped us off to the website that started it all, "This Week in Precipitation," at http://precipblog.blogspot.com/2013/12/ipert-part-ii.html back on November 25th...seems much longer ago to me.

Larry Blow
MaglevTransport, Inc.

[Richard Gronning]

Since a "G" suit is warn around the legs to prevent blood from pooling
in a pilot's legs when pulling "g's" UP, in other words when a pilot
pulls back on the stick and the force is DOWN, then why would a rider
need a G suit when the force is horizontal?

[Jeff Davis]

Dick,
Seriously? You want to apply logic and the generally accepted laws of
physics? Ivan W. has already stated that they have discovered whole new
laws of physics, so in his universe there may not be any horizontal g force.

Dude, keep up!

Jeff

-----Original Message-----
From: transport-...@googlegroups.com
[mailto:transport-...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Richard Gronning
Sent: Saturday, December 14, 2013 10:49 AM
To: transport-...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [t-i] Re: Is there an I.P.E.R.T maglev PRT operating at Los
Alamos? (fwd)

[Richard Gronning]

Because logic, like math, can be fun!
... and you seriously want me to get serious?

I liked the bit about the 5 point restraint though. If we're going to
pull 6.5 G's, it would be nice to be restrained if we have to stop.