GreyFalcon.us website actual photo of Haunebu Saucer
LIBERATOR
eeew, that is genuine, look at all the people under it, I bet this is
the saucer I, I mean Hitler wisked away in to goto Mars to find,
discover, Bill Shatner to rescue himself from losing WW2.
And this one I suspect is a pilot or aviator of the saucer craft:
http://www.slide.com/s/2OK4e9WUsz-Lm_q5xIUZ-n_UWRI_q44F
Looks a little artificial though.
LIBERATOR
http://www.slide.com/s/jEq9LEPy3j8Qm3kbL_DhVrq2d5tBjUmn
This is what happens when you fly drunk, I wonder if he just thought
the saucercraft was also a submarine of which he ended up drowned, or
he hit something above the water and then crashed and sunk to the
bottom.
Only Robbie knows.
David E. Powell
into the fight, and people would have known about it by now.
Jim Wilkins
wrote:
> Enough. If Germany had anything like this they would have thrown it
> into the fight, and people would have known about it by now.
The original Haunebu who muscled in on the Eastern Mediterranean after
the Trojan War were likely Sicilians and Sardinians. They weren't
aliens, they were the Mafia.
jsw
Rob Arndt
wrote:
> Enough. If Germany had anything like this they would have thrown it
> into the fight, and people would have known about it by now.
What exactly would YOU know of the entire German flugscheiben
development in WW2 and even pre-war? These type discs were only
experimentals and prone to severe instability. They used a celestial
navigation system and an EMG engine that was the most advanced aerial
technology in the world. Only 7 of the Haunebu series were ever
produced and the Haunebu III was kept in reserves for transport duties
in 1945.
Any external armament badly destabilzed the disc and drew critical
power from the Antrieb. The KSK Donau twin-60mm beam gun overheated
badly after just a few shots and was dropped. No bombs could be
carried internally nor externally and the few discs with top-mounted
remote-controlled systems were only for VTOL. The compexity of flight
with these machines made them fast straightline accelerators, but
nowhere near as agile and slow as a conventional Allied piston
fighters. Early examples could only make turns in certain degrees and
slowly. They tried MG mounts, but those proved ineffective too.
The Vril and Haunebu craft were experimental disc types meant for
Raumflug (Spaceflight) not war and those that the SS tried to mount
weapons on failed. In the end, the survivors not destroyed on purpose
were used to ferry SS and Nazi personnel out of the Reich and to safe-
havens in S America- largely Argentina. Then there is the question of
Base 211 personnel and the continued operation of that base somewhere
in the Muhlig-Hoffman mountains supplied by the Haunebu type disc from
S America to Antarctica.
Even if you disregard these types, the Germans definately had several
other designs testing as in the BMW Flugelrad disc-fans out at Prag-
Kbley Aerodrome as well as Schriever's unstable larger disc-fan
Flugkreisel. Josef Andreas Epp was working on 1/10th scale Omega
Diskus models that are photographed as well as the documented Repulsin
discoid motors from Schauberger who was forced to build them under SS
control at Mauthausen along with many engineers and help from the
Kertl Company since 1940. Henri Coanda was also arrested in Paris in
1940 and forced by the SS to develop a lenticular flugscheibe which
was wind tunnel tested in 1944, but could not be built as each disc
would cost 12x Jumo 004s and much fuel needed for the Me-262s, and
Ar-234s.
Then there are the patents for the Focke Schnellflugzeug Rochen since
1939, the Fleissner Dusenscheibe at Peenemunde, Sack's circualr AS-6
V1, the Junkers AF-1 suction discs, and many more designs.
There was no central authority for these projects and programs. The
RLM had no authority over them and only Dornier and Junkers were
informed by the SS of the Haunebu craft in 1945 for limited
production. All other production during the war was under SS Technical
Branch control and not subject to the RLM nor Speer.
And one would not throw into combat such advanced machines in 1944-45
with the SS which made secret negotiations with the US over such high
technologies. That is why they remain CLASSIFIED even though the USAF
ADMITTED in 1995 that they lied about the German discs and that
Germany had experimentals- no further details. Add to this the USAAF/
USAF lies about the Foo Fighters as unknown only to be proven liars
when a document emerged on German Capabilities for 1945 that lists
those weapons under PHOO BOMBS- firmly German weapons and technology-
transferred to Japan where sightings began in the summer of 1945 in
the PTO.
David, you are another person who doesn't know shit about German
secret weapons technology, so I would shut up if I were you and don't
meddle where you don't belong.
Rob
Jim Wilkins
> On Mar 25, 2:15 pm, "David E. Powell" <David_Powell3...@msn.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Enough. If Germany had anything like this they would have thrown it
> > into the fight, and people would have known about it by now.
>
> What exactly would YOU know of the entire German flugscheiben
> development in WW2 and even pre-war? These type discs were only
> experimentals and prone to severe instability. They used a celestial
> navigation system and an EMG engine that was the most advanced aerial
> technology in the world. Only 7 of the Haunebu series were ever
> produced and the Haunebu III was kept in reserves for transport duties
> Rob
Is it similar to this?
http://science.nasa.gov/newhome/headlines/prop06apr99_2.htm
Note Robert Goddard's interest in 1906.
Electrostatic ion propulsion was fairly popular with amateur model
makers in the 20's and 30's, but like insect wings it doesn't scale up
well and is power-limited by parasitic corona discharge, which worsens
with altitude and relative humidity (clouds).
Works fine in space, though.
jsw
Rob Arndt
> On Mar 25, 8:26�pm, Rob Arndt <teuton...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > On Mar 25, 2:15 pm, "David E. Powell" <David_Powell3...@msn.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > Enough. If Germany had anything like this they would have thrown it
> > > into the fight, and people would have known about it by now.
>
> > What exactly would YOU know of the entire German flugscheiben
> > development in WW2 and even pre-war? These type discs were only
> > experimentals and prone to severe instability. They used a celestial
> > navigation system and an EMG engine that was the most advanced aerial
> > technology in the world. Only 7 of the Haunebu series were ever
> > produced and the Haunebu III was kept in reserves for transport duties
> > in 1945....
> > Rob
>
> Note Robert Goddard's interest in 1906.
> Electrostatic ion propulsion was fairly popular with amateur model
> makers in the 20's and 30's, but like insect wings it doesn't scale up
> well and is power-limited by parasitic corona discharge, which worsens
> with altitude and relative humidity (clouds).
>
> Works fine in space, though.
>
> jsw
Why stop there? There is an entire history of terrestrial circualr
craft dating back to 1908 and continuing postwar. I have already gone
through the patents and secret craft of Lockheed, Republic, Northrop,
Boeing, NASA, Sukhanov, MiG, and others like the circular UAVs now
operating in Afghanistan and Iraq plus the police versions used in the
UK, Germany, etc...
The problem with such craft is the science. Tesla was working on
designs for electrogravitational a/c in the 1930s along with his
broadcast power craft. the Nazis had his material, German quantum
physics, SS Technical Branch resources, and the metaphysical science
of Thule/Vril. Very complicated arrangement mixing Metaphysical
science with the boundries of 1940s science and applying quantum
physics- all under SS supervision.
I get annoyed having to post links ot terrestrial historical craft,
the German craft, the postwar rush for German scientists and the West
to get patents for disc aircraft both civilian and military when there
was NO REQUIREMENT FOR SUCH A CRAFT. The mere fact that immediately
postwar the US was worried about the Soviets manufacturing the Ho
XVIII and disc craft based on Schauberger's models should tell us
something is suspicious. Add the German rush for patents after the 10
year ban and that is amazing since none of those individuals worked
with each other and were spread out all over the Reich! The Germans
that went to Argentina must have been transported by disc craft too as
declassified reports from the late 1940s (especially from 1946-47)
report these type of craft over their skies. And then came Roswell in
NM where secret German technology was being tested. Coincidence? No.
Other disc images come from Canada where AVRO Canada was working on
disc craft postwar based on German designs and the US had to go up
there and interfere to make sure the Canadians failed and that the
program got shut down so that the Canadian specialists would come to
the US to work on US disc craft.
There is so much real history that is beyond official US Govt history
that it makes me sick. The USAAF/USAF had admitted LYING about the
PHOO BOMBS and German DISC AIRCRAFT, and THREE versions of the Roswell
craft in 6 decades!!!
They also suppressed information on Germany's MBB/DASA/EADS stealth a/
c.
So do I trust anything the USAF has to say? No.
I laugh MFAO at the USAF when it attacked Saddam's German and Yugoslav
built Q4 Superbunker with 80 tons of ordnance including the bunker
busters and didn't even scratch it as the main GERMAN dsigner foretold
in advance. Germany had bunker busters in WW2- the Rochling AC shell
made of titanium, chromium, and vanadium. The US didn't invent a/c
revolver cannons, AAMs, bunker busters, stealth, and a wide range of
other tech they claim- Germany did in WW2.
So fuck the USAF and idiots that stick to official histories.
In fact, go try to find out about the 1942 Battle of Los Angeles and
the disc craft involved. No word from the USAAF on that or US Govt.
But they failed to down it.
Rob
Dan
> On Mar 25, 2:15�pm, "David E. Powell" <David_Powell3...@msn.com>
> wrote:
>> Enough. If Germany had anything like this they would have thrown it
>> into the fight, and people would have known about it by now.
>
>
Aren't, do you actually believe that crock? If so, I will pray for you.
Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
Dan
Unfortunately aren't can't put her explanations into examples
everyone can understand. This is because she hasn't a clue about basic
science and mathematics. Still, she does serve as comic relief at times.
We can't discuss REAL military aviation all the time, can we?
Rob Arndt
>
> - Show quoted text -
Examples everyone can understand:
1) Non-German Circular and Disc Aircraft (1911-1945)
http://discaircraft.greyfalcon.us/World%20Disc%20Development.htm
2) German Disc Aircraft of WW2:
http://discaircraft.greyfalcon.us/index.html
3) Postwar Disc Aircraft:
http://www.laesieworks.com/ifo/index.html
And this is just for starters :)
Rob
Dan
<snip>
Tesla was working on
> designs for electrogravitational a/c in the 1930s along with his
> broadcast power craft. the Nazis had his material, German quantum
> physics, SS Technical Branch resources, and the metaphysical science
> of Thule/Vril. Very complicated arrangement mixing Metaphysical
> science with the boundries of 1940s science and applying quantum
> physics- all under SS supervision.
They still couldn't have made it work. Gravity is unaffected by
electromagnetism. You already know that having been told many times, but
keep trotting it out and you'll keep looking foolish.
Dan
I suppose referencing your own blog makes sense to you. Keep trying
and maybe you can explain why no one has made a man sized disc aircraft
powered by anything other than fossil fuels. The war ended in 1945 and
science has progressed to the point non governmental activities could
duplicate anything the Nazis actually did, so where are the flying saucers?
I have asked you many times why the U.S. military has never used your
fantasy aircraft to save lives since WW2. You never have answered. The
answer is simple, they don't exist. You tell us they are "classified for
75 years" and "you can't trust the U.S. military," but never explain how
you know all about them. What will you tell us when the 75 years are up
and there is no information backing you up?
Rob Arndt
Apparently you can't read- the USAF has already been forced to ADMIT
that the Germans had BOTH disc aircraft AND the Foo Fighter weapons
under both FOIA documents and also the US Govt document on German
Projected Capabilities for 1945.
They LIED twice and were found out and yet do not disclose those
weapons b/c they remain tied to current SAPs. So they remain
CLASSIFIED.
The discs certainly are not the disc-fan types b/c PROJECT BLUE BOOK
states that the only a/c in the world that could duplicate the flight
performances of UFOs (and this was in the 60s) was "certain
developments of the Third Reich at the close of the war"!!!
WFT??? That is an official US Govt document and they are claiming what
from the Reich? Certainly a Me-262 could in NO WAY duplicate the
flight capabilities of UFOs. They KNEW the Germans had disc a/c and
EMG types at that. The Foo Fighter craft (Kugelwaffen) had mercury-
plasma engines. Certainly, THOSE match UFO reports, or what else can
you substitute? Nothing. No German jet could equal UFO performances.
Dan, you ask for proof and I have the document on the Phoo Bombs and
also Jim Wilson's FOIA disclosure from Popular Science as well as the
Project Blue Book page. And so you are not arguing with me but your
own Govt and USAF!!!
Fucking idiot.
Rob
scottl...@ix.netcom.com
> Dan, you ask for proof and I have the document on the Phoo Bombs ...
Jesus tapdancing Christ. You're *again* trotting out napalm ("Phoo
Bombs") as proof of Nazi antigravity flying saucers?
Dan
Amazing how you don't believe the USAF but accept Blue Book and
FOIA. Remember how the AAC and USAAF insisted B-17 could fight without
fighter escorts? Those are the same people you claim "knew" the Nazis
has disc aircraft prior to the war. As for "mercury plasma engines" I
defy you to describe how they work. Next time you get someone to take
you out for a drive at night you will see mercury vapour lights which
use mercury plasma.
Blue Book never said there were actual flying saucers, only that not
all sightings could not be explained. Guess what? Many of those
sightings were fraudulent or delusional. UFO means simply that the
object wasn't identified. It doesn't automatically mean it was Nazi or
Nazi derived.
For your edification disc and annular aircraft have been
experimented with almost since man first started flying heavier than
air. The U.S. successfully flew one during WW2.
Now, please explain, in your own words, to us how EMG propulsion works.
Keep trying, you poor, deluded, infatuated girl.
As for your last line, no thank you, I wouldn't touch you with a 10
foot pole.
Dan
I think she meant phoo fighters.
Rob Arndt
FYI,
Foo Fighter Word Etymology:
When the USAF 415th NFS and British intruder aircraft first
encountered the German land-based and launched WNF Feuerball and AEG
Kugelwaffen weapons in the skies over occupied France in late 1944
they were simply called "Fire Fighters" due to their intense glow or
"burn" in the sky. In the WNF Feuerball this was the chemical burn
ring that caused an intense electrostatic field at close proximity to
the daylight bombers. With the AEG Kugelwaffen, the glow or burn was
considered part of the propulsion system which was suspected of being
a mercury-plasma type.
As word spread of these mystery weapons the word Fire got changed
several times:
1) Since the "Fire Fighters" appeared over France, the French word for
fire was adopted- "Feu Fighter"
2) Too complicated for the Allied airmen, the USAF changed that to
"Foo"- a crude reference to the Smokey Stover comic of a bumbling
fireman that actually started fires and had a catchphrase of "Where
there's foo, there's fire". So, the mystery weapons became known as
"Foo Fighters". The RAF simply called them Kraut Meteors instead.
3) To hide the fact that these were German weapons, US Intel
designated them in official military documents as "PHOO BOMBS"
starting in December 1944. This has foiled FOIA document researchers
for decades until a declassifed 1944 document concerning possible
German Capabilities in 1945 revealed the code words and matching
precise description. Perhaps they labeled them BOMBS as many believed
this was a flying flak weapon, or aerial mine... which later proved to
be a false assumption.
Refs:
Newspaper reported:
http://antarctica.greyfalcon.us/pictures/Foo-04.gif
http://discaircraft.greyfalcon.us/picturesf/foo1000.jpg
US Documents:
http://hitlersflyingsaucers.greyfalcon.us/rosetta.html
Also, idiot, NAPALM (naphthenic and palmitic acids) was an ALLIED
WEAPON first used against the Germans in 1944:
On July 17, 1944, napalm incendiary bombs were dropped for the first
time by 14 American P-38 Lightning aircraft of the 402nd Fighter
Squadron / 370th Fighter Group on a fuel depot at Coutances, near St.
L� France.
The Germans, however, invented the vacuum bomb (aka first FAEs):
Official References to the German Vacuum Bomb
Headquarters United States Strategic Air Forces In Europe Office of
the Director of Intelligence:
An Evaluation Of German Capabilities In 1945
CIOS Report:
Interrogation of Dr. Hans Friedrich Gold
GFYS Scott,
Rob
LIBERATOR
Yeah!
Robbie is right on all counts...
thus - eeew!
Jim Wilkins
> ...>
> Examples everyone can understand:
> ...
> Rob
I'm not "everyone", I build experimental prototypes of very advanced
"stuff", have studied chemistry, physics and electronics extensively
and know how electric propulsion works, even tinkered with other
devices using the same underlying principles.
I just want you to reveal the unclassified technical details. So far
you haven't shown that you know the fundamental physical reason why
the vehicles are circular.
jsw
Dan
Because she said so? Seriously I can think of no reason. Some of the
drawings I have seen of supposed disc aircraft show a cockpit in the
center of the upper surface. This makes the pilots blind to 50% of the
space around him.
Robin
Ion thruster
An ion thruster is a form of electric propulsion used for spacecraft
propulsion that creates thrust by accelerating ions. Ion thrusters are
categorized by how they accelerate the ions, using either electrostatic
or electromagnetic force. Electrostatic ion thrusters use the Coulomb
force and accelerate the ions in the direction of the electric field.
Electromagnetic ion thrusters use the Lorentz force to accelerate the
ions. Note that the term "ion thruster" frequently denotes the
electrostatic or gridded ion thrusters, only.
:::::::
Propellants
Ionization energy represents a very large percentage of the energy
needed to run ion drives. The ideal propellant for ion drives is thus a
propellant molecule or atom with a high mass/ionisation energy ratio. In
addition, the propellant should not cause erosion of the thruster to any
great degree to permit long life; and should not contaminate the vehicle.
Many current designs use xenon gas due to its low ionisation energy,
reasonably high atomic number, inert nature, and low erosion. However,
xenon is globally in short supply and very expensive.
Older designs used mercury, but this is toxic and expensive, and tended
to contaminate the vehicle with the metal.
Dan
Not to mention the weight of the mercury. In any event I wanted
aren't to respond to see if she had a clue about this.
Keith Willshaw
"Robin" <b.r...@neurol.org> wrote in message
news:4bacd2fb$1...@news.x-privat.org...
> On 26/03/2010 8:53, Dan wrote:
>> Rob Arndt wrote:
>
>
> Ion thruster
>
> An ion thruster is a form of electric propulsion used for spacecraft
> propulsion that creates thrust by accelerating ions. Ion thrusters are
> categorized by how they accelerate the ions, using either electrostatic or
> electromagnetic force. Electrostatic ion thrusters use the Coulomb force
> and accelerate the ions in the direction of the electric field.
> Electromagnetic ion thrusters use the Lorentz force to accelerate the
> ions. Note that the term "ion thruster" frequently denotes the
> electrostatic or gridded ion thrusters, only.
>
Indeed but their thrust is typically measured in ounces or at best pounds
and they don't work well (if at all) in an atmosphere. The most powerful
experimental ion thruster around produces less than 20 lbs of thrust.
Its a pity you snipped the part in the Wiki article that says that but
never fear I'll put it back in.
<Quote>
The thrust created in ion thrusters is very small compared to conventional
chemical rockets, but a very high specific impulse, or propellant
efficiency, is obtained. This high propellant efficiency is achieved through
the very frugal propellant consumption of the ion thruster propulsion
system.
Due to their relatively high power needs, given the specific power of power
supplies, and the requirement of an environment void of other ionized
particles, ion thrust propulsion is currently practical only in outer space.
</Quote>
Keith
Jim Wilkins
> ....
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ion_thruster
NOOOOOO!!!
Do you not realize the dangers of proliferation???
By revealing our secret alien technology you've let EVERYONE build
their own Atom Smasher, Vernier Thruster, or worst of all, Ionic Air
Purifier!!!
http://www.heavenfresh.com/
<sigh>
scottl...@ix.netcom.com
> On Mar 25, 11:46 pm, "scottlowt...@ix.netcom.com"
>
> <scottlowt...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> > On Mar 25, 11:38 pm, Rob Arndt <teuton...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > Dan, you ask for proof and I have the document on the Phoo Bombs ...
>
> > Jesus tapdancing Christ. You're *again* trotting out napalm ("Phoo
> > Bombs") as proof of Nazi antigravity flying saucers?
>
> FYI,
>
> Foo Fighter Word Etymology:
Sorry, Rob, but "feu boms" have been around for centuries. And Rob,
you blithering moron, of course Napalm was an Allied development...
and similar German developments - real and expected - were thus was
described with Allied terminology. You know, "phoo bombs." As the
Allies were planning for the invasion of Europe and the conquest of
Germany, it was of course important to catalog what sort of defenses
the Germans would mount. And "feu/phoo bombs," basically explosive
mines with a whole lot of flammable liquid, of the type which had been
in use essentially since the development of gunpowder, were an obvious
defensive system that the Allies could expect to face.
Soldiers in Viet Nam used "phoo gas" often enough against VC tunnel
complexes... but perhaps you think that US Army grunts were equipped
with vaporized flying saucers?
Jim Wilkins
>
> Soldiers in Viet Nam used "phoo gas" often enough against VC tunnel
> complexes...
There is another French weapon term that sounds like feu gaz:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fougasse_(weapon)
jsw
scottl...@ix.netcom.com
Yes, that's the one. The "fougasse" is a somewhat generic term,
another word for the "phoo bomb." From the Wiki article:
"
A fougasse (phonics: /foo-GAHS/) is an improvised mine constructed by
making a hollow in the ground or rock and filling it with explosives
(originally, black powder) and projectiles. Fougasse was well known to
military engineers by the mid-eighteenth century but was also referred
to by Vauban in the seventeenth century and was used by Zimmerman at
Augsburg in the sixteenth century. This technique was used in several
European wars, the American Revolution, and the American Civil War.
The term is still used to describe such devices.
"
Also:
"
A flame fougasse was a similar weapon in which the projectile was a
flammable liquid, typically a mixture of petrol (gasoline) and oil.
The flame fougasse was developed by the British Petroleum Warfare
Department in response to the threat of German invasion during World
War II.
"
"
The November 1944 issue of the US War Department Intelligence Bulletin
refers to 'Fougasse flame throwers' used in the Russian defence at
Stalingrad being the basis of a German version found in Italy that
were buried with a fixed direction discharge tube and integrated with
conventional landmines and barbed wire in defense works. The German
weapon, the Abwehrflammenwerfer 42 had an 8 gallon fuel tank and the
seven in the installation were wired back to a control point and could
be fired individually or together.
"
Noite that this explains Rob's "phoo bombs" perfectly well. Of course,
the Abwehrflammenwerfer 42 has the disadvantage of not feeding into
his lies and insanity, and therefore it's replaced in his world with
bad science fiction.
Dan
Actually a variation of napalm was used by the Germans in WW1 in
flamethrowers.
scottl...@ix.netcom.com
> Actually a variation of napalm was used by the Germans in WW1 in
> flamethrowers.
Was is made using actual, factual Vril saucer squeezin's?
Ian B MacLure
[snip]
> Actually a variation of napalm was used by the Germans in WW1 in
> flamethrowers.
Or in WWI where the Germans also used flamethrowers.
IBM
Rob Arndt
Morin, go back and read item 4 on the US document. It states that the
PHOO BOMBS were unmanned anti-formation ramming a/c, remote-controlled
from the ground or air, that had a speed of 525 mph and endurance of
estimated 25 minutes. They are listed as have been witnessed by
hundreds of airmen and have toyed with the bombers. They were lusted
as BOMBS b/c the Allied thought was that they would be loaded with
explosives to detonate inside the formation- an aerial flakmine.
Not so... but still WHAT unmanned remote-controlled 525 mph a/c did
the LW have in inventory to perform these attacks?
And WHY label them PHOO BOMBS instead of giving them a designation?
They are exactly as the USAAF and RAF described as Foo Fighters.
Don't you feel like a fool?
And of course I shoved it in Lowther's face that NAPALM was Allied.
The PHOO BOMB Allied term did not refer to German NAPALM but aircraft
threat.
Go back and learn to read, you idiot.
Rob
Rob Arndt
Another idiot that cannot read the Allied document and its description
of PHOO BOMB as an unmanned, remote-control, anti-bomber formation
AIRCRAFT used by the Germans.
Also, firedamp was the Austrian and German version for experiemntal
aerial gas attacks to ignite bomber engines. Austria experimented with
these since 1936 and the Germans had several experiments with firedamp
artillery shells, a cannon (Pandora used in the Warsaw Ghetto), and
the SS firedamp bomb mixing it with LOX and a reagent.
NONE of those is used in Allied Intel as PHOO BOMB. PHOO comes from
Foo which came from Feu.
It's utterly amazing that you guys ask for proof and when provided
still cling to your absurd theories or make other invalid comparisons.
Again, go back and read item 4 on the Intel document.
Rob
Rob Arndt
Maybe it was used in Miranda's V-7 aerial flakmine hoax ;)
Still licking Miranda's ass, Scott?
Rob
Rob Arndt
> Dan <B24...@aol.com> wrote innews:Kgwrn.19184$y13....@newsfe12.iad:
>
> � � � � [snip]
>
> > � �Actually a variation of napalm was used by the Germans in WW1 in
> > flamethrowers.
>
> � � � � Or in WWI where the Germans also used flamethrowers.
>
> � � � � IBM
Flamethrowers have NOTHING to do with the PHOO BOMB description as
outlined in the Allied Intel report I provided. So another moron
jumping on the bandwagon of willful stupidity. the PHOO BOMB
description is one of an unmanned, remote-controlled, 525 mph a/c used
for anti-formation disruption witnessed by hundreds of airmen. WHERE
is the connection to NAPALM, which was an ALLIED weapon used against
the Germans and Japanese???
Go ahead, explain how ALLIED intel is now wroing and confused an
aerial weapon as NAPALM, you fucking fool.
Rob
scottl...@ix.netcom.com
> Again, go back and read item 4 on the Intel document.
I see you making claims but not providing evidence. The usual Arndt
approach. Couple that to your predilection for perversion, I think
it's pretty clear that you are certifiable.
Rob Arndt
Really? Repost:
Item 4 US Documents: PHOO BOMB
Refs:
Newspaper reported:
http://antarctica.greyfalcon.us/pictures/Foo-04.gif
http://discaircraft.greyfalcon.us/picturesf/foo1000.jpg
US Documents:
http://hitlersflyingsaucers.greyfalcon.us/rosetta.html
Also, idiot, NAPALM (naphthenic and palmitic acids) was an ALLIED
WEAPON first used against the Germans in 1944:
On July 17, 1944, napalm incendiary bombs were dropped for the first
time by 14 American P-38 Lightning aircraft of the 402nd Fighter
Squadron / 370th Fighter Group on a fuel depot at Coutances, near St.
L France.
The Germans, however, invented the vacuum bomb (aka first FAEs):
Official References to the German Vacuum Bomb
Headquarters United States Strategic Air Forces In Europe Office of
the Director of Intelligence:
An Evaluation Of German Capabilities In 1945
CIOS Report:
Interrogation of Dr. Hans Friedrich Gold
GFYS Scott,
Rob
p.s. Please give exact reasons WHY any of these refs are wrong, You
can't and are proven a liar who is trying to convert an unmanned,
remote controlled anti-bomber formation AIRCRAFT of German origin into
NAPALM. Neither the newspapers nor the US documents (on the PHOO BOMBS
or the vacuum bombs) state any connection with NAPALM. BTW, love the
Miranda work in old Antarctic Press comics with the busty LW babes!!!
And his V-7 Flakmine hoax exposed- WHAT, no reply??? You are an
imbecile, Scott, who previously over the years stated that you hated
German paper projects and put down German technology in all areas- now
you are peddling German paper projects and also technology articles on
your blog. At least I am consistant with my beliefs and work- you are
a fraud.
scottl...@ix.netcom.com
>
> GFYS Scott,
Sorry, Rob, you're the pervert around here. I'll leave it to you to
try that. I'm sure you've already given it the ol' college try.
> p.s. Please give exact reasons WHY any of these refs are wrong,
Because they are simply the claims made by stressed out pilots in
combat situations seeing things they cannot explain. "I saw something
vague and distant that I cannot explain" =/ "it's a radio controleld
flying saucer capable of 525 miles per hour."
>You are an
> imbecile, Scott, who previously over the years stated that you hated
> German paper projects
Nope. Wrong on both counts. But that's hardly something new for you.
Dan
<snip>
At least I am consistant with my beliefs and work- you are
> a fraud.
Is that right, Xenia/Jon/Blond Valkyrie/Watch This Space? Tell us
about those "several patents" you said you hold.
Ian B MacLure
d19d55...@h4g2000pre.googlegroups.com:
Wasn't talking about phoo bombs I was talking about flamethrowers.
Pointed out that there were jellied gasoline weapons around earlier
than was proposed.
And the Foo FIghter was a tag used for the Me-163 Komet
Oh and lest I forget, yer a phoolish phukwit.
IBM
LIBERATOR
> On Mar 25, 8:26 pm, Rob Arndt <teuton...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > On Mar 25, 2:15 pm, "David E. Powell" <David_Powell3...@msn.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > Enough. If Germany had anything like this they would have thrown it
> > > into the fight, and people would have known about it by now.
>
> > What exactly would YOU know of the entire German flugscheiben
> > development in WW2 and even pre-war? These type discs were only
> > experimentals and prone to severe instability. They used a celestial
> > navigation system and an EMG engine that was the most advanced aerial
> > technology in the world. Only 7 of the Haunebu series were ever
> > produced and the Haunebu III was kept in reserves for transport duties
> > in 1945....
> > Rob
>
> Note Robert Goddard's interest in 1906.
> Electrostatic ion propulsion was fairly popular with amateur model
> makers in the 20's and 30's, but like insect wings it doesn't scale up
> well and is power-limited by parasitic corona discharge, which worsens
> with altitude and relative humidity (clouds).
>
> Works fine in space, though.
>
> jsw
Lies staged to keep fame from arriving where it belongs, with the 3rd
Reich & Hitler.
LIBERATOR
> craft dating back to 1908 and continuing postwar. I have already gone
> through the patents and secret craft of Lockheed, Republic, Northrop,
> Boeing, NASA, Sukhanov, MiG, and others like the circular UAVs now
> operating in Afghanistan and Iraq plus the police versions used in the
> UK, Germany, etc...
>
> The problem with such craft is the science. Tesla was working on
> designs for electrogravitational a/c in the 1930s along with his
> broadcast power craft. the Nazis had his material, German quantum
> physics, SS Technical Branch resources, and the metaphysical science
> of Thule/Vril. Very complicated arrangement mixing Metaphysical
> science with the boundries of 1940s science and applying quantum
> physics- all under SS supervision.
>
> I get annoyed having to post links ot terrestrial historical craft,
> the German craft, the postwar rush for German scientists and the West
> to get patents for disc aircraft both civilian and military when there
> was NO REQUIREMENT FOR SUCH A CRAFT. The mere fact that immediately
> postwar the US was worried about the Soviets manufacturing the Ho
> XVIII and disc craft based on Schauberger's models should tell us
> something is suspicious. Add the German rush for patents after the 10
> year ban and that is amazing since none of those individuals worked
> with each other and were spread out all over the Reich! The Germans
> that went to Argentina must have been transported by disc craft too as
> declassified reports from the late 1940s (especially from 1946-47)
> report these type of craft over their skies. And then came Roswell in
> NM where secret German technology was being tested. Coincidence? No.
>
> Other disc images come from Canada where AVRO Canada was working on
> disc craft postwar based on German designs and the US had to go up
> there and interfere to make sure the Canadians failed and that the
> program got shut down so that the Canadian specialists would come to
> the US to work on US disc craft.
>
> There is so much real history that is beyond official US Govt history
> that it makes me sick. The USAAF/USAF had admitted LYING about the
> PHOO BOMBS and German DISC AIRCRAFT, and THREE versions of the Roswell
> craft in 6 decades!!!
>
> They also suppressed information on Germany's MBB/DASA/EADS stealth a/
> c.
>
> So do I trust anything the USAF has to say? No.
>
> I laugh MFAO at the USAF when it attacked Saddam's German and Yugoslav
> built Q4 Superbunker with 80 tons of ordnance including the bunker
> busters and didn't even scratch it as the main GERMAN dsigner foretold
> in advance. Germany had bunker busters in WW2- the Rochling AC shell
> made of titanium, chromium, and vanadium. The US didn't invent a/c
> revolver cannons, AAMs, bunker busters, stealth, and a wide range of
> other tech they claim- Germany did in WW2.
>
> So fuck the USAF and idiots that stick to official histories.
>
> In fact, go try to find out about the 1942 Battle of Los Angeles and
> the disc craft involved. No word from the USAAF on that or US Govt.
> But they failed to down it.
>
> Rob-
Robbie, as history betrayingly gives credit to Einstein as the
ultimate presence responsible for discovery and progressing quantum
physics, would the true name be Max Planck and/or Viktor Schauberger?
I know Einstein is not the true source, but what German name would be
the "Einstein" name that truly deserves the credit?
LIBERATOR
> Jim Wilkins wrote:
> > On Mar 25, 8:26 pm, Rob Arndt <teuton...@aol.com> wrote:
> >> On Mar 25, 2:15 pm, "David E. Powell" <David_Powell3...@msn.com>
> >> wrote:
>
> >>> Enough. If Germany had anything like this they would have thrown it
> >>> into the fight, and people would have known about it by now.
> >> What exactly would YOU know of the entire German flugscheiben
> >> development in WW2 and even pre-war? These type discs were only
> >> experimentals and prone to severe instability. They used a celestial
> >> navigation system and an EMG engine that was the most advanced aerial
> >> technology in the world. Only 7 of the Haunebu series were ever
> >> produced and the Haunebu III was kept in reserves for transport duties
> >> in 1945....
> >> Rob
>
> > Is it similar to this?
> >http://science.nasa.gov/newhome/headlines/prop06apr99_2.htm
> > Note Robert Goddard's interest in 1906.
> > Electrostatic ion propulsion was fairly popular with amateur model
> > makers in the 20's and 30's, but like insect wings it doesn't scale up
> > well and is power-limited by parasitic corona discharge, which worsens
> > with altitude and relative humidity (clouds).
>
> > Works fine in space, though.
>
> > jsw
>
> everyone can understand. This is because she hasn't a clue about basic
> science and mathematics. Still, she does serve as comic relief at times.
> We can't discuss REAL military aviation all the time, can we?
>
> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired-
..u see, I knew he was a she... even Dan knows....
LIBERATOR
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Examples everyone can understand:
>
> 2) German Disc Aircraft of WW2:http://discaircraft.greyfalcon.us/index.html
> 3) Postwar Disc Aircraft:http://www.laesieworks.com/ifo/index.html
>
> And this is just for starters :)
>
Eeews!
LIBERATOR
>
> Tesla was working on
>
> > designs for electrogravitational a/c in the 1930s along with his
> > broadcast power craft. the Nazis had his material, German quantum
> > physics, SS Technical Branch resources, and the metaphysical science
> > of Thule/Vril. Very complicated arrangement mixing Metaphysical
> > science with the boundries of 1940s science and applying quantum
> > physics- all under SS supervision.
>
> electromagnetism. You already know that having been told many times, but
> keep trotting it out and you'll keep looking foolish.
>
> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
Tesla is a phony, stratagem for stolen Nazi treasures!
LIBERATOR
<scottlowt...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> On Mar 25, 11:38 pm, Rob Arndt <teuton...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > Dan, you ask for proof and I have the document on the Phoo Bombs ...
>
> Jesus tapdancing Christ. You're *again* trotting out napalm ("Phoo
> Bombs") as proof of Nazi antigravity flying saucers?
You have video of Hitler, I mean me tapdancing?
Where? lemmeee see!
LIBERATOR
> On Mar 25, 11:46 pm, "scottlowt...@ix.netcom.com"
>
> <scottlowt...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> > On Mar 25, 11:38 pm, Rob Arndt <teuton...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > Dan, you ask for proof and I have the document on the Phoo Bombs ...
>
> > Jesus tapdancing Christ. You're *again* trotting out napalm ("Phoo
> > Bombs") as proof of Nazi antigravity flying saucers?
>
>
> Foo Fighter Word Etymology:
>
> encountered the German land-based and launched WNF Feuerball and AEG
> Kugelwaffen weapons in the skies over occupied France in late 1944
> they were simply called "Fire Fighters" due to their intense glow or
> "burn" in the sky. In the WNF Feuerball this was the chemical burn
> ring that caused an intense electrostatic field at close proximity to
> the daylight bombers. With the AEG Kugelwaffen, the glow or burn was
> considered part of the propulsion system which was suspected of being
> a mercury-plasma type.
>
> As word spread of these mystery weapons the word Fire got changed
> several times:
>
> 1) Since the "Fire Fighters" appeared over France, the French word for
> fire was adopted- "Feu Fighter"
>
> 2) Too complicated for the Allied airmen, the USAF changed that to
> "Foo"- a crude reference to the Smokey Stover comic of a bumbling
> fireman that actually started fires and had a catchphrase of "Where
> there's foo, there's fire". So, the mystery weapons became known as
> "Foo Fighters". The RAF simply called them Kraut Meteors instead.
>
> 3) To hide the fact that these were German weapons, US Intel
> designated them in official military documents as "PHOO BOMBS"
> starting in December 1944. This has foiled FOIA document researchers
> for decades until a declassifed 1944 document concerning possible
> German Capabilities in 1945 revealed the code words and matching
> precise description. Perhaps they labeled them BOMBS as many believed
> this was a flying flak weapon, or aerial mine... which later proved to
> be a false assumption.
>
> Refs:
>
> Newspaper reported:http://antarctica.greyfalcon.us/pictures/Foo-04.gifhttp://discaircraft.greyfalcon.us/picturesf/foo1000.jpg
>
> US Documents:http://hitlersflyingsaucers.greyfalcon.us/rosetta.html
>
> Also, idiot, NAPALM (naphthenic and palmitic acids) was an ALLIED
> WEAPON first used against the Germans in 1944:
>
> On July 17, 1944, napalm incendiary bombs were dropped for the first
> time by 14 American P-38 Lightning aircraft of the 402nd Fighter
> Squadron / 370th Fighter Group on a fuel depot at Coutances, near St.
> L France.
>
> The Germans, however, invented the vacuum bomb (aka first FAEs):
>
> Official References to the German Vacuum Bomb
>
> Headquarters United States Strategic Air Forces In Europe Office of
> the Director of Intelligence:
>
> An Evaluation Of German Capabilities In 1945
>
> CIOS Report:
>
> Interrogation of Dr. Hans Friedrich Gold
>
> GFYS Scott,
> Rob
Robbie, I believe they existed, but they aren't reported as causing
the bombers to crash, so what did they actually do if anything other
than track an airplane and fly next to it using advanced propulsion?
That no report exists of these achieving anything, it's not a great
subject matter.
LIBERATOR
> On 26/03/2010 8:53, Dan wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Rob Arndt wrote:
> >>> I suppose referencing your own blog makes sense to you. Keep trying
> >>> and maybe you can explain why no one has made a man sized disc aircraft
> >>> powered by anything other than fossil fuels. The war ended in 1945 and
> >>> science has progressed to the point non governmental activities could
> >>> duplicate anything the Nazis actually did, so where are the flying
> >>> saucers?
>
> >>> I have asked you many times why the U.S. military has never used your
> >>> fantasy aircraft to save lives since WW2. You never have answered. The
> >>> answer is simple, they don't exist. You tell us they are "classified for
> >>> 75 years" and "you can't trust the U.S. military," but never explain how
> >>> you know all about them. What will you tell us when the 75 years are up
> >>> and there is no information backing you up?
>
>
> >>> - Show quoted text -
>
>
> An ion thruster is a form of electric propulsion used for spacecraft
> propulsion that creates thrust by accelerating ions. Ion thrusters are
> categorized by how they accelerate the ions, using either electrostatic
> or electromagnetic force. Electrostatic ion thrusters use the Coulomb
> force and accelerate the ions in the direction of the electric field.
> Electromagnetic ion thrusters use the Lorentz force to accelerate the
> ions. Note that the term "ion thruster" frequently denotes the
> electrostatic or gridded ion thrusters, only.
>
>
> Propellants
>
> Ionization energy represents a very large percentage of the energy
> needed to run ion drives. The ideal propellant for ion drives is thus a
> propellant molecule or atom with a high mass/ionisation energy ratio. In
> addition, the propellant should not cause erosion of the thruster to any
> great degree to permit long life; and should not contaminate the vehicle.
>
> Many current designs use xenon gas due to its low ionisation energy,
> reasonably high atomic number, inert nature, and low erosion. However,
> xenon is globally in short supply and very expensive.
>
> Older designs used mercury, but this is toxic and expensive, and tended
> to contaminate the vehicle with the metal.
>
Eeew! Robin should marry Robbie!
Robin, if you know anything about Red Mercury please be defiant to the
suppressors and disclose what you can!
LIBERATOR
<keithnos...@kwillshaw.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> "Robin" <b.ro...@neurol.org> wrote in message
Hmmm, what about ionization used for flying saucers, where the shell
of the saucer is ionized twice one layer eats the other for propulsion
of which the saucers glow? Or is what I just said not correct?
LIBERATOR
LOL, right on Jim.
LIBERATOR
Robbie is always right!