Re: Lifter (fwd)

["High Voltage list" <hvlist@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Original poster: Steven Roys <sroys@xxxxxxxxxx>



---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 10:34:23 -0600
From: Dr. Resonance <resonance@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: High Voltage list <hvlist@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Lifter (fwd)



Our KREW (Kinetic Resonance Energy Weapon) was fired several times at our 
fall Teslathon in front of hundreds of people including Steve Ward, Terry 
Blake, et.al.  We don't discuss our govt work on any internet formum such as 
the TC mailing list.  We prefer to do this work "quietly" for obvious 
reasons.  Losing funding is perhaps the best one.  With my labors costs, 
insurance, work comp ins., etc., without proper funding I can not work on 
projects.

Our initial Tesla rifle design is now being developed by an independent 
company presently under contract with the DOD for possible overseas 
deployment.  You will hear more about this in the media in the next 12 
months.

Your description of our lifter is accurate.  We developed two versions ---  
one with small batt pack totally self sufficient and the second runs off a 
ground power supply.  The first is now being considered for some military 
applications so at present I'm not at liberty to discuss any technical specs 
other than that it does work.  Biggest problem is trying to keep it 
hovering --- it likes to drift off in all directions --- at present not very 
controllable.

Unfortunately, due to a huge summer work load for museums, I'm not doing 
much work on these projects right now --- just not enough time and funding 
to do it.  Perhaps later this fall or when I get to my winter home in 
Tucson, AZ, I will find more time to tinker with it.

Regards,

D.C. Cox

Dr. Resonance


>
> Please clarify the configuration of your lifter so there can be no
> misunderstanding:
>
> 1. The lifter's sole source of power is a chemical battery ("power pack")
> supplying DC current to the HV power supply;
> 2. The battery is mounted on or in the lifter structure, and remains in
> place during the lifter's flight;
> 3. During flight, the lifter is not tethered to the ground, nor any other
> surface or object; and no other power source is used to provide additional
> lift (helium balloon, compressed air jet, etc)
> 4. The lifter is able to generate sufficient thrust with its on-board 
> power
> supply to raise the entire lifter assembly, with power supply, battery, 
> etc,
> off the "ground" and maintain flight or hover for at least 5 seconds.
>
> Have I stated the description of the hardware and the flight conditions
> correctly?
>
> Please forgive me if I sound sceptical, but some form of verification
> (photos, technical description, specific performance criteria, etc) would
> help this reader accept these claims as factual.
>
> I seem to remember previous claims of a "Tesla rifle" directed energy 
> device
> and a "Kinetic Resonance Energy Weapon" that (apparently) were never 
> backed
> up with credible evidence and quickly faded into oblivion (Tesla Coil
> Mailing List, August 14, 2004).
>
> Regards,
> Scott Hanson
> (Septical in So Cal)
>
> ---- Original Message ----- 
> From: "High Voltage list" <hvlist@xxxxxxxxxx>
> To: "hvlist" <hvlist@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Monday, May 22, 2006 6:45 AM
> Subject: Re: Lifter (fwd)
>
>
>> Original poster: Steven Roys <sroys@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 09:27:17 -0600
>> From: Dr. Resonance <resonance@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> To: High Voltage list <hvlist@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> Subject: Re: Lifter (fwd)
>>
>>
>>
>> Wrong.
>>
>> Resonance Research Corp. has a 60 kV Electrothrust lifter that is powered
>> by
>> a power pack (battery) that lifts itself and additional weight.  It is
>> totally self-contained --- not tethered to the ground.  At present we are
>> investigating marketing options for this device --- possible military
>> applications.  We are also investigating the best "steering mechanisms"
>> for
>> our new flyer.
>>
>> Electrostatic fields do not require high current only high voltage so a
>> heavy transformer is not required.  Our transformer units weigh less than
>> 8
>> oz.
>>
>> Dr. Resonance
>>
>>>
>>> No one to date has made a lifter that is self contained in the public
>>> sector.
>>>
>>>
>>> Key to reducing the weight is the elimination of the transformer and
>>> almost all magnetics in general. Simply put, magnets are heavy, too
>>> heavy.
>>> Older systems may have used transformers (deSeversky, Brown Biefeld,
>>> etc).
>>> However, the power source was on the ground.
>>>
>>> Another key is getting the efficiency up. LiPo batteries reduce the
>>> weight
>>> and increase the efficiency for a power source. However, processing the
>>> power into the high voltage needed requires a very lightweight diode and
>>> cap network. The diodes are there. Even with high tech caps (ultravolt
>>> etc), the Cockroft-walton multiplier cannot meet the performance
>>> criteria.
>>>
>>> Piezoelectrics are still in their infancy. This alternative may be 
>>> viable
>>> in the coming year or two, but will be outdistanced by higher
>>> efficiencies
>>> and lower weight.
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>