Green lady and the auroras borealis...

a reply to: nobel

gotta pic of that model you're talking about. I love models. especially the ones with the long legs.

PM? a reply to: BASSPLYR

a reply to: nobel

sure PM the model pic. hope she's naked or dressed naughty. but I'm sure the other fellas on this thread would enjoy seeing any pics of models so why not post em here.

a reply to: nobel

sure PM the model pic. hope she's naked or dressed naughty. but I'm sure the other fellas on this thread would enjoy seeing any pics of models so why not post em here.

a reply to: BASSPLYR

if it is a commercial model then just post it, or send me the pic and i'll post it.

i don't fear reciprocities from 3 letter types

a reply to: penroc3

we hope it's a commercial model other wise what good is it. the best models are the ones actually working. I'm not interested in William Morris rejects.

a reply to: BASSPLYR

i didn't mean that as a reply to you.

but the statement still stands.

a reply to: penroc3

hell yeah it still holds. we wanna see models.

You need the NSW version of "Picture magazine"..Qld version is tamed down..Cursed censors...
Best models are the final versions of the windtunnel versions..Give you a great idea of the aerodynamics needed..As Zaph has said wing and fuselage shape give you a good indication of role..Fast movers are nearly always pointy with delta wings..BB was very typical of the Concorde way of doing it..Copper Coast I thought was a waverider design where the body is a lifting body with short wings..X56 maybe?

a reply to: Blackfinger

ooooooh. me likes picture magazine. qld censors stuff? not very smart for the "smart state"

my favorite models have sleek curves with a thin fuselage. no onboard computer necessary.

Something like this rendering of the SR72: Inside America’s next spyplane

Notice the tail on this depiction. IT resembles what was shown on the windtunnel image of what I mean to remember was the L-301 undergoing tests by NASA. The one from the office I can’t seem to find on the interwebs anymore..

originally posted by: Zaphod58

originally posted by: nobel
That some notable members either declines to join the discussion, or avoids the question might be evidence that this could be something worth looking into..

People put way too much stock in things like this. Sometimes people that know simply want to sit back and see where things go, or simply don't want to join in on a discussion for reasons that are their own.

I couldn't say it better.

a reply to: nobel
Problem is there has been so many startup projects/companies and ideas its hard to nail down what is just fantasies and what is nuts and bolts.

Funny how there are as many interpretations of the original thread as there are people who have read it. I fully understand the sentiment that was expressed about watching people wander close to the truth and then lose the plot. Even though I don't know the truth, it's easy to see the genesis of certain ideas.

The eponymous "weird sighting" that started the whole thing was just of a large and fast unknown aircraft, with a strobing green light that was probably intended to foil observation via NVG.

Probably needs be in the Space forum but found this interesting..
Air Breathing Electric Thruster