It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Inventor Poised to Release Self Sustaining Electric Amphibious Vehicle

page: 1

log in


posted on Dec, 25 2012 @ 01:51 AM
looks interesting Article calls it "perpetual motion but the inventor calls it "self-sustaining energy" by a "super high-performance, electro mechanical gyro generator system." So will this one make it to market or fade away like all the rest so far... Says they are due to undergo 3rd party testing By the University of Plymouth or other university in the next few weeks....

Chris Garner has released prototype of his first amphibious vehicle
He claims it is powered by what he describes as 'Gyro Generator' technology that he says will revolutionise the way we travel...

He came up with the idea for his range of personal marines after a close encounter with a large shark.
But now concept designer Chris Garner is also preparing for coming face-to-face with predators on land - with his first attempt at an amphibious craft.
But he claims that is not the remarkable aspect of his new Explorer MSV.

Read more: gy.html#ixzz2G2z91YCs

I checked PESN and they did a write up on it too:

The company, MSVEX, is presently running in-house tests, which they expect to be completed in about a week. After that, they will be doing third-party testing to validate the technology, probably at the University of Plymouth (UK), or another university, depending on available facilities.

edit on 25-12-2012 by hawkiye because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 25 2012 @ 02:35 AM

Originally posted by hawkiye
Says they are due to undergo 3rd party testing By the University of Plymouth or other university in the next few weeks....

Rather interesting, as you say.
Reading the page, it even says...

Addendum to last mail I ran some more tests on the GGS today with a couple of ratio adjustments giving me 120% for 1hr.
This would have been longer but intercooler housing needs larger input to ensure even temp regulation. No big deal as all is needed to deal with this is a marginally smaller gauge inlet and marginally larger outlet to the intercooler housing to balance the system.

But I cant help but wonder why all these "free energy" machine inventors seem to need to get third party verification of the tests. In any other field, you'd just make a brilliant machine and sell billions of them.

Why, oh why, is there always the desire to have a University double check some tests?
FFS, just make it and sell it!!!

posted on Dec, 25 2012 @ 08:29 AM
reply to post by alfa1

I think the issue is that they want to sell these things to people who are at least technologically aware enough, that they know that its claims of sustaining its own energy are questionable, since the laws that dictate all kinetic transfer of energy from one purpose to another, suggest that this is impossible. Your average goon will not purchase, for example, this amphibious device, because your average goon does not give a fig about whats happening under the ocean. Regular folk just want to get to work and back without paying a faceless corperate entity thousands of pounds a year.

A righteous goal to be sure, but this device is specifically aimed at undersea interest groups. This is a group of minds who HAVE, by thier very nature, to be tech savy, and aware of the engineering aspects of craft design, under sea operation, and so on.

Other devices that have made comparable claims, have been isolated engines, whose sole purpose is to prove a point about energy conservation, and to do this, they also have had to undergo peer review, because they were built specifically to pass those reviews (wether they have or not is not the point, that is what they were created to do).

And honestly, even the average joe these days will question an engine that requires no fuel in order to run, no initial outlay of money or other material resource in order to power it. So even the man on the street will want some proof before spending the no doubt considerable sum, that such an engine would have attatched to it. People want to know the product they are buying is going to perform as they would wish, and as advertised. There is no way to prove these things to most people, without resorting to peer review.

Personally speaking, if someone told me "Right Pete, heres the deal. I have an engine which will never need petrol, never need a battery change, require no constant outlay what so ever, and all you have to do to attain this marvel of engineering, is place in my hand twenty thousand pounds !"(just to yank a figure out of the air) then I would look at them sideways, and then say "First, I am a pauper, so on that score, your bang out of luck. And second, even if I had such a pretty penny, what can you do to prove to me that your engine works the way you say? Where is your accreditation, and how come none of the monthly science and tech publications to which I subscribe have mentioned your device, since it clearly violates various principles of physics and engineering? Surely such a wonder machine would warrant note in such publications?".

As the salesman realises hes lost out, all for down to a) me having a bank account that next to never actually contains money and b) the ability to sell to this individual on a mans word and a handshake alone being somewhat less than he would like, I would witness his face fall, and his shoulders begin to stoop, and notice him fingering the small bottle of whiskey that he thinks he has hidden in his blazers inside breast pocket, but that I can clearly see the outline of, despite the shapeless cut of his jacket.

As he is calling his boss to complain that he cannot be expected to sell the device under such circumstances, and demanding to know why there is no accreditation attatched to the device, no proof of concept he can offer the layman, that they can believe, I will be walking away intrigued but unconvinced.

You have to consider that ANY device which allows the total removal of fuel cost from running a vehicle, of any type or purpose, is going to cost serious money. Therefore, people are going to want it to come with garuntees and proofs of its performance. The only way to prove to people that a device works, is to ask people who would be able to tell, wether it does or not, to offer thier backing to it as a functional peice of design.

Another thing is that many people who have come up with designs for fuel free engines, have not been super rich and capable of funding a mass production of thier product themselves. Often these folks are backyard and garage enthusiasts who have an idea, and have built a good prototype, but lack the funding to produce en masse, the device they have come up with. To gain that funding, they have to prove thier design does what they say it does, and to do that, one often requires the backing of a university or other experts.


log in