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.


Libertango Corvette Nano

page: 1

log in


posted on Jan, 19 2013 @ 08:20 PM
The 2014 Corvette Stingray has been unveiled and contains generous portions of engineered nano particles.

Carbon Fiber: The Secret of the 2014 Corvette

Health and Safety: Fibers

The Boeing 787 Dreamliner has just recently been grounded worldwide. Originally it relied heavily on carbon fiber (23,000 tons of it) in order to be lighter, similar to the 2014 Corvette.

Carbon Fiber Making Inroads In New Applications Despite Safety Concerns

Carbon fiber is different from metal; it does not visibly show cracks and fatigue.

A few years ago, a former senior aerospace engineer at Boeing’s Phantom Works research unit, Vince Weldon, went public with concerns that the 787 Dreamliner was unsafe. He claimed that “in a crash landing that would be survivable in a metal airplane, the new jet’s innovative composite plastic materials will shatter too easily and burn with toxic fumes.”

“The brittleness of the plastic material from which the 787 fuselage is built would create a more severe impact shock to passengers than an aluminum plane, which absorbs impact in a crash by crumpling. A crash also could shatter the plastic fuselage, creating a hole that would allow smoke and toxic fumes to fill the passenger cabin.

After such a crash landing, the composite plastic material burning in a jet-fuel fire would create ‘highly toxic smoke and tiny inhalable carbon slivers’ that ‘would likely seriously incapacitate or kill passengers.’”

Boeing 787 Dreamliner is Grounded Worldwide by Regulators/Jan. 17, 2013

Carbon fiber and other nano materials are being used wholesale in just about everything without tests for safety. I've presented 3 items here: the new Corvette (although some nano has been used since 2005), the Boeing Dreamliner and bycicles. This is just a small sampling of the products we all offer ourselves as guinea pigs for. And pay for the privilege. Carbon fiber is electrically conductive and tends to be brittle.

The old Corvette (pre-nano)...keep recycling...feel the love and the seduction:

edit on 19-1-2013 by luxordelphi because: correct first link

posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 04:29 PM
The very very tiny particles used in the production of the Dreamliner, the current Corvette and assorted bicycles are lab created. They don't exist in nature. The question might be: how long will they persist? Would there be a point of spontaneous disintegration?

posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 04:49 PM
What is the deal on toxicity? It is like micro fiberglass.

posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 05:51 PM
reply to post by cavtrooper7

Micro fiberglass (spheres, balloons) is dangerous if inhaled. It can cut you up inside. Here, the authors and experts are talking about nano size carbon in composite which would become available to breathe in an accident or fire. It is comparable to asbestos as far as internal particle behavior. Safety guidelines have only recently been issued (April of this year 2013) and their issuance is concurrent with the industry now claiming that creating the particles in a more stubby shape and seeing to it that their nature enables them to remain in biological solution and separate from each other does away with these issues.

Back in 2008 or so when some of the studies on the dangers of these particles began to surface, the industry did the same thing - calling the studies inconclusive or just suppressing them entirely. Similar to GMO, it was also decided, in this industry friendly world, that labelling with the words nano or ultra-fine would be detrimental, so most things are not labelled.

The industry is new (1990's) so apparent spontaneous disintegration (without accident or flame) in the right conditions - whatever those may be - hasn't really been considered. We are all familiar with outgassing in various forms and conditions but not really in this context at all.

posted on Jul, 10 2013 @ 01:35 AM
reply to post by luxordelphi

Sounds like an accident would produce a carbon "cloud" of material inside a vehicle where it's body and interior are composed of the same carbon.

posted on Jul, 10 2013 @ 03:16 AM
reply to post by cavtrooper7

You have the jist of it. In addition would be the brittleness of the fiber so that it would just break. The 777 with its' comparatively small amount of fiber has had problems with parts falling off. Some bike repair shops won't even work with it, especially when strategically located in high stress areas. And, finally, the electrical properties. It conducts electricity so loose particles will short out electrical components.

It doesn't show cracks but does deteriorate (altitude is a factor) by somehow forming water pockets under the surface leading to less integrity. That's the problem that Boeing supposedly solved with the Dreamliner but there isn't any internet information that I can find relating to how it was solved. Or, more importantly, how the solution was tested.

posted on Jul, 25 2013 @ 02:01 PM
Maybe this thread doesn't belong in medical conspiracies BUT I think that foisting untested nano onto an unsuspecting public is a health hazard. The Dreamliner is in the news again:

FAA to airlines - remove or inspect Boeing 787 beacons

with a pertinent quote from the article:

The Dreamliner's fuselage is made of carbon-fibre composite, a material that burns at a lower temperature than the aluminium alloy used in traditional aircraft designs. The fire has set up the first test of a major repair of the jet, which industry experts say airlines will be watching closely to determine both the length of time required and the cost to fix the jet's body.

The story is basically that a parked Dreamliner experienced spontaneous combustion of some kind which damaged the fuselage. The damaged area is made of the carbon composite and now needs to be repaired. The same sort of repair that some bicycle repair shops refuse to do on bikes containing this material because of the brittle nature of the composite.

posted on Jul, 25 2013 @ 02:14 PM
reply to post by luxordelphi

Carbon fiber has been used on cars for a while now....Search Lamborghini and carbon fiber.....Most supercars are made almost all out of carbon fiber because of the durability and very lightweight....

Search youtube (can't at work right now) and watch the video of the carbon fiber hood being driven over by a jeep and not breaking.....This should be seen as an advance, not guinea pigs!

It has been used for a really long time now, sorry if this is new to you.....

posted on Jul, 25 2013 @ 02:59 PM
reply to post by Chrisfishenstein

It has been used for a really long time now, sorry if this is new to you.....

Testing of the Dreamliner utilizing the population at large is a current event. In my OP, which you failed to read, I mentioned dates within the 2000's that saw the initiation of tentative forays into the use of this material. There were stops and starts - changing the shape and size in order to prevent further mishaps.

The Dreamliner saw gobs of this material used - far more than the 777, which also has had fuselage problems coincidental with one of the places carbon composite was put into play on that craft.

The possibility of spontaneous combustion or spontaneous disintegration at 30,000 feet, fully loaded (that means passengers), is not a safe way to test this material. But, heck, go back to You Tube and marvel at the wonders of science.

posted on Jul, 26 2013 @ 03:35 PM
reply to post by luxordelphi

Apparently you didn't read, just as I didnt.....The reason for me if you read is I can't watch videos....Hence the reason I said to go to youtube instead of linking the video...

Yeah the plane could be unsafe, but you are also speaking about a corvette......Which is more my talk, cars......Don't really care about the planes.....

But a good way to derail your own thread is by insulting posters in it.....So congrats on the 4 responses.....This plays a huge role in the reason why

posted on Jul, 27 2013 @ 12:38 PM
reply to post by Chrisfishenstein

Sorry if you felt did I when you said:

It has been used for a really long time now, sorry if this is new to you.....

and I apologize for my knee jerk reaction. Truth is, since I started this thread I have had big BIG problems which are ongoing. Avoiding these problems was my hope in originally hiding the Dreamliner behind the corvette and bicycles and the tango but all that has been to no avail. So, I'm a little touchy and hope you will forgive.

I saw a graphic online which I can't find again. It showed the amounts of composite in the 777 compared to the Dreamliner, the 787. On the one hand, some of the wing and fuselage and some other areas were composite but in the Dreamliner it was almost all. The corvette has also seen an escalation in the use of this composite.

I found stories online of bicycles which had problems when the composite was used in places like the steering column but almost every week brings spontaneous combustion stories about the Dreamliner. Here are a few more from the past week:

Oven On A Boeing 787 Dreamliner Catches Fire In Midair

Qatar grounds a 787 as glitches pile up on Boeing jet

The airline and Boeing Co declined to give further details but industry sources said they were treating seriously reports that the aircraft had been grounded for days after smoke was seen near an electrical panel.

The 787 has suffered a spate of mishaps in recent weeks, including a spontaneous fire on an Ethiopian Airlines-owned 787 that broke out while the plane was parked at a remote stand at London's Heathrow airport for eight hours on July 12.

new topics

top topics


log in