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.


High Performance Aerial Vehicle Method

page: 1

log in


posted on May, 29 2006 @ 04:17 PM
In light of the desire shown to understand how a high performance aerial vehicle can work that exhibits the performance commonly associated with "alien vehicles", including right angle turns, and high speed course reversal, etc. refer to the following:

The design method has two components as described in the following patents, the first component is g-force protection for the pilot. The second component is an aerial vehicle that can maneuver on 3-axis almost instantaneoulsly. Please excuse the typo's, as the U.S. Patent Office was quite busy. The drawings are rudimentary and only required enough detail to show the concept.

G-force Patent

The following patent is for the aerial vehicle. Read these patents very carefully, as they can be difficult to understand.

3-axis Propulsion Vectoring Aerial And Spacecraft Vehicle

If you thoroughly read these patents, you will see how this concept can work.

posted on May, 30 2006 @ 07:27 AM
Well it starts interesting but when I try the images section to see what they're actually talking about it cannot load the pics.

All i get is the page with a white blank where the pic is supposed to be and a little sqare thingy in the upper right angle that idicates tha there was supposed to be something there....................Ithink I need help

posted on May, 30 2006 @ 11:40 PM

Use the following link for patent office info on how to view their image files.
You seem to be the lone interested wolf for this post. Stay with learning the method, you won't be disappointed.

Info On Image Viewing

Again, the images are only meant to show concept in a rudimentary form, the written method associated with the images is the key for understanding this concept. Once you read them, if you have questions let me know and I will try my best to clarify them.

posted on May, 31 2006 @ 06:08 AM
Thanks for the help. I've had some trouble with the patent offices images before, but didn't bother to solve it.

As for the patents:

The one about the saucser like hyper maneuverable vehicle really reminds me of the Silverbug and the Avro Car both from Avro Canada. And I think it has the same disadvatages as those designs: it is simply not flexible and has allmost no potential for design variations.
This saucer is an integrated engine and it has little room for anything else. I can imagine a formation of three of these packed in a triangle vehicle but that is too limiting and would result in a simple lifting platform probably less efective than a hellicopter.
I think it's not a promising invention and it's not very likely to be developed.

Sorry if I'm dissapoiting you.

The second one sounds good but it may take some time untill it's perfected.
The Idea of a swinging platform inside the aircraft can surely scare most engineers away. The heavy construction associated with the design is the biggest hurdel to it.

But I think there allready is a system that can provide a pilot with that capebility
It's a "new" Anti-g suite that is filled with water.
It supposedly gives a pilot the abillity to sustain 10gs and still be able to speak normally. That is surely not the case with current anti-g that can give you a maximum of 12gs and I'm still serching on the maximum that this libelle suite can give you.

[edit on 31-5-2006 by vorazechul]

posted on Jun, 1 2006 @ 01:59 AM

You are not disappointing me. Matter of fact, I am intrigued with your ability to actually review the information. Yes, the one patent is much like Silverbug, or project Y2. The difference lies in that Y2 was a flat riser and once airborne would maneuver like an airplane. The new design allows for computer control of the exhaust ports individually, so that the vehicle can move down a course line and via computer control of the exhaust ports, change direction at any angle, including reverse.

Now, put the two patents together. Lets take an example for a high speed right angle turn. The pilot is in a disc shaped vehicle that has the characteristics of both patents. The pilot is on a course of 360 degrees. The pilot commands a course change to 090 degrees. The first patent comes into play for g-force protection. The gyroscopic cockpit pivots the pilot to be aligned with the new course of 090 degrees. Once aligned with the new course, the vehicle then decelerates and changes the thrust vector via computer control to the course of 090 degrees. Since each exhaust port on the vehicle is individually controlled by the computer, the change in course can be initiated almost instantaneously once the pilot is aligned with the new course.

Vorazechul, put the two patents together. Don't think in terms of Silverbug, or existing engines, or any other project. Look at the combined functioning of both patents together.

You have shown a keen focus, keep analyzing these patents in a simplistic view of their principles together. How the pilot can be pivoted in a vehicle that is capable of changing course at great angles to initial course line.

posted on Jun, 2 2006 @ 10:19 AM
My concern with that patent is not the lack of maneuverability but the fact that it shows an unpractical design. Of course you'll get a hyper maneuverable vehicle when you can instantaniusly change the thrust vector. But the way that this vehicle expects to achieve it is not technically feasible. The propulsion unit seems also very unefficient. This patent is much more suited to be use for a homing missile than for a transportation vehicle capable of sustained flight and/or transporting something more than just the pilot

this is also an example of a vehicle that has if not 3-axis then 2-axis thrust vectoring(it's a space interseptor designd for the .......I don't remember Missile defence initiative or somthing like that
And i find it a much better candidate for a high performance vehicle than the

The above patent for 3 axis propulsion vectoring is only one way to acheave extreme thrust vectoring and I'm pretty sure it is not the best one.

posted on Jun, 3 2006 @ 12:13 AM

Thank you for reviewing the information. I also thank you for giving me the links to other design possibilities. You have an open mind to technology. I hope you learn what interests you most. I am now leaving this post for other endeavors. I wish you well.

Aero _visions

P.S. We had a saying in my class for a friend. "Pull back to go up" The reply was,
"or down". Vorazechul, "pull back to go up"!

new topics

top topics


log in