Full NASA Seedling Seminar - LENR Aircraft is online

  • it seems they ignore the easiest method which is an hybrid system as SUGAR proposed.
    They attack the hard problems.
    Brayton cycle, ramjet.... quite challenging.
    The idea of nickel nanoparticle seems unrealistic for safety reasons
    I prefer the hybrid LENR/turbine+electric+accumulators+engine system, based on existing electric or gas-hybrid system.

    some really surprising concepts like the wing-in-ground...
    HALE Drone seems the first applications.

    Their phase II seems to continue... refine ideas, create "promotional" content...

  • Quote

    They attack the hard problems. Brayton cycle, ramjet.... quite challenging.

    It seems that they believe in LENR technology and they dont want to start small and therefor think big right from the beginning. I think it is because they dont have to produce for consumer markets and see LENR as a technology which is not just able to dramatically change the world, but in addition is able so solve all the major air- and spacecraft problems.

  • yes they try to address the hard points.
    very different from SUGAR Boeing/Nasa approach...
    As you says they see less constrained by market approach. Maybe because Boeing job it to quickly make classic LENR plane in 1-2 decade, and NASA/NARI to design impossible aircraft for the decade after.

    For the first LENR plane I would bet on companies like Pilatus, designing drone, then tourism plane, skydive planes... with hybrid technology...(like the first steam+sail boats)

  • <p>I find intriguing why Mr. Wells did not consider important to quote the previous work of Zawodny, with the promotional video of LENR and all, and or the interest shown by Bushnell. Is possible that he is not aware of that?</p>

    I certainly Hope to see LENR helping humans to blossom, and I'm here to help it happen.

  • I agree.
    The biggest support of NASA to LENR studies have been for long not to fire the researchers who used their free-time, and the NASA labs to experiment and consider LENR.

    JP Biberian, Longchampt,have worked beside their mainstream activities, with no of few support from their lab.

  • Thanks for your reply Barty, I think Zawodny has support of NASA if one goes by the patent application and the video in the NASA innovation site. I also know that Zawodny has been criticized by at least one person online for "wasting taxpayers money" on LENR research. Perhaps this is why Zawodny has gone silent on this.

    I certainly Hope to see LENR helping humans to blossom, and I'm here to help it happen.

  • I don't think Wells is unaware of anything.

    However this subject is very sensible, and either he is competing, or not wanting to be "contaminated" by some controversies.

    What shock me the most is the fact that it does not refers to Boeing/NASA SUGAR works, not even to acknowledge this seedling takes different position (as barty explain well, his project is different from Sugar and Zawodny).

    Zawodny documents are not very rich in "data", unlike SUGAR LENR chapter, which gives numerical requirement on the technologies. Zawodny is more doing promotional work, but as we see at the end of Wells slides it is part of the job...

  • Intriguing anyway, perhaps as you say internal competition, or trying to take distance from controversy. I wonder if Wells would be prone to answer e.mails from a Chilean LENR enthusiast...

    I certainly Hope to see LENR helping humans to blossom, and I'm here to help it happen.

  • The assumptions he made regarding how a LENR system would scale and its throttle-abilty seem reasonable (slide 52). Most
    LENR system designs will probably look and function like a fission nuclear reactor without the radiation.

    Slide 16 was interesting in that he proposes injecting LENR nano-particles into the combustion chamber and blowing them
    out the exhaust. I would guess that this would not be allowed as transition metals are can be toxic in an airborne state.

  • What hasn't been picked up in the discussion yet is the comment in the chat on the side at 20 mins, repeated in the Q&A at 33 mins that Lockheed Martin is looking at this too. This is the biggest name mentioned in connection with LENR yet and is potentially huge - I don't think the comment refered to the hot fusion reactor they're designing as that's probably not suitable for aviation.


    Chris Snyder (GRC): NASA and other groups are working their own efforts to identify / understand these systems (try to determine if real or not). Nothing to report (yet - as far as I know). So the future is unknown.

    Khomaza Dmitry: thank you. As far as I know there is a similar initiative in Lockheed Martin//

    Of all the designs shown it seems to me that the VTOL / ramjet one looks most suitable to LENR: pure heat in a ramjet (though it remains to be seen if temperatures above the Nickel melting point are required) and no moving parts means no electricity is required beyond keeping the reactor going during cruise. For take-off driving the rotors should have lower power requirements than a jet take-off and could also be smoothed out with battieries. Transition at 0.5 Mach doesn't seem a great speed for ramjets yet but maybe enough to get them going. The supersonic speed and ability to take off and land anywhere just a nice bonus.

  • no, that is not their business at NARI. They did it at NASA GRC.
    (see old thread http://www.lenr-forum.com/old-…mp-Mills-cell-experiments )

    their experiments are replicating (miles cells) or have been replicated (gas permeation).

    I think that for some industries question is not to develop LENR reactors, but to avoid having their market frozen with clients expecting the LENR model. whether it is cars, planes, boilers, power-plant, cargo, trains, metro, generators, A/C... they will buy the license, the company, or the researchers...
    but their job is to develop their new model.

    It is time to invest and prepare, because in 6 month it will be to late.

    for LENR technology I see DoD doing the job through Navy, SRI, Brillouin

  • there will be many time frame.
    Innovation takes normally 5 years to reach the market with many illusion lost... E-cat is thus expected for 2016, as a modest technology... what it seems it is now, just to save electricity for heating... not the revolution we imagine.

    To tumble a market it can take few years or a decade.
    The time for cars to be designed with LENR should be 5-10 years if following the usual pipeline in car company. 10-20 years for planes...

    however some existing market can get frozen in 1-2years waiting for the revolution, killing any hope to sell expensive products with long payback... This fact can cause panic in incumbent market.
    Imagine that the boiler companies face clients that refuse to pay for expensive boilers... that electric companies refuse to buy nuclear powerplant, hydro, or solar/wind generators, just waiting for LENR power plants.
    Imagine Airbus and Boeing unable to sell their jumbo because people wait for the LENR jumbo...
    Imagine the oild companies who stop prospecting new oil, stop prospecting shales...

    there will be no other choice for them than to accelerate the transition from 5-10 years to 3 years, or die.

    in few month Rossi will give a report.
    LENR-Cities will give names of partners.

    In one year, Brillouin will start to compete with Rossi will all US government behind them.
    NASA and ESA will start panicking to save their respective industries.
    EPRI, Elforsk, CEA, ENEA will panic to help their electric companies (Elforsk started already to warn).
    Boilers, cars, planes companies will feel quickly their clients want something that last and payback for 5-10 years, no more.
    money will flow.

    and if the good seat are not taken in this 6 month, you will have to travel without seat.
    that is the meaning of my 6 month...

    The train of panic will start in few years (with first e-cat style boilers), but the seat will be occupied in few month.
    and it will reach the next station in 5 years... full LENR prototypes of anything that heat, power and moves.

  • Now, with Elforsk and Cherokee support, after Levi&al test, it seems clear there is something honest and working.
    However the test show modest performances, and I suspect stability problems...
    Jed Rothwell who have been suspicious about E-cat, is now much more positive in his comment after having access to next test results...

    Rossi and Brillouin seems the leading horses.
    Defkalion with recent defection (Luca Gamberale&Defkalion Europe, Symeon tsalikoglou) seems in huge trouble with no clear future (success is not to exclude, and rebirth is probable).

    Anyway, if you have seen Rasta Rocket, you know that with good talent, big failures, and some delay, a new inexperienced team can catch-up with the leaders (nb: I don't says that Jamaica prepare a LENR team)...

  • Now, with Elforsk and Cherokee support, after Levi&al test, it seems clear there is something honest and working.
    However the test show modest performances, and I suspect stability problems...

    But Elforsk's test wasn't independent. Rossi still had control over the facilities and the equipment used.


    Jed Rothwell who have been suspicious about E-cat, is now much more positive in his comment after having access to next test results...

    Is this a genuin independent test?

  • what control ?
    not on the wire ? not on the outer wall ?
    Rossi did not have enough control on the environement to risk any trick...

    the cables were unplugged, meters could be used to check anything, thermocouple could be placed anywhere, know emissivity dots could be placed anywhere, and many things have been tested (but not all, without Rossi being responsible of that)...
    That freedom to test, remove any possibility to use trick on that details...

    The only possible trick that have been imagined is the DC offset. Not only it look hard to do it practically (since there was instruments on the same phase that would have exploded with high voltage DC), but simply it could be detected so easily that it was irrational to use that trick without controlling the instruments used.

    You can see what participant like Torbjörn Hartman
    or Bo Hoistad
    tested many tricks, with more or less scientific methods.

    This is the opposite to his previous test, where Rossi controlled the instruments, the water flow, the thermocouples.
    I agree that even test where you allow people to check and test, but when they don't control, are much weaker.
    Defkalion demo for ICCF18 was weak in that sens, as matt lewans did not controls the water flow, could not play with the piles and wires for days... it was a demo, like previous Rossi's demo.

    The fact that they used IR cam, thermocouples to calibrate it, instead of waterflow redice many opportunities to trick.

    The only thing that Rossi was controlling was the building and the inside of the boxes, and all else could be checked and touched, without any opportunity to oppose...
    He could tweak the electric plug, but it could be measured...
    He could tweak the emissivity of the reactor, but thermocouple, known emissivity dost, and IR cam would find it.
    He could send energy my microwave, IR, UV, radiations, but the people moving around the reactor would have detected it, or suffered from it by mistake.

    As Bo Hoistad admit, the content of the reactor is not proven... it can be pixie dust and Rossi team may have replaced it with black powder. What is sure is that it produce 3x/6x more heat than put inside as electricity.

    If he was proposing tricks, he would have allowed few things, but would have controlled all else (as he did before).

  • There is compelling evidence that Nickel-Hydrogen experiments produce excess heat. If you don't believe
    that then go to lenr-canr.org and search for nickel.

    There a a plausible case for Nickel-Hydrogen reactors to work. If Rossi's E-CAT doesn't work then this design
    may not be far from what could work.

    I am quite sure Rossi would not know why his reactor works if it does. Turning nickel into copper doesn't seem probable.

    My point is that a device such as an E-CAT is a real scientific possibility. Other claims such as magnet motors or gravity engines or
    noble gas engines are nonsense. I also ignore what Randy Mills claims with his hydrinos.