Andreas Parsch wrote in message ...
robert arndt wrote:

First, let me address the fact that you keep ignoring my the FACTS
that the USAF ADMITTED the Flugelrad craft in 1996. May I remind you
yet again that they denied the craft even existed for 51 years.

Could you please quote the USAF report? Thanks. Anyway, even if the
Flügelrad actually flew, none of the web sources I saw (Unfortunately,
I don't have any other sources on it) mention any of the outlandish
alien or occult propulsion schemes. The Flügelrad seems to be
effectively a very fancy turbojet-powered autogyro.

Jim Wilson, writing for Popular Mechanics, obtained his DoD reports
through the Freedom of Information Act after certain military
documents were forcibly declassified by a congressional mandate in the
mid-to-late-90s. He wrote several articles on the US "Projects
Silverbug" and the "nuclear flying saucer", the LRV (Lenticular
Re-entry Vehicle) as well as "Roswell Plus 50" and their origin firmly
placed with the German discs of WW2. His information obtained through
the Freedom of Information Act (which the DoD frantically tried to
restrict to the defense industry)places German disc engineers at
Wright Patterson (back then Wright Field) in 1946 as well as the
Horten brothers. The Horten presence can be verified through the
declassified "Operation Paperclip" documents. The documents state that
the Hortens were released from UK custody in 1945 for work in the US
in 1946. The articles contain information on the USAF desire to
replicate German disc aircraft at Wright Patterson and the continuing
development of disc offensive systems. Horten disc models, not flying
wings, were windtunnel tested in the US in 1946. The articles also
mention German wartime construction of disc aircraft including the
Flugelrads that were in their words... "highly unstable".
I'm sure you can contact PM and request their DoD sources for their
articles, or just search for them yourself through the Freedom of
Information Act.

The USAAF that became the USAF also has plenty of documentation and
footage of the Feuerball weapon from the 415th NFS. That too is a FACT
that you can't dispute. So where are the files and disclosure on those
craft? Are you telling me the USAF admits these craft but has
absolutely no photographic proof of them or flight footage? They have
everything and if you don't think so look up the story of the two USAF
reporters that have come forward to describe the German discs that
were seen at MacDill AFB back in the '60s. They saw they them,
photographed them, and were given access to MacDill's archives which
showed the German craft in flight.

I know this story. And where _are_ those photographs? Without them,
it's just a story, nothing more. I could produce a new story of this
type from scatch every week. So why should I believe it? If someone
claims they saw some extremely unusual thing, but can't produce _any_
kind of hard evidence, why should I believe the tale?

How exactly were the two reporters going to leave MacDill AFB with
their cameras and photographic evidence when they were seized and
kicked off base? Anyway, you can at least verify that the next month
issue of the USAF in-house magazine, the one that was supposed to
feature the prototype aircraft at MacDill AFB, was NOT published. Not
just the article... but the entire month's magazine.

It is obvious that you don't want to accept this... for what reason I
don't know.

Because of complete lack of hard proof. Like provably genuine
photographs and/or reports. Just saying the USAF has it all under wraps
isn't enough for me - sorry.

I disagree based on the volume of consistant leaks of information and
declassified information through the Freedom of Information Act.
Unlike the UFO conspiracy people I do not believe the evidence is "out
there" I believe it has always been internalized, compartmentalized by
the USAF, DoD, CIA, NSA, NRO, ad infinitum...


I apologize for the comment, it was inappropriate.

Accepted.

It just bugs me the
way people are so in denial about advanced aircraft. Its that old fear
of the unknown thing. Why exactly can't we handle a technology that
produces a rotating magnetic field and one that uses gravity to do all
the work? Mankinds solution to flight thus far has been using engines
that go AGAINST nature. We use powerful explosive forces in jets and
rockets to PUSH air and spacecraft through the atmosphere and space.
Nature is the opposite and Schauberger, Coler, and the rest of the
people at Lockheed & Northrop seem to have grasped that idea and have
working craft that far exceed conventional jet aircraft.

If it's so easy, and if aerospace companies employ "gravity drives" (or
"electrogravitic" ones) routinely in secret projects, why do you think
that the millions of physicists in universities and research labs
around the world haven't come up with any testable and verifiable
theory of "electrogravitics"? There are many _very_ smart theoretical
physicists, who have tried in vain for 70+ years to develop a viable
theory of quantum-gravity and to bring gravity "in line" with other
basic forces (which would presumably lead to something one could call
"electrogravitics"). Do you think, they are just too stupid, because
all the _really_ good scientists work in aerospace? Or do think, it's
all "covered-up"? The second notion is completely ridiculous - there is
absolutely _no_ way anyone, let alone the USAF which has no influence
in non-US universities, could prevent the extremely radid spread of
such a discovery in the physics community.
In short, you can't keep a law of nature a secret.

You can keep military projects secret even when information leaks out.
T. Townsend Brown proposed electrogravitic propulsion to the USAF back
in 1956 and had working models of his craft plus published findings. I
find it amazing that physicists on the outside can't seem to or are
reluctant to participate in this type of research. However, it is
undrstandable if they don't have the type of coordinated programs the
people at Lockheed and Northrop have. They certainly don't have the
advantage of German disc propulsion knowledge nor decades of
experimentation from Wright Patterson forward. And, most importantly,
the funding. Current costs of just one TR-3b ASTRA (if it does exist)
is said to be $3 billion!!! That's almost the cost of 3 B-2 Spirits
which by themselves are $1.3 billion and ironically enough are said to
incorporate the very technology you deny- electrogravitics!

Maybe you look at the F-22, MiG-39, Su-47, Gripen, Eurofighter,
Rafale, B-2, F-117, etc... as state-of-the-art military technolgy, but
I do not. I look at them like I would a biplane prior to WW1. These
craft are obsolete.

And why the hell is the USAF investing _billions_ of $$$ into the
"obsolete" F-22?? I know that the USAF is frequently blamed for wasting
money, but what you say would really push this blame to a new level ;-)!

Hey, we agree on this too. I have voiced my opinion on the lousy F-22
and ridiculous costs to the US taxpayer many times over. It IS an
extreme waste... but conventional technology DOES form the backbone of
our arsenal. From what I gather the US suffers from the same thing the
Germans did in WW2... that these electro-magnetic-gravitic systems are
only good for designs that are used for high altitude recon and
possibly for launching a few cruise missiles. They are practically
useless as fighter/strike aircraft and the loss of just one would be
costly. The other black budget craft seemed to be all bunched up in
UCAVs and other exotics (but not electrogravitic). The SR-75, TR-3a
Blackmanta, XR-7, AX-17, etc... use PDWs, Hydrogen Scramjets, or
conventional powerplants.

No, common sense tells us that there are more advanced aircraft flying
since the B-2 was unveiled in the late '80s. Do you honestly believe
the only thing we're working on now is that lame F-22 and F-35? What
has the USAF, NRO, NSA, CIA, etc... been doing covertly for over 2
decades?

I can't see any real argument in that last paragraph. Just because
_you_ think that the B-2 etc. are outdated, it _must_ be true that more
advanced aircraft are developed? I'm sorry, but I'd prefer a bit more
tangible evidence.

What more tangible evidence do you need than history? No great
military power in the world just "gives up" on R & D. The UK for
example is nowhere near the US in airpower. Yet they have the HALO and
other stealth aircraft out of Bae Warton. The UK MoD also admitted the
HALO after years of denial. Years when near-fatal air collision with
commercial aircraft were commonly reported. HALO is a delta the size
of a Hawk... but with no visible propulsion system. Are you telling me
that the British with their limited resources have an electrogravitic
aircraft in the air while the US with vast resources has none? That's
absurd. And there is persistant talk of the German Firefly II black
triangle. Despite US pressure on MBB not to develop the original
Firefly (Lampyridae) it seems the Germans didn't just give up their
stealth development program either.


The "UFO community" takes advantage of everything for its agenda,
agreed. But the Belgian Wave was reported all over the world and the
photos published everywhere. The photos do not just show 3 blobs of
light. They show a distinct black triangle with 3 non-jet sources of
propulsion.

Please show me a photo where all this can be clearly identified. Thanks.
Please spare the sarcasm for a moment. I can show you hundreds of
conventional aircraft filmed at night (like the F-117 and B-2) and you
couldn't distinguish them either. What is important in the BW
incidents is that the craft photographed don't match any propulsion
system around. According to various sources the TR-3b Astra matches
these images. The 3 blobs of light (which actually looks more like
fire) are the 3 maneuvering rockets, not the electrogravitic drive
itself.

And there weren't just one craft but several which flew in
formation. The craft sped off as the F-16s approached and headed back
towards the UK. Can you say Bae Warton? But before you go on about
doubting electrogravitic propulsion

Indeed I doubt it, see above ;-).

why then has the USAF also
admitted testing of a FFX or Field-Effects demonstrator back in the
'90s?

Did they? Please provide a source for this claim. A _USAF_ source where
they admit it.

I am trying to locate that source right now. It was back in the late
'90s, based on the LoFlyte demonstrator, but utilizing a field-effect
system.

BTW, not even Google comes up with anything on this - which is rather
unusual, because normally no claim is too weird that some nut wouldn't
post it on his website.

Google has thousands of hits on Field Effect propulsion,
Electrogravitics, and the German discs I mentioned... so what are you
talking about? You can also look up US disc projects Silverbug, LRV,
etc...


You lied when you said the A.S.6 was the only circular/disc craft to
fly in the Third Reich. It is fairly obvious (at least to me) that the
Flugelrads flew as well as the Feuerball weapon that plagued the 415th
NFS. Schauberger's Repulsin motors also achieved flight in the
laboratory and may have been installed on a larger scale in one of the
other German disc programs (read "Hunt for Zero Point"). Then there
are the controversial RFZ,Vril, and Haunebu craft...

It may be "fairly obvious" to you, but it certainly isn't for me. The
A.S.6 is the _only_ aircraft in the whole collection, which undoubtedly
existed and flew (albeit not very successfully). All the other claims
range from the possible to the extremely esoteric. I didn't _lie_, I
just stated an opinion which happened to differ from yours. In the
worst case, I was mistaken - still not a _lie_.


Do you live forever ;-)?

No, but I will probably be here in 2020 when the files are opened.
Maybe you will too and we will see who was right and who was wrong.
Fair enough?

Fair enough ... provided that you'll actually believe what's in the
files, even if they _don't_ contain anything on flying saucers.

Andreas

OK, deal.

Rob