Question |
| Asked by: |
Richard Urwin |
| Subject: |
Alex Jones device in Meccano and Questions? |
| Question: |
Fascinated by the “Heretic” video on this sight, I have built a very crude Alex Jones device with a super precision gyroscope and Meccano set. The device jumps forward (with a kick) in little hops before the vibration of the gyroscope makes some the Meccano nuts fall off, making the parts of the device fall part in various different ways after short runs (frustrating).
Isn’t the Alex Jones device itself a working embodiment of the Eric Laithwaite patent? (Gravity driven version)
Does the Sandy Kidd device provide its thrust in a series of impulses? Previously on this forum I have read Sandy Kidd use the term “high speed inertial pulse generation”.
Is this why in the Heretic video when Sandy Kidd’s device is switched off you can see when Sandy Kidd is lifting up the set of two gyroscopes of the device; they move inwards towards each other?
In the Sandy Kidd device shown in the “Heretic” video, does it work by varying (increasing and decreasing) the rotating velocity of the set of two gyroscopes forcing the gyroscopes to lift and move inwards towards the axes of symmetry of the device. Then slowing the rotation resetting there position recycling through the process again; imparting a pulsing thrust each cycle.
If the spin velocities of dual gyroscopes in the Kidd device themselves is varied (creating different velocity’s of precession) is it possible that a continuous (non impulse) acceleration be provided by varying the rotation of the set of gyroscopes and the spin velocities of the gyroscopes themselves (Increasing one and decreasing the other in cycle)? Or will it always be a pulsing thrust type device?
I have to say that after performing a few basic gyroscope (very amateur) experiments; I have begun to re-read comments in this forum with a whole new perspective/mindset!
|
| Date: |
30 March 2007
|
| report abuse
|
|
Answers (Ordered by Date)
|
| Answer: |
Sandy Kidd - 03/04/2007 10:50:49
|
| | Dear Richard,
You have been doing some serious thinking, have you not?
You asked:
“If the spin velocities of dual gyroscopes in the Kidd device themselves is varied (creating different velocity’s of precession) is it possible that a continuous (non impulse) acceleration be provided by varying the rotation of the set of gyroscopes and the spin velocities of the gyroscopes themselves (Increasing one and decreasing the other in cycle)?”
I think that you are aware that a photograph of that particular and rather tatty device resides in the “Propulsion” section of this site.
I would be obliged if you could possibly explain how such a mechanism designed to produce the aforementioned rotation speed changes could be incorporated into this machine.
In reality the device rotation was via a direct drive from a pedestal drilling machine, and the gyroscope rotation drive was from a common gearbox driven by a 6.5cc model aircraft engine.
I think that you are a very bright individual. I am wondering just how bright?
I am curious to know how you think that this could have been achieved?
However Richard, a small issue, is the fact that contrary to the views of some on this site, it is not precession which creates this effect as there is no precession in a mechanically accelerated system.
Keep up the good work as you obviously have a flair for stuff like this.
Sandy Kidd
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Richard Urwin - 04/04/2007 08:03:53
|
| | Thank you for responding to my questions.
Sandy Kidd: “You have been doing some serious thinking, have you not?”
Yes, like a lot of people on this forum I have been captivated by the Alex Jones device moving forward in the “Heretic” video and your own device and seeing the shaft of the device clearly lift.
I am finding this an interesting subject; and I felt that the Alex Jones device is a good place to provide a good intro for myself in the mechanics of such a system before attempting something more complicated. Further, I have really found that if you spend the time reviewing this website it provides a great single resource/repository of info on the subject, for beginners. I think Glen turner has done a truly commendable job in collating all the info into this single page.
It is interesting to review the diagrams of the gyroscope devices that have throughout the last century received popular press (Di Bella, Laithwaite, Jones, Stratton, yourself) and patent applications. I was interested that the Laithwaite/Dawson patent would be granted when the device they descried is not an improvement on the Alex Jones device. I would think that the claims granted would be very limited as a true document of protection and any claims would be very open to argument based on the prior art.
I have been racking my brain to find applications for this form of unconventional propulsion that do not involve sending them into orbit.
I can see that the single main benefit to this type of propulsion device is that it would impart thrust without imparting effects to it surroundings. It does not require an amount of traction to a road; or air/water intake to then expel. As a result I think it would be a good braking type device depending on the force that could be extracted.
for applications such as :-
Trains (transmission of a thrust would not depend on the friction of the train with the track, which I am guessing is a limiting factor to speeding up and slowing down with larger loads)
Airplane (if the Gyroscope propultion device 1/3 thrust to weight it would provide a constant and some what simplified thrust) that might allow high altitude flight and possible resulting in greater speed for a given thrust;
Bow/stern Thruster - for a boat/yacht/ship (originally proposed by Di Bella in 1968) providing for a some what simpler installation than traditional devices (not ruining the water flow over the boats hull)
Boat/Yacht/Ship/Submersible main propulsion reduced wake, a propeller-less Boat/Submersible
However if you wanted to test in orbit you could if you made it small enough, asked nicely and paid the money at Bigelow Aerospace www.bigelowaerospace.com ; Or not quite orbit but one hell of a drop test, Zero Gravity Corporation http://www.gozerog.com/zerog.html.
I think this would provide definitive/spectacular proof for gyro propulsion in a weightless environment.
Sandy Kidd: “I think that you are aware that a photograph of that particular and rather tatty device resides in the “Propulsion” section of this site.”
I have reviewed your comments and previous post on this forum and both of the machines in the “Heretic” video. It would be great to see more devices you have constructed; I have tried to buy your book however Amazon no longer has it listed.
Sandy Kidd: “I would be obliged if you could possibly explain how such a mechanism designed to produce the aforementioned rotation speed changes could be incorporated into this machine.”
Looking back it is a silly comment about continues thrust in thinking (second thoughts) more about it would always be cyclical even if such a system could be implemented.
My thoughts on possibly providing a device with different speeds might be preformed by increasing and decreasing the diameters of the dual gyroscopes and the diameter/distance the dual gyroscopes sit apart from each other, if that is at all possible.
Sandy Kidd: “In reality the device rotation was via a direct drive from a pedestal drilling machine, and the gyroscope rotation drive was from a common gearbox driven by a 6.5cc model aircraft engine.”
How did you reset the dual gyroscopes to there original position? Is that what you where doing to get the impulse? Is the angle to the fulcrum of the device the most important in transmitting the thrust?
Sandy Kidd: “However Richard, a small issue, is the fact that contrary to the views of some on this site, it is not precession which creates this effect as there is no precession in a mechanically accelerated system.”
Point taken, I understand your stress of this point; my apologies for the mistake in terminology.
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Sandy Kidd - 04/04/2007 12:34:42
|
| | Dear Richard,
The only device which I know of which did work was the one built by Scott Strachan, the rest I am extremely doubtful of.
Richard your question relating to gyroscopic or device rotation speeds was not wrong, I was just curious to see if you could figure out why. It was a complicated procedure but was consistent as sin, and I am using variations of the same set up today.
Unfortunately I had a terrible job trying to extract more thrust than the weight of the gyroscopes (not so strange if you believe the stuff I have posted)
I thought I had reached a limit which could not be passed, but where there is a will there is a way, and I found a way. I hope this does the trick.
So I will leave you to figure out how the original differential was created. That should keep you busy for a bit.
Sandy Kidd
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
piegeabscon - 17/08/2007 19:09:21
|
| | IL est inconcevable que des scientifiques de ce niveau soient incapables de faire fonctionner un système aussi simple : 2 gyroscopes!!.Ils doivent savoir calculer l'energie cinetique d'un gyroscope e=m*r^2*(2*µ*n)^2
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Glenn Hawkins - 06/09/2007 14:28:23
|
| | Dear Richard,
I believe your report is so vague that it is misleading. Can you be more detailed in the sequences of actions such as visual cause and effect, actions & reactions, reactions & actions, one, two, there, four and so on?
I believe that when you lift the gyro (# 1.) it and the frame will move a couple of inches backwards. When you next drop the gyro (#2.) it and the frame will move forward. I believe that as you oscillate the gyro upward and downward by lifting and loosening to fall the gyro plus frame will oscillate forward and backwards and that the device will not otherwise hop forward (one hop only). What happens as you lift it to reload it for the next hop? That is the question. Be thorough please.
Thank you,
Glenn
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
steven styles - 03/05/2010 21:53:47
|
| | Guys, surely Issac newton wasn,t wrong?or was he?
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Thomas Welch - 05/08/2015 09:38:50
|
| | Both Alex jones and Sandy kidd were close to answers however both are different types of use for the gyro.Both would need to go back to first principles , first now your subject.
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Nitro - 05/08/2015 13:22:36
|
| | Dear Thomas Welch
Perhaps now, your explanation?
Nitro
|
| Report Abuse |
| Add an Answer >> |
