Synergy Aircraft

Discussion in 'Aircraft Design / Aerodynamics / New Technology' started by Tom Nalevanko, Apr 30, 2011.

Help Support HomeBuiltAirplanes Forum by donating:

Not open for further replies.
1. Jun 13, 2012

Jan Carlsson

Well-Known Member

Joined:
Jan 11, 2009
Messages:
1,860
386
Location:
Sweden
We can set up a Synergy-bet.TM about what day it will fly for the first time, and one about its top speed, it will make the year go faster, ööh, maybe slower, the winner buys beer to the rest of us

clanon likes this.
2. Jun 13, 2012

davidb

Well-Known Member

Joined:
Jun 3, 2008
Messages:
1,594
413
Location:
Vacaville, CA
Haha, I really like that idea! I've wanted to donate to the cause but I don't really need a $25 coffee mug. Maybe someone could organize a 'betting pool' where we donate$10 bets on the 'numbers'. The proceeds could go towards the cause and the winner gets a ride in Synergy. I believe StarJar already volunteered to be the bookie.

3. Jun 14, 2012

H.Evan'sRV7A

Well-Known Member

Joined:
Jun 2, 2011
Messages:
190
30
Location:
Grosse Pointe, MI
I am sure that John would be happy to accept your contribution without sending you a mug, hat or whatever. You can still donate at his website or at the Friends of Synergy site and you can put comments in the PayPal form.

4. Jun 14, 2012

davidb

Well-Known Member

Joined:
Jun 3, 2008
Messages:
1,594
413
Location:
Vacaville, CA
I do plan to donate to the project. However, I think a lottery or betting pool for a chance at a ride might be a fun way to raise funds. Granted, the work involved in organizing such a thing wouldn't be justifiable for John. I just thought the idea had merit if someone was willing to take it on (only with John's blessing, of course).

Last edited: Jun 14, 2012
5. Jul 11, 2012

H.Evan'sRV7A

Well-Known Member

Joined:
Jun 2, 2011
Messages:
190
30
Location:
Grosse Pointe, MI
6. Jul 15, 2012

Aircar

Banned

Joined:
Feb 20, 2010
Messages:
3,568
366
Location:
Melbourne Australia
With due respect , this link is again self referential (on the Synergy link ,for "technical information" you are re directed to THIS forum, and the similar EAA forum, for 'answers' and technical explanations.

In fact on both forums people are exasperated about not getting answers --(to 'non commercial in confidence type' questions and in reaction to statements that just don't add up) .

The "FAQs" on the Synergy website are also either self serving and hardly likely to be asked by anybody or are again not answered in any substantative fashion , yet again.

Since June, the element of 'moral hazard' has entered the situation with a very large amount of money being sought from the public still in the absence of any reassurance about the legitimacy of the whole project . (Kickstarter initially refused to be involved and pointed to their criteria for eligibility that emphasized the credentials and track record,justifying information, and so on for any applicant seeking money -- this is not provided anywhere on the websites or given to the editor of the RC Model site after (or before) his "model this" story on the Synergy where he related his extensive, but entirely fruitless, search for any hard figures or technical explanations on the aircraft.
His(somewhat scathing) assessment published then very much accords with my own experience and any actual reading (as invited) of the EAA or this forum reaches the same conclusion.

When asked to give his background and experience in aircraft design John sidestepped yet again and said "the Synergy is my resume" (he claims. on HBA, to have designed "thirty aircraft" that were all better than the best existing airplanes in this class and upped that to "100" on the phone to me -- attempts by others to get some proof of this were ignored or stymied by more techno.... talk .
By inferring that the (unfinished,unproven and highly questionable -by experts ) Synergy is a glowing endorsement to itself and to justify putting hundreds of thousands of dollars of 'free' money in IT is the height of circular argument and of course dodges the question and the INTENT of the Kickstarter due diligence process.

If applying for a job would you tell the prospective boss that the work you are about to be paid for is the assurance that he has that you are qualified ? same thing. If you claim a great track record you prove it FIRST.

If John has in fact patented NEW technology or a design then surely he should post the number to allow potential donors or investors to judge the validity --if the configuration is already in public domain (as I have shown that it is in fact in the"Synergistic application.". paper by Dennis Bushnell that includes the drawing of the Goldschmied 'box tail' design and references all the other ,well known, and quite old (ca 50 years) 'revolutionary concepts' embodied or used in the Synergy) then is it possible that the whole thing is based on misconceptions ? Have all other designers really been unaware of this published work -for fifty years ?.
This is an important point since the whole basis for the claims and requests for monies is that it is original work,unprecedented,novel and somehow going to lead to an aircraft at "10% of comparable aircraft cost and 10% of the fuel used" (no specifics on either but the clear intent of the claims themselves is there )

It SEEMS like the whole gamut of 'features' (listed and apparent from pictures) can be found from nothing more than the handful of recently republished papers and links from the CAFE site rather than from any lifelong ,deep or original research .

Much of the phraseology used ( by John) on the EAA 365 forum and the HBA forum and the website is DIRECTLY copied, word for word from those papers and cannot be 'explained' by the designer.-- for a literary work this is damning (like faking your thesis ) but the extent of the, 'gloating' is not too strong a word for it, of the designer about how so much superior it is to all other designer's work and this being the raison de etre -for it's existence , demands that the claims and their basis be proven bona fide.

Some projects soliciting funds from the public via Kickstarter have been the subject of plagiarism claims -successfully established , and therefore not legitimate under the provisions or the spirit of Kickstarter.

As a technology venture this test of authenticity (ie who is the author of the ideas) still applies -is it a 'creative' work by definition rather than being 'derivative' to put it mildly.
If there is no patent or other protection of the embodied know how in this case the investors are at risk since disclosure and the underlying IP ownership is also . Many 'asides' by the promoter are simply wrong in a factual sense --eg the pusher propeller will be "protected" when landing on "backwoods airstrips" by THE SPLIT FLAPS . that one sentence makes claims and offers applications that are indeed valuable; --being limited to asphalted and smooth runways constrains what an aircraft can be used for greatly and for a designer to be ABLE to use so many more dirt strips is a big plus (and for "selling" the whole concept to donors or investors ) --having noted the vulnerability of the propeller to damage in the very forums quoted as "supporting" this design (by inference) and knowing the real difficulty to ACHEIVE this ability plus the actual lack of protection for the propeller as shown by numerous CAD renderings and drawings etc this statement again creates the problem of non factuality .
ON the HBA forum an essentially identical design in terms of the landing gear and prop,wings,height off ground and such pertinent factors (Northrop XP 56) was shown to have in fact flipped inverted and destroyed itself on a quite smooth flat surface showing the inherent danger by design.

Claiming that this aircraft was,say, also amphibious would doubtless attract more supporters and finance but would not be true or possible (A Mr Moller has done exactly that though in a similar web offering for a VTOL aircraft that has been financed amply but never flown and has no hope of flying off water .
I described this sort of unfounded claiming as 'crying wolf' on the very web forum that the Synergy designer directs interestred parties to to inform themselves as to technical viability.

I too am as baffled as the editor of the RC site.

Last edited: Jul 15, 2012
7. Jul 15, 2012

H.Evan'sRV7A

Well-Known Member

Joined:
Jun 2, 2011
Messages:
190
30
Location:
Grosse Pointe, MI
response to Aircar

This is a reply to Aircar's latest without burdening the forum with an extremely long quote.

1. If that is your version of "due respect" I am glad you are not my enemy. In case you miss this point, that is some pretty hostile and disrespectful stuff.

2. You would probably get your points understood and even perhaps accepted more readily if you took some care to write better. Short, declarative sentences and appropriate paragraph breaks would be a start. Some attention to outlining and structuring your thoughts would also help.

3. I posted that link merely to be helpful. Your latest seems to repeat a long list of complaints and accusations and to imply that John equals some other (bad) person. John may or may not be proven right or wrong in the near future, but he is not the bad person you picture. Those of us who have chosen to either contribute to his efforts or to support him in other ways are not naive children and you are not the only person to remember the scams and other failures in the industry. You don't like him nor trust him; it is obvious; give it a rest.

4. When John says, repeatedly, that he is using technology that was developed and demonstrated by others you then turn it around and call it plagiarism. That's a very short version of what you are doing. At the least you should not turn his statements around in order to criticize them.

ultralajt and FarmBoy like this.
8. Jul 15, 2012

clanon

Well-Known Member

Joined:
Jun 6, 2007
Messages:
1,101
217
I wonder ... where can i see full size pictures...
Anyone...

9. Jul 15, 2012

Starman

Well-Known Member

Joined:
May 17, 2009
Messages:
2,011
61
Location:
High in the Andes Mountains
Full size pictures? How big is your monitor?

clanon likes this.
10. Jul 15, 2012

PaulS

Well-Known Member

Joined:
Sep 6, 2011
Messages:
297
12
Location:
Seattle, Wa., USA
Aircar,
Patents are in the "pending" envelope, No real specifics of the aircraft are public yet, Only the investors, the lawyers and the folks working on the aircraft know the specifics and they only know what they need to know to do their jobs.
Berating an aircraft that you have no information about and no investment in just makes you look like you are jealous, paranoid or the second "Ralph Nader".
Berating the designer because he won't release private and personally owned information is childish. It is common to withhold information from those who are not part of the program in most industries. Nobody has taken your money, your time or your ideas so relax and wait with the rest of us to find out what its flight characteristics are.
You could always get information by donating $500K and asking for the prospectus. You would have to sign a non-disclosure agreement so you couldn't tell anyone else about the project. Paul ultralajt and FarmBoy like this. 11. Jul 15, 2012 FarmBoy FarmBoy Active Member Joined: Mar 14, 2012 Messages: 40 Likes Received: 6 Location: Gainesville, VA response to Aircar This is another reply to Aircar's latest... 1. I have to wholeheartedly agree with H.Evan'sRV7A. I had previously had some respect for you - though I still respect your aeronautical knowledge, your postings deserve little respect or credence (perhaps about the same as you accuses John of). 2. The application of your knowledge has repeatedly made inappropriate/inapplicable references to designs which in no way actually matter aerodynamically to Synergy's design dynamically in 3 dimensions. Though it appears misplaced, I do appreciate your dedication to safety and desire to help others. Though there are often gaps to bridge, doesn't determinism in investigation hinge upon the specific - not upon generalizations? In this respect, I am perplexed by your repeated comparisons of other aircraft to Synergy as they bear little, if any, similarity from an airflow/fluid dynamics perspective. In this respect, flight behavior is certainly specific to the Synergy design and any conclusions drawn from the multiple birds you have referenced here and in the past are highly speculative.​ 3. John has noted he has patents in the works - and that very process has it's own dangers/pitfalls and many difficult decisions to which your comments show either complete disregard, lack of respect, or no understanding whatsoever. Capital at risk - duh - if it was already flying and proven investment would be a no brainer - and even then capital is at risk with any company. 4. You make the very unsubstantiated claims you accuse John of (by direct reference, inference, etc. to Moller, Ligeti Stratos, etc. here again and in the past) with the latest inferring that Synergy will flip and destroy itself - poor form in the utmost. And with John's repeated references to an undisclosed prop, you have no legs to stand on there - and even in all the pictures the prop 'shown' is likely within the confines of the lower tail boom strakes (and perhaps even within the elevon surfaces in the inverted position - and not in any position to beat the plane to death irregardless).​ Attached Files: • 228231_112355115514707_112353422181543_118532_331609_n.jpeg File size: 44.9 KB Views: 905 Last edited: Jul 17, 2012 12. Jul 16, 2012 Autodidact Autodidact Well-Known Member Joined: Oct 21, 2009 Messages: 4,531 Likes Received: 799 Location: Oklahoma I like Synergy as an aircraft design. I have no idea if the aerodynamic doohickies will work, but it is pretty obvious that if it is a stable and controllable aircraft, it will also be a relatively efficient one, as well. Nothing is proven until certification. Other composite designs (Lanceair, etc.) have been successful, within the context of the present economy and legal backdrop. The big problem I see is the engine; unless the Big Few change over to this engine, it will not exist as something that can be bought since there has to be a viable market for it. Still, the design can fly with other engines. I wish Bombardier hadn't shelved their V6, but that sort of points to my argument. 13. Jul 16, 2012 Aircar Aircar Banned Joined: Feb 20, 2010 Messages: 3,568 Likes Received: 366 Location: Melbourne Australia I just lost over an hour's typing in response;-- to the real issues involving the Synergy Inc matter and Kickstarter, my previous 'deleted' posts and Jakes' advice to take up the funds soliciting with Kickstarter , my agreement with John for a moratorium and to settle the technical claims and misconceptions off line via a 'non disclosure' Qand A of John by a moderator and much much else. There is much that you writing to defend John (and/or Synergy) and to attack me don't know or cannot be told. The attack on me is purely personal and impugns my integrity --there is for example NO attempt to validate the claims about suitability to use unmade backwoods airstrips or any of the other unsubstantiatable claims about the design. It is pure ad hominem. In any event I cannot trust this forum to not just wipe out everything without any warning --and it is already extremely frustrating and time wasting to try to correct any false statements even if only because they are wrong, technically or otherwise. As I said to John -I don't have any personal feelings about him based on any him personally or any other factors -- it would not matter who or what nationalilty or anything else was doing the same thing --and I do believe that it is important not to ignore such things no matter what else might be at stake . I will do a technical analysis of the claims made for Synergy and the purported basis for them with reference to the sources and the actual physics etc involved and the design principles being broken --(and relate this to the modus operandi of the whole use of HBA and EAA etc in the context of the public forum and Kickstarter) Such a 'one stop' summation of the 'hardware' issues and the promotional conduct means as a unit should connect the two aspects of the whole project that are most troubling (and the context includes the prior history of other such schemes and promotions especially in the public or unversed aviation marketplace of ideas. ) By doing this as a private email, not on HBA I will not be under threat of total loss or being censored and the recipients can independently evaluate the aircraft and project - and draw their own conclusions on these and other things. And it will be a record that is safe can be kept to refer back to after things play out -hopefully without avoidable loss to anyone. (and not a re run of the Ligeti Stratos case or others that did not end well ) I stated that one of my primary reasons for posting on HBA was for it's value as a repository for the use of designers especially in the roadable aircraft field and to allow others to learn from the mistakes of their predecessors to avoid the pitfalls and dead ends that have plagued this part of aviation (nothing else is stuck in 1950s level technology so much as general aviation and this gap is exploited by many illegitimate promoters which leads to cynicism or gullibilty in equal amounts when some new offering appears ) Removing or losing postings thwarts this value and precludes the protection of others from false claims. And by not 'pre informing' John of the analysis questions and queries the technique of saying "I knew that" or just writing something that to an uninformed reader LOOKS con vincing is also avoided and I can protect my reputation. Hopefully by this means the issues can be resolved without further loss. I am really frustrated right now so this might not pass an' English expression examination' in hindsight( as deemed by my critics) but the substance of it is more important. 14. Jul 16, 2012 Autodidact Autodidact Well-Known Member Joined: Oct 21, 2009 Messages: 4,531 Likes Received: 799 Location: Oklahoma Aircar, the tendency to lose long posts is a technical glitch, and nothing more. We have ALL had it happen to us. I have, several times, had this happen and then I re-wrote the post in a text program (such as Windows Notepad), copied and pasted it and reposted it and all was fine. There is no real censorship save for posting that breaks the ROC going on here. You continue to lose posts and complain about it when people have tried to show you the solution. It is very frustrating to present a very simple idea to a very intelligent person and then have them appear to ignore it for some reason, which may be a hardware/software difficulty on your end. This hardware/software difficulty on your end may be conspiring, along with software glitches on the admin's end, to cause the problem, but this is not a cogent type of conspiracy. ultralajt likes this. 15. Jul 17, 2012 FarmBoy FarmBoy Active Member Joined: Mar 14, 2012 Messages: 40 Likes Received: 6 Location: Gainesville, VA That statement isn't helping your credibility here... I meant no personal attack - my apologies if it was taken that way. My reference was of loss of respect due to the repetitive tone and content of your postings (though John's tone has occasionally lacked a bit as well as we all probably have due to this poor mode of communication). I will gladly offer a beer in recompense if we have the privilege of meeting one day. Regarding suitability for backroads airstrips, there are any number of aircraft that could fit into this category and having seen the extremely generous design margin of Synergy's landing gear myself (i.e. way more safety factor than required), as long as the stall speed is low enough, it should have quite a few options for landing. Speaking of endless pure ad hominems, argumentum ad baculums, argumentum ad misericordiams, genetic fallacies, etc., etc. Please do - and without all of the wise cracks and endless conspiracy theories... Sincerely, Your advanced degreed Farm Boy with 25 years of systems engineering experience (including the aerospace kind) but apparently completely lacking any sense... p.s. my$\$ is also where my mouth is...and if it wasn't and Synergy did not succeed, I would feel a poor soul indeed that I did not attempt to forward even a portion of its potential - if it does succeed, the lessons learned will help forward other such ventures in technology, life, and the human spirit - if it doesn't at least I can say I tried my best to help it do so (and the lessons learned will do much the same)...

Last edited: Jul 17, 2012
16. Jul 18, 2012

Topaz

Moderator

Joined:
Jul 30, 2005
Messages:
13,436
5,132
Location:
Orange County, California
Gentlemen, let's all please step back and take a long breath. Most of the posts on the last two pages have accomplished nothing but raise the temperature in the room. Now the argument has devolved to the point where you're trying to pick each other apart in your efforts to support or decry the Synergy effort, and both sides are doing it without any factual support with regard to the actual project involved. The fact is that only John knows what's really going on with his project and the investment process, and whether those things are on the up-and-up or if they're not. NONE of you know otherwise, regardless of your point of view.

Opinions on both sides are welcome, but let's leave it at that. Attempting to shout down someone else's opinion by attacking them personally just makes everyone involved look bitter and argumentative.

At this point, I'd say both camps have more than had their say. If you have something specific to talk about with regards to the Synergy project, please contribute. If you're just going to cheerlead or naysay the project with no first-hand information, please give it a rest. If the arguments, bickering, and personal attacks continue in this thread, we'll shut it down.

17. Jul 19, 2012

StarJar

Well-Known Member

Joined:
Sep 6, 2011
Messages:
1,723
402
Location:
El Centro, California, USA
Don't hold your breath; the US Government usually doesn't put patents into the public domain if they may have possible military applications.

18. Jul 19, 2012

clanon

Well-Known Member

Joined:
Jun 6, 2007
Messages:
1,101
217
Yup! i'm pretty sure the B2 and F117 came out of a garage homebuilder too... and the predator too
PS:i'm just being ironic.
And quoting "Jaws" i think we'll need a bigger prop...

19. Jul 19, 2012

Georden

Well-Known Member

Joined:
Sep 17, 2006
Messages:
154
24
Location:
So when is this thing supposed to fly? I'm always skeptical of new concepts, I'm waiting for the real world results.

clanon and Topaz like this.
20. Jul 19, 2012

Joined:
Mar 8, 2010
Messages:
4,544