Synergy Aircraft

HomeBuiltAirplanes.com

Help Support HomeBuiltAirplanes.com:

Status
Not open for further replies.

Topaz

Super Moderator
Staff member
Log Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2005
Messages
14,110
Location
Orange County, California
So when is this thing supposed to fly? I'm always skeptical of new concepts, I'm waiting for the real world results.
From the latest progress photos on their Facebook page a couple months ago, they seem to be about 60% through the build, at a guess. So I wouldn't expect a first flight in the near future.
 

PaulS

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2011
Messages
297
Location
Seattle, Wa., USA
The patents are pending - the numbers are not issued and the paperwork is not available until the patent is resolved.
You'll just have to wait for those too. Ain't life tough.... Patience is a virtue.
 

Aircar

Banned
Joined
Feb 20, 2010
Messages
3,567
Location
Melbourne Australia
Since I am invited to answer the criticisms made of me and the gist of what I have said seems to be lost I will briefly cover the main points.

I have no 'conspiracy theory' that I know of --who are the conspirators alleged ? This one I cannot fathom .
I AM offended by any sort of claim for some miraculous breakthrough that PURPORTS to be orginal and new, based on the personal efforts of an individual himself and so on when none of these is true .( when I see someone offering a perpetual motion machine or 'free energy' device that defies all normal physics it is THEY who claim some conspiracy to cover up this wonderful technology and THEY who take the part of the downtrodden but pure souled genius just trying to save mankind from the nasty oil companies or (fill in hated entity of choice)

I am taking the part of the 'debunker' in this case NOT the conspiracy promoter -- I am NOT some 'anti new design' or 'let's all design Piper Cubs coz they're good ' or conventionalist as might be implied . I HAVE spent my life researching and prototyping aircraft and aircars far more radical than anyhting to like Synergy -and done it on my own and my own dollar . I also happen to think that someone should get a working knowledge of the status quo in terms of aircraft construction,actually operating aircraft ,maintenance and repair and the failings of aircraft (eg getting a few years of experience as a pilot, running an aircraft maintenance and repair business, working in an aircraft factory (and or car industry -all "for real" rather than just "teaching' everybody without having yourself ever learnt how things are done. ( I know John uses the term "teach" also in the patent language sense but his entire delivery has been as someone with a superior intimate knowledge of the subject who finds it difficult to convey his brilliance to lesser souls and resorts to endless turgid 'explanations' that explain nothing but which DO include whole paragraphs that appear in the papers posted in the last few years on the CAFE website .

What can be said is that the "beyond streamlining" --as in the EAA 365 forum- "technology' can ALL be found already published in just the handful of those CAFE papers --and over the years it starts to be clear that this is all that is involved and at the least there is no NEED for any original research or development -- perhaps there is in fact none (no precursor designs, no 'lab notes' or other proof of the derivation that a patent ot claim to exclusivity or orginality requires )
John has scoffed at the pathetic value of just normal designs and emphasized how he alone has the key to totally revolutionize aviation and 'save' it with much use of expletives and seeming false modesty and so on --there is no concrete summation of how this all adds up to a breakthrough or what is even being claimed so impenetrable is the wordage and drawn out 'pre non view' that evetually led to the posting of a CAD picture -whereupon the configuration is seen to be a copy of Goldschmied's published twin jet airliner in the Bushnell paper ( I will post the thread and post # )

Several times I tried to show that the rear propeller will NOT somehow magically result on 'zero drag' or 'self propulsion' but would in fact SUCK BACK the fuselage --I even referred to the NASA tests where they isolated the prop and tested the body and prop drag and thust independently at various downstream positions and including where the prop was within the body itself (but not connected so that the drag of the body in front was measurable in isolation ) -- the misconception that ADDING a propeller behind a body will LOWER it's drag -over the freestream or BLC value - is fundamental to the flaws in the Synergy (Goldschmied placed his engines AWAY from the central body -which in his case was itself a lifting blended body -- making the big gap in the rear surface make sense but John could only repeat the nonsensical statement that the tgail wasn't there because "the job of the wing is to throw air at the ground "-- so why have ANY down lifting tail anywhere ? John had hours to explain himself at his request and convenience but chose instead to threaten legal action with me by phone .

Go back and read ANY of the HYPE that has been the trademark of the whole project - slowly revealed in a classic PR but not engineering fashion --and then ask why is John titling his Oshkosh presentation "Synergy - cutting through the hype " -??

end send and continue.





I related the REAL origin of the Ligeti Stratos and how it came to be (including the link to the actual "source" for the configuration
 

Autodidact

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 21, 2009
Messages
4,513
Location
Oklahoma
I have no 'conspiracy theory' that I know of --who are the conspirators alleged ? This one I cannot fathom .
Sorry, Aircar. You mentioned censorship (I think) and I thought that in frustration at having lost a few posts, that took some effort to create, you might have thought you were being censored. I guess I was seeing something that was not there. :)
 

StarJar

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2011
Messages
1,723
Location
El Centro, California, USA
I sat down and thought for a long time about the Synergy, to think about the actual reasons I like it. After long thought, the main reasons were; I think it looks cool and different. The next reason was, it could take me from point A to point B. I know there is also talk about possibly, improved, performance. That would also be nice. Man, I love this thread! Thanks HBA.
 

Topaz

Super Moderator
Staff member
Log Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2005
Messages
14,110
Location
Orange County, California
MODERATOR NOTE: Thread closed for one week due to the continued personal attacks and sniping, in violation of the HBA Rules of Conduct. The most-recent offending posts have been deleted from the thread. This thread will reopen on July 28th.

To all involved: If you see a post which is a personal attack or other violation of the HBA RoC, report it to the moderators. Do not try to respond, counterattack, or otherwise police it yourself. If you feel that you're being unjustly attacked, report that post. When you do, an e-mail is sent automatically to all the moderators and one of us will respond to the situation as quickly as we can. Leave it to us. It's why we're here.
 
Last edited:

Topaz

Super Moderator
Staff member
Log Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2005
Messages
14,110
Location
Orange County, California
MODERATOR NOTE: The moderators have discussed the matter, and due to the persistently argumentitve nature of this thread, we've decided to keep it closed until such a time as more definitive and objective information is available to end unfounded speculation. After a first flight, as one example. Parties interested in continuing discussion about the project should contact the moderators via private message so that we can discuss the issues before taking action, if any. ​Thread closed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top