Is Moller at it again?

In article ,
Bob Fry wrote:

"JW" == John A Weeks, John writes:

JW How do you mean "at it again"? Moller has been in business
JW for many years. They have had several highly successful
JW products, and they continue to develop their prototypes for
JW flying vehicles.

If a business can consist of promoting a completely impractical
machine, and products being successfully scammed grants and
investments, then I agree with you.

So, do you consider the Wright Brothers and Bell Helicopters
to be scams, also? One used a bicycle shop to fund a 20 year
long quest for powered flight, while the other spent 15 years
and 1.5-billion developing the tilt-rotor aircraft. How is
that any different from Moller manufacturing products like
mufflers and motors, and doing contract R&D, to fund his
dream of the flying car? In your world, would you have
put someone like Dean Kaman in prison for using profits from
his dialysis machine to fund the design of the Segway human
transporter? I guess you would have been leading the effort
to have Galileo blinded for looking into the heavens with
his telescope.

-john-

--
================================================== ====================
John A. Weeks III 952-432-2708
Newave Communications http://www.johnweeks.com
================================================== ====================

John: I've included the statement used below by AirScooter in publisizing
their products. This kind of stuff is common with Moller also. While I
like and have used his Super Trapp exhaust, there has yet to be a flying
machine produced by him that even approaches the outlandish advertisements
and claims.
It is my personal opinion that businesses practicing this kind of stuff are
to be avoided.
Safe Harbor Statement: This press release contains forward-looking
statements within the meaning of the "safe harbor" provisions of the Private
Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. You should not place undue
reliance on these forward-looking statements. These statements involve risks
and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from
those suggested in the forward-looking statements, particularly those risks
and uncertainties inherent in the process of developing, manufacturing and
distributing aeronautical products and engines. Factors that may cause such
a difference include risks related to AirScooter's limited operating
history, risks associated with completing development and successful
production of AirScooter products, the risk that AirScooter products will
not meet with market acceptance, the risk of future warranty and product
liability claims, the uncertainty of AirScooter's future access to capital
to sustain operations, achieve profitability or continue as a going concern,
the failure by AirScooter to secure and maintain relationships with
suppliers, manufacturers and other third parties, reliance on key employees,
and dependence on intellectual property. Further information on the factors
and risks that could affect AirScooter's business, financial condition and
results of operations, are contained in AirScooter's public corporate
documents. These forward-looking statements are based on information and
management's expectations as of the date hereof. Future results may differ
materially from our current expectations. AirScooter Corporation disclaims
any intent or obligation to update those forward-looking statements, except
as otherwise specifically stated.



--
Stuart & Kathryn Fields, Publishers
Experimental Helo magazine
P. O. Box 1585
Inyokern, CA 93527
(760) 377-4478 ph
(760) 408-9747 publication cell
(760) 608-1299 technical cell
www.experimentalhelo.com
www.vkss.com


"John A. Weeks III" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Bob Fry wrote:

"JW" == John A Weeks, John writes:

JW How do you mean "at it again"? Moller has been in business
JW for many years. They have had several highly successful
JW products, and they continue to develop their prototypes for
JW flying vehicles.

If a business can consist of promoting a completely impractical
machine, and products being successfully scammed grants and
investments, then I agree with you.

So, do you consider the Wright Brothers and Bell Helicopters
to be scams, also? One used a bicycle shop to fund a 20 year
long quest for powered flight, while the other spent 15 years
and 1.5-billion developing the tilt-rotor aircraft. How is
that any different from Moller manufacturing products like
mufflers and motors, and doing contract R&D, to fund his
dream of the flying car? In your world, would you have
put someone like Dean Kaman in prison for using profits from
his dialysis machine to fund the design of the Segway human
transporter? I guess you would have been leading the effort
to have Galileo blinded for looking into the heavens with
his telescope.

-john-

--
================================================== ====================
John A. Weeks III 952-432-2708
Newave Communications http://www.johnweeks.com
================================================== ====================

In article
,
"John A. Weeks III" wrote:

In article ,
Bob Fry wrote:

"JW" == John A Weeks, John writes:

JW How do you mean "at it again"? Moller has been in business
JW for many years. They have had several highly successful
JW products, and they continue to develop their prototypes for
JW flying vehicles.

If a business can consist of promoting a completely impractical
machine, and products being successfully scammed grants and
investments, then I agree with you.

So, do you consider the Wright Brothers and Bell Helicopters
to be scams, also? One used a bicycle shop to fund a 20 year
long quest for powered flight, while the other spent 15 years
and 1.5-billion developing the tilt-rotor aircraft. How is
that any different from Moller manufacturing products like
mufflers and motors, and doing contract R&D, to fund his
dream of the flying car? In your world, would you have
put someone like Dean Kaman in prison for using profits from
his dialysis machine to fund the design of the Segway human
transporter? I guess you would have been leading the effort
to have Galileo blinded for looking into the heavens with
his telescope.

-john-

There is a HUGE difference between the Wrights, Sikorsky and BEll from
Moller.

The former used a methodical engineering and scientific approach to
developing their machines BEFORE they announced them, whereas Moller,
for at least 30 years, has announced his machines before they flew
successfully.

He does not hold an aeronautical engineering degree, is not a pilot and
apparently has no clue as to how aircraft fly or operate. His machine is
a Rube Goldberg contraption with 8 engines, all of which must be
operating in perfect tune and "electronically synchronized".

He has never had even one successful test flight without a tether or a
crane keeping the thing in the air.

How many ways can you spell "scam" or pronounce "snake oil"?

I'm reminded of something attributed to Sikorsky that said something like:
All designers should fly their designs. That way we would only have good
designers.

--
Stuart & Kathryn Fields, Publishers
Experimental Helo magazine
P. O. Box 1585
Inyokern, CA 93527
(760) 377-4478 ph
(760) 408-9747 publication cell
(760) 608-1299 technical cell
www.experimentalhelo.com
www.vkss.com


"Orval Fairbairn" wrote in message
news
In article
,
"John A. Weeks III" wrote:

In article ,
Bob Fry wrote:

"JW" == John A Weeks, John writes:

JW How do you mean "at it again"? Moller has been in business
JW for many years. They have had several highly successful
JW products, and they continue to develop their prototypes for
JW flying vehicles.

If a business can consist of promoting a completely impractical
machine, and products being successfully scammed grants and
investments, then I agree with you.

So, do you consider the Wright Brothers and Bell Helicopters
to be scams, also? One used a bicycle shop to fund a 20 year
long quest for powered flight, while the other spent 15 years
and 1.5-billion developing the tilt-rotor aircraft. How is
that any different from Moller manufacturing products like
mufflers and motors, and doing contract R&D, to fund his
dream of the flying car? In your world, would you have
put someone like Dean Kaman in prison for using profits from
his dialysis machine to fund the design of the Segway human
transporter? I guess you would have been leading the effort
to have Galileo blinded for looking into the heavens with
his telescope.

-john-

There is a HUGE difference between the Wrights, Sikorsky and BEll from
Moller.

The former used a methodical engineering and scientific approach to
developing their machines BEFORE they announced them, whereas Moller,
for at least 30 years, has announced his machines before they flew
successfully.

He does not hold an aeronautical engineering degree, is not a pilot and
apparently has no clue as to how aircraft fly or operate. His machine is
a Rube Goldberg contraption with 8 engines, all of which must be
operating in perfect tune and "electronically synchronized".

He has never had even one successful test flight without a tether or a
crane keeping the thing in the air.

How many ways can you spell "scam" or pronounce "snake oil"?