Ernest Christley wrote in news:46dcc4ef$0$17145
:

Whoooowhiee. wrote:
Harry K wrote in

What is new is a clumsy, non-flying machine that looks like it was
put
together by some 'inventor' in a garage while ignoring common
engineering practices, mainly KISS. Only a nut case would try to
build something using EIGHT! small engines.


Fine, doesn't matter...


I think it's a piece of **** too, doesn't alter my argument.





No. It most certainly does alter your argument. It completely
invalidates it.


No, it doesn't.



You compared Moller to the Wright Brothers,


No, I didn't

and accused anyone that
would accost Moller as lacking of imagination.


No, I didn't


The truth is that by all
accounts the Wright Brothers spent a great deal of time studying the
work of others, experimenting and actually advancing the science.
Their
creation wasn't a pipe-dream come true. It was the fruition of years
of
study and built upon engineering principles uncovered by others.

Moller has spent a great deal of time molding pretty fiberglass parts,
and choosing the best shade of red paint to impress journalist and
potential investors. His design flies in the face of common sense,
let
alone basic engineering principles. He has a design that depends on
full-time flawless performance from at least four engines. Damn-it,
that is a deathtrap waiting to spring. It is not sound engineering.
It's not even sane engineering. He has not advance the science or
produced anything worthy of note. If anything he has leached energy
that could have gone to engineers that could develop something.



Learn to read