Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.electronics.design > #433621
| From | "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | sci.electronics.design, sci.physics, rec.arts.sf.science, sci.space.policy |
| Subject | Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. |
| Date | 2016-11-03 09:48 -0400 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <nvff61$i6q$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | <nvab5b$is1$1@dont-email.me> <5ec5d120-948f-4013-a835-cd5ae4e4dd19@googlegroups.com> <adjh1c5npmcbodbs2ojif5vhfrgjm33dbb@4ax.com> |
Cross-posted to 4 groups.
The commonly used name for these EHD devices made by amateurs is "lifters". The problem with their not being able to fly independently is the power supplies are so heavy. Look for example at the lifter here: How to: "Lifter" Power Supply. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tfdsEVjBpBU Quite commonly the lifters weigh, and the thrust they can produce, is in the range of grams but the power supplies weigh in the range of kilograms. So how do you solve that problem? Let me give an analogy. Many people are aware of the technical innovations the Wright brothers made to be able to develop a successful flying machine. They made their own wind tunnel. They tested various air foils to find efficient ones of high lift. They developed a warping wing technique for steering. However, not as well known is the one key innovation they made for which all those other innovations would have been worthless. When many scientists of the time after doing a mathematical analysis asserted that no heavier-than air flying machine could work, oddly enough they were *right*. But the problem was, they were basing this on the power sources widely known at the time, steam engines. But the steam engines were so inefficient they could not supply sufficient power for their weight. They were too heavy. Around the time of the Wright brothers though the internal combustion gasoline engine was coming into use for automobiles, but they were still too heavy for the Wright brothers use. So the one *key* innovation the Wright brothers made was that they designed and built their OWN lightweight internal combustion engine. Now, back to the EHD propulsion method. The power supplies are too heavy, so what can we do about that? Well, you can make them out of lightweight materials. That's a possible route to follow, but most amateur and even professional experimenters have used ready made power supplies or used ready made parts to build them. The result is they are all pretty standard weight for the power they put out. But let's analyze this further, *why* are the power supplies so heavy? It turns out the reason they are so heavy is the voltage needed for the ion propulsion method is in the range of tens of thousands of volts, frequently as high as 50,000 volts. This then requires heavy transformers to produce voltage this high. Alright then, can we find a way to reduce the required voltage? Yes! It turns out if you reduce the diameter of the wires doing the ionization of the air then the required voltage is reduced. In fact, according to the math if the wires are at the nanoscale then the required voltage might be reduced to only tens of volts instead of tens of thousands of volts. For the small-scale lifters, if you used now wires at the nanoscale, it may be they could be powered by a couple of 9-volt batteries connected in series. So that's the key point, for nanowires the voltage required for ionization is severely reduced. This is the content of Peek's Law: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peek%27s_law Bob Clark ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, nanotechnology can now fulfill its potential to revolutionize 21st-century technology, from the space elevator, to private, orbital launchers, to 'flying cars'. This crowdfunding campaign is to prove it: Nanotech: from air to space. https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/nanotech-from-air-to-space/x/13319568/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "John Larkin" wrote in message news:adjh1c5npmcbodbs2ojif5vhfrgjm33dbb@4ax.com... On Tue, 1 Nov 2016 10:06:41 -0700 (PDT), mrdarrett@gmail.com wrote: >On Tuesday, November 1, 2016 at 8:09:00 AM UTC-7, Robert Clark wrote: >> Nanotechnology makes possible an "ion drive" for air vehicles analogous >> to >> the famous ion drive of NASA's deep space probes: >> >> Carbon nanotubes for "Ionic Wind" Craft or "Ionocraft". >> Clark R* >> Department of Mathematics, Widener University, USA >> Review Article >> Volume 1 Issue 2 / Received Date: September 26, 2016 / Published Date: >> October 20, 2016 >> Abstract >> Peter Thiel of the Founders Fund once famously said, "We wanted flying >> cars, >> and we got 140 characters."But nanotechnology now does make possible the >> long desired flying cars. It's a different propulsion method though than >> propellers or jets however. It's propulsion by electric fields known as >> electrohydrodynamic propulsion (EHD). It works by ionizing air then using >> electric fields to propel the charged air molecules rearward, thus >> producing >> thrust. It's quite analogous to the famous space ion drive of NASA. EHD >> has >> been known at least since the sixties. Its problem is, as with ion drive, >> the thrust is so low. So far the EHD craft have not been able to lift >> both >> themselves and their power supplies. The ones made so far leave the power >> supply on the ground and connect to the craft through power cables. But >> the >> equations of EHD suggest the thrust for the power required gets larger >> for >> thinner ionizing wires. In fact if the wires are at the nanoscale then >> this >> important thrust-to-power ratio can be a hundred times higher than for >> the >> craft constructed so far. This would be enough to lift the craft and the >> power supply. This research is to prove what the mathematics suggests. >> Note >> that if it works then all propeller and rotor driven craft become >> obsolete. >> Also, intermediate range automobile travel would be taken over by the EHD >> craft, so a large proportion of carbon-emissions would be eliminated, >> replaced by this zero-emission travel method. In regards to space >> propulsion, since EHD is so similar to ion drive, using components at the >> nanoscale may also work to improve the thrust of ion drive. This would be >> important to shortening the flight times of spacecraft using such drives. >> This is important not just for robotic spacecraft but also satellites >> that >> use such ion drives to reach their final GEO destinations. As it is now, >> the >> ion drives used have such low thrust it takes months for such satellites >> to >> reach GEO, resulting in millions of dollars of lost revenue to the >> satellite >> companies. Being able to increase the thrust of these drives would reduce >> the flight time, and therefore reduce this lost revenue. >> Keywords: Electrohydrodynamic propulsion; Carbon nanotubes; Nanowires; >> Ionic >> wind; Ionocraft; Plasma drive >> https://medwinpublishers.com/NNOA/volume.php?volumeId=23&issueId=63 >> >> Bob Clark >> > > > >Do they work when it's raining / in humid environments? > >Michael No. And under even ideal conditions, they don't work for long. Why do people invent (and press release) crazy sci-fi dreams that ignore basic physics? There is a reason why helicopters have gas turbine engines and giant fan blades... and horrendous fuel consumption rates. Why don't they just use their jet engines to lift the vehicle? -- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc picosecond timing precision measurement jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com http://www.highlandtechnology.com --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Back to sci.electronics.design | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Ion drive for aircraft imminent. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2016-11-01 11:09 -0400
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2016-11-01 08:51 -0700
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. bitrex <bitrex@de.lete.earthlink.net> - 2016-11-01 14:27 -0400
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. krw <krw@nowhere.com> - 2016-11-01 22:01 -0400
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2016-11-03 09:16 -0400
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2016-11-03 08:33 -0700
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2016-11-04 07:29 -0400
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2016-11-04 07:35 -0400
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-11-04 12:20 -0700
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2016-11-06 12:23 -0500
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-11-06 16:28 -0500
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-11-13 19:13 -0700
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. mrdarrett@gmail.com - 2016-11-01 10:06 -0700
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2016-11-01 10:20 -0700
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. mrdarrett@gmail.com - 2016-11-01 11:24 -0700
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Phil Hobbs <pcdhobbs@gmail.com> - 2016-11-01 14:41 -0700
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> - 2016-11-01 14:53 -0700
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. mrdarrett@gmail.com - 2016-11-01 15:09 -0700
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. George Herold <gherold@teachspin.com> - 2016-11-02 08:14 -0700
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> - 2016-11-02 10:29 -0700
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. mrdarrett@gmail.com - 2016-11-01 15:14 -0700
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2016-11-02 12:10 +1100
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2016-11-01 18:03 -0700
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2016-11-03 10:00 -0400
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. mrdarrett@gmail.com - 2016-11-03 09:24 -0700
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-11-03 17:51 +0000
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Yuri Kreaton <invlaid@invalid.com> - 2016-11-06 16:37 -0600
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Sjouke Burry <burrynulnulfour@ppllaanneett.nnll> - 2016-11-07 02:28 +0100
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2016-11-08 11:03 -0500
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Yuri Kreaton <invlaid@invalid.com> - 2016-11-08 11:17 -0600
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-11-08 17:53 +0000
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2016-11-13 12:09 -0500
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Yuri Kreaton <invlaid@invalid.com> - 2016-11-13 12:04 -0600
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2016-11-13 20:34 -0500
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2016-11-13 17:50 -0800
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Yuri Kreaton <invlaid@invalid.com> - 2016-11-13 20:12 -0600
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-11-08 17:37 +0000
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. kevin93 <kevin@whitedigs.com> - 2016-11-08 15:07 -0800
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. krw <krw@somewhere.com> - 2016-11-08 18:43 -0500
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. mike <ham789@netzero.net> - 2016-11-08 16:19 -0800
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. krw <krw@somewhere.com> - 2016-11-08 19:43 -0500
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2016-11-13 10:53 -0500
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Yuri Kreaton <invlaid@invalid.com> - 2016-11-13 12:09 -0600
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. John S <Sophi.2@invalid.org> - 2016-11-03 05:58 -0500
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2016-11-03 08:35 -0700
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Martin Brown <|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2016-11-03 17:26 +0000
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> - 2016-11-03 11:01 -0700
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2016-11-03 09:48 -0400
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2016-11-03 08:41 -0700
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Yuri Kreaton <invlaid@invalid.com> - 2016-11-03 12:22 -0500
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. mrdarrett@gmail.com - 2016-11-03 10:45 -0700
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2016-11-04 16:09 -0400
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-11-04 21:09 +0000
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Phil Hobbs <pcdhobbs@gmail.com> - 2016-11-04 14:28 -0700
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2016-11-07 07:29 -0500
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-11-07 18:37 +0000
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> - 2016-11-07 15:31 -0500
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-11-07 21:46 +0000
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Lasse Langwadt Christensen <langwadt@fonz.dk> - 2016-11-07 14:40 -0800
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. mike <ham789@netzero.net> - 2016-11-07 18:18 -0800
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-11-08 03:39 +0000
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. mike <ham789@netzero.net> - 2016-11-07 20:51 -0800
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-11-08 07:13 +0000
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. krw <krw@nowhere.com> - 2016-11-08 12:28 -0500
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. mike <ham789@netzero.net> - 2016-11-08 13:33 -0800
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-11-08 22:05 +0000
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. krw <krw@somewhere.com> - 2016-11-08 18:45 -0500
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-11-09 00:13 +0000
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. krw <krw@somewhere.com> - 2016-11-08 19:46 -0500
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-11-09 01:05 +0000
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Rick Jones <rick.jones2@hpe.com> - 2016-11-09 18:26 +0000
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-11-09 20:03 +0000
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-11-13 19:21 -0700
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2016-11-14 08:40 +0000
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-11-14 02:55 -0700
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-11-14 06:02 -0500
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2016-11-14 11:31 +0000
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-11-14 05:54 -0700
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2016-11-14 13:47 +0000
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-11-14 12:35 -0700
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2016-11-15 00:04 +0000
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-11-14 13:37 -0500
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2016-11-14 18:52 +0000
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2016-11-14 14:56 -0500
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2016-11-14 13:17 -0700
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Yuri Kreaton <invlaid@invalid.com> - 2016-11-14 12:53 -0600
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2016-11-14 19:19 +0000
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2016-11-14 18:57 +0000
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2016-11-14 11:27 +0000
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-11-14 05:52 -0700
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2016-11-14 13:56 +0000
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-11-14 12:47 -0700
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2016-11-14 23:58 +0000
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-11-14 22:07 -0700
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2016-11-14 22:09 -0800
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Alain Fournier <alain245@videotron.ca> - 2016-11-15 20:34 -0500
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2016-11-15 18:01 -0800
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2016-11-15 18:59 -0800
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2016-11-16 04:33 +0000
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2016-11-16 02:52 -0800
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-11-15 21:42 -0700
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2016-11-16 09:05 +0000
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2016-11-16 02:13 -0700
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2016-11-16 03:02 -0800
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. krw <krw@somewhere.com> - 2016-11-16 20:32 -0500
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2016-11-16 02:46 -0800
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2016-11-14 17:30 -0800
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2016-11-14 04:08 -0800
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-11-03 17:49 +0000
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. mrdarrett@gmail.com - 2016-11-03 11:18 -0700
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Bill Beaty <billb@eskimo.com> - 2016-11-06 22:19 -0800
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> - 2016-11-01 10:36 -0700
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2016-11-03 09:28 -0400
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-11-01 18:19 +0000
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2016-11-01 14:13 -0700
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-11-02 00:00 +0000
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. krw <krw@nowhere.com> - 2016-11-01 22:05 -0400
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-11-02 02:54 +0000
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. krw <krw@nowhere.com> - 2016-11-02 20:20 -0400
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Sjouke Burry <burrynulnulfour@ppllaanneett.nnll> - 2016-11-03 02:24 +0100
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-11-03 02:02 +0000
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)" <seawasp@sgeinc.invalid.com> - 2016-11-03 07:41 -0400
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Yuri Kreaton <invlaid@invalid.com> - 2016-11-01 19:10 -0500
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. krw <krw@nowhere.com> - 2016-11-01 22:06 -0400
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2016-11-01 19:12 -0700
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-11-02 02:57 +0000
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2016-11-01 20:38 -0700
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2016-11-01 20:40 -0700
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Phil Hobbs <pcdhobbs@gmail.com> - 2016-11-02 18:03 -0700
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Ingvald44 <noone@nowhere.com> - 2016-11-04 12:33 -0400
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2016-11-01 14:24 -0700
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2016-11-03 10:35 -0400
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-11-03 17:39 +0000
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2016-11-06 13:12 -0500
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-11-06 19:54 +0000
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2016-11-03 11:37 -0700
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Yuri Kreaton <invlaid@invalid.com> - 2016-11-01 19:08 -0500
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Robert Baer <robertbaer@localnet.com> - 2016-11-02 00:33 -0800
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. mike <ham789@netzero.net> - 2016-11-03 01:05 -0700
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-11-03 17:43 +0000
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2016-11-04 15:38 -0400
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Bill Martin <wwm@wwmartin.net> - 2016-11-02 11:47 -0700
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. jack4747@gmail.com - 2016-11-08 06:17 -0800
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. Ralph Barone <ralph@invalid.com> - 2016-11-08 15:21 +0000
Re: Ion drive for aircraft imminent. krw <krw@somewhere.com> - 2016-11-08 18:48 -0500
csiph-web