The Fairey Rotodyne was a valiant but doomed attempt to develop a high speed civilian passenger VTOL. Decades ago, the British Airfix plastic model kit company released a decent model of it, but it has been unavailable for a good long while. They’re bringing it back out.
The new tools and techniques are now operating reliably. Behold:
The wide-view photo is pretty awful; taken in bad lighting, no flash. Ah, well.
Once split apart these will be 12″x44.” Probably going to go for $35 each, plus postage. Anyone interested?
Back in the mid 80’s, one of the things I got a kick out of was the FASA Star Trek starship combat game. Not just the game itself, but all the books and miniatures that went along with it. I bought, assembled and painted a number of the little metal ships, and have tried to keep them through all the decades since… but through numerous moves and general attrition and entropy, a bunch of the ships have vanished. Recently I’ve had an itch to take the ones I’ve got, strip their decades old paint and try again, and to replace the ones I’ve lost. I’ve looked for replacements on ebay with limited success. Most of what’s available are still in their packages, which means the prices are nuts, and the ones I really want to replace haven’t popped up.
So… does anyone have a collection of these things – or even just one – that you want to unload for a reasonable sum? If so, let me know.
Also: am I alone in having an attachment to these lead/pewter miniatures that simply doesn’t exist for plastic ones, including modern 3D printed versions? There just seems to be something special about them. Perhaps it’s the weight… and perhaps it’s the fact that these were what I had when my brain was developing connections that have ossified since I became an adult. I’d accept either or both explanations, but the fact remains: metal > plastic.
Along with the various iterations of single-seat tiltrotors (especially a stealthy version shown HERE), Bell also proposed a more conventional helicopter for the Light Helicopter eXperimental program in the early 80’s. The artwork below was published in 1985 and depicts a single seat scout chopper with stealthy features. I have no data on this design; scale can be estimated based on the size of the human figures. It would doubtless have been a chore for a single pilot to handle; probably less problematic than a single-seat tiltrotor.
An article by Sandia Labs discussing the disposition of an old, old, OLD Mk 17 nuclear bomb “trainer.” Obviously this isn’t, never was, an actual thermonuclear weapon, but a training device; as such, it doubtless included a lot of the same parts as the actual bomb.
The Mk 17 was a giant of a bomb, deliverable only by the B-36; with a yield of about 15 megatons, it was delivered in 1954, withdrawn from service in 1957. Consequently, this thing is pushing seventy years in age. The article states that it was “transported to Kirtland Air Force Base for its end-of-lifecycle dismantlement and disposition.” One *hopes* that means it’ll be lovingly restored and sent to a good museum for display. One fears it means it’ll be disassembled and scrapped. That *seems* to be its fate based on the vague descriptions of what’ll happen to it.
This is from a while back, but the video is *damned* entertaining if you are into spectacular engineering failures.
In short: Cantilever has it’s issues. Especially when, seemingly, you’re using glass window panels and compression members.
The title of this YouTube video claims that “Chrome Lords” was a 1988 movie that ripped off “RoboCop” and “Terminator.” But in fact “Chrome Lords” never existed. The video is ten minutes of “stills” from a movie that never was… all the images were produced by an AI. And other than places where it looks like AI/CGI, it *does* rather look like one of those schlocky 1980’s crapfest movies. So, well done. But here’s the thing… give it a few years (5? 10? 20?) and someone will have an AI take a few text prompts and spit out a full script, feed these images and the new script into another AI… and shazam, “Chrome Lords” will exist as an actual 90 minute horrible movie. But who – if anyone – will own the copyright?
The “Enzmann Starship” is named after Robert Enzmann, who “designed” it decades ago. Just exactly *when* has been an issue of some confusion in recent years.
It first came to light in the late 60’s or early 70’s, with claims that he thought it up around 1964 or so. The design is unique: a giant spherical ball of frozen deuterium fuel at the front, followed by a cylindrical ship, ending with a series of Orion-style nuclear pulse engines. It was an *ok* concept for a practical starship, though relatively recent analysis presented in the Journal of the British Interplanetary Society argued that it was not nearly as good as imagined. It became something of a sensation in the 70’s after appearing on the cover of “Analog” in 1973.
Nothing has ever been produced, so far as I’m aware, backing up the concept with any sort of detailed design of analysis until that JBIS paper. No reports, proposals, pages of math, from Enzmann seem to be available… just text descriptions of a few sentences and some art. And that’s fine. But in recent years the claims have become more and more expansive. Enzmann, near the end of his life, claimed that the design for a nuclear-pulse vehicle dated not from the time of the Orion program, but back to the *40’s*.
I spoke to Enzmann on the phone a few times over the years. He was enthusiastic, verbose… and baffling. He made lots and lots of claims about having worked on this or that amazing program, but when asked for verifiable details… it was classified. Those who have picked up his mantle and are trying to carry his torch seem to be following in his footsteps there, continuing his claims without much apparent criticism. I’ve recently engaged their twitter contact to get some sort of verification of his claims… but we have now reached the point where not only am I convinced that no such evidence will be produced, I feel no reason to assume anything remarkable is true at all. Behold:
He published nothing on his Starship before NYAS conference #1 other than his own words. ANP aircraft were built in the 50's, and buried deep under a NM mountain, according to Enzmann, who was there. He is the reference.
— Enzmann Archive (@EnzmannArchiv) January 2, 2023
Claiming that nuclear powered aircraft were actually built in the fifties and then buried in a mountain? Yeah… no. I’m out.
Where the thread started:
Enzmann Starships refueling at Saturn's moon.
Paining by RDE, 1949.
“We stand today upon the doorsill of manned inter-stellar flight. It will happen swiftly.” =RDE pic.twitter.com/tgNZYzMoCY— Enzmann Archive (@EnzmannArchiv) January 1, 2023
The December 2022 rewards are available for APR Patrons and Subscribers. This latest package includes:
Large Format Diagram: AWACS model diagram
Document: “Preliminary Design of a Mars Excursion Module,” 1964 conference paper, Philco
Document: “Astronauts Memorial” 2 diagrams
Document: “Patrol Reconnaissance Airplane Twin Float,” Convair brochure (via photos), 1944. Two piston engines, two turbojets
Document: “Hard Mobile Launcher,” Martin Marietta PR, two images. One photo, one artists impression
Document: “JVX Space Proposal” apparently a fragment, 1984 Bell maps of manufacturing facilities for what would become the V-22
Document: “Minimum Man In Space,” 1958 NACA memo describing proposals made to Wright Air Development Center for what would become the Mercury program
If you would like to help fund the acquisition and preservation of such things, along with getting high quality scans for yourself, please consider signing on either for the APR Patreon or the APR Monthly Historical Documents Program. Back issues are available for purchase by patrons and subscribers.
And because I forgot to post about it at the time, the November 2022 rewards were made available a month ago:
Large Format Diagram: B-50A Superfortress Model Diagram
Document: “Design Study of a One Man Lunar Transportation device,” 1964 North American Aviation conference paper on a rocket “hopper”
Document: “Project EGRESS (Emergency Global Rescue, Escape and Survival System),” 1964 Martin conference paper on ejection capsule for aerospacecraft
Document: “The Hydrogen Fueled Hypersonic Transport,” 1968 Convair conference paper
CAD Diagram: Mach 3 turbojets: Allison 700 B-2 (J89), GE YJ-93-GE-3 (cutaway), P&W J58
If you would like to help fund the acquisition and preservation of such things, along with getting high quality scans for yourself, please consider signing on either for the APR Patreon or the APR Monthly Historical Documents Program. Back issues are available for purchase by patrons and subscribers.
I have been poking away at resuming cyanotype production using the new setup and the old transparency negatives. In order to go forward successfully, I need to be able to print on transparent film up to 2 feet wide by six long. I have encountered a lot of trouble here, which has baffled me. No print shops within a hundred miles seem to be able to do that. I put in an order to buy a roll of the film myself to keep at one of the local shops to print off on as needed… and was informed today that the roll will be delivered no sooner than late *February.* The manufacturers don’t have the raw materials for it.
What’s baffling is that when last I worked with this, circa 2017 or so, getting these sort of prints was no trouble whatsoever. I’d send the files to a local print shop in Utah and within a few days the job would be done at reasonable cost, no sweat. Now, though… it’s just not done. And it turns out there is a reason: up until about 5 years ago, it seems people were still regularly using diazo-type blueprinting for architectural and other industrial diagrams, which required this sort of film. But around five years ago, digital printing finally drove the last nail in diazotypes coffin. Without the market, there’s no supply.
So, hopefully the film will still arrive. But I have a customer who kinda wants his custom job, and that’s an unreasonable wait. So something new is being done. The customers line diagram is being printed not on thin transparent film, but on thin *plexiglas.* I can see this resulting in superior cyanotypes; the plexiglass will be vastly less prone to being anything other than dead flat, so the prints should be sharper. But plexi is *far* more expensive (two full size prints will cost as much as the entire roll of film that’s hopefully coming)… and when not in use, I can’t just roll it up and stick it in the corner. If I get 24 inch by 72 inch prints on these, not only is storing them going to be a problem, I can’t even fit them in my car. Grrr. These are problems that will be solved, but, grrr. Everything is always harder not only than it needs to be, but than it used to be.