Discussion:
1933 Trenn Flying Platform
(too old to reply)
Rob Arndt
2007-07-13 07:14:14 UTC
Permalink
Loading Image...
Loading Image...

Patented on 10/03/33 the Trenn Flying Platform predated the postwar
Piaseki and more complex Hiller designs by 25 years!

Rob
Vaughn Simon
2007-07-13 18:37:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rob Arndt
Patented on 10/03/33 the Trenn Flying Platform predated the postwar
Piaseki and more complex Hiller designs by 25 years!
Did a manned model ever fly?
Was it ever put into production?

Vaughn
Rob Arndt
2007-07-13 19:12:58 UTC
Permalink
On Jul 13, 11:37?am, "Vaughn Simon"
Post by Vaughn Simon
Post by Rob Arndt
Patented on 10/03/33 the Trenn Flying Platform predated the postwar
Piaseki and more complex Hiller designs by 25 years!
Did a manned model ever fly?
Was it ever put into production?
Vaughn
No production, but a single prototype was started around 1935. Yet for
some reason, by 1939, it had been abandoned. The craft had civilian
markings on it, D-EMKZ, and a test pattern painted on. There are
claimed existing photos of the machine under construction and
completed on the ground, but I have never found any to date. The
artwork, however, matches descriptions of the craft with the Nazi flag
draped over it (probably for some form of public demonstration). Yet
the machine was believed to be unstable due to the engine (SH-14)
postion under the pilot's cockpit and no way to accurately counter the
fuel tank weight in the circular wing nor control flight with the
movable wing louvers. the pilot had absolutely no downwards visibility
either. What this was to be used for is a mystery.

I do not know if there were any subsequent German paper projects for a
flying platform or if the US got any of this information to use with
their postwar designs.

I doubt there was any military application for it, so that is why it
was not accepted for production. A unique machine, but just an
experimental VTOL in the end.

Rob
Vaughn Simon
2007-07-13 22:29:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rob Arndt
I doubt there was any military application for it, so that is why it
was not accepted for production. A unique machine, but just an
experimental VTOL in the end.
One does not have to be an aviation engineer to recognize that the Trenn
would tumble out of the sky if one of the props lost power. Actually, this
reminds me a lot of Moller's designs. http://www.moller.com/xm4.htm Another
thing that makes Moller's stuff similar to the Trenn is the lack of flight, for
apparently many of the same design reasons.

Vaughn
Rob Arndt
2007-07-14 03:26:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Vaughn Simon
Post by Rob Arndt
I doubt there was any military application for it, so that is why it
was not accepted for production. A unique machine, but just an
experimental VTOL in the end.
One does not have to be an aviation engineer to recognize that the Trenn
would tumble out of the sky if one of the props lost power. Actually, this
reminds me a lot of Moller's designs. http://www.moller.com/xm4.htm Another
thing that makes Moller's stuff similar to the Trenn is the lack of flight, for
apparently many of the same design reasons.
Vaughn
It's more like a lack of a complex flight management system to balance
out all the weights of the machine at all times. No FBW existed in
1933,35, or 39. Also, attaching any Mk-108s or bombs to that platform
would have totally destabilized it. I am still investigating the
machine for more info to move it from my Little-Known Disc Page over
to its own entry. More to come... as all I need is the construction
photos and any flight photos at all, including just hovering off the
ground.

Rob
Vaughn Simon
2007-07-14 11:58:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rob Arndt
Post by Vaughn Simon
One does not have to be an aviation engineer to recognize that the Trenn
would tumble out of the sky if one of the props lost power.
It's more like a lack of a complex flight management system to balance
out all the weights of the machine at all times.
No. Please go back and look at the Trenn and explain to the group what
"complex flight management system" could keep that thing in the sky if it lost
power to one of its four fans spaced at 90 degree intervals around the central
axis.

Vaughn
Dan
2007-07-14 18:52:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Vaughn Simon
Post by Rob Arndt
Post by Vaughn Simon
One does not have to be an aviation engineer to recognize that the Trenn
would tumble out of the sky if one of the props lost power.
It's more like a lack of a complex flight management system to balance
out all the weights of the machine at all times.
No. Please go back and look at the Trenn and explain to the group what
"complex flight management system" could keep that thing in the sky if it lost
power to one of its four fans spaced at 90 degree intervals around the central
axis.
Vaughn
He won't do it since it was a Nazi design with pretty pictures and
that's all that matters to him.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
Rob Arndt
2007-07-14 19:25:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dan
Post by Vaughn Simon
Post by Rob Arndt
Post by Vaughn Simon
One does not have to be an aviation engineer to recognize that the Trenn
would tumble out of the sky if one of the props lost power.
It's more like a lack of a complex flight management system to balance
out all the weights of the machine at all times.
No. Please go back and look at the Trenn and explain to the group what
"complex flight management system" could keep that thing in the sky if it lost
power to one of its four fans spaced at 90 degree intervals around the central
axis.
Vaughn
He won't do it since it was a Nazi design with pretty pictures and
that's all that matters to him.
Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Shut up Dan.

No one on this entire NG knew about that patent (nor if any actual
craft was ever built). You never bring up anything remotely like I do
on aviation, so GFYS, you pathetic POS.

You contribute nothing of any real value to this NG except your
fucking opinions and commentary.

Rob
Dan
2007-07-14 20:00:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rob Arndt
Post by Dan
Post by Vaughn Simon
Post by Rob Arndt
Post by Vaughn Simon
One does not have to be an aviation engineer to recognize that the Trenn
would tumble out of the sky if one of the props lost power.
It's more like a lack of a complex flight management system to balance
out all the weights of the machine at all times.
No. Please go back and look at the Trenn and explain to the group what
"complex flight management system" could keep that thing in the sky if it lost
power to one of its four fans spaced at 90 degree intervals around the central
axis.
Vaughn
He won't do it since it was a Nazi design with pretty pictures and
that's all that matters to him.
Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Shut up Dan.
I notice you decline to answer Simon's question.
Post by Rob Arndt
No one on this entire NG knew about that patent (nor if any actual
craft was ever built).
That may be true, who knows. You said "a complex flight management
system" could make the Trenn machine flyable. I pointed out Moller's
machine isn't and has the benefit of "a complex flight management
system" and has yet to transition to forward flight after decades of
work. So answer Simon's question already.


You never bring up anything remotely like I do
Post by Rob Arndt
on aviation,
True, I don't bring up fictional flying machines.

so GFYS, you pathetic POS.

Care to demonstrate?
Post by Rob Arndt
You contribute nothing of any real value to this NG except your
fucking opinions and commentary.
Rob
Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
Rob Arndt
2007-07-14 23:20:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Vaughn Simon
Post by Rob Arndt
Post by Vaughn Simon
One does not have to be an aviation engineer to recognize that the Trenn
would tumble out of the sky if one of the props lost power.
It's more like a lack of a complex flight management system to balance
out all the weights of the machine at all times.
No. Please go back and look at the Trenn and explain to the group what
"complex flight management system" could keep that thing in the sky if it lost
power to one of its four fans spaced at 90 degree intervals around the central
axis.
Vaughn
My original comments:

Yet the machine was believed to be unstable due to the engine (SH-14)
postion under the pilot's cockpit and no way to accurately counter
the
fuel tank weight in the circular wing nor control flight with the
movable wing louvers. the pilot had absolutely no downwards
visibility
either. What this was to be used for is a mystery.

I firmly stated the reasons believed by many why this was either not
built or not flown.

I only suggested that it needed a complex control system to keep it in
flight, but perhaps like the Epp Omega Diskus with lift fans, the
answer wouls have been a redesign with an aux. propulsion system
(although that design had 8 disc fans). Epp used a rampjet rotor above
the cockpit with Omega and the Soviets redesigned Pirna Disc used tip
turbojets and revised control surfaces:

Epp Omega Diskus:
http://greyfalcon.us/restored/JOSEF%20ANDREAS%20EPP.htm

Epp Pirna Disc:
http://discaircraft.greyfalcon.us/GDR%20Pirna.htm

Rob
Dan
2007-07-14 03:31:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rob Arndt
http://modelshelves.free.fr/analyses/MS2004_7P/SCRH_TRENN/TRENN_Pat.JPG
http://modelshelves.free.fr/analyses/MS2004_7P/SCRH_TRENN/SCRH_TRENN_Flight2.JPG
Patented on 10/03/33 the Trenn Flying Platform predated the postwar
Piaseki and more complex Hiller designs by 25 years!
Rob
Just like Moller, Hiller, Piaseki and all the rest your Nazi design
wouldn't have been capable of flying out of ground effect. It's a pipe
dream in which suckers sink millions of dollars with nothing to show for it.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
Rob Arndt
2007-07-14 05:08:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dan
Post by Rob Arndt
http://modelshelves.free.fr/analyses/MS2004_7P/SCRH_TRENN/TRENN_Pat.JPG
http://modelshelves.free.fr/analyses/MS2004_7P/SCRH_TRENN/SCRH_TRENN_...
Patented on 10/03/33 the Trenn Flying Platform predated the postwar
Piaseki and more complex Hiller designs by 25 years!
Rob
Just like Moller, Hiller, Piaseki and all the rest your Nazi design
wouldn't have been capable of flying out of ground effect. It's a pipe
dream in which suckers sink millions of dollars with nothing to show for it.
Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
Pipe dreams are good for humanity... like manned flight, splitting the
atom, walking on the moon, genetic engineering, etc... :)

Take your pessimism someplace else Dan. Historically, the skeptics are
eventually proven wrong.

Trenn's design at least showed some originality and was VTOL for
1933.

Rob
Dan
2007-07-14 05:49:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rob Arndt
Post by Dan
Post by Rob Arndt
http://modelshelves.free.fr/analyses/MS2004_7P/SCRH_TRENN/TRENN_Pat.JPG
http://modelshelves.free.fr/analyses/MS2004_7P/SCRH_TRENN/SCRH_TRENN_...
Patented on 10/03/33 the Trenn Flying Platform predated the postwar
Piaseki and more complex Hiller designs by 25 years!
Rob
Just like Moller, Hiller, Piaseki and all the rest your Nazi design
wouldn't have been capable of flying out of ground effect. It's a pipe
dream in which suckers sink millions of dollars with nothing to show for it.
Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
Pipe dreams are good for humanity... like manned flight, splitting the
atom, walking on the moon, genetic engineering, etc... :)
Take your pessimism someplace else Dan. Historically, the skeptics are
eventually proven wrong.
Trenn's design at least showed some originality and was VTOL for
1933.
Rob
Tell you what, take a look at Moller's abortion. He's been using
computers, modern materials, modern engines etc and still can't get out
of ground effect. He never will.

If Trenn had been in the U.S. and not German you'd never claim it had
potential and you know it.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
Dave Eadsforth
2007-07-14 07:01:45 UTC
Permalink
In article <XuZli.35957$***@newsfe13.lga>, Dan <***@aol.com>
writes
Post by Dan
Post by Rob Arndt
Post by Dan
Post by Rob Arndt
http://modelshelves.free.fr/analyses/MS2004_7P/SCRH_TRENN/TRENN_Pat.JPG
http://modelshelves.free.fr/analyses/MS2004_7P/SCRH_TRENN/SCRH_TRENN_...
Patented on 10/03/33 the Trenn Flying Platform predated the postwar
Piaseki and more complex Hiller designs by 25 years!
Rob
Just like Moller, Hiller, Piaseki and all the rest your Nazi design
wouldn't have been capable of flying out of ground effect. It's a pipe
dream in which suckers sink millions of dollars with nothing to show for it.
Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
Pipe dreams are good for humanity... like manned flight, splitting the
atom, walking on the moon, genetic engineering, etc... :)
Take your pessimism someplace else Dan. Historically, the skeptics are
eventually proven wrong.
Trenn's design at least showed some originality and was VTOL for
1933.
Rob
Tell you what, take a look at Moller's abortion. He's been using
computers, modern materials, modern engines etc and still can't get out
of ground effect. He never will.
If Trenn had been in the U.S. and not German you'd never claim it had
potential and you know it.
Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
Looking at the vids on Moller's site he does appear to be well out of
ground effect - he just doesn't appear to have cracked the problem of
getting an engine that will never fail.

Cheers,

Dave
--
Dave Eadsforth
Dan
2007-07-14 08:04:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dave Eadsforth
writes
Post by Dan
Post by Rob Arndt
Post by Dan
Post by Rob Arndt
http://modelshelves.free.fr/analyses/MS2004_7P/SCRH_TRENN/TRENN_Pat.JPG
http://modelshelves.free.fr/analyses/MS2004_7P/SCRH_TRENN/SCRH_TRENN_...
Patented on 10/03/33 the Trenn Flying Platform predated the postwar
Piaseki and more complex Hiller designs by 25 years!
Rob
Just like Moller, Hiller, Piaseki and all the rest your Nazi design
wouldn't have been capable of flying out of ground effect. It's a pipe
dream in which suckers sink millions of dollars with nothing to show for it.
Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
Pipe dreams are good for humanity... like manned flight, splitting the
atom, walking on the moon, genetic engineering, etc... :)
Take your pessimism someplace else Dan. Historically, the skeptics are
eventually proven wrong.
Trenn's design at least showed some originality and was VTOL for
1933.
Rob
Tell you what, take a look at Moller's abortion. He's been using
computers, modern materials, modern engines etc and still can't get out
of ground effect. He never will.
If Trenn had been in the U.S. and not German you'd never claim it had
potential and you know it.
Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
Looking at the vids on Moller's site he does appear to be well out of
ground effect - he just doesn't appear to have cracked the problem of
getting an engine that will never fail.
Cheers,
Dave
I will have to look at his site again. The videos I have seen show
his money pit hovering less than 3 feet, well within ground effect.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
Rob Arndt
2007-07-14 23:35:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dan
Post by Dave Eadsforth
writes
Post by Dan
Post by Rob Arndt
Post by Dan
Post by Rob Arndt
http://modelshelves.free.fr/analyses/MS2004_7P/SCRH_TRENN/TRENN_Pat.JPG
http://modelshelves.free.fr/analyses/MS2004_7P/SCRH_TRENN/SCRH_TRENN_...
Patented on 10/03/33 the Trenn Flying Platform predated the postwar
Piaseki and more complex Hiller designs by 25 years!
Rob
Just like Moller, Hiller, Piaseki and all the rest your Nazi design
wouldn't have been capable of flying out of ground effect. It's a pipe
dream in which suckers sink millions of dollars with nothing to show for it.
Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
Pipe dreams are good for humanity... like manned flight, splitting the
atom, walking on the moon, genetic engineering, etc... :)
Take your pessimism someplace else Dan. Historically, the skeptics are
eventually proven wrong.
Trenn's design at least showed some originality and was VTOL for
1933.
Rob
Tell you what, take a look at Moller's abortion. He's been using
computers, modern materials, modern engines etc and still can't get out
of ground effect. He never will.
If Trenn had been in the U.S. and not German you'd never claim it had
potential and you know it.
Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
Looking at the vids on Moller's site he does appear to be well out of
ground effect - he just doesn't appear to have cracked the problem of
getting an engine that will never fail.
Cheers,
Dave
I will have to look at his site again. The videos I have seen show
his money pit hovering less than 3 feet, well within ground effect.
Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Moller broke ground effect way back on the 10/26/02 test flight. Which
makes you a liar again.

Rob
Dan
2007-07-15 00:00:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rob Arndt
Post by Dan
Post by Dave Eadsforth
writes
Post by Dan
Post by Rob Arndt
Post by Dan
Post by Rob Arndt
http://modelshelves.free.fr/analyses/MS2004_7P/SCRH_TRENN/TRENN_Pat.JPG
http://modelshelves.free.fr/analyses/MS2004_7P/SCRH_TRENN/SCRH_TRENN_...
Patented on 10/03/33 the Trenn Flying Platform predated the postwar
Piaseki and more complex Hiller designs by 25 years!
Rob
Just like Moller, Hiller, Piaseki and all the rest your Nazi design
wouldn't have been capable of flying out of ground effect. It's a pipe
dream in which suckers sink millions of dollars with nothing to show for it.
Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
Pipe dreams are good for humanity... like manned flight, splitting the
atom, walking on the moon, genetic engineering, etc... :)
Take your pessimism someplace else Dan. Historically, the skeptics are
eventually proven wrong.
Trenn's design at least showed some originality and was VTOL for
1933.
Rob
Tell you what, take a look at Moller's abortion. He's been using
computers, modern materials, modern engines etc and still can't get out
of ground effect. He never will.
If Trenn had been in the U.S. and not German you'd never claim it had
potential and you know it.
Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
Looking at the vids on Moller's site he does appear to be well out of
ground effect - he just doesn't appear to have cracked the problem of
getting an engine that will never fail.
Cheers,
Dave
I will have to look at his site again. The videos I have seen show
his money pit hovering less than 3 feet, well within ground effect.
Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Moller broke ground effect way back on the 10/26/02 test flight. Which
makes you a liar again.
Rob
I just looked at his site and can't find where he claims to have
hovered out of ground effect. Perhaps you can show me where he says it.
The video he has on his site shows his toy bouncing to maybe 5 feet, but
not hovering. Avrocar could bounce almost as high. I'll believe Moller
when he can hover or transition to horizontal flight out of ground
effect with a manned and untethered machine.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
Rob Arndt
2007-07-15 00:48:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dan
Post by Rob Arndt
Post by Dan
Post by Dave Eadsforth
writes
Post by Dan
Post by Rob Arndt
Post by Dan
Post by Rob Arndt
http://modelshelves.free.fr/analyses/MS2004_7P/SCRH_TRENN/TRENN_Pat.JPG
http://modelshelves.free.fr/analyses/MS2004_7P/SCRH_TRENN/SCRH_TRENN_...
Patented on 10/03/33 the Trenn Flying Platform predated the postwar
Piaseki and more complex Hiller designs by 25 years!
Rob
Just like Moller, Hiller, Piaseki and all the rest your Nazi design
wouldn't have been capable of flying out of ground effect. It's a pipe
dream in which suckers sink millions of dollars with nothing to show for it.
Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
Pipe dreams are good for humanity... like manned flight, splitting the
atom, walking on the moon, genetic engineering, etc... :)
Take your pessimism someplace else Dan. Historically, the skeptics are
eventually proven wrong.
Trenn's design at least showed some originality and was VTOL for
1933.
Rob
Tell you what, take a look at Moller's abortion. He's been using
computers, modern materials, modern engines etc and still can't get out
of ground effect. He never will.
If Trenn had been in the U.S. and not German you'd never claim it had
potential and you know it.
Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
Looking at the vids on Moller's site he does appear to be well out of
ground effect - he just doesn't appear to have cracked the problem of
getting an engine that will never fail.
Cheers,
Dave
I will have to look at his site again. The videos I have seen show
his money pit hovering less than 3 feet, well within ground effect.
Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Moller broke ground effect way back on the 10/26/02 test flight. Which
makes you a liar again.
Rob
I just looked at his site and can't find where he claims to have
hovered out of ground effect. Perhaps you can show me where he says it.
The video he has on his site shows his toy bouncing to maybe 5 feet, but
not hovering. Avrocar could bounce almost as high. I'll believe Moller
when he can hover or transition to horizontal flight out of ground
effect with a manned and untethered machine.
Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Avrocar was a GETOL (Ground Effect Take-Off and Landing) machine never
meant for flight but as a hovering ground attack machine armed with a
bazooka or recoilless gun on the rear deck.

Shows how much you know about its design and development.

Why do you think the US Army got in on it?

Rob
Dan
2007-07-15 00:53:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rob Arndt
Post by Dan
Post by Rob Arndt
Post by Dan
Post by Dave Eadsforth
writes
Post by Dan
Post by Rob Arndt
Post by Dan
Post by Rob Arndt
http://modelshelves.free.fr/analyses/MS2004_7P/SCRH_TRENN/TRENN_Pat.JPG
http://modelshelves.free.fr/analyses/MS2004_7P/SCRH_TRENN/SCRH_TRENN_...
Patented on 10/03/33 the Trenn Flying Platform predated the postwar
Piaseki and more complex Hiller designs by 25 years!
Rob
Just like Moller, Hiller, Piaseki and all the rest your Nazi design
wouldn't have been capable of flying out of ground effect. It's a pipe
dream in which suckers sink millions of dollars with nothing to show for it.
Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
Pipe dreams are good for humanity... like manned flight, splitting the
atom, walking on the moon, genetic engineering, etc... :)
Take your pessimism someplace else Dan. Historically, the skeptics are
eventually proven wrong.
Trenn's design at least showed some originality and was VTOL for
1933.
Rob
Tell you what, take a look at Moller's abortion. He's been using
computers, modern materials, modern engines etc and still can't get out
of ground effect. He never will.
If Trenn had been in the U.S. and not German you'd never claim it had
potential and you know it.
Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
Looking at the vids on Moller's site he does appear to be well out of
ground effect - he just doesn't appear to have cracked the problem of
getting an engine that will never fail.
Cheers,
Dave
I will have to look at his site again. The videos I have seen show
his money pit hovering less than 3 feet, well within ground effect.
Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Moller broke ground effect way back on the 10/26/02 test flight. Which
makes you a liar again.
Rob
I just looked at his site and can't find where he claims to have
hovered out of ground effect. Perhaps you can show me where he says it.
The video he has on his site shows his toy bouncing to maybe 5 feet, but
not hovering. Avrocar could bounce almost as high. I'll believe Moller
when he can hover or transition to horizontal flight out of ground
effect with a manned and untethered machine.
Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Avrocar was a GETOL (Ground Effect Take-Off and Landing) machine never
meant for flight but as a hovering ground attack machine armed with a
bazooka or recoilless gun on the rear deck.
Shows how much you know about its design and development.
Why do you think the US Army got in on it?
Rob
I was making a comparison. I should have been more clear. I forgot to
whom I was talking.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

Rob Arndt
2007-07-14 07:18:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dan
Post by Rob Arndt
Post by Dan
Post by Rob Arndt
http://modelshelves.free.fr/analyses/MS2004_7P/SCRH_TRENN/TRENN_Pat.JPG
http://modelshelves.free.fr/analyses/MS2004_7P/SCRH_TRENN/SCRH_TRENN_...
Patented on 10/03/33 the Trenn Flying Platform predated the postwar
Piaseki and more complex Hiller designs by 25 years!
Rob
Just like Moller, Hiller, Piaseki and all the rest your Nazi design
wouldn't have been capable of flying out of ground effect. It's a pipe
dream in which suckers sink millions of dollars with nothing to show for it.
Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
Pipe dreams are good for humanity... like manned flight, splitting the
atom, walking on the moon, genetic engineering, etc... :)
Take your pessimism someplace else Dan. Historically, the skeptics are
eventually proven wrong.
Trenn's design at least showed some originality and was VTOL for
1933.
Rob
Tell you what, take a look at Moller's abortion. He's been using
computers, modern materials, modern engines etc and still can't get out
of ground effect. He never will.
If Trenn had been in the U.S. and not German you'd never claim it had
potential and you know it.
Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Absolute bullshit Dan as I have posted on the Vought Umbrella Plane,
Nemeth Roundwing, Antes Annular, Vought V-173 and XF5U-1, Lockheed
Silverbug, Lockheed LRV, Northrop NS-97, NASA disc lifting bodies, the
Townsend Brown experiments, and ALL of the VTO/VTOL/VSTOL US aircraft
projects.

You are a liar.

Rob
Dan
2007-07-14 08:03:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rob Arndt
Post by Dan
Post by Rob Arndt
Post by Dan
Post by Rob Arndt
http://modelshelves.free.fr/analyses/MS2004_7P/SCRH_TRENN/TRENN_Pat.JPG
http://modelshelves.free.fr/analyses/MS2004_7P/SCRH_TRENN/SCRH_TRENN_...
Patented on 10/03/33 the Trenn Flying Platform predated the postwar
Piaseki and more complex Hiller designs by 25 years!
Rob
Just like Moller, Hiller, Piaseki and all the rest your Nazi design
wouldn't have been capable of flying out of ground effect. It's a pipe
dream in which suckers sink millions of dollars with nothing to show for it.
Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
Pipe dreams are good for humanity... like manned flight, splitting the
atom, walking on the moon, genetic engineering, etc... :)
Take your pessimism someplace else Dan. Historically, the skeptics are
eventually proven wrong.
Trenn's design at least showed some originality and was VTOL for
1933.
Rob
Tell you what, take a look at Moller's abortion. He's been using
computers, modern materials, modern engines etc and still can't get out
of ground effect. He never will.
If Trenn had been in the U.S. and not German you'd never claim it had
potential and you know it.
Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Absolute bullshit Dan as I have posted on the Vought Umbrella Plane,
Nemeth Roundwing, Antes Annular, Vought V-173 and XF5U-1, Lockheed
Silverbug, Lockheed LRV, Northrop NS-97, NASA disc lifting bodies, the
Townsend Brown experiments, and ALL of the VTO/VTOL/VSTOL US aircraft
projects.
You are a liar.
Rob
And you are a sad, deluded sack, so?

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
Rob Arndt
2007-07-14 08:10:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dan
Post by Rob Arndt
Post by Dan
Post by Rob Arndt
Post by Dan
Post by Rob Arndt
http://modelshelves.free.fr/analyses/MS2004_7P/SCRH_TRENN/TRENN_Pat.JPG
http://modelshelves.free.fr/analyses/MS2004_7P/SCRH_TRENN/SCRH_TRENN_...
Patented on 10/03/33 the Trenn Flying Platform predated the postwar
Piaseki and more complex Hiller designs by 25 years!
Rob
Just like Moller, Hiller, Piaseki and all the rest your Nazi design
wouldn't have been capable of flying out of ground effect. It's a pipe
dream in which suckers sink millions of dollars with nothing to show for it.
Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
Pipe dreams are good for humanity... like manned flight, splitting the
atom, walking on the moon, genetic engineering, etc... :)
Take your pessimism someplace else Dan. Historically, the skeptics are
eventually proven wrong.
Trenn's design at least showed some originality and was VTOL for
1933.
Rob
Tell you what, take a look at Moller's abortion. He's been using
computers, modern materials, modern engines etc and still can't get out
of ground effect. He never will.
If Trenn had been in the U.S. and not German you'd never claim it had
potential and you know it.
Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Absolute bullshit Dan as I have posted on the Vought Umbrella Plane,
Nemeth Roundwing, Antes Annular, Vought V-173 and XF5U-1, Lockheed
Silverbug, Lockheed LRV, Northrop NS-97, NASA disc lifting bodies, the
Townsend Brown experiments, and ALL of the VTO/VTOL/VSTOL US aircraft
projects.
You are a liar.
Rob
And you are a sad, deluded sack, so?
Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
No, you are a fucking sad German-hating liar. And the RAM archive
proves it, asshole.

Rob
Dan
2007-07-14 18:40:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rob Arndt
Post by Dan
Post by Rob Arndt
Post by Dan
Post by Rob Arndt
Post by Dan
Post by Rob Arndt
http://modelshelves.free.fr/analyses/MS2004_7P/SCRH_TRENN/TRENN_Pat.JPG
http://modelshelves.free.fr/analyses/MS2004_7P/SCRH_TRENN/SCRH_TRENN_...
Patented on 10/03/33 the Trenn Flying Platform predated the postwar
Piaseki and more complex Hiller designs by 25 years!
Rob
Just like Moller, Hiller, Piaseki and all the rest your Nazi design
wouldn't have been capable of flying out of ground effect. It's a pipe
dream in which suckers sink millions of dollars with nothing to show for it.
Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
Pipe dreams are good for humanity... like manned flight, splitting the
atom, walking on the moon, genetic engineering, etc... :)
Take your pessimism someplace else Dan. Historically, the skeptics are
eventually proven wrong.
Trenn's design at least showed some originality and was VTOL for
1933.
Rob
Tell you what, take a look at Moller's abortion. He's been using
computers, modern materials, modern engines etc and still can't get out
of ground effect. He never will.
If Trenn had been in the U.S. and not German you'd never claim it had
potential and you know it.
Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Absolute bullshit Dan as I have posted on the Vought Umbrella Plane,
Nemeth Roundwing, Antes Annular, Vought V-173 and XF5U-1, Lockheed
Silverbug, Lockheed LRV, Northrop NS-97, NASA disc lifting bodies, the
Townsend Brown experiments, and ALL of the VTO/VTOL/VSTOL US aircraft
projects.
You are a liar.
Rob
And you are a sad, deluded sack, so?
Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
No, you are a fucking sad German-hating liar. And the RAM archive
proves it, asshole.
Rob
OK, tell us, o foul mouthed one, which of the U.S. aircraft you
have listed here did you tell us were forward leaning like the Trenn
example?

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
Loading...