TactiSMART 046: The Flying "A-Team" CamperVan: the Best Air/Ground Combination Towards the AeroGavin Flying Tank
"I
love it when a plan comes together"
Certainly, the following proposal may exceed the "Overton Window" of what the normies can imagine--much less tolerate!
"The
smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum
of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum—even
encourage the more critical and dissident views. That gives people the
sense that there's free thinking going on, while all the time the
presuppositions of the system are being reinforced by the limits put on the
range of the debate."
--Noam Chomsky
Sadly, our dear friend, retired LTC K.P. Rice recently passed-away who we worked with to restore his LARA concept back to the U.S. Military and...flying cars! He created the VOLANTE flying car.
combatreform.org/killerbees2.htm
1st, ponder back to the beloved TV show, the "A-Team" and the brilliant movie by the same name which should have resulted in a movie series like the James Bond and the Johnny English movies. The A-Team operates from an iconic and highly useful black van with red stripe providing ground surveillance positions, getaway and resting place.
Now ponder making the A-Team van FLY! Better have a bunch of sedatives to put B.A. Baracus--who hates to fly--into a restful sleep as Murdock takes the wheel--to take-off.
Contradicting Physical Properties: the Large Van Offers the MOST to Work With--NOT Small Cars
To vividly illustrate the problem of wrapping an airplane AROUND a tank--look at this pic of the USAF and IAF desperately trying to airbase-harden large C-130 transports from enemy TFS/PDM fires.
The minimalist answer that can be dispersed & hardened is to make the tank FLY ITSELF by attaching a flying aka aero unit to it.
The easiest air/ground solution is to simply combine an airplane to a ground vehicle and shed the aero unit when on the ground can & should be used for military fire & maneuver since they can set guards to protect the aero units as we do now to recover parachutes after an Airborne operation.
M113A8 AeroGavins
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=24Rr03hqDec
The civilian air/ground vehicle that sheds its aero unit at the destination airport while being free to ground travel ends up being wed to the airport having to go back to recover them, re-attach and fly back to base. True, a transportation service could move the aero units back if the ground vehicle finishes the trip on its own. Certainly, the aero unit should become its own trailer to facilitate transport--but in civilian life these become targets for thieves.
To not shed wings demands a way to store them--the relatively small car just doesn't have enough of itself to work with as seen by Toyota's patent to stack wings like Pringle potato chips.
https://www.businessinsider.com/toyota-patent-for-flying-car-2018-9
Another option is rotary wings that can sublimate by folding and/or removal and hiding but are inferior in aviation performance compared to fixed-wing aircraft. The VTOL capabilities of a rotary-wing AEROGYRO or AEROHELO are not tolerated by American society that demands a HELIPAD--re: even if Kobe Bryant's helicopter didn't crash, explode & burn with 9 total people on-board into a hill in bad weather, it would have still had to land at a helipad 6 miles away from the desired destination sports complex--demanding a limo be sent to get them--or they could have walked (doubtful).
Royal Naval Intelligence Commander Ian Fleming's buddy, RAF Wing Commander Roald Dahl (married to ubersexy Patricia Neal) wrote the screenplay for his "Chitty, Chitty, Bang, Bang" flying & swimming car story ending with the simplest way to fly: Anti-Gravity Craft (AGC) as also seen earlier in Walt Disney's "Flubber" movies with a flying car. Currently, AGC technology is restricted to secret Illuminati purposes.
However, a VAN has plenty of side, top & bottom surface area to absorb & hide its wings and internal cargo area to sublimate the tail/power unit! The AEROVAN while larger than the car--this is counter-intuitive--is actually the easiest way to make an Air/Ground vehicle that on-the-ground looks just like other vans--and not attract the interest of thief/thugs. The AEROVAN on-the-ground doesn't become a consciously-compromised ground vehicle.
An AEROVAN will require a General Aviation-trained & certified pilot which only a small segment of the 330millionish American population can attain. This GA Aviation sub-culture also is limited in their mindsets driven by a fixation on flying skills amidst the VFR vs. IFR conundrum that continually gets people murdered: re: the Kobe Bryant horror incident.
GA must stop playing the unattainable, IFR-is-AOK game and STOP FLYING IN BAD WEATHER, period by instead transitioning to ground vehicle mode. The whole GA paradigm of flying from airport-to-airport, landing there and becoming stranded without ground transportation and a place to stay.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vi0SJeJ4bzs
The upcoming Terrafugia TRANSITION is a small car that cannot hide its folded wings but can & should have a TRUNK & BUNK "Micro-Camper" arrangement where the rear trunk area folds flat for a sleeping area--as we did with our Yaris-Martin 007 car:
Unexpected AEROVAN Benefits: a Mobile Home
Since the AEROVAN is the maximum ground vehicle to hide its folding wings, we gain a huge unexpected benefit: you get a MOBILE HOME! In Colorado, wayfarervans.com will convert your Dodge-type van into a camper for about $10K.
Once the AEROVAN is figured out, the interior can be easily configured to be an extremely comfortable & satisfying MOBILE HOME! An AEROcampervan. With roof solar panels--which can be the top-most folded wing--the electrical needs to light, heat/cool, cook food can be met without needing the power grid in case polite society collapses.
The GA aviator can fly by AEROcampervan to anywhere there is VFR weather and/or drive @30 mpg diesel efficiency when bad weather gets in the way. He can even land at the airport and "stealth camp" in its parking lot if tired needing sleep. Alternately, the GA Aviator can drive his AEROcampervan to a National Park--but he damn well better be armed in the face of the criminals & cryptoids that prey upon folks there. Re: Missing 411.
It Gets Better & Better: EVERY American Should Have a Campervan as an UNDERGROUND EMERGENCY Shelter
Every American should have a $50Kish Campervan for use as an emergency, off-the-grid home in event their fixed location home gets threatened and/or destroyed. Worry about climate change? Get a Campervan.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/KBoAiDWlTyWh/
Where do we start?
The Veterans Administration (VA) should start this transformation by supplying Campervans to every able-bodied/addictive drug-free, veteran who needs a home & transportation to jobs--which may require re-locating to distant areas in the U.S. to meet seasonal demands. These Campervans would be paid-back to the VA from monthly wages.
These Campervans should be dug-into the backyard ground of the veteran's VA Home Loan house under a concrete slab with storm doors becoming very comfortable underground shelters. If the veteran/family needs to re-locate to avoid a The Battle Against The Earth (TBATE) or The Battle Against Man (TBAM) destructive-force disaster, they can quickly with less than 1-hour loading of lightweight valuables leaving nothing in the static home for thieves to steal excepting flat screen TVs which ghetto thugs can masturbate all over as the disaster destructive force rids them from the gene pool.
Once the Campervan becomes the American societal "norm", its half-way there that these have flying versions for GA pilots. The Overton Window bar would be dramatically moved ahead.
NO, We Don't Want the Jetsons, Star Wars & The 5th Element etc. Flying Traffic Jams & Collisions
Sadly, America's numbers coupled with urban ground vehicle traffic jams simply cannot move by massive numbers of flying cars no matter the computerized deconfliction controls--but is a popular science fiction fantasy. The real future is lesser numbers of High Speed Trains (HSTs) moving more people than air or ground cars.
combatreform.org/jamesbondfliesbytrain.htm
HST tunnels and tracks from America to Europe should be constructed making us a Mackinder land power instead of a weak, tenuous Mahanian naval power that can vanish in an instant.
NEW American GeoStrategy Needed
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vxTZ870RJAc
Ponder the plight of the once-mighty, Royal Navy:
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10976413/royal-navy-shrinking-delayed-warships/
QUOTE:
THE Royal Navy will be smaller than Italy’s as new warships are delayed.
By the mid 2020s the number of frigates and destroyers in service will fall to just 15.
That breaks the Government’s long standing promise never to go below 19.
Former admirals branded the admission “a national embarrassment and disgrace” and warned the cock-up will relegate Britain to the second division of the world’s navies.
In comparison, France has 22 frigates and destroyers, and even Italy has 17.
****
The importance of the civilian normies who are GA pilots adopting air/ground mobility is to shame their unimaginative military brethren--who while on public adulation pedestals--are hardly our best & brightest when it comes to innovation until at war and forced by death to make bold improvements. The wheeled, unarmored AEROcampervan is just shy of being a M113A8 AeroGavin flying armored, tracked tank we need to prevail over 720 degree, Non-Linear Battlefields (NLBs) avoiding both Precision Directed Munitions (PDMs) and Terrain Firepower Saturation (TFS) destruction...
James Bond is REAL.
Will Flying Cars Help the U.S. Beat China? The Air Force Hopes So
BY PATRICK TUCKER
TECHNOLOGY EDITOR
READ BIO
FEBRUARY 25, 2020
PIC: Service officials say giving American manufacturers first-mover advantage is just as important as the military benefits of vertical-lift buses.
The U.S. Air Force wants flying cars. But more than that, it wants to give U.S. manufacturers a head start in a hot future market.
On Tuesday, service officials released a request for proposals for the Agility Prime program, which seeks a highly modular vertical-lift aircraft that could play a variety of roles. The service dubs them ORBs, for organic resupply buses.
“Given their flexibility, an ORB could act as an organic resupply bus for disaster relief teams, an operational readiness bus for improved aircraft availability, and an open requirements bus for a growing diversity of missions. ORBs could enable distributed logistics, sustainment, and maneuver, with particular utility in medical evacuation, firefighting, civil and military disaster relief, installation and border security, search and rescue, and humanitarian operations,” the request said.
Will Roper, the service’s assistant secretary for acquisition, said last week that that program is much broader than just building a flying bus. He’s looking to create the circumstances by which the industry can take off in the United States before it swims to China.
Roper made his remarks to a handful of Pentagon reporters, but he could have been speaking to an international crowd of policy-makers and Fortune 500 CEOs in Davos or Munich. Helping to launch flying car market in the United States is “equally” as important as acquiring them for the Air Force, he said.
DOD provides about “20 percent of the [research and development] funding in this country,” he said. “Twenty percent is not going to compete with China long-term, with a nationalized industrial base that can pick national winners.”
A January report from data analytics company Govini supports that view. Govini found that while the U.S. government and U.S. businesses are spending more on research and development than China, the pace of China’s investment is surpassing that of the United States.
Among the tech winners that China has been able to poach from the United States is the consumer drone market. Roper described it as a cautionary tale for what could happen with flying cars. “The Pentagon didn’t take a proactive stance on it and now most of that supply chain has moved to China. If we had realized that commercial trend and shown that the Pentagon is willing to pay a higher price point for a trusted supply chain drone,.” the drone market would be different, and the U.S. military would be the direct beneficiary.
“We probably could have kept part of the market here and not have the security issues we do now when someone wants to use a foreign-made drone at an air force or service event.
Agility Prime is saying, ‘we’re not going to let that happen again and we’re going to be part of the global tech ecosystem.’”
The Air Force has created a venture arm, Air Force Ventures, to persuade the venture capital community to invest in projects with military relevance. Roper said that partnering with the big-money houses of Silicon Valley has already helped to bring $400 million in private investment into companies working on defense problems.
The Air Force has also introduced processes meant to get more money to companies that aren’t traditional defense contractors. In the beginning phase, there’s AFWERX, which the Air Force created in 2017 as a seed investor. AFWERX is making investments of roughly $50,000 in small companies as part of the Small Business Innovation Research, or SBIR, program. Companies that make it to phase II of the SBIR program could get $1 million. Finally, the Air Force is looking to match the investment of private venture capitalists for bigger bets.
That’s a big departure from the way defense contracting happens traditionally, with a known defense contractor snagging a big multi-year contract and then working it until it’s canceled. “We’re not going to get a new defense prime. It collapses every year through mergers and acquisitions. Trying to recreate the 20th century industrial base is a losing strategy,” Roper said.
Early-stage investments in technology that could have dual military and civilian use, Roper said, is the only way the United States is going to stay competitive with China. But the military has a lot of other assets it can bring to bear on tech innovation that the private sector can’t, such as testing ranges for experimental aircraft.
The acquisitions program for Agility Prime would feature a “challenge-based acquisition plan. We’ll have different durations of flight and payloads that have to be carried. And if you pass the hurdle, you will move further down the wickets of getting safety certified and moving onto a procurement contract. We’re working with our operators right now on what missions” that might entail, he said.
Roper hopes that certifying companies to produce flying cars for the Air Force will go a long way to convincing other federal authorities to give their stamp of approval. “The companies that are able to make it to that point are able to go to domestic certifiers and say, ‘You should trust that I am able to fly commercially,’” he said.
Peter W. Singer, a strategist at New America, said, “Pentagon leaders are putting far more thinking into supply chains than they were in the past, in both already established programs of record as well as what might be the programs 20 years from now. So I am supportive of this kind of thinking. A challenge, though, is in areas where the consumer side might take off, pun intended. The Pentagon’s buying power might be enough to aid a startup at the early stage, which is obviously valuable. But the long term prospects of a firm selling into a mostly civilian market are going to be decided outside the E-Ring.”
Paul Scharre, a senior fellow and the director of the Technology and National Security Program at the Center for a New American Security, said, “I think it’s good that DoD is thinking about supply chain security and how commercial markets evolve. Keeping a demand signal in the marketplace for trusted suppliers is important for shaping how an industry evolves.”
Stephen Rodriguez, a senior advisor at the Atlantic Council, said “China came to dominate the commercial drone market not only by investing heavily out of their federal coffers but also, and probably more importantly, coordinating their industrial policy with commercial technology developers. This enables Beijing to clearly see what technology they need to buy or build and what technology wasn’t important. We still wrestle with this paradigm. Whether we have a ‘trusted market’ or not, Washington still needs to understand what technologies are truly game-changing on an ongoing basis, and then building programs around that policy.”
Patrick Tucker is technology editor for Defense One. He’s also the author of The Naked Future: What Happens in a World That Anticipates Your Every Move? (Current, 2014). Previously, Tucker was deputy editor for The Futurist for nine years. Tucker has written about emerging technology in Slate.
Semper
https://www.combatreform.org/2LTMichaelSparksUSMCR.htm
Airborne!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkRaE3UEags
Commander Ian Fleming RNVR 1939-51 wrote the James Bond 007 books/movies for the Information Research Division (IRD) of MI6-SIS who he worked for as a Master Spy under journalistic cover from 1933-39 and 1945-1964 when he was murdered (as concluded by legendary investigative reporter, Jim Marrs to me) to prevent him publicly condemning the Warren Commission white wash of the CIA's group ambush murder of his friend, President John F. Kennedy.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/bKnOnlXSuue4/
http://www.jamesbondisforreal.com
Comments
Post a Comment