Anyone know any more about this? 1

[dicer]

http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Gun_Engine#Official_Website

 

[Bribyk]

I know it made my brain hurt reading that.

 

[SomptingGuy]

I do like reading these articles just to see how quickly my BS bell starts ringing. Usually in the first paragraph.

- Steve

 

[jmw]

Motto 1: "there is no such thing as a free lunch" and:
Motto 2: "It it sounds to good to be true, it is too good to be true."

OK, NOX reduction is presumably due, in part or total, to the water, though the ratio of water to fuel seems surprisingly high. FWE (Fuel Water Emulsions) of heavy fuel oils can be comprised of around 40% water but 8 times as much water as fuel? Why don't we drop the fuel altogether? OH, they do somewhere and we get the old solar powered electrolysis of water to produce, you guessed it, hydrogen.

But, if we compare to the usual Perpetual Motion/zero point energy/free energy/over-unity device schemes(scams) what is missing is a sophisticated web site with flash players, pop-ups and lots of entertaining animations complete with a testimonial from some credulous "independent" scientist - the belief being, apparently, that the more sophisticated the web site the more credible the concept will seem.

Also, what these web sites usually lack is photographs and videos or real live working models; most usually we are told that a new scaled up version has been requested by some energy giant (or utility or some similarly impressive company), but we are never able to see a working prototype. Or we may be told that because of security, we cannot be allowed to see some details.

We usually also discover that some $millions have been invested in the company to further research/perfect the design and it soon becomes apparent that no one has actually seen anything that actually works unless it is some "do not touch or get too close or use any instruments to measure things" demonstration model that produces next to no power but will "in the final version".
We usually also find that much of this investment money seems to be being spent on directors salaries.

Here we don't have all those tell-tales and far from being a well organised company with everyone on the same page, and some pretty 1950's Sci-Fi machine, we have a fairly disorganised bunch who are fighting about intellectual property rights and have what looks, to the lay person, like a conventional engine. At a guess, they don't have a lot of money or investment.

To be sure, prototyping is being done by some reputable company (assumed reputable since I don't know them, but the usual point is that some independent company working on the device is seen, somehow, as an endorsement when in fact any company asked to make prototypes etc. doesn't have to make it work nor have any interest in whether it will/can work or not. They just make the thing and get paid their money.

I did like the photo at

http://www.fair-pr.com/hydrogenambassadors/team-canada1.php

and I wondered who the guy was who looked like a part time druid. But reading the blurb on this page is where we come to the usual bit about hydrogen fuels:

Also, the car comprises a Hydrogen Generation Unite that uses a solar panel or panels to produce Hydrogen from water by electrolysis, so the invention is self fuelled with hydrogen during sunny periods.

Then too we have some other ambitious plans such as "In addition the invention proposes variety of vehicles including an amphibious and amphibious flying over water surface vehicle that utilizes the WIG effect (wing in ground effect) which improves lift." We are just missing the airships and wind turbine electricity generators to initiate it all.

Hmmm. On the other hand, in this day and age the artful scam proposes a device that is:
[ul][li]cheap[/li]
[li]pollution free[/li]
[li]will make everyone rich[/li][/ul]
But here we have a design that though it may reduce pollution (the NOX reduction, or some NOX reduction, is believable since it uses the water injection/emulsion mechanism) but it can still use fossil fuels; more efficiently, it is claimed (300mpg) but fossil fuels all the same. So even though it takes a pass at hydrogen fuelled options, its fundamental flaw as a scam is the perpetuation of fossil fuel use plus it is that devils toy, an internal combustion engine.

So, even without the science, the BS meter suggests it could actually have some faint possibility of being a real device. On the other hand, it may be a "so what?"/"who cares?" invention worthy of "American Inventor" or it will not get the green vote on some technicality.

For a true scam we need to see the money flowing in with nothing but promises coming out.





JMW

http://www.ViscoAnalyser.com

 

[PedroCG]

even if it works (if) i wonder how expensive will be to replace con rod bearings every 100km...

 

[Bribyk]

JWM, you forgot about the patent mentions to add credibility.

I also looked into the NEC "expert" testimonial (you can even pull up his resume in the link!).

 

[dcasto]

The speeding up of energy release is through detonations of homogenous fuel, yet a shielding of piston from explosions of fuel, prevents over excessive stress in crank and related parts, as the explosion of fuel acts rather on an additional piston floating on air pocket. Also traditional camshaft and associated gears, to manipulate valves, are replaced with electromagnetic or hydraulic actuators, controlled with an electronic controller similar to that in robotics.

How does it cool that pocket of air as it compresses?, how does it....

 

[PedroCG]

it probably doesn't...

 

[ivymike]

I also run the convert on many fuels including Hydrogen. No visible performance were noticed, yet the most important was that the convert runs very well on Acetylene that is already in production and the distribution infrastructure exists. This fuel is important as it is made out of coal and not pertoleum.

"no visible performance" seems like it's probably an honest description, if not the most marketable.

 

[dicer]

I think that relates to Hydrogen.