Asps PNN (Propulsione Non Newtoniana) tests which in our opinion violates action reaction principle

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • calmagorod wrote:

      To tell you that together with my collaborators if we keep the mosfet always powered by solving the problems of heat dissipation and also those of the batteries and impedance, we will attempt to take off F432 and maneuver it in a first attempt like a drone.
      I'll open a special thread on this project as soon as possible
      Do you use Lateral Double Diffused MOSFETs? And how do you manage the heat dissipation in the coldness of space?

      BTW my italian is not that good..
    • >Do you use Lateral Double Diffused MOSFETs?

      Amplifier on plancia have a single mosfet

      >And how do you manage heat dissipation in the coldness of space?

      First only large plancia in Al make heat dissipation.
      Subsequently, a vertical aluminum structure was added with a thermostat to disconnect the power supply as soon as 50 degrees Celsius was reached
    • New

      Per Aspera ad Astra



      On March 5th ASPS held a demonstration of PNN thruster F432 specifically made for a private enterprise. The parts signed an observation protocol written on the basis of ASPS assessment procedure. It’s important to underline that they haven’t signed a collaboration contract for the industrial development of PNN, but they “just” shared a set of generic agreements for a reciprocal safety. For privacy reasons I won’t publish the enterprise name.
      But how did the roadshow go? Here’s a brief account of the highlights of the event:
      Out of 4 planned PNN tests, 3 have been improvised since there were problem with the data transmission from the Kern scale to the computer.
      The first standard test based on this procedure:



      was on the rocker arm pendulum, where the power supply of the prototype (batteries) didn’t exceed 320 W. The test was positive.
      In a consecutive test, still on the rocker arm pendulum, the coaxial cable has been tilted by 180° (Laureti never attempted this test before), and F432 went nuts since the polarization of the transmitted e.m wave has probably been altered. Even with this inefficiency in the two tests that followed the prototype (after it has been detached from the rocker arm pendulum, its coaxial cable approximately retwisted and then hung again by its short coaxial cable) gave the right thrusts ad 0° and 180°.
      Thanks to the cable shortening and the possibility to use the heavy primary amplifier instead of the one on Little Cart, the power supply could reach 600W (always at 432 Mhz). The prototype was rather overheated but fortunately it didn’t break.
      The person sent by the enterprise to assist the event stated that he remained favorably impressed by the demonstration and he told ASPS that (before any financial development) he would like to repeat the tests using a spinning bushing (used in radars) in the point (the crest) where the coaxial cable runs in the box that contains the prototype. Said bushing has been already retrieved by ASPS.
      However, Laureti stated that the prototype has suffered thermal stress for a year and therefore it has to be redone with new and more efficient materials, especially with better, low loss, coaxial cables. In fact, after the tests he opened the prototype and he could observe that various insulations and supports of the inner structure were almost carbonized by the extreme irradiation, and the carbonization alters the insulating properties of the materials.
      For the above mentioned reasons Laureti decided to create a new prototype to reduce the risks and the inefficiencies during the demonstrations . Therefore he’s already working on a variant called F432H variant (where the H stands for Hybrid). Further details about the device are confidential at the moment.
      ASPS request remain unchanged over the years: fundings and sharing of patent and projects for an industrial development of the technology.

      More precisely: the counterpart must allow ASPS, always if the PNN test in enclosed box have been considered convincing, to have its own means to commercialize the PNN, EVEN if the financial counterpart disagrees. If an agreement is possible, said counterpart won’t be impeded in its commercial activities related to PNN but it MUSTN’T FORBID NOR IMPEDE THOSE OF ASPS.


      In short, if a potential financier is interested in PNN it must let ASPS (in other corporate form) free to sell the PNN engines on its own without interfering.
      At the moment the counterpart has not taken a decision yet, therefore everything is postponed after the construction of F432H. However, Laureti recently hinted that the enterprise who attended the roadshow isn’t the only one interested in PNN.

      neolegesmotus.com/2019/04/16/f432-roadshow/