David Hamel Generator.

[Dansway]

Hey Steve! (& all),

Mr. Hamel tried to rebuild or replicate his 45 gallon "drum experiment" many years ago and did not succeed.

Why do you think Mr. Hamel used CONES to make the broken-line-movement or as Hamel called it the "Isotope" line of movement.
Why 3 cones and not 3 anything else?

It is because of AIR movement to form the positive and negative flows.
When the cones wobble they will fan or push air in a CIRCLE (the cones wobble or oscillate in a circle)
Hello... are we paying attention now!

People have real balls to try and think they know the technology, but they are children playing with toys.
It's sad...I wish it was different.

Regards,

Dan


P.S. 
Back at ya Steve.  Nice to hear from you.

[Dansway]

Hi Steve,

My remarks reflex my frustration and was NOT pointed toward anyone, especially you.
You have graced us all with your open research and honesty and printed words are often taken wrongly as in this case.  My apology.

The UFO motor and the 3 cone 45 gallon drum device work on AIR flow charged and changed by magnetic fields.

David Hamel was very hard to understand in a lot of his explanations so that is a lot of the problem.
I have been silent these past few years as no one will listen to me and I have not the patience anymore to explain over and over again what I have personally learned from Mr. Hamel.

Again, I'm sorry for the words and I hope all is well?

All the best,

Dan

[Koen1]

No offense intended, but I think you're misremembering it, probably remembering a mix of things (45GD+Hamel's engine that did fly away+Schauberger's device that went through the roof?). I'm sure if you go to the hameltech group right now and ask you'll find the Hamel's 45GD didn't lift off. That it imploded is what he told me.

Well I must indeed be misremembering. Haven't really kept up with it for some time now, I just saw this thread and jumped in.
Sorry for the mixup! Hope nobody's offended...

I was quite impressed with mr Hamels proof-of-concept gadgets (spinner, WIS, 45GD) and his theory (even though I must admit I still didn't follow all of it),
and most impressed by his engine and craft design as well as his perseverence. The man actually built a large part of a granite saucercraft,
for Bobs sake! Damn. And a flippin cool engine to power it. Now there's an inventor for ya.

As for the spinner reference, I'll see if I can find it for you. I read the article about half a year ago or so so I'll have to search a bit.

@Dan: Of course the 45GD and the engine used air... Was that a matter of discussion? The engine design included intake, outlet, and feedback
conduits and the engine "wings" (the flattened wobbling plates that are the cones in the 45GD) would 'wobble' in such a way that they would
move a large volume of air around the engine 'chamber'... right? Outflow was controlled and guided along the outer surface of the hull stages from
the top down, cylindrical intake centered at the bottom, right?
Or am I mixing stuff up horribly again?  Hope not...

Regards!

[Steven Dufresne]

My remarks reflex my frustration and was NOT pointed toward anyone, especially you.
You have graced us all with your open research and honesty and printed words are often taken wrongly as in this case.  My apology.

Frustration I can understand. My apologies for not picking up on that.

The UFO motor and the 3 cone 45 gallon drum device work on AIR flow charged and changed by magnetic fields.

David Hamel was very hard to understand in a lot of his explanations so that is a lot of the problem.
I have been silent these past few years as no one will listen to me and I have not the patience anymore to explain over and over again what I have personally learned from Mr. Hamel.

David was hard to understand? That's an understatement :-). I think I've heard frustration in his voice a few times too. I do think you were better at picking out his meanings than me though.

I do want to point out though that, as well as stressing the air flow to me too, he did say that the zero point appeared in between the magnets, and he always refered to a vortex as if that were the shape of this "zero point" when he said this too me. For those who didn't know David, he gave common words his own meaning so by "zero point" he may have meant something else.

Again, I'm sorry for the words and I hope all is well?

All the best,

Dan

No worrys. I'm glad you joined us.
-Steve
http://rimstar.org

[Steven Dufresne]

Well I must indeed be misremembering. Haven't really kept up with it for some time now, I just saw this thread and jumped in.
Sorry for the mixup! Hope nobody's offended...

No reason anyone should be. We all do the best we can. What would be bad is if someone didn't correct us or at least give their alternate point of view. That I hate. How many of my own experiments would have gone better if someone with more expertise had spoken up?

As for the spinner reference, I'll see if I can find it for you. I read the article about half a year ago or so so I'll have to search a bit.

Thanks.

-Steve
http://rimstar.org