Wesley Crusher's 21st Century UFO Design

From: Jason Lind On Behalf Of Wesley Crusher
Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2018 6:39 PM
To: 'ʞɐıuzoʍ ǝʌǝʇs ' <steve@woz.org>
Subject: FW: [Non-DoD Source] NexCraft - A 'UFO' in a 10 Year Time Frame

This isn’t even the tip of the iceberg… sending you more bytes WHEN you reply….. Live long and prosper old friend, but never become a fraking Vulcan - Wes

From: Jason Lind
Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2018 1:44 PM
To: Crider, Kimberly A (Kim) Maj Gen USAF SAF-US (US) maji@auburn.edu; srikant.mantravadi@leidos.com
Subject: RE: [Non-DoD Source] NexCraft - A 'UFO' in a 10 Year Time Frame

Maji:

Two things from my discussions with the IRC community:

(1)	I was thinking linearly, you probably weren’t. In any case thanks to the engine configuration we can use rotational momentum to alter the velocity of the craft much more efficiently than I had imagined.
(2)	https://kerbalspaceprogram.com/en/?page_id=11  Would it be worth in building her in this….?


Jason L. Lind
EVP/Transformation
http://transformation.run
jasonl@transformation.run
414.788.2820

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

From: Jason Lind
Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2018 7:35 AM
To: Crider, Kimberly A (Kim) Maj Gen USAF SAF-US (US); maji@auburn.edu; srikant.mantravadi@leidos.com
Subject: RE: [Non-DoD Source] NexCraft - A 'UFO' in a 10 Year Time Frame

Thanks for joining AFWERX! We will keep you in the loop on upcoming events and possible collaboration opportunities.
Very respectfully,
AFWERX Team

THANK YOU MAM!

Jason L. Lind
EVP/Transformation
http://transformation.run
jasonl@transformation.run
414.788.2820

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

From: Crider, Kimberly A (Kim) Maj Gen USAF SAF-US (US)
Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2018 7:27 AM
To: Jason Lind
Subject: RE: [Non-DoD Source] NexCraft - A 'UFO' in a 10 Year Time Frame

Jason

AFWerx may be the place to start.....http://afwerxdc.org/

From: Jason Lind [jason.lind@groupbobaloo.com]
Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2018 4:32 AM
To: Crider, Kimberly A (Kim) Maj Gen USAF SAF-US (US); maji@auburn.edu; Mantravadi, Srikant Sr CTR (US)
Cc: Transformation.run Members
Subject: [Non-DoD Source] NexCraft - A 'UFO' in a 10 Year Time Frame
All active links contained in this email were disabled. Please verify the identity of the sender, and confirm the authenticity of all links contained within the message prior to copying and pasting the address to a Web browser.


General Crider,

I know you are not the person to talk to about this however I am certain you can point me in the right direct. In 2004, while attending “Advanced” Avionics Training at Sheppard I spent most of my time doodling problems and one of them is this concept that has now been dubbed ‘NexCraft’. You see I RA’d under Dr. Joseph Majdalani at Marquette, mainly providing logistical support however I picked up enough of his work in analytical boundary solutions to Navieer-Stokes Differential equations for gas flow in solid, liquid and hybrid rocket engines.

With an analytical solution, as you may or may not know, the calculation for the firing time and, in liquid/hybrid, fuel flow can be precisely related to thrust and Maji’s work, to my knowledge, was focused on the efficiency aspects of this. However if we were to have multiple engines at different positions and angles on the craft, using exact thrust calculations, we could reliably create any vector in or out of the atmosphere. In fact we can theortically avoid the heat barrier entirely by decelerating with respect the weakening of gravity by firing the “top” engines and perform a controlled ‘float’ out of the atmosphere.

In addition such a craft, if armed (which given my self-imposed requirement of no moving external parts probably means energy weapons), in atmosphere wouldn’t even be in the same galaxy class as today’s fighters. It could do things like come like in at Mach 5 and stop to a hover on a near dime, square up and blast an entire Wing out of the sky and jet back out before radar even saw their birds explode.

Fixed-Engine Vector-Thrust Aerospace Craft aka NexCraft
https://imgur.com/a/mWf49

The crude diagram you are looking at (also attached in case the inline does not come through) is flattened view of the top (in black) and bottom (in blue) with the engines shown in red on the top assuming a mirror of them on the bottom. There are 4 primary engines and 72 micro-engines. At first when I showed this to Maji last month he was confused on the number of engines but when I explained to them the micro nature of most of them and that because they are fixed we need a substantial number of engines to guarantee the production of the desired vector when bridging the AI to the avionics and “power train”, particularly in atmosphere. When he had his ‘grok’ moment he said “Jason, you are talking about a UFO”.

He also confirmed that by fixing the engines positions the analytical boundary solutions are, at least theortically, simplified.

This was proposed to Leidos, through Srikant, as part of theCaution-http://permuto.xyz < Caution-http://permuto.xyz >  deal Transformation.run is working on with him and another investment group. See v2 and cybercommand.log. He seems very excited however expressed doubt that Leidos would sign off on it, hense its hidden in NexDevices and we would intend to allocate $1M of the $2.5M for NexDevices on this project. Maji indicated the math on his side could be done, if Auburn is officially engaged, within 2 years and within 6 months if we could allocate more like $5M.

The project here is similar to a Phase I of an SBIR: feasibility study, only this project is truly Manhattan (Martian?) level in nature so obviously $100k is not going to cut it through that process. Honestly if the USAF were to commit to funding the next stage of R&D I am confident we will be able to find the private sector investment to fund Phase I.

So does the USAF want a UFO?

Jason L. Lind
EVP/Transformation
Caution-http://transformation.run
jasonl@transformation.run
414.788.2820

Sent from Mail for Windows 10