Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 2,054 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 1,038,019
Pageviews Today: 1,399,690Threads Today: 335Posts Today: 6,973
12:39 PM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

The X51 Antigravity Rotorless Helicopter

 
HardTruth
Offer Upgrade

User ID: 317819
United States
10/26/2007 05:43 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
The X51 Antigravity Rotorless Helicopter
The X51 antigravity rotorless helicopter,landing on a top secret military area.



[link to www.laserway.com]



___________

If it expects or demands worship, it is not divine!!

Last Edited by HardTruth on 03/10/2010 05:00 PM
Superposition
User ID: 311071
United States
10/26/2007 05:51 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The X51 Antigravity Rotorless Helicopter
i have no doubt such a device exists, but that totally looks like a photoCHOP.. and i'm not even a graphics/art buff.

plus the homepage and other parts of the site look too sketchy and cheezey.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 317671
United Kingdom
10/26/2007 06:04 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The X51 Antigravity Rotorless Helicopter
I have to wonder, if that was a real antigravity machine, why would it have a “tail”?

The tail on helicopters hold a small rotor to stop the turning motion caused on the body by the main rotors (if you take them out, the helicopter starts spinning).
HardTruth (OP)

User ID: 317819
United States
10/26/2007 06:07 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The X51 Antigravity Rotorless Helicopter
I have to wonder, if that was a real antigravity machine, why would it have a “tail”?

The tail on helicopters hold a small rotor to stop the turning motion caused on the body by the main rotors (if you take them out, the helicopter starts spinning).
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 317671



I dont know man. Just thought this might be a possibility. Just looking for further intell.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 222531
United States
10/26/2007 06:19 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The X51 Antigravity Rotorless Helicopter
It's not a helicopter it's a "photo-shopper."
mathetes

User ID: 281281
United States
10/26/2007 06:20 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The X51 Antigravity Rotorless Helicopter
It's not a helicopter it's a "photo-shopper."
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 222531

LOL! Your quite witty!
For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.
Superposition
User ID: 311071
United States
10/26/2007 08:30 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The X51 Antigravity Rotorless Helicopter
I have to wonder, if that was a real antigravity machine, why would it have a “tail”?

The tail on helicopters hold a small rotor to stop the turning motion caused on the body by the main rotors (if you take them out, the helicopter starts spinning).
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 317671



This is actually a great idea, thats why i'm sure it exists somewhere. it has a tail so it can still operate in public view even though its not needed. since the propeller on a typical heli is almost impossible to see or notice anyway, replacing the rotor with anti gravity makes it ideal for those emergencies when it has to be used where an average joe would see it.. but not think twice!
HardTruth (OP)

User ID: 317819
United States
10/26/2007 08:36 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The X51 Antigravity Rotorless Helicopter
I have to wonder, if that was a real antigravity machine, why would it have a “tail”?

The tail on helicopters hold a small rotor to stop the turning motion caused on the body by the main rotors (if you take them out, the helicopter starts spinning).



This is actually a great idea, thats why i'm sure it exists somewhere. it has a tail so it can still operate in public view even though its not needed. since the propeller on a typical heli is almost impossible to see or notice anyway, replacing the rotor with anti gravity makes it ideal for those emergencies when it has to be used where an average joe would see it.. but not think twice!
 Quoting: Superposition 311071




Thats what I was thinking, but wasnt sure I was on the right trak with it.

Great minds think alike?


-------------------------------------------------
Let the truth be told.....though the heavens fall!
-------------------------------------------------

alone
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 316011
United States
10/26/2007 08:38 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The X51 Antigravity Rotorless Helicopter
Sorry, the ceiling fan UFO was TEN TIME the fake that this one is.

This one is just sad. Amateur hour.
Prof-Rabbit
User ID: 148352
Australia
10/26/2007 08:48 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The X51 Antigravity Rotorless Helicopter
More on anti-grav here including the X51
[link to 100777.com]
LEGION, FOR THERE ARE MANY
User ID: 186213
United States
10/26/2007 08:52 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The X51 Antigravity Rotorless Helicopter
Thats a Bell Jet Ranger or a variant of which I used to fly back in the 70`s.

I say it`s a scam............LEGION
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 299632
United States
10/26/2007 09:01 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The X51 Antigravity Rotorless Helicopter
i have no doubt such a device exists, but that totally looks like a photoCHOP.. and i'm not even a graphics/art buff.

plus the homepage and other parts of the site look too sketchy and cheezey.
 Quoting: Superposition 311071


And there are obviously NON-military buildings in the upper-left of that picture.



-
LEGION, FOR THERE ARE MANY
User ID: 186213
United States
10/26/2007 09:04 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The X51 Antigravity Rotorless Helicopter
I have to wonder, if that was a real antigravity machine, why would it have a “tail”?

The tail on helicopters hold a small rotor to stop the turning motion caused on the body by the main rotors (if you take them out, the helicopter starts spinning).
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 317671

The tail rotor and tail is to counter torque and for steering, without them it hinders and prevents auto-rotation, in the event of engine failure, leading to a crash.

It further appears, in this photo, that the intake ducts/ cowling's are in place for a jet engine.

It also appears that the exhaust port is in place, for a jet engine.

It looks like a bad photo shop photo to me.......LEGION
Fool
User ID: 293889
Canada
10/26/2007 09:08 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The X51 Antigravity Rotorless Helicopter
That is so fake... really...
Igor Sikorsky
User ID: 32062
United States
10/26/2007 09:17 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The X51 Antigravity Rotorless Helicopter
Why would you incorporate an anti-gravity device into an airframe like that Bell JetRanger? Why not build an airframe around the drive itself?
Free Thinker
User ID: 367515
United States
02/03/2008 10:58 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The X51 Antigravity Rotorless Helicopter
The tail rotor and tail is to counter torque and for steering, without them it hinders and prevents auto-rotation, in the event of engine failure, leading to a crash.

It further appears, in this photo, that the intake ducts/ cowling's are in place for a jet engine.

It also appears that the exhaust port is in place, for a jet engine.

It looks like a bad photo shop photo to me.......LEGION
 Quoting: LEGION, FOR THERE ARE MANY 186213



The photo is useless in trying to prove anything. Unless we see a photo or even better, footage of this flying, all reasonable theories are fair game. Jet engine cowl, or some contraption to protect the rotary engine while a propeller is absent are all good.

However, my biggest gripe is with the people claiming "this is photoshop." I've used photoshop extensively both professionally and personally over the past 10 years, and I let me tell you, if the photo (see link at top of thread )is photoshop, it's a flawless job, and of all the theories, it's at the top of the least likely.
I would theorize this image could have been leaked with the intended purpose to be used as a red herring and for disinformation purposes.

If this is truly anti-gravity (or a machine that generates it's own gravitational field and counters earth's own) your point about the tail rotor is likely irrelevant as it would probably then be for show, as a previous commenter mentioned.

I know for a fact objects that defy the laws of thermodynamics do exist and are in our skies on a daily basis (often seen amidst the "chemtrails"/persistent contrails), the existing and growing plethora of documented cases and my own numerous personal experiences have given me this truth and I wouldn't waste the time to debate it.

Having said that, my mind is open to your ideas and others, but definately not Photoshop, lol.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 278642
United States
02/03/2008 11:03 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The X51 Antigravity Rotorless Helicopter
I wunder if it flys at Mach 100 and can turn on a dime as well as enter and exit the atmosphere at will , and travel to Mars?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 367473
New Zealand
02/03/2008 11:09 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The X51 Antigravity Rotorless Helicopter
I wunder if it flys at Mach 100 and can turn on a dime as well as enter and exit the atmosphere at will , and travel to Mars?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 278642



Thats a tall order
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 367561
United States
02/04/2008 12:37 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The X51 Antigravity Rotorless Helicopter
It flies with a turbine engine, high speed fans that force air through that duct on the top. Its really not antigravity in the cosmic sense. It is just another way to force air downward to propel the thing. Several companies have been working on high speed turbines as a propulsion system for years. The nice thing is it can land anywhere.
meroj
User ID: 310532
United States
02/04/2008 12:54 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The X51 Antigravity Rotorless Helicopter
It's not a helicopter it's a "photo-shopper."
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 222531


I've seen this particular photo several years ago. It was, indeed, photo-shopped. Cool looking, though.
And, the NOTAR heli-program, (no-tail-rotor), was being tested over a decade or two ago. Since that time there could be some very interesting 'copters flying around, maybe even very quitely/"invisible".
meroj
User ID: 310532
United States
02/04/2008 12:56 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The X51 Antigravity Rotorless Helicopter
...that would be "...quietly..."
...sorry.
LEGION, FOR THERE ARE MANY
User ID: 186213
United States
02/04/2008 01:36 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The X51 Antigravity Rotorless Helicopter
The tail rotor and tail is to counter torque and for steering, without them it hinders and prevents auto-rotation, in the event of engine failure, leading to a crash.

It further appears, in this photo, that the intake ducts/ cowling's are in place for a jet engine.

It also appears that the exhaust port is in place, for a jet engine.

It looks like a bad photo shop photo to me.......LEGION



The photo is useless in trying to prove anything. Unless we see a photo or even better, footage of this flying, all reasonable theories are fair game. Jet engine cowl, or some contraption to protect the rotary engine while a propeller is absent are all good.

However, my biggest gripe is with the people claiming "this is photoshop." I've used photoshop extensively both professionally and personally over the past 10 years, and I let me tell you, if the photo (see link at top of thread )is photoshop, it's a flawless job, and of all the theories, it's at the top of the least likely.
I would theorize this image could have been leaked with the intended purpose to be used as a red herring and for disinformation purposes.

If this is truly anti-gravity (or a machine that generates it's own gravitational field and counters earth's own) your point about the tail rotor is likely irrelevant as it would probably then be for show, as a previous commenter mentioned.

I know for a fact objects that defy the laws of thermodynamics do exist and are in our skies on a daily basis (often seen amidst the "chemtrails"/persistent contrails), the existing and growing plethora of documented cases and my own numerous personal experiences have given me this truth and I wouldn't waste the time to debate it.

Having said that, my mind is open to your ideas and others, but definately not Photoshop, lol.
 Quoting: Free Thinker 367515

If your mind is open and prefer a straight answer, then I`ll present it this way for you.

The picture is a fraud, because I flew the plane..thats why.

As far as your expertise in photoshop, good for you.

Further, my explanation about the tail rotor is relevant.

As far as your observation on objects that defy the laws of thermodynamics..your preaching to the choir.

LEGION
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 319529
United States
02/04/2008 01:39 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The X51 Antigravity Rotorless Helicopter
The tail rotor and tail is to counter torque and for steering, without them it hinders and prevents auto-rotation, in the event of engine failure, leading to a crash.

It further appears, in this photo, that the intake ducts/ cowling's are in place for a jet engine.

It also appears that the exhaust port is in place, for a jet engine.

It looks like a bad photo shop photo to me.......LEGION



The photo is useless in trying to prove anything. Unless we see a photo or even better, footage of this flying, all reasonable theories are fair game. Jet engine cowl, or some contraption to protect the rotary engine while a propeller is absent are all good.

However, my biggest gripe is with the people claiming "this is photoshop." I've used photoshop extensively both professionally and personally over the past 10 years, and I let me tell you, if the photo (see link at top of thread )is photoshop, it's a flawless job, and of all the theories, it's at the top of the least likely.
I would theorize this image could have been leaked with the intended purpose to be used as a red herring and for disinformation purposes.

If this is truly anti-gravity (or a machine that generates it's own gravitational field and counters earth's own) your point about the tail rotor is likely irrelevant as it would probably then be for show, as a previous commenter mentioned.

I know for a fact objects that defy the laws of thermodynamics do exist and are in our skies on a daily basis (often seen amidst the "chemtrails"/persistent contrails), the existing and growing plethora of documented cases and my own numerous personal experiences have given me this truth and I wouldn't waste the time to debate it.

Having said that, my mind is open to your ideas and others, but definately not Photoshop, lol.
 Quoting: Free Thinker 367515


"nigga u gay" -riley
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 319529
United States
02/04/2008 01:45 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The X51 Antigravity Rotorless Helicopter
OK boys and girls...

there is a part of that heli in the picture that was cut trimmed and pasted 3 (THREE) times via photoshop.

50 tricky dick fun bucks to the first person to point it out

oh yeah the red x-51 is done awful!
Prof-Rabbit
User ID: 148352
Australia
02/04/2008 02:38 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The X51 Antigravity Rotorless Helicopter
Tailless-


Sikorsky S-69

Also known by the military designation XH-59A, the S-69 was part of the Advancing Blade Concept (ABC) program.[1] This Advancing Blade Concept system consisted of two rigid, contra-rotating rotors which made use of the aerodynamic lift of the advancing blades. At high speeds, the retreating blades were offloaded, as most of the load was supported by the advancing blades of both rotors and the penalty due to stall of the retreating blade was thus eliminated. This system did not even require a wing to be fitted for high speeds and to improve manoeuvrability, and also eliminated the need for an anti-torque rotor at the tail.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 363159
United States
02/04/2008 02:44 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The X51 Antigravity Rotorless Helicopter
OK boys and girls...

there is a part of that heli in the picture that was cut trimmed and pasted 3 (THREE) times via photoshop.

50 tricky dick fun bucks to the first person to point it out

oh yeah the red x-51 is done awful!
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 319529




Check out the cowl directly above the pilots side window that blends into the rotor housing. Pasted 3 times where the rotor should be and once on the tail.

Can I trade the tricky dick fun bucks in for a super special 2008 tricky dick DOOM-a-holic T-shirt?
ID10T

User ID: 103356
United States
02/04/2008 02:55 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The X51 Antigravity Rotorless Helicopter
bsflag
Frigg Stuyvesant

User ID: 365732
United States
02/04/2008 03:01 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The X51 Antigravity Rotorless Helicopter
First thing I noticed was the look of the triple louvred thingy especially the light reflections(something off about them).Then the x-51 it's not right either.

I certainly agree w/ the poster who mentioned framing the craft around the propulsion system.Ovoid or saucer shaped seems like the most obvious choice.

When you think of an aeroplane heading directly at you what you see is a wide saucer shape with an (tail fin)antennae.Remove the antennae (superfluous now).and if you weren't hindered by gravity anymore that would seem to be a nearly perfectly aerodynamic shape for flight in any direction wouldn't it?
Cui Bono?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 367593
New Zealand
02/04/2008 03:11 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The X51 Antigravity Rotorless Helicopter
Its a con
T.C

User ID: 322409
New Zealand
02/04/2008 03:58 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The X51 Antigravity Rotorless Helicopter
The disparity between the 'rotorless' part (where a rotor would normally be) and the remainder of the helicopter, in terms of reflection, shading etc, appears to me as being clearly an artificial construction (e.g. 'photo shopped'). In addition, it seems wasteful to fit a helicopter with some 'anti-gravity' technology when a craft with greater internal carriage capacity wold be more useful. If you can negate gravity, why fly around in a mini sized craft when you can fly a larger object with greater internal mass i.e. useful cargo capacity.

Just one guy's thoughts on the subject.

hf
Take your dogma and shove it!

Life is not about what happens to you, it's about how you deal with it.
Chief
User ID: 510429
Canada
09/25/2008 08:28 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The X51 Antigravity Rotorless Helicopter
As well look at the tail part the name on the tail says

X51 but why does the white paint that goes thru it cut off around that part ? Then there is a little but more read that cuts out more white around the same area. I agree with the paste 3x on the helicopter.

If this was military why would they use these colours and why would the pilot not being wear a uniform ?

News