Posted on 05/04/2007 10:51:10 AM PDT by Hal1950
ATLANTIC CITY, N.J., May 3 /PRNewswire/ -- Phyre Technologies, Inc., a San Diego based technology development company successfully demonstrated its GOBIGGS(tm) fuel tank safety system at the FAA's Atlantic City Technology Center. GOBIGGS(tm) (Green On-Board Inert Gas Generation System), is the first environmentally friendly system designed to protect aircraft from fuel tank explosions like TWA 800. This is the result of several years' development in the anticipation of a pending FAA ruling, requiring improved fuel tank safety systems on commercial passenger aircraft.
Over two weeks, various flight conditions were tested. This included ground operations, multiple rate accents, descents, and high altitude cruising in a variety of warm and cold fuel tank conditions. Throughout all phases of operations, the gases in the fuel tank were maintained outside of the flammability envelope, protecting the aircraft fuel tank from internal explosive conditions.
CEO Stuart Robertson stated, "We are immensely proud of the test results. The performance of the device exceeded even our expectations. The successes of the last two weeks, in conjunction with our recent agreements with Rolls-Royce North American Technology Inc, give us the ability to take the technology to the next level."
In addition, the technology is "green". Unlike existing fuel inerting technology that exhausts fuel vapor into the environment, Phyre's GOBIGGS(tm) system uses a state of the art catalyst design that converts the fuel vapor into an inert gas that is recycled back into the fuel tank.
Phyre Technologies, Inc. is a closely held San Diego company, specializing in de-oxygenation, thermal stability, and fire prevention technologies, for stationary, mobile, air, and maritime industries.
Hal1950:
You are obviously in on the conspiracy as well. Welcome brother.
I suspect that TP’s reply to this will be to simply dismiss it as irrelevant. He knows what he saw.
see my #185, and tell me what kind of missile it was.
Perhaps he has not explored the subject of gravity. I think that was the real killer but I am sure he thinks the government controls that also
I knew I left something off the list.
“Chuckle”.
Simple humor amuses simple folks.
And are you still rolling on the floor or have you figured out the punch line yet?
* * * * * THE LINDA KABOT PHOTO
The photo taken by Kabot depicts a bearing of north/northeast. TWA Flight 800 was south/southwest almost directly behind her. Photograph analyzed by CIA National Imagery and Mapping Administration (NIMA) advised that 1. THERE IS OBJECT IN PHOTO 2. OBJECT IS NOT A MISSILE 3. OBJECT APPEARS TO BE AN AIRCRAFT Not possible to ID aircraft because: Not possible to determine distance of object from camera. Exact time of photo unknown. (time frame only is known) Insufficient detail in photo to determine type of aircraft. 4. OBJECT IS NOT A DRONE No drone exercises conducted near Long Island July 17, 1996 http://judiciary.senate.gov/oldsite/51099lsa.htm
You have a point Hal? --- The "* * * * * THE LINDA KABOT PHOTO --" has nothing to do with the tape in question. - As you well know from previous threads posted a year or so ago, wherein we discussed these exact things in more detail.
Those threads ended just as this one will end:
-- There were many eyewitnesses, and a tape of the streak of light. - The gov't report ignored those facts. -- And rational people continue to ask 'why'?
So, -- a very adamant group of people are telling us to shut up and to accept the gov't report as gospel. - That will never happen. Bet on it.
Rosie O’Donald still claims the WTC was taken down by controlled munitions.
Very impressive, thanks for posting.
No one told you to shut up. Indeed, we've been pleading with you to provide information. Answers to our questions. Even a decent theory.
Its not that you won't shut up, its that you won't say anything that has any substance.
Did a streak of light blow up a 747?
If it was a missile, what kind could it have been?
What is it that is consistent with your streak of light, that could have blown up a 747 if not a missile?
Yet you have refused to answer a single one.
What is badly desired isn't that you shut up, but that you put up. So far you have nothing, zip, zilch.
You know, many people claim that they see puffs from a controlled implosion on the video, and the gov't has completely ignored them.
Your thought patterns remind me of Walter Mitty.
That does not surprise me from one who can’t tell the difference between a missile and a fuel tank.
No one told you to shut up. Indeed, we've been pleading with you to provide information. Answers to our questions. Even a decent theory.
I have no specific theory. Your theories do not explain the eyewitness facts. So it goes.
Its not that you won't shut up, its that you won't say anything that has any substance.
Your weird idea of 'substance' is pleading with me to provide you with information I've never claimed to have:
Did a streak of light blow up a 747?
Beats me, but immediately after the 'streak', eyewitnesses say that the 747 blew up.
. If it was a missile, what kind could it have been?
You can't tell me, as a self touted missile expert?
What is it that is consistent with your streak of light, that could have blown up a 747 if not a missile?
Again, I'm sure you'd tell me, if you could.
Yet you have refused to answer a single one.
I don't claim to have the answers. - You do.
What is badly desired isn't that you shut up, but that you put up. So far you have nothing, zip, zilch.
I've had a ~lot~ of amusement seeing you demand that I 'put up'. Get a grip on your ego.
You know, many people claim that they see puffs from a controlled implosion on the video, and the gov't has completely ignored them.
Whatever.
Does anyone know why the auto htlm feature is malfunctioning?
Big Brother shut it down with a missile.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.