How to build proper landing gear for a flying saucer?

[Dave Hull]

Gentlemen,

I have purchased plans for a functional flying saucer off the dark web, and after a thorough engineering analysis (Bob "the lizard" Lazar need not risk doing any calculations in this regard) I do not believe the landing gear will be sufficient for the terrain of my assigned landing areas. This is a disappointment, as I believe I have overcome the gravitic drive problem(s) and atmospheric stability and control issues.

I plan on landing on asphalt surfaces as these are generally what the government provides.

This design is astonishingly similar to the dual disk Nutnik published in American Modeler magazine back in September of 1959. As such, has anyone else who is currently operating such a flying saucer, whether FAA registered or not, had success with the wire whisker landing struts? I cannot overcome my suspicion that these will dig in and vault the craft into a rolling somersault if the forward velocity is more than a few kph. My current thought is to sweep the struts forward substantially, and bend a one inch long, aft-swept segment at the end of the strut. I also feel it would be prudent to add a monowheel at the bottom of the vertical disk. I was encouraged in this regard by the fine yet unsuspected taxi qualities of the L.I.T. Special on its rigidly mounted, tandem in-line gear.

And since we are performing this design review prior to construction at an undisclosed location, does the Nutnik actually stay out on the lines in overhead maneuvers as the article suggests? I may have to maneuver at high G, as the Navy is now flying with wide area search IRST sensors, and I do not want to get involved in another “gimbal” incident. Especially not at a flying location that the government has recently shut down due to sUAS “flight anomalies” for which no one could identify a pilot. Further, for a field that is still waiting for the FAA to issue an AMA-backed LOA….

I am somewhat embarrassed to ask these questions, since my inside source on flying qualities of this particular saucer design has acknowledged it was built, that he has seen it, that it was unbelievably advanced, but couldn't remember how it flew. Since he had nine crashed ones all with landing gear damage, I figured the gear ought to be modified from the original plans. They are running out of storage space at Area 51, so they don’t need any more saucers with landing gear damage piling up in the hangers.

Oh, one final request:  does anyone know where I can buy 1.7725 grams of Moscovium 115 for my drive unit? Without that, I’ll probably have to go with an OS 25 FP. I already tried my Horizon Hobbies ion thrusters and they just don’t have enough poop.

Divot McSlow

[Tim Wescott]

Ion drives have very low specific thrust, but awesome specific impulse.  They're great when you're not trapped in a gravity well, but useless for terrestrial maneuvering.  So keep looking for the Muscovium.

I'd either bend the landing gear (I think a better name would be "prop protector") the way you describe, or just fly off of (out of?) long grass.

[Gerald Arana]

Gentlemen,

I have purchased plans for a functional flying saucer off the dark web, and after a thorough engineering analysis (Bob "the lizard" Lazar need not risk doing any calculations in this regard) I do not believe the landing gear will be sufficient for the terrain of my assigned landing areas. This is a disappointment, as I believe I have overcome the gravitic drive problem(s) and atmospheric stability and control issues.

I plan on landing on asphalt surfaces as these are generally what the government provides.

This design is astonishingly similar to the dual disk Nutnik published in American Modeler magazine back in September of 1959. As such, has anyone else who is currently operating such a flying saucer, whether FAA registered or not, had success with the wire whisker landing struts? I cannot overcome my suspicion that these will dig in and vault the craft into a rolling somersault if the forward velocity is more than a few kph. My current thought is to sweep the struts forward substantially, and bend a one inch long, aft-swept segment at the end of the strut. I also feel it would be prudent to add a monowheel at the bottom of the vertical disk. I was encouraged in this regard by the fine yet unsuspected taxi qualities of the L.I.T. Special on its rigidly mounted, tandem in-line gear.

And since we are performing this design review prior to construction at an undisclosed location, does the Nutnik actually stay out on the lines in overhead maneuvers as the article suggests? I may have to maneuver at high G, as the Navy is now flying with wide area search IRST sensors, and I do not want to get involved in another “gimbal” incident. Especially not at a flying location that the government has recently shut down due to sUAS “flight anomalies” for which no one could identify a pilot. Further, for a field that is still waiting for the FAA to issue an AMA-backed LOA….

I am somewhat embarrassed to ask these questions, since my inside source on flying qualities of this particular saucer design has acknowledged it was built, that he has seen it, that it was unbelievably advanced, but couldn't remember how it flew. Since he had nine crashed ones all with landing gear damage, I figured the gear ought to be modified from the original plans. They are running out of storage space at Area 51, so they don’t need any more saucers with landing gear damage piling up in the hangers.

Oh, one final request:  does anyone know where I can buy 1.7725 grams of Moscovium 115 for my drive unit? Without that, I’ll probably have to go with an OS 25 FP. I already tried my Horizon Hobbies ion thrusters and they just don’t have enough poop.

Divot McSlow

Dave, Have you ever seen a free flight called the "Wedgy"? I think I'd do something like that.....

Good luck, Jerry

[pat king]

This shows the gear on the Super Saucer. It flies like a dream. I also have the Area 51 a 36" diameter disk with 1018 square inches of wing area.

Pat

[proparc]

You've got to understand that, once a flying saucer enters our atmosphere, the antimatter drive that it was using to get here, will be of no use to it as a means of landing. It is common knowledge that, ALL Saucers entering our air space immediate convert to an anti-gravity system to initiate landing and ALL OTHER slow speed maneuvers. The flying Saucer that recently landed in the Berkeley area, (All Saucers land in California, where else would they go) immediately switched to an anti-matter drive upon landing.
I sincerely hope this post clears up any further misconceptions or misunderstandings.

[Dave Hull]

Mr. Proparc,

Thank you for your interest, and for clarifying the nature of the required drive system.

However, I'm afraid your geography is either a bit sketchy, or far worse, you have been influenced by "the gray men."  (To avoid this in the future, please revert to wearing your aluminum foil hat as recommended in the UFOlogists Handbook, 23rd edition. However, I do have an improved folding pattern that guarantees more isolation from unwanted rays. If interested, just send me a private message on the 'hanger.)  Note that all arriving Reticulen EBEs are required to check in at their earth portal in New Mexico, near Roswell. (Officials in Roswell continue to outbid Amazon for landing and visitation access rights.) And of course, New Mexico is two states over, so please check to see that you have the latest air navigation maps. The FAA will cite you for using out of date maps. After landing and registering, their alien studies takes them wherever it takes them. As you suggest, Berkeley is a popular research zone for peculiar human behavior. Thank god they have not discovered Venice Beach, or else Los Angeles would be overcome by saucers as well. We simply don't have room for more traffic, possibly decimating the 7th-largest economy in the world. I suspect that Coney Island would have the same difficulty, although positioned as it is so close to New Jersey, that seems to provide some protection. In any event, let's be circumspect in this regard.

I completely agree that reversion to gravitic drive is necessary in an interstellar vehicle, which is why I put out the purchase request for Moscovium 115. This is my current challenge for a cold-starting drive system. All leads appreciated. According to secondary sources, the 115 that the Reticulans traded to the U.S. government for visitation rights was remachined, and the scraps and swarf remain unaccounted for. Specifically, I need only 1.773 grams to power the drive in my American Modeler Nutnik.

By the way, for those who discount this subscale effort, I have just recently been consulting with an unnamed AMA Hall of Famer in regard to the accuracy and legibility of the plans I purchased from my dark web source. This individual also had some interesting improvements to the underlying structure so that a dual power system (EBE-anti-grav-7 unit and an OS Max .25FP) would both be viable.

Progress will be made. Be prepared for these realities.

The Master Divot

[Brett Buck]

Based on what I have seen, three feet that unexpectedly appear from the bottom, even though you could see no cracks or edges around there, should descend, slowly and silently. Then a ramp should lower, emitting a blinding, yet somehow irresistible, white light.

   If you want real engineering information, I think these people have a brilliant plan, of which Darwin himself would approve:

https://www.coasttocoastam.com/article/200-000-ufo-fans-plan-to-storm-area-51/

   You might get past the trigger-happy kids with M-16s, but then what?:



  Bring your own KY.

   Brett