Buddy,
. A short time ago I posted the story about Carl Tilley, who claimed he had an over-unity device. Twenty investors who lost $4 million immediately filed suit, and the court ordered a test of the device by an independent engineering laboratory. When it was found to be a fraud, these investors were awarded $25.57 million by the court.
I am not a Cyclone investor (and never will be) so I have no standing with the SEC, but I hate to see investors lose money. The 0n-line complaint form to the SEC is very simple and can be filed by any investor. I don’t understand why the 5,000 investors who lost $65 million are so docile. Bonafiide investors could demand a certified independent third party performance and life test of the engine (probably through a court). This would answer questions once and for all about the validity of the design and take it out of the world of PR releases.
Cyclone is like the Hydra, a multi-headed creature in Greek mythology with the unique ability that if a head was severed, two new heads grew back. When Cyclone has an engine model that doesn’t perform, no problem, create two new models. While it could be a typo, but I noticed in your post with specifications for the Mark 10 engine, the torque is shown as 15,000 lb/ft. This should be 15,000 lb.-ft. Here is a prediction (just my opinion). There will be no viable Mark 10 engine in 2018, in 2028, or in 2038.
marlin6
