World Surveillance Group Inc (fka WSGI)

[siriuslyricher]

Coincidence? Dr. K's published report regarding the Airworm and stating "Up to now, no long-term experience has been gained on airship . . .." (with the next page detailing that experience removed from the report) is dated 2006. Note in imaswami's chronology below the date that Proton received government funding for more airship fuel cell work - 2006.

Posted by: imawswami
In reply to: siriuslyricher who wrote msg# 86762 Date:9/7/2007 9:47:07 PM
Post #of 99362

Sanswire partners with DOE #86679


Please,
If you are just logging on today, refer briefly to post 86679 to get your bearings.....thanks


More's the Better

Or:
How a front door agreement with Proton Energy Group lead Sanswire into a backdoor partnership with the US Department of Energy.

It begins as a question. Why the connection with Sanswire's airships and Elisra, or Trident 2008, or a repeat at CWID in 2008? We tentatively partner with Raytheon and march our airship know-how(?) to major defense conferences in the US, yet even now our stock and company appear in the toilet.

Little information comes to our aid, but the very survival of a typical pink sheet stock demands it to scream PR's almost daily. We seem to either the locked jeweled box or simply ground beef for market efficiencies.

Maybe this would had clarity.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Abbreviated chronology GTEM 2005

April 2005 Sanswire One was exhibited in San Bernardino. Announced 90-120 days to FAA approval

June 2005 Sanswire One was moved to Plant 42 in preparation for testing at adjacent Edwards AFB

June 2005 Sanswire purchased two lithium batteries from a source

July 2005 (approx. 90 days after exhibit) Sanswire signed a Cooperative Research and Development Agreement (CRDA) with Proton Energy Systems. Under the agreement, Proton was to provide prototype regenerative fuel cell systems and technical support and Sanswire the airship platform for testing and engineering inputs to tailor the RFC (Regenerative Fuel Cell) solution.

[Note: prior to 2005 and continuing beyond, Proton Energy had been involved with DOE and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in their fuel cell work, with special emphasis in HAA]

June 2006 Proton received gov't funding for more airship fuel cell work.

February 2007 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory released Persistent Monitoring Platforms:
Final Report.
---------------------------------------------------------------

So we see the partnership between Sanswire and Proton, but how does the DOE figure into this?
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Cooperative Research and Development Agreement (CRDA)
---------------------------------------------------------
What is that?


"The CRADA is a partnering tool that allows federal laboratories to work with US industries, academia and other organizations on cooperative R&D projects. The CRADA provides flexibility in structuring project contributions, intellectual property rights, and in protecting proprietary information and CRADA research results."

Lawrence Livermore Laboratory is the DOE's baby.

So, at this point, it appears that Sanswire was part of some LLNL project (along with Proton). But which one and more importantly, what came of the R&D partnership.

-------------------------------------------------
PERSISTENT MONITORING PLATFORMS:
Final Report Feb. 2007

http://72.14.205.104/search?q=cache:6GJytee_eHwJ:www.osti.gov/bridge/servlets/purl/902249-1QSCI8/+%2...

[Note: this project existed well before Sanswire entered the picture]
--------------------------------------------

What were the goals of said project?
--------------------------------------------------------
"We will develop and validate the physics models to prove the principles involved in a solar thermal-powered aircraft, in preparation for constructing a prototype scale-model to demonstrate station-keeping capability at sea level.

Successful demonstration of his technology would set the stage for construction of a stratospheric
altitude prototype capable of circumnavigating the globe.

We will also develop physics models for thermal transport, materials interactions, loss mechanisms, and engine performance in the stratosphere's environment."

------------------------------------------------------

And what happened?

It appears success. As the report states, they realized early on the heavier-than-air crafts could not cut it in the Stratosphere, so the focus went to airships. Judging by these quotes, would have to say research, development, and demonstrations must have gone well:
---------------------------------------------------------------

"The primary technical challenge is to be able to store sufficient energy accumulated during the day that overnight flight is enabled. It is this challenge that was addressed and met in the course of the work of this project."

"As a direct result of the research and development work pursued in the course of this project, several pending patents have been produced. These include those listed in the following table:"

"While these patents are pending, enabling details will not be published, and are not included here. Several companies have expressed a great deal of interest in the technology represented by the above portfolio, and licensing negotiations are currently underway."
--------------------------------------------------------------

Personal observations:

The DOE's goal in all this stuff (and who knows above them), was to solve component issues with a
sea-level prototype airship. Could S-1 just have stayed in the hangar during this work? Maybe.

These are two huge hang-ups (fuel cell and propulsion) that have thwarted all comers to date, when it comes to persistent platforms (would think gas management also) at or near the stratosphere. DOE work, words, and patent apps. says they've got it licked....wow.

Assuming that Sanswire would/could share in the outcome of this work (patents) am wondering at this point if this could help them secure a partner who otherwise would not have access to such technology.

Personally, just wished we would have been clearly informed, way back when, of the full nature of this partnering agreement.

Anyway, this is my take on these events. Hope this helps.

pete

ps. Wrote to Rob for a response on the above info. Nothing in the past two months, but know that he is busy guy.....