Quote:
Originally Posted by RPKESQ
They are the vanguard of new technologies and applications. And potentially a "big deal". Your opinion mirrors exactly those who commented negatively on all early aviation experiments and endeavors. Your aviation "knowledge" is limited by your inability to see past the present.
As well as those pundits who opinionated concerning spaceflight, rocketry, center-fire ammunition, telephones, super computers, PCs, etc.
Whose track record of being correct was better? The people actually pushing the envelope or the naysayers?
Just because you cannot see past the current limitations, does not mean others are also stuck in the past. And we all are the better for it. Even the EAA (Experimental Aircraft Association) sees this and supports it.
But Timmy boy cannot separate fact from political fiction and is locked into his "anti-green" rant because of his emotional political baggage.
|
Island wrapped this up nicely, but you obviously do not know crap about how I feel about experimental aircraft (I have built a couple from scratch). You also apparently do not understand why heavy batteries are not the most efficient means of powering an aircraft. You also apparently do not understand that PV solar costs a fortune to make for very little power output (all that sputtering of precious metals in a vaccuum and all that).
PV is nice for a remote hunting cabin, but those folks who think that they will someday inexpensively power all cars with them are nuts (as are the folks who think that all homeowners will someday be able to afford to blanket their roofs with PV cells without govt subsidies).
Batteries innovation/improvement is obviously a good thing, but I still see no value in cramming a bunch of them in modern aircraft other than as a personal achievement of the builder.
I wish this country would focus on building hundreds of nuclear power plants instead of pissing my tax money away on feel good non-viable forms of energy.