Saturday, January 24, 2009

Truck Turbines

In the late seventies, early eighties there were these trucks running up and down the road with huge smokestacks and intakes.I had the oportunity to talk to a driver who operated one of them. He said that the engine was very quiet, got great mileage and had no visible exhaust. We could tell by the way that it ran in the mountains or on the flat it had power beyond anything else on the road. They just kind of faded out as we saw less and less and then kind of just went away.

I hadn't thought of them again until lately in another blog "Trucks That Work" had a post that jogged the ol' pumpkin. I'm now wondering why, with all the concern about saving energy and stopping pollution, the gobment don't throw some money at this. I am seeing they have so much to throw at rich bankers and labor unions they should have a little left over for R&D of an idea whose time has come. Heck Sen John McCain wanted to give a hundred million to someone who could invent a battery.

Today'sadvantages to turbine power are many Who knows what tomorrow could bring.

one-third less burnt fuel than current piston engine technology
30%+ less fuel emissions and greenhouse gasses
fewer nitrogen oxides (NO, NO2, N2O2) and carbon monoxide (CO) emissions
operates on all fuels: hydrocarbon, hydrogen and synthetic
flex fuel and mixed fuels capability
no pistons or valves, and no lube oil, filters or pumps
fewer moving parts means less maintenance
high power-to-weight ratio
air cooled and lightweight: less than 2 lbs. per hp
cold start capability

The cost is compatible to today's diesel engines, about $25k. The horsepower range is fantastic 300hp to 1000hp. I don't know about the reliability, but if this engine does what it is touted to do, there is no other downside to it. I can't even see the algore sky-is-falling freaks being against it.

We now see that pouring corn in the tanks doesn't work. The new bios burn dirtier, are less efficient, and cost more. Well, they have succeeded in driving the cost of food up. I guess that's a success....for them.

Lord Obamamama is going to have to get on the stick. He can no longer coast and say "It's George Bush's fault".

Saturday, January 17, 2009

Gun Control

This has been making the email rounds on the web for some time. As I was reminded by my brother this cannot be published too often. Anybody that tells you that they are passing gun laws, "for the good of the people"....Question their motives. The only reason the government would have for taking your guns is control over you and your life and property.

An interesting note: Australia, after banning guns has not only had an increase in gun deaths, thay have also had an increase in knife deaths. The criminals that run the government are attempting to make it illegal to carry a knife. They may have already. This tells the mugger or the crazed islamo-facist that the law abiding populous is gentled down enough to attack with absolute impunity.

"From my cold dead hands"

"An armed society is a polite society"

In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.

China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated

Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million educated' people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control: 56 million.

It has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia were forced by new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by their own government, a program costing Australia taxpayers more than $500 million dollars. The first year results are now in:

List of 7 items: Australia-wide, homicides are up 3.2 percent Australia-wide, assaults are up 8.6 percent Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent)!

In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up 300 percent. Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did not, and criminals still possess their guns!

While figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady decrease in armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically upward in the past 12 months, since criminals now are guaranteed that their prey is unarmed.

There has also been a dramatic increase in break- ins and assaults of the ELDERLY. Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public safety has decreased, after such monumental effort and expense was expended in successfully ridding Australian society of guns. The Australian experience and the other historical facts above prove it.

You won't see this data on the US evening news, or hear politicians disseminating this information. Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws adversely affect only the law-abiding citizens.

Take note my fellow Americans, before it's too late!

The next time someone talks in favor of gun control, please remind them of this history lesson.

With guns, we are 'citizens'.

Without them, we are 'subjects'.

During World War II the Japanese decided not to invade America because they knew most Americans were ARMED!

Thursday, January 15, 2009


I have been watching the circus that is Illinois politics for a while now. How can we not? With the very short career of our now president-elect Barack Obama thrown into our lives and the now world famous Gov Rod Blagojevich and the claims of corruption in his administration.

The Governor has also been accused of attempting to sell the vacated Senate seat of The Obama. The Obama has done an internal investigation and concluded absolutely that neither He or His consorts were involved. I'm hoping that if I'm ever charged with a crime that the law will allow me to investigate and clear myself.

Now I don't know much about the corruption charges, probably no more than any average politician does during his career, but I do know that the US Attorney has torpedoed his own case in regards to the appointment of the Senator.

Blagojevich has broken no law in that case!

When Atty Fitzgerald arrested him for shopping the seat he had done nothing except talk about it. His attorney is going to say he was joking. Then he'll ask haven't you ever "pulled a shuck" on somebody. Think "Candid Camera" or "Punk'd". That in my mind totally absolves him of that "crime". What I'm wondering about is, why did atty Fizgerald jump the gun? Was he instructed to? Threatened? I would like to know. I do know that any atty worth a dime would know that it would sink his case by going in before the crime was commited. That is what makes me believe that he was instructed how to proceed. What I can't figure out is the why.

I don't know if The Obama wants him kept in or thrown out.