| Subject: RE: Conference call Feb.28,2012 |
Author: Dale
Date: 2/27/2012 5:16 pm
|
DD02272G
Monday, February 27, 2012
5:55 AM
Odd team (1,3,5) progress report, and agenda items relevant to 2/28/12 conference 5 group.
1) Kit detail on targeted audience;
a. who exactly are we targeting for this kit 1,
b. what is the ceiling on price, anticipated by inventor,
c. establishing b. would allow design to begin for the kit anticipated.
NOTE: The design parameters will allow a fraction of the end user price to be allocated for raw materials, manufacturing, marketing and sales, packaging, labeling, shipping, and admin to expedite correct paperwork in a timely frame.
2) Set to next agenda, when release to public, what information, pre market needs to go out now or in a short period of time and in reality manufactures have already made their sales adds out for this year, 2012 products sold are already on the shelf. Suggest school's to contact DOE?
3) Suggestions on who can handle the financial team costs to produce a product kit;
d. without one specified individual to do this progress could be stopped or slowed,
e. our vendors need to know in fact they will get paid for their services,
f. individual teams could be financed by a person like Randy that is willing to do that, or anyone financially capable of covering initial costs while holding a team note.
NOTE: The person financing the financial obligations of the team will recover the expenses with interest and will be paid by the members of the team. This is not a free handout but moreover a reassurance we do not fail due to lack of funds or paying our bills.
4) A discussion needs to take place regarding immediate needs to start on the kit design of Lui's as he anticipates;
g. primary contents safety instructions-1,
h. on cd interactive-2,
i. history of LENR not cold fusion as it started from Rossi and followed announcements by NASA, SPAWAR, and all respected organizations including MIT,
j. including specific details written in a way the targeted audience is meant to interpret the information,
k. a lesson plan already made up as to reduce the time the schools can react in purchasing the kit formally by the DOE (Department of Education).
l. a suggestion to start with an entry level kit one as we know the facts to be,
m. not wait until when the reactors are setting ready to be loaded but right now immediately start accomplishing some labor intensive tasks like writ the manual that goes with the kit,
n. suggest a way of marketing and who will be doing that, it should be started now, I have several leads.
5) Need more comments on design of test reactors, there is allot of information regarding design and it is usually accepted in writing specific details on how changes are justified from original and makes a comparison easy after one item can be viewed as in the HE concept 2.
6) General discussions on what each member has found i.e. example; Roy searched out metal specs, fitting specifications, and other kit's sold in general one brand new ink cartridge burned up and one book binder with hard copies and accompanying Auto Cad drawings. Joshua has researched the hydrogen supplies, metal powder producers with prices and availability and so on. I have been drawing and producing paperwork relevant to the provisional patent draft for our future product (final) and also requesting relevant information to produce a provisional draft for a kit of Lui's, and to further acceptable documented progress results.
NOTE: I will not draw a 3d version until all part drawings are completed. I have several good reasons for this.
7) Suggestions of the fuel materials, we need the latest info on the sizes, it seems to me that if the nickel is nano with miles of service that the Fe should also start in as close to the same dimension as the nickel. It seems what basis does the micro Fe hold in the beginning formula? The next step would be to then order the nano Fe particles so why not stay with appropriately sized fuel particles? And then purchase smaller amounts from a local U.S. supplier.
NOTE: Suggest getting the nano from the supplier that has a minimum order i.e. the place Joshua found the right sized powder metals from It appears we will be spending 2k on the fuels but Joshua will follow up in the conference to that and discussions can be entered into.
8) Two critical issues exist, 1 is that we all agreed that time is not on our side right now, others are right at our heals, that's why I busted out the multi-chamber design to put our product ahead by appearance, it's where everyone will head due to when one fuel chamber dies out just fire the one up 180, 90, 45 and so on.
What you don't see are the structural mounts, the aquarium, the piping, and the component design to make the HE (Heat Exchanger) concept 2 stretch into 2013 which is where we will end up introducing it to the public sales market. The concept 2 is not just a momentary brain blurb. There is a formula for the math end which covers the non obvious requirement for me and then just to clarify comments on the nomenclature used for the Heat Exchanger it was introduced as a part and not the assembled end result to make it what it is to become in product form, I had thought that was clear on the presentation and that's why they are termed Part Drawings. So you can call it anything you want but in all practical viewpoints it does exchange heat from the fuel chamber bores outward to the greater mass encompassed outer dimensions of the HE block and further the fluid bath the "assembled unit" operates within.
Thank you for your time in review, I see this could become lengthy so if there is any possibility we could get some feedback on the board prior to the conference it may save quite a bit of phone time. Either way I am not going to scrooge this project by not spending the time for adequate communications.
|
|
| Topics |
Author |
Date |
|
|
|
|
Dale |
2/25/2012 5:46 pm |
|
|
|
|
Ransom |
2/26/2012 2:07 pm |
|
|
|
   |
RE: Conference call Feb.28,2012 |
|
|
Dale |
2/27/2012 5:16 pm |
|
|
|
|
