Connecticut Power Of Attorney For Sale Of Motor Vehicle: Fill & Download for Free

Nothing. Mills just provided, August, 2019, the fourth item that the theory allowed to be developed, and the second item being scrutinized for procurement or lease by the USA Department of Defense."Department of Defense has a Suncell running on its premises as a licensee":by July 21, 2019:according to Navid Sadikali(CEO at The End Of Petroleum) in the first segment at time stamp 0:00 to 17:45 on a talk show at r/BrilliantLightPowerthen scroll down to "End Of Petroleum talks Hydrino Energy - Live on Freedom Talk Live July 21, 2019"UPDATE: I (Frank Acland Moderator at E-Cat World.com) have received the following message from Navid Sadikali:“Request: please modify the article. My interview stated these facts.1) The SunCell is running.2) The DOD is a licensee through ARA.3) The DOD was onsite to see the SunCell.”It is finally happening, the Suncell is being scrutinized towards being leased by a commercial or military client.I communicated with Navid, several months ago. In a radio cast, he mentions something about Brett's book about Mills: "Randell Mills and The Search for Hydrino Energy" at time stamp 2:36 "we wrote about him"..:One of several books about Mills and the Grand Unified Theory-Classical Physics.I have been asked what I am doing to get GUT-CP accepted by the academics in physics. Navid is the one who might be actually doing something about that. By joining forces, that is what will break through the impasse formed by the physics community against GUT-CP and the device on Brilliant Light and Power and on sites such as Evaco LLC as well.GUT-CP is not cold fusion. CF and LENR try to explain their mechanisms using Standard Quantum Mechanics and are all full of various hypotheses that lead nowhere. GUT-CP is purely classical and has three items fully developed1)in 1986 the explanation for the DoD for how their Free Electron Laser works2) in 2007 developed process for manufacturing accordingto the predictions of GUT-CP, diamond thin film for such uses as as a scratch proof cover on cell phones or tablets and as a heat sink substrate on circuit mother board for chip components3) 2012 developed the Millsian® molecular modeller, available for free trail use by download, 100 times more accurate than any similar app made using SQMand at least 3 more items in development, one of which is the Suncell, which is being scrutinized by the USA DoD:4) finished proof of pronciple for the SUncell in 2000, and thefully functional and finely tuned and controlled version in May 2020, the Suncell the second item being considered by the DoD for procurement or lease, which item is being developed based on the predictions of GUT-CP,5) the Hydrino, fully validated in April -May 2020 is patented in many processes and devices since 2000 and is used as the mechanism that drives the Suncell:Randell L. Mills Inventions, Patents and Patent Applications6) the end point device using the Suncell’s ash, Hydrino’s or dark matter, from which indestructible plastics are being developed for us in the structure of that end point item and which end point item is to be powered by the first viable antigravity device, which is being developed by Huub Bakker of Massey University, NZ , in collaboration with Randell L. Mills, which device was patented as :FIFTH-FORCE APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR PROPULSIONWO1995032021A1 - Apparatus and method for providing an antigravitational force - Google Patentswhich antigravity device is mentioned in general terms in a university lecture at time stamp 00:29:08:20161019 Introduction to the Grand Unified Theory of Classical Physics_001What are all those patents validations and experiments and fully developed and commercially used items, if not proof or at least some indication of the accuracy of using GUT-CP and the Hydrino as a subset or prediction made since 1999, under that theory?The case for Millsian physicsNASA Takes a Flyer on Hydrinosfresno state lecture randell millsAs an update, this answer was flagged by someone hostile to the theory of Mills and tried to have this answer collapsed. This answer was eventually allowed to stay un-collapsed, since the one complaining did not provide a specific reason to have the answer censored.This attempt at censoring this answer begs the question, why? If the theory is as bad as some claim, or even a scam, why are not other, equally suspect theories not being attacked so strongly. Yet Mills theory is the only theory so singled out for strong censoring. The reason is that GUT-CP presents a threat to the some that are using SQM to make large incomes or gaining prestige, as in developing such devices and or related experiments, as controlled fusion and quantum computing. Both are dead end projects since the physics used, to develop these, is itself a dead end. In the Sun it is gravity that draws nucleons together, exactly centre on centre, very easily to very successfully attain fusion, while the nucleons in Earth based devices are pushed together, using magnetic confinement, which ends up doing something like trying to push wet noodles together; in quantum qbits, these particles always de-cohere a fraction of a second after the device starts to “compute” actually ending in non-computing anything. This is due to all devices using SQM, as a guide, which guide is based on imagined then assumed and therefore, at based are non-existant mechanism of waves. This was a mechanism that was then just a lucky guess about a seemingly viable mechanism that seemed to explain the 2 slit experiment. Then, using what was basically a wild guess, to be the base on which SQM has laid its foundation on. It seems to explain the 2 slit experiment, in the same way that square wheels might have been considered towards building a car, at at a time when wheels were an unknown. Then, finding the square wheels seemed worked ok if pushed hard enough, was decided on for use in building a car on top of that. Later, when industry was starting to get under way, cars were seen as having the potential of being developed for rapid transportation, but the cars are found to be difficult to move at the required speeds. Instead of looking back through its development, to find where the problem might be, the wheels are considered as off limits for such scrutiny and instead the motor is considered as the most likely place for finding the problem. The motor is looked at to see how to make it more and more powerful to make the car go as fast as the transportation needs require. This is similar to what is being considered currently, to find out why qbit are decohering, then using the qbits in a different, more robust way. This, as if the problem started with the qbits themselves, and not at an earlier development in SQM when waves were an assumed mechanism, that was assumed to exist in trying to explain the 2 slit experiment. The solution, in SQM, is then to attempt to make the qbits ever more robust, with current efforts ending making large complex devices that try to ensure the qbits do not decohere.This has resulted in quantum computing having purported successes in developing all of the peripheral items, such sotware, fudiciary concerns, building being funded and built for research into quantum computing, andall the rest, except for the hardware, circuit try in electronic chips that houses and makes up the q-bits themselves. It might be better to look all the way back to where the problem is known to have a big assumption involved, when waves were accepted as the best explanation for just one particular experiment. That was at the time when qbits and their use was not even dreamed of, but the waves were ok'd for use everywhere and in an inviolable way.I did all of the surveying of the topic completely independent of Mill and his associates. I read copies of all the original papers and people at the institutions where all of the original data and records and peer reviewed papers involved originate then read those papers and communicated with theose weho were closest related to those papers or who had access to the original records relating to such sources, to get at their side of the story in all this.The sources I have used are:L. A. Rozema, A. Darabi, D. H. Mahler, A. Hayat, Y. Soudagar, A. M. Steinberg, “Violation of Heisenberg’s Measurement-Disturbance Relationship by Weak Measurements,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 100404 – Published 6 September 2012; Erratum Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 189902 (2012)Thomas E. Stolper, mathematician and Political analyst and Author of “America’s Newton, The reception of the work of Randell Mills, in historical and contemporary context”,Herman Haus, Institute profesor of Electronic Engineering,(1986). "On the radiation from point charges". American Journal of Physics. 54 (12): 1126–1129. Bibcode:1986AmJPh..54.1126H which paper was given to Mills by Haus used to develop the same model of the electron as developed by HausThe USA Department of Defense, and physics academia which accepted the FEL explanation provided by Haus,Philip Payne, Principal Scientist, Princeton University, Physicist in charge of using the topological predictions of the Grand Unified Theory-Classical Physics for use in developing the Millsian Molecular Modeller,Brett Holverstott: Science Philosopher, head of the development team of the Millsian Molecular ModellerGerrit Kroesen, Professor of Plasma Physics, Eindhoven Technologicl University, independently tested the Hydrino reaction and found no explanation for the reaction using SQM,NASA independently tested the hydrino reaction by sub contract to:Anthony J. Marchese, a mechanical engineering professor specializing in propulsion at Rowan University, with the conclusion being indeterminate of the cause of the reaction. “ From what I can tell from BlackLight's studies – and they've been pretty good about letting others outside verify their excess energy – there are some things going on that people are having trouble understanding.”Marchese, a PhD engineer from Princeton, says NASA granted him the money to study the feasibility of the BlackLight Rocket for six months. None of the NASA money will go to Mills or BlackLight Power, Marchese says, and his work will be done independently.Marchese's colleague at the Rowan College of Engineering, associate professor of electrical engineering Peter Mark Jansson, researched the BlackLight process while employed by Mills' backer Atlantic Energy, now part of the utility Conectiv.Besides Conectiv, Mills other subsidiaries using the theory are Evaco LLC, and Millsian Corp. The main company Brilliant Light and Power is growing exponentially since then.Scams just die out and disappear after getting a few million dollars and its perpetrators also disappear.Mills is still around and has all the earmarks of someone very successful, and well liked by the New Jersey Chamber of Commerce, who themselves granted him a few million dollars. Chambers of commerce are made up of people who are not known to be taken in by any kind of scams, but are on the other hand always ready to promote any business that has shown great promise in producing successful goods and services to the local community, over a long period of time and which businesses are headed by equally good willed people. In the case of BrLP those people are:DAVID BENNETTMr. Bennett was appointed to the Board of Directors in 2018.Consultant – Strategic management consulting for growth businesses in aerospace, transportation and alternative energy field. Focused on startups through mid-sized firms.Mr. Bennett was CEO of Proterra electric bus startup and led the firm from prototype design through national validation and successful commercial launch. Raised funds from key investors, including Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers, GM Ventures, and Mitsui & Co. Global Investment.Mr. Bennett worked with Eaton for ten years in a series of operating and corporate roles. His most recent roles were VP Business Development Industrial Sector and President Eaton’s Vehicle Group in Asia Pacific. The Vehicle Group AP business, headquartered in Shanghai, has operations in five countries providing full design, product development, production, sales and service solutions for a wide range of automotive and commercial vehicle customers.Previously, Mr. Bennett held a variety of general management positions in Europe and North America for the Truck business. He was also a general manager in Eaton Aerospace.Prior to joining Eaton in 2001, Mr. Bennett worked with Honeywell (formerly AlliedSignal) and General Electric in a variety of general management, operational, program management and technical roles for high technology aerospace and industrial businesses.Mr. Bennett holds a bachelor’s degree in mechanical engineering and materials from Duke University and a master’s degree in business administration from Drexel University.Emilio Icaza ChavezMr. Icaza Chavez was appointed to the Board of Directors in 2018.Mr. Icaza Chavez is a co-founder and current Chairman of the Board of Aspel, a Mexico-based company which is the market leader in small business accounting software both in Mexico and in Colombia. Telmex bought an initial stake in Aspel in 2000; since then the relationship has evolved and Grupo Financiero Inbursa now owns a majority stake in Aspel.From 1989 to 1996, Mr. Icaza Chavez worked at GBM, one of the top brokerage houses in Mexico, where he was Co-Executive Director, in charge of Corporate Finance, Research and Investor Relations.In addition to his continued role at Aspel, Mr. Icaza Chavez co-founded Fusion de Ideas in 2008, a Private Equity investment vehicle with current investments in Energy, Software, Real Estate Development, Food, and other industries.Mr. Icaza Chavez is the main shareholder of Enextra Energía, a Mexican corporation which has signed a licensing agreement with Brilliant Light Power, Inc. to serve energy customers in certain industries within the Mexican Territory.Mr. Icaza Chavez was awarded a bachelor’s degree in business administration at Instituto Tecnologico Autonomo de Mexico (ITAM) in Mexico City.JEREMY HUXMr. Hux was appointed to the Board of Directors in 2016.Mr. Hux is President of HCP Advisors, based in San Francisco, California. For nearly 20 years, he has advised Technology and Clean Technology companies on equity, debt, and strategic transactions.Prior to HCP Advisors, Mr. Hux spent nine years with Credit Suisse. He was a Managing Director and Global Head of Credit Suisse’s Clean Technology Investment Banking practice. In addition to running the Clean Technology effort at Credit Suisse, he worked extensively with semiconductor and storage companies. Mr. Hux joined Credit Suisse after approximately eight years with Morgan Stanley. At Morgan Stanley, he was Head of West Coast Clean Technology and also advised companies across the technology spectrum, including storage, networking, hardware, semiconductors, and contract design and manufacturing. Prior to Morgan Stanley, he advised Media and Entertainment companies at SG Cowen.Mr. Hux earned a Bachelor of Arts in Economics and History from Vanderbilt University, where he graduated Magna Cum Laude.DR. RANDELL L. MILLSDr. Mills, Founder and principal stockholder of Brilliant Light Power, Inc., has served as Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer and President since 1991.Dr. Mills has authored nine books, participated in over 50 presentations at professional meetings, and authored and co-authored over 100 papers regarding the field of energy technology that have been published in peer-reviewed journals of international repute. Dr. Mills has received patents or filed patent applications in the following areas: (1) Millsian computational chemical design technology based on a revolutionary approach to solving atomic and molecular structures; (2) magnetic resonance imaging; (3) Mossbauer cancer therapy (Nature, Hyperfine Interactions); (4) Luminide class of drug delivery molecules; (5) genomic sequencing method, and (6) artificial intelligence. A thorough description of the Company’s technology and Dr. Mills’ underlying atomic theory is published in a book entitled The Grand Unified Theory of Classical Physics.Dr. Mills was awarded a Bachelor of Arts Degree in Chemistry, summa cum laude and Phi Beta Kappa, from Franklin & Marshall College in 1982, and a Doctor of Medicine Degree from Harvard Medical School in 1986. Following a year of graduate work in electrical engineering at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Dr. Mills began his research in the field of energy technology.Roger S. Ballentine – CEO Green Strategies Inc.William Beck – Managing Director and Global Head of Engineering and Sustainability Services Credit SuisseH. McIntyre Gardner – Chairman of the Board, Spirit Airlines, Inc.Dr. Ray Gogel – President, Avanti EnterprisesJim Hearty – Former Partner of Clough Capital PartnersPhil Johnson – Former SVP – Intellectual Property Policy & Strategy of Johnson & Johnson – Law Department, Former SVP and Chief Intellectual Property Counsel of Johnson & JohnsonMatt Key – Commercial Director Charge.autoBill Maurer – SVP ABM IndustriesJeffrey S. McCormick – Chairman and Managing General Partner of SaturnDavid Meredith – Chief Operations and Product Officer at Rackspace Hosting, Inc., President of Private Cloud & Managed Hosting at Rackspace Hosting, Inc.Bill Palatucci – Special Counsel Gibbons LawAmb R. James Woolsey – Former Director of the CIA under President Bill ClintonColin Bannon – Chief Architect BT Global ServicesMichael Harney – Managing Director, BTIGStan O’Neal – Formerly Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board of Merrill Lynch & Co. Inc., Former Board Member of General Motors, Currently on the Board of ArconicRoger S. BallentineRoger Ballentine is the President of Green Strategies Inc., where he provides management consulting services to corporate and financial sector clients on sustainability strategy; investment and transaction evaluation and project development execution in the clean energy sector; and the integration of energy and environmental policy considerations into business strategy. He is also a Venture Partner with Arborview Capital LLC, a private equity firm making growth capital investments in the clean energy and energy efficiency sectors. Previously, Roger was a senior member of the White House staff, serving President Bill Clinton as Chairman of the White House Climate Change Task Force and Deputy Assistant to the President for Environmental Initiatives. Prior to being named Deputy Assistant, Roger was Special Assistant to the President for Legislative Affairs where he focused on energy and environmental issues. Before joining the White House, Roger was a partner at Patton Boggs LLP.Over the years, Roger has acquired a wealth of experience and knowledge of the energy sector, financial markets, and environmental business practices as well as the politics, players and trends in the energy and environmental space. Using his expertise and deep relationships, Roger has helped clients develop better business strategies, make better investment decisions, negotiate new business partnerships, build critical alliances with stakeholders, and devise impactful government and public affairs strategies.Roger currently serves on the Advisory Boards of the Department of Energy’s National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), Clean Capital LLC, 8 Rivers Capital, and the American Council on Renewable Energy (ACORE), where he was a founding Board member in 2001. He is a member of Ingersoll Rand’s Advisory Council on Sustainability. Roger also serves on the Selection Committee for the United Arab Emirates’ (UAE) Zayed Future Energy Prize and is the Co-Chair of the Aspen Institute’s Clean Energy Forum.In addition to being a frequent speaker, media commentator and writer, he has been a Lecturer on Law at Harvard Law School teaching in the area of energy and climate law and a Senior Fellow at the Progressive Policy Institute in Washington D.C.Roger is a Magna Cum Laude graduate of the University of Connecticut and a Cum Laude graduate of the Harvard Law School. He is a member of the Connecticut, District of Columbia, and the United States Supreme Court bars.William BeckWilliam Beck is a Managing Director within the Group Business Support Services (GBSS) Department of Credit Suisse. William is the Global Head of Critical Engineering & Sustainability, based in New York. He leads a team responsible for developing and implementing strategy and governance for the Bank’s Innovation, Energy management, Mechanical, Electrical, Plumbing & Fire (MEPF) design, Engineering Operations Maintenance, Environmental and Sustainability integration as well as the Data Center Strategy programs. His mandate also includes the bank’s Global Energy Strategy and Procurement integration. Bill has 25+ years of experience including the strategic planning, development, design, construction and operations of mission critical and non-mission critical facilities. William is a licensed Professional Engineer, Master Electrician and Energy procurement specialist. He holds a BSEE degree and a MS degree in Management, both from Fairleigh Dickenson University.H. McIntyre GardnerMr. Gardner was the head of Merrill Lynch’s Private Client business in the Americas and also the Global Bank Group within the firm’s Global Wealth Management Group until early 2008. As head of Private Client Americas, Mac was responsible for the region’s extensive network of more than 600 advisory offices; private banking and investment services to ultra-high net worth clients; the group’s middle markets business; investment and insurance products; distribution and business development; and corporate and diversified financial services.For the Global Bank Group, Mr. Gardner was Chairman of Merrill Lynch Bank USA and responsible for Merrill Lynch’s consumer and commercial banking and cash management products. This included distribution and sales of all bank products and services primarily delivered into the marketplace through Financial Advisors. These activities encompassed retail deposit products and services, credit and debit cards, commercial cash management, residential mortgage lending, securities-based/small business/high-net-worth structured/middle-market lending, and community development lending and investing.Mr. Gardner’s 13-year career at Merrill Lynch also included roles in strategy, Finance Director for the corporation, and as an investment banker specializing in high yield finance, mergers and acquisitions and corporate restructuring.Mr. Gardner has also served as the principal of a financial advisory services firm and as the president of two consumer products companies. He has served on the Board of Directors of Spirit Airlines, Inc. since 2010 and has served as Chairman since August 2013. He also serves on the North American Strategic Advisory Board of Oliver Wyman. Mr. Gardner is a 1983 graduate of Dartmouth College, where he received a Bachelor of Arts degree in religion.Dr. Ray GogelDr. Ray Gogel started his career in academia, where he obtained his PhD with distinction in philosophy from Drew University after studying for four years in Germany with leading Continental philosophers. Ray’s background in philosophy has permeated the rest of his career, driving a strong and abiding interest in forward-thinking leadership and business models, as well as innovation and disruptive technology. Ray moved from academia to a career in the utility and power industry, progressing through a variety of operational, leadership and business development roles at Public Service Electric & Gas Co in New Jersey, before he left to join IBM as a solution architect, where he designed, sold and delivered IBM’s first Business Process Outsourcing transaction (PG&E Energy Services). Gogel progressed within IBM to become VP—Client Services, responsible for IBM’s largest utility customer and P&L, before joining Xcel Energy, headquartered in Minneapolis.At Xcel, Ray reported directly to the CEO as CIO and later in the expanded role of CAO and President of Customer and Enterprise Solutions, where he managed the core areas of IT, Customer Care/Marketing, Human Resources and Utility Innovation. During his tenure, Xcel received recognition as a premier IT organization in InformationWeek’s Top 500 Awards, placing in the Top 20 for 3 years and twice winning their Business Technology Optimization award. Ray was featured in ComputerWorld’s Premier 100 IT Leaders. Xcel’s unique outsourcing model and use of Strategic Advisory Boards has been the subject of various publications and an early driving force for transformational outsourcing in the utility industry. In 2006, Xcel was awarded the prestigious Edison award from the Edison Electric Institute for its ‘Utility of the Future’ initiatives in IT, as well as Utility of the Year in 2009 from EnergyBiz Magazine for its unique and pioneering ‘SmartGridCity™’ efforts.Ray left Xcel Energy to serve as President and COO of Current Group, an innovative US-based start-up Smart Grid company specializing in cutting-edge smart grid operations and analytics with clients in NA, Europe and AP. He also served as Global Head of Smart Grid for Nokia-Siemens Networks as they explored entry into the Smart Grid adjacency. Ray spent two years as a Managing Director in Accenture’s Resources Group, working as a market-maker for strategic pursuits.In 2014, Ray co-founded USGRDCO with Jay Worenklein and David Mohler and served as President and COO. USGRDCO’s objective is to upgrade the distribution systems of America’s utilities and accelerate the benefits of grid modernization through commercial microgrids and distributed energy resources, thereby offering utilities alternative paths to more efficient, reliable, resilient and secure power systems. Ray and his team pioneered a series of microgrid archetypes and designs, suitable for utilities, private communities and smart cities, which USGRDCO believes represents the future of the North American grid. Ray left his COO role at USGRDCO to found his own consulting group, Avanti Enterprises, Inc., where he provides strategic consulting and business planning to companies in the power sector.During his career, Ray has served on IBM’s Strategic Advisory Board, The World Economic Forum, the Colorado Smart Grid Task Force, EEI’s Smart Grid Workshop Group, the Board of MedicAlert International, Denver’s United Way and Goodwill.Jim HeartyGraduate of Williams College and The Advanced Management Program of the Harvard Business School.Jim began as a bond trader at First National Bank of Boston, where he eventually ran the Bond Department, (the largest underwriter of Tax Exempt Debt in New England with a significant business in US Government and Agency Securities and Money Market securities). In the early 1990’s, Jim was the Assistant Secretary of Administration and Finance for Governor Bill Weld and responsible for all Bond Financings for the Commonwealth and Agencies and Authorities where the Governor served on the Board.Over the course of his career he also served as: Board Member of the Public Securities Association and a Board Member and Chairman of the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board, Board Member of the Mass HFA, The Mass Industrial Finance Agency, The Massachusetts Land Bank and the Pension Reserve Investment Management Board (The State Pension System) among others. Remained on the Board of the Pension System and co-through the terms of Governors Weld, Cellucci, Swift and Romney.Working at Lehman Brothers as a banker in the Tax Exempt Division, Jim was responsible for Business in New England and grew the franchise substantially, lead managed significant issues in all New England State. Became the Head of Public Finance in 1998, and Co-Head of the Tax Exempt Division including all trading and underwriting in 2000, and grew the Business substantially.In 2002, he was the Executive Director of the Massachusetts Pension Reserve, and served for two years as ED and CIO of the $70 Billion Pension Fund. Then in 2005, Jim was a Partner of Relational Investors, one of the original “Activist” Institutional Investors, and grew the business from $1.5 Billion to $5 Billion Dollars in AUM. Significant Engagements included Home Depot, Sovereign Bancorp, Hewlett-Packard and Sprint. In 2008, he became a Partner of Clough Capital Partners and was responsible for fundraising in the Institutional Market, where he grew the AUM in our long/short fund from $500 Million to $2.0 Billion.Jim is married to Doris Blodgett since 1975, 3 sons, Resident of Boston.Phil JohnsonPhil is currently a member of the Board and Executive Committee of the Intellectual Property Owners Association (“IPO”), Co-Chapter Editor of the Sedona Conference WG10 biopharmaceutical patent litigation project, and member of the board of the Monell Chemical Senses Center. Phil recently retired as Senior Vice President – Intellectual Property Policy & Strategy of Johnson & Johnson – Law Department. Prior to April of 2014, he was Senior Vice President and Chief Intellectual Property Counsel of Johnson & Johnson where he managed a worldwide group of about 270 IP professionals, of whom over 100 were patent and trademark attorneys.Before joining Johnson & Johnson in 2000, Phil was a senior partner and co-chair of IP litigation at Woodcock Washburn in Philadelphia. During his 27 years in private practice, Phil counseled independent inventors, startups, universities and businesses of all sizes in all aspects of intellectual property law. His diverse practice pertained to advances in a wide variety of technologies, including pharmaceuticals, diagnostics, medical devices, consumer products, semi-conductor fabrication, automated manufacturing, materials and waste management. During his time in private practice, Phil served as trial counsel in countless IP disputes, including cases resolved by arbitration, bench trials, jury trials and appeals to the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, many of which resulted in reported decisions.During his tenure at Johnson & Johnson, Phil served terms on the Medical Device & Diagnostics and Pharmaceutical Group Operating Committees responsible for managing J&J’s many businesses in these fields, while also serving on the senior management team responsible for J&J’s legal organization, which has now grown to over 450 attorneys located in 70+ locations in 35+ countries.Phil’s has previously served as the Chair of the Board of American Intellectual Property Law Education Foundation, as President of the Intellectual Property Owners Association, as President of INTERPAT, as President of the Association of Corporate Patent Counsel, as President of the Intellectual Property Owners Education Foundation, as co-founder and member of the Steering Committee of the Coalition for 21st Century Patent Reform, as Chair of PhRMA’s IP Focus Group and as Board Member of the American Intellectual Property Law Association.Phil’s has previously served as the Chair of the Board of American Intellectual Property Law Education Foundation, as President of the Intellectual Property Owners Association, as President of INTERPAT, as President of the Association of Corporate Patent Counsel, as President of the Intellectual Property Owners Education Foundation, as co-founder and member of the Steering Committee of the Coalition for 21st Century Patent Reform, as Chair of PhRMA’s IP Focus Group and as Board Member of the American Intellectual Property Law Association.Phil has frequently testified before both the House and Senate Judiciary Committees about patent law reform and, more recently, abusive patent litigation. Phil served as a member of Chief Judge Michel’s Advisory Council on Patent Reform, and was recognized in the Congressional Record as a member of the Minority Whip Jon Kyle’s “Kitchen Cabinet” for the America Invents Act (“AIA”). Thereafter, Phil served as IPO’s representative on the ABA-AIPLA-IPO committee of six experts (“COSE”) formed at Director Kappos’ request to propose regulations to the USPTO for implementing the PGR-IPR post-grant proceedings created by the AIA.Phil co-authored “Compensatory Damages Issues In Patent Infringement Cases, A Pocket Guide for Federal District Court Judges,” published by the Federal Judicial Center, and has served that Center as a faculty member on its IP-related judicial education programming. Phil was also featured in the Landslide Publication March/April 2013 issue. Most recently, Phil authored “The America Invents Act on Its Fifth Anniversary: A Promise Thus Far Only Partially Fulfilled,” published on 9/15/2016 in IP Watchdog.Phil’s awards include the Woodcock Prize for Legal Excellence (1997); the New Jersey Intellectual Property Law Association’s Jefferson Medal (2013); the Philadelphia Intellectual Property Association’s Distinguished Intellectual Property Practitioner award (May, 2017), induction into the international IP Hall of Fame by the IP Hall of Fame Academy (June, 2017) and the Intellectual Property Owners Association “Carl B. Horton President’s Distinguished Service Award” (September, 2017).Phil received his Bachelor of Science degree, cum laude with distinction in biology from Bucknell University, and his J.D. degree from Harvard Law School.Matt KeyMatt has been changing business through the innovative use of technology throughout his career. He has successfully transformed how businesses approach the market and enabled the creation of repeatable and sophisticated services and solutions whilst bringing in many new clients.Prior to Everynet and now Charge (a new connected electric truck manufacturer) he ran the Global IoT Business for Vodafone and before led the Enterprise division in Cable & Wireless Worldwide. Other experience includes working for Siemens IT Solutions and Services, Capita and Barclays.Bill MaurerBill Maurer is the Senior Vice President of ABM Industries. Mr. Maurer is responsible for managing the Energy portfolio for ABM. ABM Industries is a best-in-class provider of Integrated Facility Services which include – Energy Solutions, Mechanical Service and Construction, Facility Management, Janitorial, Security, and Parking Services for building owners and operators in North America and selected international locations. ABM is one of the nation’s most successful single source providers of high value facilities management and building optimization services.Mr. Maurer has over 20 years of experience in the Energy Industry where he has held various and increasing levels of management and responsibility. Most recently, Mr. Maurer joined ABM in 2006. Under his guidance, the Energy Solutions division has maintained exponential growth year after year. To do this Mr. Maurer had to completely re-organize and re-structure the existing energy division. There were significant changes made in personnel, market focus and overall strategy towards the Energy Business. Through the changes that were made in Energy offerings, ABM is now able to offer to their clients a unique program to provide cost savings that allow them to fund needed improvements to reduce energy consumption, reduce environmental impact and comply with government regulations. Not only has the revenue increased substantially in the Energy division, but the unique solutions delivered by ABM and the markets in which were focused on has also increased dramatically.With a Bachelor’s degree in Electrical Engineering, Maurer’s career path began at the Systems and Services Division of Johnson Controls, an internationally renowned building technology and manufacturing leader. At Johnson Controls, he spent nearly 8 years in sales and management positions where he was a top performer with a track record of consistent top performances in growth, sales achievement, profitability and leadership.Over the past 21 years, Mr. Maurer has been involved with over $900M in Energy Saving Programs to customers. He is a recognized leader in the industry by his co-workers and competition alike. He is involved with leadership positions in multiple industry related organizations – NAESCO (Board Member), BOMA, ASHRAE (Former Treasurer) and Energy Services Coalition. Mr. Maurer has been involved in multiple speaking engagements at industry/ market events and The White House. Mr. Maurer is also involved with and holds leadership positions within 2 Cancer Fund Organizations.On a personal note, Mr. Maurer has a wife of 20 years and two children (16 old boy and 14 old girl). They have lived in Milford, MI area for the past 11 years. He enjoys playing competitive hockey, soccer and golf. He is an avid outdoorsman and enjoys hunting – specifically pheasant and duck. Reading financial, motivational and educational books is a daily practice.Jeffrey S. McCormickJeffrey is the Chairman and Managing General Partner of Saturn. He founded Saturn in 1993 and began financing early stage companies including, the extremely successful business to business e-commerce company, FreeMarkets (FMKT, acquired by ARBA); the largest U.S. biodiesel company, Twin Rivers Technologies (acquired by FELDA); email marketing company, Constant Contact (CTCT); and the extremely popular Boston Duck Tours. Saturn Partners II and III, have invested in cutting-edge technology companies in healthcare, education, energy, IT and environmental businesses.Jeffrey has over 25 years of experience as an investment banker, entrepreneur and venture capitalist. He currently serves on the boards including BioWish, Knopp Biosciences, Third Pole, and XNG Energy.Jeffrey is a graduate of Syracuse University, where he received an MBA in Finance and a BS in Biology. He was a Collegiate Scholar Athlete, first year team All-American lacrosse player, and a captain of Syracuse’s first NCAA championship lacrosse team.Jeffrey is a Vice Chair of the CitiCenter for the Performing Arts. He serves on the Dean’s Advisory Committee of the School of Management at Syracuse University and is Founding Principal Financier of the Sean McDonough Charities for Children. He is actively involved with the Trinity Church in Boston.Jeffrey is married with three children.David MeredithDavid Meredith has been Chief Operations and Product Officer at Rackspace Hosting, Inc. since January 2018. Mr. Meredith’s responsibilities include P&L oversight of the vision, operational and administrative direction of Rackspace’s product lines, operations, technology and service delivery functions. Mr. Meredith has been the President of Private Cloud & Managed Hosting at Rackspace Hosting, Inc. since June 1, 2017. Prior to joining Rackspace, Mr. Meredith served as the President of global data centers at CenturyLink. He has led international managed hosting businesses in roles including senior manager, president, Chief Executive Officer and board director. His experience spans a range of industry verticals from venture-backed firms such as NeuPals in China to business units of large public companies such as Capital One, CGI and VeriSign. He served as Senior Vice President and Global General Manager for Technology Solutions at CenturyLink, Inc. As an industry thought leader, he has provided insights for leading media outlets such as BusinessWeek, USA Today and The Washington Post. CIO Magazine, Wireless Week and The Huffington Post have published his articles. He has spoken on industry topics for NBC’s Carson Daly Show, NPR’s Morning Edition, Seoul Broadcasting System, PBS’ Nightly Business Report and at analyst forums such as Gartner, Bloomberg, Yankee and Cantor Fitzgerald. In December 2016, the respected Uptime Institute recognized his contributions to the Industry by selecting him for their Change Leader Award. He was named “Top 40 under 40 – Best and Brightest Leaders” by Georgia Trend Magazine in 2008. Mr. Meredith graduated with honors from James Madison University with a Bachelor of Business Administration in finance and he earned a Masters in IT management from the University of Virginia, where he serves on the UVA advisory board.Bill PalatucciBill Palatucci is one of the state’s most prominent and widely respected attorneys, with a reputation for strategic planning and advice regarding complex public policy and communications initiatives. He has been named among NJBIZ’s “100 Most Powerful People in New Jersey Business” every year that the issue has been published.Most recently, following the Republican National Convention through Election Day, Mr. Palatucci served as General Counsel to the Presidential Transition Committee of President Donald J. Trump. In this role, he was responsible for all legal matters related to ethics compliance and contracts and agreements between such agencies as the U.S. Department of Justice, General Services Administration, and the White House. Mr. Palatucci coordinated extensively with internal and external members assisting the transition, providing all necessary legal advice and guidance to facilitate the Transition Committee’s interactions with the Trump-Pence campaign, federal departments and agencies, local, state, and federal officials, think tanks, outside experts and consultants, and various other entities and individuals with whom the Transition Committee engaged with during the pre-Election Day time period.Mr. Palatucci also served as General Counsel to Governor Christie’s presidential campaign. In 2013, he served as Chairman of the Governor’s reelection campaign and as Co-Chair for the Governor’s Inaugural Committee.In 2010, Mr. Palatucci was elected the Republican National Committeeman for New Jersey, and, for the past 30 years, he has had a hand in some of the most important state and federal elections in New Jersey. Over this time, he has led the reelection campaigns of President Ronald Reagan, President George H. W. Bush, and Governor Tom Kean, and he served as a senior advisor to Governor George W. Bush’s presidential campaign in 2000. Mr. Palatucci was also the principal consultant for Christine Todd Whitman’s run for the U.S. Senate in 1990.Amb R. James WoolseyAmbassador R. James Woolsey was the Director of Central Intelligence for the United States Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) from 1993 to 1995. He’s been appointed by Presidents to positions of leadership during the administrations of Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, and Bill Clinton. In a town riven by partisan divisions, Ambassador Woolsey is widely respected on both sides of the aisle.A national security and energy specialist, he is the Chancellor of the Institute of World Politics and Chair of the Leadership Council of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies and Chairs the United States Energy Security Council. He is also a Venture Partner with Lux Capital and chairs the Strategic Advisory Group of the Paladin Capital Group, a multi-stage private equity firm.He is a frequent contributor of articles to major publications, and gives public speeches and media interviews on the subjects of energy, foreign affairs, defense, and intelligence.This just a partial list of the high powered personnel sources I have used. Mills himself is just one of the thousands involved so far.

If you want the answer in a “Yes” or “No”, well, yes.Very little.In fact, a plank, held at some positive angle of attack, is capable of generating much, much,much, much, much, much, much, much, much, much, much, much more lift than a standard airliner oval/round/double-bubble fuselage.Wings are, after all, planks, with carefully sculpted shapes called airfoils.NASA’s Lifting Body experiments, and the Space Shuttle, are examples of fuselages specifically designed for lift.The NASA facility at Edwards—called initially the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA) Muroc Flight Test Unit—was paradise to lovers of air-planes. It was a place where people got their hands dirty working on aircraft, a place where they had the freedom to kick an airplane tire at any time. It was a place where test pilots, engineers, mechanics, and technicians all breathed the same air and walked the same halls, shops, and hangar floors. It was a place where they could take a few minutes off from tightening a bolt on an aircraft to watch a new airplane design making a flyover. The boss probably was also an airplane lover, and more than likely, he too had stopped whatever he was doing to watch the same flyover.In 1963, the lifting-body program began, circumventing the normal bureaucratic process by launching itself as a bottom-up program. It began when an enthusiastic engineer drew together a band of engineers, technicians, and pilots—all volunteers, of course—and then moved ahead, bypassing the ponderous amount of paperwork and delays of months or even years typically involved in officially initiating approved and funded aerospace programs in that era. Besides tapping into the volunteer spirit present in the 1960s at the NASA Flight Research Center, the unofficial lifting-body program also used creative methods to locate funds.The extremely low-cost M2-F1 launched the unofficial lifting-body program in 1963. Dubbed the "Flying Bathtub," this simple little vehicle was towed aloft by either a car or an old R4D, the Navy version of the C-47 aircraft.Except for the Hyper III, which was flown by remote control, the lifting-body vehicles were flown with research pilots on board. Two of the configurations, the M2-F2 and the first glider version of the HL-10, were marginal to control and later were modified aerodynamically to produce good flying aircraft.▲The HL-10: the precursor to the Shuttle.The original flight versions, the "angry machines," tested the limits of research pilots' capabilities. We were very fortunate at the time to have a pool of the world's best research pilots to fly these marginally controllable aircraft until engineers, got smart enough to convert them into good flying machines. Another lifting body, the Air Force X-24A, was converted into the X-24B, a totally new form of lifting body called a "racehorse" because it led toward n high hypersonic aerodynamic performance.As the program grew over the years to involve flight-testing eight different configurations, it became more disciplined and organized. Even then, however, it was still individuals—not organizations—that made things happen. The lifting-body concept was a radical departure from the aerodynamics of conventional winged aircraft, and it was the operational experience of the NASA and Air Force people at Edwards AFB that made the program a reality. Setting the stage for the lifting-body program was the long experience of these engineers, technicians, and pilots over previous decades in flight-testing experimental, air-launched, and rocket-boosted gliders from the XS-1 to the X-15.The Collier Trophy selection committee awarded the 1975 trophy to General Dynamics for designing the F-16 fighter. General Dynamics touted the F-16 to the committee as being a composite of design innovations "that have not previously been combined into a single vehicle." These innovations were lifting body, fly-by-wire, control-configured vehicle technology, variable wing camber, side-stick pilot's controller and high-acceleration cockpit.But the most exciting early vision of fuselage lift was that of Burnelli’s.Reproduced from Air and Space Magazine, November 1, 1989The Burnelli ControversyWas this designer a genius or his own worst enemy?Burnelli (front) designed conventional aircraft like the 1916 Continental Pusher before turning to lifting-fuselage airplanes with the RB-1. (NASM)By David NolandAir & Space Magazine | SubscribeNovember 1, 1989“This is the biggest story in aviation history,” says Chalmers H. “Slick” Goodlin. He puffs on his pipe and leans back in a 16th century oak chair in the living room of his sumptuous Coral Gables home. A suit of medieval armor sits astride a life-size wooden horse over behind the couch, and banyan trees are visible outside the window. Goodlin, a 66-year-old dealer in used jet airliners and a former test pilot from the glory days at Muroc, is talking about a subject that has consumed him—some would say obsessed him—for nearly four decades: the Burnelli lifting fuselage. This 69-year-old concept of aircraft design is one that Goodlin insists would revolutionize aviation today. “The government and the military-industrial complex have engaged in a diabolical conspiracy to kill the Burnelli concept,” he says. “The cost of that conspiracy has been hundreds of billions of dollars and thousands of human lives. It’s one of mankind’s greatest tragedies of the 20th century.”One day in 1920, a clever young aircraft designer from Texas named Vincent J. Burnelli had a brainstorm. Seeking to increase lift for a larger version of the Lawson Airliner he’d designed the year before, Burnelli hit upon the idea of shaping the fuselage like an airfoil. Instead of simply dragging through the air and unnecessarily burdening the wings, reasoned Burnelli, his fuselage would generate its fair share of lift. Moreover, the lifting fuselage would reduce structural loads on the wing and provide the additional bonus of a cavernous cabin.Burnelli’s first lifting-fuselage aircraft was the 32-passenger RB-1 biplane, which made its maiden flight in 1921. It had a broad slab of a body, curved like an airfoil across the top and bottom and tapering to a knife edge at the rear. The fuselage contributed more than 500 square feet of lifting surface, about a third of the total wing area, and was so wide that the two 550-horsepower Galloway Atlantic engines fit side by side in the nose. An improved version, the RB-2, could carry three tones of freight, an astonishing load in those days, and in 1925 the prototype hauled around a Hudson Essex automobile on an aerial sales tour. But the RB-2 was sluggish and slow, and Burnelli couldn’t get financing for production.He continued to design and build airplanes based on his lifting-fuselage concept into the late 1940s, persuading various backers to fund six more prototype aircraft. None ever went into production, even though Burnelli had the support of big names like Hap Arnold, Clyde Pangborn, and Billy Mitchell. His unusual designs also caught the fancy of aviation buffs of the day, among them an airplane-crazy Pennsylvania boy named Chalmers Goodlin, who built a model of a Burnelli when he was 10 years old.But the big contract remained elusive. Until his death in 1964 Burnelli continued to sketch designs for aircraft ranging from commercial jet transports to suborbital space planes, all employing his lifting-fuselage concept. The last Burnelli aircraft to fly was the CBY-3 Loadmaster, a squat, bulky twin-engine cargo transport that first took wing in 1947. The only surviving Burnelli, it now sits, forlorn and partially disassembled, in the grass out behind the New England Air Museum in Windsor Locks, Connecticut.When Slick Goodlin met Vincent Burnelli in 1949, Goodlin too was feeling the sting of rejection by the aviation establishment. Two years earlier, Goodlin, then a dashing 24-year-old test pilot for Bell Aircraft, had made the first powered flights of the Bell X-1, the bright orange rocket plane that would later break the sound barrier and make a national hero out of Air Force pilot Chuck Yeager. Goodlin took the X-1 to the brink of Mach 1, but it was Yeager who stepped in for the epochal supersonic ride.According to Yeager’s autobiography and the book The Right Stuff, Goodlin lost his shot as soon as he insisted on a $150,000 bonus to fly the X-1 past the sound barrier. When the Air Force balked, Yeager took over for $283 a month, his regular service pay.“That account is false,” says Goodlin vehemently, the bitterness still evident. “I had a handshake deal with Bob Stanley of Bell that I would make the first supersonic flight before we turned the plane over to the Air Force. He agreed I’d get $150,000 for the supersonic flights. But the Air Force wanted a man in uniform to break the sound barrier—better PR. And to make Yeager look like a hero, they made up the story about me refusing to fly.”In 1949, Goodlin, who had left Bell to start a used-airliner business, was introduced to Burnelli by a mutual friend. The two hit it off immediately. Empathizing with Burnelli’s role as the frustrated outsider, Goodlin grew interested in the lifting-fuselage concept, test-flew the CBY-3, and got hooked. “It was the best-flying airplane of the 10 different types I’ve flown,” he rhapsodizes. “It stalled beautifully. You could cut an engine, pull the stick back in your lap, and it would shudder a little and recover by itself. Try that in a C-46 and you’re in big trouble.”Goodlin became a stockholder in the Burnelli Company in 1950 and president in 1960. “That about finished me as far as the establishment was concerned,” he says with registration. For, as Goodlin sees it, it has been the aviation establishment that has worked to suppress Burnelli’s accomplishments.Burnelli was dogged by bad luck. One prototype crashed when the ground crew forgot to put in the aileron hinge bolts; another crashed when the ailerons were hooked up incorrectly to their controls. A major backer went broke and a government loan was called in at just the wrong time. Sales prospects for the postwar CBY-3 plummeted when the market was flooded with surplus DC-3s at $5,000 apiece.Burnelli was clearly a talented designer, but he sometimes undermined his own cause. Zealously guarding his lifting-fuselage concept, he patented every detail and always seemed to be involved in patent fights, making him appear a secretive, paranoid outsider to some. Around 1930 the U.S. government tried to buy the rights to Burnelli’s patents so that other manufacturers could build Burnelli-style airplanes. Burnelli refused. On the advice of his patent attorney, he also stayed out of the Aviation Manufacturers Association, which had its own cross-licensing and patent-pooling system. At one point Burnelli had a chance to merge with Consolidated, a big establishment manufacturer, but he backed off.His dealings with the military were also fruitless. Despite repeated rejections, Burnelli constantly bombarded the Army with design proposals that it called “unsubstantiated” and “based on faulty or misleading data.” A 1948 Army chronology of its duels with Burnelli runs 30 pages.Goodlin describes Burnelli as “too nice a man for the cut-throat aviation business.” Short, shy, mild-mannered, Burnelli was far more comfortable at his drafting board than in the offices of Wall Street financiers or Army generals. “Like so many inventors and technical geniuses, he was not a commercial man,” says Goodlin. “He was an innocent. He didn’t appreciate how dishonest big businesses could be.”As Goodlin tells it, an event in 1940 perfectly sums up Burnelli’s lifelong bad luck and frustration. His A-1 fighter-bomber design, after gaining the support of General Hap Arnold, won an Army Air Corps competition over Boeing, Douglas, and Lockheed designs. An elated Burnelli, the story goes, was invited to the White House to watch President Franklin Roosevelt sign the production contract. While an aide served champagne in the Oval Office, Roosevelt, pen in hand, casually asked Burnelli who his backer was. When told it was Arthur Pew, the Sun Oil magnate, Roosevelt exploded with anger, threw the pen across the room, and ordered Burnelli out. Pew, it seems, had been a big supporter of Wendell Willkie, Roosevelt’s Republican opponent that year. Burnelli never got the contract.Shortly thereafter, an Army review board issued a report that denigrated the Burnelli lifting-fuselage concept and stated that no Burnelli design proposal “would ever again be considered by the Air Corps.” Burnelli continued to submit designs anyway, and finally, in 1948, the Air Force tested the CBY-3 at Wright Field. It concluded that the Burnelli was comparable to the Douglas C-47 in handling and performance, but obsolete compared with newer designs then under development. Burnelli, frustrated after so many years of rejection, never built another airplane.Since Burnelli’s death, Goodlin has carried on the crusade alone—39 years of evangelistic fervor that have brought him little but rejection and scorn. It cost him his first wife. “She told me, ‘You love that airplane more than you love me.’ I told her, ‘You’re right, baby.’” He subsequently married his secretary, who, after years of typing acid letters to Burnelli’s foes, presumably knew what she was getting into.Goodlin targets Boeing as the kingpin in the anti-Burnelli conspiracy. In 1963 he ran into a Boeing marketing executive in Florida and pitched the Burnelli concept. The executive went home enthusiastic, says Goodlin, and promised to talk to his superiors. But he called back and said Boeing wasn’t interested after all. Twelve year later, Goodlin says he got a phone call from the president of Royal Jordanian Airlines. “‘Hey, Slick,’ he told me, ‘I’m here in Seattle looking at a mockup of a Boeing Burnelli. They’re telling me it’s the airplane of the future, and they’re trying to sell me a fleet of ‘em.’”The mockup turned out to be the model 754 Husky, a freight hauler Boeing developed for a company headed by Ed Cole, former president of General Motors. The Husky did indeed have a Burnelli-style airfoil-shaped fuselage. (In fact, the Boeing patent filing on the 754 cites Burnelli’s earlier patents.) A spec sheet on the 754 surreptitiously mailed to Goodlin by a Boeing engineer showed that, using the same engines as the 767, the 754 had double the 767’s payload.Goodlin promptly fired off a letter to Boeing asking about royalties; Boeing attorneys sent back a series of increasingly testy letters. The 754 project was eventually shelved—according to Goodlin, to save Boeing the embarrassment of admitting the superiority of the Burnelli concept and to avoid paying him royalties. In a gesture of conciliation, Goodlin offered to drop the matter if Boeing would (a) take out a full-page ad in Business Week apologizing to him for stealing the Burnelli concept for the 754 design, and (b) donate $50 million to an air safety organization designated by Goodlin.Boeing opted not to comment for this article. “We’re a little skittish on the whole subject of Burnelli,” a Boeing spokesman said.Goodlin describes evasive treatment by other aerospace companies. He cites as an example a Northrop engineer who wanted to submit a Burnelli design for a Naval design competition. Management killed the deal, transferred the engineer, and told him never to talk to Goodlin again. Goodlin says Northrop was edgy because the Stealth bomber has Burnelli characteristics.A Northrop source confirms the outline of Goodlin’s tale but says, “Slick didn’t just shoot himself in the foot, he shot his whole foot off. Things were going just fine until he wrote an aggressive legalistic letter to Tom Jones, the chairman. The whole thing blew apart when it hit top management. Slick shoots from the hip, and that prevents him from being taken seriously.”“The whole aerospace industry is interconnected, and they’ll do anything to stop us,” says Goodlin. “We have enough evidence for a criminal conspiracy.” (He sued the Department of Defense in 1984 but has since withdrawn the suit.) “Things haven’t changed since the 1920s. They’re still a bunch of rotten bastards.”Since there are no Burnelli airplanes in flying condition, it’s difficult to evaluate Goodlin’s claims of superior performance. According to contemporary editions of Jane’s All the World’s Aircraft, performance of the early Burnelli CB-16 and UB-14 was comparable to similar aircraft of the day. The most modern Burnelli, the CBY-3, though close in power and payload to the Douglas Super DC-3, was a good 40 mph slower.On the other hand, Goodlin points out with glee that Boeing’s own spec sheet shows that the 754 Husky would have had greater payload capacity than the 767. But the Husky had 31 percent more wing area and a higher aspect ratio—the ratio of span to average chord, a measure of the “skinniness” of the wing—than the 767, two factors that, entirely aside from its Burnelli-style fuselage, would give it a big weight-lifting advantage. Moreover, the Husky would have cruised at just Mach 0.74, compared with the 767’s Mach 0.80.According to standard aerodynamic theory, the “extra lift” provided by a Burnelli fuselage is, under most conditions, beside the point. A Boeing 767 cruising at 41,000 feet doesn’t need extra lift from the fuselage. Its wing easily provides all the lift necessary to balance its weight. (In engineering terms, the aircraft cruises at well below the wing’s maximum lift coefficient.) The designer’s task is to get that lift with the least drag. It happens that a high-aspect-ratio wing (long and skinny) has inherently less induced drag than a low-aspect-ratio lifting surface (short and fat, like a Burnelli fuselage). In cruising flight, the less the fuselage lifts, the lower the inducted drag.Conventional wisdom also dictates that a Burnelli jetliner would suffer drag penalties because of its larger frontal area, larger wetted area (the area over which air flows), and the discontinuity between the lifting fuselage and the wings. NASA aerodynamicist Jerry Hefner comments: “I would think the induced drag would be horrendous. And your skin friction drag is going to go up because of the larger wetted area.” An engineer from a major aerospace firm who asked to remain anonymous (to avoid angry letters from Goodlin) estimates the drag penalty of a Burnelli-style jet transport at about 20 percent more than that of an airplane like a 767. That may be a reasonable compromise for a bulky cargo carrier like the Husky, but not for a passenger jet.Slick Goodlin, of course, has never let conventional wisdom get in his way. “Boeing and Douglas and all the rest of them are simply wrong,” he declares flatly. “The aerodynamics textbooks have been misinterpreted for 50 years.”Goodlin and established aeronautical theory do agree on one thing, however: the extra lift of a broad, flat, airfoil-shaped fuselage can theoretically reduce landing speed. Goodlin correctly cites the takeoff and landing speeds of current jetliners—typically 140 to 180 mph—as potentially dangerous. All of Burnelli’s airplanes, by contrast, had low landing speeds.But an airplane’s landing speed is essentially a market decision, one of the tradeoffs in aircraft design. If Boeing had wanted the 747 to take off at 100 mph in 3,000 feet, it could have simply enlarged the wing and limited the weight. But since the major cities of the world all have 10,000-foot runways and since there is no great public clamor for slower, safer landing speeds, Boeing saw no reason to pay the speed, payload, and cost penalties of a short-takeoff-and-landing 747, Burnelli or otherwise.Goodlin may not win many converts to his aerodynamic theories, but he’s on much firmer ground when he criticizes the modern jetliner’s crashworthiness. Goodlin says the Burnelli’s rigid box-like fuselage would protect passengers in a crash, pointing proudly to the 1935 crash of the UB-14. The airplane hit the ground, wingtip down, at 130 mph and cartwheeled. Engines, wings, and tail were ripped off, but the boxy fuselage remained intact and the crew walked away. One vocal Burnelli proponent, Edmund J. Cantilli, professor of transportation planning and engineering at the Polytechnic Institute of New York, has decried the poor crashworthiness of the modern jetliner and proposed a Burnelli-style craft it its stead.In 1986 Goodlin enlisted the aid of Florida senator Lawton Chiles, who persuaded the Air Force to invite Goodlin to Wright Field for a speech about the Burnelli concept. Goodlin promptly demanded that the engineering vice presidents of Boeing, Douglas, Northrop, and Lockheed be in the audience. These are the people who need to hear his message, he says. “They care nothing for principle, ethics, or integrity. They care nothing for the number of people unnecessarily killed. They will even jockey us into war if it means preserving their power and greed.”And so Goodlin continues to wage his holy war on all fronts. Like most holy warriors, he seems to savor the call to battle more than the promise of victory. “I hate to say this about Slick,” says one Burnelli supporter, shaking his head, “but darn it, I wish he’d simmer down a little. He’d accomplish a lot more.”