A steam powerd airplane? In 1933?

[LONDONER]

A two cylinder steam powered plane in 1933. The footage is 1933 original, so don't expect HD.

http://www.flixxy.com/besler-steam-airplane.htm

[MisterTinkles]

As with all clean powered systems that have been adapted, devised, and developed...........its what the oil/energy magnates allow to be produced that have any bearing on society and technology. From the documentaries I have seen over the years on such mechanisms, the oil/energy corporations are in full control of such technological advances in clean engine mechanics. Thats why we have very little of them on the market. They allow just enough to keep the eco zionists happy.

There has been technology over the past century that would allow all humans to use completely clean, non-toxic, and nearly free cost utilities and fuels......but those greedy corporations and magnates refuse to allow the oil, coal, and gas productions to be outdated and made redundant.

[Genersis]

Wow.
That's pretty cool.
Wonder if there's a reason such tech never took off...other than the probable corporate influence.

[southbiochem]

Wow.
That's pretty cool.
Wonder if there's a reason such tech never took off...other than the probable corporate influence.

Ha! By then Poland had already acquired fuel-planes.

not much later the Luftwaffe was testing it's might by bombing Guernica..1936

if you look at the growing concern after Hitler was named Chancellor in 1933 and the policy of rearmament started by France and UK in response to the heavy militarization of Germany and the Soviet Union is no wonder why this model was neglected over more fire power.

[Chase]

I saw MisterTinkles sharing his opinion in his usual rants, so I figured, what the heck, I might as well rant. I usually delete my rants, but this time, I think I'll keep it up. Here comes one boring ass TLDR:
Steam power isn't always the answer. Sure, you hear the word "steam" and think "oh, that device runs on steam? As in steam from water?" that suddenly you make the false connection that "It uses water for fuel!?" when in reality you need something to heat up the water to make it steam.
Nuclear power plants for example, are technically steam power plants, in that is uses the nuclear reactor as a heat source for the steam turbine.
The old fashion trains were steam powered, but they used coal to heat the steam. Coal is a horrible pollutant. Not only for the atmosphere, but for us breathing us. Thousands get lung cancer from it every year.
That 1933 aeroplane - had an oil burner!
So many people think engineering the perfect clean energy solution is a piece of cake. News Flash - it's a pain-in-the-butt just to pass engineering in college, never mind engineering something in the real world that will affect everybody's lives.
Take hydrogen power for instance. So many people are convinced it's the perfect solution and the only reason everybody isn't using it is because the oil barons are covering it up. Well, guess what, it's more complicated than that. So many people say "oh, just run electricity threw water and you get hydrogen, duh!" - actually, while one cup of water does hold a lot of hydrogen atoms for fuel, it takes a lot of energy to separate it. It can get pretty expensive. And, according to my chemistry professor, who has a PhD in chemical engineering and has worked as a chemical engineer for decades, that isn't how much of the hydrogen fuel is being produced. There are very dirty ways of producing hydrogen. So dirty to the point where the planet would be better off if you were using fossil fuel gas. Ironically enough, some hydrogen fuel comes from separating the hydrogen atoms from fossil fuels. Plus hydrogen gas is dangerous, more dangerous than the gas in your car. It can be like an invisible fire. Some people have walked into a room filled with hydrogen gas and instantly burned to death without knowing they were walking into it. We've all seen cars leak gas before right? Well if you have hydrogen fuel car you wouldn't know it's leaking until you get out and see some crispy critters on the roadside.
Oil, gas, coal, causes a lot of pollutants. Yet when you have a hydro power dam people complain about the environment. When you have a wind farm people complain about the windmills being an eye soar. When you have solar panels, same thing, some people find something about it they don't like.
Don't even get me started on the misconceptions surrounding nuclear power. Cheese Louise. Allow me to play Devil's Advocate for nuclear power. Chernobyl was build without giving a dang about safety. In Japan 2011 it was the tsunami that was killing people, not Fukushima. Yet people in California, thousands of miles away, are saying radiation from Fukushima is giving them a headache. Meanwhile in France, nuclear power makes up around 39% of the country's energy consumption, with one French electric company managing like 59 nuclear power plants, with electricity cheap compared to the rest of the EU, very low CO2 emissions. (just playing Devil's Advocate for nuclear power here).
Sigh, nobody is ever happy with where they get their energy from. At least we know fossil fuels will one day be exhausted. Who knows if that will melt Antarctica in global warming in the mean time, so it might be best to just see Venice while we still can, just in case.

[Bowyn Aerrow]

I would be more impressed if it ran on marshmallows....

Yes I'm craving marshmallows right now so ignore whatever I'm saying.

[southbiochem]

I would be more impressed if it ran on marshmallows....

Yes I'm craving marshmallows right now so ignore whatever I'm saying.

Marshmallows are pure Glucose....

Glucose can indeed combust...

but then again we're back to square one...pollution