Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Anti-gravity propulsion comes ‘out of the closet’
Jane's Data Service ^ | 29 July 2002 | Nick Cook

Posted on 07/30/2002 8:22:27 AM PDT by Fitzcarraldo

Boeing, the world’s largest aircraft manufacturer, has admitted it is working on experimental anti-gravity projects that could overturn a century of conventional aerospace propulsion technology if the science underpinning them can be engineered into hardware.

As part of the effort, which is being run out of Boeing’s Phantom Works advanced research and development facility in Seattle, the company is trying to solicit the services of a Russian scientist who claims he has developed anti-gravity devices in Russia and Finland. The approach, however, has been thwarted by Russian officialdom.

The Boeing drive to develop a collaborative relationship with the scientist in question, Dr Evgeny Podkletnov, has its own internal project name: ‘GRASP’ — Gravity Research for Advanced Space Propulsion.

A GRASP briefing document obtained by JDW sets out what Boeing believes to be at stake. "If gravity modification is real," it says, "it will alter the entire aerospace business."

GRASP’s objective is to explore propellentless propulsion (the aerospace world’s more formal term for anti-gravity), determine the validity of Podkletnov’s work and "examine possible uses for such a technology". Applications, the company says, could include space launch systems, artificial gravity on spacecraft, aircraft propulsion and ‘fuelless’ electricity generation — so-called ‘free energy’.

Although he was vilified by traditionalists who claimed that gravity-shielding was impossible under the known laws of physics, the US National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) attempted to replicate his work in the mid-1990s. Because NASA lacked Podkletnov’s unique formula for the work, the attempt failed. NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center in Alabama will shortly conduct a second set of experiments using apparatus built to Podkletnov’s specifications.

Boeing recently approached Podkletnov directly, but promptly fell foul of Russian technology transfer controls (Moscow wants to stem the exodus of Russian high technology to the West).

The GRASP briefing document reveals that BAE Systems and Lockheed Martin have also contacted Podkletnov "and have some activity in this area".

It is also possible, Boeing admits, that "classified activities in gravity modification may exist". The paper points out that Podkletnov is strongly anti-military and will only provide assistance if the research is carried out in the ‘white world’ of open development.


TOPICS: Front Page News
KEYWORDS: antigravity; boeingantigravity; electrogravitics; evgenypodkletnov; podkletnov; space; superluminal
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-127 next last
But it is also apparent that Podkletnov’s work could be engineered into a radical new weapon. The GRASP paper focuses on Podkletnov’s claims that his high-power experiments, using a device called an ‘impulse gravity generator’, are capable of producing a beam of ‘gravity-like’ energy that can exert an instantaneous force of 1,000g on any object — enough, in principle, to vaporise it, especially if the object is moving at high speed.

Podkletnov maintains that a laboratory installation in Russia has already demonstrated the 4in (10cm) wide beam’s ability to repel objects a kilometre away and that it exhibits negligible power loss at distances of up to 200km. Such a device, observers say, could be adapted for use as an anti-satellite weapon or a ballistic missile shield. Podkletnov declared that any object placed above his rapidly spinning superconducting apparatus lost up to 2% of its weight.

Latest Podkletnov Results:

Impulse Gravity Generator Based on Charged YBa_2Cu_3O_{7-y} Superconductor with Composite Crystal Structure

1 posted on 07/30/2002 8:22:27 AM PDT by Fitzcarraldo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

Updates previous posts here on this subject.
Note the discussion of Russian export controls and
the latest Podkletnov force beam experiments.
2 posted on 07/30/2002 8:30:06 AM PDT by Fitzcarraldo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale; Physicist
Antigravity ping
3 posted on 07/30/2002 8:35:07 AM PDT by OBAFGKM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fitzcarraldo
Are the sheikhs shaking yet!
4 posted on 07/30/2002 8:40:44 AM PDT by MaxwellWolf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OBAFGKM; Howlin; doug from upland
Boeing should contact Bill&Hill, They have discovered how to break every law known to man so the LAW OF GRAVITY should be easy for these experts.
5 posted on 07/30/2002 8:45:12 AM PDT by Uncle George
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Fitzcarraldo
< boggle > Holy cow! Is this for real? < /boggle >
6 posted on 07/30/2002 8:45:47 AM PDT by B-Chan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: B-Chan
< boggle > Holy cow! Is this for real? < /boggle >

It is nothing to boggle about. Standard sort of thing: Tinkerer makes a claim, usually pretty outlandish and impossible. People look into it. Happens all the time. Usually find that the experiment producing the anomaly is defective in someway.

7 posted on 07/30/2002 8:52:00 AM PDT by hopespringseternal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Fitzcarraldo
the US National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) attempted to replicate his work in the mid-1990s. Because NASA lacked Podkletnov’s unique formula for the work, the attempt failed.
DUH!
With apologies to Miss Cleo, let me predict now,

"Even HAVING Podkletnov’s unique formula for the work, the attempt failed again!!"

8 posted on 07/30/2002 9:03:47 AM PDT by Elsie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: B-Chan
Holy cow! Is this for real?

A team at NASA tried to reproduce Dr. Podkletnov's results but were unable to.

9 posted on 07/30/2002 9:07:00 AM PDT by Physicist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Elsie
"Even HAVING Podkletnov’s unique formula for the work, the attempt failed again!!"

I wonder if this is like that anti gravity ship we used to see in the Dick Tracy mewspaper cartoon?

10 posted on 07/30/2002 9:09:13 AM PDT by Mark17
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Elsie
With apologies to Miss Cleo, let me predict now, "Even HAVING Podkletnov’s unique formula for the work, the attempt failed again!!"

Not necessarily. Could they be counting on investor speculation driving up the stock price? All they need now is for Steve Jobs to talk about how "cities will someday be designed around this technology" and they would carry the Dow to 20k singlehandedly, LOL!

11 posted on 07/30/2002 9:10:07 AM PDT by Cobra Scott
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: hopespringseternal
Tinkerer makes a claim, usually pretty outlandish and impossible.

Turns out there really are theoretic bases for this phenomenon, and, although Podkletnov is apparently difficult to work with, his observations really should be taken seriously. For example:

"The London equations for superconductors in a gravitational field." D K Ross, J. Phys A: Math Gen. 16 (1983) 1331-1335.

"Gravitational shielding." Donald H. Eckhardt, Physical Review D v. 42 n. 6 (15 Sep 1990) 2144-2145.

"Effects of a gravitomagnetic field on pure superconductors." N. Li and D. G. Torr, Physical Review D v. 43 n. 2 (15 Jan 1991) 457-459.

"Interaction between gravity and moving superconductors." H. Peng, G. Lind, and Y.S. Chin, Univ. Alabama (CSPAR), General Relativity and Gravitation v. 23 (11), p. 1231-1250, 1991

"Absorption of gravitational waves" Corneliu D. Ciubotariu, Physics Letters A v. 158, 19 Aug 1991, 27-30.

"Gravitational effects on the magnetic attenuation of superconductors." N. Li and D. G. Torr, Physical Review B v. 46 n. 9 (1 Sept 1992) 5489-5495.

"Absence of a Gravitational Analog to the Meissner Effect." C. Ciubotariu and M. Agop, Technical University of Iaso (Romania), Department of Physics, General Relativity and Gravitation v.28 (4), p. 405-412, Apr 1996.

"Does a Superconductor Shield Gravity?" C.S. Unnikrishnan, Physica C v. 266 (1-2), p133-137, 20 Jul 1996.

"A Unified Theory Based on SO(5) Symmetry of Superconductivity and Antiferromagnetism." Shou-Cheng Zhang, Science, v. 275, 21 Feb 1997.

"Superconductor-mediated modification of gravity? AC motor experiments with bulk YBCO disks in rotating magnetic fields." David Noever, Ron Koczor, and Rick Roberson*, NASA MSFC ES76, Space Sciences Lab, Huntsville, AL 35812, *Tomorrow Tools, NASA MSFC, Huntsville, AL 35812. To be presented on Monday, July 13 in Cleveland at the 34th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference and Exhibit, Cleveland Convention Center Cleveland, OH July 12-15, 1998, Special Session of Breakthrough Propulsion Physics (Session 6-APC-1), Monday Morning, 9:00 AM Chaired by: M. MILLIS, NASA Lewis Research Center, Cleveland, OH, 10:30 AM AIAA-98-3139


12 posted on 07/30/2002 9:18:01 AM PDT by OBAFGKM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: OBAFGKM
"If gravity modification is real," it says, "it will alter the entire aerospace business."

Paging Harlan Ellison. It's time to design a new civilization. Again.

13 posted on 07/30/2002 9:23:46 AM PDT by RightWhale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Fitzcarraldo; rubbertramp; rdavis84; Fred Mertz
wary inkterestink!
14 posted on 07/30/2002 9:24:41 AM PDT by thinden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fitzcarraldo

15 posted on 07/30/2002 9:34:25 AM PDT by mhking
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dd5339
PING!
16 posted on 07/30/2002 9:43:52 AM PDT by Vic3O3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Physicist
{sarcasm}
Gosh... if NASA is unable to reproduce it, it MUST be fake...
{/sarcasm}
17 posted on 07/30/2002 9:43:52 AM PDT by chilepepper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Fitzcarraldo
History tells us that the next big breakthrough in ANY given technology will not come from a leader in the field (see buggies/autos, baloons/aircraft, sliderulers/computers, etc.) There is always an exception, but I have always thought that the next big transportation breakthrough will not be an "electric car" but either a hydrogen car or an anti-grav/anti-magnetic device.
18 posted on 07/30/2002 9:50:08 AM PDT by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LS
Anybody remember the cold fusion breakthrough
at Utah St or Univ of Utah back in the early
90s?

Not reproducible and later found to be
fraudulant.

You mean that Einstein and Oppenheimer
weren't leaders in their respective fields?

Mad Vlad

19 posted on 07/30/2002 10:51:55 AM PDT by madvlad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: madvlad
Oh No! Boris Badinoff's upsidazium??!
20 posted on 07/30/2002 11:12:21 AM PDT by reagandemocrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Fitzcarraldo
The Hunt for Zero Point: Inside the Classified World of Anti-Gravity Technology , author: Nick Cook

Get thee to a library...

21 posted on 07/30/2002 11:32:23 AM PDT by martin gibson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OBAFGKM
Cool. I see cites going back to 1983? Guess that is why I haven't taken it seriously. I have been hearing about it for a while without anything coming out of it.

Without getting too arcane, what are the theoretical bases for this in a nutshell?

22 posted on 07/30/2002 11:34:24 AM PDT by hopespringseternal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: madvlad
Anybody remember the cold fusion breakthrough at Utah St or Univ of Utah back in the early 90s?

Not reproducible and later found to be fraudulant.

Commonly restated, this is simply not true. Pons and Fleischmann work was solidly grounded in theory, and they have published in several respectable journals. "Cold fusion" research continues in a number of venues today, and numerous respectable researchers report having confirmed its existence.

23 posted on 07/30/2002 12:09:25 PM PDT by OBAFGKM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: hopespringseternal
Without getting too arcane, what are the theoretical bases for this in a nutshell?

That's a tall order. You can find references and links (good, bad, and ugly) at Quantum Cavorite.

24 posted on 07/30/2002 12:15:47 PM PDT by OBAFGKM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: madvlad
Where have you been? There have been several subsequent studies of "cold fusion," and they constantly find energy---not enough yet to do anything, but do a search, and I think you'll find that many scientists are taking a VERY serious look at this again.
25 posted on 07/30/2002 12:19:35 PM PDT by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: reagandemocrat
Stand still. After I get done blasting you with my Hemulator, you won't be needing that crazy Upzidazium thang.
26 posted on 07/30/2002 1:26:38 PM PDT by Thebaddog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: reagandemocrat
You kill moose and squirrel. I'll get the formula.
27 posted on 07/30/2002 1:30:58 PM PDT by Richard Kimball
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Fitzcarraldo; RightWhale; Physicist; OBAFGKM; hopespringseternal; LS; madvlad; martin gibson; ...
Newton's Laws, Upended - S. Adams, 08.12.02
http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2002/0812/128.html

"The Nazis, General Electric and Sperry-Rand all sought to harness antigravity. Next up: Boeing?

Author Nick Cook has all the qualifications of a hard-nosed reporter. For more than a decade he has worked as aviation editor at Jane's Defence Weekly, the respected (if mind-numbingly technical) trade journal for the defense industry. So why has he penned a book on a topic usually confined to pulp sci-fi--antigravity? In The Hunt for Zero Point (Broadway, $26), due out this month, he chronicles his quest to show that Newton's laws have been annulled. It's a dramatic, entertaining tale, with a clear lesson: Corporations, universities and governments never tire of throwing good money at bad science.

His story starts in 1992, when a photocopy of a 1956 news clipping is left mysteriously on his desk at Jane's. "The G-Engines Are Coming!" shouts its headline. There's an illustration of a football-shaped craft hovering above the ground. The text predicts a future of "weightless airliners and spaceships." More intriguing are the enthusiastic predictions from such esteemed figures of the day as George S. Trimble of Martin Aircraft and Lawrence D. Bell, founder of Bell Aircraft, who proclaims, "We're already working on nuclear fuels and equipment to cancel out gravity." Using the Jane's library, Cook learns that big American companies, including Sperry-Rand and General Electric, seriously pursued "electrogravitics [a.k.a. antigravity] research."

He scours the Internet and public archives, phones contacts in the defense industry. He talks to Evgeny Podkletnov, a Russian physicist who claims to have achieved antigravity effects in his lab. Cook even delves into a mystery dating from the last days of World War II, when Allied pilots reported seeing UFOs over Germany.

The Nazi angle takes Cook to Austria, where he visits the family of the late Viktor Schauberger, a forestry engineer and inventor who experimented with a machine called a Repulsine. According to Schauberger's copious notes, the Nazi-funded device generated such a powerful levitational force that it shot upward and smashed into a hangar ceiling. Cook admits he doesn't completely grasp the physics, writing, "The primary levitating force was due to ... a reaction between the air molecules in their newly excited state and the body of the machine itself."

Huh? And why would the normally skeptical Cook believe the unverified notes of a forestry engineer transplanted far beyond his ken? Because, says Cook, "People don't throw money at programs unless they think they work"--blithely ignoring humankind's propensity for taking daft things seriously. Case in point: cold fusion, as well as other screwball free-energy schemes funded by corporations or governments. University of Maryland physicist Robert L. Park has documented such projects in Voodoo Science (Oxford University Press, $15). Park, who read a prepublication copy of Zero Point, chuckles at some of Cook's conclusions. "In my book I discuss something I call a 'belief gene.' This guy Cook's got it. He's simply prepared to believe anything."

What about Cook's reporting? He describes, for example, antigravity projects now under way at NASA and at BAE Systems in the U.K. FORBES' phone calls to these organizations verified Cook's facts, though folks were awfully careful with their language. Ronald Evans, the physicist in charge at BAE, says, "We don't use the word [antigravity]. It would make us look like lunatics." Funding is small--$3.25 million for BAE's and NASA's work combined, over seven years--but the fact that money gets spent at all is testimony to the prevalence of the belief gene. The U.S. Congress keeps dollars flowing. Since 2000 it has allocated an additional $4.8 million for antigravity research. In a July issue of Jane's, Cook reports Boeing conducted experiments involving antigravity as recently as 1999 and remains intensely interested in further research. (Boeing confirms this, but, like BAE, disdains to use the a-word.)

Cook is an engaging writer, and he peppers his high-tech detective story with digressions both rich and entertaining. His book is a fun read. But it lacks a certain ... gravity." ~ ~

Maybe "Cook" should be spelled, "KOOK". Or maybe he's just a KOOK baiter.
28 posted on 07/30/2002 3:07:47 PM PDT by Matchett-PI
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Matchett-PI
There is a story there anyway. How do quirky little projects with no hope of success get funded? Doesn't in itself make the reporter a kook, but sometimes such reporters get a little too caught up in their chosen topics and say some kooky things.
29 posted on 07/30/2002 3:16:00 PM PDT by RightWhale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

Comment #30 Removed by Moderator

Comment #31 Removed by Moderator

To: Confederate Keyester
There may be an outside chance, that ALL the researchers are failing to take into account the Tesla effect.
32 posted on 07/30/2002 5:06:49 PM PDT by Elsie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Confederate Keyester
In a telling interview, former Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) executive Tom Passell says that at least some of those involved in the campaign to debunk cold fusion intentionally misled congressional investigators and the public.

Yep, there's aaaaalways a conspiracy. Why, I spend so much time conspiring to suppress real physics that I don't have time to do my phony research.

33 posted on 07/30/2002 5:53:04 PM PDT by Physicist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

Comment #34 Removed by Moderator

To: Matchett-PI
an obvious shill for the GOV matchett
35 posted on 07/30/2002 6:14:58 PM PDT by ClearasaBell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Confederate Keyester
"This bears repeating (She then left for her native China, presumably to carry on her work for the communist government there.)"

Or maybe this is all a conspiracy to get the Chinese to waste billions of dollars, and years of their top scientists' time in a wild goose chase?
36 posted on 07/30/2002 6:15:36 PM PDT by Andrew Wiggin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: madvlad
"You mean that Einstein and Oppenheimer
weren't leaders in their respective fields? "

Einstein wasn't, at least in 1905 when he published his papers on Special Relativity, photosynthesis, and one other who's topic I forget. He was a Swiss patent clerk, he couldn't find anyone else willing to hire him.

PS It's interesting to note that while he did eventually win a Nobel Prize for one of these papers, it wasn't the one on Relativity but rather the one on photosynthesis.
37 posted on 07/30/2002 6:19:36 PM PDT by Andrew Wiggin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Fitzcarraldo
WooHoo I'm getting a mattel hover boards for Christmas I just know it...Joking aside, if its true then that is a pretty cool technology.
38 posted on 07/30/2002 6:21:42 PM PDT by MD_Willington_1976
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Confederate Keyester
Who said there was a conspiracy?

According to your post, Tom Passell did.

How many dollars are at stake for the American Linear Collider?

Probably none. Right now it now looks like the linear collider will be built in near Hamburg, Germany. The brain drain has been flowing outwards from the United States for a number of years; now it appears the pace will accelerate a bit.

39 posted on 07/30/2002 6:24:55 PM PDT by Physicist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

Comment #40 Removed by Moderator

To: Andrew Wiggin
It's interesting to note that while he did eventually win a Nobel Prize for one of these papers, it wasn't the one on Relativity but rather the one on photosynthesis.

Actually, it was the photoelectric effect. Truth be told, that was probably the more significant paper, it being one of the cornerstones of quantum mechanics. Quantum mechanics pervades modern technology; relativity does not.

41 posted on 07/30/2002 6:28:04 PM PDT by Physicist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

Comment #42 Removed by Moderator

Comment #43 Removed by Moderator

To: Confederate Keyester
Their kids also want the GI Joe with the kung-fu grip for christmass, do you think they might not fudge the results?

If there's any pressure to fudge, it's in the direction of more grandiose claims and spectacular results. (That was Pons' and Fleischmann's tragic flaw.) Antigravity would (conservatively) be worth trillions of dollars and several Nobel Prizes.

44 posted on 07/30/2002 6:41:03 PM PDT by Physicist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: LS

Already invented:


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/1689106.stm

45 posted on 07/30/2002 6:48:13 PM PDT by Cultural Jihad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Confederate Keyester
Do not some of the quantum theories predict just such a coupling of electro-magnetics and gravity?

No. There is no such theory, yet. The unification of gravity and quantum physics is the Holy Grail of physics. It's one of the largest single points of effort in modern physics. There are a couple of approaches being pursued, and it is hoped that one of them someday will bear fruit, but we aren't there, yet.

In any case, don't expect practical applications (such as antigravity) from it, once they find it. The energy scale for such a unification is gigantic (unless there are large extra dimensions we can't see, in which case it is merely huge), a fact called the "hierarchy problem". The interaction scale would be some 27 orders of magnitude greater than the typical scale of chemical interactions, a condition that could only have existed in nature in the first ten millionth of a trillionth of a trillionth of a trillionth of a second of the Big Bang.

46 posted on 07/30/2002 6:55:01 PM PDT by Physicist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

Comment #47 Removed by Moderator

Comment #48 Removed by Moderator

To: Confederate Keyester
That is somewhat disingenuos, if it is worth trillions it stands to reason that there are intrenched powers that stand to lose (trillions$) Not to mention the trillions of dollars on loan to countries whose only way to pay is based on future oil and gas revenues.

Chump change. The economy of the world isn't a tick on the backside of what antigravity would mean. With antigravity we could rearrange the solar system however we wanted. Saying that the oil industry can suppress an antigravity device is like saying that an apprentice buggy-whip maker could have prevented the invention of the internal combustion engine. (Not that the oil industry would mind an antigravity device; these things are supposed to consume energy.)

A much more credible and likely conspiracy scenario would be that a mega-corporation would take Podkletnov's device and claim it for their own, just as RCA nabbed Farnsworth's invention of TV. The fact that this hasn't happened could more reasonably be counted as evidence that no such device exists, than evidence of the suppression of same.

49 posted on 07/30/2002 8:21:15 PM PDT by Physicist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Confederate Keyester
Townsend Browns original patent is now online.

So then anybody can make one. Hold your breath; it should happen any day now. Homebrew spindizzy clubs should be springing up everywhere.

50 posted on 07/30/2002 8:26:01 PM PDT by Physicist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-127 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson