boit said:
I say it is nothing but just hot air
I believe you're correct.
One proposal I'd like to see fully examined is a study on the variation of airframe designs between traditional airframes to fully-suspended airframes.
Questions:
1. Is there even a break-even point, or are fully inertial-supported airframes the answer? Seventy years of improvements in commercial aviation seems to indicate that the goal of getting the cargo from point A to B is best served by conventional means i.e. the latter. But that preliminary conclusion seems to be based on a time expectancy (getting pax or cargo to destination in a shorter time - air shipments overseas still cost way more than ground/sea).
2. Various http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ground_effect_vehicle" have not only demonstrated serious advances in efficiency, even over high-altitude cargo craft, but certainly over train or roadway transportation which either have not or cannot be built.
Personal case in point: I wanted to visit a friend in England in 2009, and was living in Germany at the time. Chunnel? Too expensive. The sleeper ferry then in existence (it probably still is) was more akin with my budget, but for traveling just a few hundred km, was way beyond what I could afford to expend.
Anything involving going over the Channel at that time blew my budget totally out of the water.
Yet... I could afford to fly over the
entire Atlantic ocean, at will, to see my son, at least once each year, and for significantly less.
I don't know what to say, except consider it as an input.