The Burnelli Web Site
Evidence of Suppression and Official denial is overwhelming
spacer

 


 

[via Certified Mail #Z 428 484 460]

October 7, 1996.

Mr. Daniel S. Goldin
Administrator
NASA
300 'E' Street, S.W.
WASHINGTON, DC 20546

Dear Mr. Goldin,

I am attaching a copy of a letter from your General Counsel, Mr. Edward A. Frankle, dated September 25, 1996. I do not consider Mr. Frankle's letter a proper response either to my letter to you of July 9, 1996, or to any previous correspondence.

Since we first wrote to you on March 29, 1995, asking why NASA discriminated against the Burnelli Company and funded Burnelli competitors to pirate Burnelli rights, we have not received a single answer from you. As the enclosed copy of the correspondence file shows, you have deferred our correspondence to counselors who have been side-stepping the questions submitted either intentionally or through outright ignorance. In the last five letters to you or your staff, we addressed the issue of proprietary and intellectual property rights, and in every instance your counsellors ignored this issue and addressed only the issue of one patent. In other cases, your counselors have shown their ignorance of the subject matter, such as when Mr. Kennedy refers to the "flying wing airplane design". (See his letter of October 3, 1995, and my reply of October 6, 1995.)

In view of the above, we have no option but to conclude that you have no intention of dealing with this matter in a constructive manner, and you are trying to eliminate your personal responsibility by deferring correspondence to others.

You may imagine that requesting help from your counsellors on this matter will make it go away. I submit to you that this technique only further heightens suspicions regarding your determination to perpetuate the long established discrimination against the Burnelli Company by NACA/NASA administrators. Also, this appears to be an attempt to avoid fulfilling your moral duties.

It is my sincere hope that the nebulous NASA correspondence, mentioned above, is caused by your busy schedule, or other circumstances beyond your control, and that you will now take the time to address this matter in the proper context and in accordance with your moral obligations and professional duties.

As we told you in our letter of September 3, 1996, we have no wish to impede the development of superior products, based on Burnelli technology, but we feel it obligatory that appropriate credit be given Mr. Vincent Justus Burnelli and his company.

The question remains: Do you find it morally right to continue funding Burnelli competitors in the piracy and theft of Burnelli proprietary and intellectual property rights which were established by Mr. Burnelli in 1945, as demonstrated to you in the photo comparison of the 1951 Burnelli model with the 1995 McDonnell Douglas megajet and the 1996 X-33, referred to in material previously supplied?

We trust that additional material submitted to Mr. Whitehead with our letter of September 24, 1996, will now enable you to intellectually respond to my letters of March 29, 1995, and July 9, 1996.


        Yours sincerely,
        THE BURNELLI COMPANY, INC.

        [signed]

        CHALMERS H. GOODLIN
        Chairman & President

        Committee of Science, Space & Technology

.


Correspondence is listed in Chronological order
March 29, 1995 to present day (1 - 33)
(All correspondence since March 29, 1995 is present)


1. Mar 29, 1995 Burnelli letter to NASA 2. May 5, 1995-NASA response 3. Aug. 10, 1995-Burnelli letter to NASA General Counsel
4. Aug. 31, 1995-NASA response 5. Sept. 6, 1995-Burnelli responds to NASA Sr. Patent Atty 6. Sep. 20, 1995-Burnelli to NASA re: lifting body research project
7. Sept. 21, 1995-NASA says "the patent expired" 8. Sep. 27, 1995-Burnelli to NASA Counsel, "..when criminal conspiracy is involved.." 9. Oct. 3, 1995-NASA Gnl Counsel, "..I am not your attorney.."
10. Oct 3, 1995-Burnelli to NASA, "..outrageous bureaucratic tyranny.." 11. Oct 6, 1995-BURNELLI submits reports and tests to NASA 12. Nov. 2, 1995, Burnelli, "..may I have a response.."
13. June 27, 1996 Burnelli claims NASA is refusing to acknowledge 14. July 3, 1996 - NASA: "We will not consider taking licence".. 15. July 9, 1996 Burnelli, presents Lockheed correspondence
16. Aug 12, 1996 Burnelli presents Flight magazine article 17. Aug 27, 1996 - NASA Gen'l Counsel requests past correspondence-lost 18. Sept 3, 1996 Burnelli, " ..appeal to you, correct a grave injustice.."
19. Sept 6, 1996 NASA: "..we have no record of your letter.." 20. Sept 24, 1996 - Burnelli: "..all aircraft mfr's recognized Burnelli importance in mid-30's" 21. Sept 25, 1996 NASA: "..Burnelli did not submit a proposal.."
22. Oct 7, 1996 Burnelli: "..NASA, you have deferred our correspondence.." 23. Oct 11, 1996 - Burnelli: "..internet NASA FACT is a lie.." 24. Oct 28, 1996 NASA: "..we will continue to disagree.."
25. Dec 9, 1996 Burnelli: "..NASA, you have repudiated your obligations.." 26. Jun 10, 1965 - Jean A. Roche', Head Aeronautician Engr./Tech. Advisor, US Army Air Forces 27. Jan 13, 1997 BURNELLI: "..we have not received answers to our letters.."
28. Jan 29, 1997 BURNELLI: .."we request that NASA provide no further funding to BWB project.." 29. Feb 10, 1997 BURNELLI: ..Smithsonian article quote:.."the first to touch on the concept was Vincent Burnelli.. " 30. Feb 20, 1997 - NASA: .."considers this matter closed.."
31. Sep. 4, 1995 AVIATION DAILY article .."McDonnell eyes blended wing body research.." 32. Feb 5, 1986 MIAMI HERALD: " NASA behind the times" 33. CARISI Report


top
Return to "top" of letter