FAKE X

The 3.3-Stage Rocket has been in development since 2019. The first two years were spent on the theoretical framework. The third year was spent on the funding applications. Years four and five were spent on the follow-up funding applications. Year six was spent on the CostCo membership application, which was also rejected. Year seven has been the productive one. We have the rocket. It is on the table. It is, in our assessment, magnificent.

The fuselage is constructed from Bog Roll Composite™ — a proprietary single-ply cellulose laminate that is, weight-for-weight, approximately as strong as a paper towel. The staging mechanism is theoretical. The propulsion system is pending. The launchpad is a picnic table in Hertfordshire, which has been load-tested to 180kg and is structurally sound. We are ready.

Behind every great rocket is a great team. The FakeX engineering team has been captured here in a rare moment of collective reflection — reviewing the pre-launch data, marvelling at what seven years of dedication, sacrifice, and repeated rejection by the scientific establishment has produced. They are, in our assessment, visibly moved.

The team has asked us to note that they have been involved from the very beginning. They were there for the first design review. They were there for the 23rd funding rejection. They were there when the CostCo application came back. They have not complained once. They are professionals. We are proud of them. We will not be naming them for security reasons.

If the 3.3-Stage Rocket achieves an altitude greater than 3.3 feet, it will represent the single greatest achievement in British aerospace since Tim Peake went to space without us. It will prove that Bog Roll Composite™ is a viable structural material. It will prove that a picnic table in Hertfordshire is a viable launchpad. It will prove that 23 funding rejections is not the end of the story.

We fully expect to lose the telemetry data. This is standard practice. NASA lost the original Apollo 11 telemetry tapes — 700 boxes of magnetic data, the greatest technical achievement in human history, recorded on drives that were subsequently bulk-erased and reused for other purposes. Other purposes. We are not saying what those purposes were. We are saying that if it is good enough for NASA, it is good enough for FakeX. Our USB drive currently has 47 photos of a fox on it. We consider this acceptable.

FakeX has invested in a state-of-the-art telemetry system for the 3.3-Stage Rocket launch. It is a GoPro. It has 64GB of storage. Approximately 61GB is currently occupied by footage from Operative Delta's Lanzarote trip, a parrotfish, and 47 photos of a fox that visits the field on Tuesday evenings. We have 3GB available for the most important rocket launch in British history.

In the event that we exceed 3.3 feet and achieve something genuinely historic, we have a plan for the data. We will back it up. We will put it somewhere safe. We will label the drive clearly. We will not, under any circumstances, reuse the drive for wildlife photography. We are making this commitment publicly and in writing. We are aware that NASA made similar commitments. We are choosing not to think about that.

Radar, as we understand it, travels in straight lines. This is not disputed. The Earth, as the mainstream scientific establishment would have you believe, is a sphere. This is disputed — at least in this office, at least on Tuesdays. If both of these things are true simultaneously, then radar should — by the laws of geometry that we all learned at school and have not forgotten — disappear over the horizon at approximately the same rate as a ship, a lighthouse, or a moderately tall man standing at a distance.

It does not do this. Radar routinely detects objects at ranges that, on a spherical Earth, would place them well below the geometric horizon. The establishment explanation involves something called atmospheric refraction. We have read about atmospheric refraction. We have several questions. None of them have been answered to our satisfaction. The atmosphere is, apparently, bending the radar waves around the curve. The atmosphere has never done anything for us. Our last three launches were in light drizzle.

We wish to be absolutely clear: FakeX does not use radar. We have considered radar. We looked at the price of radar. We looked at the price of a second-hand radar unit on eBay. We looked at the price of a radar unit described as 'spares or repair' on eBay. We decided against radar on the grounds that our launches have, to date, been entirely visible to the naked eye from the car park.

Our current detection methodology involves Operative Bravo standing on the roof of the facility with a pair of binoculars and a thermos flask. He has a good view. He can see the rocket go up. He can see it come down. He can see it come down quite quickly. He has a notebook. He writes things in it. We consider this a robust telemetry solution and one that does not require ionospheric bounce to function.

Over-the-horizon radar, the establishment tells us, works by bouncing signals off the ionosphere — a layer of the atmosphere approximately 60 to 1,000 kilometres above the Earth's surface. The signal goes up, hits the ionosphere, comes back down, hits the target, goes back up, hits the ionosphere again, and returns to the receiver. This is the explanation. This is what they are going with.

FakeX has several concerns about this explanation. The first concern is that the signal appears to know where it is going. The second concern is that the ionosphere is described as 'variable' and 'dependent on solar activity', which means the radar is bouncing off something that changes constantly and cannot be precisely located. The third concern is that this is exactly the sort of explanation you would give if you needed to explain something that should not work on a curved Earth but does. We are not saying anything. We are just noting the coincidence.

FakeX has reviewed the available evidence on radar propagation, atmospheric refraction, ionospheric bounce, and the geometric horizon. We have concerns. We are not saying the Earth is flat. We are saying that the explanation for how radar works over the curve involves a level of atmospheric cooperation that we find suspicious.

The atmosphere is doing a lot of heavy lifting in these explanations. It is refracting the radar waves. It is bouncing the signals. It is, apparently, curving the beam just enough to follow the surface of the Earth at exactly the right rate to make long-range detection possible. This is very convenient. We find it suspicious. We will continue to monitor the situation from the roof. Operative Bravo has a good thermos. He has been up there since Tuesday. He is fine. He says the view is excellent and that he can see for miles. We have not told him how far miles should be on a curved Earth. We do not want to worry him.