AIAA Asks KTH Aeronautics Professors to Respond

As a first reaction to the rejection of our article New Theory of Flight submitted to AIAA J, I asked the assigned editor Greg Blasidell the following:

Dear Prof Blaisdell

Are you open to a discussion about the referee's reports or is the case closed?

Sincerely,

Claes Johnson

I received the following answer:

Professor Johnson,

Given the criticisms the reviewers have brought up, I do not see how you
could successfully rebut their comments. However, I am willing to read
a rebuttal, if you think you can refute what they have said. Before
doing so, I would encourage you to read the references the reviewers
cite and to discuss the issues with your colleagues in the Aeronautics
or Mechanics Departments at KTH, as the reviewers suggested. If after
having done that, you think the comments of the reviewers are not valid,
then I would be willing to listen. However, I think you would have a
difficult time convincing me that the reviewers are mistaken.

I want to make it clear that I am not encouraging you to try to rebut
the reviewers' comments. I do not want you to waste your time, since I
seriously doubt any rebuttal would be successful. However, in the
spirit of scientific inquiry, if you truly think the reviewers' comments
are not valid and can prove that, then I would be willing to listen.

Sincerely,

Greg Blaisdell

I therefore renew my questions to Professors Rizzi and Ringertz who represent the highest scientific expertize on the aerodynamics of flight at KTH. To help the process I sent the
following request to AIAA:

Thanks for your response. I have asked Prof Rizzi and Ringertz as
expertize to express their view on our work, however
to no effect. It would now seem logical that you
on behalf of AIAA make this request directly. Can you do that?

Sincerely

Claes Johnson