Messages in AirborneWindEnergy group.                           AWES10197to10246 Page 101 of 440.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10197 From: dave santos Date: 9/20/2013
Subject: Safety Design Rules for Break-Away Kites

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10198 From: dave santos Date: 9/20/2013
Subject: Doug Plagiarized? Re: [AWES] RE: Forum "starting to learn"?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10199 From: dougselsam Date: 9/20/2013
Subject: Re: Safety Design Rules for Break-Away Kites

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10200 From: dougselsam Date: 9/20/2013
Subject: Re: Doug Plagiarized? Re: [AWES] RE: Forum "starting to learn&q

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10201 From: Hardensoft International Date: 9/20/2013
Subject: Re: Johnny Heineken ,,, Welcome!

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10202 From: dave santos Date: 9/20/2013
Subject: Re: Johnny Heineken ,,, Welcome!

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10203 From: dave santos Date: 9/20/2013
Subject: Re: Doug Plagiarized? Re: [AWES] RE: Forum "starting to learn"?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10204 From: dave santos Date: 9/20/2013
Subject: Re: Safety Design Rules for Break-Away Kites

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10205 From: pierre.benhaiem Date: 9/20/2013
Subject: Re: Hydroturbine as mean of conversion, possible maximum speed

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10206 From: dougselsam Date: 9/20/2013
Subject: Re: Safety Design Rules for Break-Away Kites

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10207 From: dave santos Date: 9/20/2013
Subject: HAWT AWE, Premature FAR discussion //Re: [AWES] RE: Safety Design R

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10208 From: dave santos Date: 9/20/2013
Subject: Introducing "Crosswind-Stability"

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10209 From: dave santos Date: 9/20/2013
Subject: Constrained Crosswind Sweep for Dense Aiborne WECS Arrays

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10210 From: Harry Valentine Date: 9/20/2013
Subject: Wind-Hull assisted ship (Yak)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10211 From: Joe Faust Date: 9/21/2013
Subject: Re: Wind-Hull assisted ship (Yak)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10212 From: Harry Valentine Date: 9/21/2013
Subject: Re: Wind-Hull assisted ship (Yak)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10213 From: dave santos Date: 9/21/2013
Subject: How AWEC Blamed Joe Faust in 2010 for AWEIA's Non-Grata Status Ever

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10214 From: dave santos Date: 9/21/2013
Subject: Discussion of AWEC's Failed 2010 Privatized-Airspace Initiative

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10215 From: dave santos Date: 9/21/2013
Subject: UTexas verifies GPS Spoofing Risk to AWES Kite Planes

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10216 From: dave santos Date: 9/21/2013
Subject: Miles Loyd- "Where the Opportunities Are"

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10217 From: Pierre Benhaiem Date: 9/22/2013
Subject: Rod's disks, Selsam's Superturbine , inflatable structure for each u

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10218 From: dave santos Date: 9/22/2013
Subject: Wind Inflated Structures (persistent-inflation in calm)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10219 From: dave santos Date: 9/22/2013
Subject: Wind-Architecture //Fw: Inflatable Dune? Who?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10220 From: roderickjosephread Date: 9/22/2013
Subject: The couch potato football link to AWE

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10221 From: roderickjosephread Date: 9/22/2013
Subject: Re: Miles Loyd- "Where the Opportunities Are"

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10222 From: Rod Read Date: 9/22/2013
Subject: Show off your kite design and build skills

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10223 From: Joe Faust Date: 9/22/2013
Subject: Consumer of electricity: The Electric Kite Company

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10224 From: Hardensoft International Limited Date: 9/23/2013
Subject: Video documentation of AWEC2013; a first for AWE conferences; AWEIA

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10225 From: Hardensoft International Limited Date: 9/23/2013
Subject: Re: How AWEC Blamed Joe Faust in 2010 for AWEIA's Non-Grata Status E

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10226 From: christopher carlin Date: 9/24/2013
Subject: Re: Wind-Hull assisted ship (Yak)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10227 From: Joe Faust Date: 9/24/2013
Subject: Re: Wind-Hull assisted ship (Yak)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10228 From: christopher carlin Date: 9/24/2013
Subject: Re: Wind-Hull assisted ship (Yak)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10229 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 9/24/2013
Subject: Wave Hub. Will kite energy plug into it????

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10230 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 9/24/2013
Subject: Re: Wind-Hull assisted ship (Yak)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10231 From: christopher carlin Date: 9/24/2013
Subject: Re: Wind-Hull assisted ship (Yak)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10232 From: Joe Faust Date: 9/24/2013
Subject: Re: Wind-Hull assisted ship (Yak)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10233 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 9/24/2013
Subject: Re: Wind-Hull assisted ship (Yak)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10234 From: Joe Faust Date: 9/24/2013
Subject: Re: Wind-Hull assisted ship (Yak)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10235 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 9/24/2013
Subject: Re: Wind-Hull assisted ship (Yak)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10236 From: Joe Faust Date: 9/24/2013
Subject: Re: Wind-Hull assisted ship (Yak)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10237 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 9/24/2013
Subject: Re: Wind-Hull assisted ship (Yak)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10238 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 9/25/2013
Subject: Solar pushed a bit aside for some AWEsome

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10239 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 9/25/2013
Subject: Air handling in AWES?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10240 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 9/25/2013
Subject: Crossing Atlantic east to west

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10241 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 9/25/2013
Subject: Kite power generation method CN 101240778 A

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10242 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 9/25/2013
Subject: Multi-megawatt generation kite CN 101363411 B

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10243 From: Bob Stuart Date: 9/26/2013
Subject: Server Troubles

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10244 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 9/26/2013
Subject: Re: Server Troubles

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10245 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 9/26/2013
Subject: Rod Read continues special explorations ...

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10246 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 9/26/2013
Subject: Kite Power Coop presentation for awec2013 by Rod Read



Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10197 From: dave santos Date: 9/20/2013
Subject: Safety Design Rules for Break-Away Kites
Notes Toward TACO 2.0-

Martin Bondestam reported in the late nineties that a loose kite will generally circle down within three or four tether-lengths in a break-away. This is well confirmed at kite festivals. For larger kites at higher altitudes, this is not safe or practical enough, so the following specific design rules are suggested, with notes-

- A kite anchoring system shall be so designed such that no anchor, or part thereof, can be dragged in the event of a breakaway.

Yesterday, I had to suddenly preform a hundred-yard-dash to catch a Gomberg Falcon whose winder-lanyard parted. The winder remained on the tether with just the right dragging resistance in the tall grass to sustain the kite aloft. The lanyard was a thick piece of poly rope, perhaps decades old, with no real strength. Had I not caught the kite, it might have dragged for miles.

- All large AWES shall incorporate passive kite-killers that engage instantly in a kite break-away.

A simple classic method is to give the kite-killer rip-cord its own small anchor. If the main anchor parts, and the kite begins to run away, the kite-killer passively activates against its own anchor. Another idea is for loss of tension in a breakaway to release a kite-killer.

- Arch kites are favored where breakaway would be a hazard, since they deterministically self-kill when one side parts.

We thank Mario Milanese for first noting dual-line failsoft break-away in our circle.

- Chase teams, autonomous landing recovery, and other complex means of dealing with break-away must meet similar levels of reliability as the basic means.

There is no general exemption for less-safe design in controlled airspace. Even offshore, break-away recovery is a strict requirement, for both environmental and marine-navigation reasons. High redundancy is the standard means to meet arbitrary safety-factors in complex design cases.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10198 From: dave santos Date: 9/20/2013
Subject: Doug Plagiarized? Re: [AWES] RE: Forum "starting to learn"?
Doug,

You fail to show a text match to support your accusation of plagiarism (of very common knowledge). Search is now easy, and proper evidence is needed to convince reasonable adults of copying. The basic wind power ideas presented were taught to both of us by the wider world, before the AWES Forum. You did not invent these long known key ideas, nor do you write very well when sharing them. At least allow that my style of sharing common wind power principles lacks the many crudely offensive expressions you too often insist on,

 If only you could earn credit for some unique new AWE success, rather than only for endless paranoid accusations,

daveS
 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10199 From: dougselsam Date: 9/20/2013
Subject: Re: Safety Design Rules for Break-Away Kites

"so designed such that" is redundant.  Pick a term: "so designed" OR "designed such that", not both.

I thought you were going to be lifting a turbine.

Do we really need you making rules all day?
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10200 From: dougselsam Date: 9/20/2013
Subject: Re: Doug Plagiarized? Re: [AWES] RE: Forum "starting to learn&q

 Dave S.

I will leave the micro-analysis of past text to people with too much time on their hands like you.

Anyone who has participated in this forum knows very well that I have been saying from day-one that I've seen most of the "new" ideas promoted as AWE solutions on towers and ground-based in the past, and that I've been promoting the idea of "if it sucks on a tower or on the ground, beware it will probably suck even worse in the analhair."

Example: compressed air or hydraulic middlemen between the rotor and generator: one of the most common "new ideas" in wind energy.  Every time they treat it like a brand new conversation.

If I tried to tell you how many of these new ideas we've already seen you would simply not believe it: ALL OF THEM.  They are symptomatic, as are you.  I am going to take my own advice and give up on ever expecting a knowledgeable or logical response from a person who makes a practice of specifically avoiding knowledge and logic.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10201 From: Hardensoft International Date: 9/20/2013
Subject: Re: Johnny Heineken ,,, Welcome!
Doug,
If anyone has been practicing AWE unknown to this group. Our welcoming such an one is not only an acknowledgment but equally an invitation to open sharing.
Many thanks, JoeF. Please keep up the good work.
Further lifts.
John Adeoye Oyebanji
From: <dougselsam@yahoo.com
Sender: AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
Date: 20 Sep 2013 08:05:47 -0700
To: <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [AWES] RE: Johnny Heineken ,,, Welcome!

 

Nice article Joe.

OK this guy has been working for Makani since 2011. 

I appreciate the link to a nice article but I'm a bit puzzled at the constant "welcome to airborne wind energy" theme. " Welcome" today, when he joined Makani two years ago?  "welcome" when he may already be doing more with AWE than anyone on this list?  Who is welcoming whom here, and to what exactly?

How do we know he is not far ahead of most people in this forum with regard to AWE?

That he shouldn't be welcoming YOU to AWE - I mean, maybe he actually PRACTICES AWE for all we know and a bunch of people who mostly just TALK about AWE are going to "welcome" him to AWE after he's been working at it for two years?  I have to say I think most of what transpires on this list is beyond delusional.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10202 From: dave santos Date: 9/20/2013
Subject: Re: Johnny Heineken ,,, Welcome!

Doug,

If this is a ~belated~ welcome to Johnny, its still sincere. You were once warmly welcomed here as well, but not to rudely mock welcoming others. Please stop increasingly complaining every time folks extend the traditional Forum Welcome, which was never intended to satisfy very creepy feelings of non-welcoming. You should learn to properly welcome from us, to help reverse your sinking fortunes. Welcoming has to be real; you can't fake it to win the blessings,

daveS 

PS Seemingly, the most "delusional" AWES Forum opinion ever, is that "all roads lead to" a giant rotating-tower idee-fixe.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10203 From: dave santos Date: 9/20/2013
Subject: Re: Doug Plagiarized? Re: [AWES] RE: Forum "starting to learn"?

Doug,

So you make many weird straw-man accusations you then cannot prove (but always making excuses). We knew that.

We all get great wind power knowledge from many other sources, who all do a far better job creating it than you, but you just don't admit hat. For example, Dan Fink  a has always done a better job than you sharing his wind expertise in public, before we met you. He does not offend by incredibly obnoxious rudeness, so he has more influence than you, for sharing the same basic lessons in a friendly way with novices; lessons which all us experts already agreed on before you came here. Fink knows not to waste time ranting basics to many lurking experts like Carlin. No wonder you are so isolated, as "real" wind power moves forward.

Can't you see how your deep emotional troubles is your tragic flaw? There is lately no creative progress seen from you, just sterile soap-opera. Forum complaints about your manners are only building, and I am not going to cover for you much more. Please just act professional; not like a spoiled child, if you really want to help us,

daveS
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10204 From: dave santos Date: 9/20/2013
Subject: Re: Safety Design Rules for Break-Away Kites

 



Doug, 

Many Thanks for the grammar tip. A tip for you- Why not tone down the deep angst in your Forum writing?

Yes, I have been flying some new airborne turbines, but am waiting for the kPower media guy to transfer the latest raw video off my phone onto his drives and edit it. KiteSat1 did fly at AWEC2013, and is now touring Italy, so expect video from that front. Its a joy to have such a Fall Harvest of new work in the pipeline. Please be patient with the short delay for media hosting.

Of course, in serious AWE, we must all address FAA safety standards, and that is a special expertise of the aviation experts like me. You are no help at all by constant pissyness with regard to technical safety (or welcoming, or newbie encouragement, etc.). How exactly you will ever become qualified to design or fly an AWES safely in controlled airspace, given your disregard for the learning, and poor general attitude, is a mystery,

daveS
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10205 From: pierre.benhaiem Date: 9/20/2013
Subject: Re: Hydroturbine as mean of conversion, possible maximum speed
Chris,
 
Thanks for the information.
 
PierreB
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10206 From: dougselsam Date: 9/20/2013
Subject: Re: Safety Design Rules for Break-Away Kites

Well Dave S. I've been trying to tell you to use a rotor and a generator for years now while you've been talking about how hard a kite could pull a string to make power, or that flapping Einstein phonons were the for-sure answer.

Now that you've finally decided to attach a trailer (wind turbine) to a car (kite) and shovel dirt into the trailer (apply an electrical load) you can haul dirt (make power).

How long have I been recommending such a simple approach?

So after listening to years of your endless nonsense I'm eager to see some success.

And I maintain that endlessly worrying about all sorts of rules and laws for safety is still premature.

I mean seriously - within the first sentence we see the grammar is not up to snuff, and meanwhile your mastery of wind safety can;t even keep you from almost being flipped over in a tent-camper by the wind and possibly getting hurt or killed.  I'd concentrate on flying that kite with the turbine and stop trying to micromanage in advance the future industry.  And please be careful!  Stay away from the blades!  They can kill you before you know what happened.  Seriously.  I wish you the best of luck. :)
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10207 From: dave santos Date: 9/20/2013
Subject: HAWT AWE, Premature FAR discussion //Re: [AWES] RE: Safety Design R
Doug wrote- "Well Dave S. I've been trying to tell you to use a rotor and a generator for years now."


Doug, 

You are really misinformed. I have flying winged rotors with generators for some thirty years (ask BrooksC) albeit as indoor school demos. Many of my AWE demos since 2007 involved HAWTs, even though I test and enjoy many cool ideas, like tacking wings and phonon QFT. Note that KiteMotor 1 was an advanced AWE HAWT in 2007, flown in public before I ever knew of you.
 
Your shovel-trailer idea avoids actually describing a working AWE design. To real engineers this is, as you put it "pure drivel". Your pet idea is to avoid HAWT efficiency by tilting vertical.

If you think its premature of us to draft AWE ConOps (at NASA request, starting in 2011) that harmonize with FARs; its likely because you are increasingly so far behind the pack. For several years now, we have already been dealing with the FAA, in order to fly freely and safely. If you are not to be flying high, maybe the FARs are only a waste of your time, but not for the rest of us,

daveS

PS Please show AWE progress, and stop being the Forum troll, especially on aviation technical threads outside your expertise.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10208 From: dave santos Date: 9/20/2013
Subject: Introducing "Crosswind-Stability"

In formal terms, any single-line kite is chaotically yaw-unstable. Many AWES concepts depend on complex controls to artificially maintain critical yaw-stability over a lifetime. The necessary aerospace reliability is not there yet, Low-Complexity AWE has a ready solution-

By placing two anchors apart crosswind and running the spread lines to the kite-area, the yaw-axis is passively stabilized. This shows there is not only "Crosswind-Power", but also "Crosswind Stability". Stability is an information-theoretic thermodynamic cost  to flight that must be "paid". The practical question is whether active- or passive-stability is favored for crosswind-power AWE.

A megascale Mothra Arch, by its tremendous Crosswind-Stability factor, can provide bulk stability for even a gigawatt-scale AWE extraction capacity (hosted WECS arrays). Inherent Crosswind-Stability offers superior scaling potential, land-airspace utilization, and lower cost and complexity than small-unit AWES active yaw-autonomy.

CC BY NC SA

==========================
I am sorry for the Yahoo "CSNBC Jobs" Spam Virus 
that hijacked the Contact List for this mail account. 
Please accept this apology for any trouble caused.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10209 From: dave santos Date: 9/20/2013
Subject: Constrained Crosswind Sweep for Dense Aiborne WECS Arrays
Summary Review of key Open-Source Gigascale AWE thinking.

Large numbers of crosswind-power WECS, of many kinds, can be close-spaced into stable airborne arrays, by means of a network of constraining lines. A suitable constraint network allows far denser WECS grouping, for higher overall streamtube and land-airspace efficiency, and far greater total capacity; compared to sparse unconstrained array concepts.

Notes: Such dense-arrays may bemodularly hosted under stable mega-arches (Mothras). The optimal position for WECS arrays is at the arch TE, much like an airplane wing-flap, for highest lift and drag power-coefficients. Cascaded launch and landing would be normal.

CC BY NC SA
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10210 From: Harry Valentine Date: 9/20/2013
Subject: Wind-Hull assisted ship (Yak)
Gentlemen,


There is a proposal of a concept ship from Holland that uses its over-sized hull like a sail, to help propel itself on extended ocean voyages:


Not airborne wind energy . . . but uses wind energy to assist withpropulsion.


Harry
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10211 From: Joe Faust Date: 9/21/2013
Subject: Re: Wind-Hull assisted ship (Yak)
Consider bridling that hull to a long tether anchored to a sea buoy (in turn anchored to sea floor. Then "sail" that hull (air and water kited) back and forth. Have hydro turbines on board the hull producing electricity and other goods.   Let the hull hold a retreat resort for human vacationers. Power the resort activities as well as the production-of-energy activities. 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10212 From: Harry Valentine Date: 9/21/2013
Subject: Re: Wind-Hull assisted ship (Yak)
Interesting idea, Joe


Harry

To: AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
From: joefaust333@gmail.com
Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2013 05:21:04 -0700
Subject: [AWES] Re: Wind-Hull assisted ship (Yak)

 

Consider bridling that hull to a long tether anchored to a sea buoy (in turn anchored to sea floor. Then "sail" that hull (air and water kited) back and forth. Have hydro turbines on board the hull producing electricity and other goods.   Let the hull hold a retreat resort for human vacationers. Power the resort activities as well as the production-of-energy activities. 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10213 From: dave santos Date: 9/21/2013
Subject: How AWEC Blamed Joe Faust in 2010 for AWEIA's Non-Grata Status Ever
A window into AWE History; the year was 2010-
 
In online consultation with AWEIA members, JoeF withheld the AWEIA name from being at pointedly-requested gift by the AWEC clique (Makani, Joby, SWP, etc.). The giveaway was withheld on the general grounds that there was no open democratic process allowed by the AWEC clique's pay-to-play domination-model. To call that model "AWEIA" would be a contradiction. AWEC settled for "Consortium", which is accurate, but the practices are against US c 6 Industry Association law.

The following letter from AWEC confirms the naming-battle, and a critical key fact, that by 2010-

 "your group has established itself among your members as a viable means of communicating about, and supporting the development of, airborne wind energy as a great source of renewable energy for our planet. You can proudly point to many pioneers among your membership."

AWEC was very different: It had just been formed in deep secrecy by a tiny circle of players with tens of millions of VC capital from Google and other dotcom sources. An early but characteristic AWEC board decision was to eliminate hardship conference passes (claiming AWEC hardship), while creating blocks of free corporate passes. They seem to think that JohnO was better able to afford a jacked-up $800 conference fee ( color:rgb(0, 0, 0);background-color:transparent;font-style:normal;">
 "AWEC is established as the business-oriented organization, designed to serve the needs and interests of those entities and their investors who have a substantial financial stake in the development of the industry. Our objectives require the fiscally responsible operation of our activities. The fees for our conference are necessary for us to cover our costs. We must therefore regretfully decline your request for a complementary registration. You and members of your organization are welcome to register and attend the conference along with everyone else."

Most of us were blocked by the outrageous fees (AWEIA protest led to once-again affordable fees). We did not get to meet Miles Loyd, nor even access US ARPA-E and FAA public servants. All innovative Low-Complexity concepts were blocked by reviewers (except one Chinese start). JoeF was blocked by only getting his press-pass on the eve of the conference, too late to book a reasonable rate for travel. This was AWEC's first infamous "hijacked conference", still the worst ever.

A long-overdue debate is underway behind the scenes between AWEC and AWEIA players. AWEC (via PJ) is blaming JohnO for not being able to attend conferences, in impertinent rebuttal to a long list of otherwise unaddressed complaints about AWEC opaque non-democratic governance.

========== AWE History From the Vault ===========

From: rogercutler@juno.com 
Subject: Your request of AWEC
To: hardensoftintl@yahoo.com
Date: Monday, August 23, 2010, 8:49 AM

Dear Mr. John Oyebanji,
Thank you for writing. I have been asked by the Board to respond to your email.
First I want to affirm that the airborne wind energy industry needs more than one organization, and that your group has established itself among your members as a viable means of communicating about, and supporting the development of, airb orne wind energy as a great source of renewable energy for our planet. You can proudly point to many pioneers among your membership.
We, too, would like to see cooperation between our organizations, which is why we sometimes have found the behavior of some of your members so unfortunate. Initially we hoped to join with AWEIA under your name, and were progressing along that line until the offer of the name was suddenly and unilaterally withdrawn. We place high value on integrity and trustworthiness, so when a promise is broken like this, it is difficult to trust or have confidence in the reliability of the other. Then to learn that members of your organization are discussing a protest to be staged at our event in September further undermines our ability to see your group as a real partner in this industry.
AWEC is established as the business-oriented organization, designed to serve the needs and interests of those entities and their investors who have a substantial financial stake in the development of the industry. Our objectives require the fiscally responsible operation of our activities. The fees for our conference are necessary for us to cover our costs. We must therefore regretfully decline your request for a complementary registration. You and members of your organization are welcome to register and attend the conference along with everyone else. Perhaps in time we can re-establish a working relationship between our two organizations.
Thank you again for this contact. Please correspond with me if you would like to discuss anything further.
Sincerely,
Roger Cutler
Executive Director
AWEC
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10214 From: dave santos Date: 9/21/2013
Subject: Discussion of AWEC's Failed 2010 Privatized-Airspace Initiative

PJ yesterday posed the following questions about AWEC's privatized-airspace misadventure. Answers provided-
 
Q: Why would setting aside airspace in one way or another to ensure AWES could fly in order to generate energy from higher altitude winds be bad from the perspective of the AWE industry? 

A: Most airspace is already set aside, as a Public Commons, to be shared with AWE. We only need to be responsible users within this Commons, as all other pilots are, to be "ensured" our right-to-fly. AWES simply need to be airworthy in every current sense. There is no regulatory short-cut AWEC thinking can deliver.

Q: Obviously, the military has its own airspace set aside. There are airspace rules around airports and there are many hundreds of private airports in the USA that have classes of airspace designated around them to protect them. Is this "private" use of airspace bad, too, from your perspective?

A: Only legacy private airports operate so, with grandfathered airspace, with limited impact. Extensive military-reserved airspace is widely questioned by excluded aviation interests. Yes, these "private" airspaces are troubling, from the perspective of a pacifist child of US aviation, like me, raised in the commons. 

Any attempt at increased privatized airspace is resolutely opposed by key pilot groups like AOPA and EAA, as well as the FAA. It was shameful for AWEC, under JoeBen, to have secretly sought to privatize US airspace for AWE in our name. Its an outrage that the lobbying of US Congress happened without any consultation with the rest of us. I was proud to whistle-blow this scandal publicly. The existing pilot-world will resist like hornets any AWEC plan for AWE encroachment on Freedom-of-the-Skies.

Conclusion-

NextGen is coming just in time to support AWE. Large high-altitude AWES farms will request clearance to launch, and free up airspace when landed in calm. Conspicuity and Sense-and-Avoid capability will be enforced. Highly qualified pilots will be required, even with state-of-the-art automation. All AWE aircraft will be certified airworthy to existing standards, by mass-velocity categories. 

These aviation standards are not broken. Open-source Low-Complexity AWE is naturally advantaged. Over-sold AWEC insider-member architectures are not.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10215 From: dave santos Date: 9/21/2013
Subject: UTexas verifies GPS Spoofing Risk to AWES Kite Planes

For years now, KiteLab Austin has alerted the AWE R&D community to the danger of GPS and other radio-link AWES design-reliance. The first warnings concerned Russian GPS jammers on the global grey-market. Now a University of Texas engineering team has verified a signal spoofing threat whereby GPS-based navigation can be easily taken-over. 

Under aviation regulations, it must be shown that such known tampering hazards are resolved, which will take years. Current aviation safety depends on a Pilot-In-Control to be able to identify and over-ride a critical misreporting sensor. KiteLab Austin has advised (and NASA LaRC thinking concurs) that local ground-based AWES sensing, with no critical radio-link reliance (including radio-control), avoids a multitude of complex reliability and security open-issues.

One of many news pieces about the UT* GPS work-


* The same engineering school, UT AE, where my closest academic affiliations lay; including a 2009 AWE Seminar I presented.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10216 From: dave santos Date: 9/21/2013
Subject: Miles Loyd- "Where the Opportunities Are"

Loyd has been a living hero in AWE, a pioneer, both in operational testing and analysis, whose classic paper clearly balanced pros and cons between engineering choices like flygen or groundgen, solid wing or kite construction. In the Springer AWE book, he acknowledges that Payne and McCutchen directly informed his selection of an analytical AWES model. P & McC are like patron-saints to us.

This big new monograph* ( called Miles today, and he was most gracious, a real kiter. He understood how so many ordinary AWE developers were unable to afford AWEC2011, and so had never met him. He looks forward eagerly to reviewing the current flowering of new concepts in open-circles, "where the opportunities are".

Anyone who would like to help put together an overview for Miles, to bridge a knowledge-gap over Low-Complexity DIY and Megascale AWES conceptual and experimental work, please contact me. Attn. Pierre, Rod, JoeF, Leo, and so on; lets try to respond in two weeks or so.


* The Editors wisely stopped short of claiming their patische to be a "Textbook", its simply too soon to produce.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10217 From: Pierre Benhaiem Date: 9/22/2013
Subject: Rod's disks, Selsam's Superturbine , inflatable structure for each u
In old posts an inflatable shaft has been considered,but its drag is too
important. With a thin shaft the torsion is probably not efficient.Rod's
solution for several ropes around rings carrying the wings could resolve
both efficiency and drag.Suggestion from DougS:to replace soft wings by
blades.Other suggestion:inflatable and maybe buoyant ring.

In all cases there is a problem:the direction and the speed of wind
change according to the altitude.Variable pitch can resolve the problem
of unity of shaft with different wind speeds but not with several wind
directions (possible entanglement of ropes).

PierreB
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10218 From: dave santos Date: 9/22/2013
Subject: Wind Inflated Structures (persistent-inflation in calm)
Keep in mind that the following applies to airborne architecture (not just ground structure), even if the structure is forced to land by calm-
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10219 From: dave santos Date: 9/22/2013
Subject: Wind-Architecture //Fw: Inflatable Dune? Who?
Mothras will create a nice bow-wave for gliders to operate (like slope-lift). Imagine a "townhouse" row in a vast arch kite, with parked gliders launching into lift :)

Wind-Architecture concepts by glider pilots-
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10220 From: roderickjosephread Date: 9/22/2013
Subject: The couch potato football link to AWE
An advert for FIFA 14 featuring stabilised kite architecture is all over popular media ...  http://youtu.be/FVsgso273EE
Most of the world will get what's going on in that ad... for the US readers it's pronounced football

What's the next weird link or spin off product idea going to be... Washing powder commercials or sponsorship featuring flying clothes lines?
Maybe clothing shops or advertisers displaying ...
Optoma projector screens are good at sheet materials hmmm good business partner.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10221 From: roderickjosephread Date: 9/22/2013
Subject: Re: Miles Loyd- "Where the Opportunities Are"

 

I think there is a definite, more general need to document the key points of the low complexity study space.
I put a very simple few key points on kitepowercoop.org the other day so those of you with a login can add to it already... otherwise we should collaborate on this... as for which open sharing documentation method ... what a minefield..
evernote? google docs? libre office, this yahoo forum, kitepowercoop we should pick one
fill it with points
filter into a succinct juicy looking advert for the ideas  . . .
We should also be outlining project timelines ... talking of which some new drawings are starting tomorrow.

the basic text points I jotted at KPC (http://kitepowercoop.org/the-key-facts) were ..

Legislation

Airborne Wind Energy Systems (AWES) will be governed by strict airworthiness law.

Commercial ventures flying high mass at high speed face the strictest certification structures.

 

Lightweight networked AWES with multiple points of ground contact and ground based generator systems will be the easiest to fly, certify and insure.

Equipment

  1. Rope can transmit power more efficiently than oil pipes and electric cables.
  2. Arch kites are safe, stable lifting platforms.

They automatically face into the wind when rigged on a ground belay system.

They have failsafe component redundancy.

They can be stage launched and recovered for safer handling.

Efficient modular arch kites use off the shelf sheet and rope.

 

 

No heavy materials need to be lifted into the air

Wind Power at altitude

In general terms:

  1. There is more power available from high altitude wind than 100 x total human energy use.
  2. High altitude wind power is a sustainable resource.
  3. Standard wind turbine technology can't reach this wind resource.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10222 From: Rod Read Date: 9/22/2013
Subject: Show off your kite design and build skills
I've been meaning to do one of these instructables for a while now
http://www.instructables.com/contest/kite2013/?show=ENTRIES

They have a kite building competition running for the next week or so..
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10223 From: Joe Faust Date: 9/22/2013
Subject: Consumer of electricity: The Electric Kite Company
Consumer: 

Invited: 
    Charge those batteries using kitricity. 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10224 From: Hardensoft International Limited Date: 9/23/2013
Subject: Video documentation of AWEC2013; a first for AWE conferences; AWEIA
 Worthy thanks to Chase, the Director of Production and our own Ed Sapir of kpower; for this unprecedented show show of support. AWEIA will now share major credit with AWEC, and kPower for production and hosting video documentation of AWEC2013; a first for AWE conferences; and strategic toward GSA affiliate qualifications. kPower and the various AWEIA member-supporters involved approved this as a supportive constructive action. 
Much appreciations to all.
Further lifts.
JohnO
President-protem, AWEIA International
 
John Adeoye  Oyebanji   B.Sc. MCPN
Managing Consultant & CEO
Hardensoft International Limited
<Technologies attachments and any rights attaching hereto are, and unless the content clearly indicates otherwise, remains the property of John Adeoye Oyebanji of Hardensoft International Limited, Lagos, Nigeria. 

It is confidential, private and intended for only the addressee.
Should you not be the addressee and receive this e-mail by mistake, kindly notify the sender, and delete this e-mail immediately.
Do not disclose or use it in any way. Views and opinions expressed in this e-mail are those of the sender unless clearly stated as those of some other.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10225 From: Hardensoft International Limited Date: 9/23/2013
Subject: Re: How AWEC Blamed Joe Faust in 2010 for AWEIA's Non-Grata Status E
Thanks, DaveS;
In differentiating between AWEIA as the one United Voice for ALL Airborne Wind Energy Stakeholders and AWEC(onsortium), Roger had said it all:
“Dear Mr. John Oyebanji,
Thank you for writing. I have been asked by the Board (of AWEC) to respond to your email.
First I want to affirm that the airborne wind energy industry needs more than one organization, and that your group has established itself among your members as a viable means of communicating about, and supporting the development of, airborne wind energy as a great source of renewable energy for our planet. You can proudly point to many pioneers among your membership.
…. Initially we hoped to join with AWEIA under your name, and were progressing along that line until …….
 
AWEC is established as the business-oriented organization, designed to serve the needs and interests of those entities and their investors who have a substantial financial stake in the development of the industry.”
 
Obviously, AWEC is not for everyone.
 
Further lifts.
JohnO
President-protem, AWEIA
 
John Adeoye  Oyebanji   B.Sc. MCPN
Managing Consultant & CEO
Hardensoft International Limited
<Technologies Company
3rd Floor, 53 St. Finbarr's Road, Akoka-Yaba;
Lagos. Nigeria.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Disclaimer and confidentiality note
This e-mail, its attachments and any rights attaching hereto are, and unless the content clearly indicates otherwise, remains the property of John Adeoye Oyebanji of Hardensoft International Limited, Lagos, Nigeria. 

It is confidential, private and intended for only the addressee.
Should you not be the addressee and receive this e-mail by mistake, kindly notify the sender, and delete this e-mail immediately.
Do not disclose or use it in any way. Views and opinions expressed in this e-mail are those of the sender unless clearly stated as those of some other.



On Saturday, 21 September 2013, 15:49, dave santos <santos137@yahoo.com
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10226 From: christopher carlin Date: 9/24/2013
Subject: Re: Wind-Hull assisted ship (Yak)
Why the sea buoy? Why not direct to the anchor? I think you'll lose more energy to the sea buoy than you will to the drag on a rode. It's an interesting trade study but I suspect if you run the numbers the buoy won't buy you anything and in fact will complicate things.

Regards,

Chris
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10227 From: Joe Faust Date: 9/24/2013
Subject: Re: Wind-Hull assisted ship (Yak)
Thanks Chris, 
            I agree with you on a non-fixed-position sea buoy.   What I had in mind and did not specify was the tripodal fixed-position buoy with main rope airborne. 
However, now that we are into the matter, perhaps placing turbines along the rope underwater with no sea-surface buoy ... as I proposed earlier in a way that a couple of years ago Pierre B. liked the matter.   Use the rope as a base for even more hydroturbines besides those on the vacationers's sailed (kited) hull. 

Cheers, 
     JoeF
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10228 From: christopher carlin Date: 9/24/2013
Subject: Re: Wind-Hull assisted ship (Yak)
Dear Joe,

It'd be interesting to see how it works. Depending on sail and buoy size you'll still sink the buoy so I think dynamics are interesting. Your tripod cables only work in tension so you need a big buoy relative to the sail. Interesting issues. I think turbines on the rode and kite sweeping might be pretty elegant. Are you aware of the experimental electrical hub off the coast of Cornwall?

Regards,

Chris
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10229 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 9/24/2013
Subject: Wave Hub. Will kite energy plug into it????
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10230 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 9/24/2013
Subject: Re: Wind-Hull assisted ship (Yak)

Hi JoeF,

 

"However, now that we are into the matter, perhaps placing turbines along the rope underwater with no sea-surface buoy ... as I proposed earlier in a way that a couple of years ago Pierre B. liked the matter."

 

Considering a crosswind kite with a fixed anchor underwater:a beautiful idea,but (please correct me if I am wrong) turbines do not profit by all the power due to their place far of the kite.

 

PierreB 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10231 From: christopher carlin Date: 9/24/2013
Subject: Re: Wind-Hull assisted ship (Yak)
I think that's effectively a gearing problem.

Regards,

Chris
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10232 From: Joe Faust Date: 9/24/2013
Subject: Re: Wind-Hull assisted ship (Yak)
Pierre, 
       If I read your concern correctly, then I see you wondering how profitable might be a hydro turbine placed on the moving rope where the wing (hull) is farther out away from the anchoring.  Alter the hydro turbine design to harmonize with the turbine's position on the rope.  The main wing or hull will be moving faster than portions of the rope that are more near the anchor. "station velocity" varied by each station on the rope's length.  

JoeF
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10233 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 9/24/2013
Subject: Re: Wind-Hull assisted ship (Yak)

Joe,

 

If the turbine is at the place of the anchor,power = 0 (no motion).  If the turbine is at the place of the wing, power = 100% (before other losses). Power on turbine varies according to its place on the tether.

 

PierreB 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10234 From: Joe Faust Date: 9/24/2013
Subject: Re: Wind-Hull assisted ship (Yak)
Let the wing or hull "fly" and drive the rope. 
Out of the way, down on the rope... hang some turbines. 
The "profit" calculations won't be simple. 
Do the turbines on wing or hull bother the driving potential of the wing or hull?
Is the space on the wing or hull more or less costly to utilize for turbines than the stations on the rope?
Notice how Santos hung his producing turbine below the lifting wing, not at the wing. 
You have rigged one arrangement with the wing mixing up close with the wing. 
The subject ship as "sailing hull" has valuable structure; let that hull "fly" as strongly as possible to drive the submerged rope. 
Then add some turbines to the submerged rope.   The profit balance sheet on the choices is not seen by me. 

JoeF
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10235 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 9/24/2013
Subject: Re: Wind-Hull assisted ship (Yak)


"Notice how Santos hung his producing turbine below the lifting wing, not at the wing. "

Yes, but it is a static kite,the turbine taking real wind. With a crosswind kite,the turbine takes the apparent wind or water,so its place on the tether gives the power.

 

PierreB
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10236 From: Joe Faust Date: 9/24/2013
Subject: Re: Wind-Hull assisted ship (Yak)
Equivalent: apparent wind or crosswind. It is just wind in both cases. Crosswind will just have the lifter be able to lift more while the lifted turbine will be able to face higher wind also. The wing and turbine will not be able to prove what kind of wind they are "seeing." without having ambient wind information added to the analysis.   Profit will arrive depending on many variables.    I was not saying in-wing versus on rope was winner or not for Santos' demonstration; and Makani has solid-in-wing choice for now without any turbines down the line.  Donut-held-turbine team have turbine up in the wing and not down the line at some other station.   SuperTurbine (R) has driving blades off the lifting wing down the line some.   Could the Makani wing drive harder if the turbines were off-wing-down-line mounted?  
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10237 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 9/24/2013
Subject: Re: Wind-Hull assisted ship (Yak)

"Equivalent: apparent wind or crosswind. It is just wind in both cases. "

For crosswind kite, if the turbine is exactly between the anchor and the wing,if the speed of wing is 50 m/s the speed of the tether at the place of turbine is only 25 m/s.For static kite, the speed of real wind on the turbine = (a little less due to wind gradient) that on wing.

 

PierreB
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10238 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 9/25/2013
Subject: Solar pushed a bit aside for some AWEsome

Airborne Wind Energy Labs: New Analysis Questions Conventional Wisdom on Solar Energy

Leo Goldstein moves solar a big aside to make room for the AWEsome!
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10239 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 9/25/2013
Subject: Air handling in AWES?
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10240 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 9/25/2013
Subject: Crossing Atlantic east to west
Beginning: 

Six kiteboarders will try to cross the Atlantic Ocean
Wednesday, 25 September 2013 11:16

Beginnings will look different from future adventures.  The planned beginning adventure employs a yacht to carry the kiteboarders except for the cycled one imprinting the crossing legs.    All such teases what one day will occur: Solo crossing without an attending yacht, just kiteboarder and his or her board (though the board will hold many survival items to permit sleep, eating, fishing, health care, etc. 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10241 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 9/25/2013
Subject: Kite power generation method CN 101240778 A



Publication numberCN101240778 A
Publication typeApplication
Application numberCN 200710084662
Publication dateAug 13, 2008
Filing dateFeb 6, 2007
Priority dateFeb 6, 2007
Inventors李庆星
Applicant李庆星
Referenced by (4), Classifications (6), Legal Events (2)

External Links: SIPO, Espacenet
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10242 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 9/25/2013
Subject: Multi-megawatt generation kite CN 101363411 B
https://www.google.com/patents/CN101363411B

Multi-megawatt generation kite
CN 101363411 B
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10243 From: Bob Stuart Date: 9/26/2013
Subject: Server Troubles
Other Yahoo groups are in upheaval over the new software at Yahoo.
Currently, our site's spam trap is not accessible, so new members may
not get their messages posted. We have been getting a huge volume of
Spam, all from Brazil. I tried one site that encourages reporting of
spam, and soon got lots more of it, addressed to me. Any tips from
our computer wizards?

I appreciate the economy of not quoting a whole thread in each reply,
but am often lost when people post replies with no context at all.
This is probably a common barrier to new or casual members who might
otherwise increase the amount of time they spend on kites.

Bob Stuart
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10244 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 9/26/2013
Subject: Re: Server Troubles

Bob, 

     1. Sometimes the "Spam" folder shows, sometimes not.  I just deleted about 20 Spam posts. 

2. In the last year or so, I do not recall seeing even one item in the Spam folder as being for AWES. 

3. I think new member posts go into the Messages Pending folder that then we moderators may click into the discussions. 

4. Old guide that I kept reading: Never reply to a spam item. 

5. There are bait-and-spam operations that pretend to be friends while they are just collecting new targets. Where is the Golden Rule when one needs it!      Filters for private email program?


JoeF
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10245 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 9/26/2013
Subject: Rod Read continues special explorations ...
  1. Mothra crosswind thrusting controlled   by Rod Read on August 30, 2013.   3:11
  2. clearer control of mothra pull  by Rod Read on August 30, 2013.    1:37
  3. Mothra Moving right by Rod Read on August 30, 2013.     0:45
  4. Seagull Heart Kite  by Rod Read on September 2, 2013.       2:01
  5. evolving webs under mothra  by Rod Read on September 25, 2013    0:55
  6. mothra with flip web gills  by Rod Read on September 25, 2013        0:59
  7. belay circle anchoring   by Rod Read on September 26, 2013       1:01
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 10246 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 9/26/2013
Subject: Kite Power Coop presentation for awec2013 by Rod Read
Kite Power Coop presentation for awec2013   by Rod Read on September 26, 2013     45:54


45 minutes