Well I may mention real wind turbines every so often, but I was far ahead of where you are today in AWE thinking back in the 1970's.  No, my thinking is not clouded by tower-based turbines.  I understand how they work.  It's good to understand how something works before claiming to improve upon it.  I was once ignorant of wind energy too, and I would never claim to be clever enough to invent the airfoil, making its lift from the vacuum above.  I would have thought the pressure below was all that mattered, then come to find out that it's the vacuum that does the work.  Reminds me of economics where in order to get the economy really going, they need everyone mired in debt.  Without debt, people would take a break from work.  With debt, they become slaves.  Just like an airfoil needs negative air pressure to work well.
My opinion is you usually have almost no idea what you are even talking about.  Most of the statements you make are not sensible, and it is obvious that most of what you think is based on other things you think, and sometimes based on what your perceived authority figures say, but seldom based on facts.  The things you say make so little sense that I am not going to debate them one by one.  It is a forest of ignorance, and a thicket of inaccurate statements.  No point in going on about it.  You sound like a pro-wrestler in your bragging and predictions.  It seems to me that for you, this is all about personality, and name-dropping, and that's about it. Every second I spend responding to your nonsense is one more second I am not developing SuperTurbine(R) or other solutions (ST is just one of many), or doing anything else that would be productive.  With that, gotta run.

You are SUCH an idiot...

DaveS,

 

"Prepare for serious testing of your (and Doug's) ideas alongside all major ideas, or be left behind"

 

OK, DaveS, I take your Mothra as major idea, although not studied by major companies in AWE (Makani, TuDelft,Windlift, KiteGen etc...), but just to laugh. Flapping kite-arch as future of wind energy? Funny, grotesque, farcical. How auto-congratulations by daily posts? 1000 or more. How watt produced? 0.
"Still no answer to whether you object to Barnard's use of censorship to block technical AWE corrections (or why your spam-filter doesn't work). " See  previous answers, but you do not know how to read.So I repeat "Barnard's use of censorship" is only in your imagination. You make only bad attacks towards others, bad arguing about bad systems. 

 

PierreB 

DaveS,

(some corrections on my precedent post)

"Prepare for serious testing of your (and Doug's) ideas alongside all major ideas, or be left behind"

OK, DaveS, I take your Mothra as major idea, although not studied by major companies in AWE (Makani, TuDelft,Windlift, KiteGen etc...).But just to laugh. Flapping kite-arch as future of wind energy? Funny, grotesque, farcical. How many auto-congratulations by daily posts? 1000 or more. How many watt? 0. "Still no answer to whether you object to Barnard's use of censorship to block technical AWE corrections (or why your spam-filter doesn't work). " See  previous answers, but you do not know how to read.So I repeat "Barnard's use of censorship" is only in your imagination. You make only bad attacks towards others, bad arguing about bad systems. 

 

PierreB 

This is an accurate resume of my two (for today) precedent posts.

 

PierreB

DaveS,

 

MikeB gives red flag for fancy concepts.With only 5 (red) flags you would produce more energy. Imagine flags flapping conducted by the great DaveS-Einstein-KiteLab-GigaWatt-Moooothra...

 

PierreB

Blue tarp, red flags. Please DaveS can you add white color to make French flag?

 

PierreB

Dave S. from what I read, you know nothing about SuperTurbine(R), or its possibilities.  You have no clue of the various embodiments and super-neato ways to make it do things you've never thought of.  The aspects you say could never work already work fine, and provisions for making them work even better are already patented. 
If you knew:
1) How wind energy really works;
2) What is in the ST patents;
3) All the further unpublished ideas;
4) How ST's really work,
then maybe then we could have a real conversation about ST or even AWE.
But you don't, so we can't.  You might note the increasing number of wind energy people who have given up even talking to you.  I should be one of them.  Have fun, that is the important thing.

DaveS,

 

DaveS wrote :" But also try to honestly beat them in ongoing testing, with better ideas, so we can all laugh." With a small flygenKite I produce 10 to 100 W, against 0 for Mothra and hundreds for ST. I suppose "we" is yourself and DougS allowing you to put some watts into your empty panel. then sharing the set. So I hope high laughing. And indeed you see well AWE is not a thing serious enough to prevent laughing. You make a fixation about MikeB?Please laugh about such a fixation.

 

PierreB

DaveS,

 

I understand your right and strong angry concerning SKW for which you are the better advocate, considering rightly SWP is a promising AWES. But where is MikeB's censorship? Nowhere, in both your imagination and your feeling as revolted player. I propose you make a bord of the advantages of SWP as the most brillant technology in AWE, meeting people like yourself, DougS, and me too, and perhaps other like companies in Airborne Wind Energy Consortium.  

 

PierreB                 

Please DaveS provide some references.

 

PierreB

You know what's funny Dave S.?
I told you a way to have Mothra be relevant.
And you don't need to even lift anything with it, just put one up over and in front of a regular commercial wind turbine, and watch the enhanced output.
I have solved your main problem with your pet moth: that it has no inherent way to make power.  So use it as a shroud over a wind turbine.  Have Joe re-classify pushing wind down into a wind turbine as "kite energy" and you guys can be in kite heaven.  It is a project you could actually accomplish with your existing skillset - you don't actually need to learn anything about windmills or generating electricity.  Just put it up and measure the power increase, and yet this free idea from me seems to have gone right over your head.  Your response is I have secrets I'm not revealing.  (You have no idea how true that is.)  Well I just gave you one.  Don't look a gift horse in the mouth.  You won't be able to increase peak output at first, because that is already built into the turbine, but you could lower the wind speed range, moving the power curve to the left.  Oh well, moving the power curve to the left is only a holy grail of wind energy.  I guess you're therefore unfamiliar with the concept.  You should take something that could work and do it, because otherwise, at your present rate of progress, you will never get anywhere.  Just do it and stop acting like a jerk.
Doug Selsam
http://www.selsam.com

[[In other words: equipment for flying a kite energy system] [Claims discussions?]

DaveS,

 

Above comments on Mike's blog there is a mention: be relevant, be pertinent. I do not buy your story of MikeB's censorship. But if MikeB worked as moderator for the present forum,it would take a higher presentation like Barnard's blog with more exchanges of real technical aspects instead uncensored paranoia and auto-congratulations about pityful systems without the beginning of analysis.

 

PierreB 

Please DaveS provide some references.

 

PierreB

Here are some intellectual progresses making false expertises.

• Mix of different concepts to justify one concept within the set. For example: mixing the concept of power by waving or oscillating and the concept of airborne. Rebutting:power by waving does not depend of flying or not flying. Example: power by oscillation could be applied in trees as well.
• Believing in tabula rasa is a variation of precedent misconception. For example: AWE is new, so power extraction should be new, but by being in fact out-of-date ideas. These sorts of ideas are frequent for pupils dreaming about glory by inventing perpetual motion.
• Realities make that to reach at the stage of not understood genius, it is necessary to refute the sworn experts and to lock himself as guru by
• Speaking for the future, auto-congratulating day after day: the quantity of auto-satisfaction makes the genius.

PierreB

Autogyro (see the link www.w-p.dds.nl/bookaut/scbprts.htm ‎) has a flapping hinge due to the difference of the apparent wind speed between the blade moving forward and the blade moving back. Note that a productive flapping mode can be implemented within a kite-arch thanks to flapping hinge.

 

PierreB

DaveS,

 

"You rattle off a list of misconceptions without a single reference.."

Now there is a reference by your answer.

 

PierreB

 

Oh thanks Pierre,
So is it OK for a soft sail to have to handle this difference in apparent wind speed... But not OK for a rigid blade?
That's too weird and can't be true

Roderick Read
15a Aiginish
Isle of Lewis
HS2 0PB
kitepowercoop.org

I put again my post and complete it, thanking DaveS for being kind enough to embody these elements by his quick answer:

• Mix of different concepts to justify one concept within the set. For example: mixing the concept of power by waving or oscillating and the concept of airborne. Rebutting:power by waving does not depend of flying or not flying. Example: power by oscillation could be applied in trees as well.
• Believing in tabula rasa is a variation of precedent misconception. For example: AWE is new, so power extraction should be new, but by being in fact out-of-date ideas. These sorts of ideas are frequent for pupils dreaming about glory by inventing perpetual motion.
• Realities make that to reach at the stage of not understood genius, it is necessary to refute the sworn experts and to lock himself as guru by
• Speaking for the future, auto-congratulating day after day: the quantity of auto-satisfaction makes the genius.
• But seeing (????) the words are not the reality. So a feeling of paranoia is established. Who is guilty?
• Censorship of course! What a scandale! AWE, wind energy and aviation communities are in turmoil! Who is guilty?
• MikeB of course and all people speaking with him like me. So a trial of Stalinist type is educated by taking only supposed one part.

Please Daves answer again to allow me completing my study of intellectual progresses making false expertises!

 

PierreB

 

 

 

That is a fun start! Thanks. 

Driveshafts routinely transmit MegaWatts of power.  We have many ~3" diameter carbon fiber driveshafts designed for race cars, which produce about 1 MW of power.  As the SuperTurbine(R) patents show, the diameter can be expanded to a mesh.  There is no problem transmitting large amounts of torque through driveshafts.  That is what driveshafts do.  And beyond hollow or mesh driveshafts, the patents also show drivelines using rotating arrays of tethers, transmitting torque helically.  Even a single rope can transmit torque, though more rigid drivelines have advantages.  Dave S. has gone on record many times claiming transmission of torque by a driveshaft is not possible.  He is 100% wrong, both that it IS possible (and routine) to transmit large amounts of torque using a driveshaft, as well as the simple fact that not all SuperTurbine(R) configurations rely on driveshafts anyway.  Oh well, what do you do when ignorant people just go on and on with their nonsense? The world is full of such nonsense. Best to just ignore it as noise.

In support of that start, DaveS: 

One symptom of Professor Crackpot-itis is always targeting prototypes at a ridiculously large scale.  This gives the good professor (or in Dave S.' case, the bad wish-he-was-a-professor) an instant excuse to keep talking, instead of building and testing.  (test, test, test!)  (or is it talk, talk talk?)  Logic would say you start smaller than a GigaWatt.  Further logic would say you could start by flying a kite arch over an existing wind turbine to verify enhanced output.  Baby steps.  The basic idea is achievable steps, slowly verifying the concept, so as to garner support for future, larger versions.  The alternative is to only talk about things too large or complicated to build and test at your current stage of development.  Usually the Professor is not interested in anything that makes sense like that since his theories are whacked, and any actual step that involves building or running anything tends to verify that.  So the professor would usually prefer to stay in the internet and call people names who disagree with any of his nonsense, then take any concrete steps toward what he SAYS he wants to do.  In the case of an arch kite carrying suspended turbines, well, OK then, go ahead and try to build a GigaWatt version without first trying a smaller one.  Yeah, sure, that makes a LOT of sense, and I anticipate you will have it up and running in (checks watch) no time at all! 

Joe:
You have a lot of references, that is for sure.
Your reference shows a kite arch directing wind down into a tower-based turbine.  A kite arch that went further down on the sides could focus wind from left, right, and top, with the ground forming the remainder of the funnel.  Maybe for a few turbines side-by-side.  Like the picture in the patent, a drawing or web post is probably as far as the idea will go.  Oh well, It was just a thought.
:)
Doug S.

From his subconscious DaveS knows that Mothra does not work economically but from conscious he does not want to admit it.
So it is the reason why he "is always targeting prototypes at a ridiculously large scale".

 

PierreB