Bonjour à tous,
après
7 ans, enfin j’ai pu préparer mon nouveau vol d’essai avec le Voilier
des Airs et sa nouvelle enveloppe argentée, malgré les difficultées
rencontrées.
Il
nous aura manqué le vent pour valider à 100 % tout les essais, mais je
suis entièrement satisfait de l’opération qui m aura permis de valider
le concept de navigation de l’Aerosail et au passage le gonflage sur
une barge en mer..
Une nouvelle voie du transport maritime vient de s’ouvrir.
Il nous reste à continuer l’aventure et nous préparer pour la prochaine session d’essai et la traversée.
Nous cherchons activement des partenaires et mécènes.( voir nos dossiers sur mon site www.rousson.org en page aerosail ) , les médias seront de nouveaux au rendez-vous pour vous faire rêver avec des images exceptionnelles ..
Un grand merci à tout ceux qui m’ont soutenu pour m’aider à fiancer ce premier vol.
Voici les vidéos
et la presse avec notamment l’ Aerosail en photo du jour sur l AFP.. .
France,
Espagne, Uk, Italie, Canada,USA, allemagne, Norvege, Danemak,
Japon et tout les pays dont j ai pas pu recueprer les coupures de
presse ..
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 15301 |
From: joe_f_90032 |
Date: 10/10/2014 |
| Subject: Plan for this motion? |
Anyone with the plan for the system? This video is in the Jan Claes video channel:
|
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 15302 |
From: joe_f_90032 |
Date: 10/10/2014 |
| Subject: Jan Claes |
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 15303 |
From: joe_f_90032 |
Date: 10/10/2014 |
| Subject: Re: Plan for this motion? |
Here is an image that lets one see what is going on:
Care to e-flygen mod the device for aloft lighting?
|
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 15304 |
From: dave santos |
Date: 10/10/2014 |
| Subject: Energy & Policy Institute asked to define its AWE Policy |
Mike
Barnard has landed a position as "Senior Fellow" at the Energy &
Policy Institute (a small new "think-tank"). He is also the world's
leading public AWE detractor, whose flawed technical approach has been
countered en masse by PhD AWE experts. He continues to seek publicity
for his false belief that AWE R&D is a tactic for global-warming
deniers to suppress conventional wind adoption.
Here is a link to the Energy & Policy Institute, and the message I posted on its contact page-
========= Message posted to the Energy & Policy Institute website ==============
Mike
Barnard has repeatedly taken a stand against Airborne Wind Energy (AWE)
R&D, claiming that conventional wind is good enough. He makes an
unsubstantiated claim that anti-wind forces are behind the R&D, as
a ruse to delay conventional wind adoption. With no aerospace
expertise, he has gone against the global academic consensus about the
promise of developing upper-wind, and has even been caught
sock-puppeting his odd opinions into Wikipedia.
The
Energy & Policy Institute staff is asked to take a fresh look at
AWE, and substantiate or disavow Mike Barnard's outlier attacks on the
emerging tech.
Thank You.
|
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 15305 |
From: Joe Faust |
Date: 10/10/2014 |
| Subject: Re: Energy & Policy Institute asked to define its AWE Policy |
 |
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 15306 |
From: Joe Faust |
Date: 10/10/2014 |
| Subject: Re: Energy & Policy Institute asked to define its AWE Policy |
DaveS, your text does not seem to break their rules: 1 account per person. Be civil. No personal attacks. Respect everyone's time. No spam. 1 account per person. Be civil. No personal attacks. Respect everyone's time. No spam.
|
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 15307 |
From: joe_f_90032 |
Date: 10/10/2014 |
| Subject: Re: Energy & Policy Institute asked to define its AWE Policy |
The site Admin noted that
Dave's input may have been sent via a contact form instead of the
comment form. That would leave the question as to what message was
apparently deleted. So, maybe the comment page did not delete a
DaveS comment. ~ JoeF |
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 15308 |
From: joe_f_90032 |
Date: 10/10/2014 |
| Subject: Re: Energy & Policy Institute asked to define its AWE Policy |
Upload image did not apparently have an approved path.
|
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 15309 |
From: dave santos |
Date: 10/10/2014 |
| Subject: Re: Energy & Policy Institute asked to define its AWE Policy |
Joe,
It did not seem this was a public comment window, but a direct message to staff. The
allegation of sock-puppeting Makani's Wikipedia page could be construed
as an attack in need of substantiation, but the staff is presumed open
to the factual evidence.
What
is most mysterious about this renewable advocacy institute is its
funding sources. It seems plausible that "Industrial" Solar and Wind
has become like Big Oil, creating shadowy connections to try and drive
public policy. It seems a good cause, but with a problematic process,
subject to abuse.
MikeB will be hard pressed to show climate-science denial somehow driving AWE R&D,
daveS
On Friday, October 10, 2014 11:27 AM, "Joe Faust joefaust333@gmail.com
[AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com |
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 15310 |
From: dave santos |
Date: 10/10/2014 |
| Subject: Re: Energy & Policy Institute asked to define its AWE Policy |
Seems like Gabe will respond thoughtfully- Comments read last-to-first- Joe Faust commented 1 day
ago · Flag  Gabe Elsner commented
1 day ago · FlagHi
Joe – we received Dave Santos’ comment via our contact us form and will
get back to him. Are you associates with Mr. Santos?
Best,
Gabe Elsner
Joe Faust commented 1 day ago · FlagWhy did the Santos post get deleted?
On Friday,
October 10, 2014 12:11 PM, dave santos <santos137@yahoo.com
|
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 15311 |
From: dougselsam |
Date: 10/10/2014 |
| Subject: Re: Energy & Policy Institute asked to define its AWE Policy |
|
Ha ha, one wonders how long he could
maintain those rules! :))) It's amazing how people can earn
a living doing nothing. "Yes I'm a senior policy fellow in the
Blah Blah Blah M'kay institute, M'Kayyyyy?"
"And what do you do for a living?"
"Oh
I fly around the world, burning lots of jet fuel, to stand up in front
of large groups of people, who also used lots of jet fuel, saying
M'Kayyyyyy?"
MikeB cannot see the forest, being buried in
trees! Believing global warming is real, he wrings his hands
within a fabricated-by-others mindset. He's living in an
artificially constructed version of reality. These people see
only the puppets, but don't glance upward to see who is pulling the
puppet-strings.
The big oil companies are behind
environmental laws, big oil aligned with big gov to restrict drilling,
thereby shutting out competition of smaller drillers, coal miners, etc.
creating a de facto monopoly. Keystone Pipeline? Unwanted
competition, and besides, Warren Buffet bought that BNSF railroad
(partly from me) and he moves all that oil by rail. He also
doesn;t need the competition. DOE 's Chu, along with Ebola,
stated years ago "we need $5 gasoline". Keywords: We and
Need. Get it? The big oil companies agree - they make more
money that way!.
Fracking is screwing up their game.
MikeB, not able to see the puppeteers, doesn't realize that the people
who see the puppet-show for what it is, easily find holes in the global
warming theory on the simple basis of the actual science, along with
the well-known fact of every scientific theory eventually being proven
wrong. "Science" has been hijacked. Temporarily, we can
only hope...
Also, in the social sciences, the psychological
30-year panic cycle has reliably alternated between warming/cooling for
hundreds of years.
My take: Too much emphasis on
irrelevant wannabe wind people like a MikeB. Who is he really? A
guy who needed a job? Someone who couldn't get an actual job in
wind energy? A busybody? A guy with too much time on his
hands and a keyboard? Sorry to sound mean there. For all
his best intentions, he's pretty much irrelevant. If we can get
AWE up and running, he'll probably say he knew it the whole time.
All
this crap about how windfarms are not ugly and do not affect property
values is over the top. Even windfarm people are tired of looking
at all those overlapping rotors, and DEFINITELY do NOT want them near
their own houses. The reason property values hold near windfarms
is they move SOME civilization, paved roads, etc., into run-down rural
areas. It's NOT because people like the look. Drive through
Palm Springs on the 10 freeway and witness the visual cacophony,
imagine how your town would look with 10,000 giant overlapping rotors.
My opinion is that one row of wind turbines is beautiful, and a hundred rows is a visual cacophony.
These
windfarms belong high in the sky where they are easier to ignore.
The idea that fossil fuel companies are behind AWE - Is Mike B really
saying that? OMG that is FUNNY! I WISH! Geez maybe I
should be contacting Exxon-Mobil for funding! Holy Cow!
Come
to think of it, BP DID contact me years ago, but, like Google, were not
serious - not worth the time to even talk to them about it.
Losers! :))) |
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 15312 |
From: dougselsam |
Date: 10/10/2014 |
| Subject: Re: Energy & Policy Institute asked to define its AWE Policy |
|
Joe Faust commented 1 day ago Why did the Santos post get deleted?
*** Insert Laugh-track here *** |
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 15313 |
From: dougselsam |
Date: 10/10/2014 |
| Subject: Re: Energy & Policy Institute asked to define its AWE Policy |
|
"Are you associates with Mr. Santos?"
*** Insert ominous music here***
|
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 15314 |
From: dave santos |
Date: 10/10/2014 |
| Subject: Re: Energy & Policy Institute asked to define its AWE Policy |
There have been several Big Oil connections in AWE, in the form of small grants (SABIC excepted), but there has been no attempt to bash conventional renewables,
and the logic is to keep energy bets open by excess cash. Big Oil has
put far more cash into conventional wind and solar farms, by the same
diversification logic. Far more money in AWE has come from non-Oil
sources like university budgets, and venture players from GoogleX on
down to small investors.
AWE
will raise in public visibility if this turns into a "conspiracy
theory" debate. The ironic result may well be that anti-renewable
forces embrace AWE over wind towers, supposing MikeB to be right about
AWE's poor prospects, but then AWE emerges as the best anti-Oil
tech. Doug
is the one known climate-science denier in AWE (charitably presuming
the "rotating tower" ST is airborne), and he is marginally associated
with a few serious AWE practitioners, but mostly rejects the R&D.
The truth of MikeB's thesis absurdly only hangs on Doug.
On Friday, October 10, 2014 1:22 PM, "dougselsam@yahoo.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
|
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 15315 |
From: joe_f_90032 |
Date: 10/10/2014 |
| Subject: Occhiello. And SBIC |
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 15316 |
From: joe_f_90032 |
Date: 10/10/2014 |
| Subject: Re: Occhiello. And SBIC |
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 15317 |
From: dave santos |
Date: 10/10/2014 |
| Subject: Re: Occhiello. And SBIC |
If any proof was wanted that patent examiners have surrendered the job of vetting obvious prior art, this patent is it.
Its
also a disturbing indication that SABIC's Code of Ethics is a hollow
fiction with regard to troll patents in AWE. They have the money to use
patents like this to kill off small ventures who seek to match AWE to a
coming Hydrogen Economy, even though the prior art is well established.
One would need hundreds of thousands of dollars just to show up at
trial with invalidating art, at current patent litigation rates.
SABIC
Ventures is clearly dominating AWE patent troll activity by focusing
investment on KiteGen's patent portfolio (which is greater than all the
rest of EU combined), which has no known inventive leap, but threatens
free use of extensive prior-art. SABIC Ventures is neglecting the hard
work of a diversified AWE portfolio that creates core engineering
science value by best-practice R&D.
Dutch SABIC Ventures' analysts are not responsive to AWES Forum questions about AWE junk-patents and the SABIC ethics code.
On Friday, October 10, 2014 5:42 PM, "joefaust333@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
|
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 15318 |
From: joe_f_90032 |
Date: 10/10/2014 |
| Subject: Train claim in 1948 is emptied by at least circa 1912 fact |
US2562789
F: October 18, 1948. Raymond P. Holland Jr. Kite. [
"multiple kite flight system" "upper kites of a flight
series" "adjustable ballast bag" "achieve multiple
flying" He did not comment about the wear of the line
going through the slip to achieve the multiple kite series; the line
will rub on the keel and sail during flight; sleaving special might be needed. ]
How accurate is Holland's claim: "Heretofore
no kite has been successfully designed whereby several kites may be
flown, one above another in stacked relationship on a single ground
cord, contrasting with conventional use of a plurality of ground cords
branching out from a single cord held by the operator." ?? [ Claim is invalidated by early Perkins train or others before him.]
Search for single-line centipede kites before Holland; search to see if
the Weather Bureau had any single-line trains. Did Eddy try single-line
train? Did the Scotland pair try single-line train? Did Woglom
mention single-line train? An historical counterexample would be even a
two wing system with the second wing mounted to the one main ground
tether; it is difficult to believe that the thousands years of kiting
had not seen such an arrangement; so we search for such counterexample.
Did the pilot section of the French Army man-lifting kite train feature
single-cord stacking?  Write
a history of train kites and see where Holland fits. Does any patent
achieve the single-line train before Holland? Has someone published a
robust history of kite trains? KiteTrainsAtEKS http://www.howtokites.com/2012/10/04/kite-train-flying-is-for-all-kinds-of-kites/ Photo: Circa: 1912? Photo showing single cord holding train of
wings. This would invalidate Holland's patent claim of 1948. Designer: "Samuel F. Perkins, a Boston based kite
maker and promoter"
Well, we find easily prior art: Gonzo Death Traps From the Early Days of Aviation: Man-Liftin Kites which article brings forward a military experiment that had a train of wings on one ground cord.
~ JoeF
|
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 15319 |
From: joe_f_90032 |
Date: 10/10/2014 |
| Subject: Minesto wins WWL Orcelle Award 2014 |
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 15320 |
From: joe_f_90032 |
Date: 10/10/2014 |
| Subject: Kite System Plans |
Detail plans for kite systems are invited to be linked in this topic thread. The
systems may be for any scale or purpose. Advanced AWES plans are
welcome. Some plans refine specifications to achieve particular
purposes. Plans for utility-scale AWES for electrical generation may
one day be linked from this topic thread. Plans are of various sorts
and quality.
Start: There are many plans at KitePlans.org The largest kite plan archive - Kite Plan Base (KPB) Plans may be modifications of other plans; link the files of those also. Some
plans will be highly illustrated; some will include videos and still
photographs of builds. Some plans will append flight reports and detail
application procedures. Flygen or groundgen (or both in one) mod
some plan to produce a new AWES plan.
=== A general link over phrase "kite plan" http://tinyurl.com/KitePlanGENERAL
~ JoeF |
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 15321 |
From: joe_f_90032 |
Date: 10/10/2014 |
| Subject: Re: Minesto wins WWL Orcelle Award 2014 |
Short video of the flygen paravane system |
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 15322 |
From: joe_f_90032 |
Date: 10/10/2014 |
| Subject: Re: Minesto wins WWL Orcelle Award 2014 |
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 15323 |
From: Joe Faust |
Date: 10/10/2014 |
| Subject: Windbow |
We
have some mention of Windbow. But now this topic thread invites
long-term invitation to a study and discussion of Windbow arch kite and
mods of similar wings.
Start:
where there is this text: "12emes Rencontres Internationales de cerfs-volants, Alain Chevalier avait déroulé son Fil d'Ariane sur un champ éolien où sont venus Etienne Veyre (et ses arches fantastiques),"
Will Windbow mods be WEC lifters? Will Windbow mods be pumping AWES electricity producers? Scaling? Builds and experiences?
~ JoeF |
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 15324 |
From: joe_f_90032 |
Date: 10/10/2014 |
| Subject: Re: Windbow |
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 15325 |
From: Rod Read |
Date: 10/11/2014 |
| Subject: Re: Windbow |
In the KPB instructions The leading edge is shown as being made shorter than the trailing edge ...
???? Is that right...??? SO?.. because it's leaning back with drag... the tail isn't above the leading edge... suppose so Here's the secret ingredient: trim the edges of the units into a
truncated wedge, 1/4 inch in on each side of the leading edge (see
drawing in above post). This will bring the ribbon in about 1/2 inch at
every batten pocket on the leading edge and create the shallow curve
that's needed.  |
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 15326 |
From: dave santos |
Date: 10/11/2014 |
| Subject: Early Carousel Launch Concept |
Note the cover art in the link below; precursor concept to KULeuven and Ampyx AWES-
|
| |
| | | |
| Popular MechanicsPopular
Mechanics inspires, instructs and influences readers to help them
master the modern world. Whether it’s practical DIY home-improvement
tips, gadgets and di... |
| | Preview by Yahoo |
|
|
|
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 15327 |
From: Joe Faust |
Date: 10/11/2014 |
| Subject: Electricity from AWES by father and son project: Claes family |
Letter to the editor of Upper WindPower on October 10, 2014
Jan Claes My son used the experiment for a school project. The Archimedes Screw is driving a lite DC permanent magnet dynamo. The bowed cable is the line to the ground. Via
the link you see a video with the results on both A and V meters; the
voice in the background is reading the wind speed in m/s. The resulting power was very small (low wind conditions to max of 18 m/sec. But is was fun to do.)
[[Moderator notes: I am not sure if members will be able to see the following short video, still, or wing pattern and notes:
And this still photo: ]]
Moderator adds:
|
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 15328 |
From: joe_f_90032 |
Date: 10/11/2014 |
| Subject: Re: Windbow |
Good question, Rod. Maybe the pucker just kisses the AoA for effective airfoil forming. Let's look for robust discovery on the matter. ===================================== New dedicated folder: Windbow Kites
|
| Windbow Kites
[ ] Anchors
[ ] Safety
[ ] Weak link for asymmetrical failure?
[ ] Downing lines
[ ] Launching schemes for very large windbows |
| | | Preview by Yahoo |
| |
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 15329 |
From: joe_f_90032 |
Date: 10/11/2014 |
| Subject: Homan Walsh |
Homan Walsh
Purposeful kiting. Homan got the job done with his kite system. He helped to bridge two nations by putting his kite system to work. His AWES used the wind's energy to lift string to accomplish an objective. Homan won a contest.
|
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 15330 |
From: dave santos |
Date: 10/12/2014 |
| Subject: Re: Windbow |
The
WindBow is a wonderful kite arch case. Its not as stable as a Mothra,
nor as unstable as a flipwing*, since slow sinuous dancing is the
desired effect. Mothra traces its roots to arches by Ansar Anders, WKM
events, and George Peters.
Ansar
is a longtime wind-hacking contact, and I followed his ribbon-arch
experiments long before locating at WKM. His non-tailored arches did
not have the "freed leech", so they flew semi-stalled at a
disappointing low angle (but he did manage to sail two bikes tacking
directly upwind with and arch between them).
WKM
arch events featured Ohashi himself, and EU arches made with many
self-trimming kixels. KLG discovered that a curved leech (TE) worked
well with a straight luff (LE) for both arches and flipwings. Years
before, GeorgeP had discovered his tailored planform (working with
other talents), which is contained in the KLG planform. kPower
connected with GeorgeG in Denver, during an NREL/NWTC visit. Drachen
Foundation is a nexus of arch domain experts like WKM and GeorgeG. Rod
took up arch CAD studies, and has done great work. In parallel to all
this, the SkyBow has emerged by Roy Mueller, James Mallos and Tony
Mallow. The kite arch design space is rich and powerful.
The
strangest kite arch case is reanalysis of TUDelft kite testing in wind
tunnels and simulations, where the kites did not have long tethers, but
were "staked out" into arches. The data was wonderful validation, even
showing self-pumping modes, but TUDelft seems to have overlooked the
arch opportunity, especially cross-wind laddermills (with Wubbo down,
they futzed with Bell kites, Makani stealth-contract work, reeling AWES
details, etc.). Arch experiments at UGrenoble had good results, but
were very preliminary.
Our
growing circle of arch freaks has become a large informal Net
think-tank. KPower has next-generation arch designs in the pipeline.
* Disregarding dynamic stability of oscillation.
On Saturday, October 11, 2014 5:13 PM, "joefaust333@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
|
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 15331 |
From: dave santos |
Date: 10/12/2014 |
| Subject: Re: Homan Walsh |
Charles
Ellet Jr. was the bridge engineer who specified the kite idea, which
pre-existed: but the genius aspect was letting a child do the deed,
rather than an adult, over the natural sublimity of Niagara Falls.
On Saturday, October 11, 2014 10:12 PM, "joefaust333@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
|
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 15332 |
From: dave santos |
Date: 10/12/2014 |
| Subject: Open-AWES Technology-Transfer with Ocean Current Energy |
Almost
every idea commutes between wind kiting and water paravaning, such that
an idea emerging in one domain is likely a contribution to the other.
Over time, both domains develop more advanced rigs in mirrored
progress. Broadly seen, new lattice methods can host large dense arrays
in both cases, by the same principles. Passive-control
AWES methods worked out by KLG and kPower will also work underwater. A
looping neutral-buoyancy hyrdofoil can be effectively constrained and
tapped for power using the kite energy pattern language of anchor, PTO,
power-wing, and pilot-kite.
In the marine case, the "anchor" can be a buoy or bottom anchor, and
the "pilot-kite" paravane various combinations of ballast, buoyancy,
and drag.
CC 4.x BY NC
SA |
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 15333 |
From: dave santos |
Date: 10/12/2014 |
| Subject: One Sky, One World (OSOW) Kite Fly Today |
Be a part of the peace-kite movement; get out today and fly your kite with many thousands of others, the world over-
Note:
OSOW is uniquely celebrated two days here on the WA coast. Yesterday I
put a Gomberg Falcon up on 900ft of line (taking advantage of FAA
kite-fest waiver). The session was toward serious altitude attempts
with trains. A bronze statue of Capt. Clark held the kite, which flew
at a super-high angle, with the long line degrading flight angle only
moderately (~80 = |
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 15334 |
From: joe_f_90032 |
Date: 10/12/2014 |
| Subject: Re: Windbow |
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 15335 |
From: joe_f_90032 |
Date: 10/12/2014 |
| Subject: Re: Windbow |
Spelling correction, thanks: Correct: Anders Ansar |
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 15336 |
From: joe_f_90032 |
Date: 10/12/2014 |
| Subject: Re: Windbow |
Is this a a type of winbow ??? ... with side two anchors meeting at a single point which is furthered ground anchored?
|
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 15337 |
From: joe_f_90032 |
Date: 10/12/2014 |
| Subject: Re: Windbow |
Will the following tactic tech be used by some in windbow-using AWES?
|
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 15338 |
From: joe_f_90032 |
Date: 10/12/2014 |
| Subject: Re: Windbow |
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 15339 |
From: joe_f_90032 |
Date: 10/12/2014 |
| Subject: Arthur D. Struble, circa 1965 |
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 15340 |
From: joe_f_90032 |
Date: 10/12/2014 |
| Subject: George Lawrence |
George Lawrence
"kite aerial photography" - Google Search
|
| |
| "kite aerial photography" - Google Search Search
Options Any time Past hour Past 24 hours Past week Past month Past year
All results Verbatim About 196,000 results Kite Aerial Photography -
Welcome - Ar... |
| | | Preview by Yahoo |
| KAP is a branch of
purposeful kiting, an AWE sector. KAP may be combined with other AWE
objectives in one system. Utility-scale electricity AWES may integrate
KAP for possible various reasons: control, surveillance, maintenance,
education, training, management, security, ...
|
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 15341 |
From: joe_f_90032 |
Date: 10/12/2014 |
| Subject: Re: Latest Altaeros News? |
Graphic fresh to me is on:
|
|
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 15342 |
From: joe_f_90032 |
Date: 10/12/2014 |
| Subject: Re: Mario Garcia-Sanz honored |
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 15343 |
From: joe_f_90032 |
Date: 10/12/2014 |
| Subject: Re: EnerKite - Technik und Team - KurzTrailer |
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 15344 |
From: joe_f_90032 |
Date: 10/13/2014 |
| Subject: Art of AWES |
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 15345 |
From: joe_f_90032 |
Date: 10/13/2014 |
| Subject: Re: Art of AWES |
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 15346 |
From: joe_f_90032 |
Date: 10/13/2014 |
| Subject: Re: Art of AWES |
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 15347 |
From: joe_f_90032 |
Date: 10/13/2014 |
| Subject: Re: Art of AWES |
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 15348 |
From: joe_f_90032 |
Date: 10/13/2014 |
| Subject: Re: Art of AWES |
| Group: AirborneWindEnergy |
Message: 15349 |
From: dougselsam |
Date: 10/13/2014 |
| Subject: Re: Latest Altaeros News? |
PopSci October 6, 2014 Article: Altaeros "news" http://www.popsci.com/article/science/quest-harness-wind-energy-2000-feet?dom=PSC&loc=slider&lnk=3&con=the-quest-to-harness-wind-energy-at-2000-feetNote:
The story leaves off at yesteryear's promises, offers NO news of
current status, even though this is a major "news" publication, October
article. Try the Fairbanks newspaper: Aerial wind turbines could help power rural Alaska villages I called them to inquire a couple weeks ago, when we first started wondering about the Alsaka project's status. Contact Us - Fairbanks Daily News-Miner: SiteTook a few calls to find anyone who had any idea what I was asking about. Finally, one editor/reporter told me about another reporter who had done the above story about it ahead of the fact. I
explained the persistent problem of "green energy press-release"
enthusiasm evaporating after the initial story full of promises, and
how we seldom hear a followup story to examine whether the promises
actually materialize. (As we now know, they "quietly go away" -
think "whale bumps": 1000 stories full of promises, zero followup
stories explaining how nobody ended up using whalebumps) I asked
"Why feature a story telling what "will" happen, and not follow it up
with a story that reports the actual news of what DID happen, or what
IS happening? I explained how people are curious to hear "the rest of
the story" (as in "news" hello?). It's amazing to me to read an article that says: "This
system defines the future of "emerging technology X" due to "superior
features Y and Z", then they just leave you hanging. It is not
logical to assume, on the one hand, people should be eager to read such
promises, then assume, on the other hand, the same readers have no
curiosity to read a followup story that tells what DID happen, current
actual NEWS, or what the progress actually IS. (It's almost as
though today's "journalists" are so used to just printing any old lies,
rather than doing actual reporting, that the concept of doing actual
reporting doesn't even occur to them. "Follow up on a story?
Hmmmm, interesting idea - I guess we COULD do that...") The guy
I had on the phone assured me that the reporter who had done the
original story would be calling me as soon as he was contacted, which,
of course, I knew was unlikely. More likely his phone rang again
and the thought evaporated from his mind as someone mentioned "where to
have lunch"... "Press-release science" - hear the promise, then
please forget you ever heard it, because apparently nobody is
interested in the actual story, just the fantasy.(?) |
|
|
