Messages in AirborneWindEnergy group.                          AWES 18906 to 18955 Page 272 of 440.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18906 From: dougselsam Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: Pulsing-Tether PTO AWES Arts (short pulse/high-frequency vibrati

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18907 From: dougselsam Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: Latest Altaeros News?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18908 From: dougselsam Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: regen boat wanting a kite

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18909 From: dougselsam Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: more AWE scoring matrix attempts

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18910 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: MIT's kite history

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18911 From: dave santos Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: Concentric Tri-Tether AWES Solution

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18912 From: dave santos Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: What control laws govern classic single-line kites? (Yanbei Chen

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18913 From: dave santos Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: Latest Altaeros News?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18914 From: dave santos Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: more AWE scoring matrix attempts

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18915 From: Rod Read Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: regen boat wanting a kite

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18916 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: ISEC

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18917 From: dougselsam Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: What control laws govern classic single-line kites? (Yanbei Chen

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18918 From: dougselsam Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: Latest Altaeros News?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18919 From: dougselsam Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: regen boat wanting a kite

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18920 From: dave santos Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: What control laws govern classic single-line kites? (Yanbei Chen

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18921 From: Rod Read Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: more AWE scoring matrix attempts

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18922 From: Rod Read Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: What control laws govern classic single-line kites? (Yanbei Chen

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18923 From: dave santos Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: ISEC

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18924 From: dave santos Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: What control laws govern classic single-line kites? (Yanbei Chen

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18925 From: dave santos Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: more AWE scoring matrix attempts

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18926 From: dougselsam Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: more AWE scoring matrix attempts

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18927 From: dougselsam Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: ISEC

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18928 From: dougselsam Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: Latest Altaeros News?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18929 From: dougselsam Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: What control laws govern classic single-line kites? (Yanbei Chen

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18930 From: dave santos Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: more AWE scoring matrix attempts

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18931 From: dave santos Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: ISEC

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18932 From: dougselsam Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: more AWE scoring matrix attempts

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18933 From: dave santos Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: Latest Altaeros News?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18934 From: dave santos Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: What control laws govern classic single-line kites? (Yanbei Chen

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18935 From: Rod Read Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: ISEC

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18936 From: Rod Read Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: more AWE scoring matrix attempts

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18937 From: Rod Read Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: AWE Moderation fee

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18938 From: dougselsam Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: What control laws govern classic single-line kites? (Yanbei Chen

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18939 From: Rod Read Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: What control laws govern classic single-line kites? (Yanbei Chen

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18940 From: dave santos Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: ISEC

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18941 From: dave santos Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: more AWE scoring matrix attempts

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18942 From: dave santos Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: AWE Moderation fee

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18943 From: dave santos Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: What control laws govern classic single-line kites? (Yanbei Chen

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18944 From: dougselsam Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: more AWE scoring matrix attempts

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18945 From: dougselsam Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: Latest Altaeros News?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18946 From: dougselsam Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: What control laws govern classic single-line kites? (Yanbei Chen

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18947 From: dougselsam Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: AWE Moderation fee

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18948 From: dave santos Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: more AWE scoring matrix attempts

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18949 From: dave santos Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: Latest Altaeros News?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18950 From: dave santos Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: What control laws govern classic single-line kites? (Yanbei Chen

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18951 From: dougselsam Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: ISEC

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18952 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: ISEC

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18953 From: dougselsam Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: AWE Moderation fee

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18954 From: dave santos Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: ISEC [1 Attachment]

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18955 From: Rod Read Date: 9/3/2015
Subject: Re: AWE Moderation fee




Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18906 From: dougselsam Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: Pulsing-Tether PTO AWES Arts (short pulse/high-frequency vibrati
If i use a guitar string to walk a dog, I am not making music.

===============================================


Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18907 From: dougselsam Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: Latest Altaeros News?
"Doug, The issue with "fixation" is your choice to spend so much time complaining on Joe and my posts that we do not view the AWE world as suspiciously as you do,"
888 your suspicions here target the electric airplane effort, as well as you debunking the BAT.

Dave S. noted:  "not about the actual news (Mitsubishi entering AWE!)."
Doug S. notes: 888 Ah, but is it really true?  real news or more fake news?
..
Dave S. noted: "Try letting folks post in peace to enjoy the Forum as a technical sharing resource." Doug S. notes: 
*** a key technical detail is whether the most publicized AWE project in history even happened at all.  Peace.

Dave S. noted: "Post your own topics or find a better activity if you have nothing helpful to contribute to others' topics, daveS"
Doug S. notes: 888 I offered the only factual discussion of the most famous AWE project in the world , often discusssed here, often debunked here even by you.
 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18908 From: dougselsam Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: regen boat wanting a kite
Enjoy your sail.
Come back to port and sell some cheap electricity.
(not likely anywhere near cost competitive but such a nice thought)
*** Gabor lives!  :)

===================
Moderator note about above.
It is not clear to me if Doug S. is quoting someone or not.   The
"***" has been used some by Doug S. to indicate he is starting his comment.  
Doug, please consider stating clearing the author of quotes. And then also, please consider a very clear method to show when your comment is starting; the "***" is a challenge as such symbol might indicating footnoting bridging.  
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18909 From: dougselsam Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: more AWE scoring matrix attempts
A storm dunker refers to foul-weather clothing of oil-soaked muslin, worn by ancient mariners.

========================
Moderator note:
In our corner of kite-energy systems, Mr. Storm Dunker is an esteemed kite engineer, especially parachute styles of kite systems. Here are some references involving him:
 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18910 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: MIT's kite history

MIT

Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)

Kite systems do convert wind energy to other forms of energy. What is the history of MIT's kite energy systems' involvements? Ultimately a timeline and reference set would be an interesting result of this topic thread.

All are invited to file notes on the topic herein.
TIA

=======================

Teasing start with some "wau" AWE:

1. Soaring in the Wind: The Science of Kite Flying | MIT Video

 

2. One might explore some of the MIT Courseware to find kite-system-related matter. Here is one slice of 22 courses drawn from "aerodynamics" within MIT Searching for "aerodynamics" | Search | MIT Video


 

3. Grassroots Mapping  Grassroots Mapping | MIT Video

 

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18911 From: dave santos Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: Concentric Tri-Tether AWES Solution
Imagine an inverted pyramid. The flat top surface is the tri-sail. Wind then tilts the pyramid downwind and the resulting AoA of the tilted sail creates lift.

It should be noted that large cellular arrays of these units spaced by hexagonal holes merely need to shift a bit downwind for all the sails to create lift. With concentric tri-tethers added, the whole matrix can fly and make power in coherent waves.



On Wednesday, September 2, 2015 1:13 AM, "Rod Read rod.read@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
That sounds great. However I'm having trouble imagining how the inner tri tether passively sets AOA.
Can you draw it? Or fly a cheap demo rig?


Rod Read

Windswept and Interesting Limited
15a Aiginis
Isle of Lewis
UK
HS2 0PB

07899057227
01851 870878



Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18912 From: dave santos Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: What control laws govern classic single-line kites? (Yanbei Chen
Doug overlooks that we are discussing the classic kite in its optimal forms, not an inferior wind design with hypothetical bearings. 

He wholly fails to address the science aspect of the question (what control law basis?), but does recall to mind his ST patent, where the ST driveshaft sprouts from an actual Darrieus VAWT (which would only add drag).



On Wednesday, September 2, 2015 8:37 AM, "dougselsam@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
To me this is reminiscent of Savonius machines using maglev bearings.  The poor performance of the Savonius rotor is ignored in lieu of fixation on the "advanced" bearings.  The bearing characteristics are seen as so "overwhelming" that the lack of a suitable basic configuration is ignored.  But the reality is, the basic configuration is lacking, so the bearings won't save it.  Like a nicely-wrapped piece of doggie-doo with a beautiful bow.  Similarly, to merely mention a kite, without a good way to produce energy, and to wrap the word "kite" in the term "quantum mechanics" leaves one stuck on the starting blocks, not winning a race.


Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18913 From: dave santos Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: Latest Altaeros News?
Most news is not fake news. Its hardly useful for Doug to constantly guess what is fake news from a deeply suspicious mentality.

OK then: Doug thinks Mitsubishi is not really an Altaeros partner. We'll see how all his predictions turn out over time.



On Wednesday, September 2, 2015 9:09 AM, "dougselsam@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
"Doug, The issue with "fixation" is your choice to spend so much time complaining on Joe and my posts that we do not view the AWE world as suspiciously as you do,"
888 your suspicions here target the electric airplane effort, as well as you debunking the BAT.

Dave S. noted:  "not about the actual news (Mitsubishi entering AWE!)."
Doug S. notes: 888 Ah, but is it really true?  real news or more fake news?
..
Dave S. noted: "Try letting folks post in peace to enjoy the Forum as a technical sharing resource." Doug S. notes: 
*** a key technical detail is whether the most publicized AWE project in history even happened at all.  Peace.

Dave S. noted: "Post your own topics or find a better activity if you have nothing helpful to contribute to others' topics, daveS"
Doug S. notes: 888 I offered the only factual discussion of the most famous AWE project in the world , often discusssed here, often debunked here even by you.
 


Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18914 From: dave santos Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: more AWE scoring matrix attempts
Rod,

You seemed far more offended by Cherubini et al.'s "scoring matrix" errors than you own, even when their paper was not even a "scoring matrix attempt" (a bit of an insult).

I was defending my Italian friends with the wry logic that they hardly bother to be offended by Scots (based on population, if nothing else).

Same goes for your strong resentment of Mexican AWE opinion in this. We just don't see the Latinate World as Scotland's nemisis :)

daveS



On Wednesday, September 2, 2015 9:22 AM, "dougselsam@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
A storm dunker refers to foul-weather clothing of oil-soaked muslin, worn by ancient mariners.

========================
Moderator note:
In our corner of kite-energy systems, Mr. Storm Dunker is an esteemed kite engineer, especially parachute styles of kite systems. Here are some references involving him:
 


Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18915 From: Rod Read Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: regen boat wanting a kite
Be careful not to insult people with whacky AWES ideas when you use  :)  Doug
Some people will take this   :)   to mean
I think your ideas and world view are skewed 90deg off course.
 
We would do well to invest in a course of politically correct accessible emoticon development for AWES

Rod Read

Windswept and Interesting Limited
15a Aiginis
Isle of Lewis
UK
HS2 0PB

07899057227
01851 870878


Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18916 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: ISEC

The official newsletter of the International Space Elevator Consortium (ISEC)

 

Our mission statement:

"...ISEC promotes the development, construction and operation of a space elevator as a revolutionary and efficient way to space for all humanity..."

ISEC e-Newsletterwww.isec.org
August 2015
In This Issue
The President's Corner
Space Elevator Conference summary
The Research Lab
Why Space Elevators?
ISEC Affiliations
What is ISEC?
ISEC Corporate Sponsors
Visit ISEC on the Web
Follow ISEC!
Quick Links
Dear Friend,

 

Welcome to the August, 2015 edition of the ISEC eNewsletter.

 

The 2015 ISEC Space Elevator Conference has just wrapped up and, by all accounts, was a smashing success.  Engineers, scientists, researchers and enthusiasts from around the world gathered for the three-day conference to give presentations, conduct workshops and brainstorming sessions, compare notes and made contributions which help us further our understanding of the space elevator.

It was particularly gratifying to host the group that attended from Japan, including senior members of the Japan Space Elevator Association (JSEA) and the Obayashi Corporation, a corporation which has the stated goal of building an earth-based space elevator by the year 2050.

The ISEC Board of Directors also held its annual meeting at the conference and a report from them will be in a forthcoming issue of the eNewsletter.

If you want to help us make a space elevator happen,JOIN ISEC and get involved!  A space elevator would truly revolutionize life on earth and open up the solar system and beyond to all of us.

 

And please don't forget to LIKE US on Facebook, FOLLOW US on Twitter and enjoy the photos and videos that we've posted on Flickr and YouTube - all under our Social Identity of ISECdotORG.

 

Thank you! 

 

ISEC


The President's Corner

This month I would like to address an on-going discussion on the basic terminology for our space elevator culture.  The International Academy of Astronautics [organization that conducted SE study resulting in 300 page study report assessing feasibility of SE's[1]] is conducting a second study on space elevators and focusing on the systems engineering aspects.  As such, one of the first steps is to have a common lexicon for all to use in the process.  The suggestions are:
  • Apex Anchor (roughly 100,000 km altitude)
  • Mars Gate  (roughly 57,000 km altitude) - release to Mars
  • Lunar Gate (roughly 47,000 km altitude) - release to Moon
  • GEO Node (roughly 36,000 km altitude) - release to geosynchronous
  • LEO Gate (roughly 24,000 km altitude) - elliptical release to LEO
  • Lunar Gravity Center (roughly 8,900 km altitude) - Lunar gravity similarity
  • Mars Gravity Center (roughly 3,900 km altitude) - Mars gravity similarity
  • Marine Node
  • Tether Climbers (or just Climbers)
  • Tether
  • Headquarters and Primary Operations Center
Most of these terms are familiar to each of you.  Please look at them and send me your comments on the lexicon.  We are setting up a repository of terms to ensure consistency within the community.

There is one term we are puzzling over at this time.  ISEC has been going with'Marine Node'.  Others have termed their concept of this as a:  

Terrestrial Node, Earth Node, Earth Port, Earth Anchor.

At the present time we have multiple words representing the tether terminus on the planet - please jump in and suggest which one we should use.

Keep Climbing my Friends --  Pete Swan

------------------------------ ---------------

1 Swan, P., C.Swan, D. Raitt, S. Penny, J. Knapman, "
Space Elevators: An Assessment of the Technological Feasibility and the Way Forward." Virginia Edition, 2013.  
Space Elevator Conference Summary

The 2015 ISEC Space Elevator Conference was just completed and, by all accounts, was a great success.  ISEC Director and Conference Chair David Horn provides a brief summary of the events:

We had a great turnout for the 2015 Space Elevator Conference, August 21-23.  Around 60 presenters, attendees, and press from around the world participated in 3 days of presentations, workshops, and social events at the Museum of Flight in Seattle, WA.  Our keynote speaker, Ph.D. student Mark Hasse from the University of Cincinnati, presented the current state of research in high strength CNTs.  His talk illustrated the recent advances in creating CNT threads and forecast that we might have a 25 MYuri tether in 20 years.


The mini-workshop on marine node design provide great inputs into the 2015 ISEC study on this topic and the tether dynamics workshop helped to direct the next steps in tether dynamics simulations and studies.  Other presentations included power via the tether, space elevators in science fiction, tether experiments in space, and ideas to fund start-ups for space elevator technology research.  We were very happy to have so many members from JSEA and other organizations from Japan attend and present the latest space elevator construction plans, ISS experiments, and climber competitions in Japan.

(Picture is Mark Haase along with one of his presentation slides)

------------------------------ ---

For the second year running, the ISEC Space Elevator Conference hosted the "Elevator speech competition", a competition where contestants had to give a short, 30-second pitch extolling the benefits of a space elevator.  Generically, these types of speeches are known as "elevator speeches" and it's hard to imagine a more perfect name for a pitch about space elevators.  Contest coordinator Peter Robinson gives a brief summary of the competition:

The 2015 conference saw the 2nd running of the 'Elevator Speech' competition.  Initial sign-up only had four entrants, but a further four entered on the day.  The final result was very close, with only a quarter point separating the first and second place winners : congratulations to Jake Tucker and Nick Regnier for their excellent presentations.

Thanks go to all the contestants for the variety of inspiration and humor in their speeches, all of which stayed within the 30-80 second time limit.  Thanks also must go to the four judges (Mark Haase, Skip Perry, Ruth Richter and Sandee Schaeffer) for doing a difficult task, and to Rudy Resch for taking over the complex score calculations at the last minute.

(ISEC President Dr. Peter Swan (right) presents contest winner Jake Tucker with the first prize gift certificate)

------------------------------ -----

As part of the annual ISEC Space Elevator Conference, there is also a 'Robo Climb" competition where youngsters build battery-powered robotic climbers and then compete against each other for prizes.  These competitions have been held for several years and are always well-attended and a lot of fun.  Conference Chair David Horn reports this year's winners:

(Almost) Anything Goes

1st: Wasabi Z   (910)
2nd: Red Shirts (635) 
3rd: Atomic Robotics (120)

 
LEGO Only

1st: Cody Labs  (810)
2nd: Meadow Robotics Club #3   (440)
3rd: Space Invaders (430)

 
Engineering Award:  Cody Labs


Congratulations to all of the contestants!

------------------------------ ---------

More photos of the Conference can be found on our Flickr page.
The Research Lab

This months column is a summary of many of the science and research related topics that were discussed during the just-finished space elevator conference.

2015 Conference Research Report

A number of science-related topics were covered at the August 2015 conference : the following notes cover those directly relevant to the current ISEC earth space elevator vision.

The keynote speech by Mark Haase confirmed the promise of carbon nanotubes (CNT) as the lead material contender, but introduced alternative materials : boron nitride nanotubes do not quite match the strength of CNTs, but is far more inert and so less susceptible to oxidation and other reactions.

Dr. Bryan Laubscher described his ongoing experimental CNT work, and hinted that he may be able to reveal his progress in the near future.

Dr. Dennis Wright and Peter Robinson discussed tether dynamic simulation and described their tool benchmarking work undertaken in the last year : test cases run by analysts Jim Dempsey and Steven Patamia identified two distinct oscillation frequencies of the published tether configuration and indicated an error in the area taper equation.  This was followed by a simulation workshop, to be reported in more detail in a later newsletter.

The Marine Node (now renamed 'Earth Port') workshop will also be reported later, but identified some interesting new configuration options : for example, multiple (3+) tethers descending from some high-atmosphere junction node and connected to multiple platforms could address security concerns and may allow simpler lateral tether dynamic control using only reel in/out movement at sea level.

Dr. John Knapman discussed climber power transmission, describing a single-cable AC power transmission system that appears worthy of more extensive study.  He also mentioned an acoustic power transmission system proposed by Keith Lofstrom.

Last but not least, Yoji Ishikawa presented on the status of the concept development work in progress at Obayashi Corporation : he described an elevator concept with a higher lift capacity than the ISEC concept and included some results of dynamic simulation of various deployment scenarios.  These studies are ongoing, but are indicating a very substantial thruster fuel requirement during tether deployment from GEO to Earth.  In separate discussions he agreed that Obayashi would consider involvement in the ISEC dynamic model benchmarking process.
ISEC Affiliations

National Space Society Update - "The annual International Space Development Conference (ISDC) is the keynote event of the National Space Society (NSS), bringing together leading managers, engineers, scientists, educators, and business people from civilian, military, commercial, entrepreneurial, and grassroots advocacy space sectors. ISDC has been held in various locations throughout North America since 1982, featuring renowned speakers such as Buzz Aldrin, Eric Anderson, Charles Bolden, Neil deGrasse Tyson, Peter Diamandis, Lori Garver, Richard Garriott, Bill Nye, Elon Musk, Seth Shostak, Simon 'Pete' Worden, and many others. ISDC also features plenary talks, keynote speakers, multi-disciplinary tracks, exhibit hall, design contests, book signing, and more.
What is ISEC?

The International Space Elevator Consortium (ISEC) is the result of a coming-together of many leading figures and organizations who have worked long and hard over many years to promote the concept of a Space Elevator.  With organizational members in the United States, Europe and Japan and individual members from around the world, ISEC's goal is nothing less than to get a Space Elevator built.

Our Mission Statement says it all:

"ISEC promotes the development, construction and operation of a space elevator as a revolutionary and efficient way to space for all humanity"

Each year we adopt a theme which we use to focus our activities for that year.  For 2009-2010, our theme was Space Debris Mitigation - Space Elevator Survivability.  For 2010-2011 our theme was Research and thought targeted towards the goal of a 30 MYuri tether.  For 2011-2012, our theme wasOperating and Maintaining a Space Elevator.  For 2012-2013, our theme wasTether Climbers and for 2013-2014, our theme is Architecture & Roadmaps. For 2014-2015, ISEC has two themes; The Marine Node and a Materials Review.

If you agree that building a Space Elevator should be a priority for all of us and you want to help make this happen, please Join Us!  Benefits include eNewsletters (such as this one), the ISEC Journal CLIMB and other items listed on our Join page.

Come and join us and help make the future happen!

The International Space Elevator Consortium (ISEC) is a registered 501c3 charitable organization
(EIN 80-0302896)

Thank you, Corporate Sponsors !

The lifeblood of any organization such as ours is the support we receive from our members - and we thank them all.  We especially want to thank our Corporate Sponsors who have contributed funds and resources to ISEC at a higher level.

 
 


Visit ISEC on the Web
  
Visit our website at www.isec.org.  There you can join and learn more about what is happening in the Space Elevator community and what is being done to advance the concept of a Space Elevator.  Please consider joining ISEC - we foster research and sponsor Space Elevator-related causes, but to do so takes money.  Your contributions are crucial to our success.  Thank you!

If this newsletter has been forwarded to you, you can also sign up to be on our mailing list so you don't miss a thing!
Follow ISECdotORG on Facebook, Flickr, Twitter and YouTube!


  

  

  

  

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18917 From: dougselsam Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: What control laws govern classic single-line kites? (Yanbei Chen
Dave S. noted: "Doug overlooks that we are discussing the classic kite in its optimal forms,"

Doug S. notes:   *** Ah yes, the old "Doug overlooks" theme.  It would be nice if your task were as easy as throwing the ball back into my court, seeking to blame your own lack of relevance on me, but I believe it is incumbent on you to show:
1) a workable flapping system that makes economical power, or usable power, as a start;
2) why it is an example of a Bose-Einstein condensate operating under a quantum mechanics principle.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18918 From: dougselsam Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: Latest Altaeros News?

JoeF said: "Moderator notes for the above:

I am not clear what "888" and "88" mean."


Doug S. explains:

*** My computer was reacting to keystroke input slowly, accepting the 8/* key input before the "upper-case" key, making a * (star) come out as an 8 (eight).


JoeF continued: "We do not have historic validation if MIT had some earlier energy-kite attempt. I await for proof about MIT's total kite history before concluding when MIT's first kite-energy attempt was; perhaps this matter could become a dedicated topic thread. Yes."


Doug S. explains: *** Sorry to confuse you, Joe.  I said it was "a first-ever attempt out of MIT".  That means it is the world's first-ever helium-filled concentrator for a wind turbine, and it came out of MIT.  Let's be clear:  I did not in any way even imply it was MIT's first energy kite experiment, nor that it even was an energy kite experiment, nor that it was a kite experiment, nor that it was "MIT's"., but that it was, specifically, verbatim, to repeat: patented, helium-filled concentrator, highly unique idea, a first-ever attempt out of MIT, the most visible AWE effort in the world.


Please read it again if you are still confused in any way.


This message was brought to you by:

Monty Python

and

the "I'd like an argument" corporation


===============

Joe F comments hereon about the above fresh post:


I am still confused even though I keep reading it. This fact is not asking for further explanation; I will work on it privately; thanks for the explanation. I am not sure on some places of phrases whether or not you are quoting some author or putting forward your own words.    No biggy here. The Altaeros project principles in the gross are not novel. The BAT is an energy kite system; the combine: anchor, tether set, and wing set form "kite" for the BAT.  The BAT's wing set aloft consists of an inflated wing part and a rigid-wing wing part as well as a generator wing part as well as some strut wing parts.

~ Joe F


Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18919 From: dougselsam Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: regen boat wanting a kite
Rod said: "We would do well to invest in a course of politically correct accessible emoticon development for AWES"

Doug S. comments:  ***How about:  :O.......................

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18920 From: dave santos Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: What control laws govern classic single-line kites? (Yanbei Chen
No Doug, this topic is not about about flip-wings or BEC. Please start new topics if you want to further explore flip-wings and BEC.

This topic is about whether Yanbei Chen's paper on macroscopic QM, in the context of Control Theory as he discusses it, applies to the classic kite.

Be sure to quote carefully when you want clarification about a referenced topic.



On Wednesday, September 2, 2015 11:55 AM, "dougselsam@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
Dave S. noted: "Doug overlooks that we are discussing the classic kite in its optimal forms,"

Doug S. notes:   *** Ah yes, the old "Doug overlooks" theme.  It would be nice if your task were as easy as throwing the ball back into my court, seeking to blame your own lack of relevance on me, but I believe it is incumbent on you to show:
1) a workable flapping system that makes economical power, or usable power, as a start;
2) why it is an example of a Bose-Einstein condensate operating under a quantum mechanics principle.


Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18921 From: Rod Read Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: more AWE scoring matrix attempts
Dave S... What are you blethering about?
for your strong resentment of Mexican AWE opinion in this
I have no idea what you refer to there either.
If there is some presumption that we favour AWE based in a perceived heritage it's probably best forgotten.
That would just be a pish basis for what should be a scientific and engineering process.
Stay on AWE please.


"scoring matrix attempt" (a bit of an insult).
If I stoop so low as to issue insult based on nationality, you'll notice.
That my initial and not hugely considered opinion of the article was a scoring exercise... yeah ... it is. So what?
If the person who wrote it is sobbing into their silky hankey after my weakly opined comment, That's their lookout.
Wait till they hear what harsh AWE reality will say on the topic.

fanny head

Rod Read

Windswept and Interesting Limited
15a Aiginis
Isle of Lewis
UK
HS2 0PB

07899057227
01851 870878


Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18922 From: Rod Read Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: What control laws govern classic single-line kites? (Yanbei Chen
This topic is about whether Yanbei Chen's paper on macroscopic QM, in the context of Control Theory as he discusses it, applies to the classic kite.

Ah good,
so we know what this is about now then at least...
well does it? go on. don't leave us hanging.

Rod Read

Windswept and Interesting Limited
15a Aiginis
Isle of Lewis
UK
HS2 0PB

07899057227
01851 870878


Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18923 From: dave santos Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: ISEC
Bravo to the space-elevator visionaries who are boldly taking tether-engineering theory to new heights!

Recalling Wayne's vision of hypersonic kites at the interface with Space [Chico 2009]. Perhaps we will someday bleed excess kinetic energy from the atmosphere to better hurl space colonists on their way, by means of kites. The geeky fields of tech-kites and space-elevators could merge. We already have a strong solar-sailing overlap, where the KiteShip OL was evaluated in the Space role.



On Wednesday, September 2, 2015 11:28 AM, "joefaust333@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
The official newsletter of the International Space Elevator Consortium (ISEC)
 
Our mission statement:
"...ISEC promotes the development, construction and operation of a space elevator as a revolutionary and efficient way to space for all humanity..."
ISEC e-Newsletterwww.isec.org
August 2015
In This Issue
The President's Corner
Space Elevator Conference summary
The Research Lab
Why Space Elevators?
ISEC Affiliations
What is ISEC?
ISEC Corporate Sponsors
Visit ISEC on the Web
Follow ISEC!
Quick Links
Dear Friend,
 
Welcome to the August, 2015 edition of the ISEC eNewsletter.
 
The 2015 ISEC Space Elevator Conference has just wrapped up and, by all accounts, was a smashing success.  Engineers, scientists, researchers and enthusiasts from around the world gathered for the three-day conference to give presentations, conduct workshops and brainstorming sessions, compare notes and made contributions which help us further our understanding of the space elevator.

It was particularly gratifying to host the group that attended from Japan, including senior members of the Japan Space Elevator Association (JSEA) and the Obayashi Corporation, a corporation which has the stated goal of building an earth-based space elevator by the year 2050.

The ISEC Board of Directors also held its annual meeting at the conference and a report from them will be in a forthcoming issue of the eNewsletter.

If you want to help us make a space elevator happen,JOIN ISEC and get involved!  A space elevator would truly revolutionize life on earth and open up the solar system and beyond to all of us.
 
And please don't forget to LIKE US on Facebook, FOLLOW US on Twitter and enjoy the photos and videos that we've posted on Flickr and YouTube - all under our Social Identity of ISECdotORG.
 
Thank you! 
 
ISEC

The President's Corner

This month I would like to address an on-going discussion on the basic terminology for our space elevator culture.  The International Academy of Astronautics [organization that conducted SE study resulting in 300 page study report assessing feasibility of SE's[1]] is conducting a second study on space elevators and focusing on the systems engineering aspects.  As such, one of the first steps is to have a common lexicon for all to use in the process.  The suggestions are:
  • Apex Anchor (roughly 100,000 km altitude)
  • Mars Gate  (roughly 57,000 km altitude) - release to Mars
  • Lunar Gate (roughly 47,000 km altitude) - release to Moon
  • GEO Node (roughly 36,000 km altitude) - release to geosynchronous
  • LEO Gate (roughly 24,000 km altitude) - elliptical release to LEO
  • Lunar Gravity Center (roughly 8,900 km altitude) - Lunar gravity similarity
  • Mars Gravity Center (roughly 3,900 km altitude) - Mars gravity similarity
  • Marine Node
  • Tether Climbers (or just Climbers)
  • Tether
  • Headquarters and Primary Operations Center
Most of these terms are familiar to each of you.  Please look at them and send me your comments on the lexicon.  We are setting up a repository of terms to ensure consistency within the community.

There is one term we are puzzling over at this time.  ISEC has been going with'Marine Node'.  Others have termed their concept of this as a:  

Terrestrial Node, Earth Node, Earth Port, Earth Anchor.

At the present time we have multiple words representing the tether terminus on the planet - please jump in and suggest which one we should use.

Keep Climbing my Friends --  Pete Swan

------------------------------ ---------------

1 Swan, P., C.Swan, D. Raitt, S. Penny, J. Knapman, "
Space Elevators: An Assessment of the Technological Feasibility and the Way Forward." Virginia Edition, 2013.  
Space Elevator Conference Summary

The 2015 ISEC Space Elevator Conference was just completed and, by all accounts, was a great success.  ISEC Director and Conference Chair David Horn provides a brief summary of the events:

We had a great turnout for the 2015 Space Elevator Conference, August 21-23.  Around 60 presenters, attendees, and press from around the world participated in 3 days of presentations, workshops, and social events at the Museum of Flight in Seattle, WA.  Our keynote speaker, Ph.D. student Mark Hasse from the University of Cincinnati, presented the current state of research in high strength CNTs.  His talk illustrated the recent advances in creating CNT threads and forecast that we might have a 25 MYuri tether in 20 years.


The mini-workshop on marine node design provide great inputs into the 2015 ISEC study on this topic and the tether dynamics workshop helped to direct the next steps in tether dynamics simulations and studies.  Other presentations included power via the tether, space elevators in science fiction, tether experiments in space, and ideas to fund start-ups for space elevator technology research.  We were very happy to have so many members from JSEA and other organizations from Japan attend and present the latest space elevator construction plans, ISS experiments, and climber competitions in Japan.

(Picture is Mark Haase along with one of his presentation slides)

------------------------------ ---

For the second year running, the ISEC Space Elevator Conference hosted the "Elevator speech competition", a competition where contestants had to give a short, 30-second pitch extolling the benefits of a space elevator.  Generically, these types of speeches are known as "elevator speeches" and it's hard to imagine a more perfect name for a pitch about space elevators.  Contest coordinator Peter Robinson gives a brief summary of the competition:

The 2015 conference saw the 2nd running of the 'Elevator Speech' competition.  Initial sign-up only had four entrants, but a further four entered on the day.  The final result was very close, with only a quarter point separating the first and second place winners : congratulations to Jake Tucker and Nick Regnier for their excellent presentations.

Thanks go to all the contestants for the variety of inspiration and humor in their speeches, all of which stayed within the 30-80 second time limit.  Thanks also must go to the four judges (Mark Haase, Skip Perry, Ruth Richter and Sandee Schaeffer) for doing a difficult task, and to Rudy Resch for taking over the complex score calculations at the last minute.

(ISEC President Dr. Peter Swan (right) presents contest winner Jake Tucker with the first prize gift certificate)

------------------------------ -----

As part of the annual ISEC Space Elevator Conference, there is also a 'Robo Climb" competition where youngsters build battery-powered robotic climbers and then compete against each other for prizes.  These competitions have been held for several years and are always well-attended and a lot of fun.  Conference Chair David Horn reports this year's winners:

(Almost) Anything Goes

1st: Wasabi Z   (910)
2nd: Red Shirts (635) 
3rd: Atomic Robotics (120)

 
LEGO Only

1st: Cody Labs  (810)
2nd: Meadow Robotics Club #3   (440)
3rd: Space Invaders (430)

 
Engineering Award:  Cody Labs


Congratulations to all of the contestants!

------------------------------ ---------

More photos of the Conference can be found on our Flickr page.
The Research Lab

This months column is a summary of many of the science and research related topics that were discussed during the just-finished space elevator conference.

2015 Conference Research Report

A number of science-related topics were covered at the August 2015 conference : the following notes cover those directly relevant to the current ISEC earth space elevator vision.

The keynote speech by Mark Haase confirmed the promise of carbon nanotubes (CNT) as the lead material contender, but introduced alternative materials : boron nitride nanotubes do not quite match the strength of CNTs, but is far more inert and so less susceptible to oxidation and other reactions.

Dr. Bryan Laubscher described his ongoing experimental CNT work, and hinted that he may be able to reveal his progress in the near future.

Dr. Dennis Wright and Peter Robinson discussed tether dynamic simulation and described their tool benchmarking work undertaken in the last year : test cases run by analysts Jim Dempsey and Steven Patamia identified two distinct oscillation frequencies of the published tether configuration and indicated an error in the area taper equation.  This was followed by a simulation workshop, to be reported in more detail in a later newsletter.

The Marine Node (now renamed 'Earth Port') workshop will also be reported later, but identified some interesting new configuration options : for example, multiple (3+) tethers descending from some high-atmosphere junction node and connected to multiple platforms could address security concerns and may allow simpler lateral tether dynamic control using only reel in/out movement at sea level.

Dr. John Knapman discussed climber power transmission, describing a single-cable AC power transmission system that appears worthy of more extensive study.  He also mentioned an acoustic power transmission system proposed by Keith Lofstrom.

Last but not least, Yoji Ishikawa presented on the status of the concept development work in progress at Obayashi Corporation : he described an elevator concept with a higher lift capacity than the ISEC concept and included some results of dynamic simulation of various deployment scenarios.  These studies are ongoing, but are indicating a very substantial thruster fuel requirement during tether deployment from GEO to Earth.  In separate discussions he agreed that Obayashi would consider involvement in the ISEC dynamic model benchmarking process.
ISEC Affiliations

National Space Society Update - "The annual International Space Development Conference (ISDC) is the keynote event of the National Space Society (NSS), bringing together leading managers, engineers, scientists, educators, and business people from civilian, military, commercial, entrepreneurial, and grassroots advocacy space sectors. ISDC has been held in various locations throughout North America since 1982, featuring renowned speakers such as Buzz Aldrin, Eric Anderson, Charles Bolden, Neil deGrasse Tyson, Peter Diamandis, Lori Garver, Richard Garriott, Bill Nye, Elon Musk, Seth Shostak, Simon 'Pete' Worden, and many others. ISDC also features plenary talks, keynote speakers, multi-disciplinary tracks, exhibit hall, design contests, book signing, and more.
What is ISEC?

The International Space Elevator Consortium (ISEC) is the result of a coming-together of many leading figures and organizations who have worked long and hard over many years to promote the concept of a Space Elevator.  With organizational members in the United States, Europe and Japan and individual members from around the world, ISEC's goal is nothing less than to get a Space Elevator built.

Our Mission Statement says it all:

"ISEC promotes the development, construction and operation of a space elevator as a revolutionary and efficient way to space for all humanity"

Each year we adopt a theme which we use to focus our activities for that year.  For 2009-2010, our theme was Space Debris Mitigation - Space Elevator Survivability.  For 2010-2011 our theme was Research and thought targeted towards the goal of a 30 MYuri tether.  For 2011-2012, our theme wasOperating and Maintaining a Space Elevator.  For 2012-2013, our theme wasTether Climbers and for 2013-2014, our theme is Architecture & Roadmaps. For 2014-2015, ISEC has two themes; The Marine Node and a Materials Review.

If you agree that building a Space Elevator should be a priority for all of us and you want to help make this happen, please Join Us!  Benefits include eNewsletters (such as this one), the ISEC Journal CLIMB and other items listed on our Join page.

Come and join us and help make the future happen!

The International Space Elevator Consortium (ISEC) is a registered 501c3 charitable organization
(EIN 80-0302896)

Thank you, Corporate Sponsors !

The lifeblood of any organization such as ours is the support we receive from our members - and we thank them all.  We especially want to thank our Corporate Sponsors who have contributed funds and resources to ISEC at a higher level.

 
 


Visit ISEC on the Web
  
Visit our website at www.isec.org.  There you can join and learn more about what is happening in the Space Elevator community and what is being done to advance the concept of a Space Elevator.  Please consider joining ISEC - we foster research and sponsor Space Elevator-related causes, but to do so takes money.  Your contributions are crucial to our success.  Thank you!

If this newsletter has been forwarded to you, you can also sign up to be on our mailing list so you don't miss a thing!
Follow ISECdotORG on Facebook, Flickr, Twitter and YouTube!


  
  
  
  


Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18924 From: dave santos Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: What control laws govern classic single-line kites? (Yanbei Chen
Yes Rod, sorry if it was not clear enough:

In my professional opinion, Chen's Quantum Control Theory discussion precisely applies to the self-flying autonomy of the archetypal SLK. Accordingly, the self-flying autonomy of AWES by embedded digital controls (eg. Makani, Ampyx, etc.) is classical-physics based control computation of the kite problem.



On Wednesday, September 2, 2015 12:22 PM, "Rod Read rod.read@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
This topic is about whether Yanbei Chen's paper on macroscopic QM, in the context of Control Theory as he discusses it, applies to the classic kite.

Ah good,
so we know what this is about now then at least...
well does it? go on. don't leave us hanging.

Rod Read

Windswept and Interesting Limited
15a Aiginis
Isle of Lewis
UK
HS2 0PB

07899057227
01851 870878



Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18925 From: dave santos Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: more AWE scoring matrix attempts
Rod,

The insult here was to accuracy. Cherubini et al. was not even a scoring matrix attempt.

If I ever seriously undertake to insult Scots, allow for the fact that I am half-Scot heritage (Gorena-Guinn surname). Also allow that Mexicans excel at self-depreciating humor*, so likely you just experienced multi-culture culture-shock with undue sensitivity,

daveS

----------------------
* Memo: Did you hear that a Mexican flew on the Space Shuttle?

Flash: Really! How did it go?

Memo: Great, but for the swollen-hands.

Flash: "Swollen-hands"? What do you mean, "swollen hands"?

Memo: Well, the whole two-weeks it was, " [slap], don't touch that; [slap], don't touch that!"





On Wednesday, September 2, 2015 12:14 PM, "Rod Read rod.read@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
Dave S... What are you blethering about?
for your strong resentment of Mexican AWE opinion in this
I have no idea what you refer to there either.
If there is some presumption that we favour AWE based in a perceived heritage it's probably best forgotten.
That would just be a pish basis for what should be a scientific and engineering process.
Stay on AWE please.


"scoring matrix attempt" (a bit of an insult).
If I stoop so low as to issue insult based on nationality, you'll notice.
That my initial and not hugely considered opinion of the article was a scoring exercise... yeah ... it is. So what?
If the person who wrote it is sobbing into their silky hankey after my weakly opined comment, That's their lookout.
Wait till they hear what harsh AWE reality will say on the topic.

fanny head

Rod Read

Windswept and Interesting Limited
15a Aiginis
Isle of Lewis
UK
HS2 0PB

07899057227
01851 870878



Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18926 From: dougselsam Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: more AWE scoring matrix attempts
Don't you guys think worrying about a "scoring matrix" is much ado about nothing?  Either you have something or you don't.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18927 From: dougselsam Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: ISEC
I used to (many years ago) idolize Michael Laine and the Space Elevator group, because of all their sexy press coverage and publicity (They really know what they're doing!), until it began to slowly dawn on me that this all-talk dynamic was exactly the thing to avoid.  (I realized what Bill Gates says: Most people would like their work to yield results while they are still alive to see it.)  The more I followed them, the more I was left wondering "When are they going to actually DO something?"  At some point I began to feel sorry for them.  I hope someday we do have a space elevator, and the moon might be the best place to start.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18928 From: dougselsam Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: Latest Altaeros News?
Dave S. said: "Most news is not fake news. Its hardly useful for Doug to constantly guess what is fake news from a deeply suspicious mentality."

Doug S. notes: *** All news regarding Altaeros for the last 2 years has been fake news.
    Acknowledging this does not rise to the level of "
a deeply suspicious mentality", it is merely observant, and I would state here and now, that you know your statement was:
1) a personal attack (Where are you Joe?)
2) a knowingly-made false statement
===================================
Dave S. continues: "OK then: Doug thinks Mitsubishi is not really an Altaeros partner."

Doug S. notes:   *** Another knowingly-made false statement.  I did NOT say Mitsubishi is not really an Altaeros partner.  I asked "How do YOU KNOW that is real news?"  You have not answered that question, because you have not checked to verify the story.
====

Dave S. goes on: "We'll see how all his predictions turn out over time."

Doug S. notes:   *** Another knowingly-made false statement and mischaracterization:  I made no prediction.  daveS very well knows that.  He attempts to put words in my mouth, to create one of his dreaded "straw-man arguments".  I simply asked, after 2 years of false press-releases and "news" that was not true, "How do you know THIS is real news"?  (boy cried wolf?) Seems like I hit a nerve in daveS' funny-bone.
===========================
Moderator note:
1. Declaration of a poster's mentality does seem to be attack on the person. Alternative phrasing, perhaps?
2. The poster was not on moderation, so the message was posted immediately.
3. Two posters were today asked to consider using the "Delete" function for self-moderation. One needs to be online signed in using the Yahoo! identity associated with the forum; then one may delete one's own post. Be sure to save the content of a post to be deleted; consider editing out any hint of personal attacking; repost the AWE content in the proper topic.   Thanks for self-moderating, as budget here for moderating is slim to none. TIA

 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18929 From: dougselsam Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: What control laws govern classic single-line kites? (Yanbei Chen
Dave S. posted: "Yes Rod, sorry if it was not clear enough:  In my professional opinion, Chen's Quantum Control Theory discussion precisely applies to the self-flying autonomy of the archetypal SLK."

Doug S. notes: *** Questions:
1) What "profession" are you referring to regarding your opinion?
2) Can you EXPLAIN how "Chen's Quantum Control Theory discussion precisely applies to the self-flying autonomy of the archetypal SLK."?

Dave S. continues: "Accordingly, the self-flying autonomy of AWES by embedded digital controls (eg. Makani, Ampyx, etc.) is classical-physics based control computation of the kite problem."
Doug S. notes: *** How does the fact that these companies' digital controls operate under classical physics flow from your assertion that Chen's Quantum Control Theory discussion precisely applies to a single-line kite?
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18930 From: dave santos Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: more AWE scoring matrix attempts
Doug,

Scoring matrices are a standard engineering-science decision analysis method, rather than "nothing", as you assert. The only one who seems to "worry" about it is you.

AWE folks honor Dave Lang for having undertaken the first AWES scoring matrix [Drachen 2004], and encourage MikeB and Rod to do better. AWES scoring matrices will only continue to evolve, as engineering best-practice,

daveS



On Wednesday, September 2, 2015 1:15 PM, "dougselsam@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
Don't you guys think worrying about a "scoring matrix" is much ado about nothing?  Either you have something or you don't.


Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18931 From: dave santos Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: ISEC
Unlike Doug, who mistakenly came to "idolize" figures based "sexy press coverage and publicity ", the admiration here is for apparent conceptual progress in extending the Space Elevator concept to interplanetary apps. Somebody is doing real homework, not just peddling hype. Similarly, no AWES expert was ever so swayed by ST press coverage and publicity as to lapse into idolatry. We are doing the homework instead.



On Wednesday, September 2, 2015 1:16 PM, "dougselsam@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
I used to (many years ago) idolize Michael Laine and the Space Elevator group, because of all their sexy press coverage and publicity (They really know what they're doing!), until it began to slowly dawn on me that this all-talk dynamic was exactly the thing to avoid.  (I realized what Bill Gates says: Most people would like their work to yield results while they are still alive to see it.)  The more I followed them, the more I was left wondering "When are they going to actually DO something?"  At some point I began to feel sorry for them.  I hope someday we do have a space elevator, and the moon might be the best place to start.


Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18932 From: dougselsam Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: more AWE scoring matrix attempts
Dave S. posted: "Memo: Did you hear that a Mexican flew on the Space Shuttle?"

Doug S. notes: *** I have a large lathe, bought from a machinist friend, born in Mexico.  It features "space shuttle" stickers, distributed to shops fabricating parts for the space program.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18933 From: dave santos Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: Latest Altaeros News?
Doug,

You are implicitly predicting that the Alaska delay was not normal engineering or bureaucratic delay. In saying there has been no Altaeros news for two years, you are inplicitly predicting that the drumbeat of biz news is all false.

"All roads lead to the SuperTurbine" is not your only prediction in AWE. Yes, time will tell if your predictions hold,

Joe,

"Mentality" can be a proper consideration. For example, if I say, "Fort's test-engineer's mentality is to "test-test-test", its factual and relevant to his AWE work.

If I unfairly, incorrectly, or misleadingly characterized Doug's mentality, then please explain my error, so I can properly apologize.

daveS





On Wednesday, September 2, 2015 1:29 PM, "dougselsam@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
Dave S. said: "Most news is not fake news. Its hardly useful for Doug to constantly guess what is fake news from a deeply suspicious mentality."

Doug S. notes: *** All news regarding Altaeros for the last 2 years has been fake news.
    Acknowledging this does not rise to the level of "
a deeply suspicious mentality", it is merely observant, and I would state here and now, that you know your statement was:
1) a personal attack (Where are you Joe?)
2) a knowingly-made false statement
===================================
Dave S. continues: "OK then: Doug thinks Mitsubishi is not really an Altaeros partner."

Doug S. notes:   *** Another knowingly-made false statement.  I did NOT say Mitsubishi is not really an Altaeros partner.  I asked "How do YOU KNOW that is real news?"  You have not answered that question, because you have not checked to verify the story.
====

Dave S. goes on: "We'll see how all his predictions turn out over time."

Doug S. notes:   *** Another knowingly-made false statement and mischaracterization:  I made no prediction.  daveS very well knows that.  He attempts to put words in my mouth, to create one of his dreaded "straw-man arguments".  I simply asked, after 2 years of false press-releases and "news" that was not true, "How do you know THIS is real news"?  (boy cried wolf?) Seems like I hit a nerve in daveS' funny-bone.
===========================
Moderator note:
1. Declaration of a poster's mentality does seem to be attack on the person. Alternative phrasing, perhaps?
2. The poster was not on moderation, so the message was posted immediately.
3. Two posters were today asked to consider using the "Delete" function for self-moderation. One needs to be online signed in using the Yahoo! identity associated with the forum; then one may delete one's own post. Be sure to save the content of a post to be deleted; consider editing out any hint of personal attacking; repost the AWE content in the proper topic.   Thanks for self-moderating, as budget here for moderating is slim to none. TIA

 


Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18934 From: dave santos Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: What control laws govern classic single-line kites? (Yanbei Chen
Doug,

I am of course speaking as a paid professional in kite tech, with a life-long background in aviation and decades in AE circles.

In this case, Chen's own words are proposed to precisely apply to SLK autonomy. I am in agreement with Chen's science. I am claiming a one-to-one correspondence of the quantum control theory Chen discusses to the archetypal kite.

Go ahead and make a case that Chen does not apply to aircraft control theory,

daveS



On Wednesday, September 2, 2015 1:31 PM, "dougselsam@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
Dave S. posted: "Yes Rod, sorry if it was not clear enough:  In my professional opinion, Chen's Quantum Control Theory discussion precisely applies to the self-flying autonomy of the archetypal SLK."

Doug S. notes: *** Questions:
1) What "profession" are you referring to regarding your opinion?
2) Can you EXPLAIN how "Chen's Quantum Control Theory discussion precisely applies to the self-flying autonomy of the archetypal SLK."?

Dave S. continues: "Accordingly, the self-flying autonomy of AWES by embedded digital controls (eg. Makani, Ampyx, etc.) is classical-physics based control computation of the kite problem."
Doug S. notes: *** How does the fact that these companies' digital controls operate under classical physics flow from your assertion that Chen's Quantum Control Theory discussion precisely applies to a single-line kite?


Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18935 From: Rod Read Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: ISEC

Somebody is doing real homework, not just peddling hype. Similarly, no AWES expert was ever so swayed by ST press coverage and publicity as to lapse into idolatry. We are doing the homework instead.
Dave S,  if we're the supposed experts,  then we should both admit to our fondness for the ST and rotary power AWES dynamic scene.
Especially as you've just been singing the praises of orbital dynamic power slinging tether designs.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18936 From: Rod Read Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: more AWE scoring matrix attempts

So if a scoring matrix is best practice... I called it a scoring matrix. And you say I insulted them by calling it that...?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18937 From: Rod Read Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: AWE Moderation fee

You should put us all who've been posting bilious lies or otherwise (me included) on moderation Joe. And demand a moderation recuperation fee which covers the hire of a professional AWE forum online worker.
Hands 👐 up ⬆  all those in favour

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18938 From: dougselsam Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: What control laws govern classic single-line kites? (Yanbei Chen
daveS said: "No Doug, this topic is not about about flip-wings or BEC. Please start new topics if you want to further explore flip-wings and BEC."
Doug S. notes: *** Well surely you can sympathize with my "mistake" since you've told us your Bose-Einstein multi-flapper was "the final answer" to AWE.  What else would I assume you were talking about?  Now its' just idle musings about "a kite" - M'kay, fine.

daveS said: "This topic is about whether Yanbei Chen's paper on macroscopic QM, in the context of Control Theory as he discusses it, applies to the classic kite."
Doug S. notes:*** What do you mean?

daveS said:"Be sure to quote carefully when you want clarification about a referenced topic."
Doug S. notes:***  Oh, OK, fine then...
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18939 From: Rod Read Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: What control laws govern classic single-line kites? (Yanbei Chen

Good
So now just model your desired bungy factors into each line to determine a flexion response of a whole family of kites to match energy requirements.
Easy with enough genetic pre manufacturing design tech..
E. G
When the main lift line extends in the axis surrounded by a set of kite rings
What effect do you want to pass to your rotary wings? Inflate to a certain point then fold. Just like leaves.
Using mesh analysis see that
On tensile fabric of new qualities  these leaves can be very large and  rigidised by motion.
Feed the results back to reiterate a new printed kite response style.

Yes its tiny detail design...
But is it necessarily quantum mechanics yet.. Yes but only in so much as everything else we have ever known of... Actually that's too big a claim how would I know

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18940 From: dave santos Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: ISEC
Quite right Rod, the Daisy and ST are valued as unique contenders in the AWE test mix. Your prototypes are worthy museum pieces. I made the same case as to why the Honeywell freak-turbine was eagerly collected at the wind power museum.

Of course whatever wins by testing, on a technically level playing field, is another matter, and our feelings should not get in the way.



On Wednesday, September 2, 2015 3:29 PM, "Rod Read rod.read@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
Somebody is doing real homework, not just peddling hype. Similarly, no AWES expert was ever so swayed by ST press coverage and publicity as to lapse into idolatry. We are doing the homework instead.
Dave S,  if we're the supposed experts,  then we should both admit to our fondness for the ST and rotary power AWES dynamic scene.
Especially as you've just been singing the praises of orbital dynamic power slinging tether designs.


Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18941 From: dave santos Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: more AWE scoring matrix attempts
No, you only "insulted" truth in the abstract. What they attempted was a "review". No scoring matrix was attempted.



On Wednesday, September 2, 2015 3:34 PM, "Rod Read rod.read@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
So if a scoring matrix is best practice... I called it a scoring matrix. And you say I insulted them by calling it that...?


Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18942 From: dave santos Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: AWE Moderation fee
Lets all just keep to RAD, and not remake Joe into a paid moderator. His time is more precious than moderating poor Netiquette. Joe's proper role is a key technical visionary in AWE. Folks should add supportive focus on that activity. This topic seems off.



On Wednesday, September 2, 2015 3:54 PM, "Rod Read rod.read@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
You should put us all who've been posting bilious lies or otherwise (me included) on moderation Joe. And demand a moderation recuperation fee which covers the hire of a professional AWE forum online worker.
Hands 👐 up ⬆  all those in favour


Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18943 From: dave santos Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: What control laws govern classic single-line kites? (Yanbei Chen
Correcting Doug, my "final answer" to AWE"* has consistently been test-engineering due-diligence. Please quote me accurately.

-------------------
* Doug is fabricating or fudging quotes again. I take "final answer" to mean "best-practice" here.



On Wednesday, September 2, 2015 3:55 PM, "Rod Read rod.read@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
Good
So now just model your desired bungy factors into each line to determine a flexion response of a whole family of kites to match energy requirements.
Easy with enough genetic pre manufacturing design tech..
E. G
When the main lift line extends in the axis surrounded by a set of kite rings
What effect do you want to pass to your rotary wings? Inflate to a certain point then fold. Just like leaves.
Using mesh analysis see that
On tensile fabric of new qualities  these leaves can be very large and  rigidised by motion.
Feed the results back to reiterate a new printed kite response style.
Yes its tiny detail design...
But is it necessarily quantum mechanics yet.. Yes but only in so much as everything else we have ever known of... Actually that's too big a claim how would I know


Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18944 From: dougselsam Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: more AWE scoring matrix attempts
DaveS said: "Doug, Scoring matrices are a standard engineering-science decision analysis method,"...
Doug S. notes: ***OK, so what decisions have resulted from which matrices?

daveS said:"AWE folks honor Dave Lang for having undertaken the first AWES scoring matrix [Drachen 2004],"
Doug S. notes: *** Really, AWE folks "honor" Dave Lang huh?  So who exactly ARE these "AWE folks"?  Do they have any AWE systems running?  Why are they called "AWE folks"?   Don't you really mean you and JoeF?

Dave S. : "and encourage MikeB and Rod to do better."
Doug notes: *** Yes, maybe if they could do better "scoring matrices" we'd have a working AWE system right now, huh?

Dave S.: "AWES scoring matrices will only continue to evolve, as engineering best-practice, daveS"
Doug S: notes: *** I'd say engineering best practice involves having enough understanding and creativity to have something working by now.  Like gift-wrapping a piece of doggie-doo, why waste the time to create multiple "scoring matrices" when all the PhD's in the world have nothing running today?
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18945 From: dougselsam Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: Latest Altaeros News?
Dave S. stated: "Doug, You are implicitly predicting that the Alaska delay was not normal engineering or bureaucratic delay."
Doug S. comments: *** You are putting words in my mouth.
1) Once again you attempt to create yet another of your (supposedly) dreaded "straw-man arguments". 

2) You have stated in no uncertain terms, starting in 2014, that the relentlessly-publicized Altaeros Alaska "project" was delayed, but without including where you came across that information.  I waited patiently for over a year for:
   a) the project you said was "delayed" to resume
   b) you to explain or provide evidence for your stated "delay".
You now say you simply made the whole thing up (big surprise...)

3) I did not "predict" the past.  I simply said there was no BAT powering a small town in Alaska.  No evidence has emerged that I was wrong.

Dave S. carries on: "
In saying there has been no Altaeros news for two years, you are inplicitly predicting that the drumbeat of biz news is all false."
Doug S. notes: *** Huh?  You spelled "implicitly" wrong.  I did not predict anything.  Ummm, I said all the Altaeros "news" for the past 2 years has turned out to be fake news.  That means "journalists" abdicating their responsibility to research facts, erroneously repeating press-releases and company PR as fact.  No "journalist" ever followed up on the hype (zero research).  If any of them were the least bit vigilant, they might have started asking where the followup story was.  Inquiring minds read a story that a BAT WILL power a remote village in Alaska, and eagerly wait for the follow-on story of how well it is working.  The elephant in the room (for some people at least) is when no follow-on story emerges.  That's when astute minds realize the project never happened as stated.  I realize none of this applies to you.

DaveS continues: "All roads lead to the SuperTurbine" is not your only prediction in AWE. Yes, time will tell if your predictions hold,"
Doug S. comments:  Yes and here are a few of them:
1) daveS' Bose-Einstein flappers are NOT the final answer for AWE
2) daveS will probably never even build one
3) no AWE-powered concert will happen unless and until a system is created capable of powering a concert.  No AWE system = can be a proper consideration. For example, if I say, "Fort's test-engineer's mentality is to "test-test-test", its factual and relevant to his AWE work.
Doug S. comments:  (*** really?  What is he testing today?)

Dave S. wrote: "If I unfairly, incorrectly, or misleadingly characterized Doug's mentality,"
Doug S. notes: (***you misleadingly characterized my mentality as capable of being accurately judged by yours)

Dave S.'s sentence completion to moderator:  then please explain my error, so I can properly apologize. daveS"
Doug S. notes:*** go ahead daveS, I'll allow you to apologize on general principles.  No need to go into detail.

Moderator notes about insertion:
"from a deeply suspicious mentality"         The challenge I have with the phrase is that such seems to imply knowing the entirety of the mentality as oppose to estimating an immediate limited relation with a limited concern.  It would seem to require an all-seeing and exacting vision of a mentality to declare existential presence of a certain mentality. The targeted poster may have other pervading mentality that acts immediately to what could seem suspicious to one, but not to another. I just do not want to walk away from the post with a sense that someone supposed locked into a mentality proscribed by another.   Qualifying would seem appropriate if one got into such weighing; "he seems suspicious of news announcers..."         

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18946 From: dougselsam Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: What control laws govern classic single-line kites? (Yanbei Chen
daveS said: "Doug, I am of course speaking as a paid professional in kite tech,"
Doug notes: *** really?  Are you paid hourly, or are you on a salary?

daveS said "with a life-long background in aviation and decades in AE circles."
Doug notes: ***and yet you say an airplane need not respond to crosswinds? 
What do YOU mean when you use the abbreviation AE?  What would you say is your biggest contribution to "AE", after all those years?

daveS said"In this case, Chen's own words are proposed to precisely apply to SLK autonomy. I am in agreement with Chen's science. I am claiming a one-to-one correspondence of the quantum control theory Chen discusses to the archetypal kite."
Doug notes: *** geez but daveS, the rest of us, not blessed with your advanced mindset, are having trouble understanding what you mean.  Can you explain exactly HOW "Chen's science" applies to a simple kite?  How does "control theory" apply to holding a string?

daveS said "Go ahead and make a case that Chen does not apply to aircraft control theory, daveS"
Doug notes: *** All Roddy and I have requested is for you to explain what you mean.  Why ask others to explain YOUR theory?
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18947 From: dougselsam Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: AWE Moderation fee
I think the more time we waste discussing moderation, matrices, quantum physics, and thinly-disguised personal attacks cleverly crafted to slip through moderation, the less chance any of us will make any progress.  Don't forget, the electric plane people have hired Ford Falcon away from the Ministry of Hot Air.  Let's not let them get too far ahead of us.  Say, by the way, anyone wondering what they're up to now?  (Oh wait - maybe we're "not supposed to ask", like with Altaeros...)  Where's that 10 kW product?  Another "delay"?  Do you think they've given up, and now have a whole new approach?  Maybe the new boss told them to stop wasting his time and come up with something that works better!
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18948 From: dave santos Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: more AWE scoring matrix attempts
Scoring matrices in AE drive investment in competing designs, from airliners to fighters. NASA uses them to select mission designs. Dave Lang's status does not depend on me or Joe, but on lifetime achievement in AE, as the leading tether dynamics expert of his time. He is also famous in kite circles as Drachen Foundation's technical expert (and board member). That he did the first AWE scoring matrix is typical of his leadership. He is a key mentor to many of us in AWE.

In fact, many PhDs in AWE do have working baseline prototypes, consistent with a normal AE development critical path. All PhD-led teams reach wind higher than wind towers reach. Only USWindLabs is stuck at low altitude, as predicted by square-cube scaling law for a massive rigid drive shaft into the sky.

Doug is very unaware of how the AWE PhDs are progressing, and how important scoring matrices will be in the ultimate fly-off process. Lets hope the ST shows up for the dramatic R&D phases to come, to see how it measures up against the work of the AE community.



On Wednesday, September 2, 2015 5:31 PM, "dougselsam@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
DaveS said: "Doug, Scoring matrices are a standard engineering-science decision analysis method,"...
Doug S. notes: ***OK, so what decisions have resulted from which matrices?

daveS said:"AWE folks honor Dave Lang for having undertaken the first AWES scoring matrix [Drachen 2004],"
Doug S. notes: *** Really, AWE folks "honor" Dave Lang huh?  So who exactly ARE these "AWE folks"?  Do they have any AWE systems running?  Why are they called "AWE folks"?   Don't you really mean you and JoeF?

Dave S. : "and encourage MikeB and Rod to do better."
Doug notes: *** Yes, maybe if they could do better "scoring matrices" we'd have a working AWE system right now, huh?

Dave S.: "AWES scoring matrices will only continue to evolve, as engineering best-practice, daveS"
Doug S: notes: *** I'd say engineering best practice involves having enough understanding and creativity to have something working by now.  Like gift-wrapping a piece of doggie-doo, why waste the time to create multiple "scoring matrices" when all the PhD's in the world have nothing running today?


Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18949 From: dave santos Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: Latest Altaeros News?
Fort is supposedly doing M600 testing work now. Altaeros was known to be delayed because its public target date slipped. Initial AWEfest efforts fizzled, sure enough, but kPower has not given up trying, and Wubbo's vision for a popular AWE event lives on. The ST is actually more overdue for progress than anything else going.

If Doug has any current hope to balance his ever-mounting list of extreme negative views, it would be great to know.



On Wednesday, September 2, 2015 6:02 PM, "dougselsam@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
Dave S. stated: "Doug, You are implicitly predicting that the Alaska delay was not normal engineering or bureaucratic delay."
Doug S. comments: *** You are putting words in my mouth.
1) Once again you attempt to create yet another of your (supposedly) dreaded "straw-man arguments". 

2) You have stated in no uncertain terms, starting in 2014, that the relentlessly-publicized Altaeros Alaska "project" was delayed, but without including where you came across that information.  I waited patiently for over a year for:
   a) the project you said was "delayed" to resume
   b) you to explain or provide evidence for your stated "delay".
You now say you simply made the whole thing up (big surprise...)

3) I did not "predict" the past.  I simply said there was no BAT powering a small town in Alaska.  No evidence has emerged that I was wrong.

Dave S. carries on: "
In saying there has been no Altaeros news for two years, you are inplicitly predicting that the drumbeat of biz news is all false."
Doug S. notes: *** Huh?  You spelled "implicitly" wrong.  I did not predict anything.  Ummm, I said all the Altaeros "news" for the past 2 years has turned out to be fake news.  That means "journalists" abdicating their responsibility to research facts, erroneously repeating press-releases and company PR as fact.  No "journalist" ever followed up on the hype (zero research).  If any of them were the least bit vigilant, they might have started asking where the followup story was.  Inquiring minds read a story that a BAT WILL power a remote village in Alaska, and eagerly wait for the follow-on story of how well it is working.  The elephant in the room (for some people at least) is when no follow-on story emerges.  That's when astute minds realize the project never happened as stated.  I realize none of this applies to you.

DaveS continues: "All roads lead to the SuperTurbine" is not your only prediction in AWE. Yes, time will tell if your predictions hold,"
Doug S. comments:  Yes and here are a few of them:
1) daveS' Bose-Einstein flappers are NOT the final answer for AWE
2) daveS will probably never even build one
3) no AWE-powered concert will happen unless and until a system is created capable of powering a concert.  No AWE system = can be a proper consideration. For example, if I say, "Fort's test-engineer's mentality is to "test-test-test", its factual and relevant to his AWE work.
Doug S. comments:  (*** really?  What is he testing today?)

Dave S. wrote: "If I unfairly, incorrectly, or misleadingly characterized Doug's mentality,"
Doug S. notes: (***you misleadingly characterized my mentality as capable of being accurately judged by yours)

Dave S.'s sentence completion to moderator:  then please explain my error, so I can properly apologize. daveS"
Doug S. notes:*** go ahead daveS, I'll allow you to apologize on general principles.  No need to go into detail.

Moderator notes about insertion:
"from a deeply suspicious mentality"         The challenge I have with the phrase is that such seems to imply knowing the entirety of the mentality as oppose to estimating an immediate limited relation with a limited concern.  It would seem to require an all-seeing and exacting vision of a mentality to declare existential presence of a certain mentality. The targeted poster may have other pervading mentality that acts immediately to what could seem suspicious to one, but not to another. I just do not want to walk away from the post with a sense that someone supposed locked into a mentality proscribed by another.   Qualifying would seem appropriate if one got into such weighing; "he seems suspicious of news announcers..."         



Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18950 From: dave santos Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: What control laws govern classic single-line kites? (Yanbei Chen
Doug,

I am always happy to explain my thinking, but you have serious homework to do, to meet me halfway. Your questions are cheerfully addressed in detail, and there is of course new knowledge emerging all the time. You are the only party who refuses to answer questions, like what USWindLabs news there is, and how you intend to succeed in AWE (not by diligent testing?).

At least you and Rod seem to accept Chen's science, even if you can't yet make the leap to the kite case. Understanding Chen is a fine start,

daveS



On Wednesday, September 2, 2015 6:05 PM, "dougselsam@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
daveS said: "Doug, I am of course speaking as a paid professional in kite tech,"
Doug notes: *** really?  Are you paid hourly, or are you on a salary?

daveS said "with a life-long background in aviation and decades in AE circles."
Doug notes: ***and yet you say an airplane need not respond to crosswinds? 
What do YOU mean when you use the abbreviation AE?  What would you say is your biggest contribution to "AE", after all those years?

daveS said"In this case, Chen's own words are proposed to precisely apply to SLK autonomy. I am in agreement with Chen's science. I am claiming a one-to-one correspondence of the quantum control theory Chen discusses to the archetypal kite."
Doug notes: *** geez but daveS, the rest of us, not blessed with your advanced mindset, are having trouble understanding what you mean.  Can you explain exactly HOW "Chen's science" applies to a simple kite?  How does "control theory" apply to holding a string?

daveS said "Go ahead and make a case that Chen does not apply to aircraft control theory, daveS"
Doug notes: *** All Roddy and I have requested is for you to explain what you mean.  Why ask others to explain YOUR theory?


Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18951 From: dougselsam Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: ISEC
daveS said to Roddy: "Quite right Rod, the Daisy and ST are valued as unique contenders in the AWE test mix. Your prototypes are worthy museum pieces."
Doug S. comments: *** Thanks for noticing,  I am preserving the Sky Serpent for posterior... er, um, I mean posterity.

Dave S. noted:  "I made the same case as to why the Honeywell freak-turbine was eagerly collected at the wind power museum."

Doug S. comments:*** My memory is you said it was a good turbine.  When did it become a "freak turbine"?  Interesting how they "improved" it by eliminating all its distinguishing features, but they couldn't get rid of them all, so it remains a laughingstock, but only for those who get the joke.  So much for bigwig aerospace companies automatically understanding wind energy technology, but we already knew that.  They should be embarrassed, but no, that never happens.  What happens is "they quietly go away"...

Dave S. noted: "Of course whatever wins by testing, on a technically level playing field,"
Doug S. comments: *** The Earth is a technically level playing field.

Dave S. noted: "is another matter, and our feelings should not get in the way."
Doug S. comments: *** but feelings are what powers Professor Crackpot's devices...
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18952 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 9/2/2015
Subject: Re: ISEC
Attachments :

    Dave Santos noted: " Perhaps we will someday bleed excess kinetic energy from the atmosphere to better hurl space colonists on their way, by means of kites. The geeky fields of tech-kites and space-elevators could merge."


    Joe F. comments with attached drawing, which see.

    Kite energy system and space-elevator tether work together to pull payloads into space. The working kite system gathers a line to pull up payloads. The shown is one method proposed. Other ways for sending payloads up the space-elevator tether could be by using kitricity-powered lasers.  Other kite methods for putting payloads into space may be posted sooner or later in this forum.



      @@attachment@@
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18953 From: dougselsam Date: 9/2/2015
    Subject: Re: AWE Moderation fee
    I think we should all be put to bed with no supper, and then Joe should have to go around and make sure there is milk in our bottles.
    Once we're asleep, he can concentrate on brainstorming more uses for kites
    dropping notes...
    providing shade...
    let's see, where was I?
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18954 From: dave santos Date: 9/2/2015
    Subject: Re: ISEC [1 Attachment]
    Yes, Joe, your drawing captures a basic space-elevator halyard-hauling kite method. We barely can imagine the endless variations possible, but this is a fine start.



    On Wednesday, September 2, 2015 9:45 PM, "joefaust333@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy]" <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  
    [Attachment(s) from joefaust333@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy] included below]
    Dave Santos noted: " Perhaps we will someday bleed excess kinetic energy from the atmosphere to better hurl space colonists on their way, by means of kites. The geeky fields of tech-kites and space-elevators could merge."

    Joe F. comments with attached drawing, which see.
    Kite energy system and space-elevator tether work together to pull payloads into space. The working kite system gathers a line to pull up payloads. The shown is one method proposed. Other ways for sending payloads up the space-elevator tether could be by using kitricity-powered lasers.  Other kite methods for putting payloads into space may be posted sooner or later in this forum.




    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 18955 From: Rod Read Date: 9/3/2015
    Subject: Re: AWE Moderation fee
    No, not pay Joe, pay amazon mechanical turk... artificial artificial intelligence   ( or equivalent)
    there must be someone on there who wants to do an hour or two of moderator work per day.... maybe we could ask for 4 x 30 mins through the day.


    Rod Read

    Windswept and Interesting Limited
    15a Aiginis
    Isle of Lewis
    UK
    HS2 0PB

    07899057227
    01851 870878