Messages in AirborneWindEnergy group.                          AWES 24164 to 24218 Page 375 of 440.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24164 From: Lukas Zeidler Date: 11/14/2018
Subject: Re: Q about moving the AWE forum to a new platform

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24165 From: Lukas Zeidler Date: 11/14/2018
Subject: Re: Q about moving the AWE forum to a new platform

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24169 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 11/14/2018
Subject: Re: Q about moving the AWE forum to a new platform

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24170 From: tallakt Date: 11/14/2018
Subject: Re: Q about moving the AWE forum to a new platform

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24171 From: Olivier Normand Date: 11/14/2018
Subject: Re: Q about moving the AWE forum to a new platform

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24172 From: Joe Faust Date: 11/14/2018
Subject: Re: Q about moving the AWE forum to a new platform

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24173 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 11/14/2018
Subject: Re: Q about moving the AWE forum to a new platform

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24174 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 11/14/2018
Subject: Re: Q about moving the AWE forum to a new platform

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24175 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 11/14/2018
Subject: Re: Q about moving the AWE forum to a new platform

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24176 From: Olivier Normand Date: 11/14/2018
Subject: Re: Q about moving the AWE forum to a new platform

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24177 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 11/14/2018
Subject: Re: Q about moving the AWE forum to a new platform

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24178 From: Olivier Normand Date: 11/14/2018
Subject: Re: Q about moving the AWE forum to a new platform

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24179 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 11/14/2018
Subject: Re: Q about moving the AWE forum to a new platform

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24180 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 11/14/2018
Subject: Re: Q about moving the AWE forum to a new platform

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24183 From: Lukas Zeidler Date: 11/15/2018
Subject: Re: Q about moving the AWE forum to a new platform

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24184 From: benhaiemp Date: 11/15/2018
Subject: Re: Q about moving the AWE forum to a new platform

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24185 From: benhaiemp Date: 11/16/2018
Subject: Re: Q about moving the AWE forum to a new platform

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24186 From: dave santos Date: 11/16/2018
Subject: Windlift's UNCC Seminar Nov 20

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24187 From: dave santos Date: 11/17/2018
Subject: Re: Q about moving the AWE forum to a new platform

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24188 From: dave santos Date: 11/17/2018
Subject: Luff Rate of SS v TS Wings

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24189 From: dave santos Date: 11/17/2018
Subject: Re: Luff Rate of SS v TS Wings

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24190 From: dave santos Date: 11/17/2018
Subject: Steering Ocean Currents by Paravane Formations

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24191 From: tallakt Date: 11/18/2018
Subject: Re: Luff Rate of SS v TS Wings

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24192 From: benhaiemp Date: 11/18/2018
Subject: Re: Luff Rate of SS v TS Wings

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24193 From: dave santos Date: 11/18/2018
Subject: Re: Luff Rate of SS v TS Wings

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24194 From: dougselsam Date: 11/19/2018
Subject: Re: W = m * g (NASA syntax) v. W= mg (DougS syntax)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24195 From: dave santos Date: 11/19/2018
Subject: Reply to Doug's post// Re: [AWES] Re: W = m * g (NASA syntax) v. W=

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24196 From: dougselsam Date: 11/19/2018
Subject: Re: TETHERED TURBINE ORIENTATION

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24197 From: dave santos Date: 11/19/2018
Subject: Ongoing central role of standard kites in AWE R&D

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24198 From: dougselsam Date: 11/19/2018
Subject: Re: Q about moving the AWE forum to a new platform

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24199 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 11/19/2018
Subject: Re: Q about moving the AWE forum to a new platform

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24200 From: tallakt Date: 11/19/2018
Subject: Re: Reply to Doug's post// Re: [AWES] Re: W = m * g (NASA syntax) v

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24201 From: tallakt Date: 11/19/2018
Subject: Re: Q about moving the AWE forum to a new platform

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24202 From: Olivier Normand Date: 11/19/2018
Subject: Sweet reminder that a company is actually on the market

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24203 From: dougselsam Date: 11/20/2018
Subject: Re: Reply to Doug's post// Re: [AWES] Re: W = m * g (NASA syntax) v

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24204 From: tallakt Date: 11/20/2018
Subject: Re: Reply to Doug's post// Re: [AWES] Re: W = m * g (NASA syntax) v

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24205 From: benhaiemp Date: 11/21/2018
Subject: Re: Reply to Doug's post// Re: [AWES] Re: W = m * g (NASA syntax) v

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24206 From: dave santos Date: 11/21/2018
Subject: Re: Reply to Doug's post// Re: [AWES] Re: W = m * g (NASA syntax) v

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24207 From: Olivier Normand Date: 11/21/2018
Subject: Re: Reply to Doug's post// Re: [AWES] Re: W = m * g (NASA syntax) v

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24208 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 11/21/2018
Subject: Re: Reply to Doug's post//  Re: [AWES] Re: W = m * g (NASA syntax)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24209 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 11/22/2018
Subject: Re: Sweet reminder that a company is actually on the market

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24210 From: dougselsam Date: 11/22/2018
Subject: Re: Reply to Doug's post// Re: [AWES] Re: W = m * g (NASA syntax) v

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24211 From: dougselsam Date: 11/22/2018
Subject: Re: Reply to Doug's post// Re: [AWES] Re: W = m * g (NASA syntax) v

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24212 From: dougselsam Date: 11/22/2018
Subject: Re: Sweet reminder that a company is actually on the market

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24213 From: Baptiste Labat Date: 11/24/2018
Subject: Flapping hydro power

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24214 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 11/24/2018
Subject: Re: Flapping hydro power

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24215 From: Baptiste Labat Date: 11/24/2018
Subject: Re: "Race for Water" Kite Sailing Circumnavigation of the World cont

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24216 From: tallakt Date: 11/25/2018
Subject: Why am I not able to reply to messages in this forum?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24217 From: benhaiemp Date: 11/25/2018
Subject: Re: Why am I not able to reply to messages in this forum?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24218 From: dave santos Date: 11/25/2018
Subject: Re: Reply to Doug's post//  Re: [AWES] Re: W = m * g (NASA syntax)



Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24164 From: Lukas Zeidler Date: 11/14/2018
Subject: Re: Q about moving the AWE forum to a new platform

Thank you! That zip must have taken some work as it looks like individual screenshots.
I've just managed to pull 5k and counting messages from this yahoo group using this very convenient software: http://www.personalgroupware.com
Will make the archive available and link to it from awesystems.info

On 2018-11-14 20:24, Joe Faust joefaust333@gmail.com [AirborneWindEnergy] wrote:
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24165 From: Lukas Zeidler Date: 11/14/2018
Subject: Re: Q about moving the AWE forum to a new platform

forum.awesystems.info is basically "just a regular forum". That means it can have a more useful structure than reddit. I also thought about reddit. I agree that it would be better for organic growth. I seem to be able to create a subreddit from my account and probably will make an awesystems subreddit soonish. However I think it would be best used for posting and discussing news articles, not for in depth discussion about awesystems. Please check out the forum and let me know what you think.

On 2018-11-14 21:46, alfred.vandijk wrote:
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24169 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 11/14/2018
Subject: Re: Q about moving the AWE forum to a new platform
Here in Yahoo: 
I am trying to understand what one might want to do that cannot be done. 
========================================================
Here we can: 
1. Log in. 
2. Use search over all messages. 
3. Use Advanced search over all messages.. keywords in subject or message body. 
4. Use Google Search over all messages by keywords or quoted phrases, etc. 
5. Start a topic that has not been started. 
6. Reply to a topic. 
7. Read all the messages of a topic. 
8. Post photographs in several way. 
9. Attach files. 
10. Link to files elsewhere on the Internet. 
11. Find all the posts by a certain poster. 
12. Years later still post on some started topic to continue its content building. 
13. Invite others to participate. 
14. Clip news and place the long quotes in the body of a post. 
15. Link to other posts that have been in the forum. And so join two or more topics to bolster a given topic. 
16. Online signed in: use the edit tools to enhance a message.  (Recommend: make local home copy of text in case something happens). 
17. Add attachments. 
18. Add hot text links to related matters. 
And more. 
What is wanted that cannot be done here?   
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24170 From: tallakt Date: 11/14/2018
Subject: Re: Q about moving the AWE forum to a new platform
It’s a matter of fidelity IMHO. I participate in other Discourse based forums and it seems that they are more engaging and I experience fewer hassles on the way.

Some issues ive had:
- trouble clicking email links
- trouble posting images
- trouble with the editor hiding text on my phone

I think the best reason to stay with Yahoo is that everyone knows that the hosting provider is independent and also will probably last a few years more. Perhaps the provider of the new Discourse forum could shed some light on which organisation that controls the maintenance and might take some kind of sensoring role in the future, and how this maintenance is funded.

Im all for trying Discourse, but in the end, only the users of this forum can decide where they will participate
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24171 From: Olivier Normand Date: 11/14/2018
Subject: Re: Q about moving the AWE forum to a new platform
Hello all, I would highly recommend to move to a Facebook group. That would be much more interactive and much more user friendly 
As someone say ( but can't recall due to poor interface) I dislike yahoo groups so much, I prefer not to post 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24172 From: Joe Faust Date: 11/14/2018
Subject: Re: Q about moving the AWE forum to a new platform
Attachments :
    Here I will example the posting of a photo image that is hosted by one of my sites: 
    I selected "Copy Image" upon visiting the page: 
    http://www.energykitesystems.net/JongChulKim/index.html
    And then in my Gmail composing email to group, I pasted the image from Clip Board. 
    Now I will send it to group and see if image shows to share. 
    image.png
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24173 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 11/14/2018
    Subject: Re: Q about moving the AWE forum to a new platform
    Image got a placeholder in group and did not show online, but did show in my email copy of the group's message.
      
    Now I am at login on Internet (not email) and I will paste image from clipboard copy to the online group while logged in: 

     
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24174 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 11/14/2018
    Subject: Re: Q about moving the AWE forum to a new platform
    Attachments :
      That showed the image in online view of the group. 

      Now I will try another method.  I will use the attachment tool while signed in at Yahoo Groups for our forum. 
      I have an image of a parafoil kite on local file. 
      The attachment should be viewable by members via download choice. 
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24175 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 11/14/2018
      Subject: Re: Q about moving the AWE forum to a new platform
      A Twitter choice has been underway: 
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24176 From: Olivier Normand Date: 11/14/2018
      Subject: Re: Q about moving the AWE forum to a new platform
      Does not show, as always.... 
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24177 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 11/14/2018
      Subject: Re: Q about moving the AWE forum to a new platform
      And some activity

      And LinkedIn has many AWE workers with notes. 
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24178 From: Olivier Normand Date: 11/14/2018
      Subject: Re: Q about moving the AWE forum to a new platform
      Ahah, I know this link :) 

      The link is active but no fancy things like miniature for example 
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24179 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 11/14/2018
      Subject: Re: Q about moving the AWE forum to a new platform

      Is it possible to use a list like on https://twitter.com/rodread/lists/airborne-wind-energy/members on Twitter but only for AWE tweets?

       

       

       

       
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24180 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 11/14/2018
      Subject: Re: Q about moving the AWE forum to a new platform
      And anyone may edit articles on AWE in Wikipedia

      Airborne Wind Energy

      E.g.





      Etc. more there. 

      And we have option of hosting essays at
      http://energykitesystems.net/ by sending such to editor@energykitesystems.net asking for hosting. 
      Then a link to essay or images, etc. from such server may be used in posts in forum or elsewhere. 

      And notes and images may be posted at: 
      Links to poster's name in FB could generate discussions, comments on notes, etc. Big world: FB.
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24183 From: Lukas Zeidler Date: 11/15/2018
      Subject: Re: Q about moving the AWE forum to a new platform

      I will try to catch and answer everything in order of posting:

      @alfred.vandijk "I'm not a fan of the name "awesystems". If we can agree on a name I'd be happy to contribute to a subreddit."
      I chose the name for the AWES news twitter handle as AWE and AWES (awesome) are ambigous. Do you have a proposal?

      @joefaust333 regarding the functionality in yahoo
      Discourse has all that functionality and more. It is especially the convenient structure and user interface that makes it better than the yahoo group. I might be biased as I have never used a mailing list before but neither have any other potential new users, probably. That I reply in this fashion already says something. It is just so much easier to read a conversation. Here is more on the features of discourse: https://www.discourse.org/features Thank you for making an account and giving it a shot.

      @tallak regarding the provider of the new Discourse forum
      There is no organization behind it. It's just me. I'm funding it out of pocket. You said on twitter that you want a forum when I asked everyone which features they wanted for awesystems.info . So I got you the best forum I could find. Another reason was because I've seen the forum at someawe.org fail because of bad software so I wanted to fill that gap. I have the domain at 1und1.de, the server runs on a digitalocean.com droplet, the mail server is provideed by mailgun. I must also say that I'm not a sysadmin and have little idea of what I'm doing. It's all a dictatorship. I have all control.^^ But I'm all for distributing control. I did have a startup idea once but at the moment I have no monetary interest in the AWESystems.

      @Oliver Nomad regarding a facebook group
      I have a strong dislike towards anything by facebook and privacy concerns. I don't have an account and I would not want to make everyone who wants to join the discussion signup. Moreover facebook groups have very limited features. It's just one thread.

      @joefaust333 regarding other platforms
      Linkedin may be a source of news when workers post it there but it's not suitable for discussion.
      The wikipedia articles cannot be easily altered. Udo Zillmann has tried for some time to improve and structure the content but other editors were against it. That is also one of the main reasons why I wanted to make awesystems.info in the first place. -To give people a landing page where they come from search engines, get well structured basic information and are referred to other sites and literature.
      Sorry, but energykitesystems.net would not be used by younger users. For hosting essays I think researchgate.net is best. This has also the possibility of "organig growth".
      The facebook page can be another entry point for people to get interested in and share AWESytems but I don't think it's well suited to anything else. And as mentioned above I strongly dislike facebook.

      @alfred.vandijk regarding the reply to joe's feature list
      [2] Both new accounts were me.^^
      [3] Agreed on facebook and linkedin
      Regarding the active users: As I pulled the message archive yesterday this became really evident. It's mostly Dave and Joe with a bit of Pierre and the occasional message from someone far between.
      Waiting for you to sign up. ;)

      I've started a thread on site feedback on the forum. If you have any suggestions for categories or other feedback please post it there.
      We could have this conversation there in a more convenient manner. :P

      Also @joefaust333
      I have just learned who you are yesterday. Thank you for everything you do for AWES! I was focussed on current events and have never learned about the history of AWESystems.

      On 2018-11-15 06:34, tallak@tveide.net [AirborneWindEnergy] wrote:
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24184 From: benhaiemp Date: 11/15/2018
      Subject: Re: Q about moving the AWE forum to a new platform

      In https://www.researchgate.net/ comments are connected to papers.

      There are short AWE (or kite energy or wind kite energy...) discussions, not really forums, on numerous supports comprising Twitter, LinkedIn.

      IMHO the success of any AWE forum will depend on AWE success. 

       
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24185 From: benhaiemp Date: 11/16/2018
      Subject: Re: Q about moving the AWE forum to a new platform
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24186 From: dave santos Date: 11/16/2018
      Subject: Windlift's UNCC Seminar Nov 20
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24187 From: dave santos Date: 11/17/2018
      Subject: Re: Q about moving the AWE forum to a new platform
      All our social-media platforms are compromised by interoperability and proprietary issues. There is no true escape in embracing a new platform that will be sold-out and allowed to rot once a large user base is established. Technical due-diligence in AWE has involved tolerating this sort of secondary annoyance.

      Its wonderful when anyone expands public discourse in AWE. The problem is not so much that our social platforms are lacking, but that many ventures and even academic players do not fully disclose key information, especially crash reports of high-mass high-velocity prototypes, against traditional aviation best-practice. AWE R&D is entering its most dramatic phase since its major inception around 15yrs ago. We expect the failure of most ventures who down-selected poor architectures and are unable to migrate toward the better architectures that prevail. It does not matter any more that the losing ventures do not disclose fatal flaws, as sounder engineering is seen succeeding in general. Fortunately this process does not depend on the quirks of social media options, but on specific scaling laws, aviation safety-reliability norms, and other such critical factors.

      While this forum may seem too small by a count of active users, the tens-of-thousands of messages archived are far beyond any other source of AWE knowledge. Many top folks have participated, but social metrics was never a key statistic: The original intent was to make public key AWE domain art before any private party could patent a key idea with monopolistic intent. By that measure, we have done well, as even our flawed platform established the necessary public priority. By that logic, the more forums operating to share AWE knowledge the better. The human expert still remains essential to recall past discussion for the gems hidden in the thicket.

      AWE forum transition has a natural dynamic familiar to us. SomeAWE was intended to overcome this forum's limitations by adding new features. We even suspended this forum in anticipation, but the new forum restricted information previously allowed (eg. that AWE's most public critic was sanctioned by his IBM boss for politicized wind-energy trolling). JoeF's minimalist moderation has been more concerned to welcome expansive factual input, only restricting gross non-factual netiquette. Based on this experience, lets see how the new platform serves AWE, and then perhaps retire this platform. No need to extract and migrate archives, they will exist in searchable form as long as the Net persists.

      I lived in Mexico City long ago when the officials planned moving the chaotic Merced, the great public market spanning 53 blocks, from the heart of the city to a "more rational" new location, built at great expense. The old market was legally condemned. The Mexican Army was ordered in to evict the merchants. No one moved. The Army surrendered. The Merced, for all its flaws, endures on essential merits. The new market assumed a proper role as a modern wholesale transit hub. Both markets proved needed; not one over the other.

      Lets embrace all AWE forums, even the hype-dominated twitter-sphere.
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24188 From: dave santos Date: 11/17/2018
      Subject: Luff Rate of SS v TS Wings
      "SS" means "single-skin", of course, but "TS" is more obscure; its Peter Lynn's "Twin-Skin" (parafoil) usage to avoid confusing DS "double-skin" initials with DS flight. We have long noted that SS wings are theoretically superior by power-to-mass and power-to-cost, also found that to be true in empirical practice, and we have followed the ongoing revolution in SS wing design in recent years. The NASA Power Wing (NPW) remains the standard workhorse, Dave Culp's OL Shipkite is a classic radical simplification, and new SS paragliders and powerkites are the avant garde. Dave Culp long ago predicted that SS kites would eventually dominate large power kites, which I agree is likely. This message adds Luff Rate to comparative SS-TS theory.

      Besides lower-mass-by-area and higher-power-to-mass of an SS over a TS, the most distinguishing characteristic between the two kites is the Luff Rate. An SS kite will luff faster and recover faster. SS AoA tolerances are a bit lower, not as much as one might fear. On the TS side, valved ram-air intakes add a bit of mass and further reduce luff. At a given velocity, Luff Rate is determined by the thinness (depth-of-section) of the wing, the thinner wing having an inherently faster luff. Kite Control does not react in time as easily to a fast SS luff. However, for equivalent-mass SS and TS wings, the larger SS kite's luff rate is moderated by its larger size, and flown in weaker wind, and this slower response is operationally significant. A smaller TS in faster wind can be twitchier than an equivalent power SS in slower wind. An SS kite is more prone to flogging (harmonic luffing) damage, but excess flogging is a duly avoidable state.

      This is a start at understanding Luff Rate as an SS v TS design and operational factor. Its an open task to formalize luff mechanics in terms of Strouhal numbers, Re, quantum-of-action, etc.
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24189 From: dave santos Date: 11/17/2018
      Subject: Re: Luff Rate of SS v TS Wings
      Adding here some damping-factors on Luff Rate and Luff Amplitude-

      - SS Luff is damped by fore-and-aft multi-bridling and camber of the wing. Multi-bridling inhibits bulk oscillation and high camber restricts luff to the LE area.

      - TS Luff is damped by parafoil-cell (airbeam) buckling, which can be interpreted as a slow-phonon effect, under sonic relativity.

      Luff Rate (Frequency) and Amplitude reflect a close relation to harmonic flapping (and flogging) dynamics.

      --------------------------------------------
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24190 From: dave santos Date: 11/17/2018
      Subject: Steering Ocean Currents by Paravane Formations
      We touched on the idea years ago that paravanes (underwater kites) can steer ocean currents, possibly to forestall or mitigate ecological damage from climate change. One approach is to anchor a sort of underwater mountain of kite to dam or channel abyssal or surface current. It may be that anchoring from the bottom would be too damaging in itself; we just don't know yet. Another possibility is to oppose tethered paravanes in different currents, and steer bulk circulation by relatively small inputs. We can see that a current can be deflected by dragging on the side of desired turning, but no doubt many fluidic-engineering tricks are applicable. It would be easy for someone to pioneer this field, by simply throwing kites into a stream to see what works.

      An early app might be to upwell deep cold water for coral reef protection or to enhance general sea-life and aquaculture, or even to rob a hurricane of warm surface water. Its too early to know all about how this technology might be a blessing or curse. Easy positive buoyancy is the paravane's advantage over an airborne kite, as Minesto's current (pun) early success shows.

      Here is a nice introduction into the complexities of ocean circulation-

      Steering of upper ocean currents and fronts by the topographically constrained abyssal circulation,
      Hurlburt et al, 2008
      http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a488976.pdf


      As usual, small-holder, distant-future, and/or humanitarian use of these ideas is open, but major commercial use would invoke Open-AWE_IP-Cloud licensing. The concepts here have many kinds of applicability. Has anyone yet proposed a parachute packed in a pipe as a cheap cut-off valve? A soft varidrogue in a well bore to pump it without a conventional flapper-valve? These might be the most scalable valve designs possible. Imagine a broken pipeline that stops gushing by popping internal drogues.
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24191 From: tallakt Date: 11/18/2018
      Subject: Re: Luff Rate of SS v TS Wings
      Due to their extreme advantage in lift to mass ratio, single skin kites will always be very interesting for AWE and any other use if kites exploring the limits of what they can do.

      I just purchased a few of these kites and I will see what they are capable of for myself. It seems such kites are still in early development phase, and that the advance of the technology is difficult and slow.

      I can say from testing the Flysurfer Peak (single skin four line kitesurfing kite popular on snow) this winter, that the low wind range was exceptional (low weight probable cause) and it also had very good lift-to-size ratio. What I didnt like much was some flapping at the edges which is likely to cause some premature wear, but hey, Flysurfer probably has some data on this matter based on actual damage reports, as the kite has been in the market for some years already.

      Ozone released a similar kite I believe this year.

      Now, there is one thing missing from your analysis that was part or the «ram air» vs LEI kite design discussion back in the days. A ram air kite will contain a lot of air between the top and bottom layer. For a 12m2 kite we could estimate this to be 4m3 worth of air, weighing approx 5 kg. This mass will severly affect turning speed as the air travels with the kite. A single skin kite or the more traditional LEI (leading edge inflatable kite) does not have trapped air in the same sense.

      I thing the severity if this effect scales quite quickly with kite size. They will trap air with wingspan to the power of three given otherwise equal dinensions. Add to this the general observation that bigger kites turn slower.

      The conclusion of these observations is perhaps that single skin is the only viable option (from these designs) to be able to actually turn with reasonable speed when scalled to the 100 m2 size.

      Just thinking out loud here.

      Tallak Tveide
      SW Engineer Kitemill
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24192 From: benhaiemp Date: 11/18/2018
      Subject: Re: Luff Rate of SS v TS Wings

      The single-skin lower mass overhead favors a lower cut-in wind speed. So a significant advantage of SS is a drastic decreasing of landing and recovery operations.
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24193 From: dave santos Date: 11/18/2018
      Subject: Re: Luff Rate of SS v TS Wings
      Thanks for the input. Some further details-

      - SS power kites (NPW and Barish PG) are almost as old as parafoils ( - Turn rates between SS and TS are closer than one might think. SS kites do not have internal air mass, but the "ugly" bottom surface still has to drag/churn more entrained air mass that the smoother bottom of a TS parafoil.
      - Turn rate is more sensitive to AR (aspect ratio) and frontal C-shape. Larger SS wings of equivalent TS mass are slowed in turns by simply being bigger.
      - A bit of SS soft flutter is not very damaging. SS repair is fast, cheap, and easy (field-repairable). Its only hard flogging that damages quickly. A tensioned leech-line is the sailmaker's solution to modest TE flutter.
      - SS wings generally operate in non-dimensional lower wind velocities (kite gets bigger in proportion to constant wind velocity) compared to equivalent-mass TS wings, with lower wing-loading (by unit-area), which means higher L/D than one might expect.
      - SS have the theoretic fastest payback by being the cheapest power kite (capital-cost-per-Watt), so they may economically beat any other wing type, even if they last less time (not yet proven).
      - Bridling is a complex design factor. More SS bridling, up to a point, gives higher L/D, but simpler bridling is better operationally (OL has just three bridle lines) and high CL "grunt" power most counts, when high load-velocity is not required (truck v racing car).
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24194 From: dougselsam Date: 11/19/2018
      Subject: Re: W = m * g (NASA syntax) v. W= mg (DougS syntax)
      daveS has posited: "Work itself needs to be defined in context, to distinguish between rate-of-work (W) and quantity-of-work (Whr). Rate-of-work as my intended meaning, which should not be confused with quantity-of-work.  This is not an issue of anyone's high school physics."

      *** DougS replies:  The above statement does indeed indicate a lack of basic high-school physics knowledge, and no understanding of it.  "Work" already HAS been defined.  It's pretty simple:  Work = Energy.  The units are, for example, Joules, or for the electric power industry, Watt-hours, kiloWatt-hours, or MegaWatt-hours.  Repeat: Work = E = Energy.  What the above erroneous passage calls "rate of work" is known as "power", or "energy per unit time".  The units are Watt, kiloWatt, MegaWatt, Horsepower, etc.
      None of this is complicated, or in any way in question or debatable. The level of such a discussion is far below what should be expected in any adult engineering type forum.  It's not productive to discuss advanced concepts without a working knowledge of the basics first.

      The reason I have not been here lately is I realized you could miss a year of this forum and you will have missed pretty much nothing.  AWE seems to have "stalled" for the most part.  Google Airborne Wind Energy News and you'll find mostly articles by outsiders using the Altaeros promo images, (a concept debunked by even daveS, years ago) showing the publishers do not even comprehend in the least what is happening, where progress is, or is not, in AWE.  Reminds me of how many years the "news" in AWE was dominated by Magenn images.  Oh well, I'll check back in a few months just for laughs.
      :)


      ---In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, <santos137@...
      This is not an issue of anyone's high school physics.
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24195 From: dave santos Date: 11/19/2018
      Subject: Reply to Doug's post// Re: [AWES] Re: W = m * g (NASA syntax) v. W=
      Doug seems somehow unaware of continued steady progress in AWE, and the value of helpful on-topic posting.

      Recent AWE community news is more or less what we are used to; ongoing increases in measured power multiple teams, as our basic metric of progress. In addition, diverse milestones continue to be reported, and our collective knowledge continues to advance. The most evident lagging player with no serious AWE progress to report is Doug's own company, after years of the most extreme claims.

      Good Luck to Doug on his pending absence from the AWES Forum. May he have something better than "laughs" to offer when he returns.
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24196 From: dougselsam Date: 11/19/2018
      Subject: Re: TETHERED TURBINE ORIENTATION
      Hi Gordon_sp:  I definitely agree.  My latest demo flight did indeed use a kite for the main source of elevation, as you advise, and also due to simplicity and achieveability.  That patent covers a lot, and not every part of it necessarily represents a final answer.


      ---In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, <gordon_sp@... using a cantilevered tail to orient the turbine so the axis is more vertical to aid in the lifting of the turbine. I suggest that this method is counterproductive because this turbine will generate almost zero power because of its orientation.  Increased lift should be achieved by increase the size of the lifter kite and/or changing its angle of attack.  Kites are inexpensive, have little weight and scale proportional to their area.  Turbines and shafts are more expensive, heavy and scale poorly. I suggest you use the cantilevered tail to orient the turbine in the horizontal direction to extract maximum power. See the attached PDF for more information.
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24197 From: dave santos Date: 11/19/2018
      Subject: Ongoing central role of standard kites in AWE R&D
      The modern Power Kite was always the standard WECS basis to compare against all other AWES schemes. We include SS, ship-kites, and pilot lifters in the standard kite group.

      Many early AWE R&D players bet they could come up with something better than the power kite, but after years of trying, and hundreds of millions spent, most of them have clearly stalled or completely disappeared from the AWE race. Meanwhile, we have explored in far greater depth specific operational and design factors that predict power kite success, and standard power kites have only gotten better. Non-experts now have a mountain of supporting evidence to better guide growing investment in AWE R&D.

      Where are we now? The standard power kite has slowly gained over fashionable fringe concepts. More than ever, the AWE race seems to be how best to harness power kite rigs. New rounds of investment are shifting accordingly. We may still see large investments in non-standard wing development, but the power kite has surged ahead of every other wing; not just in validated performance, but also in direct AWE R&D. The natural failure of fringe AWES concepts is a major form of progress.

      Thank goodness for the power kite, the Cinderella Wing of AWE.
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24198 From: dougselsam Date: 11/19/2018
      Subject: Re: Q about moving the AWE forum to a new platform
      Hi Joe
      As we know, I've been maintaining all along that none of the promised "powering remote area X by date Y using system Z" projects would come true, expressing my honest opinion that, basically, none of these highly-visible projects really knew what they were doing.  Ten years later, with still no AWE system in daily operation (that we know of), I will accept that I will probably never get credit for accurately predicting the whole mess, but such unfulfilled promises of new ideas had already long been the norm in wind energy.  Since so many AWE projects basically repeated past mistakes in wind energy, just making them more expensive by taking them to the air, it was not surprising to someone with experience in wind energy.  The unexpected thing, from a wind energy perspective, would have been if any of them HAD worked out. 

      My impression was those running the Yahoo forum actively removed many messages expressing my opinion on the basis of my opinions being unwanted when they did not repeat the overly-optimistic hype that pervades AWE to this day.  "Skepticism not allowed.  Please don't bother us with facts or reality."  I think there was something about many of my messages having not been totally "deleted" but moved to some arcane special "archive" or something.  Obviously, only "certain people" are "allowed" to express negative opinions on even a single project, let alone all of them.  Still, I can only put so much time into nonsense, so I haven't followed exactly what the status of my previous posts actually is.  Are all my previous posts still searchable and reachable on the regular forum? 

      Bear in mind, the only thing that makes "science" science is the ability of every participant to actively challenge statements and paradigms.  The history of science, not to mention wind energy, is full of misguided theories that sometimes gain a certain amount of traction before being disproven or shown inadvisable.  Part of proper record-keeping is to make sure that ALL opinions are recorded so as to be viewable in hindsight as the future unfolds so people can say "Aha! Many people believed in theory X, but not everyone was so gullible.", rather than thinking EVERYONE fell for what were, in retrospect, false promises. That is what keeps the system honest.  So what is the status here of all my previous posts?
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24199 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 11/19/2018
      Subject: Re: Q about moving the AWE forum to a new platform
      Posts (that were posted) are posted. 
      Sent items when you were moderated that did not get posted because of breaking policies are in my Gmail account and in your Sent box; you were invited to form a web page of your did-not-get-through ideas, so that the forum could post a link to the matters; that option is open to you.   Any of your comments on AWE need not be lost, if you do your part.    You are directed me not to have in AWE files a special place for you, though there are some items there.   In the forum main message stream one easily finds your dire predictions. Robust repeating the dire predictions can be done on your own web page; please do not repeat  run. Your message has huge presence already.  If you have a new slant, go for fit. 
           
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24200 From: tallakt Date: 11/19/2018
      Subject: Re: Reply to Doug's post// Re: [AWES] Re: W = m * g (NASA syntax) v
      I have to admit that the observation that AWE advances have stalled sees very curious to me. Working in Kitemill I can say we are making progress every day. Slowly, but getting closer by the day. It seems Ampyx are too based on the flow of research activity pictures. Roderick Read’s rotating AWE system look super interesting, and someone just released the first commercial micro AWE generator. On tip if that kite design is progressing with single skin designs giving us unprecedented power to mass ratios.

      This is lack of progress?
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24201 From: tallakt Date: 11/19/2018
      Subject: Re: Q about moving the AWE forum to a new platform
      Being a naysayer will make you have the right answer for any new idea 90% of the time. But being one also means that you are not investing the last 10% that succeed and basically defending the view that «the current state of affairs is good enough».

      We all know that making progress through creating something new is difficult. Make that even more difficult for anything airborne. Predicting delays and failures does not make you a psychic.
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24202 From: Olivier Normand Date: 11/19/2018
      Subject: Sweet reminder that a company is actually on the market
      Dear AWE group.

      In reaction to Joe's words saying that no big players were on the market I would like to write some words.

      I don't recognize myself nor my company as a small nor big players. I would like to explain kitewinder's position on the market and why we made that product we named Kiwee.

      We started in 2014 working on AWES, then 4 yeras later, we had that product working and available for sale. I won't post any link here but if any reader's want's it , fill free to ask.

      We choose simplicity to develop our technology. First because that would be obviously cheaper to develop and second because this is the natural way innovation goes. Started with basics things working, up to more complex and sophisticated things with increasing efficiency and reliability.

      At first we thought of a bigger product in the range 500W to 1KW  for remote residential .  Then we realise 2 things: 

      1 / that would be much more expensive to develop
      2/ Who would accept to leave 3 to 5 K euros to buy a product without any reference ? I won't.

      that decide us to go for a much smaller product, Kiwee 100W for nomadic use . manual launch / automatic retrieval  / frontwind

      I'm convinced that it is our key ( and also a key for others "players" )  to the market that need to be educated to those new technology. You simply can't come to the market saying "hello we have such a great product, trust us ". You need reference, feedback and so on.  I think that it will come from the bottom ( people ) up to the industry and not the other way around.  I might be wrong, but that is my guess.

      And a word on Kiwee now. developping kiwee as been quite challenging for sure. But don't get it wrong, the most comlpicated things was to make it at an affordable price for customers.

      Thanks for reading

      Olivier from Kitewinder
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24203 From: dougselsam Date: 11/20/2018
      Subject: Re: Reply to Doug's post// Re: [AWES] Re: W = m * g (NASA syntax) v
      <tallak@...
      This is lack of progress?
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24204 From: tallakt Date: 11/20/2018
      Subject: Re: Reply to Doug's post// Re: [AWES] Re: W = m * g (NASA syntax) v
      I did not intend to call you a naysayer. I just meant that in general, it's a lot easier to predict that something will flop rather than succeed, because so many new projects fail.

      I respect that someone will claim that a business idea is going to fail. But to be of much value to the ones behind the "failing" project, one should rather comment on reasons why succeeding would be difficult. This brings a constructive discussion environment.

      If many projects in AWE have been abandoned without sharing the reasons why, this would also be an impediment to the advance of AWE, as useful information is not shared with those who are still carrying the torch...
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24205 From: benhaiemp Date: 11/21/2018
      Subject: Re: Reply to Doug's post// Re: [AWES] Re: W = m * g (NASA syntax) v

      Evolution of these last years make me think that the success of AWE is more likely than its opposite. Prototypes like Ampyx', Makani', Kitemill', Daisy, are more and more powerful, reliable, light ...And KiweeOne from Kitewinder is on the market. There are a lot useful researches comprising automation, aerodynamics, efficiency, and more and more companies and universities involved in AWE fields.

      There are two main advantages that can be combined. One is using far less material. Another is using more powerful and regular winds in high altitude or offshore on floating platforms.

      And also there is now an important return of experience from regular ground-based wind turbines: AWE systems could partially avoid some problems that are related below, in French language:

      https://www.challenges.fr/tribunes/51-deputes-lr-defendent-une-autre-politique-energetique_626236.
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24206 From: dave santos Date: 11/21/2018
      Subject: Re: Reply to Doug's post// Re: [AWES] Re: W = m * g (NASA syntax) v
      Tallak is right, AWE R&D is about persevering not complaining. Doug is welcome for credit as AWE's most extreme early skeptic, as his hundreds of Forum posts will forever show. Let Doug also live up to his most extreme personal claims as an AWE inventor, rather than just troll the advancing community with undue defeatism.
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24207 From: Olivier Normand Date: 11/21/2018
      Subject: Re: Reply to Doug's post// Re: [AWES] Re: W = m * g (NASA syntax) v
      one more time, I observe this group is just about 2 or 3 people arguing on each other's. 
      You guys complain that you do not have reply from what you call big players. Why shall them reply? You only reply to yourselves. 
      I post a topic on my vision of the market. No reply, no one care. 

      Well I m done, I hope you guys enjoy yourself in punching each other's by e mail because it is just what this group is meant to. 
      And please don't do the effort to replies to these one even if from what I have seen, this e mail will eventually have many hostile replies. 

      Bye 
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24208 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 11/21/2018
      Subject: Re: Reply to Doug's post//  Re: [AWES] Re: W = m * g (NASA syntax)

      Olivier,

       

      A specific topic is made on http://forum.awesystems.info/t/will-kiweeone-be-funded/76/3, from the new AWE forum http://forum.awesystems.info/: your vision of the market is discussed.

       

      It is difficult to plan the market and guess what can happen: it can be the reason why no player has yet discussed about it on the present forum. However Kitewinder and KiweeOne are and have been welcomed here.

       

      I would try to reply by mentioning two possibiities:

      1. The product is finished and ready for sale. The comparison of the sale price with solar panels would be made for the same available power. So KiweOne can be advantageous when it can be used while other energy systems cannot: finding the advantageous conditions and places (no sun, no wind at ground level) of use could accelerate the market.   
      2. The buyers would finance a part of R&D and KiweeOne is seen as a step. For example is it possible to stack several superimposed energy modules acting the same loop belt? If it is not too difficult it can be a way to scale-up, using the same elements under a larger kite. 

      Concerning other (automated most of the time) AWE systems like that are described on https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-981-10-1947-0 it is clear that some steps are to be made before marketing.

       

      Your "punching" remark is partially relevant and concerns above all DS/DS, sometime me too, for years: I see also technical AWE concerns as lightness vs efficiency, or elevation angle vs efficiency, or other. It is not good when technical disagreement go to personal attacks.

       

      PierreB

       

       

       

       

       

       

       
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24209 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 11/22/2018
      Subject: Re: Sweet reminder that a company is actually on the market

      Olivier,

       

      A specific topic is made on http://forum.awesystems.info/t/will-kiweeone-be-funded/76/3, from the new AWE forum http://forum.awesystems.info/: your vision of the market is discussed.

       

      It is difficult to plan the market and guess what can happen: it can be the reason why no player has yet discussed about it on the present forum. However Kitewinder and KiweeOne are and have been welcomed here.

       

      I would try to reply by mentioning two possibiities:

      1. The product is finished and ready for sale. The comparison of the sale price with solar panels would be made for the same available power. So KiweOne can be advantageous when it can be used while other energy systems cannot: finding the advantageous conditions and places (no sun, no wind at ground level) of use could accelerate the market.   
      2. The buyers would finance a part of R&D and KiweeOne is seen as a step. For example is it possible to stack several superimposed energy modules acting the same loop belt? If it is not too difficult it can be a way to scale-up, using the same elements under a larger kite. 

      Concerning other (automated most of the time, so "big") AWE systems like that are described on https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-981-10-1947-0 it is clear that some steps are to be made before marketing.

       

      PierreB

       

       

       

       
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24210 From: dougselsam Date: 11/22/2018
      Subject: Re: Reply to Doug's post// Re: [AWES] Re: W = m * g (NASA syntax) v
      is welcome for credit as AWE's most extreme early skeptic, as his hundreds of Forum posts will forever show. Let Doug also live up to his most extreme personal claims as an AWE inventor, rather than just troll the advancing community with undue defeatism."
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24211 From: dougselsam Date: 11/22/2018
      Subject: Re: Reply to Doug's post// Re: [AWES] Re: W = m * g (NASA syntax) v
      Pierre said: "Evolution of these last years make me think that the success of AWE is more likely than its opposite"
      Doug replies: "Likely".  Thusfar, the significant "accomplishments" remain perpetually "in the future".  After ten years of this current AWE hype-cycle, we've gone from "success" being considered a certain slam-dunk by many teams, to most of these teams having given up, and success now considered "possible" or in some cases "likely".  One after another, the promises evaporate.  One after another, the "certain" broadly-announced projects evaporate with no explanation.  Even daveS has stopped talking about making any power, with no further false statements of future success left to promote.

      Meanwhile, the cost of electricity from regular wind turbines has dropped in half, doubling the challenge of outperforming them.  And solar is running neck-and-neck with wind, replacing many small turbines already.  Remember the REAL goal is to create an ECONOMICAL energy SOLUTION, not a mere expensive curiosity that can be temporarily run when conditions are favorable but not TOO favorable.

      As I've pointed out, there are UNLIMITED ways to make SOME power from the wind at SOME cost.  But 99.9% of them are irrelevant because they can't help with the actual need, which is affordable energy in meaningful amounts.  Let's face it: you can cut a beer can in half and you have a wind turbine.  The cost is next-to-nothing, but so is the power produced.  There have always been inventors claiming their new wind energy idea is the breakthrough that will change the world.  So far, out of thousands, none has eclipsed the standard wind turbine design.

      I do think there is hope though, or I wouldn't still be here.
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24212 From: dougselsam Date: 11/22/2018
      Subject: Re: Sweet reminder that a company is actually on the market
      @ Olivier:
      I think you are smart to work at an achievable scale, rather than spending all your energy making false promises to keep millions of dollars flowing in, never to be returned to investors, then abondoning the projects, as so many "teams" have done.  Imagine how slow your progress would be if you wasted your (and everyone else's) time issuing meaningless press-releases such as "We rented office space!" or "We hired a new head of HR!"
      It's important to realize, as you have, that keeping costs low is paramount.  Designing for a 20-year+ lifespan is the other side of that same coin.  I tried to find where to buy one using google.  I came up with a lot of kitewinders and kiwi fruits, but no Kitewinder Kiwee.  Where do we buy one and how much do they cost?



      ---In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, <olivierabristol@...
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24213 From: Baptiste Labat Date: 11/24/2018
      Subject: Flapping hydro power
      Hi,

      No kite here, not airborne but I have just seen this and thought it would interest some of you


      ++
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24214 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 11/24/2018
      Subject: Re: Flapping hydro power

      Hi Baptiste,

       

      The video is interesting. Dave Santos will be happy there is a flapping prototype.

      Good work!

       

      PB

       

       

       

       
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24215 From: Baptiste Labat Date: 11/24/2018
      Subject: Re: "Race for Water" Kite Sailing Circumnavigation of the World cont
      An update from Race For Water/Skysails with nice day and night sailing video
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24216 From: tallakt Date: 11/25/2018
      Subject: Why am I not able to reply to messages in this forum?
      Does snyone know why I am not able to post in this forum? It happens from time to time, now with Doug Selsams latest posts.

      I think the Sky Serpent videos are pretty cool, and you do produce continuous power it seems in quite large amounts. It seems for me though that scaling to harvest large amounts of energy might be difficult due to the limited swept area of the generator.

      Tallak
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24217 From: benhaiemp Date: 11/25/2018
      Subject: Re: Why am I not able to reply to messages in this forum?

      I don't know. Sometimes my attachments open, sometimes no, sometimes later.


      Indeed Sky Serpent is interesting. And it is also a basis for some other rotating AWES like Daisy. 


      PierreB
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24218 From: dave santos Date: 11/25/2018
      Subject: Re: Reply to Doug's post//  Re: [AWES] Re: W = m * g (NASA syntax)
      In dismissing folks as merely quarrelsome, what Olivier does not explain is how the KiteLab subculture that launched the AWES Forum demoed an AWES in public that is the same architecture his own company adopted a decade later, as well as many other firsts.

      Yes, we struggle with Netiquette distractions more than anyone, bit that's hardly relevant to our unmatched engineering content, which includes reference to more sources, with discussion, than anyone else. As for big players who no longer respond in public here, they still mostly do in private; for example Fort Felker of Makani maintains an direct dialogue with critics like us, to his credit. Its really Google's and other venture players' culture, who should blamed for an unwillingness for public dialog, not us for so long sustaining what dialog there is.

      Best of luck to Olivier and his team.