Messages in AirborneWindEnergy group.                          AWES 24827 to 24876 Page 388 of 440.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24827 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/5/2019
Subject: Re: Distinguish huge differences: torque-rope drive versus loop driv

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24828 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/5/2019
Subject: Re: AirLoom News

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24829 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/5/2019
Subject: Kited tether towers to hold rungs of loops?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24830 From: Santos Date: 2/5/2019
Subject: Re: AirLoom News

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24831 From: Rod Read Date: 2/5/2019
Subject: Re: Distinguish huge differences: torque-rope drive versus loop driv

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24832 From: Santos Date: 2/6/2019
Subject: Re: Distinguish huge differences: torque-rope drive versus loop driv

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24833 From: dougselsam Date: 2/6/2019
Subject: Re: Distinguish huge differences: torque-rope drive versus loop driv

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24834 From: dougselsam Date: 2/6/2019
Subject: Re: Distinguish huge differences: torque-rope drive versus loop driv

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24835 From: Santos Date: 2/6/2019
Subject: Re: Distinguish huge differences: torque-rope drive versus loop driv

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24836 From: dougselsam Date: 2/6/2019
Subject: Re: AirLoom News

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24837 From: dougselsam Date: 2/6/2019
Subject: Re: Distinguish huge differences: torque-rope drive versus loop driv

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24838 From: dougselsam Date: 2/6/2019
Subject: Re: Distinguish huge differences: torque-rope drive versus loop driv

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24839 From: Santos Date: 2/6/2019
Subject: Re: AirLoom News

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24840 From: dougselsam Date: 2/7/2019
Subject: Re: AirLoom News

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24841 From: dougselsam Date: 2/7/2019
Subject: Re: KiteFarm Conductive Surface Methods

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24842 From: Santos Date: 2/7/2019
Subject: Re: AirLoom News

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24843 From: Santos Date: 2/7/2019
Subject: Re: KiteFarm Conductive Surface Methods

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24844 From: Joe Faust Date: 2/7/2019
Subject: Re: AirLoom News

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24845 From: dougselsam Date: 2/7/2019
Subject: Re: AirLoom News - oh and "The Wright Brothers"...

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24846 From: Joe Faust Date: 2/7/2019
Subject: Active-Fence AWES

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24847 From: Santos Date: 2/7/2019
Subject: Re: AirLoom News - oh and "The Wright Brothers"...

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24848 From: Santos Date: 2/7/2019
Subject: Re: Active-Fence AWES

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24849 From: gordon_sp Date: 2/7/2019
Subject: Re: AirLoom News

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24850 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/7/2019
Subject: Re: Active-Fence AWES

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24851 From: dougselsam Date: 2/8/2019
Subject: Re: Active-Fence AWES (& patents)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24852 From: dave santos Date: 2/8/2019
Subject: Re: Active-Fence AWES (& patents)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24853 From: dave santos Date: 2/8/2019
Subject: Energy Bird?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24854 From: dougselsam Date: 2/9/2019
Subject: Re: Active-Fence AWES (& patents)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24855 From: dougselsam Date: 2/9/2019
Subject: Re: Energy Bird?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24856 From: Joe Faust Date: 2/9/2019
Subject: Re: Energy Bird?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24857 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/9/2019
Subject: Re: Energy Bird?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24858 From: Joe Faust Date: 2/9/2019
Subject: Re: Energy Bird?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24859 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/9/2019
Subject: Re: Energy Bird?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24860 From: Joe Faust Date: 2/9/2019
Subject: Re: Energy Bird?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24861 From: Joe Faust Date: 2/9/2019
Subject: Re: Energy Bird?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24862 From: Joe Faust Date: 2/9/2019
Subject: Re: Energy Bird?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24863 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/9/2019
Subject: Re: Expedition by kite system

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24864 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/9/2019
Subject: Re: Expedition by kite system

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24865 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/10/2019
Subject: Weather Forecasting for AWES

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24866 From: benhaiemp Date: 2/10/2019
Subject: Isotropic kite

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24867 From: dave santos Date: 2/10/2019
Subject: Re: Active-Fence AWES (& patents)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24868 From: dave santos Date: 2/10/2019
Subject: Re: Energy Bird?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24869 From: dave santos Date: 2/10/2019
Subject: Re: Isotropic kite [1 Attachment]

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24870 From: dave santos Date: 2/10/2019
Subject: SkyGrid brings Boeing to Austin to revolutionize airspace.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24871 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/10/2019
Subject: Re: Isotropic kite [1 Attachment]

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24872 From: dave santos Date: 2/10/2019
Subject: Blockchain-based Airspace Security

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24873 From: benhaiemp Date: 2/10/2019
Subject: Re: Isotropic kite [1 Attachment]

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24874 From: Santos Date: 2/11/2019
Subject: Re: Isotropic kite [1 Attachment]

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24875 From: dougselsam Date: 2/11/2019
Subject: Re: Energy Bird? (Sure and I've got a bridge to sell you...)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24876 From: Santos Date: 2/11/2019
Subject: Re: Energy Bird? (Sure and I've got a bridge to sell you...)




Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24827 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/5/2019
Subject: Re: Distinguish huge differences: torque-rope drive versus loop driv

Doug, please edit out your personal attacks; just stay on technical statements. There are perspectives beyond your own. Please edit out the personal attacks from your former posts and then post the result; then delete your post version that has personal attacks. You have the tools to do such cleaning and editing before posting. Stay off the persons and work the technical matter.    Quote by copy and paste; and work with the technical matter involved.   
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24828 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/5/2019
Subject: Re: AirLoom News

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24829 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/5/2019
Subject: Kited tether towers to hold rungs of loops?

Is AirLoom considering kited tether towers to hold rungs of loops instead of rigid pole towers? 


 In any case, this topic invites the study of loop rungs held by kited tether towers.   

http://www.energykitesystems.net/KitedTetherTowersForLoopRungs/KitedTetherTowersForLoopRungs001.png


Mod would be to have loop drive groundgen. The first sketch linked does not run the loop of wings to ground. 

Mod could be flygen with PTO at an aloft pulley. 


The wings could drive the loop in one direction or reversals might be the chosen option. 

A.  Reversals: wing drive loop in one direction and then reverses to drive loop in the other direction.

B. Non-reversals (loop constantly going either clockwise or otherwise counterclockwise. 



Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24830 From: Santos Date: 2/5/2019
Subject: Re: AirLoom News
It's exciting to think of how fast AirLoom might get a hot glider going on a track, given DS gliders can top 500mph. Even 200mph would be amazing, but the turns are a limiting factor.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24831 From: Rod Read Date: 2/5/2019
Subject: Re: Distinguish huge differences: torque-rope drive versus loop driv
I think you choose not to like the new forum Dave.

Initial part of study into the hoop and line high torsion torque tube as used recently @1.4kW.... Think it was 9 sections. (away from my pc)
These hoops are 5mm carbon epoxy rods. Total shaft weight is around 1lb.
Yuck I used lb yuck! 
The rest is on

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24832 From: Santos Date: 2/6/2019
Subject: Re: Distinguish huge differences: torque-rope drive versus loop driv
Daisy transmission power to weight is shown consistent with my estimates for ST 1000ft values, especially when adjusted for reliability and scaling demands.

I like the new Forum for making happy those who struggled with the old. I don't like Discobot, badges, "love" clicking, and other gamifications. Also, must rummage to read everything, and the moderators do not have JoeF's focus on AWE content over secondary criteria, like easy-reading for newbies, so let the New Forum fill that need.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24833 From: dougselsam Date: 2/6/2019
Subject: Re: Distinguish huge differences: torque-rope drive versus loop driv
You have gone "off-topic" as usual.  "The new forum" is not "rope drive" or "loop drive"  I would not normally point out such trivia, except I am trying to give you a taste of your own nonsense.  Of course trying to make any point with you is a waste of time - you are immune.  In ten years of watching you say anything you want without any consequences, going "off-topic" anytime you want, other people are continually subjected to such trivial nitpicking in a weak attempt to somehow be "in charge".  Thank goodness there is a decent alternative.  I agree the "badges" etc. are a bit childish and annoying, but at least you are not in charge of it.  Meanwhile, posting online is still a bad habit that takes a lot of time and should be minimized or quit, at least in my case.

---In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, <santos137@...
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24834 From: dougselsam Date: 2/6/2019
Subject: Re: Distinguish huge differences: torque-rope drive versus loop driv
Speaking of using "pound", did you  know that the "pound sterling" originally referred to a pound of silver?  (Worth over 200 "pounds" today?) That is how much paper money devalues over time.  I think the original British units had many advantages.  Just being able to divide by 10 because we have ten fingers - so what?  How many people still count on their fingers anyway?  Look at temperature: Fahrenheit goes from zero being the coldest comfortable temperature the air normally reaches except in extreme cases, and 100 degrees is up toward the hottest comfortable temps, with 100 divisions in between, which allows sufficient accuracy..  !00% understandable and useful for most people.   I hear "Celsius" in Canadian forecasts and think "What does 20 degrees mean?"  Pretending 70 degrees Fahrenheit is the same s 72 degrees Fahrenheit?  Crude.  Not fine-tuned for everyday use.  Less accurate.  What about a meter?  How many people can't tell you about how long a meter is?  But a foot?  That's easy!  Just look down!  I like using British units whenever possible.


---In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, <rod.read@...
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24835 From: Santos Date: 2/6/2019
Subject: Re: Distinguish huge differences: torque-rope drive versus loop driv
DougS,

 You have not stated what power rating you estimate for your 1000ft 1000lb shaft. A sports car number only applies to high angular velocity and short length and lifecycle.

The Net tradition is side-comments are ok, it's hijacking topics that is not. I am honoring the topic here.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24836 From: dougselsam Date: 2/6/2019
Subject: Re: AirLoom News
Airloom is never going to happen - take my word for it.  Write it down.  Put a date on it.  Wait ten years.  Like everything else I've told you.  Just because someone said something does not make it "news".

---In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, <santos137@...
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24837 From: dougselsam Date: 2/6/2019
Subject: Re: Distinguish huge differences: torque-rope drive versus loop driv
Joe there was a time when there were perspective beyond my own.  But I got educated.  The start was slowly pounding into my head how "lift" really works.  Took years, and I believe I now have a better explanation than any I've read.  I told you guys ten years go that nobody in this "field" knew what they were doing and that none would enjoy ultimate success.  It was easy for me to see.  "Perspectives beyond your own", as you say.  A decade later we're reduced to arguing whether the resulting multi-million-dollar projects will even fly at all, in time spans of years, while to this day, not a single home in the world is powered by AWE, let alone hundreds, thousands, or millions.  So you tell me what "perpectives beyond my own" I've missed.  I've accurately predicted exactly what would happen, at a glance, without breaking a sweat.
Now I'm going to go off-topic.  I tried to e-mail you about someone giving away a lot of old hang-gliding magazines including "Low and Slow" - the one you published.  I did not hear back from you, so I don't know if you got the message.  I know sometimes even the publisher does not have such archival back issues saved.  If you are interested, please let me know.  :)

---In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, <joefaust333@...
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24838 From: dougselsam Date: 2/6/2019
Subject: Re: Distinguish huge differences: torque-rope drive versus loop driv
daveS I have clearly shown you were at least 2 orders of magnitude wrong.  Yet you go on, pretending you have a point. Your assertion ws so fr off that you should hang your head in engineering embarrassment and shame.  One more subject you don't grasp.  If I ever have a problem with a driveshaft handling the torque, it will be a new thing.  So far I've done pretty well.  My turbines already prove your assertion of 1 kW limitation for a 1 lb./ft driveshaft is way below any reasonble estimate.  You're off by at least a factor of 100.  In other words you are completely wrong.  I'd say being off by a factor of 100 is about par for the course for you. How much power any 1000-foot driveshaft can transmit will depend on its construction, diameter, wall thickness, rpm range, etc.  Since saying "1000-feet" does not convey any of that other information, there is no answer to your question of how much power a 1000-foot carbon fiber driveshaft can transmit.


---In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, <santos137@...
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24839 From: Santos Date: 2/6/2019
Subject: Re: AirLoom News
AirLoom is "happening" somewhat like USWindLabs and a few dozen other starts. We don't expect most ventures to ever make money, but we study them all for aggregated lessons. AirLoom is worth watching if all they ever do is set an early speed record for a semi captive track glider.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24840 From: dougselsam Date: 2/7/2019
Subject: Re: AirLoom News
So if they don't "set an early speed record for a semi captive track glider", then they will not have been worth watching, right?  What if they never fly anything at all?
Fine to watch, but I think there's got be a better word than "news".  I could say "I'm going to flap my arms and fly to the moon", and even publish renderings of me doing it, but that doesn't make it "news".  In which case the real news would be that I had lost my mind, right?  Well for people who know wind energy, most AWE "news", if you read between the lines, translates to: "Another case of group-insanity has taken hold."

---In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, <santos137@...
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24841 From: dougselsam Date: 2/7/2019
Subject: Re: KiteFarm Conductive Surface Methods
It would be refreshing if you could utilize the movement of your kite to generate electricity.


---In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, <santos137@...  

Liquefy air into an onboard tank, like Gabor's jet-stream idea, then have the bumper-cars go to a special terminal to deposit their liquid-air into a system  that will use it to generate grid-power.  There, are you happy?  Two "great" ideas, combined!  Now, back to our regularly-scheduled program...
Why not complete your latest experiment?


---In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, <santos137@...  

Doug, Form a new topic when you have nothing specific to offer on-topic. 

In fact I just shared a great new kPower crosswind power kite rig, with a nice annotated flight-testphoto. You seem to have far less active experimentation than those you imagine are not continuing to do new work.

Go ahead and think that your best AWE community contribution is predictably opine creative visionary speculation is doomed, rather than share ongoing creative ideas of your own.

On ‎Saturday‎, ‎February‎ ‎2‎, ‎2019‎ ‎10‎:‎28‎:‎09‎ ‎AM‎ ‎CST, dougselsam@... [AirborneWindEnergy] <AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com  

I think your wandering mind has wandered back into la-la land...
Where's your best AWE system?
Can we see it running?
Do you have any here-and-now AWE solutions?
Any useful ideas that could actually be implemented?
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24842 From: Santos Date: 2/7/2019
Subject: Re: AirLoom News
Yes, if AirLoom never flies anything, we remain interested in them, and all other players. Let Doug complain over this diligence as his idea of sound posting.

It was the same in the Wright Brothers era; our story is once again about all the pioneers, not just the best. Enjoy.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24843 From: Santos Date: 2/7/2019
Subject: Re: KiteFarm Conductive Surface Methods
Thanks Doug, you will not be disappointed.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24844 From: Joe Faust Date: 2/7/2019
Subject: Re: AirLoom News
Whatever occurs in AirLoom Energy world is AirLoom Energy news. 
Any poster may or may not bring the news forward to share, depending on interests. 
===========================
Mentioned in the news flow about AirLoom Energy are two 
Craig Douglas
and
Myron Allen

So, those two have rubbed against airborne wind energy.  What might come from such rub eventually: time will tell. 

====================================================
AirLoom Energy (AirLoom) (ALE) was mentioned in message 24829     
I've yet to hear from Robert Lumley about any considerations about towering via kite-system tethering. 
====================================================
ALE announced acquiring 20,000 sq. ft. warehouse space for constructing "beta version" of their concept machine.
Details of their beta version are invited openly here. 
====================================================

m
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24845 From: dougselsam Date: 2/7/2019
Subject: Re: AirLoom News - oh and "The Wright Brothers"...
Ah yes, after ten years of blather, we're back to "The Wright Brothers"...
DaveS, you remind me of an old car radio with 5 push-buttons. 
I must have pushed "The Wright Brothers" button.
Well at least you're consistent.
In the Wright Brothers' era, there were scheduled airlines running by this point. 
And that was obviously pre-internet, pre-CNC machining, when they had to develop and build their own motor.  How many AWE people build their own generators (besides me)?  They can order anything they need today, and they have comparatively unlimited money to play with.  The difference?  "The Wright Brothers" knew what they were doing, at least sufficiently to get it done.
And if you want to use the term "pioneers", go back to the pioneer days.  Someone just saying they were "planning" to "go west" would not have been "news", especially after they never actually left.
I was castigated by Joe maybe 5 years ago for asking "Is there any AWE news"?
I'm still waiting to hear the answer!  So are you, whether you realize it or not.
The closest thing to "news" is "Company X made another false pronouncement", "Company Y has not issued any statements since testing was to have commenced last year", or, "We have no idea what company Z is up to, since they said they would power the grid so long ago"...



---In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, <santos137@...
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24846 From: Joe Faust Date: 2/7/2019
Subject: Active-Fence AWES
Have a land-border fence post set found cable loops driven by wind-driven wings. Explore contributions from AirLoom Energy and Dave Santos toward active-fencing. 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24847 From: Santos Date: 2/7/2019
Subject: Re: AirLoom News - oh and "The Wright Brothers"...
Yes, Doug, the Wright Brothers remain the historical ideal as flight inventors, but we must still study all players in AWE, just as key ideas in aviation often incubated in marginal ventures. Yes, those old AM radios we're magical in their day, rather than something to despair over.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24848 From: Santos Date: 2/7/2019
Subject: Re: Active-Fence AWES
Let's review the COTS track options since ten years have passed.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24849 From: gordon_sp Date: 2/7/2019
Subject: Re: AirLoom News

My comments in SomeAWE  7/10/2016 may be helpful on this subject.  At least more reasonable cost estimates are given:

Moving Fence Wind Energy Device

This type of device consists of a number of blades or sails on a continuous track.  I can’t think of a more descriptive name for these devices.  I have made a comparison of two of the larger proposals which claim lower installation and operating costs than conventional HAWT’s.  In addition they claim more efficient land use.  I understand that one of these devices was built and failed, but have no details on it.

Alex Bolonkin’s design uses a continuous rope drive around 4 posts located in a square.  The posts are supported with guide wires. A single generator extracts power from the rope loop.  There are no details on how to adjust the angle of the blades to extract maximum power.

John Yan’s Super Turbine has a kidney shaped track with free-standing posts at regular intervals. There is an electric generator at each blade and the power is transferred to the loop.

         MOVING FENCE WIND GENERATOR

 

 

Alexander Bolonkin (2002)

John Yan "Super Turbine" (2015)

Reference

arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0701114.pdf Project #6

http://www.windpowerengineering.com/design/super-turbine-offers-alternative-conventional-designs/

 

 

 

Shape

Square

Oval with straight sides

 

 

 

Length of loop (M)

2000

2200

 

 

 

Number of blades

92

400

 

 

 

Blade dimensions (M)

50 X ?

23 X 2.2

 

 

 

Total blade area (M2)

?

20000

 

 

 

Blade speed (M/sec)

44

18

 

 

 

Output@12M/sec wind speed(MW)

43

40

 

 

 

Installed Cost ($/Kw)

185

600

 

 

 

Energy cost@7.3M/sec av. wind speed (c/kWh)

0.4

1.3?

 

These devices will be elevated above the ground by at least 5 meters, so the land can be used for other purposes. The translational speed of the blades (sails) will be relatively slow so that noise will be minimal and the danger of killing birds will be minimized.
The method of optimally orienting the blades for maximum energy extraction must be worked out. Also there must be a method of feathering the blades to prevent damage from high winds. I am sure that these technical problems can be worked out without too much expense.

It is clear that even if these numbers are optimistic, these systems have a substantial advantage over the present HAWT’s.  Similar claims have been made for the carousel style proposed by Kitegen.  The questions still remain.   Are these cost estimates realistic and will the devices perform as predicted?

It appears to me that these systems are an order of magnitude less expensive than conventional HAWT's. In addition these systems can be scaled up to 100 MW or more, whereas HAWT's are limited to ~ 3 MW.  We therefore have to develop AWE Systems which compete with these proposed devices and not existing HAWT's.

In Bolonkin's square design, there are only 4 orientations of each blade, depending on which quadrant the blades (sails) are in.  The blades change their orientation every 10 - 15 seconds which is about the same cycle time of the figure of eight cycle in a yo-yo AWE system.

I located the two systems which were constructed around 1986. These were relatively small systems of 200 and 150 KW and consisted of two rows of sails with pulleys at each end.  The front row will mask the efficiency of the back row in this design.  (Google “transpower turbine”)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24850 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/7/2019
Subject: Re: Active-Fence AWES
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24851 From: dougselsam Date: 2/8/2019
Subject: Re: Active-Fence AWES (& patents)
We have covered something like this before that was built in Tehachapi, California at Oak Creek windfarm decades ago, basically a sideways laddermill on poles.  It didn;t work out but that doesn't necessarily disprove the concept, if someone has a better way to do it.  (Plenty of regular wind turbine attempts fail too.) Also, we've talked about side-by-side arrays.
In fact I think one main reason why a lot of this stuff doesn't get pursued is it is the concepts are in the public domain, so, are not patentable.  That, to me, is an example of a bad effect of patents.  It's like, you don't want to just do something halfway normal, because somebody, somewhere, sometime, mentioned the possibility.
So anything that anybody has ever mentioned is off the list - it has to be something weird.  I think that was the problem with Altaeros.  If you'll forgive my use of the term, one aspect of my pet "Professor Crackpot Syndrome" diagnosis (a work in progress) is the mythical "good professor" insists on ruining any good invention he may have by adding "one more feature".  Lots of times it's better to stop at doing just one new thing. But if the one new thing has ever been mentioned anytime, anywhere, patentability becomes an issue.  The sad thing is that many people think patents are "the only thing",  All the patent does is give you  a government-enforced monopoly for a brief period.  If you think you cannot make a go of it without such a government-enforced monopoly, well I think that is wrong.  Work on it anyway.  You'll eventually find aspects that are patentable when you figure out how to get it working well.  That is my advice.  The patent system should not form the basis of an excuse to not try things.  That is the opposite of its intended effect. Look at Elon Musk - he said everyone could use his patents.  He's still doing OK.
Hard for wind energy people to drive by a golf course or driving range and not imagine the 50-foot-tall fence as a wind-energy collection system (WECS).  In Tehachapi there is a hill so covered with turbines the locals call it "the wind wall".
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24852 From: dave santos Date: 2/8/2019
Subject: Re: Active-Fence AWES (& patents)
Under RAD, we move the ball every time we review past concepts, not reason helplessly from passive engineering fatalism. Besides Tehachapi, the closest previous similarity case known to us is bird-scaring by kites that skirt Ag fields on cableways. AirLoom is keeping the concept in play.

What JoeF adds here is the idea of leveraging existing rural infrastructure needs, like fencing and transmission lines, to support quasi-AWE WECS, much as others suggest that urban skylines might support wind harvesting. Its now well accepted that both small and large generation systems will play key roles in meeting total clean-energy demand. 

Leveraging parallel rural infrastructure is a high-value goal apart from the engineering challenge of perfecting the tracks and gliders, that could make up for known disadvantages (low altitude, mechanical complexity, etc.). Further, we know that many ideas fail not because the idea was bad or impossible, but because early developers lacked COTS components or talent to solve specific challenges, or simply never found their market soon enough.

Lets recall a further closely related wind concept known to us, of sail and kite vehicles to operate on favored roadways to make power. This may a major use of existing infrastructure for AWE and related mobile wind tech, with the advantage that roads might be dynamically assigned according to wind direction. Similarly, any tracked AWES in principle could rely on crosswind-aligned track segments, much as airplanes use favored runways for upwind take-off and landing.

Open-AWE_IP-Cloud



 

We have covered something like this before that was built in Tehachapi, California at Oak Creek windfarm decades ago, basically a sideways laddermill on poles.  It didn;t work out but that doesn't necessarily disprove the concept, if someone has a better way to do it.  (Plenty of regular wind turbine attempts fail too.) Also, we've talked about side-by-side arrays.
In fact I think one main reason why a lot of this stuff doesn't get pursued is it is the concepts are in the public domain, so, are not patentable.  That, to me, is an example of a bad effect of patents.  It's like, you don't want to just do something halfway normal, because somebody, somewhere, sometime, mentioned the possibility.
So anything that anybody has ever mentioned is off the list - it has to be something weird.  I think that was the problem with Altaeros.  If you'll forgive my use of the term, one aspect of my pet "Professor Crackpot Syndrome" diagnosis (a work in progress) is the mythical "good professor" insists on ruining any good invention he may have by adding "one more feature".  Lots of times it's better to stop at doing just one new thing. But if the one new thing has ever been mentioned anytime, anywhere, patentability becomes an issue.  The sad thing is that many people think patents are "the only thing",  All the patent does is give you  a government-enforced monopoly for a brief period.  If you think you cannot make a go of it without such a government-enforced monopoly, well I think that is wrong.  Work on it anyway.  You'll eventually find aspects that are patentable when you figure out how to get it working well.  That is my advice.  The patent system should not form the basis of an excuse to not try things.  That is the opposite of its intended effect. Look at Elon Musk - he said everyone could use his patents.  He's still doing OK.
Hard for wind energy people to drive by a golf course or driving range and not imagine the 50-foot-tall fence as a wind-energy collection system (WECS).  In Tehachapi there is a hill so covered with turbines the locals call it "the wind wall".
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24853 From: dave santos Date: 2/8/2019
Subject: Energy Bird?
Have we reviewed this old AWE outlier?



Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24854 From: dougselsam Date: 2/9/2019
Subject: Re: Active-Fence AWES (& patents)
daveS: I think anyone who has read your gibberish for the last ten years will recognize the typical ability/urge to write many paragraphs that essentially say nothing.  Starting with using the made-up daveS term "RAD, meaning "Rapid...Development", after ten years, what is developing "rapidly"?.  So why does he say that?  Bird-scaring kites on cableways?  Where?  Never heard of that.  Next, without missing a beat, after just saying "Airborne Wind Energy (as the secret part of the "RAD" supposed "acronym"), he degenerates to "QUASI-" AWE, indicating that he is really referring to "tower-supported WECS - basically throwing in the towel on AWE, and instead blathering on about agriculture etc., self-destructing any further discussion of AWE at all to just drop a few irrelevant keywords like "rural infrastructure", "urban skylines MIGHT support wind harvesting", etc.  Really infrastructure needs, like fencing and transmission lines, to support quasi-AWE WECS"  really?  Is that what he said?  I must have missed that.
"Similarly, any tracked AWES in principle could rely on crosswind-aligned track segments,"
OK but nobody is building or running any such AWE tracks.



---In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, <santos137@...  

We have covered something like this before that was built in Tehachapi, California at Oak Creek windfarm decades ago, basically a sideways laddermill on poles.  It didn;t work out but that doesn't necessarily disprove the concept, if someone has a better way to do it.  (Plenty of regular wind turbine attempts fail too.) Also, we've talked about side-by-side arrays.
In fact I think one main reason why a lot of this stuff doesn't get pursued is it is the concepts are in the public domain, so, are not patentable.  That, to me, is an example of a bad effect of patents.  It's like, you don't want to just do something halfway normal, because somebody, somewhere, sometime, mentioned the possibility.
So anything that anybody has ever mentioned is off the list - it has to be something weird.  I think that was the problem with Altaeros.  If you'll forgive my use of the term, one aspect of my pet "Professor Crackpot Syndrome" diagnosis (a work in progress) is the mythical "good professor" insists on ruining any good invention he may have by adding "one more feature".  Lots of times it's better to stop at doing just one new thing. But if the one new thing has ever been mentioned anytime, anywhere, patentability becomes an issue.  The sad thing is that many people think patents are "the only thing",  All the patent does is give you  a government-enforced monopoly for a brief period.  If you think you cannot make a go of it without such a government-enforced monopoly, well I think that is wrong.  Work on it anyway.  You'll eventually find aspects that are patentable when you figure out how to get it working well.  That is my advice.  The patent system should not form the basis of an excuse to not try things.  That is the opposite of its intended effect. Look at Elon Musk - he said everyone could use his patents.  He's still doing OK.
Hard for wind energy people to drive by a golf course or driving range and not imagine the 50-foot-tall fence as a wind-energy collection system (WECS).  In Tehachapi there is a hill so covered with turbines the locals call it "the wind wall".
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24855 From: dougselsam Date: 2/9/2019
Subject: Re: Energy Bird?
It is nothing.  Empty bragging, as usual.
1 cent / kWh, due to a sketch on a website. (???)
More complete 100% BS -- it will never be built.
You can write that down and get back to me in ten MORE years, OK?
The website blames others for its lack of success before even explaining how it works.
Anyone can claim they have a flapping-wing wind energy solution.
How many times have we heard that?
Since long before the current AWE hype-cycle...
News: "someone made a fantasy website directed toward a subject they do not understand".



---In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, <santos137@...
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24856 From: Joe Faust Date: 2/9/2019
Subject: Re: Energy Bird?
Some attention in the past was given to the entity: 
===========================

Kite windmill experiment at Brennels by Ampyx Power?

A few years ago Gunther Niessen presented a concept for winning wind energy with an airplane on a cable .

The aircraft is becoming more and more like a piloted pilot and energy is generated by rolling out the cable. The cable is on a drum with dynamo. Bottom left in the picture.

The plane already behaves like a wick of a windmill, but at a height of between 500 and 3000 m. There it blows more than at 100 m altitude.

On the picture it flies up and down, but the air is 3 dimensional. I think that from left to right, there will be flown back and forth.

I have not heard from him for a few years.

His own website has disappeared.

Now his concept turns up with a trial by the Ampyx Power company from The Hague, which at Brennels in the Noord Oostpolder will do a 2 year experiment with the concept of Gunther Niessen.

Only is he still involved?

I can not find his name on the Ampyx Power website . According to the Chamber of Commerce it is a BV in formation and the data are temporarily unavailable.

The Ampyx Power trial takes place on the Brennels site in the Noord Oostpolder, Brennels grows nettles and makes the fibers clothes.

It came in the news because the municipality NOP Brennels has given a building permit for a ground station.

In that building comes the dynamo with drum, on which the cable is.

When the plane is in the air, it flies horizontally back and forth, just like you do with a piloted pilot. If you have ever done that, you know that such flying back and forth produces a lot of pulling power. With this, this aircraft pulls a cable from a drum. The dynamo in the drum brakes the drum a bit and delivers energy.

If the cable is back and forth after a number of flights back and forth, the aircraft goes back down to the ground station in a dive. This way the cable is caught up again. The alternator is then just the motor that drives the drum and rolls up the cable.

When the aircraft has dropped to about 500 m and the cable has been overtaken as much as possible, the pattern starts again.

The main wing of this aircraft can be compared to the wick of a windmill.

Provided the plane is well controlled.

Only this way of wind energy winning does not require a tower, and the heavy generator remains on the ground. These are all significant cost savings.

However, there is a very much used cable, which will wear and have to be replaced for so much time. And there is a risk of cable breakage. In that case, the aircraft can of course fly independently and neatly land in the right place.

If everything works well.

In normal operation, the aircraft must of course fly entirely independently and return to the ground station in time.

Moreover, it could well be that the installation requires permanent manning to bring the aircraft into the right starting position, when it has to take off again after a wind. But that can also be done automatically. In the port of Rotterdam they also have automatic container transporters.

That is why the newly mounted Ampyx Power will first test with a smaller aircraft and at lower altitude .

What needs to be new and tested is the long cable and the independent and optimal flying of the aircraft, and prove that it is all safe.

I first heard about this concept from a Gunther Niessen. He has applied for a patent for a part of this system. While searching for that patent, I met many fathers of the idea.

Actually, it would be neat if Ampyx put the ideas of others in a row that eventually led to their experiment, and whether they added something themselves.

I sent Ampyx an email.

Update:

Within a few hours an email back from Bas Lansdorp of Ampyx Power from The Hague.

The concept was published in 1980 by one Miles L. Loyd of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in the US. "Cross wind kite power". That is only a theoretical treatise, but there is enough to conclude that the concept is already 30 years old.

In 2008 this was done again by a group of Germans and a Dutchman " The pumping Kite Wind Generator: Optimization of the Power Output "

In the online story is immediately one of the problems to be solved:

Wear on the cable.

That cable is constantly rolled off a drum and then quickly rolled up again.

They styled that they have chosen a large drum to be able to have just 1 layer of cable. Which limits the height again.

If there are more layers of cable on the drum, the cable rubs over the layer underneath, causing extra wear.

Below a photo from the 2008 story. On the back of the tractor, the drum with the cable and the generator in it. The kite of about 15m2 yielded 95 kW at a height of 300 m.

"
IN THE COMMENTS SECTION ON THAT PAGE, Gunther Niessen posted two comments: 
"Gunther Niessen says:

Avatar from Gunther Niessen
The cable wear problem has been solved by a cable manager, conceived by Gunther Niessen and his company TOPtech Energy. For the time being this is secret technology, because patent registration does not work.

Our website is http://www.energybird.org

We want to build a prototype ENERGYBIRD-3 with 100m span. 
If Minister Koenders cooperates, who has told us that he has a 500 million Euro pot for clean energy, that will happen quickly. Cost prototype about 5 million. 
Koenders has added that his heart depends on clean energy. 
We will see if that is true.

Otherwise we will get the necessary money, peanuts for a large country, with 300 people directly from the citizens. Everyone can participate. See vacancies on page 1 of the website, below

Gunther Niessen

06-39 79 6116, mail@energybird.org"
AND

The weak points of the Ampyx Power Concept are: 
1. the plane. This could perhaps simulate a 2 MW bottom windmill, but never reach 50 MW such as the Albatross Wind Machine. 
2. the drum. It does not work at all at 100 tons, 
and the cable also wears off when there are small forces. 
3. the consumption of room volumes in such small systems is too high. 
the relation volume consumption / MW yield only becomes good for large systems

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24857 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/9/2019
Subject: Re: Energy Bird?
Albatross wind machine
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24858 From: Joe Faust Date: 2/9/2019
Subject: Re: Energy Bird?
https://marjorie-wiki.de/wiki/G%C3%BCnther_Niessen
Perhaps use Google Translate to translate the wiki.
CAUTION HERE IS MACHINE TRANSLATION WITH ERRORS, NO DOUBT:
"Gunther Niessen , German-Dutch, born in 1939, now (2011) 72 years
old, has developed in 50 years time a number of technical systems and
considered a number of theories, in various fields. He studied physics
and philosophy . Sometimes his theories turn into technical
developments.

His best-known development, awarded the international DSM Innovation
Award, is a novel windmill, the Albatross wind machine, which flies on
a rope in the cloudy wind, breaking its previous 200-MW limits. See
movie !:( www.energybird.org/film.swf).

His inventions include a semi-automatic supermarket cash register with
color labels, precursors of today's bar code cashes, later
supplemented by a fully automatic supermarket cash register with
transponders.

During his philosophy studies, he was interested in how thinking
works. He developed an epistemology, thinking as a sequence of 10
elementary thinking steps, and later supplemented the theory by
constructing a 3-D computer in which elementary thinking steps take
place. The technical parts of the theory are laid down in the patent
D100022

Basic statements of his "process philosophy" are laid down on the
website www.philosophy.kiddds.org Philosophy is about description of
the world process, and in preparation of it description of the
underlying structures. The world process is "the whole," the absolute,
the comprehensive. Not a philosophy of being, but a process
philosophy. Thus philosophy flows directly into the sciences, in the
description of different types of processes.

A new physics model that complements or replaces Einstein's
100-year-old physics, the General Relativity Theory ART, called
General Cosmos Theory AKT, is in the works.

Einstein and Newton also have two possibilities with equal probability
that are mutually exclusive, one overlooked, dealing with the other
alone. In AKT the overlooked possibility is examined more closely.
Model assumption is that the 2nd possibility applies. Often based on
estimates of probabilities, the consequences are worked out. In the
new physics, there is no gravity (Newton's idea) and no curved spaces
(Einstein's idea). There comes something third.

In the field of Life Science / Psychology / Medicine, GN has studied
two diseases: the sad disease (better known as sadism, often not
understood as disease) and cancer.

Sadism came under his spell after he realized that obscure groups are
targeting many good developments. Also, and especially in his main
area of work, this is noticeable when one goes to where the decisions
are made: to the "front". Anyone who never goes to the front, gets
little of it. Of course, people then think that everything is right.
But that's not the case: Bright pleasure in doing harm draws sadists.
You have a sick Schadenfreude center. A switch in it does not switch
like normal, healthy people. Sadist groups have developed cunning
games to combine self-enrichment and harm while remaining undetected.
Sadism statement at www.beo-beo.org. 10th basic theme, B10.

When realizing cheap clean energy (cCE), sadist groups are the biggest
adversaries. Concentrated on certain industries, including the oil
industry, they have billions of fonds they use as weapons, money
weapons to achieve their goals: sadistic fun and even more enrichment.

Following an event on March 24, 2011, GN-led cCE (Union cheap Clean
Energy) and BME (Confederation of Morals and Honesty) investigate
suspicious deaths and potential oil industry killings of CCE
inventors. Because about insiders is leaked, that oil people openly
discuss with each other how they can inconspicuously bring CCE
inventors who could not buy them under the ground: assassination plans
in preparation!

Krebs has become the number one killer. Most people die from cancer.
What most people do not know: 30 years ago, one died of cancer, where
5 now die from cancer. A New Cancer Theory of GN: Why have cancer
cases quintupled in the last 30 years? Why today 5 times more deaths
from cancer than 30 years ago? Are there parallels with the plague
epidemics of the Middle Ages? Is there a transfer process? The new
theory says: yes. In preparation."
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24859 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/9/2019
Subject: Re: Energy Bird?
The drawings of his patent do not seem to refer to his Albatross pumping machine; rather the drawings look to "laddermill" and other matters.   It would be neat to get a full translation to English of his patent. 

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24860 From: Joe Faust Date: 2/9/2019
Subject: Re: Energy Bird?
So far, the following cited Gunther Niessen's patent:
KORRMANN VOLKER
VERGNANO GIANNI
WRAGE STEPHAN
BRABECK STEPHAN
SKYSAILS GMBH & CO KG
DIEHL MORITZ M
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24861 From: Joe Faust Date: 2/9/2019
Subject: Re: Energy Bird?
One abstract on his patent reads:
"
Prime mover in which rotations are generated
Abstract
The invention relates to a prime mover (such as a wind machine, water machine, wave machine, engine, pump or any other prime mover with open or closed working chambers) in which rotations are generated. The inventive prime movers are prime movers in which the moment of momentum can accelerate considerably without an external support being necessary to compensate this. Furthermore, the invention relates to systems in which the moment of momentum can accelerate considerably without interfering with neighbouring systems by transmitting moments of momentum to the latter; and to systems which are easy to move while the rotations are being accelerated or slowed down inside them. These systems will not rotate while rotation accelerations are taking place inside them or will only do so as desired, even when they have no fixed support, for example when floating in water or in a state of zero gravity. The invention relates to double spiral systems and to chain wheel and pulley systems which have the advantage of low friction. An arrangement of systems in which the moments of momentum are separated is also introduced. A number of applications demonstrating the use of the invention are described. Prime movers with open and with closed working chambers can benefit from the advantages of introducing the principle of separating the moments of momentum."
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24862 From: Joe Faust Date: 2/9/2019
Subject: Re: Energy Bird?
The applicants for the patent mentioned include DSM    which company has a materials cluster which includes DSM Dyneema.    
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24863 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/9/2019
Subject: Re: Expedition by kite system
Our forum priors on topic: 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24864 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/9/2019
Subject: Re: Expedition by kite system
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24865 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/10/2019
Subject: Weather Forecasting for AWES
In 1960 following receiving the UCLA Clarence Addison Dykstra scholarship award, I had a private meeting and meal with meteorologist  Dr. Jacob Bjerknes; he also took me to his office and roof observatory. The arrangement of the meeting was motivated by alumni who had reviewed my interest in mathematics and science.  His father was the Norwegian meteorologist Vilhelm Bjerknes.  Included in the scholarship was fully paid residence and board in the just built campus student housing Dykstra Hall (photo linked below) from which I was probably the first to toss Frisbee saucers from one of the top floors.  Weather for high jumping and kiting piqued my interest since.   

     Today, energy kite systems has weather forecasting as an important service sector. Some AWES systems will be tightly mechanically coupled with forecasted weather in order then to effect alterations in AWES operations.  
art
This topic thread may be one thread tracing AWE's marriage with weather forecasting
==========================

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24866 From: benhaiemp Date: 2/10/2019
Subject: Isotropic kite
Attachments :

As attachment an interesting DaveS' file about an isotropic kite.

I am testing some draft of this. The stability looks to be a concern. Please what are possibilities (tail, cone, briddle) allowing to keep the isotropic shape of the kite? Thanks.

  @@attachment@@
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24867 From: dave santos Date: 2/10/2019
Subject: Re: Active-Fence AWES (& patents)
Doug, The AirLoom folks clearly do intend to operate from tracks. kPower tested tensioned cables on the surface as kite tracks at kFarm. There have been other AWE track testing cases, like NTS, and various track concepts, PierreB's simulated by wheel. You seem to miss a lot of reported work and discussion, none of it fairly "gibberish".



 

daveS: I think anyone who has read your gibberish for the last ten years will recognize the typical ability/urge to write many paragraphs that essentially say nothing.  Starting with using the made-up daveS term "RAD, meaning "Rapid...Development", after ten years, what is developing "rapidly"?.  So why does he say that?  Bird-scaring kites on cableways?  Where?  Never heard of that.  Next, without missing a beat, after just saying "Airborne Wind Energy (as the secret part of the "RAD" supposed "acronym"), he degenerates to "QUASI-" AWE, indicating that he is really referring to "tower-supported WECS - basically throwing in the towel on AWE, and instead blathering on about agriculture etc., self-destructing any further discussion of AWE at all to just drop a few irrelevant keywords like "rural infrastructure", "urban skylines MIGHT support wind harvesting", etc.  Really infrastructure needs, like fencing and transmission lines, to support quasi-AWE WECS"  really?  Is that what he said?  I must have missed that.
"Similarly, any tracked AWES in principle could rely on crosswind-aligned track segments,"
OK but nobody is building or running any such AWE tracks.



---In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, <santos137@...  

We have covered something like this before that was built in Tehachapi, California at Oak Creek windfarm decades ago, basically a sideways laddermill on poles.  It didn;t work out but that doesn't necessarily disprove the concept, if someone has a better way to do it.  (Plenty of regular wind turbine attempts fail too.) Also, we've talked about side-by-side arrays.
In fact I think one main reason why a lot of this stuff doesn't get pursued is it is the concepts are in the public domain, so, are not patentable.  That, to me, is an example of a bad effect of patents.  It's like, you don't want to just do something halfway normal, because somebody, somewhere, sometime, mentioned the possibility.
So anything that anybody has ever mentioned is off the list - it has to be something weird.  I think that was the problem with Altaeros.  If you'll forgive my use of the term, one aspect of my pet "Professor Crackpot Syndrome" diagnosis (a work in progress) is the mythical "good professor" insists on ruining any good invention he may have by adding "one more feature".  Lots of times it's better to stop at doing just one new thing. But if the one new thing has ever been mentioned anytime, anywhere, patentability becomes an issue.  The sad thing is that many people think patents are "the only thing",  All the patent does is give you  a government-enforced monopoly for a brief period.  If you think you cannot make a go of it without such a government-enforced monopoly, well I think that is wrong.  Work on it anyway.  You'll eventually find aspects that are patentable when you figure out how to get it working well.  That is my advice.  The patent system should not form the basis of an excuse to not try things.  That is the opposite of its intended effect. Look at Elon Musk - he said everyone could use his patents.  He's still doing OK.
Hard for wind energy people to drive by a golf course or driving range and not imagine the 50-foot-tall fence as a wind-energy collection system (WECS).  In Tehachapi there is a hill so covered with turbines the locals call it "the wind wall".
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24868 From: dave santos Date: 2/10/2019
Subject: Re: Energy Bird?
Doug overlooks his unmatched "empty bragging" when complaining about every other venture. Review of cases is not properly about bragging, but about technical reasons for failure and success. At least Energy Bird did not become about complaining helplessly, but will remain a fair early effort at figuring AWE out, welcomed like all the others we honor.



 

The applicants for the patent mentioned include DSM    which company has a materials cluster which includes DSM Dyneema.    
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24869 From: dave santos Date: 2/10/2019
Subject: Re: Isotropic kite [1 Attachment]
A round soft kite with suitable bridling would replace the paper-plate used for proof-of-concept of tilting to accept wind from any direction without rotation.

Stability is excellent due to the many-connected staked-out topology (topological stability). There is a flight video clip somewhere...



 
[Attachment(s) from pierre-benhaiem@orange.fr [AirborneWindEnergy] included below]

As attachment an interesting DaveS' file about an isotropic kite.

I am testing some draft of this. The stability looks to be a concern. Please what are possibilities (tail, cone, briddle) allowing to keep the isotropic shape of the kite? Thanks.

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24870 From: dave santos Date: 2/10/2019
Subject: SkyGrid brings Boeing to Austin to revolutionize airspace.
A bit slow reporting this, because its like a dream. Austin, Texas, my hometown, is suddenly world-leader in airspace R&D, Boeing has decided. Readers of this Forum and TACO understand in detail how critical advanced airspace management will be for AWE and so many other revolutionary aviation applications. Expect more news soon, as I meet the early SkyGrid team and study their conceptual specifications, which are presumed NextGen airspace extensions, machine-vision integration, METAR processing, etc., as discussed here over the years. Count on AWE to be in the SkyGrid mix. Looks like TACO2.0 may finally be needed, as the new airspace standards are defined and deployed.




Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24871 From: joe_f_90032 Date: 2/10/2019
Subject: Re: Isotropic kite [1 Attachment]
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24872 From: dave santos Date: 2/10/2019
Subject: Blockchain-based Airspace Security
AWE systems with wireless com links are vulnerable to hacking and jamming. The hacking risk will be mitigated by blockchain verification, a first tech note about SkyGrid approaches to secure UAS airspace; so novel a blockchain app that its not yet noted on Wikipedia, but is noted on an open SkyGrid job description-






Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24873 From: benhaiemp Date: 2/10/2019
Subject: Re: Isotropic kite [1 Attachment]
Attachments :
    Thanks DaveS. For now I experimented this ugly parachute as kite. But a parachute without holes is perhaps not as stable as a parasail with slots for what I saw, or the altitude was too low to avoid turbulence.  A kite lifter like Peter Lynn's single skin would perhaps be better than a parachute if it is quite round in order to face any wind directions without rotating, but losing also some stability (?). For this I prefer avoid implementing tails or cones. 
      @@attachment@@
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24874 From: Santos Date: 2/11/2019
    Subject: Re: Isotropic kite [1 Attachment]
    Nice fundamental test. You can also call your wing a Playsail, the theoretic probable first kite of ancient nomad tent experience, and still a Kite God favorite.

    The observed instability is "a feature not a bug", it's net harvestable power that can be controlled by stake-out geometric variance.
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24875 From: dougselsam Date: 2/11/2019
    Subject: Re: Energy Bird? (Sure and I've got a bridge to sell you...)
    "Doug overlooks" - the same old tired phrase.  When you say "empty bragging", you refer to my pointing out the advantages of SuperTurbine.  If, on the other hand, I were to flag "empty bragging", I'd be talking about you "bragging" about your phantom "airborne wind energy concert" that you promised in a certain year, at a certain park near Austin -  Result?  No AWE system at all, let alone concert..  100% predicted by me, here.  I'm talking about Magenn's empty bragging about even having a useful concept.  I'm talking about Makani, promising, every year or two, that they "will be" powering the grid in Hawaii.  I'm talking about Altaeros' "empty bragging", promising to feed the grid in remote Alaska.  I'd be talking about the "empty bragging" of KPS having promised to be "powering the grid" in Scotland this past year.  And you could go right on down the list - those are only the most highly-publicized projects, none of which has ever really happened.
    Myself?  I realized early on that making such empty promises was meaningless and served no good purpose, so I don't make promises of powering the grid at any location, or of pretty much anything.  Why "brag" about "future accomplishments"?  Who would even DO that?  And why???  And further, every one of them???  (definitely a "syndrome")  My reasoning is that there is no point making empty promises.  Either do it or don't.  Tell people your accomplishments after making them, not before.  Not that complicated of a concept.  Well, for normal people...


    ---In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, <santos137@...  

    The applicants for the patent mentioned include DSM    which company has a materials cluster which includes DSM Dyneema.    
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 24876 From: Santos Date: 2/11/2019
    Subject: Re: Energy Bird? (Sure and I've got a bridge to sell you...)
    Doug, You really do overlook key facts, like diligently reviewing AWE players is not an engineering down-select by a reviewer. Your ST is your down-select. When we review it, it's not our choice unless we state so.

    I am very proud and of being part of AWEfest efforts to date, from Enerkite's AWEC waffle party at Templehof, with kPower's KiteSat also generating, to kFarm's party sessions, to Ambient Camping music events on the Texas Coast. Wubbo's AWEfest concept continues to grow and evolve. I'll be demoing AWE for a fifth year at Austin's kitefest, the oldest such fest in the Western Hemisphere. Those who happily review all players here best appreciate AWEfest progress and potential. Energy Kite and USWindLabs are equally welcome, even if "failed" by your stated criteria.