Freeflying | 2022-04-11 15:28:09 UTC | #303 https://thepowercollective.ca/ I’ve just discovered these guys are working on a similar idea to myself. kind of beating myself too it. You know your on the right path when you find reassuring new like this. I’m not sure if this is adaptable for awes but it is encouraging. Micro scale power generation. Is within reach. There also responsible for the wind wall idea. Robert Murray-Smith investigated. ------------------------- tallakt | 2022-04-11 15:28:09 UTC | #304 Can you see the max wind speed for the RB1 Residential? Im having trouble with the web page. With this number, the local wind, and the price of electricity and the unit, you could calculate how long an installation needs to return its own investment. A heat exhange heater will provide investment parity after 5 years and lasts approx 15 years (in Norway). As most houses have grid electricity, that windmill must calculate as beneficial or close to that… https://www.enova.no/privat/alle-energitiltak/varmepumper/ ------------------------- Freeflying | 2022-04-11 15:28:09 UTC | #305 I emailed them. Asking for more deals. No reply so far. However https://youtu.be/nPvTH7Siclg It covered by many on YouTube and this is just one example. ------------------------- tallakt | 2022-04-11 15:28:09 UTC | #306 I thimk 2 kW for five of these says a lot. They must surely be €1000 a piece, and five of them would be a considerable investment.. ------------------------- Freeflying | 2022-04-11 15:28:09 UTC | #307 Uk electricity bills a have skyrocketed. My folks tend to pay 2500k on electricity each year. If it is a once of payment thats value for money. If running cost like bearing, rotors and coils maintenance. are taken into account. It still be cheaper in the long run. I’m not sure if it come with a maintenance package? Covered under warranty for x amount of years while in operation. 15 years is about normal for these kinds of things. 20-30 years would be a fantastic deal. But it would depend on materials stresses. At some point the rotor vains will become too thin to be safe. Ablative erosion being the main factor. Over the operating lifecycle. Then you have insurance to consider. if that’s something you will want? €1000 per unit isn’t all that bad. if you consider the extras? that will have to be in place due to consumer laws. If you spend 5k and save yourself 100000k in the long run it is a good deal. I agree it high outlay investment. it is where you place your money that counts! After all We are to that which we give. Its one of the better examples of home power generation I’ve seen in awhile. 2kw on your roof seam like a good deal to me. Considering the average home uses 2500kwh per annum. ------------------------- tallakt | 2022-04-11 15:28:09 UTC | #308 Electricity prices are likely to not remain so high as long as cheaper options readily exist ------------------------- Freeflying | 2022-04-11 15:28:09 UTC | #309 Yes this is true. As long as there are cheaper option, we could see a paradigm shift if energy production. Then it what am I using it for? Main appliance in the home fridge, washing machine, cookers. Heaters. Communication. Thats the bare minimum. Then it is the hot water, which is about a third of all the bill. I know some might like the idea of going native. having a hot water coil in a rocket stove.. but you still have the cost of biomass fuels to deal with. It is why Britain only has about 1/4 of it original forest. Due to charcoal production. If you can grow your own hazel and willow. then you may have a chance of slashing that bill to mere 100s. it a opportunity one that dare not be missed. Provided production cost dont impede access to the population. preventing access to a larger market.and sales. If Cost could be slashed by 2/3rds? it only leaving intial cost to begin with. Most folk I know might jump at that. Considering money is tight. ------------------------- dougselsam | 2022-04-11 15:28:09 UTC | #310 [quote="Freeflying, post:303, topic:1610"] You know your on the right path when you find reassuring new like this. [/quote] I've always agreed that the ridge would focus wind energy, but I can tell you from years of experience, this is going nowhere, and yes, you are correct that your ideas are at a similar level of ineffectiveness. I wouldn't get too excited. ------------------------- Freeflying | 2022-04-11 15:28:09 UTC | #311 I see it more as a sign post. Sure there’s much to be desired. Not all roofs face the same direction. Just a mere hopeful in a litany of designs. In some cases guide rails will be needed. To direct prevailing winds. In to the rotor blades. One the better designs I’ve seen in a long time. Though after messaging them and getting no response. It might be more of a sun dance and a wish fart away. Its hopefull contender, I just pray they got some substance. Rather than flashy neon signs saying please stop here. Excited sure! but also wary that it might not pan out. ------------------------- dougselsam | 2022-04-11 15:28:09 UTC | #312 [quote="Freeflying, post:311, topic:1610"] I see it more as a sign post. [/quote] Yeah a sign post saying "wrong way - turn back". I agree, it "looks" like a compelling design. Checks a lot of the right boxes. Unfortunately it also checks a few of the wrong boxes: 1) The "vertical-axis-type" (in this case we can call it "cross-axis") turbines, 2) The rooftop mounting... To wind newbies, rooftop mounting "seems" like a no-brainer. Rooftop mounting indeed appears quite attractive. People, especially wind newbies, almost always like rooftop-mounting. Seasoned potatoes - er um I mean wind people, on the other hand, usually try to steer people away from rooftop mounting. As much of a slam-dunk as rooftop mounting seems like it should be, find one successful example. Just imagine - every newbie wants to use rooftop mounting, yet you can't find a single successful example.... Hmmmm.... Well, it's possible they all just ruin it with a cross-axis turbine, right? (Professor Crackpot always ruins any good invention by adding bad features - why? He's nuts!) Then again look at the rooftop turbines installed at Logan Airport in Boston. Regular horizontal-axis rotors. Still didn't work out. I think they were removed long ago. twenty years ago the big story was the new world trade center building would feature wind turbines. Paul Gipe and I both said "No it won't". Who was right? I had a rooftop turbine installed on a concrete block industrial building with steel framing. Worked OK, but even though it was mounted on rubber pads, the noise still permeated the building. Then the building owner made us take it down. A wood-frame house is like a giant acoustic guitar body. A wind turbine is like the strings. Any attempt to put a turbine on a house gets "wifed". That's when the wife says "take it down!". I'll wait to hear back after you've found the rooftop wind energy installation that is operating on a daily basis that everyone is happy with... Out of 7 billion people, there has to be one, right? Right???.... ------------------------- Freeflying | 2022-04-11 15:33:17 UTC | #313 Fair point. No one wants a sleep deprived psychotic wife. That’s like being strung up by your nutsack. No guy wants that in his life. Quickest road to divorce and race to the bottom. Directed noise cancelling sound proofing still going to hard to sell. Even to the most determined of enthusiasts. If airports and former WTC decide nope. I wonder what spoiled it? Oh it noisy. It transfers too much vibration to the superstructure. like you said its a long list. Just a shame it don’t tick more boxes. As it would be more widely used. Or widely recommend. It has it challenges. If it can avoid being nuked by the wife’s of suburbia. The Viability goes up. By a factor of 4. Round where I am the neighbours would be the main problem. Envy or jealousy might do it in, in the end. It only take one of the to turn on you and problems. Over coming those hurdle would be the hardest part. Noise complaint and you have you local authority breathing down your neck. They are none too kind. Got some reading up to do if I find something i let you know. ------------------------- PierreB | 2022-04-11 16:53:31 UTC | #314 SuperTurbine (tm) has all the characteristics required to be installed on a roof. Multiple units can allow each unit to self-compensate for vibration. ------------------------- dougselsam | 2022-04-11 18:37:18 UTC | #315 [quote="PierreB, post:314, topic:1610"] SuperTurbine ™ has all the characteristics required to be installed on a roof. [/quote] Yes, it's true. Just pointing out, rooftop mounting sounds like a slam-dunk, but so far has not worked out. In the case of the SuperTwin(TM) we installed, it worked OK, but the owner made us take it down before we got to the point of taking any data. I do not recall if it ever received any strong winds before we had to remove it. I think it was during the off-season. ------------------------- PierreB | 2022-04-11 19:01:23 UTC | #316 [quote="dougselsam, post:315, topic:1610"] Yes, it’s true. Just pointing out, rooftop mounting sounds like a slam-dunk, but so far has not worked out. [/quote] I had preached the false to know the true. ------------------------- dougselsam | 2022-05-08 20:52:30 UTC | #317 What I see here is one more case of "paralysis by analysis", where people would rather sit around trying to figure out how to make everything into some complex math problem, often without really taking into account some of the most basic aspects of wind energy. Yes laddermill should have somewhere near zero tether drag compared to kite-reeling. I don't see where that requires any math to figure out. Just one more reason why I've been disappointed that nobody ever built a laddermill after all that fanfare. I mean, if laddermill was not a good idea, then why did we celebrate Ockels in the first place? Just to keep the name laddermill for something else? I seems to me that immediate;ly degenerating into math-land rather than just building a crappy laddermill, then a better one, then a still better one, was the first mistake. Oh sure, rather than 100 wings going in a continuous loop, let's just use one wing - it will be easier. Meanwhile we can sit around scratching our heads doing math problems to rationalize never building that first laddermill. As I've said from day-one, this field is pathetic in that nobody has ever even tried some of the simplest configurations. Oh well, some people would rather sit around at their computers trying to apply various mathematical formulas than get into a shop and build things. I've designed, built, and sold, many wind turbines, and a few AWE experiments, including generators and airfoils, and I don't think my math has ever gone beyond simple arithmetic and knowing a few basic facts. You quickly get to the point where all you need is for things to "look right" and they work. I say "step away from the computer". Cleanse your brain of all that debilitating math, get creative, use your hands, and get something running. You can do all the math you want, and you will miss one thing, and your machine will fly apart. That is when you start actually figuring things out. ------------------------- tallakt | 2022-05-08 20:52:30 UTC | #318 [quote="dougselsam, post:317, topic:1610"] You can do all the math you want, and you will miss one thing, and your machine will fly apart. That is when you start actually figuring things out. [/quote] Well doing mind experiments is way more effective use of time than building stuff. The analysis I just did gave some indications of where we would like to be heading. You can improve incrementally, but if the physics are not sound, you can not prevail in the end. No comparison to myself, but I read today that Betz did not produce a single physical device, still was hugely influential. Paralysis exists, but this is not it. Also did I mention my day job involves building and flying AWE rigs? That does not prevent me from thinking about AWE physics, nor does it slow me/us down ------------------------- dougselsam | 2022-05-08 20:52:30 UTC | #319 [quote="tallakt, post:318, topic:1610"] Well doing mind experiments is way more effective use of time than building stuff. The analysis I just did gave some indications of where we would like to be heading. You can improve incrementally, but if the physics are not sound, you can not prevail in the end. [/quote] OK but if you are doing backflips on paper, to try to compare a kite to a wind turbine blade, and do not even take into account the fact that a generator is slowing the blades of a wind turbine, then what good is all that gibberish? On the other hand, I did enjoy reading your links to Kitemill's progress, and it seems like Kitemill is making decent gains, unlike most of the other kite-reeling efforts. ------------------------- tallakt | 2022-05-08 20:52:30 UTC | #320 > do not even take into account the fact that a generator is slowing the blades of a wind turbine That was an error that was subsequently fixed. So if that ends the discussion over doing calculations over building stuff, you are not really having a fair conversation, rather just wasting time trying to win an argument ------------------------- dougselsam | 2022-05-08 20:52:30 UTC | #321 Well good to correct it, but it's just an example of people not understanding how wind energy even works at the simplest level, yet spending all day mathematically analyzing and postulating over stuff that either makes no sense, or leads nowhere. Out of all the papers written, presentations made, conferences had, in-depth analyses, CAD simulations, renderings, postulations advanced, etc., which one has turned out to yield any success? I'd take an ounce of focused effort that leads somewhere, over a ton of misguided busywork, handwaving, and happy-talk that leads nowhere. ------------------------- PierreB | 2022-05-09 05:09:16 UTC | #322 Hi Doug, the difficulty is that a "crosswind" AWES is not intended to be only a wind turbine, but also a tethered drone flying in 3D in the end of a long tether, using a lot of artificial intelligence (AI). Mathematics are useful to improve the control among other things. One wrong equation and you end up with an AWES in your house. ------------------------- Windy_Skies | 2023-02-19 10:04:24 UTC | #323 47 posts were merged into an existing topic: [More laddermill / spidermill ideas](/t/more-laddermill-spidermill-ideas/2375/2) ------------------------- tallakt | 2022-07-10 09:10:28 UTC | #341 [quote="PierreB, post:5, topic:2111"] I agree with Dave about the similarity (as for the device on my sketch) with Payne’s patent fig.5. [/quote] I don’t see a great similarity. Kind of like a tricycle and unicycle are alike ------------------------- Rodread | 2022-07-10 09:10:28 UTC | #342 I'm minded to agree with Pierre and Dave on this It's the ol fig5 And BTW... Please don't reference unicycling into another aspect of AWES again 🙄😂 It's already a control theory Ruins the sport for those of us who enjoy the practical ------------------------- PierreB | 2022-07-10 09:10:28 UTC | #343 There are several variants of Payne's patent figure 5 which describes two pulleys that are connected to the respective generators, and a tether connecting these two pulleys to the kite flying crosswind: Kiteborne's variant (on the video) where there are also two pulleys but only one generator. I sketched another [variant](https://forum.awesystems.info/t/reeling-2-0/2111/5) with two winches and two generators, one tether being stretched while the other tether being slack, and vice versa. All these variants are discussed at https://forum.awesystems.info/t/what-is-possible-with-paynes-patent-us3987987-figure-5/816 I suggest that the currently discussed variant is also posted on the topic above. ------------------------- tallakt | 2022-07-10 09:10:28 UTC | #344 [quote="PierreB, post:343, topic:1610"] I suggest that the currently discussed variant is also posted on the topic above [/quote] I waded through 85 posts and nothing remotely similar. You seem to be making a point that this is an old idea when actually you have not understood what I was trying to convey. I will accept maybe its an old idea, maybe even I have read about it then forgot. Its not terribly important, but please then just link to an exact match, dont send me to somewhere vague. Also if you dont want to join the discussion for any reason thats ok to. But saying «THIS WAS DONE» over and over just adds noise. None of the «variants» you propose have similar functioning. I stress; this is a pulley drive, not a pulling energy transmission. The kite position should be fixed in this design. It is «nothing» like Payne no 3. ------------------------- PierreB | 2022-07-10 09:10:28 UTC | #345 [quote="tallakt, post:344, topic:1610"] But saying «THIS WAS DONE» over and over just adds noise. [/quote] [Dave Santos](https://forum.awesystems.info/t/reeling-2-0/2111/3), [Rod Read](https://forum.awesystems.info/t/reeling-2-0/2111/8) and me find the same thing: it is reported to Payne's patent figure 5. I have linked "your" system to other variants of figure 5. "But saying «THIS WAS DONE»": I did not say that, I indicated your design is a variant of figure 5, because that's what it is. ------------------------- tallakt | 2022-07-10 09:10:28 UTC | #346 [quote="PierreB, post:345, topic:1610"] But saying «THIS WAS DONE»: I did not say that, I indicated your design is a variant of figure 5, because that’s what it is. [/quote] Ok. Can you explain why you find that? ------------------------- PierreB | 2022-07-10 09:10:28 UTC | #347 [quote="tallakt, post:346, topic:1610"] Ok. [/quote] So I am glad we now agree that this design is a variant of figure 5. ------------------------- Windy_Skies | 2022-07-10 09:18:34 UTC | #348 Topic starter wants to discuss this idea, whether it is old or new. Beyond informing the reader the idea might be similar to other ideas, which can be done in a single post like Dave has done, the above discussion is off-topic. Unclear title though I think, @tallakt. ------------------------- dougselsam | 2022-07-12 14:54:56 UTC | #349 [quote="aokholm, post:13, topic:1904"] This is one of the reasons we moved away from building airborne systems. Even with our turbine that’s “firmly” mounted on the ground it seems there are many use cases where the machine is simple too dangerous - at least for now. [/quote] This is what I've been saying from day-one: AWE people have no idea what they are even getting into, let alone how to make it all work.. ------------------------- PierreB | 2022-07-12 14:54:56 UTC | #350 [quote="dougselsam, post:349, topic:1610"] This is what I’ve been saying from day-one: AWE people have no idea what they are even getting into, let alone how to make it all work… [/quote] Are you saying that AWE is impractical except for engineers with experience in regular wind power? And how do you explain the relatively low involvement of large wind companies in AWE? ------------------------- dougselsam | 2022-07-12 14:54:56 UTC | #351 [quote="PierreB, post:350, topic:1610"] Are you saying that AWE is impractical except for engineers with experience in regular wind power? And how do you explain the relatively low involvement of large wind companies in AWE? [/quote] Hi Pierre: OK this gets repetitive, but here goes: "Wind energy is a magnet for crackpots. Airborne Wind Energy is a neodymium supermagnet." Another Doug Selsam repeated theme is: "Wannabe wind energy inventors think their passing ideas must be breakthroughs because the wind will behave the way they want it to behave, but the wind behaves the way IT wants to behave." I cannot reasonably be responsible for figuring out every aspect of why some people think they can revolutionize an industry despite no knowledge of it, but I will say, any actual experience might be helpful. Couldn't hurt. Then again, hiring Fort Felker to run the business didn't help Makani. Stepping back from the details, any solution will have to stand on its own two feet at some point. We can't just "wish" a solution into existence. A real solution must deal with the wind on its own terms. I think the low involvement of regular wind energy people in AWE is a subset of people in general not being involved in AWE. Most wind energy people are not "inventors", they are workers, executives, etc. Real inventors are rare, and as we now know, wannabe inventors are somewhat less rare. ------------------------- dougselsam | 2022-07-12 14:54:56 UTC | #352 Sorry, I forgot to include the REASON wind energy is a magnet for crackpots: It is simple: The wind is INVISIBLE. Since the wind is invisible, crackpots (or people in general) can IMAGINE the wind doing whatever they THINK it "should" do (or whatever they **wish** it would do), but it does what IT wants to do. ------------------------- dougselsam | 2022-07-12 14:54:56 UTC | #353 I was one of the debunkers he talks about. The problem with energy storage is you have already taken the effort to create the energy in the first place. Storage involves first "un-creating" that same energy, then "re-creating" that same energy yet again! Logically then, you could expect that stored energy to cost 3x as much as the energy in the first place cost. Notice toward the end of this video, where a "study" predicts a $50/MWh cost. What did they leave out? The original cost of producing the energy, that's what. And we could predict that their predicted figure is too optimistic, and would really be $100.MWh, and if it costs $50/ MWh to produce the electricity, you now have a wholesale price for electricity higher than retail, leaving no room to pay for the transmission infrastructure. Bottom line for energy storage is it should logically be expected to cost 3x as much as just generating electricity. So it may never work out. Possibly one more pipe-dream. If anything they should build a conventional water tower for a pumped hydro system. That seems like an obvious thing to look at. Maybe someone has and the cost is a showstopper? ------------------------- tallakt | 2022-07-12 14:54:56 UTC | #354 [quote="dougselsam, post:353, topic:1610"] Bottom line for energy storage is it should logically be expected to cost 3x as much as just generating electricity. [/quote] I think your analysis is a bit too simplistic here so that some useful results are probably glossed over. Having some energy storage will enable more windmills. The energy storage will fill in the gaps during lulls. Otherwise the windmills, even if cheap in LCOE, may not be used at all. And most energy is produced directly to grid with no storage, storage only deals with the remaining energy gaps Also, one would expect energy storage to be a lot cheaper than producing energy in the first place, because one is free to choose the form in which to store energy. Also, the energy after being produced the first time, can be cheaply moved, so one can combine a shut down mine shaft at one location with a wind resource at a different location That being said, I agree that energy storage is quite price sensitive. And some options exist already, like pumping hydropower, that are not utilized _today_. So probably this is not easy to get right. ------------------------- Rodread | 2022-07-12 14:54:56 UTC | #355 One word @dougselsam Arbitrage Buy low Sell high ------------------------- dougselsam | 2022-07-12 14:54:56 UTC | #356 [quote="tallakt, post:354, topic:1610"] I think your analysis is a bit too simplistic here so that some useful results are probably glossed over. Having some energy storage will enable more windmills. [/quote] OK well everyone agrees that "storage" would not only allow "more windmills", but intermittency has always been the show-stopper/deal-breaker for wind and solar in general. Yes my "analysis" is oversimplistic. But is it accurate? So far, I'd say it is pretty close to being accurate. And what Roddy is saying about "arbitrage" is also accurate, but Roddy, you just made my point - thanks. The fact is, such "arbitrage" has **always been possible**, since regular power plants like to run at a constant output and never shut down. Electricity is cheap in the middle of the night. Especially when you get to nuke plants, they want to just keep them running 24/7/365. So time-of-use arbitrage has ALWAYS been a compelling business possibility, **IF** there was an efficient, affordable MEANS of large-scale energy storage. None of this is new, as far as the DESIRE for energy storage. It's just that with wind and solar, storage is NEEDED for further grid penetration, not just desired. The REASON energy storage of grid-scale has never been implemented is, as I said, you have 3 times the task. First you have to create the energy. Then un-create it. Then create it again! That is the REALITY. There really **IS NO actual STORAGE of the actual ELECTRICITY.** It is a conversion FROM usable electricity into something else, THEN you have to "generate" that electricity (in some way) ALL OVER AGAIN. What a lot of people suffer from is the "all ya gotta do is" type of reasoning. As though if it is easy for them to say "all ya gotta do is X", then somehow, X is magically easy to accomplish. But storing energy at utility-scale is not easy, **never has been easy**, and is not going to suddenly become easy just because of a "wish". A lot of the talk about cars going all electric in just a few years, etc. is not realistic. There's nowhere near enough lithium being produced for more than about 5% of cars to be electric alone at this time. And now we're going to produce enough batteries for the grid to be battery-powered too? So your electric car battery is going to be charged by a battery-powered grid? So your power has to go in and out of two (2) sets of batteries? Losing 10% of it each time, so we lose 20% minimum? Where do we suddenly get all that power? All that lithium? Not to mention Cobalt? I've heard analyses on the financial channels that include things like people hold onto their cars for 12 years on average. Heck, my Suburban is 22 years old and just getting broken in! And how many thousand vehicles can any manufacturing plant produce in a year, and what is the actual market size, so how many new plants would need to be built every year? And if the electric grid is challenged today and suddenly we're having regular power outages like some leftist third-world dictator country, how is that same weak grid going to provide enough energy for everyones' cars too? To me the answer is for workplace parking lots to have solar-powered charging stations, so when you get to work, you plug in your car to be charged up locally, not even using the grid, or maybe grid-tied but not taking much juice off the grid per se, just producing most of what your car needs onsite. Even stores could offer onsite solar charging. Our local Super-Walmart has large solar arrays above part of the parking lot, and in the summer everyone tries to get a spot in the shade under the solar panels. If they could plug in and charge up while shopping, it mitigates the need for grid storage. But all in all, there is a lot of dreaming and unclear thinking in the clean energy space, due to, and I am serious when I say this "global warming derangement syndrome". You can start with just the whole tagline of "green energy". It is a misnomer. Coal is the "greenest" form of energy (supports greening of the entire planet). Even NASA has now explained how the amount of Earth's surface is covered with vegetation is expanding due to increased CO2. But the whole situation requires reasoning far beyond what will fit on a bumper-sticker. First of all we are in an "ice age" right now. An ice-age is when we have permanent ice on the polar caps. We are currently in an "inter-glacial" cycle of our ongoing "ice age". Glacial cycles are associated with a lot of deserts on Earth, which keeps the air dry, which keeps too much snow from accumulating at the poles. If we want "green", we might be wishing for a "snowball Earth". One mystery is why our current "interglacial" has lasted so long this time(?) Some hypothesize it is due to domestication of grazing animals denuding the landscape. Or people cutting down forests for firewood. Anyway the whole thing is immensely more complicated than any slogan. I just hope we don't "degenerate" into feeling lucky when the power is even on, as they do in some backward countries. Get it? "degenerate"? Into not generating? There's a pun there... ------------------------- tallakt | 2022-07-12 14:54:56 UTC | #357 [quote="dougselsam, post:356, topic:1610"] But all in all, there is a lot of dreaming and unclear thinking in the clean energy space, due to, and I am serious when I say this “global warming derangement syndrome”. [/quote] There we go again. However your [deranged?] view on this, the truth is that people are moving away from fossile fuel energy. This will enable some of the technologies that we are talking about. Its just about what we believe the future will bring. For sure, as long as we have coal and natural gas, there's little market for wind and solar ------------------------- Rodread | 2022-07-12 14:54:56 UTC | #358 Lithium and cobalt BS There's stax of it. And the cobalt is burnt in your low sulphur fuel. Or didn't you know? Time you were introduced to Auke Hoekatra https://twitter.com/AukeHoekstra?t=p0HCrwf2M38mZwjKVoP6XQ&s=09 Follow, Read up and get your facts on autos right Doug. Could all that early lead poisoning have retarded your ability to learn about other reading resources than bumper stickers? V2G EV cars themselves can be batteries for grid balancing. X 20M cars is a lot of battery. ------------------------- dougselsam | 2022-07-12 14:54:56 UTC | #359 [quote="Rodread, post:358, topic:1610"] Lithium and cobalt BS There’s stax of it. And the cobalt is burnt in your low sulphur fuel. Or didn’t you know? [/quote] I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss what is common knowledge in industry. While it is true that lithium is not rare per se, the infrastructure is not in place to expand output fast enough to instantly convert all cars, and the grid itself, to battery operation. Otherwise you would not see the current parade of "Professor Crackpot" energy storage debacles being promoted on a daily basis. And most people involved in electric vehicles etc. have flagged Cobalt as highly-problematic due to its sourcing from an undeveloped area using child labor to mine it. In fact there is a huge effort to try to replace cobalt, to avoid this problem. No I did not know about cobalt being burnt in low-sulphur fuel. Maybe you should explain that to all the people concerned about Cobalt production and let them know you have the answer. I'm sure they will be very excited and grateful to hear your solution. :) ------------------------- Rodread | 2022-07-12 16:03:38 UTC | #360 Classic Artisinal mines with child slave labourers That argument sticks an image right into your head doesn't it What heartless b@$tard could argue with you now Doug Nonsense Mining in the DRC is now regulated really well. The phone or laptop battery you're likely holding has much higher concentration of cobalt. Let's not even start with the "make remake" energy chat Are you on default spokesperson duty for the argument dept this month? ------------------------- Windy_Skies | 2022-07-12 16:30:06 UTC | #361 [quote="Windy_Skies, post:38, topic:2110"] If the focus is on the type of movement that the kite goes through I’m thinking there needs to be 4 categories instead of 2. One for one dimensional movement up and down the tether, or downwind (ZhongLu), one for one dimensional no movement along the tether (Kitewinder), one for movement downwind and also crosswind (Kitemill), and one for no movement downwind but crosswind movement (Makani). You just can’t put Kitewinder and Makani in the same category. Yes I could agree that Kitewinder could be hovering, like a helicopter could be hovering. No, I don’t agree that flying as fast as possible in circles is hovering. The focus in hovering is on the stationary part. [/quote] Let's find some animal motion verbs, before we get distracted by some interesting references from the Wikipedia pages. [quote="Windy_Skies, post:3, topic:2110, full:true"] Swarming [Swarm behaviour - Wikipedia ](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swarm_behaviour) | | | [Random Engineering, Physics, ..., Concepts and Ideas - #51 by Windy_Skies ](https://forum.awesystems.info/t/random-engineering-physics-concepts-and-ideas/111/51) Branching [Branch - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Branch) [/quote] [quote] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bird_flight ## Coordinated formation flight[[edit](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bird_flight&action=edit§ion=15)] A wide variety of birds fly together in a symmetric V-shaped or a J-shaped coordinated formation, also referred to as an ***"echelon"***, especially during long-distance flight or migration. It is often assumed that birds resort to this pattern of formation flying in order to save energy and improve the aerodynamic efficiency.[[26]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bird_flight#cite_note-Batt2007-26)[[27]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bird_flight#cite_note-:1-27) The birds flying at the tips and at the front would interchange positions in a timely cyclical fashion to spread flight [fatigue](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fatigue_(medical)) equally among the flock members. The wingtips of the leading bird in an echelon create a pair of opposite rotating line vortices. The vortices trailing a bird have an underwash part behind the bird, and at the same time they have an upwash on the outside, that hypothetically could aid the flight of a trailing bird. In a 1970 study the authors claimed that each bird in a V formation of 25 members can achieve a reduction of induced drag and as a result increase their range by 71%.[[28]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bird_flight#cite_note-LissamanShollenberger1970-28) It has also been suggested that birds' wings produce induced thrust at their tips, allowing for proverse yaw and net upwash at the last quarter of the wing. This would allow birds to overlap their wings and gain Newtonian lift from the bird in front.[[29]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bird_flight#cite_note-On_Wings_of_the_Minimum_Induced_Drag-29) Studies of [waldrapp](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_bald_ibis) ibis show that birds spatially coordinate the phase of wing flapping and show wingtip path coherence when flying in V positions, thus enabling them to maximally utilise the available energy of upwash over the entire flap cycle. In contrast, birds flying in a stream immediately behind another do not have wingtip coherence in their flight pattern and their flapping is out of phase, as compared to birds flying in V patterns, so as to avoid the detrimental effects of the downwash due to the leading bird's flight.[[30]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bird_flight#cite_note-Portugaletal2014-30) [/quote] https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1985JThBi.117...47R Bounding and undulating flight https://www.bbc.com/news/28563737 https://www.sciencelearn.org.nz/resources/302-wing-aspect-ratio https://journals.biologists.com/jeb/article/180/1/285/6536/GLIDING-BIRDS-REDUCTION-OF-INDUCED-DRAG-BY-WING [quote] https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20160003578/downloads/20160003578.pdf Abstract For nearly a century Ludwig Prandtl’s lifting-line theory remains a standard tool for understanding and analyzing aircraft wings. The tool, said Prandtl, initially points to the elliptical spanload as the most efficient wing choice, and it, too, has become the standard in aviation. Having no other model, avian researchers have used the elliptical spanload virtually since its introduction. Yet over the last half-century, research in bird flight has generated increasing data incongruous with the elliptical spanload. In 1933 Prandtl published a little-known paper presenting a superior spanload: any other solution produces greater drag. We argue that this second spanload is the correct model for bird flight data. Based on research we present a unifying theory for superior efficiency and coordinated control in a single solution. Specifically, Prandtl’s second spanload offers the only solution to three aspects of bird flight: how birds are able to turn and maneuver without a vertical tail; why birds fly in formation with their wingtips overlapped; and why narrow wingtips do not result in wingtip stall. We performed research using two experimental aircraft designed in accordance with the fundamentals of Prandtl’s second paper, but applying recent developments, to validate the various potentials of the new spanload, to wit: as an alternative for avian researchers, to demonstrate the concept of proverse yaw, and to offer a new method of aircraft control and efficiency. [/quote] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insect_flight [quote] https://thelanguagegarage.com/flying-soaring-gliding-and-more-english-verbs-of-movement/ [quote] **To glide** is to move through the air without using any energy. Birds glide when they’re not flapping their wings. Certain kinds of squirrels can glide by jumping off of trees and spreading their arms and legs. A glider is a craft that lets you fly by gently falling through the air. [/quote] [quote] To **drift** means to move through air (or water) by being pushed. [/quote] [quote] To **swoop** is to dive through the air very quickly from a higher position to a lower position. It’s often used with **down** . [/quote] [/quote] [quote] https://www.iluenglish.com/verbs-denoting-animal-movement/ Apes swing Deer bound Eagles swoop Swallows dive [/quote] # The Magic of Bird Flight with David Lentink https://youtu.be/pl1hGNmbg2Q?t=92 ------------------------- dougselsam | 2022-07-12 18:08:39 UTC | #362 [quote="Rodread, post:360, topic:1610"] Are you on default spokesperson duty for the argument dept this month? [/quote] I'll leave that honor for you Roddy. Personally I was chagrined as a kid that I was not allowed to get a job until age 14. I was stuck delivering all the morning newspapers in the neighborhood for a measly $10 a week, but at least I was "running a business" and had some spending money at age 11. I was already accustomed to going to work when it was still dark out, every single day, and demanding money from adults while I was still in elementary school. Therefore I don't personally see a problem with kids who probably have nothing better to do anyway, earning a little money. But it does not sound like a very well developed mining operation. I'm just sharing what I have read on that topic, but the fact that producing, then "storing" electricity **involves 3 steps: create, un-create, re-create**, is my own original contribution to the conversation. You're suddenly sounding like quite the omni-topic expert, so maybe you can tell the rest of the class any electricity "storage" method (besides pumped hydro) that doesn't cost twice as much as the original cost of generating the electricity. (?) ------------------------- Windy_Skies | 2022-07-12 21:09:51 UTC | #363 [quote="Windy_Skies, post:361, topic:1610"] In 1933 Prandtl published a little-known paper presenting a superior spanload: any other solution produces greater drag. We argue that this second spanload is the correct model for bird flight data. Based on research we present a unifying theory for superior efficiency and coordinated control in a single solution. Specifically, Prandtl’s second spanload offers the only solution to three aspects of bird flight: how birds are able to turn and maneuver without a vertical tail; why birds fly in formation with their wingtips overlapped; and why narrow wingtips do not result in wingtip stall. We performed research using two experimental aircraft designed in accordance with the fundamentals of Prandtl’s second paper, but applying recent developments, to validate the various potentials of the new spanload, to wit: as an alternative for avian researchers, to demonstrate the concept of proverse yaw, and to offer a new method of aircraft control and efficiency. [/quote] Discussed also here: https://forum.awesystems.info/t/ama-expo-west-2018-nasas-al-bowers-prandtl-wing-update/94 ------------------------- Rodread | 2022-07-12 22:18:05 UTC | #364 I'm expert on nothing But, As nominated officer responsible for responsible arguing It's appropriate to point out that this deranged argument thread started with pointing out an energy storage system comparable to pumped hydro, which was has the useful function of providing rapid timescale peak shaving and arbitrage energy value market propositions. Long sentences are great for closing nonsense arguments ------------------------- dougselsam | 2022-07-13 04:41:32 UTC | #365 [quote="tallakt, post:357, topic:1610"] as long as we have coal and natural gas, there’s little market for wind and solar [/quote] Well I don't know about that - wind and solar are increasing pretty fast. But there is increasing concern over wind and solar saturation. It used to be easy to "accomodate" wind and solar, but it's getting harder as the percentage of clean energy production increases to the point that it's obvious we have a problem when the sun goes down and winds calm. What they used to scare us with was to tell us that we had used up all the oil and gas. Even the oil companies were in on it, because they need oil to seem scarce to maintain its perceived value. But now instead of saying we're running out, since we're always producing more, they have global warming to keep a lid on drilling (prevent competition), and oil spills conveniently timed to match recessions when demand falls anyway, resulting in drilling restrictions to favor existing big players, etc. It's funny to go back in time and see how whatever "urgent" thing that seemed so important decades ago is now forgotten, like "we're running out of food and the whole world is about to starve to death!" Whatever happened to that? CO2 helping crops? All the cardiologists are embarrassed that they told us all to use margarine instead of butter and eat carbs instead of proteins and fats and it all turned out 100% wrong (opposite) to reality. Of course they were causing the heart attacks - job security. Guess who never fell for it? Me. Nope, I was one of those stubborn ignorant people who said it was all lies, and kept eating butter. Who was right? The normal-thinking people with common sense and good taste, just like today. Today the cardiologists not still making money doing bypasses and stents have given up surgery and instead just get people eating right (ignoring all the government guidelines) and the heart problems and most other medical problems disappear. Turned out the government guidelines were a result of lobbying by big agriculture and the mega-food conglomerates to allow them to produce food as cheaply as possible to maximize profits. That meant promoting sugar, carbs, and seed-oils, not fresh vegetables, healthy meats and animal fats. Look at any group picture taken before 1980. No fat people. Look at modern group pictures, or just walk down the street, and you often see most people overweight. When I was a kid, we'd have one or two fat kids in a whole school. Today the whole school is almost all fat kids. Unbelievable! Question authority. That used to be a popular saying. It's good to question things that people in power insist you believe. ------------------------- PierreB | 2022-07-13 08:39:44 UTC | #366 [quote="dougselsam, post:365, topic:1610"] the percentage of clean energy production increases to the point that it’s obvious we have a problem when the sun goes down and winds calm. [/quote] For the production of electricity, in Germany as in other countries, and with the notable exception of Denmark (until some level) due to both Baltic Sea wind resource and energy agreements with neighboring countries, intermittent energies such as solar and wind are coupled to gas which remains both one of the main energies and a backup for the intermittent. In these countries the production of CO2 is more important because of this coupling, while in France it remains much less thanks to nuclear power. Here is a link to the CO2 emissions linked to the production of electricity in live: https://app.electricitymaps.com/map Now,120 g for France, and 428 g Germany (gCO₂eq/kWh). That said hydroelectricity is still better because it is both clean and controllable, without the risks of nuclear: see for examples Quebec or Norway. But hydro is limited by geography. We cannot build mountains everywhere. [quote="dougselsam, post:365, topic:1610"] Who was right? The normal-thinking people with common sense and good taste, just like today. Today the cardiologists not still making money doing bypasses and stents have given up surgery and instead just get people eating right (ignoring all the government guidelines) and the heart problems and most other medical problems disappear. [/quote] This is contradicted a few lines further on: [quote="dougselsam, post:365, topic:1610"] Today the whole school is almost all fat kids. [/quote] Does this mean that today people listen more to the "authorities" and "elites" than before, contrary to what you seemed to assert just before? I do not believe in the fable of the good people and the bad elites, nor do I believe in the opposite, the good elites and the bad people. In reality, all this is much more intertwined than we imagine. Concerning global warming, even the IPCC forecasts are on a very wide range. It is better to take this into account without falling into catastrophism. ------------------------- Rodread | 2022-07-13 08:35:50 UTC | #367 @dougselsam that rant was so far off from what I percieve as correct. Provide links. Famine is threatening huge populations of the earth [right now.](https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2022/jul/06/famine-what-is-it-where-will-it-strike-and-how-should-the-world-respond) You can be sure those affected will question our gluttenous authority over the resources and political calls which have caused this. Scarcity is real. Human ingenuity is real. Too often we use it to exploit resources beyond sustainable levels or twist truths to suit our narratives. @PierreB love a bit of live GIS data map wizzardry. The page you posted has the UK all lumped together as one (but oddly only the Orkney Islands separately... (2nd best globally)) Here's some more granular data on the state of the UK ![Screenshot_2022-07-13-09-28-32-168_com.devpower.carbonintensityuk|225x500](upload://gjIGyRDc2BUBcuEEMUCo2WHQLVy.jpeg) Come on England and Wales yous dirty slackers. Pull your socks up. Pull the finger out. And other odd motivation based idioms. ------------------------- Windy_Skies | 2022-07-13 11:35:26 UTC | #368 [quote] https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2022/06/220601170208.htm The new study published today in Science Advances proves it isn't just albatrosses that perform the aerial acrobatics needed for dynamic soaring on the windy open ocean. The research shows that sleek seabirds called Manx shearwater perform the same feat of flight in the seas around the UK. Albatross glide in a corkscrew motion to harvest energy from the wind gradient over the ocean surface, where the wind gets faster with height. This method of harvesting wind energy to conserve effort is called dynamic soaring and explains how albatross can travel thousands of miles across the oceans whilst barely flapping their wings. Using bird-borne video cameras and GPS loggers, researchers from the Department of Biology, University of Oxford have shown that Manx shearwater also use dynamic soaring. The key difference is that by flapping their wings for part of the cycle, shearwaters can perform the same feat of flight in weaker winds. The weaving and undulating flight characteristic of dynamic soaring was first described scientifically in 1883 and was noticed nearly 400 years earlier by Leonardo da Vinci. It has, however, remained a remarkably difficult phenomenon to prove. 'Demonstrating experimentally that a bird harvests energy from the wind shear gradient is very difficult, particularly in flap-gliding birds like the shearwater,' said James Kempton, co-lead author of the study, 'so we developed a new way of calculating energy harvesting by modelling the shape of their flight trajectories in relation to the wind.' The researchers analysed video footage recorded from the backs of shearwaters skimming at speed over the Irish sea. By using this to compute the birds' weaving and undulating motion relative to the wind, the research team were able to establish when the shearwaters were using dynamic soaring to harvest energy from the wind rather than expending their own energy. GPS loggers provided behavioural data from over 200 birds on their preferred direction of travel in different wind conditions. Analysis of these GPS data revealed that not only could shearwaters employ dynamic soaring to harvest energy from the wind like the albatross; they also actively chose conditions that provided an opportunity to work smarter not harder. 'When the winds are stronger, shearwaters actively travel in a direction that uses those winds to the greatest energetic advantage,' said Dr Joe Wynn, co-first author of the paper. 'However, we only see this on the outbound flight to feed and not when the birds need to return to the colony regardless of the prevailing winds.' Unlike earlier approaches to analysing dynamic soaring, the approach developed by the authors could be applied to a variety of species, even birds not traditionally associated with dynamic soaring such as gulls and falcons that may be using the same flight technique less conspicuously. 'Our results show there are energetic savings to be made by weaving through even quite weak winds, as long as you're willing to put in a bit of effort to get a big payback,' said senior author Professor Graham Taylor. 'The fact Manx shearwater do this suggests that small drones could pull the same trick to extend their flight range and duration when patrolling UK coastal waters.' [/quote] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jibe [quote] When running (sailing nearly directly downwind) in a sloop, one may 'jibe' only the mainsail to the opposite side of the boat. This keeps both the main and jib exposed to the wind resulting in a more efficient use of wind. [/quote] Unlike in sailing where you can only go left or right while jibing, in tethered jibing flight you can also go up and down, which allows the kites to fly in a figure of eight when line twist needs to be limited or in a circle when it doesn't. When the length of the tethers is not fixed because the pull of the kites is unwinding the tethers from a drum to turn a generator, the flight path of the kites resembles that of a corkscrew or [...]. When the tethers do not unwind from a drum to turn a generator, torque must be directly transferred to the ground via the tether tension, or additional energy harvesting devices must be placed on the kite, typically secondary wind turbines that generate electricity that then is transmitted to the ground via conducting tethers. All three modes of energy generation [unwinding a drum, torque transfer, adding additional energy harvesting devices] add [...] and [...]. In [...]. In [...]. In [...]. In single tether single kite systems, tether drag and limited tether tension limits [...] at the cost of usually more complex kite control more kites can be added. [...] branching from central line [...] swarming [...] echelon flight to [...]. [...] further developments include moving away from standard airplane fuselage + wing + tail design to [...]. ------------------------- dougselsam | 2022-07-13 14:30:26 UTC | #369 [quote="PierreB, post:366, topic:1610"] Does this mean that today people listen more to the “authorities” and “elites” than before, contrary to what you seemed to assert just before? [/quote] Hi Pierre: The fact that even in undeveloped countries, everyone has been getting to be overweight the last few decades, is well known. The "problem" might just be a comparative abundance of food, but more likely the **types** of food being **provided**: Diets based on powdered grass-seed (grains), seed oils and hydrogenated seed oils, sugar and high-fructose corn syrup. These are where most of the calories in the world now come from and the result is obesity. Just like oil is controlled by a few huge international conglomerates, so is food. ------------------------- dougselsam | 2022-07-13 15:08:24 UTC | #370 [quote="Rodread, post:367, topic:1610"] Famine is threatening huge populations of the earth [right now. ](https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2022/jul/06/famine-what-is-it-where-will-it-strike-and-how-should-the-world-respond) You can be sure those affected will question our gluttenous authority over the resources and political calls which have caused this. [/quote] Hi Roddy: Before the recent artificially-provoked war in the breadbasket of Europe, it is common knowledge that the previous problem of starvation in undeveloped countries had been replaced by ubiquitous obesity. It's all controlled by huge international conglomerates. Of course if you have a war in Ukraine and Russia, which had become the defacto food suppliers for much of the third world, a short-term food crisis can result, and people are suddenly, for the first time in decades, worried about starvation. But that artificially created supply crisis does not change the fact that the world has been getting fatter and fatter by consuming the wrong foods. I'm somewhat of a healthy eating fanatic. i do a lot of juicing of carrots, kale, berries and fruits, to get good vitamins, minerals, anti-oxidants, and other good nutrition from plants, and also good meats, butter, whole milk, all the stuff the corporate-controlled government advice warned against. The American Heart Association originally got its funding from Procter and Gamble after they had invented Crisco, a partially-hydrogenated seed oil, which could be substituted for lard, which is what everyone used back then. Their money drove the American Heart Association to recommend everyone replace lard with Crisco, and butter with margarine. Why? Lower cost. So the food conglomerates lobbied congress to influence the "food pyramid" and other "official" dietary recommendations, to the point that even scientists and doctors just assumed it must be true information and even heart surgeons didn't realized their dietary advice was 100% wrong. Some cardiologists are now rebelling. The American Hear Association has been caught redhanded and has begin changing their advice. Animal fats are no longer taboo. As real information begins to trickle in, the public is beginning to realize we've been bamboozled. But the theme is not restricted to food. It extends to energy, and a lot of other fields. The information is controlled by international conglomerates, and you have a choice to believe everything they say, or to be a bit skeptical. Now you have been contending that most everything I say lately is BS. You said I was wrong about a previous discussion about energy storage. Well, due to the high frequency of conversations being moved to a different "topic" I could not go back and see which "Professor Crackpot" energy storage method started the conversation, but you might notice a similarity between, say, kite-reeling and that dumb idea of cranes **stacking then un-stacking** concrete weights to store energy. That company has already switched horses in midstream in response to so many level-headed debunkers (like me) saying how completely idiotic their scheme was. But notice the similarities to current AWE efforts: The "future of energy" being all about wrapping cables around drums, pulling and reeling our way into a future energy utopia. The problem is a lack of clear thinking, and what amounts to "a cover-up" of the lack of workability of these themes. Yes, a coverup. On this forum, for example, the "really smart people" are quick to announce some supposed sale and delivery of an AWE system, announce new "factories" to produce kite-reeling systems, yet never follow up on the story. How are the "AWE systems" that were delivered working? Or is it just one AWE system that was delieved? Well, how is it working? Nobody knows. It is a coverup. How many AWE systems is the factory now producing and delivering, years later? How are they working? silence... crickets... It is a coverup. Based on moeny. How can these companies keep raising more money if they admit they are just telling stories that lead nowhere? Just as the poster-child AWE companies promise how many hundred homes they are just about to begin powering with their unworkable contraptions, the energy storage promoters are lost in "rendering-land" and in reality couldn't think their way out of a paper bag. As you pointed out, time of use arbitrage would be the first place to implement energy storage. That has been true for what, maybe a century or more? Almost forgotten until recently? You're saying I'm full-of-it with regard to the three (3) steps to stored energy - produce, unproduce, reproduce. And so I challenged you to show us a means of energy storage that doesn't cost twice as much as the original energy cost. You have not provided any example. So who is really "full-of-it"? :) ------------------------- Rodread | 2022-07-13 16:56:33 UTC | #371 Thanks for the challenge @dougselsam And you're an OK dude in my book, dinna stress. Regarding food, you're right that globally individual diets have been getting richer and slightly more diverse but globally as a collective diets have become far less diverse and fed by cheap, just in time supply chains. And that's not a safe nor healthy result. Back to energy And yes there's always a wider picture to consider. Especially as the electrical grid can be considered as the biggest machine humans have ever made. This interconnection means we can consider a huge range of market demands and forces. Straight to YouTube for the latest link on batteries and solar... I'm served a calculation on why it makes sense for UK domestic circumstances. Batteries make sense where the market for them makes sense whether or not the energy they supply costs more than your initial source. It always will. Even in the off grid case human energy demands peak and trough and don't smoothly match production. So some manner of smoothing the supply will be valuable. Unproduce energy Hmmmmm Now, that, I do take great exception to. I might even resort to using a condescending tone and your Sunday name Douglas Energy is converted not destroyed Doug Energy Conversion - was the only class in uni I had to resit ------------------------- dougselsam | 2022-07-13 18:43:22 UTC | #372 [quote="Rodread, post:371, topic:1610"] Unproduce energy Hmmmmm Now, that, I do take great exception to. I might even resort to using a condescending tone and your Sunday name Douglas Energy is converted not destroyed Doug Energy Conversion - was the only class in uni I had to resit [/quote] Roddy you are confirming that you cannot meet my challenge to find a form of "energy storage" (electricity storage in our case) that does not cost twice what the original electricity cost to generate. (Meaning your end result will multiply the cost of electricity by a total of 3x). Heck if you want to add in the markup for the provider to make a profit, the price to the end user could be multiplied by 5x! :) Trying to talk your way out of it now by nitpicking word definitions is only digging yourself in deeper. The problem is real. Just wishing it will go away isn't going to work. ------------------------- PierreB | 2022-07-13 19:06:56 UTC | #373 But as you know, AWES, especially kite-reeling, can produce for almost nothing, using only 1/10 or 1/100 material of regular wind turbines, in the future of course. With storage, three times almost nothing, it doesn't cost much. :grinning_face_with_smiling_eyes: ------------------------- Rodread | 2022-07-13 21:45:33 UTC | #374 There is no cost to the owner after buying the battery. They get the convenience. They make money from having these devices available for grid smoothing in scale cases. I'm on a ferry right now. Low bandwidth and it was rough. Pulling into Kirkwall, Orkney. I'll get you some details soon enough ------------------------- dougselsam | 2022-07-14 13:19:34 UTC | #375 [quote="Rodread, post:374, topic:1610"] There is no cost to the owner after buying the battery. [/quote] Roddy, maybe take a course in economics 101, or a business course, or maybe accounting 101. The idea that you can just talk about any investment and say it's free once its paid for is not reflective of real life, or real economics. In most cases storage would require credit which would have to be repaid over time. And if someone could fully pay ahead of time, there is what is called "lost opportunity cost". In other words there is a cost for using money. If this is the level of the conversaion here, it is childish. Just goes to show once again, why waste my time here? Let's bypass hypotheticals for a moment, and look at off-grid living today: I have friends who live off-grid in Tehachapi, California, ground-zero for wind energy, with plenty of sunshine as well. It's well-understood by these off-gridders that their largest electricity expense, by far, is buying, then maintaining, batteries. They usually have a special room or storage shed for the batteries. The initial purchase price is huge, then they slowly go bad, losing capacity with their limited number of charging cycles. In ten years they need all new batteries. It is never free. It is always a huge expense. And the word is, if you have grid power, it is always cheaper than your own self-produced renewable electricity, especially if you are talking about battery storage versus real-time use. What you are suggesting is one more example of "All ya gotta do is" thinking: "All ya gotta do is pay for it then it's free!" Wheee! Maybe you can find a way to steal the money from someone else! At gunpoint! Everything can be "free"! Yeah, that's it! ------------------------- Rodread | 2022-07-14 18:17:22 UTC | #376 Wow Doug, don't you just ask mum to pay for everything so it doesn't count? Of course you have to pay up front and divi the lifetime energy cost. Just as any other renewables device. And opportunity cost yep that's a real thing too. You're argument isn't based on anything real though. Renewables in the UK come waaay cheaper than grid energy. I believe you get a free pint of gasoline delivered with each kWh (probably some arcane unit of measure) in the US. As for your double accounting on the cost of energy from a battery - it's nonsense You have to think about the system in the whole. The battery is complementary to the system. The only reason to charge batteries is when you have overcapacity of energy supply or cheaper grid energy available than when you will use it. This oversupply energy is going to waste otherwise. Essentially its money you can store which you don't have to pay a grid supply company for. Here, the economics make sense and the systems pay for themselves in around 5 years. ------------------------- AweEnthusiast | 2022-08-03 18:48:49 UTC | #377 AWEIA International holds that an independent technical body such as **Fraunhofer Society engineers** https://www.fraunhofer.de/en a European world-leading applied research organization should moderate an AWE competitive fly-off. I consider this option better than having an industry association like AWEurope with competing industry members sit as judges in a yet emerging industry wherein the privileged most funded teams have failed to deliver on their own promises while less privileged teams that opposed the failed concepts much earlier languish and are excluded from the industry association leveraged opportunities. Association forums should accommodate all comers and let individual members judge for themselves the merit or otherwise of proffered information. This also implies that members must be respectful of others' opinions no matter how 'foolish', 'non-feasible', or even 'irrelevant'. ------------------------- dougselsam | 2022-08-03 18:48:49 UTC | #378 There's nothing new here.except obviously DaveS posts appearing under John O's name. John mentions religion and issues the occasional "lift"-based slogan. From DaveS we have the usual references to "Einstein", "Wright Brothers", UHMPE, graphene, things that "wiggle", and idle threats of imminent TeraWatts, against a backdrop of excuses why his projects should not have to ever show **any** actual power on a meter, but instead serve as theoretical guidance whereby others should prove the great genius of the ideas revealed. Contrast the threats of greater power generation than anyone has ever contemplated, let alone accomplished, with zero actual power generated in 14 years of big talk. Basically. there is nothing new here, just the same empty. leading nowhere talk, 14 years ago in Oroville. ------------------------- Rodread | 2022-08-03 23:10:54 UTC | #379 W&I have been working on designing Giant Kite structures and the most massive component of those kite structures which will ever be used has now been completed, The component has been developed in stealth mode. Most remarkably you have probably already seen a part of it used in a test without even noticing. Here at W&I we have been working on the most massive kite structure that will ever be made, on Earth. Enough cheesy marketing - The giant component - That's the Earth itself. The vital 6,371 km radius part holding the bottom of kite lines against aerodynamic forces. Without that component - nothing. No kitey. But we are missing some tricks here. The earth isn't just one massively oversized 5.972 × 10²⁴ kg anchor point to one kite. It's all the anchor mass to all kites. If we need to anchor a giant network of kites, with multiple anchors across a field, or across a whole farm or even across a district... That anchor mass is already there. Waiting to be used, doing not much but sustaining an eco system as best it can. This giant anchor mass holds individual anchors fixed rigidly in place relative to the other anchor points. Not only that, but it is massive and rigid enough to hold all of these anchors against any movement in any direction away from the point where they are fixed. 2 anchors pulling toward each other - they are stuck fixed. 2 anchors pulling away from each other -stuck fixed. 200 random anchors - stuck fixed. Do not negate the significance of the massive component available to your kite designs. It gives AWES designers a lot of freedom to design using the Earth as a component. ------------------------- Windy_Skies | 2022-08-03 23:28:44 UTC | #380 Thank you for reminding us planet Earth exists, Rod. ------------------------- Rodread | 2022-08-04 08:08:15 UTC | #381 Just as long as everyone knows I invented it. Seriously though - it's an important point. Earth 🌍 exists, and It's massive, and What happens on one side can influence what happens the other side. Why don't >90% of AWES designs use that idea? A house doesn't suddenly move 1km West when the wind changes. Neither should a whole village. Nor a wind turbine. Neither should an AWES. We just ain't that special folks. ps. I didn't actually invent the world. I realise the comic framing isn't going to be to everyone's liking... But I think the concept is big enough to deserve its own thread. Not get buried here in slow chat. Please feel free to suggest a new way to frame the importance of spread anchor system, fixed operating zone, low deviation AWES Maybe the easiest way would have been to shift the post to the topic of Network Kites instead @Windy_Skies Or maybe just ask around before shifting folks posts. We are a community ------------------------- Windy_Skies | 2022-08-04 09:24:26 UTC | #382 [quote="Rodread, post:381, topic:1610"] Maybe the easiest way would have been to shift the post to the topic of Network Kites instead @Windy_Skies Or maybe just ask around before shifting folks posts. [/quote] I don't have a database of where people's posts should go so it goes here most often. Too much trouble and time to ask beforehand. We need more and more patient moderators for that. [quote="Rodread, post:381, topic:1610"] I realise the comic framing isn’t going to be to everyone’s liking… But I think the concept is big enough to deserve its own thread. Not get buried here in slow chat. [/quote] Then try again. Use a descriptive title, which this didn't have, and try to lay out the benefits ***[1]*** of what you want to discuss, which you didn't seem to do. It looks like a thing that has been talked about before so maybe there are previous threads or studies you can find to link to, or attach the new post to. ***[1]** Ideally also drawbacks as a balanced discussion is better and has less chance of looking like propaganda.* ------------------------- Freeflying | 2022-08-04 10:36:50 UTC | #383 Wow slow chat exploded! Venn diagram eat your heart out. Gone for a day or two. And it went mad. Any oh! Was going to ask if awes had its own version of heliostats? With a ground based focal point? More a pint of curiosity Than anything else. I’ve been hearing lot about molten driving steam production. wondering if anyone had heard something similar? Considering mirrors prism and lenses have been around for generations. most the optics is fairly advanced. Even fibre optics could come into somewhere? Didn’t know if that was something being explored in awes? I know by my reckoning it would be zero emissions. Once installed. But have no idea how it would get there? Just going to throw it out there and see what comes back with the boomerang. ------------------------- PierreB | 2022-08-04 11:14:06 UTC | #384 [quote="Rodread, post:381, topic:1610"] Why don’t >90% of AWES designs use that idea? [/quote] [quote="PierreB, post:75, topic:661"] An [Isotropic kite ](https://forum.awesystems.info/t/isotropic-kite/312) like @kitefreak’s (see below) can have several spaced anchors, and can use the earth as spar according to a good principle from DaveS. [/quote] [quote="Rodread, post:381, topic:1610"] Maybe the easiest way would have been to shift the post to the topic of Network Kites [/quote] I don't know if you allude to https://forum.awesystems.info/t/advanced-kite-networks/2105, but this method is based on multi-anchored rig, where earth works like a spar and could allow to scale more, by stiffening the AWES but at ground level, without having to bear a heavy weight at altitude. I have in reserve some patterns using the earth and multi-anchoring. I suggest you remake this interesting topic by beginning with Earth (with the funny shape you given), pursuing with earth (without capital letter) to go towards technical features. ------------------------- dougselsam | 2022-08-04 16:18:18 UTC | #385 [quote="PierreB, post:75, topic:661"] the earth as spar according to a good principle from DaveS. [/quote] Yes this whole topic sounds like daveS, once again revealing his genius for the elucidation of the rest of us unthinking peons.. Nobody had previously ever thought of multiple anchors. Nobody knew the Earth existed. Amazing how the level of thinking in AWE has evolved over 15 years. Gosh - Earth... makes me want to just go out and take a walk! :) ------------------------- dougselsam | 2022-08-04 17:33:58 UTC | #386 I just saw "People will die if AWE R&D continues to delay optimal research design by not planning a Technically Knowledgable Experts-moderated “Fraunhofer” Fly-Off." on a closed topic. OK so now of we don;t have "a flyoff", people are going to die. Nevermind that I've been saying for 14 years of this "flyoff" talk that we ALREADY HAVE A FLYOFF that has been going on for 14 years and all you have to do is show us your device on video with a power meter and you can enter the flyoff! But the same person who has insisted on a flyoff for 14 years refuses to produce or measure any electrical output or output of any measurable kind. So this is just more posturing, more pretending to have a power-producing device, more nonsense. ------------------------- AweEnthusiast | 2022-08-04 17:33:58 UTC | #387 That is precisely where you miss it, @dougselsam In a competition, there must be some level playing ground, rules, and competent, impartial referees or jurors. Funding is a key advantage in proving the merits or demerits of any chosen course. We have seen funded concepts fail miserably while those who had opposed those concepts and even walked away from them out of conviction never got funded. AWE today is looking at the MW scale to be certain and it will be nice to know of any willing funder of some contest of sorts amongst competing firms. For example how much would a 5MW AWE Power Station cost or should cost for maximum efficiency and safety? Can this be guaranteed for entrants or eventual winners and what percentage would be availed prior to the contest as a minimum participating allowance itself to help fund preparations? Who prepares the broad terms of reference and specific terms for different archetypes? ------------------------- dougselsam | 2022-08-04 17:42:19 UTC | #388 [quote="AweEnthusiast, post:4, topic:2136, full:true"] Wait a little longer, DOugS. It won’t be long anymore. Thomas only needed a week’s wait to see the living proof he sought. Higher heights, JohnO [/quote] Hi John: A biblical reference, and a slogan about "lift" - par for the course. Remember, in AWE, all achievements are in the future - and always will be! We'll be watching for the electrical output numbers - a week huh? Let's all hold our breath! ------------------------- AweEnthusiast | 2022-08-04 17:42:19 UTC | #389 Dear @dougselsam I took some literature lessons in high school. There's something called figurative speech if my memory serves me right. Not all speeches are literal, nor writings either. Thanks, DougS; for your warm welcome in a truly peculiar style. Ever read Daniel9:27 - "And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make [it] desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate. "(KJV) ------------------------- AweEnthusiast | 2022-08-04 17:42:19 UTC | #390 @PierreB, @Windy_Skies Is it possible for an author to edit an old post of his? Thanks. ------------------------- Windy_Skies | 2022-08-04 17:42:19 UTC | #391 [quote="AweEnthusiast, post:390, topic:1610"] Is it possible for an author to edit an old post of his? [/quote] On the bottom right of every comment there is the reply button. If you look at a comment of yourself, next to that is a pencil icon. Click on that to edit a comment. There is a time limit to that of, I think, several months. If you would like to edit the title of a topic, click on the pencil next to the title. ------------------------- dougselsam | 2022-08-04 17:42:19 UTC | #392 [quote="AweEnthusiast, post:389, topic:1610"] Thanks, DougS; for your warm welcome in a truly peculiar style. Ever read Daniel9:27 - [/quote] John: As far as I am aware, this group is mostly about wind energy. If you or Santos ever has anything relevant to wind energy, I'll be waiting to hear all about it. No, more bible verses won't suffice. Send us some video with power output on a meter. :) ------------------------- AweEnthusiast | 2022-08-04 17:42:19 UTC | #393 Not just wind energy but **AIrborneWind** Energy. **Tethered Aviation** or **Applied Aeronautics** but not plain mechanics or mere electronics. ------------------------- AweEnthusiast | 2022-08-04 17:42:19 UTC | #394 Thanks, I just checked. My post of a few days now seems to have lost the edit tab. Comments of today still do. ------------------------- Windy_Skies | 2022-08-04 17:42:19 UTC | #395 You should be able to now. ------------------------- dougselsam | 2022-08-04 18:03:28 UTC | #396 [quote="AweEnthusiast, post:393, topic:1610, full:true"] Not just wind energy but **AIrborneWind** Energy. **Tethered Aviation** or **Applied Aeronautics** but not plain mechanics or mere electronics. [/quote] John with all respect to both of you, in wind energy, whether airborne or otherwise, the standard is measuring output. No need for more empty talk of a "fly-off". How about just fly it and show the world what you've got. The flyoff theme is just one more diversion - one more attempt to derail the conversation into excuse-land with more empty bragging and false promises of future "TeraWatts".. A scatter-plot of output vs wind speed, with a power curve, is an example. That's pretty much the standard. Measured cumulative energy output over time is another key piece of data. Even a single measurement of peak power, or just a simple video, showing your rig in operation, and showing a power-meter, or separate meters showing voltage and amps, is what any valid assessment would require, just as a start. Showing us some pieces of cloth laying on the ground and picking out bible verses is about as far from any sort of wind energy as it gets. ------------------------- PierreB | 2022-08-04 19:03:42 UTC | #397 Hi Doug, in wind energy, the only gear that has proven itself in the industry and the market is 3-bladed HAWT like on: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_turbine Now this forum is about airborne wind energy. I have a question: what would be the kite area needed to support an utility-scale HAWT into the air? To give you an idea it takes 4 m² to lift a Kiwee turbine producing 200 W at 10 m/s wind speed. And this turbine is ultra-light (less than 1 kg), much lighter than the equally small wind turbines on the market. It is likely that a kite with the same surface area would produce much more in reeling mode. ------------------------- dougselsam | 2022-08-04 19:10:23 UTC | #398 [quote="PierreB, post:397, topic:1610"] Hi Doug, in wind energy, the only gear that has proven itself in the industry and the market is 3-bladed HAWT [/quote] Hi Pierre: Are you saying all the hype around factories manufacturing and shipping out AWE systems, and the same companies supposedly operating these systems (I guess operation of the systems comes free with purchase?) is not true? That it isn't really happening? What about all the vertical-axis turbines we keep hearing about? They're no good? Would people really put millions of dollars to work where it can do no good? Are the "Professor Crackpots" of the world, and the people who listen to them, just plain wrong? Geez, what can we do about it? try to expose them? :) ------------------------- PierreB | 2022-08-04 19:19:50 UTC | #399 HAWT for now, maybe AWES in the future and for higher winds. Doug, I know you don't like the word "future" but, as far as AWE is concerned, you can perhaps appreciate if we compare it with the present. AWE future cannot be worse than its present. ------------------------- AweEnthusiast | 2022-08-05 05:41:40 UTC | #400 Thanks, @PierreB Suffice to inform @dougselsam here that he is far behind in understanding the state of affairs in AWE today. AWE has gone past 100KW generation output. It is not as if Makani and others did not produce any power at all. What is up now is the need to step up to Grid-scale, beginning at MW levels. The path followed by earlier successes had been the point of contention and the 'opposition' seems proven right by the turn of events. I repeat: this is AWE, DougS; not typical wind energy. Thank you. ------------------------- dougselsam | 2022-08-05 09:24:12 UTC | #401 [quote="PierreB, post:12, topic:2136"] We are talking about several thousand meters of altitude where the resource is, and that the kites can reach, not a few meters above the ground. [/quote] Pierre, we've heard that one before from Santos. "Shooting us down" for not being "high enough". All I can say is at least we show substantial power output on meters. The systems were flying. Once output from flying contraptions is verified, further development becomes possible. Yes, yes, we keep hearing about Skysails. Recent news includes a bankruptcy, and abandonment of their main effort - pulling ships. Their stories are weak on details and actual data. One would think if they had impressive data, they would be publicizing it. One would think if their systems were in regular operation anywhere, we'd see more coverage of such operation. Personally, I'm not convinced. Too many examples of "clean energy breakthrough" vaporware. Given the small scale and home-built aspects, it's a decent showing of power output, proving that our concepts at least work. Demonstrating our craftsmanship at a small scale is a way of avoiding spending too much and declaring bankruptcy. "Professor Crackpot" follows the rule that "We have to build it really big, or people won;t take us seriously!" That paradigm offers multiple excuses, for some, to not build a working demo at all, and for others, when their too-large demo has a single crash, the entire company can be relieved that they can stop pretending and just go bankrupt. ------------------------- Rodread | 2022-08-05 09:24:12 UTC | #402 Ochd @dougselsam Lazy default to dismissal. You can also use the computer to research. https://skysails-power.com/onshore-unit-pn-14/ Actually doing pumping yo-yo ------------------------- AweEnthusiast | 2022-08-05 09:24:12 UTC | #403 Thanks, @Rodread for sharing this. Perhaps @dougselsam will now get it. ------------------------- PierreB | 2022-08-05 09:24:12 UTC | #404 [quote="dougselsam, post:401, topic:1610"] One would think if they had impressive data, they would be publicizing it. [/quote] Hi Doug, please read the information on the comments. Concerning SkySails data tests were published and were reported at least two times in this forum: https://forum.awesystems.info/t/autonomous-airborne-wind-energy-systems-accomplishments-and-challenges/1803 and https://forum.awesystems.info/t/metrics-or-equations-power-curves-or-simulations/1930/5... I put again and again the references of the published curves: https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev-control-042820-124658, pre-print on https://fagiano.faculty.polimi.it/docs/papers/2022-AWE_AR.pdf Figure 15 page 19: average power 92 kW, 12 m/s wind speed. And at hundreds of meters high, not few meters. My comment: it is by far, and hopefully temporarily, the best AWE MEASURED and PUBLISHED DATA. A flexible kite was used, and reeling (yoyo) method was applied. ------------------------- Windy_Skies | 2022-08-05 09:29:48 UTC | #405 @PierreB if some of the above comments on SkySails contain new info maybe you can repost that in a relevant topic, or move the comments? You have a regular badge so you might be able to. ------------------------- PierreB | 2022-08-05 09:44:12 UTC | #406 @Windy_Skies, there is no new information. Simply I must periodically remind the facts to @dougselsam about SkySails, quoting the same document. I will still quote this document in https://forum.awesystems.info/t/skysails-power-system-installed/978 topic. ------------------------- tallakt | 2022-08-05 12:43:35 UTC | #407 [quote="PierreB, post:404, topic:1610"] Figure 15 page 19: average power 92 kW, 12 m/s wind speed. And at hundreds of meters high, not few meters [/quote] 100 kW average, 400 kW peak? ouch… but good results regardless, as a stepping stone to something better ------------------------- PierreB | 2022-08-05 14:20:41 UTC | #408 [quote="tallakt, post:407, topic:1610"] something better [/quote] Certainly not as shown in figure 18 on page 22 of the same paper, except perhaps when control of the device is acquired... ------------------------- dougselsam | 2022-08-05 14:32:39 UTC | #409 Thank You Pierre: Reading on to the next page (20) of the same document, we find: "Besides power generation, the company has shown that ram-air kite technology can be used for traction of large marine transport vessels (58) using kite sizes of up to 400 m2, proving the scalability of this flexible-wing technology. Moreover, for the application of Yacht propulsion, SkySails has successfully developed and commissioned a system (68, 69) on the marine vessel Race for Water (https://www.raceforwater.org/en/). The system has been handed over to the customer and several hundred hours of automated kite flight have helped to propel the yacht, showing the high TPL achieved." Sounds good, except the company has now sold off this division. Why? If all these positive accolades are the whole story, why does the original meme, ship-towing, not catch on? Seems like there must be reasons. I was initially impressed with the numbers from kite-reeling, thinking the advantages could overcome the disadvantages. But over time, I noticed things didn't seem to be progressing according to the optimistic promises. Progress seemed to have stalled years ago. I will say, to select excerpts from various papers, it can easily look like we have a winner in AWE. However, my impression is the concept is awkward, subject to wear and operational issues, and may never pan out as an economical wind energy solution, at least anytime soon. We have many ways to analyze things. Some ways are numerical. Some are structural, some operational. We also have vast reserves in our brains that we do not even understand, but just use, all day every day, that allow us to deftly negotiate complex situations based on vague impressions whose origins we are not even aware of. These impressions can take the form of a nebulous feeling of "I've seen this movie before", whereby people can keep throwing numbers at you, but leave you still wondering "Where's the beef?" The years roll on, with still no statement of cumulative energy generation or routine daily operation by a customer, that I have seen anyway. At some point, I'm left with these vague impressions of something that "sounds great", but I remain unconvinced. After 14 years of "sounds great", I'm not falling for more hype. ------------------------- PierreB | 2022-08-05 15:22:55 UTC | #410 Doug, 92 kW average power, it is one of the best current AWE results, and it is notified in the paper. This is also 1/100 power amount of a large offshore wind turbine. To be successful an AWES should not generate 100 times less power than a conventional wind turbine, but 10 times more considering the space occupied and the more uncertain operation. This means that the chances of success are more than random. What is in your quote does not say that ships are towed by kites, but that the ram kite has scaling possibilities: "...can be used" does not mean it is do. Also regarding kite-reeling, it may not be a good solution, but the best actual result (92 kW) is well obtained by a kite-reeling. ------------------------- dougselsam | 2022-08-05 15:50:10 UTC | #411 [quote="AweEnthusiast, post:400, topic:1610"] Suffice to inform @dougselsam here that he is far behind in understanding the state of affairs in AWE today. AWE has gone past 100KW generation output. [/quote] Hi John: Yes, wasn't that 100 kW figure about 5 or more years old? Maybe older? Seven years? I've been waiting for something to develop based on that for, it seems, at least half of the current 14-year-old AWE hype-cycle. As far as the recently re-introduced concept of "a flyoff" and the idea that the lack of "a flyoff" is the main thing holding back AWE progress, this is an old discussion that I thought had been talked to death years ago. The "flyoff" idea reminds me of Santos' famous "concert that never happened" - a talking-point that developed a life of its own in his mind, but while announced, no steps were taken to make it happen. Later we heard many excuses including, at one point the statement that people playing with kites on a beach had brought a radio to listen to, and that fulfilled the obligation. Yeah, sure.. What I kept telling your friend in response to his incessant insistence about some nebulous "flyoff" idea was this: There is already a "virtual flyoff" in place. There always has been. The internet makes it all the more so. If we want to go back down that "Wright Brothers" road, you could say there was a "virtual flyoff" even way back then, before the internet. Langley was trying. The Wrights were trying. Others were trying. There was no specific reason any of them had to be in the same place at the same time. It was sufficient that each group was trying, and one group succeeded. Note that the group that succeeded was self-funded and did all their own fabrication. They didn't need to raise millions of dollars and hire an HR department just to handle all the people needed to populate their renting of "office space". Nope, they just built an engine, built a plane around it, and flew it. I believe it was "Scientific American that disputed their flight after the fact. To this day, the world of "science" cannot even agree on the theory of how a wing develops lift! That was a recent article in Scientific American. We think we're so darn smart, but evidence of our ongoing ignorance abounds. Flyoff or not, with news a bit slower before the internet, the world eventually got the word that airplanes were working, and the Wrights planted the flag. Anyway, years later, your friend did start parroting the term I had introduced: "virtual flyoff". Maybe some days he remembers that, and some days he forgets. It is only obvious that there is no specific need for various "teams" to fly their attempts at AWE at the same place and same time. The logistics of moving a system to such a site at a given time may not in all cases make sense, and to schedule such an event ahead of time might easily place it in an unexpected time of calm. No the more sensible approach would be for any team to take some data at their own test site at their own convenience and publish it for others to see, which has already been done by multiple teams.. And so there is your "virtual flyoff" - already in place and ongoing. The main thing that separates the person insisting on "flyoff" is he has not participated in the existing "flyoff" which is always there, like a 24-hour Walmart or 7-11 store - go at your convenience - go at midnight - go on Christmas - the doors are always open. Same with the virtual "flyoff" - the door is always open, Come one, come all, fly your stuff and show everyone how it works! Tke a video. Show power meters. If you have anything working, the world is eagerly waiting. Then again, if all you do is talk and have no results and nothing to show the world, well then I guess you might be so distracted you keep talking about progress being stalled by the lack of a "flyoff", but I think the real story is the flyoff has been in place for 14 years, and some people participate, while others don't. :) ------------------------- tallakt | 2022-08-05 22:19:25 UTC | #412 [quote="dougselsam, post:411, topic:1610"] There is already a “virtual flyoff” in place. There always has been. The internet makes it all the more so. [/quote] This moment of clarity is something we should all aim for. The «virtual flyoff» is probably one of the most fundamental ideas to come across this forum. Thx @dougselsam ------------------------- Rodread | 2022-08-05 20:46:31 UTC | #413 Sounds like @tallakt is going off to the computer to develop an AI AWES combat training stadium. Enough random kixels in the air it'll come up with something effective and scalable. I'll decline an opinion on the document ------------------------- PierreB | 2022-08-05 21:38:23 UTC | #414 If the Wright brothers are remembered, it is also because Boeing developed their invention on a large scale. The AWE field already has its Wright brothers, but is waiting for its Boeing. ------------------------- tallakt | 2022-08-05 22:43:57 UTC | #415 [quote="PierreB, post:414, topic:1610"] The AWE field already has its Wright brothers, but is waiting for its Boeing. [/quote] Meh. The Wright brothers of AWE will be known only _after_ some design goes massively commercial. Most likely history wil paint anyone in AWE as a «professor crackpot». That is if AWE never takes off. If anyone should succeed though, their name in history will match their contribution’s importance, unless, also likely, someone else takes the credit ------------------------- PierreB | 2022-08-05 23:02:02 UTC | #416 [quote="tallakt, post:415, topic:1610"] The Wright brothers of AWE will be known only *after* some design goes massively commercial. [/quote] This follows almost naturally from the first sentence of my comment: [quote="PierreB, post:414, topic:1610"] If the Wright brothers are remembered, it is also because Boeing developed their invention on a large scale. [/quote] As a result, we possibly will know who are Wright brothers in AWE field but only if Boeing (utility market) happens: [quote="PierreB, post:414, topic:1610"] The AWE field already has its Wright brothers, but is waiting for its Boeing. [/quote] So currently we cannot say who are AWE Wright brothers, and if they will be remembered. ------------------------- Windy_Skies | 2022-08-18 15:06:32 UTC | #417 35 posts were merged into an existing topic: [Questions about Moderation](/t/questions-about-moderation/1593/66) ------------------------- Freeflying | 2022-08-19 19:15:56 UTC | #418 https://youtu.be/DINNfsbg108 Kronos submarine. For anyone that interested. It say submarine and spacecraft. I’d love to know how? Apparently built in the highlands of Scotland. Trust the Brits to want a commando assault vehicle. Especially one with multiple vector applications. It had me going stingray, stingray! Gerry Anderson’s In the current climate? stand by for action seemed very apt! ------------------------- Rodread | 2022-08-19 19:15:56 UTC | #419 Bet its not built anywhere. Looks nonsensical -------------------------