This is normal, a photo is fixed, so you won’t see any movement.
More seriously, don’t expect a turnkey AWES here. And yet there are already some: are they suitable for you?
This topic has a participatory aspect: elements are given according to a new combination of power crosswind kite networks stretched on multiple anchors. It is now a question of making contributions to advance this concept.
If we get stuck on something, let’s try something else. For example if the triangles seem difficult to implement, you should know that other kites such as umbrellas have been suggested by the author. We can imagine umbrellas attached to each other and moving in two opposite directions without having to rotate to position themselves, thanks to their isotropic shape. Even with a low lift to drag ratio of 2 a large set could perhaps be efficient.
Re-edit, precision from Dave Santos: “Simpler to rig by lowest line count and work well enough, like countless triangle sails and kites. It’s a bit different flying with every 60deg shift, but not “difficult”. Always works at sufficient AoA.”
The AKN investigation would of course be greatly simplified if Dave could answer directly from his own account.
That quote your provided was Copernicus’ way of sliding through the politically-correct theme of his day, that everything had to comply with the bible, to keep from being sentenced to death for daring to think outside the box. The basic idea was that the establishment was stuck on thinking he sun, stars, and everything else, went around the Earth. Any deviation from their childish interpretation of the world around them was seen as dangerous. We have the same dynamic still going on today. Every day we are told not to believe our own eyes, and instead to bow down to a false reality designed to keep us ignorant and obedient. The quote I provided was how he really felt. The quote you provided was just what he said to avoid being persecuted or killed.
Thanks to DaveS:
"
Doug seems to confuse Copernicus with Galileo. Copernicus according to Wikipedia was a lifelong Catholic: “a Warmian Cathedral chapter canon” who did an “apprenticeship at the Papal Curia” “In 1533, Johann Widmanstetter, secretary to Pope Clement VII, explained Copernicus’s heliocentric system to the Pope and two cardinals. The Pope was so pleased that he gave Widmanstetter a valuable gift.[51]”
"
Hello Pierre: At this point, I don;t think it needs to be said that we should not expect a turnkey solution. Maybe a turkey solution (without the “n”). Just in time for Turkey Day.
We’ve witnessed many years of musing about crosswind kites from this same source. They are kite enthusiasts, and they enjoy flying kites.
They have gone so far as to declare power meters as irrelevant, and said they think the wind industry is too dependent on power meters. They obviously have no training in engineering, and in all these years of talking about crosswind kite power, they have not produced anything noteworthy.
I’ve been debunking whacky wind turbine ideas for many many years now. I know a promising project when I see one, and I know the all-talk format when I see it. Dreaming is nice. Producing power is better. It’s actually the only reason to be doing this. yet something they avoid. I think the talk has exhausted itself in this case. Wait and see if there is ever any power production, and even then, if it looks the least bit promising as an economical energy solution.
You know, it is really funny, but I had a guy contact me recently about his wannabe wind turbine “breakthrough” idea, with some drawings. He wanted to know if I would take a look at what he had, and let him know what I thought. I told him in advance that I was one of the main debunkers of whacky wind ideas, and how typically, wannabe inventors were not capable of understanding the simplest thing about wind energy and when a knowledgeable person analyzed their ideas there was really only one response in the end - trying to demonize the person with actual wind experience, and, rather than discussing any actual aspect of their idea, trying to change the discussion into the idea that, while their “idea” was “obviously” sound, the problem was the closed-mindedness of the knowledgeable person, that somehow the knowledgeable person was incapable of understanding the “great advantages” of their “idea”, and in the end, their predictable end result would be to develop a huge amount of anger toward the person knowledgeably analyzing their idea and providing free feedback.
This, of course, is what happened. He alternated between expressing dismay that I could not appreciate the advantages (such as a supposed perpetual motion feature) of his “breakthrough” and hoping I would partner up with him to develop his idea into a product.
Of course his idea was completely backwards and inside-out, with multiple typical and well-known “Professor Crackpot” features. By the time we had exchanged a few emails, he was ready to be dragged away by “the men in the white coats”. There was nothing wrong with his idea! The problem was me! I was now the worst person in the world. Period. (But with an invitation to partner with him still open…)
Of course, how could it be any other way? They are all the same. They come up with NOTHING, and want everyone to be impressed. The email exchange was so funny, I may have to keep it as a great example of “the syndrome”.
So there are crackpots, and there are megacrackpots. There are people who get stuff working, and those who only flail and flounder, never achieving anything at all.
If I ever see anything more than NOTHING from this group, I’ll be the first to say so. Meanwhile, we’ve suffered their abuse for many years, and there is nothing here that gives me any particular hope of any change in the situation.
Listen to their empty talk all day if you want, and build your hopes that they may someday show the world how to do wind energy. I don’t see it, and no amount of further idle chit-chat, or bragging-ahead-of-any-results from them, is going to carry any weight with me. I know what I’m looking at. Some may be swayed by the talk, but that someone is not me.
Today I’ve gotta get out there with a chainsaw - we’ve got trees down from the last windstorm, blocking half the road, with our wind turbines still intact, because they have that essential feature - overspeed protection, and because I furled the big one sideways early-on, using a hand-crank at the bottom of the 120-foot tower.
Even so, it overpowered the inverter which had to let the turbine spin freely (while furled sideways) while the inverter reset, several times, over hours of winds measured at over 50 MPH, but, unlike some of our trees, the turbine survived. Contrast that with the same old big-mouths flying recreational kites at the beach, and bragging about the future - uh-huh, sure.
Hi Doug, this will be your reward if you manage to sketch a kite network that sweeps much more than any single kite, while being maneuverable. We are waiting for your proposals while preparing the sauce.
Even on paper, on sketches, renderings, and descriptions, I have yet to see any AWES capable of operating at utility scale. This would be an opportunity.
Besides building many powerful-for-their-size prototypes, and having at least one grid-tied SuperTurbine™, often more, running continuously for many years now, I’ve published hundreds of drawings and renderings, some of which might qualify for your criteria.
Plenty of companies have come and gone, while telling the world they would soon be at utility-scale. This topic is just about the latest such set of soon-to-be-broken promises. They are going to rule the world - (checks wristwatch) - any minute now…
Meanwhile, if you had discovered where to find large amounts of easily-extracted gold, would you tell everyone where it was?
If you had bought a winning lottery ticket, would you publicize the fact that it was hidden in the glove compartment of your car?
I feel like we’re watching an episode of Sesame Street: Look kids, this is called a “Triangle”! OK so while we were waiting for the sad-looking collection of cloth triangles to generate some power, we’re treated to a desperate diversionary tactic = “Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!” as we substitute yet another person’s work for our own, and, rather than follow through on our promise to show the world how much power we’re going to make with our highly-touted Jalbert triangles, we now open the discussion to any and all triangular-shaped kites, parachutes, paragliders, and aircraft, pretending that, even though we took ZERO steps toward our previous, most recent promises (threats) of generating power using those cloth triangles, NOW we instead try to “change the subject” by pointing out a different triangular configuration, and using it as cannon-fodder in our latest hypnotic instruction of “You will FORGET everything we said about making power from the Jalbert Triangles”. Now, our feeble and easily-sidetracked minds are supposed to accept a mention of a different triangular parachute configuration as a legitimate “mindwash” vehicle to clear our minds of the promises of a few months ago, “resetting” our brains, to conveniently forget the recent promises to show us how to generate electricity using the inherited Jalbert apparatus, which, predictably, has gone nowhere.
Hi Doug, if you don’t like triangles, the same company delivers squares. Specifications are roughly the same. They are very light. Other uses than AKN can also be envisaged.
X-ONE 120
max. load LTF 120 kg | EN 105 kg
number of panels 20
weight of parachute 1,45 kg
surface 34,5 m²
number of lines 20
number of centerlines 1
sinkrate at max. load LTF 5, 98 m|s, EN 5, 49 m|s
certification LTF | EN
certification LTF RG 065.2012
certification EN EP 128.2015
container size L 27cm | B 25 cm | H 9,5cm
container volume 4.980 cm³
system length 6,5 m
max. area load 3,48 kg | m ²
Thanks Pierre:
Brainwashing complete: We have now forgotten the diversionary triangular parachute in favor of the square version.
It’s always a great relief to see the parachute open when a hang-glider or paraglider is in trouble!
The Jalbert Triangle promises are now over, and the instructions to forget it and move on to fixate on blue tarps is clear,
Your recent mail with this attachment looks like a meta-kite rather than networked kites. Please can you explain where are the kites (in red?)? And how does work the conversion system? Collective yoyo mode or other? Is this meta-kite multi-directional?
Dave’s answer:
A meta-kite has been defined as “a kite made of kites” that acts as one big kite.
It is a Kite Network of the sort that acts as one, but a network can also be a composed of units that act singly, but are many-connected.
The slide shows a highly integrated unit-sail kite network, therefore is a metakite as defined by us.
