From the report:
âFor example, the removal of energy from passing wind by the kiteâs turbine rotors lessened the effectiveness of control surfaces, such as ailerons and elevators. However, the M600 design did not compensate for this deficit, which limited maneuverability, hampering power production.â
Is this the main reason that Makani failed? Why canât they put the control surfaces near the tips of the wings out of the way of the turbines?
If you look at the kitecraft design
https://www.kitekraft.de
The turbine/props are toward the tips while the tailplane section stays central.
Might help to alleviate some of that problem.
Just one more excuse, also showing they didnât really know what they were doing. Probably an easy fix, but they went too big, too fast, worshipping a single super-expensive, ponderous prototype rather than honing their chops on cheap, disposable models.
Honing your skills with cheap disposable models
Is a very different approach to engineering than Ampyx are taking in that articleâŚ
(Fig. 2). âWe are doing this from a systems engineering point-of-view, using the same
standards as the aerospace industry, which is where we get a lot of our engineers,â said
Nastri. âWe are not building ten AP3s with the expectation that we will crash nine and
have oneâwe are designing so they do not crash.â
⌠Sounds even less experimental and explosive than Makani were
Do you not rate Ampyxâs chances @dougselsam?
See my old prediction below. I am afraid I was a little optimistic. Perhaps @dougselsam will have a more favorable evaluation 
In such dimensions and for a rigid wing, the mass of the turbines does not modify the mass of the assembly very much.
And takeoffs and landings in VTOL mode (Makani, Kitemill) are justified at least as much as the construction of an elevated airport.
Like Charlie Brown every fall, believing that this time Lucy will not pull the football away at the last moment, we take the next press-release, or statement of impending success due to high supposed qualifications, as believable, or even as fact-ahead-of-the-fact, then mysteriously lose interest or pretend it never happened when the âfuture newsâ evaporates into nothingness.
I have no opinion on Ampyx. They say they know what they are doing. I take it at face value. Maybe it is true, maybe it is not. I know only that since Iâve been aware, no revolutionary wind energy scheme besides the mainstream effort has borne much in the way of fruit. I mean, just think of the odds at this point: thousands of attempts, zero or near zero real successes. In many cases, the more publicized, promoted and high-profile, the quicker they disprove themselves like Magenn and Altaeros, for example. I look at Magenn, Makani, and Altaeros as the three horses of the apocalypse. How many thousands of times were these sometimes silly images cut-and-pasted into articles and videos? How many âreally smart peopleâ supposedly analyzed what was being put forth, nodding with knowing, beard-stroking, high-level-of-thinking approval. Today we have Skysails and what are they called again - oh yeah, Ampyx. Well theyâve both been around for quite a while at this point. Skysails âsold a systemâ over half a year ago. Supposedly âshipped to Asiaâ (normally recognized as being in the Northern Hemisphere), although the final destination was kitesurfing haven Mauritius, in the Southern hemisphere off the East coast of Africa. Once again, the future of AWE hinges on a single supposed future operation to power X homes in a remote or inaccessible location, neatly fitting âthe patternâ. Not a mention anywhere of whether it has even operated at all, still. No curiosity on the part of any AWE âplayersâ or âinterested peopleâ as to how this current leading poster-child-of-AWE is performing. Itâs almost like the AWE âcommunityâ doesnât want to know, realizing that the pre-project hype always sounds more satisfying than the resulting reality or lack thereof.
There may be a lot of âaerospace-level talentâ hired, and âaerospace-type-activityâ involved, but at some point, people who can use these sorts of skills to assess whether something is even promising enough to build needs to be applied, in my opinion.
What I always try to keep in mind is the often uncooperative nature of the wind - it has a lot of power, but only gives it up on its own terms. The wind doesnât care about how many engineering degrees some team has. I remember an eye-opening revelation when I had a stint building homes as a carpenter, specializing in roof-framing cuz it took the most brainpower, and once you were up there walking the walls getting it done, people left you alone lest they end up having to figure it out. âAll you gotta be is smarter then the boardâ was a saying I heard. âOMGâ I realized, as complicated as all these compound angle cuts, I know Iâm smarter than a board - I can DO this!
In our case, âAll you gotta be is smarter than the windâ. Either a project can outwit the wind, or it canât. No excuses do any good. No amount of âcredentialsâ will overcome the simple reality that, either you are âsmarter than the windâ or you are not. 
Providing the world with energy through AWE has not been proven to be the expected and natural future. The reverse has not been proven either. In my opinion the key lies in the design and architecture.
Well Pierre, AWE has certainly not turned out to be the no-brainer slam-dunk initially advertised. Those of us with years of wind energy experience knew this all along. Others are just beginning to see it. I agree, like you said, âthe key lies in the design and architectureâ. In other words, weâre always looking for a way. Still at the starting gate, in a race still yet to be really even defined, after all these years of hype.
Damon Vander Lind, formerly at Makani, perhaps incorporated that lesson into the design of the next thing he is involved in (Kitty Hawk)
Funny how all the guys who WERE going to MAKE energy, end up with projects that USE energy instead. âWell we werenât so good at MAKING energy, butâŚâ
Interesting that the tilted propellers pull air over the wing and help keep the flow attached to the upper wing surface. This may be the first time Iâve seen an airplane with both canards AND a tail. Still, a few telltale red-flag clues: Failed at Makani, canard + tail, reverse wing sweep, naming an airplane âHeavisideâ - huh? See, that right there, to me, injects the spectre of a certain amount of brainlessness. Like it is probably too accurate - with batteries âWell it is a bit on the HEAVY SIDEââŚ
Could the weight problem be why they fly it empty?
Typical giant beehive takeoff noise - just after they tell you how quiet it is.
The guy does look like a bona-fide nerd though, Iâll give him that.