AN INVITATION TO Open-AWE IP POOL

News
41

I thought maybe I also should share reality for those wondering what is happening behind closed doors.

I know the head of AWEurope quite well, as he was there when Kitemill was founded and has been a long time investor. He is also involved in monitoring progress of Kitemill activities in meetings and such, which is natural for any investor. Though he is less involved in day to day operations these days.

We talk now and then about Kitemill and sometimes private matters. So far we did not talk about AWEurope matters at all. Maybe I congratulated him on his new position there. Truth is me and this person live 8 hrs drive apart I don’t see him often.

I would guess he got the role of AWEurope leader due to his involvement in Kitemill in order to include many parties in the organization [i suppose other companies are also represented]. I have no knowledge about how all this happens, and dont care much. Though I can say I vouch for his integrity he would always act in a fair manner and he has the best of nature close to his heart.

I don’t think AWEurope has any sway over how EU research funds are being distributed. This would not be natural, I can’t see how anyone would opt to manage things this way.

To get EU funds, each company must submit an application to a program, and the selection process is managed by EU buerocrats as far as I am concerned. I guess Kitemill would have liked to have any influence on these funds. Of course Kitemill as a possible recipient receiver of such funds does not have such influence, even through AWEurope.

I would have thought that this would match any person’s world view. Though it seems maybe I need to spell it out?

Anyway, I would not forward any request to AWEurope. Please do that through direct channels such as email or telephone. That wpuld be both weird and wrong. I «just work at Kitemill». Thus I am not really involved in AWEurope more than any of you people. For those European you may appreciate a body working for our common interests

2 Likes
42

|### dave santos|17 Aug 2022, 23:00 (13 hours ago)||

|
| — | — | — |
|to Roland, Lorenzo, Weber, Tallak, Thomas, me, Kristian

|

Reminding folks how Tallak continues to damage pubic discourse to blindly believe Doug’s claims and not allow rebuttals from Old Forum Archives. Old debates once allowed observers to learn what Tallak is not wanting to learn, that Doug has never been able to prove his accusations, claiming to have lost all his old emails or not to be able to search JoeF’s public archives with local search. Tallak believes Doug because he wants to, even praising ideas that are mine while falsely crediting Doug.

What a terrible job of sharing AWE knowledge to allow so many provable misstatements to stand.

Over the years we solved how to practice videogrammetric physics to conduct virtural flyoff, as doomed AWEurope ventures refused the concept of rigorous aerospace flyoff and scoring matrix, and remaining insiders still do.

Roland and Lorenzo do not seem too keen on an optimal AWE research strategy nor videogrammetric detective work, seemingly content for EU ventures to drive poor engineering science from a commercial interest ethos that can only fail to deliver, due to a wide technological “Valley of Death”.

Rigorous Virtual Flyoff beyond Doug and Tallak’s imagining long ago predicted AWEurope failures. Even today, Kitemill and Kitepower data can be gleaned from media predicting scaling failure and other critical shortcomings. The grim predictions are data-driven. The marketing claims are greed-driven. No wonder they do not match up.

Facts do not go away. Virtual Flyoff analysis predicts Kitemill is already experiencing scaling safety and economic barriers, but marketing as if they do not know this.

============

On Friday, August 5, 2022 at 04:11:07 PM CDT, dave santos <santos137@yahoo.com> wrote:

Thomas,

This is very odd. Now Tallak is praising my concept (virtual fly-off) that Doug is falsely claiming.

43

My objective here is not to prove MW concept but to show that ‘rag and string’ kites NOT gyrocopters or other expensive aviation tech have been employed and can be employed to generate measured power. This was way back around 2009. AKN implies networks of multiple ‘rag and string’ kites as this to scale - necessary advancement beyond the initial ‘proof of concept’ shown here to reach desired heights and access stronger winds for more power.

44

This is the kind of destructive talk that I do not think should be posted on this forum.

Unfounded criticism. Person attacks. Not supportive, just tearing down the reputation of others who are initially well aligned in the desire to promote any AWE


3 Likes
45

Pardon me @tallakt. Perhaps I should indeed have been more discreet. I wanted you to have my view from “the horse’s” mouth. Obviously, there are no secrets under the sun otherwise what we discussed here shouldn’t have ‘leaked’.

46

I believe Skypull would fit your definition of rag and string. They have though many flight hours, power produced, performed scaling. They also present a sound physical design that the rest of us can relate to.

All of this contraty to AKN/JAL/?. And stating that you have been at it since 2009 (13 years so far) does not make things better.

One would think rag and strings would be a speedy way to power production, compared to rigid kites kite Kitemill is doing, requiring expensive molds and kites that are destoyed on crash impact. Yet here we are. Kitemill at least can show some energy produced, many flight hours, one scaling step performed, and much more.

47

Its not that I care much because these statements are so obviously quite rabid. Though I would prefer to spend my time with individuals who are in it to help each other, not to end my career in AWE

1 Like
48

But JAL claims to solve MW issue in AKN pdf. We are still waiting for a clear description of a workable conversion system.

It is a long debate against rigid wings. There are arguments on both sides. This debate is not settled.

This comment accumulates the things we don’t want in the current forum.

1 Like
49

No, your career is not the target. Be rest assured.

50

You may now wish to contact JAL through provided contact.

51

Then read the quoted text carefully
 You may accept such abuse, but I will not tolerate it

After you have read it maybe also give the «censoring» discussion a second thought

52

“There will always be contention. Sometimes folks genuinely want to know and sometimes folks only want to disagree. Then there are those who are not so adept at the use of language.” - Sophie Adebambo on Facebook.

53

Anyways, I kindly refuse any more involvement in this IP pool. To be honest it seems to me putting my name on any of that would be a quicker way to end my career in AWE than any effort by your friend @AweEnthusiast, Mr Santos.

As it seems @AweEnthusiast you are mostly relaying text produced by Mr Santos, I will refrain from involing in further discussions for now.

It seems once again i wasted time on this sinkhole of a project. No worries, I did it of my free will. Now I see there was nothing new to see, and its time to move on.

I have given my best advise on how to approach AWEurope should you want to do that.

Good luck with your project, «youre gonna need it» :joy:

54

Well noted. Many thanks for your time.
Best wishes always, especially in your AWE career.

55

I will stand on my previous statement that the term “virtual flyoff” was introduced, specifically, by me, specifically, in response to Mr. Santos’ repeated insistence, years ago, of the necessity for an in-person “flyoff” event. It was an ongoing discussion, with Santos advocating for an in-person “flyoff” and me telling him that is not how wind energy works, but rather turbines are installed in a good wind resource location accessible for whomever is doing the work, with data then taken and able to be compared with other installations in other places. I stated at the time that such an existing situation amounted to a “virtual flyoff” which made Santos’ insistence on an in-person “flyoff” unnecessary and unlikely to happen. Similar to his announced-but-never completed “AWE-powered concert”, the whole thing was just a typical Santos “talking point” of more accurately for him “arguing point”.

The fact that he now claims to have been the originator of the term “virtual flyoff” is NOT IN THE LEAST SURPRISING. but, in fact, par for the course when dealing with this particular source. In fact, his repetitive habit of lying was actually an often-discussed topic on the old forum! You can confirm that with Pierre, because I remember him being also involved in these discussions about lying on the old forum.

The conclusion I came to in the old forum was that this particular group would just keep saying anything irritating that they could come up with, but the one thing they were never likely to come up with was an AWE system that did much of anything at all.

At some point in life, under any topic or subject matter, you begin to realize, unfortunately, there are some people who are just beyond reach and cannot be helped. Sometimes they can be really annoying. But you can’t let it get to you. You just have to let it go, and realize there are some people who are just like that, and trying to help them get straightened out is never going to work, so don’t bother, and don’t worry about it. :slight_smile:

2 Likes
56

We have now come to the same conclusions here. Such a pity, DaveS is no longer here to answer you personally.
Thank you.

57

It does work for those who accept the proof.
Can @dougselsam provide his post on the old forum earlier than the below so that truth can be established else may he honorably retract?

dave santos <santos137@yahoo.com>

To:Yahoogroups

Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 10:28 AM

An old staple notion in AWE R&D was that some sort of “Manhattan Project” or “Apollo Program” was needed to accelerate progress. Of course, no such coordinated effort ever happened as the “leaders” chose to focus “stealth-venture” capital on quick down-selects, rather than broad cooperative research. This pattern is leading to a lot of losers and boring duplicated work, but the news is not all bad.

Thanks to the Net, and the ultimate need of AWE ventures for publicity, we have, paraphrasing Malreaux, an R&D world “without walls”. Even a brief coy video shot is enough for experts to judge basic AWES performance, given the barest videogrammetric cues of scale, wind, and motion. The AWES Forum itself is a creature of the Net, helping fill out a clear-enough picture of current capability. The ages of real secrets suddenly seem over.

A major coordinated AWE R&D program could still emerge to help move things along, but if not, we can count on modern media to comprise a virtual AWES flyoff for close observers, and the technology emerging eventually, by slow market selection.

How is the virtual AWES flyoff going? We see flygens hard pressed to scale, a trend toward small rigid gliders with VTOL, but soft kites keeping pace. The AWE race is not over, and the action will continue visible.

58

The above passage is an example of a typical attempt to twist reality to make his two-second videos showing something wiggling stack up against the backdrop of other groups’ hour-long videos showing power meters in real time, sometimes with power curves and data visually presented on charts that visualize power against time, etc. It;s just more nonsense from the same old source.

As I said, John, I was the one who introduced the term “virtual flyoff”, and it was long before 2017. Doesn’t matter to me what any proven liar wants to say about it now. He wouldn’t have anything to “fly off” anyway. Never has, probably never will. It’s just one more stupid talking point to try and distract from the fact that he can’t come up with any AWE system offering any compelling functionality. He uses the lack of a “flyoff” as just one more mental diversion, which seems to be working on you. He is working on “impulse-power”., driven not by logic or facts, but by emotional impulse, which is why you found him back to demanding “a flyoff”, and only mentioning the existing “virtual flyoff” I’ve always maintained already is in effect, after being reminded of it by me on this forum.

Try asking him to show you a video of his best power output in 14 years of big talk. He has nothing to show.

And as stated, there is no point wasting endless time arguing with people who are both beyond help, and dishonest as well. Not going to play any more games with “idiots”.
Nice that your little group are fans of the idea of AWE. So far we haven’t seen anything compelling come from your group’s general direction.

When someone speaks of “broad cooperative research”, that is code for having nothing to offer, while seeking some way to take credit for someone else’s project that might be more viable, just as he tries to rewrite history in trying to take credit for my term “virtual flyoff”
Sad, but as I’ve said, you can’t save everyone!.

2 Likes
59

@AweEnthusiast ,

John (unless you prefer I write “Dave”), your own topic is AN INVITATION TO Open-AWE IP POOL . I don’t see a lot comments relative to the topic.

I try to understand what your goal is. It looks that you made a proposal, particularly addressed to AWEurope:

It looks like you have not done business, unless it is what you (Dave) believe. So “less favorable terms” (in another mean) occurred during the topic, rightly mentioned by @tallakt :

I’ve seen this type of scenario hundreds of times before. This reminds me of a fable by La Fontaine: The Fox and the Grapes:

A certain Gascon Fox, a Norman one others say,
Famished, saw on a trellis, up high to his chagrin,
Grapes, clearly ripe that day,
And all covered with purple skin.
The rogue would have had a meal for the gods,
But, having tried to reach them in vain,
“They’re too green,” he said, “and just suitable for clods.”

Didn’t he do better than to complain?

John, the old forum is a thing of the past. There is no point in trying to put the DS / DS back on by proxy. To cut a long story short, I confirm everything Doug mentioned, as far as I can verify, and especially the part where he mentions me. For the rest I trust him.

Also, if you have something to say about your own topic, please do so. Otherwise you can open another topic.

1 Like
60

I did post an on topic comment about the necessity of patents, though it was ignored if I am not mistaken.

We still don’t know if there are actual patents involved here or just something different.

As if most companies would be interested in a patent for something so unique like AKN. Google patents is full of such stuff, though rarely raises an eyebrow.

Concrete stuff could matter though, eg Makani patenting putting a tension sensor on the tether. Once it’s that concrete and no way to work around it, someone may be interested. I don’t think a lot such patents exist though, because so far noone figured out a good way to do AWE and proved it. Only then would copycats come into play

Note I have no reason to think Dave or John acting as a proxy has any sensible answers to any of this, makes me wonder why it is so important to have access to this forum