My two last comments here are perfectly clear.
To understand them, however, you must read my latest comments on A (train of) parasail(s) as AWES ? and High drag coefficient : the link on X-triangle (which is not quite a Rogallo) is also here, and also on an previous comment by @AweEnthusiast ; and the link on Charly rescue system is on my preprint which is linked on this comment.
It is easy to understand that I was talking about high drag coefficients. On parasails and the latest developments from steerable Rogallo and square rescue parachutes, I have mentioned the existence of lift which allows them to be extrapolated as kites, and provided links to calculations on my preprints already connected, and which show that drag predominates, which is not a scoop.
So I wrote “drag-based kites” because that is what they are.
And drag-based kites are named regardless of the downwind movement of the swept area in yo-yo mode. This has all been discussed several times. “Bounding” term is not used in accredited environments: the terms yo-yo, pumping mode, reeling, reel-in/out are already used. One more term only adds to the confusion.
See also the Book of Abstracts (AWEC2024), page 37:
In the parachute based AWES, the shape of the parachute and the distance
between neighboring parachutes are key factors affecting the flow field, the aerodynamic drag force, and hence the efficiency in harvesting wind energy.
But the current topic is about Isotropic kite. I thought of configurations already discussed or linked in the comments cited above, because allowing steering leading to adapt to various wind directions, without having to move the anchoring, is one of the sought-after characteristics of Isotropic kites.
My previous comment noted the differences between our two respective concepts, Dave Santos and me. Do you also need a definition of crosswind kite?