Seems similar to Makani with a biplane wing. Curious to see how they progress, and I wish them best of luck!
Not sure if they use flygen. Propellers / turbines might be exaggerated in the rendering.
We cant be sure no, but more than a few propellers doesnt make sense for VTOL, so I guess flygen is a good bet
Wondering why they have the tailplane. Why don’t they just use a different amount of drag-loading for steering and stability like multicopters or thrustvectoring if that’s impossible?
A tail provides a lot of torque with minimal drag. And you dont need to know the direction of the airflow in order to get very good performance. Also, counteracting pitch moment of the wing is cheap compared to losses in the propellers.
This is just in general why most planes have tails, its a nice solution
Intuitively the skypull solution makes more sense. [edit: I thought skypull system didn’t have control surfaces]
Wondering if there has been done some research on the topic of turbine losses for steering. Probably much of the research on mullticopters can be transferred.
The skypull design is skewed, effectively implementing a tail?
As one wing is forward and one aft, a difference in AoA could be used for pitch control. Not very different compared to a tail
Would have to be like a canard aircraft.That would make the front wing a frontplane or canard and/or the back one a tailplane. But usuall a tailplane would have downward lift. The stability can’t be very great with that little leverage. Skypull indeed has controll surfaces over every wing. I really thought they controlled everything via thrust.
The (Kitekraft) biplane kite was also discussed on High lift coefficient and biplane kite. The scientific paper is on
Yepp, it’s drag-loaded. The title of the paper says so.
Just noticed that kitekraft have predicted a levelized cost of energy of 0.25 EUR/kWh.
The theory is well explained on: