Questions and complaints about moderation + unlisted, mostly unmoderated, free discussion

[PierreB]

@kitefreak

Yes, under Network Theory, which applies to many fields, network-scaling is a powerful method. In the science of flight, both birds and aircraft are known to organize into formations far bigger than single units. Birds and sailing ships also show how a large number of feathers or sails are networked as a aggregate unit. Many kites are not a single solid wing, but even deliberately full of gaps to handle wind gust surge and promote stability.

@dougselsam

From my viewpoint, the only aspect suggesting a kite “network” was that the panels were not sewn together along their seams, but only attached at the corners, leaving spaces for the air to travel through, lowering the aerodynamic efficiency and advantages of a “high-aspect-ratio” wing. Instead we saw a long, “leaky” wing. Seems like it was just too much trouble to bother with a complete construction, so it was just left “as-is” after attaching the corners of the tarps.
If you can imagine a WWII B-29 limping home with a wing full of holes, as we see in youtube documentaries, it may still barely fly, but it flies better without the holes!

Both points of view present good arguments. I believe there is both positive and negative features of kite networks like Mothra or others, and I don’t know what wins. In favor of kite networks holes can improve stability as for parasails. In the other hand migratory birds fly in formation in order to protect themselves against apparent wind, as for a cyclist peloton in a race. But kites should not protect themselves against the (real or apparent) wind, quite the contrary. What are your arguments?