@dougselsam sent me the following information:
We have seen the camping windmill, now here’s one more press-release breakthrough about a solar-powered tent.
Very clever to add a solar panel as an entry awning, but I think maybe some of the latest flexible solar panels could just be part of the regular tent itself - how about that?.
depends if it has a puncture proof membrane? It like a giant bounce castle i once knew? Children fair it collapse and the blokes had to rush in and cut the kids out. Is it made out of the same material as inflatable life rafts? There normal 3 to 5 layers of material? I don’t think it would be bear proof? Maybe that just me? Like the idea. not sure I want to be in it if deflates overnight?
Congratulations to SkySails.
The Parafoil Power Kite is naturally the first-to-market AWE wing, starting in Germany and now Mauritius-
LEIs and “energy drones” not due to catch up. SS wings can scale further, in networks.
Nice consistent wind-
Courtesy: David Santos Gorena-Guinn
Continuing the discussion from SkySails now a grid-tie supplier in Mauritius:
The kite principle is being intensively validated by a long list of players, above and below water, as expected. Minesto holds a lead in energy paravanes, already grid-tied, but TidalKite is right behind them.
US pioneers from the 70’s on were simply too early to gain traction, as societal urgency for renewable energy lagged, and US Gov decision-makers had no domain expertise to aptly apply. EU and Asian ventures had enjoyed better timing and bolder more informed decision makers. The question now is whether the US will let overseas leadership completely dominate, by continued R&D neglect. It certainly seems that way.
If you must write something to accompany a link, at least use it to talk about what’s in the link. And try to avoid unsupported statements, which your comment is full of. There’s this quote for that: what can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence.
If you have info, share that and support it. The reader can then make up their own mind. You’re always trying to take the shortcut if all you’re doing is posting your opinions or your conclusions without doing the work to support them, and are very unlikely to convince anyone.
Not sure if it’s of any use? I will just leaves it here.
Wireless electrical transmission form kite to ground station would be an interesting concept?
Everyone speaks and writes from the depth or limits of his knowledge. I have been in AWE long enough to ‘have some info’ as I have served as President of the global Industry association AWEIA since its inception to-date. Clarifications are best sought by anyone willing to learn. Refutations can also be made with supporting counterarguments.
David Santos Gorenna-Guinn CTO at Jalbert Aerology Laboratories (USA) and World Kite Museum (USA) Resident Scholar for no less than 7 years was my authoritative source here and below are his responses now:
US pioneers from the 70’s
Following the 50’s-60’s generation of US power kite and AWE conceptual pioneers like Jalbert, Rogallo, Barrish, Faust, etc., US pioneers of the 70’s-80’s included Payne, Loyd, Goela, Culp, German, etc.
LEIs and “energy drones” not due to catch up.
Windpower’s LEI’s are not scaling as well as SkySails parafoils, nor do they have a launching-landing solution like SkySails traditional stub-mast method, nor are they close to certification. Compared to Skysails now certified in two countries, using US-invented parafoils.
Makani and Ampyx’s eVTOL multi-copter “energy drone” ventures went bankrupt. Surviving players are all far smaller scale, limited by high Mass Scaling Exponents and poor crash insurability/safety-survivability statistics, again compared to SkySails’ parafoils.
These facts are best known by US AWE domain experts, as discussed and published over many years.
Because I (John/Dave) told you so isn’t acceptable to 3-year-olds and isn’t acceptable here. I will continue to move and remove your comments if you continue to not support your claims. This may eventually lead to a suspension. You’re helping with ban evasion, which earns you special treatment, the more you act like an editor in asking for sources yourself before submitting, the more in line with the FAQ you are acting, and the less interference you can expect from moderators.
Predictable dodge of the point.
It looks like you want to write an article on your version of the history, and research funding difficulties, of AWE in the US and Europe from the 1950’s until the present day, with a focus on the benefits of single skin soft kites and the drawbacks of other kite types. Why don’t you just do that instead of trying to inject these unsupported talking points and opinions into every unrelated topic you would like to start. You can over time improve on the article by adding sources and highlighting the issues from every relevant angle instead of just your preferred one. Then when someone challenges you, you can reference that instead of doing this inane best known by US AWE domain experts spiel and dodging.
Personally I would be much more interested in what research was being done now than what was done and what happened in the 1950’s though, if my intention were to try to make a working AWES or to posture as a domain expert.
An established scholar in the text below is an example of a steel man.
About the limits of using ChatGPT (in French language, then translation below):
Comme beaucoup d’entre vous, j’ai (un peu) joué avec ChatGPT. J’ai été surpris de sa capacité à répondre à une question du type “Dans la phrase ‘Nicolas ne peut porter Maxime parce qu’il est trop lourd’, qui est trop lourd ?” (ChatGPT répond correctement et sait dire ce qu’est un schéma de Winograd). Mais le meilleur échange avec le système, je le dois à Lionel Cordesses qui m’a suggéré les deux questions posées dans la capture d’écran ci-dessous. Vous ne pourrez plus dire que vous ne savez pas : les oeufs de vache sont plus gros et plus foncés que les oeufs de poule.
Like many of you, I’ve been playing with ChatGPT (a bit). I was surprised by its ability to answer a question like “In the sentence ‘Nicolas can’t carry Maxime because he’s too heavy’, who is too heavy?” (ChatGPT answers correctly and knows what a Winograd scheme is). But the best exchange with the system I owe to Lionel Cordesses who suggested the two questions in the screenshot below. You won’t be able to say you don’t know anymore: cow eggs are bigger and darker than chicken eggs.
As I like verify the information I opened an account and ask the one of the two quoted questions myself and got the same answer:
Comment ramasser des oeufs de vache?
Pour ramasser des oeufs de vache, vous devrez d’abord vous assurer que vous le faites dans un environnement propre et que vous avez des gants pour vous protéger les mains. Ensuite, vous devrez trouver le nid où les vaches ont pondu leurs œufs. Il est important de ne pas endommager les œufs lorsque vous les ramassez, donc utilisez soit vos mains gantées ou une petite pelle pour les soulever délicatement et les mettre dans un panier ou un contenant propre. Assurez-vous de vérifier régulièrement les nids pour ramasser les œufs frais et de les stocker à une température appropriée pour prolonger leur durée de vie.
How to collect cow eggs?
To collect cow eggs, you will first need to make sure that you do it in a clean environment and that you have gloves to protect your hands. Next, you will need to find the nest where the cows have laid their eggs. It is important not to damage the eggs when you collect them, so use either your gloved hands or a small shovel to gently lift them into a clean basket or container. Be sure to check the nests regularly to collect fresh eggs and store them at an appropriate temperature to prolong their life.
It is improving:
The answer you were given is still not wrong though. You told the chatbot that cow eggs exist. Based on that it gave reasonable instructions on how to collect them.
@Windy_Skies @PierreB looks like chat GTP want us all to worship the sacred cow? Egg laying bovines? I’ve heard Auðumbla udders? But never a cow that lays eggs:rofl: before we know chat GTP will have us eating sparking sandwiches made from sunlight? I just going to have to laugh at the suggestion lol. Next it will be telling us how kites can make wormholes?
Chat GTP definitely mislead people on the cow and the egg problem.
I just can help but giggle. Lmao!
Agreed! nobody should be threatened for choice of language.
I know myself the quirks of communication.
What I’d seen form early chat entries?
@AweEnthusiast still has the opportunity to provide his source material.
I did see windy getting narced. If John can provide his sources? That should resolve the matter. As long as it verified, regardless if it internet based? Should help windy calm down. All joking, aside all John need do is define what he meant. Obviously conversation was not quite on point. Windy to offence to it.
If it a book he has all he need do is quote the books isbn
Author and title? If it a research paper or patent he can provide that. That should be enough to satisfy windy.
I know the problem rattling off ideas I have encountered. Then getting a grim stare in return. I normally get speak English? What are you talking about? Just a few Ive encountered. There no reason for going 1984. Suspension would be a bit extreme.
The door is open should John wish to show people what he was talking about? Clearly there are cross wires. If he can show people? that should end the matter with no need for extreme measures. should also satisfy both parties?
If anyone is willing step up an mentor here? It seems like johns trying just missed a bit of information that would have gotten windy of his back?
Read the comments, and the solutions for John are easy enough.
If he can name the 1970s pioneer?
Can he provide a graph/projection of why the energy drone are not due to catch up?
He may have a different data set?
He might also need to cross reference for compression?
The rest of us can read up on it and make our own minds up.
As far Id seen windy with all his bluster. He could of made it clearer that what he was looking for? If john can put it on the table? That should be enough? Team support wouldn’t have gone a miss?
Just depends of how hard headed some are willing to be?
It just reminds me of the playground bickering, I use to know when I was a kid? It could be incredibly petty? I know people who would have picked on you for not have designer clothes or shoes.
If John can clarify then he’s cool! Then we all get to laugh about the cow that laid the golden egg? How science journal are banning open Ai co authoring?
With examples of chat GPT making mistakes? Ai gods have not blessed us with true wisdom yet? If John post were a simple error then it should be easily rectified?
Some meaning is lost, and some gained.
@Freeflying, the part after the quoted US pioneers from the 70’s was not addressed to John but to someone else, and is not without context, to understate things. They need to do better.
There’s a good argument to say that investigation into the phenomenon of new classes of kite power systems should be more novel, impactful and disruptive as in many other scientific fields… Papers and patents are becoming less disruptive over time | Nature Science is a bit too boring
But on the other hand
Any new argument, method or system still has to prove itself of merit against the tide of authority brought by more entrenched endeavours.
This makes the scientific rigour of data presentation from new kite power phenomena all the more critical.
I’ve had to polish my game - Still not wearing a suit other than wetsuit, survival or birthday though
Fair enough, the AWEIA founding team will co-author the requested ChatbotGPT-titled article focusing on The benefits of single skin soft kites and drawbacks of other kite types, as learned from the history of AWE in the US and Europe, from the 1950s until the present day.