Hi Doug, I thought about land and space use issue, assuming the device was working properly. But by reading the rare power curves (or by noting their absence) I saw that this was not even always the case.
Already on my sheet of paper I did not see how such machines could be sold, knowing that a wind turbine only takes the place of its location (area of the mast which is low on the ground) while for a supposedly identical production you must prohibit quite a lot of activities over a considerable area.
But I had not imagined that these machines could also produce nothing. This may be their only chance: if they produce nothing, there is no need to install any; suddenly spacing issue flies away…
AWES is like your airplane, but being a tethered aircraft. In your example the tower would be your “elevated railroad tracks”. The tether is intended to replace the tower of a regular wind turbine: it uses less material but, being long, imposes a gigantic area covering all directions, moves fast in crosswind use, and prevents secondary use, whether for a single unit or for a farm.
The space and land use is a major part of “an AWE system that is useful any way”, as notified below by an AWE company.
And in the circumstance a small stationary AWES like Kiwee is concerned. Let us imagine the problem with large (and here efficient, producing 100 kW) crosswind AWES…
Who would want a crosswind kite or even a stationary kite operating above your home?
The solution is in the root: for utility-scale, going towards giant designs to maximize power/ space use ratio; for individual scales perhaps Unlock the market by shortening the tether.
Now as the tether length is really a problem for powerful systems, you could also remove the tether by using Untethered airborne wind energy systems with still no guaranty about their efficiency.