Messages in AirborneWindEnergy group.                          AWES2080to2132 Page 22 of 79.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2080 From: Bob Stuart Date: 8/29/2010
Subject: Re: long-term survivability by reeling?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2081 From: Joe Faust Date: 8/29/2010
Subject: Re: smoothing device

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2082 From: dave santos Date: 8/29/2010
Subject: Ask NASA///open questions in AWE

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2083 From: Bob Stuart Date: 8/29/2010
Subject: Re: Ask NASA///open questions in AWE

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2084 From: Doug Date: 8/30/2010
Subject: Re: smoothing device

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2085 From: dave santos Date: 8/30/2010
Subject: Fatigue Cycling v. Creep in UHMWPE Rope

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2086 From: dimitri.cherny Date: 8/30/2010
Subject: Re: Fatigue Cycling v. Creep in UHMWPE Rope

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2087 From: dave santos Date: 8/30/2010
Subject: Re: Fatigue Cycling v. Creep in UHMWPE Rope

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2088 From: dimitri.cherny Date: 8/31/2010
Subject: Re: Fatigue Cycling v. Creep in UHMWPE Rope

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2089 From: dave santos Date: 8/31/2010
Subject: Re: Fatigue Cycling v. Creep in UHMWPE Rope

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2090 From: dimitri.cherny Date: 8/31/2010
Subject: Re: Fatigue Cycling v. Creep in UHMWPE Rope

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2091 From: Joe Faust Date: 8/31/2010
Subject: Re: Fatigue Cycling v. Creep in UHMWPE Rope

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2092 From: dave santos Date: 8/31/2010
Subject: Dyneema Creep & Dyneema v. Spectra

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2093 From: dimitri.cherny Date: 8/31/2010
Subject: Re: Dyneema Creep & Dyneema v. Spectra

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2094 From: dave santos Date: 8/31/2010
Subject: Creep in complex composite conducting tethers

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2095 From: jongchul_kim Date: 9/1/2010
Subject: Status of High Altitude Wind Power in Ecomagination of GE

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2096 From: Joe Faust Date: 9/1/2010
Subject: AWECS saving fuel wins

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2097 From: dave santos Date: 9/1/2010
Subject: Re: Status of High Altitude Wind Power in Ecomagination of GE

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2098 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 9/1/2010
Subject: Re: Status of High Altitude Wind Power in Ecomagination of GE

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2099 From: dave santos Date: 9/1/2010
Subject: Wind-Powered Glider-Launch Method /// from- AWECS saving fuel wins

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2100 From: dave santos Date: 9/1/2010
Subject: Re: Status of High Altitude Wind Power in Ecomagination of GE

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2104 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 9/1/2010
Subject: Re: Status of High Altitude Wind Power in Ecomagination of GE

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2105 From: dave santos Date: 9/1/2010
Subject: Re: Ask NASA///open questions in AWE

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2106 From: dave santos Date: 9/1/2010
Subject: Whoops, "Trade Studies" Disabiguation (Ask NASA thread)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2107 From: Joe Faust Date: 9/2/2010
Subject: Re: Wind-Powered Glider-Launch Method /// from- AWECS saving fuel wi

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2108 From: dave santos Date: 9/2/2010
Subject: Re: Wind-Powered Glider-Launch Method (sea option- "Airport of the F

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2109 From: dave santos Date: 9/4/2010
Subject: How Kitesurfers Discovered Aerospace

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2110 From: dave santos Date: 9/4/2010
Subject: yikes, the last message was posted by accident

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2111 From: Joe Faust Date: 9/4/2010
Subject: Re: Low in the sky?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2112 From: dave santos Date: 9/4/2010
Subject: AWECS Bearing & Gear Life

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2113 From: Pierre Benhaiem Date: 9/5/2010
Subject: Re: AWECS Bearing & Gear Life

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2114 From: Doug Date: 9/5/2010
Subject: Re: How Kitesurfers Discovered Aerospace

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2115 From: Joe Faust Date: 9/5/2010
Subject: Re: AWECS saving fuel wins

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2116 From: Bob Stuart Date: 9/5/2010
Subject: Re: How Kitesurfers Discovered Aerospace

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2117 From: Bob Stuart Date: 9/5/2010
Subject: Re: How Kitesurfers Discovered Aerospace

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2118 From: AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com Date: 9/6/2010
Subject: New file uploaded to AirborneWindEnergy

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2119 From: Doug Date: 9/6/2010
Subject: Re: How Kitesurfers Discovered Aerospace

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2120 From: dave santos Date: 9/6/2010
Subject: Formerly AWECS Bearing & Gear Life (elec v. mech power trans)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2121 From: dave santos Date: 9/6/2010
Subject: Mechanical Filtering of Multiline Control & Power Signals

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2122 From: Bob Stuart Date: 9/6/2010
Subject: Re: Mechanical Filtering of Multiline Control & Power Signals [1 Att

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2123 From: dave santos Date: 9/6/2010
Subject: Re: Mechanical Filtering of Multiline Control & Power Signals

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2124 From: dave santos Date: 9/6/2010
Subject: AWE Spin-Off/// Surf-Zone Energy Demo

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2125 From: Hardensoft International Limited Date: 9/7/2010
Subject: AWEC, AWEIA : AN UPDATE

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2126 From: muller.christoff Date: 9/7/2010
Subject: Re: Low in the sky?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2127 From: dave santos Date: 9/7/2010
Subject: Re: Low in the sky?

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2128 From: Joe Faust Date: 9/7/2010
Subject: Airborne wind wheels (LTA tethered turbines)

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2129 From: dave santos Date: 9/7/2010
Subject: Rowan University AWE Demo

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2130 From: Doug Date: 9/8/2010
Subject: Re: Rowan University AWE Demo

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2131 From: Doug Date: 9/8/2010
Subject: Re: AWEC, AWEIA : AN UPDATE

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2132 From: muller.christoff Date: 9/8/2010
Subject: Re: Low in the sky?



Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2080 From: Bob Stuart Date: 8/29/2010
Subject: Re: long-term survivability by reeling?
To double the fatigue life of a component, you only need to make it a few percent heavier.  The relationships are well known and documented for all engineering materials.  Very few aircraft accidents have been traced to fatigue.  The Comet disasters were famously due to fatigue from a stress concentration, which is the usual culprit in any failure.  Now, airliners are designed to withstand cracks developing until they are easy to see.  Since then, I've heard of one helicopter going down because the cycles were underestimated.  A strain gauge would have caught the forgotten factors.  
I hope we can build up a safety record in relatively unregulated airspace, and develop systems that will bring down a broken kite safely, so as to avoid the full load of aviation paperwork, which is estimated to equal the weight of each aircraft.  Crash safety might be a powerful reason to focus on flexifoils rather than rigid construction.
Mohave, California is friendly to experimenters, and has lots of wind.  I expect that we will succeed first at low elevations, and slowly work up into stronger winds.  Perhaps the drag of kites will even help to mitigate the extreme weather we are now getting, making big installations especially  welcome, but subject to occasional grounding by meteorologists.

Bob Stuart

On 29-Aug-10, at 5:55 PM, dimitri.cherny wrote:
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2081 From: Joe Faust Date: 8/29/2010
Subject: Re: smoothing device

Base-line long stroke? 

 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2082 From: dave santos Date: 8/29/2010
Subject: Ask NASA///open questions in AWE
 
NASA conceptual & feasibility study of Airborne Wind Energy is gathering steam. Mark Moore is a likely principal researcher. The results may well drive the early AWE industry. Maybe we can help. This forum is a great early repository of pioneer thinking. Joe Faust's sites will also be a great resource to build on.
 
Below is a latest "top ten" Draft of open design issues to suggest for validation research. Please forward any further topics-
 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2083 From: Bob Stuart Date: 8/29/2010
Subject: Re: Ask NASA///open questions in AWE
Output as electricity or to intermediate storage, such as water pumped to a hydro power reservoir.

Land or water-based.

Importance of proximity to existing power lines and markets.

Compatibility with aviation.

Multiple small elements vs. large ones.

Impact of large arrays on weather, birds, and public perception.

Available industrial capacity.  (wind turbine blades are forcing rapid growth of fiberglass production.)

On 29-Aug-10, at 10:11 PM, dave santos wrote:
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2084 From: Doug Date: 8/30/2010
Subject: Re: smoothing device
I'd like to redundantly bring up the point that 3000 years ago, wind energy had advanced to the point of using circular path for the sails, to minimize wear, and thereby add life to the system.
After 1000 years, it was further recognized that if this circular path could be perpendicular to the wind direction, efficiency increased while reversing stresses were eliminated.
Tangential forces were utilized, and movement parallel to the wind was eschewed.
This was 2000 years ago.
Have fun blogging!
:)
Doug Selsam
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2085 From: dave santos Date: 8/30/2010
Subject: Fatigue Cycling v. Creep in UHMWPE Rope
Cortland Puget Sound Rope has made the world's strongest UHMWPE rope for some years (Plasma Line). I talked with Randy Longerich, the president, whose vast experience gives him a fantastic ability to answer weird rope questions, even with gaps in existing research. A lot of his accumulated wisdom comes from his customers in the marine industry.
 
Randy feels that UHMWPE rope ages about the same under cyclic or static load (unlike many rigid materials). Either way, the rope will creep over time. Lab tests show the rope elongating by about a third over a few years, with almost all of its rated breaking strength still present. Wow.
 
In normal use, rough handling (nicks/abarasion) is the wear mode & monitoring the condition of the outer weave is how to decide replacement. Randy recommends a 5-to-1 safety factor in specifying a minimum breaking load (MBL) for long duty. He projects prices to fall for UHMWPE with decline in military spending (unless the military muscles into kites). An interesting fact off the website is that rope efficiency falls with diameter. Some AWE folks have been presuming that the reduction in relative aerodrag of thicker tethers would be a free-ride.
 
Some WindJammer team UHMWPE kitelines are still in regular service after 25 yrs...
 
There is a lot of good info on Randy's site-
 
 
 
Note to Dimitri: It seems you were talking about rigid airframe fatigue cycles, which we can agree is a big design concern, especially for the hot looping foils peaking over 10Gs.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2086 From: dimitri.cherny Date: 8/30/2010
Subject: Re: Fatigue Cycling v. Creep in UHMWPE Rope
Elongating by about a third?

A thousand foot line becomes a 1333 foot line after a few years of use?

Are you sure that's what he said? Can you point us to a written reference for that?


- Dimitri

Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2087 From: dave santos Date: 8/30/2010
Subject: Re: Fatigue Cycling v. Creep in UHMWPE Rope
Dimitri,
 
Its true, spectra is very creepy stuff.  But its a small price to pay for the best available weight to strength.
 
Kite fliers only see a few percent of creep, if they notice at all. Good lines are sold prestretched by a few percent.
 
It will be necessary to account for creep anywhere length is critical & the UHMWPE is highly loaded over time, like precision kite bridles or altitude/footprint restricted AWECS.
 
Creep also is critical design factor for composite/conductive tethers. Choose polyester/aramid family if low creep polymer is desired.
 
The finest lines for high performance kiting might be vintage UHMWPE lines stretched for years in a "line cellar".
 
daveS
 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2088 From: dimitri.cherny Date: 8/31/2010
Subject: Re: Fatigue Cycling v. Creep in UHMWPE Rope
Seems like you need to move over to Dyneema Dave. Maximum creep is 4.5%.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2089 From: dave santos Date: 8/31/2010
Subject: Re: Fatigue Cycling v. Creep in UHMWPE Rope
Dimitri,
 
Basically Dyneema & Spectra (including Plasma TM) are the same thing, different brands made under the DSM UHMWPE patent. Spectra is the Honeywell version.
 
A number like 4.5% is just the max creep under a particular (working) load over a given (short) time.
I kinda like the creep effect, one more thing to keep things interesting. Frankly, the KISS AWE space could soon run out of problems,
 
dave
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2090 From: dimitri.cherny Date: 8/31/2010
Subject: Re: Fatigue Cycling v. Creep in UHMWPE Rope
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2091 From: Joe Faust Date: 8/31/2010
Subject: Re: Fatigue Cycling v. Creep in UHMWPE Rope


Launch of Dyneema XBO Fiber at OTC 2010 takes synthetic ropes to a new level
http://tinyurl.com/DyneemaXBOFiber

 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2092 From: dave santos Date: 8/31/2010
Subject: Dyneema Creep & Dyneema v. Spectra
Dimitri,
 
Those who claim "zero creep" UHMWPE are mistaken, its always greater than zero in a tensioned line, although it often doesn't matter. As a test program, KiteLab Ilwaco abuses every major fiber available (even natural fibers), so switching UHMWPE brands, as you suggest, is really beside the point. Arguing Dyneema v Spectra is akin to the great Coke v. Pepsi debate, its splitting UHMWPE dog-hairs, & cordage engineers don't waste much time on it. I do have some really gnarly looking Asian pirate UHMPE to whip VC starts with, if they ever dare a fly-off ;^)
A typical on-line account of Dyneema creep-
 
Q- "How much does Dyneema creep? Is it just the tiniest bit? And does it ever stop creeping?"
A- "Creep varies with load and manufacture of line - but it is not the tiniest bit, its a lot. For instance on runners one size up for a Tayana 55 (3/8" amsteel) they elongate 6" a year, each year (we keep shorteing them, three times now-"
 
==========
 
This paper sets out the physics of Dyneema creep nicely (including super-creepy secondary-creep)-
 
by P Smeets - 2002 - Cited by 6 - Related articles
Aug 7, 2002 ... Smeets, P.; Jacobs, M.; Mertens, M.; ... In this paper a model for the creep of Dyneema HMPE on fiber level will be introduced and it is ...
ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=968205
 
 
 
 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2093 From: dimitri.cherny Date: 8/31/2010
Subject: Re: Dyneema Creep & Dyneema v. Spectra
I'm f**king with ya Dave. But 30%? Give it up man.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2094 From: dave santos Date: 8/31/2010
Subject: Creep in complex composite conducting tethers
Dimitri,
 
True, extreme creep takes a long time, but its real. The test Randy cited lasted 3 years. We are proposing even more extreme duty for our lines, beyond any normal application.
 
What this thread really teaches is how many little gotchas there are in store for the overly-complex design concepts. Fancy composite conducting tethers are going to have a lot of engineering uncertainty over long hard duty, never-mind optimistic claims based on the border aerostat model.
 
The abundance of such highly technical maintenance & operational/labor-cost issues will long delay high-automation kite-farm dreams. Meanwhile, simple tethers may just tend to get better creeping with age, & having a bunch of expert kite-pilots doing constant simple maintenance during lulls might be the smart early path to AWE. Automated AWE would likely develop best out of the piloted experience. Early bleeding-edge automaters would be footnotes in this scenario.
 
daveS
 
daveS
 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2095 From: jongchul_kim Date: 9/1/2010
Subject: Status of High Altitude Wind Power in Ecomagination of GE
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2096 From: Joe Faust Date: 9/1/2010
Subject: AWECS saving fuel wins

When AWECS play to replace extant fuel-dominant applications,

then a win is made against oil/coal.  What fuel-dominant works might be replaced

with AWECS?    There must be thousands of tasks that could be served with an AWECS. 

Identifying, designing, and perfecting such replacements may have significant positive impacts.  SkySails, sawing wood, logging, power kiting, etc. is just a start. Making electricity is one branch of AWECS that has a strong suit.  Yet there is more. Name a work and wonder how AWECS could serve.

 Here is a sketch of one such replacement where the wind energy is converted to tug in a manner to multiply tow line speed to launch a hang glider while replace fueled truck or car or scooter towing methods:

same: http://www.energykitesystems.net/images/HGtowAmbient.jpg
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2097 From: dave santos Date: 9/1/2010
Subject: Re: Status of High Altitude Wind Power in Ecomagination of GE
Jongchul,
 
Cristina Archer suggested this GE  "Ecomagination" contest as well. What would really be powerful is to combine all AWE entries into a Super-Entry. The hundreds of millions at play is enough for all the worthy scattered AWE R & D to blossom.
 
KiteLab Group would love to join a collective entry. Many other teams would also eagerly join a big cooperative push. You & KiteGen are the current best AWE entrants & could coordinate the combined submission & even direct the large broad program to follow. 
 
A coalition around this contest could tap other similar big opportunities. Cristina also identified the Gates Foundation's need for remote/mobile renewable energy to enable its massive global health initiatives.
 
dave santos
KiteLab Group
 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2098 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 9/1/2010
Subject: Re: Status of High Altitude Wind Power in Ecomagination of GE

At WEC2010 I will present two AWECS,and GE will be present.So I send two submissions to GE.Note:a great number of submissions would be good for AWECS promotion.For example KiteLab can submit several submissions for each concept.A common submission is more difficult to formalize,but would be a good supplement;for example a submission from AWEIA with generalities of AWECS advantages.

PierreB
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2099 From: dave santos Date: 9/1/2010
Subject: Wind-Powered Glider-Launch Method /// from- AWECS saving fuel wins
Joe,
 
This is a cool glider-launch method that can also be a great AWECS launcher.
 
If the wind is 10mph & the hang-glider likes a 30mph climb, then your drogue pulling 3mph downwind needs a 1 to 10 advantage to tow the glider up. If the hang-glider needs a 50lb pull (Dale's number as first approx) then the drogue needs to pull at 500lbs. which is about a 5000 sq ft conical drogue.
 
A kite tow-buggy could sweep a far smaller parafoil & power this. A pulley bank is cheap & simple but high friction for the amount of mechanical advantage. An ordinary 1 to 10 gear or belt-drive with an input & output reel would have higher efficiency.
 
daveS
 
 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2100 From: dave santos Date: 9/1/2010
Subject: Re: Status of High Altitude Wind Power in Ecomagination of GE
Pierre,
 
Isolated AWE submission is a far weaker play than a cooperative submission by a dozen or so strong teams. The small submissions would still be there alongside the super-entry. The basic collective premise is simple, not hard- To prove & develop the most effective means to tap the vast upper wind resource.
 
All we would need to do now is provide a list of interested teams & a link to Joe's central site, for a block-buster submittal.
 
Would Ortho-Kite not want to join?
 
daveS
 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2104 From: Pierre BENHAIEM Date: 9/1/2010
Subject: Re: Status of High Altitude Wind Power in Ecomagination of GE
Dave,

OrthoKiteBunch is already posted to GE but there is no problem (on the contrary) to use it again for a collective submission.I have another AWECS you can also mention (Eolicare,a low cost manual small AWECS with battery:details,photos of working prototype will be given by soon).

I think both types or submission are complementary:arguments are a little different.For individual submission:details for a particular AWECS.For collective submission:AWECS in energy mix.

Note:for individual or collective submission,the formulary is identical:500 words limit,joined files Max. 7 MB.So the collective submission shows general perspectives with some samples,and individual submissions show more details.

There are hundreds submissions on GE:so a great number of submissions with a collective submission would be a good solution. 

PierreB
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2105 From: dave santos Date: 9/1/2010
Subject: Re: Ask NASA///open questions in AWE
Mark,
 
The questions submitted are not requests for "trade studies" in any sense, but an urgent call for NASA to apply its expertise to the open technical challenges of AWE. NASA is only being asked to live up to its best flight-testing traditions & mission statements. We are talking about the foundational work on a new  renewables-based aviation, with almost unlimited applications, if you  follow this forum. Highly developed E-Flight & advanced flight-automation would be natural spin-offs.
 
The worry is that NASA will not doing its classic aeronautical science & technology pioneering job, while allowing its noble imprimatur to be co-opted by the "AWE Consortium" for marketing their dubious investments, especially at AWEC2010.
 
It would be great if the agency & partners like CAFE get really serious about the AWE mission quickly. There must be dozens of great NASA scientists by now highly aware of the need & potential, & some internal framework should already be evolving.
 
dave santos
KiteLab Group
 
PS Did you catch topics Bob added to this AWE forum thread?
 
 


 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2106 From: dave santos Date: 9/1/2010
Subject: Whoops, "Trade Studies" Disabiguation (Ask NASA thread)
Mark,
 
In fact NASA is being requested on this forum to do foundational system-engineering trade-off studies in AWE. No current corporate player has anywhere near NASA's resources or expertise to do the early comprehensive trade study demanded. The urgent need for vast new renewable energy to combat global warming has been identified by NASA & NOAA. Delay seems unconscionable.
 
Sorry for the confusion,
 
dave
 


 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2107 From: Joe Faust Date: 9/2/2010
Subject: Re: Wind-Powered Glider-Launch Method /// from- AWECS saving fuel wi

DaveS, does this sketch your furthering?
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2108 From: dave santos Date: 9/2/2010
Subject: Re: Wind-Powered Glider-Launch Method (sea option- "Airport of the F
Joe,
 
Yes, the sketch clearly shows the ideas added.
 
A solution to "drag-line wear" is to do your scheme on water. Anchoring in a current & letting a sea-anchor drogue pull gliders aloft, via a mechanical step-up between reels, is a very elegant & powerful multi-medium mechanism (a sea-anchor retracts at low drag by its apex line).
 
We have used the basic technique for some years now as a kitesailing launch method, but now it can fill the sky with aircarft, its an airport of the future. On land its probably still the best option to launch a kite, as a crane/elevator, into good wind aloft, & haul the gliders up via the tow-high point. The gliders could circle or sweep under the tow, contributing much of the lift.
 
daveS
 
dave
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2109 From: dave santos Date: 9/4/2010
Subject: How Kitesurfers Discovered Aerospace
Mark,
 
It really is incompetence to make grandiose technical claims that then just disappear in the night from AW EC homepages? Do you think Joby's giant electric VTOL is on track?
 
Its true that kitesurfer friends of a Google founder got really lucky & drifted into the aerospace. Sure they played with kites & millions as they learned to lust for hot electric UAVs, but this was not great work. Why are all the power-out AWE records made by European aerospace academics with parafoils (up to 40kw)? Sure, super-kiteplanes will eventually come, but from lucky kitesurfers managing a few AE grads?
 
Evidence of Makani negligence is available for diligent NASA review. Note that the original MacArthur Genius CEO only had a PhD in Media Arts & fudged his thesis demo of hierarchical self-assembly with a video fade. For many similar reasons he is off the scene & Corwin was promoted. His previous design coup, as you know, was a waterski kite, but hey. Makani is down to less than half its staffing high. Google.org has wised up.
 
I was inside Makani several times via my relation with KiteShip & was perhaps better able to see systemic weaknesses. You were being closely handled as an AWEC VIP. Sure Makani has learned, especially from its better-informed critics. No doubt you heard impressive things from them cribbed the day before.
 
Chris Carlin, a retired aerospace engineer with Boeing opined, when he saw Makani's claim that they would have airliner sized flygen kiteplanes flying reliably in the tropopausal jets, "what are they smoking?". Such Makani claims fell like Icarus.
 
What NASA is asked is to find the best & brightest, wherever they may be. We are talking Apollo Program quality. AWEC is not a one-stop shopping opportunity for NASA'. Don't bet your reputation in this field on that belief.
 
Please bear with the politics. Joe Faust & many others can confirm AWEC has hijacked our field like gangsters since last year's conference (HAWPCON09). All troublesome technical issues (& folks like me) have been purged from the agenda. Hear both sides out, then decide how smart the NASA/AWEC marriage will prove.
 
Right now there is an unanswered letter from AWEC's board to the knowledgeable aerospace critic dissenters almost begging them for a "right to exist", & that they are not ashamed to be a "pay-to-play" venture. (as opposed to a knowledge-driven quest like the rest of us) This is a bleated response to a coordinated push to publicly "whistle-blow" about AWEC management weakness. 
 
Did anyone really think a clique of non-aviation/non-aerospace management hacks were set to lead a multibillion dollar aviation industry quest over thousands of real experts? Look to Boeing, Airbus, & the ESA, as many of us are, for where mature utility-scale AWE must finally come, not the "capable" dot-com camera-tripod wonders.
 
Don't miss reviewing in depth the better alternatives to AWEC's plays, especially the Euros. You are especially invited to visit KiteLab (Ilwaco) & see any of the concepts fly.
 
Thanks for keeping an open mind as more AWEC info heads your way; *Sigh*, maybe you can spot some major flaws too,
 
dave
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2110 From: dave santos Date: 9/4/2010
Subject: yikes, the last message was posted by accident
Mark, Joe,
 
Sorry, the last message got sent to the forum instead of Cc:ed to Joe.
 
Maybe its for the best. NASA's participation with AWEC is a hot topic in the open AWE field & transparency is core culture.
 
Jeez,
 
dave
 
 
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2111 From: Joe Faust Date: 9/4/2010
Subject: Re: Low in the sky?

Could not pass this pause:

CAUTION:  (humor pause intended)

Means to get electricity from towered structures  by using a kite system:

http://www.veco.com.ph/admin/we_uploads/kite-flying-edit.jpg

====things could get very fuzzy.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2112 From: dave santos Date: 9/4/2010
Subject: AWECS Bearing & Gear Life
Rotary machinery runs on bearings & average duty-life in major apps is well calibrated. Standard lifetimes of about 10,000 hrs, with 90% survival, is a pretty typical spec. A giant kiteplane concept proposed to operate 24/7 for up to a year at a time (a Joby claim), & covered with turbines, has a steadily increasing risk of bearing failure during its ~10,000hr session. If such failure causes the turbine to violently self-destruct before it can be locked down, the redundancy argument is out the window.
 
Windpower is very high-duty & demands superior bearing life. Bearings do best that are inspectable, oversized, run cool, clean, & stay lubed. A ground-based generator design has an easier time enjoying these advantages. The fancy bearings required for reliable aircraft are very expensive, often with strict servce limits.
 
The death of gears is a myth. The world still runs on gears. There is even a move to add gears back into high-bypass turbofan engiine design, for fuel savings. While most flygen kiteplane proponents tout gearless generators, there are still gears in all the servo-actuators. Major early flygens oribt unstably in a loop & require a constant churning of the servos to maintain the extreme aerobatics. High-duty servo life in UAVs is conventionally reliable for about 500hrs before replacement, depending on high-consequence risk. 500hrs is about a month of flygen operation.
 
Again, ground-based AWECS machinery has the advantage of cheaper beefier actuation & power-harvest. There is an almost endless selection of mature low-cost COTS drivetrains. Routine maintenence is far easier & less skilled in a spacious ground-based equipment enclosure than the sort of delicate "robot surgery" an airframe often imposes.
 
An AWECS that has a generally lower aviation hazard level, due to mimimal mass aloft & slower airspeeds, can greatly cut capital-cost with standard industrial quality machinery & still be safer & more insurable.
Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2113 From: Pierre Benhaiem Date: 9/5/2010
Subject: Re: AWECS Bearing & Gear Life
Attachments :
    DaveS
     
    Loyd's patent which you know describes a compromise between flygen and groundgen:the propellers are on-board but the generator is on ground.Between propeller and generator the tether contains elements of transmission for cranks on-board and gears on-ground.It seems Makani prefers flygen on-board because of its lightness thanks to its rotation speed,and of course the progress of brushless technologies these last years.Nethertheless Loyd's scheme allows to avoid electrical cable and so high losses in conversion or high weight aloft (?).
    Do you think this scheme could be applicable?
     
    PierreB 
    		   @@attachment@@
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2114 From: Doug Date: 9/5/2010
    Subject: Re: How Kitesurfers Discovered Aerospace
    You know what I think is pretty much ridiculous?
    That I've introduced several fantastic and probably very workable designs for AWE systems that WORK the first time, that STAY in the air, and could solve the whole energy crisis, and all these retards with millions to invest totally ignore it.
    When I'm in contact with these top VC firms, ARPA-E, NREL, etc. all they can do is incessantly poke me for more and more details of a business plan etc. Most cannot even grasp the idea of a spinning driveshaft, thinking somehow there are spinning bearings inside etc.
    The idea of a single moving part that bends while it spins is often not something their minds can grasp, I have found.

    The idea that they should actively seek and identify new technologies and help develop it is not EVEN ON THEIR RADAR SCREEN.
    They wring their hands and lament the lack of solutions while I keeep holding these very sought-after solutions, out there with open hands.

    I offer what they say they want, while they ignore it and pretend no solution can be found. Pretty amazing.
    Let's see, at last year's conference, was there a generator in the air generating electricity for 2 days? Yes. How much did it cost to build? $500?.
    The "smarter" the people I talk to, the more they seem to have a glazed look on their face, and NO comprehension of reality.

    You want AWE?
    1) Blimp with Superturbine(R) as tether
    2) Gyrocopter Superturbine(R) with self-supporting rotors having tails
    3) Superturbine(R) with helium-inflated blades (or hydrogen)

    Boom - 3 GREAT solutions, all of which will work the FIRST time they are tried and you can go home and come back the next day and they will still be flying.
    Please I am so tired of hearing about all these ideas that somehow never quite seem to work. How about ideas that simply work? What's so bad about ideas that work?
    Oh no I know - hey if we solved the energy crisis, what would we complain about all day?
    Hey don't worry - we'll think of something!
    Anyway, I leave you all and especially the big funders and VC firms and federal labs - wake up and go back to sleep!

    Major solutions have been offered.
    Try opening the pages of the world's leading books on wind energy such as Paul Gipe's "Wind Energy Basics" (pages 30-35), or crack open the centerfold of Popular Science Magazine June 2008 (pages 51, 52).
    http://www.popsci.com/scitech/article/2008-05/ten-times-turbine

    I've updated the http://www.Selsam.com website
    Added some new Youtube Superturbine(R) videos, and a pic of me and my girlfriend with Bill Gates - one more person ignoring Superturbine(R) technology. No it's OK - hey I work Sundays and Holidays to make up for it. Don't worry Bill, I know you're a busy guy.

    Now the question is whether the rest of the world will help. Patents just issued in the entire European Union. Meanwhile I'll keep on pushing as hard as one person can! See you all at the upcoming conference at Stanford.
    :)
    Doug Selsam
    http://www/SELSAM.com
    ~<brawk!

    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2115 From: Joe Faust Date: 9/5/2010
    Subject: Re: AWECS saving fuel wins

    --- In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, it was noted: 
    =============================

    Furthering:

    A catalog of applications with standard operationg procedures and comprehensive specifications along with lessons learned could be made available to every corner of the world. New jobs could be formed for each application. Gradually much of coal/oil could be replaced by the airborne wind energy conversion systems.

    Marching in that direction, what things are being lifted against gravity using coal/oil that could rather be lifted using AWECS?    Move things from one place to another. Even let things gravity drop along aerial cableways held by slave kite systems?      Allow "kite" to keep its LTA types: kytoons, when needed.   
     

    Move water, ore, people, tourists, food, supplies, seeds, trees, animals, dirt, boulders, logs, etc.


    Move prisoner out of prison? Move border crossers one way or the other? Lift recreational sky divers? Launch hang gliders? Launch other AWECS?  Get over walls? Move cars to parking spots.  Lift turbine blades to tops of towers  :  )   .     Lift parts to tops of skyscrapers.  We already in forum began to cover lifting water and fire retardants to targets burning spots.  Tug generators to form electricity to be stored in various ways. 

     The wind is waiting for humans to tap her; and when she is used, she will replace herself with the next day's macro cycles of energy balance on earth.
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2116 From: Bob Stuart Date: 9/5/2010
    Subject: Re: How Kitesurfers Discovered Aerospace

    On 5-Sep-10, at 10:59 AM, Doug Selsam wrote:

    Hi Doug,
    When I was young, I saw a world full of poor design, and thought that designers had not been working very hard.  My own 1st prototype machine won a worldwide design competition.  Since then, I've learned that the designers who get their stuff produced spend most of their creativity in dealing with people.  Those with the purse strings are often very stupid about technical things, having made money their focus.   The financial reality is that it is best to sabotage the development of anything that affects current planning, except for incremental adjustments, unless one is sure to get a far bigger share of a reduced value market.  
    However, you might get started by filling niche markets for energy.  If you have to raise funding for that, you can still get it from people who can't imagine a flexible shaft if you pass their filters for personal likeability.  Getting  frustrated will hurt your chances badly almost anywhere.  
    Optimism is almost always found to be misplaced, but it is the engine of progress.  If you focus on hoping to change stupidity, rather than work with it, your own odds go down drastically.

    Best,
    Bob Stuart
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2117 From: Bob Stuart Date: 9/5/2010
    Subject: Re: How Kitesurfers Discovered Aerospace

    On 5-Sep-10, at 10:59 AM, Doug wrote:


    P.S. - In a  forum like this, you are almost certain of a lukewarm response, because it is for people with their own designs to push.  I've often considered working for sweat equity with other innovators, but the only time I did, the guy was fun to be with, and expected to pass on some great equipment when we finished a phase.  Passing through other design enclaves,  I've tried to pass on some dandy inspirations, but everyone already has a year's worth of their own improvements planned, so I'm only invited to build my own whole example. 

    Best,
    Bob Stuart
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2118 From: AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com Date: 9/6/2010
    Subject: New file uploaded to AirborneWindEnergy
    Hello,

    This email message is a notification to let you know that
    a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the AirborneWindEnergy
    group.

    File : /Applications for Working Kites/SimplifiedListOfApplicationsForAWECS
    Uploaded by : joe_f_90032 <joefaust333@gmail.com Description : Send note to Editor@EnergyKiteSystems.net for applications file

    You can access this file at the URL:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AirborneWindEnergy/files/Applications%20for%20Working%20Kites/SimplifiedListOfApplicationsForAWECS

    To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit:
    http://help.yahoo.com/l/us/yahoo/groups/original/members/forms/general.htmlfiles

    Regards,

    joe_f_90032 <joefaust333@gmail.com
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2119 From: Doug Date: 9/6/2010
    Subject: Re: How Kitesurfers Discovered Aerospace
    Very insightful Bob:
    Now that I've met "the smartest people in the world" and found that they are NOT, I do realize that the solution is just building the machines, and they will speak for themselves.
    Nonetheless, it's frustrating to see all the hubbub about research into exactly what we do, while those with solutions are ignored.
    Hey I can do it all myself, just don't ask me to keep showing up to conferences and do interviews and TV shows anymore cuz they take all my time and if I gotta do all tghe work myself and none of these pretenders is ever gonna lift a finger but only slow me down, then BLEEP THEM and let them figure out how to explain how they had all that money and were not even part of the solution. And I'll explain how they all slowed me down.
    It is ironic that the only thing slowing my progress is "the people who are going to help" and it never changes no matter WHAT they say.
    Personally I don't have time for one more grant proposal when I can just build a new machine for the same effort.
    Doug Selsam
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2120 From: dave santos Date: 9/6/2010
    Subject: Formerly AWECS Bearing & Gear Life (elec v. mech power trans)
    Pierre,
     
    It is true that Loyd has strongly argued that flygens & conductive tethers are not the way to go. He even invented a brilliant three-phase crank/tether combo as a superior alternative. It seems to have been Pete Lynn (Jr) who popularized, in his famous AWE posts of 04, the myth that mechanical power transmission was impractical. KiteGen, TUDelft, USWindLabs, KiteLab, & several others found this to be untrue by years of successful experiments. Key firsts & the records for AWE power-out are held by mechanical-transmission & things will likely continue so.
     
    Extended study & experiments on this forum strongly suggest that mechanical power transmission is superior in key ways- especially safety, cost, & performance. There has been no direct attempt at rebuttal by anybody in the secretive flygen circles. It will be interesting to ask Loyd if he still thinks his original opinion was sound, as he is being used by the AWEC flygen crowd & Makani especially, as a marketing icon. It would be great if he were to support mechanical-transmission research on a comparative basis.
     
    The flygen companies hope that military surveillance & "perpetual predator-drone" work will be profitable. Mark Moore, with his own ambitious E-Flight schemes & history of DoD concept work, sees this as a "synergy" (his language). Surely Bucky rolls in his grave over Orwellian Synergy. Sky WindPower in particular is favored as its multi-autogyro is a suitably stable military platform. Such tethered electric-aircraft will in many cases consume more power than they produce by motoring a lot & will be have to be fed fron the grid of paired with diesel generators on the battlefield, even as they are promoted as clean-energy solutions.
     
    dave
     
     
     
    Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2121 From: dave santos Date: 9/6/2010
    Subject: Mechanical Filtering of Multiline Control & Power Signals
    Attachments :
      There are two superposed signals on the lines of a power kite; the control input used to steer & the power output that results. A control-bar separates the two signals, but is not an optimal method for most AWECS design.
       
      KiteLab has a simple new method for kite control input to pass through a surging power-lever. The attached JPG shows the initial "folktoy" prototype that works well.
       
      Note the highly optimal lever set-up showing "short-stroke" downwind displacement. A follow-on version will add a little control-bar on the lever root, actuated by the new pulley-lines.
       
      fariIP/coopIP

      		   @@attachment@@
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2122 From: Bob Stuart Date: 9/6/2010
      Subject: Re: Mechanical Filtering of Multiline Control & Power Signals [1 Att
      Could we get a description of what the various parts do, please?

      Bob

      On 6-Sep-10, at 11:00 AM, dave santos wrote:
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2123 From: dave santos Date: 9/6/2010
      Subject: Re: Mechanical Filtering of Multiline Control & Power Signals
      Bob,
       
      The heart of it is a pulley spool spun by control lines rigged for constant length whatever the power-lever does. Another set of lines on the same spool run to a multi-line kite. Power strokes act on the spool axle, which is also the power lever. A slider on the power lever allows its leverage to be tuned to wind & kite. The power lever drives a cord around a belt-drive generator capstan against a spring-retract (key-chain mech). The sinusoidal power output is rectified by blocking diodes & smoothed by a big capacitor (not shown).
       
      The core mechanism is inspired by the Egyptian Bow-Drill & the rigging of aircraft & tall-ship controls. Flying piloted power-kites is just one aspect of the idea. An exciting super-simple use of this mechanism is for an AoA control/power cycle that drives the lever in sustained self-oscillation.
       
      Anyone can build these things...
       
      daveS
       
      Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2124 From: dave santos Date: 9/6/2010
      Subject: AWE Spin-Off/// Surf-Zone Energy Demo
      Attachments :
        Methods for extracting kite energy by "reel-gen" inspired this method for wave-energy. The key element is a "Drag-Float", a sort of pontoon with a transverse board that causes high drag force against an anchor & a shore-based generator reel.
         
        Surf-zones concentrate wave energy as each wave breaks in a fast moving surge. The return flow is also energetic. The prototype drag-float was made of strong commercial crabbing floats strung with a wood plank on a PVC tube. The power rope runs through the tube, fixed with stops. Varied line, pulley, & bungee rigging was tested off a small danforth anchor set "offshore". The drag-float hauled back & forth with high directional stability & lots of power (in shallows on the Pacific NW coast (KiteLab, Ilwaco, WA)).
         
        This sort of DIY surf-energy looks useful for small to mid-scale renewable energy on many ocean coasts. Keeping generators ashore is a huge wave-power win. Small drag-boats are easily brought in for storms.
         
        The attached JPGs show the rig set up at low-tide (01) & the drag-float resisting wave surge (02).
         
         
         
        fairIP/coopIP

        		   @@attachment@@
        Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2125 From: Hardensoft International Limited Date: 9/7/2010
        Subject: AWEC, AWEIA : AN UPDATE
        In humble service, I believe I owe all AWEIA members this report/update on relationship between AWE Consortium - AWEC and the Airborne Wind Energy Industry Association - AWEIA.
        True regards.
        John Oyebanji
        President protem, AWEIA
        www.aweia.org
        CC: Dave Culp



        Date: Wednesday, August 25, 2010,

          Dear Mr Roger Cutler,
        Many thanks for your kind response.
        I want to here state that the activities of individual members of an association does not necessarily translate to the action of the association as a body.
        That said, I am surprised at your conclusion that an offer of the name AWEIA was 'suddenly and unilaterally withdrawn'. As far as I recollect, at no time was such offer agreed to amongst our members and as such could neither have been properly made nor 'unilaterally withdrawn'. AWEIA was already formed prior to HAWPCON'09 from where you started discussions with our Mr Joe Faust. The turn-out of events with the emergence of AWEC certainly has confirmed the fears in our circle of a possible hijack of the Association and it's diversion from the founding objectives.
        Investment of intellect, time and scarce financial resources on the part of AWEIA members certainly is of no less value than the larger purse that has been available to AWEC membership and therefore should not be derided.
        My humble request of a complimentary invitation from AWEC to us for representation at AWEC2010 was but another way of our extending a hand of friendship and coopeartion which you have unfortunately refused.
        I will like to conclude with your very words : "Perhaps in time we can re-establish a working relationship between our two organizations."
        Regards.
        John Oyebanji
        President protem, Airborne Wind Energy Industry Association (AWEIA)



        Date: Monday, August 23, 2010,

        Dear Mr. John Oyebanji,

        Thank you for writing. I have been asked by the Board to respond to your email.

        First I want to affirm that the airborne wind energy industry needs more than one organization, and that your group has established itself among your members as a viable means of communicating about, and supporting the development of, airborne wind energy as a great source of renewable energy for our planet. You can proudly point to many pioneers among your membership.

        We, too, would like to see cooperation between our organizations, which is why we sometimes have found the behavior of some of your members so unfortunate. Initially we hoped to join with AWEIA under your name, and were progressing along that line until the offer of the name was suddenly and unilaterally withdrawn. We place high value on integrity and trustworthiness, so when a promise is broken like this, it is difficult to trust or have confidence in the reliability of the other. Then to learn that members of your organization are discussing a protest to be staged at our event in September further undermines our ability to see your group as a real partner in this industry.

        AWEC is established as the business-oriented organization, designed to serve the needs and interests of those entities and their investors who have a substantial financial stake in the development of the industry. Our objectives require the fiscally responsible operation of our activities. The fees for our conference are necessary for us to cover our costs. We must therefore regretfully decline your request for a complementary registration. You and members of your organization are welcome to register and attend the conference along with everyone else. Perhaps in time we can re-establish a working relationship between our two organizations.

        Thank you again for this contact. Please correspond with me if you would like to discuss anything further.

        Sincerely,

        Roger Cutler
        Executive Director
        AWEC

         

         

        Date:  August 15, 2010,

        Dear Mr JoeBen Bevirt,
        I would love very much to see a cooperative relationship evolve and grow between our two organizations - Airborne Wind Energy Industry Association (AWEIA) and Airborne WInd Energy Consortium (AWEC). As our different names indicate, certainly AWEC is more 'business' oriented while AWEIA is more 'socially' disposed. I beleive however that both must cooperate as two hands required to clap effectively.
        One way by which AWEIA has tried to extend a hand of friendship is by the conspicuous mention of AWEC on our humble websites (www.aweia.org & www.airbornewindenergy.org). Our Yahoo Technical group also remains open to all including AWEC members absolutely free and with no restrictions.
        It is no secret that most of our members are in no position to afford even AWEC's least membership fees despite their creative designs and knowledgeable contributions in the emerging field of Airborne Wind Energy Technology.
        A single free ticket for only an 'observer' status extended to AWEIA for the AWEC 2010 Conference certainly cannot be too much to ask for while a courtesy guest-speaker/presenter slot will be most appreciated.
        Thank you for your kind considerations and favorable response.
        Sincere regards.
        John Oyebanji
        President-protem Airborne Wind Energy Industry Association (AWEIA)
        Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2126 From: muller.christoff Date: 9/7/2010
        Subject: Re: Low in the sky?
        I also found it strange that all these systems fly so low. Having a look at the Maths however it seems that to extract maximum energy from the wind, the kite need to have its lift force component in a downwind direction (although I wish this was wrong). Hence why all the systems are flying at low angles and not being able to get very high.

        I wonder whether these systems plan to make use of higher angles and flying less efficiently, but flying in higher much stronger wind?

        This would bring me to a question that has been bothering me. Why is there not more focus on the system described by Dave Santos of using a pilot kite to lift a "flygen" (normal wind turbine) up higher into the vast high altitude wind resources? Or is there a lot of focus in this area that I am simply not aware of?
        Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2127 From: dave santos Date: 9/7/2010
        Subject: Re: Low in the sky?
        Christoff,
         
        Yes, a kite must be low in its window to work hardest. There are several ways to fly at a higher angle at roughly the same power rating. 
        Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2128 From: Joe Faust Date: 9/7/2010
        Subject: Airborne wind wheels (LTA tethered turbines)

        Note into office:

        Yet on holiday (more following such), here is a teaser:

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RwaCmQOukO8

        Related site: http://airborne-wind-wheels.com

         
        Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2129 From: dave santos Date: 9/7/2010
        Subject: Rowan University AWE Demo
        Somebody forgot to tell them its hard & requires millions...
         
         
        Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2130 From: Doug Date: 9/8/2010
        Subject: Re: Rowan University AWE Demo
        I started out with 4 car headlights too, with my first Superturbine(R) using 18-inch-diameter rotors, except mine burned out the headlights like flashbulbs immediately as soon as we had a strong wind. Back then new headlights were considered a major expense!
        Doug Selsam
        Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2131 From: Doug Date: 9/8/2010
        Subject: Re: AWEC, AWEIA : AN UPDATE
        For someone who does not have time to read an entire treatise, can someone please make this simple?
        Who and what do the acronyms in general represent? They all sound the same to me.
        Doug Selsam
        P.S. - yes acronyms - that's what we need! An acronym is worth all the tea in China! Let's have a fly-off! Machines against acronyms!
        :)
        Doug Selsam
        PS I signed up for the acronym event in Stanford, (AWE?) though I'm generally trying to avoid acronyms and conferences in lieu of progress.
        Group: AirborneWindEnergy Message: 2132 From: muller.christoff Date: 9/8/2010
        Subject: Re: Low in the sky?
        Hi Dave

        Thanks for the info. I'm glad to see my own ideas about pilot-lifter systems were right, but I see I'm definitely not the first to think about it. Is anyone pursuing these types of systems? They seem far better than any of the other systems out there, but I've never seen anyone working on them?

        I think I'm going to focus on these systems from now on, even if I have to pay royalties one day. The advantages will surely far outweigh the percentage in royalties in my opinion.

        If anyone has more info on pilot-lifter concepts, please let me know.

        Thanks