Thanks Joe,

   I've just started a couple of generator projects and hope to have some pics to post soon.

-brooks

-----Original Message-----
From: Joe Faust
Sent: Mar 18, 2009 10:01 AM
To: AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [AirborneWindEnergy] Welcome ... with AWE

Welcome All.
We are in a seven-day construction of the initial phase of this group. We are adding member who have a presence in the EnergyKiteSystems.net list; Yahoo limits us to 10 per day. Each member of this group may configure how messages from the group are received.

RAPID development of airborne wind energy systems is one of the targets of this group. Among scores of methods are some that involve bodies of water, for example, using huge kites to pull water-based turbines.

Feel free to post before we get the initial 70 to 80 members present. You may check the member list at any time. Add to Links and Files. Add to Photos. Invite serious researchers, designers, engineers, and scientists whom you know are interested in AWE.

Lift,
Joe

________________________________________
PeoplePC Online
A better way to Internet
http://www.peoplepc.com

Ya,

  I'm working on some prototypes in my spare time with help from Dave Santos and when we use to do art grants we would spend a lot of time jumping thru the hoops, it helps get you focused but right now I just like to work at my own pace and without the red tape hassles. My main objectives for now are to mechanicly automate the line tension and spool controls and the same for the motion controls of the kites. I have an idea for a single kite single line version that uses a control system to keep it in a steady figure 8 either side to side or front and back or possably both. The kite is in the works but after several months of really high winds it has become rather calm lately(of course).

-brooks

-----Original Message-----
From: christopher carlin
Sent: Mar 19, 2009 8:14 PM
To: AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [AirborneWindEnergy] Important way to further high altitude wind power right now.

Dear Harry,

I spent 30 years in the aerospace business. I'm convinced that you're absolutely right government funding and the paper mill that goes with it is the kiss of death. If your technology is good pursue it privately for a profit and you may achieve success. Government funding is great for keeping engineers employed but not much good for getting a product to market. 

Regards,

Chris

On Mar 19, 2009, at 11:21 PM, harry valentine wrote:

Hi Grant,
 
 
I'm wary of gov't funded research programs. Ideas sometimes get bogged down for years in university research programs with little progress. Example, the Stirling Cycle engine became subject of gov't research funding during the early 1970's to improve its efficiency. By the late 1990's little improvement had been achieved when NASA elected to fund research into thermoacoustic engines. Many makers of Stirling Cycle engines went out of business. 
 
 
Gov't funded research into high-altitude wind energy could delay by many years the introduction of such technology to market. 
 
 
Harry
 

---

 

---

Windows Live Messenger makes it easier to stay in touch - learn how!

________________________________________
PeoplePC Online
A better way to Internet
http://www.peoplepc.com

Saul Griffith makes video disclosure. 

Discussion open.

Positives, errors, challenges?

Starter:

Why did he pick 1000 years for kite history when kites have been for over 3000 years? 

Request: Would someone post the text of the video?

KiteLab had an automous kite energy control before Makani; so a key claim in the video seems untenable.

Discussion is open.

Starters:
[ ]  Request: Someone send in text of the video.
Points?

Note: The remark about first automous system is not fact. At least KiteLab had
operating an automous kite energy system.

Note: The 1000 year remark gave me a wince. What happenened to 3000 years or
more of kite history?

Note: The 300 ft. remark?  Why not mention 10,000 ft ?

Note: I like that he said "We need to support all the kids ... making these
things."   There are 50 researchers open to receive support.

Video of topic is in various places:
http://www.ted.com/talks/view/id/492
Saul Griffith: Inventing a super-kite to tap the energy of high-altitude wind

Here's two more WECS alternatives:

http://www.hicon.us/gpage7.html

http://www.hicon.us/gpage16.html

But these are not kite systems.

Hey Gang,
   sorry for this off topic but someone has been sending out some spam from an
account using my brooksbot75 email name to all the people on my main mail
account list. Delete it right away. So much for the spyware security(3 layers).
-brooks

________________________________________
PeoplePC Online
A better way to Internet
http://www.peoplepc.com

--- In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, "aieageoff" <goeggel@...> wrote:
> Here's two more WECS alternatives:
> http://www.hicon.us/gpage7.html
> http://www.hicon.us/gpage16.html
> But these are not kite systems.

Some people, including myself, see your systems as kite systems using kytoons
where some lift is occurring besides the buoyant gas lift. The kite line is the
tether of the tube, though short; the high torsion of the short kytoon line
drives your generator.  From the first instant of seeing your proposals, I
embraced them in my kite universe.

Lift,
Joe Faust

Hi All,

first have to say that I'm also surprised at some of the comments. I
thought that Saul's talk was bang on for the audience he was giving it
to, though he could have devoted a slide to explaining how the generator
is driven.
The claim for 'first autonomous power generation' I thought was a bit
cheeky given that skysails have stated for years that their systems can
be used to generate auxilary power and with tracking and active control
systems. Not to mention the other groups/companies, so maybe I'm naive
but I don't understand why he said that.

As for Makani's status and funding, well, it is a great team of highly
talented people, that has allowed them to attract great funding and the
corrollory to that funding is that they have to be careful about what
they disclose. How they spend that money is their own business, everyone
else working on a shoestring may well make new partnerships, discover
novel cost efficencies and new techniques that they may not have given a
huge budget, I know I have. (i'd still take the money though!)
So companies need IP, Academics are expected to publish, and there are
some people independently working on projects that they want to be open
source and collaborative. I don't see why these approaches can't
coexist! In fact if we want a diversity of technical approaches
attempted, we need all these to go assessed in parallel for the best to
survive commercially.

The very existance of a company like Makani means that there is a high
profile cheerleader bringing attention (and probably more investment) to
the field, and at the same time making it appear less 'far-out'. Surely
this must be to the benefit of everyone? As for inspiration, it is clear
from some of the comments on TED that that talk inspired a number of
people. I used it to help get a very talented engineering undergrad
intern over the summer.

Also important are those workers who put their ideas out in to the
public domain. Saul himself rightfully credited Miles Loyd, without that
paper I don't know if I'd be working on kite power now.

As for the patent app, there are some novel elements in there. The
depressing overextended and all-encompassing scope of that particular
application is not unique, in fact I have seen that in pretty much every
single one of the kite energy patents and seems to be just the way these
things end up once they leave the desk of the patent attorneys, it is
frustrating but that is the reality we're faced with. The kitegen
patents also seemed to claim the whole concept of steering a kite, -with
a machine, that ..wait for it... uses actuators to pull on steering
lines! shock, massive novelty there! There also seems to be enormous
overlap between the claims of a good deal of the patents so i'm sure the
lawyers will make some money when the field matures.

As for good natured commercial competition, well lets hope that we get
it, I see Bas in Delft has started a commercial project: Ampyx Power,
and I wish good luck to him. I hope he can get some substantial
investment asap.

Cheers

Allister

>

--- In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, "Joe Faust" <joefaust333@...>
wrote:
>
>
> Saul Griffith makes video disclosure.
>
<http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/saul_griffith_on_kites_as_the_future\
\
> _of_renewable_energy.html>
>
> Discussion open.
>
> Positives, errors, challenges?
>
> Starter:
>
> Why did he pick 1000 years for kite history when kites have been for
> over 3000 years?
>
> Request: Would someone post the text of the video?
>
> KiteLab had an automous kite energy control before Makani; so a key
> claim in the video seems untenable.
>

Enter your vote today!  A new poll has been created for the
AirborneWindEnergy group:

When posting, keep only selected phrases of a prior post,
not the full already viewable message.

   o Yes!
   o Maybe.
   o I would rather see the whole thread repeated and repeated and repeated.
   o No.


To vote, please visit the following web page:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AirborneWindEnergy/surveys?id=2171397

Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are
not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the Yahoo! Groups
web site listed above.

Thanks!

Hey Gang,

  one issue not being addressed by the overall alt energy community is the dwindling supply of available copper being mined from the know sources. This could be a pro for the ground generator method and should be included in a paper to the DOE. I had proposed several ideas addressing this concern to the Google 10 to the 100th contest, ideas like putting windmills and solar panels on parking lot street lamps to offset the need for heavier gage wire, although there could be just as much needed wire for the generators themselves depending on the distance to the main power source. I wanted to propose this to the DOE request but I was unable to get the required sign-up form to work so if anyone wants to include it in their paper feel free to do so.

-brooks

-----Original Message-----
From: harry valentine
Sent: Mar 25, 2009 12:28 PM
To: airborne windenergy
Subject: RE: [AirborneWindEnergy] Makani Power, Inc. video disclosure

Hi Chris,
 
 
SkyWindPower and Magenn are looking at carry electrical generation equipment aloft and transmitting the electric power down insulated tethers. I was once a proponent of such technology, however, there is great merit to using ground-based generation equipment.
 
Harry
 

---

To: AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
From: christopher.m.carlin@btinternet.com
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2009 16:48:29 +0000
Subject: Re: [AirborneWindEnergy] Makani Power, Inc. video disclosure

Harry,

I can't see the sense in carrying all that generating equipment aloft unless they're talking about some form of film based piezio generator which is I suppose possible. Further it means running conductors up to the kite which is another nightmare.

Regards,

Chris

On Mar 24, 2009, at 9:15 PM, harry valentine wrote:

Kites are well proven as are ground-based electrical generators. There is potential for the two to be combined into a workable electrical generation technology. However, Griffith is moving into uncharted territory using kites to carry airborne electrical generation equipment. 
 
Harry

---

To: AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
From: joefaust333@gmail.com
Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 18:45:23 +0000
Subject: [AirborneWindEnergy] Makani Power, Inc. video disclosure

Saul Griffith makes video disclosure.  
Discussion open.
Positives, errors, challenges?
Starter: 
Why did he pick 1000 years for kite history when kites have been for over 3000 years?  
Request: Would someone post the text of the video?
KiteLab had an automous kite energy control before Makani; so a key claim in the video seems untenable. 

---

Communicate, update and plan on Windows Live Messenger. Get started today.

---

Make your Messenger window look the way you want. Express Yourself!

________________________________________
PeoplePC Online
A better way to Internet
http://www.peoplepc.com

At the recent disclosure talk by Saul Griffith at frame time 01:20  upon saying "...like Langley,"  he showed the photograph of the kited passenger which kite now we find is by Charles H. Lamson with some human passenger.  

Thank you, Team Drachen Foundation (Dave Lang, Scott Skinner, Jan Desimpleaere),   for help in making this clarification possible. 
http://tinyurl.com/SaulGriffith888disclosurebrief

This topic thread can be branched.

What claims will survive as inventive?  How might this exerice help to reach the
target of this group of rapid development of effective AWE?

Recent application published that was filed Sept. 7, 2007

http://tinyurl.com/PatApplMarch2009BIMODALKITE

The applying inventor list:
Griffith; Saul; (San Francisco, CA) ;
Lynn; Peter; (Alameda, CA) ;
Montague; Don; (Maui, HI) ;
Hardham; Corwin; (San Francisco, CA)       Patent pending approval process will
take time. Filed: September 13, 2007   What claims will survive?
Discuss in group.
Assignee: Makani Power, Inc.

> What claims will survive as inventive?

My dated answer for the moment:
In reading the APPLICATION for a patent (it is not yet an approved patent), my
today's first blush:
I find no novel invention in the application besides construction of words for
what has already been well established as a working kite, that is, a kite that
is flown to do some work or produce energy. Multiple lines (two "bi" or more)
have been employed to effect work or make electricity in priorly demonstrated
arts).

Please prove me wrong, as I like seeing innovation.

Joe Faust
March 27, 2009.
===========================================================

Chill out Folks :-),

I am afraid that makani has already been scooped by Skysails (the
German competitor to Culp et al). The last time I looked at their
patent applications, they had "actually invented kites".....well that
is a bit exaggerated, but I was shocked when I first read the Skysail
patents, thinking there is no room left for invention in
power-kitedom :-) (Dave Culp assured me not to worry).   There seems
to be a certain ignorance on the part of patent attorneys related to
where kites came from, and how long folks have been messing with
them. Remember, a patent is only an entre' into defending one's
presumed original idea.....they do not forbid, detect, nor
automatically enforce  infringement, nor insure one will prevail in
litigation.

My guess is, if any of the technical folks at makani had written that
patent it would have been more to the point....the attorneys likely
"pulled legal rank" and "got their way" regarding
generalization....which can be a double edged sword in patent-land.

Dave L



At 5:35 PM +0000 3/27/09, Joe Faust wrote:
>  > What claims will survive as inventive?
>
>My dated answer for the moment:
>In reading the APPLICATION for a patent (it is not yet an approved
>patent), my today's first blush:
>I find no novel invention in the application besides construction of
>words for what has already been well established as a working kite,
>that is, a kite that is flown to do some work or produce energy.
>Multiple lines (two "bi" or more) have been employed to effect work
>or make electricity in priorly demonstrated arts).
>
>Please prove me wrong, as I like seeing innovation.
>
>Joe Faust
>March 27, 2009.

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        : /MakaniPower/ApplicationBimodalKiteSystem2007.pdf
   Uploaded by : joe_f_90032 <joefaust333@...>
   Description :

You can access this file at the URL:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AirborneWindEnergy/files/MakaniPower/ApplicationBi\
modalKiteSystem2007.pdf

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

Regards,

joe_f_90032 <joefaust333@...>

  Don't toss them in the fireplace just yet, while all of this has been going on I have been writing the outline for a movie script both about the current development of the industry and some possible Bruce Sterling style futuristic visions of what may come. I always assumed that when you have a all knowing/seeing/collecting powerhouse like Google funding something you can bet they will include everything the open source folks would propose into their patent. Just wondering if anyone else ever heard anything back from the Google 10 to the 100th contest which was supposed to have been opened to public voting back in February, of was it just a blatant ploy to sucker a bunch of hopeful contributions into giving up their ideas for free. with no intentions to ever actually include them in the development process. I still have some ideas for the implementation of their now proprietary tech that probably has not been fully covered and it is on such a small scale and with a humanitarian angle that they would been shamed if they attempted to shut us down for it.

   Personally I don't really blame them for wanting to get all the detail patented. It's how they share that tech in the future that will show their true colors. If they turn into another version of big oil, with It's habit of buying up any competing tech and putting it on the shelf to bury any possible competition, like in "who killed the electric car?", now that would be a reason for truly despising them.

-brooks

-----Original Message-----
From: dave santos
Sent: Mar 27, 2009 12:00 PM
To: AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [AirborneWindEnergy] Second Apology Configuration

Please substitute "first tether-force configuration" & "second tether force configuration" for "first (& second) tether element" in my last post. All this is too complicated for me still & it was late when i posted.   My profoundest sympathy for all independent AWE folks wiped out by the Bimodal Kite.   Sputnik Flip-Wings make good shoe-shine rags, now fire-sale priced.   --- On Thu, 3/26/09, Joe Faust <joefaust333@gmail.com> wrote: From: Joe Faust <joefaust333@gmail.com> Subject: [AirborneWindEnergy] Bimodal Kite System : Pat App filed Sept 7, 2007 To: AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com Date: Thursday, March 26, 2009, 8:19 PM This topic thread can be branched. What claims will survive as inventive? How might this exerice help to reach the target of this group of rapid development of effective AWE? Recent application published that was filed Sept. 7, 2007 http://tinyurl. com/PatApplMarch 2009BIMODALKITE The applying inventor list: Griffith; Saul; (San Francisco, CA) ; Lynn; Peter; (Alameda, CA) ; Montague; Don; (Maui, HI) ; Hardham; Corwin; (San Francisco, CA) Patent pending approval process will take time. Filed: September 13, 2007 What claims will survive? Discuss in group. Assignee: Makani Power, Inc.

________________________________________
PeoplePC Online
A better way to Internet
http://www.peoplepc.com