digg

Join DiggAbout
See the original image at telegraph.co.uk

The amazing kite which will save $1600 each day (graphic)

telegraph.co.uk — Its inventor, Stephan Wrage, a 34-year-old German engineer, claims the kite will significantly reduce carbon emissions, cutting diesel consumption by up to 20 per cent and saving £800 a day in fuel costs.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • QGYH2, on 01/21/2008, -0/+28more here:
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?view=D ...
  • guesswhoitis, on 01/21/2008, -40/+16How long before planes are powered by kites?
    • Scrappy1850, on 01/21/2008, -4/+31never
    • griz, on 01/21/2008, -4/+9Problem is that the plane would be limited by wind speed. A cargo ship isn't already being propelled through the water at 400MPH by its engines.
      • vdog, on 01/22/2008, -1/+1Problem is that a plane travelling at wind speed isn't generating lift over its wings. The only direction it's going is down.
    • michaelb1, on 01/21/2008, -0/+16A plane powered by a kite becomes a plane slowed down by a parachute.
    • Delphium226, on 01/21/2008, -2/+2lolz! funny ;)
    • SwingCorey, on 01/22/2008, -1/+1they are - they're called "balloons"
  • igotafeeling, on 01/21/2008, -73/+11Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't jumping back about 300 years to the days of SAILING f'ing ships? Real innovative folks!
    • MattB123, on 01/21/2008, -1/+17Yes, it is.
    • yetAnotherCroc, on 01/21/2008, -0/+33Sometimes they had it right to start with but then we went wrong. Going back to simpler and less damaging ways of doing things is not regression. Its real progress. Progress towards a goal instead of progress for progress own sake.
      • rootneg2, on 01/21/2008, -0/+2definitely. Just look at something like the bicycle; the design has essentially unchanged for centuries; manufacturing techniques and the materials used may have improved, but not much has changed in the way of the standard double-triangle road-bike, and yet they remain the dominant form of human-powered transport by a longshot.
      • DharmaTurtle, on 01/23/2008, -0/+1Wow... I think you just quoted Dolores Umbridge. Progress for progress's sake... deep dude.
    • xxTazxx, on 01/21/2008, -1/+15Yes, because there is nothing such as improving existing technologies.
      Idiot.
    • davidrools, on 01/21/2008, -0/+11RTFA. The only thing it has in common with a sail is that it uses wind. Everything else is completely different. It can't replace an engine and it works very differently from a fixed sail.
    • BOFH2, on 01/21/2008, -1/+5Never mind you are too stupid to operate the equipment. Next you are going to tell us that wind turbines should not be used since they were used to grind stuff
    • orca94, on 01/21/2008, -0/+3Just because the concept isn't particularly new, doesn't mean the application isn't innovative.
  • Googler1, on 01/21/2008, -29/+3This sounds a little silly to me, but at least individuals are trying to be innovative.
  • Littleedgitt, on 01/21/2008, -42/+2This could go really, really bad
    Katrina's siblings may use this as a toy...
    • kokoshka, on 01/21/2008, -0/+11Digging you down wasn't enough
      Must reply to tell you how stupid you sound...
    • frieddonuts, on 01/22/2008, -0/+1Solution: cut the goddamn line.
    • vdog, on 01/22/2008, -0/+2One word: retractable.
  • quakerorts, on 01/21/2008, -2/+163Boy, what a bunch of grouchy naysayers! Supplementing a diesel powered ship with a little wind boost to save energy and pollute less is the kind of thing we should be doing more of.
    • Clark3934, on 01/21/2008, -22/+7Hanging preposition :(
      • FatLoser, on 01/21/2008, -1/+28Damn shame, isn't it? His comment could have been insightful or interesting, but because of the minor grammatical flaw we'll never know what it says.
      • dixonHill, on 01/21/2008, -0/+14Clearly that is something up with which you cannot put.
      • danlowlite, on 01/21/2008, -1/+6Yeah, this is one horrible grammar mistake. Oh, wait, it's not an error, it's a holdover from when English was thought it should be like Latin. Latin, as everyone knows, is a perfect language. Dead, but perfect.
        • chatzimcfee, on 01/21/2008, -1/+2It isn't perfect. If it were perfect it would still be around. It is nearly perfect.
    • Lukesed, on 01/21/2008, -1/+3We already do this on a smaller scale:
      http://z.about.com/d/hotels/1/0/w/y/1/kitesurfing. ...
      http://www.vista-lanzarote.com/lanzarote_fotos/kit ...
    • tgc1, on 01/21/2008, -0/+2Don't worry, most of the shipping industry is already on board. They want these things to help lower the cost of shipping. Which means more money in their pockets at the end of the day. It's a win for them, and it's a win for us, the consumer.
    • spiffytech, on 01/21/2008, -1/+7Ingenious! Putting a sail on a ship! Why didn't I think of that?
      • dsmx, on 01/21/2008, -1/+5What will they think of next? Maybe some kind of oar system?
        • gh0st3000, on 01/22/2008, -1/+1ah, but they'll be super airfoil oars! or would that be waterfoil...
        • Locke2053, on 01/22/2008, -0/+2Sorry, I already patented "a method by which slaves row a boat synchronously using metered drum beats." My invention was demo'd in Greece about 3,000 years ago, so none of you can claim prior art.
    • HerbSolo, on 01/22/2008, -0/+2Yeah - this thread reads like youtube commenters invaded the site.
  • VeryBoredNow, on 01/21/2008, -21/+7Burried. I've been using kites to get around for years now.
    • diggydougie, on 01/21/2008, -1/+5What? In your cargo ship? I don't think so.
    • marcusbrutus, on 01/21/2008, -0/+9I actually commute by Zeppelin.
      • VeryBoredNow, on 01/21/2008, -0/+6you should tie a kite to it to make it go faster
  • bightchee, on 01/21/2008, -21/+2How long before helicopters are powered by kites?
    • oojamaflip2006, on 01/21/2008, -0/+1I wouldnt expect to see them on Amazon any time soon.
  • tarquell, on 01/21/2008, -10/+3carbon fibre cables?.... damn that should rinse already tight supplies...but the idea is a cool one.
    • staxofmax, on 01/21/2008, -0/+5As long as they don't bogart all the carbon fiber for the space elevator, power to them.
    • badjoke, on 01/21/2008, -0/+3Plus using carbon fiber will give the ship several thousand extra horsepower.
  • vadimus, on 01/21/2008, -2/+59How long before Wordpress blogs are powered by kites?
    • dnields, on 01/21/2008, -0/+12I thought they already were... isn't that why the crash so often?
  • cambob76, on 01/21/2008, -5/+117We cant do this people. One day we will run out of wind! What would we do then?
    • GeNe07, on 01/21/2008, -4/+11wind is the leading cause of global warming... al gore told me so..
    • Synchro, on 01/21/2008, -0/+16Are you a "Peak Wind" theorist?
    • treagh, on 01/21/2008, -0/+15I hear that politicians are a great source of wind... seems to be no shortage of them in the near future.
    • Sharky35, on 01/21/2008, -0/+10Save The Winds! Give Wind a Break!
    • tgc1, on 01/21/2008, -2/+1Light sweet wind.
    • licoricewhip, on 01/21/2008, -7/+1A wind-powered "anything" cannot save or create as much power/energy used to create the thing in the first place.
      • Lukesed, on 01/22/2008, -1/+2Erm... *****. The source of the energy generated by sails is meteorological - mostly generated by heat from night and day cycles of the sun. There is an enormous potential for energy there. You can make a "wind powered something" in ten seconds out of some printer paper, which will generate energy the rain messes it up.
      • xtc46, on 01/22/2008, -1/+1which is why no one uses windmills...oh wait they do... and they work well.
  • cowsgonemadd3, on 01/21/2008, -3/+54How long before people stop posting stupid comments/questions....??
    • Goodanswer, on 01/21/2008, -1/+10eternity.
    • mega-volt, on 01/21/2008, -0/+11come on. If you think peoples comments on digg are stupid go read comments on youtube, or any other site for that matter.
    • russ3, on 01/21/2008, -0/+10You're obviously not helping.
    • VeryBoredNow, on 01/21/2008, -0/+43 weeks
    • sponeil, on 01/21/2008, -0/+2For you, it will last for as long as you keep coming to Digg.
    • chrisatwork, on 01/22/2008, -0/+2How long before stupid people are powered by kites?
  • codyman, on 01/21/2008, -2/+20having been raised around sailboats / have been sailing basically my entire life, I can definitely attest to the power of the wind and how, especially when coupled with the latest technologies to harness it, it can easily pull around a lot of weight. I have a 27' sailboat right now and I laugh at all the big power boats who sit sucking fuel up at the gas dock (which is always current land price of gas + $1.00 per gallon) as I sail off into the distance
    • OffPiste, on 01/21/2008, -8/+4Yes in your carbon fiber, fiberglass, plastic components, mylar sails, kevlar ropes, dacron ropes, nylon ropes, gortex raingear, auxillary diesel, yep no use of petrochemicals on your sailboat.
      • tidu, on 01/21/2008, -0/+15What do you want his boat to be made out of? Wooden sticks and fairy dust?
        • OffPiste, on 01/21/2008, -6/+3Only pointing our hypocrisy when I see it.
        • spudnic, on 01/21/2008, -1/+9He was talking about efficiency rather than being green.
        • nokrev, on 01/22/2008, -0/+3There was no indication that his boat did not contain petrochemicals in it. How was that hypocritical?
      • chatzimcfee, on 01/21/2008, -0/+10And what do you think the motor boats are made of? recycled newspaper and cans?
      • VitriolAndAngst, on 01/21/2008, -1/+5His comment is, he uses a boat that is powered by the wind -- not comparing things made of twigs and recycled cardboard.
        Yes, there could be a discussion about materials -- but they have much the same sorts of things on power boats (exchange more metal for mylar). However, we don't know if he doesn't have a wooden boat -- but it isn't the point he is making.
        Sailboats take a bit more work by the owner -- but I think there is a lot of satisfaction there, and you aren't limited on range. New technologies are making sailboats faster and easier to take care of.
    • ghostfish, on 01/21/2008, -3/+6Then the boats with engines laugh as they blast by you going easily twice as fast.
      • LuckyASN, on 01/21/2008, -2/+5It's not just about the speed.
        • xtc46, on 01/22/2008, -1/+3right, I bet you believed your girlfriend when she told you size doesn't matter too.
      • VitriolAndAngst, on 01/21/2008, -2/+5How much more sex do you get with a sail boat than a motor boat? -- that's how you will win over the NASCAR crowd.

        Of course, it still matters who you put IN the boat -- but this is marketing. The Hummer-driving Viagra set still needs laws to keep them away from attractive goats and such... no, I'm not making these debate points up. For some reason, Huckabee is very worried about the promiscuous animals trying to temped good men -- that's the only way I can explain some of his preoccupation with many of the laws he thinks we need to pass. Perhaps we need burkas for these beasts.

        I don't know if this directly translates to the topic -- but I've been having this funny image of "less revealing clothing ordinances" for lifestock, to help keep American's on a chaste and moral path. I'm sure that's why NASCAR has replaced the Rodeo.
      • codyman, on 01/21/2008, -1/+7I like cruising around 10 mph with the sound of only the wind / ocean rather than a super loud drone of an engine... its very peaceful out on the water.. so much so that the following cost analysis is true:
        Cost of Owning A Sailboat < Cost of Seeing A Psychiatrist
        Sailing is an experience that somewhat unwinds you and allows you to really enjoy nature
  • getrealnow, on 01/21/2008, -0/+42Can I have mine to look like a dragon?
  • m4ngo, on 01/21/2008, -2/+27Mary Poppins > Kite
  • Yrlec, on 01/21/2008, -16/+2An added bonus is also that it gets its energy from the atmosphere. So it not only reduces CO2-emissions, it actually reduces the temperature of the atmosphere too (very marginally but it is better than nothing).
  • Scrappy1850, on 01/21/2008, -1/+11i hate it when my schwartz gets twisted.
  • OttawaMarcin, on 01/21/2008, -5/+14I think it's a wonderful idea. My question: how do you get it up? I always had trouble doing that with a kite. What if it falls in the water? On a giant ship $1600 a day is nothing (although, if you multiply it by 30 days, and by 100 ships at a company...) if it is hard to operate the kite.
    Another problem would be having a giant wire swinging around on deck. It could cut the limbs off crew members and fling them into the sea. Is $1600 worth losing a limb?
    • jsauter, on 01/21/2008, -0/+8I imagine attaching the kite to a mast that is taller then crew would solve problem of random limb amputations.

      As for getting it up, once the ship gets up to cruise, I bet the corresponding wind would be enough to inflate the cells and generate lift.
    • randatola, on 01/21/2008, -5/+30> My question: how do you get it up? I always had trouble doing that with a kite.

      Try with a woman.


      Come on, it had to be said.
    • sublimemm, on 01/21/2008, -2/+19"how do you get it up?"

      thats what she said
      • roseap, on 01/21/2008, -0/+2Sounds like you miss "The Office" as much as I do. I never miss a TWSS opportunity these days.
    • Staplerfahrer, on 01/21/2008, -1/+7They have a huge mast, like on a sailing boat. From that Mast the Kyte gets automaticaly startet and controlled. They think they can save 50% of the fuel, i wouldn't say that is nothing and 1600$ per day should be wrong.

      The main problem is that they haven't yet figured out how to make the products wear lifespan long enough to be rentable.Until they do that, the product is Vaporeware.
    • scojerroc, on 01/21/2008, -0/+1the only way the cable for that kite would move fast enough to dismember is during a severe storm. under those conditions, it would be taken down.
  • m4ngo, on 01/21/2008, -10/+1Mary Poppins > Kite
  • stouffer67, on 01/21/2008, -1/+6No idea what any of it means, but high five!
  • Dipster, on 01/21/2008, -0/+14Someone cue Charlie Brown's Kite Eating Tree...
  • carbonetc, on 01/21/2008, -2/+13They should stick some solar cells in that baby.
  • speedyrev, on 01/21/2008, -1/+86Wow! Ships powered by wind!!!
    • zephyr42, on 01/21/2008, -9/+3/sarcasm (i assume)

      It's not that they're just powered by wind if you notice the caption it says it produces more power as a kite than a *FIXED SAIL* SO by adding a kite it will drastically improve fuel economy for freighters.
    • chatzimcfee, on 01/21/2008, -1/+7ALERT THE MEDIA!
    • kjcdude, on 01/22/2008, -0/+2Revolutionary
  • misfit410, on 01/21/2008, -16/+13I think we should put our efforts into finding a way to burn stupid hippies as a fuel source.
    • OffPiste, on 01/21/2008, -0/+8Too many carcinogens in hippies, not to mention they taste terrible.
    • frieddonuts, on 01/22/2008, -0/+1No car wants to be put through the indignity of consuming Jane Fonda.
  • spidamonkey, on 01/21/2008, -0/+19Are they going to use it at night? there's something about flying a kite at night that's so unwholesome
    • OttawaMarcin, on 01/21/2008, -0/+9The wind gets covered by clouds at night.
    • oojamaflip2006, on 01/21/2008, -0/+2Gosh is there? I must try it then.
    • lewscroo, on 01/21/2008, -1/+5Hello mother.
    • personman, on 01/21/2008, -0/+3Good Simpsons reference, spidamonkey.
    • sailadayaway, on 01/21/2008, -1/+3In this house, we obey the laws of Thermodynamics.
  • JaqMs, on 01/21/2008, -0/+16This picture was not "graphic" at all. Where is the bloody mess?
    • frieddonuts, on 01/22/2008, -0/+1There's a tiny little decapitated man on the deck.
  • eightballrj, on 01/21/2008, -1/+11Wait... all metal ship + kite 175 meters higher than anything surrounding tethered by a very conductive carbon fiber cable + lightning storms at sea......= fireworks show!
    • FnordBob, on 01/21/2008, -0/+2Ships at sea get struck by lightning all the time anyway. Having a kite attached won't make any real difference.
    • chatzimcfee, on 01/21/2008, -0/+3Ships are already the highest object in the open ocean, regardless of any huge kite attached.
      • eightballrj, on 01/21/2008, -2/+0Neither of you get that it is frequency that will be the difference. My house will probably be struck by lightning in its lifetime... But, if I put a 250 meter high metal rod into the air it will become MUCH more frequent.
        • xtc46, on 01/22/2008, -0/+2But it doesn't matter if it does no damage. Put a non conductive base on the pole that connects it to the ship, ground the cable to something that can discharge the power. hell figure out a way to capture the power and use it...like to charge the lasers on the sharks.
    • rootneg2, on 01/21/2008, -0/+2The metal ship is also a very large conductor, and is sitting in, essentially, the perfect electrical ground; nearly all of the electricity will dissapate harmlessly though the ship and into the sea (they could even attach a conductive cable to the kite, and drop it directly to the sea), just like being in a car during a lightning storm is the safest place to be, the boat would probably be pretty safe.

      Although it's probably a moot point anyhow, if there is lightning, then it's probably a storm (which they would try to avoid in the first place) and they would have already reeled down the kite due to the winds.
      • xtc46, on 01/22/2008, -1/+2I find it funny that when it gets too windy they have too take down the thing designed to pull the boat via wind power.
  • Emperial, on 01/21/2008, -1/+2Very nice, people must start looking for environment friendly solutions for everything "even big ships".
    • OffPiste, on 01/21/2008, -2/+2Why do the people have to be very nice? Can't mean people come up with environmentally sound ideas?
      • xtc46, on 01/22/2008, -0/+3notice the comma between very nice and people?
  • MindTrigger, on 01/21/2008, -1/+27Digg comments are looking more and more like YouTube comments every day. It's really starting to make the site a yawner.
    • dood, on 01/21/2008, -0/+2Agreed. A one-click ignore might be useful.
  • itsbob, on 01/21/2008, -0/+12That makes so much sense it will never happen.
    • republicker, on 01/21/2008, -0/+5my thoughts exactly. Just put it on the shelf next to the cure for cancer and the hydrogen powered engine.
    • videographer, on 01/21/2008, -0/+4Bingo.
    • colin8651, on 01/21/2008, -0/+1When you can get a savings of $1600 per day, per ship you will get the attention of the execs. Its all about the money.

      Remember, the $1600 is going up each day.
      • xtc46, on 01/22/2008, -0/+1assuming the use one every day, thats over half a million a year, tht is 500k of pure profit once the kite is paid off.
  • Goodanswer, on 01/21/2008, -2/+2I look at this and suddenly I hear Cartman~" I'M Sailing A W A Y..."
  • misteral, on 01/21/2008, -1/+12Just curious where subby got the $1600 a day figure from?

    By the chart, the savings would be 500-800 gph (gallons per hour). Let's say you saved 5000 gallons a day, 5000 of diesel has got to cost at least $15,000, no?
    • videographer, on 01/21/2008, -0/+9At the local gas station, yeah. In industrial quantitles, using lower-grade "bunker" fuel, no.

    • diggzoid, on 01/21/2008, -1/+2Yes, there's no way this would be worth developing for a savings of only $1600/day. Start-up and deployment costs would be huge, so either the savings are much higher or this won't be feasible.
      • rootneg2, on 01/21/2008, -0/+2$1600/day/ship adds up pretty quick though
      • xtc46, on 01/22/2008, -0/+1that 500k a year buddy. Not exactly chump change.
    • tgc1, on 01/21/2008, -1/+1I heard an interview where they said more like $20,000 per trip, one way.
  • airencracken, on 01/21/2008, -0/+8Full circle.
  • Pauli92, on 01/21/2008, -15/+0Digg it:
    http://www.digg.com/hardware/The_Top_10_Worst_Phon ...
  • jessestorm, on 01/21/2008, -7/+3So if the cord breaks because the resistance between the ship and the kite is too great, does the boat still have enough power to get somewhere?
    • BOFH2, on 01/21/2008, -1/+2No they have to deploy a row boat like they did with the sailing ships did a long time ago. Ummmm you think they might still put engines in them? DOH
    • chatzimcfee, on 01/21/2008, -0/+9I think they have to get out and push
    • atbnet, on 01/21/2008, -0/+2Are you serious? The damn ships are still diesel driven but the kite is used so that they won't have to use as much diesel.
  • torontoliam, on 01/21/2008, -1/+7Am I the only one that's amazed by the fact that fuel consumption doubles if you go from about 15 knots to 18 knots? I know it's not a linear relationship by any means, as drag = f(speed^2), but wow. Why would anyone choose to go the 3 extra knots and double fuel costs??? Anyway, cool idea if you're going the direction of the wind anyway.
    • chatzimcfee, on 01/21/2008, -0/+2Time is money. They could save fuel costs even more if they go 0 knots.
    • orca94, on 01/21/2008, -0/+1It's understandable. But yeah it's pretty surprising.
    • mws715, on 01/22/2008, -1/+0Power to overcome drag (be in water, air, etc) is actually proportional to velocity ^3
  • yo_daddy, on 01/21/2008, -7/+2what is graphic about that? there wasn't any boobs, blood, or cussing at all
  • SpenderH, on 01/21/2008, -5/+2I'm no aeronautical engineer, but doesn't the picture show the sail pointing the wrong way? The opening in the sail should be facing into the wind so that the wind inflates the cavity. The wind must be coming from the back of the ship to push the kite in front of the ship, but the opening is shown facing forward. Also, doesn't the 50 degree line on the left look more like a 90 degree angle?
    • OttawaMarcin, on 01/21/2008, -2/+1Artists are not engineers.
    • linx0003, on 01/21/2008, -0/+1It's just a graphic meant to illustrate the idea of using a kite to help propel the ship. As for the direction and attitude of the kite, it's noted that the ship can tack as much as 50 degrees against the wind and still have the kite provide some thrust.

      Which brings another point entirely. How much fuel would the ship save when one counts the added distance for tacking along the base heading?
    • lewscroo, on 01/21/2008, -0/+1I think it's due to an optical illusion. I took a look at the graphic and you can interpret the picture with the sale in both directions if you aren't paying much attention.
  • Vennem, on 01/21/2008, -8/+3Completely Stupid! After paying $1600 for the kite, you'll have to pay over $1,600,000 to redesign the cargo ship (which is traditionally designed to push with rotating blades), not pulled up and forward. If you look at the lateral view graphic (bottom right), you'll see a "magical" S-curve cable. That cable would be pulling straight up, causing all the shipping containers to fall back and overboard.
    • Vindexus, on 01/21/2008, -0/+6I sincerely doubt the ship is going to start flying.
    • Treoinmypocket, on 01/21/2008, -0/+7You aren't suggesting that the ship will be pulling a "wheelie" are you?

      There are people called "engineers" who will apply something called "math" to all the necessary variables.

      This is a very uncomplicated idea in terms of the physics. Probably the single largest concern will be how the kite and its tether will have to be accounted for by airtraffic and other ships employing the same technology.
    • chatzimcfee, on 01/21/2008, -0/+1what is this "math" that you speak of?
    • diggzoid, on 01/21/2008, -0/+1I agree! Even a 1 degree change in angle would probably disrupt the traditional placement of the containers and affect the fluid dynamics considerably.

      • nosecohn, on 01/21/2008, -0/+1You think this kite, properly deployed, will induce a greater change in cruising angle than the waves a ship of this type encounters on the open ocean? Those things are designed for some heavy tossing and turning. Rebalancing for a little extra pull and lift at the front will not be a problem.
  • tybris, on 01/21/2008, -10/+5From the looks of it this would be a disastrous thing to have. On sea things break all the time. That's why we dropped sailing in the first place (motors break down equally often, but are easier to fix). This doesn't seem a very robust device at all. Worse in storm surges this thing would definitely pull you off course. Don't think the box will fix it, the box will fail. Very dangerous and unpractical.
    • madddigga, on 01/21/2008, -1/+2Wow you must have been the engineer on the design team that left after his protest about how dangerous and unpractical this device is fell of deaf ears.
  • heartcoldfusion, on 01/21/2008, -3/+8I'm eagerly looking forward to this being implemented. On one hand, environmentalists will wet themselves over the good they've done to the environment, until they realize that they're killing thousands of sea birds with the sail and the cables. Hilarity ensues.
    • chatzimcfee, on 01/21/2008, -0/+1We all know that air quality is more important than life quality.
    • SpaceDreamer, on 01/22/2008, -0/+1ah yes, the infamous sails that kills and endanger several bird species...
      it's an undeniable scientific fact,
      and clearly the worst environmental problem we're facing...
  • lohphat, on 01/21/2008, -3/+5How much per day will it cost in paying the extra personnel trained in operating it?
    • BOFH2, on 01/21/2008, -3/+2You think they are going to pay somone $1600/day to operate it? Can I work for you?
    • monkeywaffles, on 01/23/2008, -0/+1You think you can operate it all by yourself? Sure, you start on Monday.
  • Pauli92, on 01/21/2008, -2/+0Reminds me of kite sailing only with a ship, will be useful when the oil runs out!
    • BOFH2, on 01/21/2008, -1/+2when will that happen? We were told in the 1980s back in the 70's
  • Sharky35, on 01/21/2008, -1/+1You'd only be able to use it if the winds were at your back and if the wind were blowing faster than 20 knots. So you'd be able to effectively use it about 10% of the time.
    • CheeseburgerBro, on 01/21/2008, -1/+3So...you didn't read the labels on the diagram, huh?

      Tough break, being a retard.
      • Sharky35, on 01/21/2008, -4/+1I read it... It says 17 knots to deploy. but since the rest of the graphic if flawed... I figured I'd correct a few points. So STFU and educate yourself. And the 50 degrees still give you less than 180 degree coverage.
    • chatzimcfee, on 01/21/2008, -0/+2Wind speed is greater in higher elevations
  • OffPiste, on 01/21/2008, -2/+2Yeah but make a movie about this and it will get banned in Afghanistan.
  • subwoffers, on 01/21/2008, -0/+8They will tax the wind.
  • slvrbullet87, on 01/21/2008, -0/+1This is conservation I can get behind... inteligent idea and somewhat plausable. My guess is for a few years it will be a pain in the ass for captians and crews but they would be able to get used to it
  • opticsnake, on 01/21/2008, -5/+2This engineer needs to go take a class in fluid dynamics. This won't work because of several basic principles. If you ever watch a skydiving group using the wings instead of the standard chutes, (think of the Army's Golden Knights) they have the ability to go forward (against the wind) but, this is only because they are descending at the same time. Without the ability to descend, these chutes would just get tossed in the direction of the wind (think of that same chute with a much lighter weight attached to it). This guy's idea is predicated on the "wing" being able to keep moving forward, without any kind of propulsion, and pulling the ship behind it. At best, this wing is going to turn into a giant drag chute if the ship has to drive into the wind, which is how the graphic is showing the wing working. And if the ship is going with the wind, all you have is a standard sail.
    • opticsnake, on 01/21/2008, -2/+2OK, so I went and found the actual article this graphic is from:
      http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml;jsessi ...
      It turns out that the engineer may have a sound idea but that the jackass who drew the graphic doesn't understand the concept behind the wing.
      In effect, this wing is actually nothing more than a slightly more sophisticated sail. The article claims that the wing will carve figure eights through the air, kind of like what a kite does on an extremely windy day, thereby reaching greater speeds and creating more pull than a standard sail.
      Hate to say it but, I still don't think it's going to work. But best of luck to them.
    • orca94, on 01/21/2008, -0/+1As long as the force vector created by the kite creates more of a force in the direction of desired transit than perpendicular to it or against it, the kite will still allow for a net benefit with respect to fuel consumption despite being pulled into the direction that the wind is blowing. Also, remember the kite could always be retracted under conditions that aren't ideal. Yes, the kite will technically only function under certain wind conditions (wind speed vector in the same general orientation as the desired direction vector and enough wind speed), however considering the fuel savings such a system would create under appropriate conditions and seeing as how the system would be relatively cheap to manufacture it's still a good idea.
  • kayjay, on 01/21/2008, -5/+0most kites end up in power lines........ thats dangerous.
    • i4ybrid, on 01/21/2008, -1/+0Don't route your boat into power lines..DUH!
  • christophelyon, on 01/21/2008, -1/+3What happens if the kite is hit by lightning during a storm ?
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 83 of 83 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.