For whoever wanted a portable wind turbine


Ad

Advertisements

D

damduck-egg

Some may remember Laser 558 ,a shipborne radio station off Essex in
the early 1980's. Their attempt to hoist an antenna using helium
balloons was spectacularly unsuccessful.Depending which account you
read the balloons ended up on the continent or wrapped around a
traffic bollard in Colchester.


G.Harman
 
T

The Natural Philosopher

Some may remember Laser 558 ,a shipborne radio station off Essex in
the early 1980's. Their attempt to hoist an antenna using helium
balloons was spectacularly unsuccessful.Depending which account you
read the balloons ended up on the continent or wrapped around a
traffic bollard in Colchester.
Its the same thing these days with the EU being what it is.
 
D

dennis@home

But, in a Green world, there will be no air traffic.
Air ships?
Now there is a thought, by powering some of the turbines you could power an
airship and reduce the need for engines on the airship. that makes them even
greener as they can use nuclear power.
 
T

The Natural Philosopher

dennis@home said:
Air ships?
Now there is a thought, by powering some of the turbines you could power
an airship and reduce the need for engines on the airship. that makes
them even greener as they can use nuclear power.
Nursey - he's slipping back into total incoherence..up the sedative please!
 
D

dennis@home

Nightjar said:
So, by putting up enough wind turbines, you can give the airship enough
power to allow it to fly against the wind? I think you have just invented
a perpetual motion device.
Why?
Where does the nuclear energy go if its a perpetual motion machine?
Why not just give them their own nuclear reactor? The USA tried to do that
with a bomber in the late 1940s and early 1950s. Of course, most of the
power from the reactor would have been needed just to lift the shielding
for the crew.
The Americans and the Russians both flew planes with working reactors in
them.
They never did get the engines working AFAIK.
 
T

The Natural Philosopher

Nightjar said:
So, by putting up enough wind turbines, you can give the airship enough
power to allow it to fly against the wind? I think you have just
invented a perpetual motion device.
actually odd as it sounds it is possible to mount a wind turbine on a
car and use the electricity to drive it dead into the wind...

they key is the loss of kinetic energy of the wind relative to the
ground and the gain of kinetic energy of the car with respect to the ground.

Its not particularly efficient, but unlike most renewable energy claims,
it doesnt contravene the laws of Physics...

Why not just give them their own nuclear reactor? The USA tried to do
that with a bomber in the late 1940s and early 1950s. Of course, most of
the power from the reactor would have been needed just to lift the
shielding for the crew.
again its not impossible: the bigger problem is that you tend to leave a
radioactive contrail behind you..

But like many many engineering ideas what is possible and what is
economic efficient and cheap are several green miles apart..
 
T

The Natural Philosopher

Andy said:
With an airship you can stick the reactor at one end, the payload at the
other, and have them a safe distance apart.

Who needs shielding then?

Andy
The problem with airships - especially helium airships - is simple. The
size of structure needed to contain enough gas to lift a reasonable
weight rapidly becomes the reasonable weight that you can lift.

In short unless you can find a material with ten to twenty times better
strength to weight that carbon fibre and titanium, you are on a hiding
to nothing.

A better answer to long duration flight is solar panels and get into the
stratosphere: an electric aircraft might be capable of flying above the
clouds indefinitely, using stored battery power and gliding at night.

Its VERY marginal, but the energy balance is just about on the plus side.
 
D

dennis@home

again its not impossible: the bigger problem is that you tend to leave a
radioactive contrail behind you..
Why would that be?

Do subs leave radioactive wakes?
 
H

harry

Air ships?
Now there is a thought, by powering some of the turbines you could power an
airship and reduce the need for engines on the airship. that makes them even
greener as they can use nuclear power.
The balloon thing only works because it's tethered.
Your airship device would be another of your perpetual motion
machines.
ie, it could never work.
 
B

Brian Gaff

And this has a connection with wind turbines then? I'm confused.
Brian
 
H

harry

actually  odd as it sounds it is possible to mount a wind turbine on a
car and use the electricity to drive it dead into the wind...

they key is the loss of kinetic energy of the wind relative to the
ground and the gain of kinetic energy of the car with respect to the ground.

Its not particularly efficient, but unlike most renewable energy claims,
it doesnt contravene the laws of Physics...


again its not impossible: the bigger problem is that you tend to leave a
radioactive contrail behind you..

But like many many engineering ideas what is possible and what is
economic efficient and cheap are several green miles apart..


--
To people who know nothing, anything is possible.
To people who know too much, it is a sad fact
that they know how little is really possible -
and how hard it is to achieve it.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -
Such devices are common.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind-powered_vehicle
 
H

harry

The problem with airships - especially helium airships - is simple. The
size of structure needed to contain enough gas to lift a reasonable
weight rapidly becomes the reasonable weight that you can lift.

In short unless you can find a material  with ten to twenty times better
strength to weight that carbon fibre and titanium, you are on a hiding
to nothing.

A better answer to long duration flight is solar panels and get into the
stratosphere: an electric aircraft might be capable of flying above the
clouds indefinitely, using stored battery power and gliding at night.

Its VERY marginal, but the energy balance is just about on the plus side.

--
To people who know nothing, anything is possible.
To people who know too much, it is a sad fact
that they know how little is really possible -
and how hard it is to achieve it.
Solar powered aircraf thave flown continuously for hundreds of hours
so circumnavigation is easily possible.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar-powered_aircraft#QinetiQ_Zephyr
 
D

dennis@home

Brian Gaff said:
And this has a connection with wind turbines then? I'm confused.
Not as confused as harry and the others are about making some of the wind
turbines into fans and blowing an airship along, they appear to think its
perpetual motion even if they are powered by nuclear.
They can't even work out that it was a dig at green energy.
 
D

dennis@home

Nightjar said:
Yes, or at least those installed on the NB-36H bomber. Shielding the crew
and instrumentation needed less weight than shielding the reactor.
They still didn't leak vast amounts of radioactive waste behind them.
The shielding protected the crew from gamma and neutrons flying about.
The reactor was in a containment vessel of some sort.
 
Ad

Advertisements

T

The Natural Philosopher

Brian said:
And this has a connection with wind turbines then? I'm confused.
Brian
You missed the link to helium filled ducted fan kites hoisting wind
turbines above the boundary layer, then?
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Similar Threads

Wind Turbines 19
Wind turbines (again ...) 18
Wind turbine Hack 9
OT - Wind Turbines 45
New technology wind turbine for TNP 47
B & Q Wind Turbine 19
Wind turbines at B&Q - an update 22
Water pump motor for wind turbine project? 58

Top