by Russel Norman
On a more positive note, the Beluga Shipping co. will use a Skysail kite to assist a 132m container ship across the Atlantic in January, according to an article over at Worldchanging. The kite is supposed to reduce fuel consumption by 50% at maximum pull and up to 35% on average. If the trial is successful they will install larger kites on larger boats.
As a nation that is economically dependent on long distance shipping to get our rather heavy produce to market I think that getting into wind assisted shipping makes a lot of sense. It would be great if our sailing industry were encouraged to come up with some designs.
Published in Environment & Resource Management by Russel Norman on Thu, December 27th, 2007
More posts by Russel Norman | more about Russel Norman
on the trolls and those who are unable to keep on topic
I wish the dreamers would make a realistic representation of how a sail ship would look like in the future.
The kite mock up on a ship has fundamental flaws.
It is attached to the bow where to wind from the port side would be dragging the bow to starboard. Requiring the rudder to be set constantly steering to port to maintain a straight course. Any rudder deflction adds drag, thus reducing the power available from the wind to pull the ship forward. Kite should be attached midships. But that would take up cargo capacity.
Launching and retrieving a kite would be an interesting experience.
No mention how such a large kite would be launched, but if you have seen kite boarders you will know that you need to hold the whole kite up in the wind to get it to set. Try that on a heaving foredeck in any kind of swell. with a kite the size of an Americas Cup yacht spinnaker.
Retrieving would require the collapse of the kite somewhere above the foredeckand a quick gather up by the crew. You will have seen how much effort is required the man handle an Americas Cup spinnaker from fully loaded to down below. Now do that with a similar sized if not bigger kite.
Remembering not to snag the thing on all the foredeck anchor winch gear and mooring bollards.
No kites are for dreamers (being only effective like the square riggers of old) directly downwind or on a broad reach as pictured. Heading directly to windward or close hauled would be impossible.
No, real sailing ships of the future will have a deeper draft then conventional ships have now (to store righting momentam ballast – but with lifting and canting keels technology now available even this neccessity is not totally required) and use conventional mast, rigging and sails (furling) as we seen on modern very large sailing yachts.
That technology is widely available with an industry geared up to go. The industry has the designers, engineers, production facilities, mast builders, yacht riggers, sail makers, sailors, in fact the whole infastructure is in place.
What we required is leadership from a moneyed source to build prototypes and to explore how tall sailing ships would be loaded and unloaded using container cranes (cant see containerisation going away long term) etc.
We know how to build and service them.
The shipping future using motorised sailing ships is looking bright. But the tension for change is not there as yet. Remembering that big ships use the most redementary crude oil to power their diesel engines (engines which are very efficient)
Looking a long way out, I think short and medium haul sea freight will go by motoried sailing ships while the long haul cargo will go by nuclear powered mega ships. Those american aircraft carriers and submarines have perfected the use of nuclear power in ships.
As an aside, why are we not looking at these smaller nuclear power plants to create electricity for our ever expanding needs? Dozens of smaller nuclear powerstations would be better then one big one and would deliver electricity more efficiently where it was needed and do away with those (my pet hate) high tension pylons marching across the landscape.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Come to think of it, banning lighting would be great for our candlestick makers too
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Gerrit, have you actually read their technical information
http://www.skysails.info/fileadmin/user_upload/Pressedownload/Dokumente/EN_Technology_Information.pdf
These are real ships that are fitted with real skysails. The launch and retrieval processes are automated so no additional crew is required. These skysails can provide assistance as close as 50 degrees to the wind.
“kites are for dreamers” , but these dreamers have turned their dreams into a practical reality, that can be fitted to existing ships.
Trevor.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
they could just hold it up with a balloon. that eliminates most of the problems gerrit mentions
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
andrew,
Then they could call it an airship. Hmmm, I think that name has already been used, dang!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Gerrit
It isn’t a mock-up. It’s the real deal and they’ve apparently launched a ship.
The odd thing about using a parafoil kite on a motor vessel like that is that the dynamics aren’t what you expect. The rudder angle to obtain the necessary resistance on the lateral hydrodynamic vector isn’t all that big. They’ve apparently patented an automatic launching and retrieval system. I suspect that it is too complicated but this is a bunch of German Engineers after all
. I see that the kite is the small one, though the ship is big enough.
You can play some very interesting tricks with the relative wind and I have absolutely no doubt that they’ve done the computations for the vehicle dynamics quite closely. This was my major in Mech Eng. I studied and worked with Dr Bradfield who developed nf^2 , a hydrofoil tri, which held a the class speed record for a time.
The truth is that it takes a long time to replace the fleet of surface ships with a new fleet of such ships. This was developed and can be deployed on existing ships. I think that once they get the teething pains done with, you ARE going to see them, as well as some rather different ship routings.
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
This is a idea that has taken a long time to be implemented, as for how they get it up, with a cannon. I think its a good idea while building a new fleet of cargo ships based on sailing, this idea utilizer’s the ships that have already been built.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Sorry BJ, The photo is a mock up. Blow it up in Photoshop and we see that the background image containing the ship has larger pixels than the kite image. Meaning the kite image has been dropped in afterwards. Notice that it only has one control line. For a kite or chute you need at least two to maintain some semblance of control.
Note too that both the kite and ship are in perfect focus. Even with a lens at f22 you would be kidding me regarding the possibility to get the kite and ship in perfect focus at the distance they are apart.
If we do a bit more research we find that the trials have been conducted with an 8 metre ship model. http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=mg18524881.600
Note that in the article that they are talking a kite for a larger ship of around 5000 sq meters. About a football field in size. Yep, try setting and retrieving something that large. And the shock loadings on the control gear as the wind fills it. Shock loading of around 100 tons would require control lines of about 20mm diameter in Vectran or similar. Weight of these lines alone (for the kite to lift) would be close to one tonne. Some the kite needs to keep aloft.
Your apparent wind argument is not possible for displacement ships. To get better than apparent wind you need to lower the water drag factor and hence only catamarans, hydrofoilers or skiffs can achieve those faster then apparent wind figures. Certainly not a fully loaded cargo vessel.
No, the Danes have a far better idea with solid wing foil masts. (as seen on Dennis Conner’s Americas Cup catamaran from years ago).
But again these are not as efficient as flexible sails in raising enough lift to drag a ship along. You need initial speed (like an aircraft) to get lifting airflow across those short chord distances. However it needs further works which I know those Danes will do.
Kites are a pipe dream, totally impractical and only able to be used directly down wind or on broad reaches. How often would those conditions occur? 20-30% of the time if you are lucky.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Gerrit wrote:
“If we do a bit more research we find that the trials have been conducted with an 8 metre ship model.”
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=mg18524881.600
That article was written nearly 3 years ago and referred to trials done the previous (northern) summer, 3 and a half years ago.
gerrit also wrote:
“Notice that it only has one control line. For a kite or chute you need at least two to maintain some semblance of control.”
The control pod just below the kite has multiple lines to the kite and can adjust them. It contains motors and gears and a computer system and is powered (and presumably directed) via the cable.
“Your apparent wind argument is not possible for displacement ships.”
…but is possible for kites which do not stay in a fixed position relative to the ship. Skysails write about flying the kite in a figure 8 in front of the ship – under automatic control.
Trevor.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Gerrit,
Good explanation of how they faked the photo, but how did they fake the videos?
http://www.reuters.com/news/video?videoId=72795&videoChannel=74
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8qeKslrqeY&feature=related
The Danish government cancelled Project Windship in 1999. The reasons can be found in this HOUSE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE submission.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/congress/2006_hr/060406-rourke.pdf
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Trevor29,
Any web site that has more details such as you mention? Dont understand how the single line would work but then I’m a simple sailor. My guess it would spin out of control around the single line as the computer controlled motor and gears get their purchase to counteract any spin from that single line. But lets see what the developers say.
Still like to know how to launch a football sized kite when in a decent swell and with a windspeed of 25 knots from astern. (you would need to go head before the wind to start to fly the thing). Trials have been held in what state water and what wind speed?
One thing trialling in a flat Baltic Sea another in mid Atlantic
“…but is possible for kites which do not stay in a fixed position relative to the ship. Skysails write about flying the kite in a figure 8 in front of the ship – under automatic control.”
Even doing a figure eight you cannot sail a kite at better then a broad reach. Once the wind is forward of the beam the kite would be flying behind the ship and excerting negative forward motion.
Try flying a kids kite at anything close to a broad reach (90 degrees from the wind direction) and watch the thing spiral out of control.
Maybe a kite board sailor can inform us on how close to the wind they can sail their kites?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Kevyn,
Peter Jackson makes pretty good movies using miniture models (king Kong). They may have use the 8metre model (which is not a bad sized model) to make the movies?
Seriously they did fly a kite from a ship in January 2006 so those movies might be from then.
Wat has happened to the project?
Cannot be commercial yet and at over 2 million Euros per ship I cant see to many rushing forward to install.
I guess another good idea fallen at the feet of commercial reality.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Hi Gerrit
yes, I actually did post a link, but my post has been held up – probably because the link was too long. Look for technical information on the skysail web site at the top of this thread.
The control pod doesn’t need to obtain purchase on the cable – it is controlling the aerodynamic properties of the kite itself, steering it much like a paraglider steers his kite.
“Even doing a figure eight you cannot sail a kite at better then a broad reach. Once the wind is forward of the beam the kite would be flying behind the ship and excerting negative forward motion.”
The kite can be flown ahead of the ship – admittedly at a fair angle – even with the wind forward of the beam, just as a conventional sailing ship can tack into the wind. However the kite would be tilted nearly horisontal.
“Try flying a kids kite at anything close to a broad reach (90 degrees from the wind direction) and watch the thing spiral out of control.”
Control is the key, and the control pod has more control over its kite than you or I would have over a kid’s kite. Think more of the kid’s kites with two strings that are steerable.
Trevor.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
The photos may be fake, but I expect that they were merely made more dramatic. I’d guess that the aircraft taking the photo wouldn’t be able to get too close to the kite so they enlarged the image of the kite.
Don’t get hung up about keeping different parts on the photo in focus either. If the camera is set to infinity, the out of focus blurring corresponds to the apperture diameter. Modern digital cameras have sensors that are smaller than 35mm of film, so their appertures are correspondingly smaller. When taking a photo of a ship or a 300 square meter kite, you are not going to see blurring of a few millimeters.
Trevor.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Try
http://www.skysails.info/fileadmin/user_upload/Pressedownload/Dokumente/EN_Technology_Information.pdf
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Go into
http://www.skysails.info/index.php?id=69&L=1
and select Skysails technology information
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Gerrit,
The Reuters clip is dated Dec 17 and clearly shows the ships name as “Beluga SkySails?. The christening ceremony occurred earlier this month. The report gives the price as 500,000 Euros but that may be for the size for this rather small freighter.
The lower photo in Russell’s post is from an earlier concept video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cFB7RJSoQCI&feature=related
Wat has happened to the project?
http://www.beluga-group.com/News.345.0.html?&cHash=8d7c34a750&tx_ttnewstt_news=505
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Well hey, why not got the whole hog back to the 1700′s and reintroduce sailing ships to world shipping.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Gerrit
The photo is a mock up… the ship however, was launched. … with the 160 metre sail… attached to the bow. They ARE serious. I would expect that they’ve worked out hydraulic shock absorption of the loading at launch and of the line’s load in any case, and my argument about generating an apparent wind applies to ships of any sort. The apparent wind vector exists no matter how it is powered. You are examining this with the idea that the kite works alone, but it was never intended to do so. Once the ship is in motion the entire hull is providing the lateral resistance… only a small amount of rudder is required.
Reading the technical bits they claim to generate some power at as little as 50 degrees off the wind but admit there that they don’t do that well until the wind is on or abaft the beam. 120 degrees was (I think) mentioned.
Upwind IS possible.
http://www.dcss.org/speedsl/KI1088.html
The full scale setup with the 160 meter kite will give them better data… and more practical knowledge of the problems of doing this at sea but an 8 meter model in a wind tunnel isn’t a bad start.
Check this…
http://www.dcss.org/speedsl/KiteTugs.html
Finally, I would have to say that the middle of the Atlantic Ocean is often quite calm…
This is a device to supplement an already powered and already existing vessel. Within those parameters it can work. Not saying it will, but it can.
A vessel designed from the beginning with wind in mind can and should be very different…. and I agree that the fixed or semi-fixed airfoil mast is probably what we will see mostly. You can’t put that on an existing ship. These things don’t sail that well upwind, the rigid airfoil and a real ship design will do better, but they do get there. The upwind limitation is answered by the engine.
As soon as you recognize and allow for the fact that this thing is not intended to power the ship but to assist a powered ship the rules change.
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
BJ,
We are not that far apart in our opinions of what the possible kite attack angles are. I say a maximum arc of 180 degrees (with 0 degress set on the bow) being at 360 and 90 degrees respectively. You are saying an arc of 240 degrees is possible. (but at lessening eficiencies) Thats a 25 degree variation. Yep OK lets agree on your angles being possible.
By my roughish calculations for a 160 sq metre sail you would have a constant loading of 720 kg in 15 knots of wind. Manageable for sure. Enough pull a ship along?
Now for a 5000 sq metre kite (the size you would need for a large commercial vesel) you are talking a constant load of 22500 kg in 15 kg of wind. Again manageable loading and certainly enough to pull a ship along.
So yes it is possible to fly a kite and make a positive when the wind direction and more importantly the strength is favourable.
Wind strength is important because the kite needs at least 5 knots to stay up. Meaning that you need a minimum wind speed of 15 knots if the vessel is travelling at 10 knots. However the loading at 5 knots is down to 7500 kg for the 5000 sq metre kite. Enough to pull the ship along? I think you would need at least 25 knots of wind to make the kite viable to pull the ship along and get those fuel savings.
And this is another issue all seem to gloss over. Yes I could see you launch a 160 sq metre kite. Now try a football field size 5000 sq metre one. And get it back on deck (I gues you could shoot it up on a compressed air reuseable rocket and winch it back down into the launching chute – The critical point when winching it down will be when the kite collapses, have you got enough in the chute so that the remainder does not drop onto the deck and get snagged or worse drop over the side).
So lets get to commercial reality (they do need to sell kites).
As a prospect ship owning user I would have the navigating officer plot wind speed and directions for at least a year on the routes plied by my ships.
Work out the percentage of time one could fly a kite (when wind strength and direction was favourable) and look at the fuel cost saving versus purchasing, manning and maintenance cost of a kite.
Maybe thats what the ship owners are doing? Lets give them the benefit of the doubt and we will see thousands of kites blossoming shortly.
I dont think so.
Trevor
“Control is the key, and the control pod has more control over its kite than you or I would have over a kid’s kite. Think more of the kid’s kites with two strings that are steerable.”
My point exactly however the minimum two control lines go back to a single line. Where is their purchase (lever effect) coming from?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Gerrit
Wind speed and direction is available for all the major shipping routes for the past several decades… and OTSR has been in use since the 70′s, We also now have both satellite observation of the winds and better predictions.
http://winds.jpl.nasa.gov/publications/javaSea.cfm
Of the 3 satellites launched only the “quick-cheap” one survived. NSCAT suffered a power panel casualty and ADEOS || died shortly after launch. However, between the NSCAT and Quikscat data there is a lot of wind history, and the observations of all the surface ships making transits gives a long historical record. The windroses along most of the well traveled routes are actually pretty good information.
With quikscat data, the windroses in the southern ocean in the past decade are just as reliable.
http://www.navy.mil/search/display.asp?story_id=27544
OTSR is (or was) available to commercial ships as well as the US Navy … it isn’t that hard to imagine such a service being set up again if it has atrophied.
However, that said I do have my doubts about the overall commercial viability, and the reliability of the launching-retrieval system and the adequacy of the solution. Much depends on the cost of the fuel for the ships as well.
Given the 18+ knot hull-speed of large ships and the difference between the surface wind and the winds aloft the real problem is a lack of real-world data. They are almost certainly counting on that difference to make this work.
Which they will get from the 160m sail. The situation with a purpose built ship would be less “iffy” in terms of how far up the wind it would point, but the cost of tacking would still exist, and the need for the OTSR will still exist. I was under the impression that the big commercial carriers all used one…. but I don’t have much contact with that world anymore and it is years since I did.
The pod can change the shape of the airfoil and thus its attitude with respect to the single point of attachment. The interaction is sufficient for control. The real-time intelligence that has to be built into the pod or transmitted to it isn’t trivial.
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Gerrit asked:
“Where is their purchase (lever effect) coming from?”
The same place that a person operating a paraglider gets purchase from – (s)he doesn’t need purchase. The paraglider/kite is flying and is controlled by changes to its shape like any other aeroplane or glider. That kid’s kite with 2 strings isn’t using the two strings for leverage either – the difference in length of the two strings provides a control signal which steers the kite by altering its shape.
I haven’t been able to post a link to the technical information – it’s under Press Releases. It is also under DOWNLOADS on the Skysail page linked to above by Russel.
Trevor.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
This should help to quieten down those food-mile critics.
Hopefully it will prevent huge increases in the shipping costs to our exporters too.
Trevor.
PS: Can someone tell me what trackbacks are, as in “You can leave a response, but trackbacks are not allowed”?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Trackbacks are an automatic notification of back-links. It’s used by bloggers to keep track of who comments on their blog posts.
Also by spammers, hence the reason some sites block their use.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Thanks BluePeter. I have made several attempts to post links into Skysails’ web site but none have been accepted – I was wondering if these were being treated as trackbacks.
Trevor.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Informative article on this subject…
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=mg18524881.600
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Trevor29,
“The same place that a person operating a paraglider gets purchase from – (s)he doesn’t need purchase. The paraglider/kite is flying and is controlled by changes to its shape like any other aeroplane or glider. That kid’s kite with 2 strings isn’t using the two strings for leverage either – the difference in length of the two strings provides a control signal which steers the kite by altering its shape.”
The “lever” or “purchase” that the person flying the two string kite is across their shoulders, the “motor” to pull or release the strings are their arms at the ends of that lever. That is the purchase I’m talking about.
What you are saying is that you could hold both strings in one hand and still manupulate the kite. Technically this is possible but you would need to be extreme fast to pull and release the strings to maintain control. A lever does this so much better and faster.
But if those smart people at SkySails can work it out, i’m sure they can work out a launch and retrieve method for a football field sized kite.
A footbal field sized kite will have how many control strings to come together in the pod? Each pair will have to have a motor and pulley system to feed and and pull in one or the other. How many motors, drives and pulleys will you need? how much weight?
Weight aloft means the kite pulling power is reduced. Remember you are hauling a line capable of taking 23 tonne constant loading (shock loading of 60 tonne?) requiring at very least a 20mm multistrand vectran or dynema line (for lightest weight, highest load and stretch resistance) into which electrical power cables will need to be encased. Again we are talking weight, maybe close to 500 kg. This to add to a kite weight of around 300 kg? on top of the weight of the pod, motors and pulley system.
Personally think that the scale up from a trial kite of 160 square metres to a production version of 5000 square metres will be too much.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
http://www.military-heat.com/65/c130-hercules-deck-landing/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:UnderwayReplenishment_20060321.jpg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-3_Viking
http://battleblimps.com/refuel.html
We do a lot of unlikely things at sea… note that the last item tends to speak to the difficulty of actually using a kite this size this way. I give them no better than 50/50 odds of getting it to work well enough to make money… but stranger things have been accomplished out there.
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Gerrit said:
“Wind strength is important because the kite needs at least 5 knots to stay up. Meaning that you need a minimum wind speed of 15 knots if the vessel is travelling at 10 knots.”
This may be correct if the ship is heading downwind, but the situation is more complex if the ship is heading across the wind. With the aerodynamic properties of the kite, significant towing force would be obtained in a cross-wind of less than the ship’s actual speed.
Trevor.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“But if those smart people at SkySails can work it out, i’m sure they can work out a launch and retrieve method for a football field sized kite.”
balloon bro. takes care of all your problems
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Trevor29,
You are correct. Optimum kite flying performance comes if the ship is travelling at 90 degrees across the face of the wind direction (broad reach). It is in the quandrant where wind speed does not have the boat speed as a factor in kite performance.
Where as directly down wind it has the maximum effect on kite performance.
Unfortunately the kite on the broad beam has the least amount of forward pulling power. Flying the kite directly downwind it has the maximum pulling power for the least performance in regards wind speed negated by boat speed.
I guess if you flew the kite in the figure eight pattern you desribe (from broad reach to directly downwind you would get the maximum possible effort from the kite.
Andrew.
Have a look athe the battleblimp link sent by BJ. They are terribly unstable tethered to a ship. It would certainly solve your retrieving problem as you could douse the kite by using a sock arrangement as seen on large cruising spinnakers on yachts. The critical moment when the kite collapses would still be an interesting one, but possibly more manageable.
A blimp would have huge windage and if a kite was trying to do figure eights for maximum pulling power it would hinder that to a large degree.
There again you could pump it up before lauch, deflate it when flying the kite and inflate it again when needing to douse said kite. But then you would have a large amount of flapping material on the end of the line.
Better still would be a double skinned kite where you could blow it up to launch or retrieve. You would simply whinch it back on deck and suck air out of it as it slowly at it is winched into the launching chute.
5000 square metre kite blown up would be say 25 mtres wide and 75 metres long. Be interesting having that sitting on a launch chute and not snag any deck gear!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
gerrit said: “A blimp would have huge windage and if a kite was trying to do figure eights for maximum pulling power it would hinder that to a large degree”
well no, not if the blimp is mostly deflated once it has got the kite up.
gerrit said: “There again you could pump it up before lauch, deflate it when flying the kite and inflate it again when needing to douse said kite.”
er, yes, precisely. i guess you are just thinking out loud then.
gerrit said: “But then you would have a large amount of flapping material on the end of the line.”
not necessarily. you could for instance have the balloon mostly deflated & compressed into a vertically elongated shape to minimize wind resistance with enough of a bubble up top to keep it upright so it’s not getting in the way of the sail. or if the wind is right behind you, it would seem that having the balloon at maximum inflation could only help..
well that’s just one idea, basically all the objections are surmountable.
gerrit said: “5000 square metre kite blown up would be say 25 mtres wide and 75 metres long. Be interesting having that sitting on a launch chute and not snag any deck gear!”
no reason why it can’t be launched from & retrieved by a raft towed by the ship & then kept on board while not in use launching & retrieving.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
i’ve been using double paragraph spacing to separate the bits where i am replying from the next bit where i am quoting, but this blog software seems to condense them back down to single lines.
is there any quote feature that can make it a bit clearer?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
andrew,
The homepage has a link for Help – How to…Smilies and formatting
If you’re familiar with HTML you should have no trouble.
You could try ‘ or ” or >> to indicate quotations depending on the situation.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
andrew,
“no reason why it can’t be launched from & retrieved by a raft towed by the ship & then kept on board while not in use launching & retrieving.”
yes every obstacle in this kite flying experiment is able to be surmounted, but like the barge and blimp ideas they come at a cost.
Not just in monetory terms but in the cost savings on fuel. Towing a barge with a huge blimb on it is going to cost in fuel and windage.
The answers you are proposing are just not practical.
Mind you with the blimp attached to the ship, why not put solar panels on top and have batteries and an electric powered air screw so that you could use the blimp to pull the ship along whilst flying or not flying a kite?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
If you had a rope going right around the world, could tow a ship in a head wind Gerrit?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Gerrit said:
“Mind you with the blimp attached to the ship, why not put solar panels on top and have batteries and an electric powered air screw so that you could use the blimp to pull the ship along whilst flying or not flying a kite?”
Propellers in water are more efficient than propellers in air, particularly in a head wind. If you have electric power available, use it to drive electric motors driving the ship’s propellers or use it instead of the diesel generators on board the ship which are powering all the auxilliary equipment (lights, radar, radios, air conditioning…).
If you do fit propellers on the blimp, they could be turned by the wind to generate electricity and that could be fed down the cable to drive the ship’s propellers.
If you make those propellers big enough, they can be flown like a kite and you wouldn’t need the blimp. It would be an autogyrator (sp?) – i.e. a wind-powered helicopter.
Check out
http://www.skywindpower.com/ww/index.htm
Trevor.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
gerrit you’re too willing to see costs & too unwilling to see solutions. i’m going to turn your pessimism right around & say yes every idea comes at a cost, but every cost is able to be surmounted.
note that i pointed out the raft (if that is the solution they go with) only needs to be afloat during launch & retrieval, so the drag added by a raft is a minor issue.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
o.k. thanks kevyn
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Andrew,
I’m a cynical because I see charlatan snake oil salesman in many of these unworkable ideas in regards solutions to global warming and peak oil.
Sure discuss ideas and solutions but always remember if there is a cost (such as a kite for 2 million euros or 4milion NZ$) that has to be checked against what the cost is for alternatives. In this case for one kite I could build about 4 conventional sailing rigs (35 metre carbon masts, fully rigged and with hydrolically operated sails, on a ship.)
Now look at the risk factor. One snag, one rip, one failure of a control line and for that entire voyage you have no kite. Risk factor high. For the same money and with 4 masts the risk factor of not being to be able to achieve any cost saving is very low.
The big selling point for the kite is its ability to be placed on ships plying the marine highways today. While most other forms of wind assisted ships will need a complete redesign (though by adding water balasting capabilities to conventional shipping, this is not totally true).
However launching and retrieving a football field sized kite above a ship is not at all practical. Every solution you offer to make it so is not pratical.
Such as the raft proposal. Now more of the ships deck space is going to be taken up by storing a kite retrieval raft. Not to mention winch gear to pull it up and the engine power required to turn it.
Sure it is possible, but practical?
I said charlatans at the start of my comment because to me these guys are in a smart marketing campaign for funding to continue their “research” when even with a bit of practical thinking the idea is not going to produce the results they promise.
Expect a lot more Al Gore type charlatans with wacky, non practical ideas (as if carbon trading is goin to solve the problem of global warming) to squeeze money out of people.
No I think nuclear power will be it for big ships in the future. And a place to get rid of the waste? Simply bury it in those huge now empty caverns from which billions upon billions of barrels of oil where pumped.
Those caverns prevented oil from contaminating the planet for millions of years and can now do the same with nuclear waste.
Such a simple idea, so cost effective.
mmmmmmmmmmm, Now could I get a government grant to explore that scenario?
Only need a cool million or two to set me up for life.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Gerrit
As much as I respect you, I still reckon that this is not as bizarre an idea as you appear to think.
Control line impairment would almost certainly be repairable/replaceable at the cost in time of retrieval and relaunch, which I would expect to entail turning to a course and speed which gives the kite(s) an easy launch, and a drogue kite. In other words, launching a smaller kite to pull up the larger. I do believe that’s what is in the works. You are good at seeing potential problems, but if there are solutions to all of them the idea becomes possible. Patching material for a sail isn’t all that difficult an item to carry.
Not sure yet that it is practical. There is substantial complexity to be overcome, but German Engineering gets capital letters because it has always been thorough. The 160 meter trial installation is an important steppingstone. If I am right they will use that 160 to refine their launching process and automation, and they will then incrementally go to bigger kites.
Adding water ballasting to an existing ships? It has to be dynamic… as NO ship has been designed to function properly with any appreciable angle of heel, it has to move quickly too… and it is probably better to use sea-stabilizers. So far your “practical” thinking has only shown us the same rejection of new ideas that conventional sailors have always had to newer developments in the field. Suspicion of new things is a survival trait for a sailor. This technology has to be tested, refined and proven before anyone is going to spend big Euro’s on one of the big kites. I don’t think they’re ahead of themselves…
Al Gore is a Charlatan now? I think you went a bit over the top here. I do expect charlatans … they are attracted wherever there is money to be obtained and a shortage of research exists. There are biofuel charlatans, there are solar living charlatans, lots of people out there trying for that quick buck off the unsuspecting public. I don’t think Gore is in that category, and I am pretty sure these guys are not either. Nobody who is out there buying ships is doing so because they’re a rube. Some people buy shares that way.
Nuclear powered ships are a security problem. They retired the Savannah, but in today’s environment each ship would have to have the equivalent of a Marine heavy weapons detachment embarked…. at least…. or have to have the ability to disappear. Nuclear powered cargo submarines. That COULD work, and they not be subject to wave drag or storm damage. I’d expect the first ones to be retired military boats with the sharp stuff pulled off them.
Nuclear wast won’t go into a “vast empty cavern” which used to contain oil. In most cases the rock is porous, not absent.
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Oils reached $100/ barrel
http://sites3.barchart.com/pl/vsn/quote.asp?sym=CLZ0
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
BJ,
yep you are right, charlatan is too harsh a word for some who are trying to make a differnce such as Kite Sail (Al Gore is one in my view but that is a seperate debate I commented on a while back).
Trying to be logical in kite applications It is such a step up from 160 square metres to 5000 square metres.
Reminds me of a drag racer way back who designed a supercharged 4 cylinder dragster with the engine in east-west configuration. Extremely fast and a world record holder in its class.
In theory you should be able to scale up the east-west configuration (where engine torque can be used to keep the front down on the track and thus transfer load to the rear).
However when tried (east-west configuration) on 5000hp supercharged V8 drag engines it does not work. Somewhere along the line it crosses a barrier where performance actually decreases. Similarly with formula and Nascar race cars.
Same with the kite. Those football field sized kites have an inherent size factor where bigger does not mean better. Weight aloft increase rapidly due to larger loads and the need to control them.
I think I would rather see a triple decker kite (where airflow throught he slots will provide lift and allow the kite to be carried aloft in lower and wider angles to the apparant wind) then a monster football field sized one, or perhaps two or three smaller kites.
My earlier comments for Andrew where mainly in the vein of exploring some of the impractricallity of his suggestion. Should learn to put a smiley face next to them.
Understand the problem with security of nuclear power and I guess in a perfect world where we all loved one another it would not be such a problem.
Those underwater cargo carriers are a good idea. Here is another.
A Submerged rail tunnel floating about 30 metres underwater and tethered to the sea bed. Understand the Norwegians (Swedes?) were experimenting with one of these for crossing very deep fiords where the visual pollution of the vista with a monster bridge was not acceptable, and the fiords too deep for a conventional on the sea bed tunnel.
In theory you could span an ocean with one.
Kite repair at sea would be very difficult (not impossible just difficult).
Racing yachts (Volvo 70′s for example) can shift many tons of water from one side to the other in less then a minute. Now fitting ballast tanks to conventian
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
you still seem to be forgetting that the kite is meant to supplement diesel power, there’s no risk involved in having kite technology compared to not, since if it rips that just means the ship makes the voyage on engine power as it would in the absence of kite technology.
all of your objections are trivial or willfully ignorant, for instance your objection that we wouldn’t be able to steer the kite if it would have only one cord attached to the deck. no-one ever said there would be no control lines, only that they needn’t extend all the way to the deck. in fact the photo you claimed was a mockup clearly has 4 lines visible just on one side of the kite (presumably 4 on the other, though not visible in the photo).
or your claim that having a raft would take up too much valuable deck space actually it needn’t take up deck space at all, it could be slung off the back of the ship, or any other sensible solution. you are just claiming to see problems where they don’t exist. similarly your claim that the energy required to retrieve a raft would be a significant burden to a trans oceanic freighter!
“more Al Gore type charlatans “… ohhh. one of the anti-al-gore ones. carbon trading might not solve global warming, but it is at least a step in the right direction.
o.k from your next post i see that you are willing to consider some solutions as well as just problems. i actually like the idea of a tripple-decker kite. although it would be satisfying to now aim a slew of trivial objections at it..
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Andrew,
“although it would be satisfying to now aim a slew of trivial objections at it..”
Please do as a triple decker would provide much more lift in light winds however the setting and retrieving are still a problem.
Tell you what, when the first 5000 square metre kite has been commercial sold and utilised successfully for a twelve month period, I’ll donate $200 to your favourite charity.
Those trivial objections are real objections in a commercial world.
If you think carbon trading is going to hold global warming in check good for you, I dont think it will make an iota of difference.
When I see the banks, corporates, auditors all lining up to make money from carbon trading , it is IMHO a scam.
The same people (including Al Gore) will be creating the carbon credits from the own audited sources and selling them to you.
When I see a world body with teeth controlling who has carbon credits, sets a value and sells them only once, I will believe that carbon trading is beneficial.
Till then I believe alternative carbon free energy sources are the besat alternatives. Yes, even kites for ships are better than encouraging carbon trading and letting ship owners continue to run carbon emmitting ships.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“Those trivial objections are real objections in a commercial world.”
they’re still small compared to the projected overall benefit. you really think in a commercial world the chance to save HALF of their fuel costs, it will seem not worth it because maybe now they have to store an additional raft on board? you think a kite capable of hauling a SHIP around will be debilitated by the additional need to haul a wee balloon around?
if these are indeed the solutions they run with. they may have better ideas. i raised these ideas only to show what a trivial matter it was to overcome your objections.
now you’re very willfully misrepresenting my words.
to repeat myself: “carbon trading might not solve global warming, but it is at least a step in the right direction.”
well it has to start somewhere.
if you mean they can’t be traded, why would you do that? the trading is what allows those with emmissions-saving processes to be subsidized by those without. it’s what shifts resources to the desirable practices. it’s also what makes it an easier sell for governments, compared with outright regulation, which would likely be rejected by their electorates.
well of course. the carbon trading is supposed to provide an incentive towards that.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“…and sells them only once…”
I believe Gerrit is referring to selling the same carbon credits more than once, without the second seller buying them off the first seller. This could happen by straight fraud, or by unclear ownership.
Gerrit has a point here, but it is solvable.
Trevor.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Trevor29,
Absolutely, without an independent auditing system in place this will and has happened.
Problem I see see is that with the big auditing firms seeing a chance to make a buck it adds another layer of “ticket clippers” to the cqrbon trading cost.
Have commented earlier on another post that carbon trading with corporate money making involved is here for the long term. They will not be interested in seeing a carbon reduction (earth saving) because they would not be making money.
Carbon trading is supposed to reduce carbon emmisions, instead it will do the opposite.
Corporates will be looking for every opportunity to find a carbon sinkhole and “selling” this to the carbon emitors. With a 30% fee for carrying out the transaction and 5% per annon to keep it audited??
Now can I interest you in the carbon credits for my uncut lawn?
Andrew, let me know when the first commercial 5000 square metre kite flies for 12 months on a ship and what charity you would like me to donate the $200 to.
As I said before, no problem is insurmountable, just the implementation of the solution may not be commercially viable.
Me thinks sailing ships along the more conventioanl lines will be the answer. That plus nuclear propulsion when (as BJ says) security can be guaranteed.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
why not? people should mow their lawns a lot less. i can’t understand the obsession with short grass. another manifestation of the general insanity in society. but i doubt you’ll get any significant saving for just one lawn. what you don’t seem to understand is that when people buy credits, those credits have to come from somewhere. the existence of credits doesn’t encourage carbon emmissions, it creates a transfer of wealth from those who are emmitting to those who are planting forest, or other activities to reduce carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.
it could also be done through taxes & subsidies, but for some reason those things have a bad name
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
plus there’s no world government to administer them – the trading scheme is a mechanism for countries to co-operate on this
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
anything is commercially viable which is: a) possible &
b) pays a good enough return. in this case the commercial prize of a huge cut in fuel bills
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
It would appear to be on its way:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22788488/
“The world’s first commercial ship powered partly by a giant kite set off on a maiden voyage from Bremen to Venezuela on Tuesday, in an experiment that inventor Stephan Wrage hopes can wipe 20 percent, or $1,600, from the ship’s daily fuel bill.” (dated Tuesday 22 January, 2008)
Another link:
http://www.greenrep.net/2008/01/10/new-cargo-ship-cuts-fuel-use-with-a-kite-like-sail/
Trevor.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“To update the story, the MS Beluga Skysails set sail today from the northern Germany port of Bremerhaven on her maiden commercial voyage, carrying parts for wind turbines (ironically enough) to Guanta Venezuela.” (also dated 22 January, 2008)
http://www.triplepundit.com/pages/the-ms-beluga-skysails-leaves–002869.php
Trevor.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
It reached Venezuela on 6 Feb:
http://www.triplepundit.com/pages/ms-beluga-skysails-completes-h-002897.php
Trevor.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
It is now on its way back to Europe:
http://www.beluga-group.com/News.72.0.html?&cHash=55f876775b&tx_ttnewstt_news=570
Trevor.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
As a sailor I’m glad to see it – could design a much (much) better sail set for vehichle pictured – shut down those slow and noisy, polluttin’ engines!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Have they sold a commercial unit yet?
How much research money has this project eaten up and why are the commercial ship operators not rushing in to utilise this technology?
Research and trials have been going on for roughly five years and still no commercial sale?
It just is not viable in a commercial sense where ships tend to be larger than a small freighter.
And gee, they did not launch the kite till the lighter winds at the Azores was reached. No wind in the North Sea or the Bay of Biscay? Or too much or from the wrong direction.
Remember the kite is only deployable if the wind is from dead astern or within a 180 degree arc from dead on the port side to the opposite starboard side.
The kite is just a toy to soak up funding for the researchers, it is a feel good project to let people think something is happening while nothing of commercial or environmental value actually is.
Now, when we see a practical 1000 square metre kite sold commercially and deployed for 12 months from a larger and more practical freighter. Than we can all get exited. My offer for a $200 donation to charity stands when this event occurs.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Have to ask Russel I guess Gerrit. Not only sails but power turbines (wind,water) could be fitted for smog free electric running as well
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Gerrit said:
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Sorry – still getting the hang of the blockquote.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
frog blog’s help links are broken. All I get is Error 404.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Mark,
Absolutely, Have seen horizontal wind power generators being developed which have a huge advantage over the vertical blade type. Tha tis were the future is at.
No vertical rotor blades that require a high tower and expensive wind following rotating heads.
http://www.windpower.org/en/tour/design/horver.htm
Could quite easily see these on shipping and have the advantage of being able to be used irrespective of wind ditrection and course sailed.
Trevor29,
Suggest you go to an area where local kite surfers are playing and ask them if it is possible to generate lift from a kite with the wind anywere but in a 180 degree arc from behind themselves.
Any kite flown aft off broad beam will be a drag not a lift. Simple physics.
The further to kite is to dead down wind, the more efficient it is, broad of beam it is at it leasts efficient, aft of beam it is a drag and head to wind it wont fly.
Dont believe everything you read from Beluga.
The write not for the commercial operator but for their funders to keep the money flow going.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Interesting link! The basic Lug Sail design would do – inexpensive and highly effective – the kite looks like a bit of a joke…but yeah a hullbased vertical water turbine would probably charge any number of batteries for good reserves of electricity….
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Gerrit:
A yacht can tack into the wind. A good glider can glide several times further than it descends without finding an updraft. The same principle applies to both, except the yacht’s sail is at right angles to the glider’s wing. It also applies to the kite sail.
If the wind is beam on or ahead, the kite sail is flown nearly horisontally with just enough vertical to keep it up. In this mode, the kite sail is ahead of the ship even though the wind is in a direction that would push it behind the ship. Remember, the kite is being flown. It is under complete control, with more control than a paraglider pilot has of his (or her) parasail.
You are being mislead by applying simple physics – the sort that said that heavier than air vehicles can’t fly. The kite sail’s behaviour is a bit more advanced than that. It isn’t just a parachute and doesn’t behave like one.
Therefore I see no reason not to believe the claim that the kite sail can be effective for winds up to 45 degrees or so ahead of beam. However the towing force would be much higher for winds coming from behind the vessel.
Trevor.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Trevor29,
Still suggest that you go and talk to the kite surfers and ask them to sail to windward with a kite.
I know what the answer will be (been there, got the t shirt).
Comparing a kite with a wing or a sail leaves out one very large component. Wind energy is needed to keep the kite “inflated” and flowing.
Wings are solid so dont need energy to maintain their shape and sails are flown from masts and booms so dont need energy to keep them up.
If Beluga were serious they would be trialing the recommended 1000 square metre kite not the puny 160 metre one.
Why arent they? Because it is too big, too cumbersome, too hard to launch and retrieve and with no real benefits and with substantial risks and costs.
And until they do the kite will never fly commercially (after all is that not the point of the whole excercise?).
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Gerrit,
You are confusing the need for airflow with a need for energy. The kite sail has some drag when flying, and that is the only energy needed to keep the kite set properly. The key performance factor is the lift to drag ratio.
The kites used by kite surfers are a compromise and I expect that their lift to drag ratio isn’t as good as the kite sail can be. Remember that the kite sail can be adjusted in flight and isn’t just controlled by a pair of cables. Also the surf boards used by kite surfers are also a compromise and don’t have the same performance as a less constrained design.
Why are Beluga starting with smaller kite sails? Because they are still experimenting, and are working their way up to bigger models, and also because there are a large number of smaller vessels that they can sell the smaller models to.
Trevor.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Sorry Trevor29,
Have studied this intensively and have realised this concept will never be a commercial reality.
I could argue all day on this but not going to bother anymore.
My donation to charity stands if they sell a 1000 square metre unit commercially and it is in use for 12 months. Wonder if you will do the same if they are unsuccesful and fold.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)