-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Merged DDWFTTW in a “Real” Wind
- Thread starter ynot
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
The people posting here as spork and thinAirDesigns built a wind-powered cart that is capable of going directly downwind, faster than the wind. This has been verified by treadmill tests with miniature performed by them and confirmed by several other posters. A trial was conducted by NALSA (North American Land Sailing Association) that a cart capable of carrying a person achieved 2.7 x windspeed. The science appears to have "checked out". The poster known as humber, who tries to pass himself off as an expert in physics, but makes ridiculous, fundamental errors on nearly every post, asserts otherwise.
The poster known as humber seems to be obsessed with proving that the assertions of the builders of the DDWFTW cart are perpetrating a fraud, but he is remarkably unequipped to do so. Most of the people still participating in the discussion are doing so because humber fails in a remarkably humorous manner.
The other view is that the cart is a claim of perpetual motion. When above wind speed, it is said to be driven by the headwind generated by its own motion, or the wheel driving the propeller, or both. If you don't like those, you can go with the "tacking propeller" Harrypothesis.
That is all nonsense, so the apparent success of the cart lies elsewhere, and that is in lax experimental control, poor wind measurements and analysis,
selection of advantageous wind patterns by ignoring negative outcomes, transient rather then steady-state performance and deliberate manipulation of the data. To name but a few.
ThinAirDesigns
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2008
- Messages
- 1,058
Like this, where I ask if they knew Steve Smith. I asked many times prior to this one.
LOL -- humber lies again and even posts the proof that he lies -- again.
JB
ThinAirDesigns
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2008
- Messages
- 1,058
When above wind speed, it is said to be driven by the headwind generated by its own motion, ...
Not a soul who understands how it works says that. Not one.
JB
LOL -- humber lies again and even posts the proof that he lies -- again.
JB
Oh, there are at least 10 other posts orbiting that one.
But, that one post is enough. You denied knowing him. But he said had met Spork prior to me sending the questions to Ames. "It just so happens", that the questions I sent to the Research Director ended up in his hands. It is unlikely that a random engineer would also pass on my name and email address to you.
ThinAirDesigns
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2008
- Messages
- 1,058
You denied knowing him. But he said had met Spork prior to me sending the questions to Ames.
LOL -- you really should read back what you just wrote for comprehension.
JB
Like this, where I ask if they knew Steve Smith. I asked many times prior to this one.
humber knows that we never denied knowing Steve Smith. He can not and will not find a quote that shows we ever denied it. Instead he will insist that we have to find the quote that shows we never denied it. That's how logic works in the humberverse.
Smith said he met Spork through flying.
It's always hard to know when humber is lying and when he's delusional. I suspect he's just confused on this point (which is his normal state). But I did not meet Steve through flying.
Even thrust is same as even force. The stress at the root limits the size of wind turbines. Don't want a lot at the tip. Long lever....
One wiki does not contain the whole story. Lots of different factors,
Fans are usually wider at the tip than the root. Slow props are like that. See Bauer's.
More lecturing on stuff that he's gotten wrong before and still has wrong now.
Okay, now I know I was wrong.
Sorry my man - but that's the rule. If humber agrees with you - you're wrong.
LOL -- you really should read back what you just wrote for comprehension.
JB
Meaning that you knew him prior to Ames. I asked the question after Ames. You flatly denied knowing him prior to Ames.
But, you knew the questions were being sent, so it was more than a coincidence that they ended up in Smith's hands. If I know aerospace engineers, then if I want to "handle" the email, they are going to let me.
But he is right.
Even thrust is same as even force. The stress at the root limits the size of wind turbines. Don't want a lot at the tip. Long lever.
http://www.boeing.com/companyoffices/aboutus/wonder_of_flight/propeller.html
One wiki does not contain the whole story. Lots of different factors,
Fans are usually wider at the tip than the root. Slow props are like that. See Bauer's.
Humber, you would not know how to even begin analyzing the stress at a propeller root.
But your attempt at finding an authoritative reference is typically funny. Boeing you say? Yes surely they would be experts. So you find a site they intend for children. Ok, that is suitable for your level of understanding, but just read a little more on the knowledge base on propellers and we find your sum total background. "A propeller is shaped so that its tip spins faster than its hub." That's awesome, but we know you are still grappling with the concept, good luck.
I have the emails from Smith where he does not answer if he passed on my name and email address to you, until the 3rd asking. Yevgheni has the email where he admits he had already met you. Flying.humber knows that we never denied knowing Steve Smith. He can not and will not find a quote that shows we ever denied it. Instead he will insist that we have to find the quote that shows we never denied it. That's how logic works in the humberverse.
It's always hard to know when humber is lying and when he's delusional. I suspect he's just confused on this point (which is his normal state). But I did not meet Steve through flying.
More lecturing on stuff that he's gotten wrong before and still has wrong now.
Sorry my man - but that's the rule. If humber agrees with you - you're wrong.
This is a diversion from the matter at hand. The trail and its data. Old posts will not help you then.
Humber, you would not know how to even begin analyzing the stress at a propeller root.
But your attempt at finding an authoritative reference is typically funny. Boeing you say? Yes surely they would be experts. So you find a site they intend for children. Ok, that is suitable for your level of understanding, but just read a little more on the knowledge base on propellers and we find your sum total background. "A propeller is shaped so that its tip spins faster than its hub." That's awesome, but we know you are still grappling with the concept, good luck.
That's just great.
ThinAirDesigns
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2008
- Messages
- 1,058
Meaning that you knew him prior to Ames.
LOL - like I said, read it for *comprehension*.
Humber's world is one big fuzzball. He can't can't answer questions with any precision and accuracy and hasn't a clue what to do when one is answered that way.
JB
I have the emails from Smith where he does not answer if he passed on my name and email address to you, until the 3rd asking. Yevgheni has the email where he admits he had already met you. Flying.
Neither JB nor I ever claimed we did not know Steve. humber will never find a post that shows differently.
I've never flown with Steve. Unlike humber, Steve is neither delusional nor a liar, so I strongly doubt Steve would say we met flying.
Neither JB nor I ever claimed we did not know Steve. humber will never find a post that shows differently.
Like this one....
JB said:As is the norm for you, that is not true. This is a full time NASA aero engineer who has nothing whatsoever to do with our project (or any DDWFTTW project) and was reached with no help from us nor our knowledge.
I've never flown with Steve. Unlike humber, Steve is neither delusional nor a liar, so I strongly doubt Steve would say we met flying.
"strongly doubt"? He's not delusional you say, so surely it's a certainty isn't it?
You can't risk directly denying what may be in Yevgheni's unseen email. It that it?
So what's the plan, Chief? To undermine my attacks on your cart by secondary means? Does the thought of me getting the data worry you that much?
You knew Smith. His email suggests that he is way to familiar with the topic. It has never made the journals. It's a a niche topic. I would not expect that an impartial NASA employee, would take it upon himself to suggest that the ideas of a private citizen were delusional, and the result of pigheadedness or show so much bias.
No, the language has the same stamp as yours. Moreover, prior to the trials, you never once mentioned the ideas presented in the submission. I know them all, and they are new.
As for the trial data. You said there was another inquiry from a "real name". Why would NALSA tell you that? Were they looking for me?
Way too cozy, and defensive too.
ThinAirDesigns
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2008
- Messages
- 1,058
Originally Posted by JB
As is the norm for you, that is not true. This is a full time NASA aero engineer who has nothing whatsoever to do with our project (or any DDWFTTW project) and was reached with no help from us nor our knowledge.
100% true then -- 100% true now.
RCP reached Steve with no help nor knowledge from us and Steve had not a thing to do with our project before nor since.
JB
The discussion is not about DDWFTTW anymore. It's about reality denial on a much more basic level (how springs and spools behave).I notice that it has been a year since first post and there still seems to be an open discussion as to the veracity of the event in question.
Actually it's the other way around. The science works out fine and is known for a while. See references 58-60:I gather something cool and science-y was filmed, but the science still hasn't checked out? Please correct me if wrong.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sailing_faster_than_the_wind#cite_note-57
The question answered by the tests over the last 2 years, was if you can actually do it in reality.
100% true then -- 100% true now.
RCP reached Steve with no help nor knowledge from us and Steve had not a thing to do with our project before nor since.
JB
He says he did.
I've always wondered whether Humber believes that the quotes he posts actually support his position. I've never seen anyone who can sink himself with his own posts as much as this crackpot.
JB
Find evidence of the "air lever", the use of electrical models prior to the trials.
A mighty coincidence that Ames followed from that, and then the new claims appeared.
Hey look - humber found a post in which JB never denied knowing Steve Smith to prove JB denied knowing Steve Smith. Well done!
humber said:More manipulation. NALSA (one official at the trial) Community Centres and now Ames (one engineer). This cart is all about *****. Now, once again JB, had you earlier contact with the author of that email? Has he ever been engaged by you as an aerodynamics consultant?
JB said:
The electrical cart came from Smith, as did the entire idea. Prior to that, the cart screwed through the air prop tips move a greater distance through the air, and was powered by the ground.
Then:
Prop travels less distance through the air than the cart, wind powers the cart.
And why would NALSA have reason to think that any email address was not "genuine"?
ETA
Popular Science
"The wheels turn the car’s propeller, and the prop thrust pushes the car, which turns the wheels, Cavallaro says. It's not a perpetual motion machine, because the prop is also using wind energy as an external power source."
Comments:
"My "explanation" of how it works in the article is a bit unfortunate. That was intended to be my explanation as to why so many people think it should be impossible."
You forgot your lines.
Last edited:
ThinAirDesigns
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2008
- Messages
- 1,058
Originally Posted by humber
More manipulation. NALSA (one official at the trial) Community Centres and now Ames (one engineer). This cart is all about *****. Now, once again JB, had you earlier contact with the author of that email? Has he ever been engaged by you as an aerodynamics consultant?
Originally Posted by JB
No
JB
- Status
- Not open for further replies.