|
Server : Apache/2.4.62 System : FreeBSD fbsdweb2.web.rcn.net 14.1-RELEASE FreeBSD 14.1-RELEASE releng/14.1-n267679-10e31f0946d8 GENERIC amd64 User : www ( 80) PHP Version : 8.3.8 Disable Function : NONE Directory : /domains/daveculp/speedsl/KTwork/ |
Upload File : |
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN"> <HTML> <HEAD> <META NAME="GENERATOR" Content="Symantec Visual Page 1.0.2"> <META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html;CHARSET=iso-8859-1"> <TITLE>KiteTug</TITLE> </HEAD> <BODY BGCOLOR="#FFFFFF"> <P>This is a long, slow loading page, so please bear with me...<BR> <BR> <A HREF="KT2.html">Kite Photos</A><BR> <A HREF="KT3.html">Freighter photos & drawings</A><BR> <A HREF="KT4.html">Logos (coming)</A><BR> <BR> <IMG SRC="KTfront.gif" WIDTH="288" HEIGHT="150" ALIGN="BOTTOM" BORDER="0"><IMG SRC="KToverhead.gif" WIDTH="235" HEIGHT="183" ALIGN="BOTTOM" BORDER="0" HSPACE="20"><BR> <BR> OK, we'll start right off with the conceptual. These will make more sense with the other drawings, and the photos. The freighter in this sketch would be about 300 ft long and 60-70 ft wide, for the "small" 15ksf kite (250' span, 65' chord; about 15' max thickness of ribs--"billows" out to maybe 18' between ribs). I've drawn this kite with a "cross bridle" but much simplified. This is the bridle used on the Chevron kites (labeled, below), and are much favored by their designer. I don't want you to use these in the illustrations, however (sorry--didn't think of it until they were drawn). I want you to draw the more efficient (*far* fewer risers, or lines in the bridle) and much prettier "catenary" bridle. They are illustrated below. (I can see that I've got the perspective, and the angles, let alone the tether line length all wrong, in the right-hand sketch.)<BR> <BR> To orient you, the tiny "knob" just above the "100 ft" arrow is the pod, or KiteTug control module. It looks just like a Cigarette racer. but with a full width house, to maximize interior volume:<BR> <IMG SRC="KT%20boat.gif" WIDTH="268" HEIGHT="233" ALIGN="LEFT" BORDER="0">I don't know why this shape makes sense to me; it just always has. It could as easily be a catamaran, or even a barge. The only time it will be in the water is when something goes wrong--normally the kite only "grounds" when over land. If it has to put down at sea, it is because the Kite has problems, or they've run out of helium. It *will* be required to sail, on its own right on rare occasions. Should the kite be destroyed, it can deploy a second, smaller kite and sail home. Likely, this pod will become a barge-ish catamaran-ish thing; cheap to build with lots of volume for its weight and cost. I thought the cigarette shape looks sexier, plus the KiteTug concept is all about speed, when not actually attached to a tow ; thus even self-rescue wants to happen fast (time is money--you don't see 747's just sitting around, do you?). If you have thoughts (or something already rendered), I'm open to suggestions.<BR> <BR> Note that I've got this "limpet" attached to the port side. This is the "Big Dog" (as opposed to Didier Costes' "Chien de Mer;" I suspect "big dog" sounds ugly in French). It is shaded in the section and deck plan views. The bigger hull's shape is cut-away (thus asymetrical) so that it fits tightly. The Big Dog is the hapa "unit" the KiteTug deploys, when it is deadheading (no ship to tow). Of course it's a Proa ;-). I did not draw a sketch of the KiteTug deadheading; you'd just substitute the Big Dog for the freighter. Yes, the fin *is* nearly 10' chord, and 12' or more deep; it opposes 15,000 sf of sail. Likely, this is still too small, but then, it would never carry all the thrust the kite is capable of. The Big Dog is analogous not only to Costes' Sea Dogs, but also to Haagedoorn's ama/hapa:<BR clear = "left"> <BR> <BR> <IMG SRC="hapa1.gif" WIDTH="244" HEIGHT="241" ALIGN="MIDDLE" BORDER="0"><IMG SRC="hapa2.gif" WIDTH="201" HEIGHT="169" ALIGN="MIDDLE" BORDER="0" HSPACE="20"><BR> Haagedoorn's original hapa. Note the curved daggerboard and the vestigial ama. Because the ama was fixed (by the cross beams), this boat didn't need more surface sensing than the curved board. On a free-flying hapa, the curve alone is *supposed* to reference the surface, but in fact, it lets the hapa "jump" and "hook." I want to avoid this, so have the Big Dog with a proper hull. I don't envision this hull needing ballast, but it *will* have to be very strongly built, even though only 45' long and 3-4' beam. This puppy will need to drive through flotsam--and the occasional whale--at 35-45 kts, and will carry huge forces, from the fin.<BR> <BR> OK, to some kites. These two drawings are "Sputniks," a popular kite and very much like what I envision a KiteTug to use (Note the "catenary bridle" on the pink one--more about this below):<BR> <BR> <IMG SRC="Sput.jpg" WIDTH="178" HEIGHT="268" ALIGN="BOTTOM" BORDER="0" HSPACE="20"><IMG SRC="Sput2.jpg" WIDTH="361" HEIGHT="344" ALIGN="BOTTOM" BORDER="0"><BR> <BR> Both these kites are traveling right-to-left--yes, that's the *trailing* edge you see, on the pink kite. OK, here is an actual <A HREF="Sputdwg.gif">building drawing</A>, for a Sputink. This page is getting too big, plus I wanted this drawing to be as large as possible, should you want to print it, or scale from it. The link goes to the dwg as a stand-alone. Print it half size.<BR> <BR> <IMG SRC="US1.gif" WIDTH="247" HEIGHT="369" ALIGN="RIGHT" BORDER="0">Here's a <A HREF="KT2.html">page full of photos</A>, mostly of Andrew Beattie's Chevrons. They're similar to a Sputnik, except, a) the taper's different (the "Chevron" graphic accentuates this), b) the "curvature" is different; the Sput (and most kites like this) are arc of a circle, while the Chevrons are more "tented," and c) The Chevron is a better flying kite than the Sputnik, and it's likely the KiteTug will eventually carry something like it. However, the Sput will be easier to draw and render, I suspect, plus people seem to expect this shape. Parapentes look very much like this, too--parapente is a soft-wing ultralight glider, or "flying parachute". You can see what a mess the cross-bridle makes (Andrew is actually testing a "reefing" bridle in these--even more lines, if you can believe it.)<BR> <BR> Last, here's the cover of Ultimate Sailing I, both to show you what the cover of an AYRS book looks like (I think you have this, but would rather show it to you than miss it), and also to show the relative look of a hapa flying. Of course, the KiteTug will have a far higher aspect ratio to its kite, plus it will carry its "payload" higher off the water. (Perhaps this is another reason the pod needs to be boat-shaped. What if it gets dunked, while towing a freighter at speed? Towing speeds will only be in the 12-18 kt range, but it could be a bad thing, if the pod's not seaworthy). Please note: I've shown the "Pod" as being suspended about the same distance below the kite canopy as its span; this is shorter than this drawing, of course, and very much shorter than any kite flys (usually). However, parapentes typically fly with their pilots suspended about this distance below their canopies. Also, parapentes use generally much higher aspect ratio than kites (~8 or 10:1, where an extreme kite is 6 or 7:1). This has to do with the relatively far higher pull in a kite's lines than on a parapente's. This also translates to far higher loading per square foot of wing surface. The more extreme types just can't hold their shape. </BODY> </HTML>