ThinAirDesigns is the perfect name for the ruse.

You know, like he pulled it out of thin air - or his ass.

lol


But, I'm not laughing at him. I'm laughing at the fools
who are gullible enough to believe in this or any other
pie-in-the-sky.


Wilbur Hubbard

On Sun, 1 Aug 2010 13:17:38 -0400, "Wilbur Hubbard"
wrote:


ThinAirDesigns is the perfect name for the ruse.

You know, like he pulled it out of thin air - or his ass.

lol


But, I'm not laughing at him. I'm laughing at the fools
who are gullible enough to believe in this or any other
pie-in-the-sky.


I've become convinced that this thing does what they say. There are a
lot of smart people involved in the effort and it is reasonably well
documented.

At an intuitive level it is not much different than an ice boat, which
we all know and accept as being able to go faster than the wind, some
multi-hulls also. Ice boats and multi-hulls can not go DDW faster
than TWS however because they rely on sails to capture and translate
the wind energy. The difference is in the propellor drive.

On Sun, 01 Aug 2010 13:41:29 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Sun, 1 Aug 2010 13:17:38 -0400, "Wilbur Hubbard"
wrote:


ThinAirDesigns is the perfect name for the ruse.

You know, like he pulled it out of thin air - or his ass.

lol


But, I'm not laughing at him. I'm laughing at the fools
who are gullible enough to believe in this or any other
pie-in-the-sky.


I've become convinced that this thing does what they say. There are a
lot of smart people involved in the effort and it is reasonably well
documented.

At an intuitive level it is not much different than an ice boat, which
we all know and accept as being able to go faster than the wind, some
multi-hulls also. Ice boats and multi-hulls can not go DDW faster
than TWS however because they rely on sails to capture and translate
the wind energy. The difference is in the propellor drive.

Never doubted it worked, since it's nothing to do with "perpetual
motion" and just uses a wind-powered feedback loop.
An explanation of that is here at 3:00 in.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LjLPPInzSzI

Now I don't understand any of it, but I had a bird on a pivot which
would endlessly bob up and down into a bowl of water.
All it needed was that water.
So I'm leery of saying something is impossible.
Building big bobbing birds hooked to generators all along the
shorelines of the country was my idea to solve the energy crisis.
But nobody did it.
And I don't think we'll find cars being powered like this one either.
But like the bobbing birds, it fun to watch and I'm glad it was done.
I'd like to hear how it can be put to useful practice.
Only thing useful about it so far is to make a fool of Wilbur and some
others who say "It's impossible."
I always like that. Reminds me of the Wright brothers and their
times, and ignorant folks with waxed handlebar moustaches.
Some people confuse defying the laws of physics with making those laws
work for you in unexpected ways.
The difference in "can do" and "can't do" attitudes really.

--Vic

"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 1 Aug 2010 13:17:38 -0400, "Wilbur Hubbard"
wrote:


ThinAirDesigns is the perfect name for the ruse.

You know, like he pulled it out of thin air - or his ass.

lol


But, I'm not laughing at him. I'm laughing at the fools
who are gullible enough to believe in this or any other
pie-in-the-sky.


I've become convinced that this thing does what they say. There are a
lot of smart people involved in the effort and it is reasonably well
documented.

At an intuitive level it is not much different than an ice boat, which
we all know and accept as being able to go faster than the wind, some
multi-hulls also. Ice boats and multi-hulls can not go DDW faster
than TWS however because they rely on sails to capture and translate
the wind energy. The difference is in the propellor drive.



Going faster than the wind - no problem. Ice boats do it all the time. Even
many sailboats do it.

Going faster than the wind directly downwind - big problem - it can't be
done with wind power alone by any machine - land, air or sea.


Wilbur Hubbard

On 8/1/2010 12:41 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Sun, 1 Aug 2010 13:17:38 -0400, "Wilbur Hubbard"
wrote:


ThinAirDesigns is the perfect name for the ruse.

You know, like he pulled it out of thin air - or his ass.

lol


But, I'm not laughing at him. I'm laughing at the fools
who are gullible enough to believe in this or any other
pie-in-the-sky.


I've become convinced that this thing does what they say. There are a
lot of smart people involved in the effort and it is reasonably well
documented.

At an intuitive level it is not much different than an ice boat, which
we all know and accept as being able to go faster than the wind, some
multi-hulls also. Ice boats and multi-hulls can not go DDW faster
than TWS however because they rely on sails to capture and translate
the wind energy. The difference is in the propellor drive.

I'm with you on this one

Brian W

"Wilbur Hubbard" wilburhubbard thefarm.invallid wrote:

"Wayne.B" waynebatrecdotboats hotmail.com wrote in message
news:32cb569d6eiud9v4m5a9608m086g4am8df 4ax.com...
On Sun, 1 Aug 2010 13:17:38 -0400, "Wilbur Hubbard"
wilburhubbard thefarm.invallid wrote:


ThinAirDesigns is the perfect name for the ruse.

You know, like he pulled it out of thin air - or his ass.

lol


But, I'm not laughing at him. I'm laughing at the fools who are
gullible enough to believe in this or any other pie-in-the-sky.


I've become convinced that this thing does what they say.
There are a lot of smart people involved in the effort and it
is reasonably well documented.

At an intuitive level it is not much different than an ice
boat, which we all know and accept as being able to go faster
than the wind, some multi-hulls also. Ice boats and
multi-hulls can not go DDW faster than TWS however because they
rely on sails to capture and translate the wind energy. The
difference is in the propellor drive.



Going faster than the wind - no problem. Ice boats do it all the
time. Even many sailboats do it.

Going faster than the wind directly downwind - big problem - it
can't be done with wind power alone by any machine - land, air
or sea.

Are you the nym-shifting ****turd poasting through dizum.com?

Path: news.astraweb.com!border5.newsrouter.astraweb.com!
news.glorb.com!news2.glorb.com!feeder.erje.net!new sfeed.straub-nv.de!
open-news-network.org!news2.arglkargh.de!news.dizum.com!sewe r-output!
mail2news
From: Anonymous cripto ecn.org
Newsgroups: rec.boats.cruising
Subject: ...
Message-Id: 20100801172737.872261A7AF9 www.ecn.org
Mail-To-News-Contact: abuse dizum.com
Organization: mail2news dizum.com
--






















Wilbur Hubbard





Path: news.astraweb.com!border5.newsrouter.astraweb.com!
news.glorb.com!news2.glorb.com!news.glorb.com!news-out.octanews.net!
indigo.octanews.net!auth.beige.octanews.com.POSTED !not-for-mail
From: "Wilbur Hubbard" wilburhubbard thefarm.invallid
Newsgroups: rec.boats.cruising
References: 4c55ac32$0$65828$892e0abb
auth.newsreader.octanews.com 32cb569d6eiud9v4m5a9608m086g4am8df
4ax.com
In-Reply-To: 32cb569d6eiud9v4m5a9608m086g4am8df 4ax.com
Subject: ThinAirDesigns
Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2010 16:01:13 -0400
Organization: Sea Org, Inc.
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Mail 6.0.6002.18197
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.0.6002.18197
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
Lines: 40
Message-ID: 4c55d28a$0$65834$892e0abb
auth.newsreader.octanews.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: 01 Aug 2010 15:01:15 CDT
X-Complaints-To: abuse octanews.net

John Doe wrote:
"Wilbur Hubbard" wilburhubbard thefarm.invallid wrote:

"Wayne.B" waynebatrecdotboats hotmail.com wrote in message
news:32cb569d6eiud9v4m5a9608m086g4am8df 4ax.com...
On Sun, 1 Aug 2010 13:17:38 -0400, "Wilbur Hubbard"
wilburhubbard thefarm.invallid wrote:

ThinAirDesigns is the perfect name for the ruse.


Grow up J Doe! If you don't have balls enough to post under your own
name, don't post. Also don't bother replying to this as I won't see it.
Gordon

Vic Smith wrote:
Wayne.B wrote:
I've become convinced that this thing does what they say.

Never doubted it worked [...] An explanation is here at 3:00 in.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LjLPPInzSzI

I think perhaps the best intuitive explanation is at
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1pSYALWQ-nI
(and similar videos) showing a model wheeled vehicle on
a running treadmill, making forward progress against the treadmill.

Now, this situation is identical to the full-sized vehicle
moving downwind exactly at windspeed. That is, in both cases,
there's zero apparent wind on the vehicle, and in both cases
the wheels are spinning. The treadmill under the stationary model
is just like the "moving ground" under the full-scale vehicle
travelling downwind at wind speed. You see that???
And now, those spinning wheels are used to power a propeller.
And since there's no apparent wind on the vehicle, any little push
from that propeller will start moving the vehicle forward. In the
treadmill case, the model begins making forward progress.
On the ground, the full-scale vehicle begins moving faster
than wind speed.
There's one potential little glitch -- the spinning wheels
do have some rolling friction with the ground. So the propeller's
forward push must be greater than the wheels' retarding frictional
force. Is that possible? That's a calculation you simply have
to do -- you can't just sit here and argue the outcome with words.
But it's not physically impossible, and clever engineering might
be able to accomplish it. And since we see the results in the videos,
I assume the calculations back that up.
How fast can the vehicles eventually move? To start with -- i.e.,
either on the treadmill or at downwind speed -- there's no apparent wind,
so there's nothing (besides rolling friction from the wheels) retarding
their additional forward acceleration. So any little forward push from
the propeller gets them started. But then they immediately begin to feel
an apparent headwind, and at some speed that headwind balances the
propeller's push, and that's the steady-state speed.
Finally, note that the propeller spins faster and thus pushes harder
as the vehicle speeds up, so you might be tempted to wonder if that
harder push continues defeating the headwind, letting the vehicle
continue to speed up, and up, etc. Common sense says "no", and
physics backs that up. If you double the groundspeed, you double
the wheels' rate of spin and, so, the propeller's rate of spin, which
more or less doubles the forward push.**[see footnote] That is,
propeller push is roughly linear with ground speed. But air resistance
goes roughly as the square of speed, and it therefore quadruples
as the propeller push doubles. So resistance eventually overtakes push,
which is the final speed the vehicle winds up travelling.
Again, you need detailed calculations to work out all these numbers,
but that's the overall picture of how it goes.

**[footnote] You might hope you could just change the wheel/propeller
gear ratio to increase propeller speed more and more. The problem here
is that extra torque comes from wheel/ground friction which would have
to increase, and which would be an additional retarding force defeating
any additional push from the faster propeller.
--
John Forkosh ( mailto: where j=john and f=forkosh )