On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 9:19 AM, Stephen A. Lawrence <[email protected]> wrote:
> I'm also pretty amazed at the concept of solar powering the things. If > they really draw 5 kw (as per the last paragraph), well, that's impressive > on the one hand (7 horsepower or thereabouts is not much for keeping a > plane up) but on the other hand, the solar panels need to put out more than > twice that much if it's going to stay up 24 hours, which means they're > looking at a minimum of something like 15 square meters of solar panels, > assuming something like 50% efficiency (and assuming it's high noon for 12 > hours every day). That sounds like a lot. > In addition to technical considerations, there are two social considerations: (1) it might be unnerving for some (most?) populations to have a plane perpetually aloft that is owned by a private company that could be carrying out reconnaissance or collecting data for its own purposes; (2) in unstable areas those planes probably look like excellent target practice for anyone with some stingers lying around. Eric
