I studied the Fletner Rotor ship in a fluid dynamics class at university. Took far too much power for the propulsion benefit it produced. Slotted wings such as used on AC45 america's cup catamarans are far more efficient and have fantastic ability to modulate lift.
If you want to see something cool check out upwind wind-turbine powered race cars: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wrro4MxNr7Y&feature=related Best they can do directly upwind is 65% of wind speed (ie 6.5kts in a 10 kt wind) On 25 June 2012 18:27, Hoyt A. Stearns Jr. <[email protected]> wrote: > Also consider circulation controlled airfoils: > > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turbosail> > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Jones Beene [mailto:[email protected]] > > Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 8:50 AM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: RE: [Vo]:Free Shipping > > > > From: Robert Lynn > > > > Wind turbines on the ship would probably make more sense, > as > > at least they will work in any wind direction (even travelling straight > > into the wind), as well as in port. > > > > I agree that wind turbines make way more sense than sails or even kites, > > but they too are not cost-competitive will oil at $100 or less. > > > > In fact oil would need to go above $200 before wind makes sense in terms > > of no-subsidy operation. However ! that will happen, no question ... and > > "sooner-rather-than-later," given the power and greed of OPEC/Big-Oil. > > > > There is a very-windy test area for turbines nearby, and they have every > > type imaginable to cross-compare. I haven't seen the firm data, but from > > having visited there numerous times in all wind conditions, and talking > to > > the techies - there is clearly one superior design, and it would be ideal > > for ships. It always seems to be doing the best especially in light wind. > > > > It is vertical axis, but with straight and surprisingly thin airfoils. > The > > curved airfoils do far worse. The one pictured below is similar; and it > is > > fairly low cost. In coastal areas, this device blows solar panels away, > so > > to speak, in terms of fast pay-back. The noise is inescapable ... but not > > all that unpleasant (the sound of $aving$ - as they say). > > > > <http://news.cnet.com/8301-11128_3-9956965-54.html> > > > > However, subsidies are needed with this one too, in 2012 and beyond. > > > > But the underlying premise for wind and solar, in general, is that oil > > will reach $200/barrel within a decade. At that time, the early adopters > > will look like prophets - unless LENR comes along first. > > > > Jones > > > > >
