Re:The Tethered Uni-Rotor Network: Eternal Flight UAV
by adrianmonk on Tuesday February 19, 2019 @11:52AM
(#19200358)
It probably wasn't a good choice for them to use the word "tethered" in the name.
It might not be incorrect, but tethered means you are connected to something. In this case, that something is the aircraft itself. Self is not the first thing most people are going to think of when they hear the word tethered. Especially since, as you point out, there are already aircraft that are tethered to the ground.
Re:The Tethered Uni-Rotor Network: Eternal Flight UAV
by grahn on Tuesday February 19, 2019 @11:31AM
(#19200131)
It's not tethered to the ground. It's a group of rotating "wings" tethered to each other in the centre, wherein the centrifugal force of the rotation give structural stability. That way they get away with using less structural material, which means more of the weight can be batteries or fuel.
Re:The Tethered Uni-Rotor Network: Eternal Flight UAV
by rtkwe on Tuesday February 19, 2019 @12:54PM
(#19201060)
These plan to operate much higher at 60k feet and won't be tethered to the ground. The additional height will give them better coverage than the radar aerostats you mention. I think removing the tether might be required for them to be used a lot because the tether seems like it'd a) weigh a lot requiring much larger stats and b) if they're dense enough the tethers could pose a danger to air traffic (at the very least you'd have to route planes to avoid them). Both of those get worse as the stat operates higher and the forces on the cable get higher. It may become an issue where the increased strength required increases the cable weight beyond the point where an cabled aerostat becomes viable.
The Department of Customs and Border Protection already operates a fleet of tethered airships. These seem to be a much simpler solution to "eternal flight."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tethered_Aerostat_Radar_System