Skip to main content

TR Memescape

  • TalkRational: you owe it to yourself to at least view the end result of a forum run nearly on your own retarded principles

Topic: Direct Down Wind Faster Than The Wind (Read 24000 times) previous topic - next topic

spork, Michael C and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.
Re: Direct Down Wind Faster Than The Wind
Reply #1975
@Spork; Do you recall the name of the guy from Christchurch NZ you sparred with back in '09 at JREF? The one who made the circular track and ran a prop driven wheel on it? He also posted a video of the test he constructed. Remember? Give me a name and I'll find those videos. Heh, and happy christmas.  :smug: 

Re: Direct Down Wind Faster Than The Wind
Reply #1976
I was thinking, instead of a treadmill, maybe the cart could run on a round revolving platform like a merry-go-round, Just bend it slightly so it runs in a circle. That would eliminate the problem of the cart running off the end of the treadmill all the time.

Go back to page 1:
http://talkrational.org/index.php/topic,24.msg1863.html#msg1863

I hesitate to ask the question, but is there any chance that device is loosing traction, vibrating or skipping along on that revolving wheel thing?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=38&v=2JL_7cx7lnc



All you need to do is increase the speed enough and the wheels are guaranteed to start slipping at some point.
That is when the "cart" will make headway.
"When a true genius appears in this world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him." (Jonathan Swift)

Re: Direct Down Wind Faster Than The Wind
Reply #1977

Any loss of traction will result in less acceleration of the device,

The counter weight is to keep the device from being off balance, nothing more

Oh yeah, right. I've heard that one before. Heinz Hershold and I know better than to fall for that old yarn, don't we Heinz?


I know you are joking but yes, I know better than to fall for that yarn, and YOU will know better when you make the HFR video.

Of course, the Cargo Cult will NEVER know better, even after they see the wheels losing traction when the cart advances, and when the wheels do not lose traction (at lower belt speed) the cart goes back with the belt, but slowly.

It will all become crystal clear with the HFR video.
  • Last Edit: December 22, 2017, 02:27:45 AM by Heinz Hershold
"When a true genius appears in this world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him." (Jonathan Swift)

Re: Direct Down Wind Faster Than The Wind
Reply #1978
OK, Heinz has just corrected me on something...
HOLY CHRIST - you're kidding me!?

No worries spork. I did get the gear ratio correct but I had the order reversed, so I'm still an idiot, but not a CRACKPOT!
"When a true genius appears in this world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him." (Jonathan Swift)

Re: Direct Down Wind Faster Than The Wind
Reply #1979
OK, Heinz has just corrected me on something.  I never opened the gearbox and somehow had heard the ratio was 1:1 and it looked close at a casual look.  Now I measured it carefully and it is in fact about a 1.23 gearing.

But the ratio is reversed from what Heinz notes.  The wheels turn 1.23 revolution for each 1 turn of the prop shaft.  So the overall cart advance ratio is about 0.8/1.23 = 0.65.

A cart advance ratio from wheel to prop under 1.0 is required for downwind performance I am pretty sure.  Ratio of 1.0 will likely result in a cart with will neither go downwind faster than the wind nor go upwind at all.  An advance ratio of over 1.0 is required for a cart to drive upwind.

Oh sorry. I was going by the video. There he says to put the big gear (16 teeth) on the propeller shaft and the small gear (13 teeth) on the axle. Your GB has it the other way?

Nevermind. I got confused. The wheels drive the propeller, not the other way around. I will leave you guys alone now.
No, the gears are as you say, larger gear on the prop shaft.  Wheels make 1.23 turns for each 1 turn of the prop.

And regarding going in a circle, with no differential on the axle this will make the wheels scrub, causing friction and reducing performance.  Unless slipping is what you want...:)

Yes, that's what I was referring to when I said 4 wheels would present a problem. The cart would need steering and a differential gear box to work. All of the devices running on a circular track use two wheels for that reason.
"When a true genius appears in this world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him." (Jonathan Swift)

Re: Direct Down Wind Faster Than The Wind
Reply #1980
Any loss of traction will result in less acceleration of the device,

And you know this how?
"When a true genius appears in this world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him." (Jonathan Swift)

Re: Direct Down Wind Faster Than The Wind
Reply #1981
Any loss of traction will result in less acceleration of the device,

And you know this how?

I think of all the H's nonsense and stupidity over the years I find hyev's idea that a cart which loses traction could perform better than a cart which does not the most fascinating. It would be truly incredible how many over unity schemes the H's have proposed to explain the cart's function regardless of how they misunderstood its mechanisms. The irony of the fact that in their ignorance they think ddwfttw itself is over unity is what makes their flailing so hilarious.

Re: Direct Down Wind Faster Than The Wind
Reply #1982
In the purely hypothetical world where a HFR video shows 'hopping and skipping' per the Heinz theory (as unlikely as it is) there will form a new cult. This new dubfttabhas ( direct up belt faster than the air by hopping and skipping) cult will assert that a vehicle powered only by the treadmill and still air can go direct upbelt faster than the air.

Argument will persist indefinitely as to whether this represents ddwfttw.

Spork and JB will be accused of secretly initiating seismic activity during the BUFC testing.

Re: Direct Down Wind Faster Than The Wind
Reply #1983
Any loss of traction will result in less acceleration of the device,

And you know this how?

I think of all the H's nonsense and stupidity over the years I find hyev's idea that a cart which loses traction could perform better than a cart which does not the most fascinating. It would be truly incredible how many over unity schemes the H's have proposed to explain the cart's function regardless of how they misunderstood its mechanisms. The irony of the fact that in their ignorance they think ddwfttw itself is over unity is what makes their flailing so hilarious.


What is really so hilarious is the Cargo Cultists do not understand how something on a vibratory conveyor can ONLY advance by LOSING TRACTION.
"When a true genius appears in this world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him." (Jonathan Swift)

Re: Direct Down Wind Faster Than The Wind
Reply #1984
In the purely hypothetical world where a HFR video shows 'hopping and skipping' per the Heinz theory (as unlikely as it is) there will form a new cult. This new dubfttabhas ( direct up belt faster than the air by hopping and skipping) cult will assert that a vehicle powered only by the treadmill and still air can go direct upbelt faster than the air.

Argument will persist indefinitely as to whether this represents ddwfttw.

Spork and JB will be accused of secretly initiating seismic activity during the BUFC testing.

Nothing hypothetical about it. By now, even the hardest core cargo cultist KNOWS the cart advances on the treadmill ONLY by losing traction periodically. All that is left is for the many excuses to be made why a HFR video was not shown at least ten years ago, and this ridiculous claim was allowed to flourish on the Internet.

As for the outdoor tests, it is patently obvious the BUFC was never travelling directly down wind, and the wind was much, much greater than the claimed 10 mph! So, 28 mph in a 25 mph wind, at an angle of 40 Degrees or so, is nothing to crow about! Just a fantasy created by a dupe and a dunce for the benefit of a little-known wind energy company out in California, that has yet to produce one commercially viable product, looking for Green energy grant money from Uncle Sam.

No argument will persist. The argument will be OVER and done with. DDWFTTW is and always was, a FARCE and a SCAM.
"When a true genius appears in this world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him." (Jonathan Swift)

Re: Direct Down Wind Faster Than The Wind
Reply #1985
OK, Heinz has just corrected me on something.  I never opened the gearbox and somehow had heard the ratio was 1:1 and it looked close at a casual look.  Now I measured it carefully and it is in fact about a 1.23 gearing.

But the ratio is reversed from what Heinz notes.  The wheels turn 1.23 revolution for each 1 turn of the prop shaft.  So the overall cart advance ratio is about 0.8/1.23 = 0.65.

A cart advance ratio from wheel to prop under 1.0 is required for downwind performance I am pretty sure.  Ratio of 1.0 will likely result in a cart with will neither go downwind faster than the wind nor go upwind at all.  An advance ratio of over 1.0 is required for a cart to drive upwind.

Oh sorry. I was going by the video. There he says to put the big gear (16 teeth) on the propeller shaft and the small gear (13 teeth) on the axle. Your GB has it the other way?

Nevermind. I got confused. The wheels drive the propeller, not the other way around. I will leave you guys alone now.
No, the gears are as you say, larger gear on the prop shaft.  Wheels make 1.23 turns for each 1 turn of the prop.

And regarding going in a circle, with no differential on the axle this will make the wheels scrub, causing friction and reducing performance.  Unless slipping is what you want...:)

Yes, that's what I was referring to when I said 4 wheels would present a problem. The cart would need steering and a differential gear box to work. All of the devices running on a circular track use two wheels for that reason.

I was thinking something literally as big as a merry-go-round. or bigger

I don't think this would be any different then when the cart needs a slight adjustment or bend to keep it from going off the side of the treadmill. I'm talking a typical three wheel cart as in the build videos. The cart still advances although veering off to the side.


  • F X
  • The one and only
Re: Direct Down Wind Faster Than The Wind
Reply #1986
The circular wind tunnel also showed a cart will travel ddwfttw. No skipping or hopping required.

I too could not find the YT, but I remember watching it.
"If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous he will not bite you. This is the principal difference between a dog and man."
― Mark Twain 🔭

Re: Direct Down Wind Faster Than The Wind
Reply #1987
OK, Heinz has just corrected me on something.  I never opened the gearbox and somehow had heard the ratio was 1:1 and it looked close at a casual look.  Now I measured it carefully and it is in fact about a 1.23 gearing.

But the ratio is reversed from what Heinz notes.  The wheels turn 1.23 revolution for each 1 turn of the prop shaft.  So the overall cart advance ratio is about 0.8/1.23 = 0.65.

A cart advance ratio from wheel to prop under 1.0 is required for downwind performance I am pretty sure.  Ratio of 1.0 will likely result in a cart with will neither go downwind faster than the wind nor go upwind at all.  An advance ratio of over 1.0 is required for a cart to drive upwind.

Oh sorry. I was going by the video. There he says to put the big gear (16 teeth) on the propeller shaft and the small gear (13 teeth) on the axle. Your GB has it the other way?

Nevermind. I got confused. The wheels drive the propeller, not the other way around. I will leave you guys alone now.
No, the gears are as you say, larger gear on the prop shaft.  Wheels make 1.23 turns for each 1 turn of the prop.

And regarding going in a circle, with no differential on the axle this will make the wheels scrub, causing friction and reducing performance.  Unless slipping is what you want...:)

Yes, that's what I was referring to when I said 4 wheels would present a problem. The cart would need steering and a differential gear box to work. All of the devices running on a circular track use two wheels for that reason.

I was thinking something literally as big as a merry-go-round. or bigger

I don't think this would be any different then when the cart needs a slight adjustment or bend to keep it from going off the side of the treadmill. I'm talking a typical three wheel cart as in the build videos. The cart still advances although veering off to the side.



It's good that you noticed the veering off to the side. That is another indication that the cart does not have full traction. In some of the videos you can see the cart being poked backwards and forwards and sideways, and it slides around as if it is on ice! A sure sign something is wrong with the claim of full traction.
"When a true genius appears in this world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him." (Jonathan Swift)

Re: Direct Down Wind Faster Than The Wind
Reply #1988
The circular wind tunnel also showed a cart will travel ddwfttw. No skipping or hopping required.

I too could not find the YT, but I remember watching it.

Circular wind tunnel?

Anyway, how would you know the cart was not skipping and hopping?
"When a true genius appears in this world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him." (Jonathan Swift)

Re: Direct Down Wind Faster Than The Wind
Reply #1989
In the purely hypothetical world where a HFR video shows 'hopping and skipping' per the Heinz theory (as unlikely as it is) there will form a new cult. This new dubfttabhas ( direct up belt faster than the air by hopping and skipping) cult will assert that a vehicle powered only by the treadmill and still air can go direct upbelt faster than the air.

Argument will persist indefinitely as to whether this represents ddwfttw.

Spork and JB will be accused of secretly initiating seismic activity during the BUFC testing.

Nothing hypothetical about it. By now, even the hardest core cargo cultist KNOWS the cart advances on the treadmill ONLY by losing traction periodically. All that is left is for the many excuses to be made why a HFR video was not shown at least ten years ago, and this ridiculous claim was allowed to flourish on the Internet.

As for the outdoor tests, it is patently obvious the BUFC was never travelling directly down wind, and the wind was much, much greater than the claimed 10 mph! So, 28 mph in a 25 mph wind, at an angle of 40 Degrees or so, is nothing to crow about! Just a fantasy created by a dupe and a dunce for the benefit of a little-known wind energy company out in California, that has yet to produce one commercially viable product, looking for Green energy grant money from Uncle Sam.

No argument will persist. The argument will be OVER and done with. DDWFTTW is and always was, a FARCE and a SCAM.


I suppose it could be said that a runner can only run by periodically "loosing traction" in that with each stride his feet must certainly come off the ground. The same might be said about a wheel, looking close enough, at high enough magnification or something, maybe, But seriously?

In general the cart (three wheeler in the various treadmill videos) propeller is tilted so that it would tend to force the cart down into the treadmill if anything. Also in the video with the string holding the cart back and also DOWN to some degree, but the wheel in the "merry-go-round" video looks like a perfectly smooth rail spinning without the slightest vibration and the propeller is ridding on the rail with a rather large - wide friction wheel. It does not look like there is ANY play whatsoever in the bar attached to the propeller thing. (Unless the bar is balanced somehow so that it can rock or pivot which it doesn't look like it to me) There is no chance of the wheel jumping or hopping off the rail to ever eliminate friction so it can lunge forward periodically. The rail is as smooth as glass and spinning with zero apparent vibration.

I'm guessing the "counterbalance" is no such thing at all, but simply a rod allowing for adjustment so as to center the friction wheel over the spinning rail and serves no other purpose and is completely unnecessary other than for the initial setup. The traction of the wheel on the rail appears to be quite steady and positive at all times. The acceleration is smooth, not at all jumpy or irregular as I should think it would be if due to "slippage" of some sort.

And yes I was kidding, but, a theory is a theory. Maybe the thing IS just balanced in the middle and can rock like a seesaw for all I know, and maybe the rod thing really is for counterbalancing so the thing rides on the rail with a feather touch so it can loose friction, BUT I VERY MUCH DOUBT IT. Anyway, a bit of investigation into the actual construction of the thing should settle the matter.



Re: Direct Down Wind Faster Than The Wind
Reply #1990
OK, Heinz has just corrected me on something.  I never opened the gearbox and somehow had heard the ratio was 1:1 and it looked close at a casual look.  Now I measured it carefully and it is in fact about a 1.23 gearing.

But the ratio is reversed from what Heinz notes.  The wheels turn 1.23 revolution for each 1 turn of the prop shaft.  So the overall cart advance ratio is about 0.8/1.23 = 0.65.

A cart advance ratio from wheel to prop under 1.0 is required for downwind performance I am pretty sure.  Ratio of 1.0 will likely result in a cart with will neither go downwind faster than the wind nor go upwind at all.  An advance ratio of over 1.0 is required for a cart to drive upwind.

Oh sorry. I was going by the video. There he says to put the big gear (16 teeth) on the propeller shaft and the small gear (13 teeth) on the axle. Your GB has it the other way?

Nevermind. I got confused. The wheels drive the propeller, not the other way around. I will leave you guys alone now.
No, the gears are as you say, larger gear on the prop shaft.  Wheels make 1.23 turns for each 1 turn of the prop.

And regarding going in a circle, with no differential on the axle this will make the wheels scrub, causing friction and reducing performance.  Unless slipping is what you want...:)

Yes, that's what I was referring to when I said 4 wheels would present a problem. The cart would need steering and a differential gear box to work. All of the devices running on a circular track use two wheels for that reason.

I was thinking something literally as big as a merry-go-round. or bigger

I don't think this would be any different then when the cart needs a slight adjustment or bend to keep it from going off the side of the treadmill. I'm talking a typical three wheel cart as in the build videos. The cart still advances although veering off to the side.



It's good that you noticed the veering off to the side. That is another indication that the cart does not have full traction. In some of the videos you can see the cart being poked backwards and forwards and sideways, and it slides around as if it is on ice! A sure sign something is wrong with the claim of full traction.


After I build one and try it out, I think It should become very obvious what is going on, probably without the need for a high frame rate video, but we shall see. In the mean time I still don't rule out there may be some invisible string involved.

Re: Direct Down Wind Faster Than The Wind
Reply #1991
In the purely hypothetical world where a HFR video shows 'hopping and skipping' per the Heinz theory (as unlikely as it is) there will form a new cult. This new dubfttabhas ( direct up belt faster than the air by hopping and skipping) cult will assert that a vehicle powered only by the treadmill and still air can go direct upbelt faster than the air.

Argument will persist indefinitely as to whether this represents ddwfttw.

Spork and JB will be accused of secretly initiating seismic activity during the BUFC testing.

Nothing hypothetical about it. By now, even the hardest core cargo cultist KNOWS the cart advances on the treadmill ONLY by losing traction periodically. All that is left is for the many excuses to be made why a HFR video was not shown at least ten years ago, and this ridiculous claim was allowed to flourish on the Internet.

As for the outdoor tests, it is patently obvious the BUFC was never travelling directly down wind, and the wind was much, much greater than the claimed 10 mph! So, 28 mph in a 25 mph wind, at an angle of 40 Degrees or so, is nothing to crow about! Just a fantasy created by a dupe and a dunce for the benefit of a little-known wind energy company out in California, that has yet to produce one commercially viable product, looking for Green energy grant money from Uncle Sam.

No argument will persist. The argument will be OVER and done with. DDWFTTW is and always was, a FARCE and a SCAM.


I suppose it could be said that a runner can only run by periodically "loosing traction" in that with each stride his feet must certainly come off the ground. The same might be said about a wheel, looking close enough, at high enough magnification or something, maybe, But seriously?

In general the cart (three wheeler in the various treadmill videos) propeller is tilted so that it would tend to force the cart down into the treadmill if anything. Also in the video with the string holding the cart back and also DOWN to some degree, but the wheel in the "merry-go-round" video looks like a perfectly smooth rail spinning without the slightest vibration and the propeller is ridding on the rail with a rather large - wide friction wheel. It does not look like there is ANY play whatsoever in the bar attached to the propeller thing. (Unless the bar is balanced somehow so that it can rock or pivot which it doesn't look like it to me) There is no chance of the wheel jumping or hopping off the rail to ever eliminate friction so it can lunge forward periodically. The rail is as smooth as glass and spinning with zero apparent vibration.

I'm guessing the "counterbalance" is no such thing at all, but simply a rod allowing for adjustment so as to center the friction wheel over the spinning rail and serves no other purpose and is completely unnecessary other than for the initial setup. The traction of the wheel on the rail appears to be quite steady and positive at all times. The acceleration is smooth, not at all jumpy or irregular as I should think it would be if due to "slippage" of some sort.

And yes I was kidding, but, a theory is a theory. Maybe the thing IS just balanced in the middle and can rock like a seesaw for all I know, and maybe the rod thing really is for counterbalancing so the thing rides on the rail with a feather touch so it can loose friction, BUT I VERY MUCH DOUBT IT. Anyway, a bit of investigation into the actual construction of the thing should settle the matter.




The type of loss of traction that I am talking about can not be seen with a standard frame rate video. That is why a HFR video is required.

I agree the circular wheel thing does look smooth, but at HFR it may not be.

But, there are other problems with the circular wheel setup that I think invalidate it. That crossbar support will offer resistance to being moved with the wheel and cause the cart to slow enough where the thrust can reverse the direction.

Also, the rotating wheel is a non-inertial frame so we cannot apply a Galilean transform in any case.

The treadmill is actually a better test, in my opinion.

  • Last Edit: December 22, 2017, 09:35:35 AM by Heinz Hershold
"When a true genius appears in this world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him." (Jonathan Swift)

Re: Direct Down Wind Faster Than The Wind
Reply #1992
OK, Heinz has just corrected me on something.  I never opened the gearbox and somehow had heard the ratio was 1:1 and it looked close at a casual look.  Now I measured it carefully and it is in fact about a 1.23 gearing.

But the ratio is reversed from what Heinz notes.  The wheels turn 1.23 revolution for each 1 turn of the prop shaft.  So the overall cart advance ratio is about 0.8/1.23 = 0.65.

A cart advance ratio from wheel to prop under 1.0 is required for downwind performance I am pretty sure.  Ratio of 1.0 will likely result in a cart with will neither go downwind faster than the wind nor go upwind at all.  An advance ratio of over 1.0 is required for a cart to drive upwind.

Oh sorry. I was going by the video. There he says to put the big gear (16 teeth) on the propeller shaft and the small gear (13 teeth) on the axle. Your GB has it the other way?

Nevermind. I got confused. The wheels drive the propeller, not the other way around. I will leave you guys alone now.
No, the gears are as you say, larger gear on the prop shaft.  Wheels make 1.23 turns for each 1 turn of the prop.

And regarding going in a circle, with no differential on the axle this will make the wheels scrub, causing friction and reducing performance.  Unless slipping is what you want...:)

Yes, that's what I was referring to when I said 4 wheels would present a problem. The cart would need steering and a differential gear box to work. All of the devices running on a circular track use two wheels for that reason.

I was thinking something literally as big as a merry-go-round. or bigger

I don't think this would be any different then when the cart needs a slight adjustment or bend to keep it from going off the side of the treadmill. I'm talking a typical three wheel cart as in the build videos. The cart still advances although veering off to the side.



It's good that you noticed the veering off to the side. That is another indication that the cart does not have full traction. In some of the videos you can see the cart being poked backwards and forwards and sideways, and it slides around as if it is on ice! A sure sign something is wrong with the claim of full traction.


After I build one and try it out, I think It should become very obvious what is going on, probably without the need for a high frame rate video, but we shall see. In the mean time I still don't rule out there may be some invisible string involved.


OK. I look forward to your efforts and much appreciated also.
"When a true genius appears in this world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him." (Jonathan Swift)

Re: Direct Down Wind Faster Than The Wind
Reply #1993
Quote
"... for the benefit of a little-known wind energy company out in California, that has yet to produce one commercially viable product, looking for Green energy grant money from Uncle Sam."

What's that about? Making vague, unsupported insinuations doesn't particularly make your case. There is nothing wrong or improper about seeking government grant money IMO, and your case against the cart working has no real support, as far as I can see. Just curious. I could use a grant to work on my Tesla-Vuilleumier ambient heat engine contraption.

  • MikeB
Re: Direct Down Wind Faster Than The Wind
Reply #1994
(Replying to Spork, I'm out of it after some surgery and probably missed a page)

Hahaha, I do admit I had not check the gearbox ratio carefully!  "Props" to Heinz for that!

Re: Direct Down Wind Faster Than The Wind
Reply #1995
@Spork; Do you recall the name of the guy from Christchurch NZ you sparred with back in '09 at JREF?
I remember the guy, and the experiment, but not the name.

Re: Direct Down Wind Faster Than The Wind
Reply #1996
@Spork; Do you recall the name of the guy from Christchurch NZ you sparred with back in '09 at JREF?
I remember the guy, and the experiment, but not the name.

Bummer. I recall there were some very interesting discussions about his videos, and many points made quite relevant to the idea of circular tracks instead of treadmills. What I don't remember is what you and a few others had a falling out with him about, and his user name.

Thanks anyway spork, and if anyone else here knows who we're talking about let me know.

Re: Direct Down Wind Faster Than The Wind
Reply #1997
Quote
"... for the benefit of a little-known wind energy company out in California, that has yet to produce one commercially viable product, looking for Green energy grant money from Uncle Sam."

What's that about? Making vague, unsupported insinuations doesn't particularly make your case. There is nothing wrong or improper about seeking government grant money IMO, and your case against the cart working has no real support, as far as I can see. Just curious. I could use a grant to work on my Tesla-Vuilleumier ambient heat engine contraption.

You are absolutely right. Just ignore that comment.
"When a true genius appears in this world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him." (Jonathan Swift)

Re: Direct Down Wind Faster Than The Wind
Reply #1998
@Spork; Do you recall the name of the guy from Christchurch NZ you sparred with back in '09 at JREF?
I remember the guy, and the experiment, but not the name.

Bummer. I recall there were some very interesting discussions about his videos, and many points made quite relevant to the idea of circular tracks instead of treadmills. What I don't remember is what you and a few others had a falling out with him about, and his user name.

Thanks anyway spork, and if anyone else here knows who we're talking about let me know.

It was easy to find using Google. His name is Ynot
"When a true genius appears in this world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him." (Jonathan Swift)

Re: Direct Down Wind Faster Than The Wind
Reply #1999
Easy for you maybe, but I still have trouble with g-searches. Thanks Heinz. May I ask what words you typed into google to get his name? I well remember ynot, but didn't think he was the guy with the round belt for his prop driven wheel.

Will check out his posts and share his relevant contributions soon.