Impact of the Wind on the Hovering Performance of Stabilized Payload Lifting with a Single Tethered Fixed-Wing Aircraft
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Over the last 90 years, many concepts of lifting payload with a single tethered fixed-wing aircraft have been proposed. In this concept, an airplane flies along a quasi-circular flight path and the payload should remain at the center of this circle. The main challenge encountered has been payload stability in hover (i.e., when the payload is fixed in space and the aircraft flies along a quasi-circular path above). In calm conditions, lengthening the tether to reach two or three kilometers (1.5 mile) has been proven to stabilize the payload in an orbit with a radius of the order of 1 meter (3 ft). However, the presence of wind has shown a drastic reduction in payload stability. At the end of the 1990s, a patent proposed to add a thruster-based stabilization device onto the payload but no further studies explored such a concept. This study proposes a new concept inspired by the former. The main difference lies in the addition of a reel-in mechanism to control and stabilize the payload in the vertical direction. This work analyzes the impact of the wind on this new concept in hover. The results have shown a maximum power requirement of 37 kW (60 hp) for the aircraft and 15 kW (20 hp) for the stabilization device to lift a 300 kg (660 lbm) payload fixed in the inertial frame with a 400 m (1,300 ft) long tether. This work has highlighted the high impact of the tether force on the towing airplane and therefore a means to reduce this impact is required.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".