Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [AWES] High and low complexity,modus operanti and materials

Expand Messages
  • dave santos
    Pierre, You raise several questions; let me just answer the big overall question first- The High-Complexity/Low Complexity AWES categories were introduced into
    Message 1 of 2 , Dec 29, 2012
      Pierre,

      You raise several questions; let me just answer the big overall question first-

      The High-Complexity/Low Complexity AWES categories were introduced into AWE by Jeremy Calvert of Kitebot. Fort Felker also covered the subject in his AWEC 2010 presentation, without calling it such. "High-Tech" v. "Low Tech" is common popular wording for the same spectrum. "Aerospace Complexity" is an established way of expressing the concept in aeronautics.

      As a crude measure of what is meant, "part count" is good. By part, we mean each different kind of part needed. The ultimate goal of "Low Complexity AWE" is to do AWE with "just rag and string aloft". Lets define "High Complexity AWE" to be standard Aerospace Complexity, dependent on complex computing, avionics like GPS, complex composite airframes, and the like.

      I disagree that it is only possible to imagine a low complexity "working prototype" once some formal schema is defined. The 40,000 year old returning boomerang is highly optimal in form and function, and has just one moving part. It was only formally understood by aerospace engineers in recent decades. This does not mean that low complexity AWE is not assisted by the most advanced thinking. The paradox is that true engineering simplicity naturally results from more complex thought than messy engineering complexity requires.

      Higher understanding is not necessarily the key factor. Instead, a relentless program of constant testing of every imaginable configuration of string and rag, with sharp observation followed by further testing, evolves effective devices. This is like genetic algorithms in computer science, where no formal theory is required within the computation for an optimized output to result (just a fitness function applied Darwinistically),

      daveS


    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.