Paul, just ask Dale and check that he looks you in the eye when you ask about the torch. B^>

Rgds

Damon

Dale’s gone out in the middle of the night and beaten up one of his turbines, then climbed a few trees nearby with a torch tied to a fishing pole to freak out the locals with “lights in the sky”.

Instant free publicity for Ecotricity.

You’re a sly dog, Dale, but I see through your ruse.

Furthermore, one explanation for the ‘tentacles of light’ coming off the ‘huge’ UFO (according to witnesses) may be a plasma field introduced by the craft’s propulsion mechanism.

I have wondered about the bat thing – (not in this context though) – it shouldn’t be too difficult to repel them with bat-repellent (like shark repellent but mounted on turbines rather than on the utility-belt)

I like bats… and wind turbines… & I hope, in all seriousness, that a solution is found for them to co-exist. Do you think they would learn to avoid them in time?

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn16401-why-wind-turbines-arent-batfriendly.html

Why?

(Drumroll please) Radar cannot see through them..!!

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2008/feb/06/arewindfarmsreallyathreat

the lights in the sky were from the Guardian web editor’s birthday party … http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/organgrinder/2009/jan/08/windpower-thesun

That’s if the UAV crashed… an 8 ton armor plated, Kevlar coated, intercontinental, autonomous warfare, killing machine, sent on low level flight, to negotiate a random obstacle course of moving fibre-glass windmill blades… sounds like a jolly good test of the technology… who says they had to collect the whole machine, maybe just a small piece, hence the unexplained lights and no crater =8~) Also, how disappointing that their test failed (well it hit something), but it still got home. These stealth planes can maneuver in an incredible fashion, due to their irregular shape, computer controlled surface deformation. With out a pilot to worry about G-forces, the mind boggles at how it could nip through any obstacle course.

okay, okay… it was a flying saucer… no no, it was an ice build up in the layers of fibre glass, and the thing just popped… ah damn it, how about ball lightening.

It broke… but what about the strange lights, if it were not ball lightening (and maybe it was, but just not the cause of the damage, a co-incidence perhaps… there is no doubt that ball lightening exists – I might add that I am looking at a full sized wind farm out my window right this moment, I have never seen any strange lights ever… only the blinking to warn aircraft)… if it wasn’t extraterrestrials, then it had to be people.

What were they doing there, sabotage maybe, the Countryside Unclutterd Now Tendancy?

PS. It broke, just like they do sometimes… but the lights man, what about the lights?

I doubt the UAV scenario because as Robert said it would likely result in a crash. While it would have been covered up by the MoD i think there would be evidence, specifically on the groud of where the aircraft was downed that would be difficult to cover up (ie damage to the ground etc).

no need to call me a doubter! All I’ve said so far (apart from comments made in jest about flying octupii) is that the missing blade was on the ground (you said you would take correction open-mindedly) and speculated that maybe one blade was hit by another. I’ll believe whatever the forensic evidence implies, if it provides a clear explanation.

Secondly, I think you’ve corrupted the process of elimination: you eliminate scenarios that are impossible (not improbable) leaving only the possible scenarios. If there is only one possible scenario left, then however improbable it is, it’s true.

@ robert
Sorry mate, I simply don’t buy it… the lights were the MOD clearing up the mess, still fits your counter argument to the “UAV may have hit the turbine” theory. Don’t suggest having inside information (“without divulging anything” as you said), because if you do have the required inside information, then your ball lightening theory is part of the cover up. (Last time I got involved in an incident with the MOD in Lincolnshire concerning an “Unidentified Flying Vulcan Bomber”, I had the MOD “men in black” on the doorstep of my house in London in the late evening, and I let them in. An eye opening interview was conducted, followed by their complete disappearance and denial that they had ever been to visit.)

If ball lightening does not cause the damage that normal lightening does, nor leave any traces umm… how does that fit with your lengthy discussion about high temperatures, lightening and ball lightening and of course the actual damage done to the turbine.

It seems to me that the old ball lightening theory is the one most often trotted out in these circumstances, that or marsh gas, or of course the local military. Given all the hallmarks, it must have been a UFO. Well I am not a witness, so I guess a trip to Spain is off the cards for the MIBs.

LoL

Rgds

Damon

I am sure that an object of great size traveling at a fair speed colliding into the turbine would have caused the turbine to slant slightly as these turbine shafts are made of hollow steel.

Here is what i think happened the turbine blade has came loose and dropped off colliding with the crumpled blade.
I think these blades are made of either fibre glass or aluminum so the can be badly damaged with any large objects.

In reference to the UAV the rate of velocity and weight are important factors, however without divulging any particulars, the UAV has a large fuselage to wing ratio, meaning that any impact would have meant a crash.
In reference to high heat lightening leaving tell tale signs of melting and charring you would be most likely correct, however plasma lightening is a different phenomena and would leave little to no trace.

@simmon mallett

I already explained the improbability of blade on blade collision being due to, blade rotation direction is wrong to support that theory.

Like I said before, stick with me the “Ball lightening/Plasma Ball solution, it’s most probable.

http://www.videosift.com/video/Super-Wind-Turbine-Mayhem-Playlist

Dale in his Radio 4 interview said that the only thing that had been categoricaly ruled out was a lightening strike, none of the evedence of a lighting strike was there.. you know all those high temperatures. charred and melted stuff, lightening can and does melt concrete. That’s what Dale said, please correct me if I am wrong someone, maybe I was dreaming.

For what it is worth the windfarm I see out of my window at the top of a mountain has been convered in snow for the last weeks, and it has been perishing cold… still standing and working =8~) We have regular electrical storms, sometimes they go on for 10 hours, none has been hit as yet.

Must have been a flying saucer… great inadvertent publicity, if I were in the UK I’d switch to ecotricity with out hesitation. In the interests of green energy, UFO gets my vote.

I guess he is waiting to hear from the experts…

Back to reality, when is Dale going to release his say on this topic, Paul?

@Simon – just to be absolutely clear on how this came about – the UFO story was not the work of Ecotricity’s ‘well oiled PR machine’

We were all as surprised by the local’s reports appearing in the papers as everyone else! A generally bad news week meant that the papers lept on it as a light hearted ‘and finally…’ story – they not only ran with it, but practically fell over themselves in a mad dash to get the scoop!

The Sun didn’t even phone us! First we knew of the front page thing was at 7.30am on the day of the print run when the Press Association phoned Maddy (said PR machine) and she nearly choked on her muesli.

I couldnt find a shoe this mroning….I think aiens have had it *Calls the Sun newspaper*

(Can’t wiat for us to be proved wrong, eh simon? ;o) )

But, put a bit of UFO spin on it, everybody (the tabloids in particular) focuses on the paranormal and misses the fact that a rather large unrestrained spinning object in some way broke off and caused significant damage to another spinning object!
Am I going to walk under a spinning turbine ever again? NO!

Whoever came up with the UFO story needs a bonus!

To determine a cause or solution, one can determine that whatever is improbable can prove that which is probable (in other words, use the process of elimination and fact based determination to draw a conclusion). Bear in mind that not all of the facts are at my disposal and I only see very little of, and am at the mercy of the varying reports.
As in my previous comments it is clear that a UFO would not be that clumsy. To have a blade just snap off to cause the type of damage to the bent blade is also debunk as is mentioned in my previous comments. As for the previously mentioned, a UAV or any other craft would have been wiped out upon contact with a blade as they are not very heavy. The chunk of ice thing not possible due to the fact that if it were large enough to cause damage to the turbine blade, the plane to which it would have been attached to would have reported serious problems of its’ own, i.e.… crash or failure. Furthermore, as for any of these except maybe the UFO, plasma balls with lightening tentacles would not be associated with them.
The damaged blades on the turbine were ultimately due to some type of external and/or internal source of degradation such as in this case: temperature, moisture, blade design, corrosion etc. Eye witness accounts for the presence of ball lightening or plasma balls. Lightening is common in wind turbine fields, and when present can generate up to 50,000 degrees Fahrenheit. That alone is enough to damage a blade or even disintegrate it or a part of the blade. To compound the conditions, let’s consider the composition of the blades to include the problem of moisture or water intrusion. Combine that with the 50,000 degrees F and now steam will be generated causing expansion inside the blades. Notice the one blade that was split open and contorted. Not only is there obvious damage to the blades but I would suggest that further heat damage to the shaft, bearing, or the generator itself is worth investigation. I can go on all day, but ultimately if you consider the obvious then the details of the findings when compiled will only further support what I have been saying all along. Lightening is common to wind generator farms and so it is apparent to me that this one is just as vulnerable as well to “Ball Lightening or Plasma Balls”. That’s my story and I’m sticking to it. Let’s just wait and see what Paul says.

However, I think it highly unlikely a wayward alien trade mission has crashed its company saucer into a wind turbine whilst seeking out Ecotricitys’ expertise in renewable energy systems. hehe

Mind you, the story has kept the organisation in the limelight which makes for excellent publicity…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WLrsO3ZI-bA