A Different Operating Regime for AWE

Exploring low-altitude continuous-operation architectures

June 2026

• Continuous short-stroke generation

​

• Low-altitude operation AWE

​

• Predominantly non-negative power/time behaviour

​

• Focus on continuity, simplicity, deployable density

KGM1 in context

The project direction was strongly influenced by the 2015 HWN500 AWE benchmarking initiative.

• Independent development over 10+ years (<20k€)
• 2 prototypes built and tested outdoors in real wind conditions
• Preliminary non-negative power/time behaviour observed
• Solar Impulse Efficient Solution Label

Current AWE logic vs. KGM1 hypothesis

• Mainstream AWE: maximize altitude and peak power
• KGM1: maximize continuity, simplicity and deployable density
• Short cycles, instead of long pumping phases
• Low altitude (<100 m), instead of 350–700 m operation

Core Question

Can low-altitude continuous operation compensate for lower peak aerodynamic efficiency through higher deployable density?

Hypothesis:

Power 50 kW x 25 units = 1250 kW

Hypothesis:

Power 150 kW x 1 units = 150 kW

Conceptual density scenario

Prototype Evolution

Prototype 1: proof of concept and thesis work

​

​

​

Prototype 2: real flight tests and GUI validation

​

​

​

Prototype 3: automatic control and scalability validation

Prototype 2 – Experimental Observations

• Non-negative power output over time observed
• No active retraction motor during passive phases
• Continuous generator rotation
• Tested in real wind conditions

HOW KGM1 WORKS

Short-stroke linear sled (KSU)

​

​

Elastic elements + kinetic buffering

​

​

Generator driven by traction variations

​

​

Dynamic depowering keeps the wing moving continuously

rendering

Prototype 2

Gust Integration & Continuous Dynamics

Conventional AWE often treats gusts as disturbances

​

KGM1 attempts to use gust energy into the cycle

​

Passive mechanics reduce switching events

​

System behavior dominated by continuous dynamics rather than event-driven control

Why Low Altitude May Change Farm Density

Shorter tether → smaller exclusion area

​

Potentially higher farm density

​

Lower regulatory complexity below 100 m

​

Simpler maintenance and logistics

Prototype 3 – Validation Objectives

• Validate continuous-operation
• Measure repeatability and loads
• Validate gust integration effects
• Test automatic control and scalability assumptions

Prototype 3 – Simplified Timeline

0–4 months:

redesign and manufacturing

​

●──────────────────────●──────────────────────●──────────────────────●

4–8 months:

assembly and bench testing

8–12 months:

manual flight tests

12–16 months:

semi-automatic and automatic validation

Open Questions & Research Directions

SCALABILITY

Can the architecture scale across power classes (10-50 kW ---- 100 + kW?)

LONG-TERM ENERGY BALANCE

What is the annual energy balance under varying wind regimes and seasons?

AUTOMATIC CONTROL

How will closed-loop control improve continuity, reliability and load managements?

GUST INTEGRATION

How much can gust energy be integrated into the cycle to increase availability?

DESPLOYABLE ENERGY DENSITY

Can short-tether architectures enable significantly higher farm density?

REGULATORY & OPERATIONS

What are the implications of low-altitude operation (<100 m) on regulations, safety

and logistics?

Conclusions

• Prototype 2 does not prove superiority.

​

• It suggests that AWE may still contain unexplored operating regimes.

​

• Prototype 3 will validate or falsify these assumptions.

​

​