<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_07_01_1747249</id>
	<title>Flapping NAV Performs Controlled Hovering Flight</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1246471080000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>An anonymous reader writes <i>"AeroVironment, Inc. was awarded a Phase II contract extension in April from the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) <a href="http://www.businesswire.com/portal/site/google/?ndmViewId=news\_view&amp;newsId=20090701005345&amp;newsLang=en">to design and build a flying prototype for the Nano Air Vehicle (NAV) program</a>. As part of this program AV has accomplished a technical milestone never before achieved: the <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cov7-XWUa18">controlled hovering flight of an air vehicle system with two flapping wings</a> (video) that carries its own energy source and uses only the flapping wings for propulsion and control. Two wings for propulsion and control, nothing else."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>An anonymous reader writes " AeroVironment , Inc. was awarded a Phase II contract extension in April from the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency ( DARPA ) to design and build a flying prototype for the Nano Air Vehicle ( NAV ) program .
As part of this program AV has accomplished a technical milestone never before achieved : the controlled hovering flight of an air vehicle system with two flapping wings ( video ) that carries its own energy source and uses only the flapping wings for propulsion and control .
Two wings for propulsion and control , nothing else .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An anonymous reader writes "AeroVironment, Inc. was awarded a Phase II contract extension in April from the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) to design and build a flying prototype for the Nano Air Vehicle (NAV) program.
As part of this program AV has accomplished a technical milestone never before achieved: the controlled hovering flight of an air vehicle system with two flapping wings (video) that carries its own energy source and uses only the flapping wings for propulsion and control.
Two wings for propulsion and control, nothing else.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546251</id>
	<title>Why the hell would you do that?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246475400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>People can't drive cars so now we give the same people flying cars...</htmltext>
<tokenext>People ca n't drive cars so now we give the same people flying cars.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People can't drive cars so now we give the same people flying cars...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28570073</id>
	<title>Hmm</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246623600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This thing + tiny video camera = free amateur porn!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This thing + tiny video camera = free amateur porn !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This thing + tiny video camera = free amateur porn!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28547579</id>
	<title>Re:Why the hell would you do that?</title>
	<author>Conspiracy\_Of\_Doves</author>
	<datestamp>1246479900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It isn't a car. It's a tiny robot. The whole thing weighs less than 10 grams.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is n't a car .
It 's a tiny robot .
The whole thing weighs less than 10 grams .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It isn't a car.
It's a tiny robot.
The whole thing weighs less than 10 grams.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546251</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546255</id>
	<title>Methinks...</title>
	<author>kipin</author>
	<datestamp>1246475400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They need to get one of those flapping NAV's to fan off their server and cool it down.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They need to get one of those flapping NAV 's to fan off their server and cool it down .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They need to get one of those flapping NAV's to fan off their server and cool it down.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546521</id>
	<title>Clocks</title>
	<author>the\_Bionic\_lemming</author>
	<datestamp>1246476240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This just in, Prototype lost to clock with bacteria digester system.</p><p>PETA responded with applause.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This just in , Prototype lost to clock with bacteria digester system.PETA responded with applause .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This just in, Prototype lost to clock with bacteria digester system.PETA responded with applause.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28547199</id>
	<title>Two wings only?</title>
	<author>sabt-pestnu</author>
	<datestamp>1246478460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; Two wings for propulsion and <b>control</b>, nothing else.<br>(emphasis mine)</p><p>Even hummingbirds have tails.  A bee might be a better example, but they have four wings, as do butterflies.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Two wings for propulsion and control , nothing else .
( emphasis mine ) Even hummingbirds have tails .
A bee might be a better example , but they have four wings , as do butterflies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; Two wings for propulsion and control, nothing else.
(emphasis mine)Even hummingbirds have tails.
A bee might be a better example, but they have four wings, as do butterflies.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28548457</id>
	<title>Re:Advantages vs. traditional rotating wing?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246439220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are some energy technologies that have a fast recharge/discharge cycle. Most batteries are based on a continuous discharge cycle and are optimized to deliver relatively low power for a relatively long time. There are some newer technologies that are not battery based (at least not directly) that allows a fast discharge and a "rest" period (a second or so) where the capacitor can recharge. This recharge can be effected through chemical/biological processes that would normally be too slow to use as a traditional battery.. However, couple this high discharge rate with a slow but very long lasting power source (amazing how much energy is in a teaspoon of sugar) and then add a propulsion technology that's compatible with those power sources (e.g., a "flapping wing") and you can create a bird that stays aloft for hours at a time. Add a low-wattage transmitter (backed by a traditional battery) and you have an effective surveillance system.</p><p>But I'm just saying...</p><p>Wow.. Did you see all those little birds flying around recently?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are some energy technologies that have a fast recharge/discharge cycle .
Most batteries are based on a continuous discharge cycle and are optimized to deliver relatively low power for a relatively long time .
There are some newer technologies that are not battery based ( at least not directly ) that allows a fast discharge and a " rest " period ( a second or so ) where the capacitor can recharge .
This recharge can be effected through chemical/biological processes that would normally be too slow to use as a traditional battery.. However , couple this high discharge rate with a slow but very long lasting power source ( amazing how much energy is in a teaspoon of sugar ) and then add a propulsion technology that 's compatible with those power sources ( e.g. , a " flapping wing " ) and you can create a bird that stays aloft for hours at a time .
Add a low-wattage transmitter ( backed by a traditional battery ) and you have an effective surveillance system.But I 'm just saying...Wow.. Did you see all those little birds flying around recently ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are some energy technologies that have a fast recharge/discharge cycle.
Most batteries are based on a continuous discharge cycle and are optimized to deliver relatively low power for a relatively long time.
There are some newer technologies that are not battery based (at least not directly) that allows a fast discharge and a "rest" period (a second or so) where the capacitor can recharge.
This recharge can be effected through chemical/biological processes that would normally be too slow to use as a traditional battery.. However, couple this high discharge rate with a slow but very long lasting power source (amazing how much energy is in a teaspoon of sugar) and then add a propulsion technology that's compatible with those power sources (e.g., a "flapping wing") and you can create a bird that stays aloft for hours at a time.
Add a low-wattage transmitter (backed by a traditional battery) and you have an effective surveillance system.But I'm just saying...Wow.. Did you see all those little birds flying around recently?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546671</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546249</id>
	<title>Ornithopter</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246475400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Shouldn't this sort of thing be called an <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ornithopter" title="wikipedia.org">Ornithopter</a> [wikipedia.org]?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Should n't this sort of thing be called an Ornithopter [ wikipedia.org ] ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Shouldn't this sort of thing be called an Ornithopter [wikipedia.org]?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28550845</id>
	<title>mirror</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246447200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...their website is being served off of the fapping bird robot, and said robot has crashed.</p><p>Fortunately, youtube is crash proof:<br><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cov7-XWUa18" title="youtube.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cov7-XWUa18</a> [youtube.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; ...their website is being served off of the fapping bird robot , and said robot has crashed.Fortunately , youtube is crash proof : http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = Cov7-XWUa18 [ youtube.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; ...their website is being served off of the fapping bird robot, and said robot has crashed.Fortunately, youtube is crash proof:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cov7-XWUa18 [youtube.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546159</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28554827</id>
	<title>Re:When can I buy a ridable griffon/dragon?</title>
	<author>tolgyesi</author>
	<datestamp>1246566900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They are made by <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saab" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Saab</a> [wikipedia.org]: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JAS\_39\_Gripen" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Griffin</a> [wikipedia.org], <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saab\_35\_Draken" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Dragon</a> [wikipedia.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>They are made by Saab [ wikipedia.org ] : Griffin [ wikipedia.org ] , Dragon [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They are made by Saab [wikipedia.org]: Griffin [wikipedia.org], Dragon [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546423</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546557</id>
	<title>Re:Ouch</title>
	<author>dotancohen</author>
	<datestamp>1246476360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>0 comments and it's already slashdotted.</p></div><p>What the hell is this? Who are all the noobs who went off to RTFA?!? <a href="http://xkcd.com/591/" title="xkcd.com">Has<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. been trolled?</a> [xkcd.com]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>0 comments and it 's already slashdotted.What the hell is this ?
Who are all the noobs who went off to RTFA ? ! ?
Has / .
been trolled ?
[ xkcd.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>0 comments and it's already slashdotted.What the hell is this?
Who are all the noobs who went off to RTFA?!?
Has /.
been trolled?
[xkcd.com]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546089</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28548515</id>
	<title>Star Wars</title>
	<author>Cyner</author>
	<datestamp>1246439340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Perhaps developments like this were the reason the <a href="http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/03/16/1339217" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">Star Wars Program</a> [slashdot.org] was miniaturized. Protecting us from "mosquitos" sure sounds like a good cover story.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Perhaps developments like this were the reason the Star Wars Program [ slashdot.org ] was miniaturized .
Protecting us from " mosquitos " sure sounds like a good cover story .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perhaps developments like this were the reason the Star Wars Program [slashdot.org] was miniaturized.
Protecting us from "mosquitos" sure sounds like a good cover story.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546739</id>
	<title>I'm confused</title>
	<author>AdamWeeden</author>
	<datestamp>1246476960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What does this have to do with Norton Anti-Virus?</htmltext>
<tokenext>What does this have to do with Norton Anti-Virus ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What does this have to do with Norton Anti-Virus?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546693</id>
	<title>Your Federal Tax Dollars At Work</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246476780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>for war instead of health care.</p><p>Yours In Socialism,<br>Kilgore Trout</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>for war instead of health care.Yours In Socialism,Kilgore Trout</tokentext>
<sentencetext>for war instead of health care.Yours In Socialism,Kilgore Trout</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546775</id>
	<title>Real original</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246477080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Pity nobody has <a href="http://www.gizmag.com/go/3533/" title="gizmag.com">thought of this before</a> [gizmag.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Pity nobody has thought of this before [ gizmag.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pity nobody has thought of this before [gizmag.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28554701</id>
	<title>Re:Two wings only?</title>
	<author>home-electro.com</author>
	<datestamp>1246565220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>mosquitoes?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>mosquitoes ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>mosquitoes?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28547199</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28555825</id>
	<title>Re:When can I buy a ridable griffon/dragon?</title>
	<author>3waygeek</author>
	<datestamp>1246537680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Rideable griffins do exist -- Woz used to have <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kathy\_Griffin" title="wikipedia.org">one</a> [wikipedia.org].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Rideable griffins do exist -- Woz used to have one [ wikipedia.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Rideable griffins do exist -- Woz used to have one [wikipedia.org].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546423</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546985</id>
	<title>Re:Advantages vs. traditional rotating wing?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246477740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>What I don't understand is why a normal helicopter design couldn't suit all of these needs better and cheaper.</p></div><p>I'm just going to quote the Ornithopter article on wikipedia: </p><p><div class="quote"><p>Unlike airplanes and helicopters, the driving airfoils of the ornithopter have a flapping or oscillating motion, instead of rotary. As with helicopters, the wings usually have a combined function of providing both lift and thrust. Theoretically, the flapping wing can be set to zero angle of attack on the upstroke, so it passes easily through the air. Since typically the flapping airfoils produce both lift and thrust, drag-inducing structures are minimized. These two advantages potentially allow a high degree of efficiency.</p></div><p>Sounds logical; I've seen some very large dragonflys; that are both faster, more agile, and probably more efficient than similarily sized remote control helicopters.  But that is pretty apples:oranges; I guess the better comparison would be a remote controlled dragonfly or the more ideal, but far less attainable, comparison:  a biological helicopter.</p><p>
&nbsp; <br>
&nbsp; </p><p>Hmm... yes, a biological helicopter indeed.  To the laboratory, Igor!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What I do n't understand is why a normal helicopter design could n't suit all of these needs better and cheaper.I 'm just going to quote the Ornithopter article on wikipedia : Unlike airplanes and helicopters , the driving airfoils of the ornithopter have a flapping or oscillating motion , instead of rotary .
As with helicopters , the wings usually have a combined function of providing both lift and thrust .
Theoretically , the flapping wing can be set to zero angle of attack on the upstroke , so it passes easily through the air .
Since typically the flapping airfoils produce both lift and thrust , drag-inducing structures are minimized .
These two advantages potentially allow a high degree of efficiency.Sounds logical ; I 've seen some very large dragonflys ; that are both faster , more agile , and probably more efficient than similarily sized remote control helicopters .
But that is pretty apples : oranges ; I guess the better comparison would be a remote controlled dragonfly or the more ideal , but far less attainable , comparison : a biological helicopter .
    Hmm... yes , a biological helicopter indeed .
To the laboratory , Igor !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What I don't understand is why a normal helicopter design couldn't suit all of these needs better and cheaper.I'm just going to quote the Ornithopter article on wikipedia: Unlike airplanes and helicopters, the driving airfoils of the ornithopter have a flapping or oscillating motion, instead of rotary.
As with helicopters, the wings usually have a combined function of providing both lift and thrust.
Theoretically, the flapping wing can be set to zero angle of attack on the upstroke, so it passes easily through the air.
Since typically the flapping airfoils produce both lift and thrust, drag-inducing structures are minimized.
These two advantages potentially allow a high degree of efficiency.Sounds logical; I've seen some very large dragonflys; that are both faster, more agile, and probably more efficient than similarily sized remote control helicopters.
But that is pretty apples:oranges; I guess the better comparison would be a remote controlled dragonfly or the more ideal, but far less attainable, comparison:  a biological helicopter.
  
  Hmm... yes, a biological helicopter indeed.
To the laboratory, Igor!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546671</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546579</id>
	<title>Re:Why the hell would you do that?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246476420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Apparently, iCantSpell can't read either.  It's called a Nano Air Vehicle for a reason; because it's small.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Apparently , iCantSpell ca n't read either .
It 's called a Nano Air Vehicle for a reason ; because it 's small .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apparently, iCantSpell can't read either.
It's called a Nano Air Vehicle for a reason; because it's small.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546251</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546457</id>
	<title>fago8z</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246476060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>of playinNg your = 36400 FreeBSD</htmltext>
<tokenext>of playinNg your = 36400 FreeBSD</tokentext>
<sentencetext>of playinNg your = 36400 FreeBSD</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546017</id>
	<title>Fapping Open Sores Fan Performs Poorly</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246474800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>fap fap fap</htmltext>
<tokenext>fap fap fap</tokentext>
<sentencetext>fap fap fap</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28547769</id>
	<title>Re:Ouch</title>
	<author>Endo13</author>
	<datestamp>1246480380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The link to TFA works fine. It's the link to the <i>video</i> that's slashdotted.</p><p>But what does all this mean?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The link to TFA works fine .
It 's the link to the video that 's slashdotted.But what does all this mean ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The link to TFA works fine.
It's the link to the video that's slashdotted.But what does all this mean?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546557</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546691</id>
	<title>Re:When can I buy a ridable griffon/dragon?</title>
	<author>CorporateSuit</author>
	<datestamp>1246476720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sponsor a $20 Billion, tax-exempt contract for ridable, mechanical dragons/griffons that live entirely off large livestock and I'm sure you'll have them fleet-ready in 15 years (as long as PETA doesn't catch wind of it).</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sponsor a $ 20 Billion , tax-exempt contract for ridable , mechanical dragons/griffons that live entirely off large livestock and I 'm sure you 'll have them fleet-ready in 15 years ( as long as PETA does n't catch wind of it ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sponsor a $20 Billion, tax-exempt contract for ridable, mechanical dragons/griffons that live entirely off large livestock and I'm sure you'll have them fleet-ready in 15 years (as long as PETA doesn't catch wind of it).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546423</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546873</id>
	<title>Re:Advantages vs. traditional rotating wing?</title>
	<author>s7726</author>
	<datestamp>1246477440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Nature has a tendency to self optimize over time, i think that walking fish guy might have invented the idea.

I believe winged flight is more efficient than what we have been able to achieve prior to this point. I could be wrong.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nature has a tendency to self optimize over time , i think that walking fish guy might have invented the idea .
I believe winged flight is more efficient than what we have been able to achieve prior to this point .
I could be wrong .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nature has a tendency to self optimize over time, i think that walking fish guy might have invented the idea.
I believe winged flight is more efficient than what we have been able to achieve prior to this point.
I could be wrong.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546671</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28547159</id>
	<title>For those with tinfoil hats... when does it become</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246478400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Illegal to shoot birds and insects on sight? We have in some cities ordinances stating "DON'T FEED THE BIRDS/PIGEONS" due to trying to control vermin and bird droppings in public venues.</p><p>But, suppose building owners or overreacting individuals decide to "malathion" a bird they think is a spy vehicle?</p><p>Well, one way to deal with these things is to put sticky glue traps (mean to cat rodents) all over the place. Or, periodically "mist" the air with soap or sticky/bubbly shit to down them. Or, where there may be perches, set up IR lasing beams to jam them (-- if you can figure out the ops/coms freqs) or IR lasing or kill them when they land or get too close. Surely, they'll be landed for energy conservation reasons.</p><p>Or, set up mirrors in the buildings so they crash into them or get stuck and the operators cannot figure the way out. When they get too close to vortavacs, suck their asses into a disposal chute.</p><p>Diabolical, or what?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Illegal to shoot birds and insects on sight ?
We have in some cities ordinances stating " DO N'T FEED THE BIRDS/PIGEONS " due to trying to control vermin and bird droppings in public venues.But , suppose building owners or overreacting individuals decide to " malathion " a bird they think is a spy vehicle ? Well , one way to deal with these things is to put sticky glue traps ( mean to cat rodents ) all over the place .
Or , periodically " mist " the air with soap or sticky/bubbly shit to down them .
Or , where there may be perches , set up IR lasing beams to jam them ( -- if you can figure out the ops/coms freqs ) or IR lasing or kill them when they land or get too close .
Surely , they 'll be landed for energy conservation reasons.Or , set up mirrors in the buildings so they crash into them or get stuck and the operators can not figure the way out .
When they get too close to vortavacs , suck their asses into a disposal chute.Diabolical , or what ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Illegal to shoot birds and insects on sight?
We have in some cities ordinances stating "DON'T FEED THE BIRDS/PIGEONS" due to trying to control vermin and bird droppings in public venues.But, suppose building owners or overreacting individuals decide to "malathion" a bird they think is a spy vehicle?Well, one way to deal with these things is to put sticky glue traps (mean to cat rodents) all over the place.
Or, periodically "mist" the air with soap or sticky/bubbly shit to down them.
Or, where there may be perches, set up IR lasing beams to jam them (-- if you can figure out the ops/coms freqs) or IR lasing or kill them when they land or get too close.
Surely, they'll be landed for energy conservation reasons.Or, set up mirrors in the buildings so they crash into them or get stuck and the operators cannot figure the way out.
When they get too close to vortavacs, suck their asses into a disposal chute.Diabolical, or what?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28548489</id>
	<title>You FAIL It</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246439280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><A HREF="http://goat.cx/" title="goat.cx" rel="nofollow">Pooper. Nothing Fact: *BSD is dying morning. now I have invited back again. from within.</a> [goat.cx]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Pooper .
Nothing Fact : * BSD is dying morning .
now I have invited back again .
from within .
[ goat.cx ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pooper.
Nothing Fact: *BSD is dying morning.
now I have invited back again.
from within.
[goat.cx]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546845</id>
	<title>Re:Advantages vs. traditional rotating wing?</title>
	<author>Dynedain</author>
	<datestamp>1246477320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Helicopters are LOUD</p><p>Winged vehicles can glide (among other things) making them far more stealthy in small forms.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Helicopters are LOUDWinged vehicles can glide ( among other things ) making them far more stealthy in small forms .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Helicopters are LOUDWinged vehicles can glide (among other things) making them far more stealthy in small forms.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546671</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546653</id>
	<title>Never before achieved?</title>
	<author>fahrbot-bot</author>
	<datestamp>1246476600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>As part of this program AV has accomplished a technical milestone never before achieved: the controlled hovering flight of an air vehicle system with two flapping wings that carries its own energy source and uses only the flapping wings for propulsion and control.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
By man or something man-made perhaps.  Now if you'll excuse me, my <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hummingbird" title="wikipedia.org">Hummingbird</a> [wikipedia.org] is bored...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>As part of this program AV has accomplished a technical milestone never before achieved : the controlled hovering flight of an air vehicle system with two flapping wings that carries its own energy source and uses only the flapping wings for propulsion and control .
By man or something man-made perhaps .
Now if you 'll excuse me , my Hummingbird [ wikipedia.org ] is bored.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As part of this program AV has accomplished a technical milestone never before achieved: the controlled hovering flight of an air vehicle system with two flapping wings that carries its own energy source and uses only the flapping wings for propulsion and control.
By man or something man-made perhaps.
Now if you'll excuse me, my Hummingbird [wikipedia.org] is bored...
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28547427</id>
	<title>LD</title>
	<author>fulldecent</author>
	<datestamp>1246479300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;&gt; Flapping NAV Performs Controlled Hovering Flight</p><p>da Vinci... is that you?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; &gt; Flapping NAV Performs Controlled Hovering Flightda Vinci... is that you ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;&gt; Flapping NAV Performs Controlled Hovering Flightda Vinci... is that you?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546325</id>
	<title>Youtube</title>
	<author>reg106</author>
	<datestamp>1246475640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Here is an <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cov7-XWUa18" title="youtube.com" rel="nofollow">AeroVironment NAV video</a> [youtube.com] on YouTube.  Not sure if it's the same one, but it was uploaded today...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Here is an AeroVironment NAV video [ youtube.com ] on YouTube .
Not sure if it 's the same one , but it was uploaded today.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here is an AeroVironment NAV video [youtube.com] on YouTube.
Not sure if it's the same one, but it was uploaded today...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546577</id>
	<title>I thought . . .</title>
	<author>arizwebfoot</author>
	<datestamp>1246476420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>it was pretty cool.</p><p>There will be hummingbird looking things flying in and out of your nearest neighborhood crime syndicate office monitoring their activities.</p><p>Who needs wiretapping now?</p><p>Oh, and I think hummingbirds have prior art.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>it was pretty cool.There will be hummingbird looking things flying in and out of your nearest neighborhood crime syndicate office monitoring their activities.Who needs wiretapping now ? Oh , and I think hummingbirds have prior art .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it was pretty cool.There will be hummingbird looking things flying in and out of your nearest neighborhood crime syndicate office monitoring their activities.Who needs wiretapping now?Oh, and I think hummingbirds have prior art.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546403</id>
	<title>Laserbeak?</title>
	<author>oodaloop</author>
	<datestamp>1246475880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Where's the Laserbeak tag?  Or at least Lazerbeak, depending on which geek you ask.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Where 's the Laserbeak tag ?
Or at least Lazerbeak , depending on which geek you ask .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Where's the Laserbeak tag?
Or at least Lazerbeak, depending on which geek you ask.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28545995</id>
	<title>First tweet</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246474740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>First tweet</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>First tweet</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First tweet</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28548121</id>
	<title>Re:Real original</title>
	<author>amicusNYCL</author>
	<datestamp>1246481340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It should be readily apparent that there's a massive difference between a manned aircraft and a 10g robot.  It's not about "thinking of it before", DARPA isn't sponsoring a competition to see who can think of an ornithopter first.  It's about execution.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It should be readily apparent that there 's a massive difference between a manned aircraft and a 10g robot .
It 's not about " thinking of it before " , DARPA is n't sponsoring a competition to see who can think of an ornithopter first .
It 's about execution .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It should be readily apparent that there's a massive difference between a manned aircraft and a 10g robot.
It's not about "thinking of it before", DARPA isn't sponsoring a competition to see who can think of an ornithopter first.
It's about execution.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546775</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546089</id>
	<title>Ouch</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246474980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>0 comments and it's already slashdotted.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>0 comments and it 's already slashdotted .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>0 comments and it's already slashdotted.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546167</id>
	<title>Slashdotted!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246475220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>here's a link to another article which atleast has a <a href="http://ftnews.firetrench.com/?p=14229" title="firetrench.com" rel="nofollow">computer generated image</a> [firetrench.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>here 's a link to another article which atleast has a computer generated image [ firetrench.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>here's a link to another article which atleast has a computer generated image [firetrench.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28554283</id>
	<title>Re:Ornithopter</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1246474380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nope. As you can see, the wings flap <em>horizontally</em>, which means it is a completely different concept, from what birds do.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nope .
As you can see , the wings flap horizontally , which means it is a completely different concept , from what birds do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nope.
As you can see, the wings flap horizontally, which means it is a completely different concept, from what birds do.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546249</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28547343</id>
	<title>Crowbar</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246479000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Does anyone else have the nagging urge to whack that thing across the room with a crowbar?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Does anyone else have the nagging urge to whack that thing across the room with a crowbar ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does anyone else have the nagging urge to whack that thing across the room with a crowbar?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546865</id>
	<title>Re:Advantages vs. traditional rotating wing?</title>
	<author>fahrbot-bot</author>
	<datestamp>1246477380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>What I don't understand is why a normal helicopter design couldn't suit all of these needs better and cheaper.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
I imagine it has to do with potential mechanical problems in feathering or hinging the blades as the scale gets really small.  A speck of sand could muck things up quite nicely.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What I do n't understand is why a normal helicopter design could n't suit all of these needs better and cheaper .
I imagine it has to do with potential mechanical problems in feathering or hinging the blades as the scale gets really small .
A speck of sand could muck things up quite nicely .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What I don't understand is why a normal helicopter design couldn't suit all of these needs better and cheaper.
I imagine it has to do with potential mechanical problems in feathering or hinging the blades as the scale gets really small.
A speck of sand could muck things up quite nicely.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546671</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28548719</id>
	<title>Re:I'm confused</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246439940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well obviously.... it's just another platform that Norton fails to detect a virus on.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well obviously.... it 's just another platform that Norton fails to detect a virus on .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well obviously.... it's just another platform that Norton fails to detect a virus on.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546739</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546609</id>
	<title>BzZzZzz</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246476480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>BzZzZzzzZZzZz...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>BzZzZzzzZZzZz.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>BzZzZzzzZZzZz...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28552287</id>
	<title>Re:Advantages vs. traditional rotating wing?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246454940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>helicopters of this size are in fact not loud, not in the sense of the helicopters we all know and love.  $50 and a trip to radio shack will show you that.</p><p>rotary wings get less and less efficient when the diameter of the rotor gets small, and flapping wings get much better at that size.</p><p>one of the things that happens is flapping wings create vortexes on some of the strokes which helps increase the pressure differential that's keeping them airborne.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>helicopters of this size are in fact not loud , not in the sense of the helicopters we all know and love .
$ 50 and a trip to radio shack will show you that.rotary wings get less and less efficient when the diameter of the rotor gets small , and flapping wings get much better at that size.one of the things that happens is flapping wings create vortexes on some of the strokes which helps increase the pressure differential that 's keeping them airborne .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>helicopters of this size are in fact not loud, not in the sense of the helicopters we all know and love.
$50 and a trip to radio shack will show you that.rotary wings get less and less efficient when the diameter of the rotor gets small, and flapping wings get much better at that size.one of the things that happens is flapping wings create vortexes on some of the strokes which helps increase the pressure differential that's keeping them airborne.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546845</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28547859</id>
	<title>Re:When can I buy a ridable griffon/dragon?</title>
	<author>camperdave</author>
	<datestamp>1246480620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you want an engineered dragon, you're on the wrong <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pern" title="wikipedia.org">planet</a> [wikipedia.org].</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you want an engineered dragon , you 're on the wrong planet [ wikipedia.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you want an engineered dragon, you're on the wrong planet [wikipedia.org].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546423</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546159</id>
	<title>Apparently...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246475160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>...their website is being served off of the flapping bird robot, and said robot has crashed.<br> <br>
They can make flapping wing flying robots, but can't make a slashdot proof webserver, meh.</htmltext>
<tokenext>...their website is being served off of the flapping bird robot , and said robot has crashed .
They can make flapping wing flying robots , but ca n't make a slashdot proof webserver , meh .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...their website is being served off of the flapping bird robot, and said robot has crashed.
They can make flapping wing flying robots, but can't make a slashdot proof webserver, meh.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28557667</id>
	<title>Re:Ornithopter</title>
	<author>metaforest</author>
	<datestamp>1246549260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>"Nope. As you can see, the wings flap horizontally, which means it is a completely different concept, from what birds do."</i></p><p>You obviously have never taken a really close look at a slow motion video of a hummingbird doing the stationkeeping thing.<br>The NAV is mimicking a  simplification of the hummingbird's vertical stationkeeping fight mode.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; Head, Tail and back are in a vertical orientation, (like a person standing) wings flapping in a 'sculling' motion to direct thrust downward.   The wing shape is used more like a propeller blade in this mode than a lifting wing.</p><p>If you tread water, while swimming using arm-sculling, your arms are doing a slow motion version of roughly the same motions, with corrections, and for the same reasons, to maintain balance and position.  Take particular note of how the hands are used as blades and tilted to direct force down against the water.<br>Our arm geometry is somewhat different so we don't orient the hand portion or our 'wing' vertically, and lacking feathers we rotate the thumb down to generate lift on the return stroke, rather than up and out as the hummingbird does.</p><p>The only difference with the NAV is that it's wing geometry is not as complex as a hummingbird so the system cannot switch to the more efficient horizontal orientation for cruising flight, the mode most birds use commonly.  Hummingbirds use this more typical flight mode when they are not hovering.</p><p>I have witnessed some types of sparrows kind of manage the vertical flight mode, but their body's are not balanced correctly to make it very stable IMO. Consequently, they must use a lot more energy to stabilize the maneuver. This reduces their ability to hover to a matter of ten seconds or so before fatigue sets in.</p><p>Larger birds cannot mange the vertical flight mode at all. They simply can't move their wings fast enough to generate stable raw lift when their bodies are oriented vertically.  The closest they can get is a cupped wing geometry used for VTOL maneuvers, and this too uses a lot of energy and is not stable enough for hovering.</p><p>One other variation I have seen is in small hawks where they seem to induce a low-speed stall and use small wing movements at the "wrist joint" to hold position for a few moments before committing to an attack dive.  This is not a stable flight mode.  After a few seconds they must either resume forward motion and normal flight, to mitigate the effects of the stall, or begin their attack dive.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Nope .
As you can see , the wings flap horizontally , which means it is a completely different concept , from what birds do .
" You obviously have never taken a really close look at a slow motion video of a hummingbird doing the stationkeeping thing.The NAV is mimicking a simplification of the hummingbird 's vertical stationkeeping fight mode .
    Head , Tail and back are in a vertical orientation , ( like a person standing ) wings flapping in a 'sculling ' motion to direct thrust downward .
The wing shape is used more like a propeller blade in this mode than a lifting wing.If you tread water , while swimming using arm-sculling , your arms are doing a slow motion version of roughly the same motions , with corrections , and for the same reasons , to maintain balance and position .
Take particular note of how the hands are used as blades and tilted to direct force down against the water.Our arm geometry is somewhat different so we do n't orient the hand portion or our 'wing ' vertically , and lacking feathers we rotate the thumb down to generate lift on the return stroke , rather than up and out as the hummingbird does.The only difference with the NAV is that it 's wing geometry is not as complex as a hummingbird so the system can not switch to the more efficient horizontal orientation for cruising flight , the mode most birds use commonly .
Hummingbirds use this more typical flight mode when they are not hovering.I have witnessed some types of sparrows kind of manage the vertical flight mode , but their body 's are not balanced correctly to make it very stable IMO .
Consequently , they must use a lot more energy to stabilize the maneuver .
This reduces their ability to hover to a matter of ten seconds or so before fatigue sets in.Larger birds can not mange the vertical flight mode at all .
They simply ca n't move their wings fast enough to generate stable raw lift when their bodies are oriented vertically .
The closest they can get is a cupped wing geometry used for VTOL maneuvers , and this too uses a lot of energy and is not stable enough for hovering.One other variation I have seen is in small hawks where they seem to induce a low-speed stall and use small wing movements at the " wrist joint " to hold position for a few moments before committing to an attack dive .
This is not a stable flight mode .
After a few seconds they must either resume forward motion and normal flight , to mitigate the effects of the stall , or begin their attack dive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Nope.
As you can see, the wings flap horizontally, which means it is a completely different concept, from what birds do.
"You obviously have never taken a really close look at a slow motion video of a hummingbird doing the stationkeeping thing.The NAV is mimicking a  simplification of the hummingbird's vertical stationkeeping fight mode.
    Head, Tail and back are in a vertical orientation, (like a person standing) wings flapping in a 'sculling' motion to direct thrust downward.
The wing shape is used more like a propeller blade in this mode than a lifting wing.If you tread water, while swimming using arm-sculling, your arms are doing a slow motion version of roughly the same motions, with corrections, and for the same reasons, to maintain balance and position.
Take particular note of how the hands are used as blades and tilted to direct force down against the water.Our arm geometry is somewhat different so we don't orient the hand portion or our 'wing' vertically, and lacking feathers we rotate the thumb down to generate lift on the return stroke, rather than up and out as the hummingbird does.The only difference with the NAV is that it's wing geometry is not as complex as a hummingbird so the system cannot switch to the more efficient horizontal orientation for cruising flight, the mode most birds use commonly.
Hummingbirds use this more typical flight mode when they are not hovering.I have witnessed some types of sparrows kind of manage the vertical flight mode, but their body's are not balanced correctly to make it very stable IMO.
Consequently, they must use a lot more energy to stabilize the maneuver.
This reduces their ability to hover to a matter of ten seconds or so before fatigue sets in.Larger birds cannot mange the vertical flight mode at all.
They simply can't move their wings fast enough to generate stable raw lift when their bodies are oriented vertically.
The closest they can get is a cupped wing geometry used for VTOL maneuvers, and this too uses a lot of energy and is not stable enough for hovering.One other variation I have seen is in small hawks where they seem to induce a low-speed stall and use small wing movements at the "wrist joint" to hold position for a few moments before committing to an attack dive.
This is not a stable flight mode.
After a few seconds they must either resume forward motion and normal flight, to mitigate the effects of the stall, or begin their attack dive.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28554283</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28550471</id>
	<title>Re:WowWee's Bat and Dragon also hover on wings.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246445640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Maybe DARPA should outsource.</p></div><p>DARPA <i>does</i> outsource.  WowWee should have bid.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe DARPA should outsource.DARPA does outsource .
WowWee should have bid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe DARPA should outsource.DARPA does outsource.
WowWee should have bid.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28547363</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28552029</id>
	<title>Re:Crowbar</title>
	<author>gyrogeerloose</author>
	<datestamp>1246453320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was thinking Louisville Slugger myself.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was thinking Louisville Slugger myself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was thinking Louisville Slugger myself.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28547343</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28555367</id>
	<title>Re:Ornithopter</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246530900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hornicopters?  Well yeah, the article <strong>is</strong> about fapping NAV.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hornicopters ?
Well yeah , the article is about fapping NAV .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hornicopters?
Well yeah, the article is about fapping NAV.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28547923</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28547923</id>
	<title>Re:Ornithopter</title>
	<author>CarpetShark</author>
	<datestamp>1246480740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>US.mil: "Those terrorists will cower before our hornicopters.. orniopters.. morningchoppers.  Goddamit.  Private Geek, say that word at the end of my sentences from now on."</p><p>Nah, won't work.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>US.mil : " Those terrorists will cower before our hornicopters.. orniopters.. morningchoppers .
Goddamit. Private Geek , say that word at the end of my sentences from now on .
" Nah , wo n't work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>US.mil: "Those terrorists will cower before our hornicopters.. orniopters.. morningchoppers.
Goddamit.  Private Geek, say that word at the end of my sentences from now on.
"Nah, won't work.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546249</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28551247</id>
	<title>Re:Ornithopter</title>
	<author>Dragonslicer</author>
	<datestamp>1246449060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Don't you mean <a href="http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://sales.starcitygames.com/cardscans/MAG4TH/ornithopter.jpg&amp;imgrefurl=http://sales.starcitygames.com/cardsearch.php\%3Fsinglesearch\%3DOrnithopter&amp;usg=\_\_9N3OQHrI9ys8rag\_5ZOo8RLFoHk=&amp;h=321&amp;w=235&amp;sz=42&amp;hl=en&amp;start=1&amp;um=1&amp;tbnid=vhq6XPeRUgKg1M:&amp;tbnh=118&amp;tbnw=86" title="google.com">Ornithopter</a> [google.com]?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't you mean Ornithopter [ google.com ] ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't you mean Ornithopter [google.com]?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546249</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28549613</id>
	<title>Re:Youtube</title>
	<author>bughunter</author>
	<datestamp>1246442520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes, it's the same one.  I viewed it on AV's site this morning before the slashdotting.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , it 's the same one .
I viewed it on AV 's site this morning before the slashdotting .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, it's the same one.
I viewed it on AV's site this morning before the slashdotting.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546325</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28554307</id>
	<title>Re:WowWee's Bat and Dragon also hover on wings.</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1246474500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is a <strong>w</strong> too much in your link. The site is called "wowee.com". "wowwee.com" is a scam / domain squatter site.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is a w too much in your link .
The site is called " wowee.com " .
" wowwee.com " is a scam / domain squatter site .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is a w too much in your link.
The site is called "wowee.com".
"wowwee.com" is a scam / domain squatter site.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28547363</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28547363</id>
	<title>WowWee's Bat and Dragon also hover on wings.</title>
	<author>Animats</author>
	<datestamp>1246479060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
This is almost as good as WowWee's <a href="http://wowwee.com/en/products/toys/flight/flytech:bat-dragon" title="wowwee.com">Bat and Dragon</a> [wowwee.com]. They're little, they fly with moving wings, and they can hover.  $39.99. Available <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Wow-Wee-Flytech-Dragon-Red/dp/B002C87IAI" title="amazon.com">wherever toys are sold</a> [amazon.com].
That's the entry-level product; the next step up, the <a href="http://wowwee.com/en/products/toys/flight/flytech/dragonfly:green-dragonfly" title="wowwee.com">Green Dragonfly</a> [wowwee.com], is an indoor/outdoor R/C ornithopter capable of hovering.
</p><p>
Those models doesn't have any onboard intelligence, but some of the other WowWee flying machines have collision avoidance. WowWee has a whole line of flying and robotic toys, and they deliver impressive technology at prices well under $100. Maybe DARPA should outsource.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is almost as good as WowWee 's Bat and Dragon [ wowwee.com ] .
They 're little , they fly with moving wings , and they can hover .
$ 39.99. Available wherever toys are sold [ amazon.com ] .
That 's the entry-level product ; the next step up , the Green Dragonfly [ wowwee.com ] , is an indoor/outdoor R/C ornithopter capable of hovering .
Those models does n't have any onboard intelligence , but some of the other WowWee flying machines have collision avoidance .
WowWee has a whole line of flying and robotic toys , and they deliver impressive technology at prices well under $ 100 .
Maybe DARPA should outsource .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
This is almost as good as WowWee's Bat and Dragon [wowwee.com].
They're little, they fly with moving wings, and they can hover.
$39.99. Available wherever toys are sold [amazon.com].
That's the entry-level product; the next step up, the Green Dragonfly [wowwee.com], is an indoor/outdoor R/C ornithopter capable of hovering.
Those models doesn't have any onboard intelligence, but some of the other WowWee flying machines have collision avoidance.
WowWee has a whole line of flying and robotic toys, and they deliver impressive technology at prices well under $100.
Maybe DARPA should outsource.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546671</id>
	<title>Advantages vs. traditional rotating wing?</title>
	<author>dfay</author>
	<datestamp>1246476660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To any familiar with this company or this line of research in general:</p><p>What are the advantages of the ornithopter design over a traditional helicopter design? Why is DARPA interested?</p><p>Yes, I did read the article... and I understand what DARPA is interested in getting out of a small UAV that can hover. What I don't understand is why a normal helicopter design couldn't suit all of these needs better and cheaper.</p><p>Regardless of the answer, it's a very cool project. Obviously very worthwhile just from the point-of-view of the scientific and engineering advances.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To any familiar with this company or this line of research in general : What are the advantages of the ornithopter design over a traditional helicopter design ?
Why is DARPA interested ? Yes , I did read the article... and I understand what DARPA is interested in getting out of a small UAV that can hover .
What I do n't understand is why a normal helicopter design could n't suit all of these needs better and cheaper.Regardless of the answer , it 's a very cool project .
Obviously very worthwhile just from the point-of-view of the scientific and engineering advances .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To any familiar with this company or this line of research in general:What are the advantages of the ornithopter design over a traditional helicopter design?
Why is DARPA interested?Yes, I did read the article... and I understand what DARPA is interested in getting out of a small UAV that can hover.
What I don't understand is why a normal helicopter design couldn't suit all of these needs better and cheaper.Regardless of the answer, it's a very cool project.
Obviously very worthwhile just from the point-of-view of the scientific and engineering advances.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28547299</id>
	<title>Re:Advantages vs. traditional rotating wing?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246478820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think one of the downsides to a helictoper is that you have to counteract the rotational force of the rotors; an Ornithopter might be less complicated to control/less prone to catastrophic failure if something happens to the tail rotor or its control linkages. (Plus less weight by not having those components?)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think one of the downsides to a helictoper is that you have to counteract the rotational force of the rotors ; an Ornithopter might be less complicated to control/less prone to catastrophic failure if something happens to the tail rotor or its control linkages .
( Plus less weight by not having those components ?
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think one of the downsides to a helictoper is that you have to counteract the rotational force of the rotors; an Ornithopter might be less complicated to control/less prone to catastrophic failure if something happens to the tail rotor or its control linkages.
(Plus less weight by not having those components?
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546671</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546665</id>
	<title>wind gusts</title>
	<author>Red Flayer</author>
	<datestamp>1246476660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>FTA, emphasis mine:<blockquote><div><p>"The goals of the NAV program -- namely to develop an approximately 10 gram aircraft that can hover for extended periods, can fly at forward speeds up to 10 meters per second, <b>can withstand 2.5 meter per second wind gusts</b>, can operate inside buildings, and have up to a kilometer command and control range -- will stretch our understanding of flight at these small sizes and require novel technology development." 2.5 m/s wind gust == ~5.6 mph wind gust.  For outdoor use, that seems like a pretty low threshold -- so the requirement that it "can operate inside buildings" seems to be the more of the primary use.<br> <br>That's a tall order, though, for something under 10 grams.  I wonder if it's necessary to have an active system to respond to wind gusts and auto-stabilize the flight, or if it's be possible via aerodynamics alone.</p></div></blockquote></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>FTA , emphasis mine : " The goals of the NAV program -- namely to develop an approximately 10 gram aircraft that can hover for extended periods , can fly at forward speeds up to 10 meters per second , can withstand 2.5 meter per second wind gusts , can operate inside buildings , and have up to a kilometer command and control range -- will stretch our understanding of flight at these small sizes and require novel technology development .
" 2.5 m/s wind gust = = ~ 5.6 mph wind gust .
For outdoor use , that seems like a pretty low threshold -- so the requirement that it " can operate inside buildings " seems to be the more of the primary use .
That 's a tall order , though , for something under 10 grams .
I wonder if it 's necessary to have an active system to respond to wind gusts and auto-stabilize the flight , or if it 's be possible via aerodynamics alone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FTA, emphasis mine:"The goals of the NAV program -- namely to develop an approximately 10 gram aircraft that can hover for extended periods, can fly at forward speeds up to 10 meters per second, can withstand 2.5 meter per second wind gusts, can operate inside buildings, and have up to a kilometer command and control range -- will stretch our understanding of flight at these small sizes and require novel technology development.
" 2.5 m/s wind gust == ~5.6 mph wind gust.
For outdoor use, that seems like a pretty low threshold -- so the requirement that it "can operate inside buildings" seems to be the more of the primary use.
That's a tall order, though, for something under 10 grams.
I wonder if it's necessary to have an active system to respond to wind gusts and auto-stabilize the flight, or if it's be possible via aerodynamics alone.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28551707</id>
	<title>Re:WowWee's Bat and Dragon also hover on wings.</title>
	<author>serutan</author>
	<datestamp>1246451400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wow! Thanks for posting that. I had no idea this type of toy was available, and so cheap. You solved an upcoming birthday dilemma for me!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow !
Thanks for posting that .
I had no idea this type of toy was available , and so cheap .
You solved an upcoming birthday dilemma for me !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow!
Thanks for posting that.
I had no idea this type of toy was available, and so cheap.
You solved an upcoming birthday dilemma for me!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28547363</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546989</id>
	<title>So now all they need is flying brooms</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246477800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>and DARPA can play Quidditch.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>and DARPA can play Quidditch .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and DARPA can play Quidditch.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28554269</id>
	<title>Not working like birds, but worse?</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1246474200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wonder, why the "wings" flap horizontally instead of vertically. Looks like except for the flapping part, it has nothing to do with how birds fly, but instead is just using uplift like traditional plane wings, but moves the wings quickly trough air for an added effect. This thing could not glide for example.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder , why the " wings " flap horizontally instead of vertically .
Looks like except for the flapping part , it has nothing to do with how birds fly , but instead is just using uplift like traditional plane wings , but moves the wings quickly trough air for an added effect .
This thing could not glide for example .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder, why the "wings" flap horizontally instead of vertically.
Looks like except for the flapping part, it has nothing to do with how birds fly, but instead is just using uplift like traditional plane wings, but moves the wings quickly trough air for an added effect.
This thing could not glide for example.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28549505</id>
	<title>Re:When can I buy a ridable griffon/dragon?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246442280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I read the subject as "When can I buy a ridable girlfriend".</p><p>And honestly, I think that's a better question for the engineers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I read the subject as " When can I buy a ridable girlfriend " .And honestly , I think that 's a better question for the engineers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I read the subject as "When can I buy a ridable girlfriend".And honestly, I think that's a better question for the engineers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546423</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546423</id>
	<title>When can I buy a ridable griffon/dragon?</title>
	<author>seanalltogether</author>
	<datestamp>1246475940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Dear engineering community, that's all I've ever wanted from you in life, please make it happen.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Dear engineering community , that 's all I 've ever wanted from you in life , please make it happen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dear engineering community, that's all I've ever wanted from you in life, please make it happen.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1747249_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28548719
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546739
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1747249_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28554307
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28547363
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1747249_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28552287
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546845
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546671
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1747249_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546691
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546423
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1747249_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546985
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546671
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1747249_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28552029
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28547343
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1747249_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28547769
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546557
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546089
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1747249_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28547579
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546251
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1747249_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28549505
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546423
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1747249_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28550845
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546159
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1747249_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28547299
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546671
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1747249_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28554701
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28547199
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1747249_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28557667
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28554283
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546249
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1747249_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28555367
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28547923
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546249
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1747249_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28548457
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546671
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1747249_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28551707
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28547363
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1747249_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28547859
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546423
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1747249_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546865
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546671
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1747249_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28548121
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546775
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1747249_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28555825
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546423
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1747249_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546873
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546671
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1747249_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28554827
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546423
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1747249_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546579
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546251
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1747249_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28549613
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546325
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1747249_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28551247
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546249
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_1747249_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28550471
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28547363
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1747249.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546739
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28548719
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1747249.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28554269
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1747249.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546577
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1747249.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546423
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28547859
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28555825
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546691
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28549505
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28554827
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1747249.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546671
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28547299
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546873
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28548457
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546845
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28552287
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546985
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546865
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1747249.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546017
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1747249.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546665
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1747249.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546521
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1747249.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546775
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28548121
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1747249.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546159
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28550845
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1747249.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546167
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1747249.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28547343
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28552029
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1747249.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546089
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546557
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28547769
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1747249.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546249
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28551247
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28554283
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28557667
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28547923
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28555367
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1747249.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28547159
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1747249.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546251
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28547579
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546579
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1747249.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28546325
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28549613
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1747249.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28547363
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28550471
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28551707
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28554307
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_1747249.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28547199
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_1747249.28554701
</commentlist>
</conversation>
