<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_11_22_0220214</id>
	<title>UAVs Go Green With Fuel-Cell Powered "Ion Tiger"</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1258914180000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="http://hughpickens.com/slashdot/" rel="nofollow">Hugh Pickens</a> writes <i>"Increasingly, the military is deploying unmanned aerial vehicles, or UAVs, as eyes in the sky to scan the ground for targets and threats, especially for missions that are too dangerous for manned aircraft.  Now Live Science reports that <a href="http://www.livescience.com/technology/091120-ideas-spy-power.html">a new robotic spy plane called 'Ion Tiger' will harness alternative energy</a> to make it more covert and longer lasting than battery-powered or engine-powered UAVs. A 550-watt, 0.75 horsepower hydrogen fuel cell will power the Ion Tiger with four times the efficiency of a comparable internal combustion engine and seven times the energy of the equivalent weight of batteries. When Ion Tiger took flight in October, it <a href="http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/10/091013123350.htm">exceeded any demonstration of electrically powered flight so far</a>, flying 23 hours and 17 minutes. 'And it carried a 5 lbs. payload to boot &mdash; enough to carry, say, a day-and-night camera,' says researcher Karen Swider-Lyons, head of the alternative energy section at the Naval Research Laboratory in Washington. 'No one has come close to flying 24 hours with a significant payload before.'  Another big advantage is the Ion Tiger's  reduced noise, heat and emissions. 'Think about lawnmowers or chainsaws &mdash; they're really loud,' says Swider-Lyons. '<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6WGb003R9M">It's hard to spy on people when they know you're there</a>, so you had to fly them at high altitudes to keep them from being heard.'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hugh Pickens writes " Increasingly , the military is deploying unmanned aerial vehicles , or UAVs , as eyes in the sky to scan the ground for targets and threats , especially for missions that are too dangerous for manned aircraft .
Now Live Science reports that a new robotic spy plane called 'Ion Tiger ' will harness alternative energy to make it more covert and longer lasting than battery-powered or engine-powered UAVs .
A 550-watt , 0.75 horsepower hydrogen fuel cell will power the Ion Tiger with four times the efficiency of a comparable internal combustion engine and seven times the energy of the equivalent weight of batteries .
When Ion Tiger took flight in October , it exceeded any demonstration of electrically powered flight so far , flying 23 hours and 17 minutes .
'And it carried a 5 lbs .
payload to boot    enough to carry , say , a day-and-night camera, ' says researcher Karen Swider-Lyons , head of the alternative energy section at the Naval Research Laboratory in Washington .
'No one has come close to flying 24 hours with a significant payload before .
' Another big advantage is the Ion Tiger 's reduced noise , heat and emissions .
'Think about lawnmowers or chainsaws    they 're really loud, ' says Swider-Lyons .
'It 's hard to spy on people when they know you 're there , so you had to fly them at high altitudes to keep them from being heard .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hugh Pickens writes "Increasingly, the military is deploying unmanned aerial vehicles, or UAVs, as eyes in the sky to scan the ground for targets and threats, especially for missions that are too dangerous for manned aircraft.
Now Live Science reports that a new robotic spy plane called 'Ion Tiger' will harness alternative energy to make it more covert and longer lasting than battery-powered or engine-powered UAVs.
A 550-watt, 0.75 horsepower hydrogen fuel cell will power the Ion Tiger with four times the efficiency of a comparable internal combustion engine and seven times the energy of the equivalent weight of batteries.
When Ion Tiger took flight in October, it exceeded any demonstration of electrically powered flight so far, flying 23 hours and 17 minutes.
'And it carried a 5 lbs.
payload to boot — enough to carry, say, a day-and-night camera,' says researcher Karen Swider-Lyons, head of the alternative energy section at the Naval Research Laboratory in Washington.
'No one has come close to flying 24 hours with a significant payload before.
'  Another big advantage is the Ion Tiger's  reduced noise, heat and emissions.
'Think about lawnmowers or chainsaws — they're really loud,' says Swider-Lyons.
'It's hard to spy on people when they know you're there, so you had to fly them at high altitudes to keep them from being heard.
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30192210</id>
	<title>Re:Thanks for the redundant unit conversion!</title>
	<author>mspohr</author>
	<datestamp>1258888740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Can't we all just stick to SI units to avoid problems like this?<p>
"The dimension of power is energy divided by time. The SI unit of power is the watt (W), which is equal to one joule per second." </p><p>
Horsepower is a non-SI unit.  "One horsepower is equivalent to 33,000 foot-pounds per minute, or the power required to lift 550 pounds by one foot in one second, and is equivalent to about 746 watts."</p><p>
550 watts would be 0.74 horsepower but why even bother with horsepower?  Only cowboys and the idle rich use horses.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ca n't we all just stick to SI units to avoid problems like this ?
" The dimension of power is energy divided by time .
The SI unit of power is the watt ( W ) , which is equal to one joule per second .
" Horsepower is a non-SI unit .
" One horsepower is equivalent to 33,000 foot-pounds per minute , or the power required to lift 550 pounds by one foot in one second , and is equivalent to about 746 watts .
" 550 watts would be 0.74 horsepower but why even bother with horsepower ?
Only cowboys and the idle rich use horses .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can't we all just stick to SI units to avoid problems like this?
"The dimension of power is energy divided by time.
The SI unit of power is the watt (W), which is equal to one joule per second.
" 
Horsepower is a non-SI unit.
"One horsepower is equivalent to 33,000 foot-pounds per minute, or the power required to lift 550 pounds by one foot in one second, and is equivalent to about 746 watts.
"
550 watts would be 0.74 horsepower but why even bother with horsepower?
Only cowboys and the idle rich use horses.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191854</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30192938</id>
	<title>Re:Huh?Christmas gifts,shoes,handbags,Jacket,ugg</title>
	<author>coolforsale117</author>
	<datestamp>1258901400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.coolforsale.com/" title="coolforsale.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.coolforsale.com/</a> [coolforsale.com]  Dear ladies and gentlemen Hello, In order to meet Christmas, Site launched Christmas spree, welcome new and old customers come to participate in the there are unexpected surprises, look forward to your arrival. Only this site have this treatmentOur goal is "Best quality, Best reputation , Best services". Your satisfaction is our main pursue. You can find the best products from us, meeting your different needs.Ladies and Gentlemen weicome to my coolforsale.com.Here,there are the most fashion products . Pass by but don't missit.Select your favorite clothing! Welcome to come next time ! Thank you! <a href="http://www.coolforsale.com/productlist.asp?id=s76" title="coolforsale.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.coolforsale.com/productlist.asp?id=s76</a> [coolforsale.com]  (Tracksuit w) ugg boot,POLO hoody,Jacket, Air jordan(1-24)shoes $33 Nike shox(R4,NZ,OZ,TL1,TL2,TL3) $35 Handbags(Coach lv fendi d&amp;g) $35 Tshirts (Polo<nobr> <wbr></nobr>,ed hardy,lacoste) $16 free shipping Thanks!!! Advance wish you a merry Christmas.</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.coolforsale.com/ [ coolforsale.com ] Dear ladies and gentlemen Hello , In order to meet Christmas , Site launched Christmas spree , welcome new and old customers come to participate in the there are unexpected surprises , look forward to your arrival .
Only this site have this treatmentOur goal is " Best quality , Best reputation , Best services " .
Your satisfaction is our main pursue .
You can find the best products from us , meeting your different needs.Ladies and Gentlemen weicome to my coolforsale.com.Here,there are the most fashion products .
Pass by but do n't missit.Select your favorite clothing !
Welcome to come next time !
Thank you !
http : //www.coolforsale.com/productlist.asp ? id = s76 [ coolforsale.com ] ( Tracksuit w ) ugg boot,POLO hoody,Jacket , Air jordan ( 1-24 ) shoes $ 33 Nike shox ( R4,NZ,OZ,TL1,TL2,TL3 ) $ 35 Handbags ( Coach lv fendi d&amp;g ) $ 35 Tshirts ( Polo ,ed hardy,lacoste ) $ 16 free shipping Thanks ! ! !
Advance wish you a merry Christmas .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.coolforsale.com/ [coolforsale.com]  Dear ladies and gentlemen Hello, In order to meet Christmas, Site launched Christmas spree, welcome new and old customers come to participate in the there are unexpected surprises, look forward to your arrival.
Only this site have this treatmentOur goal is "Best quality, Best reputation , Best services".
Your satisfaction is our main pursue.
You can find the best products from us, meeting your different needs.Ladies and Gentlemen weicome to my coolforsale.com.Here,there are the most fashion products .
Pass by but don't missit.Select your favorite clothing!
Welcome to come next time !
Thank you!
http://www.coolforsale.com/productlist.asp?id=s76 [coolforsale.com]  (Tracksuit w) ugg boot,POLO hoody,Jacket, Air jordan(1-24)shoes $33 Nike shox(R4,NZ,OZ,TL1,TL2,TL3) $35 Handbags(Coach lv fendi d&amp;g) $35 Tshirts (Polo ,ed hardy,lacoste) $16 free shipping Thanks!!!
Advance wish you a merry Christmas.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191470</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30192046</id>
	<title>Re:Huh?</title>
	<author>buybuydandavis</author>
	<datestamp>1258885860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> <i> When Ion Tiger took flight on October, it exceeded any demonstration of electrically powered flight so far, flying 23 hours and 17 minutes.</i> </p><p>No it didn't.  Have they never heard of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QinetiQ\_Zephyr" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Qinetiq Zephyr</a> [wikipedia.org]?  It flew for 82 hours.</p></div><p>The article claims that it is record for a fuel cell powered flight - not an electrically powered flight.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>When Ion Tiger took flight on October , it exceeded any demonstration of electrically powered flight so far , flying 23 hours and 17 minutes .
No it did n't .
Have they never heard of the Qinetiq Zephyr [ wikipedia.org ] ?
It flew for 82 hours.The article claims that it is record for a fuel cell powered flight - not an electrically powered flight .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>  When Ion Tiger took flight on October, it exceeded any demonstration of electrically powered flight so far, flying 23 hours and 17 minutes.
No it didn't.
Have they never heard of the Qinetiq Zephyr [wikipedia.org]?
It flew for 82 hours.The article claims that it is record for a fuel cell powered flight - not an electrically powered flight.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191470</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191682</id>
	<title>Re:Green don't matter</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258920900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The fuel cel is only green if you are separating the hydrogen and oxygen using power from a nuke plant.   Otherwise it costs a tremendous amount of fossil fuel energy to separate the hydrogen.</p><p>The only truly green fuels at this point are hydrogen and electricity from nuke plants, perhaps supplemented by solar and wind, although the later two are extremely expensive per watt in comparison, as well as extremely inefficient land-usage wise.</p><p>--M</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The fuel cel is only green if you are separating the hydrogen and oxygen using power from a nuke plant .
Otherwise it costs a tremendous amount of fossil fuel energy to separate the hydrogen.The only truly green fuels at this point are hydrogen and electricity from nuke plants , perhaps supplemented by solar and wind , although the later two are extremely expensive per watt in comparison , as well as extremely inefficient land-usage wise.--M</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The fuel cel is only green if you are separating the hydrogen and oxygen using power from a nuke plant.
Otherwise it costs a tremendous amount of fossil fuel energy to separate the hydrogen.The only truly green fuels at this point are hydrogen and electricity from nuke plants, perhaps supplemented by solar and wind, although the later two are extremely expensive per watt in comparison, as well as extremely inefficient land-usage wise.--M</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191482</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191482</id>
	<title>Green don't matter</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258831800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>The military really doesn't care much it it is "green" or not, they just want the UAV on mission as long as possible. If it takes a "green" fuel cell, then fine. But if it took a ton of black coal to do the mission, then the dirty coal would be the fuel.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The military really does n't care much it it is " green " or not , they just want the UAV on mission as long as possible .
If it takes a " green " fuel cell , then fine .
But if it took a ton of black coal to do the mission , then the dirty coal would be the fuel .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The military really doesn't care much it it is "green" or not, they just want the UAV on mission as long as possible.
If it takes a "green" fuel cell, then fine.
But if it took a ton of black coal to do the mission, then the dirty coal would be the fuel.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191672</id>
	<title>Re:easy fix</title>
	<author>MoeDumb</author>
	<datestamp>1258920780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Honey, is that you posting? All right all right, I'll get off the computer and mow the lawn! Although I never thought you'd stoop so low to troll here just to get my attention.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Honey , is that you posting ?
All right all right , I 'll get off the computer and mow the lawn !
Although I never thought you 'd stoop so low to troll here just to get my attention .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Honey, is that you posting?
All right all right, I'll get off the computer and mow the lawn!
Although I never thought you'd stoop so low to troll here just to get my attention.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191512</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30193244</id>
	<title>Re:Huh?</title>
	<author>TheKidWho</author>
	<datestamp>1258904460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Right, but I don't think that vehicle would make a very good spy plane<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p><p>With an 18+m wingspan, it's rather hard NOT to see it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Right , but I do n't think that vehicle would make a very good spy plane ; ) With an 18 + m wingspan , it 's rather hard NOT to see it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Right, but I don't think that vehicle would make a very good spy plane ;)With an 18+m wingspan, it's rather hard NOT to see it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191470</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30192240</id>
	<title>Liquid able to absorb and transport hydrogen</title>
	<author>DeltaQH</author>
	<datestamp>1258889220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What we really need is a liquid, at normal temperatures and maybe hydrocarbon based, able to absorb and transport hydrogen to fee later feed to a fuel cell.

I doubt that batteries and ultracapacitors can reach the energy density of a tank of gasoline/diesel, and the greater efficiency of electric engine will not close the gap.

If we could develop a such a liquid, without incurring in too much energy losses and emssions in producing and using it, it may be the solution for fuel cells.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What we really need is a liquid , at normal temperatures and maybe hydrocarbon based , able to absorb and transport hydrogen to fee later feed to a fuel cell .
I doubt that batteries and ultracapacitors can reach the energy density of a tank of gasoline/diesel , and the greater efficiency of electric engine will not close the gap .
If we could develop a such a liquid , without incurring in too much energy losses and emssions in producing and using it , it may be the solution for fuel cells .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What we really need is a liquid, at normal temperatures and maybe hydrocarbon based, able to absorb and transport hydrogen to fee later feed to a fuel cell.
I doubt that batteries and ultracapacitors can reach the energy density of a tank of gasoline/diesel, and the greater efficiency of electric engine will not close the gap.
If we could develop a such a liquid, without incurring in too much energy losses and emssions in producing and using it, it may be the solution for fuel cells.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30192778</id>
	<title>Re:Green don't matter</title>
	<author>amorsen</author>
	<datestamp>1258899780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wind is quite cheap actually, even compared to modern nuclear power plants -- as long as you compare actual price for e.g. the new Finnish plants instead of prices in the budget. Like other large projects, nuclear power plants have a notorious tendency to cost more than expected. Wind turbines on the other hand are off-the-shelf.</p><p>If you're trying to create hydrogen wind turbines are fairly good, but they can't beat just cracking natural gas cost-wise. You can use heat from nuclear plants directly to create hydrogen, skipping the inefficient low temperature turbines used at most nuclear power plants, but I'm not aware that this has been put into production anywhere.</p><p>Land used for wind turbines can be used for farming as well. The only limitation is that it must be possible for service personnel to reach the wind turbines. You can also put them in the sea, which while more expensive also provides a steadier supply of power, and fewer neighbours will complain. By the way, a wind turbine has been put up at the conference center where the climate conference in Copenhagen will be held. I live ~500m from it, and I expected to be able to hear it or perhaps see distracting reflections of the sunlight off the wings. So far there has been no annoyances from it at all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wind is quite cheap actually , even compared to modern nuclear power plants -- as long as you compare actual price for e.g .
the new Finnish plants instead of prices in the budget .
Like other large projects , nuclear power plants have a notorious tendency to cost more than expected .
Wind turbines on the other hand are off-the-shelf.If you 're trying to create hydrogen wind turbines are fairly good , but they ca n't beat just cracking natural gas cost-wise .
You can use heat from nuclear plants directly to create hydrogen , skipping the inefficient low temperature turbines used at most nuclear power plants , but I 'm not aware that this has been put into production anywhere.Land used for wind turbines can be used for farming as well .
The only limitation is that it must be possible for service personnel to reach the wind turbines .
You can also put them in the sea , which while more expensive also provides a steadier supply of power , and fewer neighbours will complain .
By the way , a wind turbine has been put up at the conference center where the climate conference in Copenhagen will be held .
I live ~ 500m from it , and I expected to be able to hear it or perhaps see distracting reflections of the sunlight off the wings .
So far there has been no annoyances from it at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wind is quite cheap actually, even compared to modern nuclear power plants -- as long as you compare actual price for e.g.
the new Finnish plants instead of prices in the budget.
Like other large projects, nuclear power plants have a notorious tendency to cost more than expected.
Wind turbines on the other hand are off-the-shelf.If you're trying to create hydrogen wind turbines are fairly good, but they can't beat just cracking natural gas cost-wise.
You can use heat from nuclear plants directly to create hydrogen, skipping the inefficient low temperature turbines used at most nuclear power plants, but I'm not aware that this has been put into production anywhere.Land used for wind turbines can be used for farming as well.
The only limitation is that it must be possible for service personnel to reach the wind turbines.
You can also put them in the sea, which while more expensive also provides a steadier supply of power, and fewer neighbours will complain.
By the way, a wind turbine has been put up at the conference center where the climate conference in Copenhagen will be held.
I live ~500m from it, and I expected to be able to hear it or perhaps see distracting reflections of the sunlight off the wings.
So far there has been no annoyances from it at all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191682</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191554</id>
	<title>Re:Huh?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258832700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The article didn't mention the craft having solar power as well to boost the amount of power available so it may still be the longest duration flight of any non-solar powered craft to date.  Aircraft that use fuel cells + solar powered electrolysis have been speculated to be able to fly indefinitely if properly engineered.  The solar power powers flight during the day and produces hydrogen from electrolysis and the fuel cells power the craft at night.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The article did n't mention the craft having solar power as well to boost the amount of power available so it may still be the longest duration flight of any non-solar powered craft to date .
Aircraft that use fuel cells + solar powered electrolysis have been speculated to be able to fly indefinitely if properly engineered .
The solar power powers flight during the day and produces hydrogen from electrolysis and the fuel cells power the craft at night .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The article didn't mention the craft having solar power as well to boost the amount of power available so it may still be the longest duration flight of any non-solar powered craft to date.
Aircraft that use fuel cells + solar powered electrolysis have been speculated to be able to fly indefinitely if properly engineered.
The solar power powers flight during the day and produces hydrogen from electrolysis and the fuel cells power the craft at night.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191470</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191612</id>
	<title>Re:Huh?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258920060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"The Zephyr holds the world record (unofficial) for the longest duration unmanned flight with a 82-hour, 61,000 foot flight in July 2008"</p><p>Keyword: unofficial.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" The Zephyr holds the world record ( unofficial ) for the longest duration unmanned flight with a 82-hour , 61,000 foot flight in July 2008 " Keyword : unofficial .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The Zephyr holds the world record (unofficial) for the longest duration unmanned flight with a 82-hour, 61,000 foot flight in July 2008"Keyword: unofficial.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191470</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191626</id>
	<title>Great place for a fuel cell</title>
	<author>WindBourne</author>
	<datestamp>1258920240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>In general, Fuel cells (and oil powered engines) are going to lose out to batteries. Battery (and ultracaps) tech is improving at a quick rate. HOWEVER, at this time, hydrogen fuel cells will win out if you disregard costs. I have little doubt that this craft will costs more to build than will either battery or engine based, but it does something that the other 2 do not do; The demands of the job.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In general , Fuel cells ( and oil powered engines ) are going to lose out to batteries .
Battery ( and ultracaps ) tech is improving at a quick rate .
HOWEVER , at this time , hydrogen fuel cells will win out if you disregard costs .
I have little doubt that this craft will costs more to build than will either battery or engine based , but it does something that the other 2 do not do ; The demands of the job .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In general, Fuel cells (and oil powered engines) are going to lose out to batteries.
Battery (and ultracaps) tech is improving at a quick rate.
HOWEVER, at this time, hydrogen fuel cells will win out if you disregard costs.
I have little doubt that this craft will costs more to build than will either battery or engine based, but it does something that the other 2 do not do; The demands of the job.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30194746</id>
	<title>Re:Green don't matter</title>
	<author>daem0n1x</author>
	<datestamp>1258915140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>But now they can alleviate their guilt when they bomb villages full of civilians and kill many women and children. They can say in the loudspeakers "Don't run, we are your friends. We even use green energy to avoid polluting your country".</htmltext>
<tokenext>But now they can alleviate their guilt when they bomb villages full of civilians and kill many women and children .
They can say in the loudspeakers " Do n't run , we are your friends .
We even use green energy to avoid polluting your country " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But now they can alleviate their guilt when they bomb villages full of civilians and kill many women and children.
They can say in the loudspeakers "Don't run, we are your friends.
We even use green energy to avoid polluting your country".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191482</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191710</id>
	<title>The hummingbird laughs at your 5 pound capacity</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258921320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nobody has heard about the OFFICIAL holder of the rotocraft endurance tests? Boeings A160.</p><p>"It was the longest un-refueled flight of any rotorcraft, and the FAI has awarded Boeing the official endurance record in the 500 kg to 2,500 kg autonomously controlled UAV class for the flight.<br>-Staff. "Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) World Records". F&#233;d&#233;ration A&#233;ronautique Internationale. http://records.fai.org/documents.asp?from=u&amp;id=15059. Retrieved 2008-11-30."</p><p>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing\_A160\_Hummingbird</p><p>Why are they bragging about a damn plane that has to continuously change positions to stay in the air with only a 5lb capacity when the have a rotocraft that can remain stationary and carry 1000+ pounds!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nobody has heard about the OFFICIAL holder of the rotocraft endurance tests ?
Boeings A160 .
" It was the longest un-refueled flight of any rotorcraft , and the FAI has awarded Boeing the official endurance record in the 500 kg to 2,500 kg autonomously controlled UAV class for the flight.-Staff .
" Unmanned Aerial Vehicle ( UAV ) World Records " .
F   d   ration A   ronautique Internationale .
http : //records.fai.org/documents.asp ? from = u&amp;id = 15059. Retrieved 2008-11-30 .
" http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing \ _A160 \ _HummingbirdWhy are they bragging about a damn plane that has to continuously change positions to stay in the air with only a 5lb capacity when the have a rotocraft that can remain stationary and carry 1000 + pounds !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nobody has heard about the OFFICIAL holder of the rotocraft endurance tests?
Boeings A160.
"It was the longest un-refueled flight of any rotorcraft, and the FAI has awarded Boeing the official endurance record in the 500 kg to 2,500 kg autonomously controlled UAV class for the flight.-Staff.
"Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) World Records".
Fédération Aéronautique Internationale.
http://records.fai.org/documents.asp?from=u&amp;id=15059. Retrieved 2008-11-30.
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing\_A160\_HummingbirdWhy are they bragging about a damn plane that has to continuously change positions to stay in the air with only a 5lb capacity when the have a rotocraft that can remain stationary and carry 1000+ pounds!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191596</id>
	<title>Re:Huh?</title>
	<author>Rei</author>
	<datestamp>1258833420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Fuel cell plus solar powered electrolysis"?  Yeah, throwing away 70-80\% of your energy is a good way to stay aloft, right?  Low loads on a fuel cell means tank-to-drive efficiency of ~45\%, and small-scale electrolysis tends to be very inefficient, generally 50\% or less (the big steam electrolysis systems are more efficient).</p><p>The Zephyr stayed aloft with lithium-sulfur batteries.  Being still experimental, they don't have a very long cycle life yet (although there have been some big lab breakthroughs in this regard), but they have more energy storage capacity than li-ion.  And more importantly, they don't throw away the overwhelming majority of their collected energy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Fuel cell plus solar powered electrolysis " ?
Yeah , throwing away 70-80 \ % of your energy is a good way to stay aloft , right ?
Low loads on a fuel cell means tank-to-drive efficiency of ~ 45 \ % , and small-scale electrolysis tends to be very inefficient , generally 50 \ % or less ( the big steam electrolysis systems are more efficient ) .The Zephyr stayed aloft with lithium-sulfur batteries .
Being still experimental , they do n't have a very long cycle life yet ( although there have been some big lab breakthroughs in this regard ) , but they have more energy storage capacity than li-ion .
And more importantly , they do n't throw away the overwhelming majority of their collected energy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Fuel cell plus solar powered electrolysis"?
Yeah, throwing away 70-80\% of your energy is a good way to stay aloft, right?
Low loads on a fuel cell means tank-to-drive efficiency of ~45\%, and small-scale electrolysis tends to be very inefficient, generally 50\% or less (the big steam electrolysis systems are more efficient).The Zephyr stayed aloft with lithium-sulfur batteries.
Being still experimental, they don't have a very long cycle life yet (although there have been some big lab breakthroughs in this regard), but they have more energy storage capacity than li-ion.
And more importantly, they don't throw away the overwhelming majority of their collected energy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191554</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191516</id>
	<title>Tiger in the tank</title>
	<author>Kell Bengal</author>
	<datestamp>1258832220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Put a tiger in your... er... cells!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Put a tiger in your... er... cells !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Put a tiger in your... er... cells!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191656</id>
	<title>toy story come to life</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258920600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>yea<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. the land of the free and home of the brave<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..</p><p>has become the land of the flag waving corporate slaves<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. and the home of cowards that use machines to fight their battles from thousands of feet<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. and thousands of miles away<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>yea .. the land of the free and home of the brave ..has become the land of the flag waving corporate slaves .. and the home of cowards that use machines to fight their battles from thousands of feet .. and thousands of miles away . .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>yea .. the land of the free and home of the brave ..has become the land of the flag waving corporate slaves .. and the home of cowards that use machines to fight their battles from thousands of feet .. and thousands of miles away ..</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30192742</id>
	<title>Re:Tesla</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258899120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"A 550-watt, 0.75 horsepower hydrogen fuel cell will power the Ion Tiger"</p><p>Pretty incredible that the Tesla can do 0-60 in 3.9 seconds on 0.75 HP<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" A 550-watt , 0.75 horsepower hydrogen fuel cell will power the Ion Tiger " Pretty incredible that the Tesla can do 0-60 in 3.9 seconds on 0.75 HP ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"A 550-watt, 0.75 horsepower hydrogen fuel cell will power the Ion Tiger"Pretty incredible that the Tesla can do 0-60 in 3.9 seconds on 0.75 HP ;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191882</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30194762</id>
	<title>Re:Huh?</title>
	<author>fnj</author>
	<datestamp>1258915260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>ICEs are generally 35-45\% efficient in peak operation.</p></div></blockquote><p>ICE's are generally most efficient at 60-80\% of max hp at optimum rpm (less so at full or "peak" power, and less at lower power).  Certainly 35-45\% thermal efficiency at the highest efficiency operating point is achievable, but I don't think any available lightweight 0.75 hp ICE's come anywhere near that much.  Maybe half; maybe less.  Glow plug model airplane engines are fantastically inefficient; spark ignition somewhat better.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>ICEs are generally 35-45 \ % efficient in peak operation.ICE 's are generally most efficient at 60-80 \ % of max hp at optimum rpm ( less so at full or " peak " power , and less at lower power ) .
Certainly 35-45 \ % thermal efficiency at the highest efficiency operating point is achievable , but I do n't think any available lightweight 0.75 hp ICE 's come anywhere near that much .
Maybe half ; maybe less .
Glow plug model airplane engines are fantastically inefficient ; spark ignition somewhat better .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ICEs are generally 35-45\% efficient in peak operation.ICE's are generally most efficient at 60-80\% of max hp at optimum rpm (less so at full or "peak" power, and less at lower power).
Certainly 35-45\% thermal efficiency at the highest efficiency operating point is achievable, but I don't think any available lightweight 0.75 hp ICE's come anywhere near that much.
Maybe half; maybe less.
Glow plug model airplane engines are fantastically inefficient; spark ignition somewhat better.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191550</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30192202</id>
	<title>For domestic use only</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258888620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> 'It's hard to spy on people when they know you're there,</p></div><p>Ask yourself: why care of the targets know they're being watched? In a hostile situation this acts as a a means of suppressing activities - the bad guys won't enact their badness while there's a drone buzzing around. That's effectively what you're intending, so the spy-plane is as good at preventing attacks as an armed intervention. However, if you want to use it for surveillance against people who might have a legitimate complaint against being watched - for instance your own citizens, then yes, having them not be aware of your nefarious activities is a BIG help.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>'It 's hard to spy on people when they know you 're there,Ask yourself : why care of the targets know they 're being watched ?
In a hostile situation this acts as a a means of suppressing activities - the bad guys wo n't enact their badness while there 's a drone buzzing around .
That 's effectively what you 're intending , so the spy-plane is as good at preventing attacks as an armed intervention .
However , if you want to use it for surveillance against people who might have a legitimate complaint against being watched - for instance your own citizens , then yes , having them not be aware of your nefarious activities is a BIG help .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> 'It's hard to spy on people when they know you're there,Ask yourself: why care of the targets know they're being watched?
In a hostile situation this acts as a a means of suppressing activities - the bad guys won't enact their badness while there's a drone buzzing around.
That's effectively what you're intending, so the spy-plane is as good at preventing attacks as an armed intervention.
However, if you want to use it for surveillance against people who might have a legitimate complaint against being watched - for instance your own citizens, then yes, having them not be aware of your nefarious activities is a BIG help.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30193376</id>
	<title>I for one...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258905660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>welcome yada yada...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>welcome yada yada.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>welcome yada yada...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30192560</id>
	<title>Awww..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258896240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But what fun would be chainsaws without the 'wrooom'? Imagine the Friday 13th screenplay: "the masked killer approached her, with the chainsaw softly buzzing in his hand"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But what fun would be chainsaws without the 'wrooom ' ?
Imagine the Friday 13th screenplay : " the masked killer approached her , with the chainsaw softly buzzing in his hand "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But what fun would be chainsaws without the 'wrooom'?
Imagine the Friday 13th screenplay: "the masked killer approached her, with the chainsaw softly buzzing in his hand"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30193800</id>
	<title>Size difference</title>
	<author>SmallFurryCreature</author>
	<datestamp>1258908900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Your is the size of a normal passenger carrying helicopter, theirs is the size of a model plane.
</p><p>Somehow I think your thingy requires a LOT more in terms of support then theirs.
</p><p>Theirs can be carried by a field unit, yours needs a support base.
</p><p>Why can't you spot this simple thing by the fact yours comes on the back of a large truck while theirs is carried by hand?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your is the size of a normal passenger carrying helicopter , theirs is the size of a model plane .
Somehow I think your thingy requires a LOT more in terms of support then theirs .
Theirs can be carried by a field unit , yours needs a support base .
Why ca n't you spot this simple thing by the fact yours comes on the back of a large truck while theirs is carried by hand ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your is the size of a normal passenger carrying helicopter, theirs is the size of a model plane.
Somehow I think your thingy requires a LOT more in terms of support then theirs.
Theirs can be carried by a field unit, yours needs a support base.
Why can't you spot this simple thing by the fact yours comes on the back of a large truck while theirs is carried by hand?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191710</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191550</id>
	<title>Re:Huh?</title>
	<author>Rei</author>
	<datestamp>1258832700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Also on the subject of misleading claims:</p><p><i>A 550-watt, 0.75 horsepower hydrogen fuel cell will power the Ion Tiger with four times the efficiency of a comparable internal combustion engine</i></p><p>That would mean an efficiency of greater than 100\%.  Which is obviously nonsense.  ICEs are generally 35-45\% efficient in peak operation.  If you want to say that you're not comparing peak operation, then you can't compare fuel cells at peak operation, either.  For example, when driving the NEDC (the New European Drive Cycle, one that generally is gentler than our combined city/highway cycles), the tank-to-wheel efficiency of a fuel cell stack is <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?\_ob=ArticleURL&amp;\_udi=B6TH1-4MTC6HN-2&amp;\_user=10&amp;\_rdoc=1&amp;\_fmt=&amp;\_orig=search&amp;\_sort=d&amp;\_docanchor=&amp;view=c&amp;\_acct=C000050221&amp;\_version=1&amp;\_urlVersion=0&amp;\_userid=10&amp;md5=c1d6c915c43ce214984f650347ddf69d" title="sciencedirect.com">about 36\%</a> [sciencedirect.com] (gasoline engines in the NEDC are generally 20-25\% efficient, and diesels, 25-30\%).  Even at low, steady loads, fuel cells are about 45\%.  And that's tank-to-wheel -- i.e., doesn't include the losses in making hydrogen, which are significant.  Yes, you can get really high efficiencies, 50-70\% or so, with fuel cells in the lab.  But to do that, you have to feed them pre-compressed oxygen rather than low-pressure air, and not count any accessory loads.</p><p><i>and seven times the energy of the equivalent weight of batteries</i></p><p>Notice they chose the one metric that favors H2 -- rather than, say, volume, durability, power, price per watt, fuel price per energy or fuel price per watt, or any other such metric that fuel cells bomb at.  And they're almost certainly just comparing the fuel, ignoring how heavy the fuel cell stack is.</p><p><i>Another big advantage is the Ion Tiger's reduced noise, heat and emissions.</i></p><p>Fuel cells lose out to battery-electric in all three of those regards.</p><p>Now, I will say that UAVs are a better role for fuel cells than cars -- steadier loads, cost is less of an object, and a higher percent of the vehicle's mass needs to be energy storage.  But they still aren't very attractive.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Also on the subject of misleading claims : A 550-watt , 0.75 horsepower hydrogen fuel cell will power the Ion Tiger with four times the efficiency of a comparable internal combustion engineThat would mean an efficiency of greater than 100 \ % .
Which is obviously nonsense .
ICEs are generally 35-45 \ % efficient in peak operation .
If you want to say that you 're not comparing peak operation , then you ca n't compare fuel cells at peak operation , either .
For example , when driving the NEDC ( the New European Drive Cycle , one that generally is gentler than our combined city/highway cycles ) , the tank-to-wheel efficiency of a fuel cell stack is about 36 \ % [ sciencedirect.com ] ( gasoline engines in the NEDC are generally 20-25 \ % efficient , and diesels , 25-30 \ % ) .
Even at low , steady loads , fuel cells are about 45 \ % .
And that 's tank-to-wheel -- i.e. , does n't include the losses in making hydrogen , which are significant .
Yes , you can get really high efficiencies , 50-70 \ % or so , with fuel cells in the lab .
But to do that , you have to feed them pre-compressed oxygen rather than low-pressure air , and not count any accessory loads.and seven times the energy of the equivalent weight of batteriesNotice they chose the one metric that favors H2 -- rather than , say , volume , durability , power , price per watt , fuel price per energy or fuel price per watt , or any other such metric that fuel cells bomb at .
And they 're almost certainly just comparing the fuel , ignoring how heavy the fuel cell stack is.Another big advantage is the Ion Tiger 's reduced noise , heat and emissions.Fuel cells lose out to battery-electric in all three of those regards.Now , I will say that UAVs are a better role for fuel cells than cars -- steadier loads , cost is less of an object , and a higher percent of the vehicle 's mass needs to be energy storage .
But they still are n't very attractive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Also on the subject of misleading claims:A 550-watt, 0.75 horsepower hydrogen fuel cell will power the Ion Tiger with four times the efficiency of a comparable internal combustion engineThat would mean an efficiency of greater than 100\%.
Which is obviously nonsense.
ICEs are generally 35-45\% efficient in peak operation.
If you want to say that you're not comparing peak operation, then you can't compare fuel cells at peak operation, either.
For example, when driving the NEDC (the New European Drive Cycle, one that generally is gentler than our combined city/highway cycles), the tank-to-wheel efficiency of a fuel cell stack is about 36\% [sciencedirect.com] (gasoline engines in the NEDC are generally 20-25\% efficient, and diesels, 25-30\%).
Even at low, steady loads, fuel cells are about 45\%.
And that's tank-to-wheel -- i.e., doesn't include the losses in making hydrogen, which are significant.
Yes, you can get really high efficiencies, 50-70\% or so, with fuel cells in the lab.
But to do that, you have to feed them pre-compressed oxygen rather than low-pressure air, and not count any accessory loads.and seven times the energy of the equivalent weight of batteriesNotice they chose the one metric that favors H2 -- rather than, say, volume, durability, power, price per watt, fuel price per energy or fuel price per watt, or any other such metric that fuel cells bomb at.
And they're almost certainly just comparing the fuel, ignoring how heavy the fuel cell stack is.Another big advantage is the Ion Tiger's reduced noise, heat and emissions.Fuel cells lose out to battery-electric in all three of those regards.Now, I will say that UAVs are a better role for fuel cells than cars -- steadier loads, cost is less of an object, and a higher percent of the vehicle's mass needs to be energy storage.
But they still aren't very attractive.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191470</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30196182</id>
	<title>Re:Thanks for the redundant unit conversion!</title>
	<author>calidoscope</author>
	<datestamp>1258883160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>
A perhaps more useful definition of horsepower is 376 mile-pounds per hour, i.e. 1 pound of thrust at 375 MPH equals one horsepower.
 <p>


While SI is is a bit more consistent that Imperial/US customary units (would be nice if the unit of length was the light-nanosecond), there are cases where calculations are easier to do in "English" units than SI. An example is calculating the power in HP required for an airplane in level flight which is simply the product of weight in pounds times speed in MPH divided by the product of propeller efficiency and 375. To do the same calculations in SI would require taking into account the gravitational constant (~9.8m/s/s) and converting from km/hr to m/s. </p><p>

There are, of course, many situations (probably the majority) where SI is much more convenient than "English" units. I do cringe, however, when someone uses kg as a unit of weight...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A perhaps more useful definition of horsepower is 376 mile-pounds per hour , i.e .
1 pound of thrust at 375 MPH equals one horsepower .
While SI is is a bit more consistent that Imperial/US customary units ( would be nice if the unit of length was the light-nanosecond ) , there are cases where calculations are easier to do in " English " units than SI .
An example is calculating the power in HP required for an airplane in level flight which is simply the product of weight in pounds times speed in MPH divided by the product of propeller efficiency and 375 .
To do the same calculations in SI would require taking into account the gravitational constant ( ~ 9.8m/s/s ) and converting from km/hr to m/s .
There are , of course , many situations ( probably the majority ) where SI is much more convenient than " English " units .
I do cringe , however , when someone uses kg as a unit of weight.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
A perhaps more useful definition of horsepower is 376 mile-pounds per hour, i.e.
1 pound of thrust at 375 MPH equals one horsepower.
While SI is is a bit more consistent that Imperial/US customary units (would be nice if the unit of length was the light-nanosecond), there are cases where calculations are easier to do in "English" units than SI.
An example is calculating the power in HP required for an airplane in level flight which is simply the product of weight in pounds times speed in MPH divided by the product of propeller efficiency and 375.
To do the same calculations in SI would require taking into account the gravitational constant (~9.8m/s/s) and converting from km/hr to m/s.
There are, of course, many situations (probably the majority) where SI is much more convenient than "English" units.
I do cringe, however, when someone uses kg as a unit of weight...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30192210</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30193502</id>
	<title>furureman says:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258906500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>pffft, noobs, I'm typing from my fusion-powered phone right now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>pffft , noobs , I 'm typing from my fusion-powered phone right now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>pffft, noobs, I'm typing from my fusion-powered phone right now.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191592</id>
	<title>ion + tiger =</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258833360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>iger?</htmltext>
<tokenext>iger ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>iger?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30192786</id>
	<title>Ion Tiger?</title>
	<author>mynickslongerthanurs</author>
	<datestamp>1258899900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What's next? Laser Sharks?</htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's next ?
Laser Sharks ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's next?
Laser Sharks?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191512</id>
	<title>easy fix</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258832160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Think about lawnmowers or chainsaws -- [conventional UAVs are] really loud...It's hard to spy on people when they know you're there</p></div></blockquote><p>Just pay some neighbors to mow their lawn all day so that nobody knows the difference.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Think about lawnmowers or chainsaws -- [ conventional UAVs are ] really loud...It 's hard to spy on people when they know you 're thereJust pay some neighbors to mow their lawn all day so that nobody knows the difference .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Think about lawnmowers or chainsaws -- [conventional UAVs are] really loud...It's hard to spy on people when they know you're thereJust pay some neighbors to mow their lawn all day so that nobody knows the difference.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30193864</id>
	<title>Re:For domestic use only</title>
	<author>Captain Nitpick</author>
	<datestamp>1258909320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Ask yourself: why care of the targets know they're being watched?</p></div><p>Firstly, when the enemy knows that you're watching, he can attempt to deceive you.</p><p>Secondly, if the enemy can reliably know when he is being watched, then he can also reliably know when he is not being watched and is thus free to do whatever he wants.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ask yourself : why care of the targets know they 're being watched ? Firstly , when the enemy knows that you 're watching , he can attempt to deceive you.Secondly , if the enemy can reliably know when he is being watched , then he can also reliably know when he is not being watched and is thus free to do whatever he wants .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ask yourself: why care of the targets know they're being watched?Firstly, when the enemy knows that you're watching, he can attempt to deceive you.Secondly, if the enemy can reliably know when he is being watched, then he can also reliably know when he is not being watched and is thus free to do whatever he wants.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30192202</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30192590</id>
	<title>Nothing new under the sun...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258897080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In other words, ever since man lived in caves and hunted for mammoths, research and development has always had military weapons as top priority. Slightly depressing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In other words , ever since man lived in caves and hunted for mammoths , research and development has always had military weapons as top priority .
Slightly depressing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In other words, ever since man lived in caves and hunted for mammoths, research and development has always had military weapons as top priority.
Slightly depressing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30194380</id>
	<title>Re:Huh?</title>
	<author>Hal\_Porter</author>
	<datestamp>1258912680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That was based on reverse engineered Goa'uld technology from Antarctica though. This one is 100\% human developed. Apart from the ZPMs. And the anti gravity drive.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That was based on reverse engineered Goa'uld technology from Antarctica though .
This one is 100 \ % human developed .
Apart from the ZPMs .
And the anti gravity drive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That was based on reverse engineered Goa'uld technology from Antarctica though.
This one is 100\% human developed.
Apart from the ZPMs.
And the anti gravity drive.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191470</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30201596</id>
	<title>Re:ion + tiger =</title>
	<author>AP31R0N</author>
	<datestamp>1258989420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>tigerion. TIE-gair-EE-on.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>tigerion .
TIE-gair-EE-on .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>tigerion.
TIE-gair-EE-on.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191592</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191882</id>
	<title>Tesla</title>
	<author>tsa</author>
	<datestamp>1258881480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One of these small cells in a Tesla would make it an awesome car. Two of them in a Tesla would make it an even more awesome car. I really think the future is fuel cells, not batteries. Batteries are just a 'bridging' technology until we have overcome all the challenges surrounding a conversion to fuel cells and hydrogen fuel.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One of these small cells in a Tesla would make it an awesome car .
Two of them in a Tesla would make it an even more awesome car .
I really think the future is fuel cells , not batteries .
Batteries are just a 'bridging ' technology until we have overcome all the challenges surrounding a conversion to fuel cells and hydrogen fuel .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One of these small cells in a Tesla would make it an awesome car.
Two of them in a Tesla would make it an even more awesome car.
I really think the future is fuel cells, not batteries.
Batteries are just a 'bridging' technology until we have overcome all the challenges surrounding a conversion to fuel cells and hydrogen fuel.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191470</id>
	<title>Huh?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258831680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i> When Ion Tiger took flight on October, it exceeded any demonstration of electrically powered flight so far, flying 23 hours and 17 minutes.</i></p><p>No it didn't.  Have they never heard of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QinetiQ\_Zephyr" title="wikipedia.org">Qinetiq Zephyr</a> [wikipedia.org]?  It flew for 82 hours.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When Ion Tiger took flight on October , it exceeded any demonstration of electrically powered flight so far , flying 23 hours and 17 minutes.No it did n't .
Have they never heard of the Qinetiq Zephyr [ wikipedia.org ] ?
It flew for 82 hours .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> When Ion Tiger took flight on October, it exceeded any demonstration of electrically powered flight so far, flying 23 hours and 17 minutes.No it didn't.
Have they never heard of the Qinetiq Zephyr [wikipedia.org]?
It flew for 82 hours.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30194218</id>
	<title>Loudmouth Liberal Agenda</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258911720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I read comments in this forum and wonder why some of these educated "intelligent" responders can't comprehend that the equipment was engineered from specifications laid out by structured goals.The design is beyond R&amp;D when it goes on a mission. It's not "you and your buddies" building model airplanes in the basement with mom's new weekend Uncle. Then I remember, it is a design of aggression. War machines will always rankle these peace-niks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I read comments in this forum and wonder why some of these educated " intelligent " responders ca n't comprehend that the equipment was engineered from specifications laid out by structured goals.The design is beyond R&amp;D when it goes on a mission .
It 's not " you and your buddies " building model airplanes in the basement with mom 's new weekend Uncle .
Then I remember , it is a design of aggression .
War machines will always rankle these peace-niks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I read comments in this forum and wonder why some of these educated "intelligent" responders can't comprehend that the equipment was engineered from specifications laid out by structured goals.The design is beyond R&amp;D when it goes on a mission.
It's not "you and your buddies" building model airplanes in the basement with mom's new weekend Uncle.
Then I remember, it is a design of aggression.
War machines will always rankle these peace-niks.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191618</id>
	<title>Get this out of your head now</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258920180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's the ion the tiger<br>It's the thrill of the fight<br>Rising up to the challenge of our rival...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's the ion the tigerIt 's the thrill of the fightRising up to the challenge of our rival.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's the ion the tigerIt's the thrill of the fightRising up to the challenge of our rival...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191854</id>
	<title>Thanks for the redundant unit conversion!</title>
	<author>voltaicsca</author>
	<datestamp>1258880880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ok, great.  550 watts is approximately equal to 75 horsepower... Did they really need to include that?  And that's before the energy is converted from electrical to mechanical, so that is, in fact a completely useless number.

I understand goverment reporters not fully grasping units of measure, but slashdotters?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ok , great .
550 watts is approximately equal to 75 horsepower... Did they really need to include that ?
And that 's before the energy is converted from electrical to mechanical , so that is , in fact a completely useless number .
I understand goverment reporters not fully grasping units of measure , but slashdotters ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ok, great.
550 watts is approximately equal to 75 horsepower... Did they really need to include that?
And that's before the energy is converted from electrical to mechanical, so that is, in fact a completely useless number.
I understand goverment reporters not fully grasping units of measure, but slashdotters?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191926</id>
	<title>yes But,</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258882680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Can it Run Linux?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Can it Run Linux ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can it Run Linux?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30192968</id>
	<title>Re:Green don't matter</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258901760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Right. How does the army get its electricity in Afghanistan? A very long cable from the &#220;S, or Europe, or India?</p><p>Of course energy efficiency matters for the army. More often than not they have to bring diesel in with trucks and run generators.<br>These convoys are expensive and vulnerable. Tons of black coal are definitely out of the question.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Right .
How does the army get its electricity in Afghanistan ?
A very long cable from the   S , or Europe , or India ? Of course energy efficiency matters for the army .
More often than not they have to bring diesel in with trucks and run generators.These convoys are expensive and vulnerable .
Tons of black coal are definitely out of the question .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Right.
How does the army get its electricity in Afghanistan?
A very long cable from the ÜS, or Europe, or India?Of course energy efficiency matters for the army.
More often than not they have to bring diesel in with trucks and run generators.These convoys are expensive and vulnerable.
Tons of black coal are definitely out of the question.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191482</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_0220214_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30196182
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30192210
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191854
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_0220214_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30192778
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191682
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191482
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_0220214_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30192742
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191882
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_0220214_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30194380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191470
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_0220214_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30192938
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191470
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_0220214_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30193244
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191470
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_0220214_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30192968
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191482
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_0220214_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191672
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191512
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_0220214_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191612
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191470
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_0220214_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191596
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191554
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191470
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_0220214_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30193800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191710
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_0220214_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30194746
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191482
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_0220214_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30193864
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30192202
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_0220214_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30192046
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191470
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_0220214_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30194762
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191550
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191470
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_22_0220214_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30201596
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191592
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_22_0220214.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30192202
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30193864
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_22_0220214.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191470
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30194380
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191612
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191554
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191596
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191550
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30194762
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30192938
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30192046
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30193244
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_22_0220214.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191482
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30192968
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30194746
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191682
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30192778
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_22_0220214.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191710
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30193800
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_22_0220214.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191592
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30201596
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_22_0220214.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191512
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191672
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_22_0220214.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191626
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_22_0220214.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191854
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30192210
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30196182
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_22_0220214.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30191882
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_22_0220214.30192742
</commentlist>
</conversation>
