Mechanical failures like this are easily checked out – there is no magic or aliens involved. I expect that if a little green guy could make it here from space they could surely avoid a slow moving turbine blade.

İf a UAV hit it then bye bye UAV – it would have been found near the turbine.

Be nice for some proper follow up by the turbine supplier to say what really happened in place of letting fools ramble on.

Mechanical failures like this are easily checked out – there is no magic or aliens involved. I expect that if a little green guy could make it here from space they could surely avoid a slow moving turbine blade.

İf a UAV hit it then bye bye UAV – it would have been found near the turbine.

Be nice for some proper follow up by the turbine supplier to say what really happened in place of letting fools ramble on.

not if it was rotating at the time, it wouldn’t – the inertia would cause it to be thrown, on axis with the rotation. that may mean up, down, or anywhere in between.

at any rate, they’ve uncovered the ‘missing’ blade, so no need to worry about that.

as for thinking outside the box, how about this:

water got into the rotor mechanism, then froze, expanding and pushing the prop from it’s intended position. this caused metal to grind against metal, creating noise and friction/heat. the heat melted the ice, upon which the rotor mechanism fell back into place (albeit, presumably, damaged). the inertia of the prop’s modulated position, coupled with the heat/malleability caused one or more blades to become off balance, leading to further grinding and most likely a good wobble in one or more blades, which created the “catastrophic” conditions necessary for a fatigue-related failure.

that’s an educated guess based on what I’ve heard of witness reports, what I’ve seen of the damage, and a decent understanding of physics. thinking outside the box, I’d venture to suggest the only reason a UFO explanation was so widely reported rather than a variant on my much more obvious theory is because Ecotricity and co would really rather not advertise the fact that their wind turbines are fundamentally ill-suited to icy conditions, in spite of the anti-icing system on most turbines’ blades.

another, equally simple explanation would be that the anti-icing failed on another turbine, causing ice build up which was eventually thrown from one turbine directly at the (now broken) other. this seems unlikely given how far away the blade was, but it’s entirely possible this started the process described in the first explanation, rather than ice interfering with the rotor mechanism.

however you look at it, it wasn’t little green men.

not if it was rotating at the time, it wouldn’t – the inertia would cause it to be thrown, on axis with the rotation. that may mean up, down, or anywhere in between.

at any rate, they’ve uncovered the ‘missing’ blade, so no need to worry about that.

as for thinking outside the box, how about this:

water got into the rotor mechanism, then froze, expanding and pushing the prop from it’s intended position. this caused metal to grind against metal, creating noise and friction/heat. the heat melted the ice, upon which the rotor mechanism fell back into place (albeit, presumably, damaged). the inertia of the prop’s modulated position, coupled with the heat/malleability caused one or more blades to become off balance, leading to further grinding and most likely a good wobble in one or more blades, which created the “catastrophic” conditions necessary for a fatigue-related failure.

that’s an educated guess based on what I’ve heard of witness reports, what I’ve seen of the damage, and a decent understanding of physics. thinking outside the box, I’d venture to suggest the only reason a UFO explanation was so widely reported rather than a variant on my much more obvious theory is because Ecotricity and co would really rather not advertise the fact that their wind turbines are fundamentally ill-suited to icy conditions, in spite of the anti-icing system on most turbines’ blades.

another, equally simple explanation would be that the anti-icing failed on another turbine, causing ice build up which was eventually thrown from one turbine directly at the (now broken) other. this seems unlikely given how far away the blade was, but it’s entirely possible this started the process described in the first explanation, rather than ice interfering with the rotor mechanism.

however you look at it, it wasn’t little green men.

Given what I know of physics-a blade that size sheared off would have fallen straight to the ground. Also, if another known air vehicle had been involved given the nature of the blade and the damage to the other blade, along with the fact the other turbines were untouched-leaves more questions than answers.

It is time to think outside the box.

Given what I know of physics-a blade that size sheared off would have fallen straight to the ground. Also, if another known air vehicle had been involved given the nature of the blade and the damage to the other blade, along with the fact the other turbines were untouched-leaves more questions than answers.

It is time to think outside the box.

I just hope that the physical evidence is examined forensically to try to find out what caused this damage.

I just hope that the physical evidence is examined forensically to try to find out what caused this damage.