Hey everybody!

As many of you know, we have been posting here on SBO for many years now, and it is for a reason... we feel that this is the best (most professional) forum site on the web. Until about three months ago, I wasn't even aware of some of the other sites, but my business has changed all that. As you know, we have cruised in a rather "decked out" Hunter 25.5 . We have cruised that boat thousands and thousands of miles and when we moved to St. Aug, we even lived on Empty Pocket full time at a dock (yuck!)for a while.

Some of you may know the story of that stern-mounted solar contraption on our boat that we call the Solar Stik, and many of you have e-mailed questions about where I got it... Well, I have spent the last three years redesigning, testing, and perfecting the unit. It is now in full production here in FL at our facility.

I am sure that many of you also frequent the "other" forum sites, and have seen the discussions going on there, but I am at "home" here as many of you know me personally, so I am going to post here a letter that was sent out via e-mail regarding the "other forum's" posts. The following went out to many people who have sent correspondence to my Solar Stik E-mail account.

...and please understand, my intention here is not to "advertise" but to "inform".

Thank you all!


Greetings!

I appreciate all of the inquiries I have received during the last couple weeks. Unfortunately, I am on the road quite a bit and do not have the time to peruse the forums, so I will be sending this to many of you who have written me. I truly apologize for the impersonal reply as I try to address every issue on a one-to-one basis.

I will try to address this as eloquently and directly as I can.

Let me begin with this: We (at Solar Stik) are not scientists. I invite anyone to do their own research into the following and they will invariably arrive at the same conclusions that we have, be it through actual testing or deductive reasoning. In order to fully explain a few things, you need to know the Genesis of the Solar Stik:

Back in 1998, we developed a solar panel mounting system unlike any other for three boats. The idea we had was literally born of necessity. We didn't have room to put large solar arrays on out little boats, but with our cruising plans, we needed all the power we could get. A triple axis pitching solar system seemed to be the answer, but we truly had no idea at the time what we had developed or why it worked so well. Only after 5 years of sailing and constant experimenting with it did we understand why the Solar Stik functions so well.

Here is what we learned:

Despite what some in the forums have stated, It IS possible to exceed the output ratings of a solar panel. Let me explain:

A solar panel is designed and built using a very tightly controlled process, but the doping process where positive and negatively charged particulate is entered into the silicon cell structure is an imperfect science. There is no way to control the exact amount of (positive and negative) atoms injected into a silicon cell structure. Because the doping process varies by manufacturer, some panels perform better (or worse) than others, even with the same power ratings.

Solar panel operating characteristics (watts, amps, volts) are rated at "STC", or "standard operating conditions", which are set and vary by individual manufacturers. Current, voltage and wattage at STC are NOT "maximums", and these values can be higher at times depending on operating conditions and panel brand.

When I've been able read a few posts from the forums, I see a few people who dismiss the Solar Stik as "hype" or "marketing". However, it is also apparent to me that some who are promulgating operating theories and "debunking" the Solar Stik system are operating at a disadvantage as they obviously do not fully understand what they are stating, or attempting to say (and we can empathize as we had to get educated about solar energy ourselves).

For example, there are a few people who talk about MPPT and how it works, but they don't really understand Blue Sky Energy's brand of Solar Boost controls. I highly advise that these individuals go to the Blue Sky Energy website and read about their particular MPPT controls; we chose their controls for many reasons over other controllers. (case in point: someone posted in a forum that the Solar Boost 2000E gives you the extra 30% when the solar conditions are not optimal, when in fact this could not be farther from the truth. It is only at optimal conditions when there is extra power there to be tapped using MPPT!)

Also, I advise you to research deeper into the actual function of a solar panel. Do not simply go to the state of California's panel output website to see what the "state" (I.E. "beaurocracy") says about solar panels. By the way, the BP350U (the panel we use on the Solar Stik) is noticeably absent from that site... hmmm.

I'll be the first to admit that the Solar Stik is really a simple idea. "Simple" in that it does nothing more than give solar panels the two main ingredients that they need to operate at their "maximum" output: Direct sunlight and sufficient cooling. Three axes of rotation mean direct aiming at the sun ALL day, and the high wing-like arms mean the panels get extremely good airflow against the panel, keeping the panel temperature low (which substantially aids in power output).

"But the cost is too expensive..." it is NOT just a pole and brackets. It is a mechanical device that was load tested for the worst environments and conditions. It will last 25 years.

I've seen arguments about the "attenuation of the sun" and the "time of day", but here is the reality: A solar panel WILL produce more power in direct sunlight,,, period. Even at 30 minutes before sunset, a panel aimed at the sun will produce SUBSTANTIALLY more than one not pointed sunward. The graphs that are on our website are not "b.s." (as I read in one forum post). They are the result of much testing and effort.

By placing the panels in an environment where these two factors are optimally met, the Solar Stik's BP350U panels are able to operate at or even above their STC rating for most of the day. And when a panel is operated at or above STC, MPPT technology is also at it's best. We haven't invented a new panel, just taken the best one that we found, maximized ALL of the operating factors through a unique mounting system, and complement it with the best MPPT technology there is.

We bought 14 different brands of solar panels to determine which one was the most powerful, and after two years of testing, the BP350U was chosen. We were consistently able to exceed the STC rating of the panel in good conditions. For those who argue about "real world" conditions, testing 14 brands of panels wasn't something we had to do, but we wanted the best performing equipment for the Stik. We didn't just read the labels to determine which one to use.

70-80 amp hours (using Blue Sky Energy MPPT technology) IS normal, and we stand by these numbers. 100 amp hours will be rare (if ever) on a boat, But the same Solar Stik can be removed and used in the other applications such as an RV, where it may be used in a different environment. In the deserts in the Mid-East, the Solar Stik operates at maximum output from 30 minutes after sunrise until 30 minutes before sunset because of the intensity of the sun and lack of "attenuation" effect in the atmosphere, consistently delivering in the upper 90's amp-hour range. Don't misunderstand, there are MANY scenarios that will affect the output of ANY solar system, and the Solar Stik is not immune. But given optimal conditions, 70-80 amp hours is a fair representation of the daily power output for the marine market. If it is cloudy, then ALL solar systems operating in that environment will have the same losses that the Solar Stik has, and therefore it is all relative at that point.

The bottom line is: we use the best solar panel and the best MPPT controller to complement the best mounting system available. The system is sold as a complete system, leaving nothing more than the wiring to be purchased for the installation. No one sells a turn-key system as complete OR as effective as ours; However, I know people will extrapolate what they wish to. A case could be made that airplanes can't really fly either, but we all know that they do.

In summary, I am going to quote another respected member of the solar industry regarding the Solar Stik:

"The Solar Stik has two big advantages in that 1) The modules point more directly at the sun for the whole day, and 2) They are up in the air and breeze cools them which increases power.... Amp-Hours is the mathematical integration of current with respect to time. Moving the modules as the Solar Stik can has a huge impact on keeping the current numbers high during the whole day." - Rick Cullen, CEO Blue Sky Energy Inc.

There is so much more to discuss about the Stik, but unfortunately that is all I have time for now.

Best Regards,

Brian Bosley
CEO Solar Stik photo:

Brian,

I did check out what the other forum was saying, and it really saddened me the amount of trashing this device has gotten. I have seen the product, I have seen the quality, and I have seen the application of the product. I also have spent quite a bit of time speaking with Brian about it's application and results. It is not for everybody, but, it is perfect for my small sailboat. One will be on the back of Lola, this year.

I was humored how the experts on the competing forum was picking words out of a laymens posting and acting like the "caught" the poster in a lie. Conchy, sorry that you and Lalelu had to go through that. I would have chimed in, but the posting was way to deep to reply on old points.

Brian, keep up the good work, and if you need a gulf coast demo boat, give me a call. In the meantime, I will save my allowance and recycle all my coldie containers.

Ross in Tampa
1979 Oday 25 "Lola"


photo:

I have a friend that discovered that solar panels don't work at all well with three inches of snow on them. photo:

to this forum, this is still advertising. This is akin to PBS stations advertising by saying that the advertiser is a sponsor then go about telling all the things the sponsors products do. If you had absolutely no affiliation with Solar Stik, then I would agree that this would be informative, which it is by the way.

However, it up to SBO to determine if there is intent or not. photo:

if you were the west coast rep.? photo:

I was impressed that you hadn't responded to any of the negative drival. It takes pretty thick hide to run out front while people throw rocks at you, but thats the price. I personally feel you'll be quickly expanding into something much more interesting$$$ than the tiny market niche of cruising sailors needing to be convinced that this is a major part of everyones future in their boats/homes/work. Good luck in your exciting ventures to help get us off the grid with a great combination of tools/ideas(thankfully starting with our beloved boats).

As a famous general once retorted
"Illigitimous Non Carborundum"
Don't let the bastards grind you down!

Keep up the good work sparky. Stay focused and stick with the cutting edge RandD. Think big, and now's the time to make hay....GO, GO, GO(buy steph a bikini.....wait, I lost my focus).

Aloha and all our best,
Michael and kelli

From the "SUNSHINE State". Hmmmmm I wonder if there's anything to that..... photo:

I fear it would tip over my boat.

Really though, I understand Brian's concerns. But as far as Sailnet and other places, who cares? If the product merits praises and works as advertised, then he shouldn't need to worry. It will sell on its own. Personally, I think it is expensive, but I have no plans of buying one. photo:

is working for the better of man kind and letting us sail/boaters in on it. I wish you all the luck and may your in basket overflow with opportunities. I see what you are doing as a favor for all and future generations as well. Keep up the good work and we'll all be keeping a eye towards the future and what the solar system has in store for us. May we all be independent energy producers. Now can you produce energy from the little wheel that goes round under our hulls? Got a web page? Thanks again and
Keep it up,
Ctskip photo:

Will get you 70-80 A/H's a Day or are you talking about two of them?

The specs for the BPU350U give a Short Circuit Current: 3.17 A's Even the best MPPT controller can only convert so many total available Watts into A/H (granted at 17.3volts).

Given a full 3 amps for 12 hours a day thats still only 36 A/H's ? Even using the MPPT to convert some of that extra power above 14.5 volts won't get you double the A/H's. You've gotta be talking about 2 pannels.

Even then that is impressive, and I agree totally that "aiming" the solar panels is going to get you a lot more power than lying flat on your deck or bimini. Thats so obvious as to almost not be worthy an argument

Have you thought about approaching Practical Sailor or some other "respected" independant testing Magazine and let them do the testing and results to prove what you claim.

That should shut up the 'nay-sayers'

photo:

isn't this more civilized than that gang beating of the fuel whistle guy about a year ago? Must be the boat babe bought some good graces! go ahead, ask yourself the question.
photo:

tracker? photo:

I have to ask.....what sort of pull do you have with PS? I sent them some sample Fuel Whistles last summer and Darrell Nicholson STILL has them sitting on his desk! He has been promising me for 9 months that he is going to get around to testing them but..... You'd think that environmental stuff like that would be a "no brainer", ...go figure photo:

It is manual by design. A tracking system presents two problems: cost and maintenance. A more detailed explanation can be found here... photo:

Related link

Well, I wish I knew. They actually approached us at the Miami show and less than two weeks later they had a system for testing.

Alan, please give me a call at the number for tech support... photo:

Well we knew the link was coming sooner or later. At least you had the common decency to use the link to answer a question.


I know I'm not too bright and I do agree with what you are claiming about energy production but how in the heck would you manually aim the thing on a moving boat? I'll throw you a bone that it can be done while actually sailing but at anchor manual aiming would seem to require a lot of attention.
Let me ask the question another way; how often do you find you have to re-aim them when at anchor?

On another tack, selling to the military. I assume you are aiming your product towards the "foot bound out in the dirt" user like a platoon leader or some of those special operations folks since everybody else has a genset and would not need your product. I can tell you from experience that 200 lb of light weight stuff still weighs 200 lb and unless you can replace all the different batteries (and their weight) and operate 24/7 and through a couple of cloudy days and work under triple canopy jungle and make it fit in one or two rucksacks you are going to have a hard sell on your hands. My office looked into just your type of product back in the late 90s for the Army special operations community and while the idea looked great when the sun was shining, it had to have some sort of battery(s) to power all the stuff at night time. So it was kinda dumb to add more weight to the soldiers rucksack and not get rid of anything. Now if you sold a set of rechargeable replacement batteries so he would not have to carry all the throwaway type and you could still lighten his overall load that would be something that would sell like hotcakes. Kind of a solar battery recharging station.
For the record the Army already had just such a thing. It is called a rock and the soldier manually aims the flexible panel. The rock is locally procured and you don't need to take it with you. This product still does not work in the jungle though.

Good luck and keep on thinking up great ideas. America need innovators and integrators. photo:

The radios the military use generally don't work on 12 volts. I've seen everything from 6 to 49 volts as the required voltage and some even need several different voltages at the same time. 24 volts is common however.

Again good luck photo:

Anything Solar requires a different mindset. In a home, you may put in a traditional incandescent light bulb in the socket - and forget about it. In our boats, that thought would make you cringe.

It is all about the "light footprint"... Solar is not an alternative to on-shore electric plug in. Easy to say - but you have to think different - and that is hard. Running the refrigerator does not become magically easier because you buy a tweaked solar panel/tracker/converter.

The "light footprint" mindset maeans that you have to think very hard about how you use the electric - when you use it - and how you create it. This is the reality in power systems. It is just easy not to remember it.

I too have wrestled with the efficiency problem - in a different area. If you could get 10% better MPG on the car - you might be very happy. Something that could give you 10 - 20 - 30% or even better performance in a stock power system for MPG would make most anyone very happy.

Power systems are a series of pieces that work together - with the use of power - to make a smooth, balanced system: Light Footprint - Smooth production - smooth use, so to speak.

Nigel Calder goes into aspects of this in great detail - about all the pieces.

I think this is a really neat idea and a good, simple product. Doing a simple thing that LASTS can be pretty hard. The most ingenious things can look the simplest.

Bottom line is that one has to thin of production, storage, and use as a balanced entity. Some folks appear to be getting mad because there is no ONE simple "magic bullet" to fix their situation. Pehaps a step back - on their part - to really understand the pieces of the system would help. photo:

* photo:

Bill,

The tracking answer is certainly hit or miss. If you are sailing, with pitch and yaw, the panels are not going to always hit the sun directly. But that holds true with any panel no matter where it is mounted, right?

The point is that you have the ability to aim them. If you are on a tack on a passage, you can aim them in the general direction of the sun.

Mooring is certainly different given swing, but if you are swinging in an arc, at least you can have them pointed in the general direction so they do get a better chance at direct sunlight than flat mounted.

I read somewhere, personal experience, that this guy had his mounted on an axis so he could at least swing them forward and back. He commented that he substantially increased the efficiency of his panels, simply by tilting them more towards the sun.

And you have to agree that having one mounted on your sailboat is major Tim Taylor tooltime..... ARGH ARGH ARGH! photo:

major draw or large equipment. In college i built one using a pole mount similar to yours, but on a tri-pod as mine was a temp project. I used windshield wiper motors to move the panels, controlled with relays hooked to a Stamp micro controller that had a small array of photo-cells on a ring to detect which direction the sun was. The panel also had photocells on the top and bottom to detect tilt. I had the eyes polled every 10 sec, then averaged over 30 polls at which time it would calculate the direction of movement and power the motor for a few sec to move the panel. The hardest part was making the program, it took me and my partner the better part of the semester to do so. The unrefined system i made only took about 5 amp-hours a day, but improved the 50 watt panel's output by 17 amp-hours. At total darkness it was programed to return the panel to the stop which was the morning angle. photo:

Please have Stef check your outfit each day. Could you possibly find a dorkier look than the white socks and brown shoes??

Just having fun here folks! photo:

Hmmm, as I recall, some of the brightest minds in history weren't exactly fashion statements either. Hey Brian, I wouldn't worry about what these people say about your clothes! You've got bigger fish to fry!

Now if we could just do something with your hair... <G> photo:

It must've been the brains, sure aint anything else. (speaking solely for my self)

Brian, subliminal message "grouper sandwich and a coldie" photo:

got to say.................. Steph, you wake up next to that apparition each morning? photo:

Voltage tester in his hands.....

That is all. photo:

I went over to the sailnet forum to see what was going on... and it seems to me that Conchy was the one who brought it on himself, as did LaLeLu. Both of them were saying that the Blue Sky controller would give you more power from the panels than you could get with out using one. This is clearly either a lie or a complete misrepresentation of how a Blue Sky charge controller works.

Unfortunately, it appears that neither LaLeLu or Conchy have enough of a basic understanding to realize that an MPPT controller increases the amperage sent to the batteries by reducing the voltage—this does not yield an increase in power from the panels, but probably does increase the efficiency of the charging process, losing less energy to heat.

I also think it was somewhat deceitful that Conchy didn't clearly identify himself as having an existing relationship with the SolarStik manufacturer. That strikes me as being less than ethical.

Then, from what I saw on that thread, Conchy Joe seems to take every criticism of the product or question about the product as a personal attack, and attacked most of the people who weren't SolarStik advocates. I doubt that Brian wants to have his product identified with obnoxious behavior like that.

Also, LaLeLu were confusing the amperage reading on the Blue Sky controller for amp hours—which are clearly not the same thing.

Finally, Conchy Joe posted some impossible message about the military having gotten 100 Amp-hours out of a single SolarStik in a single day, in Kuwait, due to the 16 hour day there. Unfortunately, Kuwait is too close to the equator to ever have a 16-hour day, so that would be out and out lying.




Brian-

It looks like an interesting product. When you get an evaluation of it that is done by a group of qualified, impartial people, who don't have their heads up the butts, please let me know. I'd be interested in hearing about it. You can e-mail me at willsmith87@gmail.com photo:

Brian, I would really like to believe you, because if you can get twice the output compared to conventional panels, then that means solar becomes twice as cost-effective for me. I'd like that!

But when you say "Despite what some in the forums have stated, It IS possible to exceed the output ratings of a solar panel. Let me explain: ...
Solar panel operating characteristics (watts, amps, volts) are rated at "STC", or "standard operating conditions", which are set and vary by individual manufacturers. Current, voltage and wattage at STC are NOT "maximums", and these values can be higher at times depending on operating conditions and panel brand. "

That doesn't doesn't jibe with everything else I've found from every other source about solar panels, including the state of California (who have their own more conservative ratings), the solar panel makers, and the federal guidelines.

Perhaps I don't understand what everyone else is saying, so correct me on these, would you?

Panels are rated at "STC" and you say that "Current, voltage and wattage at STC are NOT "maximums"," but the industry says that STC represents full direct "noon" sunlight under perfect atmospheric and climate conditions, including optimum airflow over the panels to cool them. On this planet, you just don't get more solar power going INTO a panel, than it does under STC rating conditions. And if you can't get more power IN, you can't get more power OUT. Please note that "power" is rated in WATTS, and the question of trading volts for amps like the BlueSky controller does, will not affect the maximum WATTS available from a panel.

So please, tell me how you see a panel exceeding the environmental conditions that are used to provide the STC ratings, when everyone else says those ratings are based on the best possible conditions that can be obtained?

I fully understand that re-orienting the panels every once in a while will help them to operate at greater efficiency, but once you get outside the "noon" window, touside the four hours or so when there is direct strong sunlight overhead, even orienting the panel directly at the sun will not regain the solar power that is lost as the sun has to slant down through a much greater amount of the atmosphere. Again, the STC ratings are based on that full noon sunlight. Re-orienting the panels could help you maintain the full rated power--for as many hours as it is available--but they won't help you beat it.

What am I missing here?

How many hours of how much power do you claim you can get from a 100W-rated array, in what location? How many times do the panels have to be moved, in order to obtain that much power in one day?

I want to believe you have a revolutionary product, I just haven't seen any objective, repeatable, scientific explanation to back it up. If your numbers are right--be patient, we should all be able to understand the logic and see it. photo:

is 30 degrees north, about the same as Jacksonville, FL. From sun rise to sun set on June 21 is 14 hours and 12 minutes. From twilight to twilight would be close to 16 hours so labeling a statement as an "out and out lie" is at the least heavy handed. My feeling concerning your remarks falls into the realm of "if you don't like the product don't but it" but I think that you on coming close to defaming a person whom you do not know. photo:

Ross-

I don't see how saying 14.2 hours of daylight is not equal to 16 hours of daylight can be anything but the truth. Saying that someone who claims to get 16 hours of operation out of a solar panel, when the day is only 14.2 hours long, is a liar, is really quite accurate in my opinion. Also, last I checked, truth is a defense for defamation actions, at least in the United States.

Jacksonville, FL is at 30°19'55.00"N. The northern border of Kuwait is approximately at 30° 4'40.26"N, which means that the day in Kuwait is slightly shorter than those of Jacksonville, FL.

Also, exactly how much power do you think a solar panel generates when the sun is down and it is twilight? My guess is that the contribution from the twilight hours is neglible. It is statements like yours, where your claiming that twilight to twilight is a useful measurement of the effective day for a solar panel that makes Brian and his product look ridiculous.

I would like to understand the science behind how the product works, and how Brian can claim to make the panels generate more power than the STC ratings on a consistent basis. The mathematics and numbers I saw on the Sailfar thread seemed to be pretty spot on to me, and if Brian has any real evidence to dispute those figures, I would like to see them. photo:

15 miles south of Jacksonville. We are concerned about daylight versus sunlight and one can speak in generalities or in specifics. But if a man should speak in generalities and another listens in specifics then there evolves a question of interpretation.
I know and care nothing about this particular system But I know that all solar panels are rated as if they are of fixed orientation. Should someone devise a means of having them track the sun like a flower then it follows that they will collect more energy than a fixed panel. photo:

This is one of a very few forums where people are both informative and respectful and where differences of opinion are treated in that manner. If you want to argue and be impolite, you will be more welcome on Sailnet where that behavior seems acceptable. photo:

photo:

Did some research on tracking collectors. Seems that a fully tracking 2-axis collector does in fact (according to the University of North Carolina) collect 75% more energy than one that is simply facing south at the optimum angle for that time of year. It certainly would have to beat a horizontal (deck top) mounting. So if a deck top mounting is working for folks then a system that tracks in 2 axises has to be better even if you only have it "generally" aimed at the sun.
A great example of taking a simple idea and making a profit on it.

Good luck with your military showcase Brian. photo:

You will see that people WERE in fact personally attacking Myself as well as Susan.

If you want to come over here and start another fight, that is fine, but you will find it much harder, as this forum is not a "Fox guarding the henhouse" forum, and Phil will not put up with it for a moment.

If you wish to make a valid argument, As Red has, instead of arguing what word or words was used when, despite the fact you fail to note that I corrected Susan and myself, then have at it.

Otherwise, I suggest you take your argument elsewhere.

If, given wording to your satisfaction, you do not think the SolarStik performs as advertised, simply speak in that manner, and you will find a spirited debate. If you think BlueSky and BP AND the people that make SorarStik, as well as myself and Susan are full of crap, you will find that majority rules around here.

If you wish to call me or others out, and post a lot of the stupid crap that was posted over there, once again, I suggest you take it back to Sailnet, or give Sailing Anarchy a try.

I would ask, simply, who are you and what qualifies you to speak about the three products that make up the SolarStik?

We like to make sure around here that people actually have a boat, maybe a few solar panels, maybe even a Blue Sky controller, and such, and are not just looking to get in a fight about the usage of amps -vs- amp hours -vs- amps per hours in a sentance.

PS. You sound suspiciously like SailingDog.......... photo:

It takes just a little bit of effort -- a fraction of a second, really -- to be respectful of other owners. Disagreement is not the problem, but how the disagreements are stated can be.

Thanks for your cooperation. photo:

I guess the truth is in denial here.

I don't believe a solar panel will be effective during the twilight hours. It does not matter who makes it, what kind of charge controller you are using, or which direction the panel is facing.

It also appears that the people on this board are unwilling to look at an honest and open discussion of a product. In a democracy, the minority voices are just as important, if not more so, than the majority voices.

Bill, if you would post a link to that North Carolina study, I would like to see it.

Conchy Joe, I am trying to get some honest information on how this product works. I would like to see how what Brian says about his product, rather than listening to someone who doesn't seem to know what they are talking about.

From what I saw, from reading on Sailnet, you were attacking at least as much as you were attacked, and many of the "attacks" on you were simple criticisms or questions of what you had posted. I did not read the entire thread, as it seems to have wandered off topic into wind generation.

As for my qualifications, I don't have any specific, beyond what I've learned necessary to doing things like re-wiring my house and boat electrical systems, and working on car electrical systems. I do have a fairly strong background in basic electrical and electronic theory, as I've spent the better part of 10 years installing alarm systems and telephone systems, but have no degrees or licenses in the field.

I've read as much of the literature that the different manufacturers have put out, including what I was able to find on Blue Sky's website. I've also spoken with the people at Hamilton Ferris in Massachusetts regarding solar panels. The people over at Hamilton Ferris have said that what SolarStik is claiming is very unlikely to be possible, given the limitations of two 50-watt solar panels. Blue Sky's own information seems to back that up.

I'm all for an open discussion of the product, but would like to hear what Brian has to say about it first. I'd rather get my information from the source. photo:

Bill and Red,

I welcome this direct debate with you regarding the claims of the power output of the Solar Stik.

Before I begin, I am extending an invitation for you to perform an independent test of the Solar Stik that would meet your criteria. Practical Sailor (a "qualified, impartial entity with their head on straight") just completed a thorough review of our system in Virginia, and I think you will be surprised at what you will see. I unfortunatley cannot openly discuss the results yet, and we are still waiting to see which issue will have the results. So stay tuned...

Now, as far as the Solar Stik ratings are concerned, we absolutely stand by the 80 to 100 amp-hour claims. Let me back up for a minute and qualify this:

When we developed the first Solar Stik in 1998, we didn't re-invent the solar wheel, the solar wheel ultimately ran over us. I am sure that you have read by now about the Genesis of the Solar Stik; three boats initially sailed with Stiks in 1998, but they used a different solar panel than the one we currently use (it is no longer in production). In 2003, we decided to develop the mounting because it had proven itself through the roughest of seas, and allowed for constant aiming of the panels toward the sun and cooler operating temperatures than a "fixed" panel (subsequently providing more power). Our level of "solar understanding" at that time was pretty basic. In 2004, I bought a 3024I MPPT control with a shunt/pro-remote setup for our boat, and "optimized it" according to the manufacturer's recommendation. That is when we first noticed the total amp-hours for the day constantly floating around 80AH (in March). We had to backtrack to find out why we were getting so much power, because with two 50 watt panels, we didn't believe our own math either. For the next two years, we sought the answers and believe me, they were NOT easy to find. Most people (even many in the industry) simply repeat what they have been told... but don't actually perform any "STC" testing. So with no one able to help us decipher the opinions from reality, we performed much of our own testing and research IN ADDITION TO getting answers from qualified industry leaders such as Mr. Cullen from Blue Sky Energy Inc and BP Solar.

Now about the ratings, "STC" ratings are NOT maximums, despite what you have heard or seen. Solar panel output IS directly affected by the cell operating temperature. Panels are rated at a nominal temperature of 77 degrees Farenheit. The output of a solar panel can be expected to vary by about 2.5% for every 5 degrees variation in temperature from the STC rating. As the temperature increases, the output decreases. We have purchased and tested 14 brands of solar panels to determine which one actually performed the best on the Solar Stik. We also tested the entire system (panels, mounting system, MPPT control) for two years to make sure that these numbers are correct. (The caveats are always "the weather" and the "condition of the battery".) During the summer months you will have the benefit of the long days, and in the winter, you have the benefit of the cooler temps. Most of our testing was done between Virginia and Florida, and the Bahamas. On boats, the average amount of pitches was four (including tide swing.)

Kuwait and "16 hours" was not my statement, and I suspect that it was a simple miscommunication somewhere. The total hours may have been incorrect, but we have collected data from the military in the Mid East that shows the Stik operating at around 7.5 amps for better than 12 hours, plus the 30 min after sunrise and 30 min before sunset to total more than 90 AH. This is, of course, because of the intensity of the sun over there.

Susan and Bob are not alone with their "results" reporting, and I tremendously appreciate their spirit and initiative to venture into the forums to discuss the Stik. They do so on their own and they are NOT compensated in ANY way by us. There would probably be more people discussing their experiences with the Solar Stik, but the reality is that most of the people who have bought these systems are out sailing/cruising, and don't have access to forums. We have been selling these systems since early last year, with many sailors regularly contacting us to tell us just how much power they are getting. We just had a boat come back to St. Aug from the Bahamas that never saw a dock for four months. They reported an average of 75-80 AH daily with their system.

As far as the California site, do we really know what THEIR test conditions were? I could probably "pick apart" their testing just as many have tried to pick apart the Solar Stik... by splitting hairs. And for the record, where is the CA listing for the BP350U? It isn't there that I can find...

The "Bottom Line" is this:

The Solar Stik will produce as much as 80 to 100 amp-hours in good conditions and depending on where it is utilized... and we stand by that. Just this evening, I am coming in from yet another "test" where the Solar Stik system output was 5.6 Amps at forty minutes before sunset. Total for today: 63AH (It was cloudy with rain until 10:30 AM).


Here is another link to a document called the "Synopsis of the Solar Stik".

I hope that helps. Let me know if I missed anything or can be of further assistance. You can always contact me at the tech support e-mail/phone-line as well.

Best Regards,
Brian Bosley photo:

Related link

Just so I am clear, today we were using an "optimized" Solar Boost control with temp sensor, a battery bank with a starting voltage of 11.5, and the temperature outdoors was about 66 degrees.

...I am on the road headed to Oakland for the Strictly Sail Show, so any future responses may be a few days away. My apologies in advance for any delays.

I do have e-mail capability on the road and can be reached here:
research@solarstik.com photo:

Brian, your explanation has given me 3 ideas for getting more power for American style cruising. It's easy to daydream, hard to run a company; so they're yours if interested.

1 Double the power by using 4 panels. Consider making a frame, hinged in the middle, supporting a panel in each half, like a picture frame that could be locked open. When the frame is closed, the panels would face each other for protection of the glass. A frame on each side of the solar stik would give 4 panels, twice the power. It appears your stik is plenty strong. The support for the wind generator, radar, antennas, etc. might need to be longer to get sun off the panels. Consider this an upgrade that spreads the cost of the stik over the performance of more panels to make it comparable to a larger fixed array that most cannot place due to space. The solar panels would be easily removable as now (if too much wind remove one on each side).

ideas 2 and 3 are crazier

2 Could the frame be engineered such that the back of each solar panel be cooled by some evaporative process using seawater wicked up or dripping down from a resevoir in order to improve performance by cooling the panel. A fan to enhance evaporation might improve performance more than the power it uses. Another alternative is to have a heat sink like for a CPU. My panels are two inches thick, so i'm not sure how much idea #2 is going to help.

3 Would there be any advantage to using a mirrored surface (maybe mylar film on ribbed plastic panels) hinged from above and below the frame that opens to a 45' angle from the solar panel to reflect sunlight, increasing solar intensity and turning Anywhere into Kuwait. Obviously, this would add a lot of wind resistance or could bother neighbors, so the mirrored panels would need to be removeable.

So i'm thinking of a frame supported on each side of the solar stik that when closed would have two solar panels facing each other with two thin plastic plates in between with the mirrored surfaces facing the solar panel glass. Each frame could be easily disconnected from the stik and would protect the panels during storage. Oh, and they should float, or have a lanyard, have rounded edges, have a satellite dish option, and kill mosquitos after sunset.
photo:

Nautiduck-

You might want to learn how to read. I never called anyone ridiculous. What I said was:

"It is statements like yours, where your claiming that twilight to twilight is a useful measurement of the effective day for a solar panel that makes Brian and his product look ridiculous. "

The time between twilight to sunrise and sunset to twilight is not going to generate any appreciable amperage with solar panels. They are solar panels, which kind of implies that the sun is necessary for them to operate.

Claiming that they can operate effectively before the sun has risen or after it has set is clearly ridiculous.

Also, claiming to have 16 hours of operation in a place that physics says only has a maximum of 14.3 hours of daylight is lying. You can not operate solar panels effectively if the sun is not in the visible sky.

Given the definition of lying:

"A lie is a statement made by someone who believes or suspects it to be false, in the expectation that the hearers may believe it."

Either Conchy Joe is lying or he doesn't understand that Kuwait can't have 16 hours days. However, he has stated that Kuwait can't have 16 hour days... so draw your own conclusions.




Conchy Joe-

I also don't see where I took what you said on Sailnet out of context. Apparently, either does Ted. If you could point out specifically what I or Ted said that was taken out of context, I would appreciate it.

Amps and Amp-hours are very different things. Being precise when talking about technology isn't being an english teacher, but trying to keep things honest and accurate. If you don't understand what you are talking about, maybe you should stop talking until you do.

No one said that the SolarStik doesn't provide more electricity than a fixed mount panel of the same wattage. That claim isn't under question. The question is how did you arrive at the final figures of 80-100 Amp-hours, especially if you don't understand the physics behind it to calculate it properly. Instead of answering the questions, you seem to have a habit of insulting the questioners.

As Ted has kindly pointed out... over on the Sailnet thread, most of the attacks were instigated by you, Conchy Joe. That also appears to be a pattern of your behavior on multiple sailing forums, from what I've read Ted to say. This is evident per se, from your posts on those forums.




Bill-

Thanks for the link.


photo:

photo:

from the tone of the responses. Your first post condemned the entire report and all of the claims for the performance of the system as being much less than valid. Further you felt that there was intent to mislead with the statements made by the proponents of the system. As a result of an extremely negative characterization of the system and the people involved, you received a very hostile and defensive response.
There has followed some clarification of the fine points of the performance of the system and what seems to remain is a question of whether or not there exists in Kuwait 16 hours of sufficient light to be considered daylight. That is could you work outside without artificial light? Versus the duration of sunlight. As the details of the operating system have become better explained and understood most of these disputes have been settled. Now we seem to have gotten to the point of who started calling "names" first. I think we could probably determine that as well but will it serve a useful purpose?

So Are you convinced that the system will perform as claimed with a few caveat's? Are you satisfied that you drew as much blood as you lost? photo:

publicity if you tried. Thank both your supporters and detractors for helping to promote discussion and sparking curiosity about your product. I think the system design is very good and backed by solid premises. photo: