bholleran

Sorry I wasn't correcting you Barry, just trying to explain why the rules are there. They help to prevent incidents such as this one just last week: http://www.malverngazette.co.uk/news/8982605.Paraglider_s_lucky_escape/?ref=mr The BHPA sometimes get a bad press, especially in paramotoring circles where some pilots see them merely as a hindrance when no licence is required - but they do a lot of good work for the sport (and not just the training, insurance, magazines etc). Alan (BHPA Pilot, Hill & Motor) No problem at all Alan, we were both singing from the same sheet. I just think you explained it more clearly. I agree that proper training is important regardles of what the law requires. As it only takes one bad pilot to loose a site for everone else. Let alone the accidents that might occour.

engine \ doner paramotor was 800 aluminium \ bolts \ netting etc 100 harness 200 propellor 140 Tank 40 to be fair, I am just about to change to a manufactured off the shelf unit. But only because the corsair motor is not really big enough for me(125kg). But other than that it works as I intended it to. Just need to be lighter.

I built mine. it can be seen in its unfinished state here. viewtopic.php?f=1&t=5342 It has since been painted and finished off.

While its true that you can't stop someone buying a wing off ebay and jumping off the nearest mountain, most paragliding sites in the UK are maintained by the local clubs who have negotiated (and pay for) access with the land owners. Usually this requires pilots to hold a BHPA (or equivalent) rating with 3rd party liability insurance. Sites have been jeopardised or lost due to incidents involving non qualified pilots breaching these rules. Although I prefer Scotland's 'right to roam' policy on access to the countryside, the rules are there for safety - in the same way that you would not want unqualified & uninsured drivers on the roads next to you. Paramotoring is similar in that most of the 'rules' relate to the site you launch from, and although no formal qualification is legally required there are severe penalties for breaching Air Law. Beyond that of course there is always the most severe death penalty which can be summarily enforced by Judge Gravity at any time for serious errors ....... I suppose I should have expanded on what I said to be: it never stopped any individual flying from a non school or non club site that they had access to. With land owners permission. But that you for exapnding on my answer.

Yes, it has always been the case. I was also told the same as you, which seems to be the line that you are told by BHPA schools. The reasoning behind it is that the sites that they fly from are controlled by the schools and they insist that everyone has had training. But it never stopped any individual flying from a non school site that they had access to. The same sort of principle applies in the paramotoring world. i.e. You can only fly from the Membury site if you are a club member.

Hi, This is fantistic stuff, it does require a bit of practice though. I build my entire frame using it.

You can add a third to that (although it was for a wing) not a motor!

Ok, mayby I am missing some other assumptions here. Let assume that both the two and three blade prop are from the same manafucturer, and that they have both been designed for max thrust. Regardless of fuel economy. 1. Which would be quieter? I am guessing the three blade as it would be producing the same power at lower revs! Lets assume a different set of 2 and 3 blade props. Both designed to give the same noise level which would give the most the best fuel economy and which would give the best thrust. I am not sure if it makes the question eeven more complicated.

Regarding the air space. Have a look at the following and zoom in to tangmere. In my opinion yes it is, with the exception of the last bit of the old runway. As you know I looked at getting permission to fly there but it also involved getting permission from goodwood. An it just seemed like a lot of effort after getting the other field. doh ! would help if I added the link pmcdisplaynotams.php

Regarding the air space. Have a look at the following and zoom in to tangmere. In my opinion yes it is, with the exception of the last bit of the old runway. As you know I looked at getting permission to fly there but it also involved getting permission from goodwood. An it just seemed like a lot of effort after getting the other field.

Acording to Clive it is in excess of 6 months. He has one in trials I think but it is not for public release. I have asked

Hi Pete, They do not make the spirit with the evo engine. Barry

I am sorry for the barrage of questions tonight but i am just keen to make my next purchase the right one. I have been trying out a range of paramotors over the last few days, with a view to changing to a bigger engine. Out of my list of motors one has kept comming to the top of my list. It meets all my requirments in terms of price, dealer support, and most importantly I can easily get in and out of the harness. On the ground, I have yet to fly this motor though. My only concern is that it is high hang point and every thing else I have ever flown has been low hang points. Have any of you ever changed? If so how did you get on? In particular do you end up getting sore arms after a while as the brakes would be higher i assume. Is it still easy to get to the risers for things like adjusting the trimmers, and getting to tip steering toggles(dudek nucleon) \ big ears etc I assume that the launch tequnique will just need the risers to be held higher and a bit of practice? Many Thanks Barry

Thank you very much for the offer, can you remind me where in the country you are based?

Can anyone tell me where I could get a replacment coil for the above engine that is likley to be open over the next few days. I would have got one from ConIarSports but they are closed and I would really like to get some flying in over the next few days but mine has died. Thanks Barry

I have a couple of questions that I hope someone can answer for me. Assuming that I am running a Simonini Mini 2 Evo engine. What configuration will. 1. Give the most thrust - A 3 blade or 2 blade and at what reduction ratio \ specific prop etc. 2. Be the quietest - A 3 blade or 2 blade and at what reduction ratio \ specific prop etc. 3. Best Fuel Economy - A 3 blade or 2 blade and at what reduction ratio \ specific prop etc. I am guessing that there is going to be a trade off? Thanks. Barry

Clive to you reckon that the Current Simonini model that you do have would be up to the job for me?

Are you lookng for a test pilot?

Hi Clive, How long do you reckon it will be until the evo model is ready? Thanks Barry

I really liked the look of the prototype one that I seen, but as I understand it they only do a high hang point version. I would really prefer a low hang point machine if possible but it is definitely worth considering.

Hi Seymore, I cant make it tommorow, as I am at work. Also I am waiting on a new starter motor to arrive as mine is dead. But I am getting desperate to fly me new Nucleon

Hi Seymore, One of my main requirments when I started looking for a new motor was to get a quieter one. This was mainly down to comments from you and Morgy and the noise sensitivity of your site. I spent about an hour on the phone to Bailey today, in particular discussing the new engine. The short version of the conversation was that the V4-200 version is slightly more powerfull than the new V5 version. (But the V5 is lighter) But all that said and done they did not believe that either motor would be powerfull enough for my weight. They suggested that the engine had been designed around a Max pilot weight of 100kg, and although I may well be able to use it. The climb rate and fuel economy would be so poor that it would not really be a smart option. They do not have any plans at this time to release a larger engine, which brings me back to my problem. So I guess that by going for a very big engine and running it at a significantly lower number of revs should provide a motor that is overall quiter in normal operation. I dont know if there is any sort of comparison site that shows the difference in volume from different motors. I suppose that is actual measured db and percieved noise based on the exhaust tone? Thanks

Thanks Alan for the reply. I have looked and strugled to find any more information on the Rocco. In particular the distance between the swing arms and the length of the lap belt. i.e. the circumfrance from the seat back. i.e. will it go around my middle, I have tried a parajet with a large harness and it was ok when sitting down but it nearly cut me in half when I stood up. Any chance you could measure it for me. Thanks Barry

I have the same wing but I have not flow in yet, but I did find the following video explaining how it should \ could be used.

I am in the market for a new motor, I would love to get a 4 stroke but after a lot of looking around I dont think there is anything on the market big enough. I am 125kg and will be flying a Dudek Nucleon 34. All up weight in the region of 170kg ish I currently fly on a M21Y engine on a 125 prop. This is ok and works fairly well but I am using more fuel than I would like (approx 5 ltr per hour on a Gin Bolero iii) I am sure that the Vittorazi Monster or the Simonini Mini 2 engine would have enough power. However I feel that if I go up another engine size that I will get better fuel economy as I will be crusing at less throttle. Despite the engine being a little heavier. I also like the bulldog spirit but as I understand it, there is no low hang point version available. Although it did look lovely when I saw it. That leaves me with 1. Kobra Rocco ST230 Evo 2. EC Extreme EC33 Has anyone flown both? Experience of either? Thanks Barry