aljken

You might find this article an interesting read:

http://www.xcmag.com/2016/11/how-fast-does-it-go-testing-paraglider-speeds/

Basically wings aren't as fast as manufacturers generally think.

Apparently the wing pushes air down more on the underside than the top side, forcing it up. I'm not sure how different this is to the air goes faster over the top than bottom causing a pressure difference theory. 

Either way I guess the wing works and that's all I need to know

What's the best method?

Use a GPS and go one way, check the speed, then go the other way, check the speed. Then take the mean of the 2?

Or any better ideas?

Hi Justin,

There's no reflex wing which really excels at thermalling and climbing compared to a free flight wing. They just don't have the same glide. Your M3 will be better than all the reflex ones we've talked about in this thread.

Thermalling with a paramotor isn't nearly as fun as with a free flight wing. Especially when it's really (thermic) strong. It's just not that fun having 40kg plus strapped to your back being thrown about in a strong thermal. I thought the same as you when I started, but quickly realised that paramotoring and paragliding are in many ways opposite spots!

If you want easy take-offs, the really lightweight wings are the easiest.

Cheers,

Alex.

Cable ties, velcro, super-glue....

Hi RSquared,

Me and my friend Martin bought polini thor 130s over 3 years ago. We both are about 70 or 75 kg body weight, and the power is just right flying 22m reflex wings.

Positives:

Reliable - especially given the number of hours we've both put on. Martin's exhaust cracked at about 60 hrs so he put on a new one. It sustains the revs we use flying trimmers out most of the time.

Efficient enough - does over 2 hours on a full tank (I get bored and cold at 1 hour usually).

Easy to fix. Walbro carb easy to change diaphragm and clean yourself. All parts easy to get hold of in UK.

No engine outs...... so far.

Been around a while to be low risk.

The walbro carb it comes with doesn't come with a high screw (to tune high end) -  you might see this as a negative, but I'm actually glad it's preset and works fine as it is without any faffing!

Flash start is fantastic, easy starts. it just wears out (see negatives).

Negatives:

The flash starter wears out after about 2-3 years or so (depending on use). It's the plastic teeth which go, and costs about £5 and 30-45 mins to change them.

Slightly oil stained around exhaust to cylinder join (apparently this is common). It doesn't affect performance. A paramotorist I once met said Polini have a reputation for this - I don't know though.

The crank shaft bearing had to be changed to a stronger version - compared to the initial one it came with on my engine ( I have one of the original 130 engines).  I think the new engines come with the new strong crank shaft bearing though - you would want to check this though. I flew mine for well over a year with the old bearing and nothing went wrong, but it's not worth risking it.

Polini customer support is rubbish apparently (See the problems that the thor 200 had). I'm not saying that your local dealer isn't any good, it's the customer support from Italy which is apparently rubbish. I fortunately haven't had to contact them and the thor 130 has seemed to be reliable.

Going back both me and my friend would have definitely bought the 130 again. We took a risk when it first came out as it was a brand new model, but it seems to have turned out to be a reliable model with few issues. Now it's been around a while I think it's been well tested and seems reliable.

Hope this helps.

Hi Ian,

Don't worry. I knew absolutely nothing about 2 stroke motors before I started paramotoring, and now can do pretty much anything myself. You can teach yourself all of it, get advice of other paramotorists/2 stroke engine owners.

Stuff doesn't go wrong very quickly with the 2 stroke engines, so it's only 1 part at a time that you learn how to fix. After a while you'll realise you've learnt loads about them and don't just fix stuff, but actually modify stuff to make it better than it orginally was!

Good luck.... and remember, there's nothing that's actually difficult to fix on the 2 stoke.

My advice would be to fly your free flight wing for much much longer (6 months plus depending on how much flying you're doing) then progress onto a more advanced reflex wing (I would actually advise you to get the speedster 2 or sirocco (or sirocco 2 - when it comes out)).

You'll be surprised at how irritating take off and landing is on a motor compared with free flight, and it's much easier on a free flight wing. However, you'll learn fast (if you get into motoring) and will be ready for a higher rated motor wing given your free flight experience. You also might not like motoring (coming from a free flight background) - so wait  a bit before you commit any more money in buying a wing. However you're free flight experience will be excellent, and you'll really understand so much more which would have taken you ages to learn.

I have taken my motor to the US by checking it in (from UK)

I replaced the fuel lines with new ones and cleaned it out as much as possible. It looked pretty brand new. It was in a custom made cardboard box with loads of those foamy padding particles. Looked quite professional and new.

The fuel tank I put in a separate bag, wrapped in cling film. There was no way I could get rid of the fuel smell until a whole packet of cling film had gone round it!

I was asked a few time if it was brand new or not - I replied, "yes, never used". They opened up the box 2 or 3 times during all the transfers.

I don't think I would get away with it now cos my exhaust is way too tatty and the frame looks a lot more used now.

For free flying you should look at http://www.tvhgc.co.uk/. There's quite a few free flying hills near to swindon (in addition to motoring options already mentioned).

Whatever you get is a compromise. However I would point out you can retrofit a trimmers to many paraglider wings, and use speedbar too. I did this with a U-Turn Blacklight which is a high end B wing suitable for XC paragliding. I flew with it under power many times and it  worked so much better with the trimmers fully open. However it definitely was not as fun as a reflex wing - it felt like dragging a sail through water whenever I throttled up.

It was obviously a compromise and now have a dedicated XC free flight wing, and a reflex paramotor wing. The paramotor wing would be useless for XC, but still very fast and fun for high wind ridge soaring. When it is light the paramotor wing just wants to go down though.

In terms of size  and a free flight wing. Chose whatever wing size suits you for free flight, then just fly it under power. yes you'll be massively over the weight range, but it will still seem slow.

I think you are right, if you are more into paramotoring then get a reflex wing and go ridge soaring when you are getting desperate.

I can't tell you what it's like on a paramotor, but on a paraglider it's fine - even long term!

I actually find split leg ones nicer for running about and messing about with the wing on some dunes, there is no seat board to get in the way when running, and they are very slightly lighter.

The weight shift is usually reduced if you have a split leg harness (with no seat board) - if that's what you mean by better. When you start to fly mini wings (sub 20m paraglider wings) it's recommended you use a split leg harness for this reason. I personally like to fly using weight shift with a seat board on my paramotor as I can wedge myself onto one side of the harness to counteract the torque effect!

I have been caught flying in light rain under power and unpowered a few times. I just try and fly away from the rain and apply speedbar/open up trimmers. Beware, although you might feel only a little wet, quite often the wing is getting much wetter (as it's acting like an umbrella to you).

I really do try to avoid flying in wet conditions. It's a horrible feeling thinking that your wing could just go parachutal and drop out the sky.  I have seen one person free flying get completely soaked within 10 mins of flying at St Andre when the conditions changed quickly. They spiralled down but them and the wing was utterly drenched. The wing never stopped flying though. I would be really concerned about line shrinkage due to wet lines in this sort of situation.

To answer your question - how much is too much? i have no idea. I certainly have no idea in mm/hr. All I know is that in my experience, with light rain the wing carries on flying ok - for how long this occurs though.... who knows.

7 hours ago, ptwizz said:

Ethanol in fuel is a hot topic among classic bike and car owners and has been the subject of much research and discussion.

Some of the basics about Ethanol:

Ethanol is hygroscopic, which means it attracts water. It draws in water from the air, which then sits inside your fuel system and corrodes parts which would normally be protected by their immersion in fuel. The combination of water, alcohol (i.e. ethanol) and dissolved oxygen will attack most of the materials used in traditional fuel systems, including steel, copper, brass, rubber and Mazak (carburetor bodies). Some of the plastics used in fuel systems are attacked and form a translucent, gummy deposit which is near invisible when immersed in fuel. I have dismantled petrol taps which have been entirely filled with this stuff.

Ethanol increases the octane rating of petrol. Some brands of 'premium' fuel contain more ethanol than the non-premium fuel of the same brand.

Ethanol has a lower energy content than petrol, so the reduction in power may provide some limited protection from overheating.

 

Thanks for the expert explanation.

I had no idea that there was more ethanol in higher octane fuels.

However I will still probably go and buy the higher octane rating if able - your predetonation argument is a good reason to.

Cheers,

Alex.

Probably cos they dont have one!

I can confirm that in practical terms you will probably notice no difference in power as I have used both high and lower octane fuels, including flat out on  a hot day. I have never ever noticed a difference.

I use high octane if I can get it, mainly because it has less ethanol in it. Ethanol deposits in your paramotor are probably not a good thing so I try to avoid it, I have read that it produces sticky residues. I don't know if anyone has ever proven this on a motor though, other than just anecdotal stories? Ethanol in fuel might be more of a problem in the UK than in US or Australia - as the EU has a rule meaning a certain percentage of it now has to be ethanol (as it is considered more environmentally friendly). Consequently there is more ethanol in our fuels in the UK than previously.

Hi all,

It seems like the thor 130 (and 100) have known issues from the poor design of the flash starter.

Has anyone tried doing this mod:

http://www.southwestairsports.com/ppgtechinfo/thor130200/flashstarter/insert.htm

Might fix the problem permanently?

Is it easy to do?

Wouldn't you have to remove the swing arms too? Then where do the risers attach?

Pain in the arse I would have thought even it does work.

This thread has focussed mainly on the economy benefits and theory of larger engine. What happens in reality is different.

If you are a light person (ie. 70 to 80 kg) then I don't think there is any real advantage to be had from having a big engine. I can still climb with trimmers out and speedbar fully on, on a 22m reflex wing with a 130 cc engine. I have never once felt I need more power. Even when I was at higher altitudes (10 to 11000 ft). If I had more power I would just be battling with torque effect more and lugging about weight I didn't need, with a bulkier thing.

The efficiency point is not that relevant to me either. I usually get bored or cold and land long before my petrol tank is empty. 2 hours is the max for me really, 1 hour flying is fairly typical. I actually quite like burning up fuel too, cos then I can buy some more and I don't have any sitting around degrading in a fuel tank. I am normally flying about trimmers fully open going as fast as I can. If I really want to fly as far as I can then I will attach my paraglider wing - that makes way more difference than me choosing a bigger motor.

Unless you are competing the reality is that selecting an engine which is appropriate for your size is better, than picking a bigger one. When you first start weight does make a difference as you have failed take offs and get tired out. Also you will end up carrying it about (from car to take off).

For the average paramotorist, the most important factors when choosing your motor must be reliability/user friendliness, how it feels to fly and weight (probably in that order). The rest is irrelevant until you've been flying a while.

What do you want investigating exactly.

The cause of the accident is flying a paramotor with a prototype wing close to the ground.

The accident was probably caused by equipment failure or pilot error.

A post mortem would not determine the cause of the accident. It would determine his cause of death which is already established (trauma).

I agree transparency is desirable, but Ozone has no obligation to tell the general public what prototype wing it was as it is not in general production.

On 7/27/2016 at 9:21 AM, morgy said:

Light weight ones don't exist??  20kg for an AC and the Mac Fly range are 3-4kg lighter with the same engine fitted to Zen.  

Yeah, but they will still be over 15kg. Lightweight to me means it doesn't feel heavy when I pick it up!

15 hours ago, fuzzybabybunny said:

The Parajet's on the heavy side. And really expensive 10.5kg for the chassis and another ~15kg for the engine (190-200cc) means 25.5kg, plus the weight of the box. Airlines usually top out at 23kg for the max weight of a single item. Sure, I can break it down into two separate boxes, but I'd ideally like a 20kg engine+chassis unit and chuck in 3kg for the box.

The Parajet also doesn't seem to be easily repairable since everything is custom machined. Aluminum tubes are fairly easy. A Parajet CNC-machined aluminum part is... good luck.

What was the all-up weight and how much extra did it cost you?

The all-up weight was however much a motor weighs (minus a fuel tank which is plastic and not much). Paramotors are all heavy, the zenith is lighter than all the other motors I have seen and lifted up on the hill, but not by much. Light weight ones do not exist.

Cost was the price of a custom made strong cardboard box to the max dimensions the airline took (which a friend made for free) and then the excess baggage which was about £150 ish from memory. Way cheaper and more convenient than the courier quotes I had got too. Save weight on the box, you don't need anything fancy to check it onto a plane, just make sure it is well padded.

A Zenith is easy to repair cos you can just fix a single spar if necessary, not a whole piece.

Yes they are expensive... but they are good.

Zenith. I have checked mine onto a plane in a box and picked it up in USA.

I have done the same to mine and it works well. It is free and easy to do. Make sure it is not too high up the leg (as opposed to toe end) so that when your foot flexes it doesn't catch.

Take offs look interesting. P!us it is possible to move the camera in flight and put it on your head instead of having 2 cameras (although gopro knock offs are so cheap now you could get a couple of cameras).

Ozone usually release the full weight wing one year, then the light weight one a year or 2 later.