adamjedgar

Nah 100% made it richer on both...added about 1/8 on low and half a turn on high. The crank had the tiniest bit of play in it when i was putting prop on...if i had known it had roller little end bearing, i would never have taken off. I was convinced it was the big end a few flights back but when i lifted barrel there was not play in the big end...i ended up putting it down to a bit of 2 stroke piston slap. Compression, starting, idling, and power were all great prior to take off, but i dont think with 2 strokes that means much! Here is a photo of spark plug the day before. Even thought its a coffee brown colour, i normally run a black colour. For it to be going brown when i had increased rich mixture i think says the excessive movement in little end and failed bearing was adding friction heat to the underside of piston and also affecting exhaust port timing making engine run lean. The other side of piston and barrel are unaffected by this.

heres the failed upper connecting rod roller bearing...shes stuffed.

Hi guys,Had an engine failure yesterday on the simonini mini2plus 200.Landing was fun but thanks to my always trying to keep downwind bomout options within reach, i nailed a perfect high g/s feather duster on Monash Country Club 16th hole fairway...wind was north east coming off the ocean.https://www.livetrack24.com/track/1645021wasnt sure how much wind shadow effect there would be passing down through tree line (a 10-12 knot coastal seabreeze was blowing 2-3km east of me) so i let the trimmers out about 40mm to try and compensate for that frightful dead airzone below tree top height and it all worked out well. I paced out two lovely looking 10meter long worm burn marks on the fairway grass...a token of my appreciation for the temporary club membership...hehehe. Real feather chuffing stuff (shame there was not a soul in sight to witness my one decent landing in my ppg career). It looks like the upper connecting rod roller bearing has failed and in turn the engine seized. its early in the strip down but its obvious she has also grabbed a piston on the cylinder wall as well clearly running lean through exhaust port at the time of failure. Im not suprised by that because i was on about 3/4 speed system climbing up into the hills to the west of the coastline at the time trying to get home before sunset.I had only increased the low and high speed mixture settings on previous flight yesterday as we are coming into our cooler months here in Sydney, so its not mixture related even though engine did end up running hot...i believe thst was due to unfavourable port timing caused by bearing failing.Whats really interesting is that as the bearing failed the engine did not produce any audible knocking noise like you get with an automotive engine...small engine small noise i suppose.Will be at the very least a new piston/cylinder kit (although im suspecting a crank split to replace lower connecting rod bearing may also be needed as im certain pieces of the failed upper rod bearing will have gone through the bottom end (i cant feel anything but shiny pieces of metal fell out of the spark plug when i removed it and tapped it on a hard surface)Engine has about 150 hours and has always been very reliable.I had the head off a few weeks ago and cleaned out decompression port also checking the liner for any score marks, put a walbro kit in it carby, and replaced the electric starter and battery.What sort of hours are you guys getting out of roller type upper connecting rod bearings?Ive never had a little end fail before, big ends on other engines yes...but not upper. Makes me think roller type little ends are a bad idea?

Anyone know of any engine brans in paramtoring who do fuel injection? Wouldnt it resolve the issue of 2 stroke engine failures due to carburation issues? In cars fuel injection also add quite a bit of horsepower as well as much better fuel economy. Couldnt we benefit from that? I habe read that jetskis for example use it

Hi guys, I have an update on this issue... 1. The nicads developed a memory and would take full charge. 2. The starter motor brushes packed it in 3. The simonini mini2plus decompression port had gotten blocked. As you can imagine, i got completely confused as to what the heck was wrong in all of that. Suffice to say: 1. 3 battery packs (i thought the nimh new one was a failure and therefore ended up buying a new nirvana nicad one as well), 2. 2 starter motors (which still didnt fix the problem), 3. and removal of head to clean out decompression port...and dinally the rodeo is singing along happily again. 4. Replaced fuel primer and new carby kit You can imagine my shock when new battery and a second starter motor still wouldnt turn the engine over. I didnt suspect the decompression port because i had checked it only a few hours before the final breakdown that grounded her months ago. I have lost track of how much money this cost but im thinking roughly $600 AUD might cover it. An expensive exercise in frustration. Looking back i still cant see that i could have avoided all of the screwing around. On a bright note, it turns out that: 1. the nimh batteries work brilliantly 2. I cant get replacement brushes for my starter...so after rewinding it, im still stuffed and had to get a complete replacement starter anyway (lucky i got a second hand one in good nick for $50...$400AUD for new one). The nirvana has now done around 20 hours in the last month without any issues. Fingers crossed. I wish it was possible to pull start it whilst on my back.. It develops so much compression its impossible. I can only just pull start it standing beside the unit (let alone with it on my back) Its no wonder the electric starter has so much trouble. These decompression ports on the bigger motors seem like a bit of a fail to me.

I dont live at altitude...sea level actually. However, my first 2 paramotors (still use both) are 200cc engines and i weigh 71kg. Get the lightest most powerful unit you can is my advice. Because you are at high altitude, perhaps it might be worth considering a 1 size larger wing? (I cant say this from experience but if you are launching at those kinds of altitudes then i would be looking for horsepower/thrust and lowering wing loading a bit. You might also consider different prop. Imagine that for a given engine, at higher altitude you could probably use a coaser pitched propellor because the air is thinner? You probably would need to ask the manufacturers about all of this...they would know their own gear.

Hi guys, Has anyone else noticed that their wing at a given trim setting flies faster with engine at idle descending than under power straight and level? I tested this twice today and both times my gps speed increased by about 3km/hr when i went back to idle and began to descend compared with straight and level flight under power. Any ideas on why? I have 2 theories... 1. Increased drag at idle lowers angle of attack to the point of producing increased airspeed that more than compensates for increased drag, 2. Approx 7 degree recline on prop unloads the wing under power...so wing flies slower for a given weight under throttle because the vertical component of thrust due to the 7 degree recline carries some of your weight. I dont think its entirely point 2 above...because 7 degrees as a percentage of 180 degrees i dont think equates to a gps speed difference of 3km/hr (35 vs 38km/hr) My calc says 7 degress is 3.8 percent however that only equates to 1.47km/hr change in speed. Any other thoughts on this?

I have removed the insulated windings and prepared the armature to rewind. Apart from my time, its relatively inexpensive to purchase the wire to rewind this...so what the heck, i will have a crack at it. After all, what could possibly go wrong that is worse then where i am at right now in that i need to purchase a new starter motor. If i can get the right wire...to be continued (never done this before, so i thought i would enrol in "Starter Motor Rewind" classes at the International Institute of Youtube)

Hi guys, I have a nirvana rodeo with a mini2plus engine in it that is also 16.8 volt electrical system. The NS50 starter motor used by Nirvana (which is not a Simonini factory spec one) has failed. My assumption is that Nirvana use a different starter because they have increased the battery to 16.8 Volt instead of the Simonini standard 12 volt electric start system. After exhaustive trial and error and learning, i have managed to finally test it correctly and have determined that the resistance testing of adjacent poles on the comutator is the problem. When i test each adjacent pole, initially it shows a small resistance, however, with a few seconds, this value drops to zero. My understanding is that if the resistance value drops after a short period of time, then there is a short. The starter motor is also rapidly burning out the active brush after cleaning and reinstalling. Also, the starter barely even turns the motor over. The battery is brand new and is the 3rd new battery i have tried...so i think i can safely rule that out! Does anyone know what make of starter motor the Nirvana NS50 actually is? (it is not the same as the one used on the Nirvana Instinct) I would be open to an alternative starter, however, this system is 16.8Volts and I dont know if the starter motor is different to a 12 volt one because this is a 16.8 volt system. If it is different, in what way would that be the case? (ie windings, gauge wire???) Images of starter attached. Last 3 photos are after I machined the comutator, then reinstalled it into motor and tried to start (as you can see, its burning the active brush immediately)

Dont the engine specs say engine 1 is 80 ml and engine 2 is 100ml. If 1ml = 1cc...then both of those motors, considering they are also 4 strokes, are drastically underpowered for ppg. Not even worth considering in my view.

So is this also the ssme for freeflying paragliders too. (Ie no legal requirement for training) How do you guys get on when you visit countries like Australia where one must be licenced to fly paragliders and parsmotors?

Hi guys, i am just wondering if someone can provide me with a link to the opps manual that is used in the UK. Do you guys have a ppg only course or is it an addon to a pg license? What are the requirements for ppg and pg over there? what levels of ppg license are there in the UK and what are the requirements for each? kind regards Adam

another thing i havent seen mentioned here is full throttle engine rpm on big vs small engines. the little top 80 i imagine is doing a crapload more rpm than my simo 200 to get me airborne. So i am of the view that the big engine working easy is going to last a whole lot longer between engine rebuilds, and is also going to be a lot more reliable because it is not working so hard all the time.

sorry for the late reply, the nirvana rodeo has about 150 hours now. also, another strategy often used by Nirvana for reducing cracking of various components is the up the idle RPM...dont let your motor idle too slow or the excessive vibration at idle causes cracks everywhere.

This is one area where Nirvana Rodeo have a much better solution. A long section of the header pipe is all flexible. The entire silencer is rubber mounted whilst i have had an outer covering of the silencer come apart (rivets let go), i have never have cracking problems with the header pipe.

I have an update here that has surprised me to the point of shock. I ran into a guy yesterday (not literally btw), who wwighs 84kg, was flying a top 80, and a 19 metre Ozone Freeride. For those who haven't heard of Tucker Gott, the Free ride is just below the viper in performance...it's a pretty high end wing. I am still trying to figure out how the heck he gets it into the air with a top 80 at his body weight...surely it must be pretty marginal? Oh, I did ask him about using the speed system with it...he said he is yet to try...so Perhaps that answers the question as I have my musings as to whether an 84kg pilot could maintain level flight on full speed system with a top 80 and the Free ride? It takes me back to one particular memorable flight I had in Glass house mountains in QLD Australia with the 25m Dudek Universal and Nirvana Rodeo 200. At one point I hit sink so bad, even at full throttle wing set full slow, I went down at over 400 feet per minute losing hundreds of feet of altitude. I shit myself as I was sure I was going to be pushed all the way down to bush and scrub below. Eventually I flew threw it and came away with a few hundred feet to spare...losing 400ft of my altitude (i was at 600 initially) I perish the thought as to what the outcome would have been on a top80!

The only other thing I can think of is the size of the wing vs your body weight. What are the weight specs for: 1. You 2. Your motor 3. Wing weight range

Could i also add to my above post, and this is something i believe incredibly important about such a scenario... let's say it was possible to have a throttle get stuck wide open and one could not shut the engine down. Imagine if, in the process of trying to perform fairly risky height loss maneuvers (considering they would be under high power setting), what if something catastrophic happened with wing and one had to throw the reserve chute? The engine is still running under high power, and the reserve is deployed.. no way to shut the engine down,I could imagine that being a recipe for death! has anyone ever tested a reserve throw whilst engine is producing near max power with the main canopy completely out of control? (i cant imagine anyone being game enough to even try)

I put screws into mine to fasten them to the bars using the holes that you have indicated by your arrows in images. might pay also to hang test because i found that if the height and legnth of the jbars is too great, it causes the front part of the harness to lift up under your legs making the angle between legs and spine less than comfortable. I find it cuts off circulation to my legs after a relatively short period of time on my apco harness. Also, on mine there are two carribiner connection options. I have tried on the lower ones, but it leans me back to far with my jbars. i notice your jbars look even longer than mine. I wonder if Shorter ones (jbars) would allow me to use lower connections and would be better for ground handling as currently the risers are right up next to my ears...its awkward to say the least! EDIT...oh by the way, is this the high hook in point or the low one? (IT LOOKS LIKE THE HIGH HOOK IN POINT) IF HIGH HOOK IN POINT Before you fly wing (if you dont already know this)...its critical you lengthen the brake lines by at least 100mm (from factory settings) BEFORE you attempt to fly. Failure to do this will likely result in you stalling your wing shortly after takeoff and crashing (or torque steering into ground which is just as bad)!!! After changing brake line length, you will then have to test and keep readjusting this length until you get it right on your wing with this high hang point ppg unit. You might think landing wil be a problem with such long brake line lengths, however, its fine. You have to think about it logically...on a low hang point unit, the carribiners are about chest height, on high hang point units, carribiners are at or even above your ears...quite a bit higher. The higher the carribiners, the higher your hands must go up to not pull on any brake on wing trailing edge...so you must lengthen brakes on high hang poiint units. Its even worse when you use speed trimmers as these raise the rears up even higher (a further 100-240mm depending on wing) which can actually put the brake toggles completely out of reach if you let them go whilst trimmers are fully released! The factory defaults on wings i have flown usually have marks on the brakes lines where handle knot should be for standard low hang point set up. Just add 100-150mm (start with just 100mm) from that mark and you should be safe. The way to test if length is ok; hop into your paramotor unit without the engine running when there is a 5-6knot breeze blowing. Launch and kite your wing and have someone look at the trailing edge for you to see if, when your hands are about shoulder height...there should be no brake engaged on the rear of the wing. You dont want to come down below about shoulder height as too much slack in brake lines will then greatly reduce the amount of flare authority available for landing and brake control in the air. The aim is to adjust the knots lengthening the brake line so that the brake handles are at about the same height as they would be for a low hang point unit. Not sure what wing you fly, however, you might find on Ozone wings, this may leave almost zero tail left in the rope/line after the knot fastening it to your brake handle! (Dudek wings have quite a decent excess so i have found no problem with them)

I know guys who fly 120's...guys of upwards of 100kg in body weight. It's more about what wing you fly than the motor. If your engine c.c. is small, go for a larger lower end wing. As an illustration, I have two ppg units...both 200's. One has a shit prop on it which doesn't produce much thrust...but this unit is also 7kg lighter than my other 200 with the good prop. Now I can fly my 25m Dudek Universal with either ppg unit no problem. I recently purchased a 22m Ozone Sirrocco...I am yet to successfully get off the ground on this wing using the ppg with the shit prop (I have tried more than a dozen launches over a couple of days going home both times completely knackered and very very frustrated! On one launch, i got it above my head and ran 50 meters...not once during that run did i ever get the feeling i was going to get airborne...i felt more like a turkey heading for (and straight through) the nearest fence at full tit. However I can successfully launch it with the unit that has the better prop. The moral of the story...the difference in my case between flying and not with the low thrust unit is definitely the wing...it's reasonably easy to launch the larger lower end glider with it, the faster higher end Sirrocco...virtually impossible.

I agree, just opem trimmers, full speedbar from time to time, big ears...ride it out. I personally wouldn't go trying to reach behind into cage area...that area whilst engine is running is a bed of snakes! Most engines have both ignition and kill switches...I think you have a pretty good chance of safely shutting down with these two alternatives. Some engines has clear fuel primers that are easily within reach whilst strapped in. Perhaps one option might be to perforate/rip the primer so it sucks air thus starving engine of fuel? If I were reaching around into cage, I would go for blocking the air filter intake...however both my paramotors are high hang point so the ability to move around in harness is extremely limited (On nirvana Rodeo virtually impossible) I am not sure about bline stalls under full power, I'm of the opinion that could be catastrophically dangerous as I have lost control of a glider after it went parachutal doing that once...it ended up a bed sheet beneath me and I missed falling into it by inches as I fell down though. Safest is big ears, 360's, and wing over into 360 to minimise regain altitude as you exit wingover (the degree of wing over depends on experience and skill obviously). These manoeuvres are really only for short bursts to get rid of excessive height...you are gonna get pretty tired awful quickly if you tried to spend the entire 2 or more hours doing them, Main thing is not panic and fly it out (keep the wing flying stable) staying well within your level of experience and skill. You are unlikely to die flying for 2 hours till fuel runs out, but you could easily die cocking up trying to pull plug, fuel line, or performing unstable descent techniques (high power bline stalls in my book are unstable and potentially very very dangerous)

I haven't flown the niviuk wings, although my instructor here in Australia David Wainwright sells them and won icarus on one. I am surprised it is any different to the apco lift ezy to be honest...there isn't that much difference in the wing rating. I have a Dudek Universal (A/B rating). I don't usually have to let trimmers out at all launching that wing in light conditions up to about 10knots (obviously I'm reverse launching in anything over about 5 knots). In any case, your launch trimmers settings in lighish conditions should be similar to the apco and my wing I would have thought. Can I ask, what ppg unit do you fly? Have you checked you brake line lengths on that new wing for the ppg unit you are flying? Perhaps the hang points require brake lines to be lengthened slightly on that wing? (This shouldn't be an issue but you should always check with a different wing in any case to make sure you are not launching wing with brake engaged...or just in case someone else has altered them)

well i have managed to finally finish soldering up the Nimh battery pack with heavier duty copper pieces for linking batteries. i put it into paramotor this afternoon and unfortunately it was a complete fail. There is barely enough cranking amps to turn the 200cc motor over. I have to say i am disappointed, i was sure that this would work...even a local battery supplier (who also make up battery packs) were certain that the Nimh batteries would be far better than Nicads. It would seem that the few forum posts i have managed to google comparing Nicads and Nimh batteries are correct...for electric starter cranking power, Nimh are pretty much useless. Back to the drawing board...i guess tomorrow i will be heading out to buy some Nicads to make another battery pack up. I will post back once i have done that...might even make a video about it as I am sure a real life comparison might be of use to others.

Thank's guys for the input. I have some thinking and tinkering to do. I guess the short of this, I am dismayed at my Nimh failure...I really thought that was going to be a winner cause everyone say they are better. I missed the part where Nimh are apparently crap for high drain applications. Anyway, I have one more avenue of trial and error with Nimh, I am going to use heavier gauge metal (copper that was previously on my old nicads) linking batteries together in series. This is just to make sure I am truly comparing then properly. If the Nimh batteries still won't crank the motor, then I will know for sure it's a fail. I am persisting just a little longer because Wikipedia says these batteries should work (at least that my comprehension of the Wikipedia writeup) If the Nimh turn out to be a fail, in the short term I will have to use Nicad until I can convert the whole thing to 12v. Once it's 12v, I can use the battery my other paramator has (which is a compact lightweight lithium motorcycle battery and is brilliant).

Ok...my preference would be to go for Lipo...I have seen those in model aircraft and are great. Concerns... 1. On the nirvana the battery pack is built into the fibreglass shell in a pocket right behind my back. Are they safe enough to be in such a location? (Fire) 2. The system charges to 16.8volts (nicad) which peaks I believe at 22volts. I would need to change this...I'm thinking it may be better to drop back to 12 volt motorcycle lipo. Is it easily doable to change the nirvana rodeo (simonini200) over to 12 volt and then I can use a standard motorcycle 12volt Lipo battery? What is involved in this?