adamjedgar

I am not sure Vauxscott...i have in the past turned it over using a 12volt motorcycle battery. The Nirvana fired up ok, however, if a starter motor normally runs on a 16.8 Volt system, will using a 12 Volt battery cause problems for the starter motor? I ask that because i once had a fridge at our house catch fire and burn half a house down because the fridge motor supply power cable was damaged and the compressor was unable to draw enough to run properly. Eventually it over heated and caused a fire. Would not the same thing happen to a starter motor that is not being supplied with enough voltage? (ie less than the designed16.8V)

What voltage is that? The Rodeo is 16.8v. I can't get this voltage with lithium...nearest is 18v which won't work because of the charging system on the Nirvana Rodeo. It's a 16.8V system I have since read that Nimh aren't good for high current drain...such as electric starters

Hi guys, I recently decided to replace my Nirvana Rodeo 200cc engine Nicad battery pack with Nimh. The old pack consists of 14 sub C batteries in series to produce 16.8 volts. After making up the new pack and then charging batteries 1 week ago, I installed the new pack into motor yesterday and attepted to start ...it barely turns the Simonini 200 over. Ideas?

Gee is the 200 rewlly having problems getting that off the ground? Im am really surprised...my simonini 200 would near go shit vertical with that trike (i weight 73kg +motor is 34kg = 107kg ex wing) Maybe try a 3 blade prop? What is your body weight, fuel capacity, and what wing are you flying with it?

Hi guys, The nirvana has sat in storage for a few months. Got it out, charged battery, started up...no problems. Next day, went to field, started up...all good. Shut down, setup wing, put motor on back...wouldnt start and then popped the fuel primer (rubber stuffed) Purchased a new primer, started at home, all good. Next day down to field, started motor and warmed up. Shutdown, climbed into harness leaning back and then forwrds to get in and up on feet, walked over to glider, clipped wing onto carrabiners...motor wouldnt start. Took wing off, and climbed out of harness, primed motor and after a bit of mucking around, she fired up again. I stopped engine, then restarted...she went first go. Went through the process of leaning back to get in, then forward to stand up, buckled up, went over to wing, clipped in...no way could i get it started. Battery went flat...pulled plug and she wasnt flooded...so i went home with the shits! If i didnt know better, i would say fuel is not staying up to carby and is draining back to tank! I did try reversing the way primer was connected...if its wrong it simply didnt pump fuel up wt all, so i think i have it round the right way? I should also make mention...battery isnt great (even though i did cycle it the nite before...i think nimh's need replacing)

For my 20 cents worth... 1. Your wing loading with a motor is significantly higher (especially since we ppgers mostly use reflex gliders with high sink rates and poorer glide ratios, whereas pg guys mostly do not) so you dont feel thermals nor do they have as much effect until they get much stronger than with free flying...by the time you really feel them they are getting bloody strong and a lot more dangerous. Its at this point in the middle of the day that even a lot of free flight guys may be choosing to land! 2. Under thrust, paraglider wings dont like turbulence anywhere near as much with no thrust (under gravity)...ever landed your motor in turbulence from trees etc...notice how it snakes around and pitches much more than if you turn the motor off and descend through the rough stuff? 3. Hitting bad sink near the ground or taking a collapse near the ground with 30kg on your back is going to hurt a lot more than free flying with just a harness (which also usually has back protection btw (unlike ppg harnesses which ushally do not) 4. Because of heavier wing loadings when motoring, effectively the amount of energy and difficulty your setup produces, is at least one class higher than the gliders free flight rating. So En A becomes En B, En B becomes En C and so on. Therefore you are actually flying a much more dynamic wing in more difficult and stronger thermic conditions needed in order to stay up without the motor going...thats a lot of extra difficulty compared with free flying 5. Because of less weight shift, increased cage drag, and restricted head and body movement due to things like cage and swing arms, thermalling in a motor is actually significantly more difficult than free flying. 6. If thermalling/soaring for a long time at altitude, you may find your motor has cooled down and difficult to start again. Because you arrived at said spot under power, you may have not thought about "can i get out of here to a safe bombout if motor wont start again?" Your answer might be yes, but did you base your glide to that bombout on a free flying sink rate or motor sink rate. This is often a huge trap for guys who fly both pg and ppg...their brain subconsciously switches modes and they inadvertantly forget they now have a really terrible comparative glide ratio because they are concentrating on catching/following thermals or soaring ridge lift in the motor. Not saying for a minute dont ridge soar or thermal a motor, just dont take it for granted ppg is the same same as free flying and just as easy. It isnt. Kind regards Adam

That looks like a cobra paramotor made in asia...its a close copy of the nirvana rodeo. I own a nirvana rodeo and this unit is high hang point and doesnt have any weight shift (on mine carabiners attach to top of harness on shoulders). Your one looks like different hang points but soft ones like that have eome weight shift but i think its a bit limited. If its the same as mine, you can thermal with the right wing but without weight shift arms get very tired.

Simple question...can a single skin wing be flown in rain? (My theory is yes, but i would be interested in hearing points of view on this one)

One solution is to buy a 4 stroke. What you are experiencing is common among 2 strokes. I would look at jet adjustment on carby first, exhaust port and pipe, and reed valves.

You say this is an engine that is essentially brand new? If its got very very low hours, take off seems fine but is bogging down when you climb to altitude, my first point of contact is mixture settings on the carby. Just remember that as an engine is run in, carby mixture settings often need tweeking. Time of year and temperature also affect these settings to...so if you are flying in a different area mixtures may need altering. Fuel mixture settings on 2 strokes are never set and forget for life, location and altitude. To some extent mixtures are more likely to need adjusting on a new engine than one that has been run in and has a season or 2 of use.

I also wonder if they are using a non reflex wing. The floatiness of a standard paraglider should require less thrust to stay up.

actually i have just remembered, this is one of the really great things about the design of the Nirvana rodeo...the side comfort bars are quite short and if needed will hinge downwards when you are standing, thus allowing your butt to be right in the seat from a standing position. Also, as with many designs, the rear section of the lower seat quite easily rotates upwards with your butt cheeks when you are standing. I find that on my unit, so long as leg straps are adjusted correctly, there is really no need to wiggle into seat. I believe that this is one of the determining factors between a great paramotor design and a very ordinary one. Poor seat design not only makes it hard to get into, its hard to launch as well. Recently, i mentioned i blew 5 launches in a row on my other"el cheepo" dle powered unit whilst my nirvana was undergoing some minor repairs to its exhaust silencer. I got back into the nirvana the other day and couldnt believe how much easier it is to launch...and that is hard to believe when one considers the Nirvana is almost 10kg's heavier than the DLE powered unit. I am now a real believer in the notion that paramotor quality, design, functionality, and geometry are extremely important and should always be considered over purchase price. If one cannot afford a new quality unit, definately go for a second hand one that is a top name brand known for the above mentioned parameters. Just to give a heads up, there is a Nirvana Instinct (simo 200cc engine) with 34 hours on it for sale in Australia at present for only $6500 Aussie dollars (thats 4000 Euro). This is an absolute bargain especially considering all the gear the owner is selling with it (ie 3 blade carbon prop, agami water flotation system etc). Its for sale on the high adventure facebook page (australia high adventure btw) see it on following page...https://www.facebook.com/groups/176413562398519/

Yep over maximum is a bad idea in terms of takeoff and landing speeds for sure. I remember at my training course there was a big guy...he had a lot of trouble getting off the ground because he couldnt committ to the run for more than very short bursts that were not enough to get airborne. I think flying heavy would only make this much worse. The other thought is, the faster you go close to the ground, the more its going to hurt when you hit the ground...so slower is better until you get some proficiency up. I have over 100hours paramotoring and still have problems sometimes...and yet when free flying i fly a high aspect ratio competition 2 liner glider and have 400 hours in that form of the sport. I personally believe a new ppger should go for light wing loading...the lighter the better within manufacturers guidelines. Excluding the weather conditions considerations of a given flying day, i reckon it should be at least bottom of weight range with minimal or empty fuel tank. You have to keep in mind, we are already flying the wings grossley overweight (+25-30kg) compared with equivalent free flying specs anyway so collapses really are not an issue unless as a newbie you are going to willingly fly in shitty air.

@ Alan, yes I think that is also part of the reason undoubtedly, however the dudek is far less sensitive to variable light wind conditions @Simon, very good point. You have reminded me that was something going through my head after all those failed launches. I remember when I first started learning how to free fly I used to have problems when forward launching that felt as if that was my problem...ie couldn't detect what the wing was doing as it was coming up, so not being used to the feedback compared with the dudek universal may very well be a new learning experience for me? At present I have two thoughts... 1. I am currently using my DLE powered ppg unit which has a prop on it that doesn't produce very good thrust. Because I power launch I am thinking perhaps I am taking it a bit too easy on the wing with my initial throttle settings and the wing is easily popping up off the ground, but then is not getting enough forward momentum once it climbs above the prop wash zone to get overhead properly? Trouble is, when looking at it out of the corner of my eye, it appears to be going offline whilst still in the prop wash zone. Perhaps I am inadvertently directing the thrust at one side of the wing whilst looking over my right shoulder when launching? 2. The lower feedback on the lighter wing. Not sure whether lightweight wings produce less line tension when launching...I suppose if the wing is lighter than that would make sense? Maybe I am just being too tender on a new wing and need to "brutalise" it a little when launching I think that perhaps my next plan is to do some forward launching practise using a free flying harness so I can get used to how it comes up. I am also pulling my finger out completing the exhaust repairs that have grounded my Nirvana ppg unit for the last month. I am sure that flying a better and more familiar unit will help sort the issue (I have most of my hours on the Nirvana and it has better throttle setup, has a much smoother power curve and finally, produces much better thrust).

After picking up wing and reading label the SIrocco is 24m flat...approx 21.5 projected i think. Does anyone who flies wings with neutral trimmer settings like that of the speedster and sirocco ever close them fully for takeoff and or landing? I have only fully closed trimmers when free flying the sirocco....tried them closed on a ppg launch recently but felt like wing wanted to go parachutal...i gave up on that launch pretty quickly. I did have tip steering toggles in hand too i think...another launch fail. A lot of experimenting to do with this wing.

as title outlines...does anyone here feel that, when forward launching a lightweight wing, its easier for the wing to go offline than a standard wing? I only ask this because after having got the sirocco, i find it is much more difficult to get that wing to come up straight than my dudek wing. The Dudek seems to just want to come up straight...the Sirocco appears to want to come up anything but straight. The slightest loading to one side, whether from moving air or line tension, and over it goes before wing gets anywhere near overhead where it can be easily corrected by side stepping or adding opposite brake (or both). I blew 5 launches in a row yesterday because of the wing doing this repeatedly...I cant remember the last time i blew 3 in a row let alone 5. I even tried setting up with a pronounced "V" in the wing instead of an arc...didnt make any difference The wing seems extremely sensitive to asymmetric loading...its as if i have to learn how to launch again. After 130 hours of motoring and 400 hours free flying this is an unexpected experience.

Try to find a decent second hand unit...there are plenty around. Just make sure you buy a decent brand and you will be ok. Basic engine rebuilds are not expensive so long as the bore, crank, and various bearings are ok. To be honest, there is so much vibration on a 2 stroke engine, things are always breaking on them. Main thing is, whatever unit you buy, look after the prop and keep it well balanced...dont footdrag in dirt or sand. (i prefer carbon fibre props myself but timber ones take more of a beating before they fail). Good luck with it.

I have had a terrible time forward launching the Sirocco in last 2 flights...im really struggling to come to terms with the way the wing comes up. The dudek likes to come up straight and is easy to get overhead. The sirocco takes every opportunity to throw a wing tip over. I think its lighter weight may be the reason for this? I have to say it mains brakes configuration is terrible and i dont like it at all but i guess i need to setup 2d steering and learn how to use it (weird that the activate tst one must push upwards instead of down) I also find the Sirocco nervous in the air...not feeling as if a collapse is imminent, just that wing reacts quite noticably to the slightest air turbulence,and in particular engine torque...the dudek is far more comfortable to ride underneath and a lot more resilient to the influence of torque. There is only 1.5 sq m difference in wing size (dudek 25.5m and sirocco 24m) so i dont see this as being the main factor. I dont think i will ever buy another lightweight ppg wing again...huge mistake for me.

Personally, i prefer, if one is going for a big engine (like the 185), to go for a 200. The moster doesnt produce more thrust than the simo mini 2 plus. That is a fabrication...see below, Simo mini 2 plus weighs 15.4kg with starters and exhaust, produces 26hp and 78kg thrust at only 6800 rpm. At 7200rpm the simo 200 is still reving lower than 185 moster but it is now producing a whopping 86kg thrust...which is enormous. The 185 moster weighs almost exactly the same as simo 200, however develops 25hp at 7600 rpm (a lot higher reving than the 200 cc engine) Big difference in performance...i have never been out climbed by a 185 moster. I can also guarentee the 200 is going to be quieter (due to lower engine rpm), be more economical, and last a lot longer between rebuilds. The 200 could be detuned to further improve its longevity and still outperform a 185 (which is what i think nirvana have done). Not saying the moster isnt a great engine...it is a great engine, just dont be fooled by bullshit sales pitch comparing a 200 with a 185. The bigger capacity is always going to win out.

I would also urge you to consider other en a/b wings too...as long as they are or have full reflex capability. Wings such as apco lift, macpara charger, etc. I like the universal because unlike other wings, withs it long trimmer range the wing profile can have almost all reflex removed enabling it to free fly in lowish winds. You will be lower than standard pg wings but it free flies quite ok and a lot better than other reflex ppg wings. I dont free fly mine anymore...but i used too. In terms of the motor and frame,because you live on a boat portability should be a very high priority. For that reason you really need to compare your shortlist units with the nirvana rodeo. The rodeo is expensive, but wwight is more about the engine size than anything else. It packs up in a very impressive manner. In terms of weight, almost all big name 200cc engines for example are going to see just the engine and exhaust alone weighing in at 19+kg. The exception is the nitro 200...however the first model of that engine had some cracking issues that i am certain are the result of excessive weightsaving design at the expense of strength and longevity...which was clearly a foolish choice at the time. My understanding is that in subsequent models these issues have been addressed. Weight is more about engine size than anything else.

First parameter wing was an Ozone Buzz PWR Z4...complete waste of time...only lasted about 5 flights on it before changing to a reflex glider. The buzz became my free flying only wing for quite some time and was excellent for that purpose. My first and most favoured reflex wing was, and still is, a Dude Universal (the original not the 1.1). I have just purchased an Ozone Sirocco (once again the original not the Sirocco 2). I can honestly say, the Dudek Universal is by far a better designed wing than the Ozone Sirocco. It is obviously a lower end glider which of course makes an enormous difference too. The dudek is an En A/B and the Sirocco En C. Have outlined that, irrespective the dudek still has better design features and is far more resilient against torque induced steer in any configuration than the Sirocco...even at cruise. Its trimmer system works better, it is actually far easier to control on launch, turns better on main brakes without also using tip steering (which is a must with the Sirocco), although it is heavier on speed bar. I have only put about 2 hours on the Sirocco so its early days but I have to say I do not trust this wing whereas the Dudek is near bullet proof in the air in a wide variety of conditions. The Sirocco is faster in top speed, however I am not actually convinced it is significantly faster on only trimmers...just when bar is used. So for cross country on trimmers, the Dudek is very competitive, a lot safer, and easily twice as comfortable in bumpy stuff. Paramotoring is about a lot more than speed and zippy manouvres. For your first wing paramotoring, I would advise against going for a sportier wing...you will walk away from far too many botched takeoffs and especially botched landings wishing you had a lower end wing. From my experience the difference between the Sirocco and Universal in takeoff and landing is actually quite significant...of particular interest in my opinion is landing speed. A new pilot should always buy a wing with as low a landing speed as possible (preferably a wing whose minimum flying speed is in the very low 20km/h range). You won't actually be touching down at this speed but must learn how to bleed off speed in the final flare to reduce touchdown speed below about 15-17km/hr...and this is because I don't know of any human that is capable of running at 20+km/hr with 30-35kg on their backs without tripping ass over head so often that ones parameter unit is going to start looking like a demolition derby vehicle within just a few short hours. Damage to ones ppg unit means frustration, cost, and eventually an unwillingness to fly as often as is needed to maintain proficiency (thus it becomes a vicious cycle quickly moving towards giving up the sport). I would recommend a Dudek universal (or synthesis) as first wing 100%.

Thats a misconception when its comes to torque steer stalling wings. A stalled En A hits the ground just as hard as a stalled En C. In any case i feel that a lightly loaded low end wings may actually torque steer worse than more heavily loaded highend ones. Also,the high angle of climb isnt relevant...stalling is about angle of attack to relative airflow, not angle to horizon. It may be that your wing design isnt a good one for motoring and this begins to become more noticable with higher thrust engines.

I like to master the aging process...its a lifetime dream

Oh i should have been a little clearer... 1. My ppg units are both high hang point. When the wing was brand new i was the first person to fly it out of the box. I setup its brake lines for high hang point for my paramotor unit on its test flight... it appears that the first owner (who is an ozone dealer) did not then re adjust brake lengths to suit his own ppg unit (which is low hang point). I say this because they were in same position as i had setup for its first flight after i unpacked it out of the box. Its first owner dmaged an ankle flying on this wing and i suspect that is partly why its hardly flown even though its around 3 years old. I free flew it to sus out whether weight shift made any real difference...i free fly high performance 2 liner en-d and ccc class gliders so im a reasonably capable pilot...i can say that weighshift didnt really fix the problem much...essentially the manouvrability of the sirocco is rather poor when just using main brakes at trim speed even with weightshift. Considering Ozones experience in designing gliders i am surprised at the lack of turning authority on main brakes. I dont see this as a bad thing, its just a different philosophy to what i am used to with my dudek...which has excellent turning authority on main brakes. Wing is almost brand new...its done approx 6 flights. Another thing i notice is that the Sirocco brakes dont produce much additional lift in the flare when landing trimmers neutral (if any at all). Add this lack of flare authority to my above equation of poor turning and to my way of thinking the ozone design philosophy with this wing seems fundamentally flawed. I will reserve my judgement until i have flown it enough times to experiment more.

I started before Tucker Gotts videos...my inspiration was Dell Schanze, and my dream was always to fly a paramotor across the mouth of Sydney Harbour and continue down the "Sydney victor one" sightseeing the eastern cliffs of Dover heights and the Royal Narional Park, then on to Wollongong. I also wanted to paramotor the summitt of Mount Warning, and also the Glass House Mountains. Ive achieved my goals...i guess i should give up the sport now