Ivan

It is quite a complex question and you would not be able to find any precise numbers for climb rate. It depends on the wing type, wing load, thrust, prop, weather, etc. In my opinion if you regularly want to do 12 000ft, higher thrust is second to none, I would not hesitate to go for 250.

PS Angle of attack does not depend on thrust as it is an angle between the chord and upcoming air (not between the chord and horizontal plane) BHPA exam theory is still sitting in my memory

This guy has done it on purpose on request of SkyMax to prove that the frame can survive any power launch 

This video was very useful for me because I wanted to be downright sure that the frame is solid enough. 

Two days ago one more guy here at Wirral has broken his prop when doing power launch with Tornado engine and well known frame, more expensive then one buy SkyMax..

Can't wait to get my hands on mine...

For me more important then price was the fact that these frames are smart. To eliminate any twist tendency they made horns of peculiar shape and they - left and right horns - are different (!) Central shaft allows you to shift the weight and correct any tendency of the wing to turn left / right...

Sorry for the quality of the pictures was too thrilled with discussion about the frame so didn't take proper pictures.

Andy, it is really good that you made an effort to look into this  If you have the numbers for SkyMax labour cost it is even better  waiting for you posting the payslips to prove the point  I am sure you know better then me visiting the factory last month 

From my side I can reply to you with some research on submarines (if I am correct in understanding your reference to something secret - UK made Titanium submarines, thats why our industry is the best ) . 

So, here we go - UK has eleven nuclear submarines (and some of them even working occasionally, according to the Daily Mail ). Russia has 40 (!) of them.

Therefore I presume Russia either has a very well developed Titanium manufacturing industry   -     either buying the old British submarines to scrap some Ti from them     -    either they all are made in China because of the cheap labour 

Being serious  out cross country team wmonkeys.co.uk decided to swap our frames to new Star type by SkyMax. I am literally going to NatWest this morning to arrange the payment. Frames are going to be made by special order as will have non standard fuel tanks, 18 litres instead of 15 litres. Hoping to see them here in the UK in the end of Feb. 

Andy, I can only reiterate - there is no cheap labour at SkyMax, you are free not to believe me, its your choice

Alloys are cheaper indeed but not the labour. 

I agree what you telling about the ships but that was not my point so cant see where I am wrong

I do not think it is about cheap labour or welding mate, I have been to SkyMax factory a month ago.  

Have not been to the UK nuclear subs, sorry... )))

It is about manutacturing the titanium alloys and tubes. Trust me - Airbus is placing an orders for manufacturing the undercarriage parts in Russia not because of the cheap welding, but because of the fact that Ti alloys are manufactured in Russia and the technology to process it is quite developed there. 

PS We are to get our SkyMax Star frames in late February. It takes a bit longer to get them as we decided to go for tailored type with 18l fuel tanks (standard is 15L) and will do a full review then.

Tried it couple of weeks ago in a short 40 min flight.

In comparison with classic SupAir it was not so much comfortable. You just feel that your legs are sort of compressed. 

Then (again, in comparison with SupAir) there is no adjustment to the front edge of the harness which I use as a precise tool for keeping the direction of the flight and which just makes you more comfortable during long cross country flights.

Certainly  there is no pocket underneath the harness (again in comparison to SupAir) which is essential if you need to take oil, etc for cross country.

Surprisingly I did not find that it is easyer to steer with weightshift using split leg then with classic.

The positive thing is that you do not have to make an effort to get into the harness after the take off. It is not a problem for me with the motor I currenty fly (SkyMax compact) but can be an issue with different machines. For someone just starting it can be a paramount thing.

Thats my personal impression and It might be not 100% accurate because of my body shape and previous flight experience with SupAir. 

Fuel bags work good at boats and small planes. Can not see any reason why they can not be used in paamotor.

Tanks are robust and during the tests Skymax guys were dropping them from 15 meters height with no damage to the tanks. I doubd that the standard plastic ones can survive it.

Yes it is different from what we all are used to but  we are getting minus 1 kilo in regards of the weight and no have issues with fuel tank ventilation.  

I will be placing an order for this frame late December..

Gentlemen,
Recently we came across an issue with the Moster Classic pull starter. 
I replaced my old starter pulley system with a new one and within a few flights I got a problem. The cable stopped retracting after pulling. This situation can quickly become unsafe as my Moster has no clutch and the cable can easily damage the prop if it is loose. 

When I disassembled the starter I found a defect (groove) on the axis of the starter. It was preventing the spring from rolling backwards when retracting the cable. You can see the defect on the photo below and the evidence of what was happening.

When you pull the starter (scheme 1) the axis is rotating clockwise and the spring is not touching it. But when you release it the axis is rotating anti clockwise, the spring edge is getting trapped into the groove and stopping the axis from further movement (scheme 2). 

I polished the groove out but surprisingly after a few flights the problem developed again. When I disassembled the starter again I found the same problem with the same defect. At this point I realized that the problem is not in the defect itself but is the spring. The spring is made of hardened steel and the starter’s axis is made from relatively soft aluminum. Therefore, the spring edge when unrolling was acting like a chisel cutting the soft aluminum (scheme 3).
The solution of this problem is pretty simple. All you have to do is to gently bend the spring (scheme 4) so when retracting it will not touch with the sharp edge but with the flat bent part. 

I took a couple of photos as well to show the right and wrong shape of the spring.

Since then the problem has disappeared and never come back.
I hope this might help somebody to have a safe flights. 

Ivan&Alan

To my oppinion - the clutch will make your life much easier and safer and it worth having the total reliability reduced.

With Rodeo the option is to have extra fuel tank by Nirvana on your knees. Unfortunately you then will have a question - where to mount the reserve??? There is no space underneath the seat or at the side. Potentially you can get it on top of the frame like PAPs but then it will be not so convenient to assemble and disassemble the frame.. Sorry, have no experience with Scout. 

Nirvana Rodeo was probably the best machine I had in terms of both comfort and reliability. And the thing which I really appreciate is that Nirvana is might be the only one company doing total rebuilding and tuning of the engines (Simonini) before installing them to the frame. Their paramotors are not the very lightest or most modern but really comfortable and reliable. That's my personal opinion. The big disadvantage which made me eventually buying another paramotor was 9 liter fuel tank. It is only 1h30min flight with a fast wing. I started flying cross country at that time and it became a nuisance. Apart of that it was a great machine.

I have had both Rodeo and Instinct. Rodeo was much easier to assemble and had more comfortable harness less prone to twist position. If I would go for Nirvana again I would definitely go for Rodeo or Ranger rather then Instinct. Had no experience with Scout.

Sure. But Thor 250 weights 18kg (19kg with electric stater) without the radiator and fluid. That's what Polini site states. So I would expect 20 kg at least with the radiator.  Some Web sites state 24kg... I am not a superhero 

Totally agree. 

What I would mind is sending the motor to the other side of the country by courier services, getting it back in 2 - 3 weeks of precious summer time just to find out that the problem still exists 

That's what I was seeing throughout being in this sport, at least with Moster you can keep it simple and do most of the things yourself. Sorry for being might be too cautious sometime. I am looking at 4 strike motors for quite a while as it is a pain to do every single take off for cross country with 20 litres of fuel on me but can't see any light and reliable option for now. Hope the situation with this motor will be different.

I was discussing this engine with EOS distributor I know for years. The fuel economy should be great, but there is one disadvantage which makes me really concerned about it. I was told that 4 stroke valve system is quite complex there and I would not be able to adjust and tune it by myself. I am used to the fact that the engines we fly are not very reliable but at the same time I can service my Moster (as an example) by myself. If it is really different with this engine I would better stay away from it. That's my choice... 

PS anybody knows, why the cylinder  head of this engine look so familiar with Bailey? 

Adam,

I had Nirvana Rodeo for two years, the primer should never looks spongy.

Silly question, but does the walve in the fuel cup work? If you take of the cup before the flight is the air going inside (that should not happen).

Can you check the filter? Do not remember, is it in the tank or not now. 

Have you tried adjusting the carb? I do not believe it is a baterry problem. Carb needs adjusting if the temperature shif is more than 15 degrees and in some other cases. 100h might be one of them. Do you have the RPM meter installed? Had max RPM fallen since the problem occured?

Have you contacted Nivana technical support (head office) ? They should be quite experienced in this sort of problem. I usually called them instead of writing an emails - they did not tend to answer promptly at all the occasions. 

I tried not to use manual starter on Rodeo - in my oppinion it is not designed for every day use.... just as an emegrency option.

PS I would not use easy start to be honest. The best option is to find the problem then to deal with consucecuences...

PPS looking at the video it seems that it is a problem of lack of fuel then something else, and the spongy primer only makes this more likely.

The fact that it is spongy means that that it is not enough pressure in the pipeline. Check the filter first thing.

I had both Nirvana Rodeo and Nirvana Instinct paramotors, Nirvanas top sellers.

To my opinion, it is a bit controversial. 

Nirvana is a unique manufacturer as they are not only making the frames, fuel tanks and assembly but tune the engines profoundly – Simonini undergoes some milling operations to improve heat dissipation, gets new exhaust, new air intake, new ball bearing and etc etc etc. In terms of reliability, Simonini tuned by Norvana … probably is the best engine.

Moreover, they do a lot of really useful options as carburetor heating and onboard generator to supply the heated gloves if you are flying in a very cold climate. So if you are flying under conditions like this, you will be really happy ))

Nirvanas harness (compatible with their machines only) is one of the most comfortable I ever flied. Propellers they manufacture for their paramotors are exceptionally good and one bolt system to connect the prop to the paramotor is reliable and time saving.

And it is the most beautiful looking paramotor (in my opinion).

At the same time, they tune the same Simonini Engines for the last 10 years. They are not the lightest ones and the whole paramotor is not the lightest as well.

Then they use high soft hangpoints with semi-movable middle horns. Of course, it is another discussion but – in my opinion (flying cross country predominantly) – I would not go for this hang type again. Because you cannot use the weight of your body to change the flight direction, the feedback from the wing is not clear in comparison to S horns I am flying now. Flight is more comfortable but if you find yourself in a rough conditions and strong turbulence you might be not able to distinguish some input from the wing you have to be aware of.

Then in deep spirals aluminum horns inside the harness are loosing the shape and have to be unclenched and replaced just in 40 – 50 hours. The same about the aluminum bracket going across the frame to which the horns are attached to. Sometimes the quality of the parts used is not as good as you expect.

Rodeo and Instinct (especially Instinct) are prawn to twist under certain conditions. I understand that one can say the same about any paramotor, but it is an abyss between Skymax (with S-horns, I fly now, Air Concept has the same hang type) and Nirvana. Nirvanas harnesses having diagonal strap specially to compensate the reactive component and other paramotors just do not need one.

With Nirvana Instinct every assembly was a bit of a headache for me – the net usually is in a mess when being transported and is a conundrum to untangle. If you are not assembling/disassembling it every time it is much easier.

So, if you really love the appearance of Nirvana – go for it. Generally speaking there is nothing wrong with this paramotor but do not expect it will be totally flawless. I would go for Rodeo instead of Instinct because of the frame but Rodeo has 10 liters fuel tank and the flight range will shorter. 

Thanks a lot.

I know that Vitorazzi distributor I am buying the parts from was going to write to them about the problem but have not heared anything back yet. 

Thanks.

I just have ordered the high temperature exhaust sealant (for repairing car exhaust systems) at ebay. Will try it and let you know how I get on with it. 

Gentlemen,

It seems there is a trouble with Vitorazzi new exhaust gasket for Moster Classic (the gasket between the engine and the exhaust).

Recently they changed the design of it and removed the central metal ring. This ring was stoping the exhaust gauses from damaging the gasket.

In the period of the last 3 weeks I had a failure of 3 (!) gaskets which burned out in approximately 2 hours after being installed. I blamed myself thinking that I am not tightening them up properly before understanding what happening. Because of the absence of the metal ring the exhaust gauses are burning out the paper-type material of the gasket leading to the fissure betweeb the engine and exhaust, vibrations and so on.

It seems that Vitorazzi distributors have no old type gaskets left. 

It is very disturbing as I have to stop flying till the problem is sold.

Please, if anyone has some spare old type gaskets with the metal ring I will be more than happy to buy it asap.

Any ideas on what material to use making the gasket myself wellcomed as well.

 Thanks, it is good to know that it is helpful 

As for the Oxygen, I have asked this question to BHPA, they say it is not mandatory for us to have the Oxygen on board and to use it up to 14000 feet. However (personaly) I can see the difference from 11500 feet  already and will try to get it on board anyway when we fly high next time.

Gentlemen,
Sorry for taking it so long to come back with some answers to the questions discussed earlier.

1. It took about a dozen calls, multiple emails to CAA and BHPA and studying of legislation to clarify the transponder question. 

Here is the response from General Aviation Unit of CAA:
Definition - Paramotoring is Paragliding with an auxiliary motor attached to the pilot. The CAA has defined this recently legitimized form of powered flight as a foot launched self-propelled Hang glider (SPHG). This does not mean that Paramotors are deregulated, as they still have to comply with all U.K. aviation law/rules of the air. 
AS a general rule for all normal flight in open FIR no transponder would be needed.  Although FL100 is a high level  for paramotor flight it would only need a transponder if operating outside a non SSR gliding area.  So essentially if you are operating within a non SSR gliding area you won't need to have a transponder. 

So, In one world – NO, we do not need the transponders in F and G lass airspace no matter what altitude we fly. (FIR – Flight Information Region, SSR – Secondary Surveillance Radar). And the second fact – Yes – we are classified as a type of Glider.

Just in case – that’s a doc stating that we do not need the transponders. Honestly, I would not be able to find it by my own, many thanks to GA unit.
The relevant extracts from 1.5 GEN of the AIP which is the definitive source of for all airspace equipment requirements: 
 5.3.4 Exceptions (to mode S transponder)
5.3.4.1 The requirements at sub-paragraphs 5.3.1 (c) to 5.3.1 (f) shall not apply to:
(a) Gliders, including self-sustaining gliders and self-propelled hang gliders, and self-launching motor gliders except;
(i) Where operating above FL 195 outside airspace notified as TRA(G), or
(ii) Where operating below FL 195 outside notified Non-SSR Transponder Glider Areas. –

Although we do not need to use the transponders here is an advice from CAA regarding high altitude flights:  
Our advice here is most definitely keep all surrounding ATC informed when planning to fly at those higher levels.

Gentlemen, I would suggest – do not hesitate to contact your local ATC and ask if they want to know what you are doing.

2. The second question I promissed to come back to was VFR / IFR (Visual Flight Rules /Instrumental Flights Rules) question. In simple worlds - can we go through the clouds legaly. 

Prior to coming to the question itself,
I truly believe that it is silly and dangerous to fly in the cloud. It is nothing interesting inside and It is not safe for you or any other pilots. 

Regarding if it is it legal or not to go through the clouds. It is controversial. 
I preferred not to ask CAA a kind of silly question as “Can I fly into the cloud please”  but I have done some research on it. 
I hope, nobody will argue that Air law does not recognize being in the cloud as a separate type of the flight. It is only VFR or IFR we can fly. 
One will fly according to VFR in VMC (Visual Meteorological Condition) and IFR in IMC (Instrumental Meteorological Condition)

What do you think about this photo from our recent flight to Wales? Are we flying under VMC or IMC here?

If you think that these are Visual Meteorological Conditions you are wrong. It is Instrumental. 
Because of the VFR minima difinition for Class G airspace for 3000ft – FL100 which is:
- 5 km flight visibility
- 1500m horizontally from cloud
- 1000ft vertically from cloud

So strictly speaking, when I approached and went through this small tiny cloud (Air Law has is not recognizing “BIG” and “tiny” clouds ) I was flying under IMC.

So, is it legal? 
Two fundamental facts are:
1.    We are classified as Gliders.
2.    In G class airspace both VFR and IFR flights are permitted. No clearance needed as it is not controlled airspace.
3.    Gliders are permitted to fly IFR. 

At this point one can think that he can legally fly under IMC and fly through the cloud. Moreover, a lot of paragliding instructors in the UK think that it is silly, dangerous but still legal.
I personally do not think it is. The reason for it is Part 10 of Schedule 6 of the Air Navigation Order 2016 and Regulations which sets the minimal list of equipment for the aircrafts flying under IFR:
-    Magnetic heading
-    Pressure altitude
-    Indicated airspeed
-    Vertical airspeed
-    Turn and slip
-    Attitude
-    Stabilized heading 

I do not think that anybody has the slip indicators installed at his paramotor  and I do not thing there is an exception made specially for us. Moreover, all the equipment to be used for flying IFR has to be approved by CAA.

This is the variometer I am using during the flights to identify the altitude and vertical airspeed.

It is a nice and reliable device but it is not approved by CAA so technically it is not legal to use it for IFR. And again - technically, we can not comply to minimum IMC equipment requirements. Thats my opinion. 

In conclusion - although there is no clear answer if there is a chance for us to legally fly under IMC I believe that nobody is interested how you are flying, where and what model of altimeter you have since you are not doing the silly things. In one sentence – do not fly through the clouds, in restricted airspace and over the public, do not endanger yours and others life. 

If you have any doubts where and when you can fly – do not hesitate to contact BHPA or CAA. They are really helpful and keen in keeping us all safe. 

So let us enjoy our beautiful sport and keep safe.  
Ivan
www.wmonkeys.co.uk

Hi Denny,

Sorry not coping with answering strait away as it requires going through the legislation which is really time consuming.

I can see where the question about Aircraft/Glider comes from and you are right, we are not in a position to decide, which type of an Aircraft we are.

It is Schedule 4 part 1 of the Air Navigation Order 2016 and Regulations delivering this.

We are classified as heavier then air aircrafts – power driven flying machines – type 4 - Aeroplane (Self Launching Motor Glider).

So, there are no Paramotors in the Air Navigation Order 2016. We are in the same group with SLMG

Just to give you an idea, Gliders like this

 can take off with engine then servo takes it away to the fuselage and they are landing as not a power driven glider.

If you are still not convinced, FAI approved part of paramotor competition is when you are given 1 or 2 liters of fuel and the winner is a pilot who will land the last one (with no fuel of course).

Please, let me have 3 – 4 days to get together some info on IFR / VFR rules you are asking about and transponders. I placed the inquiries with BHPA and CAA as there are some contradictions and it seems to be not so strait. Hope to get some news soon.  

6 hours ago, Dariuszk24 said:

Hi Ivan

Can you show me where in uk air law its write "its illegal to fly over 10000 feet without aircontrol trafic in air space class G and F

 

Dariuszk24

If you prove that I am wrong, you will make me the happiest person for the next 15 min 

 The Air Navigation Order 2016 and Regulations

in the text go to:

- Radio communication and radio navigation equipment

looking for our aircraft type

- (4) All gliders and SLMGs within the United Kingdom -

- (a) Flying at or above flight level 100

looking for equipment scate type - E2

going to E2 description:

Secondary surveillance radar equipment which includes a pressure altitude reporting transponder capable of operating in Mode A and Mode Cand has the capability and functionality prescribed for Mode S Elementary surveillance and is capable of being operated in accordance with such instructions as may be given to the aircraft by the air traffic control unit. 

14 hours ago, Danny B said:

Very interesting read, but to clarify rulings on flight for Paramotors should we not always be:

•at VFR rules

•not running out of fuel (as it is actually illegal for an aircraft to do so) 

Bit confused that although ATC gave you clearance for the height surely that wouldn't include the IFR type flying above what appeared to be blanket clouds?

 

 

Hi Danny,

Just to clarify, repeating myself - that flights we have done abroad. And we  were really lucky to get the arrangements.

We are going to be in contacts shortly with CAA regarding the same flights in Wales. It can be done by special permission only as it has to be an exception from FL100 rule for transponders. So you can not legally fly in the UK above 10000 feet without CAA approval. I will keep the forum updated if we will manage to go through the process. 

As for the fuel, Danny, we are gliders  how do you think the guys are flying without the motors?  The rules for the airplanes and self propellered foot launched gliders (that what we are from the point of view of the law) are different. 

No problem at all. I have an air conveyor installed and tuned my carb so the temperature does not exceed 200 degrees no matter how long I hold the throttle for. Then with an altitude the ambient temperature goes down and the air density goes down as well, so the fuel-air mixture becomes richer and there is no risk to overheat the cylinder head.

However, with all the motors I had (and with Moster as well) I have temperature gauge installed and I keep an eye on temperature just to be aware of any issues.