Blackburn Mark

Parajet Volution 2 Pilots Manual Doesn't seem to be any mention of a manual decompression valve... Back to the drawing board

Well spotted.... If Ciaran has one and isn't opening it to start, he owes you a packet of Hobnobs!

If my memory served, Kurt's vid was a cheap shot at utilising Tuckers popularity for his own ends. If Tucker hurt himself (a risk we all take) Kurt would be all "I told you so".... "I am the oracle of all wisdom" etc. etc...... Its a horribly cynical tactic to crowbar the cracks that we ALL carry, including Fister. RISK... We all aim to minimise it without removing the spice and we all like different amounts of spice If Kurt followed his own advice, he might cut the pies and get a stair-master... But why should he... And why should Tucker dial back his own risk-reward dial?

Has the V4 got the 2.88 redrive or the 3.19 ? Would love to hear how you get on with a 1.50 I have looked at a DT Propellers ground adjustable 1.60 thinking it "might" be doable on the V5 (3.19 redrive) E-Props also do ground adjustable props so you may be able to tune it to match (bit pricy though // DT propellers were more reasonably priced if my memory serves me) The E-props website has a calculator to give you some comparative numbers: 1.60 @ 15000w (20hp) 3.19 redrive will give you 74kg static thrust (tip speed 0.62 ... might be noisy at takeoff power) - That's 10kg additional thrust over the standard 1.30 E-PROPS: the best Propellers for Paramotors PPG, hi-tech & ultra-light (e-props.fr)

So the V2 is carrying about 5.5kg extra, that's not far off a full tank of fuel! The V2 feels almost reasonable when its no fuel in it so 5.5kg lighter would be pretty cool! Starter motor and sprag clutch on the V2 cant be far off 2kg and the magneto bell is no lightweight either.

I weighed my setup yesterday to make sure I wasn't bullshitting.... 40kg with half a tank of fuel, no flight deck. My old legs are close to admitting defeat... Too heavy and not enough power to get me off reliably. I love the stupid thing for the reasons you mention (aprox 2.2 liters an hour) The newer V5 is a bit lighter but a bit too pricy for a skinflint. As much as I don't want to end up on wheels, I want a two stroke even less and I want to give up flying even less than that... Rock and a Hard place If you have good strong legs, do it! I guess we have the EOS quattro to look forward to as far as four-stroke developments go.

No worries, I know how they work, I am just surprised you got it to work so well on 52mm stainless. Good luck

Great stuff! Ill look forward to seeing that. I have made one myself but for smaller size aluminum tubing / used it to build a new prop cage.

I'm assuming that's stainless tube... what wall thickness and did you roll those shapes yourself? I would think its pretty tough to get a curve in such a large diameter, thin wall stainless tube.

That looks like the kind of thing you could hit a brick wall at 40mph and walk away from.... looks pretty heavy though

Your website doesn't seem to offer any maps of sensitive arias. If you have issues with paramotors in particular, an additional tucked away section on your website that included the words "Humber Paramotors" may draw some attention from the relevant parties where you could include maps, nesting times/requested exclusion zones or whatever you chose to include on that page. Alans idea ought to work towards having people who spot them research the extent of boundaries so a map with a boundary circle and a height (forming a cylinder) might be helpful. So some sensible search terms that will draw the relevant researchers to your map would help. And remember, there may already be folks who avoid arias they know about... Like I said, there are hides I know of that are not marked and I give them a wide birth or quietly tip-toe over at +1000ft

Its tricky... I tend to look at maps (Google / Airspace / OS) when looking for a new spot to explore and were I need to tread carefully. There are a few places I avoid that are not marked. Both our interests tend to intersect on the same type of remote arias but it is my experience that pilots will avoid stepping on other peoples toes when they are in the know (It ruins the mindset) An idea... In any hides, or carried by interested parties, it may be an idea to have a sign that you can grab an point at any pilot when there is an incursion into your peace n quiet. Don't get angry, that pilot is out looking for an escape into the wilderness just like you are... I am 99.9% sure if you flashed that sign, you will get an apology wave and that pilot will peel off and avoid that aria in future. Be ready to inform any "new" incursions (unlikely to be the same pilot)... It is possible that word will get around and incursions become rare. Try not to "bagsey" the whole planet... We are a rare breed ourselves

That's a shame as it seems the EOS quattro and late Bailey's heads, pistons, cylinders and cams come out of Taiwan (Taida GY6 kits) You would have easy access to the best four stroke paramotor spares... They are a pricy item over here.

I initially thought that... than I thought "airboat" style cage

Ah.... yea, be carful! I'm guessing I would find the response a bit wild having flown a four stroke for so long but I'm thinking I would be enjoying the extra 20kg of thrust too much to let the throttle get on my tits

That's typical of a highly strung two stoke... Throttle can be like an "ON-OFF" switch compared to a four stroke. You need to preempt the response to stay in front of it going turbo... I'm guessing you have learned to subliminally dance with your trigger finger Andy. Lowering compression is usually accompanied by a lower fuel efficiency (all things being equal) but I am guessing the typical cruse RPM with the XC head must somehow be inside the pump resonance... I cant see how, I guess a lower pressure shockwave travels slower giving the bottom end a better breathing timing I'm shit with two strokes! This is assuming the exhaust and intake remain the same and just the head is swapped out?

Ah, so you have no access to the old one either... ? The new one would only give you a clue as to where in the RPM range the hysteresis would be at its worst. Quantifying that would be quite the trick Like I said, it is a "safe assumption" that it is an improvement if that is what the designer professes to be the point. Besides that, it would seem plenty of people have many happy hours on such machines (even "peaky" ones) so it is also safe to assume the issue is not insurmountable with a touch of trigger finesse

Why else would they bother? The response hysteresis may be gone but I doubt it... Cant see it being worse though... Id put money on it that its an "improvement". Do you have the "old" curve? Wouldn't mind a look at that

What exactly are you looking for in the thrust curve? (I assume you mean "power curve") If its dubbed to have "flattened the curve" then its reasonably safe to assume that the aim has been to make the machine less "peaky"... More pilot // trigger-finger friendly at the expense of some top end. If the compression is lower then maybe some loss in efficiency at wide open throttle BUT that might be offset with a slightly better cruise efficiency.... but we cant read that in a power curve. Are you going to be able to read any more than that from a power curve?

Did I say "entirely" ? Are you being tactically uncharitable in your interpretations? So we do indeed agree....Yes? I suspect you are being uncharitable again. Within the context of paramotoring, I doubt very much that the amount of "reflex" we use does a great deal more than "unload" a portion of the rear of the wing so it is hardly lifting in the negative or positive in stable flight. The video shows an "unloaded" wing, a wholly different animal to a loaded wing. As Andy stated "The ppg wing maintains stability by virtue of the large not insignificant weight dangling below it"... this remains true on either style of wing! Any additional stability we gain is in the context of remaining open during moments of unloaded lines. Try to imagine how much "pitch up" that trailing edge could impart into the pilot-wing relative positions through "reflex" alone..... Not much if its measurable at all. So it would seem the trailing edge becomes neutral or very close to it in reflex mode, not adding nor removing lift ergo not adding induced drag as it would when in high lift mode... The "active" portion of the wing is, it would seem, higher in its "aspect ratio", yes? I think you may be conflating paramotor wing levels of reflex with more traditional reflex implementations on hard bodied aircraft that can and do make use of much larger pitch moments.

You seem to be excluding a subtlety: Are we in agreement that a reflex increases the wing loading (aerodynamically) and increases the aspect ratio (aerodynamically)..... ? These things, if true, are not insignificant which may be the reason why we don't see a large difference between the two as Andy has pointed out.

I always assumed that a reflex reduces a profiles pitch instability AND it unloads the rear of the wing giving the whole wing a *higher "aerodynamic" wing-loading (faster) and a higher "aerodynamic" aspect ratio (improved efficiency) The speed dumps a lot of efficiency and the higher aspect ratio claws "some" of it back. I am not sure it is sound to conclude that a "reflex" is inherently inefficient without balancing the gains and losses of the various regimes... But I am happy to be corrected, my grasp is a pretty rudimentary one Design two tailless RC models with the same projected aspect ratio (one reflexed and one not) and I suspect the advantage of a reflex would give the none reflex a run for its money (shallower sweep, less tip washout and all that associated jazz)

You have a lot of things to juggle when launching.... Too many until the muscle memory eases the brains workload! I am assuming your brain is reacting to the harness beginning to take "some" of your weight. Tell your brain not to call "Gear Up" at all... you can switch the running off later..... Your feet will eventually start missing the floor

Or you could be wise and do what Alan says!

Not sure what you are asking here... DONT rush, forget that you own a motor, you own a very large kite. I would hope you can be disciplined to enough to almost find ground-handling mundane in a mix of conditions before you re-mount your motor on your harness. Remove your harness from the motor..... lay out your wing carefully, you will find making a birds nest out of your lines very easy when its disconnected from your harness so be mindful. Your "A Lines" are the leading edge set of lines so make sure they are on top and all other lines have a straight run all the way to their wing attach points (it can be a handful at first but the logic will sink in) Attach the harness to the rider with the A lines facing forward. There are two launch options... Forward launch and Reverse launch, everyone seems to have a preference for one or the other but as we are aiming to ground-handle, life would be much less physically demanding using the reverse launch in a light wind (6mph ish // less than 10mph !) In a "forward" the wing is behind you and the wind in your face // in a "reverse" the wing is in front of you with the wind on your back. What you input to the wing is the same in either case. Reverse launch// Once your wing and harness are connected together correctly, turn the harness though 180 degrees before you buckle in (less likely to get dragged in a sudden gust) Clip in... Run you hand from the first carabiner down the back of a riser until it hits the break, pull the break off the magnet (this is to help prevent a pull-up with a break-line wrapped around your riser // happens too often and can be dangerous during a flight) Do the same with the other.... you are now in a relatively safe mode, in a gust you can easily run towards your glider and wind both breaks in to kill the wing. Don't let go of those breaks unless you are happy to lose that control. The risers will be crossed in front of you and it can be a bit confusing, you will be all fingers and thumbs trying to isolate your "A line" riser"... be carful, it is easy to lose a break and drop it through your lines which you will need to pluck out without wrapping it around any other lines. Lets say you had a 6mph wind on your back, as soon as you back up to take tension on your lines, the wing is likely to begin inflating... (called "building a wall"... use this to check there are no twists in your lines, its easy to spot one when the wing is inflated) if you jump back a little more suddenly, it will pop further up but it is unlikely to attempt to pull up over your head without a little encouragement from your "A-lines". This is where the fun starts.... Don't expect any grace or finesse, adding tension to your A-lines will have your wing attempt to launch in its ark until it is over your head. It might try to overshoot // it will collapse and shower you with slack lines (Needed a dab of breaks before it reached the top) It might be off to one side // it will continue to roll until it is upside down (you are not square with the wind or you pulled asymmetrically) It might not make it overhead // it will flop back down (you let go of the A-lines too early or didn't walk backwards hard enough) TIP: when you are allowing your wing to flop back down, release any break pressure, that will help prevent the leading edge from rolling forward making it harder to re-inflate. What you are aiming to do is get the wing overhead and keep it there using movement (walking towards the low wing tip) and break inputs. Its tricky at first but easily cracked with some time and effort. Forward launches are physically demanding, you are facing the wind and are usually employed when there is little to no wind so you have to RUN .... Expect to tire quickly. If your wing is capable of pulling you down wind (in any mode) behave yourself, pack up, its too strong!