t_andrews

On a Fusion the riser buckle alignment is an accurate indication of how much reflex is assigned to your wing. Anything past neutral gets into reflex and at neutral I expect a wing reaction right on par with a free flight non adjustable wing. So far it does just what I expect at neutral. It's a bonus that you can trim slower than neutral to 'flap' the wing for slower liftier flight. The trade off is stability, which is never a yes or no, but should be considered a range. I can't speak to other manufacturer variations on how they apply reflex, and won't dare anyway as it's not the subject header.

I can attest that the fusion soars well in strong gusty conditions (an inch inside the green trim) where I would never have taken off on the Epsilon4. While many may say a wing shouldn't widen your flight envelope, reflex does and will even if it becomes transparent to the pilot. Gusts were evident more for lift in this configuration then for the pitch they would introduce in a non reflex wing. You could feel it moving / twitching to gusts, but input needed was minimal and weightshift sufficed for all but the largest gusts. Launch was 20+km/hr gusting to 40+ (12-25+mph) which would normally leave me on the bank, but I've gotten used to full reflex ridge inflations, trimming slower as needed prior to launch for conditions when ridge soaring. Good to see another pilot flies one in ridge lift using trims as well. I look forward to flying with hang gliders with stabilo in the strong laminar stuff when my PG friends are grounded. I've already seen them land due to strong conditions and wondered why... I understood the certification testing was limited to full slow only because there is no criteria in place for the infinite variation in trims, and certifying bodies are still maintaining adherence to classic PG testing methodology. While collapse testing is still part of that, it will not be sufficient to test wings that are difficult or impossible to induce frontal/asymetric/spin in full reflex without a standardized method. Not much wonder it's been such a chore for MCJ and the like to get such testing in place.

Or build one yourself. chainsaw and servos with a trainer traction kite Just remember to pull off the extra (anti nose plant) tail before takeoff... It did fly though. Really fast. Crashed fast too. Good times.

There's no real argument that being fit doesn't improve everything, including getting launched after half a dozen botched thermic attempts. Like most sports, the level of effort drops off as skills improve. The pros do make it look easy. One poster noted the "lean forward" takeoff technique, and while it does look a bit out of place I practice it as an extension of my free flight training. Keep it loaded and all that, until you have forward speed and energy for a flared recovery if it goes bad. This may wear off with airtime, but I think it's one of the main reasons I'm on prop #1 so far. Tick one on the groundhandling praise. It's whatever workout you want it to be and all gravy for knowing your rag.

http://www.simonini-flying.com/contatti.htm They may direct you to a dealer.

You can apply as much as you need. Tip steering deforms the (edge of) overall lifting section and redirects the lift sideways while removing it from regular wing section. Think of it as akin to a Leading edge inflatable traction kite (4 line). The lift bias (and outside rear tip deformation) lets the roll happen. You can do big wingovers with them, or hang only the weight of your arm to offset torque steer. I don't really think you can overdo it while using it merely to steer. Stabilo line would probably fail before you could overdo it given the loads at speed. See my gallery for an alternative to the manufacturer's tip steer kit. Works very well on a pulley. Stability will be affected if you're messing with bits of reflexed profile when you're crawling up the stabilo line, but you'd really have to get in that sort of effort range to bump the reflex off one side of the canopy I would think. I serious input will roll the fusion like a brake input on slow trim, but I'm talking serious input. It does not feel less stable even doing this - actually it's fun (watch you alt tho, eats it quick). Try it with your hand @ speed first. Effect increases above green trim proportional to the amount of trim you have let out as the chord shortens.

http://para2000.org/wings/advance/omega4.html DHV 2-3/DHV 3 Therein lies your challenge. Comp wings require deft input especially in the air (loaded). Manual (page 24+) http://www.advance.ch/fileadmin/user_up ... manual.pdf Bang it to death learning to kite it well, but as you say don't ever fly it. Please. It's no learner flying wing and my we've come a long way since it was sewn. Not to mention line lengths (which may be part of the trouble - see chart in pdf). This wing is the hard knock way of re-learning to kite, but if you master it, you will think a new wing feels kind of boring to kite but much more reassuring in manners. You will become a ripstop harp musician so to speak in order to manage it. I was given an old Perche dhv2 http://para2000.org/wings/perche/sensor.html and it folds and touches tips and falls over sideways like it's weighted. Overly sensitive they are and by today's standard poorly designed. What did they know in 1994/1998 after all compared to today... Great ground rag tho.

Can't add much to that Whitters, spot on advice. Curious tho - Advance 4 and harness? If it's used gear then you may want to check your line lengths, if it's an Epsilon 4 it's not difficult to kite once you know how. Learning to kite has probably sent more prospective pilots packing than the rest of the sport. The curve is steep initially and goes vertical when you mix in bad conditions (ref: training for meteo). If it's a groundhandler you bought, then find thee some laminar winds light enough to barely inflate and build up from there. Build a wall and pick it up, let it down, one side up - let it down, other side, middle, all. Drills that build skill AND confidence. When you can pick the wing off the ground and hold it *halfway* up, you'll have a jump on many pilots for wing control and it will pay dividends down the road. Learning to fly your wing starts long before your feet leave the ground. Groundhandling playlist on youtube - at the least entertaining. http://www.youtube.com/user/zorackthegrate#p/c/A2784B9C3875C540/0/Ec1bwkXmUy8

Nice to see incorporation of the CLE. Any specs been released?

A wing's polar (flight curve) changes with loading so that can affect it's efficiency for a single trimmer setting. A machine's combination of motor and redrive and prop is also not fixed in that it will offer different amounts of thrust based on the dynamic speed simply due to propeller efficiency. That is: If you adjust your trimmers a "little bit" faster, you may well push your forward speed to a spot where your prop becomes more efficient thus increasing economy. I know that was the original goal to your question, but the accurate answer is - It depends. A friend recently told me that in looking for his sweet spot for economy, he discovered there were two spots that gave him straight and level flight at different speeds. One was 'x' trimmer setting, and the second was full fast with 'x' amount of bar for the same engine rpm. It should be noted he was flying dual props in an X configuration and they were wide blades. With the infinite variation in trimmer settings, it should be no shock that there are several ways to do things. Hanging your feet below your seat versus straight forward using a foot strap will also add drag and kill economy, but it too has it's place. All variables among those not mentioned here. Simon has proposed one liter burn would suffice to see variation in airtime / distance across wings. Standardizing the pilot and motor are a great first step. Dave's comp bottle suggestion might help in priming between flights too Simon, land - unclip, refuel, clip in and be off with a warm engine for each run. Another variable removed. Trying not to derail the thread here...

I would suggest a standard setting for all tests as variation in consumption for climbing is huge. That is, standardize your flying to be incredibly boring for those three hours, or whatever is required - and try to minimize influence from thermal climbing or sink. No min sink, no brake inputs aside from weight shift (pick a bank angle not to exceed) - lazy weight shift offset torque steer circles @ 300m are what I'm seeing as most manageable. Something like: 1: Takeoff, full throttle to 1k 2: set straight and level cruise power 3: yawn and stretch whilst go juice, goes. 4: On engine out glide for spot landing 5: brake inputs only for flare This is a great idea and Kudos for suggesting it, but without minimizing influences via input (and subsequent need to climb or descend) the variation across a single litre would be too high to offer an accurate wing winner? I'm just raising the consumption variation flag and hope economy minded folk can offer their take on this to make it worth doing with trusted results.

Surely I'm missing a newer thread than this, but it should appear in 'new posts' at any rate. The first 294 Cyclone (rotron) has now flown in Canada. I wasn't there, but I saw the video, now you can too... Oddly enough in editing I noticed the wumwumwum of the rotary idle actually has FOUR peaks in the sound wave rather then the three I expected. Go figger. Listen for yourself: [youtubevideo] [/youtubevideo]It should be noted Spudnick was flying a lot lower wing loading then he is used to, and twice the power.

Looks like someone was rinsing their paintbrushes in the tank... I do hope the new owner got a deal on an otherwise perfect motor.

I've been wishing I had a reason to try one of these: http://cgi.ebay.ca/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=250407842983 But I have an LS-7 float sensor set on 1/3 tank to be full on. If I rock the machine I can tell down to about a litre left, then it stays on. Pix in my gallery.

Clipped in reverse Dave? That would indeed feel odd. Given that the ground-sky interface is the biggest risk we take, the more ground handling we do, the safer we are and the better we know our wings. I look forward to a video. In the meantime, let's pretend with someone else... [youtubevideo] [/youtubevideo]

Do consider Justin (if you're still reading here) that your opinion is as valid as anyone's. You are correct it is an open forum, within the reasonable moderation so deftly applied by admins/mods. This is not a call for you to reconsider, rather for anyone reading this to appreciate the good that comes from this forum rather than the debate that some folks prefer over letting things lie. We are, after all human. We can be most accurately blamed for acting it on occasion. The validity of anyone's opinion doesn't make them right, or even reasonable, but it will most certainly adjust perception if only a tad. That's worth the pain in my opinion Others will disagree, just for fun, or because they understand something differently, or because they may be directed by a well intentioned goal. It's all good because it means the forum is working.

My first (Saying Of the Day) SOD award. Thanks

Do you suppose someone in the class with a herocam on their helmet would stick out? Thanks for chasing it Simon.

There are "drills" you can do with your wing to become more comfortable with it safely. Playing with pitch and surge in the beginning is an eye opener for sure. On a fusion heavily loaded I've found that even neutral has more pitch stability than my free flight wing, but your mileage may vary. Try turning as flat a 360 as you can (vario as measure). Try Losing a specific amount of height in a specific amount of time via ears, S-turns or spiral if you've progressed to that. Good practice for that emergency landing you will have. All little drills that don't necessarily provide revelations, but DO expand your flight envelope and comfort with your aircraft. Wingovers are fun too, even if they are actually S-turns in the beginning The dangerous stuff you can do in your head, but DO really do it in your head. Be specific and deliberate as though it were actually happening. If the mental exercise is done with sufficient intent, the only difference from the real thing is the video...

I would submit that anyone new to the sport is forced to think in generalizations in order to form their very own theories and truths to guide them in their own path to experience and practical knowledge. I do try to keep sufficient information in my posts to ensure I don't intentionally mislead, so when my words get pulled from context and some key sentences of them ignored, well, it's a bit of a burn. I do appreciate anyone's passion that the truth is exposed, but caution them that unbridled dives for it are often driven by tunnel vision. Sometimes I just feel like arguing, but do resist it when it doesn't serve the audience, or my limited credibility as just another forum guy. This was originally a thread on the revolution, and while it has diverged as many do I still consider it in context as long as the title is up there. So, while generalizations are made and cited as generalizations, that be the extent of it. Justin must not feel guilt for the actions of others If a lone voice from the mist to the major manufacturers makes the communicator feel better so be it, but like certification testing of (the reflex characteristics in) REFLEX gliders I don't expect them to line up their theory, nomenclature or presentations for anyone but themselves. My best wishes to anyone on that quest. Thanks for the pointer to page 8 mate. I've been there and been was disappointed. As I've said before, the manual shoots you a snapshot, but has so much missing (and conflicting with trimmers) that it begs what to really believe. That and there are several ways to do one thing with a revo/fusion in part due to the infinite variation on profile. Good times. Side note: I've heard of MCJ doing reflex seminars for his merchants, and begged for a video copy that I just know is out there somewhere. I expect that it would round out the manual with theory from the creator of the tech I fly and invite, nay applaud a link to any such video from any part of the world. Anyone?

Risk assessment is a hard lesson to teach. It requires previously acquired consequences to be properly realized and applied to flying, especially when you plan to fly safely. I recall being told that even though one comes out of an unforeseen extreme event without a scratch, if you do not assess what went wrong you can simply consider it one tick on the counter toward when it WILL go bad. That is, the one in a hundred event WILL get you if you don't learn from the ninety-nine you got away with (if you're that lucky). I've not had many events to scare me yet - 40% asymmetric in mechanically turbulent ridge lift, dealing with really strong "popcorn" lift, landing in wind shadow to escape a thermal thrashing... Those poor decisions I've made were all last minute ones, which in itself makes the decision poor, but directly after I made them I knew they were the wrong ones If you fly often you're not wasting your Fusion Visualization is for me, the next best thing to SIV (not having been to an SIV course) watching movies and imagining what you see happening does help. The asymmetric deflation weight shift happened automatically because I had "lived" it mentally so many times. Instructor had told me what to do, but everyone learns differently. I've seen people spin, land parachutal, fly into trees, fixate on , and take pictures of things that could have gone horribly wrong. I've even seen an idiot launch right directly into a thunderstorm. The only example I try to set it for myself, so I can fly tomorrow too. Sounds like you're flying a similar path - good on ya.

Fanman: What is your "NO" for? Justin was clear he was asking, and I tried to be clear pointing to the fusion and revo as examples. I'm not sure what you're disagreeing with as they were all generalizations. While the full slow trim setting (with full bar) may vary in amount and even in whether it's in reflex or not, wouldn't you agree that it would still be less stable then full fast with bar for any reflex wing? Anyone who flies a reflex wing would suggest stability builds with it's application via faster trims. That is, after all the point right? I do wish your mention of a manual telling one how to fly at different trims were true. I've been sponging up reflex detail as I see it because the manual is sparse on much of what the wings can do and how "best" to approach it. As noted prior, the manual doesn't always agree, and in fact some cases directly conflicts with, what the trimmer diagrams themselves say. The truth is only exposed by those who know by experience what will happen. I think that's what Justin is after, I know I am.

Sound reasoning Justin, and I'd be inclined to say you have nailed the gist of it. One could certainly say that a reflex glider is more stable with application of speedbar at only fastest trims than any other setting (at least for a fusion/revo). I doubt anyone would suggest otherwise. The three settings you cite are the extremes and average, and while the actual range is infinite in between I'm assuming you picked the three for clarity to boil it down for public consumption. I'm not going to use "undercamber" here as I'm not sure it's applicable although I think I know what you're getting at. I've noticed when free flying the fusion that the full slow setting has a lower sink rate then if I set it to Neutral and fly a la conventional via min sink. Regardless of what I've tried, the full slow is more efficient. Emulating this with riser bias has the same effect (of course). This is no shock to those who watch the trimmers adjust the profile proportionally - flying neutral with brake application destroys part of the profile (C's) and makes for messy, inefficient airflow. This also has it's place however, as the sink rate is higher then full slow and can be instantly managed via brake pressure in trade for some lift. It is particularly effective in elevator-like descents in strong (more than your loaded stall speed) ridge lift for toplandings using the "flapping" double brake pump technique to destroy lift - with the added inefficiency and sink rate of a Neutrally trimmed glider (or faster trim settings pending wind strength). One poster noted some luffing on his wing when he inadvertently applied bar on full slow, and it makes sense that the center of pressure moves back the chord on full slow trims. Bar application and AOA decrease also increases pressure throughout with speed gain, but it's reasonable to expect instability at some point as you will approach a point where the leading edge drops below the required angle for pressurization and frontal is imminent. With that said, I'm speaking of conventional wings as I have not, nor seen a post from anyone who has tried it either under power or glide. certification testing notwithstanding. Full slow trims and speedbar. Why? To see if you can. Play high though please.

I've noticed the silkscreened vinyl or whatever it is on the newer style markings is easily shredded by even moderate adjustments to the trimmers. I've not a lot of time on the wing and can see the day coming that the coating will be gone. At present I think the rougher surface is aiding settings to stay where they are set, although I've seen maybe a centimeter difference from where I intended it to stay before. It seems a function of how they're adjusted. Feeding and unloading clamp versus just unloading the clamp to let'em slide (this is where the added cm appeared and yes, not surprising as the teeth settled in). I've considered a couple/few cross sewn colored nylon threads at specific ranges, but as was said - when it's worn off you've already learned where you want them for takeoff and flight anyway. It would be a fab idea for paramania to include colored threading into the trimmer strap tho as a more resilient but less newbie friendly way to measure at a glance. Green good. I did see somewhere on their site a place that you can order just the trimmer strap, but can't find it right now. New springs link

The Revo manual says: "Although the speed bar can be used with confidence throughout the whole range of the trim settings, it is obviously most effective when used with the trims off I.e. on the fast setting." The Fusion manual is similar, but when I hear/read folks talk about speedbar use at slow trims (or full slow per CEN testing where it was recorded as stable) everyone gasps like I just crapped on their shoes. Anyone hear anything about MCJ's work on getting testing adjusted to encompass reflex profiles?