paramotormike Posted August 2, 2013 Share Posted August 2, 2013 Here is a short explanation from Pascal Cambell Jones about his views on "low versus high hang points". I like the last paragraph best... Low hang points (LWSHP) like those from Parajet, PAP, Kangook and similar make so much more sense then most high hang points (HHP) that I have seen during my time flying paramotors. I really believe paramotor manufacturers should be offering LWSHP as standard. But why I hear you say? Think about the inflation: imagine trying to pull your car in neutral gear with a rope attached to your shoulders (the equivalent of high hang-points). Now think of how much more control and pull you would have if the rope was attached to your waist area (the equivalent of low hang-points). Now, try to remember all the strange zig-zag take-offs you have seen where the pull of the wing is almost controlling the pilot. Which hang-points were they using? Apart from the added benefit of low hang-points to your launching, there is the ability to 'feel' the feedback a wing can give you about the air while you are flying. There is also the possibility of using weight shift to give you extra control over your wing via your body movement. You can literally steer the wing with your body, allowing for better camera control or to counter torque. Once you have a little experience with low weight-shift hang-points you will naturally begin to use your body to carve tighter, more precise turns. I simply cringe when I hear some pilots say that "high hang-points are more stable". To me all I hear is, "I like to have less control". Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.