Re: Kite Classification Proposition - to Steve
- Eddy, you've got to realise that Kitesurf magazines are funded by
advertising from the manufacturers. As a buyer of magazines you are
merely paying for the distribution costs and some production costs.
Therefore you might as well assume that the manufacturers are paying
for favourable reviews. If you want to change the situation you want a
magazine that purely exists on funding from the readership and does not
rely on advertising from any sources which could be said to have an
influence on reviews/testing.
This is a rare thing in todays commercial world.
Once again go to the Internet where there are real people like yourself
testing and reviewing kites and kitegear and try different kites/gear
yourself. It's the only way.
Have fun, Dave (Dr Surf Australia)
--- In email@example.com, "Eddy Cormon <emet.cormon@v...>" <
> Hi Steve I'm a paraglider too.
> Yes you have DHV from germany and AFNOR from France.
> Still there a big differences in their definition.
> Most paragliders now buy DHV1-2 even those comming form DHV2 or DHV2-
> In the paragliding world it took already several years to get the new
> CEN norm defined and it will take again several months to get the
> first real tests and certifications.
> However the best guidelines you can find in the French "Vol Libre".
> These measurements and their opinions are quite realistic, which
> cannot be said of Parapente Mag.
> Now in the kitesurf there is nothing at all.
> This month I saw a french maginzine rating the CO2 2003 as
> intermediate to specialist kite and the German Kite rating it almost
> beginenr to intermediate !
> Still my best sources of information are the kite magazines when
> testing the new models and telling the throoth about last years model.
> Read what they now write about the Fuel 2002: depower was almost in
> So I'm still hoping someone comes up with some classification.
> --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "theflyingtinman <thorpes@a...>"
> <thorpes@a...> wrote:
> > --- In email@example.com, "Eddy Cormon <emet.cormon@v...>"
> > > ... What should be measured:
> > > 1) the span from tip to tip in one straight line
> > > 2) the length of the top of the middle batton to the ground ...
> > > ...These examples are just my guess, as I never could have
> > > measured these kites all by myself.
> > >
> > > So I propose to agree on the methods of measurement. They still
> > > change. Measurement methods have to be simple.
> > > And then just measure up your kites.
> > Eddy, there is a great deal more to the behaviour and handling
> > of a wing than any finite combination of measurements you
> > can make on that wing.
> > > What is it good for:
> > > 1a) beginner /learning
> > > 1b) two liner for wave riding ?
> > > 2a) easy intermediate for once you've started
> > > 2b) intermediate for those who know how to rip
> > > 3a) don't know
> > > 3b) the professional
> > It should theoretically be possible to do a much better job of
> > categorizing various aspects of kite behavior than is presently
> > done, e.g. launch performance, flight performance and handling
> > (in various wind strengths), etc.
> > The trouble is the resources required to evaluate every kite to
> > the same benchmark standards are impossibly prohibitive at present.
> > You don't just invent a categorizing system and then expect all
> > manufacturers to magically know where their kites fit on the
> > scale. The only way for such a categorizing system to have any
> > validity is for a single, independant agency to be charged with
> > the responsibily of grading every kite manufactured. Who would fund
> > such a venture? This is not a small task. If the rating system
> > is not centrally administered there will always be discrepencies
> > in the many criteria used for evaluation, especially where much of
> > the data collected are highly subjective. And if the manufacturers
> > get involved then you will not only have discrepencies due to
> > the distributed nature of administering the system but the system
> > would inevitably suffer from the appearance of bias.
> > The only equivalent of what you are proposing that I can think of
> > offhand is (of course ;-) a paragliding (and hanggliding) parallel.
> > Due to the very obvious necessity for some kind of safety
> > classification for foot-launched gliders a number of independant
> > agencies have, over the years, provided internationally accepted
> > safety ratings (don't ask me who funded them - I don't know) the
> > currently most recognised system is the DHV rating system ...
> > http://www.dhv.de/english/testberichte/index.html
> > described as
> > ...LBA Approved Testing Laboaratory for Hanggliders and
> > Paragliders Under a Mandate of the Austrian Aviation Authority
> > Despite the current extensive scope of this organization it
> > still only addresses safety-related issues and does not attempt
> > to categorize perfomance and/or non safety-related handling
> > characteristics of gliders - e.g. Min-sink, glide ratio,
> > thermalling ability etc. That is still left up to manufacturers
> > and as such the numbers they give are taken with the proverbial
> > pinch of salt by prospective buyers.
> > Of course what you are asking for would be great for consumers
> > and something like it may eventually evolve out of demand
> > but don't look for it to happen overnight. Proposing it is
> > easy, anyone can do that job ;-) ...
> > Steve T.
- --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "Peter Frank <pf@4...>" <pf@4...>
> In windsurfing we don't have any classification of sails, eventhough
Windsurfing does classify sails:
and a few hybrids of the above with some cam/no-cam variations. Add
the size and some advice from stores and magazines etc and you get a
good idea of what the sail is for and how it will perform.
Kites are little similar in that you have:
4-line low AR
4-line high AR
Add the flat area and some marketing background and you have a pretty
good idea of what a kite is and how it is likely to perform in a
You could replace AR with a performance designation like "high
performance" or "wake style" or whatever. You still get an idea of
what the kite is supposed to handle like. That's the job of the
stores and magazines and this group to add experience and knowledge
in interpreting the bull.
The situation is the same in paragliding. A DHV 1-2 or DHV 2 rating
is not an absolute measure of the suitability of a wing for a given
pilot. You have to ask your local dealer and take a few test flights
and scour the web for knowledge.
- --- In email@example.com, "Greg Walsh <Greg.Walsh@b...>"
> --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "Peter Frank <pf@4...>" <pf@4...>Yep - but classified in exactly the same (very simple) way as
> > In windsurfing we don't have any classification of sails, even
> Windsurfing does classify sails:
kitesurfer kites are now.
Not in numbers nor detailed topics, as the original posting was about.