Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: Wing Selection - Safety vs Performance

Expand Messages
  • noodlydoo
    I should update my last statement; I looked at the 34m and it had a few more C ratings in other areas.
    Message 1 of 23 , Dec 1, 2008
      I should update my last statement; I looked at the 34m and it had a
      few more C ratings in other areas.


      --- In ppgbiglist@yahoogroups.com, "noodlydoo" <noodlydoo@...> wrote:
      >
      > Thanks,
      >
      > The only other wing on my list is possibly a Dudek Synthesis. It is
      > all CEN A except for a B on spiral recovery and a C on recover from
      > Assymetrical....although, it appears much less likely to take the
      > assymetrical in the first place. It appears to be a fairly well
      > received glider by the flying community. It would be nice to find a
      > DHV1 Reflex glider though.
      >
      >
      >
      > --- In ppgbiglist@yahoogroups.com, "Terry Lutke" <tllutke52@> wrote:
      > >
      > > I've read that one mans diaper is another mans wing, besides a 1.5
      > > sink offers short field landing potential; even a BurgerKing roof can
      > > be an LZ/TL
      > > --- In ppgbiglist@yahoogroups.com, zebur mercan <zmercan21@> wrote:
      > > >
      > > >  Heh heee... !
      > > >  
      > > > 1.5m/s min sink rate, L/D is around  5.0,  38 Km top speed,
      > > And  Prima AKA Pampers in some EU countries :) 
      > > >  
      > > >
      > > >
      > > > --- On Mon, 12/1/08, Terry Lutke <tllutke52@> wrote:
      > > >
      > > > From: Terry Lutke <tllutke52@>
      > > > Subject: [ppgbiglist] Re: Wing Selection - Safety vs Performance
      > > > To: ppgbiglist@yahoogroups.com
      > > > Date: Monday, December 1, 2008, 1:06 AM
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > > Ah here we go...
      > > > au contraire btw regarding the Prima, it is seeing a resurge in
      > > sales
      > > > because of it's newbie friendly status. A glider steady for newb's
      > > > and trusty when you're rusty..
      > > >
      > > > TerryL
      > > >
      > > > --- In ppgbiglist@yahoogro ups.com, zebur mercan <zmercan21@ ..>
      > > wrote:
      > > > >
      > > > > >I am debating between four wings: Apco Prima, Apco Thrust, Uturn
      > > > > >Emotion and Advance Epsilon.
      > > > >
      > > > > Hi Chris,
      > > > >  
      > > > > You are comparing apples to spanners :)
      > > > >  
      > > > > Date,class,price. .. nothing is fair comparison !!
      > > > >  
      > > > > Apco prima and Epsilon are ancient wings and if you are not paid
      > > > to take them,don`t touch them :)  
      > > > >  
      > > > > Thrust is older and wasn`t anything special from the day one!
      > > > >
      > > > > Between theese four, DHV-1 Emotion will be the safest for you but
      > > > if you are not a compleate beginer,you` d better broaden your
      > > search a
      > > > little more.
      > > > >
      > > > > Cheers
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > Zebur
      > > > >  
      > > > >  
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > --- On Sat, 11/29/08, noodlydoo <noodlydoo@ ..> wrote:
      > > > >
      > > > > From: noodlydoo <noodlydoo@ ..>
      > > > > Subject: [ppgbiglist] Wing Selection - Safety vs Performance
      > > > > To: ppgbiglist@yahoogro ups.com
      > > > > Date: Saturday, November 29, 2008, 9:23 PM
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > Just joined the group, wanted to say hello and ask a question. My
      > > > > background first. I've flown ppg w/ trike a couple of times (but
      > > not
      > > > > much) on a la Mouette and a Fresh Breeze Skip 1. Flew an old
      > > > > Pro-Design Classic wing (back in the mid 90's) and the original
      > > > Reflex
      > > > > wing. Switched over to PPC's and flew about 100 hours under a
      > > > Quantum
      > > > > OC500 wing, but also took some instruction under various other
      > > > wings,
      > > > > including the Chiron elliptical when it first came out.
      > > > >
      > > > > Ok, enough about me....
      > > > >
      > > > > After taking a sabitical from PPC for a couple of years, I'm
      > > ready
      > > > to
      > > > > get back into the air. I've decided to go PPG instead of PPC for
      > > > > several reasons, and am having a heck of time deciding on
      > > equipment.
      > > > > So, I thought I would have you gents (and lady's) weigh in on the
      > > > most
      > > > > important choice....my wing.
      > > > >
      > > > > I'm more of a hands free kinda pilot. I like to cruise and look
      > > > down,
      > > > > fly through the fields, etc. Not an active pilot and I know it.
      > > > (isn't
      > > > > it a strength to know your weakness?)
      > > > >
      > > > > I should also mention I tend to fly at the end of the day in calm
      > > > > conditions.
      > > > >
      > > > > I am debating between four wings: Apco Prima, Apco Thrust, Uturn
      > > > > Emotion and Advance Epsilon.
      > > > >
      > > > > My thoughts on the Prima is that it has a high sink rate and very
      > > > > large cells that are probably much more likely to fly like a PPC
      > > > wing.
      > > > > I calculated its glide at about 6 which would be in line with the
      > > > > current ellipticals on PPC. Now here is where I need insight. I'm
      > > > > trying to figure out, if a DHV 1 glider with a high glide ratio
      > > like
      > > > > the emotion, if it were to take a forward tuck or assymetrical,
      > > > would
      > > > > the Prima take that same collapse in the exact same conditions?
      > > > >
      > > > > I'm inclined to think that given such large cells and its
      > > > > inefficiency, its more likely to resist and type of collapse that
      > > > > would require pilot input than say a higer aspect ratio wing even
      > > > > though its DHV1.
      > > > >
      > > > > I guess what I'm asking, is what wing is most likely to keep me
      > > out
      > > > of
      > > > > that situation in the first place? Like I said, I tend to fly in
      > > > soft
      > > > > smooth air anyway, but that doesn't mean I don't glide into the
      > > > > occasional rotor on landing or off a hill etc.
      > > > >
      > > > > It appears like these DHV1 wings have become extremely high
      > > > > performance in the past 5 years, which for most pilots is a great
      > > > > thing. Stability is the first and formost important factor. For
      > > me,
      > > > > everything else is a distant second. Maybe hands off isn't
      > > realistic
      > > > > uder a PPG wing, in which case its back to the big lumbering PPC
      > > > world
      > > > > and the inefficiency of thier wings that make them so inherintly
      > > > stable.
      > > > >
      > > > > Any input appreciated.
      > > > >
      > > > > Chris
      > > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      > > >
      > >
      >
    • zebur mercan
      C`mon Terry ....!   Hah HAAA...  :)    There are lots of modern beginner wings and great intermediate reflex/non reflex wings out there,lots to choose
      Message 2 of 23 , Dec 1, 2008
        C`mon Terry ....!
         
        Hah HAAA...  :)
         
         There are lots of modern beginner wings and great intermediate reflex/non reflex wings out there,lots to choose from...    all of them are very comparable and well improved since Prima was designed 15 years ago. 
         
        "a 1.5 sink offers short field landing potential; even a BurgerKing roof can
        be an LZ/TL"

        Well, If that`s your prima being sold, at least don`t fill it with words like That !
         
        You`d better give up and call it a joke :)
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         


        --- On Mon, 12/1/08, Terry Lutke <tllutke52@...> wrote:

        From: Terry Lutke <tllutke52@...>
        Subject: [ppgbiglist] Re: Wing Selection - Safety vs Performance
        To: ppgbiglist@yahoogroups.com
        Date: Monday, December 1, 2008, 4:15 AM






        I've read that one mans diaper is another mans wing, besides a 1.5
        sink offers short field landing potential; even a BurgerKing roof can
        be an LZ/TL
        --- In ppgbiglist@yahoogro ups.com, zebur mercan <zmercan21@. ..> wrote:
        >
        >  Heh heee... !
        >  
        > 1.5m/s min sink rate, L/D is around  5.0,  38 Km top speed,
        And  Prima AKA Pampers in some EU countries :) 
        >  
        >
        >
        > --- On Mon, 12/1/08, Terry Lutke <tllutke52@. ..> wrote:
        >
        > From: Terry Lutke <tllutke52@. ..>
        > Subject: [ppgbiglist] Re: Wing Selection - Safety vs Performance
        > To: ppgbiglist@yahoogro ups.com
        > Date: Monday, December 1, 2008, 1:06 AM
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > Ah here we go...
        > au contraire btw regarding the Prima, it is seeing a resurge in
        sales
        > because of it's newbie friendly status. A glider steady for newb's
        > and trusty when you're rusty..
        >
        > TerryL
        >
        > --- In ppgbiglist@yahoogro ups.com, zebur mercan <zmercan21@ ..>
        wrote:
        > >
        > > >I am debating between four wings: Apco Prima, Apco Thrust, Uturn
        > > >Emotion and Advance Epsilon.
        > >
        > > Hi Chris,
        > >  
        > > You are comparing apples to spanners :)
        > >  
        > > Date,class,price. .. nothing is fair comparison !!
        > >  
        > > Apco prima and Epsilon are ancient wings and if you are not paid
        > to take them,don`t touch them :)  
        > >  
        > > Thrust is older and wasn`t anything special from the day one!
        > >
        > > Between theese four, DHV-1 Emotion will be the safest for you but
        > if you are not a compleate beginer,you` d better broaden your
        search a
        > little more.
        > >
        > > Cheers
        > >
        > >
        > > Zebur
        > >  
        > >  
        > >
        > >
        > > --- On Sat, 11/29/08, noodlydoo <noodlydoo@ ..> wrote:
        > >
        > > From: noodlydoo <noodlydoo@ ..>
        > > Subject: [ppgbiglist] Wing Selection - Safety vs Performance
        > > To: ppgbiglist@yahoogro ups.com
        > > Date: Saturday, November 29, 2008, 9:23 PM
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > Just joined the group, wanted to say hello and ask a question. My
        > > background first. I've flown ppg w/ trike a couple of times (but
        not
        > > much) on a la Mouette and a Fresh Breeze Skip 1. Flew an old
        > > Pro-Design Classic wing (back in the mid 90's) and the original
        > Reflex
        > > wing. Switched over to PPC's and flew about 100 hours under a
        > Quantum
        > > OC500 wing, but also took some instruction under various other
        > wings,
        > > including the Chiron elliptical when it first came out.
        > >
        > > Ok, enough about me....
        > >
        > > After taking a sabitical from PPC for a couple of years, I'm
        ready
        > to
        > > get back into the air. I've decided to go PPG instead of PPC for
        > > several reasons, and am having a heck of time deciding on
        equipment.
        > > So, I thought I would have you gents (and lady's) weigh in on the
        > most
        > > important choice....my wing.
        > >
        > > I'm more of a hands free kinda pilot. I like to cruise and look
        > down,
        > > fly through the fields, etc. Not an active pilot and I know it.
        > (isn't
        > > it a strength to know your weakness?)
        > >
        > > I should also mention I tend to fly at the end of the day in calm
        > > conditions.
        > >
        > > I am debating between four wings: Apco Prima, Apco Thrust, Uturn
        > > Emotion and Advance Epsilon.
        > >
        > > My thoughts on the Prima is that it has a high sink rate and very
        > > large cells that are probably much more likely to fly like a PPC
        > wing.
        > > I calculated its glide at about 6 which would be in line with the
        > > current ellipticals on PPC. Now here is where I need insight. I'm
        > > trying to figure out, if a DHV 1 glider with a high glide ratio
        like
        > > the emotion, if it were to take a forward tuck or assymetrical,
        > would
        > > the Prima take that same collapse in the exact same conditions?
        > >
        > > I'm inclined to think that given such large cells and its
        > > inefficiency, its more likely to resist and type of collapse that
        > > would require pilot input than say a higer aspect ratio wing even
        > > though its DHV1.
        > >
        > > I guess what I'm asking, is what wing is most likely to keep me
        out
        > of
        > > that situation in the first place? Like I said, I tend to fly in
        > soft
        > > smooth air anyway, but that doesn't mean I don't glide into the
        > > occasional rotor on landing or off a hill etc.
        > >
        > > It appears like these DHV1 wings have become extremely high
        > > performance in the past 5 years, which for most pilots is a great
        > > thing. Stability is the first and formost important factor. For
        me,
        > > everything else is a distant second. Maybe hands off isn't
        realistic
        > > uder a PPG wing, in which case its back to the big lumbering PPC
        > world
        > > and the inefficiency of thier wings that make them so inherintly
        > stable.
        > >
        > > Any input appreciated.
        > >
        > > Chris
        > >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >


















        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Terry Lutke
        Admit it Zebur..BurgerKing roofs aside, if I were training your sister you would be quite happy if I were using a Prima3 at my school (which I do BTW) Terry
        Message 3 of 23 , Dec 1, 2008
          Admit it Zebur..BurgerKing roofs aside, if I were training your
          sister you would be quite happy if I were using a Prima3 at my school
          (which I do BTW)

          Terry

          --- In ppgbiglist@yahoogroups.com, zebur mercan <zmercan21@...> wrote:
          >
          > C`mon Terry ....!
          >  
          > Hah HAAA...  :)
          >  
          >  There are lots of modern beginner wings and great intermediate
          reflex/non reflex wings out there,lots to choose from...    all of
          them are very comparable and well improved since Prima was designed
          15 years ago. 
          >  
          > "a 1.5 sink offers short field landing potential; even a BurgerKing
          roof can
          > be an LZ/TL"
          >
          > Well, If that`s your prima being sold, at least don`t fill it with
          words like That !
          >  
          > You`d better give up and call it a joke :)
          >  
          >  
          >  
          >  
          >  
          >  
          >  
          >  
          >
          >
          > --- On Mon, 12/1/08, Terry Lutke <tllutke52@...> wrote:
          >
          > From: Terry Lutke <tllutke52@...>
          > Subject: [ppgbiglist] Re: Wing Selection - Safety vs Performance
          > To: ppgbiglist@yahoogroups.com
          > Date: Monday, December 1, 2008, 4:15 AM
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > I've read that one mans diaper is another mans wing, besides a 1.5
          > sink offers short field landing potential; even a BurgerKing roof
          can
          > be an LZ/TL
          > --- In ppgbiglist@yahoogro ups.com, zebur mercan <zmercan21@ ..>
          wrote:
          > >
          > >  Heh heee... !
          > >  
          > > 1.5m/s min sink rate, L/D is around  5.0,  38 Km top speed,
          > And  Prima AKA Pampers in some EU countries :) 
          > >  
          > >
          > >
          > > --- On Mon, 12/1/08, Terry Lutke <tllutke52@ ..> wrote:
          > >
          > > From: Terry Lutke <tllutke52@ ..>
          > > Subject: [ppgbiglist] Re: Wing Selection - Safety vs Performance
          > > To: ppgbiglist@yahoogro ups.com
          > > Date: Monday, December 1, 2008, 1:06 AM
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > > Ah here we go...
          > > au contraire btw regarding the Prima, it is seeing a resurge in
          > sales
          > > because of it's newbie friendly status. A glider steady for
          newb's
          > > and trusty when you're rusty..
          > >
          > > TerryL
          > >
          > > --- In ppgbiglist@yahoogro ups.com, zebur mercan <zmercan21@ ..>
          > wrote:
          > > >
          > > > >I am debating between four wings: Apco Prima, Apco Thrust,
          Uturn
          > > > >Emotion and Advance Epsilon.
          > > >
          > > > Hi Chris,
          > > >  
          > > > You are comparing apples to spanners :)
          > > >  
          > > > Date,class,price. .. nothing is fair comparison !!
          > > >  
          > > > Apco prima and Epsilon are ancient wings and if you are not
          paid
          > > to take them,don`t touch them :)  
          > > >  
          > > > Thrust is older and wasn`t anything special from the day one!
          > > >
          > > > Between theese four, DHV-1 Emotion will be the safest for you
          but
          > > if you are not a compleate beginer,you` d better broaden your
          > search a
          > > little more.
          > > >
          > > > Cheers
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > Zebur
          > > >  
          > > >  
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > --- On Sat, 11/29/08, noodlydoo <noodlydoo@ ..> wrote:
          > > >
          > > > From: noodlydoo <noodlydoo@ ..>
          > > > Subject: [ppgbiglist] Wing Selection - Safety vs Performance
          > > > To: ppgbiglist@yahoogro ups.com
          > > > Date: Saturday, November 29, 2008, 9:23 PM
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > Just joined the group, wanted to say hello and ask a question.
          My
          > > > background first. I've flown ppg w/ trike a couple of times
          (but
          > not
          > > > much) on a la Mouette and a Fresh Breeze Skip 1. Flew an old
          > > > Pro-Design Classic wing (back in the mid 90's) and the original
          > > Reflex
          > > > wing. Switched over to PPC's and flew about 100 hours under a
          > > Quantum
          > > > OC500 wing, but also took some instruction under various other
          > > wings,
          > > > including the Chiron elliptical when it first came out.
          > > >
          > > > Ok, enough about me....
          > > >
          > > > After taking a sabitical from PPC for a couple of years, I'm
          > ready
          > > to
          > > > get back into the air. I've decided to go PPG instead of PPC for
          > > > several reasons, and am having a heck of time deciding on
          > equipment.
          > > > So, I thought I would have you gents (and lady's) weigh in on
          the
          > > most
          > > > important choice....my wing.
          > > >
          > > > I'm more of a hands free kinda pilot. I like to cruise and look
          > > down,
          > > > fly through the fields, etc. Not an active pilot and I know it.
          > > (isn't
          > > > it a strength to know your weakness?)
          > > >
          > > > I should also mention I tend to fly at the end of the day in
          calm
          > > > conditions.
          > > >
          > > > I am debating between four wings: Apco Prima, Apco Thrust, Uturn
          > > > Emotion and Advance Epsilon.
          > > >
          > > > My thoughts on the Prima is that it has a high sink rate and
          very
          > > > large cells that are probably much more likely to fly like a
          PPC
          > > wing.
          > > > I calculated its glide at about 6 which would be in line with
          the
          > > > current ellipticals on PPC. Now here is where I need insight.
          I'm
          > > > trying to figure out, if a DHV 1 glider with a high glide ratio
          > like
          > > > the emotion, if it were to take a forward tuck or assymetrical,
          > > would
          > > > the Prima take that same collapse in the exact same conditions?
          > > >
          > > > I'm inclined to think that given such large cells and its
          > > > inefficiency, its more likely to resist and type of collapse
          that
          > > > would require pilot input than say a higer aspect ratio wing
          even
          > > > though its DHV1.
          > > >
          > > > I guess what I'm asking, is what wing is most likely to keep me
          > out
          > > of
          > > > that situation in the first place? Like I said, I tend to fly
          in
          > > soft
          > > > smooth air anyway, but that doesn't mean I don't glide into the
          > > > occasional rotor on landing or off a hill etc.
          > > >
          > > > It appears like these DHV1 wings have become extremely high
          > > > performance in the past 5 years, which for most pilots is a
          great
          > > > thing. Stability is the first and formost important factor. For
          > me,
          > > > everything else is a distant second. Maybe hands off isn't
          > realistic
          > > > uder a PPG wing, in which case its back to the big lumbering
          PPC
          > > world
          > > > and the inefficiency of thier wings that make them so
          inherintly
          > > stable.
          > > >
          > > > Any input appreciated.
          > > >
          > > > Chris
          > > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          > >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >
        • zebur mercan
          Terry, First of all !    You`d better continue training your own sister with your prima and start giving people better advise on a new wing.    The
          Message 4 of 23 , Dec 1, 2008
            Terry,
            First of all !
             
             You`d better continue training your own sister with your prima and start giving people better advise on a new wing.
             
             The specs of all other wings are out there and the reason I`m debating this topic with you is because you are not promoting a decent wing.
             
            www.para2000.org  is the very basic guide line for everyone and most wing can be compared.
             
             Without getting low and personal, just give people the reason why they should buy a 15 years old design, what are the benefits?
             
             
             
             
             
             
             
             
             


            --- On Mon, 12/1/08, Terry Lutke <tllutke52@...> wrote:

            From: Terry Lutke <tllutke52@...>
            Subject: [ppgbiglist] Re: Wing Selection - Safety vs Performance
            To: ppgbiglist@yahoogroups.com
            Date: Monday, December 1, 2008, 1:19 PM






            Admit it Zebur..BurgerKing roofs aside, if I were training your
            sister you would be quite happy if I were using a Prima3 at my school
            (which I do BTW)

            Terry

            --- In ppgbiglist@yahoogro ups.com, zebur mercan <zmercan21@. ..> wrote:
            >
            > C`mon Terry ....!
            >  
            > Hah HAAA...  :)
            >  
            >  There are lots of modern beginner wings and great intermediate
            reflex/non reflex wings out there,lots to choose from...    all of
            them are very comparable and well improved since Prima was designed
            15 years ago. 
            >  
            > "a 1.5 sink offers short field landing potential; even a BurgerKing
            roof can
            > be an LZ/TL"
            >
            > Well, If that`s your prima being sold, at least don`t fill it with
            words like That !
            >  
            > You`d better give up and call it a joke :)
            >  
            >  
            >  
            >  
            >  
            >  
            >  
            >  
            >
            >
            > --- On Mon, 12/1/08, Terry Lutke <tllutke52@. ..> wrote:
            >
            > From: Terry Lutke <tllutke52@. ..>
            > Subject: [ppgbiglist] Re: Wing Selection - Safety vs Performance
            > To: ppgbiglist@yahoogro ups.com
            > Date: Monday, December 1, 2008, 4:15 AM
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > I've read that one mans diaper is another mans wing, besides a 1.5
            > sink offers short field landing potential; even a BurgerKing roof
            can
            > be an LZ/TL
            > --- In ppgbiglist@yahoogro ups.com, zebur mercan <zmercan21@ ..>
            wrote:
            > >
            > >  Heh heee... !
            > >  
            > > 1.5m/s min sink rate, L/D is around  5.0,  38 Km top speed,
            > And  Prima AKA Pampers in some EU countries :) 
            > >  
            > >
            > >
            > > --- On Mon, 12/1/08, Terry Lutke <tllutke52@ ..> wrote:
            > >
            > > From: Terry Lutke <tllutke52@ ..>
            > > Subject: [ppgbiglist] Re: Wing Selection - Safety vs Performance
            > > To: ppgbiglist@yahoogro ups.com
            > > Date: Monday, December 1, 2008, 1:06 AM
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > Ah here we go...
            > > au contraire btw regarding the Prima, it is seeing a resurge in
            > sales
            > > because of it's newbie friendly status. A glider steady for
            newb's
            > > and trusty when you're rusty..
            > >
            > > TerryL
            > >
            > > --- In ppgbiglist@yahoogro ups.com, zebur mercan <zmercan21@ ..>
            > wrote:
            > > >
            > > > >I am debating between four wings: Apco Prima, Apco Thrust,
            Uturn
            > > > >Emotion and Advance Epsilon.
            > > >
            > > > Hi Chris,
            > > >  
            > > > You are comparing apples to spanners :)
            > > >  
            > > > Date,class,price. .. nothing is fair comparison !!
            > > >  
            > > > Apco prima and Epsilon are ancient wings and if you are not
            paid
            > > to take them,don`t touch them :)  
            > > >  
            > > > Thrust is older and wasn`t anything special from the day one!
            > > >
            > > > Between theese four, DHV-1 Emotion will be the safest for you
            but
            > > if you are not a compleate beginer,you` d better broaden your
            > search a
            > > little more.
            > > >
            > > > Cheers
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > Zebur
            > > >  
            > > >  
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > --- On Sat, 11/29/08, noodlydoo <noodlydoo@ ..> wrote:
            > > >
            > > > From: noodlydoo <noodlydoo@ ..>
            > > > Subject: [ppgbiglist] Wing Selection - Safety vs Performance
            > > > To: ppgbiglist@yahoogro ups.com
            > > > Date: Saturday, November 29, 2008, 9:23 PM
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > Just joined the group, wanted to say hello and ask a question.
            My
            > > > background first. I've flown ppg w/ trike a couple of times
            (but
            > not
            > > > much) on a la Mouette and a Fresh Breeze Skip 1. Flew an old
            > > > Pro-Design Classic wing (back in the mid 90's) and the original
            > > Reflex
            > > > wing. Switched over to PPC's and flew about 100 hours under a
            > > Quantum
            > > > OC500 wing, but also took some instruction under various other
            > > wings,
            > > > including the Chiron elliptical when it first came out.
            > > >
            > > > Ok, enough about me....
            > > >
            > > > After taking a sabitical from PPC for a couple of years, I'm
            > ready
            > > to
            > > > get back into the air. I've decided to go PPG instead of PPC for
            > > > several reasons, and am having a heck of time deciding on
            > equipment.
            > > > So, I thought I would have you gents (and lady's) weigh in on
            the
            > > most
            > > > important choice....my wing.
            > > >
            > > > I'm more of a hands free kinda pilot. I like to cruise and look
            > > down,
            > > > fly through the fields, etc. Not an active pilot and I know it.
            > > (isn't
            > > > it a strength to know your weakness?)
            > > >
            > > > I should also mention I tend to fly at the end of the day in
            calm
            > > > conditions.
            > > >
            > > > I am debating between four wings: Apco Prima, Apco Thrust, Uturn
            > > > Emotion and Advance Epsilon.
            > > >
            > > > My thoughts on the Prima is that it has a high sink rate and
            very
            > > > large cells that are probably much more likely to fly like a
            PPC
            > > wing.
            > > > I calculated its glide at about 6 which would be in line with
            the
            > > > current ellipticals on PPC. Now here is where I need insight.
            I'm
            > > > trying to figure out, if a DHV 1 glider with a high glide ratio
            > like
            > > > the emotion, if it were to take a forward tuck or assymetrical,
            > > would
            > > > the Prima take that same collapse in the exact same conditions?
            > > >
            > > > I'm inclined to think that given such large cells and its
            > > > inefficiency, its more likely to resist and type of collapse
            that
            > > > would require pilot input than say a higer aspect ratio wing
            even
            > > > though its DHV1.
            > > >
            > > > I guess what I'm asking, is what wing is most likely to keep me
            > out
            > > of
            > > > that situation in the first place? Like I said, I tend to fly
            in
            > > soft
            > > > smooth air anyway, but that doesn't mean I don't glide into the
            > > > occasional rotor on landing or off a hill etc.
            > > >
            > > > It appears like these DHV1 wings have become extremely high
            > > > performance in the past 5 years, which for most pilots is a
            great
            > > > thing. Stability is the first and formost important factor. For
            > me,
            > > > everything else is a distant second. Maybe hands off isn't
            > realistic
            > > > uder a PPG wing, in which case its back to the big lumbering
            PPC
            > > world
            > > > and the inefficiency of thier wings that make them so
            inherintly
            > > stable.
            > > >
            > > > Any input appreciated.
            > > >
            > > > Chris
            > > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            > >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            >


















            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • aldersonjames2002
            Chad (of TrikeBuggy fame) also told me that the Prisma/Prima3 is a perfect wing to get started triking on, although the certification of even the 33m is only
            Message 5 of 23 , Dec 1, 2008
              Chad (of TrikeBuggy fame) also told me that the Prisma/Prima3 is a
              perfect wing to get started triking on, although the certification of
              even the 33m is only 244 lbs max and thats not much more than I weigh
              without any equipment. He also said that it would be really hard to
              pick a DHV1 wing these days that would be a bad wing. Eric Dufour also
              had great things to say about the Prisma/Prima3, but was also honest
              that it wasn't a very fun wing.

              I wonder if anyone has ever thought about renting a Prima out as a
              training wing so you can use it for your first 10 flights or so and
              then send it back and pay for the time you had it. Everyone seems to
              say that its also a good wing because it lasts for so long because of
              its construction and materials.

              James

              --- In ppgbiglist@yahoogroups.com, "Terry Lutke" <tllutke52@...> wrote:
              >
              > Admit it Zebur..BurgerKing roofs aside, if I were training your
              > sister you would be quite happy if I were using a Prima3 at my school
              > (which I do BTW)
              >
              > Terry
              >
              > --- In ppgbiglist@yahoogroups.com, zebur mercan <zmercan21@> wrote:
              > >
              > > C`mon Terry ....!
              > >  
              > > Hah HAAA...  :)
              > >  
              > >  There are lots of modern beginner wings and great intermediate
              > reflex/non reflex wings out there,lots to choose from...    all of
              > them are very comparable and well improved since Prima was designed
              > 15 years ago. 
              > >  
              > > "a 1.5 sink offers short field landing potential; even a BurgerKing
              > roof can
              > > be an LZ/TL"
              > >
              > > Well, If that`s your prima being sold, at least don`t fill it with
              > words like That !
              > >  
              > > You`d better give up and call it a joke :)
              > >  
              > >  
              > >  
              > >  
              > >  
              > >  
              > >  
              > >  
              > >
              > >
              > > --- On Mon, 12/1/08, Terry Lutke <tllutke52@> wrote:
              > >
              > > From: Terry Lutke <tllutke52@>
              > > Subject: [ppgbiglist] Re: Wing Selection - Safety vs Performance
              > > To: ppgbiglist@yahoogroups.com
              > > Date: Monday, December 1, 2008, 4:15 AM
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > > I've read that one mans diaper is another mans wing, besides a 1.5
              > > sink offers short field landing potential; even a BurgerKing roof
              > can
              > > be an LZ/TL
              > > --- In ppgbiglist@yahoogro ups.com, zebur mercan <zmercan21@ ..>
              > wrote:
              > > >
              > > >  Heh heee... !
              > > >  
              > > > 1.5m/s min sink rate, L/D is around  5.0,  38 Km top speed,
              > > And  Prima AKA Pampers in some EU countries :) 
              > > >  
              > > >
              > > >
              > > > --- On Mon, 12/1/08, Terry Lutke <tllutke52@ ..> wrote:
              > > >
              > > > From: Terry Lutke <tllutke52@ ..>
              > > > Subject: [ppgbiglist] Re: Wing Selection - Safety vs Performance
              > > > To: ppgbiglist@yahoogro ups.com
              > > > Date: Monday, December 1, 2008, 1:06 AM
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > > Ah here we go...
              > > > au contraire btw regarding the Prima, it is seeing a resurge in
              > > sales
              > > > because of it's newbie friendly status. A glider steady for
              > newb's
              > > > and trusty when you're rusty..
              > > >
              > > > TerryL
              > > >
              > > > --- In ppgbiglist@yahoogro ups.com, zebur mercan <zmercan21@ ..>
              > > wrote:
              > > > >
              > > > > >I am debating between four wings: Apco Prima, Apco Thrust,
              > Uturn
              > > > > >Emotion and Advance Epsilon.
              > > > >
              > > > > Hi Chris,
              > > > >  
              > > > > You are comparing apples to spanners :)
              > > > >  
              > > > > Date,class,price. .. nothing is fair comparison !!
              > > > >  
              > > > > Apco prima and Epsilon are ancient wings and if you are not
              > paid
              > > > to take them,don`t touch them :)  
              > > > >  
              > > > > Thrust is older and wasn`t anything special from the day one!
              > > > >
              > > > > Between theese four, DHV-1 Emotion will be the safest for you
              > but
              > > > if you are not a compleate beginer,you` d better broaden your
              > > search a
              > > > little more.
              > > > >
              > > > > Cheers
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > > Zebur
              > > > >  
              > > > >  
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > > --- On Sat, 11/29/08, noodlydoo <noodlydoo@ ..> wrote:
              > > > >
              > > > > From: noodlydoo <noodlydoo@ ..>
              > > > > Subject: [ppgbiglist] Wing Selection - Safety vs Performance
              > > > > To: ppgbiglist@yahoogro ups.com
              > > > > Date: Saturday, November 29, 2008, 9:23 PM
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > > Just joined the group, wanted to say hello and ask a question.
              > My
              > > > > background first. I've flown ppg w/ trike a couple of times
              > (but
              > > not
              > > > > much) on a la Mouette and a Fresh Breeze Skip 1. Flew an old
              > > > > Pro-Design Classic wing (back in the mid 90's) and the original
              > > > Reflex
              > > > > wing. Switched over to PPC's and flew about 100 hours under a
              > > > Quantum
              > > > > OC500 wing, but also took some instruction under various other
              > > > wings,
              > > > > including the Chiron elliptical when it first came out.
              > > > >
              > > > > Ok, enough about me....
              > > > >
              > > > > After taking a sabitical from PPC for a couple of years, I'm
              > > ready
              > > > to
              > > > > get back into the air. I've decided to go PPG instead of PPC for
              > > > > several reasons, and am having a heck of time deciding on
              > > equipment.
              > > > > So, I thought I would have you gents (and lady's) weigh in on
              > the
              > > > most
              > > > > important choice....my wing.
              > > > >
              > > > > I'm more of a hands free kinda pilot. I like to cruise and look
              > > > down,
              > > > > fly through the fields, etc. Not an active pilot and I know it.
              > > > (isn't
              > > > > it a strength to know your weakness?)
              > > > >
              > > > > I should also mention I tend to fly at the end of the day in
              > calm
              > > > > conditions.
              > > > >
              > > > > I am debating between four wings: Apco Prima, Apco Thrust, Uturn
              > > > > Emotion and Advance Epsilon.
              > > > >
              > > > > My thoughts on the Prima is that it has a high sink rate and
              > very
              > > > > large cells that are probably much more likely to fly like a
              > PPC
              > > > wing.
              > > > > I calculated its glide at about 6 which would be in line with
              > the
              > > > > current ellipticals on PPC. Now here is where I need insight.
              > I'm
              > > > > trying to figure out, if a DHV 1 glider with a high glide ratio
              > > like
              > > > > the emotion, if it were to take a forward tuck or assymetrical,
              > > > would
              > > > > the Prima take that same collapse in the exact same conditions?
              > > > >
              > > > > I'm inclined to think that given such large cells and its
              > > > > inefficiency, its more likely to resist and type of collapse
              > that
              > > > > would require pilot input than say a higer aspect ratio wing
              > even
              > > > > though its DHV1.
              > > > >
              > > > > I guess what I'm asking, is what wing is most likely to keep me
              > > out
              > > > of
              > > > > that situation in the first place? Like I said, I tend to fly
              > in
              > > > soft
              > > > > smooth air anyway, but that doesn't mean I don't glide into the
              > > > > occasional rotor on landing or off a hill etc.
              > > > >
              > > > > It appears like these DHV1 wings have become extremely high
              > > > > performance in the past 5 years, which for most pilots is a
              > great
              > > > > thing. Stability is the first and formost important factor. For
              > > me,
              > > > > everything else is a distant second. Maybe hands off isn't
              > > realistic
              > > > > uder a PPG wing, in which case its back to the big lumbering
              > PPC
              > > > world
              > > > > and the inefficiency of thier wings that make them so
              > inherintly
              > > > stable.
              > > > >
              > > > > Any input appreciated.
              > > > >
              > > > > Chris
              > > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              > > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              > >
              >
            • Terry Lutke
              Z, Are you becoming angry with me?:) There are lots of good starter wings as you very correctly say, and most are more efficient than the Prima (there I said
              Message 6 of 23 , Dec 1, 2008
                Z, Are you becoming angry with me?:)

                There are lots of good starter wings as you very correctly say, and
                most are more efficient than the Prima (there I said it); however few
                are easier to learn or safer to fly in the early part of one's
                flying 'career'.
                15 yrs old design you say? One might also say that the Prima has
                stood the test of time as an easy/safe school wing.

                Perhaps we can remain in disagreement on this and move on.

                TerryL
                www.cheaptrikeflyer.com



                --- In ppgbiglist@yahoogroups.com, zebur mercan <zmercan21@...> wrote:
                >
                > Terry,
                > First of all !
                >  
                >  You`d better continue training your own sister with your prima and
                start giving people better advise on a new wing.
                >  
                >  The specs of all other wings are out there and the reason I`m
                debating this topic with you is because you are not promoting a
                decent wing.
                >  
                > www.para2000.org  is the very basic guide line for everyone and
                most wing can be compared.
                >  
                >  Without getting low and personal, just give people the reason why
                they should buy a 15 years old design, what are the benefits?
                >  
                >  
                >  
                >  
                >  
                >  
                >  
                >  
                >  
                >
                >
                > --- On Mon, 12/1/08, Terry Lutke <tllutke52@...> wrote:
                >
                > From: Terry Lutke <tllutke52@...>
                > Subject: [ppgbiglist] Re: Wing Selection - Safety vs Performance
                > To: ppgbiglist@yahoogroups.com
                > Date: Monday, December 1, 2008, 1:19 PM
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                > Admit it Zebur..BurgerKing roofs aside, if I were training your
                > sister you would be quite happy if I were using a Prima3 at my
                school
                > (which I do BTW)
                >
                > Terry
                >
                > --- In ppgbiglist@yahoogro ups.com, zebur mercan <zmercan21@ ..>
                wrote:
                > >
                > > C`mon Terry ....!
                > >  
                > > Hah HAAA...  :)
                > >  
                > >  There are lots of modern beginner wings and great intermediate
                > reflex/non reflex wings out there,lots to choose from...    all of
                > them are very comparable and well improved since Prima was designed
                > 15 years ago. 
                > >  
                > > "a 1.5 sink offers short field landing potential; even a
                BurgerKing
                > roof can
                > > be an LZ/TL"
                > >
                > > Well, If that`s your prima being sold, at least don`t fill it
                with
                > words like That !
                > >  
                > > You`d better give up and call it a joke :)
                > >  
                > >  
                > >  
                > >  
                > >  
                > >  
                > >  
                > >  
                > >
                > >
                > > --- On Mon, 12/1/08, Terry Lutke <tllutke52@ ..> wrote:
                > >
                > > From: Terry Lutke <tllutke52@ ..>
                > > Subject: [ppgbiglist] Re: Wing Selection - Safety vs Performance
                > > To: ppgbiglist@yahoogro ups.com
                > > Date: Monday, December 1, 2008, 4:15 AM
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > > I've read that one mans diaper is another mans wing, besides a
                1.5
                > > sink offers short field landing potential; even a BurgerKing roof
                > can
                > > be an LZ/TL
                > > --- In ppgbiglist@yahoogro ups.com, zebur mercan <zmercan21@ ..>
                > wrote:
                > > >
                > > >  Heh heee... !
                > > >  
                > > > 1.5m/s min sink rate, L/D is around  5.0,  38 Km top speed,
                > > And  Prima AKA Pampers in some EU countries :) 
                > > >  
                > > >
                > > >
                > > > --- On Mon, 12/1/08, Terry Lutke <tllutke52@ ..> wrote:
                > > >
                > > > From: Terry Lutke <tllutke52@ ..>
                > > > Subject: [ppgbiglist] Re: Wing Selection - Safety vs Performance
                > > > To: ppgbiglist@yahoogro ups.com
                > > > Date: Monday, December 1, 2008, 1:06 AM
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > > Ah here we go...
                > > > au contraire btw regarding the Prima, it is seeing a resurge in
                > > sales
                > > > because of it's newbie friendly status. A glider steady for
                > newb's
                > > > and trusty when you're rusty..
                > > >
                > > > TerryL
                > > >
                > > > --- In ppgbiglist@yahoogro ups.com, zebur mercan
                <zmercan21@ ..>
                > > wrote:
                > > > >
                > > > > >I am debating between four wings: Apco Prima, Apco Thrust,
                > Uturn
                > > > > >Emotion and Advance Epsilon.
                > > > >
                > > > > Hi Chris,
                > > > >  
                > > > > You are comparing apples to spanners :)
                > > > >  
                > > > > Date,class,price. .. nothing is fair comparison !!
                > > > >  
                > > > > Apco prima and Epsilon are ancient wings and if you are not
                > paid
                > > > to take them,don`t touch them :)  
                > > > >  
                > > > > Thrust is older and wasn`t anything special from the day one!
                > > > >
                > > > > Between theese four, DHV-1 Emotion will be the safest for you
                > but
                > > > if you are not a compleate beginer,you` d better broaden your
                > > search a
                > > > little more.
                > > > >
                > > > > Cheers
                > > > >
                > > > >
                > > > > Zebur
                > > > >  
                > > > >  
                > > > >
                > > > >
                > > > > --- On Sat, 11/29/08, noodlydoo <noodlydoo@ ..> wrote:
                > > > >
                > > > > From: noodlydoo <noodlydoo@ ..>
                > > > > Subject: [ppgbiglist] Wing Selection - Safety vs Performance
                > > > > To: ppgbiglist@yahoogro ups.com
                > > > > Date: Saturday, November 29, 2008, 9:23 PM
                > > > >
                > > > >
                > > > >
                > > > >
                > > > >
                > > > >
                > > > > Just joined the group, wanted to say hello and ask a
                question.
                > My
                > > > > background first. I've flown ppg w/ trike a couple of times
                > (but
                > > not
                > > > > much) on a la Mouette and a Fresh Breeze Skip 1. Flew an old
                > > > > Pro-Design Classic wing (back in the mid 90's) and the
                original
                > > > Reflex
                > > > > wing. Switched over to PPC's and flew about 100 hours under a
                > > > Quantum
                > > > > OC500 wing, but also took some instruction under various
                other
                > > > wings,
                > > > > including the Chiron elliptical when it first came out.
                > > > >
                > > > > Ok, enough about me....
                > > > >
                > > > > After taking a sabitical from PPC for a couple of years, I'm
                > > ready
                > > > to
                > > > > get back into the air. I've decided to go PPG instead of PPC
                for
                > > > > several reasons, and am having a heck of time deciding on
                > > equipment.
                > > > > So, I thought I would have you gents (and lady's) weigh in on
                > the
                > > > most
                > > > > important choice....my wing.
                > > > >
                > > > > I'm more of a hands free kinda pilot. I like to cruise and
                look
                > > > down,
                > > > > fly through the fields, etc. Not an active pilot and I know
                it.
                > > > (isn't
                > > > > it a strength to know your weakness?)
                > > > >
                > > > > I should also mention I tend to fly at the end of the day in
                > calm
                > > > > conditions.
                > > > >
                > > > > I am debating between four wings: Apco Prima, Apco Thrust,
                Uturn
                > > > > Emotion and Advance Epsilon.
                > > > >
                > > > > My thoughts on the Prima is that it has a high sink rate and
                > very
                > > > > large cells that are probably much more likely to fly like a
                > PPC
                > > > wing.
                > > > > I calculated its glide at about 6 which would be in line with
                > the
                > > > > current ellipticals on PPC. Now here is where I need insight.
                > I'm
                > > > > trying to figure out, if a DHV 1 glider with a high glide
                ratio
                > > like
                > > > > the emotion, if it were to take a forward tuck or
                assymetrical,
                > > > would
                > > > > the Prima take that same collapse in the exact same
                conditions?
                > > > >
                > > > > I'm inclined to think that given such large cells and its
                > > > > inefficiency, its more likely to resist and type of collapse
                > that
                > > > > would require pilot input than say a higer aspect ratio wing
                > even
                > > > > though its DHV1.
                > > > >
                > > > > I guess what I'm asking, is what wing is most likely to keep
                me
                > > out
                > > > of
                > > > > that situation in the first place? Like I said, I tend to fly
                > in
                > > > soft
                > > > > smooth air anyway, but that doesn't mean I don't glide into
                the
                > > > > occasional rotor on landing or off a hill etc.
                > > > >
                > > > > It appears like these DHV1 wings have become extremely high
                > > > > performance in the past 5 years, which for most pilots is a
                > great
                > > > > thing. Stability is the first and formost important factor.
                For
                > > me,
                > > > > everything else is a distant second. Maybe hands off isn't
                > > realistic
                > > > > uder a PPG wing, in which case its back to the big lumbering
                > PPC
                > > > world
                > > > > and the inefficiency of thier wings that make them so
                > inherintly
                > > > stable.
                > > > >
                > > > > Any input appreciated.
                > > > >
                > > > > Chris
                > > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                > > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                > >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                >
              • Terry Lutke
                James; I m considering offering a generous Prima buy-back/tradein offer with my CheapTrike. TerryL ... of ... weigh ... also ... of ... school ... of ...
                Message 7 of 23 , Dec 1, 2008
                  James;

                  I'm considering offering a generous Prima buy-back/tradein offer with
                  my CheapTrike.

                  TerryL

                  --- In ppgbiglist@yahoogroups.com, "aldersonjames2002"
                  <aldersonjames2002@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > Chad (of TrikeBuggy fame) also told me that the Prisma/Prima3 is a
                  > perfect wing to get started triking on, although the certification
                  of
                  > even the 33m is only 244 lbs max and thats not much more than I
                  weigh
                  > without any equipment. He also said that it would be really hard to
                  > pick a DHV1 wing these days that would be a bad wing. Eric Dufour
                  also
                  > had great things to say about the Prisma/Prima3, but was also honest
                  > that it wasn't a very fun wing.
                  >
                  > I wonder if anyone has ever thought about renting a Prima out as a
                  > training wing so you can use it for your first 10 flights or so and
                  > then send it back and pay for the time you had it. Everyone seems to
                  > say that its also a good wing because it lasts for so long because
                  of
                  > its construction and materials.
                  >
                  > James
                  >
                  > --- In ppgbiglist@yahoogroups.com, "Terry Lutke" <tllutke52@> wrote:
                  > >
                  > > Admit it Zebur..BurgerKing roofs aside, if I were training your
                  > > sister you would be quite happy if I were using a Prima3 at my
                  school
                  > > (which I do BTW)
                  > >
                  > > Terry
                  > >
                  > > --- In ppgbiglist@yahoogroups.com, zebur mercan <zmercan21@>
                  wrote:
                  > > >
                  > > > C`mon Terry ....!
                  > > >  
                  > > > Hah HAAA...  :)
                  > > >  
                  > > >  There are lots of modern beginner wings and great intermediate
                  > > reflex/non reflex wings out there,lots to choose from...    all
                  of
                  > > them are very comparable and well improved since Prima was
                  designed
                  > > 15 years ago. 
                  > > >  
                  > > > "a 1.5 sink offers short field landing potential; even a
                  BurgerKing
                  > > roof can
                  > > > be an LZ/TL"
                  > > >
                  > > > Well, If that`s your prima being sold, at least don`t fill it
                  with
                  > > words like That !
                  > > >  
                  > > > You`d better give up and call it a joke :)
                  > > >  
                  > > >  
                  > > >  
                  > > >  
                  > > >  
                  > > >  
                  > > >  
                  > > >  
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > > --- On Mon, 12/1/08, Terry Lutke <tllutke52@> wrote:
                  > > >
                  > > > From: Terry Lutke <tllutke52@>
                  > > > Subject: [ppgbiglist] Re: Wing Selection - Safety vs Performance
                  > > > To: ppgbiglist@yahoogroups.com
                  > > > Date: Monday, December 1, 2008, 4:15 AM
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > > I've read that one mans diaper is another mans wing, besides a
                  1.5
                  > > > sink offers short field landing potential; even a BurgerKing
                  roof
                  > > can
                  > > > be an LZ/TL
                  > > > --- In ppgbiglist@yahoogro ups.com, zebur mercan
                  <zmercan21@ ..>
                  > > wrote:
                  > > > >
                  > > > >  Heh heee... !
                  > > > >  
                  > > > > 1.5m/s min sink rate, L/D is around  5.0,  38 Km top speed,
                  > > > And  Prima AKA Pampers in some EU countries :) 
                  > > > >  
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > > --- On Mon, 12/1/08, Terry Lutke <tllutke52@ ..> wrote:
                  > > > >
                  > > > > From: Terry Lutke <tllutke52@ ..>
                  > > > > Subject: [ppgbiglist] Re: Wing Selection - Safety vs
                  Performance
                  > > > > To: ppgbiglist@yahoogro ups.com
                  > > > > Date: Monday, December 1, 2008, 1:06 AM
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > > Ah here we go...
                  > > > > au contraire btw regarding the Prima, it is seeing a resurge
                  in
                  > > > sales
                  > > > > because of it's newbie friendly status. A glider steady for
                  > > newb's
                  > > > > and trusty when you're rusty..
                  > > > >
                  > > > > TerryL
                  > > > >
                  > > > > --- In ppgbiglist@yahoogro ups.com, zebur mercan
                  <zmercan21@ ..>
                  > > > wrote:
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > >I am debating between four wings: Apco Prima, Apco Thrust,
                  > > Uturn
                  > > > > > >Emotion and Advance Epsilon.
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > Hi Chris,
                  > > > > >  
                  > > > > > You are comparing apples to spanners :)
                  > > > > >  
                  > > > > > Date,class,price. .. nothing is fair comparison !!
                  > > > > >  
                  > > > > > Apco prima and Epsilon are ancient wings and if you are not
                  > > paid
                  > > > > to take them,don`t touch them :)  
                  > > > > >  
                  > > > > > Thrust is older and wasn`t anything special from the day
                  one!
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > Between theese four, DHV-1 Emotion will be the safest for
                  you
                  > > but
                  > > > > if you are not a compleate beginer,you` d better broaden your
                  > > > search a
                  > > > > little more.
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > Cheers
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > Zebur
                  > > > > >  
                  > > > > >  
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > --- On Sat, 11/29/08, noodlydoo <noodlydoo@ ..> wrote:
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > From: noodlydoo <noodlydoo@ ..>
                  > > > > > Subject: [ppgbiglist] Wing Selection - Safety vs Performance
                  > > > > > To: ppgbiglist@yahoogro ups.com
                  > > > > > Date: Saturday, November 29, 2008, 9:23 PM
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > Just joined the group, wanted to say hello and ask a
                  question.
                  > > My
                  > > > > > background first. I've flown ppg w/ trike a couple of times
                  > > (but
                  > > > not
                  > > > > > much) on a la Mouette and a Fresh Breeze Skip 1. Flew an old
                  > > > > > Pro-Design Classic wing (back in the mid 90's) and the
                  original
                  > > > > Reflex
                  > > > > > wing. Switched over to PPC's and flew about 100 hours under
                  a
                  > > > > Quantum
                  > > > > > OC500 wing, but also took some instruction under various
                  other
                  > > > > wings,
                  > > > > > including the Chiron elliptical when it first came out.
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > Ok, enough about me....
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > After taking a sabitical from PPC for a couple of years,
                  I'm
                  > > > ready
                  > > > > to
                  > > > > > get back into the air. I've decided to go PPG instead of
                  PPC for
                  > > > > > several reasons, and am having a heck of time deciding on
                  > > > equipment.
                  > > > > > So, I thought I would have you gents (and lady's) weigh in
                  on
                  > > the
                  > > > > most
                  > > > > > important choice....my wing.
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > I'm more of a hands free kinda pilot. I like to cruise and
                  look
                  > > > > down,
                  > > > > > fly through the fields, etc. Not an active pilot and I know
                  it.
                  > > > > (isn't
                  > > > > > it a strength to know your weakness?)
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > I should also mention I tend to fly at the end of the day
                  in
                  > > calm
                  > > > > > conditions.
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > I am debating between four wings: Apco Prima, Apco Thrust,
                  Uturn
                  > > > > > Emotion and Advance Epsilon.
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > My thoughts on the Prima is that it has a high sink rate
                  and
                  > > very
                  > > > > > large cells that are probably much more likely to fly like
                  a
                  > > PPC
                  > > > > wing.
                  > > > > > I calculated its glide at about 6 which would be in line
                  with
                  > > the
                  > > > > > current ellipticals on PPC. Now here is where I need
                  insight.
                  > > I'm
                  > > > > > trying to figure out, if a DHV 1 glider with a high glide
                  ratio
                  > > > like
                  > > > > > the emotion, if it were to take a forward tuck or
                  assymetrical,
                  > > > > would
                  > > > > > the Prima take that same collapse in the exact same
                  conditions?
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > I'm inclined to think that given such large cells and its
                  > > > > > inefficiency, its more likely to resist and type of
                  collapse
                  > > that
                  > > > > > would require pilot input than say a higer aspect ratio
                  wing
                  > > even
                  > > > > > though its DHV1.
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > I guess what I'm asking, is what wing is most likely to
                  keep me
                  > > > out
                  > > > > of
                  > > > > > that situation in the first place? Like I said, I tend to
                  fly
                  > > in
                  > > > > soft
                  > > > > > smooth air anyway, but that doesn't mean I don't glide into
                  the
                  > > > > > occasional rotor on landing or off a hill etc.
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > It appears like these DHV1 wings have become extremely high
                  > > > > > performance in the past 5 years, which for most pilots is a
                  > > great
                  > > > > > thing. Stability is the first and formost important factor.
                  For
                  > > > me,
                  > > > > > everything else is a distant second. Maybe hands off isn't
                  > > > realistic
                  > > > > > uder a PPG wing, in which case its back to the big
                  lumbering
                  > > PPC
                  > > > > world
                  > > > > > and the inefficiency of thier wings that make them so
                  > > inherintly
                  > > > > stable.
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > Any input appreciated.
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > Chris
                  > > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  > > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  > > >
                  > >
                  >
                • noodlydoo
                  Well, I read this last night, and for me just added more dimensions to the whole (in my head) debate. Its an article written by Mike Campbell Jones of
                  Message 8 of 23 , Dec 1, 2008
                    Well, I read this last night, and for me just added more dimensions to
                    the whole (in my head) debate. Its an article written by Mike Campbell
                    Jones of Paramania regarding testing of wings, and why he thinks DHV1
                    wings are actually becoming dangerious. Not sure I can agree with his
                    conclusions...I have to study more, but he does design wings....and I
                    don't :-)

                    His conclusions are towards the bottom:



                    Our Reflex technology and paramotoring

                    The biggest evolution in our sport, aside from improved engines and
                    better understanding of Paramotor frame geometry, is the introduction
                    of our reflex profiles, into wings developed specifically for powered
                    flight. It is now generally recognized that it has helped turn our
                    sport into a practical and relatively safe, fun form of flying.

                    :: What is Reflex Technology :: Video Demonstration :: Reflex
                    Certification ::



                    Some History
                    History has a habit of repeating itself. In the early eighties,
                    similar developments took place as pioneers of ultra light aircraft
                    bolted engines onto their existing hangliders. Whilst these early
                    ultralights flew ok, they were not ideal.
                    A wing designed for power had a completely different set of
                    requirements. A new breed of wing with stronger construction,
                    different handling and more stability, was born

                    I was privileged to have been part of these early pioneering days. My
                    name is Mike Campbell-Jones and for some inexplicable reason I was
                    imprinted with a passion for light weight flying machines. My
                    experience spans through hangliding, ultra-lights, general aviation,
                    gliding, ballooning and paragliding to present day paramotoring.
                    It proved particularly valuable when developing the original Reflex
                    paramotor wing in 1994.

                    Understanding Reflex technology
                    Reflex profiles are not new; they were first used extensively as far
                    back as the 1930’s in tailless aircraft, such as the Horten brothers
                    flying wings or the Fauvel tail-less glider, It provided these wings
                    with aerodynamic pitch stability, where there was none.
                    Hangliders also adopted reflex in profiles to give gliders a positive
                    trim. It improved safety, as it helped prevent tumbling. The effect
                    was simple enough, more reflex more pitch stability, though less speed
                    and performance as the angle of attack was increased.

                    But used in a paraglider Reflex profiles have a different effect.
                    Because unlike the hangliders or flying wings the angle of attack is
                    maintained through the lines connected to the pendulum weight of the
                    pilot suspended below, in the same way as a wing with a fuselage and a
                    tail-plane, acts as a lever, controlling the wing.
                    Reflex profile enhances this pitch stability, by adding an effective
                    elevator into the wing, whilst keeping the centre of lift/pressure
                    close to the leading edge. The wing loading is higher, as less of the
                    wings area is used for lift. So stability and speed are increased
                    without the need to change the wings angle of attack.
                    There are many other factors but the end result is there is also more
                    efficiency at speed and a greater speed range (a flatter polar curve).
                    So a bigger distance between the stall and cruising speeds and
                    generally less likelihood of being robbed of that precious air speed
                    in turbulence.
                    For paramotoring, this is an exciting development.


                    About stability
                    There are three types of stability necessary for any aircraft. Pitch,
                    Roll and Yaw.
                    They make up the 3 axis by which most aircraft are controllable in 3D
                    space. For paragliders the first two matter most, especially for those
                    developed for powered use, since the low slung mass of engine/pilot
                    and propellor thrust with all it’s associated gyroscopic and torque
                    effects. This means that enhanced stability in both pitch and roll are
                    even more vital than with non-powered paraglider wings.

                    Pitch stability -.
                    Inherent pitch stability is easily recognized in normal flight whilst
                    flying through thermals or areas of turbulence.

                    * If the aircraft pitches forward as it enters the thermal and
                    backwards as it exits. Then it is pitch positive.

                    * If the aircraft pitches backwards as it enters and forward as it
                    exits. Then it is pitch negative.

                    This movement is very noticeable on paragliders because the centre of
                    gravity (CG) is so far below the wing, a long way from the centre of
                    lift/pressure (CP) compared to most aircraft. Remember the traditional
                    fuselage and tail plane are replaced by the pendulum effect of the
                    pilot and engine unit (CG).

                    * Performance paragliders for maximum efficiency have a CP around
                    30% along the chord from the leading edge (fig 01), which makes them
                    inherently pitch negative. The wing’s stability is dependent on the
                    pendulum effect of the CG (pilot weight) to control the angle of
                    attack. In turbulence the CG (pilot weight) changes value. Imagine
                    flying an aircraft where the size of the elevator changes in flight!
                    This is why paragliding pilots are taught to fly actively, to
                    constantly control the pitch of the wing in turbulence with the brakes
                    - otherwise large changes in angle of attack can and do cause
                    collapses. Indeed, some wings are even designed with more sensitive
                    pitch control to enhance feedback in thermals.

                    * Low performance paragliders for beginners generally have more
                    pitch stability to reduce the amount of input a new pilot needs to
                    keep their wing open, this is considered safer. Designers generally
                    achieve this by using flatter wing sections, which results in the
                    centre of pressure being further forward - around 20% of the chord
                    (fig 02). This gives more stability, but the wing often remains pitch
                    negative.



                    * With a reflex wing section the centre of pressure is even
                    further forward, around 15-20% of the chord. (fig 03); with its built
                    in elevator the wing is now definitely pitch positive, so safer in
                    turbulence. This has proven ideal for Paramotor wings as it means the
                    pilot can fly safely with their hands off, as they do not need to fly
                    actively to maintain stability. In fact, when the brakes are pulled
                    pitch stability is partially reduced, as the reflex is removed and the
                    centre of pressure moves further back from the leading edge. As this
                    is the opposite behaviour of a normal paraglider, seasoned paraglider
                    pilots find this hard to accept.


                    Accelerated flight
                    Another major difference between a reflex wing and a traditional
                    paraglider occurs when the wing is accelerated with either the speed
                    bar, the trimmers, or both. Despite the change in angle of attack,
                    stability actually increases as more reflex is introduced, by pushing
                    the centre of pressure even further forward and creating more elevator
                    effect with the reflex. Combined with the extra speed, the wing cuts
                    through the turbulent air better.

                    Roll or spiral stability

                    A factor often over-looked when adding Paramotors to paragliders, is
                    that quite apart from the aircraft being able to fly in a straight
                    line, it is vital to make sure the craft is spirally positive.
                    Paramotors and trike units have many different attachment points and
                    propeller effects; so generally they need flatter front profiles (more
                    dihedral), for obvious safety reasons.
                    Most paragliders are designed and tested around a specific harness
                    width and pilot position. As it is, they sit on the boarder line,
                    partly because being close to spirally neutral is ideal for thermal
                    flying.





                    Spiral stability
                    It’s vital, and a factor often over-looked when adding a motor to
                    paragliders, to make sure the craft flies spirally positive (will
                    recover on its own from a spiral dive). The spiral stability of a wing
                    largely depends on whether the wing is anhedral or dihedral and its
                    centre of gravity. (Fig 04 shows how anhedral and dihedral works
                    relative to both an aeroplane and a paraglider wing and how it effects
                    spiral stability.)
                    Aeroplanes with anhedral have a negative profile angle, so their wing
                    tips are lower at the tips than the centre. They’re normally
                    associated with aircraft like fighter planes where a very high level
                    of manoeuvrability is important. However, these wings are so unstable
                    in flight that they usually require onboard computers to make the
                    precise adjustments needed to control them. The result is an aircraft
                    that is spirally unstable and, if put into a spiral, will tighten into
                    the dive and quickly become unrecoverable.
                    Aircraft that have completely flat wings have zero anhedral or
                    dihedral and are also very manoeuvrable. They fly on the edge of
                    stability and are excellent for aerobatics or situations where the
                    pilots are highly skilled and trained to handle them. They are
                    spirally neutral so will remain in a constant spiral that neither
                    tightens up nor opens out.
                    Aircraft that have a positive profile angle have their wing tips
                    higher than the centre of the wing, so dihral. Whilst being less
                    manoeuvrable they are easy and safe to fly and exit spins and spirals
                    without pilot input. 95% of aircraft are designed like this, for
                    obvious reasons. If the centre of gravity of a wing is moved lower,
                    like in the example of the Cessna 150 in Fig 04, a wing may then have
                    zero anhedral and still remain spirally positive. However it is
                    interesting to note that even with this classic design, when more
                    powerful engines are fitted, so more dihedral added.
                    Anhedral and dihedral in paraglider design has the same effect and
                    makes a wing spirally stable or unstable. It is largely controlled
                    through the arc of the wing. If a designer pulls the wing tips closer
                    they create a negative radial arc and the wing becomes anhedral and
                    consequently spirally unstable. A constant radial arc produces a
                    spirally neutral wing, which like its equivalent in aeroplane designs
                    will create a wing that is excellent for acrobatics and thermal
                    flying, but sits right on the edge of stability. In order for a
                    paraglider to remain spirally stable the profile has to have a
                    positive radial arc with dihedral. It’s possible to have less dihedral
                    because, as with the Cessna 150 in fig 04, our centre of gravity is
                    much lower than the wing, however if the arc changes from dihedral to
                    anhedral the wing will become spirally unstable.

                    why PARAGLIDER certification isn’t working with reflex or power
                    I have three main concerns regarding the current paraglider
                    certification tests: the lack of measurement of a wing’s actual pitch
                    stability, the emphasis of frontal collapses as the main measure of
                    safety and the limited level of spiral stability testing.
                    Firstly, there are no current tests for actual pitch stability.
                    Secondly, in order to meet the current frontal collapse recovery tests
                    we would have to alter our designs in ways that make them more
                    unstable in other areas. As in reality reflex wings are virtually
                    impossible to frontal collapse, putting such a great emphasis on
                    recovery, to the detriment of security in more commonly occurring
                    situations such as spiral stability, is misguided.
                    It is beyond doubt that the new breed of reflex profile paragliders
                    are more collapse resistant than classic paraglider wings, however,
                    the current certification systems are designed around paraglider
                    technology: they fail to take into account that, whilst it’s
                    imperative to test a paraglider’s reaction to a frontal collapse, as
                    they do collapse, a reflex wing doesn’t. A natural frontal collapse on
                    a reflex is about as likely as a wing falling off an aeroplane â€" yes
                    it can happen, and the consequences could be serious, but it is
                    incredibly unlikely. However, when the certification authorities do
                    manage to force a reflex wing to frontal collapse, it will naturally
                    have a more dynamic reaction. This is considered to be a valid measure
                    of a wing’s security, as it is when applied to a classic paraglider
                    that collapses easily, however, with an inherently collapse resistant
                    reflex wing, it simply isn’t.
                    Thirdly, whilst paragliders with a negative profile angle are spirally
                    unstable, they behave less aggressively during the asymmetric
                    deflation tests currently used in the paraglider certification system.
                    Therefore, beginner’s paragliders, like DHV 1 or CEN A graded gliders,
                    are now being designed with more anhedral or negative radial arc to
                    pass these tests.
                    I believe this is a dangerous road for designers to follow as these
                    wings sit right on the edge of spiral stability and minute changes in
                    the harness and pilot position can cause them to become spirally
                    unstable and lock into spiral dives.
                    Most paragliders are designed to be close to spirally neutral as it is
                    ideal for thermal flying. They are also designed and tested with the
                    hangpoints set at defined distance apart, normally 42 cm. However, if
                    the pilot tightens their harness chest straps just a couple of
                    centimeters narrower than the tested width they change the arc of
                    their wing. The wing changes from dihedral to anhedral and becomes
                    spirally unstable. Over the last few years there has been an increase
                    in paragliding fatalities with modern beginner wings, where pilots
                    have tightened their chest straps to feel more comfortable in rough
                    air, then entered spirals to descend, from which they never recover
                    from. We are starting to see the same thing in paramotoring. Knowing
                    that hangpoint distances are so critical for paragliders designed on
                    the edge of spiral stability how, with all the different paramotor
                    hangpoint systems, propeller effects and wing loadings, how can we
                    safely entertain the current test system?
                    Further to that, wings designed to be inherently safer for powered
                    use, need to use flatter front profiles for more positive spiral
                    stability and/or use wing sections that are more pitch stable and
                    collapse resistant - this includes beginner paragliders and reflex
                    wings. However during certification test these wings collapse
                    differently from the way DHV, DULV or EN demand in their asymmetric
                    tests (Fig 05). They end up having much less wing area left flying
                    than higher performance wings, which makes them tend to turn more
                    during the recovery process â€" a key measurement during paraglider
                    certification. The solution many designers are forced to take is to
                    build in more anhedral, which takes the wing closer to spiral
                    instability. Or increase the distance between wing and pilot which
                    increases G-forces in spirals and the risk of twists, especially with
                    propellors.

                    Conclusion
                    The current paraglider wing certification is unable to truly assess
                    the security of a reflex profile paraglider. There are some areas of
                    relevance between normal paraglider tests and paramotor wing tests;
                    however, other areas are totally inappropriate for the direction our
                    sport is going. In fact, the efforts made to pass the current tests
                    are leading to a position where we could soon have thousands of wings
                    flying that have a serious security issue with spiral instability.
                    Paramania, over the last couple of years has made a variety of
                    proposals to the main testing authorities in attempts to make the
                    paragliding certification process more relevant; however, so far none
                    of our proposals have produced any clear response and very few of our
                    proposed tests have even been carried out.
                    We are naturally disappointed as we believe the purpose of any testing
                    body should be to raise levels of safety and set standards for the
                    general public. For this it must be capable of evolving quickly to
                    meet the demands of the new technology. Otherwise what value does it have?
                    As other manufacturers join us in the use of reflex in wings and
                    paramotoring continues to grow rapidly and we are concerned for future
                    safety. And feel its time that wing test bodies woke up!

                    Article by our designer Mike Campbell-Jones ::Father of Reflex wing
                    Technology::









                    --- In ppgbiglist@yahoogroups.com, "Terry Lutke" <tllutke52@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > James;
                    >
                    > I'm considering offering a generous Prima buy-back/tradein offer with
                    > my CheapTrike.
                    >
                    > TerryL
                    >
                    > --- In ppgbiglist@yahoogroups.com, "aldersonjames2002"
                    > <aldersonjames2002@> wrote:
                    > >
                    > > Chad (of TrikeBuggy fame) also told me that the Prisma/Prima3 is a
                    > > perfect wing to get started triking on, although the certification
                    > of
                    > > even the 33m is only 244 lbs max and thats not much more than I
                    > weigh
                    > > without any equipment. He also said that it would be really hard to
                    > > pick a DHV1 wing these days that would be a bad wing. Eric Dufour
                    > also
                    > > had great things to say about the Prisma/Prima3, but was also honest
                    > > that it wasn't a very fun wing.
                    > >
                    > > I wonder if anyone has ever thought about renting a Prima out as a
                    > > training wing so you can use it for your first 10 flights or so and
                    > > then send it back and pay for the time you had it. Everyone seems to
                    > > say that its also a good wing because it lasts for so long because
                    > of
                    > > its construction and materials.
                    > >
                    > > James
                    > >
                    > > --- In ppgbiglist@yahoogroups.com, "Terry Lutke" <tllutke52@> wrote:
                    > > >
                    > > > Admit it Zebur..BurgerKing roofs aside, if I were training your
                    > > > sister you would be quite happy if I were using a Prima3 at my
                    > school
                    > > > (which I do BTW)
                    > > >
                    > > > Terry
                    > > >
                    > > > --- In ppgbiglist@yahoogroups.com, zebur mercan <zmercan21@>
                    > wrote:
                    > > > >
                    > > > > C`mon Terry ....!
                    > > > > �
                    > > > > Hah HAAA...� :)
                    > > > > �
                    > > > > �There are lots of modern beginner wings and�great intermediate
                    > > > reflex/non reflex wings out there,lots to choose from...����all
                    > of
                    > > > them are very comparable and well improved since Prima was
                    > designed
                    > > > 15 years ago.�
                    > > > > �
                    > > > > "a 1.5 sink offers short field landing potential; even a
                    > BurgerKing
                    > > > roof can
                    > > > > be an LZ/TL"
                    > > > >
                    > > > > Well,�If that`s your prima�being sold, at least don`t fill it
                    > with
                    > > > words like�That !
                    > > > > �
                    > > > > You`d better give up and call it a joke :)
                    > > > > �
                    > > > > �
                    > > > > �
                    > > > > �
                    > > > > �
                    > > > > �
                    > > > > �
                    > > > > �
                    > > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > > > --- On Mon, 12/1/08, Terry Lutke <tllutke52@> wrote:
                    > > > >
                    > > > > From: Terry Lutke <tllutke52@>
                    > > > > Subject: [ppgbiglist] Re: Wing Selection - Safety vs Performance
                    > > > > To: ppgbiglist@yahoogroups.com
                    > > > > Date: Monday, December 1, 2008, 4:15 AM
                    > > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > > > I've read that one mans diaper is another mans wing, besides a
                    > 1.5
                    > > > > sink offers short field landing potential; even a BurgerKing
                    > roof
                    > > > can
                    > > > > be an LZ/TL
                    > > > > --- In ppgbiglist@yahoogro ups.com, zebur mercan
                    > <zmercan21@ ..>
                    > > > wrote:
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > �Heh heee... !
                    > > > > > �
                    > > > > > 1.5m/s min sink rate, L/D is around��5.0,� 38 Km top speed,
                    > > > > And��Prima�AKA Pampers in some EU countries :)�
                    > > > > > �
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > --- On Mon, 12/1/08, Terry Lutke <tllutke52@ ..> wrote:
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > From: Terry Lutke <tllutke52@ ..>
                    > > > > > Subject: [ppgbiglist] Re: Wing Selection - Safety vs
                    > Performance
                    > > > > > To: ppgbiglist@yahoogro ups.com
                    > > > > > Date: Monday, December 1, 2008, 1:06 AM
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > Ah here we go...
                    > > > > > au contraire btw regarding the Prima, it is seeing a resurge
                    > in
                    > > > > sales
                    > > > > > because of it's newbie friendly status. A glider steady for
                    > > > newb's
                    > > > > > and trusty when you're rusty..
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > TerryL
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > --- In ppgbiglist@yahoogro ups.com, zebur mercan
                    > <zmercan21@ ..>
                    > > > > wrote:
                    > > > > > >
                    > > > > > > >I am debating between four wings: Apco Prima, Apco Thrust,
                    > > > Uturn
                    > > > > > > >Emotion and Advance Epsilon.
                    > > > > > >
                    > > > > > > Hi Chris,
                    > > > > > > �
                    > > > > > > You are comparing apples to�spanners :)
                    > > > > > > �
                    > > > > > > Date,class,price. .. nothing is fair comparison !!
                    > > > > > > �
                    > > > > > > Apco prima and Epsilon are ancient wings and if you�are not
                    > > > paid
                    > > > > > to�take them,don`t touch them :)��
                    > > > > > > �
                    > > > > > > Thrust is older and wasn`t anything special from the day
                    > one!
                    > > > > > >
                    > > > > > > Between theese four,�DHV-1 Emotion will be the safest for
                    > you
                    > > > but
                    > > > > > if you are not a compleate beginer,you` d better broaden your
                    > > > > search a
                    > > > > > little more.
                    > > > > > >
                    > > > > > > Cheers
                    > > > > > >
                    > > > > > >
                    > > > > > > Zebur
                    > > > > > > �
                    > > > > > > �
                    > > > > > >
                    > > > > > >
                    > > > > > > --- On Sat, 11/29/08, noodlydoo <noodlydoo@ ..> wrote:
                    > > > > > >
                    > > > > > > From: noodlydoo <noodlydoo@ ..>
                    > > > > > > Subject: [ppgbiglist] Wing Selection - Safety vs Performance
                    > > > > > > To: ppgbiglist@yahoogro ups.com
                    > > > > > > Date: Saturday, November 29, 2008, 9:23 PM
                    > > > > > >
                    > > > > > >
                    > > > > > >
                    > > > > > >
                    > > > > > >
                    > > > > > >
                    > > > > > > Just joined the group, wanted to say hello and ask a
                    > question.
                    > > > My
                    > > > > > > background first. I've flown ppg w/ trike a couple of times
                    > > > (but
                    > > > > not
                    > > > > > > much) on a la Mouette and a Fresh Breeze Skip 1. Flew an old
                    > > > > > > Pro-Design Classic wing (back in the mid 90's) and the
                    > original
                    > > > > > Reflex
                    > > > > > > wing. Switched over to PPC's and flew about 100 hours under
                    > a
                    > > > > > Quantum
                    > > > > > > OC500 wing, but also took some instruction under various
                    > other
                    > > > > > wings,
                    > > > > > > including the Chiron elliptical when it first came out.
                    > > > > > >
                    > > > > > > Ok, enough about me....
                    > > > > > >
                    > > > > > > After taking a sabitical from PPC for a couple of years,
                    > I'm
                    > > > > ready
                    > > > > > to
                    > > > > > > get back into the air. I've decided to go PPG instead of
                    > PPC for
                    > > > > > > several reasons, and am having a heck of time deciding on
                    > > > > equipment.
                    > > > > > > So, I thought I would have you gents (and lady's) weigh in
                    > on
                    > > > the
                    > > > > > most
                    > > > > > > important choice....my wing.
                    > > > > > >
                    > > > > > > I'm more of a hands free kinda pilot. I like to cruise and
                    > look
                    > > > > > down,
                    > > > > > > fly through the fields, etc. Not an active pilot and I know
                    > it.
                    > > > > > (isn't
                    > > > > > > it a strength to know your weakness?)
                    > > > > > >
                    > > > > > > I should also mention I tend to fly at the end of the day
                    > in
                    > > > calm
                    > > > > > > conditions.
                    > > > > > >
                    > > > > > > I am debating between four wings: Apco Prima, Apco Thrust,
                    > Uturn
                    > > > > > > Emotion and Advance Epsilon.
                    > > > > > >
                    > > > > > > My thoughts on the Prima is that it has a high sink rate
                    > and
                    > > > very
                    > > > > > > large cells that are probably much more likely to fly like
                    > a
                    > > > PPC
                    > > > > > wing.
                    > > > > > > I calculated its glide at about 6 which would be in line
                    > with
                    > > > the
                    > > > > > > current ellipticals on PPC. Now here is where I need
                    > insight.
                    > > > I'm
                    > > > > > > trying to figure out, if a DHV 1 glider with a high glide
                    > ratio
                    > > > > like
                    > > > > > > the emotion, if it were to take a forward tuck or
                    > assymetrical,
                    > > > > > would
                    > > > > > > the Prima take that same collapse in the exact same
                    > conditions?
                    > > > > > >
                    > > > > > > I'm inclined to think that given such large cells and its
                    > > > > > > inefficiency, its more likely to resist and type of
                    > collapse
                    > > > that
                    > > > > > > would require pilot input than say a higer aspect ratio
                    > wing
                    > > > even
                    > > > > > > though its DHV1.
                    > > > > > >
                    > > > > > > I guess what I'm asking, is what wing is most likely to
                    > keep me
                    > > > > out
                    > > > > > of
                    > > > > > > that situation in the first place? Like I said, I tend to
                    > fly
                    > > > in
                    > > > > > soft
                    > > > > > > smooth air anyway, but that doesn't mean I don't glide into
                    > the
                    > > > > > > occasional rotor on landing or off a hill etc.
                    > > > > > >
                    > > > > > > It appears like these DHV1 wings have become extremely high
                    > > > > > > performance in the past 5 years, which for most pilots is a
                    > > > great
                    > > > > > > thing. Stability is the first and formost important factor.
                    > For
                    > > > > me,
                    > > > > > > everything else is a distant second. Maybe hands off isn't
                    > > > > realistic
                    > > > > > > uder a PPG wing, in which case its back to the big
                    > lumbering
                    > > > PPC
                    > > > > > world
                    > > > > > > and the inefficiency of thier wings that make them so
                    > > > inherintly
                    > > > > > stable.
                    > > > > > >
                    > > > > > > Any input appreciated.
                    > > > > > >
                    > > > > > > Chris
                    > > > > > >
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    > > > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    > > > >
                    > > >
                    > >
                    >
                  • abresden
                    All I can say to anyone starting out is cheapness should take a back seat to functionality. Never buy anything less than a good quality wing with exceptional
                    Message 9 of 23 , Dec 1, 2008
                      All I can say to anyone starting out is cheapness should take a back
                      seat to functionality. Never buy anything less than a good quality
                      wing with exceptional launching characteristics. Watch out for used
                      gear since you have no idea who blended what. Pay the money for a
                      certified inspection of all the lines and fabric if your buying used.

                      All those fancy glider brands I never heard of since they are so old
                      probably equate to eating some dirt especially if you purchase a 15
                      year old dog of a wing. I prefer to spend my time flying trouble free
                      and therefore I fly a super easy to inflate and exceptional handling
                      wing like a Power Play Sting or an Axis Power Pluto. Both of these
                      wings are also EXCELLENT for free flying and can be purchased with
                      dual hookin points.

                      People are going to do what they are going to do but trying to save a
                      buck by not getting proper training, buying cheap junk and not
                      spending the hours and hours required to become 100% profficient at
                      kiting always has the same result.

                      DOUBLE THE PRICE AND TRIPLE THE HASTLE

                      If you want to get into PPG the right way then go spend a week with a
                      guy like Eric DuFour getting trained properly. This is how you save
                      time and money. The cost of your training will be far less than the
                      replacement cost of all your cheaply bought broken equipment provided
                      you don't have any hospital bills to go with that.
                    • Bud Johnson
                      ... Hi Chris, You have had some good responses to your original post, but they have missed the point. And from reading your posts, you are not aware of it.
                      Message 10 of 23 , Dec 1, 2008
                        --- In ppgbiglist@yahoogroups.com, "noodlydoo" <noodlydoo@...> wrote:
                        >
                        > I should update my last statement; I looked at the 34m and it had a
                        > few more C ratings in other areas.





                        Hi Chris,

                        You have had some good responses to your original post, but they have
                        missed 'the' point. And from reading your posts, you are not aware
                        of it. But maybe I missed one of the responses, and the point was
                        covered.

                        You wrote:

                        "Stability is the first and formost important factor. For me,
                        everything else is a distant second."


                        You were also saying that part of the definition of stability for you
                        was collapse resistance and hands off flying,

                        "Maybe hands off isn't realistic uder a PPG wing, in which case its
                        back to the big lumbering PPC world and the inefficiency of thier
                        wings that make them so inherintly stable."



                        If the most important factor is stability and collapse resistance, it
                        is a Reflex wing, period.


                        You wrote some things that were not correct like the above quote and
                        another:

                        "I'm inclined to think that given such large cells and its
                        inefficiency (Apco Prima), its more likely to resist and type of
                        collapse that could require pilot input than say a higer aspect ratio
                        wing even though its DHV1."


                        First, it is not "inefficiency" per se that makes a wing "so
                        inherently" stable. A reflex wing is more efficient (l/d) than a
                        Prima, but can be less efficient depending on how much reflex that
                        the ppg pilot dials in. It can be more efficient and stable than a
                        Prima, just depends on trimmer setting.

                        The aspect ratio of most reflex wings is higher than a Prima.


                        You wrote something that again says what is most important to you:

                        "Like I said, I tend to fly in soft smooth air anyway, but that
                        doesn't mean I don't glide into the occasional rotor on landing or
                        off a hill etc."


                        A reserve parachute is worthless with a low level collapse in the
                        situation you mentioned. The goal is to not have the collapse. How
                        a wing reacts in 'real' turbulence is NOT tested. Wing certification
                        is done in smooth air. More than one or two pilots have been hurt,
                        handicapped and killed with low level collapses.

                        The wings you cite don't compare with a reflex wing trim out. Awhile
                        back I asked on several forums if anyone had ever had a collapse trim
                        out with a reflex wing trim out and I specified with ones (there are
                        so called semi reflex wings, etc. now). I also asked if anyone had
                        ever heard of one. There was only one, a benign 30% (kind of a wing
                        tip collapse). Reflex wings have been around for over 10 years.
                        Still, there is air out there as we all know that will destroy any
                        and all aircraft.


                        You wrote:

                        "Maybe hands off isn't realistic uder a PPG wing"


                        You don't actively fly a reflex wing trim out, or trim in some
                        depending on the specific reflex wing.


                        So what is the downside of reflex wings?

                        The very best handling wings are not reflex wings, but all of them
                        are a lot more fun that a Prima! All of them except for the original
                        Reflex wing.

                        If you want a very fast wing with speed bar activated, it is not a
                        reflex wing because of the reflex (drag).

                        If you want a low sink rate, it may not be a reflex wing - depends
                        mostly on which reflex wing. If it is a reflex wing with a low sink
                        rate, it will not have any reflex trimmed that way (slow). But
                        again, the pilot can just dial in more reflex as desired, needed.


                        It appears that with your application as written, it is a reflex
                        wing. The question is simply which one.

                        Hope this helps.

                        Bud








                        >
                        >
                        > --- In ppgbiglist@yahoogroups.com, "noodlydoo" <noodlydoo@> wrote:
                        > >
                        > > Thanks,
                        > >
                        > > The only other wing on my list is possibly a Dudek Synthesis. It
                        is
                        > > all CEN A except for a B on spiral recovery and a C on recover
                        from
                        > > Assymetrical....although, it appears much less likely to take the
                        > > assymetrical in the first place. It appears to be a fairly well
                        > > received glider by the flying community. It would be nice to find
                        a
                        > > DHV1 Reflex glider though.
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > > --- In ppgbiglist@yahoogroups.com, "Terry Lutke" <tllutke52@>
                        wrote:
                        > > >
                        > > > I've read that one mans diaper is another mans wing, besides a
                        1.5
                        > > > sink offers short field landing potential; even a BurgerKing
                        roof can
                        > > > be an LZ/TL
                        > > > --- In ppgbiglist@yahoogroups.com, zebur mercan <zmercan21@>
                        wrote:
                        > > > >
                        > > > >  Heh heee... !
                        > > > >  
                        > > > > 1.5m/s min sink rate, L/D is around  5.0,  38 Km top speed,
                        > > > And  Prima AKA Pampers in some EU countries :) 
                        > > > >  
                        > > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > > > --- On Mon, 12/1/08, Terry Lutke <tllutke52@> wrote:
                        > > > >
                        > > > > From: Terry Lutke <tllutke52@>
                        > > > > Subject: [ppgbiglist] Re: Wing Selection - Safety vs
                        Performance
                        > > > > To: ppgbiglist@yahoogroups.com
                        > > > > Date: Monday, December 1, 2008, 1:06 AM
                        > > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > > > Ah here we go...
                        > > > > au contraire btw regarding the Prima, it is seeing a resurge
                        in
                        > > > sales
                        > > > > because of it's newbie friendly status. A glider steady for
                        newb's
                        > > > > and trusty when you're rusty..
                        > > > >
                        > > > > TerryL
                        > > > >
                        > > > > --- In ppgbiglist@yahoogro ups.com, zebur mercan
                        <zmercan21@ ..>
                        > > > wrote:
                        > > > > >
                        > > > > > >I am debating between four wings: Apco Prima, Apco Thrust,
                        Uturn
                        > > > > > >Emotion and Advance Epsilon.
                        > > > > >
                        > > > > > Hi Chris,
                        > > > > >  
                        > > > > > You are comparing apples to spanners :)
                        > > > > >  
                        > > > > > Date,class,price. .. nothing is fair comparison !!
                        > > > > >  
                        > > > > > Apco prima and Epsilon are ancient wings and if you are not
                        paid
                        > > > > to take them,don`t touch them :)  
                        > > > > >  
                        > > > > > Thrust is older and wasn`t anything special from the day
                        one!
                        > > > > >
                        > > > > > Between theese four, DHV-1 Emotion will be the safest for
                        you but
                        > > > > if you are not a compleate beginer,you` d better broaden your
                        > > > search a
                        > > > > little more.
                        > > > > >
                        > > > > > Cheers
                        > > > > >
                        > > > > >
                        > > > > > Zebur
                        > > > > >  
                        > > > > >  
                        > > > > >
                        > > > > >
                        > > > > > --- On Sat, 11/29/08, noodlydoo <noodlydoo@ ..> wrote:
                        > > > > >
                        > > > > > From: noodlydoo <noodlydoo@ ..>
                        > > > > > Subject: [ppgbiglist] Wing Selection - Safety vs Performance
                        > > > > > To: ppgbiglist@yahoogro ups.com
                        > > > > > Date: Saturday, November 29, 2008, 9:23 PM
                        > > > > >
                        > > > > >
                        > > > > >
                        > > > > >
                        > > > > >
                        > > > > >
                        > > > > > Just joined the group, wanted to say hello and ask a
                        question. My
                        > > > > > background first. I've flown ppg w/ trike a couple of times
                        (but
                        > > > not
                        > > > > > much) on a la Mouette and a Fresh Breeze Skip 1. Flew an old
                        > > > > > Pro-Design Classic wing (back in the mid 90's) and the
                        original
                        > > > > Reflex
                        > > > > > wing. Switched over to PPC's and flew about 100 hours under
                        a
                        > > > > Quantum
                        > > > > > OC500 wing, but also took some instruction under various
                        other
                        > > > > wings,
                        > > > > > including the Chiron elliptical when it first came out.
                        > > > > >
                        > > > > > Ok, enough about me....
                        > > > > >
                        > > > > > After taking a sabitical from PPC for a couple of years,
                        I'm
                        > > > ready
                        > > > > to
                        > > > > > get back into the air. I've decided to go PPG instead of
                        PPC for
                        > > > > > several reasons, and am having a heck of time deciding on
                        > > > equipment.
                        > > > > > So, I thought I would have you gents (and lady's) weigh in
                        on the
                        > > > > most
                        > > > > > important choice....my wing.
                        > > > > >
                        > > > > > I'm more of a hands free kinda pilot. I like to cruise and
                        look
                        > > > > down,
                        > > > > > fly through the fields, etc. Not an active pilot and I know
                        it.
                        > > > > (isn't
                        > > > > > it a strength to know your weakness?)
                        > > > > >
                        > > > > > I should also mention I tend to fly at the end of the day
                        in calm
                        > > > > > conditions.
                        > > > > >
                        > > > > > I am debating between four wings: Apco Prima, Apco Thrust,
                        Uturn
                        > > > > > Emotion and Advance Epsilon.
                        > > > > >
                        > > > > > My thoughts on the Prima is that it has a high sink rate
                        and very
                        > > > > > large cells that are probably much more likely to fly like
                        a PPC
                        > > > > wing.
                        > > > > > I calculated its glide at about 6 which would be in line
                        with the
                        > > > > > current ellipticals on PPC. Now here is where I need
                        insight. I'm
                        > > > > > trying to figure out, if a DHV 1 glider with a high glide
                        ratio
                        > > > like
                        > > > > > the emotion, if it were to take a forward tuck or
                        assymetrical,
                        > > > > would
                        > > > > > the Prima take that same collapse in the exact same
                        conditions?
                        > > > > >
                        > > > > > I'm inclined to think that given such large cells and its
                        > > > > > inefficiency, its more likely to resist and type of
                        collapse that
                        > > > > > would require pilot input than say a higer aspect ratio
                        wing even
                        > > > > > though its DHV1.
                        > > > > >
                        > > > > > I guess what I'm asking, is what wing is most likely to
                        keep me
                        > > > out
                        > > > > of
                        > > > > > that situation in the first place? Like I said, I tend to
                        fly in
                        > > > > soft
                        > > > > > smooth air anyway, but that doesn't mean I don't glide into
                        the
                        > > > > > occasional rotor on landing or off a hill etc.
                        > > > > >
                        > > > > > It appears like these DHV1 wings have become extremely high
                        > > > > > performance in the past 5 years, which for most pilots is a
                        great
                        > > > > > thing. Stability is the first and formost important factor.
                        For
                        > > > me,
                        > > > > > everything else is a distant second. Maybe hands off isn't
                        > > > realistic
                        > > > > > uder a PPG wing, in which case its back to the big
                        lumbering PPC
                        > > > > world
                        > > > > > and the inefficiency of thier wings that make them so
                        inherintly
                        > > > > stable.
                        > > > > >
                        > > > > > Any input appreciated.
                        > > > > >
                        > > > > > Chris
                        > > > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        > > > >
                        > > >
                        > >
                        >
                      • Bud Johnson
                        ... to ... Campbell ... DHV1 ... his ... I ... Hello again Chris, I m lazy and did not reread the below. I read it soon after Michael wrote the article. By
                        Message 11 of 23 , Dec 1, 2008
                          --- In ppgbiglist@yahoogroups.com, "noodlydoo" <noodlydoo@...> wrote:
                          >
                          > Well, I read this last night, and for me just added more dimensions
                          to
                          > the whole (in my head) debate. Its an article written by Mike
                          Campbell
                          > Jones of Paramania regarding testing of wings, and why he thinks
                          DHV1
                          > wings are actually becoming dangerious. Not sure I can agree with
                          his
                          > conclusions...I have to study more, but he does design wings....and
                          I
                          > don't :-)





                          Hello again Chris,

                          I'm lazy and did not reread the below. I read it soon after Michael
                          wrote the article.

                          By simply saying Michael said that DHV 1 wings are actually becoming
                          dangerous is misleading. He was talking about how rating
                          requirements and how a wing designer can achieve them can result in
                          some problems resulting in some trade-offs.

                          Bud


                          >
                          > His conclusions are towards the bottom:
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          > Our Reflex technology and paramotoring
                          >
                          > The biggest evolution in our sport, aside from improved engines and
                          > better understanding of Paramotor frame geometry, is the
                          introduction
                          > of our reflex profiles, into wings developed specifically for
                          powered
                          > flight. It is now generally recognized that it has helped turn our
                          > sport into a practical and relatively safe, fun form of flying.
                          >
                          > :: What is Reflex Technology :: Video Demonstration :: Reflex
                          > Certification ::
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          > Some History
                          > History has a habit of repeating itself. In the early eighties,
                          > similar developments took place as pioneers of ultra light aircraft
                          > bolted engines onto their existing hangliders. Whilst these early
                          > ultralights flew ok, they were not ideal.
                          > A wing designed for power had a completely different set of
                          > requirements. A new breed of wing with stronger construction,
                          > different handling and more stability, was born
                          >
                          > I was privileged to have been part of these early pioneering days.
                          My
                          > name is Mike Campbell-Jones and for some inexplicable reason I was
                          > imprinted with a passion for light weight flying machines. My
                          > experience spans through hangliding, ultra-lights, general aviation,
                          > gliding, ballooning and paragliding to present day paramotoring.
                          > It proved particularly valuable when developing the original Reflex
                          > paramotor wing in 1994.
                          >
                          > Understanding Reflex technology
                          > Reflex profiles are not new; they were first used extensively as far
                          > back as the 1930’s in tailless aircraft, such as the Horten
                          brothers
                          > flying wings or the Fauvel tail-less glider, It provided these wings
                          > with aerodynamic pitch stability, where there was none.
                          > Hangliders also adopted reflex in profiles to give gliders a
                          positive
                          > trim. It improved safety, as it helped prevent tumbling. The effect
                          > was simple enough, more reflex more pitch stability, though less
                          speed
                          > and performance as the angle of attack was increased.
                          >
                          > But used in a paraglider Reflex profiles have a different effect.
                          > Because unlike the hangliders or flying wings the angle of attack is
                          > maintained through the lines connected to the pendulum weight of the
                          > pilot suspended below, in the same way as a wing with a fuselage
                          and a
                          > tail-plane, acts as a lever, controlling the wing.
                          > Reflex profile enhances this pitch stability, by adding an effective
                          > elevator into the wing, whilst keeping the centre of lift/pressure
                          > close to the leading edge. The wing loading is higher, as less of
                          the
                          > wings area is used for lift. So stability and speed are increased
                          > without the need to change the wings angle of attack.
                          > There are many other factors but the end result is there is also
                          more
                          > efficiency at speed and a greater speed range (a flatter polar
                          curve).
                          > So a bigger distance between the stall and cruising speeds and
                          > generally less likelihood of being robbed of that precious air speed
                          > in turbulence.
                          > For paramotoring, this is an exciting development.
                          >
                          >
                          > About stability
                          > There are three types of stability necessary for any aircraft.
                          Pitch,
                          > Roll and Yaw.
                          > They make up the 3 axis by which most aircraft are controllable in
                          3D
                          > space. For paragliders the first two matter most, especially for
                          those
                          > developed for powered use, since the low slung mass of engine/pilot
                          > and propellor thrust with all it’s associated gyroscopic and
                          torque
                          > effects. This means that enhanced stability in both pitch and roll
                          are
                          > even more vital than with non-powered paraglider wings.
                          >
                          > Pitch stability -.
                          > Inherent pitch stability is easily recognized in normal flight
                          whilst
                          > flying through thermals or areas of turbulence.
                          >
                          > * If the aircraft pitches forward as it enters the thermal and
                          > backwards as it exits. Then it is pitch positive.
                          >
                          > * If the aircraft pitches backwards as it enters and forward as
                          it
                          > exits. Then it is pitch negative.
                          >
                          > This movement is very noticeable on paragliders because the centre
                          of
                          > gravity (CG) is so far below the wing, a long way from the centre of
                          > lift/pressure (CP) compared to most aircraft. Remember the
                          traditional
                          > fuselage and tail plane are replaced by the pendulum effect of the
                          > pilot and engine unit (CG).
                          >
                          > * Performance paragliders for maximum efficiency have a CP
                          around
                          > 30% along the chord from the leading edge (fig 01), which makes them
                          > inherently pitch negative. The wing’s stability is dependent on
                          the
                          > pendulum effect of the CG (pilot weight) to control the angle of
                          > attack. In turbulence the CG (pilot weight) changes value. Imagine
                          > flying an aircraft where the size of the elevator changes in flight!
                          > This is why paragliding pilots are taught to fly actively, to
                          > constantly control the pitch of the wing in turbulence with the
                          brakes
                          > - otherwise large changes in angle of attack can and do cause
                          > collapses. Indeed, some wings are even designed with more sensitive
                          > pitch control to enhance feedback in thermals.
                          >
                          > * Low performance paragliders for beginners generally have more
                          > pitch stability to reduce the amount of input a new pilot needs to
                          > keep their wing open, this is considered safer. Designers generally
                          > achieve this by using flatter wing sections, which results in the
                          > centre of pressure being further forward - around 20% of the chord
                          > (fig 02). This gives more stability, but the wing often remains
                          pitch
                          > negative.
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          > * With a reflex wing section the centre of pressure is even
                          > further forward, around 15-20% of the chord. (fig 03); with its
                          built
                          > in elevator the wing is now definitely pitch positive, so safer in
                          > turbulence. This has proven ideal for Paramotor wings as it means
                          the
                          > pilot can fly safely with their hands off, as they do not need to
                          fly
                          > actively to maintain stability. In fact, when the brakes are pulled
                          > pitch stability is partially reduced, as the reflex is removed and
                          the
                          > centre of pressure moves further back from the leading edge. As this
                          > is the opposite behaviour of a normal paraglider, seasoned
                          paraglider
                          > pilots find this hard to accept.
                          >
                          >
                          > Accelerated flight
                          > Another major difference between a reflex wing and a traditional
                          > paraglider occurs when the wing is accelerated with either the speed
                          > bar, the trimmers, or both. Despite the change in angle of attack,
                          > stability actually increases as more reflex is introduced, by
                          pushing
                          > the centre of pressure even further forward and creating more
                          elevator
                          > effect with the reflex. Combined with the extra speed, the wing cuts
                          > through the turbulent air better.
                          >
                          > Roll or spiral stability
                          >
                          > A factor often over-looked when adding Paramotors to paragliders, is
                          > that quite apart from the aircraft being able to fly in a straight
                          > line, it is vital to make sure the craft is spirally positive.
                          > Paramotors and trike units have many different attachment points and
                          > propeller effects; so generally they need flatter front profiles
                          (more
                          > dihedral), for obvious safety reasons.
                          > Most paragliders are designed and tested around a specific harness
                          > width and pilot position. As it is, they sit on the boarder line,
                          > partly because being close to spirally neutral is ideal for thermal
                          > flying.
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          > Spiral stability
                          > It’s vital, and a factor often over-looked when adding a motor to
                          > paragliders, to make sure the craft flies spirally positive (will
                          > recover on its own from a spiral dive). The spiral stability of a
                          wing
                          > largely depends on whether the wing is anhedral or dihedral and its
                          > centre of gravity. (Fig 04 shows how anhedral and dihedral works
                          > relative to both an aeroplane and a paraglider wing and how it
                          effects
                          > spiral stability.)
                          > Aeroplanes with anhedral have a negative profile angle, so their
                          wing
                          > tips are lower at the tips than the centre. They’re normally
                          > associated with aircraft like fighter planes where a very high level
                          > of manoeuvrability is important. However, these wings are so
                          unstable
                          > in flight that they usually require onboard computers to make the
                          > precise adjustments needed to control them. The result is an
                          aircraft
                          > that is spirally unstable and, if put into a spiral, will tighten
                          into
                          > the dive and quickly become unrecoverable.
                          > Aircraft that have completely flat wings have zero anhedral or
                          > dihedral and are also very manoeuvrable. They fly on the edge of
                          > stability and are excellent for aerobatics or situations where the
                          > pilots are highly skilled and trained to handle them. They are
                          > spirally neutral so will remain in a constant spiral that neither
                          > tightens up nor opens out.
                          > Aircraft that have a positive profile angle have their wing tips
                          > higher than the centre of the wing, so dihral. Whilst being less
                          > manoeuvrable they are easy and safe to fly and exit spins and
                          spirals
                          > without pilot input. 95% of aircraft are designed like this, for
                          > obvious reasons. If the centre of gravity of a wing is moved lower,
                          > like in the example of the Cessna 150 in Fig 04, a wing may then
                          have
                          > zero anhedral and still remain spirally positive. However it is
                          > interesting to note that even with this classic design, when more
                          > powerful engines are fitted, so more dihedral added.
                          > Anhedral and dihedral in paraglider design has the same effect and
                          > makes a wing spirally stable or unstable. It is largely controlled
                          > through the arc of the wing. If a designer pulls the wing tips
                          closer
                          > they create a negative radial arc and the wing becomes anhedral and
                          > consequently spirally unstable. A constant radial arc produces a
                          > spirally neutral wing, which like its equivalent in aeroplane
                          designs
                          > will create a wing that is excellent for acrobatics and thermal
                          > flying, but sits right on the edge of stability. In order for a
                          > paraglider to remain spirally stable the profile has to have a
                          > positive radial arc with dihedral. It’s possible to have less
                          dihedral
                          > because, as with the Cessna 150 in fig 04, our centre of gravity is
                          > much lower than the wing, however if the arc changes from dihedral
                          to
                          > anhedral the wing will become spirally unstable.
                          >
                          > why PARAGLIDER certification isn’t working with reflex or power
                          > I have three main concerns regarding the current paraglider
                          > certification tests: the lack of measurement of a wing’s actual
                          pitch
                          > stability, the emphasis of frontal collapses as the main measure of
                          > safety and the limited level of spiral stability testing.
                          > Firstly, there are no current tests for actual pitch stability.
                          > Secondly, in order to meet the current frontal collapse recovery
                          tests
                          > we would have to alter our designs in ways that make them more
                          > unstable in other areas. As in reality reflex wings are virtually
                          > impossible to frontal collapse, putting such a great emphasis on
                          > recovery, to the detriment of security in more commonly occurring
                          > situations such as spiral stability, is misguided.
                          > It is beyond doubt that the new breed of reflex profile paragliders
                          > are more collapse resistant than classic paraglider wings, however,
                          > the current certification systems are designed around paraglider
                          > technology: they fail to take into account that, whilst it’s
                          > imperative to test a paraglider’s reaction to a frontal collapse,
                          as
                          > they do collapse, a reflex wing doesn’t. A natural frontal
                          collapse on
                          > a reflex is about as likely as a wing falling off an aeroplane â€"
                          yes
                          > it can happen, and the consequences could be serious, but it is
                          > incredibly unlikely. However, when the certification authorities do
                          > manage to force a reflex wing to frontal collapse, it will naturally
                          > have a more dynamic reaction. This is considered to be a valid
                          measure
                          > of a wing’s security, as it is when applied to a classic
                          paraglider
                          > that collapses easily, however, with an inherently collapse
                          resistant
                          > reflex wing, it simply isn’t.
                          > Thirdly, whilst paragliders with a negative profile angle are
                          spirally
                          > unstable, they behave less aggressively during the asymmetric
                          > deflation tests currently used in the paraglider certification
                          system.
                          > Therefore, beginner’s paragliders, like DHV 1 or CEN A graded
                          gliders,
                          > are now being designed with more anhedral or negative radial arc to
                          > pass these tests.
                          > I believe this is a dangerous road for designers to follow as these
                          > wings sit right on the edge of spiral stability and minute changes
                          in
                          > the harness and pilot position can cause them to become spirally
                          > unstable and lock into spiral dives.
                          > Most paragliders are designed to be close to spirally neutral as it
                          is
                          > ideal for thermal flying. They are also designed and tested with the
                          > hangpoints set at defined distance apart, normally 42 cm. However,
                          if
                          > the pilot tightens their harness chest straps just a couple of
                          > centimeters narrower than the tested width they change the arc of
                          > their wing. The wing changes from dihedral to anhedral and becomes
                          > spirally unstable. Over the last few years there has been an
                          increase
                          > in paragliding fatalities with modern beginner wings, where pilots
                          > have tightened their chest straps to feel more comfortable in rough
                          > air, then entered spirals to descend, from which they never recover
                          > from. We are starting to see the same thing in paramotoring. Knowing
                          > that hangpoint distances are so critical for paragliders designed on
                          > the edge of spiral stability how, with all the different paramotor
                          > hangpoint systems, propeller effects and wing loadings, how can we
                          > safely entertain the current test system?
                          > Further to that, wings designed to be inherently safer for powered
                          > use, need to use flatter front profiles for more positive spiral
                          > stability and/or use wing sections that are more pitch stable and
                          > collapse resistant - this includes beginner paragliders and reflex
                          > wings. However during certification test these wings collapse
                          > differently from the way DHV, DULV or EN demand in their asymmetric
                          > tests (Fig 05). They end up having much less wing area left flying
                          > than higher performance wings, which makes them tend to turn more
                          > during the recovery process â€" a key measurement during paraglider
                          > certification. The solution many designers are forced to take is to
                          > build in more anhedral, which takes the wing closer to spiral
                          > instability. Or increase the distance between wing and pilot which
                          > increases G-forces in spirals and the risk of twists, especially
                          with
                          > propellors.
                          >
                          > Conclusion
                          > The current paraglider wing certification is unable to truly assess
                          > the security of a reflex profile paraglider. There are some areas of
                          > relevance between normal paraglider tests and paramotor wing tests;
                          > however, other areas are totally inappropriate for the direction our
                          > sport is going. In fact, the efforts made to pass the current tests
                          > are leading to a position where we could soon have thousands of
                          wings
                          > flying that have a serious security issue with spiral instability.
                          > Paramania, over the last couple of years has made a variety of
                          > proposals to the main testing authorities in attempts to make the
                          > paragliding certification process more relevant; however, so far
                          none
                          > of our proposals have produced any clear response and very few of
                          our
                          > proposed tests have even been carried out.
                          > We are naturally disappointed as we believe the purpose of any
                          testing
                          > body should be to raise levels of safety and set standards for the
                          > general public. For this it must be capable of evolving quickly to
                          > meet the demands of the new technology. Otherwise what value does
                          it have?
                          > As other manufacturers join us in the use of reflex in wings and
                          > paramotoring continues to grow rapidly and we are concerned for
                          future
                          > safety. And feel its time that wing test bodies woke up!
                          >
                          > Article by our designer Mike Campbell-Jones ::Father of Reflex wing
                          > Technology::
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          > --- In ppgbiglist@yahoogroups.com, "Terry Lutke" <tllutke52@> wrote:
                          > >
                          > > James;
                          > >
                          > > I'm considering offering a generous Prima buy-back/tradein offer
                          with
                          > > my CheapTrike.
                          > >
                          > > TerryL
                          > >
                          > > --- In ppgbiglist@yahoogroups.com, "aldersonjames2002"
                          > > <aldersonjames2002@> wrote:
                          > > >
                          > > > Chad (of TrikeBuggy fame) also told me that the Prisma/Prima3
                          is a
                          > > > perfect wing to get started triking on, although the
                          certification
                          > > of
                          > > > even the 33m is only 244 lbs max and thats not much more than I
                          > > weigh
                          > > > without any equipment. He also said that it would be really
                          hard to
                          > > > pick a DHV1 wing these days that would be a bad wing. Eric
                          Dufour
                          > > also
                          > > > had great things to say about the Prisma/Prima3, but was also
                          honest
                          > > > that it wasn't a very fun wing.
                          > > >
                          > > > I wonder if anyone has ever thought about renting a Prima out
                          as a
                          > > > training wing so you can use it for your first 10 flights or so
                          and
                          > > > then send it back and pay for the time you had it. Everyone
                          seems to
                          > > > say that its also a good wing because it lasts for so long
                          because
                          > > of
                          > > > its construction and materials.
                          > > >
                          > > > James
                          > > >
                          > > > --- In ppgbiglist@yahoogroups.com, "Terry Lutke" <tllutke52@>
                          wrote:
                          > > > >
                          > > > > Admit it Zebur..BurgerKing roofs aside, if I were training
                          your
                          > > > > sister you would be quite happy if I were using a Prima3 at
                          my
                          > > school
                          > > > > (which I do BTW)
                          > > > >
                          > > > > Terry
                          > > > >
                          > > > > --- In ppgbiglist@yahoogroups.com, zebur mercan <zmercan21@>
                          > > wrote:
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > > C`mon Terry ....!
                          > > > > > �
                          > > > > > Hah HAAA...� :)
                          > > > > > �
                          > > > > > �There are lots of modern beginner wings and�great
                          intermediate
                          > > > > reflex/non reflex wings out there,lots to choose
                          from...����all
                          > > of
                          > > > > them are very comparable and well improved since Prima was
                          > > designed
                          > > > > 15 years ago.�
                          > > > > > �
                          > > > > > "a 1.5 sink offers short field landing potential; even a
                          > > BurgerKing
                          > > > > roof can
                          > > > > > be an LZ/TL"
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > > Well,�If that`s your prima�being sold, at least don`t
                          fill it
                          > > with
                          > > > > words like�That !
                          > > > > > �
                          > > > > > You`d better give up and call it a joke :)
                          > > > > > �
                          > > > > > �
                          > > > > > �
                          > > > > > �
                          > > > > > �
                          > > > > > �
                          > > > > > �
                          > > > > > �
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > > --- On Mon, 12/1/08, Terry Lutke <tllutke52@> wrote:
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > > From: Terry Lutke <tllutke52@>
                          > > > > > Subject: [ppgbiglist] Re: Wing Selection - Safety vs
                          Performance
                          > > > > > To: ppgbiglist@yahoogroups.com
                          > > > > > Date: Monday, December 1, 2008, 4:15 AM
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > > I've read that one mans diaper is another mans wing,
                          besides a
                          > > 1.5
                          > > > > > sink offers short field landing potential; even a
                          BurgerKing
                          > > roof
                          > > > > can
                          > > > > > be an LZ/TL
                          > > > > > --- In ppgbiglist@yahoogro ups.com, zebur mercan
                          > > <zmercan21@ ..>
                          > > > > wrote:
                          > > > > > >
                          > > > > > > �Heh heee... !
                          > > > > > > �
                          > > > > > > 1.5m/s min sink rate, L/D is around��5.0,� 38 Km
                          top speed,
                          > > > > > And��Prima�AKA Pampers in some EU countries :)�
                          > > > > > > �
                          > > > > > >
                          > > > > > >
                          > > > > > > --- On Mon, 12/1/08, Terry Lutke <tllutke52@ ..> wrote:
                          > > > > > >
                          > > > > > > From: Terry Lutke <tllutke52@ ..>
                          > > > > > > Subject: [ppgbiglist] Re: Wing Selection - Safety vs
                          > > Performance
                          > > > > > > To: ppgbiglist@yahoogro ups.com
                          > > > > > > Date: Monday, December 1, 2008, 1:06 AM
                          > > > > > >
                          > > > > > >
                          > > > > > >
                          > > > > > >
                          > > > > > >
                          > > > > > >
                          > > > > > > Ah here we go...
                          > > > > > > au contraire btw regarding the Prima, it is seeing a
                          resurge
                          > > in
                          > > > > > sales
                          > > > > > > because of it's newbie friendly status. A glider steady
                          for
                          > > > > newb's
                          > > > > > > and trusty when you're rusty..
                          > > > > > >
                          > > > > > > TerryL
                          > > > > > >
                          > > > > > > --- In ppgbiglist@yahoogro ups.com, zebur mercan
                          > > <zmercan21@ ..>
                          > > > > > wrote:
                          > > > > > > >
                          > > > > > > > >I am debating between four wings: Apco Prima, Apco
                          Thrust,
                          > > > > Uturn
                          > > > > > > > >Emotion and Advance Epsilon.
                          > > > > > > >
                          > > > > > > > Hi Chris,
                          > > > > > > > �
                          > > > > > > > You are comparing apples to�spanners :)
                          > > > > > > > �
                          > > > > > > > Date,class,price. .. nothing is fair comparison !!
                          > > > > > > > �
                          > > > > > > > Apco prima and Epsilon are ancient wings and if
                          you�are not
                          > > > > paid
                          > > > > > > to�take them,don`t touch them :)��
                          > > > > > > > �
                          > > > > > > > Thrust is older and wasn`t anything special from the
                          day
                          > > one!
                          > > > > > > >
                          > > > > > > > Between theese four,�DHV-1 Emotion will be the safest
                          for
                          > > you
                          > > > > but
                          > > > > > > if you are not a compleate beginer,you` d better broaden
                          your
                          > > > > > search a
                          > > > > > > little more.
                          > > > > > > >
                          > > > > > > > Cheers
                          > > > > > > >
                          > > > > > > >
                          > > > > > > > Zebur
                          > > > > > > > �
                          > > > > > > > �
                          > > > > > > >
                          > > > > > > >
                          > > > > > > > --- On Sat, 11/29/08, noodlydoo <noodlydoo@ ..> wrote:
                          > > > > > > >
                          > > > > > > > From: noodlydoo <noodlydoo@ ..>
                          > > > > > > > Subject: [ppgbiglist] Wing Selection - Safety vs
                          Performance
                          > > > > > > > To: ppgbiglist@yahoogro ups.com
                          > > > > > > > Date: Saturday, November 29, 2008, 9:23 PM
                          > > > > > > >
                          > > > > > > >
                          > > > > > > >
                          > > > > > > >
                          > > > > > > >
                          > > > > > > >
                          > > > > > > > Just joined the group, wanted to say hello and ask a
                          > > question.
                          > > > > My
                          > > > > > > > background first. I've flown ppg w/ trike a couple of
                          times
                          > > > > (but
                          > > > > > not
                          > > > > > > > much) on a la Mouette and a Fresh Breeze Skip 1. Flew
                          an old
                          > > > > > > > Pro-Design Classic wing (back in the mid 90's) and the
                          > > original
                          > > > > > > Reflex
                          > > > > > > > wing. Switched over to PPC's and flew about 100 hours
                          under
                          > > a
                          > > > > > > Quantum
                          > > > > > > > OC500 wing, but also took some instruction under
                          various
                          > > other
                          > > > > > > wings,
                          > > > > > > > including the Chiron elliptical when it first came out.
                          > > > > > > >
                          > > > > > > > Ok, enough about me....
                          > > > > > > >
                          > > > > > > > After taking a sabitical from PPC for a couple of
                          years,
                          > > I'm
                          > > > > > ready
                          > > > > > > to
                          > > > > > > > get back into the air. I've decided to go PPG instead
                          of
                          > > PPC for
                          > > > > > > > several reasons, and am having a heck of time deciding
                          on
                          > > > > > equipment.
                          > > > > > > > So, I thought I would have you gents (and lady's) weigh
                          in
                          > > on
                          > > > > the
                          > > > > > > most
                          > > > > > > > important choice....my wing.
                          > > > > > > >
                          > > > > > > > I'm more of a hands free kinda pilot. I like to cruise
                          and
                          > > look
                          > > > > > > down,
                          > > > > > > > fly through the fields, etc. Not an active pilot and I
                          know
                          > > it.
                          > > > > > > (isn't
                          > > > > > > > it a strength to know your weakness?)
                          > > > > > > >
                          > > > > > > > I should also mention I tend to fly at the end of the
                          day
                          > > in
                          > > > > calm
                          > > > > > > > conditions.
                          > > > > > > >
                          > > > > > > > I am debating between four wings: Apco Prima, Apco
                          Thrust,
                          > > Uturn
                          > > > > > > > Emotion and Advance Epsilon.
                          > > > > > > >
                          > > > > > > > My thoughts on the Prima is that it has a high sink
                          rate
                          > > and
                          > > > > very
                          > > > > > > > large cells that are probably much more likely to fly
                          like
                          > > a
                          > > > > PPC
                          > > > > > > wing.
                          > > > > > > > I calculated its glide at about 6 which would be in
                          line
                          > > with
                          > > > > the
                          > > > > > > > current ellipticals on PPC. Now here is where I need
                          > > insight.
                          > > > > I'm
                          > > > > > > > trying to figure out, if a DHV 1 glider with a high
                          glide
                          > > ratio
                          > > > > > like
                          > > > > > > > the emotion, if it were to take a forward tuck or
                          > > assymetrical,
                          > > > > > > would
                          > > > > > > > the Prima take that same collapse in the exact same
                          > > conditions?
                          > > > > > > >
                          > > > > > > > I'm inclined to think that given such large cells and
                          its
                          > > > > > > > inefficiency, its more likely to resist and type of
                          > > collapse
                          > > > > that
                          > > > > > > > would require pilot input than say a higer aspect ratio
                          > > wing
                          > > > > even
                          > > > > > > > though its DHV1.
                          > > > > > > >
                          > > > > > > > I guess what I'm asking, is what wing is most likely to
                          > > keep me
                          > > > > > out
                          > > > > > > of
                          > > > > > > > that situation in the first place? Like I said, I tend
                          to
                          > > fly
                          > > > > in
                          > > > > > > soft
                          > > > > > > > smooth air anyway, but that doesn't mean I don't glide
                          into
                          > > the
                          > > > > > > > occasional rotor on landing or off a hill etc.
                          > > > > > > >
                          > > > > > > > It appears like these DHV1 wings have become extremely
                          high
                          > > > > > > > performance in the past 5 years, which for most pilots
                          is a
                          > > > > great
                          > > > > > > > thing. Stability is the first and formost important
                          factor.
                          > > For
                          > > > > > me,
                          > > > > > > > everything else is a distant second. Maybe hands off
                          isn't
                          > > > > > realistic
                          > > > > > > > uder a PPG wing, in which case its back to the big
                          > > lumbering
                          > > > > PPC
                          > > > > > > world
                          > > > > > > > and the inefficiency of thier wings that make them so
                          > > > > inherintly
                          > > > > > > stable.
                          > > > > > > >
                          > > > > > > > Any input appreciated.
                          > > > > > > >
                          > > > > > > > Chris
                          > > > > > > >
                          > > > > > >
                          > > > > > >
                          > > > > > >
                          > > > > > >
                          > > > > > >
                          > > > > > >
                          > > > > > >
                          > > > > > >
                          > > > > > >
                          > > > > > >
                          > > > > > >
                          > > > > > >
                          > > > > > >
                          > > > > > >
                          > > > > > >
                          > > > > > >
                          > > > > > >
                          > > > > > >
                          > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                          > > > > > >
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                          > > > > >
                          > > > >
                          > > >
                          > >
                          >
                        • zebur mercan
                          ...   Almost!  But not quite :) ...   Cool !   ... From: Terry Lutke Subject: [ppgbiglist] Re: Wing Selection - Safety vs
                          Message 12 of 23 , Dec 1, 2008
                            >Z, Are you becoming angry with me?:)
                             
                            Almost!  But not quite :)

                            >Perhaps we can remain in disagreement on this and move on
                             
                            Cool !
                             


                            --- On Mon, 12/1/08, Terry Lutke <tllutke52@...> wrote:

                            From: Terry Lutke <tllutke52@...>
                            Subject: [ppgbiglist] Re: Wing Selection - Safety vs Performance
                            To: ppgbiglist@yahoogroups.com
                            Date: Monday, December 1, 2008, 3:53 PM






                            Z, Are you becoming angry with me?:)



                            Perhaps we can remain in disagreement on this and move on.

                            TerryL
                            www.cheaptrikeflyer .com





                            Recent Activity


                             6
                            New Members

                             11
                            New Photos

                             1
                            New FilesVisit Your Group


                            Y! Sports for TV
                            Access it for free
                            Get Fantasy Sports
                            stats on your TV.

                            Yahoo! Finance
                            It's Now Personal
                            Guides, news,
                            advice & more.

                            Dog Zone
                            on Yahoo! Groups
                            Join a Group
                            all about dogs.
                            .

















                            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                          • noodlydoo
                            Thanks Bud, I m not trying to mislead anybody, that s why I included the full text of the article. You are correct...he said it could be dangerious. Point well
                            Message 13 of 23 , Dec 1, 2008
                              Thanks Bud,

                              I'm not trying to mislead anybody, that's why I included the full text
                              of the article. You are correct...he said it could be dangerious. Point
                              well taken. In particular, I was refering to this section:

                              Therefore, beginner’s paragliders, like DHV 1 or CEN A graded
                              gliders, are now being designed with more anhedral or negative radial
                              arc to
                              pass these tests.
                              I believe this is a dangerous road for designers to follow as these
                              wings sit right on the edge of spiral stability and minute changes
                              in
                              the harness and pilot position can cause them to become spirally
                              unstable and lock into spiral dives.
                              Most paragliders are designed to be close to spirally neutral as it
                              is
                              ideal for thermal flying. They are also designed and tested with the
                              hangpoints set at defined distance apart, normally 42 cm. However,
                              if
                              the pilot tightens their harness chest straps just a couple of
                              centimeters narrower than the tested width they change the arc of
                              their wing. The wing changes from dihedral to anhedral and becomes
                              spirally unstable. Over the last few years there has been an
                              increase
                              in paragliding fatalities with modern beginner wings, where pilots
                              have tightened their chest straps to feel more comfortable in rough
                              air, then entered spirals to descend, from which they never recover
                              from. We are starting to see the same thing in paramotoring. Knowing
                              that hangpoint distances are so critical for paragliders designed on
                              the edge of spiral stability how, with all the different paramotor
                              hangpoint systems, propeller effects and wing loadings, how can we
                              safely entertain the current test system?








                              --- In ppgbiglist@yahoogroups.com, "Bud Johnson" <budjohnson@...> wrote:
                              >
                              > --- In ppgbiglist@yahoogroups.com, "noodlydoo" noodlydoo@ wrote:
                              > >
                              > > Well, I read this last night, and for me just added more dimensions
                              > to
                              > > the whole (in my head) debate. Its an article written by Mike
                              > Campbell
                              > > Jones of Paramania regarding testing of wings, and why he thinks
                              > DHV1
                              > > wings are actually becoming dangerious. Not sure I can agree with
                              > his
                              > > conclusions...I have to study more, but he does design wings....and
                              > I
                              > > don't :-)
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              > Hello again Chris,
                              >
                              > I'm lazy and did not reread the below. I read it soon after Michael
                              > wrote the article.
                              >
                              > By simply saying Michael said that DHV 1 wings are actually becoming
                              > dangerous is misleading. He was talking about how rating
                              > requirements and how a wing designer can achieve them can result in
                              > some problems resulting in some trade-offs.
                              >
                              > Bud
                              >
                              >
                              > >
                              > > His conclusions are towards the bottom:
                              > >
                              > >
                              > >
                              > > Our Reflex technology and paramotoring
                              > >
                              > > The biggest evolution in our sport, aside from improved engines and
                              > > better understanding of Paramotor frame geometry, is the
                              > introduction
                              > > of our reflex profiles, into wings developed specifically for
                              > powered
                              > > flight. It is now generally recognized that it has helped turn our
                              > > sport into a practical and relatively safe, fun form of flying.
                              > >
                              > > :: What is Reflex Technology :: Video Demonstration :: Reflex
                              > > Certification ::
                              > >
                              > >
                              > >
                              > > Some History
                              > > History has a habit of repeating itself. In the early eighties,
                              > > similar developments took place as pioneers of ultra light aircraft
                              > > bolted engines onto their existing hangliders. Whilst these early
                              > > ultralights flew ok, they were not ideal.
                              > > A wing designed for power had a completely different set of
                              > > requirements. A new breed of wing with stronger construction,
                              > > different handling and more stability, was born
                              > >
                              > > I was privileged to have been part of these early pioneering days.
                              > My
                              > > name is Mike Campbell-Jones and for some inexplicable reason I was
                              > > imprinted with a passion for light weight flying machines. My
                              > > experience spans through hangliding, ultra-lights, general aviation,
                              > > gliding, ballooning and paragliding to present day paramotoring.
                              > > It proved particularly valuable when developing the original Reflex
                              > > paramotor wing in 1994.
                              > >
                              > > Understanding Reflex technology
                              > > Reflex profiles are not new; they were first used extensively as far
                              > > back as the 1930’s in tailless aircraft, such as the Horten
                              > brothers
                              > > flying wings or the Fauvel tail-less glider, It provided these wings
                              > > with aerodynamic pitch stability, where there was none.
                              > > Hangliders also adopted reflex in profiles to give gliders a
                              > positive
                              > > trim. It improved safety, as it helped prevent tumbling. The effect
                              > > was simple enough, more reflex more pitch stability, though less
                              > speed
                              > > and performance as the angle of attack was increased.
                              > >
                              > > But used in a paraglider Reflex profiles have a different effect.
                              > > Because unlike the hangliders or flying wings the angle of attack is
                              > > maintained through the lines connected to the pendulum weight of the
                              > > pilot suspended below, in the same way as a wing with a fuselage
                              > and a
                              > > tail-plane, acts as a lever, controlling the wing.
                              > > Reflex profile enhances this pitch stability, by adding an effective
                              > > elevator into the wing, whilst keeping the centre of lift/pressure
                              > > close to the leading edge. The wing loading is higher, as less of
                              > the
                              > > wings area is used for lift. So stability and speed are increased
                              > > without the need to change the wings angle of attack.
                              > > There are many other factors but the end result is there is also
                              > more
                              > > efficiency at speed and a greater speed range (a flatter polar
                              > curve).
                              > > So a bigger distance between the stall and cruising speeds and
                              > > generally less likelihood of being robbed of that precious air speed
                              > > in turbulence.
                              > > For paramotoring, this is an exciting development.
                              > >
                              > >
                              > > About stability
                              > > There are three types of stability necessary for any aircraft.
                              > Pitch,
                              > > Roll and Yaw.
                              > > They make up the 3 axis by which most aircraft are controllable in
                              > 3D
                              > > space. For paragliders the first two matter most, especially for
                              > those
                              > > developed for powered use, since the low slung mass of engine/pilot
                              > > and propellor thrust with all it’s associated gyroscopic and
                              > torque
                              > > effects. This means that enhanced stability in both pitch and roll
                              > are
                              > > even more vital than with non-powered paraglider wings.
                              > >
                              > > Pitch stability -.
                              > > Inherent pitch stability is easily recognized in normal flight
                              > whilst
                              > > flying through thermals or areas of turbulence.
                              > >
                              > > * If the aircraft pitches forward as it enters the thermal and
                              > > backwards as it exits. Then it is pitch positive.
                              > >
                              > > * If the aircraft pitches backwards as it enters and forward as
                              > it
                              > > exits. Then it is pitch negative.
                              > >
                              > > This movement is very noticeable on paragliders because the centre
                              > of
                              > > gravity (CG) is so far below the wing, a long way from the centre of
                              > > lift/pressure (CP) compared to most aircraft. Remember the
                              > traditional
                              > > fuselage and tail plane are replaced by the pendulum effect of the
                              > > pilot and engine unit (CG).
                              > >
                              > > * Performance paragliders for maximum efficiency have a CP
                              > around
                              > > 30% along the chord from the leading edge (fig 01), which makes them
                              > > inherently pitch negative. The wing’s stability is dependent
                              on
                              > the
                              > > pendulum effect of the CG (pilot weight) to control the angle of
                              > > attack. In turbulence the CG (pilot weight) changes value. Imagine
                              > > flying an aircraft where the size of the elevator changes in flight!
                              > > This is why paragliding pilots are taught to fly actively, to
                              > > constantly control the pitch of the wing in turbulence with the
                              > brakes
                              > > - otherwise large changes in angle of attack can and do cause
                              > > collapses. Indeed, some wings are even designed with more sensitive
                              > > pitch control to enhance feedback in thermals.
                              > >
                              > > * Low performance paragliders for beginners generally have more
                              > > pitch stability to reduce the amount of input a new pilot needs to
                              > > keep their wing open, this is considered safer. Designers generally
                              > > achieve this by using flatter wing sections, which results in the
                              > > centre of pressure being further forward - around 20% of the chord
                              > > (fig 02). This gives more stability, but the wing often remains
                              > pitch
                              > > negative.
                              > >
                              > >
                              > >
                              > > * With a reflex wing section the centre of pressure is even
                              > > further forward, around 15-20% of the chord. (fig 03); with its
                              > built
                              > > in elevator the wing is now definitely pitch positive, so safer in
                              > > turbulence. This has proven ideal for Paramotor wings as it means
                              > the
                              > > pilot can fly safely with their hands off, as they do not need to
                              > fly
                              > > actively to maintain stability. In fact, when the brakes are pulled
                              > > pitch stability is partially reduced, as the reflex is removed and
                              > the
                              > > centre of pressure moves further back from the leading edge. As this
                              > > is the opposite behaviour of a normal paraglider, seasoned
                              > paraglider
                              > > pilots find this hard to accept.
                              > >
                              > >
                              > > Accelerated flight
                              > > Another major difference between a reflex wing and a traditional
                              > > paraglider occurs when the wing is accelerated with either the speed
                              > > bar, the trimmers, or both. Despite the change in angle of attack,
                              > > stability actually increases as more reflex is introduced, by
                              > pushing
                              > > the centre of pressure even further forward and creating more
                              > elevator
                              > > effect with the reflex. Combined with the extra speed, the wing cuts
                              > > through the turbulent air better.
                              > >
                              > > Roll or spiral stability
                              > >
                              > > A factor often over-looked when adding Paramotors to paragliders, is
                              > > that quite apart from the aircraft being able to fly in a straight
                              > > line, it is vital to make sure the craft is spirally positive.
                              > > Paramotors and trike units have many different attachment points and
                              > > propeller effects; so generally they need flatter front profiles
                              > (more
                              > > dihedral), for obvious safety reasons.
                              > > Most paragliders are designed and tested around a specific harness
                              > > width and pilot position. As it is, they sit on the boarder line,
                              > > partly because being close to spirally neutral is ideal for thermal
                              > > flying.
                              > >
                              > >
                              > >
                              > >
                              > >
                              > > Spiral stability
                              > > It’s vital, and a factor often over-looked when adding a
                              motor to
                              > > paragliders, to make sure the craft flies spirally positive (will
                              > > recover on its own from a spiral dive). The spiral stability of a
                              > wing
                              > > largely depends on whether the wing is anhedral or dihedral and its
                              > > centre of gravity. (Fig 04 shows how anhedral and dihedral works
                              > > relative to both an aeroplane and a paraglider wing and how it
                              > effects
                              > > spiral stability.)
                              > > Aeroplanes with anhedral have a negative profile angle, so their
                              > wing
                              > > tips are lower at the tips than the centre. They’re normally
                              > > associated with aircraft like fighter planes where a very high level
                              > > of manoeuvrability is important. However, these wings are so
                              > unstable
                              > > in flight that they usually require onboard computers to make the
                              > > precise adjustments needed to control them. The result is an
                              > aircraft
                              > > that is spirally unstable and, if put into a spiral, will tighten
                              > into
                              > > the dive and quickly become unrecoverable.
                              > > Aircraft that have completely flat wings have zero anhedral or
                              > > dihedral and are also very manoeuvrable. They fly on the edge of
                              > > stability and are excellent for aerobatics or situations where the
                              > > pilots are highly skilled and trained to handle them. They are
                              > > spirally neutral so will remain in a constant spiral that neither
                              > > tightens up nor opens out.
                              > > Aircraft that have a positive profile angle have their wing tips
                              > > higher than the centre of the wing, so dihral. Whilst being less
                              > > manoeuvrable they are easy and safe to fly and exit spins and
                              > spirals
                              > > without pilot input. 95% of aircraft are designed like this, for
                              > > obvious reasons. If the centre of gravity of a wing is moved lower,
                              > > like in the example of the Cessna 150 in Fig 04, a wing may then
                              > have
                              > > zero anhedral and still remain spirally positive. However it is
                              > > interesting to note that even with this classic design, when more
                              > > powerful engines are fitted, so more dihedral added.
                              > > Anhedral and dihedral in paraglider design has the same effect and
                              > > makes a wing spirally stable or unstable. It is largely controlled
                              > > through the arc of the wing. If a designer pulls the wing tips
                              > closer
                              > > they create a negative radial arc and the wing becomes anhedral and
                              > > consequently spirally unstable. A constant radial arc produces a
                              > > spirally neutral wing, which like its equivalent in aeroplane
                              > designs
                              > > will create a wing that is excellent for acrobatics and thermal
                              > > flying, but sits right on the edge of stability. In order for a
                              > > paraglider to remain spirally stable the profile has to have a
                              > > positive radial arc with dihedral. It’s possible to have less
                              > dihedral
                              > > because, as with the Cessna 150 in fig 04, our centre of gravity is
                              > > much lower than the wing, however if the arc changes from dihedral
                              > to
                              > > anhedral the wing will become spirally unstable.
                              > >
                              > > why PARAGLIDER certification isn’t working with reflex or
                              power
                              > > I have three main concerns regarding the current paraglider
                              > > certification tests: the lack of measurement of a wing’s
                              actual
                              > pitch
                              > > stability, the emphasis of frontal collapses as the main measure of
                              > > safety and the limited level of spiral stability testing.
                              > > Firstly, there are no current tests for actual pitch stability.
                              > > Secondly, in order to meet the current frontal collapse recovery
                              > tests
                              > > we would have to alter our designs in ways that make them more
                              > > unstable in other areas. As in reality reflex wings are virtually
                              > > impossible to frontal collapse, putting such a great emphasis on
                              > > recovery, to the detriment of security in more commonly occurring
                              > > situations such as spiral stability, is misguided.
                              > > It is beyond doubt that the new breed of reflex profile paragliders
                              > > are more collapse resistant than classic paraglider wings, however,
                              > > the current certification systems are designed around paraglider
                              > > technology: they fail to take into account that, whilst it’s
                              > > imperative to test a paraglider’s reaction to a frontal
                              collapse,
                              > as
                              > > they do collapse, a reflex wing doesn’t. A natural frontal
                              > collapse on
                              > > a reflex is about as likely as a wing falling off an aeroplane
                              �"
                              > yes
                              > > it can happen, and the consequences could be serious, but it is
                              > > incredibly unlikely. However, when the certification authorities do
                              > > manage to force a reflex wing to frontal collapse, it will naturally
                              > > have a more dynamic reaction. This is considered to be a valid
                              > measure
                              > > of a wing’s security, as it is when applied to a classic
                              > paraglider
                              > > that collapses easily, however, with an inherently collapse
                              > resistant
                              > > reflex wing, it simply isn’t.
                              > > Thirdly, whilst paragliders with a negative profile angle are
                              > spirally
                              > > unstable, they behave less aggressively during the asymmetric
                              > > deflation tests currently used in the paraglider certification
                              > system.
                              > > Therefore, beginner’s paragliders, like DHV 1 or CEN A graded
                              > gliders,
                              > > are now being designed with more anhedral or negative radial arc to
                              > > pass these tests.
                              > > I believe this is a dangerous road for designers to follow as these
                              > > wings sit right on the edge of spiral stability and minute changes
                              > in
                              > > the harness and pilot position can cause them to become spirally
                              > > unstable and lock into spiral dives.
                              > > Most paragliders are designed to be close to spirally neutral as it
                              > is
                              > > ideal for thermal flying. They are also designed and tested with the
                              > > hangpoints set at defined distance apart, normally 42 cm. However,
                              > if
                              > > the pilot tightens their harness chest straps just a couple of
                              > > centimeters narrower than the tested width they change the arc of
                              > > their wing. The wing changes from dihedral to anhedral and becomes
                              > > spirally unstable. Over the last few years there has been an
                              > increase
                              > > in paragliding fatalities with modern beginner wings, where pilots
                              > > have tightened their chest straps to feel more comfortable in rough
                              > > air, then entered spirals to descend, from which they never recover
                              > > from. We are starting to see the same thing in paramotoring. Knowing
                              > > that hangpoint distances are so critical for paragliders designed on
                              > > the edge of spiral stability how, with all the different paramotor
                              > > hangpoint systems, propeller effects and wing loadings, how can we
                              > > safely entertain the current test system?
                              > > Further to that, wings designed to be inherently safer for powered
                              > > use, need to use flatter front profiles for more positive spiral
                              > > stability and/or use wing sections that are more pitch stable and
                              > > collapse resistant - this includes beginner paragliders and reflex
                              > > wings. However during certification test these wings collapse
                              > > differently from the way DHV, DULV or EN demand in their asymmetric
                              > > tests (Fig 05). They end up having much less wing area left flying
                              > > than higher performance wings, which makes them tend to turn more
                              > > during the recovery process �" a key measurement during
                              paraglider
                              > > certification. The solution many designers are forced to take is to
                              > > build in more anhedral, which takes the wing closer to spiral
                              > > instability. Or increase the distance between wing and pilot which
                              > > increases G-forces in spirals and the risk of twists, especially
                              > with
                              > > propellors.
                              > >
                              > > Conclusion
                              > > The current paraglider wing certification is unable to truly assess
                              > > the security of a reflex profile paraglider. There are some areas of
                              > > relevance between normal paraglider tests and paramotor wing tests;
                              > > however, other areas are totally inappropriate for the direction our
                              > > sport is going. In fact, the efforts made to pass the current tests
                              > > are leading to a position where we could soon have thousands of
                              > wings
                              > > flying that have a serious security issue with spiral instability.
                              > > Paramania, over the last couple of years has made a variety of
                              > > proposals to the main testing authorities in attempts to make the
                              > > paragliding certification process more relevant; however, so far
                              > none
                              > > of our proposals have produced any clear response and very few of
                              > our
                              > > proposed tests have even been carried out.
                              > > We are naturally disappointed as we believe the purpose of any
                              > testing
                              > > body should be to raise levels of safety and set standards for the
                              > > general public. For this it must be capable of evolving quickly to
                              > > meet the demands of the new technology. Otherwise what value does
                              > it have?
                              > > As other manufacturers join us in the use of reflex in wings and
                              > > paramotoring continues to grow rapidly and we are concerned for
                              > future
                              > > safety. And feel its time that wing test bodies woke up!
                              > >
                              > > Article by our designer Mike Campbell-Jones ::Father of Reflex wing
                              > > Technology::
                              > >
                              > >
                              > >
                              > >
                              > >
                              > >
                              > >
                              > >
                              > >
                              > > --- In ppgbiglist@yahoogroups.com, "Terry Lutke" <tllutke52@> wrote:
                              > > >
                              > > > James;
                              > > >
                              > > > I'm considering offering a generous Prima buy-back/tradein offer
                              > with
                              > > > my CheapTrike.
                              > > >
                              > > > TerryL
                              > > >
                              > > > --- In ppgbiglist@yahoogroups.com, "aldersonjames2002"
                              > > > <aldersonjames2002@> wrote:
                              > > > >
                              > > > > Chad (of TrikeBuggy fame) also told me that the Prisma/Prima3
                              > is a
                              > > > > perfect wing to get started triking on, although the
                              > certification
                              > > > of
                              > > > > even the 33m is only 244 lbs max and thats not much more than I
                              > > > weigh
                              > > > > without any equipment. He also said that it would be really
                              > hard to
                              > > > > pick a DHV1 wing these days that would be a bad wing. Eric
                              > Dufour
                              > > > also
                              > > > > had great things to say about the Prisma/Prima3, but was also
                              > honest
                              > > > > that it wasn't a very fun wing.
                              > > > >
                              > > > > I wonder if anyone has ever thought about renting a Prima out
                              > as a
                              > > > > training wing so you can use it for your first 10 flights or so
                              > and
                              > > > > then send it back and pay for the time you had it. Everyone
                              > seems to
                              > > > > say that its also a good wing because it lasts for so long
                              > because
                              > > > of
                              > > > > its construction and materials.
                              > > > >
                              > > > > James
                              > > > >
                              > > > > --- In ppgbiglist@yahoogroups.com, "Terry Lutke" <tllutke52@>
                              > wrote:
                              > > > > >
                              > > > > > Admit it Zebur..BurgerKing roofs aside, if I were training
                              > your
                              > > > > > sister you would be quite happy if I were using a Prima3 at
                              > my
                              > > > school
                              > > > > > (which I do BTW)
                              > > > > >
                              > > > > > Terry
                              > > > > >
                              > > > > > --- In ppgbiglist@yahoogroups.com, zebur mercan <zmercan21@>
                              > > > wrote:
                              > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > C`mon Terry ....!
                              > > > > > > �
                              > > > > > > Hah HAAA...� :)
                              > > > > > > �
                              > > > > > > �There are lots of modern beginner wings and�great
                              > intermediate
                              > > > > > reflex/non reflex wings out there,lots to choose
                              > from...����all
                              > > > of
                              > > > > > them are very comparable and well improved since Prima was
                              > > > designed
                              > > > > > 15 years ago.�
                              > > > > > > �
                              > > > > > > "a 1.5 sink offers short field landing potential; even a
                              > > > BurgerKing
                              > > > > > roof can
                              > > > > > > be an LZ/TL"
                              > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > Well,�If that`s your prima�being sold, at least
                              don`t
                              > fill it
                              > > > with
                              > > > > > words like�That !
                              > > > > > > �
                              > > > > > > You`d better give up and call it a joke :)
                              > > > > > > �
                              > > > > > > �
                              > > > > > > �
                              > > > > > > �
                              > > > > > > �
                              > > > > > > �
                              > > > > > > �
                              > > > > > > �
                              > > > > > >
                              > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > --- On Mon, 12/1/08, Terry Lutke <tllutke52@> wrote:
                              > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > From: Terry Lutke <tllutke52@>
                              > > > > > > Subject: [ppgbiglist] Re: Wing Selection - Safety vs
                              > Performance
                              > > > > > > To: ppgbiglist@yahoogroups.com
                              > > > > > > Date: Monday, December 1, 2008, 4:15 AM
                              > > > > > >
                              > > > > > >
                              > > > > > >
                              > > > > > >
                              > > > > > >
                              > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > I've read that one mans diaper is another mans wing,
                              > besides a
                              > > > 1.5
                              > > > > > > sink offers short field landing potential; even a
                              > BurgerKing
                              > > > roof
                              > > > > > can
                              > > > > > > be an LZ/TL
                              > > > > > > --- In ppgbiglist@yahoogro ups.com, zebur mercan
                              > > > <zmercan21@ ..>
                              > > > > > wrote:
                              > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > > �Heh heee... !
                              > > > > > > > �
                              > > > > > > > 1.5m/s min sink rate, L/D is around��5.0,� 38
                              Km
                              > top speed,
                              > > > > > > And��Prima�AKA Pampers in some EU countries
                              :)�
                              > > > > > > > �
                              > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > > --- On Mon, 12/1/08, Terry Lutke <tllutke52@ ..> wrote:
                              > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > > From: Terry Lutke <tllutke52@ ..>
                              > > > > > > > Subject: [ppgbiglist] Re: Wing Selection - Safety vs
                              > > > Performance
                              > > > > > > > To: ppgbiglist@yahoogro ups.com
                              > > > > > > > Date: Monday, December 1, 2008, 1:06 AM
                              > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > > Ah here we go...
                              > > > > > > > au contraire btw regarding the Prima, it is seeing a
                              > resurge
                              > > > in
                              > > > > > > sales
                              > > > > > > > because of it's newbie friendly status. A glider steady
                              > for
                              > > > > > newb's
                              > > > > > > > and trusty when you're rusty..
                              > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > > TerryL
                              > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > > --- In ppgbiglist@yahoogro ups.com, zebur mercan
                              > > > <zmercan21@ ..>
                              > > > > > > wrote:
                              > > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > > > >I am debating between four wings: Apco Prima, Apco
                              > Thrust,
                              > > > > > Uturn
                              > > > > > > > > >Emotion and Advance Epsilon.
                              > > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > > > Hi Chris,
                              > > > > > > > > �
                              > > > > > > > > You are comparing apples to�spanners :)
                              > > > > > > > > �
                              > > > > > > > > Date,class,price. .. nothing is fair comparison !!
                              > > > > > > > > �
                              > > > > > > > > Apco prima and Epsilon are ancient wings and if
                              > you�are not
                              > > > > > paid
                              > > > > > > > to�take them,don`t touch them :)��
                              > > > > > > > > �
                              > > > > > > > > Thrust is older and wasn`t anything special from the
                              > day
                              > > > one!
                              > > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > > > Between theese four,�DHV-1 Emotion will be the
                              safest
                              > for
                              > > > you
                              > > > > > but
                              > > > > > > > if you are not a compleate beginer,you` d better broaden
                              > your
                              > > > > > > search a
                              > > > > > > > little more.
                              > > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > > > Cheers
                              > > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > > > Zebur
                              > > > > > > > > �
                              > > > > > > > > �
                              > > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > > > --- On Sat, 11/29/08, noodlydoo <noodlydoo@ ..> wrote:
                              > > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > > > From: noodlydoo <noodlydoo@ ..>
                              > > > > > > > > Subject: [ppgbiglist] Wing Selection - Safety vs
                              > Performance
                              > > > > > > > > To: ppgbiglist@yahoogro ups.com
                              > > > > > > > > Date: Saturday, November 29, 2008, 9:23 PM
                              > > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > > > Just joined the group, wanted to say hello and ask a
                              > > > question.
                              > > > > > My
                              > > > > > > > > background first. I've flown ppg w/ trike a couple of
                              > times
                              > > > > > (but
                              > > > > > > not
                              > > > > > > > > much) on a la Mouette and a Fresh Breeze Skip 1. Flew
                              > an old
                              > > > > > > > > Pro-Design Classic wing (back in the mid 90's) and the
                              > > > original
                              > > > > > > > Reflex
                              > > > > > > > > wing. Switched over to PPC's and flew about 100 hours
                              > under
                              > > > a
                              > > > > > > > Quantum
                              > > > > > > > > OC500 wing, but also took some instruction under
                              > various
                              > > > other
                              > > > > > > > wings,
                              > > > > > > > > including the Chiron elliptical when it first came out.
                              > > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > > > Ok, enough about me....
                              > > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > > > After taking a sabitical from PPC for a couple of
                              > years,
                              > > > I'm
                              > > > > > > ready
                              > > > > > > > to
                              > > > > > > > > get back into the air. I've decided to go PPG instead
                              > of
                              > > > PPC for
                              > > > > > > > > several reasons, and am having a heck of time deciding
                              > on
                              > > > > > > equipment.
                              > > > > > > > > So, I thought I would have you gents (and lady's) weigh
                              > in
                              > > > on
                              > > > > > the
                              > > > > > > > most
                              > > > > > > > > important choice....my wing.
                              > > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > > > I'm more of a hands free kinda pilot. I like to cruise
                              > and
                              > > > look
                              > > > > > > > down,
                              > > > > > > > > fly through the fields, etc. Not an active pilot and I
                              > know
                              > > > it.
                              > > > > > > > (isn't
                              > > > > > > > > it a strength to know your weakness?)
                              > > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > > > I should also mention I tend to fly at the end of the
                              > day
                              > > > in
                              > > > > > calm
                              > > > > > > > > conditions.
                              > > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > > > I am debating between four wings: Apco Prima, Apco
                              > Thrust,
                              > > > Uturn
                              > > > > > > > > Emotion and Advance Epsilon.
                              > > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > > > My thoughts on the Prima is that it has a high sink
                              > rate
                              > > > and
                              > > > > > very
                              > > > > > > > > large cells that are probably much more likely to fly
                              > like
                              > > > a
                              > > > > > PPC
                              > > > > > > > wing.
                              > > > > > > > > I calculated its glide at about 6 which would be in
                              > line
                              > > > with
                              > > > > > the
                              > > > > > > > > current ellipticals on PPC. Now here is where I need
                              > > > insight.
                              > > > > > I'm
                              > > > > > > > > trying to figure out, if a DHV 1 glider with a high
                              > glide
                              > > > ratio
                              > > > > > > like
                              > > > > > > > > the emotion, if it were to take a forward tuck or
                              > > > assymetrical,
                              > > > > > > > would
                              > > > > > > > > the Prima take that same collapse in the exact same
                              > > > conditions?
                              > > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > > > I'm inclined to think that given such large cells and
                              > its
                              > > > > > > > > inefficiency, its more likely to resist and type of
                              > > > collapse
                              > > > > > that
                              > > > > > > > > would require pilot input than say a higer aspect ratio
                              > > > wing
                              > > > > > even
                              > > > > > > > > though its DHV1.
                              > > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > > > I guess what I'm asking, is what wing is most likely to
                              > > > keep me
                              > > > > > > out
                              > > > > > > > of
                              > > > > > > > > that situation in the first place? Like I said, I tend
                              > to
                              > > > fly
                              > > > > > in
                              > > > > > > > soft
                              > > > > > > > > smooth air anyway, but that doesn't mean I don't glide
                              > into
                              > > > the
                              > > > > > > > > occasional rotor on landing or off a hill etc.
                              > > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > > > It appears like these DHV1 wings have become extremely
                              > high
                              > > > > > > > > performance in the past 5 years, which for most pilots
                              > is a
                              > > > > > great
                              > > > > > > > > thing. Stability is the first and formost important
                              > factor.
                              > > > For
                              > > > > > > me,
                              > > > > > > > > everything else is a distant second. Maybe hands off
                              > isn't
                              > > > > > > realistic
                              > > > > > > > > uder a PPG wing, in which case its back to the big
                              > > > lumbering
                              > > > > > PPC
                              > > > > > > > world
                              > > > > > > > > and the inefficiency of thier wings that make them so
                              > > > > > inherintly
                              > > > > > > > stable.
                              > > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > > > Any input appreciated.
                              > > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > > > Chris
                              > > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                              > > > > > > >
                              > > > > > >
                              > > > > > >
                              > > > > > >
                              > > > > > >
                              > > > > > >
                              > > > > > >
                              > > > > > >
                              > > > > > >
                              > > > > > >
                              > > > > > >
                              > > > > > >
                              > > > > > >
                              > > > > > >
                              > > > > > >
                              > > > > > >
                              > > > > > >
                              > > > > > >
                              > > > > > >
                              > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                              > > > > > >
                              > > > > >
                              > > > >
                              > > >
                              > >
                              >



                              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.