More buggy riding today with the NS2 7.0. Maybe not the best session ever - but certainly the wettest. Rain over the weekend and early in the
morning didn't have time to dry any but it was still fun. A lot of slipping and sliding around. Again flying straight off the bar. Riding buggy
when flying a Paraski Flex or NPW off the bar seems to be sort of a middle ground between kiting and land sailing. Since I started riding the the NS2
kites my season has really improved. Of course, some of it could be just better winds, but it has happened enough times now to think otherwise.
I hav tried the peak 3 9M on" parakiflex bar" no lines
very powerful in comparaison to street star 6M Some lift too BUT frightening street star is SAFE !
i guess i will be abble to kitesurf no lines this summer
Let's keep this party going. Yesterday rode buggy and ATB at my Dollar Tree version of the beach at Jekyll. Have not ridden ATB much this season but
decided it might good to get a little practice in. Sometimes at Jekyll I think ATB is a little easier if winds are pretty much up and down the beach.
And it's fun anyway.
Let's keep this Borno movie party going. Yesterday rode buggy and ATB at my Thrift Store version of the beach at Jekyll. Have not ridden ATB much
this season but decided it might good to get a little practice in. Sometimes at Jekyll I think ATB is a little easier if winds are pretty much up and
down the beach. And it's fun anyway.
Yeah I love that music too. It is called "Three Kinds of Suns" and is available from Youtube's free music library. I'm using the Norma Rockwell
version (there might be others, but I'm not sure.)
Looking forward to seeing what he comes up with. I'm thinking maybe a street star type kite, but with closed cell leading edge, like the new Gin
kite. I thought about trying that myself with one my g-kites after I saw the Monjet.
Then again, it would be great if he could come up with something really new that doesn't need pumps and is not closed cell.
Looking forward to seeing what he comes up with. I'm thinking maybe a street star type kite, but with closed cell leading edge, like the new Gin
kite. I thought about trying that myself with one my g-kites after I saw the Monjet.
Then again, it would be great if he could come up with something really new that doesn't need pumps and is not closed cell.
This is interesting indeed. I'm not in the market for water kites, but this does make sense with Steffen's continual focus on SS tech. The Gin Marabou
we've been looking at this week has a pretty "chubby" AR and looks to be a slow turner from the limited video seen to date. I know virtually nothing
about pilot needs in the water, but a 6:1 AR RaceStar+ with leading edge flotation could be an interesting kite. The "+" part are some flexible rods
that repeat at the major seams perpendicular to the leading edge. In flying his new 3.0m RS+ at IBX a couple of weeks ago I was truly impressed with
the added stability afforded by these stiffeners compared to my RSs that don't have them (read I wish all my RSs were RS+s).
The RS+ stiffeners are as long as about half of the kite's width so you can still fold them lengthwise before rolling them up from their tips to the
center. I suspect you could put a second set of these stiffeners in the top half of the kite as well and then use some "valves" to allow the leading
edge to inflate passively but then stay filled until you purposely release the trapped air. Such a double vertical stiffener (RS++ if you will) kite
with an inflated leading edge I suspect would sit on the water like a somewhat floppy LEI and I bet could be tuned to be a pretty high performer. What
a cool kite that would be!
Floatable spars could be a way to go but you need a light material.
I'm working on a different concept. Put a spar into the leading edge. I did this with my original g-kite prototype (which did not have a wrap around
LE) and greatly improved performance in a kite that didn't fly very well. Next idea is to put tear drop shaped nacelles made of something that floats
on the LE. (They use these on masts for some boats for example.) Anyway - these help the LE float and maybe it can be relaunched. Might work
better with my round flex design though.
Original kite.
Attachment: phpDjvuqR (13kB) This file has been downloaded 208 times
Floatable spars could be a way to go but you need a light material.
I'm working on a different concept. Put a spar into the leading edge. I did this with my original g-kite prototype (which did not have a wrap around
LE) and greatly improved performance in a kite that didn't fly very well. Next idea is to put tear drop shaped nacelles made of something that floats
on the LE. (They use these on masts for some boats for example.) Anyway - these help the LE float and maybe it can be relaunched. Might work
better with my round flex design though.
Original kite.
Your kite had some beautiful shape and structure in the air! Nicely done. The video's sound track had me on the edge of my seat! Would the leading
edge spar be able to live to fly another day if you pile drove it into that parking lot? That would be my fear with such a design. Maybe choose a
spar material akin to a somewhat stiff but still flexible piece of tubing? If it wasn't too heavy the kite should still fly and it might be able to
withstand a ground strike.
I got my emergency "anything but a walk of shame" kit worked out and refined yesterday. It consists of a 2.5m NS4 (yes, 4) attached to handles and
four, 10m lines via z-bridles. The NS4s do some nice grouping of bridles, bringing together groups of four attachment points with only one single
long bridle to the common L or R pigtails as compared to grouping two attachment points per long bridle. This results in only needing to z-in a
single bridle per side (the middle bottom bunching on each side). This seemed a little strange when stringing the z-bridles but the kite flew great
with this setup.
Now this kit will go in my buggy bag so come hell or high water I should be able to limp back to buggy camp with some semblance of dignity.
I haven't tried this yet, but this is an interesting approach for handled flying of NasaStars. Lately I've been doing a fair amount of z-bridled
four-line static handle flying of a 2.5m NS4 and appreciate controlling the kite this way and its ability to reverse launch, but it is quite easy to
stall the kite with too much brake tension and get the kite to reverse fly. I wonder if this "fancy" three line handle setup would allow for reverse
launches with the ease that the "standard" z-bridle setup allows.
I think you would lose the ability for reverse launch because you get that by pulling the brakes in. With the kite being upside down it is just like
pulling the power when it is right side up. This setup seems to have the two brake lines connected to the 3rd line (the depower line) which
scrunches down the nose of the kite but it isn't connected to the brake lines. (If that's not the case - then reverse launch should still work, but
it seems like that would be pretty hard to do.)
One thing I always liked about the Born system is that you can bring the kite down without out completely killing it, making relaunch easier (in fact
some times you don't even have to bring it all the way to the ground).
I'll have to try that with my NS2's. Looks simple enough - just add a pulley to the end of the 3rd line and a piece of line to connect it to the
brake line leaders on the handle. This method would give guys who only like to fly with handles a way to use the NS kites w/o going to a bar. They
may not like losing the ability to do brake turns though, which give another dimension of control. (He doesn't show brake turns but rather turning is
done by pulling on one of the handles.)
Lately I haven't been flying handles that much - find it more tiring compared to a bar when riding on grass at least. Sometimes I still use handles
though.
I think you would lose the ability for reverse launch because you get that by pulling the brakes in. With the kite being upside down it is just like
pulling the power when it is right side up. This setup seems to have the two brake lines connected to the 3rd line (the depower line) which
scrunches down the nose of the kite but it isn't connected to the brake lines. (If that's not the case - then reverse launch should still work, but
it seems like that would be pretty hard to do.)
One thing I always liked about the Born system is that you can bring the kite down without out completely killing it, making relaunch easier (in fact
some times you don't even have to bring it all the way to the ground).
I'll have to try that with my NS2's. Looks simple enough - just add a pulley to the end of the 3rd line and a piece of line to connect it to the
brake line leaders on the handle. This method would give guys who only like to fly with handles a way to use the NS kites w/o going to a bar. They
may not like losing the ability to do brake turns though, which give another dimension of control. (He doesn't show brake turns but rather turning is
done by pulling on one of the handles.)
Lately I haven't been flying handles that much - find it more tiring compared to a bar when riding on grass at least. Sometimes I still use handles
though.
To me this seems a tad like a solution to a non-existent problem. When flying my NS4 with z-bridles from handles I find myself doing 95% of my turns
with subtle brake action with no appreciable input to the power lines. This to me creates a satisfying minimalist turn. The 3rd central NS line is a
nice solution for an emergency tether when flying by bar and needing to pop the chicken loop for whatever reason, but in my experience I've found
actuation of the 3rd line to not work well for scrubbing power, at least not on long open runs like on the Ivanpah playa. When I have pulled in the
3rd line out there when cruising along all I really manage to do is drop the kite way back in the wind window, but that can be problematic in its own
right and I've had some pretty serious power surges upon reinflation and having the kite race back to the front of the window again.
I may at some point play with a setup like this with one of my spare center lines, but honestly I'm pretty satisfied with my z-bridled handles at this
point and plan to stick with those.
There is only one way to make good use of NS's depower AND brakes - 5-th line - operated with a free upwind hand which otherwise has nothing to do.
Depower works more effectively if you can set it at a certain level rather than being a subject to constant variations as in bar control especially in
very strong conditions. That in addition to bridle adjustment to typically too high AOA and trailing edge pull. I tried to post a picture of my set up
but it does not seem to go anywhere. The last time I did that a number of years ago I did not have any problems. Do I need to get an URL for my
picture now to post it ?.
The typical problem is that the picture is too big - the software used here has size limits. Sometimes you can just edit the drawing by cropping or
shrinking the file. Upload size limit is 250kB. Image limit is 800x800. These can be a pain to deal with.
If you don't want to try shrinking the picture you can send me a PM and I can give you my email address to send it and I will try to post it.
The square thing on the 5-th line is a locking device which I can slide in and out with my free hand to control depower. It stays put if left alone.
For the 5-th line I use very thin fishing Spectra with about 1m leader (3 mm blue cord) to make it work with a locking device and a pulley.
The 5 line setup looks interesting, but I may try it on one of my NPW 21's. Buggy season is now over for me until the fall, so anything I do now
won't really be tested till then anyway.
I believe your comments about the bridling changes (AOA and trailing edge pull) were based originally on the NS2. I am wondering if subsequent NS3
and NS4 ever incorporated those changes. I believe the NS3 had a wider center panel and Born did make some vague comments about changing the profile.
The NS4 may just have different bridle materials.
Well played sir, well played. I know you like kites in quivers (who can blame you?). I did inquire right around the new year about possible larger
NS4s. Here was Steffen's response:
"Currently we have the 8.5m and 10.0m NS4 in the trial. The Quattro-Point cascade has to be dimensioned slightly different for the big NS4. It is not
possible for some areas in the kite to scale, because the formation of the air flow changes a bit."
So... it would seem safe to say that there may be some larger ones in the works too. Frankly, those big FB kites scare me. I have buggied in light,
janky winds in the mountains of Utah with 8.5, 10.5, and even the Big Bertha Butts 12.5m NS3s. I would think these would be outstanding in smooth,
predictable onshore coastal winds. In the UT mountains a 3-4 knot base wind has plenty of 10 knot pulses worked into the mix. Having BBB up when that
happens makes things a little "busy" especially around soccer goals, etc.
Did you try the BBB kites on short or long lines? I never liked my NS 5.5 and 7.0's much for kite buggy until I started using them on no or very
short lines. With long lines there were two gears - too little wind to fly or overpowered....With short lines the level of control is so much
greater because you go from the power zone to the top of the window in seconds. With long lines trying to depower by moving to the top of the window
takes a lot more time and you might gain power in doing it. Another advantage - if I have to dump the kite or drops to the ground in a lull -
relaunch is a lot easier than walking 80 feet to straighten it out. Also - I have a lot smaller "footprint" on the parking lots I am rolling around
it. I think that probably seems a little less threatening to "civilians" who might be passing through my launch area.
Did you try the BBB kites on short or long lines? I never liked my NS 5.5 and 7.0's much for kite buggy until I started using them on no or very
short lines. With long lines there were two gears - too little wind to fly or overpowered....With short lines the level of control is so much
greater because you go from the power zone to the top of the window in seconds. With long lines trying to depower by moving to the top of the window
takes a lot more time and you might gain power in doing it. Another advantage - if I have to dump the kite or drops to the ground in a lull -
relaunch is a lot easier than walking 80 feet to straighten it out. Also - I have a lot smaller "footprint" on the parking lots I am rolling around
it. I think that probably seems a little less threatening to "civilians" who might be passing through my launch area.
Randy, you are absolutely right about these big girls being more controllable and thus safer with short lines. I have tried the 10m NS3 on short, 7m
lines in a soccer field in a buggy as video below shows. On this particular day I would have been better served with the 8.5m but I was able to Popeye
it nonetheless.
For a better part of my first season with NS2's I used them with 3-5 m lines. I did not like the outcome for those reasons:
1. Loss of wind range because it is no longer possible to generate power by aggressive flying. So it is only "park and go" option - not often
comfortable in variable conditions. It calls for the use of a larger kite - closer to the comfort limit because the option of generating power is not
available.
2. It is impossible to make a decent powered up jibe.
3. In strong and shifty conditions it takes a fraction of a second for the kite to move from the edge to the center of the window.
So I ended up putting all my NS2's on 25 m lines - shorter than my preferred length for FB's but acceptable.
![[*]](images/perspective/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
