Contact   Imprint   Advertising   Guidelines

Flying performance comparison !

Forum for kitesurfers
User avatar
Peter_Frank
Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 12783
Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2002 1:00 am
Brand Affiliation: None
Location: Denmark
Has thanked: 1020 times
Been thanked: 1191 times

Postby Peter_Frank » Wed Jan 22, 2003 3:20 pm

I made a list of the max. performance data of the best Gliders, Hanggliders etc.
Also added a few Seagulls/Birds (taken from the classic F.W Schmitz).

Image

When you are about to go out kitesurfing, and someone passes along you on the beach, the STANDARD question is: "Are you not afraid of not being able to get down again ?"
The easy answer is always: "No, it can't happen !".

For some reason, most don't know the very first thing about flying - that EVERY flying object without motor or power, will ALWAYS fall down again (quite fast in fact), when flying freely.

Many seem to forget this simple basic principle of flight.

This goes very much for kitesurfing too.
Regardless how much wind - the sink speed is exactly the same, when you are airborne and after the apex !
So we will always fall(glide) down - but sometimes we try to hang on as long as possible.
If one jumped 10 meter, and had a full sized performance paraglider - you would soar down for (10meter)/(1.0m/sec) = 10 seconds, added to the time to get up in 10 meter height.

Because we can control the kite and its relative windspeed somewhat - we can also change sink speed for brief moments.

But I don't think there is any purpose in chasing the "Perfect Paraglider" for a kite - as it is now, it works extremely well !

When the wind picks up, and we take a smaller kite - we will also fall down faster.
But because we can boost higher when taking off, the total hangtime might still be better.

IMO it is the dynamics of a kite is what is really important - how it turns and works in gusts, and the practical issues of course.

This list might be interesting for many of you tech. heads, and simply those who wondered how well "things" perform.

Now the interesting issue is:
How would a kitesurfer kite, LEI and Foil, fit into this table ?
I have an idea of what we will see - but others can try to fill in the pieces too.
I could remember most of the data, to make above table, but have checked up on those - just in case anything had changed.
And one thing had changed - I thought the best PG's had a glide ratio of 8, but they are up at 10 to 1 now.

The best full sized gliders can reach a glide ratio of 50 to 1, at very high speeds (wind head-on does not matter much then).
Amazing !

zfennell
Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 975
Joined: Wed Nov 20, 2002 1:00 am
Brand Affiliation: None
Location: rhode island
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Postby zfennell » Wed Jan 22, 2003 3:56 pm

thanks peter,
The various comparisons are very interesting.
I've already saved your chart to some remote location of my computer.
I thought i understood the defination of "double surface". however, for each of the birds,you listed the double surface as 40%-100%. can you explain that in a little more detail?

User avatar
Peter_Frank
Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 12783
Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2002 1:00 am
Brand Affiliation: None
Location: Denmark
Has thanked: 1020 times
Been thanked: 1191 times

Postby Peter_Frank » Wed Jan 22, 2003 5:34 pm

It is an estimation, as birds have feathers, so in fact they are single skinned at the trailing edge, and forward to a specific point, where the bones and muscles are.

But because many seagulls have quite perfect wings - it is not this simple.
They have a really fine tapering of the thickness towards the TE, as they have their wing feathers crossed at some points, to give a really perfect profile.

And the profile is changing over the span too.

This is why I just made a general 40-100%, based on what I can see on their wings.
There is nothing more to it.

The data on the non-seagulls are very exact though.

User avatar
Rv
Frequent Poster
Posts: 236
Joined: Thu Aug 15, 2002 1:00 am
Brand Affiliation: None
Location: UK, south coast
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0
Contact:

Postby Rv » Wed Jan 22, 2003 6:27 pm

Nice one Peter. Guess that clears up some of my pipe dreams :smile:

User avatar
RickI
Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 9118
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2002 1:00 am
Local Beach: SE Florida
Gear: Cabrinha
Brand Affiliation: Cabrinha
Location: Florida
Has thanked: 88 times
Been thanked: 102 times

Postby RickI » Wed Jan 22, 2003 10:42 pm

Hello Peter,

Great table! Thanks for thinking of this and putting it together. I suspect that my old Vision hang glider had a bit poorer glide slope than what is listed. It is a friendly intermediate design however.

Unless you are a bird with genetic flight skills those wings with more efficient glide slopes can ruin your day come flare time on landing if your skills aren't up to it.

Lots of interesting comparisions and data, thanks again!

Rick Iossi

BLOWN AWAY
Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 2371
Joined: Mon Aug 12, 2002 1:00 am
Brand Affiliation: None
Location: AUCKLAND, NEW ZEALAND
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0
Contact:

Postby BLOWN AWAY » Thu Jan 23, 2003 12:40 pm

Ah man... !!!

No wonder the Seagulls at my local beach are whooping my ass in terms of hangtime!!!!

BLOWN AWAY

User avatar
KiteGlider
Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 829
Joined: Fri Dec 27, 2002 1:00 am
Brand Affiliation: None
Location: NW Florida
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Postby KiteGlider » Fri Jan 24, 2003 10:12 pm

Really good Peter,

Watching the Pelicans glide seemingly forever in the surface effect skimming the water is always fascinating to me.

The ultimate kite might be a rigid inflatable wing with your hangglider performance numbers.
I'm trying to look at the practicality of making one from Vectran cloth. (too expensive now I think.)

The LEIs are going the right direction with this. A pressurized rigid structure that is relatively soft if impacting a person.

KG

Guest
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Postby Guest » Fri Jan 24, 2003 10:19 pm

Good work Peter.

The table doesn't take into account the fact that kites can have markedly different hang-times depending on their profil.

My Naish ARX had a hangtime half of my current Rhino2, despite being similar in size and initial jumping height.

User avatar
Peter_Frank
Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 12783
Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2002 1:00 am
Brand Affiliation: None
Location: Denmark
Has thanked: 1020 times
Been thanked: 1191 times

Postby Peter_Frank » Fri Jan 24, 2003 11:48 pm

On 2003-01-24 22:19, Anonymous wrote:
Good work Peter.

The table doesn't take into account the fact that kites can have markedly different hang-times depending on their profil.

My Naish ARX had a hangtime half of my current Rhino2, despite being similar in size and initial jumping height.
You are right - they can have differences.
But my table are not showing any kites - it is just to compare other flying objects, and we know for sure a kite will perform lower than these.


Return to “Kitesurfing”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Brent NKB, buzzz, Camineet, chidism, dp19, evan, sflinux, Yahoo [Bot] and 565 guests