Contact   Imprint   Advertising   Guidelines

Pansh Aurora2 it's here!

For all foil kite riders


foilholio
Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 1843
Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2015 3:20 am
Kiting since: 1337
Local Beach: Ventura Beach
Favorite Beaches: Tarifa
Style: Airstyle
Gear: Foils
Brand Affiliation: None

Re: Pansh Aurora2 it's here!

Postby foilholio » Fri May 20, 2016 3:55 am

There is no other way for one bridle to support different arc shapes but to have simple cascading like 2 levels or none at all. Do you actually understand how projected area change works? If so I would love to hear you explain it. Even though I do understand some of it, other bits I am not 100%.

The Aurora 2 may or may not do projected area changes. The pictures definitely show different arc shapes. Whether they are different kites or bridles is yet to be known. My gut says no Pansh is not capable of designing a kite like that and looking at the bridle positions on the kite it doesn't seem quite right for it. But C is at a radical position on the tip and who knows what prototypes or other brands kites run through their factory, for them to learn or take what ever technology they like. The A15 is already at a design level of what could be expected from flysurfer. I will say as well the arc change is not at a level radically beyond what is already proved possible with the pyshco4, so a kite that goes from a slight ~85% PA to high ~98% is indeed possible.

I think the Aurora 2 would have the weight and performance advantage over most LEI especially strutless. Turning is not as big an issue as is made out. I can think of 3 styles were turn speed is unimportant, wakestyle, surfstyle and airstyle. You are correct foils will never be as fast turning as an LEI can, but with kites like the Pyscho4 they are indeed close and infact faster than some.

kitexpert
Frequent Poster
Posts: 336
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2015 11:20 pm
Kiting since: 2003
Gear: FS
Brand Affiliation: None

Re: Pansh Aurora2 it's here!

Postby kitexpert » Fri May 20, 2016 9:06 pm

"...so a kite that goes from a slight ~85% PA to high ~98% is indeed possible." -foilholio

No, I wouldn't say so. Or maybe, but not a good idea. Those figures compromize too much some of the benefits with reasonable canopy curve.

In P4 there is quite normal arc which gets more C-shaped when depowered and flatter when powered.

"The A15 is already at a design level of what could be expected from flysurfer." -foilholio

Yes, in 3D wire frame picture there is very much same as in FS's old CAD picture of Speed3. But line row locations are different, like there is probably different airfoil. Otherwise those strange B-C locations are not justified - if they are in any case.

"...who knows what prototypes or other brands kites run through their factory, for them to learn or take what ever technology they like."

Pansh goes it's own way perhaps too much. I think they should study and copy more. It's not what they like but what users like.

"But C is at a radical position on the tip..." -foilholio

Wingtip is so far back that pulling wingtip LE corner 1:2 is reasonable. New line is c7 pulleyline between C and brakes, it is functionally a kind of single D linerow. It is pulled 3:4, more than C and less than Z, which is correct.

"There is no other way for one bridle to support different arc shapes but to have simple cascading like 2 levels or none at all." -foilholio

No, supporting certain arc is not that precise and even no cascaded bridle line row is fixed anyway for some curve. Some pulleys to self-adjust linerow for different arcs (different PA's) would be needed IMO but P4 does not have them. Perhaps they would divide forces harmfully in other respects.

And why should different arc shapes be fully supported? P4 max depowered flies supported (almost) on A lines only. When powered CoL moves further back, towards to flatter B and C line row bridle configurations. So then kite gets flatter and has more PA. Additionally P4 deflates a bit when depowered, it makes wingtips flap down and get PA smaller. Air intake location has a function there.

In P4 bridle cascades are there. Too bad I can't refresh my memory from FS's lineservice, they've messed their website. Changing PA in P4 is remarkable achievement technically but perhaps less in practice, I know some kiters which preferred P3 and then went to Speed or LEI's.

foilholio
Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 1843
Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2015 3:20 am
Kiting since: 1337
Local Beach: Ventura Beach
Favorite Beaches: Tarifa
Style: Airstyle
Gear: Foils
Brand Affiliation: None

Re: Pansh Aurora2 it's here!

Postby foilholio » Sat May 21, 2016 2:42 am

kitexpert wrote:"...so a kite that goes from a slight ~85% PA to high ~98% is indeed possible." -foilholio

No, I wouldn't say so. Or maybe, but not a good idea. Those figures compromize too much some of the benefits with reasonable canopy curve.

In P4 there is quite normal arc which gets more C-shaped when depowered and flatter when powered.
https://web.archive.org/web/20090707221 ... &mnid=1744

The Pyscho 4 conducts a 26% change ,70% to 88%, some sizes are actually more than that I would say the depower state is more like 60% or 65%. 85% to 98% is only 15% change, less than some recent flysurfer models like speed3 and speed4lotus 21% change ,70% to 85%, even the boost2 has an 11% change which is impressive for an inflatable.
kitexpert wrote:""The A15 is already at a design level of what could be expected from flysurfer." -foilholio

Yes, in 3D wire frame picture there is very much same as in FS's old CAD picture of Speed3. But line row locations are different, like there is probably different airfoil. Otherwise those strange B-C locations are not justified - if they are in any case.


I meant from a perspective of flying and using it, it is up to flysurfer's level, quality is not though. Construction is a little different but I think they save weight in some ways. The B/C positions have benefits and negatives, we will see over time I guess what is better. I have seen positions like this on one other kite I think, I will have to look.
kitexpert wrote: Pansh goes it's own way perhaps too much. I think they should study and copy more. It's not what they like but what users like.
They do indeed copy. The mini ribs are from flysurfer but where did flysurfer get them? The dual air intakes I think flysurfer had a long time ago ,but recently I have seen them on an obscure french brand. Copying is normal for some brands, I have witnessed a brand start it's development of a kite by copying another's exactly. They then proceeded to fuck it up so it looked more original. God I hope most brands don't do that. The changes they make seem like they lack fundamental understanding. I hope Pansh is not like that, well at least they are cheap. Plenty of reading and trying things is the only way to become knowledgeable in any field. English is of a great benefit in that regard, Chinese not so much.
kitexpert wrote: "There is no other way for one bridle to support different arc shapes but to have simple cascading like 2 levels or none at all." -foilholio

No, supporting certain arc is not that precise and even no cascaded bridle line row is fixed anyway for some curve. Some pulleys to self-adjust linerow for different arcs (different PA's) would be needed IMO but P4 does not have them. Perhaps they would divide forces harmfully in other respects.

And why should different arc shapes be fully supported? P4 max depowered flies supported (almost) on A lines only. When powered CoL moves further back, towards to flatter B and C line row bridle configurations. So then kite gets flatter and has more PA. Additionally P4 deflates a bit when depowered, it makes wingtips flap down and get PA smaller. Air intake location has a function there.

In P4 bridle cascades are there. Too bad I can't refresh my memory from FS's lineservice, they've messed their website. Changing PA in P4 is remarkable achievement technically but perhaps less in practice, I know some kiters which preferred P3 and then went to Speed or LEI's.

You lost me with the first part? Do you mean a bridle with no cascades? or no cascaded bridle? meaning is quite different. A bridle with no cascades is not fixed and neither is one with. The difference is the simpler bridles like 2 cascades or none can adapt to radical arc changes and still maintain tension. Some cascade bridles will loose tension on certain parts and the kites shape maybe become odd.

The different arc shape is not necessarily supported, well one of them :-) That is one of the hints to how it is done. The transition states are fully supported. P4 depowered can fly solely on A. The tension of B flattens the arc and C and Z would effect too but mainly B. Deflation I think has nothing to do with it, and is negative to the concept. I think flysurfer discovered it between trying to understand how Peterlynn ARCs fly and why tips collapse. If you read about peter lynn and particularly his large show kites you might see how it is all possible.

True some people preferred the pyscho3 over the 4, same people preferred the speed2 over the 3. The pyscho4 is a radically different kite to the pyscho3, we are talk beyond C kite to bow kite. As such I would not expect everyone to like it. It is however a very advanced concept with huge advantages, particularly for wind range, turning speed and stability depowered. I am surprised not many have cottoned on to it yet, such is the smallness of flysurfer in the industry and the lack of penetration the pyscho4 had I guess. It did have it's issues, but it was but the first generation with only one tiny brand pushing it's development. A tiny fraction of the development that what went into the first bow kite went into the pyscho4 and it's amazing they achieved what they achieved. Testament to what not wasting money on videos with just tits and arse will get you. I can just imagine to shit storm of marketing crap the big brands will produce when they work out how to implement it on their inflatables. It will be revolutionary for the user, I hope Armin has patent on it, he can retire :-)

The P4 does have cascades. The bridle design changes from ABCZ, both the lengths and cascading. A has the most simple of cascades and does indeed adapt to the changing arc quite well. Z is a very fixed design.

The line plans are here too viewtopic.php?f=197&t=2392202


I have my doubts the Aurora2 changes arc as radically as in the pictures. In the flat arc picture there seems to be something missing that should be present if the kite was indeed adaptable like that, but from the angle of the photo it is hard to see.

kitexpert
Frequent Poster
Posts: 336
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2015 11:20 pm
Kiting since: 2003
Gear: FS
Brand Affiliation: None

Re: Pansh Aurora2 it's here!

Postby kitexpert » Sat May 21, 2016 2:21 pm

"A bridle with no cascades is not fixed and neither is one with." -foilholio

Of course I didn't mean chordwise fixed bridle, depowerable foilkite must have some speedsystem. It is about spanwise adjustability/fixity by each line row, if there is a PA change.

If you design different canopy curves for different line rows you will get changing PA when powering/depowering the kite. Especially when depowered A line row only defines arc shape and possibly smaller PA, because then other (flatter) linerows slack.

"The mini ribs are from flysurfer but where did flysurfer get them?" -foilholio

Old invention for sure, from paragliders very probably. Miniribs are just tails of the normal ribs.

"The difference is the simpler bridles like 2 cascades or none can adapt to radical arc changes and still maintain tension. Some cascade bridles will loose tension on certain parts and the kites shape maybe become odd." -foilholio

In practice there is no difference. Normally every linerow is calculated for the one and same canopy curve. Linerows are fixed (spanwise) no matter if there is cascades or not. Finally each line row comes to single point, to the speedsystem.

Without cascades bridle is very primitive, many eccessively long same thickness lines and a lot of line drag. For example a1, b1 and c1 lines in Aurora2.

If bridle is not partially self-adjusting changing curve will create some distortions or at least some slacking bridle lines. It is FS's fine technical achievement to have made it possible in P4 anyway.

"I think flysurfer discovered it between trying to understand how Peterlynn ARCs fly and why tips collapse. If you read about peter lynn and particularly his large show kites you might see how it is all possible."

No. I have designed some arcs, they are completely different kites compared to bridled foils. They are the most difficult kites to design by far. Arcs do increase their PA when powered up, but this is due to unsupported C-kite shape. It explains so called "C-kite boost" and also line slack when kite recovers and returns to its normal C-shape. Free style kiters like C-kites for a good reason.

foilholio
Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 1843
Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2015 3:20 am
Kiting since: 1337
Local Beach: Ventura Beach
Favorite Beaches: Tarifa
Style: Airstyle
Gear: Foils
Brand Affiliation: None

Re: Pansh Aurora2 it's here!

Postby foilholio » Sat May 21, 2016 6:29 pm

I was not talking about cordwise. Spanwise can change it's towpoint and arc, i.e. it is not always fixed. A spanwise bridle that can support a changing arc shape is what the pyscho4 uses. The spanwise bridle is not fixed, but by it's tow points moving out and in it can support different arc shapes. Only what you called primitive bridles can do this well ,lol, your "advanced" complicated stuff can not do it so well, lol. I was not referencing peter lynn ARCs for their arc changes. There is multiple components to how a foil kite supports it's shape and the bridle is but one. Arcs are still foil kites, they just use an extremely simple bridle, only 4 attachments. Flysurfer has made ARCs with full bridles, Reinhart who works for them now has also as well.

I absolutely "love" (not puke) kite designers that obsess about bridles for their drag. They then use huge tubes on inflatables or very thick airfoils on foils. The basics of frontal area are lost on them, they can't even do the basic engineering to optimize the bridle or line strengths for the forces involved,fucking idiots. There are some inflatables with about 18 tons of attachments and 4 tons of bridles coming off the kite. The bridles go something like Super strong>strong>less strong>superstrong>weak line end>lines, totally fucked that is. Is it any wonder most inflatables fly like shit?

On noes the C kite argument. The magic slack actually occurs on other types of kites, its technique that produces it. C kites are loved because when you are dropping the kite 99 out of a 100 times trying to learn an impossible trick they are the most reliable for not causing any of the mischief kites with bridles or soft kites do.

kitexpert
Frequent Poster
Posts: 336
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2015 11:20 pm
Kiting since: 2003
Gear: FS
Brand Affiliation: None

Re: Pansh Aurora2 it's here!

Postby kitexpert » Sat May 21, 2016 8:38 pm

"A spanwise bridle that can support a changing arc shape is what the pyscho4 uses." -foilholio

I found P4's lineplan in FS page but no old models any more. On the other hand old bridles are more or less primitive and hardly anyone uses those kites so it is somehow acceptable.

Every linerow in P4 is spanwise fixed. If there was some pulleys they could have self-adjustment to different arcs but that is not the case. Linerows are different though and if you know what to look you can understand how changing PA works in P4.

"Spanwise can change it's towpoint and arc, i.e. it is not always fixed." -foilholio

??? Fixed bridle linerow can adapt to different arcs only if some lines slack - or if there are some pulleys. Towpoint has nothing to do here, it is chordwise matter.

"Only what you called primitive bridles can do this well ,lol, your "advanced" complicated stuff can not do it so well, lol." -foilholio

Actually just opposite is true. If you really want adjustable bridle for different arcs you must use pulleys. (Of course there must be something fixed to define some arc). And how do you put pulleys in straight lines, without cascades?

Without pulleys primitive bridle is just as fixed as cascaded one. It is better to believe this, it is a geometrical fact.

"Flysurfer has made ARCs with full bridles, Reinhart who works for them now has also as well." -foilholio

Then it is just a C-shaped bridled foilkite. If newcomer kite designer makes a foilkite it flys better or worse. But if he trys to do an arc there is near zero chance to even get it in the air. Bridled foil kite is elementary school stuff, arc is university level.

"The bridles go something like Super strong>strong>less strong>superstrong>weak line end>lines, totally fucked that is." -foilholio

Yes, but in LEIs there is so few bridle lines that they don't have to be very thin. Thick lines are durable, keep their lenght and are easy to handle and don't tangle so much. In a big foilkite total bridle line lenght may be 200m, so they must be thin. And unfortunately for foils it is worse to have many thin lines than a few thick lines for the drag. You know that howling sound foilkites produce, it does not come for free.

"The magic slack actually occurs on other types of kites, its technique that produces it." -foilholio

Yes, to some extent. But in C-kites (arcs) kite itself changes its shape. If you look some pro rider with C kite you can see how much his kite wobbles when he is doing his tricks. If kite is supported with bridles this movement is not possible. C kites relaunch much worse than bridled LEIs but hard pop and good slack are so important they don't care.

"Is it any wonder most inflatables fly like shit?" -foilholio

LEI's advantages are low inertia, stiffer structure and thin TE. They usually turn much better, difference is biggest at the edge of the wind window. However latest super efficient foils give equal power in two or tree sizes smaller, so they are quite fast too and generate much more power when flied actively. For foils it is very beneficial to use smaller sizes because doubling the size makes volume 4 times bigger. No wonder why Speed 21m is so slow, it has huge amount of air inside.
Last edited by kitexpert on Sun May 22, 2016 12:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.

foilholio
Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 1843
Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2015 3:20 am
Kiting since: 1337
Local Beach: Ventura Beach
Favorite Beaches: Tarifa
Style: Airstyle
Gear: Foils
Brand Affiliation: None

Re: Pansh Aurora2 it's here!

Postby foilholio » Sun May 22, 2016 1:03 am

I gave you a link to all the flysurfer line plans.

Original point , I will make it again , the simple "primitive" spanwise bridle on the P4 , mainly A, adapts and keeps tension to a changing arc shape through all of those changes. Of course cordwise changes force this, but other things do as well. Again the bridle is not the only thing that gives a foil kite it's shape. how blatant can I get :-)

More complicated bridles will lose tension in a changing arc shape.

At what point does an ARC become a bridled foil? Some arcs already have 6-8 attachments. If you have some in the middle or distributed across the front? What if you increase the number at what point does it become a bridled foil? ARCs are foils with minimal attachments that form an arc shape, they have heaps in common with all other foils. Even though Peter Lynn didn't invent them, if you read what he writes particularly about show kites you can understand how they work.

Inflatable kite designers ,for a group so pedantic about bridles, sure do put little effort into optimizing them. One could easily think they don't know how.

The riding technique is producing the slack. The effects on the kite are irrelevant. Some kites are easier to do this with but C kites don't have a monopoly on it. C kites are very easy to relaunch, some even reverse. Trust me if your at the level of handlepasses relaunching a C kite doesn't even compare. I have to laugh, in my head that is, when people comment on how a kite relaunches. Often find they never understand the particular method to a certain kite. I hear it so often it doesn't surprise me guys struggle with foil kites.

The inflatable design has benefits but L/D is not one. Though a well designed bridle has yet to be attached to one. Flat wings can produce very high L/D, it's obviously the drag part is holding back the inflatable. Failure to understand something causes this, probably frontal area. Amazes me guys who obsess over turning speed. I think they took up the wrong aspect of kite flying. Stunt kite flying seems to be what they actually want to do. Mind you with their "fast turning" kites they certainly don't do much with them.

kitexpert
Frequent Poster
Posts: 336
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2015 11:20 pm
Kiting since: 2003
Gear: FS
Brand Affiliation: None

Re: Pansh Aurora2 it's here!

Postby kitexpert » Sun May 22, 2016 12:54 pm

"I gave you a link to all the flysurfer line plans." -foilholio

Thanks, I noticed. It was so big file that I didn't want to download it just for checking some lines for a kite that I don't have any more.

"...they have heaps in common with all other foils. Even though Peter Lynn didn't invent them, if you read what he writes particularly about show kites you can understand how they work." -foilholio

Arcs have very little in common with foilkites when it comes to how they fly and support themselves. By flying shape they are C kites. They have same flying characters too, but softened by foil structure and slowed by bigger inertia.

I know Peter Lynn's work thoroughly, he is a great guy. I dare to say I know how arcs work and which are their critical design parameters. I've spent a few hundred hours designing, making and flying them, how much have you? 8)

I don't see connection to show kites at all, if they are not arcs.

There is no bridle support for flying shape in arcs. If there is, it is a bridled foilkite. There has been trys to mix these two, but not succesful ones. I made one design too but I didn't finish it, I lost my belief.

"...the simple "primitive" spanwise bridle on the P4 , mainly A, adapts and keeps tension to a changing arc shape through all of those changes." -foilholio

It is not primitive but cascaded bridle, (it could very well be more cascaded), it is spanwise fixed and so it does not keep tension to a changing arc shape - it is geometrically impossible. P4 just tolerates different canopy curves and when depowered it flies on A, which then defines canopy curve alone.

"Again the bridle is not the only thing that gives a foil kite it's shape. how blatant can I get :-)" -foilholio

For canopy curve or for changes in PA it is. Deflating may have some additional effect when depowered at low AoA.

"Failure to understand something causes this, probably frontal area." -foilholio

There is practical limits to how small LE diameter can be. And thicker ones do fly well, even better. Limits are tested years ago and pro kite designers know what they are doing. Of course they have to do compromises, for many reasons.

foilholio
Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 1843
Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2015 3:20 am
Kiting since: 1337
Local Beach: Ventura Beach
Favorite Beaches: Tarifa
Style: Airstyle
Gear: Foils
Brand Affiliation: None

Re: Pansh Aurora2 it's here!

Postby foilholio » Sun May 22, 2016 3:53 pm

kitexpert wrote: There is no bridle support for flying shape in arcs.
kitexpert wrote:"Again the bridle is not the only thing that gives a foil kite it's shape. how blatant can I get :-)" -foilholio

For canopy curve or for changes in PA it is.
kitexpert wrote:I don't see connection to show kites at all, if they are not arcs.
No shit.
kitexpert wrote:Arcs have very little in common with foilkites when it comes to how they fly and support themselves.By flying shape they are C kites.
ARCs have almost nothing to do with C kites. They are 100% parafoils and are infact bridle supported in all variations. 2 front lines in a V is a bridle.

I can see your cognitive dissonance like a blazing fire in the room with me. "ARCs can not be in common with foil kites, because foil kites only get their shape from a complicated bridle and an ARC doesn't have a complicated bridle but an ARC has a shape". Jesus!

To help you from google. A parafoil is a nonrigid (textile) airfoil with an aerodynamic cell structure which is inflated by the wind. Ram-air inflation forces the parafoil into a classic wing cross-section. Parafoils are most commonly constructed out of ripstop nylon.

now in case you were wondering ,I know, a foilkite is a parafoil. The foil comes from parafoil.

An ARC has a "nonrigid (textile) airfoil with an aerodynamic cell structure which is inflated by the wind" and is therefore a parafoil and therefore a foilkite.
kitexpert wrote:There is practical limits to how small LE diameter can be. And thicker ones do fly well, even better. Limits are tested years ago and pro kite designers know what they are doing. Of course they have to do compromises, for many reasons.
There is no limits on how small the LE diameter can be, it can even not exist. The pro kite designers know what they are doing? Is that a joke? How could the board designer from one of the worst brands, out do the whole lot of them? And you have "pro kite designers" from the left and right saying I don't see the benefit of that design!, no shit you don't fuckwits otherwise you would have already done it.

kitexpert
Frequent Poster
Posts: 336
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2015 11:20 pm
Kiting since: 2003
Gear: FS
Brand Affiliation: None

Re: Pansh Aurora2 it's here!

Postby kitexpert » Sun May 22, 2016 10:28 pm

"ARCs have almost nothing to do with C kites." -foilholio

They have essentially same principle for keeping their shape in flight. And this (canopy curve) was relevant for our previous discussion, not if kite has ram air cells or pressurized struts. Same principle leads to corresponding flight behaviour, with differences I already mentioned.

"...and are infact bridle supported in all variations. 2 front lines in a V is a bridle."

Flying lines are not part of the bridle :)

"No shit." -foilholio

You asked simple and trivial questions and got similar answers. Many of your questions tell that you don't have very good understanding of kites. It is actually very common among kitesurfers. It does not mean that kiter is not able to use kites well or can't have reasonable opinions of them. But to kite designer it is not possible situation.

However I think your experimenting with different speedsystems has had some value, although it looks a bit like shooting in the dark. If it produces usable results it does not matter if the process wasn't so neat and sound. But because I know current 1:2:4 speedsystem is efficient and sound I wouldn't waste my time there. Foil kite development is not to try to invent the wheel again, work is completely elsewhere than in tweaking speedsystems.

"There is no limits on how small the LE diameter can be, it can even not exist." -foilholio

I wrote "practical limits". If LE is too thin it doesn't support kite. If you fly grossly underinflated LEI you get similar results.

I'm not sure what you are referring to "board designer from one of the worst brands". If Greg from BRM, his kites compromize many things for light weight. Benefits of strutless kite are obvious but so are the drawbacks too.


Return to “Foil Kites”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

cron