Agree the AR is only one of many parameters blended into a final design. Profiles and their spanwise AOA and morphing are key determining factors and somewhat proprietary to most designers and brands. That said, attached is the Switch Method 9 center profile for those interested.
I tend to vary the depth of profiles between 12-15% depending on kite models and size with max draft between 17 - 25% (on inflato kites) and morph them to 0-5% and more draft aft in the wingtips. The constant curve leading edge on my designs make the profiles appear flatter because the kite is smoothly sculpted from tip to tip without angled joints but the profiles are anything but flat.
Many heavyweights prefer 'bucket kites' with substantial coning which tend to sit back in the window and pull hard even at low speeds. To me, that type of kite is one dimensional and inefficient with regards to upwind ability making them less desirable for all-round use. It is pretty well known by now that the Method is very powerful for its flat area size and also very efficient upwind. The Nitro is also known for rapidly generating power with great upwind angle so heavyweights really do have a choice and no longer have to settle for 'tractor' style mow-the-lawn kites.
I think AR is not a much importance if you don't know the profile of the wing of the kite. If different AR kites have the same low wing profile you never have good low end for the heavier riders. So good luck if you are heavy...
Method-Profile.jpg [ 22.66 KIB | Viewed 1087 times ]