.

.

All things hang gliding. This is the main forum. New users, introduce yourself.

Moderators: sg, mods

User avatar
By joefaust
#378989
More:
Attachments
sketchAirBeamTwoBladdersWebCombinedSplintsCabled.png
sketchAirBeamTwoBladdersWebCombinedSplintsCabled.png (9.73 KiB) Viewed 4459 times
Last edited by joefaust on Tue Nov 24, 2015 11:21 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
By joefaust
#378990
HG1HHSS
Attachments
HG1HHSS.jpg
HG1HHSS.jpg (34.83 KiB) Viewed 4507 times
User avatar
By joefaust
#379020
Movement participant noted on Wed Jun 17, 2015 wrote:
I like the idea of taking a regular glider (maybe someone's worn out Falcon?) and fitting it with:

A mechanism to easily remove the sail from the frame
Sleeves to join longer tubes after cutting for short packing

I think that's a practical approach and could be accomplished fairly easily within our abilities.
User avatar
By joefaust
#379021
Instead of hinged X series, have two runs of X series that firmly couple for assembly. Explore shaping the X parts for airfoil formation. Stay lines keeping the form provides the lower surface against which the sock will press during positive loading of the wing.
================================================
Toward the Movement Participant's note:
Sail-connect explorations:
== Duct tape
== Velcro parts
== Magnets
== Corded clasping
== Sticky wrap
== Snap-in-channel (Zip-Lock)
== Rim cord in groove
== ? (open to committee work)
==============================
Tube-coupling explorations for available cut macro tubes
== Plug core and oversleeve
== Terminals: threaded join
== Splints and whipping
== Locking clamps
== Mating flanged inserts for bolting
==
== ? (open to committee work)

====================
====================
Yet, progress on other families of solutions will occur.
User avatar
By joefaust
#379022
Water and air in the beam explored:

==> http://www.textilearchitecture.polimi.i ... -material/

Research on the combination of water and membranes as a structural building material
Proceedings of the IV International conference on textile composite and inflatable structures, membranes 2009, Stuttgart, 2009
User avatar
By raquo
#379058
Convenient sail connectors are key to making a truly portable glider I think (well, a non-inflatable one, anyway).

Joe, could you please elaborate a bit on "Rim cord in groove"? Not sure what it is.

I think one of the possible ways to connect two pieces of sail together is for them to connect at something rigid, for example a batten. Imagine a common HG sail with a batten pocket. Now, cut the batten pocket perpendicular to its length every... say... 20 centimeters. Don't touch the main sail. Now, cut the main sail right next to where the batten pocket attaches to it. First 20 cm cut on the left of it, next 20 cm cut on the right of it, then left again, then right again, and so on. In the end you'll end up with your sail cut in two pieces, with each piece having approx. 5 batten pockets each covering 20 cm of the batten, but in combination covering all of it. Now if you insert the batten in these pockets it will be attached to both pieces of sail, and they will follow its profile. if you remove the batten you can roll up and store the pieces of sail separately. Of course you would need to sew a new sail on this idea, not cut up an existing one – I figure a bunch of sail reinforcement would be required.

Damn, that's a lot of words, sorry. Here's a picture I drew, I hope this clears things up (see end of post).

So if you cut up your sail like this, you can have a few very manageable sections of sail that you can easily install on the wing one after another. Now you don't need to think of an elegant way to put a sail onto the glider frame, or to make the frame easily collapsible inside the sail.

Or you can use this technique to split the sail in two, right in the middle. An alternative way to achieve that would be to use something like corset ties – I think some rigid wings use something like this. Again, the holes could be positioned so that the rope goes around a batten on each side of the sail, to keep the wing profile.

Man, I wish zippers were reliable enough to use as sail connectors. I think some models are more than strong enough, it just seems like a not very reliable solution. Maybe with a backup rope and some innovative terminals (edges) that prevent accidental unzipping they could be reasonably reliable.
Attachments
photo.JPG
photo.JPG (260.53 KiB) Viewed 4381 times
User avatar
By TjW
#379070
If you'd like a simpler way to describe it, just say "like a piano hinge with a removable pin."
User avatar
By joefaust
#379072
raquo,
Good shares! The castlated
TjW ... thanks.
===========================

raquo,
Cord in groove:
http://www.tectonica-online.com/product ... _tecosign/
=========
Using slides and slugs in groove is a bit different than sail-edge cord in grrove:

Image

=====================
Image

================
Slides
Slugs
Grooves
Sail attachment
Reefing
Furling
By CLOUDSCULPTOR
#379138
Is 5 foot the clincher for you , or something else ?
All the aeros kingposted models go to 6 foot.
i used to regulary fy and antonov c 14 and then a stalker 12 at wallaby . building it up from short pack from air freight with no tools. Needed 60 mins.
I was told they designed then all short packed to allow storage in aptments and reteives by train or bus when few people had cars.
I loved it. Cheaper to repair tubes too.
For quite a while it was the only way they were sold .
User avatar
By raquo
#379154
Well one of the implicit constraints we're assuming here is to not need 30-60 minutes time to set up / break down the glider. That's just too much hassle.
User avatar
By joefaust
#379376
CLOUDSCULPTOR,
It seems there is severe dispute about the measurement on the short pack for the Aeros family: http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=30641
It appears to be over the 6 ft. mark just mentioned. I am seeing over 7 ft in that discussion. However, a current Fox short: 2 m which is about 6.56 ft; does that include what the bag might do to final length? [[Aeros support page: http://www.aeros.com.ua/structure/suppo ... ort_en.php ]]

However, the topic is 5 ft or under for some definite reasons:
1. Longer becomes visually intimidating when embarking on public city buses..
2. Longer leaves out the interior of many cars without extra todos with trunk doors and seat challenges.
3. Fits under rung of many closets.
4. The challenge may tend to bring clever construction modes that may tend to be very quick assembly and disassembly.
5. Shipping will be less costly.
6. Bicycle mounting or trailering or integrating-as-bicycle may be part of the coming results.
7. Body carry and lever effects on body during carry become different.
8. Pilot-carrying in front on oneself, if one is with eye level just above 5 ft , allows a hugging to one's chest during bus travel.
9. Pack is perhaps looks less like a body-bag. Package decor may be explored: gift-wrapped? Music-instrument decor? Friendly happy coloring designs? "This is a hang glider" signage? Transparent bag? Wear the sail wrapped about one's body; just pack the frame and lines? Consider two or even three modules?

raquo,
There may be two strains about the time for assembly. One is a toleration of 30 min to 60 min in some niche hang gliding activity. Another is to have "presto change-o!" opening, perhaps even for one minute assembly and disassembly; be ready for some creative solutions for some niche hang gliding.

Longer time toleration may even be a wanted tactic in some scenes:
1. The activity of assembling might be a magnet for involving other people in conversation about the wing and the activity. Meet people. Tell about hang gliding.
2. One might use the time to carefully examine every inch of the wing. Think about each part.
3. Perhaps a type of wing is wanted that did not fit the "presto chang-o" solution. Maybe some other characteristic was in focus that takes longer time. A quadruplane hang glider for 5 ft pack could be a super challenge. : ) Maybe one aims for very low volume with the 5 ft or less max dimension; say a wing made of angle cross section that nest into one another (or Z sections); coupling modes may bring lower cost but more assembly time. We will see.

Those aiming for the one-minute assembly will be different from the 10-min assemblies; and further, the 30-min assemblies will form a family. The 60-min family will exist. And ... there will be wings that arrive in 5 ft or less in kit form of raw materials that may take scores of hours to make or to assemble; will making of parts be required? How complete will be kits? Then there is the extreme: Carry a plan (or receive plan via Internet) or have plan memorized and then go to a site and from ambient natural materials construct one's hang glider; such might take a large lump of hours or weeks or ?

[youtube]
[/youtube]

====================
One may examine the Malibu video for things one might want to avoid in the 5 ft or less direction:
[youtube]
[/youtube]

tag: dive stick short pak shortpack shortpak short-pack

Fox
Image

=================
Consider anchor-and-pull-apart mechanisms to aid some solution assembly. That is, anchor part of the complex to ambient ground or boulder or tree or friend; then go to another part of the complex and pull against the resistance of the anchor. The tension of the pulling might result in the blossoming of the wing. And leave such method open to have two anchors or three anchors or four anchors; then pull to have the wing open and rise to full form or maybe near-full-form.

=================
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leash Hang glider pilot's wing leash system ... : the system's kite-line set, hang-line set, gliding-kite-systems tether system ...
=================
Long assembly
[youtube]
[/youtube]
=================
[youtube]
[/youtube]
The 5-ft (or less) Movement ... group think, sharing style, niche activity, special engineering magic, art, ...

=================
Some in the Movement might consider "one-way" short-pack solutions where the tote is short, but the final form does not get disassembled. Consider rise to form which form does not disassemble. Consider foam-to-form. Consider rise and fix by UV curing. Consider smart self-assembly to non-reduction format.
==================
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/0 ... 80978.html Carbon aerogel ?
http://www.popsci.com/technology/articl ... ercent-air
==================
[youtube]
[/youtube]
==================
What do insects and birds have to offer the Movement? Spiders?
User avatar
By skyelevator
#379398
Very good to see this come up now and then to let the few manufactures out there know that there IS a market and some of us would pay double (yes) for a truly hikeable hanglider. FEX just doesn't quite do it and although fine I am sure paying new costs for a late eighties design is kinda hard to swallow. But ya, they will build you one. Material science is advancing leaps and bounds with things like carbon nano tubes a reality right now, albeit in the lab. Keep seeing paraglider pilots boarding trams and such overseas or even at places in the states like Crystal Mountain. My hat is off though to the operators of the Wallowa Lake Tramway in NE Oregon, someday....
User avatar
By joefaust
#379574
skyelevator,
I like the ring of HH (hikeable hangglider). :mosh:

=================================================
Joining the discussion topic thread:
http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?p=363997
================================================

Distinction of type of hiking will spell styles and solutions with difference.

================================================

Recalling the tradename "Bus Wing" by Omega Hang Gliders ...
Busing to sites ... Not necessarily mountaineering ...

================================================
By old newbie
#379578
I have a 5 lb paraglider and harness, real small bag. If you really thing they plummet from the sky add a 5 lb reserve. I think your goal is a bit too lofty, just lighter simpler hangs would be great, no need to go down to 5'
User avatar
By joefaust
#379608
old newbie Steve,
Such reserve in the PDMC-PG need
has severe challenges!

==== You just bypassed the topic.
Rather, need was already established some; more need may be explored in parallel to solving the topic ever more robustly.

Yes "lighter and simpler" is a style of a sector of this and other topics; but add that to the "5 ft" (or less) topic; say, lighter-and-simpler 5 ft (or less); yet the topic admits also of "heavier" but 5 ft (or less); or "heavier-and-less simple" 5 ft (or less) for max pack dimension. Wide berth here, but within "5 ft" constraint. The need may not be felt by all in same degree or at all. Some expression for need has been posted; and others easily may still express need; but the need is an adjunct to the topic. The topic regards getting to the 5 ft (or less).

The topic and movement concerns 5 ft length or less.
You are invited to delve into your best wits to contribute to the positive target.
Notice the allowance of varied solutions for niche hang gliding activities.
Notice the optional directions of substantial assembly time through "presto-chang-o" time.

Continuing while still mining the various seeds in some of the above posts of topic:

Consider options within the worlds of fast-rise modules coming together to form HGs to fit topic.

Consider options within the worlds of sock on bowed presto-spar to form HGs to fit topic.

Some tease: HERE

And HERE also

And HERE.
User avatar
By RobertKesselring
#379675
I think it would be a mistake to try to design something that would replace our current hang glider designs with short pack versions of the same things. The reason for this is as follows...

1. Our current wings are highly engineered
2. Adding additional, desirable, design attributes to a highly engineered piece of equipment will require sacrifices in other attributes of the design. In other words, any design which adds short-pack-ability will sacrifice something else (set-up time, safety, handling, performance, cost, etc...)

By focusing only on short-packing options, and what other attributes we sacrifice for short-pack-ability, we might miss desirable attributes that some short pack designs might offer that current designs simply don't offer at all.

For example, an inflatable hang glider might not be desirable if it sacrifices too much in the way of performance, handling, and durability. However, if you make it so that it can be inflated within a couple seconds, by pulling a cord, while in free-fall, you've made a whole new hang-glider-like product which might attract some people away from wing-suite flying or skydiving. They don't care if it only glides 7:1. and handles like a truck. It does what wing suites do by opening in free fall but also offers land-ability without a parachute. It does what parachutes do, by providing for safe landing, but it actually flies and glides instead of just being a steerable air-brake.

This is just one example of functionality which may be added when implementing a fundamentally different design, and not really one I'm particularly trying to push. I'm just saying, lets look at any NEW functionality that new designs can add instead of simply trying to preserve the TRADITIONAL functionality with new designs (which I believe can only be done by substantially increasing cost).
User avatar
By raquo
#379682
Well for me portability is certainly new functionality in itself. Namely, it lets me to:

* store my hang glider in my apartment and live where I want, not in a house in the suburbs
* store it in a hotel room and thus take family vacations that are not exclusively about flying HG
* take my HG on a gondola that is too small for full-sized gliders
* travel by plane or train with my HG and then use a rental car without a dedicated HG rack to transport my glider
* get rides from people without HG racks

Let's spare the discussion on whether or not these are useful features. They are useful to me and many others.
Adding additional, desirable, design attributes to a highly engineered piece of equipment will require sacrifices in other attributes of the design. In other words, any design which adds short-pack-ability will sacrifice something else (set-up time, safety, handling, performance, cost, etc...)
This is only true if you add portability as a bolt-on to an existing design. If you come up with a completely new design it could be superior to existing ones in more than one way. For example, a portable non-cantilever rigid wing could be lighter and slower than current rigid wings, both of which could be seen as advantages.
By focusing only on short-packing options, and what other attributes we sacrifice for short-pack-ability, we might miss desirable attributes that some short pack designs might offer that current designs simply don't offer at all.
True, but we're talking about portability because we already feel the need for it. That's our goal in this thread. We could sure talk about other stuff too, but focus is good if you want to solve a specific problem.
User avatar
By joefaust
#379686
Great discussion posts, RobertKesselring and raquo !

========================================
Continuing:

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ar ... 8310000235
Dynamic behavior and vibration control of a tensegrity structure
N. Bel Hadj Ali, , I.F.C. Smith
Last edited by joefaust on Mon Dec 07, 2015 10:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
By Fletcher
#379698
Anyone checked out

Extendclimb telescoping ladders
The pro series are constructed with aircraft grade aluminum

Unroll the sail, pull a string to telescope frame, pre-flight, hook in, fly
Telescoping rigid wing in the trunk of your car?
:drool:

Thanks for the tour. Looked like you just walked i[…]

Well that was worth the wait! Mostly clear air m[…]

Clear L.A. Skies on Friday!

Well mate you just flew above those walls :lol: […]

involuntarylist

Ive had enough. More than enough agitating peopl[…]